When I was 72 years old, I felt like 100. Now that I am 79, I feel like 35 (well, most of the time). What caused this turnaround? The scuttling of an arthritic old left hip and its replacement with one made of cobalt chrome and polyethelene.
I had been suffering for more than a year with lots of pain which gradually immobilized me to the point where I couldn't walk more than a quarter of a block without having to sit down. A normally active person, this was, to put it conservatively, a decided nuisance. I visited the eminent New York orthopedic surgeon, Dr. Phillip Bauman, who informed me that I would ultimately require the replacement surgery, but that it was up to me to decide when. Being an inveterate coward, I kept postponing it even long after the miserable old bone had become intensely painful to keep in my body. Finally, the discomfort and inconvenience became great enough to overcome my bounteous lack of courage, and I scheduled the surgery.
Dr. Bauman is right out of Central Casting. He is slim and handsome with just enough gray hair peppered among its darker neighbors to add a big dose of distinction. He is soft-spoken, sympathetic and reassuring. His stellar reputation helped a great deal to give me the guts to undertake the cure. I knew he had operated successfully on many of our great ballet dancers, and I saw that he had been chosen for many years as one of New York Magazine's 100 Best Doctors in New York. How could I go wrong?
Well, I couldn't. The surgery was relatively untraumatic, and I recovered quickly with little pain. In five or six weeks I was walking without a cane and without discomfort. From a crippled old woman, I had materialized into an active young one again. I asked myself, as does practically every hip replacement veteran who postpones surgery beyond a reasonable time, "Why on earth didn't I do this sooner and spare myself all that agony?"
Within a year of my operation, on March 20, 2003, the United States conducted its immoral and unjustified Shock and Awe assault on Baghdad. Like so many other right-minded people, I marched in protests prior to the actual attack -- MARCHED, mind you, inconceivable without my new hip -- and then, once the war was an awful reality, became a full-time anti-war advocate.
A few months after we invaded Iraq, I saw a photograph in TIME Magazine of a 14-year-old boy, Ali, who had lost his arms, was hideously burned all over his torso, and, as if that weren't enough torment for a child to endure, lost his entire nuclear family -- his parents and many siblings. These tragedies were caused, to our eternal shame, by OUR bombs.
I thought, "I have to DO something." And, I did. I started a group, Grandmothers Against the War, and initiated a rally at the Eleanor Roosevelt Statue in Manhattan's Riverside Park. Next, I began a vigil on Fifth Avenue in front of Rockefeller Center on a freezing January day in 2004, which continues every Wednesday to this day. It began with just two of us and now has escalated to an average of 15-20 people. I could never have possibly even considered such an action prior to my surgery. There is just no way I could have stood on my feet for an hour and done the walking necessary to get to and from the vigil site.
Our next big event was the arrest of 18 of us grandmothers, our jailing and subsequent six-day trial in criminal court for attempting to enlist in the military at the Times Square recruiting center in order to replace the young people in harm's way so they'd have the opportunity to live long lives as we had. We were arrested because, denied entrance to the recruiting station, we all sat down on the concrete ground and refused to move, knowing we were within our Constitutional rights to peacefully dissent. Even with my artificial hip, getting down on the ground was a laborious effort. Getting up was even more problematic. I looked like an ungainly elephant as I untangled myself from the ground and clumsily pulled myself up. But, because of my faux new hip, I did it! Sitting in jail later for five hours on a hard wooden bench would have been unthinkable, also, with my old diseased hip. I tell you, that surgery really opened up new vistas in my life! After all, who wouldn't want the fascinating experience of being incarcerated in a prison cell? Incidentally, we were acquitted of all charges. The whole episode created quite a media stir.
I was able to participate in many activities of the group we now called the Granny Peace Brigade -- song-and-dance performances by us grannies in shows we created; a trip to Berlin to give speeches to peace groups; a ten-day trek from New York to Washington DC with stops along the way at various cities and towns; marches across the Brooklyn Bridge, and many other endeavors requiring LEGS and, therefore, HIPS. By the grace of the good Doctor Bauman, I was able to do all this.
I wasn't the only granny in my group to have a hip replacement. Three others had them, and one, Beverly Rice, had a double hip replacement in one surgery. All recovered well and have marched, protested, stood for long hours, and gone to jail without any physical limitation whatsoever.
There are now 500,000 hip replacement surgeries performed in a year, a huge increase since 1990, when there were 119,000. In Dr. Bauman's vast experience, for instance, he has performed well over 1,000 of such operations. Though it has been reported recently that certain implants have been found to be faulty and are being recalled, Dr. Bauman fortunately never used any of the deficient ones. The increase in such miracle surgeries is attributable, of course, to the fact that so many people are living longer. And, the Baby Boomers, now entering their 50's and 60's, are requiring this type of surgery in large numbers, perhaps because of the exercise and fitness craze indulged in by that generation which wears out joints more rapidly than previous generations with their less physically active life styles. And, even people of advanced ages can have their hips replaced. Dr. Bauman did so recently on an 85-year-old person.
Many complain about the failures of medicine, and its pitfalls. Yes, it is deplorable that there still is no cure for cancer, for Alzheimer's, for ALS, and a slew of other awful diseases. Yes, it is terrible that so many deaths occur in hospitals because of mistakes in medications, and rampant staph infections.
But, modern medicine has made stupendous strides forward, too. Were it not for this advance in orthopedic surgery, I would now be living in a wheelchair, loaded up with painkillers and anti-inflammatories, cranky from pain and restless inactivity. The fact is, Dr. Bauman gave me back my life. In fact, he enabled me to start a new life I had never contemplated. I am able to do what I consider my patriotic duty and go out on the streets to oppose the misguided foreign policies of my government. At this stage of my life, that feels damned good.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Thursday, October 14, 2010
MESSAGE FOR OBAMA
President Obama often expressed during his campaign that if he became President he wanted we, the people, to let him know when we thought he needed a reality check. Accordingly, New York City's Granny Peace Brigade has been out on the City's streets lately conducting a survey of citizens as to how they want their tax dollars spent. I think their results would surprise him and would perhaps motivate Mr. Obama to make some serious adjustments to the federal budget.
The grannies have been conducting their survey with the aid of a unique gadget named Ms. Gizmo, consisting of eight tubes representing eight major budget items. They are marked Arts and Culture; Education; Environment and Clean Energy; Health Care; Housing; Jobs; Military; and Transportation. The women give each person participating twenty pennies which they are then invited to put into the tubes of their choice. At the end of each session, the grandmothers total up the numbers of pennies in each category.
In addition to getting a sense of where people want their tax money to go, the Ms. Gizmo actions provide an opportunity to educate and motivate the public. Those joining in the fun are very enthusiastic, and there is much dialogue between the grannies and the survey takers. It seems to be an excellent way to get people to think seriously about how the obscenely high military budget drastically reduces funding for domestic needs.
It's amazing how the priorities of our citizens differ markedly from the current budget. For instance, whereas today's federal budget spends 48% on current and past military expenses, the survey reveals that altogether the participants want to devote only 5% to the military. Interestingly, the ONLY group that put a good supply of pennies into the military tube were young adolescent boys in East Harlem. We speculate that this is a result of the relentless military recruitment conducted in minority schools and the lack of jobs for these young people forcing them to turn to the military for economic survival.
On the other hand, for example, the U.S. budget only earmarks 38% to ALL human resources, which includes health and human services; education; food/nutrition programs; housing and urban development; and other human resources. That seems woefully small, does it not, when compared to the enormous amounts of money allocated for the military? The Ms. Gizmo participants want to devote 19% to just health care alone, 21% for education alone and 19% solely for jobs.
Of course, it can't be claimed that this is a scientifically accurate poll. However, it does cover a variety of populations -- Brooklyn workers, the lower east side community heavily populated by university students and artists, the upper West Side professionals and yuppies, East Harlem Latinos, the opinionated denizens of Union Square, and the fun-seeking crowds from everywhere who flock to 42nd Street.
It is known that Mr. Obama is a very punctilious person when it comes to getting the facts right, so perhaps he would be interested in learning the full results for the budget which 538 people in six different locations wished for:
Arts & Culture -- 8%
Education -- 21%
Environment & Clean Energy - 9%
Health Care - 19%
Housing -- 12%
Jobs -- 19%
Military -- 5%
Transportation -- 6%
It is urgently hoped that President Obama "gets the message!"
The grannies have been conducting their survey with the aid of a unique gadget named Ms. Gizmo, consisting of eight tubes representing eight major budget items. They are marked Arts and Culture; Education; Environment and Clean Energy; Health Care; Housing; Jobs; Military; and Transportation. The women give each person participating twenty pennies which they are then invited to put into the tubes of their choice. At the end of each session, the grandmothers total up the numbers of pennies in each category.
In addition to getting a sense of where people want their tax money to go, the Ms. Gizmo actions provide an opportunity to educate and motivate the public. Those joining in the fun are very enthusiastic, and there is much dialogue between the grannies and the survey takers. It seems to be an excellent way to get people to think seriously about how the obscenely high military budget drastically reduces funding for domestic needs.
It's amazing how the priorities of our citizens differ markedly from the current budget. For instance, whereas today's federal budget spends 48% on current and past military expenses, the survey reveals that altogether the participants want to devote only 5% to the military. Interestingly, the ONLY group that put a good supply of pennies into the military tube were young adolescent boys in East Harlem. We speculate that this is a result of the relentless military recruitment conducted in minority schools and the lack of jobs for these young people forcing them to turn to the military for economic survival.
On the other hand, for example, the U.S. budget only earmarks 38% to ALL human resources, which includes health and human services; education; food/nutrition programs; housing and urban development; and other human resources. That seems woefully small, does it not, when compared to the enormous amounts of money allocated for the military? The Ms. Gizmo participants want to devote 19% to just health care alone, 21% for education alone and 19% solely for jobs.
Of course, it can't be claimed that this is a scientifically accurate poll. However, it does cover a variety of populations -- Brooklyn workers, the lower east side community heavily populated by university students and artists, the upper West Side professionals and yuppies, East Harlem Latinos, the opinionated denizens of Union Square, and the fun-seeking crowds from everywhere who flock to 42nd Street.
It is known that Mr. Obama is a very punctilious person when it comes to getting the facts right, so perhaps he would be interested in learning the full results for the budget which 538 people in six different locations wished for:
Arts & Culture -- 8%
Education -- 21%
Environment & Clean Energy - 9%
Health Care - 19%
Housing -- 12%
Jobs -- 19%
Military -- 5%
Transportation -- 6%
It is urgently hoped that President Obama "gets the message!"
Sunday, October 3, 2010
NEW YORK CITY SUPER ELDERLY TAKE A LEAD IN PROTESTING IRAQ AND AFGHAN WARS: Hold NYC Supplement to One Nation March in DC October 2
Just because one is 80, 90 or older, don't think for one moment one doesn't still retain the power to effectively protest the wrongs committed by our Government.
Many old people wished to go to Washington DC Saturday, October 2, to join the One Nation March to advocate an end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but were too infirm or disabled to make the long, difficult trek. Did that stop them from participating in the day's protests? Not on your life.
In Manhattan, a group of very old residents of the Hallmark seniors apartment building in Battery Park City, average age 88, solved that dilemma by holding their own alternative demonstration. Approximately 75 people, many in wheelchairs and leaning on walkers and canes, circled a little park on North End Avenue for about an hour and a half carrying such signs as "How Is the War Economy Working for You?" and "Bring them Home from Afghanistan and Iraq," and occasionally breaking into chants of "Peace...NOW," and the like.
One of the main organizers of the event, 94-year-old Harold Hirschlag, a retired CPA, declared, "We at the Hallmark senior residence are shocked that our government has allowed and participated in the killing of thousands of human beings in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention the thousands of U. S. soldiers. There is no end in sight. The troops and funds for that war are desperately needed for the very poor conditions here in the U.S."
The Hallmark is unique, it is believed, in having a very active political action committee, the Hallmark PAC. It was begun when the facility was first completed 10 years ago. The group has supported candidates for public office and arranges regular talks by politicians, administrators of government programs and experts in areas of interest to the residents.
Its current president, former New York City public school early education teacher Frances Berrick, almost 90, explains the motivation for their anti-war event: "In the 50's and 60's, our kids were involved in the anti-Vietnam war movement. It worries us that there isn't the same push against these unnecessary wars among the younger people. So, even though we can only walk around the park twice before we have to sit down, we felt it necessary to show our strong feeling that we have to stop this needless slaughter that is going on in the middle east."
The Battery Park City protesters were joined by members of Grandmothers Against the War, the Granny Peace Brigade, and the Raging Grannies, turning the event into far more than a local event but rather an anti-war rally of determined and dedicated Peacenik oldsters from all over the City. There was also a small contingent of Veterans for Peace. The great civil liberties attorney, Norman Siegel, who had defended the peace grannies when they were on trial for trying to enlist in the military at Times Square in October 2005, also marched in the rally (though he is far from being in the oldster category).
The numbers of marchers were small compared to those in DC, to be sure, but inasmuch as it was the first public protest by the Battery Park old folks, it can be perceived as a hopeful sign that more and more people are waking up to the reality that the U.S. must end these wars right away if we are to solve any of our problems of joblessness, inadequate health care and education, and all the other urgent dilemmas we are facing today.
Perhaps these elderly patriots don't have the energy of their younger days, but nevertheless they continue to struggle to end the wars and build a better society. Ms. Berrick, who is legally blind, sums it up when she says, "You don't give up. You just do what you're able to do."
Many old people wished to go to Washington DC Saturday, October 2, to join the One Nation March to advocate an end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but were too infirm or disabled to make the long, difficult trek. Did that stop them from participating in the day's protests? Not on your life.
In Manhattan, a group of very old residents of the Hallmark seniors apartment building in Battery Park City, average age 88, solved that dilemma by holding their own alternative demonstration. Approximately 75 people, many in wheelchairs and leaning on walkers and canes, circled a little park on North End Avenue for about an hour and a half carrying such signs as "How Is the War Economy Working for You?" and "Bring them Home from Afghanistan and Iraq," and occasionally breaking into chants of "Peace...NOW," and the like.
One of the main organizers of the event, 94-year-old Harold Hirschlag, a retired CPA, declared, "We at the Hallmark senior residence are shocked that our government has allowed and participated in the killing of thousands of human beings in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention the thousands of U. S. soldiers. There is no end in sight. The troops and funds for that war are desperately needed for the very poor conditions here in the U.S."
The Hallmark is unique, it is believed, in having a very active political action committee, the Hallmark PAC. It was begun when the facility was first completed 10 years ago. The group has supported candidates for public office and arranges regular talks by politicians, administrators of government programs and experts in areas of interest to the residents.
Its current president, former New York City public school early education teacher Frances Berrick, almost 90, explains the motivation for their anti-war event: "In the 50's and 60's, our kids were involved in the anti-Vietnam war movement. It worries us that there isn't the same push against these unnecessary wars among the younger people. So, even though we can only walk around the park twice before we have to sit down, we felt it necessary to show our strong feeling that we have to stop this needless slaughter that is going on in the middle east."
The Battery Park City protesters were joined by members of Grandmothers Against the War, the Granny Peace Brigade, and the Raging Grannies, turning the event into far more than a local event but rather an anti-war rally of determined and dedicated Peacenik oldsters from all over the City. There was also a small contingent of Veterans for Peace. The great civil liberties attorney, Norman Siegel, who had defended the peace grannies when they were on trial for trying to enlist in the military at Times Square in October 2005, also marched in the rally (though he is far from being in the oldster category).
The numbers of marchers were small compared to those in DC, to be sure, but inasmuch as it was the first public protest by the Battery Park old folks, it can be perceived as a hopeful sign that more and more people are waking up to the reality that the U.S. must end these wars right away if we are to solve any of our problems of joblessness, inadequate health care and education, and all the other urgent dilemmas we are facing today.
Perhaps these elderly patriots don't have the energy of their younger days, but nevertheless they continue to struggle to end the wars and build a better society. Ms. Berrick, who is legally blind, sums it up when she says, "You don't give up. You just do what you're able to do."
Thursday, September 23, 2010
GRAY PANTHERS URGE AN END TO TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH
The Panthers are dedicated to creating a humane society where the needs of people are put over profit.
As the tax-cut debate rages through the Senate, the House, and among the prospective candidates for public office, the Gray Panthers are firmly committed to their stance that tax cuts for the wealthy must end.
Bucking the Tea Party and Right Winger presidential wannabes Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney, and other advocates for the super rich at the expense of all the rest of us, the Panthers have issued a proclamation outlining their proposals regarding tax cuts. Among their many resolutions is one demanding that the progressive taxation system practiced in many other developed democratic countries be adopted here.
Progressive taxation, as I'm sure my well-informed readers know, is a tax system in which those who earn higher incomes pay a higher percentage of their income than those with lower incomes. A graduated tax is one example. Seems very logical, doesn't it? If such were the case, then the current system of granting tax cuts to those earning $250,000 or more annually would be obviated.
Susan Murany, Executive Director of the National Gray Panthers, wants to know, “We do have to ask ourselves - as Americans- Is it fair that the rich continue to benefit from our financial policies while the people who are poor, the working poor and the middle class continue to suffer? Because as most of us continue to experience the recession, the number of millionaires continues to increase. “
The gap between the wealthiest Americans and middle- and working-class Americans has more than tripled in the past three decades, according to a June 25 report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities." Murany says, “It’s no surprise that over 60 percent of all income growth since 1979 has gone to the top 10 percent.”
According to this information, it would certainly seem that eliminating their tax cuts would hurt the pocketbooks of the rich a lot less than eliminating cuts for ordinary folks, doesn't it?
In addition to recommending a progressive taxation policy, the Panthers offer a number of other suggestions to reform the tax system. Among them, they advise the elimination of tax loopholes which support consumption and accumulation of wealth by corporations and wealthy individuals at the expense of ordinary wage earners. They also call for laws and policies which hold corporations accountable for delivering social benefits (living wage jobs, pollution controls, environmental protection, workplace safety and more) to states and localities which compete for corporate investments in their jurisdictions.
The Panthers further state that they oppose war, and believe it would be less likely if it were not funded with debt but with current taxes, and therefore counsel Congress to enact a separate, dedicated and progressive tax sufficient to cover the costs of war in Afghanistan and each and every future war.
The Gray Panthers are tired of such statements as that of, for example, Newt Gingrich, "I think to raise taxes on people who create jobs in the middle of a 9.5 percent unemployment rate is, frankly, crazy." Inasmuch as more and more corporations are transplanting jobs to low-wage workers in other countries, that comment seems a bit disingenuous. Our history has shown more than once that expanded wealth at the top does not trickle down into the pockets of the less fortunate. Such pronouncements are simply not true and it is sort of mind-boggling to imagine that ordinary people would swallow them.
The Gray Panthers have committed themselves to working for social and economic justice and as such, see the extension of tax cuts for the rich as a justice issue. The well-to-do have been getting richer for decades. They now have the responsibility like all of us to contribute their fair share for the benefit of all.
As the tax-cut debate rages through the Senate, the House, and among the prospective candidates for public office, the Gray Panthers are firmly committed to their stance that tax cuts for the wealthy must end.
Bucking the Tea Party and Right Winger presidential wannabes Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney, and other advocates for the super rich at the expense of all the rest of us, the Panthers have issued a proclamation outlining their proposals regarding tax cuts. Among their many resolutions is one demanding that the progressive taxation system practiced in many other developed democratic countries be adopted here.
Progressive taxation, as I'm sure my well-informed readers know, is a tax system in which those who earn higher incomes pay a higher percentage of their income than those with lower incomes. A graduated tax is one example. Seems very logical, doesn't it? If such were the case, then the current system of granting tax cuts to those earning $250,000 or more annually would be obviated.
Susan Murany, Executive Director of the National Gray Panthers, wants to know, “We do have to ask ourselves - as Americans- Is it fair that the rich continue to benefit from our financial policies while the people who are poor, the working poor and the middle class continue to suffer? Because as most of us continue to experience the recession, the number of millionaires continues to increase. “
The gap between the wealthiest Americans and middle- and working-class Americans has more than tripled in the past three decades, according to a June 25 report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities." Murany says, “It’s no surprise that over 60 percent of all income growth since 1979 has gone to the top 10 percent.”
According to this information, it would certainly seem that eliminating their tax cuts would hurt the pocketbooks of the rich a lot less than eliminating cuts for ordinary folks, doesn't it?
In addition to recommending a progressive taxation policy, the Panthers offer a number of other suggestions to reform the tax system. Among them, they advise the elimination of tax loopholes which support consumption and accumulation of wealth by corporations and wealthy individuals at the expense of ordinary wage earners. They also call for laws and policies which hold corporations accountable for delivering social benefits (living wage jobs, pollution controls, environmental protection, workplace safety and more) to states and localities which compete for corporate investments in their jurisdictions.
The Panthers further state that they oppose war, and believe it would be less likely if it were not funded with debt but with current taxes, and therefore counsel Congress to enact a separate, dedicated and progressive tax sufficient to cover the costs of war in Afghanistan and each and every future war.
The Gray Panthers are tired of such statements as that of, for example, Newt Gingrich, "I think to raise taxes on people who create jobs in the middle of a 9.5 percent unemployment rate is, frankly, crazy." Inasmuch as more and more corporations are transplanting jobs to low-wage workers in other countries, that comment seems a bit disingenuous. Our history has shown more than once that expanded wealth at the top does not trickle down into the pockets of the less fortunate. Such pronouncements are simply not true and it is sort of mind-boggling to imagine that ordinary people would swallow them.
The Gray Panthers have committed themselves to working for social and economic justice and as such, see the extension of tax cuts for the rich as a justice issue. The well-to-do have been getting richer for decades. They now have the responsibility like all of us to contribute their fair share for the benefit of all.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Michael Moore just posted an article on various web sites, "NEVER FORGET: BAD WARS AREN'T POSSIBLE UNLESS GOOD PEOPLE BACK THEM," in which he argues that the leading liberals of the time and the liberal media were largely responsible for the Iraq war by supporting rather than opposing it. Moore also details the public abuse and threats he took as a result of his principled anti-war stance. I felt moved to write a response.
Dear Michael Moore:
I applaud you for opposing the war back then when most people, including liberal big leaguers, were so gullible and cowed that they actually supported the Bush crime syndicate's sinister plot. I know you were razzed and attacked for speaking out and I am certainly sympathetic for the hard times you endured, knowing as you did how correct you were. But today at least you have the satisfaction of knowing that the world knows you opposed the war when others didn't dare to, and that you were right and they were wrong. You are now, justifiably, a hero to millions.
As you state, you weren't the only one, though your anti-war stance had the advantage of being widely noted, thus having the possibility of persuading people to rally against this iniquity being jammed down our throats. For instance, a group of us old New York City grandmothers, calling ourselves the Granny Peace Brigade, knew the war was wrong, too. We also never believed for one moment that there was any reason to invade Iraq. We read the New York Times and we, too, didn't believe. We heard that Hillary Clinton agreed we should attack Iraq, and we, too, still didn't believe. Our hearts broke when Al Franken went along with the program, and John Kerry, and Chuck Schumer and all the other Limp Liberals, and we didn't believe them, either.
And, Colin Powell, a man supposedly of impeccable character. Huh! We didn't believe him for one minute, either, as he shuffled all those maps in front of the cameras claiming they were proof of the WMDs. We knew there would be terrible consequences and that thousands of innocent people and our own military kids would die and be horribly wounded, physically and mentally. We knew it was a complete crock.
We trembled with outrage as CNN whooped it up during the hideous, unprovoked "Shock and Awe" bombing of Iraq as if it were the latest action movie. For shame!
So we, too, went out on a limb and tried to stop it. Soon after the war began, eighteen of us elderly grandmothers ranging in age from 60 through 90 went down to the Times Square military recruiting station and tried to enlist. We figured we'd had the good fortune to live long lives and we hoped to replace the kids so they'd have the same opportunity.
They didn't want us, though. In fact, they locked the door on us. So, we laboriously lowered our sore old joints and bones to the ground and sat. The cops came and asked us to move, but we wouldn't budge. We knew we were within our rights to hold a peaceful demonstration. Strangely, the police weren't as well acquainted with the Constitution, and they arrested us and took us to jail where we old ladies languished the afternoon away.
After that, we had several court appearances, always pushed along to the next one until finally we were put on trial in criminal court for six days. Wow, isn't it a credit to the City of New York that they caught us dangerous criminals and tried to convict us so the city would be safe?
Well, we were acquitted. We got some notice in the media, too, although it was short-lived. We decided to take advantage of our fifteen minutes of fame by doing everything within our power to try and alert the public of the folly, the immorality of our occupation of Iraq. We girded our over-the-hill but still kicking selves into one action after another. We began a weekly vigil in front of Rockefeller Center, called the Grandmothers Against the War vigil, which has continued without missing a single one through today no matter what the elements throw at us -- pouring rain, debilitating heat, freezing cold. We didn't incur national wrath, as you and the Dixie Chicks did, but we had to deal with our share of hecklers passing by, especially in the first few years.
We did parades across Brooklyn Bridge, a 10-day trek to Washington DC stopping at cities and towns along the way to spread the word. We wrote and performed shows with skits, comedy monologues, songs, and dramatic readings. We traveled to Europe and Central America to speak at peace meetings. We organized a national action wherein 100 grannies descended on the Capitol to lobby 100 senators for peace. We did a song and dance in the middle of Times Square. And more and more.
But, it didn't really do what we hoped. The war went on and on, and then our new President, who most of us old broads supported eagerly, went and increased the troops in Afghanistan. Yes, he had indicated during the campaign that he was going to focus on Afghanistan, but either we were too dazzled by him to notice or we figured once he was in office he'd see the light and bring them home. So, now, we are struggling to end TWO wars. Don't think for a minute we are hoodwinked into believing the war in Iraq is over. Uh uh! Fifty thousand troops is not chopped liver, and they are dying, too, in smaller numbers, to be sure, but that's immaterial to a worried parent.
So we go on and on without much applause or acknowledgment, because we HATE what we have done to Iraq and Afghanistan. We DEPLORE threats to Iran and Pakistan. We DESPISE every goddamned criminal war act we commit, always trying to justify them with phony rhetoric about democracy and safeguarding the homeland and all that blarney.
President Obama may not know about us. Our senators and Congress people may not, either, nor much of the media. But, we will go on and on even if nobody but passersby on the street see us. We will go on and on as long as we can stand up. We have our grandchildren to consider, you see. We must try to leave them with the world a modicum more peaceful than it is now. If only we had a lot of years ahead of us so we could keep on keeping on until that is achieved.
But, unfortunately we don't. And, it looks, sadly, like this state of war and chaos is going to continue for a long, long time. We urgently hope there are patriots out there to replace us when we are unable to continue.
Dear Michael Moore:
I applaud you for opposing the war back then when most people, including liberal big leaguers, were so gullible and cowed that they actually supported the Bush crime syndicate's sinister plot. I know you were razzed and attacked for speaking out and I am certainly sympathetic for the hard times you endured, knowing as you did how correct you were. But today at least you have the satisfaction of knowing that the world knows you opposed the war when others didn't dare to, and that you were right and they were wrong. You are now, justifiably, a hero to millions.
As you state, you weren't the only one, though your anti-war stance had the advantage of being widely noted, thus having the possibility of persuading people to rally against this iniquity being jammed down our throats. For instance, a group of us old New York City grandmothers, calling ourselves the Granny Peace Brigade, knew the war was wrong, too. We also never believed for one moment that there was any reason to invade Iraq. We read the New York Times and we, too, didn't believe. We heard that Hillary Clinton agreed we should attack Iraq, and we, too, still didn't believe. Our hearts broke when Al Franken went along with the program, and John Kerry, and Chuck Schumer and all the other Limp Liberals, and we didn't believe them, either.
And, Colin Powell, a man supposedly of impeccable character. Huh! We didn't believe him for one minute, either, as he shuffled all those maps in front of the cameras claiming they were proof of the WMDs. We knew there would be terrible consequences and that thousands of innocent people and our own military kids would die and be horribly wounded, physically and mentally. We knew it was a complete crock.
We trembled with outrage as CNN whooped it up during the hideous, unprovoked "Shock and Awe" bombing of Iraq as if it were the latest action movie. For shame!
So we, too, went out on a limb and tried to stop it. Soon after the war began, eighteen of us elderly grandmothers ranging in age from 60 through 90 went down to the Times Square military recruiting station and tried to enlist. We figured we'd had the good fortune to live long lives and we hoped to replace the kids so they'd have the same opportunity.
They didn't want us, though. In fact, they locked the door on us. So, we laboriously lowered our sore old joints and bones to the ground and sat. The cops came and asked us to move, but we wouldn't budge. We knew we were within our rights to hold a peaceful demonstration. Strangely, the police weren't as well acquainted with the Constitution, and they arrested us and took us to jail where we old ladies languished the afternoon away.
After that, we had several court appearances, always pushed along to the next one until finally we were put on trial in criminal court for six days. Wow, isn't it a credit to the City of New York that they caught us dangerous criminals and tried to convict us so the city would be safe?
Well, we were acquitted. We got some notice in the media, too, although it was short-lived. We decided to take advantage of our fifteen minutes of fame by doing everything within our power to try and alert the public of the folly, the immorality of our occupation of Iraq. We girded our over-the-hill but still kicking selves into one action after another. We began a weekly vigil in front of Rockefeller Center, called the Grandmothers Against the War vigil, which has continued without missing a single one through today no matter what the elements throw at us -- pouring rain, debilitating heat, freezing cold. We didn't incur national wrath, as you and the Dixie Chicks did, but we had to deal with our share of hecklers passing by, especially in the first few years.
We did parades across Brooklyn Bridge, a 10-day trek to Washington DC stopping at cities and towns along the way to spread the word. We wrote and performed shows with skits, comedy monologues, songs, and dramatic readings. We traveled to Europe and Central America to speak at peace meetings. We organized a national action wherein 100 grannies descended on the Capitol to lobby 100 senators for peace. We did a song and dance in the middle of Times Square. And more and more.
But, it didn't really do what we hoped. The war went on and on, and then our new President, who most of us old broads supported eagerly, went and increased the troops in Afghanistan. Yes, he had indicated during the campaign that he was going to focus on Afghanistan, but either we were too dazzled by him to notice or we figured once he was in office he'd see the light and bring them home. So, now, we are struggling to end TWO wars. Don't think for a minute we are hoodwinked into believing the war in Iraq is over. Uh uh! Fifty thousand troops is not chopped liver, and they are dying, too, in smaller numbers, to be sure, but that's immaterial to a worried parent.
So we go on and on without much applause or acknowledgment, because we HATE what we have done to Iraq and Afghanistan. We DEPLORE threats to Iran and Pakistan. We DESPISE every goddamned criminal war act we commit, always trying to justify them with phony rhetoric about democracy and safeguarding the homeland and all that blarney.
President Obama may not know about us. Our senators and Congress people may not, either, nor much of the media. But, we will go on and on even if nobody but passersby on the street see us. We will go on and on as long as we can stand up. We have our grandchildren to consider, you see. We must try to leave them with the world a modicum more peaceful than it is now. If only we had a lot of years ahead of us so we could keep on keeping on until that is achieved.
But, unfortunately we don't. And, it looks, sadly, like this state of war and chaos is going to continue for a long, long time. We urgently hope there are patriots out there to replace us when we are unable to continue.
Friday, September 10, 2010
A STUDENT ANSWERS MY QUESTIONS
Please read this wonderfully articulate and insightful response to the blog I posted immediately before this (see below), as follows:
A Young Person
Posted September 8, 2010 at 10:58 PM
Dear Ms. Wile,
I think you are absolutely right to remark on the apathy of the young in modern times. You may find it revealing that despite the size and location of a campus like NYU, the students at large are vastly apathetic. The largest campus political club are the College Republicans (a tragedy) and even they are not especially well-populated.
I think most young people accept a state of war as a common feature of the political landscape. I was 13 during 9/11, so in the crucial years when one strikes out to form an independent view the default state of the world was one of war.
Perhaps more importantly, it is a state of great detachment from the realities of war. I am sure you are well aware of the US government's policies about keeping caskets and dead bodies off of the air waves. I believe this explains the shock that accompanied the release of Wikileaks' video "Collateral Murder," which was not especially graphic given the sort of imagery that war so often creates. I cried when I saw the video, not just because it was disturbing, but because I (and many, many more like me) routinely play video games that simulate this sort of activity with great accuracy. Our so-called "brave men in uniform" murder indiscriminately using an interface (and with the same sort of sanitized, black-and-white feedback) that I can experience at my desk at home. I've even read that Playstation controllers are being used inside APC's because the youthful machine gunner recruits are already acclimated to the control scheme and attuned to staring at screens hosing human forms with bullets.
Young people are also generally spoiled and materialistic. Many young people do not hold jobs and have never held a job; but instead of using this fortunate position to improve their thinking and thus the world, most seem content spending all of their time indulging their vanity by buying designer clothes and slouching around coffee shops talking about foreign films. This appears especially true for the "radical leftist' types that, perhaps in a past era, one would expect to be kicking over the traces to end the war. Instead they study social work or write dissertations on airy notions of "social justice' to get a perpetually secure union job working for the government -- the same institution that perpetrates the greatest injustices towards peaceful society the world over.Many smart students are also siphoned off into high-paying military jobs or into the massive network of private firms that support the military. Two young people that I knew as a child, both of high intelligence and associated with religious pacifism growing up, now work for the military doing high-level computer science.
Perhaps a draft would interfere enough with a young person's life that the opposition would become audible. Or maybe young people would simply look at it as another opportunity to be cared for from cradle to grave, with all of life's troubles taken care of by a mysterious paternal force. At least until the bullets started flying!
Young people also know almost nothing about the history of American imperialism, nor do they know about the rich (and bipartisan!) antimilitarist tradition in America. Years of government school has only served to leave Uncle Sam looking strapping in his camouflage. This is probably why inanities like "they hate us for our freedom" have such currency in America.
Finally, most young people are more interested in remaining in the good graces of those around them than learning about the world. Despite all the adages about youthful folly and boldness, many young people do not have any opinions whatsoever: not even bad, ill-thought out ones waiting for mature reflection. War and peace? That sounds like a topic that would require reading a book or talking intelligently to adults -- I might even form an unpopular view if I entertain these ideas! Pshaw! Pass the Heineken!
Sincerely,
A Young Person.
A Young Person
Posted September 8, 2010 at 10:58 PM
Dear Ms. Wile,
I think you are absolutely right to remark on the apathy of the young in modern times. You may find it revealing that despite the size and location of a campus like NYU, the students at large are vastly apathetic. The largest campus political club are the College Republicans (a tragedy) and even they are not especially well-populated.
I think most young people accept a state of war as a common feature of the political landscape. I was 13 during 9/11, so in the crucial years when one strikes out to form an independent view the default state of the world was one of war.
Perhaps more importantly, it is a state of great detachment from the realities of war. I am sure you are well aware of the US government's policies about keeping caskets and dead bodies off of the air waves. I believe this explains the shock that accompanied the release of Wikileaks' video "Collateral Murder," which was not especially graphic given the sort of imagery that war so often creates. I cried when I saw the video, not just because it was disturbing, but because I (and many, many more like me) routinely play video games that simulate this sort of activity with great accuracy. Our so-called "brave men in uniform" murder indiscriminately using an interface (and with the same sort of sanitized, black-and-white feedback) that I can experience at my desk at home. I've even read that Playstation controllers are being used inside APC's because the youthful machine gunner recruits are already acclimated to the control scheme and attuned to staring at screens hosing human forms with bullets.
Young people are also generally spoiled and materialistic. Many young people do not hold jobs and have never held a job; but instead of using this fortunate position to improve their thinking and thus the world, most seem content spending all of their time indulging their vanity by buying designer clothes and slouching around coffee shops talking about foreign films. This appears especially true for the "radical leftist' types that, perhaps in a past era, one would expect to be kicking over the traces to end the war. Instead they study social work or write dissertations on airy notions of "social justice' to get a perpetually secure union job working for the government -- the same institution that perpetrates the greatest injustices towards peaceful society the world over.Many smart students are also siphoned off into high-paying military jobs or into the massive network of private firms that support the military. Two young people that I knew as a child, both of high intelligence and associated with religious pacifism growing up, now work for the military doing high-level computer science.
Perhaps a draft would interfere enough with a young person's life that the opposition would become audible. Or maybe young people would simply look at it as another opportunity to be cared for from cradle to grave, with all of life's troubles taken care of by a mysterious paternal force. At least until the bullets started flying!
Young people also know almost nothing about the history of American imperialism, nor do they know about the rich (and bipartisan!) antimilitarist tradition in America. Years of government school has only served to leave Uncle Sam looking strapping in his camouflage. This is probably why inanities like "they hate us for our freedom" have such currency in America.
Finally, most young people are more interested in remaining in the good graces of those around them than learning about the world. Despite all the adages about youthful folly and boldness, many young people do not have any opinions whatsoever: not even bad, ill-thought out ones waiting for mature reflection. War and peace? That sounds like a topic that would require reading a book or talking intelligently to adults -- I might even form an unpopular view if I entertain these ideas! Pshaw! Pass the Heineken!
Sincerely,
A Young Person.
Thursday, September 9, 2010
GRANDMA WANTS TO KNOW
Dear Grandson (a senior at New York University):
Those of us actively engaged in the anti-war movement have had a spectacular lack of success in bringing the current wars to an end. We can’t help feeling that if the youth of America were part of our movement, things would be vastly different. Unfortunately, we’ve seen little signs of student involvement or even, to be frank, concern. To us, it seems as if there is tremendous apathy among our youth as to caring about or even noticing that your peers (in age) are dying and suffering horrendous wounds every day in wars which we among the anti-war people deplore as unwise and unconscionable, as well as unproductive in terms of making the U.S. more secure.
During the Vietnam War, there was a massive student movement opposing that conflict. I don’t have the expertise to analyze how large a role that played in bringing the war to an end, but I suspect it may have been one of the key (if not THE key) factors in persuading President Nixon and his cabinet to withdraw from that trouble spot.
Of course, as we all know, there was a draft at that time, which probably fueled the huge numbers of students protesting the war. Or, were there other reasons, also, for student participation? Was there a difference in political consciousness or even character in a young person of the 60s and 70s … or what? Would a return of the draft now have a similar effect? Would it mobilize you and your ranks to revolt against the wars in numbers large enough to stop the occupations? Or would it simply add to the carnage of young people being slaughtered in Iraq and, now, particularly, in Afghanistan without effecting a change in policy?
Those are the questions I pose to you. I hope to provoke you to pay some attention to this matter, and, in so doing, stimulate discussion among you and your friends which will assist us in understanding your attitudes. Perhaps, then, we can figure out ways to engage you in our struggle.
It really is more YOUR struggle than ours — the trillions being spent to fund these wars decrease assets for education, housing, health care, and most pertinent to your needs, JOBS. And, I don’t want to alarm you, but in years to come, perhaps there will be a conscription and your lives will be on the line. Not a happy thought.
If you oppose the wars, as do I, then I should expect you to have some interest in trying to stop them. If you support them, I wonder if perhaps you are at all motivated to volunteer to fight in them. Tell me, I want to understand. Maybe you are so despairing about citizen action having any discernible effect that you just want to concentrate on the things at hand — your studies, your fraternity, your college-related activities. If that’s the case, I don’t blame you, certainly. I am very discouraged, too, and sometimes think, “What’s the use?” I also realize that you haven’t got the time, in all likelihood, to add protesting to your schedule. I remember college well — that feeling you’re always lugging a hundred-pound weight on your back as you try to do all the required reading, write the essays, and prepare for the tests. Ye gods, what pressure!
Manhattan Congressman Charles Rangel has introduced a bill every year since the beginning of the invasion of Iraq to bring back the draft. Part of his reasoning is that there would be such a giant student uprising that the wars would be over within a few months. What is your opinion about that?
I queried some of the people in my anti-war groups -- Grandmothers Against the War, Vets for Peace, Peace Action, the Granny Peace Brigade, et al -- regarding the draft. Some feel it would not achieve the same results today as it did in Vietnam and that creating jobs and a better economy are what is needed. Some feel it is the missing ingredient in our unsuccessful quest to bring the troops home. Others, like me, are uncertain.
I really want to know your thoughts and earnestly hope you and your fellow students will think a bit about the questions I’ve raised and let me know what your conclusions. We grandmothers and other older people amongst the war opposition groups will not be here much longer to fight this fight. At some point, you will have to take on the battle yourselves.
Or not?
Those of us actively engaged in the anti-war movement have had a spectacular lack of success in bringing the current wars to an end. We can’t help feeling that if the youth of America were part of our movement, things would be vastly different. Unfortunately, we’ve seen little signs of student involvement or even, to be frank, concern. To us, it seems as if there is tremendous apathy among our youth as to caring about or even noticing that your peers (in age) are dying and suffering horrendous wounds every day in wars which we among the anti-war people deplore as unwise and unconscionable, as well as unproductive in terms of making the U.S. more secure.
During the Vietnam War, there was a massive student movement opposing that conflict. I don’t have the expertise to analyze how large a role that played in bringing the war to an end, but I suspect it may have been one of the key (if not THE key) factors in persuading President Nixon and his cabinet to withdraw from that trouble spot.
Of course, as we all know, there was a draft at that time, which probably fueled the huge numbers of students protesting the war. Or, were there other reasons, also, for student participation? Was there a difference in political consciousness or even character in a young person of the 60s and 70s … or what? Would a return of the draft now have a similar effect? Would it mobilize you and your ranks to revolt against the wars in numbers large enough to stop the occupations? Or would it simply add to the carnage of young people being slaughtered in Iraq and, now, particularly, in Afghanistan without effecting a change in policy?
Those are the questions I pose to you. I hope to provoke you to pay some attention to this matter, and, in so doing, stimulate discussion among you and your friends which will assist us in understanding your attitudes. Perhaps, then, we can figure out ways to engage you in our struggle.
It really is more YOUR struggle than ours — the trillions being spent to fund these wars decrease assets for education, housing, health care, and most pertinent to your needs, JOBS. And, I don’t want to alarm you, but in years to come, perhaps there will be a conscription and your lives will be on the line. Not a happy thought.
If you oppose the wars, as do I, then I should expect you to have some interest in trying to stop them. If you support them, I wonder if perhaps you are at all motivated to volunteer to fight in them. Tell me, I want to understand. Maybe you are so despairing about citizen action having any discernible effect that you just want to concentrate on the things at hand — your studies, your fraternity, your college-related activities. If that’s the case, I don’t blame you, certainly. I am very discouraged, too, and sometimes think, “What’s the use?” I also realize that you haven’t got the time, in all likelihood, to add protesting to your schedule. I remember college well — that feeling you’re always lugging a hundred-pound weight on your back as you try to do all the required reading, write the essays, and prepare for the tests. Ye gods, what pressure!
Manhattan Congressman Charles Rangel has introduced a bill every year since the beginning of the invasion of Iraq to bring back the draft. Part of his reasoning is that there would be such a giant student uprising that the wars would be over within a few months. What is your opinion about that?
I queried some of the people in my anti-war groups -- Grandmothers Against the War, Vets for Peace, Peace Action, the Granny Peace Brigade, et al -- regarding the draft. Some feel it would not achieve the same results today as it did in Vietnam and that creating jobs and a better economy are what is needed. Some feel it is the missing ingredient in our unsuccessful quest to bring the troops home. Others, like me, are uncertain.
I really want to know your thoughts and earnestly hope you and your fellow students will think a bit about the questions I’ve raised and let me know what your conclusions. We grandmothers and other older people amongst the war opposition groups will not be here much longer to fight this fight. At some point, you will have to take on the battle yourselves.
Or not?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)