Be a Hero, Pay a Price

A military judge has found Army Pvt. Bradley Manning guilty of more than 20 counts against him, including espionage, for his role in supplying information for the notorious WikiLeaks release of hundreds of thousands of sensitive documents, including State Department cables. Manning walked on the count of “aiding the enemy” – appropriate, in my view, as I don’t think that was his intention, even though some of the material could actually put foreign interests working with the United States in danger. Manning’s stated intention was to encourage debate, and that he did, but it could cost him decades in prison.

Pardon me, but I’m still trying to figure out, besides sparking debate, exactly what this release accomplished. Manning had to violate an oath, steal information, and make public cables for which the senders had a reasonable expectation of privacy. While Manning  likely heads for prison, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is trapped in the Ecuadorean embassy in London, perhaps a step up in accommodations, but probably not much higher.

Meanwhile, Edward Snowden remains stuck in the Moscow airport transit section following his revelation of the NSA scheme to collect data on Americans, whether or not they are suspected of crimes. Snowden also violated an oath, but felt we all needed to know about this program and start talking about it. It worked! But Snowden may find himself living in less-than-savory countries from now on, always looking over his shoulder.

Some -- though I’m not one of them -- may consider all three of these guys heroes and may wonder why they have to pay for brave acts in furtherance of the noble cause of light-shedding. Bravery (or bravado) was certainly involved, but how noble were the causes? It may truly be up to history to decide that question. I do think it’s fair to say that all three deserve what’s coming to them, at least in the short term.

A hero always has to pay a price – or risk paying one. It comes with the territory.

Thanks, Mr. Weiner

We should be grateful for the Anthony Weiners of this world. They give us something to talk about. Comedians should actually be sending him royalties. Are we having fun yet?

Then there are those of us who are shocked, shaking our heads. Disgusting! How can this be? How can this slug have the audacity to present himself for public office? Here’s where we get to feel just a little superior. We’d never do anything like what he did.

Look -- of course he should know better than to seriously present himself for office with that kind of an admission.  But can’t we take a minute to feel sad for the waste of an otherwise talented individual who has been and might again have been an effective legislator, were it not for his little problem? This would be especially true if you’re a Democrat.

Remember that this isn’t the first public official to be in this kind of boat, though maybe this is the 21^st century version of it. We allow sexual peccadilloes up to a point, but we are not a forgiving lot when it comes to this stuff, especially if it goes over the kink line.

Here’s the really hard one: Can we take another minute to say to ourselves, “There, but for the grace of God (or whatever force you choose) go I?” And be grateful, for just one nanosecond, that we are not subject to Anthony Weiner’s particular brand of compulsion?

Or at least be grateful that whatever compulsion we are subject to, it’s a socially acceptable one?

Just wondering…

Fear of the Other

President Obama startled the unsuspecting White House press corps, and much of the country, with his unscripted remarks about race on Friday. Following the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin in Florida, the President may have been feeling the pressure from the civil rights community to say something, and he delivered. But he made it clear that it really wasn’t about the verdict in the case. It was about profiling, saying that Trayvon Martin could easily have been he 35 years earlier.

That tragic incident in Florida was not about the state’s Stand Your Ground law. It was about much broader and deeper issues, starting with America’s love affair with guns, but even that’s too narrow a focus. It’s about the primal human fear of The Other.

I heard an NPR commentator – a white woman – say this morning that while she prided herself on her progressive views and her support of racial equality, the city she lives in, Washington D.C., is predominantly African-American, and that she was surprised to discover some lingering racial attitudes in her own heart.

As most of us know, prejudice is pre-judging – coming to a conclusion before all the facts are in. We do this all the time, about many things besides race, perhaps most often to ourselves. We say things like, “I’m no good at math,” and we do everything we can to avoid working with numbers, perhaps because of bad experiences with them in school. But then the day comes when our accountant is vacationing in Maui, and we have financial decisions to make on a deadline. We have to sit down at the kitchen table and figure it out. And we discover we’re not as bad at math as we thought. Numbers don’t scare us anymore, because we had no choice but to work with them.

What exactly does the expression, “Some of my best friends are Jews” mean, as an example? It doesn’t mean, “I like you in spite of the fact that you’re a Jew.” It means, “You’re my friend first, and your Jewishness is secondary” – or perhaps not an issue at all. What happens when people of different races fall in love and get married -- once a crime in many states? It means they love each other as complete human beings. It's why Mr. Obama is on this planet.

As an aside, I’ve often said that the quickest way to learn a foreign language is to fall in love with someone who doesn’t speak yours. Trust me, it leaves Rosetta Stone in the dust.

The trouble with prejudice is that there’s security in it. Everything and everybody are in their assigned places, fulfilling the roles expected of them. It’s all “sorted,” as the British like to say, so we don’t have to think about it. It goes even beyond the fear of The Other. It’s the fear of Chaos.

Some of us have a deeply ingrained resistance to having our world rocked. But the days of that kind of stability are over. Our world is being rocked almost daily now, and our preconceived notions are falling like dominoes in all kinds of fields. Perhaps that’s a good thing. Is the time coming when we will actually welcome such changes instead of fighting them?  And celebrate differences instead of fearing them?

I should live so long.

Hardly a Surprise

I had a strong feeling that George Zimmerman was going to walk, though I was reluctant to voice it ahead of time.

Was justice done for him and Trayvon Martin? Justice is one of those lovely abstractions we like to hang things on, but when reduced to the human level, justice is a very subjective thing. By itself, our court system doesn’t represent justice. It’s just the vehicle that’s supposed to get us there. The last stage in the process is the trial. As with any adversary situation, much like a sporting event, the better team wins. A clear majority of the legal talking heads on cable TV seemed to conclude that the defense did a much better job of presenting its case than the prosecution did.

Much of the trial was televised as per Florida law, raising the perennial issue of whether cameras in the courtroom are harmful. This may go against the grain, but I have persistently believed that if a single seat in a courtroom is open to a member of the general public, by extension, the rest of us should be able to see the same proceeding, with adequate protections, of course, for the jurors.

While the usual concerns about media hype and the folks in court playing to the cameras are raised, I submit that it’s beneficial for the public to know exactly how our courts work and how our laws are applied. There are cameras on almost every street corner, and while we may not all like the idea, we’re used to them by now. If there were cameras in every courtroom in procedures that are open to the public, we would eventually get used to that concept, and be better educated as well. There would be fewer “trials of the century,” because they’d all be on TV.

To return to the point, though, was justice done in Florida? One Facebook friend commented on a post of mine last night, telling us all to relax, it’s Florida, as if real justice isn’t expected there. If we expect all trials to produce justice, are we expecting too much?

I won’t dodge your lingering question. As I’ve said before, I think this country would be a considerably safer place if we didn’t have Neighborhood Watchers walking around with guns.

Disaster and Humility

This morning I read a rather surprising story about a surviving passenger aboard the plane that crashed at San Francisco International Airport on Saturday. This individual, an executive at Samsung, began tweeting out information to the world almost immediately after the crash. Naturally, the cable news networks wanted to talk to him, but he said no, on the grounds that he didn’t want to divert attention from the crash and was just tweeting to let the world know that most of the passengers were OK.

He said NO? Is he a candidate for sainthood or just shy?

When I was a journalist, I was a little different. Some years ago, my town was rattled by a rather strong earthquake, which lasted what seemed like an eternity. Before the shaking stopped, I was on the phone to a national radio network. My wife observed that I hit that phone first before even asking how she was. She doesn’t hold it against me, saying I was just acting like a good reporter.

Cut to last year, where I was in the lead car of a metro train in the city where I live now. The train struck someone who was on the tracks. He had lain there deliberately, apparently. The train stopped, and I heard the engineer calling plaintively under the train, “Sir, are you OK?” Did I worry about how other passengers were reacting? I had no recorder with me, and probably would have used it to gather their reactions for news use. Instead, I was on the phone to the local news radio station immediately.

Should I be ashamed of this cold-fish behavior? I can’t say that I am, even though the Samsung guy at least started me thinking about it. Isn’t one of the chief motivations of the average professional journalist – or media outlet – to be there first with the information? Doesn’t part of the thrill come from knowing you are first, and if even for a few seconds, in complete control of the story?

Those of you who think this is a questionable motivation are no doubt thrilled to know that in this interconnected world, the media don’t control stories anymore. The people do. Humility is being forced on media folks, whether we like it or not. Professional reporters aren’t usually the first at the scene of breaking news. Information has been democratized. Media outlets depend on “civilians,” who carry all the necessary newsgathering equipment in their pockets. And the civilians are in control. If you don’t want to talk to CNN, as that Samsung guy didn’t, you don’t have to.

It’s clear to me, though, that I will not be joining him as he ascends into heaven. I am packing a Hawaiian shirt for the other place.