Wailing Wall and Dome of the Rock

Today, the morning started with a call home…as it does most mornings. While I’m so thankful for this wonderful experience being in Palestine/Israel; I must confess that I miss home. I miss my wife, sons, and extended family members the most. There’s nothing in particular that I miss as it is the rhythm of life that I have become accustomed to which involves their presence. In so many ways, I know who I am because of them. Dr. Naim Akbar would describe this as a part of the African World View: There is no “me” without “we.” My family provides for me a sense of identity.

And if there was a theme to this past Thursday, “identity” would be it. We started the day with a tour of two very important sites for Jews and Muslims: the Wailing Wall (which is part of the remains of the Second Temple built by Herod the Great) and Haram al-Sharif (where the Dome of the Rock – a very holy place for Followers of Islam) can be found. These two very holy sites which mean so much to these two passionate people groups are almost side by side. It is amazing looking at the Wailing Wall which Jews are praying toward and then look up and see the golden dome where Muslims believe that the Prophet Mohammad ascended to the heavens with the angel, Gabriel. Though I’m not Jewish or Muslim, I felt a deep and abiding spirit of reverence while at these locations. I decided to wear my Ghanian garb and it brought with it a few questions from the Muslim elders. I greeted them in Arabic and with my brown skin and traditional attire it made them pause and either invite me into the mosque for prayer or ask where I was from.

I could not enter the mosque for prayer (only Muslims are allowed into the al-Aqsa mosque), but the two Palestinian women who are a part of our delegation did accept the offer to enter for prayer. Already being two very proud Palestinians, I’ve seen them be edified even more so by walking the ground of their ancestral homeland. Being “home” truly does make a difference.

Which is part of the reason that I wanted to come on this trip. I wanted to learn more about the land, the peoples, and the conflict here that involves approximately 4.5 million Palestinian refugees who just want to return home to their land and to their lives.

That’s a side of the “Middle East” conflict that Americans are not allowed to see according to our media. When we see Palestinians in American news they are most times one-dimensional characters. They are stone-throwing, angry, irrational, terrorists who hate “our” way of life and don’t want peace. They are never portrayed as people living under the harsh boot of the Israeli Government’s occupation. They are never portrayed as people who at the end of the day just want to go back home. I’m going to continue hearing the un-filtered stories of Palestinians and Israelies while here and look forward to sharing my experiences in fuller detail with you when I get home…(I also look forward to throwing my television out of the window!)

That’s all for right now.

Salaam.

5th April 2010 10:44 EST

WikiLeaks has released a classified US military video depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad — including two Reuters news staff.

Reuters has been trying to obtain the video through the Freedom of Information Act, without success since the time of the attack. The video, shot from an Apache helicopter gun-site, clearly shows the unprovoked slaying of a wounded Reuters employee and his rescuers. Two young children involved in the rescue were also seriously wounded.

The military did not reveal how the Reuters staff were killed, and stated that they did not know how the children were injured.

After demands by Reuters, the incident was investigated and the U.S. military concluded that the actions of the soldiers were in accordance with the law of armed conflict and its own “Rules of Engagement”.

Consequently, WikiLeaks has released the classified Rules of Engagement for 2006, 2007 and 2008, revealing these rules before, during, and after the killings.

WikiLeaks has released both the original 38 minutes video and a shorter version with an initial analysis. Subtitles have been added to both versions from the radio transmissions.

WikiLeaks obtained this video as well as supporting documents from a number of military whistleblowers. WikiLeaks goes to great lengths to verify the authenticity of the information it receives. We have analyzed the information about this incident from a variety of source material. We have spoken to witnesses and journalists directly involved in the incident.

WikiLeaks wants to ensure that all the leaked information it receives gets the attention it deserves. In this particular case, some of the people killed were journalists that were simply doing their jobs: putting their lives at risk in order to report on war. Iraq is a very dangerous place for journalists: from 2003- 2009, 139 journalists were killed while doing their work.

Apparently, Maryland isn’t the only state opening the door for more gambling. Check out this piece from CNN:

It’s situations like these that remind me of the fact that politicians are generally not the ones who come up with progressive ideas to engage challenging or transformative times. Elected officials all around the country are pushing this “old idea” in a time where many people are searching for a new vision for the future. As the world’s social structures continue to crumble, people are realizing that the kingdoms of this world have long been promoting a way of life that is at best unsustainable and at worst criminal. The gig is up.

While the national and state governments continue grasping for straws; the truly progressive and sustainable ideas are coming from everyday people. That’s right. Not the corporate heads, not the TV talking heads, and not the politicians – but the people.

Even a surface study of contemporary American history will reveal that many of the best and most progressive ideas were NOT born in the halls of Congress or in the committees of City Hall. But the best ideas were often born in the bosom of the community that was most directly impacted by whatever the challenge was at that time. Our celebrity culture helps to mislead the masses into believing in their own inferiority when it comes to proposing ideas for the now and the future. However, it is everyday folks that have what it takes to lay the groundwork for what tomorrow needs to look like. Everyday folks need only have two important ingredients: imagination and at the very least an ambivalence toward the existing political arrangement.

Take for instance what’s going on in Ohio. The CNN video above spotlights the owner of the Cleveland Cavaliers, Dan Gilbert, who along with his partners spent $50 million to convince voters to put another casino in Ohio – using the same ol’ tired casino-justifications: the money will be used for public education, horse racing, and will bring in jobs.

Now in that same state, while Gilbert and his guys are pushing the old idea, the community has come together to give birth to a progressive, forward-looking idea: Evergreen Cooperatives; a new model of economic development that created a network of employee-owned businesses.

As the Mayor of Cleveland, Frank Jackson, said at the end of the Evergreen video, “Cleveland wants to be where the world is going, not where the world is.” That’s the type of visionary ideas and ideals that we need in Baltimore, Detroit, and many other cities as well.

As Mario Osava says in his article – Another Kind of Economics is possible. And it’s up to us – regular folks to organize, become more informed, and transform our communities from below instead of waiting for help to come down from the top of the political hierarchy. (Here’s a secret: most of them don’t have a clue!)

For more ideas and stories about how communities are coming up with democratic, community-based, economic development options, check out this resource-rich website: Community-Wealth.org.

Perhaps you’ve caught this new show on CBS that takes corporate CEO’s and has them go “undercover” in their own companies to hear the perspective of workers and learn about the business “from below.” In Undercover Boss, the corporate execs take on a new name, perhaps adjust their appearance, and pose as a potential new worker within their own company. They go through the different departments of their company and are taken under wing by a low-wage worker who shows them the ropes.

After watching a couple of episodes, you quickly pick up the pattern of the show. Corporate exec goes “down” to the worker bees curious about how to make his [and yes "his" was intentional] company better. Dedicated and hardworking employees mentor the “undercover boss” and in the process a relationship is formed [right on cue with the sentimental music]. The “boss” learns that the job “down below” isn’t so easy and is portrayed as clumsily and inefficiently trying to keep up. Then, “boss” encounters one of his employees having some type of hardship and they “risk” blowing their cover by running off to the car and making a phone call to help them. Finally, the climax is reached with the “boss” bringing the worker bees up to Corporate Office and revealing his true identity. Shock then sentimental moments ensue with the “boss” promising to help the worker bees advance in the company and in their personal lives. A big corporate rally closes out the show with the “boss” telling a hall full of employees what he has done and promising to be more sensitive to the needs of workers. The workers cheer and the credits roll.

This show does wonders in profiling corporate executives as beneficent, unselfish, and altruistic humanitarians. Not only does it project executives in an immensely favorable light, but it also lauds corporations and propagates the “Boss-worker” paradigm. It shows workers – skilled, passionate, affable workers who may have some minor gripes about the company, but ultimately are portrayed as being appreciative almost to the point of reverential to the corporate entity by the end of the show.

My critiques of the show are many:

1. So far it is a glaring indictment on the lack of diversity within “Corporate America.” The boardroom meetings with the “boss” are overwhelming White and male. The worker bees are overwhelmingly Non-white and female.

2. The show perpetuates paternalism by showing the White, male executive saving the day for a “helpless” worker who apparently got into a bad predicament on their own with no influence from outside factors. (I’m thinking of the female worker in the first episode whose house was about to be foreclosed on because she wasn’t making enough to pay her mortgage and the “undercover boss” in a charitable act paid it with no real analysis of how unjust wages from his company probably impact thousands more on his payroll.)

3. Given all of the heat that corporate executives have received (and rightly so) in relation to this so-called “global economic crisis” and recession, this is a perfect show to clean up the corporate image. Because of the greed of many corporate executives, many people are struggling right now to make ends meet. (Where is the show about greedy executives and unjust corporations? Oh, I forgot. That’s the show we’re living in!)

This “television sitcom” just might amount to being a well-financed public relations campaign launched to support the status quo and existing power structure at a time when many people are considering other ways of “being” in the world. (More people are looking at co-operatives like the Cleveland Food Co-op, Red Emmas Bookstore in Baltimore, and mutual aid initiatives like Common Security Clubs.) Presented as being serendipitous, I posit that “Undercover Boss” is really intentional and strategic. It is in direct opposition to the people’s history of corporations presented by the late Howard Zinn in his book, A People’s History of the United States and intrinsically undermines the efforts of Human Rights groups like United Workers in Baltimore and the Coalition of Immokalee Workers in Florida – both being labor-rights organizations led by poor workers.

Watch the show if you want, but as you’re watching hear the words of Gil Scott Heron as he reminds us that The Revolution will NOT be televised!

Be clear that you’re watching a dramatic press release scripted to the hilt to support the current power dynamic in this country. The Supreme Court recently gave Corporations the right to continue unjustly influencing national politics, but now to a greater degree and CBS – with this show – has given Corporations greater ability to influence your mind. So far it’s a great year to be a Corporation.

According to MSNBC political analyst, Keith Olbermann, he is. In fact, according to Olbermann, Wright should turn in his clergy collar and and give his Bible to someone who has read it because “he is no longer by the stretch of anybody’s imagination a Man of God.” Pretty harsh words.

The offense came while Dr. Jeremiah Wright was attending the annual Hampton Minister’s Conference this past week. A columnist from Norfolk’s Daily Press put a microphone in Wright’s face asking him questions in relation to the President. While the national arms of mainstream media sliced out the pieces of the interview that would be most sensational absent of context, the Norfolk Daily provides a fuller picture of what transpired.

After assuring his inquirer that Obama is “his son” who he refuses to disown, the reporter then asks if he has spoken to President Obama since he has been in the White House. That’s where the trouble begins.

“Them Jews ain’t going let him talk to me.”

Yea. That produces a certain uneasiness when heard. I replaced “Jews” with other ethnic groups and repeated the statement outloud to myself adjusting the characters in the conversation to make sure I felt the impression of the phrase. It does sound harsh.

But then I examined the context of the statement because I know that the Jewish Community, like all other communities, is not a monolithic group. Wright says, “Them Jews.” Which Jews is he talking about?

Wright explictly says in his comments that he’s talking about Zionist Jews and “AIPAC Jews.” Readers here know that AIPAC, the American Israeli Political Action Committee, brags about being the most powerful lobby group in D.C. It’s a group that holds tremendous sway in the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives. Wright further makes clear that he’s talking about Zionist Jews in a subsequent interview with Mark Thompson of Sirius Radio. Wright accuses “these” Jews of controlling President Obama by forbidding him to send U.S. representatives to the Durban Review Conference on Racism (which he mistakenly calls the Darfur Review Conference) and by justifying ethnic cleansing in Gaza which he calls a “sin and a crime against humanity.”

Oh. He’s talking about those Jews? The same Jews that other Jews are standing up against like these Jews, these Jews, and these Jews?

So what’s the real issue here? I posit the real issue boils down to deflection. Mainstream media has to keep your eyes off of the real issue and in this case the real issue centers on the occupation and injustices committed against the Palestinian people. The CNN video conveniently cuts the interview off before Wright starts talking about humans rights violations in Gaza and Olbermann simply ignores that part of Wright’s statement opting to fan the flames of the sensational by taking a phrase out of context.

There is a Jewish blog that was created to track efforts to stifle open debate on U.S.-Israeli policy called muzzlewatch.

That’s how unrelenting this organized effort to silence critics of Israeli Policy toward Palestinians is. Even ultra leftwing political talking heads like Olbermann won’t touch the apartheid of the Palestinians. He chooses to put a well-respected African American clergyman in his sites.

So for the next week or so we’ll be talking about “them Jews” and we won’t be talking about breaches of international law and human rights abuses committed by the Israeli Government and Military.

I kindly disagree, Mr. Olbermann. Reverend Jeremiah Wright is not the worst person in the world. He just has the courage to speak of one of the worst examples of politically acceptable injustices in the world. If only you possessed that courage as well.

Pastor John Hagee

Some of you remember my announcement not long ago that this month’s Sunday School at my church would be different than the norm. This month we’ve focused our energy on the issue of the Middle East and particularly Palestine/Israel.

Before beginning this, I wasn’t sure how it would all turn out. However, I’m glad to report that things have gone quite well. The discussion has been engaging, the searching through scripture has been eye-opening, and we all are learning so much from and about each other.

For the first two Sundays, we’ve focused pretty sharply on the question of the Jews being “God’s Chosen People.” While I’ve always had an opinion on this question, it was only until engaging in this study that I’ve had the opportunity to pin down passages of scripture which suggest a biblical pattern that challenges mainline traditional thinking. I’m confident now that those who have been attending our sessions are on the path to new understanding on the question of “God’s Chosen People” and are able to articulate by way of scripture where they stand.

Now that we’ve begun turning the soil over on the theological and religious aspects of the Palestine/Israel issue, we’ll begin this Sunday grappling with the political angle. It doesn’t hurt that last week the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) held it’s annual conference in DC. Not only will we review their perspective on the Middle East question, but we’ll also review the growing counter-argument from activists themselves and even other Jews who decry what’s being done in their name.

Deepening our perspective on the intersection between Faith and public policy, we’ll review the Pope’s recent statements regarding a two-state solution and we’ll hear from Pastor John Hagee of the Cornerstone Church in Texas and Founder and National Chairman of Christians United for Israel (CUFI). CUFI has designated Sunday, May 17, 2009 as Christians United for Israel Sunday.

Before the month is out we’ll also explore how the American media helps to shape our perspective on the Middle East question. I purchased an amazing documentary from the Media Education Foundation entitled, Peace, Propaganda, and the Promised Land. I’ve never seen a documentary that more accurately analyzes how American media broadcasts a distinct bias on the issue.

Feel free to join us in dialogue this month around this very important issue every Sunday morning from 9:30 – 10:30AM at Pleasant Hope Baptist Church.

The New York Post has published this cartoon today that that has caused quite a stir in many circles. The editor of The Post released a statement saying that it’s just a parody of recent events and a broad swipe at Washington’s attempt to revive the economy.

Al Sharpton, among others, are wondering if something more sinister is at play here. Given the long history of violent reprisal against people of color for daring to enter the political arena, some question if The Post is sending a coded racial insult with the President of the United States, Barack Obama, as the butt of the joke.

If this is in fact a deliberate attempt to make a statement about President Obama or even something that floated up unfiltered from the subconscious of a man who has been classically conditioned in the ways of White Hegemony, what I can’t say about this is that it is surprising. For many the question wasn’t “if” something like this would happen, but “when.” A man with melanin in his skin sitting in the Oval Office will prove to be too much for some people.

A man with a rifle drives up to the capitol with a “delivery” for Obama and now this?

Buckle up, folks. It’s going to be an interesting 4 years.

Source: City Paper

Assume its poetic justice. Assume its sweet revenge. Just don’t assume that young people are always the problem, because that would be far from the truth.

In the February 3rd Edition of the Sun, an article titled, Teacher in assault pointed to as Instigator, showed that the infamous cell phone video fight between a student and teacher was a snippet of an incident that was instigated by the teacher. On April 4, 2008, Baltimore City and the rest of the country was shocked to see the images of a student sitting on top her teacher assaulting her vigorously while other students looked on. The fight and video made local and national headlines, and the assaulted teacher, Ms. Jolita Berry was even a guest on NBC’s Today Show, where she instantly became a symbol of the victimized teacher.

However, after further investigation and several key witnesses coming forward, the fight, that was supposed to have been started by the student, was actually caused by Ms. Berry. Why did Ms. Berry decide to paint a biased picture about what really happened that day? The melee between the student and Ms. Berry sparked a nationwide conversation about teacher-student relations and classroom safety.

Around the city, the incident caused an uproar, from North Ave to City Hall to the streets. School and city officials tried to respond quickly by assuring the city that Baltimore City Public Schools were safe. We heard the barrage of responses from politicians, teachers and union officials about how teachers should be “protected” in the classroom. There were cries for more school police and the need for better training so teachers should know how to handle “problem children” in the class. And with all of the fanfare and rash judgments, assumptions were made, attitudes were hardened and the city’s youngest member was once again left out in the cold, without being heard. There was hardly a whisper about the view of the students compared to the chorus singing about the protection of teachers.

In my conversations with students at a local west Baltimore middle school, a few days after the incident, there was the attitude that a situation like this was bound to happen. These students shared their stories of how some teachers just did not respect students. They said these teachers had a tendency to use profanity at them and in the classroom in general. Plus, the teachers themselves had attitude problems and instead of trying to diffuse tense moments, they resorted to using language that both demeaned and instigated a conflict. So where is the justice for students who are confronted with this behavior from their teacher?

Based on the article, Ms Berry pushed the student, used obscenities when yelling at her, and clearly prepared herself for a physical confrontation. Given all these indicators a fight was going to happen, the student should have reported Ms. Berry right then and there. However, this was a case where the student clearly felt disrespected by the teacher and refused to accept it.

I know it is easier to blame a teenage girl for poor judgment rather than a grown woman but, in a day and time when teachers are having intimate relationships with students, political corruption runs rampant, and other issues affects those at the top, assumptions can no longer be made that authority figures always exercise proper judgment. So incidents of this nature should not be viewed from the lens of who is involved but based on what really happened. And even though, the young girl was wrong for fighting her teacher, Ms. Berry was even more liable for instigating the situation and making the whole city believe she was a victim.

If the school system and the city truly want to build a stronger relationship with young people, then truth and justice must be the foundation of that effort. The authority figures i.e. politicians, police offices and school officials, have to be willing show young people that truth and justice is the cornerstone for governance and authority. As a city, we should not be so judgmental about the things we hear regarding young people without getting the full truth, because quick judgments in a limited circumstance can sometimes be more destructive than the circumstance itself.

If Ms. Berry would have had a more peaceful attitude, things would have been different. If she would have seized the moment to show that good judgment is the best way to resolve conflict, things would have been different. If she would have been honest about what happened, then this incident would have been a step forward for the city to have a different relationship with young people. However, none of this happened, and unfortunately, those lessons were never taught.

Farajii R. Muhammad serves as President of New Light Leadership Coalition, Inc. and host of Listen Up! on public radio WEAA88.9 FM

Today, I preached a sermon entitled, “Hanging on to Christmas” with a scriptural focus of Matthew 2:16-19. This passage describes Herod’s murderous response to the birth of Jesus. For fear that the Christ Child would push him from his perch as client ruler of Judea, Herod ordered infanticide in Bethlehem and the surrounding area hoping to ensare the baby Jesus and add his corpse to the pile of dead bodies in town. Those in the Catholic Church identify this sorrowful occurrence in scripture as The Slaughter of the Innocents. In my sermon, I remarked on how soon after the birth of Jesus, the scriptural focus centers on Herod and his deadly campaign. The reader can barely get through the giving of gifts by the Magi before spiritual wickedness in high places demands an audience.

The parallel to current events is gravely ironic.

Two days after Christmas 2008 – two days after many purpose to celebrate the birth of the central figure in the Christian Faith, Israel began a murderous military campaign killing hundreds of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

The bias of Western media is obvious. They would want you to believe that all of the dead are “militants” or “terrorists.” These days if governments attach that label to someone, it basically justifies them stripping the individual (or group of individuals) of all of their rights as Human Beings. Mainstream media takes the cue and refuses to probe into the situation with more than a sound byte analysis.

What’s truly disturbing to me is when those in the Christian Community – especially those who are leaders – either remain silent to this grave injustice or take an extreme Pro-Israel stance based on an uncontextualized understanding of Psalm 122:6.

A basic understanding of the history of the region would compel all Human Beings of Conscience and Faith to cry out and renounce this injustice. Israel is committing systematic acts of genocide and mass murder toward the Palestinian People under the false pretext of national security with weapons that were “made in the U.S.A.” Despite the so-called truce between Israel and Hamas, Israel continued to severely restrict food, water, medical supplies, and mobilization to the 1.5 million Palestianians within the Gaza Strip.

Though some would have you to believe that all Jews stand in support of the unjust actions of the Israeli Government, there are many that reject being silent partner or active participant to the atrocities, like Jewish Voices for Peace and the Shministim – a group of high school students in Israel who have been imprisoned for refusing to serve in an army that occupies Palestinian Territories.

The Israeli Government is the greatest purveyor of violence in the Middle East and because they wield so much influence on the United States Congress, the United Nations, and other major governmental bodies, they are given a free pass to kill innocent Palestinians at will.

The Slaughter of the Innoncents continues today in Palestine.