A Poem: "Citizenship"

CITIZENSHIP
for Muhaiyaddeen Michael Green

1
--Don't I know you from somewhere, Sensi says.
--"The birds are still in flight," I answer
with Jack Spicer koan carried since college.
--Is that what you learned at Dover Beach?
--Yes, Sensi, first sighting after I lost my faith.
--How curious, grasshopper, faith that can be lost.
--I am always losing things.
--Thank Buddha, they are things you can find again
like car keys and birth certificates.
--You mean things left lying around the house, Sensi?
--Nothing is lost, just more or less salient
given the moment. What does Basho say?
"The ultimate jackpot:
Firefly breathes light on temple bell
to ring it."

2
--Grasshopper, what did you lose your faith in this time?
--My faith in a God whose name comes to mind
like the name of a prescription drug.
--A prescription for what?
--Memory loss.

3
--Is there any God other
than the one who can disappear
like a flock of birds headed south, Sensi asks.
--You mean the God that always returns?
--Ah, grasshopper, but does he have to go
for even a second?
--Not lately, Sensi.
--What is the name for this God?
--The Restorer, Sensi.
--I suppose one alias is as good as another.
Tell me another name this God goes by.
--The Beholder and Beholden, Sensi,
twins lost in the intransitive gaze
of all-consuming remembrance.

4
--Grasshopper, will we still meet like this
once the flames beckon to my bones
and you must find my original likeness?
--Your staff is always at hand, Sensi,
bringing the moon and mountains closer.
--You won't need a souvenir cup of ashes?
--The cup is for tea, Sensi, to drink to one another
to remind us the war is over.
--Some say it never started, grasshopper.
--Then they must be having a very good day.

5
--When you strike me gently with your staff, Sensi,
I feel like a fish nestled in the pelican's mouth
being carried in a candidacy for heaven.
--'You always hurt the one you love.'
--They say the Buddha presents the sword
that will kill him to his assassin.
--Remember to bow before using it, he says.
--Is that what your Buddha told you, Sensi?
--Mine took back the sword and asked,
'Don't you have a train to catch?'

6
--Grasshopper, what is the song the fish sings to the pelican?
--"Take My Heart With You Wherever You Go."
--Ah, the old songs. None like them.
Off with you now, no need to say goodbye.
--Sometimes when I'm walking, Sensi,
the mountain quotes you to me.
--Mountains are the last to go, grasshopper.
What words does the mountain attribute to me?
--"The birds are still in flight."

--David Federman, Ardmore, March 8, 2011

From Freedom to Free-dumb of Speech

Yeah, I know I should be paying rapt attention to the latest developments in Egypt, Bahrain and Yemen. And I know I should be praying against any Franco-like defeat of the nascent republic in Libya by the same crushing force of mercenary thuggery as in Spain 1937. And, wait, let's not forget our daily bread of consternation for continuing Israeli war crimes in Gaza. Boy, if God put us here to find and drain aquifers of compassion, we're fulfilling our mission on earth and slowly turning our Earthen dessicated tear ducts into Martian deserts.

Nevertheless, the biggest fret on my mind this morning is landslide loss of reason and compassion manifest in Supreme Court's 8-to-1 landslide decision against Albert Snyder in his fight to stop criminal harassment by Christian zealots at GI funerals. If Baptists can wave "God hates fags!" signs with impunity across the street from churches where funeral services are being held for Iraq and Afghanistan war dead, why can professors be fired for calling Gaza bombings war crimes and genocide? When did the First Amendment cease to protect warranted outrage and intelligent dissent? When did it become thinly veiled, Supreme Court-guaranteed Second Amendment remedy used by hate groups to demonize foes and allow them to fire into dignified assemblies of those foes. Make no mistake. Westboro Baptist not only cried "Fire!" in a crowded theater; they set fire to it. Their hate speech was a form of open sniper fire. Albert Snyder was entitled to First Amendment protection more than Westboro Baptist Church because he was the victim of its harassment and rights abridgment. Hell, the church phoned the media and invited it to its hate fest.

I am disturbed by the inexorable encroachments of religious extremism and fundamentalism in our society. Bill O'Reilly called slain abortion doctor George Tiller "Tiller the Baby Killer" on 28 telecasts before someone took the hint and murdered him in his church. Of course, O'Reilly was quick to deplore the act and distance himself from any responsibility for it. But we all know in our heart of hearts that he is an accessory to the crime. My question remains: Was the unchecked use of incendiary language by a leading media figure a legal exercise of his First Amendment rights? If so, what does this say about freedom of speech? Is it only irrational hate-speech which enjoys this protection? I've seen Nobel Prize winners shamed into apologies for their angry condemnations of Gaza and West Bank indignities. Yet lawmakers openly hate-bait electorate to crimes against abortion clinics. They even legalize ostracism and hatred through the legislative process. When do words become bullets? When does slow, steady drip of contextualization for purposes of fear and prejudice further goals of demonization and incited hatred? When did the First Amendment become heavily-greased sliding board by which words are quickly converted into weapons used against the people and concepts they define?

We all feel an involuntary Pavlovian twinge of dread when we see or hear the words "Negro," "Jew" or "Communist." Call it historical conditioning. Now the twinges come with mere mention of "Muslim," "Gay," even "Zionist." I believe words that define ethnic groups or controversial philosophical concepts require semantic neutrality to function in rational discourse. The method of fascism is to deprive these essential classifying words of that neutrality by give them high hate-charges which magically desensitize users to the moral consequences of the demonization process.

Once weaponized, words for ethnic groups or key economic and philosophical concepts are put on a defensive from which they can never escape. How do we restore the near-sacred right of rational discourse to words once they are converted into highly charged units--either as epithets or euphemisms--of hate speech? Ideas like Medicare that on their own have vast majority support lose credibility once demonized with adjective of "Socialist," or "Marxist." So do those who espouse such ideas once they are labeled as "Socialists" or "Marxists."

To me, the Supreme Court has knowingly contributed to the weaponization of words that is being used to convert them from free to hate speech. What's a Jew being pursued by Nazis or a Palestinian pursued by Israelis going to call himself to merit re-humanization and the safety it brings? Demonization deprives the hated of rights to the refuge of synonyms such as "one of you," "humankind," "average Joes" to which most other groups have access. Fear-and-loathing semantics put groups and concepts into gulags that makes escape back to the mainland of rational discourse impossible.

The First Amendment was one of the fruits of the Enlightenment. Now it is being used as a cover for darkness.



NATION
One Family's Fight Against the Westboro Baptist Church
Mar 2, 2011 – 4:01 PM
AOL

Theunis Bates
Contributor
On March 10, 2006, more than 1,200 people gathered at St. John's Catholic Church in Westminster, Md., to say their farewells to Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder. The 20-year-old Marine had died a week earlier, when his Humvee rolled over in western Iraq while he was manning the gun turret.

His father, Albert Snyder, later told the Marine Corps Times how beautiful it was to see strangers come out on the streets of Westminster and salute the funeral procession as it drove to a nearby veterans cemetery. "I've never seen a funeral like this in my life," Snyder said. "It was just amazing to see."


Amy Davis, Baltimore Sun / MCT
Albert Snyder, center, supported by his attorney, Sean Summers, left, and Kansas City Attorney General Steve Six, speaks to the media after opening arguments in Snyder v. Phelps were made at the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 6.
But the presence of seven uninvited guests from Kansas meant that his memories of that day are forever tarnished and led to a long legal battle that ended with defeat today in the U.S. Supreme Court for Snyder and his family.

A small group of religious extremists from the Westboro Baptist Church traveled 1,100 miles from their home in Topeka to stage a shocking celebration outside St. John's. The group of adults and children waved signs declaring "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "God hates fags" and shouted offensive slogans -- part of their bizarre gospel, which states that soldiers will continue to die so long as America tolerates gays, Jews and Catholics.

Snyder didn't see those hate-spewing protesters that day. The church windows had been blocked out and the Patriot Guard Riders -- a team of motorcyclists who attend military funerals around the country and separate the Westboro mob from mourners -- shielded the cemetery. But he saw their crude signs later during television news reports. And two weeks after the funeral, he read a rant titled "The Burden of Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew A. Snyder" posted on the Westboro website.

The essay accused Matthew's parents of raising their son "for the devil" and teaching him about adultery and divorce. (His parents are separated.) It also said they supported "the largest pedophile machine in the history of the entire world, the Roman Catholic monstrosity." Snyder told CNN that he felt physically sick after read that online tirade.

The 55-year-old father of three has described himself in interviews as a quiet man who attempted to avoid confrontation all his life. But he wasn't prepared to stand by and allow the Phelps clan, who run the Westboro church, to slander his family. "They are very sick individuals," Snyder said to CNN. "It comes down to dignity. No one should be buried with what the Phelps did. Everyone deserves to be buried with dignity."

His fight back started straight away. On June 5, 2006, he sued the Westboro church for defamation, invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of distress. The suit didn't ask for money, but stated that the Phelps should pay emotional damages, Snyder's court costs as well as punitive damages for "reprehensible actions." Albert's plan was to cripple the church financially and put an end to its campaign of hate and bigotry.

A jury accepted Snyder's claim, and in 2007 his family was awarded $2.9 million in compensatory damages, plus $8 million in punitive damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress and intrusion upon seclusion. A year after that verdict, a federal judge in Baltimore reduced the total damages to $5 million.

But in 2009, that judgment was overturned by an appeals court in Richmond, Va., which ruled that Snyder would have to pay $16,000 toward the Phelps' legal costs. (Fox News' Bill O'Reilly offered to cover those costs.) Despite those massive setbacks, Albert refused to back down. His lawyers petitioned the Supreme Court, and in March 2010, it agreed to hear his case.

"[Albert] knows what Matt went through in Iraq, and he feels like he can't back down just because this is getting tough, because Matt didn't back down," Craig Trebilcock, one of two lawyers representing Snyder pro bono, told The Baltimore Sun last year. "He's tougher than when we started out. Kind of like something that's been hit so many times, it's become tougher."


Snyder hasn't yet commented on today's Supreme Court ruling -- his attorney Sean Summers said, "It's not the decision [Snyder] wanted -- he realized there was a fair risk that he might lose the case. Albert said last year that the tireless support he received from people across the country, and from his two daughters, inspired him to keep fighting." His legal bills have been covered thanks to donations from thousands of people, meaning that the battle against Westboro won't bankrupt the electronics salesman, who earns $43,000 a year.

"It kind of restores your faith in mankind after dealing with this wacko church," Snyder told The Baltimore Sun last March. "Win or lose, I'll know that I did everything I could for Matt, and for all the soldiers and Marines who are still coming home dying."

A Day in the Teaching Life

Yesterday, I struggled all day with how to make my English reading and writing class at the Community College of Philadelphia both technically instructive and intellectually inspiring. And I had to arrive at what I'll call a "two-state solution" to my problem. Henceforth, I decided, the writing portion would be very basic, focused on mastery of simple structure and technical proficiency. The reading portion, however, would be far more adventuresome, intended to goad long, hard thought about one's life and times.

Today, I will begin to take my new two-pronged approach. The first half of the 3-hour class will be a back-to-basics writing workshop; the second half will be a reading and discussion workshop in which they explore notions about heroism by studying people unknown to them whose bravery made them stand against their society.

On Monday, we studied Martin Niemoller (1892 - 1982), a highly-decorated German U-boat captain during WWI who became a clergyman in the 1930s and ended his life as a pacifist and passionate advocate of nuclear disarmament. In between, he was thrown in Dachau for differences of opinion with Hitler over Third Reich infringement on religious freedoms. Yet his fights with the Nazis never rose above theological disputes. Indeed, in 1939, while in a concentration camp, he volunteered for duty in the German Navy and encouraged his three sons to join the armed forces. It was only in 1946 when he attended the Nuremberg War Trials that he realized the full horror of the Hitler regime and denounced his personal failure to fully condemn his government for its racial policies. From then on, his "radicalization" was steady and inexorable. During the Vietnam War, he visited Hanoi and praised Ho Chi Minh. He protested America's bombings throughout all of Southeast Asia. He died, calling himself a socialist on the road to becoming an "anarchist."

Niemoller came to my attention for a poem about the need for political resistance attributed to him that is really just an assemblage of lines from speeches and lectures he gave after WWII:

First they came for the Communists, and I did not speak out

because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out

because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out

because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out

because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me.

Given Labor's struggles in Wisconsin, Ohio, Indiana and Michigan, plus the domino-like spread of uprisings in the Middle East, I thought the poem would speak to, if not for, my students.

Today, the instigation will continue.

English 098 - 099

Mr. Federman

March 2, 2011

Reading/Discussion Assignment

Profiles in Courage #2, William Stafford's "The Mob Scene at McNeil"

If someone asked me to name the bravest group of people, I would not answer soldiers, police, or fire fighters. Yes, these are all men of courage who face danger every day. But these are men who are seen as heroes and applauded for their bravery.

No, I would have to say the bravest group of people for me are pacifists. Also known as conscientious objectors (COs), these men refuse to serve in armies and fight in wars--no matter how noble or just these wars may appear to be. So they are rarely applauded for their bravery.

To the contrary, COs are often seen as cowards and traitors. Sometimes they are subjected to the kind of violence which they themselves vow to resist. Imagine being so committed to the idea of non-violence that you refuse to serve in your country's military, even in the midst of a war like World War II that most men think was necessary. Imagine being so sworn to non-violence that you will not resort to violence (except, perhaps, minimal self-defense) if you are attacked for your beliefs.

Meet pacifist and poet William Stafford (1914 - 1993). From 1942 to 1946, he was interned in CO camps across America--fighting fires, planting trees, helping with irrigation and soil conservation projects. After the war, he wrote a book about his experiences as a pacifist, and submitted it as his master's thesis to the University of Kansas, in his home state. Called "Down in the Heart: Peace Witness in War Time," the book was published by the Brethren Publishing House in 1947. The title refers to an old spiritual, "I Know God Down in My Heart." In other words, the principles by which Stafford lives come from deep down in his heart.

The book's first chapter, "The Mob Scene at McNeil," describes a Sunday afternoon where a small group of COs are allowed a day off in a small Arkansas town to pursue private pleasures such as painting, writing and reading. While engaged in these activities, a small group of towns people gather who know they are COs and ask them about what they're doing. Within a matter of minutes, all cordiality disappears and the situation escalates into a confrontation between locals and COs. Greatly outnumbered and faced with physical violence, Stafford and his friends try to pacify the crowd and escape harm.

Read this chapter and try to put yourself in Stafford's shoes. What would you be feeling? How would you behave? Do you see why I think he belongs to the bravest group of people I know? Or do you think he is wrong for refusing to serve his country in a war that is universally seen as honorable and necessary?

If you feel the later, know you're not alone. I've had passionate debates with friends who think COs are the equivalent of "spiritual freeloaders," safely removed from the battlefield while their neighbors are dying to protect their freedom to refuse to bear arms. While I think Stafford was the ultimate patriot, I have had friends tell me he was a coward. What do you think? More importantly, if you put Christ's teachings of forgiveness and pacifism above all other beliefs, what would you do if asked to fight another Hitler?

After reading this excerpt from "Down in the Heart," we'll hold a class discussion and exchange views about Stafford's views and actions on their behalf. As you read, try to recall any situations in your own life where your deepest beliefs pitted you against common belief and public opinion. What did you do? Did you remain steadfast? Did you find a way to compromise that still left you with your dignity?