Link: Wikipedia on Religion in the United States.
(Before reading the post today, please keep in mind that what I write is solely my opinion. It is not my intention to inflame, or aggravate, any person who holds opposing viewpoints. If you have difficulty with the idea of a pluralistic society and freedom of expression for all, then maybe you should stop reading this and go pick up last month's issue of Mother Jones. Cheers.)
I have always been fascinated by the need to portray every U.S. presidential candidate as a "devout church-going Christian". When I was just a boy, I decided (a bit prematurely, it turns out) that as soon as I was an adult, I would quit going to church because it was so "boring". Then I see these guys, fighting tooth and nail to be president, making a show of their absolute thrill of being in church, at least as long as the camera was rolling. I have to give credit where its due: President Barrack Obama doesn't pretend to be a churchgoer. He is our first president to not attend church (except on those annoying important days, like Christmas and Easter). If there is one thing that really pisses me off, its affectation. I don't believe that people should do things just for appearances sake. If Obama doesn't agree or appreciate what is being expressed on the pulpit, then he should just head to a Golf Course somewhere (no reason to waste the day). I do have a bone to pick with the president when it comes to religion, though. As much as I appreciate his candidness today, where was that candor for the past twenty years? The Obamas were regular attendees at the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, and they had the unique opportunity of hearing Reverend Jeremiah Wright speak every Sunday. In fact, Reverend Wright baptized both of Obama's daughters. I'm sure everyone remembers the controversy regarding Reverend Wright and his sermons, which regularly included hateful lectures directed at white people. And we're not referencing just a few sermons. Reverend Wright believes that white people purposely enslave blacks in America, and he considers the USA to be rotten at the core. President Obama claimed that during the almost two decades that he attended Rev. Wright's church, he couldn't recall ever hearing that kind of message. Interestingly enough, others who attended during the same time period, couldn't recall ever NOT hearing that kind of message. So this is my observation: President Obama does not feel the need to attend church regularly now that he's in the oval office. We can assume his daughters will receive whatever religious instruction the Obamas, as parents, believe is appropriate. Obama attended church in Chicago. He doesn't attend anymore, now that he lives in the White House. Let me explain the difference between Chicago and DC.
President Obama is not a closest Muslim, although many Red-Staters chose to believe otherwise. If Obama is a Muslim in hiding, he's in trouble. Remember, Muslims have five obligations that stick around for life. I have yet to see Obama pull out the prayer rug, and say a prayer in the direction of Mecca five times a day (Salat), and I think any diet choices because of Ramadan would have been detected. In fact, I don't believe that Obama is a Christian, either. He might be. Most self-identified Christians no longer attend services on Sunday, so its possible that the Obamas fit into that group. Personally, I don't buy it. If anything, Barrack Obama is religious about his politics. He wants badly to affect change in our society, because he views our country as terribly flawed. He continued to attend Rev. Wright's sermons because the good Rev. Wright wasn't actually preaching about religion. He was demagoguing about social justice and political action. Obama has no problem attending religious events and ceremonies as a speaker, because he can control the message he is delivering. And the line between religion and social justice is fine indeed......if it exists at all.
I have a number of great friends who are Mormon. I also have friends who are Methodists and others who are Lutheran. I recently met an amazing young man named Kevin who I'm convinced will one day be President himself, and Kevin is a regular, church-going Baptist. Just in regular conversation, I learned that each of these Christian denominations are active overseas, working to feed people, build homes and vaccinate children. And I don't believe for one second that their assistance is contingent upon a Baptism Ceremony. I am referring to people who have accepted the truly rewarding obligation of helping others. As a Roman Catholic who has spent a bit of time researching the Holy See, I am aware of the countless outreach efforts that the Catholic Church sponsors. You will find Priests feeding the hungry and treating the wounded in Syria, and you will find Nuns burying the deceased and treating the sick in Ebola-ravaged Sierra Leone. No one has a monopoly on philanthropy. But I find the approach from the U.S. government to be confusing. When George W. Bush was in office, the government went out of its way to assist private charities and aid organizations, regardless of religious affiliation (if any). Bush made it a hallmark of his presidency to encourage young people to return to volunteer work. I'm curious if Peace Corps numbers increased during the Bush years; I'll check and get back to you. In 2015, the Obama Administration continues to encourage people to volunteer resources and time, but anything with a religious tag needs to be avoided. I understand that it can be a slippery slope. If the US government works with one religious charity but choses not to work with another (possibly because it presented fraudulent documents, etc.), then Uncle Sam can be accused of playing "religious favorites". But the avoidance of all things religious goes way beyond charity or the First Amendment. I used to live in DC, and recently I returned to visit a friend. We set aside two days to visit the White House and the Capital Building. In fact, we did the loop; we started at the White House, walked to the Lincoln Memorial, around to the Washington Monument, hopped across 15th Street, up past the Smithsonian and on to the reflecting pool and the Capital Building. I love DC so much and I recommend it for tourists unreservedly. But something has changed about the Capital. Religion has disappeared completely. You won't see a mention anywhere. It was a Sunday, and I couldn't find anyone who appeared to be either on their way, or returning from, church services. I heard no bells ringing, and no historic tours with a religious theme at any of the museums.
I can't say, in good conscience, that religion has become unfashionable. Au Contraire. Its cool to pop into a Hindu Temple and educate yourself a bit, and Buddhism can be fascinating as well. Linguists teaching Arabic are a valuable commodity in DC, as young diplomats at Foggy Bottom and young diplomats in-training at Georgetown University buy up all the Barnes & Noble copies of "The Idiot's Guide to Islam". But Christianity is, like, yesterday's religion: a bit stale, old-fashioned, and boring. Please don't quote me. This is what I assume is going on in the minds of twenty-somethings nowadays. And our president manages to be the most uber-cool of all. he goes on Jimmy Kimmel, he makes out a NCAA basketball bracket, and he no longer goes to church. The truth is, America is changing, and its not Barrack Obama's fault In fact, if you're a Christian, you have to have faith that all of this scary, bad news fits into His plan somehow. Before 2008, the United States still seemed determined to find its own way, and let others follow. Now its 2015, and we are right in step behind Europe, which is exactly where the Progressives like Obama believe we should be -BEHIND Europe, not leading, but following. When I think of the fundamental changes that have occurred in the United States over the past six years, I almost lose my breath. The number of folks who are dependent on Washington DC for everything, from food to wiping their ass, has skyrocketed. And if you try and motivate people to do for themselves, you are a cruel, racist, hater. Our military is shrinking, and veterans continue to have trouble finding appropriate medical care. I have to say that the disappearance of Christianity from everyday life has coincided with a host of bad news. Its high-time we embrace the simple message in that statement, and turn this ship around.
Showing posts with label Sierra Leone. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sierra Leone. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 25, 2015
Monday, March 2, 2015
Combating The Spread Of Extremism In The Third World (Part I)
Links A. Impact Of The Repudiation Of Third World Debt
B. Council On Foreign Relations Comments Regarding Terrorism And Debt
Frequently, I include links that present a viewpoint with which I disagree. I am convinced in the efficacy of this strategy in fully understanding the issue at hand. If you aren't prepared to give fair consideration to all perspectives, that don't expect anyone to listen to whatever bullshit you have to offer. Attentively considering the opposing viewpoint will invariably provide you with more information about the subject, which will strengthen your ability to craft a useful and reasonable opinion. Having spent many years in Africa, I have a strong opinion regarding the issue of African Debt (to banks, related financial mechanisms, and countries). Very few on the list of donors can seriously argue that their motivation for providing financial assistance was anything more than a means to acquire more money/resources or influence. In fairness, I must say that my research has uncovered a few organizations that have absolutely no motivation for personal gain in their efforts to provide aid. Most of these organizations have a religious support network, which introduces the problem of "conversion coercion through the alleviation of hunger" (I invented that phrase, thank you). If I were starving, would I convert to being a Baptist instead of a Roman Catholic? I can't say, but I have no doubt that if Boko Haram were threatening to chop off my head, I would be memorizing lines from the Quran in a heartbeat (God knows your heart. He also expects you to value the gift of life. A temporary "fib" about personal religious conversion won't condemn a person's eternal soul, at least not in my mind's Judgment Day).
But I digress. Recently a U.S. government spokeswoman (can't recall if she was an administration official or from Foggy Bottom) slid off the edge of her talking points a bit by rambling on about "giving ISIS jobs" to discourage them from committing acts of terror. Note to State Department: No one uses a guillotine anymore, and public executioners for the State of Texas usually need some medical background. I do appreciate the sentiment, though. It reminds us that the young people volunteering for ISIS are doing so in a vacuum (tell the truth: how many of you just had a mental picture of a bunch of Middle-Eastern types, stuck inside of a Hoover?); the international culture that our generation in particular has fostered, that eschews anything faintly religious or moral, promotes the importance of "feeling good" over just about everything else, creates heroes out of criminals, and sexualizes everything from a Big Mac to a chainsaw. Oh how I long for the days of my youth, when an individual was admired for getting a job at sixteen, avoiding children before marriage, finishing college, respecting old folks, and loving the United States of America. But again I digress. This is a tough subject. The truth is, we need to be more successful in creating jobs and the opportunity for a future for young people, regardless of the language they speak. There is no "one solution fixes all", but lets take a look at Africa, where ISIS and Al-Qaeda have been so successful recently at recruiting young people.
Actually, economic conditions have greatly improved in a number of African countries (for the purposes of this post, Africa is south-of-the-Sahara). Success stories include Botswana, Gabon, Namibia, Angola, Mozambique (hey, remember how bad it was BEFORE?), Zambia and even Rwanda (I refuse to add Uganda to the list, regardless of their economic growth and GDP; any society that openly advocates the murder of people for their sexual preference will receive no type of acknowledgement from me). Some signs of improvement had been noted in West Africa as well, and then Ebola had to show up and ruin everything. I'm still optimistic about West Africa. The determined efforts to keep the Ebola outbreak from becoming a full-blown plague were largely successful. A new crop of national leaders in Cote d'Ivoire, Mali, Liberia, Sierra Leone and Senegal appear to be singularly focused on improving the lives of their people. All in all, I believe that the continent of Africa is ripe for some recognition from the West; that its efforts to control unemployment, fight corruption, and root out terrorists have not gone unnoticed. I'm not speaking of something as temporary as an extension on loan repayments. I believe the time has come for Europe, Asia and North America to eliminate all African debt. Furthermore, it should be done without conditions.
B. Council On Foreign Relations Comments Regarding Terrorism And Debt
Frequently, I include links that present a viewpoint with which I disagree. I am convinced in the efficacy of this strategy in fully understanding the issue at hand. If you aren't prepared to give fair consideration to all perspectives, that don't expect anyone to listen to whatever bullshit you have to offer. Attentively considering the opposing viewpoint will invariably provide you with more information about the subject, which will strengthen your ability to craft a useful and reasonable opinion. Having spent many years in Africa, I have a strong opinion regarding the issue of African Debt (to banks, related financial mechanisms, and countries). Very few on the list of donors can seriously argue that their motivation for providing financial assistance was anything more than a means to acquire more money/resources or influence. In fairness, I must say that my research has uncovered a few organizations that have absolutely no motivation for personal gain in their efforts to provide aid. Most of these organizations have a religious support network, which introduces the problem of "conversion coercion through the alleviation of hunger" (I invented that phrase, thank you). If I were starving, would I convert to being a Baptist instead of a Roman Catholic? I can't say, but I have no doubt that if Boko Haram were threatening to chop off my head, I would be memorizing lines from the Quran in a heartbeat (God knows your heart. He also expects you to value the gift of life. A temporary "fib" about personal religious conversion won't condemn a person's eternal soul, at least not in my mind's Judgment Day).
But I digress. Recently a U.S. government spokeswoman (can't recall if she was an administration official or from Foggy Bottom) slid off the edge of her talking points a bit by rambling on about "giving ISIS jobs" to discourage them from committing acts of terror. Note to State Department: No one uses a guillotine anymore, and public executioners for the State of Texas usually need some medical background. I do appreciate the sentiment, though. It reminds us that the young people volunteering for ISIS are doing so in a vacuum (tell the truth: how many of you just had a mental picture of a bunch of Middle-Eastern types, stuck inside of a Hoover?); the international culture that our generation in particular has fostered, that eschews anything faintly religious or moral, promotes the importance of "feeling good" over just about everything else, creates heroes out of criminals, and sexualizes everything from a Big Mac to a chainsaw. Oh how I long for the days of my youth, when an individual was admired for getting a job at sixteen, avoiding children before marriage, finishing college, respecting old folks, and loving the United States of America. But again I digress. This is a tough subject. The truth is, we need to be more successful in creating jobs and the opportunity for a future for young people, regardless of the language they speak. There is no "one solution fixes all", but lets take a look at Africa, where ISIS and Al-Qaeda have been so successful recently at recruiting young people.
Actually, economic conditions have greatly improved in a number of African countries (for the purposes of this post, Africa is south-of-the-Sahara). Success stories include Botswana, Gabon, Namibia, Angola, Mozambique (hey, remember how bad it was BEFORE?), Zambia and even Rwanda (I refuse to add Uganda to the list, regardless of their economic growth and GDP; any society that openly advocates the murder of people for their sexual preference will receive no type of acknowledgement from me). Some signs of improvement had been noted in West Africa as well, and then Ebola had to show up and ruin everything. I'm still optimistic about West Africa. The determined efforts to keep the Ebola outbreak from becoming a full-blown plague were largely successful. A new crop of national leaders in Cote d'Ivoire, Mali, Liberia, Sierra Leone and Senegal appear to be singularly focused on improving the lives of their people. All in all, I believe that the continent of Africa is ripe for some recognition from the West; that its efforts to control unemployment, fight corruption, and root out terrorists have not gone unnoticed. I'm not speaking of something as temporary as an extension on loan repayments. I believe the time has come for Europe, Asia and North America to eliminate all African debt. Furthermore, it should be done without conditions.
Labels:
Al-Qaeda,
Angola,
Boko Haram,
Botswana,
Cote d'Ivoire,
Ebola,
Gabon,
ISIS,
Liberia,
Mozambique,
Namibia,
Rwanda,
Senegal,
Sierra Leone,
Zambia
Monday, January 26, 2015
Sub-Saharan Africa 2015: What To Expect
Link: Brookings Evaluates Sub-Saharan Africa 2015
When I consider the prospects for Sub-Saharan Africa in 2015, by habit, I always start with
political considerations. But Africa has changed, evolving and adjusting to international economic trends much more quickly than I expected. I don't think we can under-estimate the impact that communication has had on Sub-Saharan Africa. The relative simplicity and low cost involved with cell phone networks has brought every dark corner of Africa into the light. I remember the cell phone revolution as it arrived in South Africa. It seemed as if overnight, everybody had one. The real-time contact engendered by the presence of cell phone networks as instrumental in getting the continent reasonably wired on the net. I remember being in Bangui, Central African Republic, sometime in 2001, and suffering from water shortages and no taxis or public transportation. But the internet café was up and running, thanks to the world's first home-made satellite dish and a motley combination of modern and World War II-era French Army generators. From my perspective, the arrival of the cell phone ushered in a techno-economic revolution in Africa. We had BACP (Before the Arrival of the Cell Phone) and AACP (After the Arrival of The Cell Phone). I think this date-differentiation can be accurately used when examining economic trends in the Middle East and the Indian Sub-Continent. The cell phone has made that much of a difference, folks.
Africa in 2015 is connected. Abidjan is connected to Maputo, and Yaoundé is chatting with Tokyo. Sadly, the last bit of "African mystery" is gone. An archaeologist can be digging in Mali and be interrupted by a phone call from Dublin. But in this instance, there can be no doubt that the benefits of technology outweigh the negatives. African banks and stock markets have real-time communication with the big guys in Europe, Tokyo and New York. The western investments in oil and mining no longer have to wait for value-impacting information from on-site. That information is available as it occurs. Wow. More so than in many years, I am optimistic for the future of Sub-Saharan Africa. The days of military coups and brutal dictators seems to be ending. Africa still suffers from the ass-boil that is Robert Mugabe, but everyone dies eventually, right? Some folks see Museveni in Uganda as a dictator, and also young Kabila in Kinshasa. But these guys seem to be out of touch and behind the times. The world has become so much smaller, and the money to be made in Africa isn't limited to African money. There is Euro to be made, and Dollars. The Chinese seem to be all over Africa, but I think we will see a bit less of them in 2015. I think the trend away from despots and one-party rule will continue, because there is more money to be made in a competitive system, and even the nasty guys will end up chasing the bigger $.
Let's start with China in 2015. The Chinese started 2014 on a rampage, flying from capital
to capital, promising all sorts of funding for development projects. In the past, the Chinese have been good on their word. They have built roads, dams, and blocks of flats. Everyone, I mean EVERYONE, took notice when the Chinese offered to finance the rebuilding of the Dakar-Niger Railway. This ambitious and absolutely overdue plan included building an additional rail line, linking Bamako, Mali and Freetown, Sierra Leone. As things stand at present, the Dakar-Niger Railway is a mess. It rarely is able to keep to a schedule and its ability to transport is limited. Any rain or weather-related incident is likely to shut the rail system down for weeks. The real problem is the lack of repair of the track system. Why does this issue attract the attention of EVERYONE (as I stated earlier)? Because this rail system transports the gas that keeps the various mines in Mali and Guinea in operation, not to mention the other materials it transports that are essential to those particular mining operations that basically belong to western investors. Ideally, Mali should be able to rely on transport of goods in three directions: Dakar, Freetown, and Abidjan. I have no doubt that in my lifetime I will see this develop. But the anticipated rebuilding of the Dakar-Niger railway hit a huge snag. The Chinese went back to Beijing, took out their calculators, met with banking and economic officials, and announced that "they had never actually agreed to finance the project....that it was all just conversation". In the end, I think the Chinese will realize that the benefits outweigh the cost, and will provide a definite amount of invaluable goodwill.
Now for some serious conversation. African countries need to continue the move away from one-commodity economies. Nigeria, that doesn't mean you continue moving towards being totally dependent on oil, it means to diversify your economy, so that when the price of oil tanks, your economy doesn't crash as well. Cote d'Ivoire and Ghana have been successful moving away from a reliance on cocoa, as has Mali with cotton and Botswana with Diamonds. I am concerned about the falling price of oil and its impact on juvenile economies such as Cabo Verde and Equatorial Guinea. I don't really have much sympathy for Nigeria. They are sitting on a gold mine of resources, and all they can do in Lagos is fight their own cousins for every Dollar, while the nastiest of insurgencies terrorizes and brutalizes children all over the north of the country. How does a nation with the resources and international connections of Nigeria, not have an army worth a damn? All this may
change if Goodluck Jonathan losses the election in February (it ain't gonna happen, folks). I would be willing to take a chance on the other guy just for the sake of change. Ebola in 2015: I believe this outbreak of Ebola is winding down, and Africa learned some invaluable lessons on how to respond. This particular outbreak could have been monstrous. For Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone, it was. But the protocols that were put in place and followed worked exactly as expected. This bodes well for the future. Unfortunately, West Africa will take some time to climb out of the economic and social disaster that Ebola wrought. The rest of Africa needs to step up, especially South Africa, who pretends to be a leader, but always seems to be missing at the table during a crisis. I think China will revisit its commitments, and return with a smile. The Dakar-Niger project will begin, and positive economic fallout will help with the Ebola recovery.
I think this subject was a bit heavy to tackle in one post, but wither way, as a lover of Africa, I'm looking forward to 2015. I purposely left South Africa out of the conversation. They seem to be chugging along just fine down south, on their own schedule and in their own little world. Zuma had a tough year in 2014, and I anticipate that his enemies are smelling blood, so to speak. South Africa has always been a bit obsessed with its own identity and importance in the world. It's sad, because I believe that Nelson Mandela truly wanted South Africa to be the leader of the continent. Heck, even Nigeria seems to draw more attention from other African states. South Africa does remain popular for illegal immigration though, as people from all over go searching for jobs and opportunities. I believe that the fall in the price of oil will be a boost to South Africa, which has always been so sensitive to that commodity. South Africans have a tendency to worry when the Rand hits a free-fall against the Euro and the Dollar. They shouldn't. It directly impacts the all-important tourist industry, not to mention the increasing number of investors from the United States, looking for a good value for their Dollars.
political considerations. But Africa has changed, evolving and adjusting to international economic trends much more quickly than I expected. I don't think we can under-estimate the impact that communication has had on Sub-Saharan Africa. The relative simplicity and low cost involved with cell phone networks has brought every dark corner of Africa into the light. I remember the cell phone revolution as it arrived in South Africa. It seemed as if overnight, everybody had one. The real-time contact engendered by the presence of cell phone networks as instrumental in getting the continent reasonably wired on the net. I remember being in Bangui, Central African Republic, sometime in 2001, and suffering from water shortages and no taxis or public transportation. But the internet café was up and running, thanks to the world's first home-made satellite dish and a motley combination of modern and World War II-era French Army generators. From my perspective, the arrival of the cell phone ushered in a techno-economic revolution in Africa. We had BACP (Before the Arrival of the Cell Phone) and AACP (After the Arrival of The Cell Phone). I think this date-differentiation can be accurately used when examining economic trends in the Middle East and the Indian Sub-Continent. The cell phone has made that much of a difference, folks.
Africa in 2015 is connected. Abidjan is connected to Maputo, and Yaoundé is chatting with Tokyo. Sadly, the last bit of "African mystery" is gone. An archaeologist can be digging in Mali and be interrupted by a phone call from Dublin. But in this instance, there can be no doubt that the benefits of technology outweigh the negatives. African banks and stock markets have real-time communication with the big guys in Europe, Tokyo and New York. The western investments in oil and mining no longer have to wait for value-impacting information from on-site. That information is available as it occurs. Wow. More so than in many years, I am optimistic for the future of Sub-Saharan Africa. The days of military coups and brutal dictators seems to be ending. Africa still suffers from the ass-boil that is Robert Mugabe, but everyone dies eventually, right? Some folks see Museveni in Uganda as a dictator, and also young Kabila in Kinshasa. But these guys seem to be out of touch and behind the times. The world has become so much smaller, and the money to be made in Africa isn't limited to African money. There is Euro to be made, and Dollars. The Chinese seem to be all over Africa, but I think we will see a bit less of them in 2015. I think the trend away from despots and one-party rule will continue, because there is more money to be made in a competitive system, and even the nasty guys will end up chasing the bigger $.
Let's start with China in 2015. The Chinese started 2014 on a rampage, flying from capital
| Dakar Railway Station; Source: J.W.H. van der WAAL |
Now for some serious conversation. African countries need to continue the move away from one-commodity economies. Nigeria, that doesn't mean you continue moving towards being totally dependent on oil, it means to diversify your economy, so that when the price of oil tanks, your economy doesn't crash as well. Cote d'Ivoire and Ghana have been successful moving away from a reliance on cocoa, as has Mali with cotton and Botswana with Diamonds. I am concerned about the falling price of oil and its impact on juvenile economies such as Cabo Verde and Equatorial Guinea. I don't really have much sympathy for Nigeria. They are sitting on a gold mine of resources, and all they can do in Lagos is fight their own cousins for every Dollar, while the nastiest of insurgencies terrorizes and brutalizes children all over the north of the country. How does a nation with the resources and international connections of Nigeria, not have an army worth a damn? All this may
![]() |
| Goodluck Jonathan Source: World Economic Forum |
I think this subject was a bit heavy to tackle in one post, but wither way, as a lover of Africa, I'm looking forward to 2015. I purposely left South Africa out of the conversation. They seem to be chugging along just fine down south, on their own schedule and in their own little world. Zuma had a tough year in 2014, and I anticipate that his enemies are smelling blood, so to speak. South Africa has always been a bit obsessed with its own identity and importance in the world. It's sad, because I believe that Nelson Mandela truly wanted South Africa to be the leader of the continent. Heck, even Nigeria seems to draw more attention from other African states. South Africa does remain popular for illegal immigration though, as people from all over go searching for jobs and opportunities. I believe that the fall in the price of oil will be a boost to South Africa, which has always been so sensitive to that commodity. South Africans have a tendency to worry when the Rand hits a free-fall against the Euro and the Dollar. They shouldn't. It directly impacts the all-important tourist industry, not to mention the increasing number of investors from the United States, looking for a good value for their Dollars.
Labels:
China,
Cote d'Ivoire,
Dakar-Niger Railway,
Ebola,
Guinea,
Kabila,
Lagos,
Liberia,
Mali,
Museveni,
Nigeria,
President Goodwill Jonathan,
Robert Mugabe,
Sierra Leone,
South Africa,
Sub-Saharan Africa,
Uganda
Wednesday, October 29, 2014
U.S. Troops Head To Africa To Fight Ebola
Links: A. 3,000 U.S. Troops To Deploy To West Africa
B. U.S. Troops To Africa For Ebola Mission
C. U.S. Military Quarantined After Ebola Trip
I have been finding reasons to avoid writing this post because I'm not very clear on my own
emotions regarding this mission. In September, when the Ebola virus was tearing a hole through Liberia and Guinea, President Obama anticipated the need for U.S. assistance and ordered the military to respond (I'm assuming that the military and not the President's staff, developed the deployment agenda). A plan was created which would eventually call for three thousand troops from the 101st Airborne Division to deploy to locations in West Africa (see Links A and B). The first group of U.S. military personnel, Army Major General Darryl A. Williams and his staff of ten, just completed a tour of Liberia. During the tour Major General Williams and his crew observed the screening procedures and medical assistance measures in place in all areas of the country. Its safe to say that they reached some level of exposure to the virus. As is explained in link C, they will be isolated and monitored for twenty-one days, which is understandable.
As the first link points out, the military will be tasked with building a 25-bed portable hospital in Liberia. It is expected that 17 treatment centers will eventually be built in the area. Along with building facilities to treat patients with Ebola, the U.S. military will train up to 500 health-care workers a week to combat the disease. My friends in the region tell me that currently "you can't throw a stone without hitting a white person". I assume that many of the white people in question are Americans, as my cousin in Bamako tells me that the Center for Disease Control (CDC) has commandeered the nicest hotel in town. My close friend, who owns a luxury car business in Abidjan, Cote d'Ivoire, is very impressed with the medical facilities that seem to be popping up all over the country. Medecins Sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders) is there, and the World Health Organization is too. The International Red Cross (IRC), which has permanent offices in all the capital cities of the region, has been active from the beginning, and are probably responsible for keeping the number of Ebola cases as low as they are. In the Spring, with the first confirmed cases, the IRC began sending volunteers out into the rural areas of Guinea, Liberia, Mali, Sierra Leone, and Cote d'Ivoire, to stress the need for sanitation and education. Most importantly, the IRC took note of the local health facilities and what was needed to set-up screening centers and isolation units. I am impressed with the response to date of the United States and European health communities. So far the procedures put in place appear to be working.
I have heard it said that the true reason behind President Obama ordering troops to deploy to Africa is to assist in evacuations and crowd control. I assume "crowd control" would include "riot control". Orderly crowds being moved by authorities have a tendency to get out of hand in Africa (my comment is not racist; it is the product of my years of living in Africa). Actually, orderly crowds can become quite "disorderly" anywhere, not just in Africa. I believe the initial projections by the experts in Atlanta (CDC) forecast that the outbreak would have spread to Mali and Cote d'Ivoire by now. Given the impossibility of adequately controlling border crossings (sound familiar?), the CDC probably assumed that infected persons who had not yet begun to show symptoms would be traveling as usual. Keep in mind that many folks see the borders in African as more of a suggestion than anything else. The valuable gold and diamond mines in
Mali, and other countries, traditionally employ workers from bordering states. I believe that the CDC was correct in assuming that the situation would be much more serious than it is, hence the in-depth planning for mandatory evacuations and (if needed) crowd control. This is in addition to the fact that some people will not voluntarily leave their homes, and in the instance of a deadly virus like Ebola, they cannot be left behind. The issue is not just the health of the resident; anyone who stays in the contamination zone becomes a potential carrier, who may find a way to rejoin healthy people and start the contagion all over. At this point I haven't bought into the argument that the troops are really here to control people. I'm not that cynical. But then see me again next week.
B. U.S. Troops To Africa For Ebola Mission
C. U.S. Military Quarantined After Ebola Trip
I have been finding reasons to avoid writing this post because I'm not very clear on my own
emotions regarding this mission. In September, when the Ebola virus was tearing a hole through Liberia and Guinea, President Obama anticipated the need for U.S. assistance and ordered the military to respond (I'm assuming that the military and not the President's staff, developed the deployment agenda). A plan was created which would eventually call for three thousand troops from the 101st Airborne Division to deploy to locations in West Africa (see Links A and B). The first group of U.S. military personnel, Army Major General Darryl A. Williams and his staff of ten, just completed a tour of Liberia. During the tour Major General Williams and his crew observed the screening procedures and medical assistance measures in place in all areas of the country. Its safe to say that they reached some level of exposure to the virus. As is explained in link C, they will be isolated and monitored for twenty-one days, which is understandable.
I have heard it said that the true reason behind President Obama ordering troops to deploy to Africa is to assist in evacuations and crowd control. I assume "crowd control" would include "riot control". Orderly crowds being moved by authorities have a tendency to get out of hand in Africa (my comment is not racist; it is the product of my years of living in Africa). Actually, orderly crowds can become quite "disorderly" anywhere, not just in Africa. I believe the initial projections by the experts in Atlanta (CDC) forecast that the outbreak would have spread to Mali and Cote d'Ivoire by now. Given the impossibility of adequately controlling border crossings (sound familiar?), the CDC probably assumed that infected persons who had not yet begun to show symptoms would be traveling as usual. Keep in mind that many folks see the borders in African as more of a suggestion than anything else. The valuable gold and diamond mines in
![]() |
| Diamond Mine in Sierra Lione |
Labels:
101st Airborne Division,
Abidjan,
Bamako,
CDC,
Center for Disease Control,
Cote d'Ivoire,
Ebola,
Guinea,
IRC,
Liberia,
Mali,
Medecins Sans Frontieres,
Sierra Leone,
United States,
WHO
Sunday, October 19, 2014
Still Stuck In Africa...Let's Talk About Liberia And Ebola (Part I)
Links: Wikipedia Liberia
The U.S. Has An Obligation To Liberia
Mea Culpa To Dallas From Liberian President
(Part I)
It's possible that in over two months of writing posts for this blog (I have yet to miss a day), this post may be the most important.
It should be important, especially to Americans. I'm grateful that Wikipedia is always there to provide a snapshot of Liberian history; most grade school pupils in the United States have never heard of Liberia. Beginning in 1820, freed slaves from the United States began returning to Africa (Liberia) with the support of various Abolitionist movements, especially the American Colonization Society. In 1847, with a continual flow of freed slaves from mostly the United States, the Republic of Liberia was created (any slaves who were fortunate enough to be freed en route to the Americas also became Liberians). The capital city was named Monrovia, in honor of U.S. President James Monroe, a strong advocate of the colonization of Liberia. By 1867, roughly 13,000 citizens of the Republic of Liberia were former slaves. Obviously this territory, located in west central Africa on the Gold Coast, was already inhabited in 1820. Numerous indigenous tribes dotted the Liberian landscape before the arrival of the first settlers from the United States. The former slaves and their descendants never accounted for more than five percent of the entire population of Liberia, but they immediately assumed the mantle of superiority. The indigenous population were treated as savages and for almost a century were not considered actual citizens of Liberia.
In truth, the American Colonization Society (ACS), which was supported by both President Abraham Lincoln and Orator/Senator Henry Clay, believed that repatriation of former slaves to Africa was preferable to emancipation (freedom) within the United States. Some in the organization were concerned about the difficulties former slaves would encounter after emancipation, while others felt it was in the best interest of both whites and blacks that they be returned to Africa. However, it's important to keep in mind that by 1860 a large portion, if not the majority, of slaves had been born in the United States, or the Caribbean, rather than in Africa.
Either way, on July 26, 1847, the settlers in Liberia issued a Declaration of Independence and promulgated a Constitution. Not surprisingly, the Liberian Constitution bore a close resemblance to the Constitution of the United States. The new nation suffered tremendous growing pains, as a small population of western-minded and Christian former slaves attempted to establish their authority over the indigenous inland tribes. The government of Liberia (elected solely by male settlers) outlawed commerce between foreign nations and inland tribes. A serious attempt was made to funnel all economic activity of Liberia to the capital city of Monrovia and through its port (a few other towns had sprung up, including Buchanan). Development was very slow, and towards the turn of the century, France and England started exerting their authority over areas once claimed by Liberia. In fact, The European nations were responsible for the boußndaries that today constitute the border of the Republic of Liberia. With no army and no real diplomatic authority, Liberia had no choice but to except the demarcations as determined by France and England, which left Liberia with an English colony on its northwest border and a huge French-controlled territory on its northeast and east.
At the beginning of the twentieth century, Liberia had very little to show for is fifty years of existence. It was believed by most that the end of the Civil War would result in a huge wave of immigrants from the former slave population in the southern United States.
For various reasons, that flood of new settler blood never really occurred. In 1904 the Liberian government finally granted citizenship to all Liberians, but many indigenous tribes continued to oppose efforts at development. In the mid-twentieth century, the United States became more involved in Liberia, with the construction of Roberts International Airport and new port facilities for Monrovia. In 1945, Liberia became one of the original members of the United Nations, and was one of the first countries to openly oppose the Apartheid policies of the South African government. Growth was slow and incremental, but progress was being made. Rubber and Timber were being exported, and diamonds along with other precious metals and gems were discovered. The soil appeared to be perfect for creating a fruit-based export avenue, and Liberia's history and the coastal areas seemed ideal for establishing a tourist industry. In 1979, the economy was healthy and jobs were being created. Unfortunately, a military coup was staged, led by Master Sergeant Samuel K. Doe of the Krahn ethnic group. Doe and his supporters accused then-President William R. Tolbert, Jr. of corruption and of giving preferential treatment to particular tribes to the detriment of others. Tolbert and most of his cabinet were executed, along with many members of his political party; his family barely escaped Monrovia with their lives.
From 1980 until internationally-monitored elections in 2005, Liberia was literally hell-on earth. Liberia suffered one coup after another, with each new government more despotic and violent than the previous one. (If someone is interested in the details of the coups and the attempts at new governments, then Google is your answer.) In fact, after 2000, it seemed the entire region was engulfed in war. A horrendous Civil War swallowed Sierra Leone whole and created an entire generation of victims with missing limbs (instead of killing the enemy, it became habitual to just hack off a limb). And the various mines planted everywhere rang up a high limb-count as well. And to my surprise, even traditionally stable Cote d'Ivoire, with its French patisseries and tree-lined boulevards, fell victim to civil strife. I'm so pleased to say that since 2005, a sea-change has occurred. Peace in Sierra Leone, a new government and peace in Cote d'Ivoire, and a brilliant, no-nonsense President in Liberia.
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, a Harvard-trained economist with a sparking reputation, took office with a tremendous display of energy and confidence. The Liberian people immediately responded, and since then growth has been the word for a new generation of Liberians. The western banks and governments love Sirleaf, and she has done wonders battling that eternal, always-present beast of African governance: corruption. She has surrounded herself with gifted individuals and everyday makes a point to go into the street and communicate with the people.
Johnson was re-elected in 2011 and is, in my opinion, personally responsible for convincing international banks and governments to write-off billions and billions of dollars of Liberian debt. This has allowed the Liberian government more freedom of movement regarding development projects and education. I'm sure that Sirleaf has political opposition in Liberia and that some may accuse me of being a Sirleaf sycophant (I like the way that sounds). Well, guilty as charged. I love what this woman has done to strengthen and give hope to the faultering country, and I pray that the Ebola crisis doesn't destroy all that she has worked to build.
Mea Culpa To Dallas From Liberian President
(Part I)
It's possible that in over two months of writing posts for this blog (I have yet to miss a day), this post may be the most important.
It should be important, especially to Americans. I'm grateful that Wikipedia is always there to provide a snapshot of Liberian history; most grade school pupils in the United States have never heard of Liberia. Beginning in 1820, freed slaves from the United States began returning to Africa (Liberia) with the support of various Abolitionist movements, especially the American Colonization Society. In 1847, with a continual flow of freed slaves from mostly the United States, the Republic of Liberia was created (any slaves who were fortunate enough to be freed en route to the Americas also became Liberians). The capital city was named Monrovia, in honor of U.S. President James Monroe, a strong advocate of the colonization of Liberia. By 1867, roughly 13,000 citizens of the Republic of Liberia were former slaves. Obviously this territory, located in west central Africa on the Gold Coast, was already inhabited in 1820. Numerous indigenous tribes dotted the Liberian landscape before the arrival of the first settlers from the United States. The former slaves and their descendants never accounted for more than five percent of the entire population of Liberia, but they immediately assumed the mantle of superiority. The indigenous population were treated as savages and for almost a century were not considered actual citizens of Liberia.
In truth, the American Colonization Society (ACS), which was supported by both President Abraham Lincoln and Orator/Senator Henry Clay, believed that repatriation of former slaves to Africa was preferable to emancipation (freedom) within the United States. Some in the organization were concerned about the difficulties former slaves would encounter after emancipation, while others felt it was in the best interest of both whites and blacks that they be returned to Africa. However, it's important to keep in mind that by 1860 a large portion, if not the majority, of slaves had been born in the United States, or the Caribbean, rather than in Africa.
![]() |
| Life Membership Certificate ACS |
At the beginning of the twentieth century, Liberia had very little to show for is fifty years of existence. It was believed by most that the end of the Civil War would result in a huge wave of immigrants from the former slave population in the southern United States.
For various reasons, that flood of new settler blood never really occurred. In 1904 the Liberian government finally granted citizenship to all Liberians, but many indigenous tribes continued to oppose efforts at development. In the mid-twentieth century, the United States became more involved in Liberia, with the construction of Roberts International Airport and new port facilities for Monrovia. In 1945, Liberia became one of the original members of the United Nations, and was one of the first countries to openly oppose the Apartheid policies of the South African government. Growth was slow and incremental, but progress was being made. Rubber and Timber were being exported, and diamonds along with other precious metals and gems were discovered. The soil appeared to be perfect for creating a fruit-based export avenue, and Liberia's history and the coastal areas seemed ideal for establishing a tourist industry. In 1979, the economy was healthy and jobs were being created. Unfortunately, a military coup was staged, led by Master Sergeant Samuel K. Doe of the Krahn ethnic group. Doe and his supporters accused then-President William R. Tolbert, Jr. of corruption and of giving preferential treatment to particular tribes to the detriment of others. Tolbert and most of his cabinet were executed, along with many members of his political party; his family barely escaped Monrovia with their lives.
From 1980 until internationally-monitored elections in 2005, Liberia was literally hell-on earth. Liberia suffered one coup after another, with each new government more despotic and violent than the previous one. (If someone is interested in the details of the coups and the attempts at new governments, then Google is your answer.) In fact, after 2000, it seemed the entire region was engulfed in war. A horrendous Civil War swallowed Sierra Leone whole and created an entire generation of victims with missing limbs (instead of killing the enemy, it became habitual to just hack off a limb). And the various mines planted everywhere rang up a high limb-count as well. And to my surprise, even traditionally stable Cote d'Ivoire, with its French patisseries and tree-lined boulevards, fell victim to civil strife. I'm so pleased to say that since 2005, a sea-change has occurred. Peace in Sierra Leone, a new government and peace in Cote d'Ivoire, and a brilliant, no-nonsense President in Liberia.
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, a Harvard-trained economist with a sparking reputation, took office with a tremendous display of energy and confidence. The Liberian people immediately responded, and since then growth has been the word for a new generation of Liberians. The western banks and governments love Sirleaf, and she has done wonders battling that eternal, always-present beast of African governance: corruption. She has surrounded herself with gifted individuals and everyday makes a point to go into the street and communicate with the people.
Johnson was re-elected in 2011 and is, in my opinion, personally responsible for convincing international banks and governments to write-off billions and billions of dollars of Liberian debt. This has allowed the Liberian government more freedom of movement regarding development projects and education. I'm sure that Sirleaf has political opposition in Liberia and that some may accuse me of being a Sirleaf sycophant (I like the way that sounds). Well, guilty as charged. I love what this woman has done to strengthen and give hope to the faultering country, and I pray that the Ebola crisis doesn't destroy all that she has worked to build.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)








