Helping Haiti and Having Happiness

Recently I've started going back to church. No, I'm not talking about worshiping some invisible guy in outer space who hates homosexuals and dictates that we give our money to sex fiends and the Republican party... Sorry, hope I didn't offend anyone...

The girlfriend and I have been going to the Unitarian church called Micah's Porch, located in Chicago's Wicker Park. We've been searching for answers about the meaning of life, what our role is in the world, the other good things that actually come from the "church experience": community, service, discussion of meaning, free food.

The things I like: we drink coffee instead of harping on about drinking some dude's blood, God is a personal and different concept depending on the person, lack of dogma dictating who is "saved" and going to hell, services are held in a theater instead of some weird churchy place, and a rock band plays decent non-Christian music.

I don't consider myself religious, Christian, or atheist. I see worth in Christian compassion, but also Buddhist philosophy, Taoist rationalism, and progressive Muslim thought, and other parts of various traditions.

I told the pastor that I didn't know if there is a God. He responded that people all have to find what is authentic to them, on a path that is compassionate and mindful of how individuals impact the world.

With that in mind, I've tried the service thing that everyone claims to want to do to better the world and make a positive impact, feed the children, save the whales, etc.

Two strangers from the Micah's and I (most of the "parishioners" are under 30) carpooled out to a nonprofit called Bright Hope yesterday. The two strangers quickly became my friends, both interested in questioning government, the arts, politics, philosophy in a way with which I could engage.

Upon getting to Hoffman Estates-based Bright Hope, the more left-leaning folks from Micah's (us 3) came into contact with suburbia, Illinois, with Republican Christians, a girl scout troop, and possibly the random Americorps volunteer trying to pay back college loans. Our collective goal: feed Haitian kids.

We assembled into a warehouse and in assembly-line fashion, packaged bags with measured amounts of protein, dehydrated veggies, soy, and rice, something the organizers deemed a "scientifically-divined" formula to give the right nutrients to kids who would have otherwise eaten dirt to stave off hunger pains.

I handled the rice at first, pouring it after the protein, veggies, soy into a spout that filled bags. The bags were measured, pulled taut, sealed, boxed, and organized to be sent to rural areas of Haiti. I shifted from rice to veggies, from veggies to soy in my attempts to stave off the tediousness of dumping food product in a spout to save lives in Haiti, making sure to make polite small talk with my more conservative and Christian co-workers The Micah's group, all three of us, broke off to invade the Republicans. (note: I am not really a Democrat, but I do enjoy making fun of Republicans, in good humor of course.)

Though the work was very mundane in itself, (repetitive factory work for 2 hours what many people would consider the ideal way to spend the afternoon) the spokesman/organizer at bright hope reminded us of our important work. And it did feel good to help in my small way to feed kids who would otherwise go hungry, make new friends, work with people with which I might not usually find much in agreement.
We were informed that the warehouse group of about 40ish volunteers produced 21,000 "meals," filling 98 boxes to be sent to Haiti, with the ultimate possibility of staving off hunger for 57 kids for a year. All in all, I felt that that was a Saturday better spent than sitting in front of the computer.

While riding back to Chi-town with my two new friends, we talked about other ways we could help out, common concerns with the economy/politics, listened to good music. The whole experience helped me fulfill a need that many in my generation may have - a feeling of connectedness to the world.

Cheesy, but true. I recommend any volunteering that you think could make an impact. Take a flask along if you need a pick-me-up.

City Planning, Windfall for Developers.

The Tribune provided an illuminating snapshot of zoning in Chicago versus other larger cities. Basically, developer wants to buy property to make extravagant condos + donations to aldermanic race = BIG condo on your front lawn.

The new, 8,200-square-foot mansion is by far the biggest house on the 1800 block of North Wood Street, leaving Fred Ehle's four-bedroom home next door in its shadow.

"I don't mind gentrification and development—I live in Bucktown—but it has gone out of control," Ehle said. "It's crazy. It's so obviously different than what the neighborhood was and still is."

Zoning rules had prohibited such a behemoth from going up on the block. But that was before the developer got a break from then-Ald. Ted Matlak (32nd). Two weeks after the developer applied for a lucrative "upzoning" so he could build a much bigger house, one of the developer's companies gave the alderman a $2,000 campaign contribution.

The real zoning code in Chicago is unwritten, but developers know it well: Changes in zoning go hand in hand with contributions to aldermanic campaigns.

Perhaps the phenomena of campaign coffers for zoning lenience is obvious to any Chicago politico, neighborhood activist, or longtime resident. But for fear of stating the obvious, papers often clam up when real corruption takes place. But I'm glad the Trib lied it out here.

It's a city where the council rubber stamps aldermen's wishes—rejecting just 15 requested zoning changes in a decade—and where almost half the zoning changes were concentrated in 10 of the city's 50 wards that are exploding with growth.
...City officials in the Zoning and Planning Departments review proposals and issue recommendations before aldermen vote. That review involves determining if new construction would be an "intrusion" to the neighborhood.

But aldermen pay little heed. City staff objected to about 40 percent of the zoning changes that the council approved over the last three years, city records show.

Ald. William J.P. Banks (36th), chairman of the City Council Zoning Committee, said the reality in the neighborhoods—as represented by the aldermen—is far more important than what city staff think about a zoning change application. He said the tradition of aldermanic prerogative in zoning is as strong as ever, but that he advises council members to run projects by their constituents first.

I have to say that I'm not surprised, but the "pay-to-lay" way of development is different from what I'm accustomed.

In Madison they passed an ordinance last year to restrict development that goes against the character of neighborhoods, creating "historic districts." Madison Ald. Tim Gruber faced strong opposition, nearly losing his District 11 seat because of neighbor disapproval of four-story condos, calling it too "high-rise" for them.

Granted, Madison is not your typical town when it comes to city governance either.

Back in Chicago, the "exposure" of developers paying alderman to build condos lends cred to the Humboldt Park No Se Vende! movement in my own neighborhood.

At the housing summit in November, residents demonstrated against the influx of "yuppies," condos, rising housing costs. Organizers for the Participator Democracy project related to me how resident's didn't necessarily have a problem with development, but they are being excluded from the fruits of development by being priced out of their neighborhoods, which severs the social ties that help the community fight crime and thrive economically.

One perk of gentrification is a tendency for lower crime in a geographic neighborhood. It's much easier for a city to move in new condos than to deal with underlying social dilemmas.

Get me affordable housing!

It's been awhile...

Here's a little piece I wrote for chitowndailynews.org on Humboldt protests regarding lack of affordable housing.

"Yuppie, yuppie, why you lie? Why you try and gentrify?!" was one of the more interesting chants I left out. As well as "Boricua si! Yuppie No!"

Given the fact that foreclosures in the area for residents of color is on the quick rise, as noted by a corresponding Tribune article, I can understand the anger.

Matthew Rodriguez told me that the community wanted to simply be a part of any new development than be pushed to the wayside.

In redevelopment of a neighborhood, shouldn't the existing civic and social networks be maintained?

JESUS CAMP, mind control, and the uncanny power of self-loathing

Palestinian camps are putting hand grenades in their kids' hands, so America has to train their kids to be part of the "God's Army." So says Pastor Becky Fischer at her Bible Summer camp, "Kid's on Fire"

"I wanna see young people who are as committed to the cause of Jesus Christ, as the young people are to the cause of Islam," Fischer says in the documentary "Jesus Camp." She explained that Christian kids should be just as ready as young Muslims to "lay down their lives" for their own creed, rationalizing that "we've got the better message."

Last night was the first time that I saw award-winning documentary. At times it wasn't easy to watch, as kids were being manipulated to hate anything un-Christian, but it really is a must see, a provocative look into a dysfunctional world.

I found the formula for manipulation to be somewhat familiar, as I was often fed the message that I was dirty, needed salvation from my own impurities as a K-12 student at Catholic Schools.

Step 1: Fischer welcomed the kids with a smiley face and caring persona to the camp,

Effect: Makes the kids feel at-ease, in a compassionate environment.

Step 2: Fischer alienated the kids, calling them evil. Example: She said that Harry Potter would have been "stoned to death" for being a warlock. She then implied that they brought unclean souls to the camp (swearing, doing bad just like the other kids), and washed their hands with...Nestle bottled water.

Effect: The children may be bored, ashamed, miserable but Fischer instills in them the idea that they are that way because they are "sinners." And eureka, she has a way to help them! And makes the salvation fun!

Step 3: The path is laid as kids are taught to hold their faith above all else, convulse with the spirit of the lord, and are told that half of the world is pure evil.

Effect: Kids can be alienated from the "sinners," everyone else. They conceptualize their duty to "save" everyone.

Step 4: Fischer and friends reaffirm that the kids are important, will be the future leaders, and need to go out and convert others, oppose homosexuality, abortion rights, support President Bush, the war in Iraq, the conversion of Muslims at all costs.

Results: Kids are wearing camouflage face paint while swinging sticks, praising the "Christian flag" and spreading the word to evil doers.

One kid even said that he got saved at age 5, because he was looking for more in life. (Though he probably didn't think his life was so worthless until people like Fischer told him so) And I can't forget the 10-year-old girl who said she only dances for the Lord, "not for the flesh."

See for yourself:



Fischer justified her actions, saying that kids cannot make choices -good or bad- (not much faith in kids...).

Repeatedly through the film, the "teachers" are praising the way that Christianity can influence kids, that their greatest asset is malleability. Not their creativity, innocence, or intelligence.

Fischer describes the enemy/Muslims as radicals who dogmatize their kids in a violent view of the world, and that it's her job to set them straight. And what are you doing to the kids, Fischer? Honoring their freedom of choice and presenting them with multiple viewpoints?

What's more is that even the evangelical heads are not without "sin"...

In many spots in the film, Fischer is seen primping herself, flaunting openly about how lovely she is. She also places a cardboard cutout of Bush for the kids to praise.

...The 7th deadly sin forbids excessive pride, and that first commandment forbidding the praise of idols before God...

And let's not forget our buddy Ted Haggard, who mad a cameo in the film bashing "the gay lifestyle." He was an adviser for Bush, by the way.



After the film and earlier this year, Haggard was caught with his own "sexual improprieties" and moral quandaries. Such as being caught with a male prostitute and using methamphetamines.

"...let he who is without sin cast the first stone..." -Jesus

But the sin is not homosexuality, or even meth use, but hypocrisy.

Good thing for Haggard, he became a heterosexual once again, and was saved from his gay tendencies. Maybe he feels this was all the result of a meth bender?

After observing all this hypocrisy, it occurs to me that the leaders of this radical, violent, politicized brand of Christianity are unable to deal with their own vices.

Like the children they exploit, perhaps they were once told that they were evil, made to feel dirty, and forced to embrace an ideology that seemed unnatural. The failure to work through sexual insecurities, addiction, violent tendencies (due to the disapproval in the social sphere of Church) had forced these currents to manifest themselves as problems later in life?

But self-loathing is nothing compared to how the extreme Christian right loathes their enemies, be they homosexuals, secularists, Muslims, or liberals.

There seems to be never-ending cycle of self-manipulation, that feeds itself with tax-free donations.

God might not have planned it better...

Eat The Kids!

U.S. House Dems are crafting a response after the Bush Administration's threat to veto version of a Senate bill that would expand government health insurance for kids, reports The New York Times.

The push comes after President Bush rationalized keeping the State Children’s Health Insurance Program funded at $35 billion rather than $65 billion over 5 years because the administration opposes expanding the role of government where the private sector can offer solutions.

And he doesn't want to raise taxes by 61 cents a pack to fund health insurance for low-income kids whose parents make too much money to qualify for Medicare. Granted, the program is meant for households who can't afford private insurance either.

Another rationalization found in an AP story is that Bush doesn't want expansion of federal government. ????????????? see Iraq, No Child Left Behind, Dept. Homeland Security, CIA interrogations...

The Senate's, bi-partisan proposal is slated to expand coverage to 3.3 million kids. That could put a large dent in the $8.3 million without insurance. Considering Bush doesn't send the bill to the sinker.

Meanwhile the Administration is implying things like:
You know what those kids need? Private, tax-free savings accounts, so that they can pick and choose, spend wisely when they need those insulin shots, x-rays, and checkups. Got strep throat, well, make sure you save your money so that you can get the penicillin you need, rather than the penicillin you want, or hope to have.

Can't your parents make do with their allowance?

By the way, Bush recently got a colonoscopy payed by the U.S. taxpayers, they even removed a few polyps from his rich sphincter. Maybe Jane Public can do the same if she'd saved enough money instead of trying to use bloated government services.

Can't you accept personal responsibility? Jeeze...

Dems and Reps, mostly wrong

As Democratic and REpublican presidential candidates, as well as many congress members debate the futility of the IRaq situation, what is disturbing is the tendency to blame Iraqis.

Hillary et. al. call for benchmarks so that the Iraqis "step up to the plate" for the security of their country. While Republicans, for the most part, clamor about how they'd extend Guantanamo Bay. It's like Rudy and Mitt are having a pissing contest on how tough they can be with rogue nations.

Hmmm, many in the rest of the globe consider the U.S. to be a rogue nation.

Politicos say that Iraq leaders just aren't doing enough to insure security for their people, to quash "sectarian violence" sprouting up in the green zone and elsewhere.



But what about the failure of U.S. leadership? Invading Iraq after a brutal dictatorship expecting things to be puppies and rainbows, roses tossed at the troops.

Some parts of the country have less electricity and job prospects than under Saddam. How about Abu Ghraib's scourge brought on by Western treatment, driven by the highest levels of defense. What of the amount of looting allowed and decision by Paul Bremer to purge Iraq of Baathist elements who have experience to rule?

The Iraqi's didn't bring all of this on themselves, though tensions between Shia and Sunnis doesn't help. They got caught up in what UW alumnus/Washington post correspondent Anthony Shadid calls "The U.S. war in Iraq."

Politicos don't seem to recognize that Iraq and Iran have a history of a bright civilization with preservation of the arts and sciences. Though that was muddied further when English and French colonialists grasped for oil in the early 20th century.

OF course, the ones in charge usually don't have problems finding scapegoats.

For a look into the Iraqi consciousness, see this blog by an Iraqi teenager who's lost most of his family.

Two steps back

Palestine has erupted into chaos as Hamas takes over Gaza and President Mahmoud Abbas scraps the government, blaming the internal strife on Hamas, and calls for new elections.

I remember four months ago when there was some sign of hope for a coalition between Abbas and Prime Minister Ishmael Haniyeh via the Mecca accords, with the bringing together of a unity government. Hamas even agreed to respect prior peace agreements made by the PLO, though didn't specifically address Israel.

The only G8 groups that considered backing the accords were Germany, France and Russia, with the U.S. only agreeing to meet with Abbas.

It's possible to partially blame the West for lack of progress there. The U.S. and Israel were as stubborn as Hamas about conditions in the international "peace process."

The U.S.-Israel camp conditioned restoration of foreign aid if Hamas reject violence, recognized Israel, and past agreements. Hamas wanted to keep the slightly altered (Mecca Accords) status quo vis a vis Israel, in turn for restored aid.


In the midst of the February talks, a Rural Sociologist and West Bank native at UW-Madison, with whom I talked, made a common yet poignant observation. The good professor pointed out, who the hell are Israel and the U.S. to make demands when they don't really embrace peaceful terms with all of Palestine? Israel doesn't recognize Hamas as an authority despite both allowing state-sponsored violence against civilians.

On the other hand.

The West does not deserve the entire blame for the current situation. Hamas was so horizontally organized that internal strife was already common despite the Mecca Accords.

Even if Haniyeh had complied with Israel's demands (less likely than a snowstorm in the West Bank), pissed off, fragmented groups would have still lobbed missiles.

What happens in the planned new elections is another sign of whether there could be any progress for reconciliation between Fatah, Hamas, let alone Israel in the next 20 years. And this is all the more convoluted with Syria and Iran's involvement.

Abbas has been able to pull off small miracles in the past. Let's just hope the U.S. doesn't support him so much that he or the government there are even less legitimate than now. Or that Abbas doesn't get killed.

For a BBC take, click here.

Contraception, helping rape victims, and the old guy in the sky

Davidoff at the Cap Times reports about the discord between state Republicans regarding a bill that mandates emergency contraception at hospitals. This before an assembly vote on the matter.

The fact that it only applies to rape victims has likely made the bill more palatable to conservative groups such as Wisconsin Catholic Conference and Wisconsin Right to Life, who are not opposing the bill. Regardless, some state senate Republicans voted "ney" as part of a tiny minority.

The assembly vote is not certain as there is a slight Republican majority. The bill's co-sponsor state Rep. Terry Musser, R-Black River Falls, and ally state Rep. J.A. Hines, R-Oxford, are concerned about the political viability of their party in the next election cycle.

I'm pleased that state Sen. Mike Ellis and state Rep. Dean Kaufert, both Republicans from my hometown of Neenah, made the good sense decision to support it.

Kaufert has a nice bar in Neenah as well, delivering Spotted Cow and delicious chicken tenders...

Iran and US, revisited

This sent to me by historian\cab driver\book writer-seller Allen Ruff

Original source: Counterpunch, June 2007, as noted on the Nasir Khan Blog. (Supplemented by hyperlinks of other sources)


"Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's election as president in June 2005 has not made dialogue any easier, given his taste for provocative statements, particularly about the Holocaust and Israel. But Iran is a big country rich in history and there is more to it than
its president. There is much tension within the government and Ahmadinejad had severe setbacks both in the local elections and in elections to the Assembly of Experts in December 2006. There are substantial challenges, economic and social, and forceful demands for more freedom, especially among women and young people. Iranians refuse to be regimented and the only strong card the regime has to win their loyalty is nationalism, a refusal to accept the kind of foreign interference suffered
throughout the 20th century."

However, War monkeys may not get it...

"...the war on Iran has already begun. Many sources confirm that the United States, bent on destabilising the Islamic Republic, has increased its aid to armed movements among the Azeri, Baluchi, Arab and Kurdish ethnic minorities that make up about 40% of the Iranian population. ABC News reported in April that the US had secretly assisted the Baluchi group Jund al-Islam (Soldiers of Islam), responsible for a recent attack in which some 20 members of the Revolutionary Guard were killed. According to an American Foundation report (1), US commandos have operated inside Iran since 2004 (Retired Air Force Colonel Sam Gardiner)."

Not exactly news, but gives some context to my previous posting.

Revolutionary Kin?

Newsweek highlights the trials of Arab bloggers in a time when radical elements of power reign supreme.

Dissidents rail daily in their own ways against their governments, much like many patriots before them. A growing movement of discontent dwells beneath the surface of leaders who may put little value on the creativity and intelligence of their citizens.

Sounds somewhat familiar...

Featured in the Newsweek article is a "cynical, snarky, pro-US..." Egyptian writer who runs the blog 'Rantings of a Sandmonkey'. The writer in question got some heat for posting a video of an Egyptian bus driver being sodomized by police. He has since stopped blogging.

Also featured is Syrian blogger Ammar Abdulhamid, who runs 'A Heretic's Blog'. An alumni of UW-Stevens Point, he blogs from Maryland after being exiled from his country for railing against "the thug," President Bashar Assad. Abdulhamid credits receiving less severe punishment to the fact that his mother, Mona Wasef, is a famous Syrian actor.

These examples remind of the reformist blogs in Iran that were shut down soon before the coronation of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The Neo Cons call for regime change. Perhaps they are correct in some way. But the organic discontent from within the country needs to lead it. Otherwise, it's likely the whole prospect will likely be seen as a movement for Western interests.

Revolution takes time. The movement seems instantaneous, but the result must clear several roadblocks.

Srebrenica looks for justice

Citizens of Srebrenica are looking to sue the Netherlands and the U.N. over the slaughter of Muslims by the Serbs.

UN bureaucracy and rules of engagement kept Dutch "peacekeepers" from intervening. A big motive was to not take sides in the Bosnian catastrophe. But lack of forces and pressure to not risk Dutch casualties drove operations, or lack of them, on the ground.

While the widows of the Srebrenica massacre may be right in their anger at the ineptitude of the UN in times of war, (see Rawanda), is suing the Dutch going to achieve the goal of reform?

Addressing a general Western ambivalence to get involved in conflict, in which the West doesn't have an interest, may be too difficult. And given the situation of defending "human rights" in Iraq, Afghanistan, developing proper intervention in such situations becomes all the more muddied.