county fair

Today, Ellen took me and her kids (Joseph, Thomas, and Amelia) to the fairgrounds, where we picked up the things that I had entered into competition at the Creative Arts Building. I had entered two pastel paintings, one small afghan (crocheted granny squares), and two crocheted doilies. I won an "honorable mention" for the afghan and "best of class" for the still life seen here. The green ribbon says "best of class" on it but that's kind of hard to see.
I am very happy with the results of the fair. It was great fun to enter stuff and to win prizes! Also, when I went to the fair, I got to take a walk with a llama, which was fun, too!

World Trade Center (the movie)

My friend Lynn took me and four other people to see a preview of the movie "World Trade Center."
It's the story of two Port Authority police officers who were buried alive in the rubble on 9/11 and who were pulled out alive. The officers were Sergeant John McLoughlin (played by Nicholas Cage) and Will Jimeno (played by Michael Pena). It depicts vividly and graphically the officers' descent into the pits of hell or into something that looks much like one would imagine to be the pits of hell. It also tells the story of the panic of the families of the two officers, when they find out that their loved ones are missing.
"World Trade Center" was a very gritty movie that strove for complete realism. There was altogether too much realism for me. Every shake, bump, and bang that the officers experienced was reproduced on screen. This produced an effect that should not be felt by those of us who are prone to motion sickness. A few sound effects without the shaking camera view would have produced the desired results, without creating a sensation of vertigo in viewers.
Another weakness in the movie was that it didn't give me a chance to know who the characters were before the disaster occurred. It turned two men into anonymous victims, instead of interesting people who were trying to survive despite the tremendous odds against them. Their families were depicted as panic striken and frantic. Other than that, they came across as being complete strangers.
More effort at character development in the script would have made this a much stronger, more emotionally moving film.
The rescue effort, however, was portrayed in an interesting way. For me, the character of former marine David Carnes (played by Michael Shannon) seemed to be the most interesting. He came across as a Don Quixote type, tilting at windmills and singing, "Onward to glory we go!"
Carnes managed to lead rescuers to the two trapped police officers in a slightly mad, yet heroic-type effort.
"I am Staff Sergeant Carnes," he told the other rescuers as he strode confidently onto the rubble of the World Trade Center.
I remembered from the musical, "I am I, Don Quixote!"
The ex-Marine believed that destiny was calling him to take this action.
Don Quixote felt the same way.
The former Marine was entertaining.
The movie's entertainment value was not sufficient, however, for me to recommend it to anyone. In fact, it felt as if I were trapped in a long nightmare. When the movie ended, I couldn't wait to get out of the theater. Unfortunately, the waves of vertigo that had hit at the early part of the movie, when the building shook and threatened to collapse on the heads of the Port Authority police officers, had not subsided. I had to get up slowly to get my bearings.
If you want to see a movie that depicts the 9/11 disaster and some of the rescuers involved, I recommend 9/11, a documentary by Jules and Gedeon Naudet. Originally planned to be a documentary about a new firefighter in his probationary period, this movie shows life in a firehouse when the disaster occurs. The two brothers present the lives of the firefighters, especially 21-year-old Tony Benetatos, with warmth. What happens to these firefighters and to one of the film makers, who is missing for a brief amount of time, matters to viewers who have gotten to know them before the disaster strikes.
Read more about this movie at http://www.ambafrance-us.org/culture/tv/programs/naudet911.html

Not Quite the Trial of the Century

The date for my Big Trial had arrived. I was prepared to plead "no contest" to the charge of "violation of a lawful order" and to make a speech. I had come to the conclusion that "violation of a lawful order" was a charge too stupid to deserve much of a response.
I also intended to ask to be sentenced to "community service."
I felt as ready as I could be to go to court on the morning of July 21.
I got up early and packed my bag and I had breakfast.
Before long, it was time to go to the federal courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia.
When we arrived at the courthouse, Art informed me that the judge who was assigned to my case, Judge Theresa Buchanan, was a "hanging judge," who had no difficulty in sending protesters to jail for as long as six months.
Horrors!
I had not anticipated the possibility of being sent to jail. In fact, I was so confident that I would not be sent to jail that I had bought a round-trip ticket and was scheduled to return home that very evening. I was looking forward to going to my friend's family reunion and felt that a stay in jail would "cramp my style."
But still, I knew that there were always consequences when one chose to challenge the U.S. government's policies and that a jail sentence was always a possibility.
On the floor where the trial was to be held, a bunch of people were already clustered around the prosecutor. He was talking about the two choices that defendants could make in Judge Buchanan's court. Guilty or not guilty.
So much for the "no contest" plea.
I had to respond to this charge.
I toyed with the idea of pleading guilty and of saying, "Yes, I did it. I violated the order to stay in a little fenced-in area and protest for the benefit of my fellow protesters. I did it on purpose and I am proud of what I did and I am sure that I will do it again!"
I was told that proclamation of guilt would most likely annoy the judge and encourage her to send me to jail.
On the other hand, I could plead "not guilty."
I didn't believe that the order was lawful. Therefore, I had not violated a law. How could I plead guilty to violating a law that I had not violated?
I went into the courtroom with the other fourteen defendants when it was our turn.
There were two prosecutors and two separate trials for the protesters.
Two of the protesters were charged with "violation of a lawful order" for a protest that occurred at the Pentagon on April 13. The prosecutor said that he couldn't find one of the witnesses to testify against Brian De Rouen so he was requesting that his case be dismissed. "Dismissed!" said the judge, who simultaneously banged her gavel. Brian returned to the spectators' seats. It was Susan Crane's turn to be tried. The prosecutor had no trouble finding the witnesses to testify against her. Apparently, Judge Buchanan and Susan were acquainted.
Susan chose to defend herself. Her trial was relatively brief. At the end, the judge found her guilty. Judge Buchanan was trying to figure out a sentence for Susan, who said that she would not pay a fine and that she would not cooperate with terms of probation, especially the part about "following the law." "I'll follow God's laws," Susan declared. Judge Buchanan was not too impressed with that. "Thirty days in jail," announced the judge. "You are to be remanded to the custody of the U.S. marshals."
The U.S. marshal was ready to remove Susan from the courtroom at once. The second prosecutor asked that Susan be allowed to stay where she was as she had another trial that was about to begin. Judge Buchanan said that it was all right for Susan to remain in the courtroom for her second trial.
One of the defendants in the second trial, concerning the March 20 protest near the Pentagon, had chosen to plead guilty. He was fined $75, and he left the courtroom.
All of the other defendants in court on July 21 were stipulating as to identity. That meant that we acknowledged that we had crossed the fence on March 20 so that we could continue walking to the Pentagon to deliver a coffin to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
Also, all of the defendants were ready to proceed "pro se" or without an attorney.
The prosecutor offered an opening statement and then one of the defendants, Maria Allwine, made an opening statement, about the war, Nuremberg Principles, and first amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and freedom to peacefully assemble and to ask the government for redress of grievances. How could an order that so obviously violated our first amendment rights be lawful?
The prosecution presented one witness, Major William Stout, of the Pentagon Police. After the prosecution finished asking him questions, one of the defendants, Michelle Grise, began cross examining him. The cross examination went on and on. Among the things that it revealed was that there were approximately 100 police on duty that day. Major Stout said that he had designed the "free speech zone" for us. He admitted that it would be difficult for people in the Pentagon to see us or hear us. He said that there was another "free speech zone" near the Pentagon metro stop but that it was determined that we could not be there for the March 20 protest.
In fact, I and a number of others had been at the "free speech zone" near the Pentagon metro stop earlier that morning. I had noticed then that more police were around than usual and that they seemed prepared to make arrests. They were sporting plastic handcuffs on their belts and there were a variety of barricades that were not normally at that spot.
Michelle questioned Major Stout for quite some time. His story became more and more disjointed as she cross examined him. When she was finished, a few other defendants asked Major Stout a few questions.
After Major Stout was excused from the stand, the prosecution rested its case. One of the defendants, Jean Athey, made a motion for a directed judgment of acquittal. That is a standard motion in any trial. Weren't we surprised when Judge Buchanan said that the prosecution failed to identify any of us as having been at the scene. "Case dismissed," she announced and banged her gavel loudly.
We were stunned when the trial ended so abruptly. The prosecution was even more stunned.
The U.S. marshal removed Susan.
The rest of us left/
And thus ended the trial that was to be the Trial of the Century but actually was more like the Trial of the Moment.

a week in washington, day three

Mary and I returned to the Palestine Center for lunch (delicious falafels and refreshing lemonade) and a talk, titled "Hamas, its Neighbors, and the Quartet." The speaker was Nadia Hijab, senior fellow and co-director of the Institute for Palestine Studies (Washington office). She has written several books, including Womanpower: The Arab debate on women at work (1988) and Citizens Apart: A Portrait of Palestinians in Israel (1990). She has also worked as a United Nations development offer and a journalist.
Ms. Hijab presented the history of various peace treaties between Israel and the Palestinians, paying special attention to the Oslo accords. She also discussed the concept of human rights. She defined three important human rights as being self-determination, freedom from military occupation, and the ability for persons to return to their homes. She said, "People deprived of their rights will always resist." The question is: will the resistance be violent or nonviolent?
According to Ms. Hijab, the Palestinians are resisting:

• the wall that Israel is building that "separates people." It seaprates "Palestinian areas from Israeli areas and Palestinian areas from (other) Palestinian areas." She suggested that the purpose of the wall was for Israel to be able to annex land and resources, especially access to water, a scarce commodity.
• the economic siege, which didn't end when Israel withdrew from Gaza. Produce could not be transported, and it was left to rot. Ms. Hijab quoted one Israeli as saying, "We have pulled out of Gaza and have left it a wasteland."
• the wholesale detention of Palestinians in Israeli jails. Many are arrested for no reason at all and held for long periods of time without charges being filed against them. There are 10,000 prisoners in Israeli jails.

Ms. Hijab described Hamas as the main Palestinian organization that is still resisting Israeli occupation. She said that Hamas first used only military resistance. It has evolved to including political, diplomatic, and economic resistance. Hamas did this because many people were "tired of suicide bombings and of the retaliation that followed." She said that Hamas agreed to support a two-state solution, "a big shift for Hamas, which previously wanted to liberate all of Palestine."
Ms. Hijab said that Hamas won the most recent election because it promised a clean government, without the corruption that characterized previous Palestinian governments. But Hamas never had the chance to "prove itself and run a clean government."
Not all resistance against Israeli occupation has been violent. Ms. Hijab said that many Palestinians have engaged in nonviolent resistance and many Israelis have joined them in this.
Then Ms. Hijab discussed the ongoing crisis in the middle east. She said that both Hamas and Hezbollah are characterized as "terrorist organizations" because they "use violence against civilians." In this conflict, all participants (Israel, Hamas, and Hezbollah) have violated international law, Ms. Hijab pointed out.
"Where do we go from here? The region is doomed without a comprehensive solution. How many people will die before this reality is recognized?" Ms. Hijab asked.

After the talk, I took the Metro to Union Station so that I could go to the Postal Museum. There I purchased baseball player stamps, and I mailed my entry form to the Erie County Fair (which has been renamed "America's Fair"). I saw an exhibit of artwork done by young people, aged 13 to 17, for a duck stamp competition. The media used were oil paints, acrylic paints, and colored pencils. When I left, I answered a survey and was given a free book. I returned to Union Station, where I saw a horde of kids leaving. All of the girls were clutching identical pink Victoria's Secret bags.
Then I went to the School of the Americas Watch office for a party for Christy Pardew, who was leaving her position as communications coordinator. I was given books, videos, and other materials for my upcoming talks on SOA/WHINSEC and on my own experiences of working to close that military training school.
After dinner at a friend's house, I returned to the Catholic Worker house, and day number three of my adventure had come to a close.

a week in Washington, day two

Wednesday, July 19, was my tourist day. I grabbed my camera, my sketchbook, and my "fat lil notebook," and I was on my way. After a ride on the green line of the famous five-color Metro system, I headed to the National Archives. Each line gets a different color: red, yellow, blue, green, and orange. The lines go to different places in Washington, D.C., Virginia, and Maryland. It reminds me of a color wheel. The only one that is missing is purple but, maybe, one of these days, a purple line will be opened.
But, I digress (one of my best skills). After I got off of the metro, I went straight for the National Archives. There I saw an exhibit titled "Eyewitness: American Originals from the National Archives." I obtained a small audio device and went into the exhibit. The device is easy to operate, so I had an audio tour of the exhibit. On display was a sampling of letters, statements, diary entries, and notes from people recording historical events. Some of the people were very well known, while others were not. Most of the documents were written but there were also a few recorded documents.
Among the many documents on display were:

• a letter from Thomas Jefferson, written in July of 1789, describing the storming of the Bastille and the violence and chaos that followed,
• a letter from a fugitive slave, John Boston, dated January 12, 1862, to his wife Elizabeth. In the letter, Mr. Boston told his wife that he had found refuge with a New York regiment.
  
• John C. Fremont's report on his 1842 expedition to the Rockies, as written by his wife, Jessie Benton Fremont, on March 1, 1843.
• Laura Ingalls Wilder's diary entries (dated 1894) on her move with her husband Alonzo and eight-year-old daughter Rose from South Dakota to Missouri.
• Lt. Col. Dwight D. Eisenhower's November 13, 1919, summary report on a transcontinental motor convoy.
• Red Cross worker Marie Adams' June 7, 1945, document describing starvation conditions during the final days of a Japanese internment camp in the Philippines. She said that, when she was in the camp, from May 1942 to February 1945, she worked in the hospital.
• Pfc Harold Porter's May 7, 1945, letter to his parents describing the horrifying scenese at the Dachau concentration camp when it was liberated. The letter was written on Waffen SS stationery.
• John Lewis' testimony in Federal court about the March 7, 1965, march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, where he suffered a skull fracture after being hit by a billy club. He is now a member of Congress from Georgia.
• Memo of a telephone conversation between President George H. W. Bush and German Chancellor Helmut Kohl on the reunification of Germany, on October 3, 1990.

And much more.
In the National Archives, I also saw the original Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution, and Bill of Rights. They were all faded but what was left was preserved in dim light under glass.

After leaving the National Archives, I walked through the Butterfly Habitat Gardens. On a plaque was this statement: When butterflies grace the garden, they send the spirit soaring. Four different types of habitats are featured at this garden: wetland, wood's edge, back yard, and meadow.
My next stop was to the Arts and Industries Building. It was still closed. So I sat outside and did some sketching.
After that, I returned to the Catholic Worker house.
In the evening, I went with a friend, Mary, to the Palestine Center to see two movies. They are part of a film series being presented at the Palestine Center.
The first movie that we saw was a short satire, called "Chic Point." It was presented as a fashion show, with a runway. The models were all men. They demonstrated fashion statements that were appropriate to get them across an Israeli check point. When they cross the check point, they have to show their abdomens to prove that they aren't wearing bomb belts. The models used various devices to more readily show off their abdomens. It was a very entertaining show of tummies, fashion, and creativity.
The second movie that we saw was a documentary called "Improvisation." The movie is about three brothers in the Joubran family. They are musicians and they play the 'oud, an Arab traditional instrument that bears some likeness to the mandolin. The three brothers are seen with their extended family in a variety of settings. They are also seen practicing for concerts. The three brothers are very different in many ways. One is married and has a bright, outspoken little daughter. One brother is a violin maker. Their passions run in different directions. One is passionate about politics, while another one is passionate about his girlfriend.
The filmmakers follow the brothers from Nazareth to Ramallah to Paris. It was moving an fascinating, offering a glimpse into the lives of the musicians and of a completely different culture, including a snapshot into the life of people in Ramallah, a besieged city. The documentary was directed by Raed Andoni, and it was released in 2005.
And that ended day number two of the Big Adventure.