For a lifetime, words have fascinated me. Specifically, words used to describe individuals with disabilities, in common parlance.
I was handicapped as a child. Today, I am disabled. Both are loving names.
Cruel kids crippled me. Punks proclaimed, "Palsy Patty."
I was stunned by an adult appellation of Gimp. I am Patty, I am not a Gimp.
Yet, I am having the last laugh. I was blessed with a lifelong sensitivity, and passion for words of all forms. The sting of those words is replaced by dedication. Words used to describe individuals, be the words adjectives, or nicknames, may in no way dictate derogation.
Two words akin to handicapped, and crippled, were not spoken in reference to me. Yet, they still sting.
Invalid. In-val-id. In-va-lid.
These two words speak volumes. Do we hear the emphatic value judgment that we make? Do we care?
I don't believe these words are used as frequently as they were at one time. Yet, they are worthy of our notice.
Birth defect.
Manufactured goods have defects. Children are not manufactured. They are not mistakes on an assembly line. They are children of God.
I may be said to have two birth defects. But, they have names. Call them by name. Let them be known. Let them be understood. My birth defects are cerebral palsy and epilepsy. The next time you meet them, in me, or in someone else, address them by name.
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Strength...Weakness...A Strong Will
We must learn to pray out of our weaknesses so that God can become our strength." - Joan Chitister
I found this passage tonight. It was posted in Sojourners' Verse and Voice. Joan Chitister calls us to do much more than dig ourselves--individually, and collectively--out of a hole--a hole of bravado. We shudder at--we deny--the very presence of weakness in our lives.
Weakness. "Not in my backyard."
Weakness. We don't know how to live with it--in our lives, much less in our selves.
Strength. We cannot live without it in our lives--in our world.
Weakness. What does it mean? Strength. What does that mean?
We are at a defining moment in our lives--in our world. Why? What is so special about this moment? Is it just because Joan Chittister's passage was selected by Sojourners today? I think not.
In my personal life, surgery prompted me to confront bodily strength and weakness. Realizing that now I may walk without pain raises the question, "How long has it been?" Last spring, perhaps? If not, when? I do not know. I denied my weakness.
My surgery was designed to treat my "weak" ankle---my weak foot. In four to six weeks, I thought should be at full strength.
A cure is resignation's salvation--pain's hope. Yet, a cure is more elusive than salvation's promise to us. A cure is a dangerous temptation. His return on investment is shallow, at best. Pain's hope must be deeper than a cure. Pain's hope is far from easy. Yet, openly willed each day, it is far more fulfilling than any cure could ever be.
May we meet this day with a strong will--
A conscious choice to embrace what is life-giving.
May our strong will be a declarative act of living,
Rather than a defiant part of speech.
Tables Turned
Today, I finished another chapter in setting the wheels in motion toward a different life--getting beyond my home on my own power with the use of an electric wheelchair. Hopefully, with doctor appointments, the requisite paperwork documenting my need, the wheelchair will be forthcoming soon. I am not sure how to define "soon." Days? I doubt. Several weeks? More likely.
Tables turned? Why?
I am coming to terms with the tables turned. For a lifetime, without much thought that there was an option, I strove to achieve Mom's mantra, "You will learn to live independently." Anyone who dared to challenge that mantra was subject to my fierce defensiveness--a side to me whose strength I underestimated.
Fast forward to July 2009. A new lifetime--a new life orientation--began by necessity. Rather than pounding on my chest with pride, "Look Mom, I am living independently," I was called to testify to my need for dependency. It was an odd, uncomfortable--humbling--position in which to find myself. Yet, that was where I was called to live--to be.
Tables turned? Why?
I am coming to terms with the tables turned. For a lifetime, without much thought that there was an option, I strove to achieve Mom's mantra, "You will learn to live independently." Anyone who dared to challenge that mantra was subject to my fierce defensiveness--a side to me whose strength I underestimated.
Fast forward to July 2009. A new lifetime--a new life orientation--began by necessity. Rather than pounding on my chest with pride, "Look Mom, I am living independently," I was called to testify to my need for dependency. It was an odd, uncomfortable--humbling--position in which to find myself. Yet, that was where I was called to live--to be.
Friday, March 18, 2011
I've Got to Hand It to You
Until relatively recently, I have given my left hand little due attention--little credit--for her service to me. Some were amazed at what I could do with the use of just my left hand--with little to no help from my right hand. I felt no amazement--I was born this way--never have I had full use of both hands. So amazement was not worthy of my energy's expense. My occupational therapists were frustrated, if not angry. I kept finding ways to do tasks they conceived to be two-handed tasks without calling on my right hand.
My views toward my left hand have changed since July, 2009. No longer working--living on long-term disability--I was called to a different view of my left hand. She was shaky. No longer was indomitable strength in hand. Nor was it at arm's reach.
My left hand still has some strength. Yet, she has put me on notice. She will not stand for any further abuse for my ego's sake. Boxers may fear a right jab. I fear my left's fist in my face.
So, do I duck? No. What do I do? Wake up. Look. Listen. Feel. Accommodate.
Habits are hard to break. Yet, too much is at stake not to act. Now.
I am not alone. We do not want to admit it, yet, we are aging. Each of us is called to different accommodations.
Outstretched hands. Figuratively, I pray I have outstretched hands that welcome others into my life. Yet, literally, I need to give care not to try to stretch my fingers so wide that they are strained by going beyond their natural limits. I recognize when I try to grab too much weight, and in such a way that I compromise the palm of my hand--where my hand and thumb meet.
I am further along in recognizing that I need to care for my right ankle. She needs my loving care, so that she does not give out completely. The temptation to be angry with her is present. She has failed me. Yet, will anger bring her strength back to me? Will resignation to her disintegration make her strong?
There must be a middle point between anger, and resignation. The ballerina tries not to fall off her balance beam. Am I alone on the beam? Where are you?
My views toward my left hand have changed since July, 2009. No longer working--living on long-term disability--I was called to a different view of my left hand. She was shaky. No longer was indomitable strength in hand. Nor was it at arm's reach.
My left hand still has some strength. Yet, she has put me on notice. She will not stand for any further abuse for my ego's sake. Boxers may fear a right jab. I fear my left's fist in my face.
So, do I duck? No. What do I do? Wake up. Look. Listen. Feel. Accommodate.
Habits are hard to break. Yet, too much is at stake not to act. Now.
I am not alone. We do not want to admit it, yet, we are aging. Each of us is called to different accommodations.
Outstretched hands. Figuratively, I pray I have outstretched hands that welcome others into my life. Yet, literally, I need to give care not to try to stretch my fingers so wide that they are strained by going beyond their natural limits. I recognize when I try to grab too much weight, and in such a way that I compromise the palm of my hand--where my hand and thumb meet.
I am further along in recognizing that I need to care for my right ankle. She needs my loving care, so that she does not give out completely. The temptation to be angry with her is present. She has failed me. Yet, will anger bring her strength back to me? Will resignation to her disintegration make her strong?
There must be a middle point between anger, and resignation. The ballerina tries not to fall off her balance beam. Am I alone on the beam? Where are you?
North Atlantic Treaty Organization...What Do We Know?
What do we know of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization--NATO?
NATO is one of the organizations spoken of in discussions of how the no-fly zone over Libya will be implemented. Yet, just as with the Arab League, it seems we have a nebulous sense of NATO.
The implementation of the no-fly zone--the likely involvement of NATO leads me to ask basic--very basic--questions. First, when was NATO founded? Where is it headquartered? Who were its founding members? Who are its current members? NATO is not a singular amoebic body. It is a sum of its parts.
We need to know more about its parts. Are the NATO member nations part of other world partnerships--the UN?
If so, did they have a vote on the UN Security Council Resolution 1973, which approved the no-fly zone?
OK. Too many questions. Let's get some answers. Let's get a sense of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
First, NATO was founded in 1949--four years after the founding of the Arab League, and the United Nations. It is headquartered in Brussels, Belgium.
NATO is comprised of 28 independent member countries.
The member nations of NATO are: Albania, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, the Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, and the United Kingdom.
Canada, and the United States round out the roster of NATO member nations.
Four NATO members are serving on the UN Security Council currently. France, the United Kingdom, and the United States voted in favor of Resolution 1973. Germany abstained.
In addition to the 28 member nations, apparently, there are "partner countries." The first group of partner countries is called the "Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council"--the EAPC. The member nations of the Council include Armenia, Austria, Azerbijan, Bahrain, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzogovina, Finland, Ireland, Kazakhstan, the Kyrghyz Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Malta, the Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, Russia, Serbia, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.
Wake up. I know your eyes are glazing over. Your attention is waining.
Yet, this is important. We need to know who our neighbors on this earth are. Peace depends upon it.
NATO has a NATO Mediterranian Dialogue. It consists of seven countries in the Mediterranian Sea, including: Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco, and Tunisia.
Next, are these seven Dialogue nations members of other relevant partnerships? Yes. Six of the seven countries are members of the Arab League. Obviously, Israel is not a member of the Arab League.
Stay with me. Two more partnerships of NATO need to be identified.
First, the Instanbul Cooperative Initiative. The ICI consists of five countries: Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. ICI members address security issues--military readiness, and terrorism. NATO identifies defense reform, defense budgeting, cooperation to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Civil emergency planning is among other goals that guide the Istanbul Cooperative Initiative.
Finally, four countries distant from the North Atlantic Ocean are "contact countries"--they share strategic interests of NATO. Australia, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and New Zealand are the four ICI contact countries.
I am left with two questions. Libya. Will NATO member nations become involved in implementing the Libyan no-fly zone? If so, what nations? I shudder to think of the extent, much less the result.
Secondly. Japan.
Will NATO become involved in helping Japan to deal with the nuclear crises, or the earthquake, and tsunami that struck Japan? Will the work done on civil emergency planning, in which Japan was a participant, propel NATO to act? Others have noted that NATO is waiting for a request for help by Japan.
Have the ICI member nations developed any strategies that Japan is or may be drawn upon to expedite addressing the immediate crises, and dealing with the longer-term rebuilding efforts in which Japan will be engaged? Let us hope so.
Just some thoughts. I make no claims on any answers. I pray for peace.
NATO is one of the organizations spoken of in discussions of how the no-fly zone over Libya will be implemented. Yet, just as with the Arab League, it seems we have a nebulous sense of NATO.
The implementation of the no-fly zone--the likely involvement of NATO leads me to ask basic--very basic--questions. First, when was NATO founded? Where is it headquartered? Who were its founding members? Who are its current members? NATO is not a singular amoebic body. It is a sum of its parts.
We need to know more about its parts. Are the NATO member nations part of other world partnerships--the UN?
If so, did they have a vote on the UN Security Council Resolution 1973, which approved the no-fly zone?
OK. Too many questions. Let's get some answers. Let's get a sense of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
First, NATO was founded in 1949--four years after the founding of the Arab League, and the United Nations. It is headquartered in Brussels, Belgium.
NATO is comprised of 28 independent member countries.
The member nations of NATO are: Albania, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, the Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, and the United Kingdom.
Canada, and the United States round out the roster of NATO member nations.
Four NATO members are serving on the UN Security Council currently. France, the United Kingdom, and the United States voted in favor of Resolution 1973. Germany abstained.
In addition to the 28 member nations, apparently, there are "partner countries." The first group of partner countries is called the "Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council"--the EAPC. The member nations of the Council include Armenia, Austria, Azerbijan, Bahrain, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzogovina, Finland, Ireland, Kazakhstan, the Kyrghyz Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Malta, the Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, Russia, Serbia, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.
Wake up. I know your eyes are glazing over. Your attention is waining.
Yet, this is important. We need to know who our neighbors on this earth are. Peace depends upon it.
NATO has a NATO Mediterranian Dialogue. It consists of seven countries in the Mediterranian Sea, including: Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco, and Tunisia.
Next, are these seven Dialogue nations members of other relevant partnerships? Yes. Six of the seven countries are members of the Arab League. Obviously, Israel is not a member of the Arab League.
Stay with me. Two more partnerships of NATO need to be identified.
First, the Instanbul Cooperative Initiative. The ICI consists of five countries: Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. ICI members address security issues--military readiness, and terrorism. NATO identifies defense reform, defense budgeting, cooperation to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Civil emergency planning is among other goals that guide the Istanbul Cooperative Initiative.
Finally, four countries distant from the North Atlantic Ocean are "contact countries"--they share strategic interests of NATO. Australia, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and New Zealand are the four ICI contact countries.
I am left with two questions. Libya. Will NATO member nations become involved in implementing the Libyan no-fly zone? If so, what nations? I shudder to think of the extent, much less the result.
Secondly. Japan.
Will NATO become involved in helping Japan to deal with the nuclear crises, or the earthquake, and tsunami that struck Japan? Will the work done on civil emergency planning, in which Japan was a participant, propel NATO to act? Others have noted that NATO is waiting for a request for help by Japan.
Have the ICI member nations developed any strategies that Japan is or may be drawn upon to expedite addressing the immediate crises, and dealing with the longer-term rebuilding efforts in which Japan will be engaged? Let us hope so.
Just some thoughts. I make no claims on any answers. I pray for peace.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Mauritania. What Do We Know?
By now you know that I start with the basics, in hopes of developing a deeper understanding of the world beyond my condominium in Minnesota.
Mauritania. What do we know?
I looked to two sources--the U.S. Department of State, and to the African Union. I did not find satisfactory information from other sources that provided the building blocks to understand more about Mauritania. The sources may exist. I did not find them. I started with two sources I trust.
The U.S. Department of State. Mauritania is located on the Atlantic Ocean in Africa. Mauritanians speak Arabic, and French. Mauritania is populated by 3.2 million people. Nouakchott, the capital of Mauritania, has a population of 661,400 individuals.
In 1999, the African Union was founded. Mauritania is among the member nations committed to advancing the African nations from their days as colonies of other countries.
Mauritania is one of the 151 nations that comprise the United Nations. It joined the U.N. on October 27, 1961--one year after Mauritania gained its independence from France.
My understanding of Mauritania--what I can learn now--is limited by a humbling fact. I do not speak Arabic, or Wolof--the two official languages in Mauritania. Nor do I speak French, Pulaar, Soninke, or the Arabic dialect of Hassaniya, all of which are spoken in Mauritania. I have not heard coverage regarding Mauritania, so I make no judgment in this case regarding such coverage. However, when I have listened to news coverage of recent uprisings, I give lesser credibility to the coverage given by reporters who convey that they do not speak the language native to the country they are covering. In recent days, translations from Japanese to English have resulted in dangerous miscommunication of facts--the level of radiation in the air.
Although the stakes may not seem as high in other cases, it is important that journalists educate themselves in the foreign languages relevant to their work. Understanding cultural nuances, and subtleties are essential to developing and nurturing world partnerships.
Today I have learned that 100% of Mauritanians are Muslims. I do not claim any personal barometer as to what that fact says regarding Mauritania. I was raised as a Universalist, a tradition which is based on the principle that there is good--there is beauty--to be found in all world religions. I am a practicing Catholic. When I learn that a country is Catholic, I have a sense of what that might mean. I have no personal experience with Muslims to have any frame of reference to assess the fact that Mauritania is 100% Islamic. Rightly or wrongly, I don't impose the expectation on journalists regarding an understanding of the religious faith of a country, in the same way that I have regarding the knowledge of native languages.
So, I don't know where that leaves me--my overall assessment of Mauritania. Is there any unrest brewing regarding the government? Geography tells me that I would find an arid climate, yet, if I were to visit Mauritania, what cultural climate would greet me? I sense nothing amiss from my cursory view of Mauritania, I am a curious citizen of this world.
Mauritania. What do we know?
I looked to two sources--the U.S. Department of State, and to the African Union. I did not find satisfactory information from other sources that provided the building blocks to understand more about Mauritania. The sources may exist. I did not find them. I started with two sources I trust.
The U.S. Department of State. Mauritania is located on the Atlantic Ocean in Africa. Mauritanians speak Arabic, and French. Mauritania is populated by 3.2 million people. Nouakchott, the capital of Mauritania, has a population of 661,400 individuals.
In 1999, the African Union was founded. Mauritania is among the member nations committed to advancing the African nations from their days as colonies of other countries.
Mauritania is one of the 151 nations that comprise the United Nations. It joined the U.N. on October 27, 1961--one year after Mauritania gained its independence from France.
My understanding of Mauritania--what I can learn now--is limited by a humbling fact. I do not speak Arabic, or Wolof--the two official languages in Mauritania. Nor do I speak French, Pulaar, Soninke, or the Arabic dialect of Hassaniya, all of which are spoken in Mauritania. I have not heard coverage regarding Mauritania, so I make no judgment in this case regarding such coverage. However, when I have listened to news coverage of recent uprisings, I give lesser credibility to the coverage given by reporters who convey that they do not speak the language native to the country they are covering. In recent days, translations from Japanese to English have resulted in dangerous miscommunication of facts--the level of radiation in the air.
Although the stakes may not seem as high in other cases, it is important that journalists educate themselves in the foreign languages relevant to their work. Understanding cultural nuances, and subtleties are essential to developing and nurturing world partnerships.
Today I have learned that 100% of Mauritanians are Muslims. I do not claim any personal barometer as to what that fact says regarding Mauritania. I was raised as a Universalist, a tradition which is based on the principle that there is good--there is beauty--to be found in all world religions. I am a practicing Catholic. When I learn that a country is Catholic, I have a sense of what that might mean. I have no personal experience with Muslims to have any frame of reference to assess the fact that Mauritania is 100% Islamic. Rightly or wrongly, I don't impose the expectation on journalists regarding an understanding of the religious faith of a country, in the same way that I have regarding the knowledge of native languages.
So, I don't know where that leaves me--my overall assessment of Mauritania. Is there any unrest brewing regarding the government? Geography tells me that I would find an arid climate, yet, if I were to visit Mauritania, what cultural climate would greet me? I sense nothing amiss from my cursory view of Mauritania, I am a curious citizen of this world.
The Arab League
Hopefully, oversimplification of my reflections is a step toward a broader understanding, rather than a jumping off point for simplistic solutions.
The Arab League.
The news coverage is peppered with references to the Arab League. Yet, what do we know of it? When was it founded? Where is it headquartered? What are the member countries? When did the member countries join in partnership with the Arab League?
In 1945, the Arab League was founded in Cairo, Egypt. The founding members were Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Yemen, and what was known as Transjordan, which has been known as Jordan since 1950.
The founding of the Arab League was simultaneous with the founding of the United Nations in Yalta. To put the Arab League in the context of the United Nations, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Syria were founding members of both the Arab League and the United Nations.
I was reading of a subtle distinction--subtle to me, at least. The Arab League describes itself as "a regional organization of sovereign states, rather than a federation, or a union."
I am curious. What was the tenor of the deliberations that led the Arab League to support a no-fly zone over Libya? Lebanon--a founding member of the Arab League--was one of 11 U.N. Security Council members, who approved the implementation of the no-fly zone over Libya.
What is the dynamic of Libya's membership in the Arab League? To date, has Libya been influential in the organization? I don't want to see the slaughter of innocent lives. Yet, just as I was influenced by childhood experiences participating as a host family in a foreign exchange program, two other childhood influences color my perspectives. While many families' homes were adorned with the American flag, our home was adorned with the flag of the United Nations. On October 24th, special attention was given to honoring the founding of the United Nations on October 24, 1945. The second experience that has a huge influence on my world view is the Vietnam War. Specifically, my parents subscribed to something long since forgotten, such that our family received a poster each month which displayed the number of casualties of North Vietnamese, South Vietnamese, American individuals, as well as individuals from the Viet Cong.
I digress. The Arab League.
Iraq joined the Arab League shortly after it was founded. Libya joined the Arab League in 1953--eight years after its founding. In 1956, Sudan joined the Arab League. Tunisia and Morocco joined the Arab League in 1958. Kuwait joined the Arab League in 1961. One year later, Algeria joined the Arab League. In 1967, Southern Yemen joined the Arab League--the same year that the Arab-Israeli War occurred. 1971 was a year of tremendous growth in this regional organization. Oman, Portugal, and Qatar joined the League. On September 21, 1971, just one month after gaining its independence from England, Bahrain joined the Arab League.
In 1973, the Islamic Republic of Mauritania joined the Arab League. Mauritania is located on the Atlantic Ocean. Currently, it has a population of approximately 3.2 million people. It is the size of Texas, and New Mexico in the United States. I confess to know little of Mauritania.
In 1974, Somalia joined the Arab League. Somalia had been a member of the United Nations, since 1960.
Comoros joined the United Nations in 1975. It did not join the Arab League until 1993. I confess that I know nothing of Comoros--a fact that I should rectify.
In 1976, the Palestinian Liberation Organization became a member of the Arab League.
It would be easy to say that a partnership has no cost. Yet, Egypt paid a price for its peace treaty with Israel in 1977. Egypt's membership in the League was suspended for 10 years. The Arab League headquarters was moved from Cairo, Egypt to Tunis, Tunisia during that time.
May this offer an outline of the Arab League--a chronological, as well as a geographic profile--that may provide some sense of what is meant when "the Arab League" is mentioned.
The Arab League.
The news coverage is peppered with references to the Arab League. Yet, what do we know of it? When was it founded? Where is it headquartered? What are the member countries? When did the member countries join in partnership with the Arab League?
In 1945, the Arab League was founded in Cairo, Egypt. The founding members were Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Yemen, and what was known as Transjordan, which has been known as Jordan since 1950.
The founding of the Arab League was simultaneous with the founding of the United Nations in Yalta. To put the Arab League in the context of the United Nations, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Syria were founding members of both the Arab League and the United Nations.
I was reading of a subtle distinction--subtle to me, at least. The Arab League describes itself as "a regional organization of sovereign states, rather than a federation, or a union."
I am curious. What was the tenor of the deliberations that led the Arab League to support a no-fly zone over Libya? Lebanon--a founding member of the Arab League--was one of 11 U.N. Security Council members, who approved the implementation of the no-fly zone over Libya.
What is the dynamic of Libya's membership in the Arab League? To date, has Libya been influential in the organization? I don't want to see the slaughter of innocent lives. Yet, just as I was influenced by childhood experiences participating as a host family in a foreign exchange program, two other childhood influences color my perspectives. While many families' homes were adorned with the American flag, our home was adorned with the flag of the United Nations. On October 24th, special attention was given to honoring the founding of the United Nations on October 24, 1945. The second experience that has a huge influence on my world view is the Vietnam War. Specifically, my parents subscribed to something long since forgotten, such that our family received a poster each month which displayed the number of casualties of North Vietnamese, South Vietnamese, American individuals, as well as individuals from the Viet Cong.
I digress. The Arab League.
Iraq joined the Arab League shortly after it was founded. Libya joined the Arab League in 1953--eight years after its founding. In 1956, Sudan joined the Arab League. Tunisia and Morocco joined the Arab League in 1958. Kuwait joined the Arab League in 1961. One year later, Algeria joined the Arab League. In 1967, Southern Yemen joined the Arab League--the same year that the Arab-Israeli War occurred. 1971 was a year of tremendous growth in this regional organization. Oman, Portugal, and Qatar joined the League. On September 21, 1971, just one month after gaining its independence from England, Bahrain joined the Arab League.
In 1973, the Islamic Republic of Mauritania joined the Arab League. Mauritania is located on the Atlantic Ocean. Currently, it has a population of approximately 3.2 million people. It is the size of Texas, and New Mexico in the United States. I confess to know little of Mauritania.
In 1974, Somalia joined the Arab League. Somalia had been a member of the United Nations, since 1960.
Comoros joined the United Nations in 1975. It did not join the Arab League until 1993. I confess that I know nothing of Comoros--a fact that I should rectify.
In 1976, the Palestinian Liberation Organization became a member of the Arab League.
It would be easy to say that a partnership has no cost. Yet, Egypt paid a price for its peace treaty with Israel in 1977. Egypt's membership in the League was suspended for 10 years. The Arab League headquarters was moved from Cairo, Egypt to Tunis, Tunisia during that time.
May this offer an outline of the Arab League--a chronological, as well as a geographic profile--that may provide some sense of what is meant when "the Arab League" is mentioned.
Moving forward....Almost.
I never imagined what is exciting me right now. I believe I am within several weeks of getting my wheelchair--a red wheelchair. This week, I have felt the sense that everyone wants to see me getting what I never imagined might be best for me--the woman at the insurance company, my physiatrist, primarily. I do not mean, by any stretch of the imagination, to slight the tremendous of family and friends. It took me a year to come to terms with the notion that a wheelchair was my vehicle to living fully. I knew I needed to come to terms with the idea--be emotionally comfortable with the idea--before I could engage in the advocacy necessary to go through the doctor appointments, the physical mobility assessments, and the stress associated with how well I could use the wheelchair.
It is quite odd, at the moment my level of anticipation outweighs the prospect of losing use of my left hand. That is MUCH more significant than you might appreciate, unless you know me. All of my life I have had no fine motor skills in my right hand. I use my left hand to a FAR greater degree than other people, who have full use of both hands. That is not worthy of trumpeting on a daily basis. In simple terms, I have never known any other way of living with regard to my hands. Today, I said yes to the option to getting something that I may use if I come to the point of not having the requisite use of my left hand. The full implications of not having the use of my left hand that I have today is not something that I can fixate my attention at this moment.
My excitement may be more aptly described as satisfaction with myself. In late December, when I met with my doctor to have the requisite mobility assessment for a motor scooter/wheelchair, I wanted nothing to do with either. I begrudgingly opted for a scooter. That was all that my emotions could handle. In fact, when I tried to use several scooters, I was shown a wheelchair to try using. I accepted the invitation to try it in the store. Something seemed different, but, I didn't know what it was. I stood up, and the man at the medical supply store said that I had been using an electric wheelchair.
"What?"
It couldn't be. It just couldn't be. I was too young. Only old people--people who were slumped over-- used wheelchairs. People in wheelchairs had speech impairments. They could not be understood. Their thinking was impaired.
I am too young. I don't have any speech impairments. The doctors may have had serious doubts as to whether I would ever talk. But, I proved them wrong. And my thinking is not delayed--it is not impaired. OK, my thinking is not exactly clear immediately following a seizure. But, my seizures are rare. I made my way through college. I was not a star student by a long shot. But, I did return, and was graduated with a master's degree. And they said I would fall flat on my face--not in so many words, but through actions of doubt.
"You did well with the wheelchair."
"What? That can't be."
I left the store bewildered. My insurance case manager called me.
"Patty, think long term. Think beyond what your immediate needs are. Think what you will need in five years."
"I don't want to. That is too much. That is too daunting for me. What are YOU going to need in five years?"
Dreaming that I was in a combination scooter/wheelchair, as I was crashing into the activity room of an assisted care facility unable to find the brakes did not help one bit. I was completely out of control. The nightmare of crashing into people was so vivid. I was out of control--completely out of control.
So, what was the turning point? There were two. First was time. Second, the experience of being able to turn around 360 degrees in the elevator, while sitting in the wheelchair. Not having to back out of an elevator. I am sure there will be some of that. Right now, I cannot focus on that.
This has been a long road. One and three-quarter years of not working, having diminishing stamina, and an arthritic ankle have taken their toll. My mind needs what a wheelchair will offer. To feel the support, and affirmation of my doctor, my case manager, and the medical supply company president was....no....is empowering.
It is quite odd, at the moment my level of anticipation outweighs the prospect of losing use of my left hand. That is MUCH more significant than you might appreciate, unless you know me. All of my life I have had no fine motor skills in my right hand. I use my left hand to a FAR greater degree than other people, who have full use of both hands. That is not worthy of trumpeting on a daily basis. In simple terms, I have never known any other way of living with regard to my hands. Today, I said yes to the option to getting something that I may use if I come to the point of not having the requisite use of my left hand. The full implications of not having the use of my left hand that I have today is not something that I can fixate my attention at this moment.
My excitement may be more aptly described as satisfaction with myself. In late December, when I met with my doctor to have the requisite mobility assessment for a motor scooter/wheelchair, I wanted nothing to do with either. I begrudgingly opted for a scooter. That was all that my emotions could handle. In fact, when I tried to use several scooters, I was shown a wheelchair to try using. I accepted the invitation to try it in the store. Something seemed different, but, I didn't know what it was. I stood up, and the man at the medical supply store said that I had been using an electric wheelchair.
"What?"
It couldn't be. It just couldn't be. I was too young. Only old people--people who were slumped over-- used wheelchairs. People in wheelchairs had speech impairments. They could not be understood. Their thinking was impaired.
I am too young. I don't have any speech impairments. The doctors may have had serious doubts as to whether I would ever talk. But, I proved them wrong. And my thinking is not delayed--it is not impaired. OK, my thinking is not exactly clear immediately following a seizure. But, my seizures are rare. I made my way through college. I was not a star student by a long shot. But, I did return, and was graduated with a master's degree. And they said I would fall flat on my face--not in so many words, but through actions of doubt.
"You did well with the wheelchair."
"What? That can't be."
I left the store bewildered. My insurance case manager called me.
"Patty, think long term. Think beyond what your immediate needs are. Think what you will need in five years."
"I don't want to. That is too much. That is too daunting for me. What are YOU going to need in five years?"
Dreaming that I was in a combination scooter/wheelchair, as I was crashing into the activity room of an assisted care facility unable to find the brakes did not help one bit. I was completely out of control. The nightmare of crashing into people was so vivid. I was out of control--completely out of control.
So, what was the turning point? There were two. First was time. Second, the experience of being able to turn around 360 degrees in the elevator, while sitting in the wheelchair. Not having to back out of an elevator. I am sure there will be some of that. Right now, I cannot focus on that.
This has been a long road. One and three-quarter years of not working, having diminishing stamina, and an arthritic ankle have taken their toll. My mind needs what a wheelchair will offer. To feel the support, and affirmation of my doctor, my case manager, and the medical supply company president was....no....is empowering.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
International Atomic Energy Agency
Fifty individuals in Japan are working to ensure that one of the nuclear reactors is contained. At least, that is my understanding. Tonight, a commentator familiar with nuclear power issues, which I am not, asked where the International Atomic Energy Association was in managing this situation--this dire problem.
My question is different. If you are familiar with my thinking, that is of no surprise:) Yet, what is my question.
Who makes up the International Atomic Energy Association? When was the IAEA created? Where is it headquartered?
There are 151 member nations that comprise the IAEA. It was created in 1957. It is headquartered in Vienna, Austria. The organization is guided by a 35-member nation Board of Governors. The Board of Governors include countries from each occupied continent.
Proceeding alphabetically, the member nations from Asia from 2010-2011 are: Ajerbijan, China, India, Japan, South Korea, Mongolia, Pakistan, the Russian Federation, and Singapore.
Australia is serving on the Board of Governors currently. It has been a member of the IAEA since its founding in 1957.
For the 2010-2011 period, the European Board of Governors members are: Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Finally, Canada, and the United States are serving on the Board of Governors. Both Canada and the United States were founding members of the IAEA.
This may seem to be boring information. It may not be exciting. But, it is essential if we are to have anywhere approaching a full understanding of world affairs, and global relationships.
My sense has been to think that the IAEA was one monolith, rather than a global consortium.
Of concern should be the status of North Korea. Although it was one of the founding members in 1957, North Korea withdrew its membership in the IAEA in 1994. It is highly unlikely that under the current leadership in North Korea, that their view toward toward the IAEA will change. Yet, when Kim Jong-il is no longer in power, will his successor take a different stance? When a successor comes to governance, then working toward that goal seems worthy of consideration.
It is worthy of note that Libya, Bahrain, the Ivory Coast, and Saudi Arabia are all members of the IAEA. There is
Similarly, both India and Pakistan are members of the IAEA. These two countries have vast differences in their relations with one another. Yet, those differences have not prevented them from joining forces with the IAEA.
The price of not being aware of the other countries in our world is steep. Afghanistan, Egypt, lran, Iraq, Libya, and Tunisia are examples of a lack of understanding the nuances of the countries--their people, ideologies, and cultures.
In addition to being aware of the International Atomic Energy Agency, there are other consortia worthy of our understanding. I will explore them in future postings. My aim is to identify what countries are members of multiple world partnerships, so as to understand how world peace may be furthered in our time.
My question is different. If you are familiar with my thinking, that is of no surprise:) Yet, what is my question.
Who makes up the International Atomic Energy Association? When was the IAEA created? Where is it headquartered?
There are 151 member nations that comprise the IAEA. It was created in 1957. It is headquartered in Vienna, Austria. The organization is guided by a 35-member nation Board of Governors. The Board of Governors include countries from each occupied continent.
Proceeding alphabetically, the member nations from Asia from 2010-2011 are: Ajerbijan, China, India, Japan, South Korea, Mongolia, Pakistan, the Russian Federation, and Singapore.
Australia is serving on the Board of Governors currently. It has been a member of the IAEA since its founding in 1957.
For the 2010-2011 period, the European Board of Governors members are: Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Finally, Canada, and the United States are serving on the Board of Governors. Both Canada and the United States were founding members of the IAEA.
This may seem to be boring information. It may not be exciting. But, it is essential if we are to have anywhere approaching a full understanding of world affairs, and global relationships.
My sense has been to think that the IAEA was one monolith, rather than a global consortium.
Of concern should be the status of North Korea. Although it was one of the founding members in 1957, North Korea withdrew its membership in the IAEA in 1994. It is highly unlikely that under the current leadership in North Korea, that their view toward toward the IAEA will change. Yet, when Kim Jong-il is no longer in power, will his successor take a different stance? When a successor comes to governance, then working toward that goal seems worthy of consideration.
It is worthy of note that Libya, Bahrain, the Ivory Coast, and Saudi Arabia are all members of the IAEA. There is
Similarly, both India and Pakistan are members of the IAEA. These two countries have vast differences in their relations with one another. Yet, those differences have not prevented them from joining forces with the IAEA.
The price of not being aware of the other countries in our world is steep. Afghanistan, Egypt, lran, Iraq, Libya, and Tunisia are examples of a lack of understanding the nuances of the countries--their people, ideologies, and cultures.
In addition to being aware of the International Atomic Energy Agency, there are other consortia worthy of our understanding. I will explore them in future postings. My aim is to identify what countries are members of multiple world partnerships, so as to understand how world peace may be furthered in our time.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Global Information's Starting Point
I am fascinated by the many sources of information. Discerning the veracity of that information intrigues me. I was raised in a democracy. Within that democracy, my family, friends, and culture instilled in me the belief that there are channels of government--channels within the community--to address problems. I witnessed civil service close to home.
Cynicism about government is not a part of my composition. Any cynicism I might have is channeled into my votes for candidates with more positive--more constructive organizations.
Any endorsements I give to voting against a candidate, rather than for a candidate with a more constructive view, only serve to delay resolution of the problems at hand. Time is precious. We may ill afford such delays. That is not to say that decisions should be made hastily. Quite to the contrary, decisions need to be made with due deliberation.
Cynicism about government is not a part of my composition. Any cynicism I might have is channeled into my votes for candidates with more positive--more constructive organizations.
Any endorsements I give to voting against a candidate, rather than for a candidate with a more constructive view, only serve to delay resolution of the problems at hand. Time is precious. We may ill afford such delays. That is not to say that decisions should be made hastily. Quite to the contrary, decisions need to be made with due deliberation.
Monday, March 14, 2011
Information's Integrity
The veracity of information is assessed in different ways, depending on the individual, or group receiving the information. In journalism, a rule of three independent sources prevails in order for information to be considered "verified"--to be worthy of the word "integrity." When evaluating information dealing with world politics, veracity is assessed on the basis of independence from government. Evaluating information on the World Wide Web, the type of website on which the information appears is a basis on which integrity is assessed.
When assessing world politics--global affairs--several questions need to be posed. First, does the government limit what may be covered. A cynic might say, "Of course, they do. What do you expect?"
I prefer further exploration. My questions are these. Does the government have an information ministry? Does the government have a culture ministry?
Are there institutions within the government that allow for appeal of limitations imposed on sharing informations? These institutions do not guarantee the availability of trustworthy information. But, they do improve the chances.
What sources of information does the government deem trustworthy, as evidenced by links on their websites? For example, are foreign governments, or foreign press organizations included among the hypertext links on the website?
Currently, I must confess, I am intoxicated by trying to identify information sources with integrity--websites that represent a wide variety of viewpoints. I am a long way from being up to date with the content of each of these websites. Yet, I do believe it is a starting point.
I am reminded of elementary school grammar lessons. In the 1960s, the emphasis was on composing a cogent paragraph, which is built upon a topic sentence. That instruction was given simultaneous with the development of the Internet--the structure upon which the World Wide Web flourishes today.
We are sloppy in our use of several words--Internet, and the World Wide Web. The Internet is not the content--the information--we consume online. Rather, the Internet is the structure that the Department of Defense was instrumental in developing. In contrast to the Internet, the World Wide Web refers to the free exchange of information globally. There is a second generation of the World Wide Web.
Social media is at the heart of the World Wide Web's second generation. Blogs, wikis, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and YouTube are among the examples of social media that are in our midst. I must confess that I had disdain for social media. Given time, I recognize that my gut reaction to social media has been rooted in how it is used, rather than at its existence. My disdain needs to be replaced with discernment. I think the reverse is true as well. Social media enthusiasts are called to be discerning. How may I use social media most responsibly? Leisure is a responsible use. I don't mean to cast a dark shadow over social media. My concern about social media use centers more around uses that violate the character and integrity of any human being, or idea.
Hopefully, we may choose topic sentences, rather than sound bites. May we be selective, and deliberate in the information we consume. May we listen keenly, rather than settle for white noise in our environs.
When assessing world politics--global affairs--several questions need to be posed. First, does the government limit what may be covered. A cynic might say, "Of course, they do. What do you expect?"
I prefer further exploration. My questions are these. Does the government have an information ministry? Does the government have a culture ministry?
Are there institutions within the government that allow for appeal of limitations imposed on sharing informations? These institutions do not guarantee the availability of trustworthy information. But, they do improve the chances.
What sources of information does the government deem trustworthy, as evidenced by links on their websites? For example, are foreign governments, or foreign press organizations included among the hypertext links on the website?
Currently, I must confess, I am intoxicated by trying to identify information sources with integrity--websites that represent a wide variety of viewpoints. I am a long way from being up to date with the content of each of these websites. Yet, I do believe it is a starting point.
I am reminded of elementary school grammar lessons. In the 1960s, the emphasis was on composing a cogent paragraph, which is built upon a topic sentence. That instruction was given simultaneous with the development of the Internet--the structure upon which the World Wide Web flourishes today.
We are sloppy in our use of several words--Internet, and the World Wide Web. The Internet is not the content--the information--we consume online. Rather, the Internet is the structure that the Department of Defense was instrumental in developing. In contrast to the Internet, the World Wide Web refers to the free exchange of information globally. There is a second generation of the World Wide Web.
Social media is at the heart of the World Wide Web's second generation. Blogs, wikis, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and YouTube are among the examples of social media that are in our midst. I must confess that I had disdain for social media. Given time, I recognize that my gut reaction to social media has been rooted in how it is used, rather than at its existence. My disdain needs to be replaced with discernment. I think the reverse is true as well. Social media enthusiasts are called to be discerning. How may I use social media most responsibly? Leisure is a responsible use. I don't mean to cast a dark shadow over social media. My concern about social media use centers more around uses that violate the character and integrity of any human being, or idea.
Hopefully, we may choose topic sentences, rather than sound bites. May we be selective, and deliberate in the information we consume. May we listen keenly, rather than settle for white noise in our environs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)