Monthly Archives: October 2014

Opposite & Equal Reaction

Borrowing from Newton’s 3rd Law of Physics;

“For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. You receive from the world what you give to the world.”

Gary Zukav, Author

The world has held its breath for a month while Kurdish fighting forces within the city of Kobani on the Syria/Turkey border fight for their lives and their city. Turkish troops are massed at the border: not to prevent destruction of Kobani, but to prevent Kurdish people from entering Syria and help defend the city. They are there to cheerlead for Daesch, in so much as Turkey feels less intimidated by ISIL than they do by a continued Kurdish habitation on land inside and close to Turkey .

Today, October 20, the world continued its response. The day began with three C-130 cargo planes dropping 27 bundles of supplies directly into the hands of the Kobani fighters.

In Washington, DC, a native son of Kobani began a hunger strike in Dupont Circle to call attention to the Kobani issue. He was joined by Kurdish supporters and westerners that believe enough is enough. The group has also started a petition, which they invite the world to sign.

In New York City, a concert of solidarity took place at the Elebash Recital Hall at the City University of New York (CUNY). The featured band, DisOrient, has another concert scheduled for October 25 at the Riverside Church, 91 Claremont Avenue, at 6:30 pm.

Protests across Turkey, including Diyarbakir in eastern Turkey, have resulted in over 30 deaths since erupting on October 8. Turkish media is not accurately reporting the incidents, downplaying their scope and magnitude.

Protests across Europe continue as the millions of dispersed Kurds across the globe call attention to the plight of their people.

What is the meaning of Kobani? What is the meaning of surviving the odds, defying predictions and remaining resilient?

We have long believed that the decision to do nothing is, within itself, a decision. We also believe it would be in the best interests of history and humanity for the United States to remove the terrorist label placed on the PKK and open talks for diplomacy. We believe Turkey has misrepresented the intentions, scope, purpose and cause of the PKK to the world. This is the same PKK that has demonstrated in recent weeks its ability to work cohesively with respectful forces to save the lives of innocent people from a REAL terrorist organization.

We also believe Turkey’s call for a buffer zone across the Rojava region is an attempt to use the crisis in Kobani to further their agenda of ridding Kurds from their and neighboring countries. This area has been governed with the Constitution of the Rojava Cantons, a document that is a testament to a social contract, and does not need a buffer zone instituted by Turkey, or any other country.

Occupy World Writes calls on support from the world over to continue for Kobani. We stand in solidarity with those who have taken action in whatever way they can to help.

Image via Twitter.

Image via Twitter.

Share Button

News You Won’t Hear About – London Calling

Last Friday, Occupy Democracy started in London’s Parliament Square. We’ll let the organizers explain in their own words what this is all about:

Occupy Democracy- Friday night. Photo via Facebook,

Occupy Democracy- Friday night. Photo via Facebook,

The imposition of austerity has no democratic mandate from the public. Nobody voted for the  privatisation of the NHS, or the Bedroom Tax, and the Liberal Democrats were quite prepared to renege on one of the key promises they made to their voters on tuition fees.

Our system of parliamentary democracy is unable to deal with the consequences of a social crisis it helped to create. We are facing record homelessness, while many more struggle to keep a roof over their heads, record numbers are relying on food banks to feed their families, and record numbers are facing fuel poverty as energy prices rise eight times faster than wages. Meanwhile inequality is reaching levels not seen since the nineteenth century.

Nobody voted for this.

It is becoming clear to millions in this country that our system of democracy increasingly functions in the interests of big business and a tiny wealthy elite.

This union/association/group notes:

That the imposition of austerity has no democratic mandate from the electors.

That nobody voted for privatisation of the NHS.

That the Liberal Democrats broke the promise on tuition fees they made to their voters when  they entered into the Coalition.

This union/association/group believes:

That the Coalition government’s conduct reveals a fundamental problem with Britain’s system  of parliamentary democracy.

That Parliament has failed to protect the interests of the majority, and especially of the most  vulnerable, in our society.

That government and Parliament function in the interest of big business.

This union/association/group resolves:

To support the call of the Occupy movement for the occupation of Parliament Square on Friday 17th October in order to put forward a set of democratic demands for the fundamental reform of Britain’s system of democracy.

The occupation began with an overnight vigil marking the International Day for the Eradication of Poverty. It was also a direct challenge to the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011, which repealed the law that prohibited protests near Parliament Square, but instead outlawed items that could be used for sleeping in that area.

Photo via Facebook

Photo via Facebook

Friday night passed peacefully, but Saturday night had the police forcibly removing campers’ personal belongings and harassing the protesters. On Sunday night, hundreds of police converged on the square in an attempt to remove the protesters. The demonstrators were given 30 minutes to leave or face arrest. According to the Occupy Democracy Facebook page, the protesters will be occupying the square in shifts through the night. The occupation is scheduled to run until this coming Sunday. A schedule of events is listed here.

Occupy World Writes stands in solidarity with Occupy Democracy. All over the world, the people are saying enough is enough. United, we can change the world. Divided, we don’t stand a chance.

Share Button

Keep The Lights On

Peter Greste in the field. Image via FaceBook.

Peter Greste in the field. Image via FaceBook.

The United States ranks 46th in the world for press freedom. The Obama Administration has cracked down on more whistleblowers and journalists through prosecutions and investigations for stories they don’t like, using national security issues as an excuse.

The Department of Justice is being used to facilitate this crackdown. What is the message we are sending the rest of the world? That it is okay to do this to journalists and citizen reporters. Yet we wonder why Egypt feels justified for imprisoning international journalists for telling both sides of a story. We are horrified when press people are targeted, and the added atrocities of murder only add to the confusion.

Meanwhile, we live in a world where 50 MILLION people are currently living in refugee conditions. The conditions are so widespread, many international communities have become desensitized to the real issues. As we observe that the majority of humanity desires the same thing – an opportunity for a secure, healthy, educated life for their children – we can not help but wonder why this seems so remote of an idea.

Would you rather NOT know about the troubles in other countries? Would your future seem brighter if you did not know all you know now? Do you think it is acceptable for people to die in the course of reporting the news, with no one reporting their death?If it were your city being attacked, your neighborhood being invaded, or your home being seized by an enemy, wouldn’t you want someone, somewhere, to report it?

If you consume the news, national or international, you owe the reporters that bring you that news your solidarity. Without them, you would be in the dark. You would not know that Russia had taken Crimea and continues to threaten stability in Ukraine and across Europe. You would not know that Daesch is storming across the Middle East, threatening Muslims, Christians, all minorities, all women, all children, and wishes to do the same to anyone who does not agree with their misguided interpretation of religion. You would not know that a city on the Syrian-Turkey border has been in a month-long war to prevent the slaughter of the remaining residents there, while Turkish troops prevent additional fighters wanting to go help defend the city.

The Frontline Club is one of the world’s most prestigious media organizations that promote the message and ideals of a free and responsible world press. Set up by Vaughan Smith in 2003 in honor of colleagues at the Frontline News Television agency who died pursuing their work, the Frontline Club quickly became a center for a diverse group of people united by their passion for quality journalism and dedication to ensuring that stories that fade from headlines are kept in sharp focus. It exists to promote freedom of expression and support journalists, cameramen and photographers who risk their lives in the course of their work.

On Thursday, October 16th, 2014, the Frontline Club hosted their annual awards ceremony. The keynote speech was particularly special, coming for the first time from an imprisoned journalist. Please read this most important message, and consider its meaning the next time you consume news.

Frontline Club: Peter Greste’s Keynote Speech for the Frontline Club 2014 Awards Ceremony

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Tonight is, I know, a moment to celebrate the very best of our craft, to honor those whose work represent the standards and values that draw the admiration and respect not just of our peers but also the public, and that we can all point to in arguments about why our industry really is essential to a proper functioning democracy.

But this evening’s gathering also comes soon after the horrific executions of James Foley and Steven Sotloff by the Islamic State in Syria, and so before I talk about the awards, I’d like to take the opportunity to pay my respects to them and reflect on the state of journalism more broadly.

Both James and Steven paid the ultimate price for working in an industry increasingly reliant on brave, committed freelancers. They occupied a space where risk-averse news organisations are increasingly outsourcing coverage itself.

Of course the extremists who murdered them weren’t concerned about who they worked for. What mattered was that they were journalists, and that they were westerners. And in those respects, they represent a shocking example of a broader state of affairs faced by thousands of journalists around the world.

Rarely have so many of us been imprisoned, beaten up, intimidated or murdered in the course of our duties. In my cell in Masraa prison in Cairo, I don’t have access to the latest figures, but an editorial in The Times that I saw quotes the sums that Freedom House put together for last year. In 2013, 71 journalists were killed on the job. Eight hundred and twenty six were arrested, 2,160 were physically attacked and 87 were kidnapped. And those numbers don’t include the fixers who are often more exposed than us reporters who hire them, or the citizen journalists who are often the only sources of information in a place like Syria.

Heaven only knows what the numbers are like this year, with Syria, Iraq, Gaza and Ukraine helping to drive them north. As of May (2014? PG does not state the year) more than 60 reporters had died in Syria alone and more than 30 had been kidnapped. And that’s before the killing of James and Steven.

Globally, Freedom House says that press freedom is the worst it’s been in a decade. It reckons that 44 percent of the world’s population lives in places where the media is ranked as ‘not free’, while 42 percent are in regions where the media is said to be only ‘partly free’.

A few years ago Barrack Obama addressed a special joint sitting of Australia’s parliament, and in his typically grand, sweeping style, he declared that the ‘currents of history ebb and flow, but over time they move decisively in a single direction’ . History, he said, ‘is on the side of the free – free societies, free governments, free economies, free people’.

But if that is true, why are times so tough for those of us working at the sharp end of the fourth estate? After all, our industry is supposed to underpin that inexorable march towards liberty and democracy. I don’t know of any politician who openly declares that the world would be better off with a meek and compliant press, and yet the disturbing figures tell a very different story.

I may not have an academically researched hypothesis, but as you’ll appreciate, I’ve had a bit of free time to think about this. It seems to me that at least part of the problem is the changing nature of conflict itself, and it’s driven in particular by that atrociously named ‘war on terror’. And the name itself I think goes a long way towards explaining why we are in this situation.

Throughout most of the past four decades, wars have been dominated by struggles over tangible things like territory or resources or ethnicity. Even some of the conflicts over competing political ideologies such as Colombia’s civil war between leftist rebels and a right-wing government were, in truth, struggles for control of land.

Those of us who’ve covered that messy, complex conflict, or other local wars like the battle for resources in Eastern Congo or political and ethnic power in South Sudan will know that the biggest risk comes from random bits of flying metal or a drunk soldier at a checkpoint, rather than an attack aimed specifically at journalists. It’s risky of course. But the dangers are usually incidental, from working in an inherently violent environment rather than in a place particularly hostile to journalists.

Even in the early days of the Arab Spring, when I’d argue that the fighting was over one of the most valuable resources of all – political power – journalists were rarely directly attacked. And plenty of news organizations were able to place teams on both sides of the lines and cover the crises with a degree of balance and neutrality.

Of course propaganda is as old as war itself, and warring factions have always sought to control the narrative of a conflict. But in these wars over stuff, the target has generally been the message rather than the messenger.

But this brings me back to the War on Terror – a conflict that by its very nature is indefinable, with no clear physical or ideological boundaries; and with a title that means everything and nothing. Or rather, it means whatever any of the groups involved want it to mean.

This is, in a way that we’ve rarely seen in the past, a struggle over ideas and ideologies. It’s a battle between competing world views much more than a fight for land or minerals. And in this struggle, the message is as much a weapon as any gun. Witness the way Islamic State has used YouTube to recruit its supporters and terrify its opponents.

The trouble for us journalists is that there is no neutral turf, no safe ground from which to report. As much as we abhore and condemn the executions of James and Steven, it was George Bush who set the ground rules in the wake of 9/11 when he declared that you’re either with us or with the terrorists. That single statement made it impossible for reporters to hold to the principles of balance and fairness without being accused of acting as an agent for the enemy.

Al Jazeera learned that to its cost when the US hit its offices in Baghdad during the invasion to oust Saddam. And in Afghanistan one of its camermen, Sami al Haj, was arrested. He spent seven years in Guantanamo Bay before being released without charge.

Since the War on Terror began, all manner of abuse of journalists and attacks on human rights and priess freedoms have been excused as necessary evils, and by governments across the globe. It almost feels like a kind of globalized McCarthyism, where simply invoking terrorism is enough, in some cases, to get away with murder.

I do not mean to minimize the risks of terrorism, or blame governments alone. The Islamic State’s executions are simply the latest and most shocking examples of the problem on the other side of the ledger.

The roll call of victims is sobering indeed. From my old friend Maria Gracia Cutuli, an Italian magazine writer and the group of freelance and agency journalists she was traveling with, who were among the first to be murdered by the Taliban in Afghanistan after 9/11, to the Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl; to the BBC’s Simon Cumbers gunned down in Saudi Arabia and Frank Gardiner who survived the attack, to another BBC friend and colleague Kate Peyton killed in a drive-by shooting in Mogadishu; and the Channel 4 News cameraman Martin Adler who died there the following year; and on to the latest victims. These are just some of the more high profile casualties of the conflict, and in this relatively small community I’m willing to bet that only a handful of people here tonight have more than one or two degrees of separation between themselves and someone who’s been killed, wounded or imprisoned. We all know someone, or know someone who knew one of them.

My point is that in all of these battlegrounds, whether hot or cold, journalists are no longer on the front lines. We are the front lines. In this wider conflict, there is no such thing as a neutral, independent reporter. In the view of both sides, if you cross the lines in pursuit of our most fundamental principles of balance, fairness and accuracy, you effectively join the enemy.

The compelling world views seem so widely divergent that to even try to understand the other side is to commit what many governments now consider to be treason.

So, where does this leave the future? Well, I don’t think it’s hopeless. At a personal level, our incarceration in Egypt – myself and my two Al Jazeera colleagues Mohammed Fahmy and Baher Mohamed – and more crucially the Foley and Sotloff murders have dramatically reminded people why a free and untramelled press is so important. People might not always like everything they see in the media, but they recognize the intrinsic value of ethical, professional reporting and instinctively balk at anything that limits it.

I’ve been staggered by the incredible number of people who’ve supported our cause, not so much because they see an injustice, but because they see an attack on press freedom.

In one of the letters that made it through the prison gates, one woman wrote to gleefully remind me of those surveys we see often that rank journalists somewhere between used car salesmen and abattoir workers in terms of social status. But then she went on to write ‘I also know that fearless and frank journalism as practised by true professionals is what keeps our treasured democracy so strong’.

The key phrase here is ‘true professionals’. People recognize shabby, partisan journalism when they see it, but at times of crisis, they still turn on the news or go to the websites of their most trusted news organization.

The hunger for reliable news and the recognition of the role it plays in a healthy, functioning democracy is still there, but we can’t take public support for granted. That’s why I’m convinced that our best strategy as an industry starts with a rock solid commitment to our core ethical and professional standards. The more sloppy we get, the more we degrade public support for our business, the more excuses we give to governments to limit and control what we do.

This is far more than an abstract idea. This is very much about our own security as individual journalists.

Take our case as an example. I am incredibly proud and humbled by the extraordinary wave of support that we’ve been getting from around the world – from human rights groups, from politicians and diplomats but also, crucially, from a huge chunk of the public as well.

As I said, much of that has been in response to the principles they’ve seen violated, but I am also convinced that if any of us had stained professional reputations, our accusers would have hailed it from the roof tops, and our support would have crumbled to dust. Our political champions would have walked away and we’d be seen as victims of our own shabby standards.

We are still in prison of course, but I am still certain that if and when we are finally released, that global support, will be what ultimately saves us.

There is also one other source of backing that I want to spend a few moments on, that has been both crucial and I suspect somewhat unprecedented.

Even at the very best of times, we journalists are a fractious lot. We are argumentative, skeptical and fiercely competitive. I suppose those are the qualities that drew most of us into this business in the first place but they are also traits that make us notoriously hard to organise. And yet . . . it feels as though our entire community has set aside its instincts and swung behind us in a solid, unified block.

We’ve seen letters co-signed by fierce rivals, the zip-lips campaign which has seen our colleagues from around the world post selfies with their mouths taped shut including, I’m sure, more than a few people in this room. There have been persistent questions in news conferences, notes of support to us in prison and of protests to the authorities. In short, there has been a unity of purpose that not only inspires and strengthens us, but I believe sends a powerful message to any politican considering a clamp down on the press.

Taken together this outpouring of political and public support has helped reignite a crucial debate about the relationship between governments and the media; or more correctly, between a free press and a free society.

Whether people are aware of it or not, I’d like to think that most would agree with Albert Camus who said that, “A free press can, of course, be good or bad, but, most certainly without freedom, the press will never be anything but bad.”

Ladies and Gentlemen, I’ve not had an opportunity to see any of the entries for tonight’s awards, but I know that to have made the short list, the work you will see will, by any definition, be amongst the best independent journalists can deliver. I know without seeing it, that it will be courageous, revealing and inspired. I also know that it will be the kind of work that reminds our readers and audiences why a free press really does matter.

Thank you.

This speech was put together by Peter Greste’s family after speaking with him over a number of fortnightly prison visits.

Share Button

More Common Ground

As you’ve probably noticed by now, the protests in Hong Kong have captured our attention. We normally wouldn’t write another piece on them so soon (we wrote about the protests two days ago), but there’s so much happening that we feel it’s worthwhile to catch up with what’s going on.

The iconic image of "Umbrella Man" at the protest site in Hong Kong. Image via Twitter.

The iconic image of “Umbrella Man” at the protest site in Hong Kong. Image via Twitter.

What I personally find fascinating are the similarities in the responses both here and in Hong Kong to protesters by the powers that be. You might be thinking; “Similarities? Between what’s supposed to be the land of the free and the largest authoritarian regime on the planet?” Why, yes – that’s exactly what I mean. Let’s look at some examples.

On Wednesday, the media and communications adviser to Leung Chun-ying, Hong Kong’s Chief Executive, posted a photo to Facebook that was supposedly of a police officer who was wounded in clashes with the protesters the night before. This was circulated by supporters of the police as evidence that the protesters weren’t as peaceful as they claimed to be. This sounds similar to Ferguson, Missouri and the supposed pictures of Officer Darren Wilson that were circulated in the conservative media as “proof” that Michael Brown had assaulted Wilson, leaving Wilson no other option but to shoot Brown in self defense, doesn’t it?

It turned out that this wasn’t the only similarity. Like the supposed pictures of Wilson, the photo of the police officer turned out not to be of who they said it was. Instead, the photo was of an actor who plays a zombie police officer in a HKTV show called Night Shift, and was a still photo from one of the episodes.

Then, there’s who’s actually directing the response. The New York Times, in an article yesterday, said that according to former Hong Kong and Chinese government officials, as well as other experts, it’s the Beijing government who have been directing the response to the protests, and not the local government. Once again, this sounds eerily similar to the response to the Occupy movement here in the US, where documents obtained through FOIA requests showed that the crackdown on the Occupy encampments were coordinated by DHS and the FBI, with the local police for the most part following their guidance.

Or, maybe it’s not so surprising. After all, in almost all the unrest around the world over the last few years, there’s been common themes. We want to have a voice in our government. We want to be able to earn a living wage. We want our children to be educated. We want women and minorities to be treated with respect and as equals. We want affordable housing. We want the opportunity to be the best we can be. With all that in mind, is it surprising that those in power follow the same script as well?

The world is waking up. Every day, we read of more demonstrations, more protests, more people saying enough is enough. Occupy World Writes reaches out in solidarity to all of these people across the globe. Together, we can change the world.

We are many; they are few. We are the 99%, and we shall overcome.

Share Button

How Solid Is Your Resolve?

We live in a time of globalization. With access to internet and social media, anyone in the world can become a citizen journalist. Today is day 293 for the Aljazeera journalists serving time in Egyptian prison. Journalists die in the course of doing their jobs, most recently the slayings by Daesch of international journalists and their support staff has not escaped our attention.

Telling the story is just half the goal. When individuals are willing to risk life and/or freedom to reveal the truth about what is happening, they do so with the goal in mind that only by telling people, will there be any hope for the situation to change.

One person standing on a street corner and shouting will not bring results. If that person can rally at least 50 people, the group might get noticed. With enough momentum, the group can grow to a few thousand. Then the news media is forced to notice. But, when joined in solidarity, that group can grow to a massive crowd of millions, and when that happens, no one, including governments, can ignore it.

When Occupy Wall Street set up in September of 2011, thousands of people across the nation immediately identified with the concerns voiced by the movement. Encampments followed in other major cities, and soon the conversation became a national topic. As a result, some incremental changes took place in certain areas, and the national conversation still includes terms such as “income inequality,” “social justice,” and “plutocracy.”

Most of this transformation would not have happened the way it did had it not been for people being willing to “stand in solidarity.” We hear the term frequently, but now ask you to pause long enough to think about what it means.

It means not crossing a picket line. It means not purchasing products from companies who do not practice social responsibility. It means standing in freezing cold and wind to attempt the recall of a governor who is not serving the people of his state. It means going to rallies where you do not know anyone, but you still hold up a sign and join the crowd.

Most recently, I was reminded again of how important this is not only for personal interests, but also for those you are supporting. If you read our posts frequently, you are aware of our declaration of solidarity with the Kurdish fighters within the city of Kobani. Does it matter, if we can not go there? I read a Newsweek article that made me think about this differently, “Kobane Diary: 4 Days Inside the City Fighting an Unprecedented Resistance Against ISIS.”

Imagine you were there, wondering if anyone even cared that you and your entire community are literally fighting for their lives. Every person in the entire town is involved in the battle in one way or another. There is nothing that resembles a normal life – a normal life is something these people have not had in what seems like forever to them. Wouldn’t it be nice to know that someone, somewhere, cares what happens to you and your city, your family and your community?

Protesters in support of Kobani. Image via FaceBook.

Protesters in support of Kobani. Image via FaceBook.

Solidarity : a feeling of unity between people who have the same interests, goals, etc.

What does it mean to you? How and when will you use this empowerment?

Share Button

The Bull in the China Shop

Photo via Flickr

Photo via Flickr

There’s been a major upheaval happening for the last three months halfway around the world; yet the Western press has only covered it in fits and starts. If you’re a regular reader here, you probably know the basics of the Umbrella Revolution; we’ve covered both the protests in July and the beginning of the current wave of unrest and how it became known as the Umbrella Revolution. What had been for the most part peaceful protest turned violent this week, as the police began to crack down.

On Monday, the New York Times ran an op-ed by Shiu Sin-por, the head of The Central Policy Unit of of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (the Beijing government). In it, he claimed that the pro-democracy protesters must accept Beijing’s powers as defined in the Basic Law; what China says is the constitutional document that specifies how Hong Kong is governed. In remarks made to the China News Service (a state-run news organization), Zhang Xiaoming, the head of the central Chinese government’s Liaison Office in Hong Kong, said the movement had “provoked” the central Chinese government and engaged in “radical forms of street confrontation,” and that China’s central leadership was “paying very close attention to the current developments.”

Then, on Tuesday morning, police using chain saws and sledgehammers cleared away the barricades that protesters had put up around two sites, and reopened several major roads that the protesters had blocked. Early Wednesday morning, students and the police clashed, with the police using riot shields, batons and pepper spray. The police made 45 arrests, and four policemen were injured. However, it’s the other thing the police did that has Hong Kong up in arms.

A video shot and broadcast by TVB, a usually pro-government television station, showed at least six plainclothes Hong Kong police officers dragging a pro-democracy protester into an alley, where he was kicked and beaten by them. The public reaction to this was as you’d suspect. “I thought a situation like this would only be seen in foreign countries, other societies — I didn’t expect to see it in Hong Kong,” said Ronny Tong, a Civic Party member of Hong Kong’s Legislative Council.

Audrey Eu, the chairman of the Civic Party, said; “Whatever they might charge him with, both his hands were tied behind his back with a plastic tie, and he was carried by police officers to a dark corner where he was assaulted for four minutes. I don’t know what has come over the police. It’s criminal.”

Hui Chun-tak, a spokesman for the Hong Kong police, said the authorities would conduct an “impartial and fair investigation” over the beating. Meanwhile, a front page commentary in the People’s Daily (the official Communist Party newspaper) praised Leung Chun-ying (Hong Kong’s Chief Executive)’s handling of the protests and further said the calls for his dismissal from protesters were part of a plot to force the government into unacceptable concessions.

As we’ve said before, we’re struck by how much the situation in Hong Kong parallels our own here in the U.S. Rampant income inequality, a lack of affordable housing, and many more. Even the way candidates are chosen for the highest office are similar; the only difference is that here we pretend the special interests who control the government and choose which candidates will run aren’t actually who’s in charge.

And, just like on the Chinese mainland, our media does its best to ignore the protests, hoping that they’ll go away before we notice what’s happening; before we realize that we share common goals; before we realize that we too have the power to bring about change.

Share Button

The Dog Who Hated Austerity

Loukanikos at work. Photo via Facebook

Loukanikos at work. Photo via Facebook

He came out of nowhere, defended the people, and disappeared again. Those that met him will never forget him. Those that have heard of him realize this is where legends come from.

In 2011, Athens, Greece witnessed the austerity protests that reflected the sentiments of the world Occupy movement. When journalists and press descended on the city, they saw a street dog that appeared to have extrapolated what was transpiring, and chose to take sides. Known as Loukanikos, translation meaning Sausage, he would run between the police line and the protesters, barking and nipping at the shins of the armed authorities to try to tell them to back away from the people of Athens.

He was often in the middle of pepper spray and tear gas attacks. He was also kicked and beaten by the riot police as their shins would bear the brunt of his warnings to back up. The battles took their toll, and Loukanikos died in May of 2014, with the reports just coming out this week.

World leaders have published photos of themselves seated on a majestic horse. Universities and High Schools use animal mascots for team support. One of the world’s largest banks chose the bull as a symbol. Riots ensued following the euthanizing of an ebola patient’s dog, in fear it would carry and transmit the virus. A US tobacco company uses the camel in its’ logo. The list goes on, and we are quite certain you can think of several others yourself.

Animals play an important role in our lives. They contribute to our quality of life through service, companionship or good farming and hunting practices. They also remind us of the fragility of life, and how quickly everything can change.

Do not take these gifts from animals for granted. Think about the favorite pet you’ve had. How was your life enriched because of that bond you had with it? For you to experience the joy that comes in having that pet, that unconditional love you receive from them, you must make the commitment to protect and care for them.

Occupy World Writes salutes all animal lovers and owners who understand the gift they have been given. We believe that Loukanikos was one of those rare, exceptional animals who was a gift to the entire world. May his memory encourage you to think differently about animals you meet in your future.

Loukanikos at rest. Photo via Facebook

Loukanikos at rest. Photo via Facebook

Share Button

The Kashmir Calamity

Kashmir region. Map by CIA (public domain) via Wikimedia Commons

Kashmir region. Map by CIA (public domain) via Wikimedia Commons

While we’ve been distracted by the fighting in the Middle East, there’s been a resurgence of a conflict which may have more consequences worldwide than any Middle Eastern conflict would.

To understand what’s happening here, we need to go back to 1947. The British, after facing increasing nationalism and mutinies by their own soldiers, conceded that the British India Empire was a thing of the past. However, they also saw the need for a Muslim homeland, as there was a large Muslim population in the region, and tensions between the Hindus and Muslims were high.

The British proposed what was called the Mountbatten Plan, named after Louis Mountbatten, who was the last viceroy of British India. This plan divided British India into two parts; India and Pakistan. India was to hold the majority of the Hindus, and Pakistan to hold the majority of the Muslims. This was accepted by the Indian political leaders on June 2, 1947, and on August 14, Pakistan became a dominion in the Commonwealth of Nations, followed the next day by India becoming an independent country. Pakistan became the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in 1956.

Where does Kashmir come into this? When the partition took place, the 562 princely states of British India were given the option to become part of India, part of Pakistan, or to become independent. Pakistan expected that Kashmir would join Pakistan, as most of its population was Muslim. However, the government of the state was ruled by a Hindu, the Maharaja Hari Singh. In October of 1947, Muslim revolutionaries from western Kashmir and Pakistani tribesmen united in an attempt to overthrow the Kashmir government, which led Singh to ask India to accept Kashmir as part of India. On October 27, 1947, Kashmir became an Indian state.

This led to the rebels and tribesmen furthering their push into Kashmir, and Singh asked the Indian government to intervene. Thus began the first Indo-Pakistan War. The conflict’s been going on ever since then, with some memorable spikes in the violence; three more wars between India and Pakistan in 1965, 1971 and again in 1999 (the country of Bangladesh, formerly East Pakistan, came about due to India’s intervention on the side of the Bangladesh nationalist forces in their struggle for independence in the 1971 war). In 1962, China and India had a short war, with China gaining control of the Aksai Chin region.

Which brings us to the present day. If it were just up to the two countries’ leaders, there probably wouldn’t be any problem and the whole Kashmir question would more than likely be put up for a vote by the citizens of Kashmir. Both Narendra Modi of India and Nawaz Sharif of Pakistan are hard line nationalists, but they also represent the conservative business class that recognizes the value of cordial relations between the two countries. It’s questionable how much they’d go against the wishes of their wealthiest supporters. But, there’s a third party in the ballgame; the Pakistani military. The Pakistani military isn’t interested in better relations with India; they see that as an end to the army’s elite status as saviors of the country and leading to possible reductions in its substantial economic power.

Arun Jaitley, the Indian Defense Minister, says the recent violence is caused by Pakistan’s attempts to “precipitate tension where none existed.”

“Pakistan in these attacks has clearly been the aggressor, but it must realize that our deterrence will be credible. If Pakistan persists with this adventurism, our forces will make the cost of this adventurism unaffordable.”

Pakistan for their part says they’re too busy fighting internal extremists to be involved with causing trouble along the Kashmir border. However, Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, the head of the Pakistan Peoples Party, said recently in a speech:  “I will take back Kashmir, all of it, and I will not leave behind a single inch of it because, like the other provinces, it belongs to Pakistan.”

As horrible as the situation is in Kashmir, it’s not as bad as it could be. You see, both India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons. With the posturing and chest pounding happening on both sides, a “limited” nuclear exchange can’t be completely ruled out. However, it’s unlikely that any such exchange would be limited when all was said and done. Kashmir could be a bigger tinderbox than the Middle East ever dreamed of being.

 

Share Button

A Much Better Name

1492Today is the 78th time that Columbus Day has been celebrated as a federal holiday. Over the years, we’ve seen it go from a memorial to New World colonization and exploitation whitewashed to make it seem as it were divine will to one of those floating holidays that employers like to dangle in front of their workers and stores love to have sales on. And, while the exploitation of the worker and consumer class that’s the holiday today is actually a fairly good summary of what Columbus brought to the New World, it’s nothing to celebrate by any means.

The old reasons to celebrate Columbus have fallen by the wayside. We know now that Columbus didn’t discover America, nor was he the first white European to do so.  And, while we admit that colonization made this country possible, the exploitation and/or genocide of the native populations and cultures in doing so isn’t a thing for anybody to be proud of.

Not all places in the U.S. celebrate Columbus Day. Hawaii celebrates Discoverers’ Day the same day, and doesn’t consider it or Columbus Day a legal holiday. South Dakota celebrates Native American Day. Oregon and Alaska don’t celebrate it at all, and Iowa and Nevada don’t celebrate it as an official holiday, but their governors are “authorized and requested” by statute to proclaim the day each year. Various tribal governments in Oklahoma either designate the day Native American Day, or they name the day after their tribe.

In 1992, Berkeley, California was the first city to call the holiday Indigenous People’s Day. This idea has spread to various locations across the country including Sebastopol and Santa Cruz, California, Dane County, Wisconsin (the Madison area), Seattle and Minneapolis.

This is the first year that Minneapolis has celebrated Indigenous People’s Day instead of Columbus Day. In declaring it, the Minneapolis City Council said it was an attempt to recognize the history and contributions of American Indians in and around the city. Events will be held at the Minneapolis Indian Center, and include speeches by Senator Al Franken, Congressman Keith Ellison, Minneapolis mayor Betsy Hodges, and a keynote address by activist and former vice presidential candidate Winona LaDuke.

Occupy World Writes congratulates Minneapolis for making this day be about our Native population and their culture instead of celebrating colonialism, exploitation and genocide. We encourage the rest of the nation to follow suit.

Share Button

What Terrorists Fear Most

“With her courage and determination, Malala has shown what terrorists fear most: a girl with a book,” said Ban Ki-moon, the United Nations Secretary General. (Read the full story here)

The first person from Pakistan to win the Nobel Peace Prize.

The youngest person to ever win the Nobel Peace Prize.

Our first video post ever.

The most important message you will hear today.

Share Button