Selflessness

To achieve complete selflessness is a remarkable thing. Especially in a world as self serving as ours. Consumerism in unthinkable ways pushes us more and more to invest in personal comforts and pleasures. A bigger house, a newer car, a bigger tattoo, the latest gadget and endless varieties of foods to consume. The purpose of progress seems to be only about personal gain. This makes us a citizen of our wants more than the needs of the world. Then there are doctors, nurses, relief workers and activists who work in selfless ways in the service of humanity. Some of us contribute to that effort every time there is a catastrophe and the images on TV become unbearable and the suffering of others questions our place in the world. Having acquired an obscene amount of wealth, a few super rich start foundations and give sustainably over a period of time as they are concerned about their legacy. There are those who achieve a level of selflessness that people like mother Teresa and others in her group have come to embody and symbolize. Driven by religion or some internal drive or passion they do good that leaves people in awe of their presence. Then there are those who have lived a loveless life and gain love by selflessly giving to others. The world is full of such nameless people who we seldom hear or read about.

Recently, bouncing from channel to channel on American television in search of something worthwhile to invest my time, I came across a documentary film on PBS titled "Blood Brother". The colorful images peaked my interest because the film was set in India, the country I was born in. Blood Brother tells a story of a young man named Rocky Braat and his time at an orphanage in a remote village in the southern state of Tamil Nadu. My initial reaction to the film was - here we go again, another story of a white person going to some impoverished and destitute part of the world to save "the children". I have seen this before. If it weren't for a white person and his/her compassion from a place of privilege, this film would never have been made. But as I began to watch the film, my cynicism began to shift. As I saw Rocky immerse himself in this world of children, who were abandoned and left on the edges because they were HIV positive, my impression about him and his journey began to change. Watching him care for these children, while they consumed a cocktail of drugs to stay alive and intermittently saw their companions fall to the horror of this disease was moving. Keeping hope alive was a daily struggle and Rocky had become the motivator of that joy and hope.

Rocky's motives for being in India were a bit puzzling. It was clear that he came from a broken family in Ohio, where his emotional needs were not met in any way. But the fact that he chose this route to express that deficiency and sought to fill that void by helping children with HIV was impressive. Walking barefoot, like the children and adults he had come to live and move with, he felt at home in this remote and drastically different place. The love he had found by putting himself in a place where most would run from, somehow grounded him. Through all the challenges India throws at you, he seemed to have come to appreciate the essence that truly makes Indian people, especially children, genuine through ever present misery, oppression and cultural imprisonment.

As we watch Rocky go through his motions, there are times you really wonder if his journey was being captured on film to make a spectacle of a situation that is dire, distraught and disturbing. But what turns the tables, is when he comes to care for a child who is on the verge of death. When a ten year old's entire body erupts into open wounds from the inside of his eyes to his toes, the doctors give him ten days to live. In an extremely hard to watch long sequence, we see Rocky attend to this child in the most selfless manner possible. Nursing every wound with extreme care, concentration and diligence, without leaving his bedside for a moment, ignoring the threat of infection, Rocky brings the child back from the brink. This scene in this film transforms the viewer and with the power of the documentary medium, one truly comes to appreciate Rocky and his unconditional devotion to this child. His selflessness is on full display via an observational camera. By saving this one child, you feel he somehow conquers the world and finds the meaning of life.

Most documentaries of this nature end with the protagonist returning to his/her country of comfort a changed and humbled person. Reflecting on this complex phenomenon called "humanity", he/she is transformed. Or some western agency or organization awards a medal to the protagonist for his/her charity. While the film has won many awards for the humanity it captures, it ends with Rocky making the village his permanent home. Marrying an Indian woman from the nearby village, he settles down in the service of these children. Whether his time there will be temporary only time will tell. But for now Rocky seems to have found a family and love that he was deprived in another world.

If more of us exhibited selflessness, when asked to do so, the world would change. Today there are 9 million internally displaced refugees in Syria. There are another 2.4 million who have been driven from their homes and are living in squalor in camps in Jordan and other neighboring countries. United Kingdom has agreed to give asylum to a few hundred, those who have been subjected to the most horrific violence. As the Geneva talks falter, there is a great need for nations around the world to act in selfless ways to stop the suffering. There is ample room in the world for many, but very little space in our hearts it seems.

This week we lost a giant in America. An inspirational figure to all through music and valiant acts of defiance and demanding justice in a democracy. Pete Seeger once said "the key to the future of the world, is finding the optimistic stories and letting them be known." Rocky's story is of optimism and hope. We can all find such stories in our minuscule lives to share. Sharing is caring, and to care is to change. It is what it is.

Invincible

About a year ago I was called in to edit a video obituary on Nelson Mandela for BET (Black Entertainment Television) News. He was in the hospital and the world's attention was on South Africa. A few days later he emerged and went home and the world breathed a sigh of relief. On December 5th this year, I was called back to finish the job. "Madiba" as he was lovingly known in his country, was finally free. The long years spent on planet earth, most of them in torment, had come to an end. As President Obama pointed out, Nelson Rollhlahla Mandela now belonged to the ages. The long road traversed, had come to an end.

As a film editor I look at many hours of footage to condense it to the most essential elements. Moments that would inform, entertain and take the viewer on a journey of discovery and exploration in an effortless way. I guide the viewer's gaze and make the story flow with music and visual juxtaposition. And from the endless hours of footage, emerges a coherent story. What I gain in the process, is a wealth of knowledge and an insight that is perceptive and enriching.

While I sat in a dark edit room at 2 AM in Manhattan, watching the live feed of the memorial and funeral of Nelson Mandela coming in from South Africa, it placed me right in the moment in real time. I became a part of history in an infinitesimal sense. I was there grieving, celebrating, learning and enjoying the passing of a man who like many before him had left an indelible mark on the timeline of humanity.

When Nelson Mandela was released from prison in 1990, invincible and unbowed, his story became an international event. Very soon movies, documentaries and books began to be made about his life and the birth of a new nation (the latest one being "Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom")  Western nations and leaders that called Mandela a terrorist and propped up his enemy, made him their hero. For Americans, especially Black Americans he became a personification of their own struggles. He joined the ranks of their hallowed leaders who fought to end the other Apartheid not too long ago. At the memorial service President Obama paid homage to his legacy by saying that his own ascent was partly inspired by Mandela's journey.

The defeat of an entrenched, oppressive and brutal Apartheid regime, and the emergence of a democratic nation based on tolerance, compromise and reconciliation, set an example for the world to appreciate and emulate. Mandela gained freedom at 71, and within a decade created a nation which in principle put aside retribution to create a society that would have a chance to grow and evolve in the long run. Unlike many other African leaders, some his friends, he relinquished power and allowed his colleagues to build upon his vision. With his departure that vision stands in the balance, as poverty among the majority black population ravages the nation and corruption grips the ruling class, and the fear of reprisals among the white population rises to the surface.

Revolutions, violent and non-violent, are not fought and won alone. Many die along the way, others sacrifice much if not more, but the "chosen ones" who see the big picture prevail, persevere and get immortalized. Nelson Mandela certainly fit that mold. His story is of fortitude and courage, his sacrifice makes his story that much more powerful. With out his colleagues Steve Biko, Walter Sisulu, Oliver Tambo, Chris Hani and other unnamed foot soldiers nothing could have been achieved. But it is the emergence of his voice of reason that bore fruit. Nelson Mandela's transformation from a  violent approach to a non-violent one, is a journey of not just self realization but of strategy and insight. While he did take lessons from his predecessors (Gandhi and King) his struggle was very different from theirs. His true genius lies in the fact that he negotiated and executed the demise of a regime from a place of incarceration and then followed through with his vision against the will of his compatriots and brothers in arms.

Those who become symbols of struggle and then freedom, run the risk of being deified. Mandela in his halcyon days made every effort to avoid that by openly reflecting on his personal failings, missteps and inadequacies. Despite his efforts he has joined the exclusive pantheon of the saintly. As time goes on his cult of personality will only grow. South Africa inaugurated an imposing statue of his likeness the very next day he was interred. In the million obituaries that were written and spoken, he was elevated to having an aura around him. In reality he was a man who saw the big picture and knew his place in time. He was a resilient man of strength and tenacity. As quoted in his favorite poem "Invictus" he was "the captain of his soul" but not as much a "master of his fate".

As the year comes to an end and we remember those who left their mark on the speck of humanity, his name will definitely lead the pack. Whether his legacy will influence people in power, only time will tell. As Mahatma Gandhi famously said "My life is my message" so is Madiba's . That is all. It is what it is.

JFK

On this day, half a century ago, three shots rang out in downtown Dallas, Texas. Time stood still, a president was dead and a nation was left in shock. A bright and cheerful Dealey Plaza turned chaotic, and the city of Dallas was scarred forever. A lone shooter and a rifle is all it took. Fifty years on, that day remains fresh in the minds of those who were old enough to grapple with the aftermath. For those of us who were born after, the story of John F. Kennedy has been seared via countless books, films, buildings and memorials. Much like the untimely deaths of Abraham Lincoln, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Salvador Allende, Patrice Lumumba and many others are mourned everyday, John F. Kennedy is remembered as a man who stood for universal values of peace, democracy, equality and human rights.

When assassinated, Kennedy had served just over a thousand days as president. In that short period he had captured the imagination of people all over. The three alphabets, JFK, came to symbolize someone larger than life. His youthfulness was seductive. He was the first president brought to the American living rooms via the mass medium of television and he knew how to use it to his advantage. There was an instant connection and the romance that emerged, lasts to this day. His charisma was enhanced by his wife, children and wardrobe and the whole package was endearingly branded "Camelot" for many Americans.

The 1950s were a very prosperous time in America. There was a respite from the wars and while Europe was rebuilding itself from the carnage, America was intact, and therefore had a lead. For the first time ever middle class families owned homes, cars and refrigerators. Schools, highways, shopping malls and libraries were being built at breakneck speed. Families had leisure time and extra money and wanted to be entertained. Movies, television, music and car companies all fed this thirst and a new America began to take shape. The suburbs were birthed and the cities were transformed. Kennedy sensed this shift and knew he could be the one to lead America into the sixties as a man of the times. So when he defeated Richard Nixon in a televised presidential debate (many concluded he lost in the radio version) he arrived on the scene. He was inaugurated on January 20th, 1961 to become the youngest, the first to be born of the century and the first Catholic president. His election was no land slide victory though, it was a photo finish. He won by 119,000 votes in the popular count.

Even though Kennedy was somewhat of an outsider to the style of politics of the time, his pedigree was as elite as elite can be. Born into a wealthy family one of nine children, his father Joseph Kennedy was a tough Irishman who wanted all his sons to be president. Harvard educated, with an impeccable war record, he had all that he needed to make a run for the highest office in the land. The Kennedy's, infamously had made their money during prohibition bootlegging liquor and since had multiplied their money to buy into power and privilege. Kennedy paid his dues as a politician by serving as a congressman for six years and a senator for seven and when the time came, was ready to fulfill his father's dream.

What made Kennedy appealing to many, was his youthful appearance. The sixties in America were just beginning to get interesting. Elvis Presley, Marlyn Monroe, Bob Dylan, Frank Sinatra and others were in vogue. Hollywood was exploding and a sense of sexual liberation and freedom that would define a generation was laying its foundation. The young were setting the mood, away from the conservative and puritanical mode of the past. Kennedy fit right in and was certainly part of that milieu and consciously wanted to be associated with its evolution. He fraternized with the glitterati from Gore Vidal, Tennessee Williams, Frank Sinatra to Walter Cronkite. He was known to be a serial philanderer, had questionable connections to the mafia and some of his adventures were quite un-presidential. He was lucky to have lived and died in a time when privacy was respected and the media was interested in only what mattered to the public at large.

Kennedy even today is the poster boy for the liberals as Ronald Reagan is to the conservatives. Kennedy certainly lifted the stature of the Democrats and single handedly steered the black vote solidly their way, which up until then was Republican. By coming to Martin Luther King's aid when he was arrested in Atlanta at a sit in, he became popular among African Americans who were in the thick of fighting for civil liberties. While Kennedy was perceived to stand for modern, liberal, secular values which many Democrats still harp about as the foundations of the party, in reality he was a moderate. In comparison to his brothers Ted and Bobby, he was borderline conservative. As a chief executive he was fiscally cautious and constrained. Even though the black population favored him, in reality he was hesitant and timid about civil rights, and frustrated many of the civil rights leaders until finally articulating his vision in June of 1963. When the Russians launched "Sputnik", the first satellite into space, it de facto triggered the space race, arms race and the cold war. In response it is often imagined that Kennedy was the one who dreamed of putting man on the moon to shame the Russians. But in fact he wanted to send astronauts to Mars and had to be talked out of it because it was impractical. Kennedy was perturbed by the cost of space exploration and actually said "Why should we spend that kind of dough to put man on the moon?" He even spoke to the Russian premier about ending the space race and establishing a joint Soviet-Russian partnership for a moon landing.

Despite all of it, in the short time Kennedy was president, he inadvertently lay the foundation for important things to come. He established the Peace corps, successfully steered out of a nuclear confrontation with Russia during the Cuban Missile Crisis, pushed for racial desegregation and women's rights and started the Vietnam war. His vice president and successor Lyndon Johnson, actually saw many of his plans bear fruit. He managed to pass the civil rights bill through congress despite monumental opposition. He landed the first man on the moon. Created programs such as food stamps, Medicare and Medicaid to tackle poverty, but took America deeper into the Vietnam war.

As we remember JFK on this day, his legacy and enigma is strong as ever among Americans, partly because like Elvis he died young and because the aura of his lineage still endures. As a testament to that, his daughter was recently appointed the Ambassador to Japan and despite individual failings and mishaps among family members, the weight of the Kennedy name is powerful and influential to this day.

If one were to visit the site of the assassination one is appalled by how small an area Dealey Plaza is and how close Lee Harvey Oswald was to the president when he fired the shots. The chances of him missing his target were very slim. Since that day Americans have wrestled with that reality, never finding satisfying and conclusive answers or never wanting to believe the official version. Conspiracy theories are abound and to this day keep a window open to a revelation. In 2017 the sealed Kennedy assassination papers will be released to the public and maybe then the suspicions will settle. Until then, movies will be made, like the new film opening this month titled  Parkland and more books will be written, as the Kennedy story still sells.

What Kennedy's assassination reveals, is that all men are mortal, no matter how mighty they are perceived. Presidents are ordinary people pushed into extraordinary positions. They are flawed like us and sometimes are good at what they do, for all of us. History paints their portrait for us to examine, but not to deify or distort.

In his inaugural address in 1961, John F. Kennedy said

"If a free society cannot help the many that are poor, it cannot save the few that are rich".

With 80% of the stocks on Wall Street owned by 5% of the population and the wealth of the Wal-Mart family equal to the bottom 30% of Americans, his words ring true louder than ever today. In some ways he is still a man of the times.

It is what it is.

Phones and Drones

President Obama swept into power beating all odds, riding on a wave of impressive support and enthusiasm. It was mainly a reaction to a dismal performance by the previous administration that had all but shredded the constitution in the name of security. President Obama promised change. A promise to restore America's standing in the world. A return to a value when a nation and its people would be judged for being fair, transparent and respectful of all those who are mighty and not so mighty. For that he was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize. His early overtures were seen as historic and his nascent charismatic diplomacy was refreshing and filled many with pride. A sense of optimism filled the air. Today if one were to look back at his presidency, despite many accolades, two things stand out as controversial and contentious. The issues of Phones and Drones.

The promise that was offered to the American people, twice, was of real change. Which included an end to an indiscriminate and open ended "global war on terror". Torture as a policy would stop, and its most decisive and divisive symbol "Guantanamo Bay" would be shuttered for good. There would be transparancy and openness and George Bush's signature Patriot Act would be rolled back and America would adhere to principles of international law and human rights as the leader and police of the free world.

The ground wars have figuratively ended, but Guantanamo Bay remains open, invisible and marooned. The war on terror has taken to the skies in an ominous way, piloted by the president himself. Drone strikes in the border regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan have escalated beyond measure. Yemen, seen as a fertile ground for terrorists has been a victim of the hi-tech executioner as well. And this week Somalia joined the club, when a car allegedly carrying "suspected Al-Shabab militants" was suddenly blown up. President Obama has earned the dubious destinction of becoming the first president to authorize more drone strikes than any before. Even his predecessor who brought drone warfare to the forefront, was allegedly weary of this technology. Drone warfare has sparked a new arms race. China and other countries are trying to manufacture or procure drones, while the rules of engagement remain ambiguous.

Early this month Human Rights Watch released a detailed report which placed America's controversial drone program front and center as missing its mark and taking an indiscriminate toll on innocent civilians in Yemen. The report found America in direct violation of the laws of war. Amnesty International has called drone strikes a "war crime". Many Yemeni's today fear Al-Qeada as much as they fear the terror of America raining down from the skies. According to the report America so far has carried out 81 targeted drone strikes inside Yemen, killing at least 473 combatants and civilians.  Jeremy Scahill's book and documentary "Dirty Wars" which came out earlier in the year, exposed the  nature of this war, that causes unspeakable horror in the name of keeping America safe. In response to the Humans Rights Watch report the White House spokesman Jay Carney said  

"We are reviewing these reports carefully. To the extent these reports claim that the US has acted contrary to international law, we would strongly disagree. The administration has repeatedly emphasized the extraordinary care that we take to make sure counter terrorism actions are in accordance with all applicable law."

The denials and debate over numbers are endless. The math of how many innocent versus "bad-guys" killed, does not absolve anyone. It might make sense politically to not have troops on the ground and kill "terrorists" with so called surgical strikes from the sky. But what the report clearly exposes is that there is no such thing as a surgical strike. And in the eyes of the law, an innocent Afghan, Yemeni or Somali life is as precious as an American one. Where you live should not decide whether you get to live or die

The American drone program is largely run by the CIA, who rely on human intelligence on the ground to identify targets to destroy. On many occasions the intelligence has been faulty and innocent people have died and the US government has acknowledged that fact in the past. For that they have a term "Collateral Damage". Collateral Damage is a war crime. If one has to kill innocent people in poor desperate nations to keep America safe, then one has to wonder if this war is worth fighting like this, or can this war be won like this. There are real dangers out there, and there are people who are motivated to cause mayhem like recently witnessed at the Westgate Mall in Kenya. But taking innocent life to secure a planet or a nation, cannot be justified by a state under any situation. But then again by definition war is the taking of innocent life in one form or another. Ongoing case in point, Syria.

While the CIA is America's premier agency tasked with keeping the nation safe by relying on human intelligence on the ground, the NSA (National Security Agency) is tasked with doing the same using technology, the technology of eavesdropping. By using a sophisticated global grid of computers, satellites, listening posts and human analysts, the NSA listens to chatter on phones and the internet. It then filters millions of intercepted emails and phone calls using complex software, to foil or warn about terrorist attacks, or simply gather information that might be useful to the nation. With Edward Snowden blowing the cover on the NSA and exposing its over reach, there is high anxiety. It is perceived that the agency has gone above and beyond the law and has lost its bearings violating constitutional rights to privacy. The fact of the matter is, with the ongoing war on terror the nation signed away the right to privacy via the Patriot Act, which President Obama reaffirmed and endorsed. The president called it a minor inconvenience in exchange for national security. The argument is, if you are not doing anything that is deemed "wrong" or "dangerous" by the state apparatus, then there is nothing to worry. This was the same logic used by the Stasi when it spied on its citizens in East Germany spreading a veil of fear that defined an entire generation. The difference being, for now I can still write this blog without fear, hoping to be protected by the first amendment enshrined in the American constitution. Now that it has been revealed that even Google and Yahoo were violated by the NSA, one wonders whats next.

This week it was revealed that it was not just US citizens who were spied on, but citizens of other countries and their heads of state were also included. Thirty five world leaders had their phones tapped and the list could be longer. As a result an uneasy and embarrassing diplomatic situation has pushed the president on the back foot. Much like he was unaware of the kinks in the roll out of his signature health care plan, he denied knowing about the extent of NSA's activities. When the NSA chiefs were ordered up to congress to explain, they all defended their program by saying it was business as usual, no one should be surprised, all nations do it, even among friends, to gain an upper hand in the doggy dog world of espionage in social, economic, political and security arenas.

The Europeans, who have lived through the cold war grip of the KGB, Stasi and its ilk, do not see it as business as usual. They see it as a grave violation of their trust and rightfully so. I am sure they acknowledge that spying does go on among friends, but the tapping of phones at the highest of levels of government is something they don't see as normal. America will have to respond to this shameful behavior decisively and forcefully otherwise risk isolation and loss of camaraderie amongst allies.

When the airplanes rammed into the twin towers in Manhattan, they caused lasting damage the effects of which are still being felt a decade later. That ghastly event psychologically turned America inward transforming it into a hawkish fortress. The most telling example in addition to the phones and drones, are the twelve hundred or so security agencies, private and public, that have mushroomed in and around Washington since 9/11. It seems the madness of keeping America safe is causing more harm while it does some good. In the 2010 book titled "Top Secret America" Dana Priest and William Arkin, raised the alarm of a state security apparatus gone out of control, whose unraveling we witness today. What is even more telling is the acknowledgement by the president of America of being out of touch with what is going on under his watch.

Reigning in America's security apparatus is a gargantuan task. Billions of dollars are at stake, and like everything else, it is economics. Its a big job creator and a money maker for lobbyists and contractors. And politically since America has not seen a serious attack on its soil since 9/11, the security expansion is seen as a success. But the fact of the matter is, if it is not reigned in, it will do irreversible damage. And freedom if it not already is, will only be an illusion.

One of the founding fathers of America, Ben Franklin, eloquently said "Those who give up their liberty for more security, neither deserve liberty nor security". That holds true even in the violent times that we live in.

It is what it is.

The Unraveling

It is final. Us humans are pushing the only planet we have, over the cliff. For those with doubts, the recently published United Nations' guarded report, is a resounding revelation. Global warming is real and is here to stay. One did not need a report to validate it. All one needed is an open eye and an understanding of how the human species has come to exist with that which gives it sustenance. Islands of garbage, balding forests, depleted wastelands and smog filled skies, that is how we have returned the favor. For the skeptics who think and say that global warming is a phenomenon that has been ongoing for millions of years and it is only engine earth going through its motions, there is enough scientific evidence to prove otherwise. Even for a moment if we were to side with the skeptics, it is hard to debate the fact that human activity is accelerating the warming process.

The recently released IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) report states with 95% certainty, that humans are the dominant cause for global warming, at least since the 1950s. The report says that in the span of the last 1400 years, the decades between 1983 and 2012 have been the warmest in the Northern Hemisphere. That means, in those years more than ever, ice sheets lost more mass, glaciers rapidly shrunk and the spring snow cover continued to fall in extent. Going forward the sea levels are expected to rise at least 26 cm on the low end to 82 cm on the high end, relative to the emissions of this century.

The report says atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased by 40% since pre-industrial times, leading to warmer oceans and erratic weather patterns. It is "virtually certain" the report says, that most places will see more hot and fewer cold temperature extremes as the warming increases. And it is very likely heat waves will occur more frequently than occasional winter extremes.

One of the most damning aspect of the report was the conclusion that some 15% to 40% of released carbon dioxide will remain in the atmosphere longer than 1000 years after the emissions have ended. Raising the concern that some aspects of climate change are irreversible.

So now what does humanity to do? How does it cope? How do we save whats left for future generations? All of the above data has been published, parsed and tossed in documentaries, books and media reports feverishly over the past two decades. As a result summits have been convened, symposiums have gathered and every few days alarms have been raised, but very little has been achieved in tangible behavioral change. In this latest UN report, four possible scenarios with varied emissions controls were presented. With strict controls we could possibly limit the temperature rise by as little as 0.3 degree celsius by year 2100. This was the best case scenario if we made some monumental changes today. The scientists who published the report expressed hope, albeit faint.

Humanity is no monolith. We have one planet, but everyone sees borders everywhere all the time. No two nations can agree on anything, let alone climate change. Even genocide by Sarin gas is disputed even when the evidence couldn't be starker. The developing nations see it as their right to burn their way to an affluent lifestyle. The developed ones cant stop consuming like there is no tomorrow. As there is always that next new gadget to be had and a virgin market to dump it on.

Human appetite for energy is insatiable. And energy consumption is the primary cause for green house gas emissions. Either we reduce our energy consumption or find ways to create clean energy. There is no doubt that the human addiction to all fossil fuels is not going to taper for another fifty or hundred years. There are still large reservoirs in the deepest oceans that are being readied to exploit. Clean energy is not yet sustainable to compete with conventional sources of energy. Unless and until this equation is resolved, any hopeful scenario the scientists foresee will be morphing into an impossible dream and a possible nightmare.

This month Japan turned off its last nuclear power station. All the fifty reactors of the nation are now offline. The nuclear disaster that resulted from a massive Tsunami that struck Japan in 2011, prompted the nation to rethink its energy production. Now there is a 30% shortfall in their energy sector. This has pushed Japan to rapidly peruse renewable energy like no other nation. But it has proven unsustainable. One square meter of land devoted to wind power generates just two watts of power. For solar power an equivalent area produces 20W. Nuclear power generates about 1000W per square meter. Therefore Japan has no choice but to turn to oil, gas and coal to make up for the nuclear deficit, thereby generating more green house gasses than it did in the past. It is what it is. 

Let Freedom Ring

"I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin
but by the content of their character"

These profound words washed over thousands on this day fifty years ago, changing the course for America forever. In the shadow of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., Rev. Martin Luther King once and for all called into question the character of a nation that was moving against its own founding principles, "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by the creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness".

1963 was a year when America was confronting issues of a critical nature. The Civil Rights movement headed by black leaders big and small, was unrelenting. The Vietnam war was sending young men back in body bags in numbers that were hard to ignore. The cold war was escalating with terrifying visions of a nuclear holocaust. There was violence everywhere and not much hope. In this environment Martin Luther King, guided by Gandhian principles, was talking non-violence and civil disobedience. And when he marched into Washington, his mission was not only to demand racial justice but economic equality.

America in many ways has come some distance in terms of racial justice, but it is no where close to what Martin Luther King envisioned in his historic speech. The economic gulf between white and black, has gotten worse and is only increasing. King knew that racial equality did not amount to much if there was no economic consequence to go along with it. The gathering that took place at the Washington Mall in 1963 was called "March on Washington for jobs and freedom" for a reason. King was clearly calling for a leveling, in terms of economic opportunity for blacks and other disenfranchised groups.

Today blacks lag behind whites in life expectancy and median income. According to The Economist, In 2011 the median household wealth (cash, investments, homes, cars etc. ) for white families was $110,500. For blacks it was $6,314. That means poorer black children are more likely to attend substandard schools and less likely to finish college. They have less money to put towards home ownership, which is the cornerstone of establishing wealth in this country. On average white families buy homes eight years earlier than black ones and have more money to put down on their mortgages. Therefore blacks live in depressed neighborhoods and are more likely to foreclose on their homes. Crime in these neighborhoods is disproportionately high and therefore the incarceration of young black men is excessive. In 2011, 478 of every 100,000 white men and 51 of every 100,000 white women were imprisoned for breaking the law. For black men that rate was 3,023 and for women 129. The black population of America is 13% as opposed to 77% white. Martin Luther King had a clear understanding of the demographics in 1963 and knew that a community that had been oppressed for centuries would need more than just equal freedom to succeed as a race.

This past weekend on a visit to Washington DC, I stood on the very spot where Martin Luther King addressed a sea of humanity, who had gathered in all its colors. When he saw all those hues holding signs, chanting slogans and singing songs of freedom, I am sure he was filled with hope and jubilation. A hope that America would live up to a higher purpose. Where people of all origins could lay claim to this land, as it belonged equally to everyone. There was no single race that could claim it more than any other, as its original owners had long been  vacated. This uniqueness of this land, was enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, in all its coincidental enlightenment and contradiction. And it was King in 1963, who eventually brought it to bare fruit for myself and everyone who came before and after me. Without the civil rights movements, minority groups from around the world who make America their home, would not be able to enjoy the freedom and justice, that they take for granted with pride today.

As I climbed up the stairs of the Lincoln Memorial and laid eyes on the Gettysburg Address inscribed on the left wall of the memorial, it became clear to me that the two speeches, separated by a century, had essentially drafted a blue print for America. A framework and guide that has kept hope alive even in the darkest of hours and many a times has brought the nation back from the brink. The election of President Obama in one sense overtly symbolized the culmination of that hope. But it is evident, that though words are powerful and have great meaning, change is always painfully slow, incremental and not always forthcoming.

On one of the stone tablets inside the memorial museum were inscribed the following words by Abraham Lincoln.

"There is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence - the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man"

These words were spoken in the 19th century. The dream is yet to be fully realized. It is what it is.

Last of a Breed

In journalism school I was taught, or rather I gathered, that a true journalist is not beholden to any nation, people, ideology or agenda. He or she is beholden to one thing and one thing alone "the truth". To find the truth and to expose it in all its complexity, is what journalists are supposed to do. To ask the tough questions without fear, to unwrap the uncomfortable silences, to uncover deception and lies in the service of the public, is what the noble profession of journalism is at its core. Many reporters in the last decade have died in this cause. Some in the battlefield and others in their offices, cars and verandahs. Others have made fools of themselves by chasing celebrity instead of the truth. But whenever a journalist dies on active duty, so dies democracy. The death of a journalist is as devastating as a death of a soldier defending right from wrong. In most cases it is more devastating, as a journalist most often knows right from wrong and sometimes a soldier does not. Therefore journalists are the true soldiers of democracy. With out their safety, freedom and stature, democracy seizes to exist.

This week one such towering soldier of American democracy left the planet, leaving a legacy unmatched and unparalleled. Her name - Helen Thomas, she was 92. In her long career she locked horns with ten US presidents, irritating and annoying them in the White House press room, by doing what any journalist should do, ask uncompromising questions. She was known as the dean of the White House Press Corps., for her long relentless tenure on the beat. She reported for the United Press International wire service for three decades and in her final years worked for the Hearst News Service.

A daughter of Lebanese immigrants, Helen Thomas was certainly a trail blazer for her sex. She was the first female officer of the National Press Club and the first female member and president of the White House Correspondent's Association.

Helen Thomas' dead pan, razor sharp yet simple and direct questioning of American presidents made her the stuff of legend. She famously asked Richard Nixon point blank what his secret plan of ending the Vietnam War was. She asked Ronald Reagan what right he had to invade Grenada in 1983. After the cold war ended and the Berlin Wall came down, in response to the defense budget remaining unchanged, she asked George H.W. Bush "Who's the enemy?". To George W, Bush she launched: "I'd like to ask you, Mr. President. Your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime. Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is, why did you really want to go to war?". For this she got banished to the back rows of the White House press room for three years, after rightfully earning a seat in the front row for decades. She would return to the front row after Bush left office to ask President Barack Obama "Mr. President, when are you going to get out of Afghanistan? Why are you continuing to kill and die there? What is the real excuse? And don't give us this Bushism, 'If we don't go there, they'll all come here".

During the second Iraq war, I worked at ABC news as a video editor in the news division. As I watched from the inside the collusion of the news media with the agenda that was being set by the White House, it shattered my faith in the ethics I came to accept in college. As the mainstream news media joined the war machine in beating the drum, with imbedded reporters losing all perspective of their purpose, Helen Thomas did more than most by asking the "real" questions that should have been asked by everyone all along.

The American media has not bounced back from the low it fell to during the Iraq war. News gathering and reporting which is meant to be a public service, is driven more and more by a profit motive. Conglomerates such as New Corp., have taken hold of more news organizations than ever before, setting an agenda by ownership and control. Cable television news has become a highly polarized space, where journalism is guided by sensationalism, celebrity and careless, callous and  uninformed sound bytes that boggle the mind. The internet has exploded, perforated and fragmented the media space, leaving a clutter of opinions and diatribes that are hard to keep track of, and sometimes make sense of. The only place it seems like one can find anything that can be deemed news or newsworthy is on so called "Fake News Shows" like "The Daily Show", "The Colbert Report" or "The Bill Maher Show". It seems like journalism these days lies somewhere between the absurdity of that which is exposed in the above mentioned comedy shows and the seriousness of the established outfits such as the New York Time, Washington Post, BBC and its ilk. Humor sometimes ends up being the winner by just being unabashedly honest and boldly transparent.

Helen Thomas with all her accolades did fall victim to the very media world described above. Honesty in today's media landscape can be dangerous if you are on the wrong side of the prevalent opinion. On May 27, 2010, she was ambushed by Rabbi David Nesenoff at a White House event. Wearing a yarmulke and carrying a video camera, the rabbi approached her and asked if she had any comments on Israel."Tell them to get the hell out of Palestine," she blurted. "Remember, these people are occupied and it's their land. It's not Germany, it's not Poland." Asked where they should go, she answered, "They should go home.""Where's home?" Nesenoff asked. "Poland, Germany and America and everywhere else," Thomas replied. She later apologized for her remarks, but the damage was done. By speaking up against Israel she fell on the wrong side of western history. While historically what she said was factual, it is her honesty in a time of politics that got her into trouble.

There is no doubt Helen Thomas can only be described as a patriot and a hero. Her seat in the White House press room made a huge difference in designating America as a democracy even in its darkest hour. To fill her shoes will be a formidable task. But in many ways, she just did her job and did it as it was supposed to be done. By exercising her right as a citizen with full force and without fear, she set an example for men and woman to follow. If only more of us could do that. It is what it is.