Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf Takes Executive Mansion ‘On the Road’

I’ve decided to pay more attention to President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf of Liberia. I am just finishing This Child Will Be Great: Memoir of a Remarkable Life by Africa’s First Woman President. Johnson Sirleaf’s story is amazing, and her memoir offers an incredible history of Liberia.

It is not my intention now to write a review of the book. Yes, I recommend it. Johnson Sirleaf is brilliant, with a strong background in economics and finance. She appears to be keenly aware of the needs, potential and promise of Liberia, and the African continent as a whole. At this point, I want to keep up with President Johnson Sirleaf’s current work, so I’m introducing a new category on Turning Left: Liberia. Expect to read more in the days and weeks ahead.

Let me begin here: Johnson Sirleaf writes stirring and frightening accounts of the bloodbaths of former Liberian presidents Samuel K. Doe and Charles G. Taylor. Charles Taylor is currently on trial in the Hague. President Doe was captured in Monrovia, the Liberian capital, by faction leader Prince Y. Johnson on September 9, 1990. He was tortured and killed. According to Johnson Sirleaf’s memoir, Doe’s ears were sawed off before he died. No one deserves to die that way, Johnson Sirleaf comments, no matter what they’ve done.

So I’m going to start following Ellen Johnson Sirleaf. I believe she is worth of attention. For all I know, she could secretly be a scoundrel — but I don’t think so. My gut tells me she’s for real.

The latest I was able to find is a piece dated today regarding President Johnson Sirleaf taking her Executive Mansion "on the road," visiting the people where they live.

From AllAfrica.com:

Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf has virtually taken the Executive Mansion "on the road," as the implementation of development projects becomes more compelling, with the arrival of the dry season.

The President was, a little over a week ago, in Falie, Grand Cape Mount County, discussing with her direct representatives-the Superintendents-in the political sub-divisions of the country, their programs and challenges. A number of issues emerged at the forum which not surprisingly, included the administration of the County Development Funds (CDF).

The exercise has, understandably, come under serious criticism, owing to what critics see as a lack of transparency in its administration. The President acknowledged that some of the accusations may not be true. "Some may be rumors; some may be misunderstanding, but in several cases, funds have been misused or misallocated. Your responsibility is to take charge of the CDF in such a way that the mandates given by our Constitution to the three branches of Government are fully respected.

"We are not going to do anything in a confrontational way; we are going to do it through consultations, through dialogue, through working with colleagues with one common objective in mind, an objective that is common to all the branches and to all the leaders and to all the citizens of the County, and that objective is: to bring development to the people. I am sure that in that spirit, we will be able to find a solution, to come up with new procedures that will enable us to get more results and have more effectiveness and efficiency in the implementation of our County Development Projects," the Liberian leader reminded her officials, urging them to start a process of consultation to achieve the objective.

Too many times, she observed, leaders are removed from the people they serve. "Many times the People do not know; this is why sometimes the lack of information gives way to rumors and to wrong information. You are responsible to hold consultations with your citizens. You need to go into the districts, the communities, in the villages. Tell them what you are doing. Show them that the CDA comes out of a process in which they contributed. It’s their project. This is what has been done; these are the problems; this is our progress-so they can know. Because they are the ones that will defend you," she urged the County Superintendents.

I am completely impressed. This sounds just like the woman I read about in This Child Will Be Great. And I look forward to reading more.

Irish Report Unambiguous: Catholic Church Covered Up Sexual Abuse of Children

The report concerning the alleged sexual abuse of children by clergy released today by the Department of Justice, Equality and Reform in Ireland is unequivocal in its conclusions: the Roman Catholic Church engaged in widespread cover-up.

From paragraph 1.10 of the report (emphasis added):

The Commission examined complaints in respect of over 320 children against the 46 priests in the representative sample. Substantially more of the complaints relate to boys – the ratio is 2.3 boys to 1 girl.

From paragraph 1.15 of the report:

The Dublin Archdiocese’s pre-occupations in dealing with cases of child sexual abuse, at least until the mid 1990s, were the maintenance of secrecy, the avoidance of scandal, the protection of the reputation of the Church, and the preservation of its assets. All other considerations, including the welfare of children and justice for victims, were subordinated to these priorities. The Archdiocese did not implement its own canon law rules and did its best to avoid any application of the law of the State.

Regarding the alleged ignorance of child sexual abuse, paragraph 1.17:

The authorities in the Archdiocese of Dublin and the religious orders who were dealing with complaints of child sexual abuse were all very well educated people. Many had qualifications in canon law and quite a few also had qualifications in civil law. This makes their claims of ignorance very difficult to accept. Child sexual abuse did not start in the 20th century. Since time immemorial it has been a “delict” under canon law, a sin in ordinary religious terms and a crime in the law of the State. Ignorance of the law is not a defence under the law of the State. It is difficult for the Commission to accept that ignorance of either the canon law or the civil law can be a defence for officials of the Church.

Regarding the alleged failure by the Church to implement its own rules:

The Church authorities failed to implement most of their own canon law rules on dealing with clerical child sexual abuse. This was in spite of the fact that a number of them were qualified canon and civil lawyers. As is shown in Chapter 4, canon law appears to have fallen into disuse and disrespect during the mid 20th century. In particular, there was little or no experience of operating the penal (that is, the criminal) provisions of that law. The collapse of respect for the canon law in Archdiocesan circles is covered in some detail in Chapter 4. For many years offenders were neither prosecuted nor made accountable within the Church. Archbishop McQuaid was well aware of the canon law requirements and even set the processes in motion but did not complete them. Archbishops Ryan and McNamara do not seem to have ever applied the canon law.

Catholic Church policy is ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’:

The American phrase, “don’t ask, don’t tell” is appropriate to describe the attitude of the Dublin Archdiocese to clerical sex abuse for most of the period covered by the report. The problem as a whole never seems to have been discussed openly by the Archbishop and his auxiliaries, at least until the 1990s. Complainants were told as little as possible. The note “Gain his knowledge, tell him nothing” for dealing with complainants and witnesses, discussed in Chapter 4, typifies the attitudes of the Archdiocese.

The existence of a cover-up is clear, according to the report:

As can be seen clearly from the case histories, there is no doubt that the reaction of Church authorities to reports of clerical child sexual abuse in the early years of the Commission’s remit was to ensure that as few people as possible knew of the individual priest’s problem. There was little or no concern for the welfare of the abused child or for the welfare of other children who might come into contact with the priest. Complainants were often met with denial, arrogance and cover-up and with incompetence and incomprehension in some cases. Suspicions were rarely acted on. Typically complainants were not told that other instances of child sexual abuse by their abuser had been proved or admitted. The attitude to individual complainants was overbearing and in some cases underhand (see Chapter 58).

The report, released to the government in July but publicly released today, covers each case in detal.

How many other countries are doing similar investigations right now? This behavior is beyond damnable.

Roman Catholic Church Covered Up Child Abuse in Ireland, Panel Finds

From the New York Times:

An expert commission says the Roman Catholic Church in Dublin covered up decades of priests’ sexual abuse of children because its bishops were determined to protect the church’s reputation at the expense of victims.

Abuse victims have welcomed Thursday’s publication of a government-ordered investigation into how scores of priests were permitted to molest and rape boys and girls with impunity for decades.

The 720-page report analyzes the cases of 46 priests from 1975 to 2004 against whom 320 complaints were filed. The report names 11 priests who were convicted of child abuse but the others, either dead or yet to face trial, have their names omitted or replaced with aliases.

Investigators spent three years poring over 60,000 previously secret Dublin church files.

The NYTimes indicates that the text above is a breaking news update. A more complete story will follow.

Update: The NYTimes published a longer, updated story filed at 10:52 a.m. ET.  Read the entire article here.

Turning Left will follow this story as it make its way through the Irish legal system. No further comment right now.

Obama Digs In Heels on Afghanistan

From the New York Times:

President Obama said Tuesday that he was determined to “finish the job” in Afghanistan, and his aides signaled to allies that he would send as many as 25,000 to 30,000 additional troops there even as they cautioned that the final number remained in flux.

The White House said Mr. Obama had completed his consultations with his war council on Monday night and would formally announce his decision in a national address in the next week, probably on Tuesday.

At a news conference in the East Room with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India, Mr. Obama suggested that his approach would break from the policies he had inherited from the Bush administration and said that the goals would be to keep Al Qaeda from using the region to launch more attacks against the United States and to bring more stability to Afghanistan.

“After eight years — some of those years in which we did not have, I think, either the resources or the strategy to get the job done — it is my intention to finish the job,” he said.

He said that he would outline his Afghanistan strategy after Thanksgiving, adding, “I feel very confident that when the American people hear a clear rationale for what we’re doing there and how we intend to achieve our goals, that they will be supportive.”

Mr. Obama was silent on what "finish the job" entailed, nor did he offer any details on what benchmarks he and his advisers had drawn up. He also did not provide a target date for finishing the war.

According to the Washington Post, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said Democrats face "serious unrest" over possible expansion of the war in Afghanistan:

Pelosi, in a conference call with economists, said House Democrats were concerned about the "opportunity costs" of steering billions of dollars toward the troop increase as compared to "our ability to invest domestically with an eye to fiscal soundness." The issue of financing new troops in the region has come to a head in advance of Obama’s decision, to be announced next week, as a handful of senior Democrats have proposed a "war tax" on the nation’s wealthiest wage earners and some corporations to finance the war.

Pelosi deflected questions about her support for such a tax-hike proposal but noted that an expensive new war plan faces very high hurdles in her 258-member Democratic caucus, about two-thirds of whom were largely opposed to the Bush administration’s 2007 "surge" of troops into Iraq and have voiced doubts about increased troop levels in Afghanistan.

"Let me say that there is serious unrest in our caucus about, can we afford this war?" Pelosi said in a Tuesday morning call, just hours before she met Obama in a closed-door meeting at the White House.

With an economy struggling to recover, the bottom line is crucial here. Are Americans ready to sacrifice more than they already have? Would Americans support a "war tax," even if it was only on the "wealthiest wage earners," while Congress works to stitch together a health care reform bill?

British Scouts Yell “Kill the Jews” at Jewish Second World War Vets

They were only teenagers, and part of adolescence is testing the limits. The other part is learning when you’ve gone too far, sometimes horribly too far, and learning there are indeed limitations.

From The Guardian:

A scout troop is being investigated by the police after its members shouted death threats and racist abuse at Jewish war veterans during a remembrance parade.

Dressed in full uniform, the explorer scouts, who were taking part in Remembrance Sunday service in Romford, Essex were heard to repeatedly shout "Let’s kill the Jews" at Jewish second world war veterans.

The head of the scouts in the area has issued a full apology for the incident, which was witnessed by a senior policeman standing a few feet away.

A Metropolitan police spokesman said the Met was investigating two allegations of "racially aggravated harassment" involving more than one member of the Romford explorer scout unit. He would not say how many scouts were involved.

The Rev Lee Sunderland, who was taking part in the service, expressed shock after hearing the scouts shout: "Here come the Jews, let’s kill the Jews."

Other witnesses said the racists chants were started by a boy believed to be 15 years old. One of the troop has since come forward and been interviewed by police. He has been ordered by the Scout Association to visit the rabbi of the Romford and district synagogue to apologise in person.

One 84-year-old former RAF pilot challenged the scouts, "I was absolutely fuming … I told them I was a Jew and I’d spent four and a half years in the RAF during the second world war, and that Jewish people had sacrificed so much for freedom," he told the Evening Standard."

Nod to AmericaBlog for this.

Krugman: Emulate Europe to Spur Job Growth

Nobel Prize-winning economis Paul Krugman advises, if the United States will not employ a "conventional stimulus," then the United States should consider European solutions to the Great Recession.

From the New York Times:

Here in America, the philosophy behind jobs policy can be summarized as “if you grow it, they will come.” That is, we don’t really have a jobs policy: we have a G.D.P. policy. The theory is that by stimulating overall spending we can make G.D.P. grow faster, and this will induce companies to stop firing and resume hiring.

The alternative would be policies that address the job issue more directly. We could, for example, have New-Deal-style employment programs. Perhaps such a thing is politically impossible now — Glenn Beck would describe anything like the Works Progress Administration as a plan to recruit pro-Obama brownshirts — but we should note, for the record, that at their peak, the W.P.A. and the Civilian Conservation Corps employed millions of Americans, at relatively low cost to the budget.

Alternatively, or in addition, we could have policies that support private-sector employment. Such policies could range from labor rules that discourage firing to financial incentives for companies that either add workers or reduce hours to avoid layoffs.

And that’s what the Germans have done. Germany came into the Great Recession with strong employment protection legislation. This has been supplemented with a “short-time work scheme,” which provides subsidies to employers who reduce workers’ hours rather than laying them off. These measures didn’t prevent a nasty recession, but Germany got through the recession with remarkably few job losses.

Should America be trying anything along these lines? In a recent interview, Lawrence Summers, the Obama administration’s highest-ranking economist, was dismissive: “It may be desirable to have a given amount of work shared among more people. But that’s not as desirable as expanding the total amount of work.” True. But we are not, in fact, expanding the total amount of work — and Congress doesn’t seem willing to spend enough on stimulus to change that unfortunate fact. So shouldn’t we be considering other measures, if only as a stopgap?

But these aren’t normal times. Right now, workers who lose their jobs aren’t moving to the jobs of the future; they’re entering the ranks of the unemployed and staying there. Long-term unemployment is already at its highest levels since the 1930s, and it’s still on the rise.

And long-term unemployment inflicts long-term damage. Workers who have been out of a job for too long often find it hard to get back into the labor market even when conditions improve. And there are hidden costs, too — not least for children, who suffer physically and emotionally when their parents spend months or years unemployed.

So it’s time to try something different.

We need to do more than what we’re doing. President Obama and Congress must listen. The future of this country — and their respective re-elections — depend on it.

Read the entire column here.

Best Wishes on the Birthday of Guru Nanak

For all of our Sikh brothers and sisters, best wishes on the birthday of Guru Nanak Dev Ji, celebrated on November 2.

From the BBC:

Sikhism was founded by Guru Nanak, and present day Sikhism is still based on his teachings and those of the nine Sikh Gurus who followed him.

Gurpurbs are Sikh festivals which celebrate the lives of these Gurus. Guru Nanak was born in 1469 in what is now Pakistan. At the age of 30 he mysteriously disappeared for 3 days. When he reappeared, he began to preach the Sikh faith and spent the rest of his life teaching, writing and travelling around the world to discuss religion with Muslims and Hindus.

Sikhs celebrate Guru Nanak’s Birthday and the other Gurpurbs with an Akhand Path, a reading of the Sikh holy scriptures, the Guru Granth Sahib, continuously from beginning to end. This is done by a team of Sikh men and women, each reading for 2-3 hours over 48 hours, beginning two days before and ending early on the morning of the birthday.

On the day before the birthday, processions are held in India and in some parts of England. These are led by five people representing the original Panj Piare (Five Beloved Ones) and followed by singers, musicians and even teams of people demonstrating martial arts.

Glenn Beck: Obama’s Call for Volunteerism = Mao’s China

Yes, Glenn Beck dredges up a blast from the past. Enter Mao Tse Tung.

From the Huffington Post:

The Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF), a Hollywood charitable organization, has helped to organize a push in the television industry to encourage volunteerism among the citizenry. The support for volunteerism will be spread across 60 shows, and in some cases woven into the plot lines.

Enter Glenn Beck, who reads in this yet another conspiracy theory that President Obama is using Hollywood in an attempt to turn American in a communist nation: "Well, this is fantastic. It’s almost like we’re living in Mao’s China right now."

Yup. And I suppose the Catholic Church is no better than the Emperoro Mao, encouraging volunteerism and all that.

So, if you work at a soup kitchen, you must be a Communist.

Oy.

President Obama Wins the Nobel Peace Prize: It’s About Hope

Barack Obama

(PHOTO: ENEWSPF)

The news of President Barack Obama has circulated and percolated throughout the world for just over three hours now. I’m not even taking a look at what anyone on the far right is saying at this point. No doubt the right wingnuts now have to figure out how to turn this into a political liability for Obama. That should be interesting to watch.

Here’s the fact: President Barack Obama has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Why?

Many on the right and the left and those more moderate are asking themselves this question. No doubt President Obama is asking himself the same questions right now. As a friend on Facebook commented, "Here’s hoping Obama’s real reaction upon hearing the news this morning was, like everyone else’s, ‘WTF?’ "

I have not yet begun to survey opinion from around the world. I can only offer my own assessment. Yes, it’s true that Obama did not succeed in locking the Olympic bid for Chicago, but, in all honesty, is Chicago ready to join the Federation? (Yes, that’s the Trekker in me.) The Olympic bid was more about Rio de Janeiro. After Chicago lost in the first round of voting, the votes went overwhelmingly for Rio.

Chicago 2016 was not about Obama. It was about a young man beaten to death in the streets of Chicago just a week before the vote. It was about the many, many doubts regarding the ability of Chicago politicians to do the Olympics honestly.

To begin, I don’t think we as Americans have the least understanding how world opinion about the United States has shifted since the November 2008 election. No, we’re not out of the woods yet. But consider this from Reuters:

The United States is the most admired country globally thanks largely to the star power of President Barack Obama and his administration, according to a new poll.

It climbed from seventh place last year, ahead of France, Germany, theUnited Kingdom and Japan which completed the top five nations in the Nation Brand Index (NBI).

"What’s really remarkable is that in all my years studying national reputation, I have never seen any country experience such a dramatic change in its standing as we see for the United States for 2009," saidSimon Anholt, the founder of NBI, which measured the global image of 50 countries each year.

He believes that during the previous administration of George W. Bush the United States suffered in the world ranking with its unpopularforeign policies but since Obama was elected, and despite the recent economic turmoil, the country’s status has risen globally.

"There is no other explanation," Anholt said in an interview, referring to the impact of Obama.

The Obama Administration means the return of diplomacy to the world stage. From the New York Times:

The Nobel Committee announced in Oslo that it has awarded the annual peace prize to Barack Obama, just nine months into his presidency, “for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.”The award cited in particular Mr. Obama’s effort to reduce the world’s nuclear arsenal. “He has created a new international climate,” the committee said.

The announcement shocked people from Norway to the White House. “There has been no discussion, nothing at all,” said Rahm Emanuel, the president’s chief of staff, in a brief telephone interview.

Mr. Emanuel said that he had not yet spoken directly to the president. A senior administration official said in an e-mail message that his press secretary, Robert Gibbs Mr. Gibbs called the White House shortly before 6 a.m. and woke the president with the news.

“The president was humbled to be selected by the committee,” the official said, without adding anything further.

The White House has made no official comment.

I don’t think we as Americans realize how far we had fallen in the eyes of the world during the Bush Administration. This year’s Nobel Peace Prize is about America regaining honor and respect throughout the world. At least to a point. This prize is as much about the future as it is the past. My students asked, "What has he done? He just got elected!" But the committee is not simply recognizing Obama’s accomplishments as president. Obama has spent his adult life in service to others. As a United States Senator, Obama was campaigning for a return to diplomacy, for a radical shift in United States foreign policy. He has begun to implement the siesmic shift in policy we need in this country and throughout the world: a return to diplomacy.

Have we arrived? No. The United States is still mired in two wars. Iran — the government, not all Iranians — is still a threat.

The last president labeled himself a "war president." May this award be a constant reminder to President Obama that it is possible to strive, every day, to be a "peace president."

French President Nicolas French President Nicolas Sarkozy said today President Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize marks "America’s return to the hearts of the people of the world."

Are Obama’s — and America’s — greatest days ahead?

The world hopes so. This award is about that hope.

McChrystal is not Obama’s Grant

Lieutenant General Stanley McChrystal was promoted to top commander in Afghanistan in May, 2009. He replaced General David McKiernan, who had been calling for big troop increases in the months before he was relieved. McChrystal has been calling for troop increases as well, taking his campaign public in recent weeks.

After complaining to the media that he did not have enough access to the president, McChrystal had a personal 25-minute summit aboard Air Force One with the Commander in Chief last week:

President Obama squeezed a 25-minute council of war into his Copenhagen visit yesterday, meeting General Stanley McChrystal aboard Air Force One before returning to Washington.

The general was summoned to the airborne White House on the day it was announced that four more British and American servicemen had died in Afghanistan. He was on his way back to Kabul from London, where he made a powerful public pitch for more troops to be sent to the battlefields.

Until yesterday, General McChrystal had been in direct contact with Mr Obama only twice since taking up his post as Nato commander in Kabul six months ago – once via video link to the Oval Office and then as a participant in a major Afghan strategy meeting on Wednesday, again via videolink.

Since arriving in Kabul, General McChrystal has written a damning assessment of the Afghan security situation, and an election marred by widespread fraud has undermined the case for propping up the regime of President Hamid Karzai.

The runway summit happened after McChrystal gave a speech in London pointedly criticizing the president and United States policy in Afghanistan:

When asked on CNN about the commander’s public lobbying for more troops, Gen Jim Jones, national security adviser, said:

“Ideally, it’s better for military advice to come up through the chain of command.”

Asked if the president had told the general to tone down his remarks, he told CBS: “I wasn’t there so I can’t answer that question. But it was an opportunity for them to get to know each other a little bit better. I am sure they exchanged direct views.”

An adviser to the administration said: “People aren’t sure whether McChrystal is being naïve or an upstart. To my mind he doesn’t seem ready for this Washington hard-ball and is just speaking his mind too plainly.”

In London, Gen McChrystal, who heads the 68,000 US troops in Afghanistan as well as the 100,000 Nato forces, flatly rejected proposals to switch to a strategy more reliant on drone missile strikes and special forces operations against al-Qaeda.

He told the Institute of International and Strategic Studies that the formula, which is favoured by Vice-President Joe Biden, would lead to “Chaos-istan”.

When asked whether he would support it, he said: “The short answer is: No.”

He went on to say: “Waiting does not prolong a favorable outcome. This effort will not remain winnable indefinitely, and nor will public support.”;

President Abraham Lincoln fired no less than five generals before he “found his Grant,” as T. Harry Williams wrote in Lincoln and His Generals:

Yet Lincoln and His Generals does show, clearly and readably, why Lincoln had to fire one general after another: 1) McDowell, who was routed at Bull Run; 2) McClellan, who, in Lincoln’s phrase, was afflicted with “the slows”; 3) Burnside, equivocal in the field and, by his own admission, lacking the confidence of his own officers; 4) Hooker, who disliked his unearned nickname, “Fighting Joe,” and hesitated when he should have moved; 5) Meade, who let Lee get away after Gettysburg.

(Citation is from Time Magazine review)

Donald T. Phillips explores this further in Lincoln on Leadership: Executive Strategies for Tough Times.

President Obama is still seeking his General Grant for Afghanistan. McChrystal spouting off one-liners in public speeches is less than appropriate for a person of his stature.

President Obama must keep searching for his Grant. Our troops and the American people deserve no less.