banner2e top

Sgt. Bergdahl Becomes Political Football by Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.

June 15, 2014

Sgt. Bergdahl Becomes Political Football
By Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.

Jesse3 

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - The freeing of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl after five years in Taliban captivity in exchange for five Taliban captives held in the military’s Guantanamo Bay prison has generated more fury than celebration.

Republican legislators rail that the Taliban prisoners are murderous, with Republican Rep. Mike Rogers, chair of the House Intelligence Committee, claiming that three of the five are likely to return to the battle. Some are outraged the president “negotiated with terrorists,” cutting a deal with the Taliban.

Democratic legislators led by California Senator Dianne Feinstein are in high dudgeon because they weren’t given 30 day notice, as required by law. Some in the military are furious because Bergdahl was captured when he left the base alone without permission. American soldiers reportedly lost their lives in the effort to find him. Some scorn Bergdahl as a deserter, if not a traitor. The president has been savaged for making the trade. Bergdahl’s father has received death threats in emails.

His hometown canceled a scheduled celebration, worried about violent demonstrations by outsiders. All this, to my mind, says a lot more about the horrible divisions in America, than the actions of Sgt. Bergdahl or the president. Our military and our country pride itself on leaving no man behind. We expect the president, our military leaders, our soldiers to do what they can to bring our soldiers back, and to free them from captivity if needed. In that tradition, the freedom of five Taliban terrorists would be considered a minor price to pay for one American soldier.

That proud principle applies to every soldier. It doesn’t apply only to the courageous or the brave. It doesn’t apply only to whites or blacks. It doesn’t apply only to officers and not privates. We leave no man — and in today’s military, no woman — behind, period. As for negotiating with the Taliban, they were holding Bergdahl captive — reportedly keeping him in a metal cage in the dark after he tried to escape. Who else would we negotiate with? It doesn’t do any good to negotiate with our friends.

To free a prisoner of war, the president has no choice but to negotiate with our enemies. The president would have been wise to inform the nabobs of the Senate ahead of time. But given the need for absolute secrecy, one can imagine why he was reluctant to involve them, no matter how senior their rank. As for the exchange with the five Taliban prisoners, the reality is that they would have to be tried and executed or released eventually. Locking people up in Guantanamo without charges or trial is a disgrace to America’s principles. But even then, we aren’t going to keep these folks in prison forever.

The U.S. is getting out of Afghanistan. The longest war in our history is coming to an end. Trading these prisoners to free an American POW is just common sense. Are the freed Taliban future terrorists? Who knows? They’ve been in prison for over a decade. They are “graybeards” now, and their world has changed dramatically. They are going to be held in Qatar for a year. All the fulmination about the threat they pose is simply political posturing. No one really knows. What we can expect is that they will be under close watch.

According to military reports, Sgt. Bergdahl is too emotionally unstable to return home yet. Clearly he was under acute mental stress five years ago when he essentially committed a suicidal act — leaving a base to go into hostile territory in Paktika Province alone and unarmed. If he was unstable, he wasn’t alone. According to a military study at the time, more than one in five soldiers and Marines in Afghanistan in 2009 were suffering from acute stress, depression and/or anxiety. Bergdahl had apparently gone AWOL before, but nothing was done to remove him from his post or to deal with his stress. Serving in an outpost in a strange land under the constant threat of death puts brutal pressure on everyone. Some hold up better than others.

Some act out in different ways than others. Those of us who have not been there should be the last to judge or to condemn. Secretary of State John Kerry, a Vietnam veteran, got it right when he said it would be “offensive and incomprehensible to consciously leave an American behind, no matter what.” We should be proud of that tradition, not sacrifice it to partisan politics or senatorial privilege. 

The Lies about “Illegal Immigration” by A. Peter Bailey

June 15, 2014

The Lies about “Illegal Immigration”
By A. Peter Bailey

apeterbailey

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - In a recent conversation with a colleague, she expressed great indignation about “illegal immigration” and how all those Latinos smuggling themselves into the United States “are taking jobs away from Black folks.” She thus joined many other people in this country who refuse to recognize one basic fact: There is absolutely no way that millions of people can be smuggled into this country. If that many people are entering this country "illegally” someone is letting them in.

That is a fact known to every reporter and correspondent from The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, CBS, NBC, ABC, Fox News, MSNBC and to every politician ranting about “illegal aliens.”  Yet, not a single one of them will focus on and report on the role that significant sections of American industry play in this ongoing drama, most notably, agriculture, construction and "fast foods".

Those industries benefit greatly from exploiting the cheap labor provided by the so-called “illegal” immigrants.  They have a captive labor force that can’t complain about wages or working conditions because of the threat of deportation.  If an industry can’t have free labor, the next best thing is a captive one that can’t give it any trouble at any time.

What those industries also have are journalists and politicians who almost unanimously ignore their pivotal role in the immigration debate. Instead, they go on and on about how terrible it is that the United States can’t close its borders.  The most strident opponents of this situation never even mention the beneficiaries of cheap, hapless labor. Instead, they focus all their fake anger at the poor people who are being exploited.

By the way, most of the people in this country go along with this "game" because the industries’ exploitation of cheap labor allows them to buy fruit, vegetables, and homes at lower prices.  Thus, the entire country benefits from a 21st Century version of peonage, just as it built its original wealth on the enslavement of African people and the theft of the land from the indigenous peoples who lived in what is now called the United States of America.

Veteran Administration Health Care Services by Dr. E. Faye Williams, Esq.

June 15, 2014

Veteran Administration Health Care Services
By Dr. E. Faye Williams, Esq.

williams2

(TriceEdneyWire.com) – "I can't tell you if the use of force in Iraq today will last five days, five weeks or five months, but it won't last any longer than that."  -  Donald Rumsfeld

That comment by the former Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, is indicative of the short-sightedness that existed during the Bush Administration and which now plagues the nation.  It demonstrates that those with the authority to make war without the experience of having fought in one are often subject to grave errors.

Aside from the lies that took us into war - the lies that principals of the Bush Administration continue to repeat, revise or modify - their minimization of the impact of these wars on the country should be determined to be criminal.  Those that fought the Bush Wars and the thousands of servicemen and servicewomen injured in other wars and engagements continue to fall victim to their service to this country.

Today, we’re rightly engaged in a reassessment of the healthcare provided veterans whose health is at risk. Allegations of a healthcare bureaucracy mired in antiquated processes and procedures, overwhelmed by the number of patients needing care, and floundering under the apathy of treatment providers desensitized to the needs of ever-increasing waves of veterans are proved more the rule than exception.  Today the VA Hospital system is guilty of mission failure.

Although there is no excuse for the failures of the VA hospital system, it was the height of folly to believe that our forces would be able to leave the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq quickly and unscathed.  For the astute observer, it should have been clear that improvements in our ability to manage combat trauma would increase the number of wounded returning from the combat theater and, consequently, increase the number of service members requiring extended or lifetime treatment.

It was foolish for those in the Bush Administration to believe that an already over-burdened VA Health System could readily accommodate thousands of additional patients without a corresponding increase in budget and the hiring of qualified medical professionals.

It is the height of hypocrisy and ignorance for Republican law-makers to condemn deficiencies that have festered under their noses for twenty years or more while they label the healthcare needs of service-injured veterans as "entitlements."  Their refusal to fully-fund the VA and address and pay for the medical needs of our service members while giving major tax-breaks to the wealthy is not only hypocritical, it is criminal.  While Verizon has an effective tax rate lower than zero dollars, multi-billion dollar industries frequently have tax liabilities that are less than the average citizen, and Republicans fight to subsidize or allow the wealthy to shelter income from the IRS, the mantra of the Republican Congress demands budget cuts to fund any increased spending on veterans programs.

Now those self-serving Republican critics of the VA, specifically, and anything that has to do with government, generally, are once again emerging into the public discourse with the hue and cry to privatize VA Healthcare functions.  Although I see no long-term benefit in the privatization of VA functions, a delay in delivery of requisite medical services to our veterans is unacceptable.  Far too many Republican legislators have forgotten or choose to ignore the role of the Federal government as providing services to the nation that the individual citizen, municipality or state government is ill-equipped or incapable of providing.

Until the VA system is fixed, I propose that Congress immediately appropriate emergency funding for veterans’ healthcare delivery outside the VA system and that veterans, especially those from whom treatment was withheld or delayed, be given first priority of treatment.  These men and women deserve nothing less in repayment for their service to this nation.

(Dr. E. Faye Williams is National Chair of the National Congress of Black Women, Inc.-- www.nationalcongressbw.org.-- 202/678-6788.)

Deals With the Devil? by Julianne Malveaux

June 15, 2014

Deals With the Devil?
By Julianne Malveaux

malveaux

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - When the Koch Foundation gave the United Negro College Fund $25 million, it set off a maelstrom of comments in cyberspace and real time.  How dare the UNCF take money from the Koch brothers, some asked.  They ought to send it back, said others.  One woman told me she would never give to UNCF again because of the Koch donation.  Another says the Koch donation changes her perception of UNCF.

The donation will provide $18.5 million in scholarships, money that is badly needed to get some of our young people out of school, especially with the cuts so many experienced because of reduced access to the Parent Plus loan. Another $4 million will go to the 37 UNCF schools for general support, again to make up some of the losses that came from reduced enrollment due to Parent Plus.  The remainder goes to UNCF for their general support.  What’s wrong with this picture?

Koch scholarships will be awarded to students with good grades, financial needs, and an interest in studying how “entrepreneurship, economics and innovation contribute to well-being for individuals, communities, and society”.  Sounds like conservative free markets to me.  More than that, it sounds like granting scholarships to further the Koch government-reducing, free market focus.  Koch protects its interest by having two seats on the five member scholarship committee, with the other three from the UNCF.  While non-Koch interests are the majority, it will be interesting to see if a donor can sway a committee.

What else?  The Koch brothers are making the most of this gift in the media.  Rarely have I seen so many headlines generated by a gift of that size.  $100 million, maybe.  $250 million, surely.  But while $25 million will mean a lot to the UNCF, schools like Harvard would likely consider it nothing more than a modest behest.  The Koch brothers must think they’ll get some positive publicity from their gift, and they obviously have the PR team to pitch it.

Furthermore, these are the very Koch brothers who have supported voter suppression efforts.  They would reduce the size of government, which means the Pell grants that so many students depend on would shrink in size.  What one hand gives, in other words, the other takes away.  If the Koch brothers would fight to maintain or increase the size of the Pell grant, fewer would look askance at their gift.  Instead, many see this as the cynical manipulation of a deep-pockets donor who gets much publicity from their gift.

It kind of reminds me of the Donald Sterling gift to the Los Angeles branch of the NAACP.  After Sterling’s racist rant, his donation was returned.  Still, the NAACP had honored him at least once, prior to his verbal rampage.  Indeed the 2014 outrage against Sterling had elements of class bias.  The multi-million dollar players weren’t angry when he discriminated against African Americans and Latinos in the slum housing he owned, but they were dismayed when he made negative comments about them.  Their silence equaled acquiescence to Sterling’s racism; their protest suggested that they would get angry only when rancid racism was directed at them.

Do basketball players really think that Sterling is the only NBA owner that harbors racist views?  Those owners have enough sense not to articulate them publicly.  If they know that other owners share Sterling’s views then they condone closed door racism, not the open door kind.  If they are aware, and don’t care or share, they are making deals with the devil.

If the Koch brothers are the devil, then most of our organizations are making deals with the devil. Look at the list of sponsors for any African American organization or event.  Sit through a board meeting, and listen to folks review possible sponsors, many corporate.  There are “good” corporations whose diversity portfolio is robust, and then there are those who need a little help.  The need for funds notwithstanding, are we for sale for the price of a table or a few salmon (used to be chicken) dinners?

On the other hand, when the New York Times criticized the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation for its corporate support, Elsie Scott, the then-director said that if we spent money on certain products it was only right that we get their support.  Does this apply to the Koch donation?

Unfortunately too many African American organizations buy what we want and beg for what we need.   Many in the African American community have $25 million to give to the United Negro College Fund.  Many could spend the dollars to support our students.  The fact that we do not leaves us vulnerable to contributions like Koch, contributions that come with strings and, perhaps, a conservative agenda.

Should Dr. Lomax send the money back?  Only if someone steps up to replace it!   The $18.5 million for scholarships represents 3700 scholarships for students.  If the $4 million is divided equally among 37 schools, it means $108,000 per school, enough to hire back one of the people laid off and to support some programs.  Should Michael Lomax lay down with the devil?  Where is the angel?

Julianne Malveaux is a DC based economist and author.

 

 

In National Movement: New Orleans, Chicago, Newark Fighting 'Discriminatory' School Closings by Kari Dequine Harden

June 10, 2014

In National Movement: New Orleans, Chicago, Newark Fighting 'Discriminatory' School Closings
By Kari Dequine Harden

justicescales

Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from Louisiana Weekly

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - After Louisiana State Superintendent John White dismissed a federal complaint alleging abuses of the civil rights of children and families in New Orleans schools as a “joke,” and a “political farce,” the groups who filed the complaint issued a letter demanding White’s immediate resignation.

The letter, sent to White on June 4, reads: “The discriminatory effects of school closures that students of color and their families experience in New Orleans are no laughing matter. We find no humor in our school communities being dissolved, no amusement in being forced to send our children to charter schools that are unaccountable to our families, and no comedy in schoolchildren waiting outside before sunrise for school buses to take them across the city because we have no neighborhood schools left.”

Part of a national effort with similar federal complaints filed on the same day in Chicago and Newark, the New Orleans complaint was filed May 13 under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination in the use of federal funds.

As New Orleans takes the stage as home to the nation’s first all-charter school district – the Recovery School District (RSD) – the privately-run publicly-funded charter schools that have replaced neighborhood schools over the past nine years have operated with astonishing autonomy and sparse accountability.

Representing two community groups, the Coalition for Community Schools and the Concerned Citizens Controlling Community Changes (C6), the federal complaint and letter to White were signed by Karran Harper Royal and Frank J. Buckley.

The letter continues: “It is with utmost seriousness that we have called for a civil rights investigation of the harmful school closure policies that have shuffled countless Black and Brown children from failing schools to other failing or near-failing schools, year after year. “

While White’s response to the complaint in a May 15 story in The Times-Picayune was filled with contempt, condescension and anti-union rhetoric bearing no relevance to the issues raised, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights wrote an open letter on May 14 to remind charter school operators of their legal obligations.

“I am writing to remind you that the Federal civil rights laws, regulations, and guidance that apply to charter schools are the same as those that apply to other public schools,” Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Catherine Lhamon writes in the letter. “For this reason, it is essential that charter school officials and staff be knowledgeable about Federal civil rights laws.”

The letter sent to White outlines the “harms” wrought by the RSD: the closure of more than 30 schools, children being trapped in failing schools, and closures disproportionately affecting students of color. It also describes the continued academic failure of the RSD – with a majority of its schools still ranked as failing by the state’s own standards.

“Your real allegiance is to the pro-charter, pro-privatization agenda,” Harper Royal and Buckley write to White. “It has become clear that you will lie, bribe, and turn a blind eye to discrimination to benefit this agenda.“

Also described is a landscape of discriminatory selective admissions schools – public schools that can accept and reject whoever they want, creaming the most desirable students while operating within the same grading and funding system.

While African-American students make up over 80 percent of the student population in New Orleans, only account for about 30 to 47 percent of the population at most of the high-performing schools, the letter states.

White did not respond to a request for an interview regarding the complaint or the call for his resignation, but instead issued the following response through Louisiana Department of Education spokesman Barry Landry:

“We take the success of students as seriously as any responsibility we have in the education of our kids. We take seriously the mission of raising graduation rates, increasing student performance, and ensuring all students have access to high-quality schools. We take seriously any group seriously committed to that mission. The group writing this letter is part of a national campaign that wants more to do with politics than with the success of children.”

The letter contends that based on his repeated history of dismissing protests, complaints, concerns, and “lived experiences” from the communities most affected by his policies, White is unfit for the job.

“That you would now refer to this current civil rights complaint as “a joke” further shows your disregard for the discrimination experienced by students of color and their parents,” Harper Royal and Buckley write. “We have had enough of your misguided, paternalistic policies and request your immediate resignation.”

X