Lost in Translation: The Line Between Journalism and Espionage

NY Times article: "Contracts Tied To Efforts to Kill Militants"

Let me get this straight. So the "benign gov't info-gathering program" was a website known as Afpak, proposed by a former CIA guy and a former TV exec., set up to operate as what looks like a local news service focusing on cultural conflict issues in the context of wartime. And the intermediary - the accused Mr. Furlong - between the military and Afpak told Afpak that the military wasn't interested while also telling the military that Afpak was worthwhile? And when the rug got solidly pulled out from under Afpak, Furlong reallocated some of the leftover funding into one military program while shoving the rest - $15 mill. - into thin air?

Out of all this, aside from the outrageousness of his actions, if verified, it strikes me how apparently this Afpak endeavor was never clearly defined as either news-gathering versus covert intelligence gathering. If the boundary between the two is not recognized by the editors, not to mention our own military, contractors and the leaders of Afghanistan and Pakistan - two countries where the USA has unstable relations, to say the least - then it's no wonder why journalism is regarded with suspicion and contempt by leaders on both sides (despite what they may say in public about the importance of a free press) and why the work journalists produce – and risk their lives for – are regarded as little more than spying.

It’s no wonder why what we do is lost in translation in countries where there is no free press. It’s no wonder why our own gov’t leaders make such pitiful efforts to defend our work and our lives when it comes to that.

Quotes about Rapes in Haiti

Below are some choice quotes and excerpts from an AP article on the dramatic increase in rapes of women and children in the tent camps in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. The words and stories speak for themselves.

"The toddler is taking antibiotics for a gonorrhea infection of the mouth."

"Rape was a big problem in Haiti even before the earthquake and frequently was used as a political weapon in times of upheaval...

"The 21-year-old said her family has received no food aid because THE HAITIAN MEN HANDING OUT COUPONS FOR FOOD [and shelter] DISTRIBUTION DEMAND SEXUAL FAVORS."

"Eventually she found the patrol car but THAT OFFICER "TOLD US TO GO AND GET THE ATTACKER AND BRING HIM TO THEM.""

"Few rapes are reported... women often face humiliating scrutiny... police officers who suggest they invited the attacks... nurses who contend young girls were "too hot" in their dress style."

"WE ARE AWARE OF PROBLEM... BUT IT'S NOT A PRIORITY," Information Minister Marie-Laurence Jocelyn Lassegue said last month."

Buy the Book?: Texas Conservatives Seek to Rewrite History Textbooks

And the battle continues, both over what points-of-view get play in history textbooks and over whether a handful of people in one state with a large student population - Texas - should be allowed to decide the textbook foundation for the majority of public school curricula throughout the country.

It's a fascinating debate and conflict with valid points on all sides. But education really should not be at the whim of changing political tides, as idealistic as that may sound to some. This is a goal and point that really should be reached for as much as possible.

As for the debate going on in Texas right now, it's one thing to advocate a certain measure of balance to textbook curriculum (i.e. the quoted proposal to add info on conservative organizations and public figures, or even comparing Jefferson Davis' ideas with those of Lincoln's, for context), but it's quite another to eliminate and replace existing historical events and context (i.e. American imperialism in its early and middle development, the neutral description of the different political and economic systems at play, and the goals, however idealistic, of minorities during the Civil Rights Movement).

(photo credit: Darren Heater - http://morguefile.com/archive/display/625322)

International: Asylum for the Domestic and Sexually Abused?

This post is in response to this NYTimes article, which reports on an issue that reveals the indignance presented by the Bush administration and the walking-on-eggshells hesitation by the Obama administration as regards setting asylum criteria that would consider sexual abuse and physical abuse as eligible instances to would trigger asylum.

The reservation is understandable, but one can be protective without being cold and hard and hypocritical. What, ultimately, makes political or religious asylum any different than asylum based on sexual abuse? Perhaps it reflects our existing willingness and even desire to ignore physical and sexual abuse in domestic situations even of our own citizens.

POLITICS:OPINION: Zoot Suit Riot - The Distracted and Silent Press

t r u t h o u t | St. Paul's Police Protest the Press

Source: www.truthout.org

Police in full riot gear arrest protesters, and members of the press, at the GOP convention in St. Paul. (Photo: Reuters)

Arrests were made of journalists and the protesters they were covering at both political conventions these past two weeks, but as Michael Winship of PBS' Bill Moyers Journal writes here, only the St. Paul police actually targeted the journalists, from a wide variety of news outlets and political leanings, both before and during the large events.
This premeditated and concerted effort at stifling wide and more complete coverage of events of national and public significance, especially through physical abuse and arrest, is an abomination, as well as being illegal and unconstitutional.

Why is this abuse and arrest of journalists not being covered by any mainstream media? This is news and journalists should be making it known - such abuse affects all of us, not just those who dare to have the guts and chops to shine a light on it. When there is corruption, we're supposed to follow it, not run away... It's like being a tornado chaser. We're not wishing for it to happen, but if it's there, it's there.

In a world where federal governance and law enforcement are relied upon with increasing frequency and without regulation and checks of power, how can we possibly expect to extricate ourselves from partisan politics if we cannot even recognize our responsibility to society and fulfill our duty to question authority's restraints over discourse and information?