Jonathan P. Baird

I moved to Anchorage in late May this year. It is probably not enough time to know a place. In truth, I have actually been here less than three months. I spent most of June in the Washington D.C. area.

Still, I do not find it difficult to offer some early opinions about this place. I like Alaska very much. People have been warm, welcoming, and pleasantly informal. I used to think New Hampshire was informal. Alaskans take informality to a whole new level.

For many, the idea of dressing up might mean a best pair of jeans and a clean sweatshirt. While I know there are some snooty opinions out there about how awful it is Alaskans (and Americans generally) dress down, I find it refreshing. Instead of being compelled to spend precious dollars on wardrobe, the emphasis here is casual and comfortable. To me, this way is less affected and more down-to-earth.
The informality is also fitting because Alaskans live closer to the natural world than many other Americans. You do not have to go too far to be in the wild. And what an immense wild it is! It is a big sky country.

Anchorage itself has been in a state of geographic expansion over the last 30-40 years. One result has been encroachment on bear habitat. The story of bear/human interaction is a perennial favorite in the paper. On the front page of the Anchorage Daily News, there is almost always some story about a bear. If you go to http://www.adn.com (website of the Anchorage Daily News), you will see the bear section, replete with multiple pictures taken by readers of bear sightings.

Back in New Hampshire, we had black bears. I would sometimes see them walking through my backyard in Wilmot heading toward the blueberry patch. Alaska has brown/grizzly bears, black bears and polar bears. The polar bears are way north but brown bears seem to be everywhere in the state. Black bears inhabit the southern two-thirds of the state.

Male grizzlies can run 400-1,100 pounds. Females run 200-600 pounds.  It is estimated by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game that the state has 35,000-45,000 brown bears and more than 50,000 black bears.

For hikers, the bear presence is not a small concern. Avoiding the bear is always the preferable course of action. Bear spray is widely advertised. Many hikers and anglers carry guns. It is not a great idea to surprise a bear. Hikers are advised to make noise, talk loudly or tie a bell to your pack. There is a cottage industry of advice about what to do around bears. Always giving them space and a wide berth seems like the wisest course to me.

There was a story yesterday in he Anchorage Daily News about a brown bear death zone near the confluence of the Kenai and Russian rivers. Two years ago, nine bears were killed in defense of life and property  in a five mile radius around two of Alaska’s most popular fisheries. The red salmon run has been a big attraction for the bears. This year the run was weaker. Because it was so weak, biologists closed the Russian river to anglers in mid-August. That in turn meant less bear/human contact.

In another story from this summer, the mayor of Denali Borough shot and killed a grizzly that charged him near the area landfill. It turned out that someone had previously shot the bear with a .22 caliber bullet. The mayor felt badly he shot the six foot 400 pound bear. Grizzlies were climbing over the landfill fence despite the city’s efforts to stop them. One online commenter noted that shooting a grizzly with a .22 was an uncivilized form of torment.

Along with bear stories, it is hard to miss the stories about small plane crashes. Planes are everywhere. When I have gone out hiking, I have been surprised by the number of planes in the air. A reality of Alaska life is the limited road system. Planes are often the only way to get around much of the state.

While the Senator Stevens’ crash was the big local news event, there seem to be no shortage of other small plane crashes. The weather typically figures in as a factor. I do realize I am talking about the weather and the winter has not arrived yet. Still, it is always a big topic.

The summer weather of 2010 has to be considered a big disappointment. I have been told that this is not typical. Last summer was much better. It was beautiful at the end of May. Unfortunately, that was pretty much it for prolonged sun. This should go down as the summer-less summer of 2010. I think there were 30 something days of consecutive rain. The sun barely made an appearance.

September now edges forward with a sense of impending winter. I suppose I am a little paranoid about when the first snow will fly

I have to acknowledge that September may be the best weather month in New Hampshire. It often remains warm and sunny all the way into October and foliage season. Maybe Alaska will surprise me but September already seems cooler and no less wet. The days are getting shorter. Oh well.

While I would have liked more warm, the absence of stifling humidity has been a pleasure.  Maybe Fairbanks very occasionally gets oppressive heat but not Anchorage. I am apparently going to be making a trip to Fairbanks this coming December. I have heard it gets to be 50 below there. I am curious to see what that feels like – at least once.

In a week or so, i will be going to Ketchikan. Earlier I spent a week in Juneau. I will write more about the southeast peninsula. Stay tuned…

From afar, I have followed with interest the debate over New Hampshire’s new unemployment law about gross misconduct. Without any basis, opponents have claimed that workers who steal from employers will be able to collect benefits. Under the new law, just as under the prior law, workers who steal from employers in an amount less than $500 will be denied benefits on the ground of misconduct.
It was hard to take seriously the allegation that the new law rewarded bad behavior or countenanced stealing from an employer. The people saying this have little knowledge about how the unemployment system actually works. Or they are fabricating this charge for perceived political gain.
The problem with the old law was that it inflicted the same very lengthy disqualification and penalty on someone whose minor misconduct involved 35 cents as someone whose gross dishonesty involved $100,000, instead of making the severity of the penalty match the seriousness of the offense.
The law change was necessary because workers were being harmed by the old law. The state previously over-utilized the gross misconduct disqualification and wrongly
denied workers who never should have faced that charge.

Mr. 10/22
The best way I can illustrate the problem with the old law is a story. Back in the 1990s, I represented a guy from Newport named Harry King. King, who has now passed away, was a Vietnam veteran, a Little League coach and a hell of a nice guy. Since coming back from Vietnam, he had worked at the Sturm Ruger gun factory in Newport for 22 years.
By all accounts, King was a good worker. Co-workers called him Mr. 10/22 after the rifle he worked on.
One morning he came to work early, around 6 o’clock, and wanted to buy a cup of coffee from the machine in the shop. The coffee cost just 35 cents. King had a $10 bill in his pocket and no change. On a nearby supervisor’s desk, he spotted some spare change. He took 35 cents off the desk and bought himself a cup of coffee. He intended to pay it back.
King went back to work. Later that morning he got called into the office. The company accused him of stealing the 35 cents. Officials had the theft on videotape. The company claimed that money had been disappearing off of that supervisor’s desk and they had secretly placed a hidden camera nearby to monitor the desk.
After 22 years on the job, Ruger terminated King for the alleged theft of 35 cents. Because he had no other source of income, King filed a claim for unemployment benefits. The state Department of Employment Security denied his claim on grounds of both misconduct and gross misconduct.
The “theft” of 35 cents was considered dishonesty and therefore not just “misconduct” under the law but “gross misconduct.” Gross misconduct has harsher consequences for a worker than simple misconduct. In addition to being denied benefits at that time, the worker loses all wage credits, effectively denying any possibility of collecting for a long time.
King went to an appeal tribunal hearing in which he represented himself – and lost.
He then sought counsel from New Hampshire Legal Assistance. I handled his case and filed an appeal with the Employment Security commissioner arguing his denial was an error of law. The agency reopened the case and allowed a new hearing on the merits of the case. We subsequently had a full hearing in which Ruger brought eight witnesses to testify against King.
The appeal tribunal reversed the decision in King’s favor. Both the findings of misconduct and gross misconduct were overturned. The appeal tribunal found that King did not have the intent to steal anything.
King’s case is indicative of the typical misuse of the old gross misconduct statute. Dishonesty could be broadly construed.
The case got some publicity. Bob Hohler, a former Monitor reporter, wrote a sympathetic story about the case that appeared in the Boston Sunday Globe. After that, a lowbrow TV newsmagazine of the era, A Current Affair, did a segment about the case that aired nationally. The Boston TV stations covered the appeal tribunal hearing.
New law
The new law, House Bill 1168, clarified the circumstances in which Employment Security could invoke the gross misconduct disqualification. Previously, the law denied workers who committed arson, sabotage, felony, assault which causes bodily injury, and “dishonesty.”
The problem with the old law was the vagueness of the term “dishonesty.” While the other offenses are clear on their face, dishonesty is much more slippery terminology. As the King case demonstrates, almost any factual dispute where parties disagree could be mischaracterized as dishonesty by a party. Employment Security had a bad habit of overusing this disqualification when simple misconduct was the more appropriate charge.
House Bill 1168 replaced the offense of dishonesty with theft in an amount greater than $500. Theft in an amount over $500 is more consistent with the other serious crimes outlined in the statute. Again, stealing $5 or anything less than $500 will still cause you to be disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits. But you won’t also lose all your wage credits, so that if you get another job and then get laid off from the new job, you may be able to collect.

Business support
The new law was a cooperative venture supported by labor, business and Employment Security. The Unemployment Compensation Advisory Council, which includes representatives of business and labor, supported the bill. It passed the House Labor Committee on a 17-0 vote. There were two hearings. Business interests did not oppose the bill when it was before the Legislature. It passed both Houses on an overwhelming vote.
If this was such a harmful bill to employers, why did it sail through unopposed? The business lobbyists were not asleep at the wheel. They were there 24/7 and they knew all about it.
What seems to be going on is an effort, after the fact, to mislead the public. I find it reminiscent of the Shirley Sherrod case. First, present a sensationalist picture based on distortion and misinformation. Then claim a harm. Have little or no regard for the truth. Try to gain partisan political advantage in the wake of the confusion you have created.
The cynical underlying assumption is that the only thing the public will remember is the accusation that workers who steal from employers will be rewarded. This is a new version of the Big Lie technique. Politicians who go down this road should not be rewarded.

In the last month, I have made the big move from New Hampshire to Alaska. There is not much I have not left behind. I moved away from my home, my family, my friends, my dog, my job and a world of familiarity and security. Because of the complications and logistics of the move, my wife and I have to live apart temporarily.

Still, while you never know for sure in life, I think this is the right move. For someone who has always lived in the northeastern U.S.,  Alaska is a pretty big adventure. It is not just West Coast remote. We are talking four times zones away.  Anchorage is a three and a half hour flight from Seattle.

After an initial two weeks in Anchorage, I can offer a few observations.  It is hard to be prepared for the scale of Alaska. Flying in from Seattle, there are mountains beyond mountains extending for a long distance as you approach Anchorage.  For a good chunk of the time on the flight, it looked like there were no people below.  I flew into the city in late May and the mountains are all snowcapped.

Anchorage is nestled between big water and surrounding mountains. The views are lovely in many directions.

I was not prepared for the brightness of the light. I got some new sunglasses in New Hampshire before I left and I am glad I did. For whatever reason, the light seems brighter. Contrary to expectations of lousy weather, the first two weeks were beautiful. The temperature reached up into the 80’s and there was almost no rain.

I have found it is easy to lose track of time. By June, it was staying light til 11:30pm.  As an easterner, I could easily have thought it was 7pm at 11:30 at night.  I have enjoyed the late light. You simply need to tell yourself to go to sleep when it does not look like that time.

Being in a new city can be disorienting.  It takes a little time to overcome feeling like an alien outsider. Af first, I did feel like brother from another planet. Driving around the city helped considerably. Anchorage does not seem like a difficult place to get around in if you have a car.
It is a large geographic area but the layout is straightforward.  One of the first things I did when I got to town was to buy a good city map at Barnes and Nobles.

People have been very welcoming and open.  I was put up by my new friends Cliff and Theresa who went way beyond the call as far as generosity.  Greeting newcomers (and even welcoming vacationers) seems like a warm and deeply ingrained Alaska tradition and ritual.  As a last frontier,  Alaska seems to draw a potpourri of people like myself coming for a job opportunity, those down on their luck arriving to make a fresh start, loners and PTSD sufferers who are literally heading for the hills and prospective Houdinis who are trying to disappear into the woodwork probably because they want to escape something bad from the lower forty eight.

I would say there is more diversity than I might have expected. Based on initial observations, Alaska is quite a bit more diverse than New Hampshire. Native Alaskans, African Americans, and Pacific Islanders all seem to have significant concentrations in Anchorage.

While people have told me that the economy is better than the rest of the U.S., I did note the St Francis Shelter, the sizable local homeless shelter, and the nearby homeless campground.  Some people freeze to death in the winter as even in Alaska some homeless people camp outside all winter.  I am curious to see the extent of that.

My first weekend in Anchorage, my friends Cliff and Theresa took me on a hike to Hatcher Pass, a place 40 or 50 miles north of the city. It was incredibly scenic. On the way back we stopped in Wasilla, Sarah Palin’s hometown. While the former governor has monopolized coverage of things Alaska, I was surprised by how poor quality housing was on the city’s main drag. Parts of the downtown looked very dumpy.  I expect there are lovely places on the back roads but I have not seen media coverage of how shabby the downtown row of shacks is.  I have not heard any media commentator ask her about that.

No one will ever accuse Alaska of being manicured. Unlike places like L.A. where parts of the city look like a movie set, Alaska is down to earth in a way I like. It is not a place for stuffed shirts. It has a casual quality reminiscent of New Hampshire. People dress for comfort and in a more freewheeling, natural way than in many American cities where employees concoct fancy get-ups for their job. I like the informality.

On the other hand, I have experienced a degree of sticker shock at the cost of everything. Gas is at least 50 cents a gallon higher than in New England. Ditto for food prices. Housing costs are also quite high. Anchorage is not a cheap place to live.

I do expect to like living here. The whole experience of this transition makes me think of Walt Whitman’s poem Song of the Open Road. Since it is my personal favorite poem, I will shamelessly use this opening to hawk the poem. There are many lines that speak to me but my recent experience leads me to think of these lines.

“What beckonings of love you receive, you shall only answer with passionate
 kisses of parting
You shall not allow the hold of those who spread their reach’d hands toward you.”

Because I love Whitman, I will post the whole Song of the Open Road. It is hard to imagine a greater poem. I will be writing more about Alaska.

1
Afoot and light-hearted I take to the open road,
Healthy, free, the world before me,
The long brown path before me leading wherever I choose.

Henceforth I ask not good-fortune, I myself am good-fortune,
Henceforth I whimper no more, postpone no more, need nothing,
Done with indoor complaints, libraries, querulous criticisms,
Strong and content I travel the open road.

The earth, that is sufficient,
I do not want the constellations any nearer,
I know they are very well where they are,
I know they suffice for those who belong to them.

(Still here I carry my old delicious burdens,
I carry them, men and women, I carry them with me wherever I go,
I swear it is impossible for me to get rid of them,
I am fill’d with them, and I will fill them in return.)

2
You road I enter upon and look around, I believe you are not all that is here,
I believe that much unseen is also here.

Here the profound lesson of reception, nor preference nor denial,
The black with his woolly head, the felon, the diseas’d, the illiterate person, are not denied;
The birth, the hasting after the physician, the beggar’s tramp, the drunkard’s stagger, the laughing party of mechanics,
The escaped youth, the rich person’s carriage, the fop, the eloping couple,

The early market-man, the hearse, the moving of furniture into the town, the return back from the town,
They pass, I also pass, any thing passes, none can be interdicted,
None but are accepted, none but shall be dear to me.

3
You air that serves me with breath to speak!
You objects that call from diffusion my meanings and give them shape!
You light that wraps me and all things in delicate equable showers!
You paths worn in the irregular hollows by the roadsides!
I believe you are latent with unseen existences, you are so dear to me.

You flagg’d walks of the cities! you strong curbs at the edges!
You ferries! you planks and posts of wharves! you timber-lined sides! you distant ships!

You rows of houses! you window-pierc’d façades! you roofs!
You porches and entrances! you copings and iron guards!
You windows whose transparent shells might expose so much!
You doors and ascending steps! you arches!
You gray stones of interminable pavements! you trodden crossings!
From all that has touch’d you I believe you have imparted to yourselves, and now would impart the same secretly to me,
From the living and the dead you have peopled your impassive surfaces, and the spirits thereof would be evident and amicable with me.

4
The earth expanding right hand and left hand,
The picture alive, every part in its best light,
The music falling in where it is wanted, and stopping where it is not wanted,
The cheerful voice of the public road, the gay fresh sentiment of the road.

O highway I travel, do you say to me Do not leave me?
Do you say Venture not—if you leave me you are lost?
Do you say I am already prepared, I am well-beaten and undenied, adhere to me?

O public road, I say back I am not afraid to leave you, yet I love you,
You express me better than I can express myself,
You shall be more to me than my poem.

I think heroic deeds were all conceiv’d in the open air, and all free poems also,
I think I could stop here myself and do miracles,
I think whatever I shall meet on the road I shall like, and whoever beholds me shall like me,
I think whoever I see must be happy.

5
From this hour I ordain myself loos’d of limits and imaginary lines,
Going where I list, my own master total and absolute,
Listening to others, considering well what they say,
Pausing, searching, receiving, contemplating,
Gently,but with undeniable will, divesting myself of the holds that would hold me.
I inhale great draughts of space,
The east and the west are mine, and the north and the south are mine.

I am larger, better than I thought,
I did not know I held so much goodness.

All seems beautiful to me,
I can repeat over to men and women You have done such good to me I would do the same to you,
I will recruit for myself and you as I go,
I will scatter myself among men and women as I go,
I will toss a new gladness and roughness among them,
Whoever denies me it shall not trouble me,
Whoever accepts me he or she shall be blessed and shall bless me.

6
Now if a thousand perfect men were to appear it would not amaze me,
Now if a thousand beautiful forms of women appear’d it would not astonish me.

Now I see the secret of the making of the best persons,
It is to grow in the open air and to eat and sleep with the earth.

Here a great personal deed has room,
(Such a deed seizes upon the hearts of the whole race of men,
Its effusion of strength and will overwhelms law and mocks all authority and all argument against it.)

Here is the test of wisdom,
Wisdom is not finally tested in schools,
Wisdom cannot be pass’d from one having it to another not having it,
Wisdom is of the soul, is not susceptible of proof, is its own proof,
Applies to all stages and objects and qualities and is content,
Is the certainty of the reality and immortality of things, and the excellence of things;
Something there is in the float of the sight of things that provokes it out of the soul.

Now I re-examine philosophies and religions,
They may prove well in lecture-rooms, yet not prove at all under the spacious clouds and along the landscape and flowing currents.

Here is realization,
Here is a man tallied—he realizes here what he has in him,
The past, the future, majesty, love—if they are vacant of you, you are vacant of them.

Only the kernel of every object nourishes;
Where is he who tears off the husks for you and me?
Where is he that undoes stratagems and envelopes for you and me?

Here is adhesiveness, it is not previously fashion’d, it is apropos;
Do you know what it is as you pass to be loved by strangers?
Do you know the talk of those turning eye-balls?

7
Here is the efflux of the soul,
The efflux of the soul comes from within through embower’d gates, ever provoking questions,
These yearnings why are they? these thoughts in the darkness why are they?
Why are there men and women that while they are nigh me the sunlight expands my blood?
Why when they leave me do my pennants of joy sink flat and lank?
Why are there trees I never walk under but large and melodious thoughts descend upon me?
(I think they hang there winter and summer on those trees and always drop fruit as I pass;)
What is it I interchange so suddenly with strangers?
What with some driver as I ride on the seat by his side?
What with some fisherman drawing his seine by the shore as I walk by and pause?
What gives me to be free to a woman’s and man’s good-will? what gives them to be free to mine?

8
The efflux of the soul is happiness, here is happiness,
I think it pervades the open air, waiting at all times,
Now it flows unto us, we are rightly charged.

Here rises the fluid and attaching character,
The fluid and attaching character is the freshness and sweetness of man and woman,
(The herbs of the morning sprout no fresher and sweeter every day out of the roots of themselves, than it sprouts fresh and sweet continually out of itself.)

Toward the fluid and attaching character exudes the sweat of the love of young and old,
From it falls distill’d the charm that mocks beauty and attainments,
Toward it heaves the shuddering longing ache of contact.

9
Allons! whoever you are come travel with me!
Traveling with me you find what never tires.

The earth never tires,
The earth is rude, silent, incomprehensible at first, Nature is rude and incomprehensible at first,
Be not discouraged, keep on, there are divine things well envelop’d,
I swear to you there are divine things more beautiful than words can tell.

Allons! we must not stop here,
However sweet these laid-up stores, however convenient this dwelling we cannot remain here,
However shelter’d this port and however calm these waters we must not anchor here,
However welcome the hospitality that surrounds us we are permitted to receive it but a little while.

10
Allons! the inducements shall be greater,
We will sail pathless and wild seas,
We will go where winds blow, waves dash, and the Yankee clipper speeds by under full sail.

Allons! with power, liberty, the earth, the elements,
Health, defiance, gayety, self-esteem, curiosity;
Allons! from all formules!
From your formules, O bat-eyed and materialistic priests.

The stale cadaver blocks up the passage—the burial waits no longer.

Allons! yet take warning!
He traveling with me needs the best blood, thews, endurance,
None may come to the trial till he or she bring courage and health,
Come not here if you have already spent the best of yourself,
Only those may come who come in sweet and determin’d bodies,
No diseas’d person, no rum-drinker or venereal taint is permitted here.

(I and mine do not convince by arguments, similes, rhymes,
We convince by our presence.)

11
Listen! I will be honest with you,
I do not offer the old smooth prizes, but offer rough new prizes,
These are the days that must happen to you:
You shall not heap up what is call’d riches,
You shall scatter with lavish hand all that you earn or achieve,
You but arrive at the city to which you were destin’d, you hardly settle yourself to satisfaction before you are call’d by an irresistible call to depart,
You shall be treated to the ironical smiles and mockings of those who remain behind you,
What beckonings of love you receive you shall only answer with passionate kisses of parting,
You shall not allow the hold of those who spread their reach’d hands toward you.

12
Allons! after the great Companions, and to belong to them!
They too are on the road—they are the swift and majestic men—they are the greatest women,
Enjoyers of calms of seas and storms of seas,
Sailors of many a ship, walkers of many a mile of land,
Habituès of many distant countries, habituès of far-distant dwellings,
Trusters of men and women, observers of cities, solitary toilers,
Pausers and contemplators of tufts, blossoms, shells of the shore,
Dancers at wedding-dances, kissers of brides, tender helpers of children, bearers of children,
Soldiers of revolts, standers by gaping graves, lowerers-down of coffins,
Journeyers over consecutive seasons, over the years, the curious years each emerging from that which preceded it,
Journeyers as with companions, namely their own diverse phases,
Forth-steppers from the latent unrealized baby-days,
Journeyers gayly with their own youth, journeyers with their bearded and well-grain’d manhood,
Journeyers with their womanhood, ample, unsurpass’d, content,
Journeyers with their own sublime old age of manhood or womanhood,
Old age, calm, expanded, broad with the haughty breadth of the universe,
Old age, flowing free with the delicious near-by freedom of death.

13
Allons! to that which is endless as it was beginningless,
To undergo much, tramps of days, rests of nights,
To merge all in the travel they tend to, and the days and nights they tend to,
Again to merge them in the start of superior journeys,
To see nothing anywhere but what you may reach it and pass it,
To conceive no time, however distant, but what you may reach it and pass it,
To look up or down no road but it stretches and waits for you, however long but it stretches and waits for you,
To see no being, not God’s or any, but you also go thither,
To see no possession but you may possess it, enjoying all without labor or purchase, abstracting the feast yet not abstracting one particle of it,
To take the best of the farmer’s farm and the rich man’s elegant villa, and the chaste blessings of the well-married couple, and the fruits of orchards and flowers of gardens,
To take to your use out of the compact cities as you pass through,
To carry buildings and streets with you afterward wherever you go,
To gather the minds of men out of their brains as you encounter them, to gather the love out of their hearts,
To take your lovers on the road with you, for all that you leave them behind you,
To know the universe itself as a road, as many roads, as roads for traveling souls.

All parts away for the progress of souls,
All religion, all solid things, arts, governments—all that was or is apparent upon this globe or any globe, falls into niches and corners before the procession of souls along the grand roads of the universe.

Of the progress of the souls of men and women along the grand roads of the universe, all other progress is the needed emblem and sustenance.

Forever alive, forever forward,
Stately, solemn, sad, withdrawn, baffled, mad, turbulent, feeble, dissatisfied,
Desperate, proud, fond, sick, accepted by men, rejected by men,
They go! they go! I know that they go, but I know not where they go,
But I know that they go toward the best—toward something great.

Whoever you are, come forth! or man or woman come forth!
You must not stay sleeping and dallying there in the house, though you built it, or though it has been built for you.

Out of the dark confinement! out from behind the screen!
It is useless to protest, I know all and expose it.

Behold through you as bad as the rest,
Through the laughter, dancing, dining, supping, of people,
Inside of dresses and ornaments, inside of those wash’d and trimm’d faces,
Behold a secret silent loathing and despair.

No husband, no wife, no friend, trusted to hear the confession,
Another self, a duplicate of every one, skulking and hiding it goes,
Formless and wordless through the streets of the cities, polite and bland in the parlors,
In the cars of railroads, in steamboats, in the public assembly,
Home to the houses of men and women, at the table, in the bedroom, everywhere,
Smartly attired, countenance smiling, form upright, death under the breast-bones, hell under the skull-bones,
Under the broadcloth and gloves, under the ribbons and artificial flowers,
Keeping fair with the customs, speaking not a syllable of itself,
Speaking of any thing else but never of itself.

14
Allons! through struggles and wars!
The goal that was named cannot be countermanded.

Have the past struggles succeeded?
What has succeeded? yourself? your nation? Nature?
Now understand me well—it is provided in the essence of things that from any fruition of success, no matter what, shall come forth something to make a greater struggle necessary.

My call is the call of battle, I nourish active rebellion,
He going with me must go well arm’d,
He going with me goes often with spare diet, poverty, angry enemies, desertions.

15
Allons! the road is before us!
It is safe—I have tried it—my own feet have tried it well—be not detain’d!

Let the paper remain on the desk unwritten, and the book on the shelf unopen’d!
Let the tools remain in the workshop! let the money remain unearn’d!
Let the school stand! mind not the cry of the teacher!
Let the preacher preach in his pulpit! let the lawyer plead in the court, and the judge expound the law.

Camerado, I give you my hand!
I give you my love more precious than money,
I give you myself before preaching or law;
Will you give me yourself? will you come travel with me?
Shall we stick by each other as long as we live?

This has been a tumultuous time in my life.  In the last year, I lost my dad and my sister.  I have left a job I loved and a place I loved, Wilmot, NH. I have moved to Anchorage Alaska to accept a new job as an administrative law judge for the Social Security Administration. My wife Debra Reis and I are temporarily living apart as we navigate this transition. There are many loose ends.

With so many changes, i wanted to write something that expressed my love for my wife. I have long held onto and admired the below poem by Wendell Berry.  it is a poem that I have carried with me for a long time. It says things better than I can.

Ripening     by Wendell Berry

The longer we are together
the larger death grows around us.
How many we know by now
who are dead!  We, who were young,
now count the cost of having been.
And yet as we know the dead
we grow familiar with the world.
We, who were young and loved each other
ignorantly, now come to know
each other in love, married
by what we have done, as much
as by what we intend.  Our hair
turns white with our ripening
as though to fly away in some
coming wind, bearing the seed
of what we know. It was bitter to learn
that we come to death as we come
to love, bitter to face
the just and solving welcome
that death prepares. But that is bitter
only to the ignorant, who pray
it will not happen. Having come
the bitter way to better prayer, we have
the sweetness of ripening. How sweet
to know you by the signs of this world!

I wanted to put up the eulogy I gave for my dad at his memorial service which was held almost a year ago. It will be a year on June 7.

Today I want to offer some words of praise for my Dad.  To me, he was a larger than life figure.  He was a mainstay of love, support and devotion to family.  Even now, his passing comes as a shock because of his presence, his resilience, his energy and his never-say-die spirit.  He was a force.
    He overcame so much in his life.  He had more than his share of ups and downs.  He knew tragedy, but what I find compelling was his unwavering optimism.  In the face of adversities that were crushing, he found a way to remain positive.  As one e-mail we received from a business associate put it, he was the kind of businessman you don’t find these days, one full of passion and integrity.
    My Dad was a totally passionate man.  He had so many life enthusiasms.  I remember very competitive golf, tennis, ping pong, pool, horseback riding, fishing on his boat, Any Old Rags, learning to fly a plane and body surfing and the seashore.
    He took me to Eagles and Phillies games for virtually my whole life.  He taught me an appreciation for sports and a love of athleticism.  When I was 10 or so, he took my friend, Hank Fried and me to Phillies Spring Training in Clearwater, Florida.  We got autographs of Robin Roberts, Richie Ashburn and Curt Simmons.  That was pretty cool for a kid.
    We listened to Stan Hochman talking Philly sports on the radio on the way to school in the morning.  Later, it was sharing Bill Lyon columns from the Inquirer.  Whether it was Richie Allen, Randall Cunningham, T.O. or Donovan McNabb, he loved talking sports, always hoping for that Eagles Super Bowl win that has never happened and that Phillies World Series victory that did.
    As probably some of you know, my Dad and I still talked about 20 times on the phone during every Eagles game.  He would call me in NH and keep me on the phone literally doing play by play.  I loved my Dad’s enthusiasm for the play and players.  Those memories are precious to me.
    I think of my Dad’s passion in other contexts as well.  When my brother Rich died, my Dad felt it so much.  He talked of Rich frequently and how Rich got cheated out of life.  It always bothered the hell out of him.  It was his wish to be buried next to my brother.
    When his dad, Phil, my Pop-Pop died, he went to a minyan at Adath Israel every morning for a year to honor him.  He had tremendous feeling for his own dad.  He always told a story about how he took cream to the prison for his dad when he was incarcerated.  Dad paid off the prison guard to make sure cream got to Pop-Pop for his coffee.
    My Dad completely supported his parents financially for many years.  He did this selflessly and generously.  Generosity was one of his signature characteristics.  He gave even when he could not afford to give.  He paid for private school, college and part of law school.  When I graduated law school in 1985, he drove up a new Honda Civic that he gave me as a graduation present.  When Debra and I bought our house in Wilmot, NH in 1989, he and my mom gave us the downpayment.  We could not have closed on the house otherwise.  He pretty much let me off the hook when I cracked up his fiberglass body Corvette Sting Ray in 1967.  It was crazy how much he gave.  No one knows.
    My Dad was also passionate about my Mom.  He was very proud of my Mom and would lavish praise on her whether it was her superb cooking or her 24/7 care-taking of him.  He would often say that he did not know how she had put up with him for so many years and, in truth, he was not an easy man to oppose.
    He and I had our conflicts.  I remember one blow out argument in a restaurant in South Jersey.  Dad was doing business in Chile.  It was after Gen. Pinochet and the Chilean fascists overthrew Salvador Allende.  We were center stage arguing about the Chilean revolution.  Another time around 1971, dad was upset about sleeping arrangements at our house on Melrose Road when I had a girlfriend over.  His face was beet red and the vein in his forehead was bulging out.  I called him sexually repressed.  I put him through a lot in a 1960s kind of way.
    Still, I feel very fortunate that we were able to work through early conflicts.  We had a chance to reconcile.  My own life experience has given me a much deeper appreciation of how lucky I was to have a Dad like him.
    He took incredible pride in the accomplishments of his children.  So much so that it went completely over the top.  He would tell every Tom, Dick and Harry about his Jonny, Lisa and Rob.  That was cringe time.
    I can safely say that I will never in this lifetime have a booster or fan who compares to my Dad.  No one will ever be that loving, vocal or complimentary.  Dad carried on this quality with grandkids as well.  He bubbled over.
    He always kissed me fully on the lips my whole life.  There is only one other guy I know who does that – my NH friend Steve Cherry.  It leads me to think there are 2 types of people.  The full lip kissers and the people who give cheek.  He was a full lip kisser.  I believe it perfectly reflected his passionate embrace of life and living.
    I miss him.  I used to call him everyday.  I tangibly feel his absence.  I feel pride in the man he was – a man’s man.  I was blessed to have a Dad like him.

When I think of judges in my lifetime who have been truly great, the names that immediately come to mind are Thurgood Marshall, William Brennan, and William O. Douglas. Out of my own lack of awareness, I do not think of judges from outside the United States.
 
One name that does come to mind though is Judge Baltasar Garzon. Judge Garzon has been Spain’s chief criminal magistrate. In his role, Judge Garzon has been bold and fearless. He has defined the term heroic.
 
While he has gone after other big fish, the prosecution that has taken the cake was his pursuit of Gen. Augusto Pinochet, the Chilean dictator. Garzon sought Pinochet’s extradition to Spain to face criminal charges for violating international laws between 1973 and 1990.
 
Pinochet and his military overthrew the democratically elected government of Salvador Allende on September 11,1973. Thousands of Allende’s supporters were murdered, disappeared, imprisoned, tortured and driven into exile. This crime against humanity never faced criminal prosecution until Garzon’s actions in 1998.
 
On October 16,1998, Garzon had Pinochet arrested when Pinochet was in London recuperating from surgery. Pinochet claimed immunity from the jurisdiction of the English courts on the grounds that he was the head of the State of Chile when the alleged crimes were committed.
 
Remarkably, on November 25,1998, in its first judgment on the Pinochet case, the British House of Lords ruled that under international law the former head of state, Pinochet, could not claim immunity from the jurisdiction of the courts of another country to avoid facing charges that he had committed the international crime of torture. The House of Lords decision was based on the 1984 Convention Against Torture.
 
This was a landmark decision. The Convention Against Torture required states to prosecute or extradite any alleged torturer or anybody who had been complicit in torture. Ironically, in 1988, shortly before he left power, Pinochet personally decided that Chile should ratify the Convention Against Torture.
 
Garzon’s actions in 1998 were part of a broader effort by prosecutors in Spain, France, Belgium, and Switzerland. All those countries made extradition requests on Pinochet. During Pinochet’s rule, more than 3,000 people were murdered or disappeared. More than 1500 of the disappeared have never been accounted for.
 
We now know that Pinochet spearheaded a military operation known as Operation Condor. Operation Condor brought together military leaders from Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Paraguay, and Uraguay. Later Brazil joined. Operation Condor was essentially an international death squad dedicated to the elimination of perceived enemies all over the world.
 
Among the most famous victims of Operation Condor were Orlando Letelier, the former Chilean Ambassador to the United Nations. He and his colleague Ronni Moffitt were murdered by a car bomb in Washington DC in 1976.
 
The previous head of Chile’s scret police, the DINA, Colonel Manuel Contreras Sepulveda confirmed Pinochet’s connections to the murder, torture and disappearances in Chile. In May 2005, while in prison, he explained that he reported directly to Pinochet without any intermediary.
 
The history of the Pinochet case is quite fascinating. Within a week of its first decision, the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords set aside the landmark judgment because it concluded one judge assigned should not have sat on the case. There was a rehearing. The second judgment was even more amazing than the first. The Lords concluded that the Torture Convention provided a universal jurisdiction to pursue torturers.
 
Still, after this second judgment, Pinochet was able to escape punishment. The British government terminated extradition proceeedings and after 16 months, Pinochet escaped back to Chile. Pinochet had used his deteriorating health and his advanced age as a way out.
 
Garzon deserves tremendous credit for the pursuit of a monster like Pinochet. No one else had the guts to go after Pinochet. Garzon did. In the process, The Pinochet case created a precedent which, at the least, has added a level of fear and insecurity for government torturers and their accomplices. Maybe that will make some think twice about torturing.
 
I would also like to point out that the full role of the United States in Operation Condor has never been clarified. We know that the U.S. was involved in the coup against Allende. Five days after the coup, Henry Kissinger told President Nixon “we helped them”. The dimensions of that help deserve full exposure.
 
Garzon now faces troubles of his own. In 2008, Garzon initiated an investigation into the crimes against humanity committed by the fascist forces led by Gen Franco during the Spanish Civil War of 1936-1939. In a blatantly political effort led by fascists and their allies, Garzon was accused of exceeding his authority for opening the investigation. Garzon has been suspended as a magistrate. The suspension could last 20 years, effectively ending his legal career.
 
The Right accused Garzon of the crime of judicial prevarication. Because of a 1977 amnesty law, his enemies claim Garzon has no jurisdiction to investigate Spanish Civil War crimes. Again at issue is universal jurisdiction and whether crimes against humanity can be amnestied or subject to a statute of limitations.
 
So is the crime the disappearances or the investigation?
 
I will include an open letter to the Spanish judiciary regarding Garzon signed by lawyers, jurists, intellectuals, and artists. Thousands of people in Spain have been demonstrating in support of Garzon. Anti-fascist Americans have a stake in this case too.

…………….

Open Letter to Spanish Judiciary Authorities in Solidarity with Justice Baltasar Garzón

Judges of the Supreme Court, Criminal chamber

General Prosecutor of the State Cándido Conde-Pumpido Tourón

As jurists, lawyers, judges, academics and human rights defenders of different nationalities signing below, we are writing to you in order to express our perplexity regarding the decision on 3 February 2010 of the Investigative Judge of the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court in the special case Nº: 20048/2009. The judge decided to continue the judicial investigation against Justice Baltasar Garzón, allegedly responsible of the offence of judicial prevarication [1].
The criminal complaint was filed against Justice Garzón for trying to fulfill the obligation of the Spanish State to investigate crimes against humanity committed during Franco’s dictatorship, in particular enforced disappearances. He is allegedly responsible of disregarding the 1977 Amnesty Law, of violating the principle of non retroactivity of criminal law and the principle of legality and prescription of criminal action.

On 31 October 2008, the United Nations Human Rights Committee has expressed its concerns about the existing obstacles that Spanish victims have been fighting against in order to obtain truth, justice and reparation. The Committee has also called Spanish authorities to take the necessary measures to nullify the 1977 Amnesty Law and to guarantee the imperceptibility of crimes against humanity. Moreover, the Committee has asked the Government to create an independent commission to determine the historic truth about human right violations which took place during the Civil War and Franco’s regime, and that will guarantee the localisation, exhumation and identification of the victims’ remains, and its restitution to their families.

The so-called law “of Historical Memory” of 2007 has not taken into account the appropriate and sufficient measures in favor of victims. Contrary to what the investigative judge has stated in the decision against Garzón, the above mentioned law allows him to act in favor of the victims, for example by requesting the exhumation of the remains. Indeed the law establishes that it is “compatible with the exercise of the right to remedy and access to ordinary and extraordinary judicial proceedings, as established in national law or in international treaties and conventions ratified by Spain”.

Enforced disappearances are among the gravest crimes which cannot be prescribed nor be granted with amnesty without attempting against international law, which is part of the Spanish judicial system.

The crime of illegal detention, without giving information of the detainee’s location, or the crime of enforced disappearances, are crimes of continuous nature, that are ongoing until it is known what happened to the victims; that is why these crimes cannot be object of criminal prescription. When these disappearances have been committed in a systematic, massive and generalized manner, as it occurred during the Civil War and Franco’s dictatorship, they are considered as crimes against humanity and hence cannot be subject amnesty nor pardon. For this type of crimes, the principle of non-retroactivity in criminal law cannot apply since the prohibition of such crimes already existed under international customary law (jus cogens) at the time of the facts and, the principle of legality, is formed by national provisions and international human rights law.

The investigative judge adds against Justice Garzón: “Of course, altruist motives, as the laudable wish of palliating the pain of the family of victims of horrendous crimes, do not exonerate, or even attenuate, the possible criminal responsibility of [judge Garzón]”.

Justice Garzón certainly acts within his obligation towards justice and human rights. Altruism can be part of his personal convictions, but what is at stake here is the obligation of the State of Spain to respect the rights of victims of Franco’s dictatorship as well as to fulfill its international obligations as regards human rights.

The investigative judge reproaches Justice Garzón for not having considered the denounced facts as related to political crime and for disregarding the application of the 1977 Amnesty Law. Nevertheless, the same law states in its article 1 that it is not applicable concerning facts that presuppose “grave violence against the life or personal integrity of several persons”.

The International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, ratified by Spain on 24 September 2009, states in its article 13 that “the offence of enforced disappearance shall not be regarded as a political offence or as an offence connected with a political offence or as an offence inspired by political motives”.

In its article 24, the Convention considers as a ’victim’ “the disappeared person and any individual who has suffered harm as the direct result of an enforced disappearance” and states that “each victim has the right to know the truth regarding the circumstances of the enforced disappearance, the progress and results of the investigation and the fate of the disappeared person”. Finally it reiterates the obligation of each State Party to take “all appropriate measures to search for, locate and release disappeared persons and, in the event of death, to locate, respect and return their remains”.

We therefore express to you, dear judges, our perplexity in relation to the use of the offence of judicial prevarication against Justice Baltasar Garzón. Indeed, a judicial officer has always some scope for discretion in the implementation of law. If he does so in order to fulfill the State’s human rights obligations, his acts cannot be considered as irrational or contrary to law, otherwise damaging the basic principles of the administration of criminal justice concerning the investigation, prosecution, reparation and prevention of all types of crimes, in particular crimes of international character, as in the present case.

We would also like to express our recognition of Justice Baltasar Garzón’s work in favour of victims’ rights to truth, justice and reparation, not only in Spain but beyond Spanish borders. He became thereby a very important defender and promoter of international criminal law in the past years, enjoying now a well-earned worldwide recognition.

We hope that you can reverse Francisco Quevedo’s maxim “where there is little justice, it is dangerous to be right”, and contribute to have in Spain a lot of justice and a lot of reason, allowing the rights of victims and their families to be fully respected. We also call you to support judges like Baltasar Garzón, in their actions that enable Spain to fulfill its obligations under international human rights law, and that contribute to the well being of Spanish people but also of the humanity as a whole.

Respectfully yours.

SIGNATORY ORGANISATIONS

Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos de España (APDHE) – ESPAÑA
Comisión Española de Ayuda al Refugiado (CEAR) – ESPAÑA
Institut de Drets Humans de Catalunya (IDHC) – ESPAÑA
Instituto de Estudios Políticos para América Latina y África (IEPALA) – ESPAÑA
Justicia y Paz – ESPAÑA
Liga Española Pro Derechos Humanos – ESPAÑA
Movimiento por la Paz, el Desarme y la Libertad (MPDL) – ESPAÑA
Paz y Cooperación – ESPAÑA
Mundubat – ESPAÑA
UNESCO Etxea – ESPAÑA
ATTAC – ESPAÑA
Comunal Laurita Allende en España de PSCh – ESPAÑA
Asociación para las Naciones Unidas en España (ANUE) – ESPAÑA
Asociación para la Defensa de la Libertad Religiosa (ADLR) – ESPAÑA
Plataforma de Mujeres Artistas contra la Violencia de Género – ESPAÑA
Coordinadora Estatal de Asociaciones Solidarias con el Sáhara (CEAS-Sáhara)
Asociacion Española para el Derecho Internacional de los Derechos Humanos (AEDIDH) – ESPAÑA
Asociación por los Derechos Humanos en Afganistán (ASDHA) – ESPAÑA
IPES Elkartea. Instituto de Estudios Sociales, Navarra – ESPAÑA
Voluntarios Comunidad Parroquial Santo Domingo de la Calzada. Cañada Real. Madrid. – ESPAÑA
Center For Constitutional Rights – USA
Lawyer’s Rights Watch Canada (LRWC) – CANADA
Syndicat de la Magistrature Français – FRANCIA
Conférence du Barreau de Paris – FRANCIA
Grupo Belga por la Justicia y la Paz en Guatemala – BÉLGICA
Unione Forense per la Tutela dei Diritti dell’Uomo (UFTDU) – ITALIA
Asociación Servicios de Promoción Laboral (ASEPROLA) – COSTA RICA
Ligue Djiboutienne des Droits Humains (LDDH) – DJIBOUTI
Asociación Por Derechos Humanos (APRODEH) – PERÚ
Asamblea Permanente por los Derechos Humanos (APDH) – ARGENTINA
Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS) – ARGENTINA
Centro para la Acción Legal en Derechos Humanos (CALDH) – GUATEMALA
Comisión de Derechos Humanos de Guatemala (CDHG) – GUATEMALA
Comisión Ecuménica de Derechos Humanos (CEDHU) – ECUADOR
Frente Ecuatoriano de Derechos Humanos (FEDHU) – ECUADOR
Comisión de Derechos Humanos de El Salvador (CDHES) – EL SALVADOR
Centro de Derechos y Desarrollo – (CEDAL) – PERÚ
Coordinadora Nacional de Derechos Humanos (CNDDHH) – PERÚ
Centro de Políticas Públicas y Derechos Humanos – Perú EQUIDAD – PERU
Coalición Salvadoreña para la Corte Penal Internacional (CSCPI) – EL SALVADOR
Corporación Colectivo de Abogados “José Alvear Restrepo” (CCAJAR) – COLOMBIA
Instituto Latinoamericano de Servicios Legales Alternativos (ILSA) – COLOMBIA
Comité Permanente por la Defensa de Derechos Humanos (CPDH) – COLOMBIA
Organización Femenina Popular – COLOMBIA
Organización Mundial contra la Tortura (OMCT)
Frente Nacional de Resistencia Popular – HONDURAS
Bloque Popular Honduras – HONDURAS
Fundación Regional de Asesoría en Derechos Humanos (INREDH) – ECUADOR
Comité de Acción Jurídica (CAJ) – ARGENTINA
Centro Nicaragüense de Derechos Humanos (CENIDH) – NICARAGUA
Centro de Iniciativas Democráticas (CIDEM) – PANAMÁ
FIAN Internacional
Federación Internacional de Derechos Humanos (FIDH)
Associació per a la recuperació de la memòria històrica de Catalunya (ARMHC)
Fédération euroméditérannéenne contre les disparitions forcées (FEMED)
Collectif des Familles de Disparu(e)s en Algérie (CFDA)

INDIVIDUAL SIGNATURES

Louis Joinet, ex magistrado de la corte de casación francesa y ex relator especial de la ONU para Haití y en la lucha contra la impunidad.
Carla del Ponte, actual embajadora de Suiza en Argentina.
Roberto Garretón Merino, abogado chileno, ex-relator especial y experto de la ONU, y miembro de la Asemblea General de la OMCT.
Luis Acebal Monfort, Vicepresidente Asociación Pro DD HH1 de España (APDHE).
Roberto Saviano. Escritor. Autor de Gomorra.
Inma Chacón, Escritora y Profesora de la Universidad Rey Juan Carlos de Madrid
Javier Mujica. Defensor de Derechos Humanos.
Mario Lana. Presidente Liga Italiana. ITALIA.
Rosa María Ayala Sancha. Defensora DD HH
Carlos Ballesteros García, Profesor Universidad Pontificia Comillas
Ana Barrero Tiscar, Fundación Cultura de Paz
Lionel Baudet Labbé, Presidente Comunal Laurita Allende en España
Andrew Buchan, Lawyer
Eric Alt, delegado del Syndicat de la magistrature à MEDEL (Magistrats européens pour la démocratie et les libertés) FRANCIA
Jorge Auat fiscal a cargo de la Unidad Fiscal de Coordinación y Seguimiento de las causas por violaciones a los Derechos Humanos cometidas durante el terrorismo de Estado (Procuración General de la Nación -ARGENTINA-).
Pablo Parenti, coordinador de la Unidad Fiscal de Coordinación y Seguimiento de las causas por violaciones a los Derechos Humanos cometidas durante el terrorismo de Estado (Procuración General de la Nación -ARGENTINA-).
Amelia M. Bayón Gimeno, APDHE
Mikel Berraondo López. Instituto de DD HH, Universidad de Deusto
Javier Blanco Belda. Defensor DD HH
Raquel Colera Cañas. Defensora DD HH
M. Isabel Córdoba Montaña, Defensora DD HH
Ana Mª Cañas Cortázar. Defensora DD HH
Paco Cascón Soriano. Educador, Defensor de DD HH
Raquel Colera Cañas. Defensora DD HH
Javier Chinchón Álvarez. Profesor de Derecho Internacional y Relaciones Internacionales
Paloma Cruz López. Defensora de DD HH
Bernardo Diaz Salina. Defensor DD HH
Julia Jaraiz. Defensora DD HH
Ana Etxenique. Vicepresidenta Confederación de Consumidores y Usuarios
Celia Fernández Aller. Profesora Derecho, Univ. Politécnica Madrid
José Miguel Fernández López. Defensor DD HH
Paula Fernández Martínez. Defensora DD HH
Ana María Flores Barraza. Directiva APDHE
José Antonio Gimbernat Ordeig, Presidente Federación de Asociaciones de Derechos Humanos – España
Katya Ruiz Jodrá, Defensora DD HH
Bienvenida Goikoechea Aldaz. Defensora DD HH
María Isabel Guijarro Atienza, Defensora DD HH
Mª Pilar Hernández Vázquez. Abogada. Defensora DD HH
Calo Iglesias. Educador para la Paz. Santiago de Compostela
Marisol Iturralde Roger. Directiva APDHE
Augusto Klappenbach Minotti. Ex-Rector Universidad. Argentina
Manuel León Rodríguez, Fundación Socialdemócratas
Pedro López López. Profesor Universidad Complutense.
Antonio López Pina. Catedrático de Derecho Constitucional. Universidad Complutense
Concepción Marino Canosa, Defensora DD HH
Fernando Mariño Menéndez, Director Instituto de Derecho Internacional, Universidad Carlos III, Madrid
María José Martín Antón. Defensora DD HH
Concepcion Martin Rey. Defensora DD HH
Asier Martinez de Bringas. Profesor de Derecho. Constitucional, Barcelona
Federico Mayor Zaragoza, Presidente, Fundación Cultura de Paz
Manuela Mesa Peinado. Directora de CEIPAZ-Fundación Cultura de Paz
Alicia Moreno Pérez. Abogada del Ilustre Colegio de Abogados de Madrid
Adriana Moscoso del Prado Hernández. Directiva APDHE
María Novo Villaverde. Catedrática de la Universidad Nacional a Distancia. Madrid
Carmen Oliart Delgado de Torres, Defensora de DD HH
Manuel Ollé Sesé. Abogado. Presidente APDHE
Rosa Orta Álvarez. Defensora DD HH
Annarita Palumu. Defensora DD HH
Cristina Pascual Álvaro. Defensora DD HH
Francisco José Pascual Díez. Profesor. Defensor DDHH
Fernando Pedrós Pérez. Defensor DD HH
Justo Pérez Corral. Defensor DD HH
Lilian Ana Pertovt, Defensora DD HH
Oscar Peyrou. Defensor DD HH
Annegret Pietsch. Defensora DD HH
José Luis Pitarch Bartolomé. Directiva APDHE. Profesor de Derecho Constitucional, Univ. de Valencia.
Isabel Pizarro Ponce de la Torre. Defensora DD HH
Higinio Polo. Profesor y escritor. Barcelona.
Martin PRADEL, Abogado y Ancien secrétaire de la Conférence du Barreau de Paris – FRANCIA
Jorge Riechmann, Profesor de Filosofía Moral. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
Miguel Ángel Rodríguez Arias, Profesor de Derecho Penal Internacional, Universidad de Castilla La Mancha.
Carlos Ruiz. ATTAC España
Mari Carmen Sánchez Hernández. Defensora DD HH
Mari Carmen Sánchez Sánchez. Defensora DD HH
Santiago Sanz Álvarez. Directiva APDHE
Elias Sanz Casado. Defensor DD HH
Silvia Schmitz Engelke, Defensora DD HH
Patricia Simón Carrasco. Defensora DD HH
Teresa Torres, Defensora DD HH
Silvia Tubert, Defensora DD HH
Lydia Vicente, Abogada, Defensora de los DD HH
Andrés Viñas Orta. Defensor DD HH
María Jesús Fernández Alonso. Defensora DD HH
Crisanta Rey Ordás. Defensora DD HH
Maximino Rey Rey. Defensor DD HH
Paloma Maldonado. Psicóloga.
Jonathan Contreras. Jurista.
José Ugaz Sánchez-Moreno.Penalista. Procurador anticorrupción y profesor de derecho.
Dr. Francisco Ercilio Moura. responsable del Programa de Derechos Centro de Derechos y Desarrollo – CEDAL.
Eduardo A. Coello. Politólogo – HONDURAS
Erasto Reyes Abogado, miembro del Bloque Popular-FNRP-Honduras – HONDURAS
Lorena Zelaya. Resistencia Honduras – HONDURAS
Mario Eduardo Minera Monzón – GUATEMALA
Jime Nani Mosquera. Infostelle – PERÚ
Walter Schweninger. Vocero del Grupo de Trabajo Internacional y Paz de los Verdes de Alemania.
Juan Antonio Gimbernat. Presidente de la Federación de Asociaciones de Defensa y Promoción de los Derechos Humanos-España
Rachel LINDON Abogada y Ancien Secrétaire de la Conférence – FRANCIA
Delphine JAAFAR. Abogada y Ancien Secrétaire de la Conférence du Barreau de Paris – FRANCIA
Francisco Torres Pérez. Sociólogo y profesor del Departamento de Sociología y Antropología Social de la Universidad de Valencia.
Prof. José García Añón. Vicedecano de innovación educativa y calidad y Coordinador de la Facultad de Derecho para la Convergencia al Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior. Universidad de Valencia.
Susana E. Vior. Docente investigadora Universidad Nacional de Luján Argentina
Fouad Lahssaini. Député fédéral. Groupe Ecolo-Goen! Bélgica
Oscar Castellucci. Docente universitario. Presidente de la Asociación Civil Martín Castellucci.
María Adela Antokoletz. Docente. Hermana de Daniel, detenido desaparecido en la ESMA el 10/11/1976.
Jose Antonio García Saez. Defensor DD HH
Manuel Lambert. Conseiller juridique de la Ligue des Droits de l’Homme (Belgique), Président de la Coordination des ONG pour les droits de l’enfant (Belgique) et assistant en droit à l’Université libre de Bruxelles.
Catherine Absalom. Miembro de la FIDH. Defensora DD HH.
Jimena Reyes. Abogada. Defensora DD HH.
Lola Borges Blázquez. Jurista y traductora. Defensora DD HH
Maria Ximena Cañón Dorado. Abogada colombiana. Defensora DD HH
María Roca. Politóloga. Defensora DD HH.
Jaume Gosalbez. Periodista. Defensor DD HH.
Vanesa Vacas. Socióloga. Defensora DD HH.
Luis Guillermo Pérez. Secretario General FIDH y Secretario ejecutivo de CIFCA.
Benjamin Deman Abogado. BÉLGICA
Guyot Madeleine. Defensora DD HH. BÉLGICA
Sharon Weill, Phd Candidate in international law, University of Geneva. SUIZA.
Jules Fafchamps. Sindicalista. BÉLGICA.
Florence Paul. Defensor DD HH.
Liliane Cordova. Defensora DD HH. FRANCIA
Florent Schaeffer. Defensor DD HH. Paris.
Nicole Kahn Lyon. Defensora de los derechos humanos y miembro de la unión judía francesa por la paz que milita por los derechos de los palestinos. FRANCIA.
Kristiina Vainio. M. Pol. Sc. (international law). FINLANDIA
Professor Marian Hobson CBE. Fellow of the British Academy. Cambridge.
Dr. Anat Matar. The Dept. of Philosophy. Tel Aviv University. Tel Aviv 69978. Israel
Enrique Santiago Romero. Abogado.
Ruth Kñallinsky Dra. Dpto. Incidencia y Comunicación Fundación CEAR –Habitáfrica.
Alice Cherki Psiquiatra y Psiconalalista. FRANCIA
Juan Carlos Capurro. Presidente del CAJ y viceporesidente de la FIDH.
AdAr Grayevsky. Defensor DD HH.
Judith Butler. Professor. University of California, Berkeley
Prof. François Lecercle. University of Paris-Sorbonne, Paris IV
Rela Mazali. Defensora DD HH. Israel
Kerstin Reemtsma. Defensora DD HH.
Yuval Yonay. Senior Lecturer. Department of Sociology and Anthropology University of Haifa. ISRAEL
Jaime San De Bremond. Abogado de DD HH
Jean-Michel Frodon. Ecrivain, professeur, critique, ancien directeur des Cahiers du cinéma.
Gustavo Gómez. Abogado del Ilustre Colegio de Abogados de Barcelona. Defensor DD HH
Mauricio Forero. Profesor de Derechos Humanos. Mission de Derechos Humanos en Haiti-MICIVIH
Tom Koenigs, Chairman of the Committee on Human Rights and Humanitarian Aid of the German Bundestag
Footnotes
[1] Article 446 of the Spanish penal code says: “the judge or magistrate who, intentionally, pronounces a ruling or emits a judgment that is not fair will be sanctioned: … 3. by a fine of twelve to twenty-four months and special disqualification from public employment for a period of between ten and twenty years” .

May 1, May Day, is the International Workers Day. It is a day to celebrate working people and the social and economic achievements of the labor movement. As is pretty obvious, in America we celebrate big shots and celebrities who generally don’t deserve it. The hard working people do not get recognition or rewards.
 
Many people might associate May Day with old Red Square parades and official celebrations in places like North Korea. That is unfortunate. While such a perception is not surprising, May Day actually originated in the U.S.
 
May Day came out of the 19th century American movement for an eight hour working day. Working conditions were terrible and it was common for workers to be made to work 10 to 16 hours daily in unsafe conditions.
 
In 1886, American workers decided that May 1 should be the day of universal work stoppage. 200,000 American workers left their jobs and demanded the eight hour day. That year, the Haymarket Riot/Massacre in Chicago also took place. A number of workers and police died in the melee after an anarchist allegedly threw a bomb into a crowd.
 
Eight anarchists were arrested and convicted of murder although a number of the arrested were not even at Haymarket when the bomb went off. In what was the first American Red Scare, four of the arrested, Albert Parsons, August Spies, George Engel, and Adolf Fischer, were executed by the State in 1887.
 
Haymarket proved to be a big impetus to the international celebration of May Day. However, back at home, the American origin of May Day has been disappeared.
 
May Day is an official holiday in 66 countries and it is unofficially celebrated in many more. I think it is fair to say that it is rarely celebrated in the U.S. In 1958, Congress designated May 1 as Loyalty Day. There was a conscious political effort to erase May Day as a workers holiday and to obliterate international working class solidarity.
 
Part of that effort was the creation of Labor Day in September. Our Labor Day is not celebrated outside the U.S. It is an apolitical excuse for a three day weekend. It is a pale shadow of May Day.
 
I think a fitting way to celebrate May Day is to recognize one of the greatest American poets of the people – Langston Hughes. Hughes had an enormous body of work, including many political poems. I think his poetry, more than any other American poet, has embodied the aspirations of the American people for a better life. In honor of May Day, here are two of my favorite Langston Hughes’ poems:
 
 
Dreams 
 
Hold fast to dreams
For if dreams die
Life is a broken-winged bird
That cannot fly.
 
Hold fast to dreams
For when dreams go
Life is a barren field
frozen with snow.
 
 
 
Life is Fine
 
I went down to the river,
I sat down on the bank,
I tried to think but couldn’t,
So I jumped in and sank.
 
I came up once and hollered!
I came up twice and cried!
If that water hadn’t a-been so cold
I might’ve sunk and died.
 
     But it was
     Cold in that water!
     It was cold!
 
I took the elevator
Sixteen floors above the ground.
I thought about my baby
And thought I would jump down.
 
I stood there and I hollered!
I stood there and I cried!
If it hadn’t a-been so high
I might’ve jumped and died.
 
    But it was
    High up there!
    It was high!
 
So since I’m still here livin’,
I guess I will live on.
I could’ve died for love —
But for livin’ I was born.
 
Though you may hear me holler,
And you may see me cry —
I’ll be dogged, sweet baby,
If you gonna see me die.
 
    Life is fine!
    Fine as wine!
    Life is fine!

May 4 is the first anniversary of my Dad’s death. I miss him terribly and I wish I could talk to him about so many things. I want to reflect back on the man that he was.
 
My Dad was representative of the Greatest Generation. After serving in the army, he returned to Philadelphia in the mid 40’s and he went to work. He started his own textile trading business. With help from no one at the start, he created the business and he made it into a very successful enterprise.
 
Dad traded all over the world. In the 50’s and 60’s, he and my mom frequently travelled to Europe (especially Italy), Japan, and Hong Kong. Dad also went to India, Pakistan, the Middle East, and South America. Long before globalization, my dad and mom were wonderful diplomats and ambassadors for America, going off beaten tracks. They were antidotes to the Ugly American.
 
I remember Dad’s international phone calls in those days. He practically screamed through the house to make sure he was heard on the other end. He and my mom had many friends all over the world. When I was a kid, I remember trading partners frequently staying at our house. I think particularly of Aldo Fantacci, Vitaliano, and Mr. Takahashi. They became more than business partners – they were fast friends.
 
My Dad’s drive, determination, hard work, and international busness savvy caused his business, Baird Associates, to thrive for many years. That was a great and creative accomplishment and it allowed his whole family a very comfortable standard of living.
 
This is remarkable considering that as a young man starting out, he had no advantages. He grew up poor. His dad, Phil, my Pop-Pop, was a sweet guy but he was a negligent father and he had trouble with the law. Pop-Pop had a criminal record for arson and interstate robbery. My Dad faced discrimination because he was the son of an ex-con.
 
From the time he was 12 years old, Dad had to take economic responsibility for his whole family. He worked non-stop. Not only did Dad have the financial responsibilities but he had to be a father figure to his younger brother Carl and his sister Arline.
 
Dad used to tell me about going to prison to see his dad. He brought his dad cream for his coffee which the prison did not provide. To get the cream to his dad, he had to pay off a prison guard.
 
Dad supported both his parents from age 12 on. That never stopped until they passed away. Starting at 12, he gave his paycheck to his mother. He started with a paper route and he worked multiple jobs. He pretty much paid for everything where his parents were concerned. Although I knew my grandparents as loving and devoted to their grandchildren, they gave Dad almost nothing.
 
Dad always regretted his lack of education. He had tremendous respect for learning and education. He never had the opportunity to go to college though. He had to drop out of high school to work. He briefly attended the Philadelphia College of Textiles. I do think part of the reason he sent his children to private school was because he had been shortchanged in his own life and he did not want his children to have his experience. He wanted them to have every advantage he missed out on.
 
Dad’s generosity was a defining characteristic. He gave and gave. For someone with street smarts, he often got taken advantage of. That did not stop his giving. As a child of Don’s, I have to say there was not much he and my mom did not give us.
 
When I was 10, my Dad took me and my friend, Hank Fried, to Phillies spring training in Clearwater, Florida. I remember seeing Richie Ashburn, Robin Roberts, and Curt Simmons. That was huge and it is a memory I cherish.
 
Over the years, Dad, Mom and I went to many Phillies and Eagles games together. In the late 50’s-early 60’s, Dad got Eagles season tickets. Together we saw the Norm Van Brocklin-led Eagles beat the Packers at Franklin Field in 1960. That was the last time the Eagles won a champonship.
 
I remember going to the old Connie Mack Stadium to watch the Phils play the Giants. I am not sure why but I remember Willie McCovey hitting a towering homer near the light tower in right field to beat the Phils in a night game. The memories are wonderful.
 
Dad was a good athlete himself. He loved many sports, especially golf. He belonged to quite a few clubs and he could shoot low to mid 80’s at the height of his game. He also played tennis, fished, and rode horses.
 
He had amazing enthusiasm for life and he was always up for trying new things. Later in life, he took flying lessons and he considered getting his own plane. As a son, it was tremendous to have a dad with such zest.
 
To say Dad was a fan of his wife and kids does not do justice to his passion. He was way over the top but I have to say as his child it was wonderful to have such a strong supporter behind you. No one could have been a bigger fan than Dad. He was so effusive talking about his Dee, Jonny, Lise, and Robs. And then later about his grandchildren.
 
While it is superficial to mention this, my Dad was an extremely handsome man. In early pictures, he and my mom look like movie stars. Women always loved my dad and it is easy to see why.
 
Dad and Mom had a very good marriage. They had almost 60 years together. Dad was loyal and a very strong family man. He made me aware of what a family could be in a good sense.
 
Dad was also very stubborn. He was not easy to disagree with. We had our conflicts but I was fortunate in that we were able to move way beyond the conflicts we had when I was in my 20’s.
 
I would not describe Dad as a religious or spiritual person. He grew up in an orthodox Jewish milieu but he rebelled against that. He knew Yiddish and he had great familiarity with things Jewish but he was never much of a believer.
 
As an adult, he became a reform Jew which fit his world view much better. I remember Dad listening to Jewish radio shows on Sunday where Jewish stars sang songs like “My Yiddishe Mama”. Dad could sing that too. He had real feeling for Jewish culture. I would say he was knowledgeable about the tradition but not comfortable with the religious baggage. He used to tell me religion was a crutch for weak people.
 
I remember Dad snoring during Friday night services at Main Line Reform Temple. He would need an elbow sometimes when the snoring got too loud. He did serve in the temple and I remember Dad making pizza at the temple Purim party.
 
Dad had a thing about the extreme Orthodox. Driving around Lower Merion in his later years (which was the community where he lived and I grew up), Dad watched the now large community of Orthodox Jews who were dressed up in old world long Black coats and widebrim hats. He was intolerant of the Orthodox brand of Judaism.
 
Dad was a modernist and he was thoroughly Americanized. Having had exposure to orthodoxy as a child, he was totally turned off to it. He thought the Orthodox were bad for the Jews.
 
I am glad that Dad did not see my sister Lisa die because I think that would have pushed him over the edge. Dad and Lise had a special bond.
 
Since Dad died I have wanted to praise him and to express my eternal thanks to him. I was very fortunate to have a role model like Don Baird. I will close with two poems.
 
My Father   by Yehuda Amichai
 
The memory of my father is wrapped up in
white paper, like sandwiches taken for a week at work.
 
Just as a magician takes towers and rabbits
out of his hat, he drew love from his small body,
 
and the rivers of his hands
overflowed with good deeds.
 
translated from the Hebrew by Azila Talit Reisenberger
 
 
For Brother, What Are We?    by Thomas Wolfe
 
For brother, what are we?
 
 
We are the sons of our father,
Whose face we have never seen,
We are the sons of our father,
Whose voice we have never heard,
We are the sons of our father,
To whom we have cried for strength and comfort
In our agony,
We are the sons of our father,
Whose life like ours
Was lived in solitude and in the wilderness,
We are the sons of our father,
To whom only can we speak out
The strange, dark burden of our heart and spirit,
We are the sons of our father,
And we shall follow the print of his foot forever.

I was meandering in Tracy Memorial Library in New London and I came across a poetry collection edited by Robert Pinsky and Maggie Dietz. It is titled Poems To Read. I was thumbing through it and I found a poem by Pablo Neruda that was so beautiful, I just wanted to share it. The translation is by W.S. Merwin.
 
Tonight I Can Write
 
Tonight I can write the saddest lines.
 
Write, for example, “The night is starry
and the stars are blue and shiver in the distance.”
 
The night wind revolves in the sky and sings.
 
Tonight I can write the saddest lines.
I loved her, and sometimes she loved me too.
 
Through nights like this one I held her in my arms.
I kissed her again and again under the endless sky.
 
She loved me, sometimes I loved her too.
How could one not have loved her great still eyes.
 
Tonight I can write the saddest lines.
To think that I do not have her. To feel that I have lost her.
 
To hear the immense night, still more immense without her
And the verse falls to the soul like dew to the pasture.
 
What does it matter that my love could not keep her.
The night is starry and she is not with me.
 
This is all. In the distance someone is singing. In the distance.
My soul is not satisfied that it has lost her.
 
My sight tries to find her as though to bring her closer.
My heart looks for her, and she is not with me.
 
The same night whitening the same trees.
We, of that time, are no longer the same.
 
I no longer love her, that’s certain, but how I loved her.
My voice tried to find the wind to touch her hearing.
 
Another’s. She will be another’s. As she was before my kisses.
Her voice, her bright body. Her infinite eyes.
 
I no longer love her, that’s certain, but maybe I love her.
Love is so short, forgetting is so long.
 
Because through nights like this one I held her in my arms.
my soul is not satisfied that it has lost her.
 
Though this be the last pain that she makes me suffer
and these the last verses that I write for her.