Feb 12, 2016
Feb 4, 2016
Tale of Two Cities: How Officials Respond to "threatening" Situations
I read two interesting articles, back to back, as I browsed the Internet this morning. When I finished reading them, I immediately thought of “The Tale of Two Cities”, by Charles Dickens.
Just in case you’ve forgotten, go back and refer to the Cliff notes, as we all did in studying for a class. Charles Dickens begins “The Tale of Two Cities” by developing the central theme of duality. His pairings of contrasting concepts such as the "best" and "worst" of times, "Light" and "Darkness, "and "hope" and "despair" reflect the mirror images of good and evil that will recur in characters and situations throughout the novel. The year is 1775, and life in England and France seems paradoxically the best and the worst that it can be. The rulers and ruling classes of both countries may have the best of life, but they are out of touch with the common people and believe that the status quo will continue forever. Of course as you read on, you’ll see drastic changes that most of the people never expected.
I began my reading journey this morning with an article that focused on the January 2, 2016 takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, a federal property in Burns, Oregon by a group of self-styled armed militants. The group, led by three brothers from the Clive Bundy family of Nevada, is protesting the arrest of a father and son pair of Oregon ranchers scheduled to begin 5 year prison sentences. Dwight Hammond Jr., 73, and his son, Steven Hammond, 46, were convicted of arson three years ago for fires they started on federal property. Both men served time — the father three months, the son one year. The pair said they lit the fires in 2001 and 2006 to reduce the growth of invasive plants and protect their property from wildfires. A judge ordered them to return to prison Monday to serve an additional four years because the time already served did not meet minimum-sentencing laws. The pair reported to prison peacefully, but said they will seek clemency from President Obama.
The occupation of the wildlife refuge reflects a decades-old dispute over land rights in the United States, where local communities have increasingly sought to take back federal land. In phone interviews from inside the occupied building on the night of the takeover, Ammon Bundy and his brother, Ryan Bundy, said they are not looking to hurt anyone. But they would not rule out violence if police tried to remove them, they said.
On January 26, after the standoff had lasted more than three weeks, the FBI and Oregon State Police arrested eight, including leader Ammon Bundy, and killed one member of the self-styled, armed militia who staged a takeover. Three more militia members were arrested later in the day after turning themselves in. As of February 4, four people remain at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. the occupiers said they were in contact with the FBI. The occupiers said they were in contact with the FBI and want pardons for all who were involved in the standoff.
After reading about the militia standoff in Oregon, I flipped my page to information about the MOVE group in Philadelphia in 1985, thirty years ago. MOVE was a Philadelphia-based, self-proclaimed black liberation group founded by John Africa (born Vincent Leaphart) in 1972. The group lived communally and frequently engaged in public demonstrations against racism, police brutality, and other issues.
The MOVE group was particularly known for two major conflicts with the Philadelphia Police. In 1978, a standoff resulted in the death of one police officer, injuries to several other people and life sentences for 9 members. In 1985, another standoff was ended when the police deliberately dropped a bomb on their compound, which was a row home in the middle of a city street; Osage Ave. This resulted in the deaths of 11 MOVE members, including the leader John Africa and 5 children, the destruction of 65 houses and widespread news coverage.
The handling of this situation in Oregon in 2016 may be the best of times and the 1985 slaughter of the MOVE group in Philadelphia was certainly the worst of times. I’m sure the scholars can explain in detail why the participants were treated so differently. The final solution took place in Philadelphia with the MOVE group in 1985. We’ll just wait for a final resolution to the standoff in Oregon.
Related Articles
Why So Many People Never Heard of the MOVE Bombing
Just in case you’ve forgotten, go back and refer to the Cliff notes, as we all did in studying for a class. Charles Dickens begins “The Tale of Two Cities” by developing the central theme of duality. His pairings of contrasting concepts such as the "best" and "worst" of times, "Light" and "Darkness, "and "hope" and "despair" reflect the mirror images of good and evil that will recur in characters and situations throughout the novel. The year is 1775, and life in England and France seems paradoxically the best and the worst that it can be. The rulers and ruling classes of both countries may have the best of life, but they are out of touch with the common people and believe that the status quo will continue forever. Of course as you read on, you’ll see drastic changes that most of the people never expected.
The occupation of the wildlife refuge reflects a decades-old dispute over land rights in the United States, where local communities have increasingly sought to take back federal land. In phone interviews from inside the occupied building on the night of the takeover, Ammon Bundy and his brother, Ryan Bundy, said they are not looking to hurt anyone. But they would not rule out violence if police tried to remove them, they said.
On January 26, after the standoff had lasted more than three weeks, the FBI and Oregon State Police arrested eight, including leader Ammon Bundy, and killed one member of the self-styled, armed militia who staged a takeover. Three more militia members were arrested later in the day after turning themselves in. As of February 4, four people remain at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. the occupiers said they were in contact with the FBI. The occupiers said they were in contact with the FBI and want pardons for all who were involved in the standoff.
After reading about the militia standoff in Oregon, I flipped my page to information about the MOVE group in Philadelphia in 1985, thirty years ago. MOVE was a Philadelphia-based, self-proclaimed black liberation group founded by John Africa (born Vincent Leaphart) in 1972. The group lived communally and frequently engaged in public demonstrations against racism, police brutality, and other issues.
The MOVE group was particularly known for two major conflicts with the Philadelphia Police. In 1978, a standoff resulted in the death of one police officer, injuries to several other people and life sentences for 9 members. In 1985, another standoff was ended when the police deliberately dropped a bomb on their compound, which was a row home in the middle of a city street; Osage Ave. This resulted in the deaths of 11 MOVE members, including the leader John Africa and 5 children, the destruction of 65 houses and widespread news coverage.
The handling of this situation in Oregon in 2016 may be the best of times and the 1985 slaughter of the MOVE group in Philadelphia was certainly the worst of times. I’m sure the scholars can explain in detail why the participants were treated so differently. The final solution took place in Philadelphia with the MOVE group in 1985. We’ll just wait for a final resolution to the standoff in Oregon.
Related Articles
Why So Many People Never Heard of the MOVE Bombing
Feb 3, 2016
Water Contamination Crisis in Flint:Republicans' Fiscal Problem
For almost two years, residents have suffered through a water contamination problem, an impossible situation. I heard about the lead poisoned water problems in Flint initially on Rachel Maddow’s nightly show, but heard nothing on the mainstream media. (I guess they were to busy covering the minute to minute antics of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump). Now, while poisonous water is still piping into homes in Flint, state officials minimize their culpability and attempt to pass blame to the Federal government. At the same time, Michigan Governor Rick Snyder says he needs $767 million dollars to repair and replace Flint’s water infrastructure which was destroyed in his attempt to save $5 million dollars..
Therein lies the rub for Republican legislators at every level of government. Republicans control the Michigan legislature and the GOP also controls both the House and Senate at the national level. Republicans disparage the federal government every chance they get. The portray the federal government as intrusive, too involved, and determined to fiscally irresponsible. It hard to imagine a Republican Congress approving Gov. Snyder’s request for any parts of $767 million.
The racial politics are reminiscent of the failure of the federal government to respond in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. I can still hear Kanye West saying “George Bush doesn’t care about Black people". In 2013, an increasingly debt conscious Congress and the GOP’s non-diverse base were reluctant to provide necessary assistance to victims of Hurricane Sandy. With a Democratic controlled Senate, the funding was passed with only 9 Republicans voting for it. I wonder what will be said about the government’s response to Flint’s crisis.
It’s interesting to note that Governor Snyder also requests expansion of Medicaid for the youngsters impacted by the poisoning lead in the water they’ve been drinking. Yet Michigan refused to expand Medicaid for it’s eligible citizens.
It's interesting that the presidential candidates haven't weighed in on the current crisis in Flint, Michigan. I guess this poor, hard-working city doesn't warrant their attention.
Feb 1, 2016
Iowa Caucus 2016: Does It Really Matter?
Some say Iowa is the “touchstone of Democracy” where voters have the first opportunity to express their preference in the presidential nominating process for the major parties. They relish the fact that IA voters are courted by widely known candidates as well as lesser known individuals. Those who are less well funded compete with candidates that have huge financial support. I’m told that IA is a small state where it’s less expensive to run a campaign, easier for average voters to meet with candidates, and find out what they think about the issues. I’m told that Iowa voters are passionate and fully engaged. They take honor in being first and take the process seriously. They attend events, listen to candidates, ask questions, and carefully evaluate each candidate’s prospect of being the party’s nominee and hopefully the next President of the United States.
The first four sites in the presidential nominating process are Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada. I’m told not to worry about the “representativeness” of any one state, even though IA voter are older activist, not the rank and file of party voters.In 2008, 93% of participants in the IA Caucaus were caucasian. Data indicates that turnout is usually low, running about 43% of the voting population. Jeff Kaufmann, chairman of the Republican Party of Iowa says “a primary is a vote, while a caucus is a conversation and a vote. The results of the process in Iowa leaves the voters nothing to be proud of. IA’s record for selecting the Republican Party’s national presidential nominee is atrocious. The Democrats were much more successful.
In 2008, Rick Santorum won the Republican vote with 24%, barely besting Mitt Romney, the ultimate Republican party nominee for president, In 2008, Mike Huckabee won the vote with 34% to Mitt Romney’s best at second place at 25%. In 1996. Bob Dole won with 26% followed by Pat Buchanan’s 23%. For the Democrats, the last 3 Caucus winners (Barack Obama-37.6% in 2008, John Kerry-37.6% in 2004, and Al Gore-63% in 2000) won the party nomination. Of course, Obama won the presidency in 2008, Kerry lost in 2004, and Al Gore had his victory stolen from him in 2000.
As this day ends, IA voters are quickly replaced by the focus on New Hampshire. Of course the media will spend days analyzing the results in IA and predicting the outcomes in New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada. Eventually the emphasis will move to the states that carry the weight of the votes that will make a difference in which candidates will compete in the general election in November.
They tell me that IA really matters, but I’m not convinced. If I had my way, we’d start with California, New York, Illinois, and Ohio. But who am I to decide. Guess it’ll all come out in the wash when the final votes are counted.
