Dear Mr. President,
Come take a walk with me.
Let's pretend we're just two people and
You're not better than me.
I'd like to ask you some questions if we can speak honestly.

What do you feel when you see all the homeless on the street?
Who do you pray for at night before you go to sleep?
What do you feel when you look in the mirror?
Are you proud?

Sadly this is too little too late for thousands of Americans and Iraqi people who have been killed by a person who cares little if anything about human life. I have to wonder what if any lessons we as a country have learned from this debacle in Iraq. Have we learned that war only begets war and that only peace can bring an end to terrorism. I wish the president had kept playing golf and given up lying. You want to engender solidarity, call the nation to shared sacrifice. There should be no tax cuts for the wealthy in war time. You want to promote solidarity, how about gas rationing or a call to use alternatives to fossil fuels. How about an end to no bid contracts for your buddies. How about less "bring'em on" speeches and less politicization of opponents of your failed strategy.

You want to show real solidarity with the troops, own up to your mistakes honestly. Admit you were way wrong and ask forgiveness for yourself and your wrong headed strategy. Instead of a presidential library how about taking the money and putting it towards a trust fund to help the widows and children of the four thousand dead military personnel and the countless thousands of wounded from this debacle. How about asking the war profiteers to give back some of the billions of tax payer dollars to establish the beginning of an international aid program. Start playing golf again and while you're out there invite some of the orphans of Katrina, Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere to join you for lunch. Live with the victims of war and you'll be a little less likely to start another one. Spend some time living with a military family, eat the food they eat, sit up with them while they worry and pray for their loved ones. When you've been in their shoes it'll be a little tougher to start another war.

Erst werde ich über Pflicht zum Selbst, ich werde über Die Verlobung in St. Domingo von Heinrich von Kleist und Der blonde Eckbert von Ludwig Tieck schreiben. Zweite werde ich über Pflicht zu der Familie. Ich werde ein Bisschen über Der blonde Eckbert von Ludwig Tieck schreiben, aber werde ich über Die Judenbuche von Annette von Droste-Hülshoff auch schreiben. Dann werde ich über Pflicht zum Staat, werde ich über dem Schlimmelreiter von Theodor Storm.schreiben. Am Ende werde ich über Pflicht zum Gott, werde ich über dem Tod in Venedig von Thomas Mann schreiben.

Am Anfang gibt es ein Pflicht zu Selbst. Heinreich Kleist schrieb über Pflicht zum Selbst in Die Verlobung in St. Domingo. Gustav ist die Hauptfigur in Die Verlobung in St. Domingo. Er ist ein Soldat und ist er weiß. Gustav liebt Toni, aber Toni ist eine Mulattin. Der Kampf zwischen Gustav und Toni ist den Kampf zwischen Weiß und Mulattin. In Frankreich gibt es ein Revolution. In St. Domingo gibt es ein Revolution von der Sklaven. Gustav und Toni hat ein Kampf mit ihren Familien. Toni hilf Congo und ihre Mutter, die ermordete vielen weißen Soldaten. Aber mussen Gustav und Toni sich Entschlusskraften machen. Sie haben Willensfreiheit, sie haben ein Pflicht zu sich. Kleist schrieb über Willensfreiheit. Man mußt sich Entschlusskraften machen, nicht seinem Familie oder Staat oder Gott. Gustav und Toni symbolizierten diese Idee von Kleist. Am Ende Gustav mußt Selbstmord machen, und mußt er Toni schlossen. Das ist eine Thema von die deutschen Novellen. Pflicht zum Selbe, die Familie, zum Stadt oder Gott enden mit Tod. Aber Toni und Gustav machen der Entschlusskraf sich.

Der blonde Eckbert von Ludwig Tieck ist auch über Pflicht zum Selbe. Tieck schrieb über Schicksal und nicht Willensfreiheit, aber hat er über Pflicht zum Selbe. Am Ende eine alte Frau sprachte zu Eckbert, „Und Bertha war deine Schwester.“[1] Eckbert hat ein Pflicht zum sich. Aber er hat auch ein Pflicht zu seinem Familie. Auch Bertha hat ein Pflicht zu sich. Sie mußt der Freund ihres Mannes die Wahrheit sagen. Sie könnte nicht alle Zeit lügen. Sie hat ein Pflicht zum sich. Sie mußt es sagen, weil die Lüge Bertha ermorden. Tieck schrieb:

Es gibt Stunden, in denen es den Menschen ängstigt, wenn er vor seinem Freunde ein Geheimnis haben soll, was er bis dahin oft mit vieler Sorgfalt verborgen hat, die Seele fühlt dann einen unwiderstehlichen Trieb, sich ganz mitzuteilen, dem Freunde auch das Innerste aufzuschließen, damit er umso mehr unser Freund werde. In diesen Augenblicken geben sich die zarten Seelen einander zu erkennen, und zuweilen geschieht es wohl auch, dass einer vor der Bekanntschaft des andern zurückschreckt.[2]

Die Pflicht zum Selbst ist nicht dieselbe als Die Verlobung in St. Domingo. Tieck schrieb über Schicksal nicht Willensfreiheit. Aber auch schrieb Tieck nicht total über Pflicht zum Selbst. Seine Novelle ist ein Gemengie zwischen Pflicht zum Selbst und der Familie. Bertha’s Pflicht ist zum Selbst. Aber Eckbert’s Pflicht ist zu der Familie. Aber Eckbert starb als Gustav. Die Pflicht ermordete Eckbert und Bertha. Bevor Eckbert starb, die Frau sagte, „Weil du in früher Jugend deinen Vater einst davon erzählen hörtest; er durfte seiner Frau wegen diese Tochter nicht bei sich erziehn lassen, denn sie war von einem andern Weibe.“ Eckbert’s Vater wusste seinem Pflicht zu der Familie. Eckbert vergaß seinem Pflicht zu der Familie. Weil Eckbert vergaß, mußt er sterben.

Seine Familie machst du. Das ist die Idee von Annette von Droste-Hülshoff. Sie schrieb Die Judenbuche, eine Novelle von die Idee Pflicht zu der Familie. Friedrich werde seinem Vater und Onkel werden. Es gibt kein Willensfreiheit in Die Judenbuche, es ist nur Schicksal. Friedrich und die anderen Dorfbewohner leben ausserhalb des Staates. Sie haben ein Pflicht zu der Familie und nicht Selbst. Annette von Droste-Hülshoff schrieb:

Unter höchst einfachen und häufig unzulänglichen Gesetzen waren die Begriffe der Einwohner von Recht und Unrecht einigermaßen in Verwirrung geraten, oder vielmher, es hatte sich neben dem gesetzlichen ein zweites Recht gebildet, ein Recht der öffentlichen Meinung, der Gewohnheit und der durch Vernachlässingung entstandenen Verjährung. [3]

Es gibt kein Stadt in diese Novelle. Friedrich mussen seinem Onkel helfen. Er hat ein Pflicht zu seinem Onkel und Familie. Aber am Ende ist der Stadt notwendig. Die einfältige Dorfbewohner brauchen ein Stadt. Annette von Droste-Hülshoff schrieb eine Warnung am Anfang, die ist ein Warnung zu die einfältige Dorfbewohner:

Wo ist die Hand so zart, dass ohne Irren

Sie sondern mag beschränkten Hirnes Wirren,

So fest, dass ohne Zittern sie den Stein

Mag schleudern auf ein arm verkümmert Sein?

Wer wagt es, eitlen Blutes Drang zu messen,

Zu wägen jedes Wort, das unvergessen

In junge Brust die zähen Wurzeln trieb,

Des Vorurteils geheimen Seelendieb?

Du Glücklicher, geboren und gehegt

Im lichten Raum, von frommer Hand gepflegt,

Leg hin die Waagschal’, nimmer dir erlaubt!

Lass ruhn den Stein – er trifft dein eignes Haupt![4]

Pflicht zu Familie ist ok aber sehr schädlich. Der Recht ist was die Familie machen. Man kann nicht die andere Dorfbewohner urteilen.

So sprachen wir über Pflicht zum Selbst und der Familie. Jetzt werden wir über Pflicht zum Staat. Nationalismus braucht Pflicht zum Staat, oder es kann nicht sein. Theodor Storm schrieb Der Schimmelreiter. Am Kern der Idee ist ein Kampf zwischen Willensfreiheit und Schicksal, oder Pflicht zum Selbst und Pflicht zum Staat. Der Staat beschließt, was man wird. Die Hauptfigur der Novelle ist Hauke, Hauke will mehr als das Shicksal des Staates. Die Frage der Idee ist der Staat besser als das Individuum? Der Schimmelreiter ist eine Geschichte über den Begehren des Mensches gegen die Pflicht zum Stadt, der Familie oder zum Gott. Hauke ist individualistisch. Er denkt, wenn etwas für sich gut ist, dann auch für den Staat. Hauke begehrt mehr als das einfache Leben. Aber am Ende ist Hauke tot und er wäre für seinen Staat gestorben. Hauke sah ein, daß das Individuum nicht ohne den Stadt sein kam. Die Pflicht zu der Familie, zum Selbst sind nicht wichtiger als die Pflicht zum Selbst. Man mußt wollen was den Staat würden. Die Ideen von John F. Kennedy „Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country. “[5]

Nicht aller Autoren mögen die Idee von Nationalimus. In Der Tod in Venedig von Thomas Mann gibt es Pflichter zum Gott, oder der Übermenschlich. Gustav Aschenbach ist die Hauptfigur in Der Tod in Venedig. Am Anfang gibt es einem man, vielleicht der Teufel oder Dionysus?[6] Dann geht er nach Venedig. Aber hat Gustav Willensfreiheit, oder Shicksal? Wenn er Schicksal haben, dann gibt es Pflicht zum Gott. Wenn er Willensfreiheit gibt es kein Pflicht zum Gott, aber es ist Pflicht zum Selbst. In Venedig sah Gustav ein Jung, der heißt Tadzio. Gustav ist von dem Jung faziniert. Tadzio ist ein religiös figur für Gustav. Tadzio ist „David“ von Michelanglo. Nach diese Zeit gibt es einer Massenvermehrung der Cholera. Gustav könnte nach München flugen. Warum hat er nicht? Er will Tadzio sehen, er will Gott sehen. Er liebt Tadzio, aber ist es ein unmoralischen Liebe? Wenn er Willensfreiheit hat, ja es ist! Aber ich denke, daß er kein Willensfreiheit hat. Am Ende ist Gustav zu den Strand. Gustav ist krank, aber will er Tadzio einmal Zeit sehen. Gustav hat die Cholera, und er will sterben. Er müßt Tadzio sehen. Tadzio symbolizert Gott, Religion, Moral. Der Tod in Venedig ist eine Warnung, daß Gott ist Tot[7] und Pflicht zum Staat ist überalles. Gustav sah Tadzio „fallen“, er sah Gott fallen.[8] Die Cholera ist Pflicht zum Staat, die ermordete alles. Pflicht zum Gott ist die nure Idee, das kann mit Pflicht zum Staat kampfen. Wir mussen an Gott glauben, oder an unmenschliche etwas. Der Staat ist nicht alles. Gott ist über dem Staat.

Die deutschen Novellen hat ein Fortrschritt zu Nationalismus. Erst ist Pflicht zum Selbst, dann zu der Familie. Heinrich von Kleist, Ludwig Tieck und Annette von Droste-Hülshoff schrieben eine Warnung: Der Selbst und die Familie sind nicht ohne den Staat. Theodor Storm schrieb über die Idee von Pflicht zum Staat. Aber Thomas Mann schrieb eine Warnung: der Staat wird Gott ermorden. Nationalismus ist Shicksal, es gibt kein Willensfreiheit. Man kann nicht ein Individuum in Nationalimus werden. Der Staat macht der Individuum. Nationalimus sagt, „Alles für den Vaterland.“ Es ist die Idee hinter Nationalsozialistlichen Arbeiters Partei, und die Sowjetunion.

It is difficult to understand why PM Olmert continues his no-Palestinian compliance implementation of the Road Map to peace, but Prof. Paul Eidelberg, President of the Foundation for Constitutional Democracy, gives us a clue. Prof. Eidelberg says multiculturalists liberals like PM Olmert have developed what he defines as demophrenia, which is a schizophrenic-like blindness to reality.² The reality is ordinary Palestinians democratically elected Hamas to represent them. They want Hamas to maintain Islamic law and the pre-1948 anti-Zion position. The bombs exploding in Israel’s cities is glaring evidence that the Palestinians and their leaders have no real intentions of honoring the Road Map or any other treaty.

When Ben Gurion and other Israeli leaders signed the Declaration of Independence on May 4, 1948, they created a Jewish state in which principles of Torah and democracy would guide the nation. This was outlined in my previous article on the subject. At the same time, they agreed to the two-state plan outlined by U.N. Security Council Resolution 242 for the ancient land. Israeli Jews complied with their part of the United Nations agreements, the surrounding Arabs Nations did not. Instead, they launched a multi-pronged military attack to eliminate the rising Zionist state from the Arab nation.

The continued use of the term Arab nation by Hamas and many other Islamic peoples is instructive. It depicts the vision of a single Islamic empire in the Middle East. This imperial vision rooted in Qu’ranic and Ottoman history is still being frustrated both by western imperial rule and the continued existence of the Jewish state. In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, it was the dominating rule of the more powerful pax Britannia. Since then, it has been pax Americana that has hindered Islamic imperial aspirations.

The war of Israel’s independence was won not by any imperial military power but by the divinely blessed determination of the Jewish people. The odds of a relatively small nation of people defeating the armies of multiple Islamic nations was small. This fait accompli is reminiscent of the biblical battles won by the ancient nation of Jews. When Israel was fulfilling God’s will, they won every time.

What the Arab nations failed to accomplish in 1948, the creation of the PLO was meant to achieve. The PLO initiated the 6-Day War that resulted in the liberation of Jerusalem and other parts of the ancient land. The liberation of the land was not a goal sought after by the Israel’s government. It was simply taken in defense of the nation’s collective existence. Yet, the Palestinians fighters did expose those areas of geographic vulnerability that today still require Israel’s possession for Israel’s national security.

It is true the Jews agreed to two states in the ancient land. They agreed to do so for peaceful coexistence, but peace only exists with two cooperating parties. Since the establishment of the Jewish state, they have had to fight against an intractable but defeated aggressor who only recently claims willingness to play by the rules. Few nations on earth, if any, exist because they gave back lands they were forced by war to take in order to survive. Yet, United States and other world leaders demand Israel do what they never would or could.

During Independence Day celebrations, citizens of the Jewish state of Israel will remember 60 years of continuous hostilities with a people always desirous to eliminate their Jewish national existence. After such a long time, one would think that the Jewish people and their leaders would see the two-state solution as an impossible goal. Before the unilateral disengagement from Gaza, surveys revealed that the majority of people were against land for peace deal with Syria but they favored the unilateral disengagement plan for Gaza.³ Then as now, the primary concern was the end of violence against Jews in Gaza. Since then, polls show that the majority no longer favor further withdraws.⁴ Yet, a slight majority still favor the two-state solution.⁵ Maybe demophrenia affects too many citizens as well, but not every one is blind to the reality that the so-called occupation exists on useless paper and in the minds of those whose dream of a renewed Islamic imperialism.

The Palestinian Authority (PLO) has never complied with international agreements including the stipulation to end all terrorist attacks. In a recent press conference with U.S. Secretary of State Condolezza Rice, PA President Mahmoud Abbas called on Hamas leaders to end their coup to hold new elections for governance of the whole of Gaza and the West Bank. Columnist David Singer rightly interprets Abbas’ statement as a rejection of the Road Map’s requirement to dismantle all terrorist organization and aggression against Israel.⁶. Recent bombing of Ashkelon reveals the resistance to Israel’s existence has yet to subside. Abbas told the Jordanian daily al-Dustor that he not only was opposed to calling Israel a Jewish state but also requiring Hamas to acknowledge its right to exist. He only required it of the unity government. More importantly, he said, “At this time, I object to the armed struggle, since we are unable to conduct it; however, in future stages things may change..." ⁷.

The distrust voiced by citizens of the Jewish state towards both the Palestinians and their leaders is well founded. Originally, Likud party leader Ariel Sharon was elected as Prime Minister because he was presumably opposed Oslo. He and his replacement Ehud Olmert betrayed the party and the settlers they had help to establish to implement Labor’s disengagement plan by forming Kadima.⁸ Their betrayal lead to thousands of traumatized homeless citizens and to the escalation of violence and war by Islamic terrorist. If PM Olmert has his way, thousands of more citizens living in Judea, Samaria, and east Jerusalem will be made homeless as well.

It is hoped that during Israel’s 60th year of statehood, citizens of Zion will achieve their freedom from the deceptions of failed political peace plans and the terrible affects it has had on the many of them. Making politicians directly accountable to voters through Constitutional reform is one step towards ending corruption in government and blatant disregard of the constituent trust exemplified by leaders like Sharon, Olmert, and others leaders. In a recent commentary, Prof. Eidelberg wrote:

If Israel is to survive, the institutions of the State will have to be radically overhauled. We shall need a constitution designed to maximize accountability, a precondition of the rule of law as opposed to the arbitrary rule of fools and scoundrels. We must make the Legislative and Executive and Judicial branches of government accountable to the People. As for the People, they must revitalize the Torah, the covenant of their forefathers, who knew they were accountable to God.⁹

Prof. Eidelberg explains how this can occur in a 2002 paper titled Israel’s Problem, and Getting Back to a National Camp.

… members of the Legislature must be INDIVIDUALLY elected and accountable to the voters. This means we must eliminate fixed party lists and establish regional elections. Fixed party lists enables party leaders in the cabinet of the Executive branch to dominate the Legislature and to ignore Jewish public opinion BETWEEN elections. You cannot be a true Jewish nationalist if you tolerate a political system that enables nationally elected officials to compromise the PERMANENT interests and territorial assets of the Jewish people. Hence Israel needs a political system that broadens the political horizons of legislators by inducing them to represent diverse groups and opinions, which can only be accomplished by regional elections the practice of every democracy. Regional elections will increase the power of Jewish voters, decrease the power of parties, make the Legislature more independent of the Executive, and thereby establish, for the first time in Israel’s history, a system of checks and balances essential to good government.

However, you cannot have a Jewish democracy so long as the Supreme Court not only determines its own membership, but also champions the indiscriminate equality and normless freedom of secular democracy at the expense of Jewish principles and values. Therefore, judges should be nominated by the President and confirmed by the democratically elected Legislature, and they should not have the power to nullify laws enacted by the representatives of the people.

To promote a public philosophy and national unity, as well as balanced government and the rule of law, a concise constitution is essential, one clearly and proudly based on Jewish principles and values.¹⁰

If you would like to help make the needed Constitutional changes, read and sign the Petition for Constitutional Change.

_______________________________

NOTES:

1. Daily Israel Report, 12 May 2008.

2. "Does Olmert Have a Mental Disorder?," The Foundation for Constitutional Democracy, 13 May 2008.

3. Aaron Lerner, "3 Disengagement Polls," IMRA, 16 April 2004

4. "Poll: Israelis opposed to further withdrawals," The Jerusalem Post, 19 March 2008; Dr. Aaron Lerner, "Poll: 20% Support evacuation of all communities if Palestinians fulfill all obligations in final deal," IMRA, 23 November 2007.

5. "Peace Index Poll: Israeli Jews: 47%:40% peace process" historic mistake, 23% favor Green Line as future border," IMRA, 10 April 2008.

6. "Abbas Tears Up The Road Map," Canadian Free Press, 7 May 2008.

7. "Abbas in Briefing to Jordanian Daily Al-Dustour: I Am Against the Armed Struggle – But In Future Stages Things May Change," Special Dispatch Series No. 1861, MEMRI, 6 March 2008.

8. Yehud Poch, "Complete Betrayal," Israel Insider, 21 November 2005; Rick Kelly, "Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and the putrefaction of official Israeli politics," WSWS, 8 June 2006; Carl in Jerusalem, "Olmert announces he will divide Jerusalem," Israel Matsav, 1 January 2008.

9. "No Accountability in Israel: On a sham democracy," The Foundation for Constitutional Democracy, 5 February 2008.

10. The Foundation for Constitutional Democracy, 5 February 2002.

Councilmember (that's his title as an elected member) Larry Gossett and Auditor Cheryle Broom are spending the week with us in Kent, to learn about the differences in our governance and to share the way they do things in King County.

There are similarities - a population of 1.9m compared to our 1.5m and a similar budget. The interesting thing was that in terms of democratic representation, the whole county, with its urban and rural communities and thirty nine cities, has just nine elected members. It's very different.

We heard about their impressive focus on the green agenda - around 100 of the 1800 council-controlled buses are hybrid, and over the next few years two thirds of the council's 2000 cars will be low emission vehicles.

But on the minus side, only fifteen percent of the population who need social housing actually get it - leaving, as we were told, 85% of the rest "left to hustle".

We talked about the criminal justice system, and I was amazed to hear that 25% of the wordl's jail population are imprisoned in the United States. Of the 2,000,000 in jail in the US, 1,100,000 are African American.

It's a very different place. Fascinating, but very different.

John Edwards is expected to endorse Barack Obama at a rally this evening in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Having Edwards' endorsement may help Obama with the voting public that he is lacking--the white working class which has been in favor of Hillary Clinton.

From CNN:

An endorsement from Edwards, who ran as vice president on Sen. John Kerry's ticket in the 2004 presidential election, would have a significant impact on the race, Democratic strategist Peter Fenn said after Edwards dropped out.

"You could make an argument that the change issue does benefit Barack Obama, that he picks up that support. You could also make the argument that there's a lot of support out there amongst people that will go to Hillary," he said. "The big issue here is who will he endorse."

Some political pundits predicted that Edwards' supporters are more likely to lean in Obama's direction.

"The conventional wisdom is that Barack Obama will pick up maybe 60 percent of them, and in some places, that makes a huge difference," former presidential adviser David Gergen said in January.

Hmmm...think Edwards is looking for a job in the new administration? ;-)

Both experiences come from the working-class neighborhood in Northeast Portland, around the Monastery of Our Lady of the Sorrows. My first house, a no account nothing, white clapboard, American-made sedan parked in the drive way and plain curtains. Over the kitchen sink window hung a home-sewn flag made of red cloth with two blue stars on a white field. I've only seen that in one other place, in the opening minutes of Saving Private Ryan when Mrs. Ryan finds out that three of four sons are dead.

This being the evening, both the man and his wife are at home, eating dinner in front of the television, watching coverage of the Iraq War and a copy of Imperial Life in the Emerald City and Night Draws Near open face down. While I rarely go into people's houses (as it's against the rules) they invited me in to sit for a minute.

Both were what Peggy Noonan would've liked to think were "Reagan Democrats." Roughly my parents age, raised after World War II, they'd been Republican, they'd admitted "since before we could vote." The wife had campaigned with Nixon, Goldwater, and Nixon, as well as Reagan. Her husband had served as a Marine in Vietnam.

Occasionally, we get mistakes, and so, I began to apologize for being in the wrong house, before the husband cut me off, informing me that they'd flipped their registration after Super Tuesday, gesturing to pictures of their sons in dress uniform, and saying, "It's shameful."

I spoke, briefly, about the Marines and soldiers I'd met while studying Arabic at home and abroad, and my own experience in studying the Middle East, mentioning both the books they were reading as part of my understanding of Iraq in particular.

They spoke proudly of their sons, eighteen months apart, who'd joined the Corps after graduating High School, and were serving in Iraq--I couldn't identify the town they mentioned, but I assumed it was Anbari--and they then spoke about the letters their boys, and how much it hurt them--the wife stopped herself, several times, tears in her eyes.

They then asked how they could help Sen. Obama.

I told them that I wanted to make sure that they turned in their ballots, that for us, every voter mattered. At this, they grinned, producing theirs for me, saying how proud they were to make history with the rest of the country. They asked if I could give them any lawn signs or buttons; sadly, I'd run out of both, but said that they could get them at Portland Headquarters.

I'd forgotten, of course, to ask if they wanted to volunteer. But when I mentioned headquarters, the wife asked if she could come down and help us out, and the husband volunteered, as well.

We love volunteers, I offered--it's time for all hands on deck.

I shook the wife's hand, and her husband walked me to the door.

Having finished my task and preparing to head to the next house, I shook his hand before he pointed to my PrideObama pin and said, "It's wrong, you know."

"What?"

"To discriminate against y'all. As long as a man shoots the right way, I don't care about anything else."

Some people think that the reason the public misunderstands so many issues is that these issues are too "complex" for most voters. But is that really so?

With all the commotion in the media and in politics about the high price of gasoline, is there really some terribly complex explanation?

Is there anything complex about the fact that with two countries-- India and China-- having rapid economic growth, and with combined populations 8 times that of the United States, they are creating an increased demand for the world's oil supply?

The problem is not that supply and demand is such a complex explanation. The problem is that supply and demand is not an emotionally satisfying explanation. For that, you need melodrama, heroes and villains.

It is clear that many people prefer to blame President Bush. Others prefer to blame the oil companies, who have long been the favorite villains of the left.

Politicians understand that. Numerous times they have summoned the heads of oil companies before Congressional committees to be denounced on nationwide television for "greed," with the politicians calling for a federal investigation to "get to the bottom of this!"

Now that is emotionally satisfying, which is the whole point. By the time yet another federal investigation is completed-- and turns up nothing to substantiate the villainy that is supposed to be the reason for high gasoline prices-- most people's attention will have turned to something else.

[...]

If you want cheering crowds, don't bother to study economics. It will only hold you back. Tell people what they want to hear-- and they don't want to hear about supply and demand.

No, supply and demand is not too "complex." It is just not very emotionally satisfying.

Read the whole thing. This is very central to a number of arguments conservatives use on a regular basis, but it is an inherent problem with our system. Not surprisingly, the politicians are motivated to pander to certain groups so they can maintain their office and their electoral support.

The conservatives' issue lies in whether some control or ethical framework should be employed to avoid this in the interest of a move benevolent leadership. A few things are for certain: the pandering in election years is becoming disruptingly overt, and is one of the least appealing aspects of our democratic system of government.

See Sowell's part 2 here.

Mrs. Clinton’s lopsided win could amplify her cautious argument that many blue collar Democrats aren't ready for a black president.

“The number of white Democratic voters who said race had influenced their choices on Tuesday was among the highest recorded in voter surveys in the nomination fight,” writes Mr. Healy of The Times. “Two in 10 white West Virginia voters said race was an important factor in their votes. More than 8 in 10 who said it factored in their votes backed Mrs. Clinton, according to exit polls.”

Defining Senator Barack Obama's failure to energize Senator Hillary Clinton's center of support by using "blue-collar" to refer to "racist" Americans, not only incorrect, is unhelpful. Using "blue-collar" to refer to "racist" presents Senator Obama an impossible logical challenge as an African-American Presidential candidate: Energize racists for their support. By definition, "racism" is prejudice unresponsive to reason.

That "racism" is a political challenge for Obama is an argument for and against his nomination by Democrats. And, that is the logical impossibility of Senator Clinton's proof of her electability compared to Obama: For Democrats, and Americans generally, morality may prefer defeat of an historic candidate to victory of Clinton in the general election. (That is not to argue that Clinton's candidacy is less historic, of course. It is, however, to recognize that Obama is the mathematically-probable Democratic nominee and that, because of the probability of Obama's mathematics, he is not required to argue his electability.)

However, defining Obama's challenge to be energizing support among a demographic of Americans harboring irrational prejudice, logically is impossible, and using "blue-collar" to refer to "racist" grossly over-complements the minority of "racist" Americans. "Blue-collar" America is a substantial. "Racist" America is not substantial. Or, if media suspects "racist" America to be substantial, it is, nonetheless, unhelpful for Democrats and destructive for America that the self-proclaimed "fly-to elites" persistently fail to recognize that "blue-collar" (to "working, hard-working Americans, [multi-ethnic] Americans") connotes the fundamental American morals of resourcefulness, industriousness and conscientiousness. "Blue collar" patently is not to be understood to be "racist". And, in the general election, "blue-collar" must be more deftly defined by the candidates, and it must be used non-euphemistically by the media. Advocating for citizens of our Republic who have a skill or a promise of honest effort and commitment to exchange for their American dream is unrelated to race.

"How does information become transformed into knowledge, and knowledge into wisdom? (Yerushalmi 1994)? This commitment to rereading history from papyrus to hypertext parallels the commitment to philosophy from a cosmopolitical point of view. It is not merely theory for theory's sake. Gatekeepers of the archives (and collective memory) wield power. Access to information is more than a legal right: it becomes an indicator by which effective democracies can be measured. (Derrida 1996a: 4). The mapping of archives of the infosphere needs to be concerned with uncompromised inclusivity as constitutive of a renewed, unbound, effective democracy in which plurality can co-exist with social cohesion. It requires a consistent and constant vigilance against complicity and complacence. It involves nurturing and encouraging diverse ways of seeing, knowing and remembering. The architecture of deconstruction facilitates the round-tables of discussions which invite, welcome and propel rather than discourage, exclude, dismiss and prevent convergences of divergent thoughts. The sparks of discord can illuminate the ashes and dust of the (missing) archives (Flynn-Burhoe 2000).

This is a blog version of a html webpage entitled "Mapping Memory: from Papyrus to Digitization: The Great Flood and the Arkh". In 2000 (?) it was presented to a small eclectic group of dazzling student super-geeks and hackers brought together by a shared interest in the virtual and Carleton University star professor Rob Shields.

Abstract: This paper and webpage examines intersections between Jacques Derrida's Archives Fever and texts, objects and events that informed Archive Fever: Plato's Phaedrus, Freud's Moses and Monotheism and Yerushalmi Freud's Moses. (How) Is the authority of the archonte transformed by the digitization of archives? How can conceptual tools developed by Jacques Derrida enhance understanding of the concept of archives in this period of transformation? (How) can the structure of the archives allow for the co-existence of social cohesion and pluralism? To what extent is archival meaning co-determined by the structure of the archives? (Derrida 1996a: 16) To what extent is our access to knowledge, to collective memories barred by inadequate maps and ideological obstacles?

Keywords: archives, anarchives, digitization, cartography, pharmakon, plurality, democracy

With the digitization of data, archives have been inundated with a tidal wave of information. The great flood of the archives is both cause and effect of an expanding collective electronic memory and an enlarging field of inquirers and inquiries. Cultural groups resisting the homogenous mass culture of globalization, an increasingly informed citizenry insisting on accountability in governance and grass roots movements involved in risk management excavate the archives to legitimize claims and trace memories (Wallot 1996: 23).

In this complex infosphere of '...shifting nationhood, evolving governance, mutating organizations, and changing forms of records' archivists attempt to maintain a creative tension and complementarity between their hybrid roles as gatekeepers of evidence and map-makers of society's '...long-term memory, identity and values formation and transmission' (Wallot 1996: 23). This involves nothing less than a re-examination of the theoretical roots and conceptual framework of the professional roles of archivists (Wallot 1996: 24).

In 1994 an international conference in London, organized by the Freud Museum and the Société Internationale d'Histoire de la Psychanalyse, focussed on 'Memory: The Question of Archives.' Derrida's presentation Archives Fever which lasted over three hours was dedicated to Jewish historian, Yosef Hayim Yerushalmi whose 'handsome' book Freud's Moses provided a catalyst for his own. Yerushalmi's frustrated attempts at accessing certain exclusive archives while conducting his research on Freud, led to his paper ''Series Z: : An Archival Fantasy' presented at the same conference.

Derrida juxtaposes reflections on memory and archives with Freud's psychoanalysis. Freud's archives in Freud's Museum, London and in the Library of Congress consist of thousand of items collected and stored under protective guardianship. Yet the archons of the corpus of the most-quoted man of the twentieth century seem to break all the rules of archival practice: the archived items are neither innocent, accessible nor dusty. Freud's archives were not naive: they were self-conscious, wary of censorship therefore self-censored and incomplete. Freud's own secrecy rivalled that of Goethe who was a '... great self-revealer, but also in the abundance of autobiographical records, a careful concealer' (Freud 1930: 212). But then all archives are incomplete repositories, containing only those objects and artifacts that have survived the past (Yerushalmi 1994).

Even with the best archival practice the archival documents cannot be historical facts. Vital archival objects are articulated or constructed as historical in an interpretive process through the mind and imagination of the historian. History is constructed from documents retrieved from archival storage. And archival material can be constructed to contradict memory (Yerushalmi 1994).

'Psychoanalysis aspires to be a general science of the archive, of everything that can happen to the economy of meaning and to [...] its traces.' The science (or art) of psychoanalysis depends on memory as data. Freud's human subject achieved freedom from neurosis through memory management. In the economy of psychoanalysis memories can be called up, evoked, transmitted, named, categorized and relativized.

What is the nature of transmission of memories? Freud suggested ways of remembering that were relevant to psychoanalysis and inaccessible to ordinary histories. But he only once used the term 'archives' as a metaphor for memory. In 1898 he imagined memory as an open, accessible archive that was subjected to the will. He discarded the inadequate metaphor: memories can be stored but not all can be retrieved. (Yerushalmi 1991 Freud [1898]) Yerushalmi concluded that Freud abandoned the term 'archives' as a metaphor for memory since they have '...nothing in common. Memory is not an archive, nor is archive a memory bank' (Yerushalmi 1994).

Archives, even Freud's official Archives were not 'the ultimate arbitrar of historical truth' about Freud as it was widely believed by both his defenders and his attackers (Yerushalmi 1994). In spite of the sophistication of contemporary historians who recognize the limitations of archival documents, the unlocking of Freud's most secretive archives, Series Z, led to a 'fureur de l'inédit.' This fury to publish previously unpublished archival documents was reminiscent of the 19th century heyday of scientific history informed by the cult of the archives. In the 1830s through the 1860s national governments opened their archives to research in an effort to protect their collective histories. Lord Acton proclaimed, 'To keep one's archives barred against the historians was tantamount to leaving one's history to one's enemies' (Yerushalmi 1994).

Like an archaeologist, Derrida excavates the concepts of archives and memory. These pharmakon-like concepts contain both the cure and the poison. This homeopathy of thinking describes 'archive' as open, visible, accessible and undivided. Archives become an indicator, evidence, witness, a way of rewriting history, a return to origins, a return to the archaic, a search for lost time, scar-like traces on the surfaces of the body and an archeology of the surface. But archives are also dormant, lost, dissimulated, forbidden, censored, destroyed and incinerated. Through the secret archives or anarchives Derrida raises questions of transmission in the economy of memory. (1996a)

Derrida's impressions of l'actualit� have left their mark around the globe. Situating himself as one who lives between two worlds, a world citizen who is Jewish-French but also Algerian he argues for a philosophy from a cosmopolitico view point where transmission and alterité become the centre. In international conferences spanning three decades with diverse groups: arabo-islamic intellectuals, UNESCO, the Société Internationale d'Histoire de la Psychanalyse or at John Hopkins University, he challenges complacency and complicity. He reveals how philosophy is not shackled by an exclusive, solitary memory or language: it is stereoscopic, polyglot, multi-linear even bastardized, crossbred and spliced. He calls for a new role for philosophy, one in which a rereading of Plato, for example, becomes as urgent a task as new scientific results (Derrida 1996b). He adds a third space to columns of binary opposites: a space of tension, of sparks generated from divergent viewpoints (1981:73).

Derrida cites and questions Plato's separation of live memory mneme from hypomneme. Archives are hypomneme along with inventories, citations, copies, lists and genealogies (1981:107). The archives are an extension of writing, commodified by power brokers, the sophists. Socrates' words written by Plato, upheld the 'art of memory.' Writing was imperfect memory or even forgetfulness, dependent on signs; it was nonknowledge (1981:105). The recital of 25,000 lines of Homeric verse over several days was a manifestation of the living word, of knowledge, of the promise of limitless memory. But Socrates, "he who does not write" was written. When Derrida came upon a 14th century Italian print from the Bodleian Library, reproduced mechanically as a postcard he was enchanted. It became a visual metaphor for the archival object: in the scriptorium Socrates is writing with Plato standing behind him. By examining the relationship between the two fathers of meaning in Western thought, Derrida opened a space for a rethinking of transgenerational patriarchal transmission. He brought Freud's ghost, his archives and his historian into the discussion. He reveals how secret archives and powerful archons dissimulate.

Derrida speaks and writes in a 'scriptless' hypertext, where intertextualitity can either enrich or confuse. Derrida's reflections on Plato, Freud, Yerushalmi are constructed into complex layers of texts that defy a linear structure such as this paper. Its content is better adapted to the nonlinear format of the webpage. Fascinating and thought-provoking connections can be extrapolated following Derrida's lead from papyrus to digitization. Both Plato and Freud circuitously lead us to the Black Egyptian pharaoh Akhenaton who introduced a form of monotheistic religion c. 1379 - 1362 BCE with Aton the god of the universe subsuming both Thoth the moon god and Amon-re or Amen the sun god. Plato as scribe for Socrates used a myth to discredit myth over logos. In Socrates' version of the myth Thamus disparaged Theuth (Thoth) for inventing writing along with alchemy, geometry, astronomy and calculations. Theuth not only writes and represents Amon-Ra; he effectively replaced the god himself.

Freud investigated Egyptian monotheism as possible source of Moses' monotheism. To these layers I would suggest another, accessible through archives that are still underused by western inquirers. Questions of intellectual genealogy and inheritance can be enriched (although not answered) by accessing Islamic archives. Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and the Ptolmeac corpus influenced Islamic thought. Islamic law was informed by Solomon's judicial system. Further in these archives monotheism is traced to the Patriarch common to Judaism, Christianity and Islam: Abraham. How would Socrates hypothetical journeys to Palestine and Syria and the possible influence of Hebrew sages on Socrates himself impact on the concept of bastardized, hybridized and spliced philosophies? Answers as evidence are not the issue. The answers to Freud's question 'Was Moses Egyptian?' like Yerushalmi's 'Is psychoanalysis a Jewish science?' take second place to the open-ended questions themselves.

Derrida's papyrus and postcard connection led to the Bodleian Library. While reading my library copy of Postcards, the ghostlike presence of the postcard became so tangible, I almost expected 'a missing letter' scratched on the back of Plato and Socrates to fall out from between the pages. Following Derrida's trail electronically I accessed the Bodleian Library's medieval print section. The Bodleian Library seemed elusive, even exclusive: it is the main research library of the University of Oxford used by scholars from around the world. However, a number of their collections of medieval manuscripts are now available around the globe on-line. The mechanical reproduced images that appeared on my screen leaving their impressions were from Dante's Divine Commedia. In a northern Italian 14th century illustration Dante and Virgil observe Mohammed and Ptolemy, both condemned to inferno for their heresies. The same medieval censorship that suppressed Ptolemy's Geographia, and denied the monotheism of Islam, had also misread Socrates and Plato.

Was Artaud referring to Ptolemy when he proclaimed: 'The library at Alexandria can be burnt down. There are forces above and beyond papyrus: we may temporarily be deprived of our ability to discover these forces, but their energy will not be suppressed' (1981: 53). Instead the secret archives becomes a spectre, a ghost, a phantom protecting itself from detection, repression, censorship and destruction.

An entire corpus of Greek knowledge was rejected by early Christians fearful that the spherical globe violated their fundamental religious beliefs. Navigation and cartography are inextricably interwoven. Yet the historiography of cartography of our biosphere is one of ransacked, missing, secret and recovered archives. In 391 AD Christians mobs sacked the Alexandrian library including Ptolemy's research. As Librarian of the Alexandrian, he had inherited centuries of Greek scholarship which he published in the Geographia. Arabo-Islamic scholars, unbridled by Christian fear of 'Greek science' translated and developed Ptolemaic maps for their journeys to India, Tibet and China. In 1154 Al-Idrisi, Arabo-Islamic geographer in a Sicilian court created a world map influenced by Ptolemy. The European period of world-wide expansion took place only after Medieval maps were replaced by Ptolemy's science. McLuhan suggested that without maps as a means of communication "the world of modern science and technology would hardly exist" (McLuhan 1964: 157-8). What will be the suppressed memories, the missing links on the maps of the infosphere, on the maps of the archives? Who decides the grid and the structure?

Digitized, indexed and linked image, stills and motion, sound and text can be mapped by one author then unwrapped and re-mapped by an active reader. Virtual objects seem to float dislocated from space and time connected only by links, those 'arrows frozen in time' (Shields 2000). Once reproduced electronically, an urn, an 11th century map, a postcard letter or the Bodleian's 14th century version of Dante's Commedia are wrenched from the structure, context and content. John le Carré stated, 'Nothing exists without a context.' Descriptions and explanations can be lost leaving 'vast holes in memory.' Or the opposite can occur: Navigational tools, maps and charts can reintegrate structure to context and content (Wallot 1996: 14). Through electronic embedding, for example, virtual images of Inuit sculptures, those silent ambassadors of a dynamic living culture, can hyperlink context and content in rich layers of information.

Concept maps are not innocent; they become tools for data interpretation and ways of assigning value and meaning. Maps are not draped over reality; they exclude. They are like Derrida's archontes, the archivists who wield authority (and power) over data, its interpretation, its storage and its accessibility. The archontes of electronic archives decide what is collected, described and classified or ignored, destroyed or virtually left hanging, unmapped and disconnected. What happens to the 'other' in cyber archives? If categories are not created, do they no longer exist? If there are no pointers, can they be found? Could the holocaust have happened in the age of electronic mail? Would there have been electronic traces of the crematoria?

"But of the secret itself, there can be no archive, by definition. The secret is the very ash of the archive. . ." Derrida's concept of archives bridges the technical, political, ethical and judicial with poetry and ghosts. In Feu le cendre the holocaust ashes of the crematoriums contain traces of memories, names, letters, photos, personal objects and even keys. The ashes become the pharmakon. They are both cure and poison; they remain but are gone. They are the incomplete archives, traces of the disappeared, traces that speak of that 'other' memory.

The censorship of psychoanalysis, 'a Jewish science' led to an ethos of protective secrecy about Freud's archives which continued throughout the 20th century. In 1885 and again in 1907 Freud completely destroyed all his correspondence, notes, diaries and manuscripts (Yerushalmi 1994). He wrote Moses and Monotheism, his only work specifically on a Jewish theme on the eve of Nazi occupation of Austria. Shortly after Freud's forced exile to England and the completion of his manuscript, Freud died. His inquiry into the history of monotheism was a questioning of the role of religion itself. Was it possible to trace suppressed memories of a people as one can with individuals? Would such a project reduce religion to that of a social neurosis caused by deeply embedded and suppressed transgenerational memories? Freud wrote his first manuscripts knowing that censorship would prevent it from being read, at least in his lifetime. Catholic authorities were critical of psychoanalysis: this manuscript would provoke even greater antagonism. After his death any literature on psychoanalysis uncovered by the Nazis was incinerated as 'Jewish literature.' But Freud's psychoanalysis of Jewish history and Judaism also sent a shock wave through the Jewish community. He hypothesized like Otto Rank in 1909, that Moses was born to a Egyptian princess not to a Hebrew woman. Freud suggesting that Moses' monotheistic religion was actually based on an existing Egyptian monotheistic religion, Aten. Further he sought out clues to Moses' murder. In effect Freud was dismantling the Jewish claim to uniqueness. Freud died before the manuscript was published, without ever knowing the holocaust. He wrote for a secret archives, knowing readers were not ready, nor would they be until sometime in the future. Derrida describes the writing that seeks dissimulation as anarchives, the 'other' archives, the secret archives hidden from the flames of repression.

Yerushalmi's book Freud's Moses became an appeal to the spectre of Freud to reveal the contents of the secret archives, to provide answers that the archives did not hold. How did Freud's personal life relate to his teaching or to the history of the psychoanalytic movement? In the final dramatic, audacious chapter entitled 'Monologue with Freud,' Yerushalmi addresses Professor Freud's spectre in a 'fiction which [he] somehow do[es] not feel to be fictitious' (Yerushalmi 1991:81). Yerushalmi implores Freud to reveal to him "When your daughter [Anna in 1977 declared that psychoanalysis was a Jewish science] conveyed those words to the congress in Jerusalem, was she speaking in your name?"

Was Freud being loyal to Judaism, through disloyality? Was he recognizing its weaknesses without rejecting it outright? Was he refusing alienation and victimization? Was he protecting his own true subjective freedom by refusing to accept in its entirety an inherited ethnicity, religion, culture or nationality (Derrida 1996c)?

Yerushalmi did not expect the archives to provide evidence of Freud's relationship to Judaism. But did he perhaps hope that Freud's collection of antiquities would reveal some specifically Jewish objects? None were exhibited in a travelling exhibition of Freud's antiquities in 1989. However, a year later exhibition curator Dr. Gamwell informed Yerushalmi, after he had sent off his manuscript, that at the Freud Museum in London, objects had been found "which are related to Freud's Jewishness." Included in the list of items was a Hanukkah Menorah which was in Freud's study during his lifetime and a 1913 postcard to Karl Abraham which shows the arch of Titus. On the image depicting the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE with soldiers removing the Menorah from the Temple, Freud wrote, "The Jew survives it!" (Yerushalmi 1991)

Freud used his vast collection of antiquities from Greece, Rome and Egypt to illustrate his remarks during his therapy sessions. He compared the relatively unchanging nature of the unconscious to the antique objects in the study which had been entombed and preserved, then uncovered, unchanged.

The pivotal object however was the rebound bible which Freud's father had presented to Freud on his thirty-fifth birthday in May, 1891. Yerushalmi became the first guardian, reader, doctor and the only legitimate archon (Derrida 1995:22) of Jacob Freud's Hebrew dedication, which Derrida himself analysed in detail. Derrida described the law makers who create and maintain the archives: Freud's father, Freud, Yerushalmi and the "arch-archiving of the family Bible of the arch-patriarch of psychoanalysis in the arca, cupboard, prison cell, cistern, reservoir." (Derrida 1995:23) Using this specifically Jewish artifact Derrida ties together strands that had been threading through Dissemination, Feu le cendres, Postcards and Archives Fever. The impression is left by the Jewish father on his son. The one who writes is written by the father in the presocratic language. The new skin of the Bible is covered with scar-like traces as reminders, as ways of remembering. The Bible as gift to the son continues to be the gift to Yerushalmi who yearned for the spectral presence of Freud.

The archives provide a deluge of information. But haunting questions remain: how does information become transformed into knowledge, and knowledge into wisdom? (Yerushalmi 1994)? This commitment to rereading history from papyrus to hypertext parallels the commitment to philosophy from a cosmopolitical point of view. It is not merely theory for theory's sake. Gatekeepers of the archives (and collective memory) wield power. Access to information is more than a legal right: it becomes an indicator by which effective democracies can be measured. (Derrida 1996a: 4). The mapping of archives of the infosphere needs to be concerned with uncompromised inclusivity as constitutive of a renewed, unbound, effective democracy in which plurality can co-exist with social cohesion. It requires a consistent and constant vigilance against complicity and complacence. It involves nurturing and encouraging diverse ways of seeing, knowing and remembering. The architecture of deconstruction facilitates the round-tables of discussions which invite, welcome and propel rather than discourage, exclude, dismiss and prevent convergences of divergent thoughts. The sparks of discord can illuminate the ashes and dust of the (missing) archives.

Contact � Maureen Flynn-Burhoe 2000 for comments, corrections and copyright concerns.

Re-throne Iftikhar Chaudhry and hang Zardari, and sing all Faiz and Jalib on Geo. It will be the same. That's the bitter truth...

"What I call middle-class society is any society that becomes rigidified in predetermined forms, forbidding all evolution, all gains, all progress, all discovery. I call middle-class a closed society in which life has no taste, in which the air is tainted, in which ideas and men are corrupt. And I think that a man who takes a stand against this death is in a sense a revolutionary. Fervor is the weapon of choice for the impotent." Frantz Fannon

The quotes from Frantz Fannon form the basis of my thoughts on the problem of libertarian politics in Pakistan. The problem that has been disguised in the fervor of middle class intelligentsia, civil society and the so called lawyer's trade union "movement" to reinstate the judges who were "not called" to take oath under the PCO of General Pervez Musharaf.

The first casualty of this movement was "clarity", quite understandably when middle and petty bourgeois classes and institutions of a post colonial state are the stalwarts of a "libertarian movement". When I am writing down these lines the "count down" to the end of days is over in Pakistan. The serene voice of Iqbal Bano singing Faiz Ahmad Faiz's epic revolutionary poem Hum dekhen ge is glorifying the "Judicial Movement." The day promised by Faiz being the day the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of The Islamic Republic of Pakistan should and must be "re-throned" in his "Castle of Justice" in Islamabad.

This and this alone is the solution to all Pakistan's problems. This and this alone was the goal of all libertarian politics of Pakistan, from Syed Sajjad Zaheer to Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. This and this alone was the meaning of all progressive discourse, from Manto to Faiz, from Jalib to Faraz. Any other view is treason, anyone suggesting an alternate view is a "sell-out."

Pakistan Peoples Party and its evil leadership, its evil supporters have betrayed the revolution, the Messiah of liberation incarcerated for months in dungeons, the dungeon being official residence of the Chief Justice in Islamabad with his family. Mr Ten Per Cent spent 8 years in jail without conviction and bail, never saw his children growing up, enjoying a "married life", half of which was spent in friendly imprisonment in the worst of Pakistan's jails, where his back was broken and his tongue was cut!! (Bol keh lub aazad hein tere). Yea our Messiah of Liberation was manhandled during his long march from his palace to the court, the haircut was destroyed, the black coat martyred. And all in front of cameras.

Mr Aitzaz Ahsan, the Marxist lawyer, who charges six-figure fees and delivers justice to 80% of the people of Pakistan who earn less than 2 dollars a day, speaks, his voice crackling with passion over the fate of the children who were forced to live with their parents in their own house. Has anyone ever heard from him any names other than Balaj and Palwasha? Any names like Bilawal, Asifa, and Bakhtawar who grew up without a father, who were not allowed to see their father for years and years. Who were not allowed to live in their country. When they got their father, their mother was killed. Who killed their mother? Did anyone talk about any "countdown" to start a probe into murder of leader of people of Pakistan? Of course it's the destiny of Asifa to live half her life without a father and the rest of her life without her mother. Destiny!!

The Glorious Judge:

A military dictator, General Pervez Musharraf, imposes martial law, suspends the constitution and takes over. Army surrounds the Chief Justice House, arrests the Chief Justice. Our glorious Judge Iftikhar Ahmad takes oath of personal loyalty to General Musharraf accepting him as the "source of law"

The great Judge sits in 4 benches of the supreme court declaring :

A. The martial law was legal.

B. Suspension of constitution was legal.

C. LFO and PCO were legal.

D. Those judges who haven't taken oath of PCO are no more judges.

E. General Musharaf, the chief of army staff, can amend the constitution.

F. General Musharraf can keep his uniform and be President of Pakistan.

G. 17th amendment which changed the basic structure of constitution of Pakistan is legal and constitutional.

The evil PPP doesn't accept any of the above, its leaders and workers are jailed, one is Prime Minister today, the glorious judges refuse to listen to the habeas corpus.

Dogar is a bad judge:

Dogar is a very bad judge. What has he done?

Same as above.

The Glorious "No"

Our great glorious judge said "No" to General Musharaf. He stood up to the dictator. No one else had the courage to say No to the general.

1, The Evil Party's Asif Ali Zardari was having a picnic in Attock Fort and Pindi jail, cutting his tongue and breaking his back. He kept saying yes to generals.

2. Yousaf Reza Gilani, the Prince of the Gilani clan which has been revered in Multan since Mughal times and have always enjoyed governance, also said "Yes" to the general and spent 5 years in Pindi Jail. Perhaps the first person ever in his family to do so.

3. That thug Javed Hashmi also said "Yes" to general, and was beaten, repeatedly perhaps, for his pleasure. He was also having picnic at jails. Did anyone hear his habeas corpus? No. Yet another glorious No.

4. Akbar Bugti also said "Yes" to the general and got him self hit in the head. Perhaps some suicide ideation?

5. 300 or more evil PPP workers who lost their lives in Musharaf rule also died saying yes to the general.

6. Nawaz Sharif also said "Yes" to the general when he was being entertained in Attock Fort.

But The Glorious Judge said No to the general.

The Change of Heart: An Independent Judiciary

The glorious Judge is restored. The judiciary has become independent!!

A. The Independent and restored judiciary dismissed the petitions of the Communist Party of Pakistan, Qazi Hussein Ahmad and Imran Khan on technical grounds, allowing General Pervez Musharraf to contest the presidential election in uniform. (But who cares, judges should be restored.)

B. Nawaz Sharif is dragged and sent back to Saudi Arabia against a court order, our glorious judge takes action on road blocks in Islamabad, Khawaja Asif is running with contempt of court petition in hands, it takes weeks and weeks till the glorious judge is dismissed again.

C. The glorious Chief Justice declares the written and sealed deals of Punjabi politicians Sharif brothers unconstitutional, both of whom are convicted criminals allowing them to return, at the same time not activating their sentences. But our glorious the Chief Justice passes a stay order against the NRO by which the cases which the State of Pakistan failed to gain a conviction in any court of the world in 10 years, and for which evil Sindhi Zardari served the due time in jail were withdrawn, accepting their political nature.

The Public Interest Litigation, the Civil Rights Jihad:

"Our glorious Chief Justice took notices causing a civil rights revolution in Pakistan"

1. Did the glorious Chief Justice revise and nullify Maulvi Tameezuddin case which is the backbone legal precedent of almost all unconstitutional acts in Pakistan? No

2. Did the glorious Chief Justice revise and nullify Begum Nusrat Bhutto case? No

3. Did the glorious Chief Justice revise and nullify Zaffarullah shah case? No

4. Did the glorious Chief Justice revise and nullify The Lawyers Forum case? No

5. Did the glorious Chief Justice revise and nullify The Hudood Laws which are discriminatory and unconstitutional? No

6. Did the glorious Chief Justice revise and nullify Law of evidence by which woman's evidence is considered half of that of a man? No

7. Did the glorious Chief Justice nullify the Anti Ahmedi laws which are one of the most draconian laws that ever existed any where? No

8. Did the glorious Chief Justice lift the unconstitutional ban on student unions, especially since his restoration owed a lot to "lawyer's unions"? No

9. Did he lift the ban on trade unions? No

10.Did he take notice of the murder of Nawab Akbar Bugti? No

11. Did he take notice of the Baluchistan operation? No

12. Did he take notice of the murder of 170 PPP workers and allow the PPP to register an FIR? No

13. Did he remove laws against homosexuals and gay people? No

But he took notice of individual cases. Which a supreme court normally should not. It should make legal civil rights moves to change the existing system, like in the USA. But who cares?

Evil Party is not impeaching the General

They should impeach him, apply article 6. But what will happen to glorious judges who aided the general to subvert the constitution? How can Musharraf be hanged for subverting the constitution and Justice Ifikhar and Justice Dogar and company be spared after they subverted the constitution, broke their oath and legalized his actions?

How can Imran Khan be spared, agter supporting the unconstitutional referendum, thus helping a uniformed general commit high treason?

How can Qazi Hussein Ahmad be spared for passing the 17th amendment, again committing high treason by legalizing a uniformed general's subversion of constitution?

Its very bad to take back "corruption" cases (which were never convicted and Zardari only served legal time if he was convicted). But what about the high treason cases against judges which were never filed? What about the convictions and sentences of Punjabi Sharifs? Who will file the corruptions charges against Zia and Jamate Islami? The Afghan Jihad? Who will look into the empires of General Hameed Gul and General Abdul Rehman? Is only the PPP is to be persecuted? Its one chairman hanged, second stunned, third shot, and now fourth to be hanged? Eight years of prison is not enough so will he be hanged too? But why only PPP's politician have to be held accountable? NRO is bad ? But what about the "unsung NROs"? The high treason to corruption to murder charges that never were filed in first place?

Re-throne Iftikhar Chaudhry and hang Zardari, and sing all Faiz and Jalib on Geo. It will be the same. That's the bitter truth...

Please sign this open letters by adding your name, affiliation, email address, website and comments below. FACT will make sure you are added to the signatories.

Over 130 trade unionists, social activists, students and academics have put their names to an open letter condemning the behaviour of The Manager media group.

Those signing the letter include many academics at Chulalongkorn and Thammasart Universities, including the Dean of the faculty of Political Science at Chulalongkorn University. Former Senator Jon Ungpakorn and Rawadee Prasertcharoensuk from the N.G.O. Coordinating Committee, Professor Niti Eawsriwong, Textile trade union leaders, worker activists and an academic from the Midnight University are among the signatures.

The letter is in response to the actions of Mr Sonthi Limtongkul's Manager group in promoting violence against a young student activist Chotisak Oonsong, who is being accused of lèse majesté because he refused to stand up for the King's Anthem at the cinema. Both Manager group websites and its radio station, Metro Life, have encouraged Ultra-Rightwing Royalists to attack Mr Chotisak. Ms Jitra Kotchadej, Chairwoman of the Triumph workers union has also been made a target for violence by The Manager media. Ms Jitra was singled out because she wore a T-shirt supporting the right to different views in society, including not standing up at the cinema. Both Mr Chotisak and Ms Jitra's photographs and home addresses were published alongside urges to attack them. The Manager media also encouraged people to attack and break up a meeting on Human Rights at Thammasart University recently.

Those signing the open letter compare the behaviour of The Manager with the past behaviour of Rightwing media such as Dao Sayam newspaper and the Tank Corps radio station in inciting violence that led to the 6th October 1976 blood bath.

The letter calls on people to boycott The Manager media group for abusing basic human rights. The letter also calls on P.A.D. leaders Somsak Kosaisuk, Pipop Thongchai and Somkiat Pongpaiboon to come out and officially condemn The Manager.

Associate Professor Giles Ji Ungpakorn
Open Letter Coordinator

Full list of names and text of open letter follows.

เราขอประณามพฤติกรรมของสื่อในเครือข่าย ผู้จัดการ กรณีคดีหมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพ

เรา ผู้ลงชื่อท้ายจดหมายนี้ ขอประณามพฤติกรรมของสื่อ ผู้จัดการ ในการยุให้เกิดความรุนแรงกับผู้ที่มองต่างมุม กรณีคดีหมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพ

ในรายการ Metro Life ของวิทยุผู้จัดการมีการส่งเสริมยุให้ประชาชนเข้าไปทำร้ายร่างกายของผู้เข้าร่วมการสัมมนาเรื่องสิทธิมนุษยชนที่มหาวิทยาลัยธรรมศาสตร์ และก่อนหน้านั้นสื่อ ผู้จัดการ ได้เปิดเวปไซท์ให้ผู้ที่ส่งเสริมการทำร้ายร่างกายของบุคคลที่ไม่ยอมยืนในโรงภาพยนตร์ และผู้ที่สนับสนุนสิทธิเสรีภาพของบุคคลนั้นในการแสดงออกอีกด้วย มีการโฆษณาทั้ง ชื่อ ที่อยู่ และแนะนำให้คนร้ายไปรอดักทำร้ายร่างกาย

การส่งเสริมความรุนแรงต่อผู้ที่มองต่างมุม ถือว่าเป็นการละเมิดสิทธิเสรีภาพพื้นฐานในระบอบประชาธิปไตย และเป็นพฤติกรรมคล้ายกับการกระทำของพวกฝ่ายขวาจัดที่นำไปสู่เหตุการณ์นองเลือด ๖ ตุลาคม ๒๕๑๙

เรา

· ขอเรียกร้องให้ทุกคนที่รักสิทธิเสรีภาพและประชาธิปไตย ร่วมกันบอยคอตสื่อทุกชนิดในเครือข่ายผู้จัดการ

· ขอเรียกร้องให้ สมศักดิ์ โกศัยสุข  พิภพ ธงไชย  และสมเกียรติ พงษ์ไพบูลย์ ออกมาประณามการกระทำของสื่อนี้ด้วย

ลงชื่อ
ใจ อึ๊งภากรณ์  อาจารย์คณะรัฐศาสตร์จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

ธนาพล  อิ๋วสกุล  สำนักพิมพ์ฟ้าเดียวกัน

บุญยืน สุขใหม่ เลขาธิการกลุ่มสหภาพแรงงานภาคตะวันออก

บังอร แสงงาม                รองเลขาธิการสภาแรงงานศูนย์กลางฯ

สิทธิ์  จันทาเทศ  ประธาน สหภาพแรงงานกรุงเทพผลิตเหล็ก

ศุกาญตา  สุขไผ่ตา ประธาน กลุ่ม สหภาพแรงงาน ย่านรังสิต และใกล้เคียง

วิเชษฐ์  เชยนิ่ม ประธาน กลุ่มเยาวชน คนงานแห่งประเทศไทย

ศรีไพร  นนทรีย์ นักเคลื่อนไหวแรงงานย่านรังสิต

ไพริน  ผ่อนจรุง ประธาน สหภาพแรงงาน อุตสาหกรรม ของเด็กเล่น

จะเด็จ เชาวน์วิไล มูลนิธิเพื่อนหญิง

จรรยา ยิ้มประเสริฐ โคงการรณรงค์เพื่อแรงงานไทย

เรวดี ประเสริฐเจริญสุข ที่ปรึกษาคณะกรรมการประสานงานองค์กรพัฒนาเอกชน (กปอพช.)

จอน อึ๊งภากรณ์ อดีต ส.ว. กรุงเทพฯ

ไชยันต์ ไชยพร อาจารย์คณะรัฐศาสตร์จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

จรัส สุวรรณมาลา คณบดี คณะรัฐศาสตร์จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

นฤมล ทับจุมพล  อาจารย์คณะรัฐศาสตร์ จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

กฤตยา อาชวนิจกุล  อาจารย์สถาบันวิจัยประชากรและสังคม มหาวิทยาลัยมหิดล

ดนัย ลินจงรัตน์ นักเคลื่อนไหวสิทธิคนรักเพศเดียวกัน

จันทวิภา อภิสุข นักเคลื่อนไหวสิทธิบริการ Empower

จุมพล อภิสุข ศิลปิน

สุธาชัย ยิ้มประเสริฐ อาจารย์ประจำภาควิชาประวัติศาสตร์ คณะอักษรศาสตร์ จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิยาลัย

นิธิ เอียวศรีวงศ์

สุชาดา จักรพิสุทธิ์

ศิริชัย  สิงห์ทิศ ผู้ประสานงาน สหพันธ์แรงงานอุตสาหกรรมสิ่งทอฯ

ศักดินา ฉัตรกุล ณ อยุธยา อาจารย์สายแรงงาน

มาลี พฤกษ์พงศาวลี อาจารย์คณะนิติศาสตร์มหาวิทยาลัยธรรมศาสตร์

วิภา ดาวมณี อาจารย์มหาวิทยาลัยธรรมศาสตร์

เกษียร เตชะพีระ อาจารย์คณะรัฐศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยธรรมศาสตร์

สมเกียรติ ตั้งนโม มหาวิทยาลัยเที่ยงคืน

สมบัติ บุญงามอนงค์  มูลนิธิกระจกเงา

เจษฎา โชติกิจภิวาท กลุ่มประชาธิปไตยเพื่อรัฐสวัสดิการ

บาหยัน อิ่มสำราญ อาจารย์ประจำภาควิชาภาษาไทย คณะอักษรศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยศิลปากร

สุชาย ตรีรัตน์ อาจารย์คณะรัฐศาสตร์จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

อนุสรณ์ ลิ้มมณี อาจารย์คณะรัฐศาสตร์จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

ศุภมิตร ปิติพัฒน์ อาจารย์คณะรัฐศาสตร์จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

วีระ สมบูรณ์ อาจารย์คณะรัฐศาสตร์จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

ตระกูล มีชัย อาจารย์คณะรัฐศาสตร์จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

สุรวุฒน์  ช่อไม้ทอง อาจารย์คณะรัฐศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยสงขลานครินทร์ วิทยาเขตปัตตานี

ทิพย์อักษร มันปาติ ผู้สื่อข่าวสำนักข่าวประชาธรรม

ประสิทธิ์ ค่ายกนกวงศ์ พนักงานการไฟฟ้าฝ่ายผลิต

ษัษฐรัมย์ ธรรมบุษดี นิสิตปริญญาเอกคณะรัฐศาสตร์จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

ชุมพล อุนพัฒนาศิลป์ นิสิตปริญญาโทคณะรัฐศาสตร์จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

ณัฎฐณิชา นันตา นิสิตปริญญาโทคณะรัฐศาสตร์จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

ทิพสุดา ญาณาภิรัตน์ นิสิตปริญญาโทคณะรัฐศาสตร์จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

จิตรา คชเดช      ประธานสหภาพแรงงานไทรอัมพ์อินเตอร์เนชั่นแนลแห่งประเทศไทย

สมสมัย นิมา      กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานไทรอัมพ์อินเตอร์เนชั่นแนลแห่งประเทศไทย

บุญรอด สายวงค์ กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานไทรอัมพ์อินเตอร์เนชั่นแนลแห่งประเทศไทย

วิภา มัจฉาชาติ   กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานไทรอัมพ์อินเตอร์เนชั่นแนลแห่งประเทศไทย

รติพร จันทรตรี    ประธานสตรีสหพันธ์แรงงานอุตสาหกรรมสิ่งทอการตัดเย็บเสื้อผ้าผลิตภัณฑ์หนังฯ

บุญเสริม คำรส   กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานไทรอัมพ์อินเตอร์เนชั่นแนลแห่งประเทศไทย

ศรุดา ดอนกระโทก          กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานไทรอัมพ์อินเตอร์เนชั่นแนลแห่งประเทศไทย

วิภร ขวัญศร       กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานไทรอัมพ์อินเตอร์เนชั่นแนลแห่งประเทศไทย

วาสนา คงหินตั้ง กรรมการสตรีสหพันธ์แรงงานอุตสาหกรรมสิ่งทอการตัดเย็บเสื้อผ้าผลิตภัณฑ์หนังฯ

จินตรา ขวานทอง            กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานไทรอัมพ์อินเตอร์เนชั่นแนลแห่งประเทศไทย

พรมมา ภูมิพันธ์ ประธานสหพันธ์แรงงานอุตสาหกรรมสิ่งทอการตัดเย็บเสื้อผ้าผลิตภัณฑ์หนังฯ

เซีย จำปาทอง    เลขาธิการสหพันธ์แรงงานอุตสาหกรรมสิ่งทอการตัดเย็บเสื้อผ้าผลิตภัณฑ์หนังฯ

อินชวน ขันคำ     เลขาธิการกรรมกรปฎิรูป

บรรจง เจริญผล  กรรมกรปฎิรูป

สุนทร บุญยอด   กรรมกรปฎิรูป

วันชัย แหลมทองหลาง    กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานสิ่งทอไทย(พิพัฒน์สัมพันธ์)

วสุ แดงสูงเนิน                สมาชิกสหภาพแรงงานสิ่งทอไทย(พิพัฒน์สัมพันธ์)

รัชดากร คงภักดี              สมาชิกสหภาพแรงงานสิ่งทอไทย(พิพัฒน์สัมพันธ์)

พรทิพย์ ดีพร้อม              สมาชิกสหภาพแรงงานสิ่งทอไทย(พิพัฒน์สัมพันธ์)

มิ่งขวัญ ศรีเลิศ               กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานกรุงเทพผลิตเหล็ก

เสณีย์ พูลสระน้อย          เจ้าหน้าที่สหพันธ์แรงงานอาหารและเครื่องดื่มฯ

ประยงค์ เอมโอด ประธานสหพันธ์แรงงานอาหารและเครื่องดื่มฯ

ธนวัฒน์ ปูพบุญ             ประธานสหภาพแรงงานแอมคอร์ประเทศไทย

วิโรจน์ ใกลชิต                กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานแอมคอร์ประเทศไทย

ชุน บุญเชิญ                   กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานแอมคอร์ประเทศไทย

นิกร เพ็งมาก                  กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานแอมคอร์ประเทศไทย

เพรชรุ่ง พุฒบ้านหลุม      กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานแอมคอร์ประเทศไทย

รัตนา ขันสัมฤทธิ์            กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานแอมคอร์ประเทศไทย

ชญาดา ศรีวิเสฐ             กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานแอมคอร์ประเทศไทย

ประสิทธิ์  ยอดโค้น          เลขาธิการสหภาพแรงงานสยามอินเตอร์

ประวร มาดี                    กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานไทยอคิริคไฟเบอร์

ชุมพล ภูมิพันธ์               กรรมการสหภาพแรงงานไทยอคิริคไฟเบอร์

นายภูมิวัฒน์  นุกิจ นักกิจกรรมเพื่อการเปลี่ยนแปลงสังคม

ปกป้อง เลาวัณย์ศิริ นักกิจกรรมด้านสิทธิมนุษยชน

นุ่มนวล ยัพราช โครงการรณรงค์เพื่อแรงงานไทย

เปรมใจ ใจกล้า โครงการรณรงค์เพื่อแรงงานไทย

จารุวัฒน์ เกยูรวรรณ โครงการรณรงค์เพื่อแรงงานไทย

สุริยา โพธิ์ชัยเลิศ นักสหภาพแรงงาน

เอกรินทร์  ต่วนศิริ เครือข่ายเยาวชนเพื่อสันติภาพ 3 จังหวัดชายแดนภาคใต้  นิสิตปโท คณะรัฐศาสตร์ จุฬาฯ

ชารีป สะอิ สมาพันธ์นิสิตนักศึกษาจังหวัดปัตตานี

ซูลกิฟลี ปูต๊ะ สมาพันธ์นิสิตนักศึกษาจังหวัดยะลา

อาฟันดี เด็ง สมาพันธ์นิสิตนักศึกษาจังหวัดสงขลา

รอมซี ดอฆอ สหพันธ์นิสิตนักศึกษา 5 จังหวัดชายแดนภาคใต้

อนุธีร์ เดชเทวพร กลุ่มสังคมนิยมประชาธิปไตยมหาวิทยาลัยธรรมศาสตร์

สุทธิพงษ์ พูนกล้า มหาวิทยาลัยรามคำแหง
ศิริภาส ยมจินดา นักศึกษา ป.โท คณะรัฐศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยธรรมศาสตร์
ศัษยา บุรณษถิตย์พร นักศึกษา ป.โท Imperial College, University of London

ศุษม อรรถวิภาคไพศาลย์ พนักงานบริษัท
วิทยา  อาภรณ์ นักกิจกรรมภาคประชาชน

พรพรรณ แก้วมุงคุณ

ดำรงพล แสงมณี

ปิยวีร์  รื่นจินดา

อานนท์ ชวาลาวัณย์ นิสิตปริญญาโทคณะรัฐศาสตร์จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

กานต์ ยืนยง

ขวัญระวี หวังอุดม

บุษยรัตน์ กาญจนดิษฐ์

อดิศร เกิดมงคล

โอภาส ภาสบุตร เครือข่ายพลเมืองเพื่อการมีส่วนร่วม

จริยา พงศ์วิวัฒน์ มหาวิทยาลัยหัวเฉียวเฉลิมพระเกียรติ

วรดุลย์ ตุลารักษ์

เก่งกิจ กิติเรียงลาภ นิสิตปริญญาเอกคณะรัฐศาสตร์จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

สาวสิริลักษณ์ ศรีประสิทธิ์

สายสัมพันธ์ รัตนปรีดากร นักศึกษา interior design

วรดุลย์ ตุลารักษ์

พงษ์เลิศ พงษ์วนานต์

ปรัชญา สุรกำจรโรจน์

สฤณี อาชวานันทกุล   นักวิชาการอิสระ

รัฐพงศ์ ภิญโญโสภณ นิสิตคณะวิทยาศาสตร์ จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย ปี4

นรสิงห์  ศรีโรจน์

พรทิพย์  ธรรมศรีใจ

เทวฤทธิ์  มณีฉาย นักศึกษาปริญญาโท คณะรัฐประศาสนศาสตร์ สถาบันบัณฑิตพัฒนบริหารศาสตร์

ปริณดา  มีฉลาด   นักศึกษาปริญญาโท คณะรัฐประศาสนศาสตร์ สถาบันบัณฑิตพัฒนบริหารศาสตร์กุสุมา  โกศล          นักศึกษาปริญญาโท คณะรัฐประศาสนศาสตร์ สถาบันบัณฑิตพัฒนบริหารศาสตร์

ธัญลักษณ์  จีนแก้วเปี่ยม     นักศึกษาปริญญาโท คณะรัฐประศาสนศาสตร์ สถาบันบัณฑิตพัฒนบริหารศาสตร์

ฤทธิวัฒน์  ทั่งกลาง               นักศึกษาปริญญาโท คณะรัฐประศาสนศาสตร์ สถาบันบัณฑิตพัฒนบริหารศาสตร์

ชโลธร  สายทัด      นักศึกษาปริญญาโท คณะรัฐประศาสนศาสตร์ สถาบันบัณฑิตพัฒนบริหารศาสตร์

ฉกาจ  ลอยทอง     นักศึกษาปริญญาโท คณะรัฐประศาสนศาสตร์ สถาบันบัณฑิตพัฒนบริหารศาสตร์

ชยา  อุทยานิก       นักศึกษาปริญญาโท คณะสถิติประยุกต์ สถาบันบัณฑิตพัฒนบริหารศาสตร์

ณัฐพร   อาจหาญ                 นักศึกษาปริญญาโท คณะวารสารศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยธรรมศาสตร์

นที  วลัญชพฤษ์     นักศึกษาปริญญาตรี คณะวิทยาศาตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยมหิดล

เอกรินทร์  ต่วนศิริ เครือข่ายเยาวชนเพื่อสันติภาพ 3 จังหวัดชายแดนภาคใต้  นิสิตปโท คณะรัฐศาสตร์ จุฬาฯ

สุธัมมะ  ธรรมศักดิ์                อดีตนักศึกษานิด้าเพื่อประชาธิปไตย

ธีระพจน์  คำรณฤทธิศร        อดีตนักศึกษานิด้าเพื่อประชาธิปไตย

สันต์  ดอนศรี                         อดีตนักศึกษานิด้าเพื่อประชาธิปไตย

อารยะ  มังกรานนท์ชัย         อดีตนักศึกษานิด้าเพื่อประชาธิปไตย

ประกอบ  สุทธิกาโมทย์

กานต์  ธงไชย

ขุนกลาง  ขุขันชิน

คณิศร  ทับทัม

สุภาพร  ชัยฤกษ์

จารุวรรณ สาทลาสัย คณะเศรษฐศาตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยเกษตรศาสตร์

ภรทิพย์ มั่นคง กลุ่ม Food Not Bomb

โยฮัน สาตออุมา อดีตนักกิจกรรม มอ.ปัตตานี

นูรุดดี โตะตาหยง อดีตนักกิจกรรม มอ.ปัตตานี

10 พฤษภาคม 2551

Please sign this urgent appeal:
http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/support.php?ua=UAC-097-2008

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that two Thai websites (Fah Diew Kan and Prachatai) have been charged under Article 116 (2) of the Criminal Code for publishing discussions of a man's refusal to stand during the Royal Anthem. This is in violation of the freedom of expression as set down in the Constitution of Thailand, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

CASE DETAILS:

According to news reports, on April 28, the owners of two Thai websites, Fah Diew Kan and Prachatai were charged under Article 116(2) of the Thai Criminal Code in Khon Kaen province for publishing discussions on their website forums regarding Chotisak Oonsoong who refused to stand whilst the Royal Anthem was being played at a cinema. According to the reports, the complaint alleges that most of the comments on the websites supported Chotisak's act and showed a desire to abolish the monarchy.

Article 116(2) of the Thai Criminal Code states that anyone who publicises either verbally, in writing, or by any other means with the purpose of inciting unrest in the public, is liable to a maximum of 7 years imprisonment. As a result of this law, the owners of the websites must go to Khon Kaen provincial police station to answer the charges. Theoretically they could be sued in every other of the 76 provinces and have to spend their time traveling around the country, in order to answer any further charges.

Section 45, Paragraph 4 of the 2007 Constitution of Thailand guarantees freedom of speech. The website forums are a place where members of the public can express an opinion in accordance with this section of the constitution and are not aimed at causing disorder or inciting abolitionist sentiments.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

In recent years, independent media in Thailand have been increasingly targeted through legal action, defamation and libel charges. Previously, an administrative order was issued against Fah Diew Kan magazine on the grounds that an article in one of its publications regarding the monarchy "may upset public order or morality" (UA-112-2006).

Media reform campaigner Supinya Klangnarong won a criminal defamation case lodged against her by the corporation formerly owned by the family of the prime minister (UP-046-2006). Community radio stations have come under increasing attack and a farmer lost a case against his station on the ground that it breached antiquated broadcast regulations (UP-024-2006). The sister organisation of the AHRC, the Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC), raised his case as one of special concern in a written submission to the UN in 2006 (E/CN.4/2006/NGO/63). Thailand has ratified the ICCPR in 1996 and the UN Human Rights Committee also raised its concerns about declining freedom of expression in the country in its concluding observations to the country's report under the ICCPR in 2005:

"The Committee is concerned about reports of intimidation and harassment against local and foreign journalists and media personnel as well as of defamation suits against them, originating at the highest political level... The State party should take adequate measures to prevent further erosion of freedom of expression, in particular, threats to and harassment of media personnel and journalists, and ensure that such cases are investigated promptly and that suitable action is taken against those responsible, regardless of rank or status." [CCPR/CO/84/THA, 28 July 2005, para. 18]

Under criminal procedure, when someone lodges a complaint to the police the investigating police officers have to conduct an enquiry and collect evidence. The investigator has to search for the owners of websites then ask them to come to the police station to inform them of the charges brought against them and to question them as part of the investigation. The police are responsible for investigating until a decision is made on whether there is enough evidence to proceed to a public prosecutor and to court. This case can be withdrawn not by the complainant but by the police.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to authorities listed below asking for the immediate withdrawal of the charges against Fah Diew Kan and Prachatai.

The AHRC has also written a separate letter to the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression calling for an intervention in this case.

Tesco Lotus came under fire yesterday as the National Human Rights Commission and the Foundation for Consumers held a seminar on the hypermarket chain's negative impact on communities and the mass media's freedom of expression...Suthichai Yoon, editor in chief of Nation Multimedia Group, told the seminar that Tesco Lotus's recent libel suits could be seen as a "classic" case study on multinational firms' ethical conduct as far as public sentiment and social responsibility are concerned...Suthichai said the public and mass media had the right to express their opinion in good faith. As a result, these critics, wanting to protect a minority in society (the traditional trade), should not face such intimidation...The Campaign Committee for Human Rights also issued a strongly worded statement criticising Tesco Lotus and urging the public to boycott its business.