I spent most of yesterday watching with amusement all of the insanitea going on locally and nationally, and was reminded that it only takes a small group of committed tea baggers to change the world…

Speaking of which I think that this guy only rents to conservatives…

Today in math class we start the last section of the semester, and I noticed that about a third of the class was not there. Our professor noted that about that many of our classmates had dropped the class before the drop deadline. So, now begins the final push of the semester, and math is the class that I am going to have to push the hardest on.

I ended up skipping Government class today, simply because I had to finish a homework assignment for Geography that I forgot about until this morning. The assignment was to watch a video of Thomas Friedman giving a lecture at MIT about globalization and then to answer different questions about the lecture. It was a relatively easy assignment, but it was actually very interesting to watch. I was however disappointed that we did not discuss the assignment in class.

Today I started researching one of the two topics for my country study project: religion in Pakistan. It has been interesting to read about religion, specifically Islam, in Pakistan, especially since I am current reading a book by Benazir Bhutto. A State Department report from 2007 presented an interesting analysis on religion in Pakistan, specifically the persecution on non-Muslims. Despite the progress that has been made there is still a significant amount of inequality in how the law is applied to minority groups.

I actually made it out of bed at six this morning, which rarely happens. However, this morning I wanted to get in some studying before my math exam, and I had a few other things to take care of before class. I had to feed the cats, make Rachel lunch, and finish the laundry. I managed to study some of what would be on the exam, but I had that feeling like I was forgetting something. I drank a cup of coffee and watched Morning Joe on MSNBC, which I think should be remained to Morning Mika. But that’s just me.

I think I did alright on the Math exam, but there were a couple problems that I did not do because I could not remember one of the steps. Of course after I turned in the exam I looked over my notes and realize the then all too obvious answer. So, hopefully I pulled a high B on this exam.

Government class was interesting; we continued our lecture and classroom discussion about the presidency. The first topic we discussed was the president’s veto power, and the “line item veto.” I spoke up and said that I thought that it was unconstitutional (the Supreme Court agrees with me by the way) because it gave too much power to the executive branch without the ability of the congress to check that power. If the president vetoes a specific line item congress does not have the opportunity to override that veto. I think that as a general rule it is never a good idea to have a policy that you would like on President to be able to exercise and not another.

Cultural Geography class was spent on a lecture about urban geography, specifically the different theories explaining the layouts of cities. There are a few different types of urban models, the Burgess, sector, and multiple nuclei models. The entire time I listened and took notes I was thinking about playing SimCity, and trying out the different urban models. We also spent a part of close calling out names of cities and towns in Texas, and our professor mapped them out on the dry erase board to illustrate the central place theory.

There was a debate tonight, a debate about concealed guns on campus. I only watched the first hour; I used my dinner break to watch. I thought that it went quite well, and both sides where engaging and presented interesting arguments. It would probably be impossible for me to form an unbiased opinion on which side presented the better case, because I am involved in opposing concealed guns on campus. However, I thought that the supporter provided a very good argument, and I thought that the most positive aspect of his presentation was the ability to stay on message. I thought the opposing side also presented a very good argument, and I thought he presented his message in a way that was very engaging with the audience and tried to provide examples of the ramifications if the policy was adopted. As for weaknesses I thought that the supporting side was heavy on statistics, which if you provide too many statistics your audience gets lost in numbers. I thought that the opposing side missed a few opportunities to press specific points, and there were certain phrases that he over used. Whether or not it changed anyone’s mind or not, I thought it was a positive just that we are actually involving the student body in the debate.  

I managed to make it through English class this morning without any caffeine, although I was strongly considering not going to class. I stopped at the front door of my house and thought for a moment this morning before I decided to walk to campus; even though I have only missed one day of class it is always better to go to class than not go to class.

After English class I spent most of my time constantly moving around the house, and Ramses constantly followed me around the house attacking my feet or meowing at me for attention. Khufu may come into the office and lay down in Rachel’s chair if I am on the computer for an extended amount of time, but usually she can be found on the bed soaking up the mid-morning sun. I cleaned up the living room and made the bed, and I put away the clean dishes but did not get around to cleaning the dirty dishes. I checked my emails more than a few times, and updated my Facebook status and posted a couple links. I was also able to finish 2 ½ loads of laundry, and make myself a couple of sandwiches for lunch.

I stared reading Reconciliation: Islam, Democracy, and the West, by Benazir Bhutto, and I continued reading Inside the Wire by Erik Saar. For some reason I tend to read two books at the same time, switching back and forth between the two. I think it comes from my multitasking personality, and probably from eight years of multitasking as an intelligence analyst.

I was asked today to run for President of On Campus Activities of the Blinn Student Government Association, and I was actually approached to run for the office by the President of Blinn Students for Concealed Carry on Campus. I did not make a commitment to run for the office, and I wonder how much I should load my plate with activities. I am planning on running for President of the Blinn College Democrats next year, and hopefully start up a student veterans organization. The BCD will not be as much work as it was this year for obvious reasons, and I would really like to only take a minimal leadership role in the veterans organization.

If I did decide to run for office then I would be able to attend the annual convention in Austin, and next year the SGA is going to Washington D.C. That is what I call a strong motivational factor. Holding a leadership position does look good on paper, and the idea of being able to visit the epicenter of policy making holds a very strong allure to me. So I think I am going to wait a few days to decide.

1. “The Man Comes Around” – Johnny Cash

2. “Bridging the Gap” – Nas

3. “Waiting” – The Devlins

4. “American Idiot” – Green Day

5. “Comin’ Where I Come From” – Anthony Hamilton

6. “Testify” – Rage Against the Machine

7. “Get Up Stand Up” – Bob Marley

8. “Where is My Mind?” – Pixies

9. “The Green Fields of France” – Dropkick Murphys

10. “Stand” – R.E.M.

11. “Just Like You Imagined” – Nine Inch Nails

12. “Mannish Boy” – Muddy Waters

13. “The Pretender” – Foo Fighters

14. “Locomotive Breath” – Jethro Tull

15. “Mobscene” – Marilyn Manson

16. “All Along the Watchtower” – Jimi Hendrix

17. “One Time Too Many” – P.J. Harvey

18. “Money” – Pink Floyd

19. “Walk the Walk” – Poe

20. “Take to the Sky” – Tori Amos

This came across my Facebook page today; a friend who is a legislative associate for the VFW posted it.

The biggest problem I have with that video is that by identifying the student as a veteran you are insinuating that this is a common occurrence with veterans at colleges and universities. My experience is the complete opposite; veterans tend to be the most respectful of their professors and instructors and the most disciplined and productive.

The other problems I have are with the student’s portrayal of the veteran, the stereotyping of all veterans (and thereby service members) as ignorant and prone to anger, and no mention of the use of a veteran’s affairs office, or the possibility of PTSD. With all of the actual challenges that veterans face, especially some of the disabled veterans that I know, colleges and universities should be reaching out to veterans not stereotyping them.

Another one of my friends and fellow veterans who works for a women’s veterans advocacy organization had this to say:

This is how significantly huge the disconnect is between our universities and our Servicemembers. They actually thought there was nothing wrong with this video... and if a university such as Penn State is this out of touch, imagine what the rest of America's universities must think about veterans.

Enough is enough. The protestors of the 60's and 70's have become the professors of today's youth. Now their ideas are outdated and off line with the whole of today's society.They grew up in a different time when they were unable to differentiate policy with the people who served under those policies. America's youth, today, are quite a bit different.

As veterans continue to seek out higher education and utilize the benefits they've earned with their selfless service, these misinformed people will perhaps gain some perspective. It's through veterans and vets' groups like Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, Student Veterans of America, the Veterans of Foreign Wars and soon American Women Veterans that this education of our educators will occur.

Perhaps they should have done a bit more research with any of these organizations before producing the video... or even their own student veteran population.

I turned in my position paper on why Guantanamo Bay should be closed this morning in my English class, and afterwards she had us fill out of instructor critiques before letting us out of class. Before class I was listening to the students around me, and for a moment it looked as though our professor was not going to show. During these discussions I listen to the students mostly complain about the class and how they did not like her grading style. They compared grades that ranged from C- to D to F+. One of the students (who received the D) complained that she graded harshly, moments after almost bragging about not using any sources. In a small way I was disappointed that they did not inquire about my grade so I could reveal that I got an A- and that perhaps that the professor did not grade harshly they were just terrible writers.

I spent most of the afternoon in the computer lab finishing Eight O’clock Ferry to the Windward Side, it is an extremely enlightening book and it is written from a very interesting perspective. The author, Clive Stafford Smith, writes about his experience as a defense lawyer for some of the detainees being held at Guantanamo Bay. Smith is also facing charges from the Pentagon that he was acting unprofessionally by sending a letter to President Obama detailing the abuses that his clients suffered in Guantanamo. Smith submitted the letter to the Pentagon and the five sided building blacked out everything but the title. So, Smith sent both letters to President Obama so he could see firsthand what it was the Pentagon did not want him to read.

Tonight I also started reading Inside the Wire by Erik Saar, an Army linguist who served at Guantanamo. The prologue itself has been interesting because he joined the army roughly around the same time I joined the Navy, and he mentions things that I am familiar with. In fact we where both stationed at the same base (Fort Huachuca, Arizona) but at different periods of time. The writing is not as good as Smith’s, but that is to be expected. I am looking forward to delving further into this book. Also, there is another book that was written by retired army colonel titled Inside Gitmo: The True Story Behind the Myths of Guantanamo Bay. It should be interesting to compare and contrast those two accounts.

Also, surprisingly enough I was interviewed this afternoon about the concealed gun law that passed committee this afternoon. The student who is the Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC) came by the lab and let me know that there was a reporter from KHRD and that he was interested in a statement from the students against the bill.

I met the reporter in the courtyard in front of the student center, and he set me up with a microphone that clipped to my shirt and then set the camera on me while she stood behind it. He then asked me for my name (and asked me to spell it), and what organization I was representing. Then he asked me what my reaction was to the bill passing, and I basically said that the bill passing committee was expected and that now it is going to the house for debate and vote. Then he asked me what the best case scenario was and I basically said for the bill not to pass, but if it did pass there was still action that could be taken on campuses throughout the state.

Then I was able to mention something I thought was particularly poignant when the reporter asked me what type of actions we could take if the bill passed. In my description of campus activism I mentioned that even though I was affiliated with the College Democrats that this is not a partisan issue, that there is bipartisan support against allowing guns on campus as in evidence that during the debate next week a Republican will be arguing against allowing concealed guns on campus. I said that this is not a partisan issue bat a campus safety issue. However, we will find out what they use on the news tonight.
 

A fascinating article written by one of the more interesting intellectual conservatives.

 

National Security and Civil Liberties:

Why Guantanamo Bay Should Be Closed

“[I]t [is] more beneficial that many guilty persons should go unpunished than one innocent person should suffer. . . . [W]hen innocence itself is brought to the bar and condemned, especially to die, the subject will exclaim, ‘It is immaterial to me whether I behave well or ill, for virtue itself is no security.”

-John Adams

The “War on Terror” has raised a fundamental question concerning human rights, and this question has taken the form of Guantanamo Bay. Should alleged terrorists be afforded civil liberties? Every person has inalienable rights, and as the defender of these rights the United States is obligated to protect the rights of even those that would seek to eliminate those rights. There have been documented violations of civil rights at Guantanamo Bay, and those violations are a threat to everyone’s civil rights. In a Letter From Birmingham Jail Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. wrote that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” (King 79). The continued operation of detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay has negative effects on the United States’ role as a world leader, it is counterproductive to combating terrorism, and it violates the founding principles of America. Guantanamo Bay should be closed.

Since January of 2002, the United States has been operating a prison on the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba. This facility was designed to hold detainees that the Bush Administration designated “enemy combatants.” Since the prison began operation almost 800 detainees have been held at Guantanamo and over 500 of these detainees have been released. When President Obama signed an executive order to close Guantanamo approximately 244 detainees remained in custody. Regardless of the Bush Administration’s rhetoric many of those detained where not terrorists, and despite being denied due process a significant number of detainees have been exonerated.

The continued operation of Guantanamo Bay has been counterproductive in combating terrorism, has contributed to the recruitment of new terrorists, and has created a national security risk for the United States. The abuse and torture of detainees places service members at risk on the battlefield. Matthew Alexander, an Air Force interrogator who served in Iraq, described that the main reason why foreign fighters came to Iraq was because of the events at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay. “It’s no exaggeration to say that at least half of our losses and casualties in that country [Iraq] have come at the hands of foreigners who joined the fray because of our program of detainee abuse” (Alexander).

The Bush Administration supported a policy that advocated the “enhanced interrogation” of detainees, including forms of torture such as water boarding. However, these interrogation techniques do not produce accurate intelligence. According to an article in the Washington Post Abu Zubaida provided valuable intelligence about al-Qaeda, however, under pressure from the Bush Administration Zubaida received “enhanced interrogation.” While being tortured Zubaida confessed to many terrorist plots but “not a single significant plot was foiled as a result of Abu Zubaida’s tortured confessions” (Finn).

Guantanamo Bay has cast a long shadow on America which has had a profound effect on America’s role as a world leader. North Korea is currently detaining two American journalists, Laura Ling and Euna Lee of Current TV. The journalists are being held on vague charges, and the North Korean government has announced that the journalists will be put on trial. According to an article by Tim Johnson of the McClatchy newspaper service, when the North Korean government was questioned on whether the journalists were receiving harsh treatment they responded by saying “We are not Guantanamo” (Johnson). When a country such as North Korea, whose human rights violations are numerous and well documented, uses the United States as an example of human rights violations we must question how our policies have affected our standing in the world.

Supporters of Guantanamo would argue that protecting national security is of greater importance than protecting civil liberties, especially when they are the civil liberties of people accused of violating our own civil liberties. However, national security and civil liberties are not mutually exclusive; if we do not protect civil liberties we are placing our national security at risk. Protecting civil liberties protects our national security. There are others that argue that people that violate our civil liberties do not deserve the protection of them, that people who break the rule of law do not deserve its protections. This goes against the very foundation of those principles we proclaim to instill. The rights guaranteed in the Constitution do not only protect those who are not accused of violating the law, they also protect those who stand accused.

The United States should to continue to be an advocate for human rights. Justice and not vengeance should be sought against those that seek to terrorize the world. If the United States holds dear the founding principles that brought forth our nation Guantanamo Bay should be closed, because as our founding father and second President once said it is “more beneficial that many guilty persons should go unpunished than one innocent person should suffer” (Levine 87). Perhaps the fundamental question is how many innocent people are we willing to persecute in the name of “justice” until we become those that we seek?

Who knew that you could burn your finger on a printer? I found out that you could today.

Well, I never thought that I could be disappointed because of a three day weekend, but because of the holiday this weekend my position paper for English is due on Wednesday. So, I have will have two less days to work on the paper, which I started today. So, for most of the next two days I will be working on my paper; although fitting this argument in to only 750 words is going to prove more of a challenge than finishing the paper in two days.

I am spending much of the night working on a math quiz, and I will also be studying geography. My math quiz is due tomorrow and I have a geography exam tomorrow. I am paying the price for not doing more homework and more studying this weekend.

There is also a group on Facebook that should probably be renamed to “Upset, Rich, White, Privileged, College Kids.” Didn’t the Boston Tea Party take place because the colonist where upset about taxation without representation, and isn’t every student in that group represented by a Congressman and two Senators?

What. The. Fuck.

By the way, this is why Guantanamo Bay is important…

 

1. “America the Beautiful” – Keb’ Mo’

2. “World Outside” – The Devlins

3. “Big Wheel” – Tori Amos

4. “Wisemen” – James Blunt

5. “Grey” – Ani DiFranco

6. “The Weight” – Travis

7. “What’s Up” – 4 Non Blondes

8. “Just Like the Moon” – Brett Dennen

9. “Should’ve Known Better” – Nickel Creek

10. “Morning After” – Howie Day

11. “Two Coins” – Dispatch

12. “Save Me” – Amiee Mann

13. “Grey Room” – Damien Rice

14. “Mist of Down Below” – Duhks

15. “Burn One Down” – Ben Harper

16. “Subterranean Homesick Blues” – Bob Dylan

17. “Stop Crying Your Heart Out” – Oasis

18. “The Remedy (I Won’t Worry)” – Jason Mraz

19. “Parachutes” – Coldplay

20. “Cookie Jar” – Jack Johnson

The semester is winding down…

While I was walking back to the computer lab from the bookstore today, after getting a cup of coffee, I noticed one of the professors setting up two liter bottles of water on a contraption. His class was gathered together next to a staircase and they all watched as he proceeded to use an air compressor and fill the bottles with air.

I spent most of the afternoon working on math homework, finishing assignments and getting my notebook ready to turn in tomorrow. Tomorrow is my third test of the semester and I will be studying hard tonight so that I can get a better grade on this test than I did on the last test.

Yesterday at the Student Government Association (SGA) meeting a bill passed that proposes allowing student the ability to carry pepper spray or mace on campus. It was introduced by the Blinn College Republicans representative, and was cosponsored by myself (the Blinn College Democrats representative).

I also found out that Blinn College will also have a chapter of the Young Conservatives of Texas. While talking to the student that pushed for the admittance of the YCT at Blinn he told me that they are not as extreme as the Texas A&M chapter. The same student asked if there was (and he thought there was) a young liberal or progressive of Texas organization. I laughed at that thought.

Fifty days until the end of the semester.

Despite Spring Break being over there is something that makes it worth getting up on a Monday morning: Spring has begun. I know that does not seem like much, but I have my strange traditions. Since spring has started I can now start wearing my Hawaiian shirts; many of them are quite hideous. Also, with Spring I start listening to the Hawai’i mix on my iPod; the Hawai’i mix includes Jack Johnson, Ben Harper, G. Love, Bob Marley, The Animal Liberation Orchestra, Pepper, and of course Israel Kamakawiwo'ole.

This morning I was able to drag myself out of bed at 6:00am, which did give me plenty of time to take a shower, make coffee, and make lunch for Rachel. The weather was nice this morning; it is t-shirt weather once again. Although, English class was about as exciting as it always is. I think I was about to pay attention for about ten minutes before I started reading a book a bought this weekend that I am going to use for my research (at least that way I was doing something related to the class).

When I was home this morning, I read the news, I checked my email, and I updated my Facebook status. I drank some coffee and did some research. I watched some television, and played some Grand Theft Auto (Vice City).

At the computer lab on campus I spent much of my time reading Eight O’clock Ferry to the Windward Side: Seeking Justice in Guantanamo Bay by Clive Stafford Smith, a lawyer who represented detainees in GITMO. The first chapter outlines what amounts to a typical day when he has flown to the naval base on Cuba; he talks about the barracks that he lives in and the military escorts that are assigned to each attorney at the prison camps. In the second chapter he discusses the research that he did during the filming of a documentary for the BBC, in which he interviewed several people that either supported the use of torture or who had actually used torture.

The interesting thing about many those who supported the use of torture was that most of them supported the use in only theoretical situations, meaning that none of them had any proof that the practical application of torture would be effective. There was a Marine Corps Lieutenant-Colonel who during the Vietnam War used torture against the Viet Cong, but he even felt that outside of a battlefield situation torture was counterproductive. The officer was quoted in the book as saying “Torture can only achieve results if the threat comes immediately upon capture. Within forty-eight hours the enemy will already have taken steps to predicted dissemination of intelligence.”

The one example that is consistently used by those that support torture (although many of them are careful never to refer to it by that term) is the “Ticking Bomb” scenario. This is what Smith concludes in the final paragraph of this chapter:

“Various people I had interviewed had now made their case for torture and sometimes against. The ticking-time-bomb hypothetical, perhaps the most compelling argument in favour of torture, had been rolled out by every torture apologist I had encountered. Mike Baker denied that such an event ever took place during his time with the CIA. Indeed, with each person I interviewed – Professor Levin, Professor Dershowitz, Richard Perle and Big Bill Cowan [the Marine officer and Vietnam veteran that I referenced] – I gave them 500 years to come up with an example. Nobody could identify one instance where a catastrophic bomb had been defused by torture.

It is this ticking-time-bomb myth that is used to justify the nightmare of torture.”

When I woke up this morning Broadcast News was playing on American Movie Classics (AMC); when I was growing up Broadcast News was one of my favorite movies. When I had aspirations of becoming a journalist the three movies that I loved to watch where Broadcast News, The Paper, and All the Presidents Men. Those movies seemed to be about the real purpose of journalist: to find the truth and expose it to the public. Sometimes I still think about being a journalist, in the vein of Amy Goodman. However, political and social activism has become too important to me, and I do not think that I could bring an objective perspective to being a journalist.

I spent the rest of the day researching; I have begun reading The Dark Side. The opening chapters of the book are about what happened before September 11^th, and how much of what allowed the attacks to take place was the failure of the CIA to share information with the FBI. Beyond that, and more to the subject that I am researching, there where a few concrete examples of very important intelligence successes because interrogating suspected terrorist. None of these interrogations involved torture. In fact on of the most important intelligence finds was gained basically through feeding a terrorist suspect, and another was gained through promising a trial in the United States and not in the African country in which he was captured.

Tomorrow I will work on some more class work, and continue to research. Then tomorrow night Rachel and I are going to a pot luck at one of her coworker’s house. A couple of her coworker’s she likes, but for the most part she would rather not have to spend time with her coworkers outside of the office. However, one of her coworkers and her coworker’s husband are friends of ours so we will at least have some people to have a conversation with.

Tomorrow is the last day, weekday at least, of Spring Break. It has gone by too fast.

I spent the day thinking about racism, racist code words, and white privilege. I will go back to studying and working on homework tomorrow, but for today I am thinking and writing about race.

I did not wake up as early or as motivated as I usually do; I stayed in bed until 8:00am. So for most of the morning I felt as though I was running behind schedule. After browsing through the headlines, making some coffee, posting a blog, and writing a few emails I walked to the library. I was going to ride my bike to the library, but I find it is rather difficult to ride my bike and drink coffee at the same time. I could have road my bike and left the coffee, but if I did not drink my coffee there would not be much accomplished at the library.

I have always liked libraries. I remember when I was a young kid my dad would take me to the public library in Downtown Houston, and I was always amazed by the amount of knowledge in that building. Of course I could have spent more time actually researching the things that I would assigned in class, and less time walking down the many isles looking at titles and sometimes taking a book off the shelf and just reading through it.

I spent about an hour in the library this morning, and checked out seven books. Even though I found some interesting sources I was disappointed in the amount of books on the subject that I am researching, well, on the subjects that I am researching. Along with the books on Guantanamo I checked out a book about Pakistan for my cultural geography country study and a book about Texas v. Johnson for my government case study.

I checked out Guantanamo and the Abuse of Presidential Power by Joseph Margulies, The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned into a War on American Ideals by Jane Mayer, and The Inheritance: The World Obama Confronts and the Challenges to American Power by David E. Sanger. I am really looking forward to reading The Dark Side, because it invokes those infamous words of Vice President Dick Cheney, “We’ll have to work the dark side if you will; we’re going to have to spend time in the shadows.” I think that particular quote exemplifies the Bush Administrations thinking while perusing the “War on Terror.” That war was best described by Mark Danner when he wrote:

The phrase "War on Terror"—the signal slogan of that administration, so cherished by the man who took pride in proclaiming that he was "a wartime president"—has acquired in its pronouncement a permanent pair of quotation marks, suggesting something questionable, something mildly embarrassing: something past. And yet the decisions that that president made, especially the monumental decisions taken after the attacks of September 11, 2001—decisions about rendition, surveillance, interrogation—lie strewn about us still, unclaimed and unburied, like corpses freshly dead.

Tonight I will be celebrating St. Patrick’s Day with Rachel at Murphy’s Law; besides Thanksgiving I think that St. Patrick’s Day is probably my favorite holiday. I have had some interesting experiences during St. Patrick’s Day: I have celebrated St. Patrick’s Day in a Mexican border town, I have celebrated St. Patrick’s Day on the river in Savannah, Georgia, and I have celebrated St. Patrick’s Day in Waikiki, Hawai’i. Savannah actually has the second largest St. Patrick’s Day celebration in the United States, second only to Boston, Massachusetts. The best way to describe St. Patrick’s Day in Savannah is as an Irish Marti Gras. I have celebrated two St. Patrick’s Days in Hawai’i and it is probably my favorite place to be during St. Patrick’s Day. Both years the beer began to flow in the late morning and latest late into the evening, I ate corned beef and cabbage, and there are parades and block parties, and there is always a beach to lay on the next morning.

Today was the first day of Spring Break. I will not be spending Spring Break in South Padre Island; I will be spending Spring Break at home. At this point in my life spending a week on a beach that is really not particularly nice surrounded by thousands of drunken college kids is not exactly my idea of a good time.

This week I am going to be working on a few different things around the house; I am going to be fixing a few odds and ends and working in the yard on what will hopefully be the beginnings of a garden. Also, I will actually be working on plenty of homework; I will be studying preparing for a couple of test, and I will be researching on a few different projects.

I will be continuing my research on the effect the “War on Terror” has had on civil liberties focusing on the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. The exploratory paper that I turned in Friday only scratched the surface of the size and scope of the research that I am doing, and the amount of information that is out there is amazing. There are numerous books on the subject, ranging from books that are specifically about Guantanamo to books that are about the powers of the executive branch during wartime. There are literally thousands of newspaper and magazine articles, and I am trying to focus on just a few different newspapers and magazines to trace the different types of editorials and reports as the timeline progressed. There are also several reports that have been produced.  The Guantánamo Testimonials Project has a plethora of information, and the testimonials are in many cases very thorough. The Justice Department memos that where released have added valuable information to the broader context of the situation.

Another project that I will be researching will be a country study of Pakistan. In my cultural geography class our professor assigned us to groups of four, and each group was assigned a country. Each group divided up what each student will be researching, writing a paper about, and presenting in class. I will be researching the political geography of Pakistan as well as the religions in Pakistan. I chose those topics because of their significance in current events. Pakistan is perhaps the most important country in the world at the moment concerning United States foreign policy.

The last project that I will be researching will be a case study for government; I have chosen the Supreme Court case of Texas v. Johnson: the decision that invalidated prohibitions on desecrating the American flag. I find it personally interesting because I have always been strongly against laws that outlaw the “desecration” or burning of the American flag, and these beliefs I have held even before I had my liberal awakening. I think that it has its roots in my interests in journalism when I was younger; when I was high school I developed a strong interest in journalism and had even planned on becoming a journalist. While I studied journalism in high school and wrote for my school newspaper and my town’s newspaper I developed a great appreciation of the 1^st Amendment. Even after years in the military surrounded by people who strongly felt that burning an American flag should be against the law I never wavered on my opinion that burning a flag is absolutely protected by the 1^st Amendment, and that someone who burned a flag in protest was being as patriotic as someone that put on the uniform of the armed forces.

I will also be working on my history class work, my assignments are due this weekend. So, I will be reading more of A People’s History of the United States. Also, I will be preparing for next weeks discussion in government class which will be about civil rights. I will be re-reading White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack, because I know that in a room full of white college kids (there are three black students in my government class) I am going to have to call out privilege when topics move to affirmative action and a phrase that is used in my text book: “reverse racism.” Also, I recently bought the Cornel West Reader; Dr. West has been one of the intellectuals that I have really been fascinated by and that I have really been absorbed by just listening to him and reading his words.

So, that is what I am doing on Spring Break…

Civil Liberties and National Security:

Should Guantanamo Bay be closed?

In the days following the September 11^th terrorist attacks the United States Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor was quoted as saying “we’re likely to experience more restrictions on personal freedom than has ever been the case in our country” (Shapiro, 20).  The United States’ involvement in the “War on Terror” has lead to a public debate concerning civil liberties and how they are affected by the interests of national security.  Whether or not Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba should remain open as a detention facility for suspected and alleged terrorists has been the focus of the debate; this debate has taken place on the op-ed pages of newspapers such as the New York Times and the Washington Post and partisan magazines such as the Nation and the National Review have published articles taking positions on the issue.  The controversy surrounding the detention facility at Guantanamo has epitomized the debate between those that believe that civil liberties must be maintained and those that believe that national security must take precedence.

Supporters of the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay believe it is essential to fighting terrorism; their contention is that the United States must be able to hold suspected terrorists at the detention facility because it protects national security in several different ways. They believe that Guantanamo should remain open because the suspected terrorists are not conventional soldiers, because they do not wear military uniforms nor do they have allegiance to any particular country.  Supporters of Guantanamo argue that because they are not conventional soldiers the Geneva Conventions do not apply.  In a National Review article Lee A. Casey argues that “the Geneva Conventions were meant to protect the lawful soldiers of states…the treaties were not designed to protect irregular or ‘unlawful’ combatants” (Casey, 22).

Supporters believe that Guantanamo should remain open is because they believe that intelligence can be gathered from detainees to save lives on the battle field in Iraq and Afghanistan, intelligence can assist in thwarting terrorist attacks both in the United States and around the world.  However, opponents have argued that intelligence gathered through what has also been described as enhanced interrogation methods produces unreliable intelligence.

Opponents believe that the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay is counterproductive to fighting terrorism; they claim that the United States is not treating suspected terrorists humanly and that indefinite detention and denial of habeas corpus is violating their civil rights.  They contend that the detention facility places the nation’s national security at risk, and that Guantanamo Bay actually hampers the ability of the United States to combat terrorism throughout the world. 

            Those who are opposed to Guantanamo Bay call attention to the documented cases of mistreatment of detainees, and even cases of torture, which are violations of their basic human rights.  The images of abuses at Abu Ghraib and the reports of torture at Guantanamo can have far reaching effects.  The family members of those who have been abused or tortured or who have been detainees at Guantanamo Bay are “vulnerable to terrorist recruiters and often join the fights against the nation that wrongfully detained their father or brother” (Grebe).

            A compromise between the two positions has been difficult to produce possibly because it is complicated to establish a set of rules to govern the prosecution of terrorists.  What those who support Guantanamo tend to believe is that terrorism should be defeated with military force, while many of those who oppose Guantanamo believe that terrorism should be prosecuted through law enforcement.  Perhaps it is necessary to conquer terrorism with both military power and law enforcement prosecutions; terrorists should be brought to justice both on the battle field on in the court room.

            The debate surrounding Guantanamo Bay is a significant and important issue; it involves weighing the importance of national security against the importance of civil rights. The paradigm of terrorism does not respect laws or treaties, but it must also be taken into consideration that while combating terrorism our country must respect the laws or treaties that we have held as just.  While protecting America’s security we must also protect something less tangible. Our place in the world is not just to be symbol but to be example of what was written in the Constitution.  I believe that the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay should be closed; no longer should morality be “outweighed by necessity” (Lewis).

The rough draft of my exploratory paper is under the cut; it is a work in progress and I still am in the process of editing and revising. However, I would like to hear feedback and criticism; if you have any ideas or opinions feel free to leave comment.