In your recent article, “Tongue-tied,” your dismay over the use of free speech cages at the Democratic Convention is quite justified. However, I’d like to point out that these mechanisms to hide dissent from the cameras have been employed to excess throughout Bush-Cheney’s cross-country campaign efforts. A simple search for “free speech zones” at any search engine will turn up hundreds of incidents where peaceful dissent was not just corraled into far-removed protest pens, but was met with arrests for even questioning the use of such pens in our alleged free speech society.

Please do more research to discover how local law enforcement all across the country are arresting opposition voices and explaining their orders are coming from the Secret Service, who in turn deny any knowledge of such activity. Everyone, including the Secret Service, knows these activities are blatant violations of our rights to peaceful protest, but by passing the buck they manage to skirt all responsibility for it.

There is no need to repeal the First Amendment to control public dissent because the administration and Secret Service have perfected their methods to achieve the same results by claiming law enforcement authorities acted on their own, while law enforcement officials claim they were acting on orders from the Secret Service.

Please research this issue to discover how widespread this suppression of the people has become in a post-9/11 world.

In The Fray Contributor

Late July, a rumor spread on my neighborhood’s listserv that a methadone clinic was to replace our local Walgreens. Before the local Alderman could set the rumor straight, a debate ensued, in which the listerv regulars (I tend to just listen in) staked out the full spectrum of emotional and ideological responses to the supposed clinic opening. Though in the end a false alarm, I feel that having to go through the motions of the social responsibility vs. nimby/neighborhood safety debate was a useful exercise for my community. We know ourselves, our fears, and our hopes a little bit better as a result.    

Here’s the message that started the debate…      

Dear Neighbors,

I was told … that the Walgreens on Armitage, near Kedzie, is due to close the end of Sept. and a methodone (sp) center will replace it … We have been trying to ‘lift up’ our neighborhood for awhile and I feel that this is not a good addition.

Over the next two days, my inbox was flooded with responses from neighobors and strangers struggling to come to terms with the idea of a methadone clinic in the community.  

Is there any way we can stop the methodone clinic from coming in to our neighborhood? In 1997, a similar clinic was slated to go into … and my understanding was that the community ‘voted’ it out…

I’m not sure I understand all the concerns here, though I probably share some of them … Methadone is an important way of keeping heroin-addicted people from obtaining their drug in dangerous and sometimes violent ways. I think that most of us see this as preferable to crime … I’ll be sorry if the Walgreen’s on … closes, since I am frequently a customer there, as are many patients to whom I’ve prescribed…

The issue in my opinion, having lived in this community for 12 years, is in bringing in or keeping a potentially harmful element. With Methodone, many believe that is simply trading one addiction for another and the ‘fail’ rate is extraordinarily high. Those addicted to drugs tend to foster and perpetuate crime to support their lifestyles and habits. This isn’t passing judgment but rather identifying time-honored facts. I would much prefer to live in a community that did not invite drug addicts, sex offenders and others similarly situated into my community. Providing them help is a worthwhile community goal but one that perhaps can be better served by spreading out such services throughout the city. Thanks for your thoughts…

I can understand how a methadone clinic encourages drug addicts to be in our neighborhood. I can also see how a methadone clinic encourages the many drug addled people who live in our neighborhood to get clean and therefore not need to break into our homes,cars, or sell their bodies on our corners … I guess what I would like to know before I join onto a campaign of stopping some sort of health care system that I know nothing about is who is managing it? And what is this particular program’s success rate? Just from checking other websites, it seems some programs are more holistic and have much better results than others. Some actually even involve the community. I also understand the need to spread services like this out. But I would like to know if having on[e] in the area would encourage the numerous prostitutes who line up on … to get help? Or what is the proportion of people from outside of our neighborhood who will use this clinic as opposed to the people who live in the neighborhood who will. Personally I don’t know these things and am loathed to make assumptions on complicated social/community issues with out first checking into it … Personally I feel that alcohol abuse is a far more problematic in our community…

Dear Friends,

Here’s the actual fact, and I say this as someone who has owned a home in this neighborhood for 28 years, since 1976. We moved here from Evanston and I believe we were among the first ‘urban pioneers’ on our block. (‘Pioneer’ used with reservation since it has really repugnant overtones, of white Europeans moving westward and displacing Native Americans…) The actual fact is that there are already drug addicts living in the neighborhood, and some of them have been here a very long time. It’s not a question of keeping them out, but rather of addressing the question: how can we best address the needs of all our community residents? I am distressed at the NIMBY-fication of the discussion — not in my back yard — since historically this has been a very diverse neighborhood. We can’t build an island of tranquility in a sea of pain … Those of us who moved here from the suburbs for more of that ‘urban grit’ or because we couldn’t afford the rising cost of East Side neighborhoods need to learn to embrace those things that brought us here in the first place. This is a wonderful, diverse community and I surely want to keep it that way: new homeowners and old retired homeowners and apartment dwellers and junkies and gangbangers and artists and musicians and charismatics and just generally nice people who fall into none of the above categories. I’m not romanticizing the more negative elements: I just want us to deal with what’s here, with who we are, and make that our starting point…

I find it very confusing that many people are both against having ‘drug addicts’ in the neighborhood and also against methodone programs in the neighborhood. That strikes me as similar to saying you don’t want gangs in the neighborhood and also don’t want gang intervention, caps, or undercover police in the neighborhood. Methodone programs and needle exchange programs are proven ways to address the problems of drug addiction and related diseases. Not wanting them in the residential area where the people needing them live is somewhat unrealistic. Are the drug addicts going to take shuttle buses or the CTA out to some suburb for treatment? I understand peoples desire for a safe neighborhood. However, I would like to suggest that when you move into a neighborhood with these existing problems, even though the property values have risen so drastically in such a short period of time, they do not go away over night.  They have been here long before condos started selling for $200k. Addressing the needs of the whole community, those that have been here for many years as well as new members, is a much more positive way to change…

I’m not sure how I feel about this clinic going in. It seems like it might help a lot of people. What I’m concerned about it losing a Walgreen’s for it. Why can’t this clinic go in one of the many vacant buildings in the neighborhood? There are too few businesses on … — why lose another?

Finally in this conversation, a note of sanity. Thank you …

I respectfully disagree with you … While I disagree with some points in a few of the conversation in this overall dialogue, I have found all points not only sane, but highly conducive to communal understanding; to  building a stronger, more vibrant and enlightened community. As … relatively new home owner in Logan Square. I enjoy (thank you) learning more about my community through this important form and would be sorry if people felt that they could not participate for fear of ridicule…

And then the Alderman steps in…

This is a rumor.

Here’s a direct quote as of 7/26/04 from the Director of Real Estate from Walgreen’s:

“We are still planning to keep that store open when Kimball/Fullerton opens in October/November and see if it can continue to do enough business to be profitable. I would think it would remain until at least sometime next year while we evaluate. It will be our operations people that make the final call. Even if we did close it someday, don’t expect a methadone clinic to be our subtenant.”

Thanks,

Benjamin Helphand

My dear friend Mia’s death leads me back to the writing of Charles Johnson: author, philosopher, professor, and humanist.

Johnson offers solace in the form of a bonfire: his words inspire me to stay awake, aware, and involved, even when I have every reason to retreat to my bed and cover myself in blankets for an extended period of time. As if that weren’t enough, he gives the distinct impression that his process of writing is as calm and clear as his finished product.

I picked up his collection of essays, Turning the Wheel, and found connections between creativity, the quest for freedom, identity, and Eastern philosophy. In his preface, Johnson writes:

“…[M]y sense of black life in a predominantly white, very Eurocentric society — a slave state until 1863 — was that our unique destiny as a people, our duty to our predecessors who sacrificed so much and for so long, and our dreams of a life of dignity and happiness for our children were tied inextricably to a profound and lifelong meditation on what it means to be free. Truly free.”

“…As a teenager I wondered, and I wonder still, are we free now? And if so, free to do what? Was our ancestors’ ancient struggle for liberation realized in 1964 with the passage of the Civil Rights Act? Or in ’65 with the Voting Rights Act? Or are the pointed questions of W.E.B. Du Bois in his address ‘Criteria of Negro Art’ — ‘What do we want? What is the thing we are after?’ — even more urgent today, and less easy to answer, than when African-Americans were blatantly denied basic, human rights and treated as pariahs?’”

“…‘There has been progress,’ Johnson quotes Du Bois, ‘and we can see it day by day looking back along blood-filled paths … But when gradually the vista widens and you begin to see the world at your feet and the far horizon, then it is time to know more precisely whither you are going and what you really want.’”

Republicans may have a short memory, but Progressive don’t. Once your party doesn’t tell the truth, it’s easy to defeat them. Some may not think it’s important, but the facts are the facts. NO WMDs means NO re-appointment to President. End of story. Remember Nixon? He brought himself down. Progressives owe Bush a huge debt of gratitude for setting the bar so low. Unless we are nuked off the earth, we can’t possibly do any worse.

In The Fray Contributor

“Just because he’s Israeli and I’m Palestinian, we’re not allowed to be together … And just because we choose to be together, now we have like some kind of curse, not to be around the people that we love: his family, my family.” Abir, a Palestinian woman married to an Israeli, is speaking about an Israeli law that may tear her family — which includes their new two-month-old son — apart.

The Israeli parliament passed the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law on July 31, 2003, and in so doing prohibited family unification for Israelis who are married to Palestinians from the Occupied Territories. The law, which is a temporary measure instituted by the Israeli government as a measure to protect its citizens, has been extended for another six months. The Israeli government views this law as both temporary and necessary; according to the Israeli government, 23 Palestinians living in the Occupied Territories who obtained residency permits during the past three years to live in Israel for the purpose of family unification have been “involved in providing meaningful assistance in hostile activity against state security.”

Amnesty International has condemned the law on the basis that it “institutionalizes a form of racial discrimination based on ethnicity or nationality,” and the UN Committee on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination has asked that Israel repeal the law.

While the law has significant political ramifications, it is the personal impact of the law that is the most heartwrenching. As Murad, Abir’s husband, states: “Here is our home, here is our land, and here is our family and our tribe and my people and my schools and my work. And I see myself here and not in any other place in the world.

Mimi Hanaoka