A few days ago I got in the mail an opportunity to become a charter subscriber to a new weekly news service of the Christian Science Monitor.  I appreciate the CSM in that I know that they will publish stories that the MSM (Main Street Media) will not.  So I was tempted to subscribe, but thought I would use this opportunity to see if they would publish anything about the Israeli piracy of the Free Gaza ship of supplies.  So I wrote to them and asked them if they had published anything about the incident.

This was their reply.  I followed the link and was very pleased with their reporting.  I was also pleased that they used it as an opportunity of reporting on the devastating effects of the Israeli blockade on the whole fishing industry of Palestine.  I had not realized the depth of the devastation.  I thought you might like to read their article also.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0701/p06s02-wome.html

After reading their article, I’m going to subscribe.

Boston Globe:  Letter to the Editors,

Here are quotes from the article on Biden (Biden says Israel can set own course on Iran nuclear threat”, Monday, July 6, 2009) but with the names changed from Israel to Pakistan and from Iran to India.

“Vice President Joe Biden signaled that the Obama administration would not stand in the way if Pakistan chose to attack India’s nuclear facilities”  “Pakistan has a right to defend itself and make its own decisions on national security.”  “Look, Pakistan can determine for itself – it’s a sovereign nation – what’s in their interest and what they decide to do relative to India and anyone else.”  “Look, we cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do.”  “Pakistan, like the United States, has a right to determine what is in its interests.” 

Bush/Chaney/Rice = Obama/Biden/Clinton when it comes to the Middle East debacle.  Our elections provided no change there.

Thanks so much for the response. 

You know I’m not one to tell you what you should do.  And I’m not one to tell you what you should not do.  You’ve got too many voices already in your head telling you all those things so you don’t need one other voice added to that cacophony. 

But I think I would like to reinforce your own statement here that you are too much of a people person to work towards a PhD and get mired in research.  I get the feeling that you enjoy the academic environment with its stimulation and the stimulating professors and fellow-students.  I find that whole environment intoxicating also.  But I think if you were to go on to get a PhD it would be to just remain in that environment for a longer period of time.  This would be an ironic case of where the journey becomes the destination.

Just as a parent needs to raise a child to become independent, we must do that with our own selves also.  We need to prepare ourselves for exiting our own cocoons and flying away as the creatures we were meant to be.  The caterpillar may love to snuggle in its warm and stimulating cocoon, but it needs to prepare itself for its flight.  I think your flight should be among people.  People with whom you can enjoy getting to know and enjoy helping.  And I am sure that there are going to be a lot of people who are made happy by having you as a butterfly fly into their presence. 

Did I ever tell you that your wings are going to be beautiful?

Date:  4/13/09

To:

Re:  To Say a Prayer

The other day you told me that your cancer might be coming back, and that you had some tests done.  You mentioned that you were very fearful of the results you were to receive at the end of this week.  You said that you knew that I didn’t believe in god, but would I please pray for you.

As you may or may not know, I am very much into storytelling as I am a member of two storytelling networks.  But, as opposed to most of the members, I am not into storytelling by standing up and telling stories to groups of children and/or adults.  These are Platform or Performance storytellers.  Rather, I am into storysharing where I will sit down one-on-one with someone and will try to draw out of them their own personal stories. 

It is a similar thing with prayer.  Instead of praying for you by myself in a room at my house, I would rather sit down with you and draw out of you the prayers that you have inside yourself.  These would be both the prayers of your own felt needs and perhaps also your subconscious prayers.  I feel that this would be more therapeutic and more helpful than my isolated prayers would be.

Date:  6/22/09

To:

Re:  The Power of Nonviolence and Iran’s Demonstrations

I wish I could be more optimistic on the positive effects of nonviolence.  But I lost my positive attitude back in the Bush administration.  We witnessed the largest demonstration ever assembled (five million people here in the US and another 3 million outside the US) and the only response we got was the President’s social finger.  The powers that be have realized that the best way to counter these demonstrations is to do nothing and to ignore them.  If they fight the demonstrators, they lose ground.  But if they ignore the demonstrators, nothing changes. 

Just because there are large demonstrations, does not mean that there will be any changes in the actions of the administration.  The US proved that with Bush. 

At first, the change-agents in Iran were looking for change within the current Iranian system.  Then, as the administration beat back the demonstrators, the demonstrators realized that they needed to require a change OF the system, not just IN the system.  They are not prepared to implement a change OF the system right now as a change at this level is recent and has not had a chance to gel.  I don’t expect to see any change IN the system or OF the system as a result of all of this.

The United States is a leader in many things – including setting a bad example of Democracy.  And I’m sure that Iran will prove to be an apt student of the Bush tactics.

David

Date:  6/23/09

To:

Re:  Question of where I work that would include such a GLBTA project: (Part B)

Since you asked where I work, I’ll answer.  I often don’t present that at first until someone has a chance to know me better -especially those involved in the Peace and Justice Movement.  I work for Raytheon. 

Although you haven’t indicated a curiosity of how a person involved in Peace and Justice can work for a company like Raytheon, I would like to give my reasons up front. 

First, to say that everyone in an organization like Raytheon is the “enemy” is like hearing Bush say that everyone in North Korea or Iraq is an enemy and deserves to be bombed.  There can be and there are good people even in such an organization.

Also, if I thought it would make a difference to Raytheon if I left, I would leave immediately.  But it would make no difference.  Also, I am not working in anything that deals with bombs or missiles.  I work in Finance and computer applications doing financial analysis.  Also, there are many areas of Raytheon that do not deal with bombs or missiles – such as the radar systems for commercial airports, and even night vision windshields for automobiles. 

Also, it becomes a slippery slope to say one should not work for such a company.  Does that mean that one should not work for a computer company like Hewlett Packard because computers are used for warfare?  It would also go that no one should work for the government since they are the ultimate ones responsible for the senseless wars.  But I wouldn’t want to go to where no one in government was anti-war.

And lastly, I have been able to be a force for good because of my position within Raytheon.  When we invaded Iraq with our “shock and awe” bombs, although I didn’t stand on a soap box, people knew where I stood.  I was able to have people come up to me and say that they were glad that there was someone else that felt as they did about the invasion.  Also, I was in a position to counter lunch-table conversations where the arguments for comparing Saddaam to Hitler could be countered rather than left unquestioned.  And also through Raytheon, I have had many opportunities to do community work such as being a math mentor to junior high kids, doing volunteer work at homeless shelters, etc. 

All of Raytheon, and everyone in Raytheon should not be considered the “enemy”.

Raytheon has a great GLBTA group that they support.  This is a network of GLBT’s and the A stands for Allies – of which I’m one.  They have won all kinds of awards for their GLBT support of their workers (such as having separate recruiting tables at job fairs targeting GLBTs to let them know that they would be comfortable in that environment, and also for their support of local GLBT events.)  As an ally, I felt that this would be an opportunity to not only support the GLBT community, but also to promote my anti-violence values.  My anti-war stance is only a subset of my values of anti-violence.  Or perhaps I should say that anti-violence, to me, is a meta-level above anti-war. 

This is, I think, a great way that an individual can do something proactively to affect their first degree of separation contacts rather than just railing against those who are six degrees separated.  I would rather do something locally than just talk globally. 

I hope you agree.

Date:  6/18/09

Re:  GLBTA Project (Original Letter from me) (Part A)

To: Leaders of the Nonviolent Peaceforce of Greater Boston, and others,

I am in the process of working out plans where I work for a monthly Commemoration for those affected by anti-GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender) violence.  My plans are to have a separate table in the dining area at lunch time with a candle where people can come for a time of silence to commemorate those GLBT folks who have been killed or severely traumatized because of who they are.  Last year, around 29 people were killed so I’m planning on perhaps two a month.  However I would also like to add a few who have been severely beaten or injured – especially on those months when perhaps no one has died.

I would like to have a piece of paper with a blurb of the four or five being commemorated.   I would like to honor them by describing them as people who have been violently victimized.  This would be a table of silence where people can come up to the table, read the page, and sit quietly for a moment to pay their respects to honor those who have been victimized and then return to their table for their lunch.

I have said that I would be willing to be responsible for providing the candle and the printed pages and to sit at the table for an hour and a half each month.  This would give those who are concerned for the violence which is performed against these people an opportunity to honor these people, and also give those people who are not concerned an opportunity to see why they should be concerned.

My problem now is to find a resource where I can go to obtain this level of information.  I have found a web site for the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP) which just issued the latest report on the total numbers last year.  However I would like to find a site that will not just report the numbers in total, but will individualize the victims.  I don’t want this to be faceless numbers, but real people who have suffered from this type of violence.

Date:  6/22/09

To:

Re:  Announcement of National Assembly for Anti-War Groups

Personally, I would like to see a paradigm shift of the anti-war movement.  Although I am strongly anti-war, I feel that the best approach is not to attack war, but rather to deal with the meta-level above war.  War is an approach that is used for conflict management.  I feel that it would be beneficial to deal with the whole issue of Conflict Management and coming to grips with better ways, more humane ways, and more effective ways of Conflict Management rather than resorting to war.  I believe that we should have dialogues discussing alternatives to war (alternative means of conflict management) rather than using Lady Bird’s simplistic approach to drugs:  “Just say NO”.  We need to let people know that war is only and always one option of many.  And this option should not be the first option, as was the case with Bush, but should only be a last option after other options have been tried.  I believe that to be effective, we need to realize that these situations are complex and require complex approaches that are more than just saying “No”.  (I should add that not only are the situations complex, but so are the reasons why so many people just accept the default option of war rather than considering other options – these reasons are complex.)

Just as for years, although I have been in favor of stopping the violence and war in Iraq, I have felt that the solution wasn’t to just bring the troops home.  I have felt that the troops might be better utilized in re-building the infrastructure of Iraq since we were the ones responsible for breaking it down.  I believe that the response to the Israeli/Palestinian situation isn’t in just saying “No”.  It should be in insisting on positive actions by both sides rather than confrontational actions by both sides and definitely not by the action of increased violence of one side. 

As long as the anti-war movement is content to “Just say ‘No’ to war”, I’m afraid it will continue to only preach to the choir and will not be as effective as it should be or as it needs to be. 

I would like to see this National Assembly in Pittsburgh deal with the Meta-Level of Conflict Management rather than exclusively deal with anti-war actions and collaboration with only other anti-war groups.  One of the chief tools of Conflict Management is Dialogue.  (Which is different than the Presentations or Spins or Debates which we see every Sunday morning on the “news” programs on TV.)  What kinds of Dialogue could this National Assembly hold?  Imagine a Conflict Management Dialogue on Respect.  Respect for the Palestinians – what does that mean?  Respect for the Israelis – what does that mean?  Respect for the sovereignty of Pakistan and/or Afghanistan – what does that mean?  Respect for other cultures and/or other religions – what does that mean?  To have a meaningful Dialogue just on that one principle of Respect would do wonders as far as presenting options to violence and presenting it to the non-choir. 

I would love to see this National Assembly hold such a Dialogue on the principle of Respect as well as other principles of Conflict Management.

Thanks for listening.