Tuesday, October 30, 2012
More on UH governance, Senate star-chamber on The Conversation, HPR2, Wednesday 8-9 a.m.
by Larry Geller
I’ll have a few minutes on the radio to discuss the recent Senate investigation of the Wonder Blunder and perhaps elaborate on why replacing the current “garbage can model” of governance would be a good thing.
Tune in to KIPO 89.3 FM at 8 a.m. Wednesday for The Conversation with Beth-Ann Kozlovich.
Saturday, October 27, 2012
Pacific Tsunami Warning Center IS tweeting
by Larry Geller
This is welcome news.
Follow them @NWS_PTWC (hint: even if you’re not a Twitter user, you can just refresh the web page to see the latest tweets).
Their Twitter page says:
This is an experimental service to explore Twitter use to extend the reach of NWS information. Visit http://goo.gl/C9g6i for details and to provide comments.
Tsunami alerts, information and misinformation
by Larry Geller
The first warning we had was a tweet from Hawaii Civil Defense ( @HI_CivilDefense). There was nothing on newspaper or other media sites at first. This is a good tweet to not only follow but to send to your phone.
Follow these folks—since the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center refused to tweet, last I checked with them. Update: They are tweeting now! Follow them @NWS_PTWC
Of course, the most up-to-date information is indeed the PTWC at their website here. There’s a table with warnings in html or text form.
Meanwhile, various news outlets are doing more or less well. The TV sites seem to be on it, but on the other hand, just a few minutes ago,
What’s with that? The article is linked right from their front page.
Another (Canadian) news source that was high up in the Google News rankings warned that Hawaii could be the target of 7 metre waves. That would be more than 21 feet high… maybe 7 feet would be closer.
CNN made up some news based on not knowing what time it is here:
We’re not in a danger zone, but we now have fully charged cell phones, bottled water, and a full tank of gas in the car.
This warning is no joke.
Friday, October 26, 2012
Department of Health agrees to provide free credit monitoring to victims of clubhouse data breach
by Larry Geller
The Department of Health will provide one year’s free credit monitoring services to victims of the September 25 data breach, according to a phone call I received this afternoon.
As I wrote yesterday (Department of Health data breach places unfair burden on those most vulnerable, 10/25/2012), a data breach which may have compromised personal data of clients of DOH’s clubhouse system was announced only yesterday (October 25) even though the data breach took place exactly one month earlier.
Yesterday DOH’s spokesperson Janice Okubo was out of the office, but we spoke this morning on the phone. I asked why the time lag, and also if DOH planned to provide free credit monitoring services for those clients who were affected, along with assistance in obtaining the services.
Okubo’s reply (paraphrase) was that it took time because of HIPAA considerations (medical privacy), and because it was difficult to determine what data was accessed. I pointed out that identity thieves could do a lot of damage in a month’s time. With regard to DOH’s plans to assist the victims of the data breach, Okubo stated that current clients would be given “tip sheets” on protecting their credit, and she hoped that former clients would hear about it. I suggested that DOH owes them free credit monitoring and some assistance in obtaining it, and she said she would bring that up for discussion. I mentioned that UH students received credit monitoring services in settlement of a lawsuit over the repeated breaches at the university.
This afternoon I received a call with the news that DOH has agreed to provide free credit monitoring services for one year. Of course, the details still need to be worked out. Okubo mentioned that not all of the data included Social Security numbers, so not everyone would be in need of monitoring services.
I think it’s important to recognize that DOH is planning to do the right thing. Readers can help—if you know of anyone who has made use of DOH clubhouse services, it might be good to let them know what’s happening with the data breach and the soon-to-be-available monitoring services.
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Department of Health data breach places unfair burden on those most vulnerable
by Larry Geller
In Hawaii, with the cutbacks that have taken place in adult mental health services, the clubhouse system is often the only point of service delivery for those receiving services from the Adult Mental Health Division.
Today the DOH announced that on September 25, 2012, exactly one month ago, there appears to have been a data breach releasing personal information of mental health consumers. According to the DOH press release dated today:
Approximately 600 former and registered members of the Waipahu Aloha Clubhouse are being notified by mail of the possible security breach.
In one month it is possible for identity thieves to act over and over. Today’s press release raises the obvious question: why the delay? I have emailed DOH to learn more.
Further from the press release:
“We very much regret that this incident occurred and the impact it may have on our Waipahu Clubhouse members,” said Dr. Bill Sheehan, Chief of the Adult Mental Health Division.
…
All Waipahu Aloha Clubhouse members are advised to place a fraud alert on their credit files and notify the police if they find any suspicious credit activity.
Dr. Sheehan is a medical doctor and should be concerned “to do no harm,” yet he is placing the burden of guarding against credit fraud on
adults living with severe and persistent mental illness
who were or are receiving services from his division of DOH.
In the case of the University of Hawaii data breaches, it took a lawsuit to get the University to do the right thing and provide credit monitoring services free of charge to those affected. The settlement in that case required students affected to sign up for services. For this population group, it would be reasonable to not only provide free services, but to provide assistance in signing up to be sure that the services are in place.
I’ve asked DOH if free credit monitoring services will be provided.
A secondary question, of course, is how well DOH is protecting personal information on all its computers, and in particular, why unencrypted data was exposed on a machine connected to the Internet, if that’s how the data breach took place. The DOH press release confirms that the computer was believed to have been remotely accessed.
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Targets of Cayetano’s lawsuit will have to determine the risks of continuing their campaign ads
by Larry Geller
Gov. Cayentano’s lawsuit against the Pacific Resource Partnership and specific indiviudals alleging libel and slander related to their campaign ads is not “disappeared news.” There’s good coverage and discussion on the Civil Beat website and on Ian Lind’s blog:
- Cayetano to PRP: You Lied And Now You Need To Pay (Civil Beat, 10/22/2012)
- Cayetano libel suit is no campaign stunt (ilind.net, 10/23/2012)
Both articles include access to the complaint. Both discuss the potential national implications of the suit, particularly if Cayetano should win. Here’s a snip from the complaint that relates directly to Citizens United:
Defendants are parties who are taking advantage of recent court rulings declaring the expenditure of large sums of corporate money to be "speech" entitled to First Amendment protection. But free speech is always subject to the limits of the law of defamation. Accordingly those persons who claim their expenditures are "speech" must be held accountable when their "speech" enters an area that is not protected by the First Amendment - false and defamatory speech made about a public figure with knowledge of its falsity or a high a degree of awareness of its probable falsity. Thus, Plaintiff herein sues not only those who wrote and published the speech, but also those who have financed and funded it under the guise of a judicially-created "free speech" exception to traditional campaign spending laws. The courts have permitted this new system of "money as speech" to arise and Plaintiff now asks the Court to set the outer limit of such "speech" and rule that it does not include financing the publication of false and defamatory statements that the financing parties know to be false and defamatory and/or publish them with an actionable state of mind. Accordingly, those persons and entities that fund such false and defamatory statements must face accountability in the same way that authors and publishers of such false and defamatory statements have traditionally been held accountable.
It will be interesting to see, however, if the offending television ads “disappear” or not.
Like the notorious SLAPP suits used against non-profits (“Strategic lawsuit against public participation”), a lawsuit such as this will have some immediate effect on its targets. For one thing, they (PRP and the individuals named) will have to devote some energy and expense to reviewing the lawsuit with their own attorneys and assess the risk of continuing the advertising in question.
They might decide to stop the advertising.
Or not. We’ll just have to see how it goes.
As the Civil Beat article describes, there could also be risk to the TV stations that ran the ads. Will they consult with their attorneys and decide to refuse future PRP advertising similar to the ones in question?
Perhaps nothing will change. Or perhaps something will.
Monday, October 22, 2012
Democracy Now (10/19/2012): George McGovern, 1922-2012
by Larry Geller
For those readers who did not experience the McGovern revolution, check out this hour-long special from Democracy Now, originally aired on Friday and reproduced here under their Creative Commons license.
The original includes a transcript and much more information. Instead of watching the video below, click over to the program page on the Democracy Now website, George McGovern, 1922-2012: Antiwar Candidate Who Challenged Vietnam and Inspired a Generation.
Johan Galtung’s view from Europe: The Peace Prize: Nobel or Ignoble?
“Take another look at the [Nobel Peace Prize] formula and compare it with the way the West, including the now prized EU, relates to the rest of the world.
Of equity and cooperation for equal and mutual benefit there is almost nothing. The West always wants an edge, something extra; and their capitalism gives them mutual and highly unequal benefits. So does their peace theory: rule of law, human rights and democracy, with no reflection on Western rule of law being so weak on acts of omission, the human rights so weak on collective rights, and democracy so weak on dialogue and consensus.”
The Peace Prize: Nobel or Ignoble?
by Johan Galtung, 18 Oct 2012 - TRANSCEND Media Service
Both, of course. Well deserved for EU’s past and for relations within, in the tradition of West rewarding West. But critics are right about relations without and the present; like debt bondage of GIPSI–Greece-Italy-Portugal-Spain-Ireland/EU periphery–to Germany.
But first, the arguments in favor.
Two French politicians, Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman, declared that Germany had been so atrocious that it had to become member of the family, and then created the family: Genius, peace genius. On 1 Jan, 1958 the European Community embodied the Treaty of Rome, which was signed in 1957 by a horde of men. It certainly fulfilled Nobel’s testament for reducing standing armies against each other and increasing understanding. The prize did not live up to the condition of the preceding year though. But events need some time to prove themselves, like Obama’s rhetoric–and, more importantly: a major omission; but better late than never.
Look at the TRANSCEND formula for peace, highly compatible:
EQUITY x HARMONY
PEACE = —————-
TRAUMA x CONFLICT
The EC-EU satisfied all four. One state one vote, no veto; ahead of the Big-Power, feudal UN. Both territorial and functional integration; territorial equity for power, functional efforts to cooperate for mutual and equal benefit. Much empathy across borders, also with the nazi-fascist countries; much harmony, reflected today in the efforts to help the victims of hypercapitalism (even the delinquent Greece). The integration of Germany in the family released the German textbook acknowledging and rejecting the past, setting a new course. Furthermore, the EU machinery handled the running and growing agenda of conflicts.
In addition, the regional, sub-state approach of the EC-EU softened the many contradictions between the states and the nations in the UK, in the Basque two-state region, and others.
An act of omission corrected. There are many of them. Here is a list from a decade ago, topped by Gandhi, so priceless, not merely reducing but negating violence and improving understanding across conflict borders. Gandhi, however, died prizeless. The Nobel Prize consultant, Jacob Worm Müller, told this author in 1953 that Gandhi was not a real pacifist. He fought the British Empire, “a gift to civilization.”
The following is a short list of some other non-laureates:
[1] Jose Figueres, president of Costa Rica, for abolishing the army.
[2] Jean Monnet & Robert Schuman for creating peace by making former Nazi Germany a “member of the family” in the European Community.
[3] Soekarno-Nasser-Tito for the first Asian-African Conference in Bandung, Indonesia in 1955 and then again in Beograd, Yugoslavia in 1961; for the Nonaligned Movement and its members’ refusal to be part of two blocs on a potentially disastrous collision course.
[4] Nehru & Zhou Enlai for the Panch Sheela Treaty with its five pillars of peaceful coexistence, maintaining peace between the world’s largest countries.
[5] Urho Kekkonen, president of Finland, for the creation of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe-CSCE (Helsinki Accords), 1972-1975.
[6] Olof Palme, prime minister of Sweden, for the Five Countries Initiative for denuclearization.
[7] The churches in Leipzig, particularly Nikolai-kirche, for the Montags-Demonstrationen of 1989, which ended the Cold War on 9/11 1989.
[8] Pope John Paul II for his untiring work on reconciliation through apology and dialogue across religious borders–also in history.
[9] Hans Küng for his work on a global ethic to bridge all religions.
Like Gandhi, they compare favorably with most of the 94 persons and 19 organizations that received the prize at the time of this list.
What do Gandhi and the names on this short list have in common? Answer: An incompatibility with Norway’s foreign policy. Aligned with the USA, that most violent country in modern history, three US presidents and five US secretaries of state were awarded the prize. The European Community was something that the Norwegian government wanted to join but which was defeated by referenda in 1972 and 1994 with the ambiguity of being a potential competitor to USA-NATO.
Nobel’s criteria for peace are still relevant. Candidates are numerous. Human rights, environment and development should also be praised, but not at the expense of peace prizes in Nobel’s spirit.
Take another look at the formula and compare it with the way the West, including the now prized EU, relates to the rest of the world.
Of equity and cooperation for equal and mutual benefit there is almost nothing. The West always wants an edge, something extra; and their capitalism gives them mutual and highly unequal benefits. So does their peace theory: rule of law, human rights and democracy, with no reflection on Western rule of law being so weak on acts of omission, the human rights so weak on collective rights, and democracy so weak on dialogue and consensus. Western individualism writ large but it is blind to we-cultures so prevalent all over the world.
Of empathy there is little or nothing; whatever stands in the way is not understood but stamped out as terrorist, fundamentalist, or what not. Of course, the still leader of the West, the USA, is No. 1 in this lack of empathy; but the others seem not to dare challenge the USA publicly in its myopia. Take the prize to Liu Xiaobo, the Charter less problematic than a man so enthused with Western colonialism that he wanted 300 years for China and praised US-led warfare all over. No understanding among nations from that one, nor reduction of armies.
Of reconciliation after the countless traumas that the West has inflicted on the world there is little or nothing; rather, the West walks out of conferences (with Israel, the latecomer in settler colonialism) denying the victims their dignity.
And of handling conflicts, creatively? Next to nothing; look at the scandals, soon dubbed “tragedies” like Vietnam, in Iraq and Afghanistan. For the capacity of Western diplomacy to bridge the gap and handle conflicts creatively, consult WikiLeaks.
Yet, the EU has a model character instead of the quartet-good-for-nothing propagating a Middle East Community along EU lines for Israel with the five Arab neighbors; a Central Asian community around Afghanistan; an East Asian Community. With that we would be in peace business.
__________________
Johan Galtung, a professor of peace studies, dr hc mult, is rector of the TRANSCEND Peace University-TPU. He is author of over 150 books on peace and related issues, including ‘50 Years-100 Peace and Conflict Perspectives,’ published by the TRANSCEND University Press-TUP.
This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 3.0 United States License.
One Response to “The Peace Prize: Nobel or Ignoble?”
Sunday, October 21, 2012
How non-Native Hawaiians might use their vote for OHA candidates
by Larry Geller
Are you a non-Native Hawaiian who is uncertain about how to vote for OHA representatives on the mail-in absentee ballot you received a couple of days ago? Or are you thinking you’ll just skip it when you find yourself confronted with unfamiliar names in the voting booth?
The article below, originally posted in 2010, outlines my struggle with the whole issue of non-Native Hawaiians voting for OHA representatives and suddenly having the responsibility of voting for people who would not (and should not) represent my interests, but who should work for the interests of others. It’s a weird twist in American democracy, don’t you think?
My conclusion was to ask those I trust whom to vote for. I did that again this year. Here are the results. This is not an endorsement. It may, however, provide some guidance for the uncertain. It would be better, of course, to seek advice from your own trusted sources.
Update: Later emails suggest preference for Walter Ritte for At Large. If I had written this article today, that’s what I would have put in the table below. Hope this isn’t too confusing.
| Haunani Apoliona | At Large |
| Robert Lindsey | Hawaii |
| Kanani Fu | Kauai |
| Dain P Kane | Maui |
How to cast a vote for the OHA representatives
by Larry Geller
In the (in-?)famous Rice case, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the practice of allowing only native Hawaiians to vote in OHA elections. Regardless of how you feel about that, the court has spoken, and so OHA candidates are on your ballot this year.
This is a double-dilemma for those of us who are not Native Hawaiians.
First, whether to vote at all… just because the Supremes said I could vote doesn’t mean that I think its morally or ethically fair that I do so. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs isn’t for my benefit. Regardless of anyone’s feelings or opinions about the organization, I don’t think I, as a non-Native Hawaiian, should vote for its representatives.
The next question is: who to vote for? It’s even worse than the Board of Education slate in terms of public information.
Here’s what I did last time and what I did today: I asked someone. I got some suggestions from a person who should and will vote, a Native Hawaiian whom I trust. She gave me some detail, actually, and I will vote according to her suggestion.
That way I feel better about the question of voting.
Hey—you may not agree, but this works for me, and I’d like to pass on the idea.
I recall speaking to someone about this last election cycle and was told that he had a problem—he didn’t know anyone who identified as Native Hawaiian. Nothing I can do about that, but I suggested that he make an effort and find someone. That’s a whole other conversation and a sad commentary on modern life in Hawaii. I am very aware that on the various boards and groups I participate in, most often there is no Native Hawaiian present in the room. Like I said, that’s another conversation.
Meanwhile, ask someone if you feel as I do and then cast a meaningful vote.
[How to cast a vote for the OHA representatives, 10/20/2012]
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Judge allows camera to roll at activist trial
by Larry Geller
Making no reference to the ACLU amicus curiae brief filed just days ago, Honolulu District Court Judge Dean Ochiai allowed one camera to roll at the trial of Laulani Teale. He incidentally mentioned that Star-Advertiser reporter Ken Kobayashi may use an audio recorder.
The Hawaii Video Hui brought and used the same ‘Olelo camera that was seemingly invisible to Judge Paula Devens-Matayoshi when she continued the Teale trial in September after saying, “The court does not see that there is a television camera” in the courtroom.
(For a discussion of the media issue, a summary of the case and a copy of the amicus brief, see: Media access and right to protest at issue in linked trials today in District Court in Honolulu, 10/17/2012.)
The Teale case was continued until November 5 after beginning late in the day. The city prosecutor offered his first witness, a police officer who gave his account of events leading to Teale’s arrest on May 1. Teale had begun to question the officer when the court recessed the trial for the day.
A side effect of Judge Devens-Matayoshi’s earlier refusal to allow videotaping of the trial was some publicity for the Guerrilla Video Hui, the organization that filed the form requesting permission to cover the trial. Star-Advertiser reporter Ken Kobayashi’s story Judge allows trial video coverage by the Hawaii Guerrilla Video Hui (Star-Advertiser p. B4, 10/18/2012) appeared in today’s paper. The Video Hui is now on the map.
If video is posted or made available, we will cover it at Disappeared News.
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Media access and right to protest at issue in linked trials today in District Court in Honolulu
by Larry Geller
This afternoon there are two trials scheduled in Hawaii District Court related to disorderly conduct charges filed against Laulani Teale on disorderly conduct charges filed against her at a protest on May 1 at Kapiolani Park. The first hearing is whether independent media will have access to video the Teale trial following immediately. There is also an issue (not before the court of course) of whether the courts are denying justice by delaying the trial without good reason. The original hearing was continued because the four arresting officers did not show up. The second was continued when the judge questioned the right of independent media (with `Olelo cameras) to cover the proceedings.
First, the background on this case: Click the link at the end of this snip for the complete article and pictures:
Activist and Hawaiian cultural practitioner Laulani Teale was arrested during the City of Honolulu's annual Lei Day May 1 festival at Kapiolani Park when she and a group of 6 protesters including artist Michael Daley tried approaching Mayor Carlisle to ask him to return the Kānāwai Māmalahoe banner and other artwork the police and City crews unlawfully seized from the (De)Occupy Honolulu encampment. Teale was the only one arrested.
[The Doug Note, Activist Laulani Teale arrested during Lei Day program at Kapiolani Park, 5/8/2012]
(photo shows Laulani Teale outside the courtroom on August 19, 2012 showing the conch shell that HPD described as a “weapon” but that didn’t bother the security checkpoint at the courthouse at all)
The case is important enough on its own right, involving (in my view) the right of citizens to petition their government peacefully. I’ll have more to say after the trial today. This is assuming that it is allowed to go forward.
Here’s what I wrote as part of a rambling article on September 19. This introduces the media access issue:
…the original trial was continued because the four arresting cops didn’t show up. Now, if the defendant doesn’t show up, a warrant is issued. But it’s ok for the cops not to show. So ok, one continuance.
Today a different judge objected to the `Olelo video camera. The previous judge approved the application for extended media coverage. This judge questioned whether the organization applying for the certificate is a qualified media or education institution. And get this – the approval was for a television camera, and the judge said “The court does not see that there is a television camera” in the courtroom. The camera was plainly marked with two `Olelo stickers. Sure, it is a little bitty thing compared to a giant studio camera, but this is 2012, not 1956.
The judge said that she is not in a position to reverse the decision of the previous judge but doubts whether the order was properly granted. So what did she do? Another continuation. The judge allowed the prosecution to introduce their witnesses to the record but not the defense, and then continued the trial until October 17, before the previous judge. She then apologized to the prosecutor’s witnesses for the continuance, but not to the defense witnesses.
What’s with that? I won’t even speculate. Who knows, one day I might face a traffic violation before this judge. But what a waste of money, and what a huge trouble caused to the defendant and her witnesses.
The media access issue caught the attention of the Hawaii ACLU. They have filed a motion and an amicus curiae brief with the court (see documents, below). The motion and proposed amicus brief were filed by Hawaii ACLU attorneys Daniel M. Gluck, Lois K. Perrin and Laurie A. Temple along with Alston Hunt Floyd & Ing attorneys Paul Alston and Brandon M. Segal. Some snips:
The Hui applied for permission to provide extended videotape coverage of the criminal prosecution of Defendant Laulani Teale (“Teale”). The Application was granted by the Court (the Hon. Dean E. Ochiai, presiding). Subsequently, on September 19, 2012, the Hon. Paula Devens-Matayoshi (presiding judge) continued Teale’s trial and expressed concern that, based on her review of the Hui's Application and the Court’s Order, the Application may not have been “providently granted.” The Record is unclear as to why Judge Devens-Matayoshi apparently sua sponte directed
reconsideration.
Sua Sponte means “Latin for "of one's own will," meaning on one's own volition, usually referring to a judge's order made without a request by any party to the case.” Snipping a bit more, with citations omitted:
The Hawaii and United States Constitutions guarantee the press a right of access to judicial records and proceedings, with primary underpinnings in the First Amendment. U.S. Const. amend. I; (“[T]he press and general public have a constitutional right of access to criminal trials. . . . [T]his right of access is embodied in the First Amendment, and applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment.”). This fundamental premise is grounded in three important policy concerns: to “(1) promote community respect for the rule of law, (2) provide a check on the activities of judges and litigants, and (3) foster more accurate fact finding.”
The trial on media access takes place at 1:30 p.m. today at Honolulu District Court.
(The copy below should be considered an unofficial copy, do not rely on it)
Download ACLU Motion to File Amicus Re Media Access from Disappeared News
The 1st Amendment is the new 2nd Amendment
OK, so itʻs past midnight and I have to go to sleep. Iʻm going to be a witness in the ever continuing trial of Laulani Teale later on today (Wed 10/17/12). Actually, before her trial, the Court will hear whether the Hawaii Guerrilla Video Hui can continue the court coverage it was granted by the original judge in the trial. Judge Paula Devens doubted that the original order allowing us to provide media coverage was "providently granted" and halted the trial to avoid media coverage. The ACLU supports our right for continuing coverage of the trial -- Iʻm a member of the named "Hawaii Guerrilla Video Hui."
H. Doug Matsuoka
17 October 2012
Makiki, Honolulu
Permalink
posted by H. Doug Matsuoka @
10/17/2012 12:14:00 AM 0 comments - add your
comment
Saturday, October 13, 2012
Follow this Facebook trail to sustainability
by Larry Geller
I am a Facebook resister. Maybe one day I’ll join, but not today. There is good stuff there and one doesn’t have to sign up to see it.
Come along with me for an interesting ride, or just click one of the links and skip ahead.
While looking for PLDC protests this morning, I thought I would start at Occupy Honolulu’s Facebook page. If you’re not a member, an annoying popup asks you to join, just get rid of it.
Keep clicking on the photos—you are now viewing images posted on the wall of Grow Food Not Lawns.
There’s the White House garden, of course, but lots of other great images for sustainability advocates.
These things never computed for me. If we on Oahu pay three times the national average for electricity (four times on Kauai), how come we are so late in using alternative energy? And is the best we can do an undersea cable that will benefit developers but run up our charges even more? That’s electricity. For water, we pay high rates and don’t use the free rainwater we have. The city wastes water by watering medians and overspraying onto roads even when it is raining. And don’t get me started on stormwater. We pay for sewer pipes while other states and municipalities require developments to dispose of their own stormwater on their property.
Of course, the ugly elephant in the room is the city’s willingness to cave in to developers and pave over some of the best farmland we have left on Oahu.
Why do we just talk about sustainability and do nothing about it?
Anyway, that was my little side trip on Facebook this morning. Click the first picture above and check it out.
Let me wrap up this rant with a video from Thursday’s Democracy Now, reproduced here under terms of their Creative Commons license. Click the thingy at the lower right for full screen. Click the title to go to the web page where there is a transcript.
"Earthship Biotecture": Renegade New Mexico Architect’s Radical Approach to Sustainable Living
New Mexico residents are trying to a break free from Los Alamos’ nuclear legacy by creating more environmentally sound ways of living. At the forefront of this struggle is renegade architect Michael Reynolds, creator of radically sustainable living options through a process called "Earthship Biotecture." Reynolds’ solar homes are created from natural and recycled materials, including aluminum cans, plastic bottles and used tires. These off-the-grid homes minimize their reliance on public utilities and fossil fuels by harnessing their energy from the sun and wind turbines. In Taos, New Mexico, Reynolds gives us a tour of one of the sustainable-living homes he created. [includes rush transcript]
Guest:
Michael Reynolds, creator of radically sustainable living options through a process called "Earthship Biotecture."
Some non-media coverage of Oahu PLDC protests and a video from Ewa Beach Neighborhood Board on Act 55
by Larry Geller
Thanks again to Occupy Hilo Media @OccHiloMedia for a pointer to these two web posts on the Monday PLDC (Public Land Development Corporation) rallies, this time on Oahu.
The first is a short YouTube video posted on TheYTDoug’s channel.
Check that channel for some videos of a recent Ewa Beach Neighborhood Board candidate forum (Senate District 20). One question addressed Act 55 (PLDC). Check out the statement by Dean Kalani Capelauto on the undemocratic process by which Act 55 was passed. Heck, I’ll include that video below.
And it seems that a Civil Beat staff member stopped by, reporting that at the time she was there, there were few protestors.
If there was only a “trickle” on Oahu, it’s gonna be tough to repeal Act 55.
Ewa Beach Neighborhood Board candidate forum, remarks on Act 55, from TheYTDoug’s channel.
Oahu media absent on PLDC protests
by Larry Geller
If I’ve missed something, could someone please point me in the right direction?
Ok, the press on Oahu have had more than enough time to develop their film and get the story out on the anti-PLDC protests held statewide on Monday, October 8, 2012.
Of course, since development interests are big business in Hawaii, I wouldn’t expect great coverage of protests against something that is such a gift to potential advertisers as is the Public Land Development Corporation.
About 50 people were reported to have attended over there.
Also on the Big Island, the Hawaii Tribune Herald did report on the protests. A tiny snip:
The Public Land Development Corporation is a terrible mistake that should be abolished, protesters across Hawaii said in sign-waving demonstrations Monday.
[Hawaii Tribune-Herald, Protesters: Abolish public lands agency, 10/9/2012]
This broader story on PLDC issues included mention of the protests:
…
And recent public protests across the state drew hundreds of participants.Much of the criticism has centered on a section of state law exempting the PLDC from “land use, zoning, and construction standards for subdivisions, development, and improvement of land.”
The mission of the PLDC has been called everything from a land-grab, to anti-democratic, to Nazi-ism.
…[BigIslandNow.com, ANALYSIS: Public Protest Too Much For Development Agency?, 10/12/2012]
Protests on Kauai were covered by the Garden Island:
For a few hours Monday afternoon, the entire state connected through simultaneous events linked by one moving force: Repeal Act 55. Community members on Kaua‘i, O‘ahu and Big Island got together from 2 to 4 p.m., and on Maui from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m., to protest against the controversial act
[The Garden Island, Kaua‘i joins statewide rally against Act 55, 10/9/2012]
Protests were directed at both the Legislature and at Governor Abercrombie. But since both of those are right here at the State Capitol, we need to know what the public is doing on Oahu and statewide also.
If the “entire state connected through simultaneous events,” you’d think there would be lots of coverage here. You’d be wrong.
Again, if I’ve missed something, please let me know.
How does it make you feel to know the next president is a deliberate liar?
by Larry Geller
Fact checking should be the routine work of journalists before they publish. Perhaps it never really was that way, but recently a whole new industry of fact-checkers has been born because the media don’t report the lies of our leaders. The score sheets are posted for all to see on the Internet.
Of course, few people will read the fact-check reports in comparison to the million sitting transfixed before their HDTV screens or who devoured the shallow newspaper accounts the next day.
Reviewing these fact-check reports makes me sad. Can it be that our leaders and would-be leaders are either totally clueless about matters of strong public concern? Or are they simply bald-faced liars?
Watching the recent vice-presidential debate, I was stunned to hear Ryan state that Social Security is bankrupt. It is not bankrupt, not even close. Now, Republicans have been circling Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid like vultures for some time, and if they sense that they may soon come to power, maybe they are deluded into thinking that Social Security is already carrion and are just licking their lips in anticipation of a bloody feast when they get into office.
One fact-check web page identified the lie:
In fact, if no changes are made, Medicare would still be able to meet 88 percent of its obligations in 2085. Social Security is fully funded for another two decades and could pay 75 percent of its benefits thereafter. There is also an easy way to ensure the program’s long-term solvency without large changes or cuts to benefits.
[ThinkProgress, At The Vice Presidential Debate: Ryan Told 24 Myths In 40 Minutes, 10/12/2012]
Now, whatever one says about Ryan, he is not an idiot. Most likely what he said about Social Security (and much else) is part of a strategy to win the election. No idiot himself, he’s counting on a good portion of the electorate to be idiots. This is sad. To think that it might work is even worse.
In other words, our leaders and potential leaders are not gullible, we are. And they know it.
Michael Moore uncovered a New York Times story from 1984 that identifies lying as a Republican strategy:
The Republicans are unabashed in their discussion of their ability to use the television medium.
"You can say anything you want during a debate and 80 million people hear it,'' observed Peter Teeley, press secretary to Vice President [George H.W.] Bush. If reporters then document that a candidate spoke untruthfully, ''so what?''
''Maybe 200 people read it or 2,000 or 20,000,'' he said.
I first became aware that presidents lie in high school when I heard a peace activist mention that Truman lied to the American people after bombing Hiroshima—he apparently claimed it was a military target.
I became aware at the same time that the American people don’t really care about the lies. The firebombing of Tokyo was similarly directed against the civilian population and killed far more people than the atomic bomb did. And there was Dresden. And so forth. What I had been taught in history class turned out to include some really big lies and also lies of omission.
Much later, we learned about Iran-Contra. Lies. Big lies. And WMDs in Iraq—lies recent enough to remember clearly.
So, ok, our government is run by a bunch of liars.
But now we have all these fact-checking organizations listing up the lies, half-truths and distortions of political candidates on both sides. Why don’t they stop their lying?
I have no answer. Michael Moore’s discovery of a Republican strategy to lie at will is as good as any.
Taking a step backward from the immediate question, probably this is what alpha males do in order to gain leadership. We share almost all of our DNA with the other big apes, so if alpha males employ deception to get ahead, what’s wrong with that? We may be programmed to accept whatever they do to gain leadership of the pack. Don’t we behave like monkeys? We accept the leadership of these alpha males while plotting rival actions to unseat them. Politicians even talk about scratching each others’ backs.
In many other counties, historically the path to leadership involves human slaughter. All we do every four years is buy into lies. So in a sense, perhaps we are a slightly advanced civilization (all our slaughter is overseas, I know, I know).
And buy into them we do. Check out your local newspaper. Editors are thrilled with the display Romney and Biden put on. Its as though the men were peacocks displaying their splendid feathers. The media loved the show. To heck with the lies.
If you care to check the depth of dishonesty that our media willingly accept, see your favorite fact-checking website, or:
- At Last Night’s Debate: Romney Told 27 Myths In 38 Minutes, (ThinkProgress, 10/4/2012) and ,
- At The Vice Presidential Debate: Ryan Told 24 Myths In 40 Minutes, (ThinkProgress, 10/12/2012
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Civil Beat’s Chad Blair asks: Should UH Say Aloha To Football?
by Larry Geller
Don’t blast Chad because of my headline. He is a sports fan and is trying to start a discussion over at Civil Beat, which is what they like to do. His headline is provocative and if you care, go over there.
It is a discussion that could go any which way.
Meanwhile, over at the Senate, they may end up killing both UH and UH football. Any more Senate inquisitions and who will want to be president at UH? Who will want to be on the sports staff?
Far more has been spent by the UH administration in fending off the interrogations than the Stevie Wonder blunder cost. Probably nothing will bring back the money scammed from the university. But the Senate could offer to help UH with its organizational issues instead of working to place blame and tear it apart.
No permanent good will come from the Senate Special Committee on Accountability if it stays on its current course. Nothing good for UH academics, and nothing good for UH sports.
Prudent to leave iwi kupuna where they are
by Larry Geller
It’s not clear from reports on the meeting between HART CEO Dan Grabauskas and community members at the Oahu Island Burial Council meeting yesterday whether the city plans to move any human bones found in Kakaako along the rail route before construction begins. (See, for example, here.)
Possibly that was clear to those attending the meeting, but the printed reports seem ambiguous, unless I’m missing something.
The iwi should be left alone.
Why?
Because there’s a good chance that if Gov. Ben Cayetano wins election in November, just a few weeks away, there will be no rail construction at all.
So whatever is found should be left alone. That would be the moral thing to do.
Portland puts in transit extension for about what Honolulu wastes in delay costs
“Portland Streetcar Loop Project will extend tracks from the Pearl District, across the Broadway Bridge, connecting via Weidler Street to Lloyd Center at NE 7th Avenue, south on MLK Blvd. to OMSI and return north on Grand Avenue to Broadway and the Pearl District. The Loop Project will provide 28 new streetcar stop locations. … The cost estimate for the Loop Project is $148.27 million dollars…”
Today’s headline indicates that rail delay costs so far will be more than $114 million. For almost the same cost ($148.27 million), Portland Oregon is completing a 28-stop extension to its flexible and well-liked transit system (see below).
The Star-Advertiser story, while correct, could be more accurate. For example, it reports:
Daniel Grabauskas, executive director of HART, notified the City Council by letter on Tuesday that the Hawaii Supreme Court ruling that stopped all construction on the project in August will likely cost the city an estimated $64 million to $95 million in delay expenses in the months ahead.
[Star-Advertiser p.1, Rail delay costs to exceed $114M, 10/11/12]
Of course, the Supreme Court ruling is not costing the city $114M. The truth is that the city’s failure to complete archeological surveys is now costing taxpayers big money. The court also invalidated a permit issued by the city.
Regardless of the official spin, the newspaper could report the story differently. On the continuation page a more complete history is noted, if you bother to turn the page on a story most people are by now already familiar with.
Meanwhile, another transit system goes forward
Let’s see… Honolulu rail at $5.3 billion for 20 miles is $265 million per mile. Portland is putting in a short 3.35 mile extension to its flexible and cost-effective transit system for $148.27 million, … or $44.3 million per mile. That’s 1/6 what our non-extensible 
And the cars will be made locally in Portland! Jobs! Maintenance! The ability to make changes easily!
Honolulu’s planned rail system won’t go to the airport and is unlikely to ever be extended to Waikiki or to UH Manoa.
Portland’s flexible system can go most anywhere.
(click map for larger)
Legislative Auditor’s report incidentally blasts DLIR’s failure to ensure public safety
“DLIR is unable to carry out its current inspection duties”—Legislative Auditor
by Larry Geller
The Legislative Auditor released a report today assessing the need to regulate zip lines in Hawaii, and concluded that the legislature should not enact SB2433 of the 2012 legislative session that would require the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations (DLIR) to charge fees of zipline operators and begin to regulate the attractions.
The issue of regulation came about after an incident in September 2011 in which a construction worker was killed working on a zip line on the Big Island:
The death of a zip line construction worker Wednesday on the Big Island could lead to government oversight of the industry, which consists of at least nineteen operations on all of the main Hawaiian islands.
Teddy Callaway, 36, of Maui, was killed when a 30-foot wooden tower collapsed causing him to fall off a zip line 200 feet above Honoli'i stream.
[KHON, Death of man on Big Island turns spotlight on zip line industry , 9/22/2011]
The audit report concludes that regulation is not necessary:
Since proponents have not provided any evidence of harm or abusive practices, we conclude that the necessity for regulating zipline and canopy tour operators has not been established. To the extent these businesses operating in Hawai‘i must be inspected annually based on industry standards for insurance purposes, safety measures are already in place to protect the public.
Reading the report reveals what perhaps is a far larger safety problem—the auditor concludes (emphasis in the original) that “Clearly [the DLIR] is not capable of funding its current duties,” referring to a backlog of 5,000 elevator inspections and a complete absence of amusement ride inspections.
In the audit summary the auditor explains why DLIR was selected and rapidly concludes that the Senate’s choice would not work out:
The body of the report reiterates the same conclusion:
The DLIR lacks the capability to ensure public safety for its existing elevator and boiler inspection program. The department has a multiyear inspection backlog of 5,000 elevators. Clearly, the department is not capable of handling its current duties, let alone another inspection program, especially without significant additional resources.
Act 103 of the current legislative session creates a special fund intended to make the elevator inspections self-sufficient, but the audit report is not at all optimistic, estimating it could take well into FY 2013-2014 to bring the safety program up to date.
I’ve ridden in elevators in the Liliha area that stopped suddenly at each floor, requiring the floor buttons to be pushed again and again. Elevators these days do not display an inspection certificate. Perhaps the lack of inspections has something to do with that.
Add DLIR to the list of state agencies not performing their duties. The Department of Health recently settled a lawsuit that concluded it failed to provide required mental health services for several years. A separate part of DOH has not been inspecting weekend farmers markets or food stands at all. The Department of Transportation (along with the Honolulu DOT) is unable to reduce the record number of seniors killed. Etc., etc.
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Of course, we never agreed to 19% of city tax revenues going toward rail
“The concern is, when in the process did we decide to radically shift city priorities and double the amount of the annual budget devoted to public transportation? When was the community discussion about this?”
by Larry Geller
David Shapiro is asking a rhetorical question, “When was the community discussion about this?” Of course, there was none.
It’s too bad that David remains locked behind a paywall. As usual, he cuts to the chase. Referring to a study by Porter & Associates Inc., he wrote this morning:
The consultant projected total operating costs of the city's transit system — TheBus, Handi-Van and rail — will consume 19.1 percent of city tax collections in 2021, up from a historic level of 10 percent.
The concern is, when in the process did we decide to radically shift city priorities and double the amount of the annual budget devoted to public transportation? When was the community discussion about this?
…
It's astounding we've gotten this far — issuing major contracts, spending hundreds of millions of dollars, starting construction — without a frank public examination of operational impacts.[Star-Advertiser p. A2, Rail's operating cost must be on table, not under it, 10/10/2012]
David reminded us that the budget was so tight this year that Mayor Carlisle’s administration instituted cuts to bus service. The cuts have proven immensely unpopular. I would like to add for myself that I suspect the cuts in bus service were one reason that Carlisle came in last in the mayoral primary.
So it really is a good question that should have been both asked and answered while the project was in the planning stage.
This rail line is so expensive that it is unlikely to ever be extended. Unlike the flexible, economical and well-regarded transit system Portand Oregan enjoys, Honolulu would be stuck paying for Mufi’s single rail line in perpetuity.
The answer to David’s question, of course, is “of course, we never agreed to 19% of city tax revenues going toward rail.”
Do we look as dumb as our leaders?
Monday, October 08, 2012
Coming to a garage near you: home-made plastic “wiki weapons”
“A number of people have already made gun parts using 3-D printers. And yes, the guns with these parts have successfully fired bullets.”
by Larry Geller
I’ve been watching the progress of 3D printers for some time. I think the technology could be very disruptive, in a positive way. And yes, I had thought about the possibility that guns might one day be easily replicated by anyone, at home, and at low cost—a very negative but perhaps inevitable outcome. Now the concept is out in the open.
And those guns could be largely or completely made of plastic, which would evade detection at many security check stations.
The threat is now documented with the posting yesterday of a story by the New York Times: Disruptions: With a 3-D Printer, Building a Gun With the Push of a Button (NY Times, 10/7/2012).
3D printing at affordable prices
There are several sources of 3D printers, with more on the horizon. The two I’ve been following are the Makerbot Replicator 2 and the Solidoodle 3D Printer. Using a different technology, you can already have caps for your teeth made while you wait in dentists’ offices here in Hawaii. While the first two machines construct the product with layering, the dental model is driven by similar 3D software but creates the cap out of a block of porcelain using a computerized tabletop milling machine.
The New York Times mentions that Chinese companies are starting to make them also and that prices are falling to about $500.
How the technology works
In the days of 78 RPM records, you couldn’t easily make one at home. The same for book printing. Now music is easily copied, books are eBooks, and anything digital can be reproduced at essentially zero cost at home if someone wants to do that.
The software for 3D printing is free—download Google Sketchup and you’re in business. If you don’t want to own a 3D printer yourself, take the output file (or send it) to a service that will print the part for you.
The first image below is of a Solidoodle printer, suitable for home use (click images to go to the websites).
The next is a commercial printer that has been available for some time.
3D printers can be used to create virtually any object directly from a computer aided design. This video shows how an Objet Connex 3D printer can produce 6 different size adjustable wrenches from 5cm in size to 50 cm in size - all in one print run. All the wrenches contain fully-movable parts and were created with no assembly. The wrenches are made of Objet's ABS-like material which has the strength and toughness of ABS-grade engineering plastics.
This large commercial printer already knocks out complex parts, and in color, too:
Here’s a bicycle produced by a 3D printer:
3D printing promises a revolution. Here’s an example.
When we lived in Japan we owned a Nissan Cedric. Yea, that’s what it was called. Like the Dodge/Plymouth twins, it had a twin named the Gloria. The Cedric was a small black limo, suitable for an imported executive. Although Japanese car owners typically looked for a new vehicle every few years, we kept our Cedric until it was 21 years old. And then we sold it. Heck, it may still be running…
Along the way it needed exactly one replacement part outside of brake pads and the usual. (Japanese auto inspections are brutal and expensive, but they ensure that cars are kept in perfect operating condition.) Inside the driver-side door, part of the opening mechanism gave way after about 18 years. The door would not open from the outside handle. Bummer.
Of course, parts were no longer available. Unlike in the US, the parts business had not yet become a profit center. Whether it was a car or an electrical appliance, it was hard to get repair parts after just a couple of years.
But Nissan was very supportive of this Cedric still driving around the streets of Tokyo. It may have been the only one of that vintage. So our local garage easily got Nissan to make a new part to fit inside the car door. The part was made in a machine shop someplace. Of course, it would be prohibitively expensive to make the least complex part that way due to labor costs.
The part that I needed could have been made very quickly and cheaply by a 3D printer.
Imagine if you or your auto mechanic could simply dial up a part from an on-line Honda catalog and either pick it up at a dealer, a nearby Kinkos, or perhaps print it in-house? That won’t work for carburetors or intake manifolds, but it could work for many of the myriad parts now stocked by dealers and for which owners are made to fork over much moola when replacement is needed. Actually, there are already some 3D printers that work in metal rather than plastic. Maybe at least part of that carburetor could be printed locally one day.
The dark side …
As with music and more recently other digital material, copying is easy. An mp3 file can be copied indefinitely without further loss of quality (or you could get an exact FLAC copy of the original). Given a computer, it costs little or nothing to have quality music stored in one’s iPod. Will there one day be an iTunes for 3D parts?
How will we know if a car part is genuine or a counterfeit copy? That may not matter for a door handle linkage part, but it could be life or death if it’s a more critical part, from steering or the brake system, for example.
And of course, we are now faced with the nightmare that sociopaths could knock out their own guns in the privacy of their homes.
From the New York Times article:
A number of people have already made gun parts using 3-D printers. And yes, the guns with these parts have successfully fired bullets. Cody Wilson, a law student at the University of Texas, is in the process of building a completely functional printed gun. “We hope to have this fully tested and put the files online in the next couple of months,” said Mr. Wilson, who runs a Web site called Defense Distributed.
He calls the gun the Wiki Weapon.
Yes, the Hawaiian word wiki applied to a weapon. That’s not exactly the aloha spirit.
After committing a crime with a printed weapon, a person could simply melt down the plastic and reprint it as something as mundane as a statue of Buddha. And guns made of plastic might not be spotted by metal detectors in airports, courthouses or other government facilities.
Finally, a 3D printer could soon be capable of making other 3D printers. So a whole gun factory could be set up in someone’s garage. Yikes! Watch out for suspicious purchases of Buddha statues in Chinatown that could be melted down to make guns!
All this sounds like a revolution to me, and it may or may not be a peaceful one if the New York Times story is taken seriously.
Johan Galtung’s view from Europe: Sociocide, Palestine and Israel
Sociocide, Palestine and Israel
by Johan Galtung, 8 Oct 2012 - TRANSCEND Media Service
Testimony for Russell Tribunal on Palestine – NYC, 7 Oct 2012
Honorable Members of the Jury: Sociocide is a new concept that has not found its place in positive international law. But Genocide, the unspeakable crime of massive killing of members of a genus, a nation, for no other reason than membership, has. And Ecocide, the unspeakable crime of killing Mother Earth who nourishes us all, is finding its place via the constitutions of some countries in Latin America.
Sociocide, the killing of a society’s capacity to survive and to reproduce itself, should become equally and prominently a crime against humanity. A society is a self-reproducing social system. So are human beings, with our basic needs for survival, wellness, identity, freedom. Society is also an organism, with a lifespan far beyond that of individuals. For humans to survive as humans their basic needs have to be met. For that to happen the society has to survive. For the society to survive the basic social prerequisites must be met:
* for security, against violence, killing, wounding the members;
* for economic sustainability, against their starvation, illness;
* for identity culturally, a meaning with life, against alienation;
* for autonomy politically, to be a master of their own house.
As society unfolds so do humans, and vice versa. Life breeds life.
This also holds for nomadic societies based on hunter-gatherers. Monasteries are incapable of self-reproduction biologically when based on one gender, but are highly viable societies based on recruitment.
Under modernity, identity is carried by the nation, with four characteristics: an idiom, a religion-world view, a history–of the past, present and future–and geographical attachment. Time, Space, with the means to communicate and something to believe is crucial.
Under modernity the state is the key executor of all the above.
Sociocide is the intended wounding-killing of a society by eliminating the prerequisites for a live, vibrant, dynamic society.
Sociocide molests the human members. In the longer run, lethally. Sociocide is what Western, and not only Western, colonialism has done for centuries, denying others their autonomy, imposing their own identity–language and world-view–moving others out of their own historical dialectic and into history as Western periphery, denying them the land they are attached to with their hearts and minds. And their bodies for security and sustenance, for food, water, health. Israel is a part of that Western tradition, with one exception: the Jewish past, hidden in the fog of myths. But some past it was, and on those lands. So I myself have been and am a supporter of a state with Jewish characteristics, not a Jewish state for Jews only, within 1967 borders; having argued so strongly in Arab countries. However, I believe neither in an one-state nor in a two-state, but in a six-state solution: a community modeled on the 1958 European Community; Israel with the five Arab border states: Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and Palestine fully recognized according to international law.
But Israeli politics has been and remains in the tradition of Western settler colonialism, bringing in more settlers, deepening the colonialism. So let us bring in the criteria of sociocide.
Security. The Palestinians are denied the right to have a military; any effort to defend themselves against occupation is to Israel a casus belli. Moreover, to Israel, nonviolence as an alternative approach to Palestinian security is met with military means, as a war. And the task of the Palestinian police is to protect Israeli settlers against Palestinians, not to protect Palestinians.
Sustenance. Depriving Palestinians of enormous swaths of land through the nakba, erasing and confiscating Palestinian villages, denying them the good soil, the water, with no end in sight.
Idiom, world-view. By and large is left untouched, but is asymmetric: Arabs have to learn Hebrew, not vice versa; no respect for Islam.
Time. Absolutely crucial. Public reference to the nakba becoming illegal, Palestinians are deprived of a major part of their past; with no monuments and none of their symbols in public space. The present is an unending harassment that impairs coherent life. And still worse: futurelessness through massive uncertainty. Israel never declares where those recognized and secured borders are located (Nile to the Euphrates?); being unpredictable, the future shrinks to survival.
Space. Sacred space, our land, not soil as resource, also shrinks below a minimum and makes Palestinians strangers in their own lands.
State. Denial; there exists only a weak “Palestinian Authority” with no “final state”. Instead of that there is exploitation of Palestinians, efforts to colonize their minds as second class citizens, Israelis using Palestinians only for the most menial tasks, fragmenting them territorially inside-outside Israel, promoting divisions between the West Bank and Gaza, inside the West Bank, and also by the Wall. Palestinians are in general marginalized.
Is Palestine the victim of sociocide by Israel? Indeed!
Security, sustenance, time, space, state, idiom, worldview, not five out of seven. Not dead, but badly wounded. No healing in sight.
Gaza is alive; but armed attacks against Israel however understandable are counterproductive. Nonviolence conveys the future one wants to see, with care, given the Israeli response. Use bi- and multilateral diplomacy, increasing international legitimacy of a Palestinian state, promoting the nation through UNESCO, and the state through the UN.
But above all working for a positive vision of the future. A live Palestinian state with all prerequisites met is indispensable. But so is an image of a community with Israel, now autistic and possibly in a process of socio-suicide, increasingly isolated. With equitable cooperation, mutual empathy and traumas cleared, in the South African way.
The USA and Israel were born in the same way, as God’s chosen people with promised lands, using sociocide and genocide (the USA). With no policy change they may also decline and fall in the same way. Even soon.
_____________________
Johan Galtung, a professor of peace studies, dr hc mult, is rector of the TRANSCEND Peace University-TPU. He is author of over 150 books on peace and related issues, including ‘50 Years-100 Peace and Conflict Perspectives,’ published by the TRANSCEND University Press-TUP.
This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 3.0 United States License.
Write a comment
A challenge to the Senate: Assist, rather than destroy, the University of Hawaii
by Larry Geller
Well, that’s my suggestion to the Webster folks for their next edition.
Dear Senators:
There’s a fork in the road ahead for the University of Hawaii, and which path they will take depends to some extent on how the Senate proceeds with its current inquisition.
One way is a hard road, with reduced chances to attract quality leadership in both academics and sports, which could diminish the value of a UH education both for past and new graduates.
The other path allows for continued growth and excellence, helping to assure bright opportunities for UH graduates, the prosperity of our state, and perhaps even the growth of a winning athletic program, if that’s what you really care about.
Should an excess of scrutiny and tough political pressure result in the removal of the current UH president, it is hard to imagine that finding a replacement will be easy. Any candidate would seek similar contractual protections knowing that the Legislature reserves the right to interrogate and interfere with the management of the university at any time. Who would want to risk their career by taking a job as president of the University of Hawaii?
Arguably the costs of defending itself against outside interference will far exceed the $250,000 or so lost in the original Stevie Wonder blunder. That money appears to be gone, but it pales in comparison to the expenditures resulting from the outside interference.
The waste will be compounded if the Board of Regents, reacting to political pressure, invokes short-term sanctions that have long-term consequences for the quality of education in Hawaii.
Instead of placing blame, it would be far more productive for the Legislature and other concerned individuals to offer assistance to UH with an aim to strengthening its internal governance so that a similar incident is less likely to happen in the future.
When the special committee convenes again, it would be refreshing, and a service to present and future UH graduates and to the state economy, if the committee would offer to help. Try it.
Sunday, October 07, 2012
No directions on bridge detour? Can it be?
by Larry Geller
The state Department of Transportation is repairing the Karsten Thot Bridge in Wahiawa. The media reported a traffic mess and numerous complaints when the repairs started in September.
Here we are several weeks later. I received a report that approaching the bridge from Central Oahu there is a “detour” sign in the center lane just before the bridge indicating that the bridge is closed. It doesn’t say whether the detour is to the left or to the right. And along the way, there is no guidance for drivers about where to go.
Can anyone verify if this is always the case?
What will tourists or those not familiar with the area do? Why not have signs with directional arrows?
Could someone who drives the route frequently please comment on whether there is some kind of guidance for drivers? Thanks.
Some economic truths should be self evident
by Larry Geller
KHON posted an article, Waimea windmills create eyesore to some (KHON, 10/6/2012) that highlights objections to the large and obtrusive windfarm above Waimea Valley. (hat tip to Cheryl Corbiell)
First Wind, according to the article, stated that the wind farm will “ultimately produce nearly 10% of Oahu's electricity needs.”
Of course the wind turbines are eyesores. Unless a wind turbine is sited out of view, it is an eyesore. This will forever be a disadvantage of wind turbines as sources of alternative energy: people do not want to see them. Many people do not want to see them very much. For others, a wind turbine springing up nearby will have practical consequences as well: eyesores reduce property values. This is a truth that should be self-evident, but standby for the biggie.
There are issues that should be raised before any other alternative energy project is permitted to go forward in Hawaii.
This should be a fundamental truth: An alternative energy project must reduce the cost of electricity to Hawaii ratepayers before it is allowed to go forward.
I hold that truth to be self-evident.
Why? Because we already pay the highest electricity rates in the country, three times the national average. Other costs are also higher in Hawaii. While it is admirable to reduce dependence on fossil fuels, and while we must remove carbon from the atmosphere, the profits of HECO or alternative energy companies are not our priority or responsibility. We have to look out for our own families and kids’ educational needs, for example, first.
Clearly, First Wind makes the first profit. Where’s our profit?
The KHON story properly emphasized that the windfarm is ugly. It didn’t say how much our electric bill will be reduced, if it will be reduced at all, or when. Perhaps that would be a consideration for some—that is, if, in exchange for some ugliness, they might save enough to pay a few expenses.
Standby—when (if) the undersea cable project should go forward, our electric bills are expected to increase—to protect HECO’s profit margin.
Not to mention that windfarms on Neighbor Islands would also be ugly.
We should not allow that to happen. If necessary, the fundamental truth above could be codified into law. It’s not a valid public purpose to further increase our costs to protect a private monopoly.
Reducing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere should be a responsibility of the oil-burning dinosaur utility monopoly to be allowed to continue operating in the state at all. And it doesn’t compute if our monthly bills don’t go down as well.
She’s may be no saint, but Dr. Greenwood isn’t the problem either
by Larry Geller
Today’s lead story is “Regents face tough choice over future of UH leader.”
Why? Dr. MRC Greenwood may be no saint—the saint is the one on the right—but she received “excellent” in her reviews. Did the Regents make a mistake with those reviews? Is the inordinate pressure applied by state legislators and perhaps the Governor making the Regents feel they have to now take action amounting even to severance?
What state law gives the Senate or Representative Mark Takai any say in the details of the operation of the university?
There was Greenwood’s testimony before the Senate Special Committee on Accountability concerning pressure from the governor’s office, which in turn was being pushed by the Senate President, House Speaker, and other political insiders seeking Donovan’s reinstatement.
The Star-Advertiser this morning quotes Rep. Mark Takai calling for Greenwood’s removal.
[ilind.net, Political meddling will compound UH problems, 10/6/2012]
Sure, mistakes were made. Without excusing them, I suggest that the system itself, rather than this particular situation, is what needs fixing.
Not only does the system need fixing, there are consequences to the way that both the state government and the university itself have handled the aftermath of the mistake(s) and a loss of opportunity if it is dealt with simply by replacing the UH president. True “simply” may not be the best descriptor here. It will be a disaster if it happens.
What chances will the University of Hawaii have to find a capable president to replace Dr. Greenwood if the Regents should decide to fire her over the Stevie Wonder concert scam? Who would want to jump into a position where any misstep would be pounced upon by lawmakers and critics to the detriment of one’s reputation?
This is not the first time that UH has found and hired a “savior” and then later shot down the same person at great cost.
The media fail to attribute the current situation to a defect of governance. (See articles on the garbage can model as applied to college and university management.) Instead, it is treated as an exception and a spectacle.
The Senate committee’s third-degree of UH officials over the Stevie Wonder concert scam is good for a story a day in our daily paper. There is something juicy about putting the UH president under the hot lights and, most recently, speculating about whether she deserves to be fired.
It’s an opportunity for the paper to repeat her salary and benefits over and over. This has happened every time there is an issue over the UH presidency. And that’s about as deep as the media analysis gets.
The media highlight the costs of replacing the president by citing the terms of her contract. You can bet that the next president will try for the same protective contractual devices or better, given the hazards of heading up our state university.
My highest dream for the university is that they bring in a bunch of organization development professors from (say) Harvard to analyze and suggest changes to the structure of governance at the University of Hawaii. This would include clarifying rules of succession.
What we have now is a typical “garbage can” organizational model. And it predicts that in a situation such as the university is faced with right now, they would simply “reach into the garbage can” for a solution. Hence Donovan’s shift to a previously non-existent position. Hence the expenditure of hard-to-imagine large sums on legal advice, as listed up in this morning’s newspaper article.
Why “garbage can model?”
… Organizations operate on the basis of inconsistent and ill-defined preferences; their own processes are not understood by their members; they operate by trial and error; their boundaries are uncertain and changing; decision-makers for any particular choice change capriciously. To understand organizational processes, one can view choice opportunities as garbage cans into which various kinds of problems and solutions are dumped. The mix of garbage depends on the mix of labeled cans available, on what garbage is currently produced and the speed with which garbage and garbage cans are removed.
[washington.edu Economic Geography Glossary]
Does “boundaries are uncertain and changing; decision-makers for any particular choice change capriciously” sound like what we are reading about how the current incident has been handled?
A well-run company such as General Electric does not operate on this model, and I doubt that Harvard does either. Of course, UH is not GE. The differences between corporate and academic governance are fundamental, including the inability to fire or control the most important staff (i.e., those with tenure). This is not a defect (tenure), it is one of the reasons that a college or university must find a model that works effectively this year, next year, and onward into the future.
In GE, if an upper-level manager with excellent reviews makes a mistake, no board will call a meeting to deal with it. The management structure will react, if necessary, in an appropriate way, including taking no action. Believe me, any manager with, say, a dozen years in that company knows what is necessary to make sure a screwup doesn’t happen again. If replacement should be necessary, that will be handled by management as it has in the past. The organizational structure is not composed of garbage, it has been developed over many years to be strong and robust and of course, profitable.
It’s clear that the Legislature, concerned as it is about its sports entertainment, and having little it can do under statute to assist the university when problems arise, will place blame, and perhaps push for corrective action in this one circumstance. I reviewed only part of the interrogation session and did not notice any offer to assist. Maybe I missed it. It’s a huge blame game. Some think that seeking blood will solve something. It won’t. What UH needs is a well-designed makeover.
What we are seeing unfold instead is a fiasco much larger than the Stevie Wonder scam. The danger is that vast sums of money that could go towards education or salary will instead go into legal and settlement costs, and UH will end up with a leadership crisis and no improvement whatsoever in its governance structure. The next time there is an “incident,” or should legislators be unhappy with a team’s performance, the cycle will simply repeat.
The garbage can does not need to be perpetuated, it needs to be replaced.
