Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Archive for June, 2005

Muslim-Americans: Mention the Word ‘Suicide’ or Visit the Wrong Website and the FBI’ll Getcha!

Saturday, June 18th, 2005

Tashnuba Hayder was an average 16 year-old teenager living with her Bangladeshi-American family in Queens when the FBI came knocking on her door. And life has never been the same since. Though she’s lived here since age 5 and speaks not a word of the native language, she has been deported to a country (Bangladesh) she hardly remembers. Only her father and brother remain in the U.S. and they are now in hiding from INS authorities who want to deport them.

If anyone reading this thinks there is anything good about the USA Patriot Act, please read the New York Times story. It is poignant, chilling and ultimately heartbreaking, representing the FBI at their worst and the U.S. justice system not far better:

An F.B.I. agent, posing as a youth counselor, first confronted Tashnuba in her bedroom, going through her school papers and questioning everything from her views on jihad to her posterless walls, she said. Sent to a center for delinquents in Pennsylvania, Tashnuba said she was interrogated without a lawyer or parent present, about her beliefs and those of her friends, mainly American girls she had met at city mosques.

As she tells it, F.B.I. agents tried to twist mundane details of her life to fit the profile of a terrorist recruit, and when they could not make a case, covered their tracks by getting her out of the country. In fact, the court order of “voluntary departure” that let her leave requires a finding that the person is not deportable for endangering national security.

Tashnuba said she believed she was singled out precisely because she is a noncitizen – allowing investigators to invoke immigration law, bypassing the familiar limits of criminal and juvenile proceedings.

Up to three agents at a time pressed her about possible terrorist ties among her friends, and what they saw as suspicious tendencies in her schoolwork, like class notes about suicide. She said they even criticized the austere décor of the bedroom she shared with her 10-year-old sister.

“The F.B.I. tried to say I didn’t have a life – like, I wasn’t the typical teenager,” Tashnuba said bitterly, fingering her long Muslim dress. “They thought I was anti-American because I didn’t want to compromise, but in my high-school ethics class we had Communists, Democrats, Republicans, Gothics – all types. In all our classes, we were told, ‘You speak up, you give your opinion, and you defend it.’ ”

When she recalls how F.B.I. agents questioned her religious lifestyle, her voice drips typical teenage scorn: “Like, I’m supposed to live for you guys?”

The Times even quotes a former FBI agent who is troubled by this first terrorism investigation to involve minors:

Mike German, who left the bureau a year ago after a long career chasing homegrown terror suspects, said that the agency’s new emphasis on collecting intelligence rather than criminal evidence has opened the door to more investigations that go “in the wrong direction.”

“If all these chat rooms are being monitored, and we’re running down all these people because of what they’re saying in chat rooms, then these are resources we’re not using on real threats,” said Mr. German, who has publicly complained that F.B.I. management problems impeded terror investigations after 9/11.

The stress on intelligence increases the agency’s demands for secrecy, to protect its sources. And secrecy, he said, leads to abuses of power.

“Perhaps the government has some incredibly incriminating piece of information and saved us from a terrible act of violence; it would make everybody feel better to know it,” he said. “Conversely, if they [the FBI] did something wrong, the public needs to know that.”

Tashnuba’s problems began some time after she became a devout Muslim and decided she would escape the secular environment of her parent’s home by accepting an arranged marriage with another Muslim man. When she eloped with him and headed to Michigan, her father called the police. And this is how a frightened teenager became a potential suicide bomber in the eyes of the FBI.

What proof does this august, never-erring agency have of Tashnuba’s Islamic radicalism? After confiscating her computer, the FBI discovered that she’d visited the website of a firebrand British Muslim cleric who once told a follower on a radio call-in show that women could be legitimate candidates to be suicide bombers. Of course, there’s no evidence that Tashnuba heard him say this or even knew anything about his attitude toward suicide bombing. And the girl, as part of an assignment from her tutor, wrote a paper on attitudes toward suicide among various religions.

I can’t say that this is all the evidence the FBI has because they won’t reveal anything about the “case” against her. In fact, after forcibly detaining Tashnuba and removing her from her home, the government never told her family where she was or what she was charged with. Only after the New York Times wrote a story about the case would the FBI allow her to have a lawyer.

Unfortunately, with no financial means at her disposal, Tashnuba’s mother agreed to immediate voluntary deportation as a means to get her daughter released from detention. Tashnuba, her mother and two young siblings were thrown on the streets of Dakar without a penny.

Officially, the FBI will not say it ever had a case for labelling Tashnuba a potential terrorist. All they will say is that hers is now an immigration case. Her visa is expired and she must leave. Plain and simple.

Foria Younis, FBI’s “gun-totin’, door-breakin’” Muslim poster girl (credit: Stuart Conway/Daily Telegraph

What adds to the tragedy of this situation is that Tashnuba’s chief FBI nemesis is an British-born Muslim agent who grew up in a secular Pakistani home. It reminds me of the Julius and Ethel Rosenberg case in which the defendants, defense and prosecuting attorneys and judge were all Jewish. It was as if the government had recruited Jews to do its own dirty work. And in Foria Younis, born into an Anglo-Pakistani family in Britain, they found their Roy Cohn. Except that the government’s Muslim terrorist-catcher didn’t have her finest hour in this case:

Ms. Younis and her partner did not reveal that they were F.B.I. agents, said Tashnuba’s mother, Ishrat Jahan Hayder. They claimed to be from a youth center, following up on the police report filed five months earlier when the girl tried to elope. Mrs. Hayder readily sent the woman upstairs to her daughter’s bedroom. “I trusted her,” she said.

From the moment she walked in, as Tashnuba tells it, Ms. Younis started paging through her papers. “She was like, ‘Can I look at this?’ Not waiting for an answer.”

What mainly drew the agent’s eye, the girl said, were papers from an extra-help class for home-schooled girls that Tashnuba had joined to prepare for exams. On one page was a diagram highlighting the word “suicide” – her notes on a class discussion about why religions oppose it, she said.

Soon, she said, Ms. Younis was dropping comments like “So, I see you’re interested in suicide,” and “So, you like staying all by yourself in your room. Are you a loner?”

Tashnuba, who had many friends, was immediately nervous and defensive. “No, I’m just in my room,” she said she protested. “I saw where they were going.”

Once the FBI spirited her away into custody in Pennsylvania 12 days of interrogation began in earnest:

“They tried to twist my mind,” Tashnuba said. “They had their little tactics – start with nice questions, try to get more severe. In the end, when I did cry they were, like, mocking me.”

A government psychiatrist concluded that she was neither suicidal nor homicidal, and recommended her release. But the agents, Tashnuba said, kept “trying to link me to the psychological state.” They zeroed in on the single artificial rose in her bedroom (her little sister’s); a psychology course (required by her correspondence program), and an essay she wrote about the Department of Homeland Security (assigned as a writing evaluation by her tutor).

Interestingly, the interrogations stopped the day the New York Times ran its first article on the girl. This is a perfect example of the positive role that the media can play as a government watchdog. Imagine the catastrophe that a USA Patriot Act without media oversight would be. And contrarily, the Daily Telegraph published this glowing profile of Younis last year which looks increasingly ironic when read in the light of this current case and her treatment of Tashnuba. Consider this Younis comment:

“My culture is very Western, in terms of my upbringing, but my heritage is Pakistani. I’ve learnt a lot of positive things from Pakistani Muslim culture.”

Apparently not enough to appreciate and correctly interpret the Islamic religious strivings of a 16 year old Bangledeshi-American girl.

And this passage is perhaps even more deliciously ironic:

She knows that when she enters a Muslim household, even on a raid, the sight of her has an electrifying effect, especially on the women and girls of the home. In many households, women are “held hostage” by their men’s radicalism, she says.

You can bet that the Hayders felt that way when Younis conned her way into their apartment with the lie that she was a youth counselor checking up on their daughter. Hey, now Mrs. Hayder is really free of her husband’s “radicalism” as the two of them live on different sides of the globe thanks to Foria Younis’ overzealous persection of the Queens teenager.

She makes a point of reaching out to children, even when sent to interview their parents. “Kids love to see the FBI badge, you can start off with that and then you put something in their minds – that all jobs should be open to all people as an American citizen. You let them know that that’s a possibility.”

Gee, maybe that’s a career that Tashnuba might be interested in??

In explaining her special appreciation of American freedoms to this British newspaper, she said:

“Spending my teenage years in America was very influential. You study all about American freedoms and the American opportunities you have.”

Tashnuba studied those same textbooks and learned the same lessons. But it didn’t quite work out the same for her now did it?

She is especially keen to counter notions that the FBI has been harassing Muslims since the September 11 attacks. “It wasn’t harassment. If we got an anonymous phone call or letter, we had to follow up on it. We presented the situation very honestly. We told people: ‘Your name has come up and we have to talk to you,’ and most people were very co-operative.”

Just like Mrs. Hayder, who believed that Younis had the girl’s best interests at heart when she barged into the family’s life and destroyed whatever peace and security they had here in this country.

Actually, the FBI’s clear and outrageous harrassment of Muslim-Americans since 9/11 reminds me of two other infamous times in American history when we allowed our justice system to ride roughshod over immigrant groups whose ethnicity or political views were considered unpopular. In the 1920s, the Palmer raids threw thousands of immigrant anarchists and Communists out of the country without charges or trials. And during World War II, we forcibly interned most of the Japanese Americans living in the western half of the U.S. Each of these episodes is viewed with shame by constitutional scholars and most Americans who are aware of them. In time, the same will be said of the USA Patriot Act and our treatment of the Muslim-Americans among us. It’s time to remember the wonderful injunction in Exodus:

Remember the stranger because you too were once strangers in the land of Egypt.

This is the final heartbreaking paragraph of the Tashnuba Hayder story:

She longed for even one more day in New York, “to say goodbye.”

Fighting tears, she fell silent, staring at the shelf of souvenirs her family had sent back over the years: a big apple, a snow globe of the twin towers, a Statue of Liberty.

Congress is now debating the renewal of the Patriot Act. President Bush recently said that the Sunshine provisions which forced the most contentious of the Acts’ sections to be submitted for reapproved by Congress were a terrible idea. If you needed any reason to doubt Bush’s thinking on this and to question the draconian nature of the Act, it’s all right here in this story.

Typepad to WordPress Blog Conversion: the Good, the Dodgy and the Not So Pretty

Thursday, June 16th, 2005

If you love WordPress, don’t be put off by my overly cute post title. I come not to bury WP, but to praise it (well, mostly praise it). It’s just that I like that old movie title, “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly” and wanted to use it here.

I recently wrote a glowing report of my experiences with my new WordPress blog and a less than glowing review of my experiences with my old Typepad blog.

After scores of hours of installations of a new theme, plugins and just plain finding my way around the new system, I’m still pretty happy. Sure, I can’t get my spellcheck plugin to work properly (UPDATE: the plugin author Brian Dupuis personally just did a virtual blog housecall and fixed the problem–now that’s service) and can’t quite figure out why the Exhibit plugin doesn’t seem to be working quite right (or else I’m missing something). And why the WYSIWYG TinyMCE editor conflicts with so many things that I had to deactivate it I don’t know. But, as with Firefox and its extensions, they take some getting used to and there are bound to be bugs and other issues that need some TLC to iron out. As I wrote in my earlier post about my conversion experience–everything’s a tradeoff. And for me, the dodgy plugins are more than offset by the immense diversity, utility and power offered by most WP plugins.

I’m immensely pleased by the new blog power I have at my fingertips. My biggest issue with Typepad was comment and trackback spam. I love WP’s comment moderation feature and I’m not even yet using any anti-spam plugins. I haven’t had a spam comment yet (though that’s probably because not all the search engines have caught up with my new site yet). But even if I did, I can delete the offending comment with the click of a button. I like that.

I also love wp-amazon and the ease with which you can upload Amazon products (in my case CDs) into your posts. Now, if it would just allow you to do the same within your sidebar! In-Series is a plugin I’ve been waiting for for two years which allows you to organize posts written on a single subject or theme so that your readers can follow them in a series. I’d probably activate David Chait’s cg Amazon plugin since it does insert products into the sidebar, but David wants to insert his Amazon Associates ID into 20% of my links and that makes me feel uncomfortable (though I don’t begrudge him offseting his costs in producing the plugin). And Technotags are splendid. I never could understand how to use them reading the Technorati specs. This plugin makes it all so easy.

Yup, that’s me–tearing my hair out over link conversion

But I saved the rough part for last: there IS a problem that’s presently causing me to tear my hair out. Anyone using my old Typepad post hyperlinks cannot reach those same posts in my new blog. Here’s what’s happening…Typepad uses a .html/underscore link format for its posts. Carhik, who helped set up my initial WP installation, tried to create an analogous WP link format. But you cannot use underscores or .htmls in WP post links. So he used the hyphen format. He then tried to create mod_rewrite rules in the htaccess file that would convert the .html links into hyphen links.

So much water has flowed under the bridge since then I don’t even remember whether Carthik’s attempt ever worked. But it sure doesn’t now. Since my old blog and new have the same domain name & path structure, people using the old links are getting to my new blog. But they’re not getting to the post because no conversion happens. See for yourself…a new link (http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2005/05/george-bush-don/) and an old (http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2005/05/george_bush_don.html).

****

UPDATE:

Carthik has once again saved the day by recreating a series of mod_rewrite rules which are now correctly converting old TP permalinks into new WP permalinks. Many thanks once again to this stellar fellow. It appears that what had happened is that the code he originally wrote for htaccess was overwritten when I either created new pages or performed some other blog function which caused material to be written to the htaccess file. I wonder if any other WP users have found this phenomenon to happen? And is there any surefire way to avoid code being overwritten (Carthik wrote his code OUTSIDE the BEGIN and END terms in htaccess which meant they shouldn’t have been overwritten but were nevertheless)?

Also, if anyone else is migrating from TP to WP and would like the benefit of Carthik’s code (I’m not sure it will work in blog configurations that are different than mine–but it may be worth looking at) please e mail me here. And while I’m in no position to offer Carthik’s help, he was very generous in helping me and might be able to provide a few pointers.

****

I’m no expert on ht access nor on mod_rewrite. So I’ve gone to the Codex, checked every link there to external solutions recommended. I’ve posted this to the support forum. I’ve posted at webmasterworld.com too. Many have tried to help, but all to no avail.

One of my problems is that unlike MovableType, TP blogs are hosted by Six Apart on their servers. You pay them (in my case $13/month) for the privilege. I’m guessing that most who move from MT to WP maintain their MT installations and use their MT templates to help in the redirect process. Since I want to shut my TP blog down, I don’t have that luxury.

If anyone out there feels confident they can help me either as a volunteer or for pay, please contact me. I’m desperate! This last technical hurdle is the only thing standing between me and blog bliss. Won’t you help me realize my bliss (and end my heartache)??

Israel’s All for Peace Radio: On the Air!

Thursday, June 16th, 2005

All for Peace logoWhy is the Israeli government so scared of efforts to promote Israeli-Palestinian dialogue they can’t control? Take the case of Radio All for Peace (hear its audio stream) , a fledgling radio station created by Biladi, the Palestinian publisher of the Jerusalem Times and Givat Haviva, an Israeli group promoting dialogue between the two warring peoples. They created a radio station based in East Jerusalem with both Israeli and Palestinian programmers and disc jockeys. They play Israeli and Palestinian music, broadcast public affairs programs in both languages and generally reach out to each community.

This is unheard of in Mideast media. Israeli radio plays a single Arab-language program each week and I don’t believe Palestinian radio ever broadcasts in Hebrew (correct me if I’m wrong). If this doesn’t sound revolutionary to you, consider that there has been so much estrangement between them for so long that even a project like this is considered dangerous and threatening by petty government bureaucrats.

That’s why the Israelis refused to allow into the country All for Peace’s radio transmitter which had been donated by the EU. The station was told it needed the proper permit and license for the equipment. But of course the apparatchiks refused to approve applications made by All for Peace. Finally, the group bought its own transmitter and is now on the air.

Isn’t it delicious when the bureaucrats are beaten at their own game? Mazel tov, All for Peace and happy listening to all my readers.

Africa Calling: Live8′s Sop to African Music

Wednesday, June 15th, 2005

Africa Calling logoBob Geldof and the folks behind Live8, a megaconcert designed to promote awareness of Africa, have reacted to the controversy engendered by its all-western, mostly all-white performer list by asking WOMAD to host a separate concert. Africa Calling on July 2nd will feature an all-African performer roster. This concert will receive some coverage in the midst of the BBC’s overall coverage of Live8.

Concert organizers released a press release today which describes the lineup:Egypt

AFRICA CALLING
Provisional Artist Line-Up

Hosts: Youssou N’Dour and Peter Gabriel

With performances from:

Akim El Sikameya (Algeria/France)
Angelique Kidjo (Benin)
Ayub Ogada (Kenya)
Daara J (Senegal)
Tinariwen (Mali)
Maryam Mursal (Somalia)
Modou Diouf & O Fogum (Senegal)
Salif Keita (Mali)
Shikisha (South Africa)
Thomas Mapfumo & the Blacks Unlimited (Zimbabwe)

Despite this turnaround on the part of Geldof and his partners, there are still disturbing issues here. First, Geldof has “farmed out” Africa Calling to Midge Ure, one of his collaborators, who has in turn farmed out the production duties to WOMAD. Now, WOMAD is a sterling organization which will no doubt do a great job in bringing Africa Calling together. But I see no understanding on Geldof’s part of why his original decision for an all-celebrity, all-western roster was so ill-conceived. It’s almost as if he’s saying: “Oh, let’s just get those whiners off our backs by offering them their own gig.”

Ultimately, I think participating in Africa Calling is the right thing for African musicians and concertgoers to do because any exposure of the music to a wider audience is a good thing. But that being said, this concert smacks of a “separate but equal” event. Like the U.S. Supreme Court in Plessy v. Ferguson, which said that African-Americans could be fully accomodated in “separate but equal” public accomodations, Geldof is saying go have your concert as long as it’s away from us. It strikes me as a terribly awkward compromise.

While I admire WOMAD and Peter Gabriel immensely (though I am teed off at how WOMAD abandoned Seattle–and the U.S.–as a WOMAD venue a few years ago), I’m sure they have a few mixed feelings about how Africa Calling came about. But I wish them all well on July 2nd and wish I could be there.

Africa Calling video is available to watch online NOW on the BBC website.

Ken Schram: Public Breastfeeding is Like Urinating in Public

Friday, June 10th, 2005

The fallout from Barbara Walters on air rebuke of breastfeeding mothers continues (see my post on the story).  Apparently, not to be outdone in the realm of exposing oneself as a public idiot, Ken Schram, KOMO-TV’s resident commentator and blowhard extraordinnaire, has entered the fray.  Ken’s dinosaur-like comments on women who breastfeed in public ("It’s natural.  Well, so is urinating, but most folks don’t up and pee in a glass jar in the middle of the mall.") mark him as one of the world’s biggest bloviators–or at the very least the Pacific NW’s biggest.  His commentary is so rich in ignorance, rank prejudice and blatant misogyny that I just had to quote the entire thing:
 
Ken Schram blowhard

I’m All For This ‘Cover Up’

June 7, 2005
SEATTLE – It was called a "nurse-in."

150 breastfeeding moms showed up outside ABC studios in Manhattan to protest something said by Barbara Walters.

And just what did she say?

Only that sitting next to a woman breastfeeding her baby on an airplane – no cover, no nothing! – made her uncomfortable.

Now, I know we’re supposed to be living in an enlightened society and all, but I’ll tell you what: When some woman sitting next to you pops it out and starts suckling little Johnny or Suzie, I think it makes MOST people uncomfortable!

Yeah, I know.

It’s natural.

Well, so is urinating, but most folks don’t up and pee in a glass jar in the middle of the mall.

Maybe women in general are more OK with breastfeeding in public (though many women tell me no they are not).

But for guys, it is nigh on impossible to switch from breasts as something sexual to breasts as take-out-food.

The "lactavists" who showed up outside ABC to boldly feed their children said their point was that women shouldn’t be discouraged from breast feeding.

Fine.

But that doesn’t mean new moms should feel encouraged to forget all about modesty, while expecting everyone around them to just go with the flow.

If you think Ken Schram is as big an idiot as I do, why don’t you tell him so by sending him an e-mail?

And for those of you who aren’t from the Northwest and who might begin to think we’re all a bunch of prudish suburban red state trogdolytes, this is what a KOMO TV newsanchor, Kathy Goertzen (and a breast cancer survivor) had to say: "Get over it! What an idiot!"  Good on ‘ya, Kathy.

I’ve always wondered what Schram’s bosses at KOMO find in his commentaries that they air them year after year.  Maybe it’s time to re-examine his position at the station?  Do they really need this guy insulting half their listeing audience?  I’d also like to know who the women are whom he claims agree with his point of view.  Aside from his wife and mother of course.  Unfortunately, they have to put up with his pontificating hot air due to blood and marriage.  What about the rest of us?  Do we have to too?

UPDATE: Ken Schram aired a second installment on his breastfeeding story noting he’d received 1,000 e mails (as if he was somehow proud of this) in response. Apparently, he’d like some sympathy for being called “ignorant,” “disgusting,” and other choice epithets. He won’t get any here.

He also quoted a sampling of responses and since not a single one was positive (or at least he didn’t allude to any) I can only guess that his foray into being a parenting commentator will be short-lived. And in case you thought he might’ve learned anything–you can forget about it. The title of his commentary is “Modesty is Moot,” which shows he’s completely missed the point. Whether a woman breastfeeds in public has nothing to do with modesty because it has nothing to do with sex. Why can’t he get that through his big, fat skull?

I wrote him an e mail too, but after reading the seriously nasty things that some women had to say to him I hadn’t the heart to give it to him with both barrels. But I did say he had a lot of nerve speaking for all men in saying that we’re offended by a woman “whipping it out” in public. I’m a guy too and I’m with the moms on this one, Ken.

Bob Geldof of Live8: Tone Deaf?

Friday, June 10th, 2005

live8.jpgBob Geldof, organizer of the famous LiveAid concerts in 1985 is revving up his creaky dog and pony show again hoping to summon the rock ‘n roll masses to Live8, where they will congregate in support of debt relief and international aid for African nations. That’s certainly a worthy cause and I wholeheartedly support these goals.

But in organizing this worthy cause Bob seems to have lost track of one key ingredient: the music.   You host a concert for African and you’re going to book some of the great African headline acts, right?  Baaba Maal, Femi Kuti, Ladysmith Black Mambazo, Oliver Mtukudze, Thomas Mapfumo to name but a few.  You’d want at least some of these performers on your bill wouldn’t you?  Not if you’re Bob Geldof, you wouldn’t.  If you were Bob Geldof, you’d want Elton John, Paul McCartney and the Spice Girls.

As my own form of musical protest, I’m offering the music of yet another African performer you won’t see at Live8.  Here is Cecile Kayirebwa’s (Rwanda) Inkindi (hear it).

kershaw.jpg

All this was too much for Andy Kershaw, BBC 3 world music presenter who, on All Things Considered tonight, railed against the idiocy of Geldof’s musical choices (sorry, but I can’t find the story on NPR’s  site).  But Kershaw wrote an article in The Independent airing his views:

In 20 years [since LiveAid], people have learnt nothing. Geldof has learnt nothing.

I was stunned when I saw the line-up for the five Live8 concerts. I had eagerly trailed my finger along the list of names – but found just one African artist: Youssou N’Dour…Youssou is excellent, but he is on that bill only because of the deeply smug, staggeringly patronising tokenism of the Live8 organisers. Geldof and Harry Goldsmith, the promoter, haven’t even gone so far as to include one African artist at each concert. What does it say about their attitude to Africa?

The response from Geldof’s camp is that he "had just three weeks to put it all together, and he went to his address book and rang the people that he knew". If that’s the case, he has very limited contacts. To compound the snub, the organisers have said they chose only "megastars that pack stadiums around the world… There are no African acts because they are not global superstars." This in a line-up that includes Axelle Red, Yannick Noah and Die Toten Hosen. How condescending can they be?

Cecile Kayirebwa

Ian Ashbridge, founder of Wrasse Records, a label which has signed many prominent African musicians, is right to say that the organisers are "a cartel of well-meaning, white, middle-class westerners…"

I can’t even see the names of many Western artists there who are known for their affection for Africa. Where is Peter Gabriel? Where is Robert Plant?

Why don’t they hold one of the concerts in Africa, where the cream of African talent could have performed? The real answer is that most of the so-called "global superstars" on the Live8 bill would be terrified to go. They have no knowledge of Africa, let alone a genuine commitment to addressing its problems.

If we are going to change the West’s perception of Africa, events like this are the perfect opportunity to do something for Africa’s self-esteem. But the choice of artists for the Live8 concerts will simply reinforce the global perception of Africa’s inferiority.

If the organisers don’t include more African musicians, I think Youssou N’Dour should boycott the event.

The New York Times published an excruciatingly beside -the-point article about the concert which covered the controversy in a single short paragraph.  The writer seemed most interested in whether the Spice Girls wouild reunite for a concert appearance.  Talk about running with the lead!  When they cover New York or Washington, DC, their coverage is quite good.  But take them out of what they know and they founder as this story illustrates.

Why is PBS Afraid of New Israel Fund?

Wednesday, June 8th, 2005

The New York Times brings us the shameful news that PBS has once again capitulated in the face of public opposition to NPR’s Mideast coverage by Christian evangelicals and pro-Israel Jews (including one California congressman). This time it was the exemplary New Israel Fund which felt the sting when its radio spots were rejected for NPR stations in New York and San Francisco.


New Israel Fund Gaza Disengagement campaign

This is controversial advocacy?? click here
to learn more about this NIF project

According to the Times, an executive at the advertising company which maintains KQED’s (San Francisco) advertising program sent an e mail saying that “the rejection of the underwriting credit by the station came in response to listener complaints about National Public Radio’s news coverage of the Middle East.” Officials at KQED and WNYC disputed this saying:

they rejected the underwriting credit…in exchange for an advertisement, because it was the kind of advocacy advertising that they routinely decline.

What the hell is that supposed to mean? Here’s KQED’s sponsorship guidelines published on their own site:

What is not allowed on KQED Public Radio:

* No comparative statements (e.g. the best, bigger, faster)
* No qualitative statements which involve subjective evaluation of quality (e.g. fine, great, rich, superb)
* No price information (including “free”)
* No call to action statements which direct the audience: to call, to visit, to try, to compare
* No inducement to buy statements which direct the audience to purchase the product (e.g. free trial period, 2 for 1)
* No first or second pronouns (e.g. I, me, you)

So what about NIF ad or its agenda violates these guidelines? It doesn’t even say a word about “advocacy” here.

Here’s the original message NIF proposed airing with its ad along with the amended later version:

support for the station “comes from the New Israel Fund, promoting equality and social justice for all Israelis” and directs listeners to the organization’s Web site, www.nif.org. An earlier version contained a clause directing listeners to visit the fund’s Web site “for information on Israel’s disengagement from Gaza,” but that phrase was deleted after it was challenged by some stations, including WETA, for running afoul of their positions against advocacy ads.

How is promoting “equality and social justice for all Israelis” advocacy advertising? And how is providing “information on Israel’s disengagement from Gaza” advocacy advertising? Besides, this IS the policy of the Israeli government. So what would make it “controversial?” It’s controversial to the settler movement no doubt who oppose the disengagement. But should the settlers and their domestic supporters in the U.S. be setting PBS and NPR’s agenda?

Would PBS refuse sponsor ads from the NAACP? Or from the Ford Foundation, the MacArthur Foundation or any number of others which promote social justice? I doubt it. So what’s the difference with NIF? The entire difference is the existence of a small, vociferous pro-Israel minority which is so frightened of anything that might remotely be perceived as criticism of Israel (not that I’d agree that NIF does this) that it wishes to completely stifle any discussion of social issues within Israel.

I say it’s shameful that a government-sponsored agency has to kowtow to no-nothings like these. It closes down the free flow of ideas and information about a very important foreign policy issue and it’s downright un-American if you ask me.

By the way, e mails from the advertising agent who negotiated between the NPR stations and NIF indicate that KQED had agreed to the script for the ads:

On May 6 Mr. Zellhart wrote that “KQED/SF is ok with this script,” and he repeated it in an e-mail message on May 16.

Now, KQED and the agent’s boss are placing all the blame squarely on the shoulders of the agent. That’s a low blow and I’m sure glad I don’t work for that guy’s jerky boss. He just decided to make his underling the scapegoat. The station is at fault. Clearly, they authorized the ad and then got cold feet probably when Ken Tomlinson or a high-level CPB board member or someone of that ilk put pressure on them. It’s despicable really.

If you feel like me, if you live in San Francisco or New York and especially if you’re a subscriber, please call, write or e mail the stations to express your displeasure at this lily-livered, cowardly behavior. Tell them they can do better by their subscribers and their viewers.

KQED president
WNYC listerner services

And perhaps you’d like to support NIF’s important work promoting economic and social equality in Israel?Profiles in Courage (Perennial Classics)

The Times quotes Jeffrey Dworkin, one of PBS’ two new “liberal-conservative” ombudsmen (is that an oddfellow combination or what?) replies to the controversy:

“Underwriting now has such political overtones, that accepting or rejecting money from a controversial funder will always muddy the waters around public radio’s independence.”

First, what in heaven’s name makes NIF “a controversial funder?” I don’t get it. They protect women from domestic violence. They teach Israeli Arabs how to use computers. They help advocate on behalf of the Israeli poor and elderly. “What’s so funny ’bout peace, love and understanding?” to quote Elvis Costello.

But Dworkin does nail the problem precisely. If they reject funding from NIF then that certainly does seriously call into question the independence of NPR’s radio stations. And rightfully so. So what are they going to do about it?

NPR’s president, Peter Edelman expressed NIF’s deep disappointment at the decision:

“We’re disappointed and a little perplexed because the message is a pretty mainstream message,” Mr. Edelman said. “Ours is a message being stated and endorsed by a wide swath of organizations.”

To me this entire episode should be entitled: Profiles in Cowardice (that’s for all of you old enough to remember JFK’s great book, Profiles in Courage).

Barbara Walters: Stop Insulting Breastfeeding Moms!

Wednesday, June 8th, 2005
'Lactivist demo against Barbara Walters‘Lactivists’ tell Barbara Walters where to go
(credit: Marilynn K. Yee/NYT)

Barbara Walters made a stupid comment on her ABC program, The View, this week when she told her viewers how uncomfortable she felt sitting next to a women breastfeeding her baby on an airplane. Flickerbug watched the show and recounts the gory details:

Ms. Walters commented how she was luckily separated, by her hairdresser in the center seat, from the woman in the aisle who needed to breastfeed her child on the flight. Not only did she comment on how she found this disturbing to “view,” she questioned why this woman wouldn’t have the decency to cover up.

Doesn’t ABC provide her with a producer? Aren’t producers supposed to prevent celebrities like her from making stupid statements on air which are going to offend a significant portion of their female viewing audience (and for Pete’s sake, she does a daytime talk show!)? It only goes to show that Barbara is a media dinosaur, born of another era and maybe it’s time to retire her to wherever good dinosaurs go when they’re no longer useful to the species. But I sorta wish Stone Phillips or Sean Hannity or Bill O’Reilly had said it because they certainly would agree with Barbara and it’d be so much more fun to see them skewered mercilessly by breastfeeding mommies everywhere (and their supportive spouses–of which I am one). Barbara so deserved the 200 mommies converging on ABC’s headquarters in Manhattan for a public ‘lact-in’ (remember those sit-in of the 60s?). The New York Times carries a story about the demonstration against stupid media celebrities who open their mouths on the air:

The protest…brought about 200 women to ABC’s headquarters yesterday. They stood nursing their babies in the unmistakably public venue of Columbus Avenue and West 67th Street. They held signs reading, “Shame on View” and “Babies are born to be breastfed.” Ms. Walters, who remarked a few weeks ago on the show that the sight of a woman breast-feeding on an airplane next to her had made her uncomfortable, said through a spokesman that “it was a particular circumstance and we are surprised that it warrants a protest”

Not only did Barbara stick her foot in her mouth, her spokesperson just shoved her other foot in there too. “Surprised that it warrants a protest?” Ain’t that just dandy. Old lady who probably never even breastfed herself expresses disdain for a good portion of the female population and, what did she expect, flowers??! I say more power to these mothers. Breastfeed wherever you need to. If someone else has a problem with it–make it their problem and not yours. And if, God forbid, a business refuses service to you or asks you to adjourn to the bathroom, you just bring 100 mothers to their front door and make them rethink their dinosaur attitudes. The sooner people realize that the breast is not a sex organ, but a means to sustain life, the sooner they’ll advance into the early 21st century. I especially liked this comment in the article:

“It’s like any other prejudice. They have to get used to it,” said Rebecca Odes, co-founder of The New Mom blog, who attended the ABC protest. "People don’t want to see it because they feel uncomfortable with it, and they feel uncomfortable with it because they don’t see it.”

That’s precisely right. Generations of men have ingrained into older women that it’s insulting or offensive to see a woman breastfeed in public. But why settle for the received wisdom when it’s prejudiced and just plain wrong? After an especially nasty run in with my own mother (one of Barbara’s fellow dinosaurs) who fled the room when my wife nursed our eldest son in her presence, I noticed this story about women protesting when the morons who run Newburgh airport removed a piece of public art which displayed (are you ready for this?) a mother feeding her newborn. I wrote my own blog post about it.