The Legend of Wooley Swamp

When You Only Hear What You Want to Hear

2008-03-22T19:21:00.015-05:00

(you're tone-deaf...)

Well, as feared a few days ago, people may have heard Obama's speech, but they sure as hell didn't listen.

People read what they wanted to into the speech. OK, that's inevitable to a degree. But to so utterly conflate theology with politics - or refuse to acknowledge the salience of race - is simply denying reality. Moreover, when you do get into the politics of all this: you find so many examples of hypocrisy and/or double standards that they'll spin your head out of orbit.

Look, Obama's approval of Wright's theology and the gratefulness he feels towards the preacher for helping him find spiritual peace, does NOT mean that he approves of the man's politics. This connection only exists in the minds of those who want it to be there. This guilt by association thinking is the opposite of the speech: simplistic, myopic and insular.

Furthermore, it's lazy: since few care to find out more about the church in question. Even a smidgen of research would show that Trinity United Church of Christ is not a hotbed of extremism (in fact, it is progressive on issues like gay rights). If you believe that Obama would join an extremist church, stay there for TWENTY years and then hope he could "get away with it", I've got a bridge to sell ya...

On the issue of race: it's clear to me that some people can't overcome their own prejudice. They watch the endless loops of Wright screaming "God damn America" on television, and then get their "analyses" of Obama's speech from the same channels that peddle these loops to begin with. Where was the journalism over the years, decades, centuries, describing a church like this, a preacher like this? This is what we get as consumers? Thanks, but no f^%*%^king thanks. It's pathetic.

Have you heard of Margaret B. Jones, aka Margaret "Peggy" Seltzer?

If not, read this and weep. A case like this shows how far removed the white community is from any black reality. Yet, they are willing to believe whatever their malicious prejudiced or bleeding liberal little hearts tell them...

Let me conclude with what "real" pundits have to say. In the mainstream media, Nicolas Kristof of the NYT has excellent points to share: "The outrage over sermons by Mr. Wright demonstrates how desperately we as a nation need the dialogue about race that Mr. Obama tried to start with his speech on Tuesday. Many well-meaning Americans perceive Mr. Wright as fundamentally a hate-monger who preaches antagonism toward whites. But those who know his church say that is an unrecognizable caricature: He is a complex figure and sometimes a reckless speaker, but one of his central messages is not anti-white hostility but black self-reliance."

And the same paper's Roger Cohen reflects on his youth in South Africa, on how being white in a racist state, informs his take on all this: "The unimaginable South African transition that Nelson Mandela made possible is a reminder that leadership matters. Words matter...The unthinkable can come to pass. When I was a teenager, my relatives advised me to enjoy the swimming pools of Johannesburg because “next year they will be red with blood.” But the inevitable bloodbath never came. Mandela walked out of prison and sought reconciliation, not revenge. Later Mandela would say: “It always seems impossible until it’s done.”

Over at the Huffington Post, former Religious Right leader Franklin Schaeffer puts the religious and other aspects into a wider perspective: "I think there is reason to hope. There are decent people out there who have refused to go along with the smear-by-association campaign. Mike Huckabee defended Obama. McCain said we can't blame Obama for his minister's words. Not everyone on the right is stooping as low as the Clintons and the right-wing media scavengers. Obama is worth fighting for. He is worth losing old friends for. History has thrown America an unlikely lifeline. Do we have the decency, the sense, the last glimmer of sanity needed to open our hearts to change?"

Finally, the most interesting take on all of this, Charles Murray's. Charles who? The man behind the infamous Bell Curve, that's who!

Writing on the National Review's online forum for its own writers, the Corner, Murray actually professed to like the speech. He is no liberal, and as he make amply clear, would never vote for Obama. But he was deeply saddened by his friends' and peers' reactions to his approval of what Obama's speech was really about:

My Last Word on Obama, I Promise. [Charles Murray]

To all my friends and people I admire who have completely befuddled me with their reaction to Obama’s speech: Speaking or writing about difficult race problems is different from speaking or writing about any other public policy issue. If you take a position on the Iraq war or health care, you will attract reaction from people who say you’re crazy, but they will be responding to what you actually said and, more or less, to how you actually meant it. The same is not true of race. Text that deals with a difficult racial issue is like a Rorschach ink blot. People project onto that text—project their own experiences, anxieties, angers; all the emotions that go into thinking about race, which means all the emotions that exist. You can weigh every word of your text. You can rewrite it until you think there is absolutely no way that a fair-minded person can fail to understand what you said. And they will not only fail to understand it, they will accuse you of saying exactly the opposite of what you said.

“Murray just has hurt feelings about The Bell Curve,” I hear from the bleachers. Well, yeah. But the problem generalizes to everyone who tries to be honest about race, and now it has happened to Barack Obama. Take, for example, the treatment of his reference to his white grandmother. Of course you can go after him in all the ways that people have gone after him—if what you want to do is go after him. But suppose you approach Obama’s text under the twin assumptions that (a) he is trying to communicate with you, and, (b) your obligation is to make a good-faith effort to understand his meaning. I read what he said about his grandmother, and his words left me in no doubt about two things: He really loves his grandmother, and he was saying something important about race that I recognized from my own experience. I bet many of the people who have slammed him recognize it from their own experience too. The guy was being honest, and he was being right. What the hell more do you want?

Ah, but he was trashing his grandmother for political purposes, he was equating what she said with the much more terrible things that Rev. Wright said, blah, blah, blah. Yes—if you insist on interpreting what he said purely as an exercise in political positioning. No, if you go to his text with the intention of trying to understand what Obama thinks about race.

I understand how naïve it is to read a presidential candidate’s speech as if it were anything except political positioning, but that leads me to my final point: It’s about time that people who disagree with Obama’s politics recognize that he is genuinely different. When he talks, he sounds like a real human being, not a politician. I’m not referring to the speechifying, but to the way he comes across all the time. We’ve had lots of charming politicians. I cannot think of another politician in my lifetime who conveys so much sense of talking to individuals, and talking to them in ways that he sees as one side of a dialogue. Conservatives who insist that he’s nothing but an even slicker Bill Clinton are missing a reality about him, and at their peril.

I can’t vote for him. He is an honest-to-God lefty. He apparently has learned nothing from the 1960s. His Supreme Court nominees would be disasters. And maybe he is too green and has lived too much of his adult life in a politically correct bubble. But the other day he talked about race in ways that no other major politician has tried to do, with a level of honesty that no other major politician has dared, and with more insight than any other major politician possesses. Not bad.

03/21 10:36 AM

Senator Obama Serves Us Some Serious Nuance

2008-03-18T11:55:00.010-05:00

I guess the question is whether people are willing to listen and move beyond what they are comfortable hearing. Every single one of us has to stop patting ourselves on the backs, pointing fingers and/or wallowing in self-pity. That's the message. We gotta look within and own up.... Right, Tracy?

jn

Tracy Morgan Tells It Like It Is!

2008-03-17T09:47:00.010-05:00

Thanksgiving 2007

2007-11-22T14:06:00.000-05:00

Thanksgiving anno 2007.

I offer you Chinyere's reflections on Thanksgiving and family.

Chinyere is a good friend of my sweetheart, Jenjira.

This is what it´s all about.

Happy Thanksgiving, folks!

jo

"Choking Freakin´ Dogs" Rally in the Rain

2007-09-18T10:19:00.000-05:00

(c) AP Photo/Alastair Grant

Yes, the American ladies beat both Sweden in ladies´ World Cup and then Europe in the Solheim Cup. This weekend saw plenty of the good, the bad and the real ugly. Speaking of which, former Solheim Cup player Dottie Pepper managed to get things going for her compatriots when she called them "choking freakin´dogs" while commenting for the Golf Channel. Her excuse? She thought they had just cut to commercial...

Pepper has a history to go with this comment: her behavior in former Solheim Cups drove the likes of Annika and Laura Davies to draw her face on a punching bag....now that ain´t nice.

More ugly: the weather. For years, decades, a lifetime, I have been trying to convince folks that the myth of bad Swedish weather is just that, a darn freakin´ myth. These are some of the adjectives used to describe the conditions in Halmstad "gloomy", "wet", "stormy", "cold" etc. etc. And I can´t say that it wasn´t all that and more. Besides, up here near the Arctic Circle, I woke up to snow yesterday.

But what I like is that the weather wasn´t dwelt upon by the players and for once the Europeans didn´t resort to excuses. Guess that would have been embarrassing due to the home course advantage. Trust me, over the years I have read countless interviews with athletes who have moaned about the weather or whatever, just in case they wind up performing poorly... lame.

OK, so it came down to the singles and the U.S. took 8 of the 12 matches, Europe 3 with one halved. Two U.S. rookies, Stacy Prammanasudh and Morgan Pressel won their matches. And how! As the Guardian reported:

The most significant point of the day was earned by Stacy Prammanasudh, who was matched with Suzann Pettersen. With Annika Sorenstam spending most of the year battling against injury, the Norwegian has emerged as Europe's best player, winning one major, the LPGA championship...

Meanwhile, Pressel, a mere 19, beat Annika - the best player in history and still number 3 in the world. Kudos (the photo is of red-clad Pressel´s dishing out a consolation hug to Annika; REUTERS/Bob Strong.) So much for choking...

------

PIC of Schelin...

Returning to the world of football, I regret to report that Sweden was knocked out today. They managed to do what the U.S. couldn´t, beat North Korea, but it was not enough. They had to win by at least three goals to leap frog the North Koreans in the standings.

Oh well, they played well in this match and Lotta Schelin, the next big thing in women´s soccer, was awesome today, scoring both goals.
And you can argue that the rules should be changed since goal difference is less telling than the head to head encounter. My guess is that FIFA just wants to encourage more goals, but then you wind up with an increased likelihood of a losing team going through. But them´s the rules, so no whining...

To close, check out this clip from Friday´s U.S. - Sweden game. What a goal by Wambach, pure poetry...

Ladies First in the Wide, Wide, World of Sports

2007-09-14T11:18:00.000-05:00

I'm talking about this weekend, folks.

It's all about the ladies! Move on over, male chauvinists....

For the first time ever (?), two major sporting events for women are being staged at the same time. And in two very different sports at that, soccer/football and golf.

1) The World Cup, contested by 16 of the leading ladies´ football teams in the world.

2) The Solheim Cup, one of the rare team events in Golf, features the U.S. versus a Europe team, flying the EU flag - kinda odd since among others a non-EU Norwegian is playing for Europe. Anywho...

In case you´re interested, most of this is on TV though surviving the live broadcasts may require caffeine and/or alcohol depending on what time zone you are in. The World Cup takes place in China and the Solheim Cup in Sweden. Currently, I am keeping an eye on Sweden v. the U.S. in Chengdu, Sichuan, China as well as the first day of the Solheim Cup in Halmstad, Halland, Sweden.

Some factoids, intrigue and trivia:

Over in the People's Republic, crazy things are afoot.

Danes are accusing the hosts of spying on them and ruining the pitches they practice on...

Back on the pitch, the game between the US and Sweden promises to be entertaining. The U.S. are heavy favorites, even if the Swedish media and team are optimistic. Currently that seems misplaced since the Americanas are up 1-0....scratch that, 2-0...the incredible Abby Wambach getting both goals. That´s 80 goals in 98 international appearances!!!!

Great game-saving dive by Solo!

In their first game, the U.S. faced North Korea, one of those politically charged games. This was especially true since there were thousands of North Koreans in the stadium - China being the one country, ol´Kim Jong-il lets his compatriots escape to. Anyway, it was an awesome game with Kil Son-Hui (props to anyone who can find me a hyperlink for this lady) firing projectiles towards the American goal all night long...

North Korea can win this tournament, Coach Kim ain´t all bluster, and that would be interesting...they have a great short-passing style.

Meanwhile, in the world of golfing millionaires...(which btw is something, unlike their male counterparts, that soccer ladies most certainly are not.)

The U.S. is the defending Solheim champion, but with nice n´ rainy Swedish fall weather to help them, Europe hopes to stick to the tradition of home team victories.

Things get a little patriotic (Euro-patriotism?) bordering on nationalistic during these events, and for some reasons, things seem to get especially testy in the courteous world of golf. Recent Ryder Cups, the mens' team event, have been downright nasty.

So, how's this for attitude from the Swedish Euro captain, Helen Alfredsson:

"After a non-Swedish caddie remarked about a tasty cinnamon roll, Alredsson said it was called a "kanelbulle." When the caddie balked at pronouncing the words, she said, "Come on, learn a little Swedish while you're here this week. At least you'll get something good to eat." The kanelbullar, by the way, are spectacular." ( from this article)

The bun, whose
name you forget at your peril!!

Pretty innocuous, but let's see how friendly folks are after the weekend.

Sörenstam teeing off

Paula Creamer with tattoos
(c) AP, Alastair Grant

So, are Annika Sörenstam and Hanna Ljungberg gonna show their mettle? Or will it be all about Hope Solo ( read this great piece on her and her father) - but why am I suddenly seeing the Millenium Falcon hitting warp speed? - and Stacy Prammanasudh?
jo

UPDATE: In Chengdu, the U.S. won 2-0 vs. Sweden and it´s all square in Halmstad, where it´s raining, raining, raining....

L.A. Jury to Save the World from Swedish Huckster

2006-11-02T13:20:00.001-05:00

Updated on 11/3/2006: A mistrial has been declared!!! Oh well, a temporary setback.
Also, see this link for yet another mindboggling write-up on this saga.

Yes, you read correctly - a L.A. jury may for once actually do the right thing.

The Swampmeister is currently in sunny Los Angeles and an important criminal case has come to his attention. Unlike O.J., Rodney King's tormenters in blue, Robert "Baretta" Blake or the King of Pop, Bo Stefan Eriksson, a native of Sweden, looks unlikely to find any mercy from his designated Californian peers. This jury will surely not acquit....

Ex-Uppsala mafioso BSE (with lawyer) at the pre-trial hearing and during the trial.
(c)Reuters/Chris Pizzello and AP/Ric Francis

Eriksson has such an amazingly sordid record (cocaine, hit and runs, stolen cars fraud etc.) that it's totally mindboggling to think he was let into the U.S. in the first place. In this day and age of heightened terror-related paranoia and anti-immigrant sentiment, here's one guy you don't want in your country. Here's one guy who managed to import three one-million cars that belonged to British banks! Customs, DHS? No problems!

In fact, BSE (you gotta love someone with the same initials as Mad Cow Disease!) somehow become a deputy commissioner in an "anti-terrorism" unit run by the San Gabriel Valley Transit Authority! Seriously. It should be added that the only reason he was free to roam is that the sentence imposed following a fraud and counterfeiting case in Sweden was halved from ten to five years! Stranger than fiction....

Read about Bo Stefan's mad life in this excellent L.A. Times feature (e.g. how Busta Rhymes and Sting helped him promote some gadget that never worked) or in this wire story on the car crash that allowed the authorities catch up with him.

A photo from the aftermath of the Ferrari Enzo's spectacular 200 mph crash that led to his eventual arrest (c) Wrecked Exotics.

Update: A hung jury (10-2) has resulted in a mistrial, so this L.A. jury botched its first chance to dish out some justice. Also, I came across this fascinating Wired exposé (props to Kotoku.com) on the amazing life of Bo Stefan.

jo

Subject: bo stefan eriksson, Los Angeles jury; LA; Sweden; Law; Crime; jury; immigration; California

Niqabophobia

2006-10-29T21:44:00.000-05:00

It’s been three weeks since Jack Straw, Britain’s former Foreign Secretary – now demoted to the position of Leader of the House of Commons – revealed himself to be ever so uncomfortable when his female constituents came to his office wearing a full-faced veil, the niqab. Those three weeks have been so filled with bluster and hype that I lost count long ago. Part of my daytime job has been collecting and analyzing various op-eds and articles on this subject. It’s been mostly disheartening reading, with occasional glimpses of enlightenment.

In general, there appears to be an amazing reservoir of fear to tap into. Having lived in London for two years, I have often raved how comfortable people there are with diversity compared to other places. A ride in the London Tube is always pleasant since the tension present elsewhere in Europe is simply absent.

Yes, London is not Britain nor is it Northern Ireland, but still the visciousness of the debate has been a little too telling. And it is surprising. The question "why now?" pops up. Has anything changed recently? As much as I’d like to blame the politicians for cynically unleashing the mob for the sake of political gain (Straw and others are in the running to replace Tony Blair) and setting up smokescreens (to distract from society’s real problems like racism, discrimination and segregation), I can’t really give them too much credit. They could not have fathomed the goldmine they hacked their way into.

Anyway, here are some thoughts and quotes from some of the articles I’ve been reading. Many of the more poignant comments have come from the Canadian press. Not so surprising since most Canadians have come to accept the niqab as one symbol among many and are thus more capable of seeing it for what it is: one tree in a forest. Folks over in Europe seem blind to individual trees and can only see an imaginary forest, the forest of radical Islam. Beards, veils, mosques...it all spells doom to them.

Without further ado, some pearls of wisdom from three Canucks.

1. James Laxer, a political science at the University of Toronto, cuts through the veneer of liberalism with consummate ease. That’s what’s bothered me all along, the fact that Straw claims to be encouraging reasonable debate when he is actually spewing out prejudice. In his piece, “Veiling Intolerance in Liberal Discourse”, Laxer writes:

“What is noteworthy is the spectacle of very powerful male politicians publicly criticizing a small number of women - who are hardly members of their countries' elites - for what they choose to wear. The criticism is made palatable because it is veiled (pun intended) in liberal discourse. These leaders are inviting the women wearing the niqab to abandon this mark of separation from the rest of society….In all dialogues of this sort, it is crucial to keep in mind the power relations among those who are doing the talking. What I see is something far from benign. A great deal of pressure is being brought to bear on a few women for reasons that extend well beyond the niqab….

What gives the narrative about the niqab its traction in the media is that it is the thin edge of the wedge in a critique of Muslims in general, not just those who wear the niqab. The question that is being asked, in a highly coded way to be sure, is whether Muslims constitute an alien presence in our society. Can they be relied upon to fit in as immigrants, to assimilate and become members of our society? Or will they be a dangerous, separate people, and even a source of terrorist recruits for attacks on us, with repeats of attacks like the suicide bombings in London in the summer of 2005?.....

When the powerful within a society begin a narrative of the kind we have seen about the niqab, however, that is not what is going on. Muslims are being set apart as the "other." Though we may pride ourselves on our liberalism, in our civilization when people are set apart and critiqued as not really belonging in our midst, the consequences can be terrible.”

Of course it's about Muslims in general and not about the possibility of communication when someone is wearing a veil. The shrillness of the debate proves that beyond a doubt. Surely no one disputes that....and that raises the specter of Islamophobia.

2. Janet Bagnall draws a parallel between the treatment the Amish community receives, (especially in the wake of the recent tragedy when the media went into a feeding frenzy) and that accorded to Muslims:

“What was so remarkable, in the view of the outside world, was the community's ability to forgive. The Amish, about whom no one from outside the community seemed to have spent any time thinking prior to Oct. 2, were not singled out for their rejection of state schooling beyond Grade 8 or modern conveniences. Nor was there any comment on their very modest attire, including long dresses and bonnets for the women. They were simply allowed to be who they are.

It would be nice if the same easy-going acceptance could be extended to observant Muslims and whatever they choose to wear, be it headscarves or veils or loose cloaks. But after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, in the United States and in Britain on July 7 last year, it seems to be too much to ask”

3. Finally Sheema Khan shares her own experience with the niqab and has a wonderful description of the absurdity of it all:

“I respect women who wear the niqab. At Harvard, after much spiritual reflection, I donned the hijab (headscarf) and also tried the niqab - for all of one hour. I found it stifling and unnatural. Yet others don't. And their choice should be respected. In some places, women are forced by the state to cover up. In other places, some have exercised their own choice to do so. At a recent scientific conference in Dubai, I met intelligent, assertive niqabis who discussed current research with both genders. What is the big deal?....

In a Monty Pythonesque scenario, the British political establishment demands that a particular minority (Muslims) integrate into British society, by coercing a minority within that minority to change its appearance. British Prime Minister Tony Blair and House of Commons leader Jack Straw have appropriated the veil as a symbol of "separateness" and an impediment to integration.

Integration is a complex issue. It is disingenuous to think that discarding the niqab will engender a new path toward integration - especially into a society as hierarchical as that of the British. In a recent study by the Home Office, Muslim students were found to be far more tolerant than their non-Muslim counterparts. By placing full onus on the Muslim community, the government has abdicated its responsibility in the integration impasse. It also has embarked on a dangerously divisive path.”

I can only concur. Read her entire piece for it compares Britain's behavior now to how it acted as a colonial master in Egypt. Back then the Governor Lord Cromer made comments eeriely similar to those of Straw's. These folks have understood nothing about assimilation. How it flows both ways, how the onus on the powerful, i.e. the host society, will always be greater.

I cannot fathom how anyone can believe that the niqab is the problem, or in fact even a problem at all. In fact, I’m quite sure that Jack Straw and company don’t believe their own hype. As the Washington Post editorial said a few days ago:

“It's hard to believe that veils are the biggest obstacle to communication between British politicians and the country's Muslims; and it's even harder to imagine Mr. Straw raising similar objections about Sikh turbans or Orthodox Jewish dress. True, the Labor Party MP was reflecting -- or maybe pandering to -- the concern of many in Britain about the self-segregation of some Muslims. But veils -- which are also under government attack in France and Italy -- are not the cause of that segregation, much less of terrorism. Attacks on Muslim custom by public officials are more likely to reinforce than to ease the community's alienation.”

In the meantime, Britiain’s Deputy PM, John “Bruiser” Prescott, is in Malaysia learning about how that country has managed its diversity. To his great credit - Bruiser came out swinging on this issue, “respectfully disagreeing” with the Strawman. I wrote a paper in college about how the West could perhaps learn a thing or two from the multiculturalism practiced in e.g. Malaysia or Singapore. But I didn’t believe then that in the year 2006, the former colonial overlord Britain would be off to the former subjects in Kuala Lumpur for advice. One thing's for sure, Prescott won't be advised to ban niqabs. Could not have written a more fitting script myself.

Next time in the Swamp, you’ll meet Sweden’s new minister for integration, who also has a glitch with the niqab.

jo

Subjects: niqab; veil; Islam; diversity; Immigration; multiculturalism; UK

Carlitos says Carlos Rocks!

2006-10-12T11:50:00.000-05:00

An inspiring little diddy from the one and only Carlos Mencia. The last minute or so is brilliant.

Watch below or click on the title of this post.

jo

But Mama Said Knock Him Out....

2006-08-05T12:43:00.001-05:00

Don't call it a comeback....(read this post while checking out this video clip, crank up the volume and press play in the middle of the image)

Yes, the Swampmeister was so incredibly disappointed with what transpired during the World Cup final that he went on an extended vacation. And just after having given Zizou his proper due too! In the final he plays like a footballing demi-god, scores a wonderful penalty on the world's best goalie, who in turn then makes an incredible save on Zizou's 104th minute leaping header from another dimension, (click here to read a good article about the final, there were so few). He was a 1/4 inch from winning a second World Cup, once again with his cabeza and adding a second etoile to the French jersey.

Enter Marco Materazzi,the grandest provacateure of them all. (click for a video collage)

Materazzi dishes out his sense of justice to Zlatan, click here for an article addressing this incident and others.

The same Materazzi who caused the penalty that Zidane scored on, the same Materazzi who equalized Zizou's strike and the same Materazzi who would later score one of the penalties in the shootout that gave Italy its fourth stella.

Suddenly Zidane charged Materazzi like a bull, planted his magical head in the Italian's chest and down the latter went. "What in the wide, wide world of sports is a-going on around here?" summarizes what one billion people were thinking at that moment.

Rumors were flying: nipple-pinching, racist jibes, counter-terrorism tactics or a classic yo mama joke, delivered in Italian. Materazzi declared the latter scenario absurd: he was a momma's boy, lost his own mother at the age of fifteen, respects and worships all mothers in the history of the world etc.

French savant Bernard-Henri Levy (unwitting contributor to the Swamp in the past) is always ready to psychoanalyze anybody but himself. Here he goes into Zidane's background, emerging from the streets of Marseilles, teeming with honor and pent up rage:

"No one knows what the Italian, Marco Materazzi, did or said (in the 111th minute of a match that this hero had dominated with all his grace) to reawaken in him those old demons of a kid from the streets of Marseilles, the very demons that soccer's code of honor, its ethic, its aesthetic, are made to quell. Even if we knew why; even if we knew for certain that the Italian insulted him, or cursed his mother, father, brothers, sister; even if we got hold of the black box of those 20 seconds that saw the champion destroy in a flash his legend that is a mix of secret king, a Dostoyevskian sweet man, the ideal Beur son-in-law, future mayor of Marseilles and, last but not least, the charismatic captain leading his troops to consecration; even if we knew the whole story, this suicide would be as all ordinary suicides are; no reason in the world explains the desperate act of a man--no provocation, no nasty remark, will ever tell us why the planetary icon that Zinedine Zidane had become, a man more admired than the Pope, the Dalai Lama and Nelson Mandela put together, a demigod, a chosen one, this great priest-by-consensus of the new religion and the new empire in the making, chose to explode right there, rather than wait a few minutes to settle the quarrel on the sidelines."

(click here to read this entire, surreal piece of soccer meets Zeus and Freud, some of it far too similar to material on this blog)

On French TV a few days later, Zidane confirmed that it indeed was an insult to his mother and sister that triggered the moment of insanity. Zizou's mother Malika raised him a certain way. She was quoted as saying: "I want Materazzi's balls on a platter" (click here for more). Elemantary, my dear Watson, the mystery is solved. Zidane pleads the LL Cool J defense, someone else told him to do it. Mama said....

Very reminiscent of what he told the press when he returned to the national team in 2005 after having retired a year earlier. "In the middle of the night, a voice told me to play for les Bleus."

Here in the Swamp, it's too hot (DC heatwave, 100 F/40 C) to make any sense of this even a month later. But to my mind, Zinedine Zidane remains a good man - those who now so eagerly rushed to judge had been sharpening their knives for years. I say: Condemn the action, accept the man.

Here endeth my own comeback and the long overdue final words on the World Cup. Soon a report from my vacation in the mountains of western Carolina and the shores of the Chesapeake Bay.

jo

Subjects: Football; soccer; world cup; World Cup 2006; germany; zinedine zidane; zidane; France; zizou; materazzi

Allons Enfants de la Patrie....

2006-07-08T12:07:00.000-05:00

Le jour de gloire est arrivee!
- La Marseillaise, French National Anthem (for complete lyrics click on the post headline)

Eight years the Swampmeister was lucky enough to be in France for most of that year's glorious World Cup. The host country showed unity, played decent football and wound up celebrating its new hero Zinedine Zidane - (c) photo: Shaun Best, Reuters) - during the mad victory celebrations his image was laser-projected onto the Arc de Triomphe on the Champs Elysee!

This year I've been in Germany for most of the Copa and enjoyed being a supporter of Tunisia. However, once they were eliminated (as was ol' Sweden) my allegiances shifted....again. We were blessed with tickets for the Spain-France game in Hannover because under the somewhat confusing ticketing rules - Spain had won the group that Tunisia was in.

It was one of the best games in the tournament so far and the stadium was awesome, purpose built for soccer. And it reawakened my passion for les Bleus. It didn't hurt that I was traveling with my French cousin and his wife. Merci beaucoup! The skills of Zidane, Thuram and Henry are pure aestethics.

Ribery dishing it out to Spain
(c) AP, Kai-Uwe Knoth

One of the new players - France has a perfect mix of age and youth - is Franck Ribery. He moves like lightning and is the most part of the great five man midfield. In the game against Spain he scored the all important equalizer just after the Spaniards had taken the lead. Today's WP has a great portrait of a man with a fascinating life story.

In the subsequent games against Brazil and Portugal, he wreaked more havoc. The game versus Brazil also saw the best of Zidane - in a game full of ridiculously talented players, he outshone them by a mile. It will go down as one of the greatest performances of all time.

Who's Your Daddy?
Zidane and Ze Roberto
(c) Charles Platiau

Tomorrow in Berlin, France takes on Italy, who knocked out the hosts Germany (my fourth choice team after Sweden, the U.S., France, and tied with Tunisia) in a thrilling semifinal. It was a heart-breaking moment for the Germans, who now have to try and settle for third place in the "consolation" game against the other losers, Portugal. This World Cup was supposed to mean so much for the German geist, economy, and the plan was to win it. In a later post, I will address all this and the issues surrounding the California-based coach Klinsmann.

Ribery celebrateshis key goal!
(c) AFP/Pierre-Phillipe Marcou

For now, it's all about the final between two major footballing powers and great rivals. France and Italy play a similar game, with a lone striker upfront. In my mind, France is a tad more offensive and its players are just a little more interesting. But that goes down to the differences between the countries themselves: their views of diversity, nationhood, citizenship (though the rainbow nation of France is still somewhat troubled and yes, soccer! Cattenaccio versus Beaute!

My prediction is 2-1 to France without the need for any extra time or penalties. Zidane will score a scintillating goal and Henry will poach one more. We will be watching the game here in Washington D.C. at the Pour House on Capitol Hill, come join us! And let's hope Germany does well today and goes out with a bang.

Vive La France!!!

jo

Subjects: Football; soccer; world cup; World Cup 2006; germany; zinedine zidane; zidane; France; zizou;
; Washington DC

Pagan Rituals Backfire, Vilhelm Smiles

2006-06-25T20:25:00.000-05:00

So there we were in yet another gigantic Berlin biergarten: War paint on, beer flowing, chants going strong, midsummer in air and engaged in endless pagan dances. It was so clearly going to be a day to remember. And so it was, but for all the wrong reasons. Somehow Sweden managed to lose a game that was in the bag and thrown down a mine shaft. It should've been like wolfing down a plate of Swedo-Teutonic meatballs.

Maybe I should've seen it coming when our group of 7 Sweden fans was suddenly surrounded by thousands of Germans. It was like this photo (c) Valery Hache/AFP/Getty Images only worse. Zlatan (as were we) was outnumbered: big time. And in the biergarten they were dancing, turning the tables on us, and as midsummer grew suddenly cold, the pagan rituals were virtually nullified.

And thus Germany Prince Poldi (Lukas Podolski's nickname, playing off a Dutch cookie that's worshipped in Deutschland) scored two goals in the opening twelve minutes while the headless chickens were still maxing and relaxing. Sweden then had to play with 10 men after its best defender Teddy Lucic was sent off in the 35th minute for a supposed foul. Henrik Larsson, of all people, missed a penalty shot at the start of the second half. And so on, and so on. A hex, pure and simple.

Prince Poldi Took a Bite out of the Swedish D

So please know this when you even think of uttering something like: "As expected, Germany won", "Sweden had no chance" , "German precision bla bla bla", "BMW Men flatten IKEA Kickers" "The Scorpions Mete out Justice to ABBA wannabes" .... It ain't that simple. In 7 games out of ten, Germany will beat the Swedes, but only once in a blue moon will this kind of midsummer madness transpire.

In other World Cup news, we just witnessed the dirtiest match in World Cup history. Holland tried to cheat its way past Portugal, but were schooled in the art of playing soccer. Nice one Portugal! How nasty was this game? See the all-telling collage photo (c) AFP/Getty Images! The game was a disgrace.

OK, time to rest, bake a humble meatball pie for y'all and dream of an alternative reality. One in which Prince Poldi sits atop of a maypole while Zlatan dances around him till break of dawn.

jo

PS Don't believe that this lil setback brings down a true Sweden fan. Just look at this guy, seen here with his lovely mother! Vilhelm, nearly eight months old, was pleased as can be even after the final whistle - ok, so the photo was taken a few weeks ago. Still, I know he was smiling yesterday. Thanks JMF for this awesome photo. Und ja wohl, kudos and congrats to Germany! Let's just hope the players can back up the increasing "Bye Bye Swedes, Have a Safe Trip Home, We will be World Champs" chants and claims. If not, I see major pie n' cookie baking in someone's future.

Subjects: Football; soccer; world cup; World Cup 2006; Pundits; germany; Zlatan; Sweden; beer; paganism; podolski;

Zlatan's Midsummer Night's Dream

2006-06-24T00:58:00.000-05:00

This pundit knows who'll be making the meatballs next time
(text reads: "Old Swede, they're tasty")

Today, it's Midsummer. On this day the moon and stars are aligned for Swedes, showing the opponents the way to premature retirement in Valhalla. It is also the day of the Maypole Dance.

In less than 18 hours, it’s GAME time: Sweden takes on Germany back at the Munich Allianz Arena. To remind you, we were there for the Tunisia-Saudi Arabia game and it sure looked like just the place for an epic battle.

The German media continues to hyperventilate about moose, kippers, meatballs, IKEA, Volvo while coming up with lame anti-Sweden songs sung to the tune of Abba's hits. Funny as is "ha ha", but at least der Spiegel is on to something with this piece:

Thankfully the German tabloid Bild is on hand to assist today, and offers a handy appraisal of Sweden's top players by comparing them to household items commonly found in IKEA. "Ever had problems with the instructions for your new piece of IKEA furniture?" asks the paper. "Bild explains how to take the Swedes to pieces!" And, if the German players follow the Bild assembly instructions to the letter, then they'll surely throw a spanner in the works come Saturday.
Take the bearded Olof Mellberg for example. He plays in defense, so obviously Bild thinks he most resembles a gnarled wooden cupboard -- or "Defensive Cupboard Olof" for short...

(click here to read the entire piece, scroll down past the sex part....)

Finally, the German coach Klinsmann upped the ante by calling a potential defeat “a catastrophe”. Dunno about that – going to Valhalla has its advantages, sire!

Swedish Fan Foretells Great Victory while drinking
Giant Danish!? Beer. Kudos: Erin T.

It will be sad to see the hosts go home, I mean stay here, but it’s the way it has to be. Enough trash talk: here’s my take on a sad discussion about which strikers should play up front for Sweden.

Everyone from fans to ‘experts’ in Sweden wants Marcus Allbäck to play. Yes, the guy who never scored for Hansa Rostock or Aston Villa. Conversely, they want to see Zlatan Ibrahimovic on the bench. Yes, one of the most gifted players around (watch the videos on youtube.com), the kind of guy who puts fear into the heart of the German defenders. The same defenders who had Allbäck for breakfast all last year. So what explains this irrational thinking?

Lots of theories abound in the Swamp’s mind. It boils down to Allbäck supposedly being a team player, more ‘Swedish’ (yes, he is blond too….) I’ve heard enough from Swedish commentators over the years and read a media analysis of the Swedish attitude to Zlatan to say there is a more than a measure of discrimination here.

When this Swedish-born son of a Bosnian father and Croatian mother first emerged on the stage, he was the future of the Swedish game. Simultaneously, he became THE symbol of diversity – that Sweden like France, with Zidane, Henry, Thuram et al, was now emerging from the mire of ethnic chauvinism. Sadly, that assessment is wrong.

When Zlatan plays well, when he signed for Juventus Turin, one of the best teams in the world, all the experts beat their chests for “Zlatan the Swede.” But when he doesn’t, he’s called “temperamental” and “not part of the collective” or "enigmatic". Puh-lease. Other more individualistic players on the Swedish team, i.e. the ethnic Swedes, are simply not held to the same standard. And when Allbäck failed to score for umpteen games in a row that was somehow ok.

Zlatan after scoring the goal against
Hungary that put them in the World Cup.

What can I say? Zlatan HAS to play for Sweden to have a chance. He shot them all the way to the finals in the first place. Talk about amnesia!

No matter, there are fools everywhere, Zlatan doesn’t care. He’ll still score that goal and off Sweden goes. May the Maypole dance comenceth.

jo

Subjects: Football; soccer; world cup; World Cup 2006; Group H; Tunisia; Pundits; germany; Zlatan; Sweden

World Cup Trash Talk

2006-06-23T04:59:00.000-05:00

NOTE: Please check out the Swamp later today, a new post featuring Viking War Paint is in the works. For now, it's off to the game! Go Tunisia...I mean, Ukraine....ehhhh....

The First Round is almost over and we’re back in Berlin to catch the Tunisia-Ukraine game at Berlin’s rather infamous Olympic Stadium. While we’re still supporting Tunisia, we kind of hope that Ukraine pulls through. That way we get an extra day in Berlin and get to watch Spain play France, South Korea or Switzerland in Hanover. Otherwise we have to ship out early on Monday and go all the way to Cologne. Confused? Don’t worry, it’s all about how the teams finish in each group.

Frenzied Fans Watching Cote D'Ivoire-Holland

In other news, it’s all about the trash talk! Ahead of the Sweden-England game, various English media outlets engaged in some friendly ribbing. And some were just plain pathetic, read this ‘jewel’ from an expat Swede, who having found paradise as a “little Englander”, now writes for the xenophobic Daily Mail. From the land of the midnight sun to bottom-feeding and lapping up warm beer….way to go!

Well, that didn’t work, now did it? Regardless, the German media are now engaged in the kind of campaign they usually deplore. You see, whenever England face Germany, the Brit media goes even crazier than in that Sweden article above. And the Germans get very upset, especially when the war somehow gets mentioned.

Now that Germany is bound for their own Teutonic Valhalla (i.e. Munich) tomorrow, confronted with the mighty hammers and feet of Thor and Zlatan, they are trying to talk the trash since they can’t walk the dawg.

Sweden is being lambasted as the land of IKEA Kickers and Knäckebröd Men. Oh yeah, and home of the moose attacks (they got that one wrong ). This from a country that lets a crazed bear run loose and then employs supposed FINNISH! bear experts to chase it down! (CLICK HERE for that wacky tale!) Gott im Himmel!

(Relaxed) Fans of all Ages, (c) Akko

A quick look in today’s Bild Zeitung, Germany´s tabloid reveals that Germany has a plan on how to try to avoid their impending doom. Read that here. It´s in German, but the graphics tell the tale and smack of desperation. "You think you can take us? You need a *(&%army to take us…."

Finally, yesterday was another glorious day as tons of pundits had to place more orders of humble pie. Both Ghana and Australia progressed out of really tough groups (as the near brilliant Cote D´Ivoire should have done). So you’ll be hearing things like “not highly rated” or “surprising underdogs”. Whatever. Ghana dominated against the Czechs last week, just like Australia controlled the game vs. Croatia yesterday. We are not talking about flukes here.

So while I was saddened by the U.S. exit, and disgusted by the refereeing, Ghana definitely deserved it. At least some face paint (thanks Leeza, and, yes, that's Jimi James in the background) cheered people up - and probably riled some fools!

And there's always the beer…does it ever run out in Germany? NO!

Skål, Cheers and Prost! Go Ghana, Australia and Sverige!

jo

Subjects: Football; soccer; world cup; World Cup 2006; Group H; Tunisia; Pundits; germany; Ghana;

Tunisia, Tunisia (and silly pundits)

2006-06-18T22:24:00.000-05:00

The World Cup is just over a week old and the Swamp has finally found the breathing room to file a report. It’s a beautiful morning in Füssen, Bavaria and I’m enjoying one of the nicest hotel buffet breakfasts ever. The town is located near one of the most famous castles in the world, Neuschwanstein (i.e. the Disney Castle.) The castle was definitely worth seeing, but it will forever be associated with the World Cup since it’s where we saw Ghana trounce the Czech Republic.

Now, this is sweet on so many levels, where to begin? For one thing, it was deserved. That might not seem so sweet, but after 10 days plus of listening to pundits wax "xenofoolery" about African (and Asian) teams' – yes, they are almost always clumped together – lack of organization and patience, this game should seal their yappers at least for a while.

For once, they HAD to comment on the soccer: the heavily favored, supposedly superior Europeans – almost never clumped together – were taught a lesson in attacking football. And mark my word; the Czech Republic is a good team.

After that game we headed back here to Füssen, checked into our hotel and headed out in search of a place to watch the second game of note: the U.S. vs. Italy. Another ‘underdog’ up against a European team that could only avoid winning due to force majeure. It ended in a rather unfortunate tie....The U.S. deserved better.

Read this story to see how smoked up the Italian coach was. A team like Italy, who claims to aspire to greatness, “underestimates” the country that pushed Germany to the brink in the 2002 quarterfinals? The Swamp was there on that late June day in Ulsan and saw with his own blurry eyes.

Hello? What is up with the anachronistic, caught-in-a-worm-hole, alternate reality thinking of these pundits? If I know that Ghana and the U.S. can win, why do they so dearly cling on to their bags of clichés and insufferable nonsense? If they only acknowledged that this might happen, they wouldn't seem so pathetic when it inevitably does.

Non-traditional footballing nations, i.e. those outside of Europe and Brazil/Argentina, have been making an impact for decades; yet the Rip van Winkle experts seems to have woken up to their playing at this level only yesterday. I could offer you a list replete with countless stupidities uttered by these characters. Instead, I’ll summarize it in this way:

If an outsider team LOSES, it is due to deficient tactics, bad coaching and eager-beaver amateur/naive players BUT

If the coach is a foreigner, i.e. from a former colonial power (e.g. Togo, coached by a German, Cote D’Ivoire/Tunisia by Frenchmen) then it’s definitely just the players’ fault AND

If these players are not amateurs but well-paid professionals, they can’t be called amateurs, so “spoiled” will do. NOW

If the outsider team WINS it’s either due to a pure luck, a conspiracy, food poisoning incurred by the opponents or a combination of the three.

And finally, features about the outsider team are usually NOT about sport, but about “exotic” things like witchdoctors, kids playing with rag-balls, the “traditions” of the countries etc.
No doubt, stereotypes always have something to them and thus you could have similar stories about e.g. France or Argentina. But somehow you never do. Wonder why….

I'll be returning to Berlin in a couple of days and will try to file a couple of somewhat more lucid reports. After attending tomorrow’s game between Tunisia and Spain, I’ll be able to comment with more authority on the Cup itself.

Who am I really cheering for? Read this and ponder....

But as you can probably tell from the photos, it’s all about Tunisia…for now.

jo

Subjects: Football; soccer; world cup; World Cup 2006; Group H; Tunisia; Pundits; germany

Anya: 25 Years In Front of a Camera

2006-06-01T15:06:00.000-05:00

Taking a breather from the usual commentary on things immigration and assorted beer suds, the Swamp today wishes to present a movie that he warmly recommends.

"Anya (in and out of focus)" is directed by Marian Marzynski and tells the tale of his own daughter's life. Basically he kept a camera around and took footage of her from the age of five onwards - they had just moved to the U.S. from Poland. While this may sound intrusive, it really does not come across that way. And that is also why I liked this movie so much.

At the screening at the DC Jewish Community Center (thanks JJY for keeping us informed), the director himself was there to field our questions. Anya had given her consent once she understood what was going on, and together with her husband approved of the final version. He also revealed that there was "only" 200 hours of footage. Over some 30 years, this is not that much. Still to make a coherent tale could not have been easy - and in this Marzynski succeeded.

This hard-to-find movie - there is not even an IMDB entry - is a simple, human tale. It speaks to so many themes: identity, growing up, diversity, parenthood, what to do with your life....It tells the story of one person's life without invading that person's privacy. And don't worry - it IS funny!

The Swamp particularly enjoyed the theme of growing up somewhere your own parents are not from. But like I said, it really is universal and does not focus too much on that or any other issue.

It may seem hard to imagine that Anya herself does not feel bared. So I asked myself afterwards: a) what am I thinking about after seeing this tale of one person's life and b) would I mind?. The first answer surprised me: I thought of my own life and less of hers. She was vehicle, and for that I am grateful. But it's not that I feel like I know her.

So I guess I wouldn't mind. Her father also told us that Anya never attends screenings since she doesn't want to answer questions. That would be too personal. She knows that the movie does not really show who she is, and that's why she was ok with it - for an alternative take by a ridiculous reviewer who had probably not spoken with Anya or her father, click here.)

Even if you have hated all other home videos you've ever seen: give Anya (in and out of focus) a chance. The director said there's a DVD out, but I have yet to find it online. So you best best to is to keep your eyes peeled.

jo

Subjects: cinema; Movies; Film; Documentary; Home Video; Marian Marzynski

The Immigration Iceman Cometh

2006-05-25T14:36:00.000-05:00

Today the Senate looks set to finally pass the heavily debated bill reforming the Immigration and Nationality Act. Charles Babington has a good piece in today's Washington Post on how we got here (and where to next), click here.

For more on the last minute deluge of amendments - aimed at making sure that the final version bears as little resemblance as possible to the original McCain-Kennedy proposal - I humbly recommend a previous post on the Swamp, click here, and Duke's thoughts over at Migra Matters, click here.

I hope to have some more on the final version of the bill - including the promised commentary on the English language amendments - posted as soon as possible. But whatever shape or size it assumes, its fate in the joint Senate-House conference committee is decidedly up in the air.

Update: The bill just passed by a 62-36 vote - with four Democrats casting nay votes and 23 Republicans, i.e. not a majority of them, casting yeas. Click here for more by Charles Babington in tomorrow's paper. Also, Amy Goldstein examines 'hidden traps' within the bill, and lets some talking heads offer their two cents, click here.

jo

Subjects: Immigration; Diversity; citizenship; naturalization; Integration; assimilation; Multiculturalism; politics; united states; U.S.; U.S.A.; Senate; Congress

World Cup Beer Update

2006-05-24T11:42:00.000-05:00

First and foremost, here are two excellent articles on my king of beer types, bock beer, courtesy of the Los Angeles Times, click here and here. 'Tis indeed the season....

In the wake of the Budweiser World Cup brouhaha it seems that the St Louis, Missouri brewing giant is on the offensive. Here's a summary of recent court rulings on which country's German immigrants are allowed to brew Bud, Budweiser, Budvar etc and where they they're allowed to do so. It seems that the descendents of German immigrants to the Czech regions have competing historical claims with their kinfolk who once headed to Missouri. Pretty ridiculous if you ask me.

BTW, Budweiser USA is not allowed to market its beers at "Budweiser" in Germany since the Czech company Budvar Budweiser has the copyright on the name "Budweiser Budvar" there. As if that wasn't enough, German brewer BITburger (watch out for the annoying song) then claimed that Budweiser's nickname "Bud" was too similar to its "Bit". Puh-lease. They reached a compromise that benefits all of us: Bitburger will be the only other beer for sale at stadiums and Budweiser will sell its beer under the new name "Anheuser Busch Bud", which may confuse some folks.

Speaking of confusion about the national origin of beers. If you ever wanted a list of beers from the 32 countries (OK, not Iran and Saudi Arabia) participating in the World Cup this summer, here's a brilliant and entirely subjective guide from the Publican, a UK pub site.

Finally, in another World Cup development it seems the Bavarian company that tried to cash in on the worst and weirdest mascot ever, GOLEO, is now bankrupt..... Now why am I not surprised?

Good-bye Goleo!

jo

Subjects: World Cup, germany, World Cup 2006, soccer, Football, united states, US, U.S.A., beer; reinheitsgebot; immigration; Humor; microbrew; bock; cryptozoology

Amend-a-Palooza: Orange Senate Crush

2006-05-23T11:28:00.000-05:00

As I write this, the Senate is voting on yet another amendment to the comprehensive immigration bill. You could interpret this as a positive step since the bill was basically declared dead around Easter. You would not be entirely wrong.

As Charles Babington reports in today’s WP, some kind of bill seems likely to emerge from the Senate this week. But all’s not fair that seems fair:

“Backers of President Bush's bid to revamp immigration laws scored another small victory in the Senate yesterday, but they are increasingly concerned about a House Republican policy that could block final agreement even if a bipartisan majority is within reach.
Speaker J. Dennis Hastert's insistence that major legislation reach the House floor only if it appears to be backed by a "majority of the majority" could throw a high hurdle in front of efforts to reach a House-Senate compromise on immigration later this year, lawmakers said. Hastert (R-Ill.) has invoked the policy in blocking bills that appeared likely to win approval from more than half of the House's 435 members but less than half of its 231 Republicans.”

Still, for the moment it seems more relevant to mention the avalanche of amendments that each Senator continues to introduce. To clarify, the purpose of these is to add or subtract something from the main bill - and to make the Senator look active. It’s kind of like a bulletin board full of post-it notes, and currently it looks as chaotic as can be. According to the Senate website, there are currently 147 amendments on the table.

The latest one, offered by Senator Feinstein of California, introduced the notion of an ‘Orange Card’ – playing off the good will of the ol' Green Card. The color orange is a beautiful one and given that it’s the color of some U.S. prison jumpsuits, far too many German sun worshippers (Read that article! Seriously!) and a TOTAL confusion when it comes to ribbons, perhaps it is time that it took on a different, simpler meaning.

It was meant to provide a simple, one-tier path to citizenship for the undocumented - and supposed to have some kind of bar code!? Senator Feinstein tries her best to be a hardliner at times, but in this case she's on to a good, common sense idea. You see, the current version of the bill proposes dividing illegal immigrants into three arbitrary categories: those in the U.S. for five years or longer, up to two and a half years, and those less than that. Different rules would apply to each group, with the latter basically being told to leave ASAP. It goes without saying that besides being arbitrary, it will be very hard to prove which category someone belongs to. We are talking about the undocumented after all....

I used the past tense above on purpose as the amendment was just rejected (37-61). Too bad - in my book her one-tier path to citizenship beats the three-tiered one - but this was done in the spirit of saving the overall bill. The three tiered approach was a major component of the compromise that saved the bill from an early burial.

Lots of other nuggets have already been up for debate, e.g. the use of the National Guard on the border - passed with a whopping 83-10! Republicans from Utah dissenting as did the Vermonters; and the building of more fencing along the Southwest border – passed by 83-16, led by the efforts of the junior Senator from the non-border state of Alabama, Jeff Sessions.

Yee-ha! Here's come the Border Patrol

National Guardsmen and Fencing: sounds ominous. But these are concessions to the restrictionists that will not totally decimate the rest of the bill. The Guard will "only" provide temporary logistical support to the Border Patrol, and there will be no fence à la Robert Samuelson.

Another amendment by Senator Jeff Bingaman from the border state above all others, New Mexico, is a very unnecessary one indeed. Its intent is to further limit the number of guest-workers and it also looks likely to pass. This too is meant to assuage the nativists. But all it really means is that more people will remain in the shadows as 'illegals' instead of becoming legal 'guest-workers'. Great, I mean, they won't leave....So this numerical cut - from 325,000 to 200,000/year- serves no real purpose other than catering to delusional restrictionists.

In the next few days, I plan to post something about the most controversial amendments, two competing ones that both passed last week. They deal with the role of the English language and as such touch upon the crux of immigration, assimilation and what it means to be American. Plenty of hysteria and sanity to relate here. At a later stage, I hope to compare this with becoming e.g. German or Swedish.

jo

Subjects: Immigration; Germany;Diversity; citizenship; naturalization; Integration; assimilation; Multiculturalism; Europe; politics; united states; U.S.; U.S.A.; Senate; Congress

World Cup Beers: Get Over It Already!

2006-05-22T12:38:00.000-05:00

Since the week is young, the Swamp offers the first installment in a new series:

Brewy Mondays

This is prompted by an article in the Times of London. It reports on what some see as blasphemy: Budweiser, one of the main sponsors of the World Cup is actually going to be given near-monopoly rights when it comes to sales of….yes, beers in the stadiums. Hello? Is this news?

Roger Boyes writes:

“The Germans are furious that Budweiser will be the official tipple for the soccer World Cup. The American lager has secured a near-monopoly of beer sales inside World Cup stadiums and within a 500m radius of the grounds, supplanting more than 1270 domestic breweries. And what most upsets the fans is that Budweiser - advertised as the "King of Beers" in the US - fails to meet the ancient German standards for purity, which stipulate that beer can be brewed only from malt, hops and water.
Budweiser uses rice in its production process and therefore fails to qualify as a beer in the German sense. Budweiser's World Cup status is a slap in the face for a country that attaches such importance to beer production. When Germany was a patchwork of principalities and duchies, a sponsored brewery was seen as the stamp of independence. "Most pubs don't even stock it," groaned Walter Konig, of the Bavarian Breweries Association. "Bavarian beer should be available in a Bavarian stadium - Munich - for the first kick-off.”
Click here to read the entire brouhaha

Immigrant Merchant of Impure Brews?

Furious? Asleep for the past few years is more like it. Crikey, a German immigrant to the U.S. (that's him, Adolphus Busch, to the right) founded Budweiser. Be proud if anything - or at least accept a share of the blame. Tastes change, palates adapt, new recipes develop. Ask someone from Szechuan what they think of Kung Pao Chicken made in Berlin. Or a Stockholmer about the meatballs served up at IKEA in Vancouver. Actually, they are kind of tasty.... 'tis all so relative.

Look, I love beer and consider myself a happy amateur when it comes to the art of sniffing out and quaffing a good brew. But this saga is more than a little ridiculous. Every German city has countless stores that sell gallons of good beer that you can then drink in public spaces - as long as you behave - so I really see no cause for concern. Especially when it's really feigned outrage at this late hour in the day. The World Cup starts in less than three weeks.

Yesterday, I was at a baseball game with a friend and we had a couple of Miller Lites. Gasp and Yikes! What WAS I thinking? Is it my beer of choice? Number 324 on my all-time list? Not even. But it is still beer…kind of. As we watched the rekindled Washington-area rivalry play out between the Baltimore Orioles and the Washington Nationals, people seemed to be enjoying themselves. Despite the ghastly 'paint thinner' on tap. Go figure.

Da Troegenator, Brethren of Budweiser!

Later on we found a premium tap serving Blue Moon Belgian White. An American beer, one of hundreds that are just hunky dory. And if I may recommend another, I'd pick the Troegenator out of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. The king of doppelbocks on this side of the pond! In case you were wondering: the Troegenator is named in honor of the original German double bock, Paulaner’s Salvator – most bocks in Germany end in –ator in deference to this magic brew from Munich.

The fuss in the article surrounding the anno 1516 Bavarian Purity Law (also inaccurately called the German Purity Law – Germany came about some 350 years later) is just that: a hullabaloo. Read this article to find out why. Good beer is good beer. Bad beer is bad beer. Simple.

So get over it, leute and folks. Your crocodile tears are anything but pure. But if you’re looking for a good guide to German beer, click here. Just don’t ruin the games by whining about Budweiser (or anything else for that matter). OK?

jo, who will be enjoying other beers and probably the occasional overpriced Budweiser while supporting Tunisia!

PS Please read these L.A. Times articles on bock beer, click here and here.

Subjects: World Cup, germany, World Cup 2006, soccer, Football, united states, US, U.S.A., beer; reinheitsgebot; immigration; Humor; microbrew

Henke Goes to Paris; plus World Cup Safety

2006-05-18T07:58:00.000-05:00

Update: 22 May 2006. In today's WP, Craig Whitlock reports on the upsurge of violence in Germany.

Yesterday in Paris, Henrik Larsson the most lauded Swedish soccer player of his generation finally won a major championship. Playing his last game for FC Barcelona, he won the Champions League, the top club competition in Europe – and perhaps the world. Henke, as he is affectionately known, came on with half an hour to go and set up both of Barca’s goals against Arsenal of London.

(c) Michael Probst AP

His teammate Ronaldinho, generally considered the best there is, had this to say about Larsson: "At Henrik's age many players announce their retirement from international football but no-one I know his age is at the great physical level Henrik is at right now. He could play at the highest level for a long time."

Henke used to play for Celtic FC in Scotland and here’s what a reporter from a Glaswegian paper said this about yesterday’s heroics. Under the headline “Talismanic Larsson provides parting gift for Celtic and Barça”, James Morgan writes:

“HENRIK LARSSON's decision to leave Celtic for Barcelona two seasons ago was vindicated last night after the Swedish striker transformed the Champions League final with a second-half contribution which wrote his name into the history books of another famous European club. Sprung from the bench in the 61st minute, the 35-year-old, who was playing his last game for the Catalan giants before a return to his homeland with Helsingborgs, turned a game which was slipping away from Frank Rijkaard's cosmopolitan side. Larsson, as ever, displayed his usual humility afterwards and preferred to concentrate on the effort shown by his team-mates."It was a tough match and the whole team deserve credit for the win," he said. "It was an unbelievable way for me to finish my career at Barcelona. I have had a fantastic experience here in my two years, with two league titles and now this. It's amazing."

Click here to read the entire tribute

Back in the Olden Days, c. 1994!

As one of the first visible minority Swedes (Swedish mother, Cape Verdian father) to break into the homogenous national team, Henke is a pioneer of sorts. But above all, he is just a good guy, great player and a talismanic presence for any team he blesses with his humble nature. In July – after playing for Sweden in the World Cup in Germany this summer – he will return to his native Helsingborg in southern Sweden. The season tickets are already sold out. Welcome home, Henke!

Speaking of the World Cup and tying into a previous post on the Swamp, today’s International Herald Tribune has a good column by Richard Bernstein. Here’s an excerpt:

“With the World Cup only a few weeks away, people here are asking this basic question: Is Germany safe?
According to the German police, in their annual crime report released last week, the country is, as Interior Minister Wolfgang Schäuble put it, "one of the safest places in the world.
But it wasn't safe for Ermyas Mulugeta, a German national of Ethiopian descent who was beaten senseless, allegedly by neo-Nazis, in the fashionable former East German city of Potsdam a couple of weeks ago. Mulugeta, who, the police say, has now awoken after about three weeks in a coma, was assaulted at the Potsdam train station by two bottle-wielding thugs who called him "nigger," the police have said.”

Click here to read the entire piece

It seems a former spokesman for the German government has sounded warnings regarding potential no-go areas in Germany. And naturally the powers that be have castigated him for soiling Germany's reputation and trying to ruin the World Cup party. C'mon....

I really don’t know why some folks are in such denial that they would jeopardize the safety of foreign visitors, not to speak of their own fellow citizens. What’s wrong with recognizing that there is both a low crime rate (pat, pat on the back of German society) AND in some areas a greater discomfort, real danger even, for those who are obviously members of a minority?

Henke, pictured with his family, becoming a Member of the British Empire
(for his service to Scotland)
(c) Gustau Racarino, Reuters

jo

Subjects: racism; xenophobia; Immigration; Germany; Berlin; BBC; World Cup; World Cup 2006; Deutschland; Diversity; Barcelona; Champions League; soccer; Football; Henrik Larsson

As I was Saying: Assimilation Policy....Bad

2006-05-16T16:52:00.000-05:00

In my last post, I was going on about how assimilation is a process that cannot be crafted into a workable policy by starry-eyed bureaucrats. And if you pick up tomorrow's edition of The Hill (a Washington daily about the shenanigans in Congress) you will see more of the same. Not by yours truly but courtesy of Oxford Analytica. Under the headline "Assimilation Policies Carry Risks" the anonymous OA writes:

"The integration (assimilation) models currently utilized in these (EU) states have a variety of structures, but they share some key similarities that may impede their effectiveness.

Integration processes often reflect one-way integration, in which the immigrant is expected to take the initiative to accomplish the level of integration that the state prescribes. However, in practice integration occurs as a two-way process: the state changes along with the immigrants it accepts.
However, this two-way process also can produce a backlash. Majority populations frequently are unhappy with the idea of their national culture changing. It is for this reason that integration programs are often portrayed by states as one-way processes, and why the majority population appears to change less quickly than a country’s immigrants..."
Please read the entire piece, click here

This is why I usually lambaste European countries: they created a problem, i.e. lack of assimilation; and are now selling a toxic concoction, i.e. bad "policy", as some kind of panacea. For whatever reason, they never seem recognize the fundamental differences between the Swedens and Germanys of say, 1906 and 2006. I mean, assimilate to what? To what the minorities are already part of? Seems redundant, no? Or to a subjective version of e.g. Germany that, at best, only existed in the past?

To me, it seems that it is the majority population, and at least many politicians, who are the ones who need to get on the assimilation train. Folks, it left Trans Central some three to four decades ago....

Backlash risks occuring by stigmatizing those suddenly expected to assimilate overnight, preferably by becoming as Western (?!) as possible. Any little difference previously seen as normal or even "exotic" could now be seen by the majority as evidence of lack of assimilation. And the backlash will be reinforced when the desired results of these misguided intentions are not forthcoming.

Lastly, I just wanted to mention that the OA piece also addresses the contrast between the U.S. and European approaches to assimilation:

" The state may either proactively or passively seek the successful integration of immigrants. For example, the United States has no formal immigrant-integration policy, other than a citizenship test requiring the demonstration of basic English language skills and knowledge of U.S. history.
Evidence suggests that integration is more successful when governments make education programs accessible and provide individualized integration plans.

The recent rise in perceptions of insecurity and deep social divides between immigrant and existing populations are prompting immigrant integration reform in most European states.

Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Austria, Denmark, Switzerland and parts of Belgium now all mandate integration....
Assimilation policies place the impetus on immigrants, asking them in essence to change their identity. However, making assimilation mandatory may actually impede the integration process it is designed to facilitate.

Indeed, integration is not achieved merely by labor-market and community participation; it also requires that the immigrant identify with and have loyalty to his new country. Mandating integration compels a speed of assimilation which may impede the developments of loyalty."

Mandating assimilation!!!! - what would Voltaire, Swift, Twain, Mencken, Wilde, Colbert et. al. write about such a Wonderlandesque concept? I laugh at that thought while crying about the rest of this sorry saga.

jo

Subjects: Immigration; Germany;Diversity; citizenship; naturalization; Integration; assimilation; Multiculturalism; Europe; politics; united states; U.S.; U.S.A.

It's the Process, Stupid!

2006-05-14T08:58:00.000-05:00

Some may think I was a little harsh on Germany in my last post. At the very least, I might have been more succinct. But there are just so gosh darn many angles to cover...

Accordingly, here's a link to the NYT's reporting on the new naturalization procedures for those wishing to become German nationals. I think Ms. Dempsey gets it right when she writes:

"In a decision that reflects the widespread debate toward the European Union's immigrant population, the interior ministers of Germany's 16 states Friday agreed for the first time to a package of measures aimed at setting new guidelines for obtaining citizenship.

The decision, made during a special two-day meeting in Bavaria, is a major change for a country long hesitant of accepting that there was a need for an integration policy despite Germany's 6.7 million immigrants make up nearly 9 percent of the country's population..."
(click here to read the entire piece)

She does a good job of tying it into the general immigration debate in Europe ( for more Swamp reporting click here, here and here), seeing both similarities and differences among the EU states, not to speak of non-EU countries like Norway and Switzerland.

But I have to raise at least some doubt regarding the term "integration policy". This expression raises the hope that the decades-long neglect of immigration and immigrants can somehow be resolved by policy, with a little social engineering. She is right in using the term since it's all the rage in Europe. But I would not call this "policy".

Unsurprisingly, this hoop-la is about creating the impression that politicians have acted, that they have done something that will then lead to a concrete result. And now it's laurel resting time. Wrong. Assimilation (integration is just another faux term for the same thing) is not about policy, it's about process. And as such it takes time and requires patience. Having a normal labor market that allows job creation and permitting, even encouraging, people to become citizens can facilitate the assimilation process. But it cannot be made to happen.

Back in the olden days, i.e. until very recently in all Western countries, there were 'assimilation policies': people were told to do this and become that. These policies succeeded only in their cruelty, stupidity and inhumanity, and failed in every other regard, especially in creating citizens out of immigrants. Let's hope the good folks of Europe know their own history.

But what do you know, here's a positive note to sign off on! On Tuesday as I was half-way across the Atlantic, new German citizens were being sworn in near my Kreuzberg home. In the neighboring area of Neukölln - a rather impoverished working class part of the former West Berlin with an interesting history of immigration, read the Wikipedia link - 54 immigrants from 15 different countries became Germans.

Becoming German. Neukölln, 9th May 2006.

Forget that the headlines were the usual moronic ones, e.g. on the 24-hour news channel N24 "Naturalization in Multicultistan: The Federal German Eagle and the Half Crescent". Neukölln is a part of Germany last time I checked. According to N24´s reporter Annette Bräunlein, 18-year old Ahmet Ügrenci "hid his (Muslim) half crescent medaillon" before the ceremony. Whatever, Anette....maybe you should hide your prejudice instead.

Anyway, Ahmet is now German. Too bad I missed it, after they all sang the national anthem there was a little party in the City Hall! Congrats, dude!

jo

Subjects: Immigration; Germany; Berlin; Deutschland; Diversity; citizenship; naturalization; Neukölln; Kreuzberg; Integration; assimilation; Multiculturalism; Europe

European Immigration Contortions

2006-05-12T09:03:00.000-05:00

Update: Check out the shout out to Dr. Frist, plus other goodies!

Have no fear; the swampy silence was not due to any drainage or lack of inspiration. It’s just that I had an intense week with a family weekend visit to Berlin (and Potsdam), catching up with forlorn friends on that side of the pond, arranging things with a new subletter and finally hopping onto another flight across Le Grand Bleu. And then I had a great birthday in Olde Towne Alexandria with the lovely JJY, followed by a roof-top extravaganza in Adams Morgan.

The flight over was less exciting this time, no Tempelhof, no stops in Brussels and Chicago etc. But nowadays both Delta and Continental have direct flights from Berlin-Tegel, and it’s nice to board a plane and wind up on another continent without having to transfer. Other than a one-year experiment in 2000-1, Berlin has not had direct flight to the U.S. since way before the Wall fell. A provincial capital city indeed.

Anyway, just in time for my return, the Senate appears set to resume debate on immigration. And on Monday, President Bush is making yet another push for reform by giving a speech to the nation. Say what you will, but he sure ain’t listening to the populist nativists on this one. In fact, ol' Lou Dobbs (the angry anchorman) lambasted Bush on CNN the other night (click here).

I will return to the U.S. debate soon enough, but for now I should try to keep my promise by quickly referring to some goings-on in Euroland and beyond. From my daily immigration updates, it is crystal clear that many countries are pre-occupied with this thorny dilemma: from Canada, to South Africa and New Zealand. The latter is actually accepting “public submissions” ("so whatyathink, mate?") on this topic. Good or bad? Different at least!

These countries have the advantage – to varying degrees – of at least acknowledging some history of immigration. In Europe, however, there is major denial. So when anything immigration related comes up, it has the ring of some kind of belated revelation: “Why, what do you know, we have some immigration. Perhaps we need to change some laws, institutions…attitudes even.” Easier said than done: witness the German citizenship debate.

In 2000, thanks to the efforts of the freshly elected center-left government, Germany finally received a new nationality law – one to supersede the antiquated bloodline law from 1913! It was a compromise – necessary after the conservatives mounted a populist campaign against the original proposal, folks lined up to sign petitions against the proposed law or as some put it “where can I sign against the Turks?”

The compromise at least put Germany more or less in line with most countries, even if the absolute rejection of multiple citizenships was a nod to the xenophobes (and a sign of lacking confidence in the assimilatory nature of German society).

So how can there still be controversies and debates over six years later, anno 2006? Without getting all wonkish, I’ll just say it has to do with the German federal model in tandem with the usual hand-wringing. Each state has the right to administer the naturalization process, and thus 16 different models have emerged! This is unthinkable in both the federal U.S. or far more centrist Sweden and France. Nonetheless, the chance of getting a passport in southern Bavaria is much smaller than in northern Berlin. So the state governments – in the current anti-immigrant climate – decided to hash out a uniform model. Did somebody say lowest common denominator....

The Swamp has already reported on the kind of test that some crackpot politicians desired. Well, it didn’t come to this, but the reactionary forces did their best to add an oppressive/dissuasive element to what really should be a celebration. Now there will be a language test of sorts and helpful hints of WHAT NOT to do in Germany. It is sad, but ultimately not surprising, that such a test becomes the opposite of its supposed model in the US.

Here, the test has some tough questions (and the background check is no cake walk) but in the main, it emphasizes what is positive about the U.S., rubbing home what you CAN do. To repeat, the German approach appears to be emphasizing what you CANNOT do.

So, after decades of not really allowing people to become citizens (at best, there was an arbitrary procedure after a 15 year minimum wait) there is now a grudging tolerance, saying “Ok, if you must”. Nice.

During my Potsdam walk with my family, I literally stumbled upon an impromptu street memorial for a victim of racist violence. Before I got back, Ermyas Mulugeta was brutally attacked late one night. He almost died, but thankfully he is now no longer in critical condition. Instead, of dealing with the obvious, some officials played the Rodney King game. They emphasized that Ermyas was a big man and suggested that he started the fight. The fact that he was nearly dead at the time they uttered their Fristesque pronouncements (see below) seemed incidental to these idiots.

Later, the federal Interior Minister, the usually sanguine Wolfgang Schäuble, said that ‘blond hair and blue-eyed people' were also attacked. He was simply trying to relativize the whole thing ahead of the World Cup, worrying more about bad publicity than Ermyas life. And bad publicity is just what he got for saying something so asinine.

His counterpart in the state of Brandenburg, whose capital is Potsdam, the rarely reflective Jörg Schönbohm, also entered the fray by immediately casting doubt on any racist connection to the near murder. This despite the fact that on Ermyas voice-mail, he was making a call to his wife when he was attacked, racist slurs by two other voices can be heard.

Beating the odds, Ermyas actually became a German citizen. But in the reporting on this tragedy he is usually referred to as a black man, an Ethiopian who happens to possess a German passport etc. No one knew how assimilated he is, how he felt about his new home. People were worried about the World Cup. Activists are using the World Cup as a backdrop for all kinds of protests, but they mostly have to do with the 'evils of globalization'. There are other causes, my friends. Like realities in the place you live.

In my last post, I referred to a debate on the BBC. A member of a Black Germans organization was on the program because he had drawn a map of places not to go in the Berlin area if you weren’t white. World Cup folks were none too pleased. As I walked past the memorial in the middle of beautiful Potsdam on a sunny day, I wondered about that map and knew that this part of Potsdam was not on it.

As this AP piece emphasizes with brutal honesty, Europe is light years far from being able to deal with diversity. May the World Cup bring people to Germany, who will show folks there another way. I’ll be there.

More on the citizenship test this weekend, including a report from a ceremony in my part of Berlin.

jo

Subjects: racism; xenophobia; Immigration; Germany; Berlin; World Cup; World Cup 2006; Deutschland; Diversity; citizenship; naturalization

Succinct in 160 characters or less

2006-05-03T08:04:00.000-05:00

As many have no doubt noticed, the Swamp loves (ab)using the unlimited space in the blogosphere. But here's a short tale of how even yours truly can keep it clean n' simple.

After coming back from a run yesterday, I flipped on the BBC World Service and they were discussing racism in Germany ahead of the upcoming World Cup. It seems that activists want to put out a map for Berlin and other cities, indicating which areas are unsafe for foreign visitors. The organizers are not happy - worrying about bad PR etc. I mean, really....what comes first? Safety or some glossy postcard Wonderland reality?

What can I say? Well, as I was cooling down, I sent an SMS/text message to the all-purpose BBC World Service number +44 7786 206080:

"There is major denial re: minorites and immigration here. Try being accepted as a non-white here. At best you'll be exotic or (at worst) a victim."
Read other, far wiser, comments from the program here

Text messages - at least on my ancient DJ Kai Sony phone - can be a maximum of 160 characters, this one was around 145.

I sent it 5 minutes before the program ended and what do you know: the presenter read it out to round off the show. (listen here, right sidebar, Tuesday program, last 15-30 minutes)

Would I advise any one I know and care about to go to the areas concerned? No! Do I go there? No! Would I advise them to come check out the World Cup? Yes! Is Germany generally safe? Yes!

More on the events that caused the BBC to take up this subject soon.

jo

Subjects: racism; xenophobia; Immigration; Germany; Berlin; BBC; World Cup; World Cup 2006; Deutschland; Diversity

Return to Tempelhof, May 1 & the Immigrant Boycott

2006-04-30T16:13:00.000-05:00

The Swamp is back in Berlin for a pit stop and landed at the mother of all airports the other day. Flying into Tempelhof during daylight hours is even more thrilling than taking off from it at the crack of dawn. Coming in from the East, we traced the outlines of the Wall; you can see how the Death Strip (Todesstreife) zone has been turned into parks or remains a wasteland. As you begin the final approach, you suddenly find yourself amidst apartment buildings, a feeling some with Kai Tak experience (Hong Kong’s former airport) may be familiar with.

(c) Gordon Ho, Airliners.net (click for more insane photos)

And walking home from the airport was just as exciting as in January. I know. I can’t get over it.

My return is well-timed since tomorrow is a holiday here, May Day. Traditionally ‘tis a day of workers’ rights rallies etc and contrary to European beliefs, it originated in the U.S. But nowadays, unemployment is so much higher here, especially in Berlin (20%) so folks are heading out to "demand"…jobs. Or to enjoy the day off with families. Tomorrow, I plan to attend the Myfest here in Kreuzberg.

This gathering was started as a neighborhood initiative by locals who were sick of vandals taking over their hood on 1 May. So instead there’s food, music and activities for the kids. If I remember correctly some of these activities are quite political with lil kids being told about the ills of this world in pedagogic terms. In particular, I remember a fair trade stand that made some good points, but also employed victimization tactics, painting all folks in poorer countries and multinationals with one broad stroke. These are the same people who don’t want their kids raised religiously because that’s ‘indoctrination’. Interesting standards.

The kind of idiots we don't want
in Kreuzberg

All in all it’s a positive street festival, reclaiming the streets from thugs and hoodlums, who don masks and destroy property. These brave souls are upset by the fact that the police are helping to organize (and protect) Myfest. Imagine that! Welcome to Wonderland.

There will be other demonstrations here and there in Germany, but my eyes will be more focused on the U.S. Across the pond, there have been calls to participate in a nationwide boycott by immigrant workers as well as by all consumers. The way things have been reported here, you would think there was agreement on this tactic and that it will be massive. That’s simply not an accurate depiction of the debate, click here and here for somewhat more sober summaries.

Last week, I attended an unrelated immigration lecture at the Migration Policy Instiute, and one of the head’s of the National Capital Immigration Coalition was there, reiterating that they did not support the boycott. In fact, only ONE of the 47 DC area groups that organized the April 1oth rally support it. There is much goodwill after the rally and employing a French-style general strike tactic may backfire and prove costly. I am not referring to how the Tancredos and Sensenbrenners will react, but to how more sympathetic voices may assess any such action.

For an alternative take, Migra Matters (as always) has up to the minute and topical commentary. Here's its list of related events. BTW, the official name of the boycott "Un Dia sin Immigrante" or " A Day without an Immigrant" is a twist on what was a funny movie "A Day without a Mexican". Check it out, it's available most anywhere.

Anyway, in tomorrow’s Christian Science Monitor, Gail Russel Chaddock reports on the fine line that’s being walked by boycotters:

“Meat-packing plants are planning to pack it in for the day. In Las Vegas, some casinos are bracing for a shutdown, and restaurants from San Diego to Bethesda, Md., are about to test whether senior staff can bus tables or sear scallops.
As companies cope with the hard-to-predict impact of Monday's worker boycott by immigrants and their backers, a big unknown is political: Will the walkout help break a legislative logjam in the Senate over immigration reform - and even affect outcomes in fall congressional elections?
Here's the state of play on Capitol Hill. The GOP-controlled House has approved a border-security bill, including a provision that makes it a felony (rather than a civil crime) to be in the US illegally, that Democrats believe will hurt Republicans in the fall elections. The Senate, in considering its version of the bill, is stuck over whether to include a guest-worker program and path to legal status for as many as 12 million foreigners already in the country.”
(click here to read the entire piece)

And as reported by Tyche Hendricks in the San Francisco Chronicle, there have been plenty of nasty undertones and overt signs of hatred recently:

“Displays of anti-immigrant and anti-Latino anger in California and across the country have increased in the six weeks since massive immigrant rights rallies began, and they’re injecting a new note of vitriol into the nation’s immigration reform debate.
This ire — in radio commentaries, a computer game, Web sites and other venues — gained visibility last week when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger publicized “disturbing and hateful death threats” received by Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante and other Latino officials. The attacks, none physical, have darkened the backdrop for boycotts and protests planned Monday across the country against a proposed new restrictive immigration law.
The angry messages don’t sit well with many mainstream immigration restrictionists, including leaders of the Minuteman Project, whose members will depart from Los Angeles on Wednesday on a cross-country lobbying tour for tougher border control. And the elected officials on the receiving end downplayed the anonymous messages, saying they get death threats from time to time on a range of issues.”
(click here to read the entire piece)

Far be it from me to trivialize these kinds of threats, violence and xenophobia. All I can is that we won’t be intimidated by what I am sure is sad, sorry minority of hatemongers. Si se puede!

Finally, today’s Washington Post has a brilliant article showcasing how one upscale DC area restaurant The Oval Room illustrates the "bottom line" of immigration. Neil Irwin and Hedgpeth write:

“At table 10 of the Oval Room, a high-price lawyer slurped an $8 bowl of asparagus soup. Over at table 71, a crowd of Office and Management and Budget staffers toasted a retiring colleague, while at table 76, a White House correspondent leaned in to hear what her lunch partner was saying.
In the kitchen of the restaurant, there was a different kind of kaleidoscope. The sous-chef, a Panamanian immigrant, directed two cooks from El Salvador, one from Guatemala and one from Honduras. A Salvadoran immigrant ran the food to the tables. All the activity was monitored by the general manager, an Austrian by birth, who needs to satisfy the owner, originally from India.
Just as all of those workers depend on the swirl of official Washington business for their livelihood, official Washington depends on them. Tomorrow, immigrant groups plan to boycott workplaces and stores to prove just that point. But one day of activity at the Oval Room, a sleekly designed spot a block from the White House, shows how difficult it is to make any kind of simple calculation.
The tangled web of economic connections among immigrants and those born in the United States creates jobs at a Philadelphia seafood distributor and revenue for the local cable company, even as it causes a financial drain on local hospitals and schools. The impacts are so intertwined that significant changes to immigration laws could change the nation's commerce in unforeseen ways.”
(click here to read the entire piece)

Yes indeed. This is a complicated issue that people love to simplify. A little nuance never hurt, now did it?

Young American Protesters to be Proud of

More about the 1st of May later on in the week I plan to write a diddy or two about recent immigration developments here, i.e. the continued anti-migrant labor (and anti-East European) sentiments in old Europe, citizenships tests, racist attacks and scapegoating. I'll try to find some good news too - after all the World Cup is starting in just over a month!

jo

Subjects: immigration, united states; immigration reform; Illegal immigration; undocumented; diversity; assimilation; Multiculturalism; religion; faith; youth; Washington D.C.; Berlin; May 1; 1 May; Tempelhof
; Kreuzberg

Songkran, Immigration Reflections & an Imagined Conspiracy vs. Assimilation

2006-04-20T08:58:00.000-05:00

Update: Enhanced photo quality, click on individual pictures for even higher resolution. Also click on the headline to visit the official Songkran photo blog.

As Easter, Passover, and Songkran come to a close, this week marks a useful period for reflection for those interested in the immigration debate. And among the many ways and places to do just this – while also getting far, far away from politics – I was lucky enough to happen upon one of the best.

On Sunday, the Swamp had the great privilege of being invited to Wat Thai Washington D.C. to join in the celebration of said Songkran. Besides religious and community functions, Wat Thai is also host to Thai school, where Thai Americans and others can learn Thai language and customs.

(c) Wat Thai Washington DC

And while this was anything but political, the immigration rally on April 10th came to mind on more than one occasion. Songkran was also a festive and eye-opening occasion. The Thai (and also some from the Lao and Cambodian) American community – like the Latino American on that Monday - was out in force. Seeing one particular group gathered in high numbers reminds one not only not of its size but more importantly of how diverse such a group always is.

This is the fact that all xenophobes, racists, nativists and their ilk have to overlook in order to believe their own misguided hyperbole. The diversity is in appearance, class, culture, heritage, parentage, aspirations, occupations etc etc etc. This is no uniform group imposing their own culture, refusing to assimilate, not speaking English, stealing one job or another. This is one group – made up of as individuals – who share two things, a connection to Thailand and an equal, if not greater, one to the U.S.

I speak of reflection, but naturally not everyone has heeded that call. In fact, loudmouths, blowhards and yes, some eminently reasonable folks on all sides of the divide have been positioning themselves ahead of next week – that’s when the Senate reconvenes and the immigration bill is bound to at least be debated. What then comes out of the Congressional grinder is anyone’s guess.

(c) Wat Thai Washington DC

In today’s WP, fence-lover Robert Samuelson once again throws his restrictionist-hat into the fray. Following what must have been a lengthy walk in his own private desert, he appears to be dehydrated and has spotted an oasis. Alas, it is a hallucination that contains just the kind of toxic beverage he tends to crave. Imbibing without pause for breath, hiccups developed. Immigration is different now then it was back in the good ol’ days, and there is a conspiracy against assimilation!

Lord help us! Whatever shall we do? Samuelson writes:

“It's all about assimilation -- or it should be. One of America's glories is that it has assimilated many waves of immigrants. Outsiders have become insiders. But it hasn't been easy. Every new group has struggled: Germans, Irish, Jews and Italians. All have encountered economic hardship, prejudice and discrimination. The story of U.S. immigration is often ugly. If today's wave of immigration does not end in assimilation, it will be a failure. By this standard, I think the major contending sides in the present bitter debate are leading us astray. Their proposals, if adopted, would frustrate assimilation….

We have a conspiracy against assimilation. One side would offend and ostracize much of the Hispanic community. The other would encourage mounting social and economic costs. Either way we get a more polarized society.

On immigration, I am an optimist. We are basically a decent, open and tolerant nation. Americans respect hard work and achievement. That's why assimilation has ultimately triumphed. But I am not a foolish optimist. Assimilation requires time and the right conditions. It cannot succeed if we constantly flood the country with new, poor immigrants or embark on a vendetta against those already here….
(click here to continue reading this piece)

There is much to say about this demagoguery-light. He claims to be pro-immigration but then uses history is a highly selective way to try and curb it. The oldest trick in the book. Nowhere in his piece does he acknowledge – and this is sad for an economist who loves history – that times have changed. First, the notion of identity is more fluid and open-minded. Bilingualism, multiple cultures etc are no longer seen as threats by most people.

Secondly, and more seemingly more important for an economist like Samuelson, you need to acknowledge how the economy has changed, both domestically and internationally. But he looks back at the good ol’ days and draws lessons. And then he after rightly claiming that assimilation takes time and requires patience, he promptly racks up data that show that he has no truck with either. He makes comparisons across eras and assumes conditions are the same. Interesting.

At least he’s forgotten about his own fence fetish, so there’s hope this lil’ diddy will plunge into another valley that time forgot.

Samuelson does raise one issue that merits some consideration, guest workers. As Tamar Jacoby points out in this op-ed, guest workers are the kind of guests that often wind up staying. Calling them guests – treating them less like less than that – can only backfire. It raises the unrealistic expectation that all will leave. And when they don’t there’s backlash.

But as Senator Kyl eloquently put it during the Senate’s floor debate, there is also no reason to assume that everyone wants to come to the U.S. and stay there. Piles of research in Europe, the U.S. and elsewhere show that immigrants do tend to stay but what often goes unmentioned is that they have no choice.

OK, you’d be right to call that Swampish hyperbole. Sure, they have often had a choice to leave, but this is not as open as folks would like to think. For one, there is the stigma of returning as a ‘failure’ etc and then there’s the potential danger of a second journey at the hand of the smugglers. But these things aides, for they are hard to assess, there is the little problem of getting back in once you leave.

By this I mean, if you do return to your country of origin what happens if you want to re-migrate again. Many “guest-workers” in Europe decided to stay put when the programs that brought them to Germany, Sweden etc were cancelled. Had they left, they wouldn’t get back in. And since they stayed, they asked their families to migrate…

Similarly, those entering the U.S. via especially the Southern border would hardly wish to try crossing that desert again. Douglas Massey’s research amply demonstrated the calculations involved here. When there is no circular migration (come and go) option available this is what happens. Back in Samuelson’s good ol’ days, returning to the motherland was that much harder and still many did. Another difference that folks forget, those returnees could’ve gone back to Ellis Island a second time, i.e. immigrated ‘legally’ a second time.

So when you think about it, the differences between then and now, especially in the areas of transportation and communication could facilitate return migration. It’s that much easier to take a plane back to the motherland or send an e-mail/make a cheap call to find out how things are there. But the current laws prevent that and compel people to stay even when they don’t necessarily want to.

(c) Wat Thai Washington DC

In an upcoming piece I intend to mention two current guest-worker programs, one here in Maryland and one in Germany, that live up to the name. Naturally, no one ever mentions them as they complicate things. So even Ms. Jacoby’s wrong when she claims to be a bucker of conventional wisdom.

Meanwhile, the Congressional recess is being used by both the left and the right to tear themselves apart. One day, it’s the Republicans who can’t reconcile nativist tendencies, and religious bigotry with the needs of big business and holy compassion. And the next the left panders to minority groups, dishes out its own xenophobia, cuddles up to the unions, embraces some churches and worries about the next elections. In the Center, things aren’t much better. Immigration sure is fun.

The alluded to hand-wringing on the right is well-known – so I’ll just link to two articles, one on the Republican Party and one on Arizona’s two Republican Senators Jon Kyl and John McCain, who not only disagree on this but both made Time Magazine’s list of the 10 best Senators.

Instead I wish to briefly highlight the left’s dilemma, which kind of leads into the (radical) center’s own problems. In the oldie online magazine Salon.com, Michelle Goldberg writes about the left splitting over immigration:

“Britt Minshall is a United Church of Christ pastor and a proud member of the religious left…And yet as he watched hundreds of thousands of immigrants march through the streets of America's biggest cities in the past few weeks, he found himself agreeing with some of the most right-wing Republicans. Most liberals are "dead wrong" on immigration, he says, arguing that social justice demands a crackdown on the undocumented. "I'm afraid the Minutemen have a point here," he says.
Most liberals have celebrated the recent pro-immigration marches, seeing in them a new kind of civil rights movement. They've supported calls to legalize many of the 11 million undocumented immigrants currently in the United States. Many have delighted in the fissures opening up on the right, where nativists are pitted against laissez-faire business interests hungry for cheap labor. Yet there are fault lines on the left as well…As people like Minshall illustrate, the liberal debate over immigration isn't simply one between the left and the center. It cuts across ideologies. There are conservative Democrats, civil rights activists and leftist multiculturalists calling for legalizing undocumented immigrant workers, while figures including antiwar Air America radio host Thom Hartmann, writer Michael Lind and Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., are urging much tougher restrictions…”

(click here to read the whole piece, you’ll need to watch a brief commercial)

Ms. Goldberg lines up some of the usual suspects like Harvard economist George Borjas who claim to have the numbers backing up claims for restrictive legislation. But as she points out David Card has different numbers and many including former head of INS, now at MPI, Doris Meissner dispute that immigration leads to less opportunity for poor native-born Americans.

Speaking of Senator Dorgan, the Swamp called his bluff after seeing him in action. And speaking of Michael Lind, he has recently opined about this with my fellow blogger Steve Clemons. Departing somewhat from the harsher rhetoric in “The Radical Center” the book Lind wrote with Ted Halstead, Steve and he argue that the focus needs to be shifted to the high-skilled, both workers and students, from the low-skilled usually meant in debates on undocumented workers.

More on this interesting aside later, especially the politics of Michael Lind.

For now, my mind travels back to Wat Thai on that lovely Sunday. For those who would go there and couldn't see this as the quintessential American scene, I say this. Adjust your clocks, it’s 2006 and counting.

(c) Wat Thai Washington DC

jo

Subjects: immigration, united states; immigration reform; Illegal immigration; undocumented; diversity; assimilation; Multiculturalism; religion; faith; youth; Maryland; Montgomery County; songkran; Thai American
; Buddhism; Washington D.C.

Manga, Mangia, Manger...for a Month?

2006-04-13T07:09:00.000-05:00

Today the Swamp simply wants to relay the story of odd recent events in Gifu, Japan. This is the story of Kiyoshi Ikeda:

"A man who stayed at a comic-book cafe in Gifu for over a month and ate there without paying was arrested Wednesday, police said.
The unemployed man, referring to himself as Kiyoshi Ikeda, 37, was arrested for fraud. He has reportedly admitted having stayed at the cafe intentionally.
"I ran out of money and I thought I'd stay there until I got kicked out," he was quoted as telling police."

(click here to read more of this wacky, wonderful tale of overstaying one's welcome)

The 34-day Diet of Kiyoshi
Ikeda

I will never feel guilty again for chilling just a tad longer in a café. In Berlin, that's an accepted art form, but elsewhere it was hitherto frowned upon. No más!

jo

Subjects: weird; Humor; manga; Japan; Café; Coffee; http://www.technorati.com/tag/toast

"Si se Puede" - an Immigrant Afternoon on the Mall

2006-04-12T07:49:00.000-05:00

And so the immigration rally - the link is to the official April 1o.org link - took place and the turnout was at least as good as forecast (click on the headline for a nice panorama shot). I made it down just in time to catch the tail end of Senator Kennedy’s trademark passion. During his speech - amidst interspersed "Si se puede's" - the crowd began chanting his name like he was Bono. And for an afternoon, he was indeed a Bono of Massachusetts.

(c) AFP, Mandel Ngan

But the real rock stars were those in the crowd. As someone memorably coined it: “We decided not to be invisible anymore”. And visible they were. So many people who live, work and study in the Washington Metro area. I can only assume that many folks who live comfortable, sheltered lives would have been taken aback by this show of peaceful protest and celebration. Sure, they may have a gardener or nanny, but do they pause to think that they are not the only ones? And that immigrants have all kinds of jobs?

From the Washington Post’s reporting on this rally and the others across the country:

“Hundreds of thousands of pro-immigration demonstrators mobilized on the Mall and in scores of cities across the country yesterday in a powerful display of grass-roots muscle-flexing that organizers said could mark a coming-of-age for Latino political power in the United States…
Unlike some national marches in the past, the pro-immigration rallies have had a bottom-up, organic quality that often surprised organizers and opponents alike. But not everything was spontaneous. In contrast to earlier rallies, which featured Mexican flags and produced a backlash, yesterday's events were awash in American flags after organizers and radio disc jockeys urged demonstrators not to give their opponents something to criticize.
"We had American flags because this is our home and we also wanted to bring part of our heritage," said Salvador Carranza, an organizer of a rally in Madison, Wis. "We believe we are part of this country, and also part of our heritage, so we don't think having other flags is disrespectful.
(click here to continue reading the article)

For a stunning slideshow, click here.

(c) Reuters, Robert A. Reeder

As the article points out, the rallies were largely peaceful even if there was palpable disappointment following last Friday’s immigration bill debacle in the Senate. They were also heavily American with pledges of allegiance and plenty of flags. This won’t dampen the nativist rant that the immigrants are anti-American, but then again nothing will.

What struck this observer was both the diversity and the lack of the same in the crowd. The diversity was that of Latinos and Hispanics from all quarters – flags, banners, and yes, awesome soccer jerseys from Colo Colo, Club América and the Strongest to good ol' D.C. United.

As this was officially an immigration rally, the absence of other ethnic groups was somewhat unfortunate. To be clear, representatives of African and Asian ethnic organizations were there, but the crowd was mostly Latino. The diversity of the American people is its strength and the more one reminds the xenophobes and restrictionists of this, the better. I realize that people may have thought this was not their battle (or disagreed with the forum) and of course people were working. Still, next time I hope the grass roots wave reaches more folks.

Manuel Herrera in NYC (c) Reuters, Chip East

Given the inevitable comparisons with past Civil Rights demonstrations (read the Swamp on this); it was good to see several African American speakers on the podium if not in the crowd. This included U.S. Representative Albert Wynn, who represents parts of Prince George’s County (that’s where my home in Laurel is) and Montgomery County (gerrymandering anybody?). Speaking for his constituents – a very heterogeneous mix of white, African American, Asian American, Hispanic Americans – he dismissed those who would see some kind of difference:

“You are beautiful….We are America. If you live here, work hard everyday, if you raise your children here and if you pay taxes: You are American…” (my transcription from the C-Span broadcast, check it out for the vibe)

Other than CASA de Maryland, the organizers were mainly unions and most significantly religious organizations from across the spectrum. Muslim and Jewish leaders spoke as did representatives of other faith-based groups. But it was the position of the Christian churches that proved most interesting.

While I was happy to see Bishop Rev. Theodore Schneider of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America spread his gospel, I was even more impressed with Archbishop Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of the Washington Archdiocese. Representing the Catholic Church to which the majority of those in attendance surely belonged, he spoke not only at length but in fluid Spanish. While I was not able to follow, the crowd’s reaction was electric.

Archbishop McCarrick’s stance follows in the illustrious footsteps of Archbishop Cardinal Roger Mahony of the Los Angeles Archdiocese. Last month he propelled himself into the immigration debate by calling for reform along the lines of the McCain-Kennedy bill that came out of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He has also issues numerous calls to prayer on the subject, including on April 5th the opening of Lent on which he also called for a show of solidarity through fasting.

Cardinal Roger Mahony at the April 10th L.A. rally

This kind of political activism by religious leaders is not appreciated by all, and this morning I had the dubious pleasure of seeing John O’Sullivan, a Catholic immigrant from the U.K., air his views on C-Span. Mr. O’Sullivan is an intelligent, well-spoken man who yearns for the America he imagined he immigrated to. The America of Samuel Huntington devotees, in which Anglo values form the base of the “tom-ah-to soup”.

By this he means that the U.S. was a tomato soup from the beginning and over time, spices and all made it tastier, but it remains a tomato soup to this day. This analogy, which he prefers to “melting pots” or “mosaics”, appears to be one of wishful thinking. ...the wishful thinking of those who prefer their tom-ah-to soup watery and 17th Centuryesque.

Anyway, please read O’Sullivan’s latest column and watch him on C-Span. Definitely worth it: the xenophobic views of an immigrant always are….When he goes off about the ‘mystic chords of memory’ (abusing a Lincoln quote), the Alamo, Anglo values and tom-ah-to soup, things get kinda wacky (13 minutes into the segment).

For more on the benevolent – and in this country of all countries’, inevitable – involvement of faith communities in the immigration debate, I highly recommend Daniel Wood’s article from the Christian Science Monitor:

“Increasingly, (religious leaders) are making their presence felt on Capitol Hill, where the Senate is now drafting its version of immigration reform. In their own churches, synagogues, and mosques, many leaders are striking a defiant pose toward an immigration bill the US House has already approved….
At stake is the moral high ground on immigration. The religious leaders see new border-tightening moves as intruding on their obligation to care for strangers - no questions asked…. It is none of the government's business who and how religious people serve," says Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy, president of Interfaith Alliance, which represents 70 faith traditions. "Would the US Congress have told the Good Samaritan not to help a stranger in the ditch?"
(click here to continue reading)

In the article, you learn the Cardinal Mahony plans to order his priests to not comply with restrictive federal immigration measures. Sure sounds like the Chicago City Council to me!

Lastly, I wanted to give a shout out n' mad props to the youth of the DC Metro area. Many students are themselves directly affected by this, and if not, members of their families may well be. On the Mall the other day, they turned out en masse. In Montgomery County, some students were actually allowed to take off from class and receive credits for participating. This is the result of a progressive (and thus somewhat controversial) community service program. Read about it here.

I am talking about Americans like Jose Cortez:

“I really want to support immigrants," said Cortez, an Einstein senior who was born in El Salvador and immigrated to Montgomery County at 4 to join his father, Mario. "Without them, this country wouldn't be anything. Immigrants aren't here to fight; they're here to work.'' The elder Cortez, who had the day off from his job at Whole Foods, smiled at his son's words… (from Lori Aratani’s article in yesterday’s WP)

Word and Palabra, Jose. “Si se puede” “Yes, we can do it”

jo

(c) AP, Evan Vucci Julio and Rosa Deng

Subjects: immigration, Politics, border, current affairs, united states; immigration reform; Illegal immigration; undocumented; diversity; assimilation; Multiculturalism; religion; Christianity; Catholicism; faith; youth; Maryland; Montgomery County

Led Zeppelin's 'Immigrant Song': Viking Anthem or Security Threat?

2006-04-11T11:43:00.000-05:00

Update: Now with added accuracy, i.e. who actually sang the Clash song (thanks CMS). Plus there's a great little video clip link at the end.

It is one of – if not THE – most ridiculous stories to emerge in this security-obsessed era of ours. As a Clash fan and a lifelong Led Zeppelin disciple – who you calling a Robert Plant wannabe? – I can only muster utter outrage. And a touch of envy: it should have been me in that taxi!

Basically, a paranoid taxi driver in London thought that an Indian-born Brit’s listening to the tunes of two classic BRITISH bands was suspect. This is whack on so many levels. As reported in USA Today:

“A love of punk and hard rock anthems by The Clash and Led Zeppelin led to a British man being hauled off a plane bound for London by police on terrorism fears, newspapers reported on Wednesday.
Indian-born Harraj Mann, 23, played "London's Calling" by The Clash and Led Zeppelin's "Immigrant Song" through the stereo of a taxi he caught to Durham and Tees Valley Airport in northern England.
The taxi driver, however, grew suspicious of his passenger after listening to the lyrics of his chosen songs and alerted the authorities after they reached the airport.”
Read the full story here

Mr. Mann himself had this to say:

"I was laughing about it, but all my mates are absolutely furious. It's just left me bemused. I can agree that there's a culture of fear. They acted on the information they had. I'm just frustrated that it happened to me. It's a mystery."

Enough said and for now I offer you some of the lyrics of the affronting songs.

Joe Strummer of the Clash sang in the punk anthem “London Calling”:

"London calling to the faraway towns
Now that war is declared-and battle come down
London calling to the underworld
Come out of the cupboard, all you boys and girls
London calling, now don't look at us
All that phoney Beatlemania has bitten the dust
London calling, see we ain't got no swing
'Cept for the ring of that truncheon thing

[Chorus]
The ice age is coming, the sun is zooming in
Meltdown Expected, the wheat is growing thin
Engines stopped running, but I have no fear
London is drowning-and I live by the river..."

Click here for complete lyrics

And as the aforementioned Plant of wild mane fame sang primally in “Immigrant Song”:

"Aaaaaaaaaaaaah- ah, Aaaaaaaaaaaah-ah
We come from the land of the ice and snow,
from the midnight sun where the hot springs blow.
The hammer of the gods
Will drive our ships to new lands,
To fight the horde, singing and crying:
Valhalla, I am coming!
On we sweep with threshing oar,
Our only goal will be the western shore."

Click here for complete lyrics

Man, I love the name of that song and understand why Mr. Mann digs it! The riffs plus there’s the connection to the Vikings as immigrants…Ja, ja, ja! Oh Odin, Oh Thor, Oh Gefjun, Oh Idunn...

If you have no access to these songs, you can listen to samples at Amazon.com
For "London Calling" click here.
For "Immigrant Song" click here.

Lastly, here's a must watch (an oldie but still brilliant). Vikings of a more feline and youthful nature, sailing to the beat of said "Immigrant Song".

jo

Subjects: immigration, border, current affairs, diversity; assimilation; Multiculturalism; UK; united kingdom; discrimination; Humor; led zeppelin; Terrorism; the clash; robert plant; Vikings

Rallying for Immigration on the National Mall

2006-04-10T07:59:00.000-05:00

Today, there will be major pro-immigration rallies all across the U.S. And given the failure by the Senate to pass an immigration reform bill last Friday – as (sort of) assumed here in the Swamp – the rallies take on an added resonance.

(c) AFP/Getty Images, J. Emilio Flores
300, 000 rally in Los Angeles on March 25, 2006.

They also need to be seen in the context of the big rallies that took place last month (click here for Migra Matters' great reporting). These were the first show of strength by those who believe in a fair, comprehensive approach to immigration. In other words, those folks who take history into account, who live within the bounds of reality and can see beyond the national security-immigration smoke screens.

Here in Washington D.C. the rally is expected to be sizeable, perhaps gathering up to 200,000 people. It will be held on the National Mall, between the Washington Monument and U.S. Capitol, and promises to attract various speakers from religious, political and humanitarian organizations.

The scene earlier today:
I am running along the Mall, soaking up sunshine and the pre-rally vibe. A stage is being set up, tv-crews try to park their vans, school kids are milling about, tourists meandering - perhaps unsuspecting of what is about to happen .... The weather is beautiful and it promises to be a good day. As I jog past the Lincoln Memorial, I am reminded of what he believed in – and of the great Civil Rights Era rallies on the Mall, led by Martin Luther King – and how clearly this too is about rights.

Yes, that last comparison is a contested one (click here to read Juan Williams back up this analogy in today’s WP). Detractors will point out that undocumented immigrants and other immigrants are not U.S. Citizens. I would add: “yet”. The current immigration situation has created an underclass that lives in the shadows, i.e. like segregation. It is antithetical to the American creed to not address this. This was, is and will always be a Nation of Immigrants. Pure and simple.

For those with concerns about transgressing laws, cultural change etc I close by offering the words of a recent immigrant, the Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger. He also addresses border security but only in the context of a broader, compassionate picture:

“Immigration is not just a theory debated on talk shows and on Capitol Hill; in California, it's a reality that we live with every day in our schools, hospitals and workplaces. When Congress returns from its Easter recess, it must immediately address immigration reform again. I urge Congress to remember that immigrants are good people….
Already we hear so much talk about so many false choices. We are told that in a free society it's not possible to have border security. We are advised that in order to secure the borders, we must deport 12 million people. Never mind that we don't know who they are or where they are, and that it could cost up to $230 billion to do it.
I reject these false choices, and Congress should too. I salute the members of both parties in Congress who are conducting a civil, serious discussion on this issue. I urge them to agree on legislation based on a simple philosophy: control of the border….and compassion for the immigrant….
To pursue a policy of compassion, Congress must attack the problem, not people. A compassionate immigration policy will fight this battle at the borders, not in our schools and not in our hospitals. Teachers, doctors and charity workers should not have to choose between helping those in need and enforcing the law. A compassionate immigration policy will acknowledge that immigrants are just like us: They're moms and dads looking for work, wanting to provide for their kids. Any measure that punishes charities and individuals who comfort and help immigrants is not only unnecessary, but un-American.”
(click here to read the entire piece)

Yes indeed. "Just like us". U.S. Representative Tom Tancredo and CNN Anchor Lou Dobbs, wrap your confused rants around that one.

In a couple of hours, I will head back down to the Mall to join the rally, and tomorrow I will file a little report for all y’all.

jo

Subjects: immigration, Politics, border, current affairs, united states; immigration reform; Illegal immigration; undocumented; diversity; assimilation; Multiculturalism

Immigration Reform Cryogenics: Senate Stuck in a Tundra of Amendments and Filibusters

2006-04-05T16:13:00.000-05:00

Update: In addition to the Washington Post story linked in the headline of this post, I recommend Charles Hurt's piece in today's Washington Times. Coming at it from the GOP angle, he claims that the Republicans are planning to filibuster their own bill! Add this to the amendment-filibustering shenanigans of Senate Minority Leader Reid, and you have a classic gridlock. Hurt's article also highlights the little known anti-immigrant past of Reid.

Update II: Things are moving quickly now, and there's news of a compromise bill that may garner enough votes. Click here, more later on. The question of if any bill is better than no bill arises....

----

As I write, the Senate appears cryogenically frozen in the churning sea of its own arcane rules. Immigration reform is still being debated, but the debate is now about how, when, what and even why to debate. And most importantly, they thus have yet to decide if they will even vote on anything at all. Come Friday, it’s the two week Easter-Passover break and things do not look promising after that.

One of the two main sponsors, Senator John McCain of Arizona, of the bill that emerged from the Judiciary Committee tried his best today to shame the “great deliberative body” into actually taking some action. To not shy away from the challenge that this extremely emotional issue poses. For make no mistake about it, in this election year the Senators, despite the many truly wise words pronounced, and are ruled by fear. Fear of losing: not just any particular vote on the Floor but at the polls this fall.

As Bill Kristol points out in this piece, worrying about the polls makes very little sense, especially for Republicans. For as he points out, the most vociferous opponents of immigration reform - and loudest nativists and border fanatics - do not represent state-wide offices (or big states). In fact, like Tom Tancredo (Colorado’s sixth district in this least diverse in an otherwise increasingly diverse state) they represent very homogenous districts.

But lest I give the impression that Republicans are the only ones with nativist tendencies, I refer you to what I witnessed when I finally made it into the Senate this past Monday. This Time Magazine article also goes into the rationale behind the Democrat maneuvering around the immigration issue. For make no mistake, they too are playing politics with this one, even if they claim to be on holy ground.

Byron Dorgan, junior Senator from North Dakota (click for the telling demographics of this tiny state), came in armed and dangerous, carrying all kinds of placards with colorful graphics. They purported to show how the "American worker" is under threat. Another Swedish (and also Norwegian) American Senator living in the 19th Century misses the point.

As the self-appointed representative of the “American worker” Dorgan – much like those who can’t stop talking about border security and the war on terror – did his best to turn this debate into something else:

“At a time when our country sees so much of the outsourcing of good jobs and now the proposal to continue importing cheap labor, I think it is a strange set of circumstances that has a proposal on the floor of the Senate saying let's deal with immigration and the immigration problem in this country by adding to the immigration bill a so-called guest worker program that would allow 400,000 additional people who now live outside our country to come into our country's labor force…. Open the newspaper these days and take a look at the news: outsourcing of American jobs; good American jobs that pay well…. In addition to outsourcing good American jobs, we are also insourcing, importing cheap labor…. Where is the talk about American workers as we discuss the issue of immigrants and immigration reform? Where is the description of the plight of the American worker? Who is here describing the circumstances faced by American workers?”

(to read his entire remarks, please click here)

Considering the numbers at hand, 11 million undocumented/illegal immigrants out of a population of 300 million, considering the fact that economies actually grow and times change, you have to wonder how someone representing a state with a shrinking population can sound so confident that he knows what the problem is and what then might represent a solution. If he believes in creating jobs for “American workers” (and just who is an American worker in the mind of the Senator from North Dakota?) that’s called statism, which some like and some don’t. But the connection to immigration is both spurious and overblown.

In fact, it is a modern version of the Know Nothings, a.k.a the American Party. Yes, the racism may be gone, or at least not as overt, and the bigotry is not anti-Catholic, but the scapegoats in this simplistic worldview remain the immigrants. How sad to see this in 2006.

Dorgan actually spoke after Senator Kennedy, who not only spoke eloquently and glowingly of the United States and immigration, but threw out a canard of his own. And that too risks creating scapegoats, though the risk is not all that great in the U.S. but more so in Europe. I refer to the immigrant as ‘salvation’ as a 'miracle elixir' for all woes:

“Immigration is the story of American history. From the earliest days of our Nation, generation upon generation of immigrants have come to be part of a land that offers freedom and opportunity to those willing to do their part. Immigrants built our great cities. They cultivated our rich farmlands. They built the railroads and highways that bind America from sea to shining sea. They erected houses of worship to practice their faiths…. That is our history. But it is also our present and our future.”

(Click here for his entire remarks)

This is a truism and recognizes the dynamic and organic nature of an immigrant society. They change over time. Excellent. But when he later made the claim that “our economy is more dependent on immigration than ever before” and that “America's choice really is between immigration and economic stagnation” he goes too far. Talk about creating expectations that cannot be met.

Immigration is part of the economic and demographic fabric, but that's it, a part of it. To paint it as a panacea risks automatically rendering it a toxic negative for populists to exploit when times are bad. Why do so few see that connection? Stop demonizing and hyping immigration.

To my mind, the social and cultural aspects need to be highlighted more. Yes, you need to sell this on economic grounds (and of course mention national security every so often). But the fact is that assimilation is taking place and that as immigrants become Americans America changes, and thus their children will inevitably grow up in a country that has assimilated to the newcomers as well. So people might not like this, but it is happening and responsible folks should convey this message.

History shows us how intrinsic and continous immigration is, but to remain stuck in another century like Senator Dorgan, and to some extent Senator Kennedy, is a big problem. What America do they want to create? Perhaps they need to realize that the newcomers and second generation are already shaping the future.

On a day, when many Senators had a lot to say, these thoughts seemed important. Today, Wednesday, the Senate was simply treading water and for a long time nothing happened. One Senator mentioned that there were some 228 amendments (changes) to the original bill. Since each amendment, unless withdrawn, requires a vote it’s not hard to see how this ship could sink before it even reaches the high seas of compromise with the House of Representatives.

As business drew to a close at around 10 pm, a faint glimmer of hope appeared. The Washington Post’s Jonathan Weisman reports on how some Republicans are trying to break the impasse with what appears to be a rather unsavory compromise. Read the story for its excellent description of the drama that unfolded as Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada faced the entire Republican causcus all by his lonesome. Tomorrow morning the Democrats have to show their mettle - and perhaps some Republicans will defy the will of their leadership and fight for what they believe.

jo

Subjects: immigration, Politics, border, current affairs, united states; immigration reform; Illegal immigration; undocumented; diversity; assimilation; Multiculturalism

Ringing the Amnesty Alarm Bell

2006-03-31T04:21:00.000-05:00

Amnesty - as alluded to in other posts here and here - is the buzzword for those opposed to meaningful immigration reform. Initially, it was only bandied about by those on the House side but then Senate Majority Leader, and Presidential hopeful, Bill Frist of Tennessee joined the fray.

However, with President Bush pushing for reform beyond the draconian House (and Fristian) measures - and with the Senate getting ready to pass a comprehensive bill - some House members are reconsidering. As Charles Hurt of the Washington Times details in this piece, the waverers include none other than House Majority Leader John Boehner of Ohio.

And today, Hurt reports on how some Congressmen are beginning to play the backlash card, claiming that the masses will soon be baying for immigrant blood. Talk about following (or pretending to follow) and not leading. As usual, Tom Tancredo is dancing to tune of the mad piper, click here for a portrait of an angry man.

Finally, the Washington Post's Dana Milbank dissects the (ab)use of the new "A" word in this column:

"Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), behind a pulpit adorned with a "Just Say No to Amnesty" sign, thundered: "Anybody that votes for an amnesty bill deserves to be branded with a scarlet letter, 'A' for amnesty, and they need to pay for it at the ballot box in November."
Stand down, Hester Prynne. Adultery is so 17th-century....

But the use of the word "amnesty" -- more than 50 times on the Senate floor yesterday -- says much about the immigration debate. Proponents of the "guest-worker" path toward legalization appear to have gained the upper hand; Specter seems to have the votes in the Senate, and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) is rethinking his chamber's hostility to a guest-worker plan. Opponents, therefore, need to escalate the rhetoric and invoke the A-word....
(click here to read the whole column)

Off to listen to the Senators wax eloquent (and alarmist.)

jo

Update: Just after I reached the Capitol Building, the Senators realized what I soaked up on my way there. It was Friday, the sun was out, it was warm, the cherry blossoms were blooming and thus, without further ado, they called it a weekend. But we'll all be back on Monday.

Subjects: immigration, Politics, border, current affairs; MEXICO, united states; immigration reform; Illegal immigration; undocumented; diversity; amnesty

A Swedish American Senator Misses the Point

2006-03-30T07:14:00.000-05:00

Update: Senator Isakson's statement is now cited verbatim.

Today, as debate on immigration reform has begun in the Senate, I offer a little tale inspired by the words of a Swedish American.

Andersonville, Chicago

It’s Thursday morning and Senators are rising to speak on the Senate floor – and they all do so as descendants of immigrants. And as Senator David Vitter of Louisiana just said, all Senators begin their speeches by detailing their own family’s history. So, here is one Senator‘s story and how it seems to have taught him nothing.

Johnny Isakson, the junior Senator from Georgia, rose to speak:

“Mr. President, in 1903, Andrew Bengsten boarded a ship and left Sweden, the son of Isak Bengsten. He landed on Ellis Island and took the last name Isakson, which is the Scandinavian tradition, to take the father's first name and add ``son'' to it. In 1916, he had a son named Ed, and in 1926 he became a naturalized citizen.
He went to West Texas as a laborer, and later on to Atlanta, GA as a carpenter. In 1944, his son Ed and Ed's wife Julia had a son, who by the grace of God is me. No one in this body has any greater respect or admiration for this great country and our process of legal immigration than I.

As we approach the most important debate this Senate will encounter in this session, it is important that it be a debate of dignity and a debate of substance and a debate where we learned the lessons of the past and make sure that immigration in the future holds the same promise it held for my grandfather 103 years ago." (continue reading the Senator's statement)

Välkommen! Swedish for Welcome. This bridge in Lindsborg, Kansas conveys the spirit that greeted Grandpa Isak when he immigrated to the U.S. His grandson should embrace this heritage.
(c) All the Pages

The Senator went on to talk about how no one supports legal immigration – without which he would not be an American, even less a Senator – like he does. What is seemingly forever lost on him is that when Grandpa Isak arrived from Sweden, he was no different than the Mexican that crossed the border yesterday. Both came empty-handed without much education, both had a dream, both were attracted by work prospects, both left friends, family and their lives behind. And both used the available channel to enter the U.S.

For the fact is that today there is no Ellis Island and thus the Grandpa Isaksons of 2006 are automatically declared persona non gratas and become part of the undocumented, the irregular, the illegal class. If you recognize that fundamental fact – then you realize that the first thing the broken immigration system needs is another Ellis Island. And the last thing it needs is a fence.

As the debate continues on the Senate floor, I sign off with a few links with varying perspectives:

First, the anti-immigration/restrictionist/border fanatics’ main spokesman, Representative Tom Tancredo of Colorado was on C-Span this morning (click here to listen).

Then, the conservative movement’s top pundit George Will offers sobering “non zero-sum” advice (thanks JH) to the shrill in his party. Yes, you can have your border cake and eat it too. But you can also embrace the historical legacy of this country.

Finally, the great immigrant city of Chicago has taken a stance against the Tancredos of this world. In the spirit of times gone by, the City Council has announced plans not to enforce any federal crackdowns on immigrants.

Chicago knows and understands immigration. In the Andersonville neighborhood, the Swedes of yesterday have been followed by new communities of Americans, Middle Eastern and Hispanic among others. It is still home to two Swedish landmarks, Erickson’s Delicatessen and the Swedish American Museum Center. May I be so bold as to suggest Senator Isakson pay Andersonville (and Lindsborg) a visit. There is much to learn about the circumstances that led to their becoming part of the American fabric. Maybe the Senator will see a connection to the present....

jo

Subjects: immigration, Politics, border, current affairs; MEXICO, united states; immigration reform; Illegal immigration; undocumented; Swedish American; diversity; Chicago

Immigration Reform on the Hill and Beyond part I

2006-03-29T08:46:00.000-05:00

This week has seen a flurry of activity by activists, pundits, politicians, legislators and media in the immigration field. And most importantly – for they are part of the fabric and are rarely asked – the voices of the immigrants themselves have been heard. It has been mostly heartening and highly overwhelming trying to follow this. As promised, here’s an attempt to highlight a few developments. In addition, either today or tomorrow, immigration reform will hit the Senate floor, from where I hope to report.

White House Shuffle

Today, President Bush heads to Mexico where he will have a chance to discuss immigration, especially the guest worker programs, with his Mexican counterpart, President Fox. This marks an opportunity for the two to repair damage done since the aftermath of the September 11th attacks buried any hope of then pending immigration reform.

Bush has been pushing for the kind of immigration reform that puts him in the middle of his own Republican party, which is bitterly split between fear-mongers and reasonable folks. And on Monday the President got this immigration week off to an auspicious and highly symbolic start by attending a naturalization ceremony.

The venue was the Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR), an interesting – and fairly controversial - organization in its own right. But this aside, the event amply shone the spotlight on the role of immigration in the U.S., both today and historically. Without ignoring security concerns etc., it was a way to remind the nay-sayers on the left and right that immigration was, is and will be positive for all involved.

(c) REUTERS/Larry Downing

So in my book, presiding over a U.S. Citizenship ceremony at DAR of all places, was an excellent move. It’s always about politics, especially for a troubled administration, but that doesn’t make it wrong. As Bush said:

“For some of you, this day comes after a long and difficult journey. For all of you, this is a defining moment in your lives. America is now more than your home; America is your country. It is inspiring to see people of many different ages, many different countries raise their hands and swear an oath to become citizens of the United States of America. Those of us who have been citizens for many years have responsibilities, as well. Helping new citizens assimilate is a mission that unites Americans by choice and by birth….At its core, immigration is a sign of a confident and successful nation. It says something about our country that people around the world are willing to leave their homes and leave their families and risk everything to come to America….The immigration debate should be conducted in a civil and dignified way. No one should play on people's fears, or try to pit neighbors against each other. No one should pretend that immigrants are threats to American identity, because immigrants have shaped America's identity.”

With his pen in hand, ready to sign something coming out of Congress, he continues to advocate reform, waiting, waiting….

And meanwhile over on the Hill

It took most of Monday, but in the face of rather dire prospects, the Senate Judiciary Committee managed to put together a real immigration reform bill – this as opposed to the one proposed by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee. Under the guidance of Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, marks and amendments were hung out to twist and turn in the wind, shop was talked and emotions were put on display. At around 6:30 pm, a vote was taken and the bill passed 12-6, i.e. with four Republicans votes. There were reports of rare applause.
I cannot imagine that many readers of the Swamp are planning to watch this mammoth session, but for those who are interested, click here (morning session) and here (afternoon session with dramatic conclusion). Two highlight: 2 hours 1 minute 25 seconds and then 2 hours 44 minutes 25 seconds, both the afternoon session.

All I want to say here is that the caliber of the debate was impressive. For once the immigration issue was handled with nuance. The kind of nuance that is entirely absent in the House of Representatives Bill 4437, which was adopted in December. For more on that, check out Migra Matters’ excellent reporting.

In the Committee room, the most eloquent voices were those of Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona – on the more restrictive side. And then on the more progressive side, Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts – whose concern for immigration is genuine and whose brother the late President Kennedy put an end to the pre-1965 discriminatory immigration laws – and Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. It was the latter who uttered words that I will never forget. He reminded us of a simple reality that all too often gets lost in the shrill debate:

“…The 11 million undocumented people are also workers....we couldn’t get by as a nation without those workers and those people. And the question is sending them ‘home’. I would just throw this out for some consideration…what do you mean by ‘home’? ....for some they’ve been here so long that they can’t imagine that where they live is not home. And that’s the real debate here. Where is home and where do you want home to be?….some don’t know where to go, their home is where they’ve raised their children, their home is where they’ve lived their married lives. And we have allowed, rightly or wrongly, for that home to be established.” (my transcription, his emphasis)

Amen. Realize the positive and assume some responsibility. Watching his entire statement (the second highlight alluded to above) is very worthwhile, especially given his lovely Southern drawl and the fact that this was ‘stream of consciousness’ rambling. The Senator had just returned from China and his biological clock was out of whack. Then he went on to call the bluff of those hucksters screaming “Amnesty!”, the concept bandied about by those who oppose bringing undocumented, exploited workers out of the shadows.

According to the senior senator from South Carolina, the only real amnesty sought was of the political kind some seem keen to secure. He was referring to those politicians that are trying to have their cake and eat it too, “wanting the ability to talk about this and not make anybody mad. Well, I’m afraid that’s just not going to happen.” Exactly, show some leadership, folks!

And over on the House side, the HR 4437 restrictionists who stir up fear – and then exploit this by claiming to be listening to their constituents – are having second thoughts. House Majority Leader John Boehner is reconsidering his love for the fence along the U.S.-Mexico border. It seems all it took was a visit to the border to hear how unworkable the idea is. Now, you would have thought that this kind of field trip would have useful before the vote last December.

As this analysis piece in the Washington Post shows, the road ahead is long and full of potholes. And in the next entry, I will offer some critical comments on the bill that emerged out of the committee as well as highlight the role of the immigrants in this whole debate. Their showing at rallies – and thus being absent from workplaces – has been sobering for those with their heads in the sand.

(to be continued…)

jo

Subjects: immigration, Politics, border, current affairs; MEXICO, united states; immigration reform; Illegal immigration; undocumented

The Dutch in 1910, plus the German Citizenship Test

2006-03-27T04:20:00.000-05:00

To my mind, this photo - taken in 1910 - resonates with my last post.

It is of a Dutch family immigrating to Canada, arriving at Pier 21 in Halifax, Nova Scotia. This was the Ellis Island of Canada, and is now also host to a museum every bit as impressive as the one on the Hudson River. Please visit when you have the chance.

As for Dutch Immigration Minister Rita Verdonk, she should have (re)visited them yesterday.

jo

PS For the German speakers out there, I recommend taking the mini-citizenship test. The questions are real. Echt? Ja wohl! (Courtesy of the Suddeutsche Zeitung, click here)

I did pretty well, tanking only on the cultural questions - which seemed kind of arbitrary. No, not just because I was proven ignorant :-)

PPS Also found a Dutch equivalent: Nederlands speakers, check it out and report back to the Swamp.

Subjects: immigration, Immigration Reform, Politics, border, current affairs; germany; Europe; Holland, Netherlands, Politics,

Before Immigration Reform hits Gucci Gulch, it's High Noon in Euroland

2006-03-24T11:21:00.000-05:00

Update: March 27. Now with some photos. Please check the Swamp later for some fresh reporting on the U.S. immigration debate.

Next week, it’s immigration showdown at Gucci Gulch. The Senate’s Judiciary Committee will try to hammer out a compromise out of the competing bills put forward by Senators, both serious and those less so. Over on the House side, the rhetoric is harsher and thus the final conference may yet see an even flatter deal.

While, the Swamp intends to offer some commentary on the bills and debates from Monday on, I thought I’d link to three stories setting the scene: one from the liberal paper in town and the other from the conservative one. Here’s the Washington Post’s take on things, and here’s the Washington Times. And here’s Marc Cooper of the Nation summarizing the mood in some greater detail, click here. For up-to-date blogging on immigration, I can highly recommend Migra Matters.

But if you think the debate in the U.S. is wacky, out of touch, redundant, overdue…this post’s purpose to highlight some immigration surrealities over in Europe. Immigration issues there tend to lie dormant until some cultural/identity issues crops up. Then the indifference – the true word behind the concept of ‘tolerance’ – is magically turned into concern and sham debates. As for discussions of actual immigration policy – who to admit to Fortress Europe – they never get anywhere since the 25 member states have 50 different opinions, if they have a coherent one at all.

Anyway, the ruckus in Germany and Holland that I’m going to touch on (rest assured, there are kindred spirits in every other country save Iceland) revolves around the same ol’, same ol’: language, assimilation and citizenship. I don’t know if all folks on this side of the Atlantic will find the goings-on in Euroland as silly as I do. Nor do all Euros object to this label. But when we talk about how immigration is a hot-button issue everywhere, it’s not a bad idea to know in what way.

The shenanigans all act to show how a supposedly post-modern and enlightened continent remains stuck in a homogenous past that never was, preach one thing and yearn for another and keeps trying to eat the cake it simply never bothered to bake in the first place. Diversity is lauded but feared – Chinatown in New York is cool, but Turktown Kreuzberg in Berlin is not – Swedish, German, Dutch identities are simply static and live on a zero-sum path to nowhere. To make things worse (or better) no one knows how to deal with the European Union project. And so identities are challenged from above, below, here, there and everywhere.

For great background information on Europe, and elsewhere, as well as data and monthly commentary, I strongly suggest checking out (and subscribing to) the Migration Policy Institute's awesome "Migration Information Source".

OK, after that intro-rant, here are the three specific cases.

Dutch (Un)delights

As of March 15, the Dutch Ministry of Justice’s Immigration and Naturalization Service (this is must click!) now requires, among other things, that prospective immigrants endure a Welcome to Holland video. Given that there had been no such thing during the previous decades of immigration; the idea was a little late in coming. And given that the thrust appears to be to dissuade rather than attract immigrants, its stated intent is a worthy follow-up to decades of indifference masked as tolerance.

This Evert Elzinga photo (c) Associated Press shows what the Holland film portends to depict. I wonder: who's tolerant and of what?

In addition, EU nationals will be exempt (it’s EU law) and more interestingly, so will Canadian, American, Australian, New Zealander and Japanese wannabe Dutchies. This is a tad strange since these cosmopolitans are just as unaware of some of the realities depicted in the film. Then again, if they saw it, they would probably think twice about moving to the Netherlands.

The film, which is part of a broader civic education package (the link is to the bizarro-world official “Coming to Netherlands” site ) – from which all rich immigrants and Westerners are also exempt – shows some “raunchy” scenes with e.g. a topless sunbather and a gay couple kissing. (In the Iran edition, these parts are omitted since such depictions are against the ‘law.’) This is patronizing and silly – e.g. Canada and the U.S. either assume that immigrants are aware of such things or will soon be informed thereof. And anyway, there are plenty of nationals within the enlightened West who have big beefs with diversity. But the movie shows immigrants a uniformity of native opinion. Perhaps the landed gentry should watch this on the silver screen….

Here is a link to the film's intro (in Dutch and requires Apple's Quicktime).

To my mind, the most telling segments are not the sexual-related bits that have grabbed all the attention for obvious reasons – but the ones showing daily life for immigrants in Holland. They depict a life stuck on welfare, facing discrimination, living in projects etc as what most likely awaits the immigrant! This is the greatest admission of failure imaginable AND simultaneously an admission that Holland cannot change its ways. And of course, for effect it exaggerates to the max. BTW, does anyone remember Australia’s infamous shark/snake infested ‘informational’ videos meant to deter asylum-seekers?

In both cases, the makers of these little jewels of a movie tried their hardest to show how nasty, dangerous, unwelcoming etc. their beloved countries actually are. Daily life there, however, is not that bad. But they do inadvertently demonstrate official strains of xenophobia: state-funded propaganda just to keep certain folks away from their paradise. Anyway....

There are some success stories in the Holland film, but they are ‘exceptions’. So I can see why the selective Dutch authorities don’t want Westerners seeing the film. If e.g. an average Canadian watched this film before migrating, he/she might reconsider their decision. I mean, leaving a society that deals with diversity as commonplace for one that is so torn and conflicted is not exactly appealing.

Gunther and Mehmet Down by the Schoolyard

Meanwhile over in Germany, there is less concern with newcomers than with those already there. Not all that surprising since net migration (immigration – emigration = Net Migration) is close to zero. So what’s on everyone’s mind is if second and third generation youth are learning German. This and who should be allowed to become a citizen.

My humble solutions: i.e. stop panicking; people are learning Deutsch and people born and/or raised there should have a right to become citizens, carry little weight in this tempest. Instead, a Berlin school recently introduced the following rule to its long list of “don’ts”, no foreign languages allowed. So next to no smoking, no spitting, no spicy food etc. there’s no Turkish, no Urdu, no this, no that. Unless of course, it’s English…now that kind of bilingualism is just hunky-dory and peachy clean.

At this Berlin-Spandau high school (click on the link for more nice photos), teenagers are still free to speak in any lingo, including slang.

The debate is pretty much beyond rationale dialogue, especially since it’s shrouded in that treacherous veneer of reasonableness and common sense (click here and here for two such examples). We want to help the kids etc. Well-established facts like that bi/multi-lingualism is not detrimental - but quite normal AND not useless in today's world - have gone out with the bathwater. So what is the reality? These kids actually speak German and the reasons they may not find work after graduation are entirely different.

I am talking about the rigid labor market that creates no jobs, and even worse, the education in the lower-tier schools that wouldn’t qualify the students for such a job if it did exist. The diplomas earned there are meant for a bygone era and do not even allow a person to enter any college or university. But since changing any or all of that sorry state of affairs would require….I dunno, something concrete, expect nothing. And thus, the time as always is ripe for scapegoating, side-tracking, smoke screens and silliness.

To my not very great surprise, the Herbert Hoover High School (U.S. President Hoover had some ties to Berlin) is now being rewarded for its efforts (link in German). The Helga and Edzard Reuter Foundation – he is the former head of Daimler (Mercedes Benz) Chrysler and son of a legendary Berlin mayor – is awarding the school 15,000 Euros with the following motivation: “ (For treading down) an exemplary, courageous path of fostering a flourishing togetherness in Germany between people with different ethnic, religious or cultural background”. Are you kidding me?

Those who have objected to the language ban are told that it was actually the students, parents and teachers who democratically elected to go down this road. Even if that is true, that would be the result of the prevailing climate of indifference and it still doesn’t address the real challenges mentioned above. Everyone’s been conned. Go figure.

In addition, the nationalistic Turkish press has gotten involved and called it all an anti-Turkish conspiracy. This has led folks in Germany to conclude that with such characters being against the idea, it simply must be a good one. This kind of faulty logic was applied recently during the Danish Cartoon Wars, i.e. because fundamentalist Islamists called Denmark’s bluff, that was taken as proof positive that it wasn’t one. Pretty spurious stuff, courtesy of those who simply can’t stay off the Kool Aid.

To become a citizen, please reveal your innermost thoughts

OK, to conclude a very brief mention of the latest in the sorriest saga of them all, the arbitrary surreality, tentatively called “You want to become German? Not in this lifetime!” The background is that Germany finally changed its pre WWI bloodline-based citizenship law in 2000, and made it somewhat easier to become a German national. But the muddled compromise was just that, and it remains temptingly controversial.

And so it was expected that it would be hijacked in 2006, during which a slew of various local and regional elections loom. It all started back in January when Baden-Württemberg drafted a citizenship questionnaire that seemed clearly meant to probe the opinions of Muslims. That’s an understatement: only nationals of the 57 member states of the Organization of the Islamic Conference are subject to the test. This kind of discrimination and thought control is naturally controversial in Germany of all places. But anything goes in these times.

This type of U.S. citizenship ceremony (click on the link for a photo essay) has attracted interest during the German electoral season. My question: Do they really understand the spirit that lies behind this?

Ahead of this weekend’s state elections, party big-wigs – including Edmund Stoiber of Bavaria and even Chancellor Angela Merkel, i.e. folks NOT on the ballot – have been making similar overtures to the riled and frenzied base. This led the Green politician Volker Beck to quip: “It’s now easier to win 100,000 Euros on a TV quiz show than to become a German citizen.” If you’re interested in the kind of questions on these questionnaires, just click on the links above. Rest assured, however, that they are of a twofold nature:

a) the kind that most Germans couldn’t answer

b) the kind that most German wouldn’t answer (due to their unconstitutionality)

So, that’s a sampling of what’s happening on distant shores while Senators McCain, Kennedy, Kyl duke it out as Representative Tancredo lurks in his own shadow, ready to pounce.

Finally – just as I’m about to post this, it’s that slow Friday afternoon in Brussels – here’s the very latest crackpot idea, courtesy of the Daily Telegraph’s great David Rennie: the European Union Integration Contract! The gist of this? To make immigrants sign some kind of inane pre-nuptial agreement, and this is before they would have to watch all manner of tax-payer financed movies and answer quixotic questionnaires - all of which also cost the prospective immigrant big money.

Talk about lacking any self-confidence in one’s own culture and its ability to adapt. In Euroland, people are falling over themselves to come up with ideas like this. Here in the U.S., the fear is less-related to culture/identity – though there are the Samuel Huntingtons out there – but there are concerted attempts to create a panic about borders and security. Tune in next week when the Swamp will address more of that jabberwocky.

jo

Subjects: immigration, Immigration Reform, Politics, border, current affairs; berlin wall; germany; Europe; Holland, Netherlands, Islam, Politics, berlin

A Foreign National Lunches at Census

2006-03-19T17:57:00.000-05:00

What’s the first thing that comes to mind when someone says “Census”? Well, in one deep recess of my mind, I think of fava beans and a nice Chianti. Luckily, that pop culture trivia part of my brain has now been supplanted by a far more pleasant Census memory. Courtesy of an insider – Khop Khun Mak Krab, you know who you are :-) I have now been to the real Census Bureau and to boot, we actually had lunch there.

Situated in rather infamous Suitland, Maryland - like my current host town of Laurel, in the equally notorious Prince George’s County, just outside of Washington D.C - Census is a gigantic bureaucracy of some 12,000 employees. But as an immigration buff, I can assure you that this is one part of government that does not merit being accused of wasting tax payers’ money.

Census Taker without risk.
(c) U.S. Census Bureau

OK, maybe a little, but it simply collects vital information that can be used by lovers of small and big government alike. And similarly, the kind of data Census (ongoing surveys as well as the decennial Census - next one is in 2010) collects on minorities and related language usage, income, education etc. is used by all sides of any immigration debate and by any serious scholar. Simply indispensable. OK, some demographers do seem to disagree with the latest estimates....Census retorts here.

Indispensable, you say? Well, in the U.S. Thomas Jefferson himself oversaw the first Census (population count) in 1790, a year after the adoption of the Constitution – Article 1, Section 2 explicitly mandates that a census be taken every ten years. This was necessary in order to divvy up the seats in Congress.

But the 1790 Census (photo copyright U.S. Census Bureau) carried out by U.S, Marshals on horseback, is a testament to much more than the fact that there were some 3.9 inhabitants in the young country. As the eminent historian Joseph J. Ellis recounts in his brilliant “Founding Brothers”, it also enumerated the shame of slavery and the subjugation of women. Only heads of household, i.e. men, were officially interviewed and slaves were listed as a third category after “Free White” and “Other Than White Free Persons”.

Ellis brings up the Census to show the absurdity of the slavery (non) debate during the Constitutional Convention. The numbers showed that the black population was growing, adding urgency to an issue that only a few brave souls – mainly Quakers – dared touch. And while the Southern States had the most slaves, the Census shows very high numbers for the states of New York and New Jersey as well.

OK, back to 2006. Off I went on the Metro, arriving right on time at the first obstacle. I was supposed to produce some ID and then mosey on over to the shuttle bus, which would take me to my host. But there was a problem: my ID is a foreign passport. So, I could not take the shuttle….from that particular location. As the nice security guard told me how to walk around the perimeter – of a supposedly dangerous area, though it was daylight – he said “You sure don’t sound like a foreigner, don’t you have a DC driver’s license or something?”

Alas I do not, so I had to walk around a construction site and 5 minutes later I was at another gate. Here, folks were just as friendly and I had to sign in and wait inside a make-shift booth. Finally, I was rescued by my host. But as we tried to walk the last few yards to freedom, we were foiled once more. “Foreign nationals have to take the shuttle and cannot walk in through the gate!”

So onboard we hopped, went for a little spin through the parking lot and came to a halt in front of one of the many buildings. I was now taken on a grand tour, saw the famed Population Clock and met some of the nicest government employees to date.

I mentioned construction and as it happens, Census is about to move into a flash, new headquarters in Suitland. The project is a Maryland,U.S.A.-Sweden enterprise as it is being built by Skanska, USA. This company is also known for building the “love bridge” between Denmark and Sweden. Here’s an article explaining the sad reasons behind that moniker.

The old buildings are indeed a bit worn and decrepit with very cavernous hallways. At the bottom is a cafeteria of some size. We both opted for some tasty soul food (not unlike the photo) with fruit for dessert: beats fava beans any day! And after thanking my host, I walked down a long corridor and into the light of day. Leaving was a piece of cake, I exited the way I could not enter.

Signing off from a region of significant demographic growth.

jo

Subjects: immigration, demography, census, population, Maryland

Fence Me In!

2006-03-09T09:16:00.000-05:00

Update: Now with uncontroversial political cartoons and more links!

The immigration debate is heating up in the U.S. Never far off anyone’s radar screen – well, save for those polling cowards who would rather not touch it with a barge pole – the recent brouhaha is tied to supposed legislative attempts at fixing the immigration system.

In today’s Washington Post, pundit Robert Samuelson enters the fray with support for the Fence. The Fence? Yes, some kind of fence along the southern border with Mexico. Mr. Samuelson, an economist by training, is playing the usual alarmist game. He tries to sound reasonable by accepting that some data and trends show that no fence would be necessary. Assimilation is happening; wages are not being depressed etc etc.

But in order to demand a fence he prefers looking at the data that might show other tendencies. He then attributes more weight to those numbers since they support his position. Nice work, Mr. Economist.

He cites a study by Rakesh Kochkar of the Pew Hispanic Center that purports to show that things are going to go to hell. That the American melting pot will boil over, that immigration must be halted because there were ‘pauses’ in the past. But these pauses were the result of restrictive legislation in an era of bigotry, limited mobility and closed economies. Mr. Samuelson, you may have remained the same, but the times have changed!

This kind of zero-sum thinking – basically protectionist racism in the guise of ‘common sense’ that is based on distorted readings of history – gets nobody anywhere. And far from granting candor to any immigration debate (this is what he claims to yearn for) it represents a willful continuation of disinformation.

Unfortunately for Samuelson, the study he cites is far more complex then he portrays it. And even more unfortunately, on the very day of his cri de coeur the same Pew Hispanic Center put out another study - this one by Jeffrey Passel (click here to see an interview) - on illegal/irregular/unauthorized migrants, which further exposes the pundit's charlatanesque ways.

Guess he forgot to cite that one, so allow me to point out some of its findings. That nearly half of the migrants are women, i.e. not bands of roving young men. That families make up the bulk of that population, including many American born children. That some 94% of adults are working, paying taxes etc. That the large majority of migrants have high school educations and that their children are likely to do better, and attend college.

Yes, all is not rosy but it never was and never will be. Swedish peasants, who arrived during the roughly 70 year period beginning c. 1840, were themselves not upper middle class folks. In my humble opinion, the reality does warrant a keen look at new legislation – I will discuss this as the debates hit the floors of Congress – legislation that does include the maligned Amnesty, or legalizing the unauthorized. Of course.

In the past, the borders were open so no one was illegal. My ancestors came en masse and were 'legal'. The amnesty was already at hand. Think about that. And now some want to build a fence. Forget that, the only fence in sight is the one extending from Samuelson’s mind, shielding his tunnel vision from reality. And that one will be torn down as well.

jo

Subjects: immigration, Immigration Reform, Politics, border, current affairs; berlin wall

Mats Sundin's Olympic Golden Glory

2006-02-27T16:27:00.000-05:00

Mats Sundin
(c) Magnus Wennman, Aftonbladet

Mats Sundin is the real King of Sweden, and as a consequence his country claimed the Olympic Gold Medals in Men’s Ice Hockey. History sometimes definitely does repeat itself, and even when basking in golden glory, the Swampmeister cannot escape the politics of it all. Read on for these lessons - and their assorted tangents – from the past fortnight in Turin.

So, the Wooley Swamp has been paying plenty of attention to Olympic events on the ice rinks in Turin or Torino (even the Italians do not have one name for the place). No, not the figure skating, the short track, the speed skating, the curling or the ice sculpting. I am talking about HOCKEY sur glace.

This is the main event of the Winter Olympics, akin to the track and field races at the Summer Games. It sees the best players in the world playing for country rather than pay check. Blazing speed, hard checking, scintillating shots....In short: heaven for hockey geeks.

Mats Sundin

Captaining Team Sweden’s quest to avenge past humiliations (see below) was one Mats Sundin, native of Stockholm (unusual since most players still come from smaller towns like Örnsköldsvik - Eagle Shield Bay - in the Arctic regions) and resident of the great Canadian metropolis of Toronto, where he captains the legendary Maple Leafs.

Doing what he does best, ´Sudden´ driving the net (c) Elsa, Getty Images

Sundin has been around for ages, and is close in age to this blogger outta Stockholm, so the connect is stronger than usual. But there is more to it all: he is a talismanic player with a unique style that all can appreciate. With the hands of Raphael, the wingspan of an albatross and the legs of an ox, he is extremely hard to defend against. When he takes off down the ice, it is power of a jumbo jet you are witnessing. An unstoppable force leaving ice, air and players in its wake.

While he has won personal accolades, minor tournaments and league championships, he has never gone all the way. Until yesterday that is. So it was poetic justice that he helped set up the game-winning goal, silkily dropping the puck to legendary defenseman Nicklas Lidström, who blasted it past the tough Finnish goalie, Antero Niitymäki.

Sundin had actually lost the preceding face-off to open the period, but the third great man on the ice, the inimitable Peter Forsberg had collected the puck and fed it to his center man. Forsberg is generally considered one of the world’s best players, and scored the winning goal on an outrageous penalty shot (e-mail me for the video clip) for Sweden’s only other Olympic win in Lillehammer 1994. (Click here for another great video with highlights from his career and that of his childhood friend, Vancouver captain Markus Näslund.)

In Norway, the professionals were not allowed to play, so Sundin (already in Canada) was not there. Not so this time. And Forsberg summed it up best “This one was for Mats Sundin”

Sweden? You mean Switzerland? Or Slovakia?

Oh yeah, I almost forgot the heroics of the goalie, young Henrik Lundqvist. This Broadway poster boy, he plays for the New York Rangers, made the save of a lifetime against Olli Jokinen (see photo, that is the puck!) There were only 30 seconds left in the game....click here and here for great New York Times stories on their hometown hero. His helmet has the Three Crowns of Sweden on one side, and the Statue of Liberty on the other. My kind of symbolism.

As for history repeating itself: Well, Sweden didn’t lose in the quarterfinals again, but it was still déjà vu in the Swamp. You see, 12 years ago, I was also in a Washington area living room watching Sweden contest an Olympic hockey final played in Europe. That time I was staring at the screen in Rosslyn, Virginia (of Watergate, “Deep Throat” fame) and the opponent was the Brazil of hockey, Canada. This time in Laurel, Maryland (interesting history too) the bout was against Sweden’s kid brother, Suomi-Finland. Outcome both times: Gold.

Coincidence? Whatever.

Anyway, here are some (short) assorted comments on the tournament itself. Judging by the Swedish media frenzy following the gold medal game, you would think they had believed in the team all along. But this was not the case. First they hyped them, then tore them to shreds, and now they try to bask in the glow of the achievement of others. Same goes for a bunch of bandwagon-pessimist-fair-weather fans.

Reporting from New Jersey a few days ago I wrote:

“Today, it’s quarterfinals day and all four winners will be playing for medals while the losers go home without any chance of collecting heavy metal. The match-ups are the result of the bizarre preliminary round format: two groups of six teams from which four from each advance. Basically, they play five games to find out who they play in one sudden-death elimination game.

What does that mean? Well, your team might wind up playing a very strong team in the quarterfinals if you finish in the ‘wrong’ position in your group. And thus you can potentially avoid that fate by losing a game on purpose. Naturally, this is considered unsportsmanlike and against the unwritten hockey code. Still, you’re playing for medals and the pressures are immense.

So, here we are with Sweden playing Switzerland, and that only because Sweden lost to Slovakia yesterday. This is great for lots of reasons, but especially because these “S” countries are always confused with each other. So you have the commentators on MSNBC saying things like ´Sweden just scored the first goal of the game…Those Swiss are great on the power play. Switzerland 1 Sweden 0.´

It’s been that way my whole life, and thus I have often been called Swiss. The slip-up does tend to occur in English-speaking countries, but it has happened several times in Germany as well. Which is even odder since Switzerland is partially German-speaking. Still, there is a yearning to call them Swedes or less often Swedes, Swiss.

Slovakia, admittedly, doesn’t sound much like the other two but as a ‘new’ country, it’s bound to happen. And their hockey is also very different, it’s pretty awesome. So beating Sweden isn’t that unheard of, but the Swedish media would have none of it. Instead they immediately started up a campaign accusing the Three Crowns (team nickname and Sweden’s national emblem) of throwing the game and bringing shame to the homeland and disrepute to the sport.

All the websites have filled with lurid allegations, conspiracy theories and wild speculation. The media wanted to stir things up a little and the poor souls who had tickets to an essentially meaningless game wanted someone to pay for their gamble. To me it all seems extremely contrived and the comments from the rest of the world have basically been: SO WHAT?

Sweden’s professionals handled the game just as any others would have. They tried, but in this case came up short against a very good team. They knew they would likely (but it wasn’t for sure) play against Switzerland with that result, instead of playing everyone’s nightmare, Team Canada.

What everyone seems to be forgetting is that in the 2002 Salt Lake City Games: due to early good play Sweden wound up playing a weaker opponent, hockey minnow Belarus. The result? Sweden lost 3-2 in the most humiliating loss in Olympic hockey history. So the idea that Sweden would go out of its way to play another team that could upset them, Switzerland, is preposterous. Especially when Switzerland is coming off wins against the 1998 Gold Medalists the Czech Republic and 2002 Champs Canada.”

Even after Sweden’s early loss to Russia – a pretty comprehensive 5-0 thrashing – I felt no sense of panic. But once again the media, and various “fans”, missed the point and were baying for the blood of the heroes they now call their own. To win you need to peak at the right time, play a smart tournament and bring home the gold.

That is what Canada did last time and the Czechs in 1998. Everyone knows that, you would think. Canada, so deep in talent that it could leave ten A-teams off the roster, is not making excuses- IF they don’t win at home in Vancouver in four years time, I will eat humble pie from here to eternity. No one else is making excuses. So it was sad to read that kind of premature vulturism early on in the tournament. Luckily, they all have amnesia now.

Fellow finalists Finland had a great tournament, but it is not making excuses after losing a close final. Finland great Teemu Selänne is their equivalent of Sundin, so there are many real hockey fans who would have been thrilled to see him with the gold as well. Yours truly included.

Sverige-Ruotsi & Suomi-Finland

And this leads us into the last lesson of the day. How to be humble and show respect for history and acknowledge reality.

REAL respect between two great players, Selänne and Sundin, (c) Mike Blake, Reuters

The day before the final, a Swedish tabloid encouraged Finns to emigrate to Sweden if they wanted to partake in golden glory. The paper even provided links to the necessary immigration documents. Color me humorless, but I found this pathetic and chauvinistic.

For perspective, I refer you to the seven centuries of Swedish colonization, with Finland then being taken over by Russia after Sweden’s wartime adventures had overstretched its little empire. And then following World War II, during which Sweden had escaped harm due to its questionable/dishonorable “neutrality” while Finland had fought back the Soviet armies and lost territory – there was a large-scale labor migration from Finland to Sweden. The rich former colonial master imported labor if you will.

This kind of guest worker migration happened all over Europe back then, but rest assured that this particular wave resonated in a unique way. Add to this mix, the existence of significant Swedish-speaking minority in Finland, one that is perceived as well-off, and you can begin to imagine that some of the ´friendly´ jibes from big brother Sweden are more than a little overbearing.

But the Swedish tone media is rather tone-deaf and the population at large knows close to nothing about Finland. Oh well, you gotta pity them. Some wise folks have compared this to how some Americans perceive Canada and Canadians. With the major difference that the American media does not insult Canada (except for Conan O´Brien and Jon Stewart, who just mock it mildly and in so doing know that they are betraying their own ignorance). And that the histories are nowhere near as entangled.

And finally since I’ve mentioned Canada in a couple of different contexts above, let me tie those together with one final thought, which I believe is worthy of some reflection. Both Sweden and Canada see themselves as hockey-powers and lovers. But who plays hockey in those countries, and who watches it? How representative are these folks of the general population, majority and minority? And what does all this say about how the countries deal with immigration, diversity – indeed how they perceive themselves?

When you think of the French national soccer team, you think of a group that is more than representative: it shows France’s diversity to the world and to France itself. Conversely, in Germany this is not the case: all Turkish Germans wind up playing for Turkey.

Now, hockey is not exactly a global game and the chances that immigrants from all over have grown up in societies where the sport was even played are not great. It is also an expensive sport, not like polo, but still not cheap with all the equipment. In this sense, it is not soccer. So, even in an immigration society like Canada, the players remain mainly Anglo and French Canadian.

But this is likely changing in the junior ranks or it at least it will. For if you go to any hockey game in cities like Vancouver, Montreal and Toronto you will see the diversity amidst the spectators to a greater degree than on the ice. Over time, Canada’s ethos of immigration and love for hockey will converge.

But back in Mats Sundin’s Stockholm, this is simply not the case yet. And I wonder if this will change anytime soon. For him this must be so odd. I mean, he now plays for the Toronto Maple Leafs and thus lives in the one of the most diverse cities in the world.

Today, large crowds gathered on the main square in Stockholm to greet their heroes from yesterday. As Sundin looked out into the crowd, he would have been hard-pressed to see the diverse reality that exists in today’s Stockholm. If he lifts the Stanley Cup later this year – the Leafs have been deprived of it since 1967, an eternity – a very different sight will greet him.

What I share with him is a love for the game and a hope that Stockholm will become a Toronto. That it will embrace its future. I wonder if anyone in the Swedish media or many in the majority population are even thinking about this. But those who are excluded from what is supposed to be a ‘national’ celebration, almost certainly are.

And there is no reason in the world not to consider this aspect, while screaming that Sundin is the real king of Sweden. Simple multi-tasking. Next summer, some may be screaming that Zlatan Ibrahimovic is the real king of Sweden. Now that would be revolutionary.

EPILOGUE:

To ‘console’ my Canadian host (while celebrating a little) we headed off to Sweden’s Embassy in the beautiful state of Maryland, the IKEA at College Park. Felt an urge to read off the random names on the furniture – which are all geographic locations, names or just plain Swedish words – and pick up some Swedish fish. Oh yeah, and chow down on some meatballs.

jo

Subjects: ice hockey, ice-hockey, history, Olympics, Canada, Sweden, Finland, Immigration, diversity, Culture

Cartoons part III

2006-02-16T11:45:00.000-05:00

Update: 21 February 2006. In the Sunday Washington Post, Flemming Rose, the editor who commissioned and then helped get the cartoons published, offered his take on the controversy. You might want to compare this with the comments he made in this February 7th C-Span interview, (1:56:27 into the program).

---

Since my last two posts (click here and here) I've found a couple articles that I believe add to an understanding of the cartoon issue. Yes, there's an endless stream, but I cannot resist. If there are any other major developments, please let me know.

For now, I note that the shrill folks continue to see proof of all kinds of things. It is my sincere conviction that if you really think about this, you will see that is patently not the case. Instead there's reason to rejoice: for these hypocrites are just continuing to expose themselves, and we can see them all the clearer for it.

The Washington Post today has an excellent investigative piece on the chronology of the whole affair. And there is also an interesting Q&A online discussion with Beirut-based correspondent Anthony Shadid, one of the journalists who wrote the piece.

Another aspect that I only tangently touched upon - the role of religion in Europe - is the subject of a New Republic article (require FREE registration) by editor Peter Beinert. It discusses some differences between the U.S. - and Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the U.K. - on the one hand and Europe on the other, highlighting that it's not just about immigration or diversity, but also about a certain respect and comfort in relation to religion. Under the lovely headline "What Bush Understands and the Danes Do Not" Beinert writes:

"Of course, the Danish newspaper had the right to publish them. But, in doing so, it revealed a particularly European prejudice, one that the United States must take care not to repeat.

The prejudice is not simply against Islam. Rather, it stems from Europe's--or at least Western Europe's--inability to take religion seriously at all. As my colleague Spencer Ackerman has written ("Religious Protection," December 12, 2005), one reason Muslims find it harder to integrate in Western Europe than in the United States is that, in Western Europe, integration is often presumed to mean secularization..."

"No matter what you think of the religious right's domestic agenda, the United States is much better off with a religious right than with a Christian right or a Judeo-Christian right. When conservative American Christians lose their ability to identify with conservative Muslims--to imagine their faith as in some basic way the same and deserving of the same basic respect--the United States will find itself less able to speak to the Muslim world, and less able to listen to it. It will find itself, in other words, in the place Europe is now. And that's a place no American should want to be."

Yes, the last part is a tad bombastic. But as a critic of the religious right, I see his point. A secular society is one thing, zealous secularism is another. I respect my religious friends. But I can recall countless examples of how that respect is sometimes lacking in Sweden, Germany, France and co. Some see that as some sort of progress, I see it as another kind of fundamentalism: Secularist proselytization. And that's coming from Public Agnostic #1.

Times are tough in Europe. Having more or less realized and/or accepted that immigrants are going to stay in these countries, the way forward is uncertain. BTW, this realization was one of both the host society, who thought people might be leaving or just hoped for this; AND that of the immigrants themselves, who thought and talked of going 'home'.

So, just how much integration/assimilation should occur? What roles can culture, religion, the job market and the welfare state play? People really do not seem to know. Instead, as in the cartoon debacle, they test boundaries in hope of reaching accommodation. OK, that's one way. But surely not the best one.

jo

Subjects: Cartoons, Religion, Current Affairs, Denmark, Islam, hypocrisy, immigration, europe, freedom-of-speech, Freedom of Speech

Cartoon Boondoggle, a Reality Check

2006-02-13T09:22:00.000-05:00

During the past few days, the cartoon debate has veered left, right and center, focusing on the nature of Islam, freedom of speech/religion and ever so occasionally on immigration. There sure is a lot of controversy (click here for a disturbing photo of Palestinian children carrying a coffin draped in a Danish flag) out there. But does anyone really know what it’s about? Here in the Swamp, confusion reigns supreme. So I offer just a few more thoughts, mostly inspired by points that people brought to my attention since the previous post.

This whole saga is one big ideological mess. Reading some of the columns, blog posts, listening to people, you would certainly get that impression. They are coming at it from such different angles. The alarming, but not terribly, surprising thing is that so many of these pundits seek – and indeed see – absolutes and moral clarity at play. You know, opinions along the lines of:

“This proves the nature of Islam”

“Free speech is threatened by violence and political correctness”

“Told you that ‘they’ (the immigrants) would be the death of ‘us’ (the natives)”

Well, let me reiterate that these savants live in the twilight zone. And I certainly hope that was clear from my last post. Those pundits, in a more blatant way than usual, only make use of the already spurious evidence that backs up their patently ridiculous claims. What the cartoon rumble does tell us is that all of these issues are addressed and need to be discussed. And that there are other issues that we should talk about. Ones that are not addressed by a punditocracy as determined to prevent theocracy as it is reluctant to tackle bigotry in their own midst. Wonderland Don Quixotes?

To me the main, and the most pressing, issue remains: what is really going on in the countries of the protests and the countries of the cartoons and their willful re-publishers? The focus this time is the latter.

So aside from just abstractly looking at the three issues referred to my hypothetical statements above, it wouldn’t be a bad idea to pay a little more attention to the nature of the regimes and power structures in Afghanistan, Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq etc. And the same goes for the Western democracies who like to point their fingers at others. Just because most of us enjoy living here doesn’t mean we need to be totally uncritical. Or does our comfort require that? I think not.

And what do you find? Without wading too deep into the religion of Islam – I mean, I know as little as most of its detractors or defenders – I note that the ones publishing the cartoons (or at least the sentiments that led to their commissioning, a questionable act to say the least) and the ones fomenting riots have a lot in common. They agree that Islam is monolithic and can only be interpreted by some authority or another. So they are both fundamentalists (click here for an excellent article on how political fundamentalism in the West and religious fundamentalism all over have inadvertently colluded during this brouhaha). Enough said.

Far trickier issues are the freedoms of speech and religion. Last time I noted that it was odd that obvious violators of free speech – in other words, countries with laws that limit free speech – criticized those who advocated just a little contemplation regarding the responsible usage of this freedom. My example was Germany and Nazi-related material (click here for news on a current trial highlighting this). But I was reminded of another and in this case more relevant example (hat tip Johnny H), France’s banning of religious symbols in schools.

Young Frenchwomen wear headbands in the colors of the French flag during protests in Paris on January 17, 2004 (c) Laurent Rebours AP

Other European countries have (or are considering) similar laws. These are mainly targeted at Islam, but include other religions in the name of equality/secularism.

The Economist has a typically sober leader this week on freedom of speech:

“In this newspaper's view, the fewer constraints that are placed on free speech the better. Limits designed to protect people (from libel and murder, for example) are easier to justify than those that aim in some way to control thinking (such as laws on blasphemy, obscenity and Holocaust-denial)….when western newspapers lawfully publish words or pictures that cause offence—be they ever so unnecessary, insensitive or disrespectful—western governments should think very carefully before denouncing them….”

This is the crux of that matter. Governments have a role to play here, but it is one of diplomacy abroad and real dialogue at home. It must through its embassies (admittedly hard when they are torched) describe and defend its own laws. If France, Germany and Denmark find that difficult due to hypocrisy and contradictory laws, tough luck. But this cannot supplant the dialogue between the independent media that published the cartoons and those who are offended by it. Pretty simple really.

And at home, it needs to try and understand the climate in which the cartoons were published. This includes examining the insecurities concerning the European Union and lost sovereignty, xenophobia, alienation and all kinds of fundamentalism. The government can only do so much to promote understanding, and its actions do not remove responsibility from the real sovereign, the people. Still, in supervising the welfare state and describing the “state of the union” the government must pay attention to all sides of any debate.

Beware the Jabberwock, my son!

The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!

Not surprisingly, I expect more from a representative government than the dictatorships of the world, but a little too often that trust seems misplaced. In this case, when it comes to the realities of diversity and the facts of immigration, they seem prone to sticking their heads in the sand, right next to the bulging necks of fundamentalists of all stripes. Unless of course, they are also putting their feet in their mouths.

So I close with the wise words of Gregory Rodriguez, as he deals with these very issues in today’s Los Angeles Times:

“The violent protests that have erupted in the wake of the publication of cartoons lampooning the prophet Muhammad have sparked a profound debate throughout the Western world over external threats to, and internal limits on, freedom of expression. In both the United States and Europe, defenders of the newspapers that have published the cartoons have invoked the principle of freedom of speech as if it were an inviolable divine law that ought to protect them from all extremists. But the fact is there is no such thing as free speech. Every time we open our mouths, write an article or draw a cartoon, we weigh the costs and consequences.
Because we live in an extraordinarily heterogeneous society, Americans know this truth instinctively, if not consciously. Social etiquette dictates that we don't discuss religion or politics at a dinner party for fear of giving offense or inciting argument. Even before the invention of political correctness, we tended to be conscious of offending those from different backgrounds. Except for fervent racists, we generally don't share our thoughts and impressions about this or that ethnic or religious group in mixed company….

So far, only a handful of American newspapers have chosen to publish the offending cartoons of Muhammad. It's not that we believe in freedom of speech any less than the Danes, but we are infinitely more attuned to the tensions between that freedom and the realities of a diverse society (emphasis added).

After all, Denmark is a remarkably homogenous country, new to the multicultural realities that immigrant nations such as the U.S. and Britain have known for years. Eighty-five percent of Danes belong to the Church of Denmark, although few attend weekly services. Muslims account for only 2% of the population. That means the Jyllands-Posten cultural editor, Flemming Rose, who commissioned the Muhammad caricatures, is the Danish poster child for a dawning reality check.

Rose says he didn't mean to offend the small, powerless Muslim minority in Denmark but instead wanted to prove his own right to publish whatever he wanted, no matter what. He was rebelling against what he considered a growing climate of self-censorship in a changing Denmark. Even after violence erupted, he told an Italian newspaper that he was happy to have started a "useful debate." But when people die, it isn't "dialogue."

In a perfect world, you and I would agree to hate what bigots say even as we defend their right to say it. In a perfect world, we'd abide by what our mothers taught us: "Sticks and stones may break your bones but words (or images) will never hurt you." But we don't live in that world, and neither do the Danes.”

This reminds me of the timeless conversation between Jim Caviezel's and Sean Penn’s characters in Terrence Malick’s cinematic war meditation: “The Thin Red Line”.

Witt (Caviezel) has just been arrested for going AWOL (absent without leave) during the run-up to the decisive Battle of Guadalcanal. After running away, Witt lived among the Solomon Islanders, and saw their supposedly peaceful ways as an alternative to the war he is fighting. His superior Welsh (Penn) has some advice:

SERGEANT WELSH (standing)

You haven't changed at all, have you, Witt? You haven't learned a thing. All a man has to do is leave it to you, you put your head in the noose for him.

(sits down in front of Witt)

How many times you been AWOL? You been in the army what, six years now? Ain't it time you smartened up? Stop being such a punk recruit? I mean if you ever gonna.

PRIVATE WITT (looks around him)

We can't all be smart.

WELSH

No, we can. That's a shame. Look at you. (pause) Truth is, you can't take straight duty in my company. You'll never be a real soldier. Not in God's world. This is C company of which I'm First Sergeant. I run this outfit. Now Captain Staros, he's the CO (Commanding Officer), but I'm the guy who runs it. Nobody is gonna foul that up. You're just another mouth for me to feed. Normally you'd be court-martialed. I worked a deal for you. You ought to consider yourself lucky. I'm sending you to a disciplinary outfit. You'll be a stretcher-bearer. You'll be taking care of the wounded.

WITT (blinks back tears)

I can take anything you dish out. I am twice the man you are.

WELSH

In this world a man himself is nothing. And there ain't no world but this one.

WITT

You're wrong there, Top. I seen another world. Sometimes I think it was just my imagination.

WELSH (smiles)

Well, then you've seen things I never will. We're living in a world that's blown itself to hell as fast as everybody can arrange it. In a situation like that all a man can do is shut his eyes and let nothing touch him. Look out for himself. I might be the best friend you ever had. You don't even know it.”

jo

Subjects: Cartoons, Religion, Current Affairs, Denmark, Islam, hypocrisy, immigration, europe, freedom-of-speech, Freedom of Speech

Offensive Cartoons Expose Munafiqs and other Hypocrites

2006-02-08T17:05:00.000-05:00

I’ll say it right off the bat, at least one of those cartoons was way over the top. But that simple fact is no longer particularly relevant. In case, you either ignored a story that has been stewing since September 2005 (!!) or have been asleep since sometime last week, the Swampmeister – himself now awake, after recently being slightly under the weather, and having for once not proved immune to the diseases of the fever swamp – wants to sound off about the Danish editorial cartoons depicting Islam and the Prophet.

Here’s an excellent Financial Times chronology and a Washington Post article on the events so far. But there are some facts and aspects that have gotten lost in the melee, and once you illuminate those, startling hypocrisy rises to the surface of this potluck.

Number one of which is: the cartoons themselves. These are editorial cartoons, hardly the most offensive ones over the years, but still obviously insulting to some. The thing about the cartoon is that few have seen them: Just readers of a few newspapers (inc. the only one in the U.S., the Philadelphia Inquirer) and those who have dug them up on the Internet. In line with blogiquette, here’s a link should you wish to see them.

Anti-Danish Sentiments in Baquba, Iraq
(c) AFP

In today’s OpinionJournal.com, Amir Tahiri explains why these cartoons, or any other depiction of the Prophet, cannot be blasphemy. Sure, it’s his opinion. But considering that most reporting has assumed that there is a blanket ban on this kind of iconography, it’s important reading. Funny, how something becomes the Truth even though there are clear alternative views.

Secondly, and not unrelated, is the fact that the nature of the cartoons was totally misrepresented by a group of Danish imams, who traveled to the Middle East to spread the word of the blasphemy. Neglecting to explain the context of the publication and the nature of Danish society was not enough for these supposed purveyors of truth and God’s word.

In addition, they told crowds about non-published (and some non-existent) cartoons, ones that depicted the Prophet copulating with his mother and a pig. You do not need to know much about anything to understand that this didn’t come across too well. The fact that the imams were lying? No worries. Anything goes when you want to foment the mob.

Here’s a blog post that exposes more on this lie and a newspaper article about the deceptive imams. And here’s Flemming Rose talking about this and the whole sorry saga on C-Span (Very worthwhile! It’s only five minutes long. 1:56:27 into the program). Rose is one of the editors from Jyllandsposten (click here to read some of their articles in English), the Danish paper that originally commissioned and published the cartoons.

Something else to keep in mind regarding the mob and supposed outrage of the whole Muslim world. Here’s how it actually works most of the time: event happens, gets distorted beyond recognition, rabble-rousers with a government-approved seal stir up a carefully selected crowd of young MEN, flags burn, cameras roll, folks in Europe and America are led to believe that a) the mobs are gigantic or that b) they are a carefully collated and representative poll sample. OK.

But while all this is material, let’s not forget about the Scandinavians and other Europeans who are now the defenders of self-evident truths and universal rights. For they have major soul-searching to do as well. First of all, their interpretation of freedom of speech leaves a little something to be desired. Secondly, their sudden razor-sharp analysis of the Muslim Street stands in stark contrast to their usual hand-wringing piety in the realm of foreign affairs.

And lastly, and closest to my heart, their miserable history of dealing with immigration suddenly – and way too conveniently – finds itself behind the mother of all smokescreens. Now, you can really blame ‘those immigrants.’ Accordingly, Joe Scandi can now say: “Look at their reaction, they’re burning out purdy flag.!! Told ya so! What? Do we have ANY responsibility for their alienation? Well, it doesn’t matter now…”

So, freedom of speech and accompanying responsibility along the lines of not shouting “fire in a crowded theater.” There is a (strong) case to be made for a near absolute freedom of speech when it does not infringe on other freedoms, especially the freedom to life. Now, some might argue that cartoons cause harm and people have been dying. To those folks I say: who did the killing? Some might say freedom of religion is harmed. To those people I say where? You don’t mean that of Christian and Jews in Saudi Arabia, do you?

Still some, like Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff, a Washington-based journalist from Germany - a country where censorship esp. related to World War II, Nazism, and Holocaust Denial exists – go out of their way to find a lot of fault in the very mild U.S. position on this whole affair.
Plus when they criticize the US for adopting an admittedly clumsy, but still diplomatic stance, they somehow forget that most of their brethren EU governments were originally nowhere to be seen at all.

So you could claim that this is none of the U.S.’s business, AND demand solidarity AND complain when it arrives. But can you really claim that this is none of other EU. countries’ business? Let’s hope the Danes don’t forget about the telling sequence of deafening silence, then kowtowing to violence and finally begrudging partnership from their closest allies and neighbors.

For an American take on this I offer the views of Signe Wilkinson. This Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist has herself been picketed by irate Muslims, Christians, Jews and many, many more.

“I don’t go out of my way to poke fun at the religiously faithful. I have no grounds to criticize other religions, when my own is such a quirky (though perfect) little cult. Unfortunately, cartoonists are easily bothered. I am particularly bothered when some group wants to impose its way of life on me--and most particularly when its adherents want my tax dollars to help them do the imposing. Religious groups are often among those asking for tax dollars, or particular laws to advance their interest or legalize their morality... I know cartoonists will take into consideration the reaction to this caricature when drawing their next ones on Muslim issues. If the reaction of the “Arab street” continues to be violence whenever they don’t like something they see in someone else's newspaper, then I predict more such cartoons are on the way. My suggestion is that instead of threatening to draw blood, Muslims should pick up their pens and draw return cartoons instead.”

Call this naïve, but it is earnest and has humor. For more humor, I highly recommend the February 7th editions of the Daily Show and the Colbert Report. You can download them (BitTorrent etc.) or catch the highlights on the Comedy Central’s brilliant website. Look for the ‘Kidding’ sketch on the Colbert Show. Awesome.

Disagree? Well, my ‘hero’ Christopher Hitchens is highly critical of the Bush Administration’s (initial) reaction and also lambastes just everybody else and calls for much more (but far wittier) mockery of religion. He’s definitely on to more than something. A man in the mold of Thomas Paine and H.L. Mencken. Provocation along intelligent lines for a real reason is never wrong.

“As well as being a small masterpiece of inarticulacy and self-abnegation, the statement from the State Department about this week's international Muslim pogrom against the free press was also accidentally accurate… How appalling for the country of the First Amendment to be represented by such an administration. What does he mean "unacceptable"? That it should be forbidden? And how abysmal that a "spokesman" cannot distinguish between criticism of a belief system and slander against a people. However, the illiterate McCormack is right in unintentionally comparing racist libels to religious faith.”

Furthermore

“…let a good Muslim abstain rigorously from (things offensive). But if he claims the right to make me abstain as well, he offers the clearest possible warning and proof of an aggressive intent. This current uneasy coexistence is only an interlude, he seems to say. For the moment, all I can do is claim to possess absolute truth and demand absolute immunity from criticism. But in the future, you will do what I say and you will do it on pain of death.

I refuse to be spoken to in that tone of voice, which as it happens I chance to find "offensive." ( By the way, hasn't the word "offensive" become really offensive lately?) The innate human revulsion against desecration is much older than any monotheism: Its most powerful expression is in the Antigone of Sophocles. It belongs to civilization… civil society means that free expression trumps the emotions of anyone to whom free expression might be inconvenient. It is depressing to have to restate these obvious precepts, and it is positively outrageous that the administration should have discarded them at the very first sign of a fight.”

OK, back to the Scandinavians. They are worried about the Arab Street, while somehow calling its bluff, realizing that the rhetoric bears no semblance to reality and the violence lacks any degree of proportion. Good for them. But it’s a classic latecomer apparition. American and Israeli actions IN GENERAL are almost always subject to this treatment. Unfortunately, the Scandinavians in those cases bend over backwards looking for a legitimate grievance on behalf of the baying mob.

This time, not only can they see no such thing, but they have forgotten how quick they were to take the opposite tack in the past. Funny that. And when the U.S. offers comments on this, well, leave it to the Europeans to find the U.S. at fault again. This time for not standing up for freedom of speech (and they do this without reasoning along Hitchens’ lines). All the while suggesting that those now pointing fingers at them need to engage in introspection. This from the master finger-pointers of times gone by.

You gotta wonder why similar situations are seen through concave or convex lenses depending on who is the object of irrational wrath. And while initial comments from the State Department were silly and mechanical, anyone believing that the land (we, the people NOT this or any other Administration) of the First Amendment is not going to stand up for free speech is stranded in left field. The State Department was being...diplomatic. Go figure.

Reporting on this from the U.S. reminds me of the Wonderland fantasies in Europe. You know the ones that claim debate is vigorous in the Old Country, but stifled here in the New World. Debate here on most any issue is earnest and vibrant. If I were to claim the consensus lovers across the sea came even close to that description, I’d just as well be sitting on top of a toadstool smoking a hookah.

Lastly, this whole spiel ties into Europe’s biggest issue, dilemma, crisis: Immigration. Denmark is justifiably well-known for open-mindedness, but also for being highly ambivalent about diversity when it comes to immigration, especially Muslim immigration.

What bothers me most of all about all of this is that this debate has received a million times more attention than the realities of immigrants in Denmark, Sweden, Germany or elsewhere in Europe. And that the reaction of fomented Muslim mobs will be used as proof-positive for those who love to misconstrue these realities. By those who somehow ‘know’ that immigrants are no good.

I urge you print out and read Christopher Caldwell’s piece from last Sunday’s New York Times Magazine. It’s about the situation in Sweden, which by all accounts is better than in Denmark. You will find that hard to believe once you read it.

When I think of the situation in these countries and what I believe lies behind the debate that led up to the commission of the cartoons, I happen to agree with the brilliant Danish writer Carsten Jensen who said: “I don't want to live in a country that in order to love itself must look down on others.”

However, let me end on a positive note. The reaction among German Muslims to all of this appears to have been one of liberal moderation. Despite their own generally unsatisfactory situation, many came down on the side of their home country’s values. If you doubt that they not only enjoy the fruits of the open society they live in, but also embrace the principles, it would appear you need to think again.

And if the reaction in Denmark (and Sweden) is similar, we find ourselves face to face with a historical irony. The possibility, perhaps the likelihood, that the real close-mindedness resides in the hearts and minds of non-Muslim Danes, Swedes and Germans as well as some Muslims in the Islamic World. Are these people the true Munafiqs?

So you decide: did Jyllandsposten provoke entirely without reason and justification? Were the cartoons, thought up by various illustrators, in bad taste? Is the Danish debate on immigration out of bounds? Perhaps. Definitely. Absolutely. As for the reactions they provoked, how that fits into the world of geopolitics and just how connected to immigration in Europe this is, stay tuned.

jo

Subjects: Cartoons, Religion, Current Affairs, Denmark, Islam, hypocrisy, immigration, europe

My Adventures at the Mother of All Airports

2006-01-31T17:04:00.000-05:00

It’s not everyday you actually walk all the way to the airport. And it certainly isn’t everyday that you walk to an airport with the kind of history of Flughafen Tempelhof. Every since ‘discovering’ that Berlin had a third airport aside from the old West Berlin one (Tegel in the heart of the former French sector) and East Berlin (Schönefeld just outside of Berlin proper), I have wanted to depart the city from there. And when I moved to an apartment nearby, the option of walking entered the picture, and made it all the more enticing.

When I say discovered, I really need to qualify that. I mean, it doesn’t take much to locate what during the 1920s and 1930s was the biggest airport in world, especially when it’s in the middle of a large city. Add to that, a healthy dose of creepy and heroic history and ‘discovering’ Tempelhof seems equivalent to stumbling upon the Eifel Tower.

Still, the day I first walked into the airport terminal – during a Sunday walkabout – I was flabbergasted and when I told people about the experience, most confessed they had never been there. As you approach the main building, you are overcome by its sheer size and you notice similar looking buildings branching off in a semi-circular pattern.

The Main Terminal, (c) FCIT

The Tempelhof terminal’s bombastic appearance (the link is too a prematurely negative BBC story) is directly connected to it ominous presence, it was one of the first structures that Hitler’s architect Speer commissioned as part of Germania, the future capital of the Third Reich. Construction began just around the time of the 1936 Berlin Olympics, and was completed in 1941. The world was going to land there, and in so doing feel awestruck. (There are two or three other Germania sites that remain in Berlin, including the rebuilt Olympic Stadium where the World Cup final will be staged next summer.)

Even if you are unaware of this part of the airport’s history, its architecture is unique enough to make you gasp. This is what led architect Sir Norman Foster to once call it ''the mother of all airports." During the Third Reich, the roof of the main building was used as a viewing platform, which had been built to hold a capacity of 100,000. People gathered there to watch displays of militarism and fantasies of Nazi superiority.

But it is the post-War tale of this airport, and living nearby, which makes it so compelling. Situated in the heart of the American sector, it quickly became the hub of Allied transport. And in 1948, it became the site of unbridled heroism. The Cold War was brewing, and as the Soviet Union had decided to blockade West Berlin, the air route was the only way of bringing supplies into the city. For nearly a year, flights took off day and night, during what became known as the Berliner Luftbruecke (the Berlin “Air Bridge” or Airlift.)

In a little park near the terminal, there is a large memorial in the shape of a bridge into the sky above. Inscribed at its base, the names of servicemen and women who lost their lives in what was a highly risky enterprise.

The Kids are Alright!

For Berliners, the coal and food supplies were essential. But the folklore is all about the “Rosinenbomber or Candy Bomber.” An American pilot named Gail Halvorsen mounted what he dubbed Operation Little Vittles, and soon other airmen followed suit. Basically, he dropped candy and other vittles from his plane. These were attached to little parachutes sailed down to kids below. It was the mother of all modern-day “hearts and minds”, and a successful one at that.

Anyway, there I was in the wee hours of the morning, departure scheduled for 7 a.m. The Ice Bowl Freeze was still in full effect and the walk had been necessarily brisk. What can I say? I was as excited as the Candy Bomber kids, and checked-in, in the process signing a petition to save the airport. You see, despite the prime location, there are major efforts to have the place shut down (air pollution being the main gripe, never bothered me though.)

-

On the way to the gate, I walk by an “Airlines of the World” poster. It’s somewhat off kilter, it’s from 1987! And it is there more as a matter of fact, not as some historical souvenir. Someone forgot to remove it. Or perhaps they like being reminded of classic airlines like Pan-Am, TWA, Czechoslovak Airlines, JAT Yugoslavia, Flying Tiger Airlines, Air Somalia…

The gate set-up at Tempelhof is new to me. Basically, you just walk out a glass door and down a short flight of steps to the waiting plane. Since this part of airport is covered by canopy, in a hangar fashion, the noise is slightly deafening. I looked at my fellow passengers, most of who were about as excited as you can expect folks heading to Brussels to be. No familiar politicians off to kowtow to the Eurocrats either. But there were two real kids traveling with their mother and you could tell they appreciated this glorious moment at the crack of dawn.

All that remained was take-off. I often bike (and by mistake, once ran) around the perimeter of the airport, so I had seen landings and departures a million times. It is indeed an odd sight seeing a plane coming out of nowhere, popping down in what is, in effect, a residential area. This time I had a front row seat, the window seat.

Maybe it’s my imagination, but it sure seemed like it was all thrusters go as the pilot tore down the runway. Perhaps this is necessary considering the location, gaining elevation quickly being quite crucial. With my face glued to the plastic pane, I stared and stared.

It was awesome: identifying your own apartment building right after take-off, gazing into its courtyard, seeing as your neighborhood gradually assumes its shape as you climb, spotting the streets, avenues and waterways, while watching it all shrink and take its proper place in the metropolis you call home. For the tech savvy, it is basically the reverse of the Google Earth experience: i.e. coming in from outer space, down, down, and down to your hood, street and then house.

So off I went from Berlin to Brussels, always a mad trip in its own right. From the capital of a country to the capital of something. But thankfully Brussels is also the capital of Belgium and I’ll close by remarking that the Duty Free Shops at Brussels International take the cake. Sure, they carry the usual suspects, the sign says “LIQUORS, TOBACCO, PERFUMES, JEWELRY, but when you add “CHOCOLATES” and most importantly “BELGIAN BEERS”, you know things are going to be all right.

jo, whose final destination was NOT Brussels.

Ice Bowl Biking & the Hamburger from Hell

2006-01-23T19:52:00.000-05:00

Berlin-Steglitz, 1 a.m. It was way below zero; with the wind chill we are talking twenty three below for those on Celsius’ side of the divide and nine below for the Fahrenheiters. (-23° C, -9°F) I was on my way home, and it was simply my own private Ice Bowl on wheels.

The infamous 1967 Ice Bowl (see photo) was on my mind because I had just watched the Pittsburgh Steelers rustle up and brand the Denver Broncos with a serious L. At near freezing, the temperature was comparatively mild at Mile High Stadium in Denver, but the sideline reporter Bonnie Bernstein was still dressed for something more like the Berlin weather. Fur hat and all.

Biking in these conditions can be hazardous, but compared to the extreme slipperiness of days prior, the cold n' dry streets were heaven. The chain was rotating smoothly save for the occasional crackle. It was actually better than walking and after some five minutes I was warm all over, and whizzed by folks freezing at bus stops. For some reason it felt like biking through a swamp. The wind wasn’t that strong, but there was a wall of invisible, fungible ice in the air.

I had been watching the game with a couple of friends at one of Berlin’s few sports bars, Picker’s. It is located in a West Berlin inner city suburb, the kind of area that hosted American military barracks in the days of the Wall. Berlin’s history has led to pockets of this and that all over the city, and on some level this oddity makes sense. I mean why have a bar like Picker’s in the city center?

Last week, we watched the Divisional Championships at a VERY different place, where folks preferred playing backgammon and looked up at the screen and shouted “that sport is all tactics!” One very tipsy Indianapolis fan was there and when he heard about my ties to DC, he approached and turned his backward St Louis Cardinals cap around, pointed at it, gesticulated wildly, and blurted out “The Redskins!” OK, dude.

Back at the far more happening Picker’s, I was feeling ravenous and made the mistake I always make in “American” diners in Germany, I ordered a burger. Like a bat out of hell, a very BIG bat, it promptly appeared and when I lifted the bun, a familiar sinking feeling set in. You see, folks here prefer the ready-made frozen patty to the freshly-prepped ground meat variety. Now that ain't cool. And the fact that it was the size of a Frisbee just meant that I didn’t eat all day today.

Will either of us ever learn?

This Evil Burger bears some similarity
to the one I encountered
(c) Shari Borkin

All in all, it was a glorious weekend for those who engage in sporting escapism, especially if you’re a Steelers fan with fondness for Washington teams. On Saturday, two, not one, mini-miracles happened at the MCI Center located in the heart of D.C’s Chinatown.

First, Georgetown University men’s basketball team beat #1 ranked Duke. It was the first victory over a #1 team for the Hoyas since 1985, and marks the beginning of the return to the glory days of Patrick Ewing and company. The omens are good: the team is now coached by John Thompson III, son of the legendary Coach Thompson. And in two years time, both Ewing’s and Dikembe Mutumbo’s sons will be playing for GU.

Secondly, a couple of hours later, the Washington Capitals (that's the original logo) ice hockey team stuck it to the NHL’s #1 team, the Carolina Hurricanes. Some think the Caps might not make the playoffs, but this showed the nay-sayers. They have the best goalie in the league, Olie Koelzig, and the upcoming rookie of the year, Alex Ovechkin.

So, you read it here first: Big Ben, Da Bus, Alloy Troy and the rest of the Steelers take Super Bowl XL, the Hoyas make the NCAA tournament and the Caps do some serious damage come playoff time. Hallelujah, escapism indeed.

Am Grossen Wannsee 56-58

2006-01-20T16:33:00.000-05:00

Wannsee, Berlin, 20th January 1942

“SS Lieutenant General (Obergruppenführer) Heydrich, Chief of Security Police and Security Service, opened the meeting by informing everyone that the Reich Marshal (Göring) had put him in charge of preparations for the final solution of the Jewish question. The invitations of this conference had been issued to clarify fundamental questions.”

So began the protocol of what has come to be known as the Wannsee Conference. As I type this into my computer fifty four years later, I feel sick to my stomach. I think of the unidentified man who was ordered by Adolf Eichmann to transcribe fifteen men's madness. I think of him hearing the words I just copied. I think of him bearing witness to the evil that followed. Did he have doubts, fears...where were the better angels of his nature?

A couple of days ago, I remembered a movie that a friend had recommended a while back (hat tip, Joachim.) “Conspiracy” is one of two dramatizations of this day in history (the other is “Wannseekonferenz”,) and it will make you doubt humanity.

As things have it, my memory was jogged just before watching the evening news where it was announced that a new exhibition was opening up at the House of the Wannsee Conference museum on January 20th.

I was there a few years ago and thus it is high time to return. The picturesque setting by Wannsee (Wann Lake) – which most landlocked (West) Berliners continue to also associate with a summer swim – renders the visitor’s confrontation with evil, both banal and radical, all the more stark.

Every time someone asks me what to visit and where to go in Berlin, I mention this memorial. For some history can seem abstract, only distantly related to the present they live in and the future they dream of. In this house, horror provides perspective we all need.

The House, Am Grossen Wannsee 56-58 (c) REUTERS/Arnd Wiegmann

That day, decisions were made in Wannsee to ensure that the present of millions would end and that they should have no future.

jo

Subject: The Holocaust