A montage of archival footage from the 75th anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg.

Happy Canada Day!

Happy Canada Day everyone! Hope you are celebrating this wonderful country of ours surrounded by family and friends.

Card by etsy seller ktcrawford

HatCityBLOG VIDEO: 2005 Danbury Unity March

This month marks the fifth anniversary of the Danbury Unity March.

On Jun 12 2005, over 2,000 supporters of immigrant rights converged on Main Street to express their opposition to the rise in anti-immigrant sentiment in the city.

The event, organized by the Danbury Area Coalition for the Rights of Immigrants and church groups, started with a march down Main Street, originating from Kennedy Park, and ended with a series of speeches from civic leaders and elected officials at Rogers Park.

The march is significant to me because it marks the first time I decided to videotape an event in the city and was one of the primary reasons I decided to start blogging about events in Greater Danbury. A full video account of what happened at the event was never shown to the public, which allowed misinformation about the march from the mayor's office to go unchallenged. Due to advances in video processing, I was finally able to successfully restore the footage I shot on that day and give proper credit to people who worked tirelessly to make the event happen.

From Jun 2005, here's footage of the march.

Eliminative Materialism

Patricia Churchland interviewed on the idea.

Clicking, will take you to the sound file. To visit the site, Philosophy Bites, an excellent repository of interviews with philosophers of all stripes, talking on all sorts of topics, see the link over in the blog roll, or click here.

The interview is somewhat puzzling. Listen and consider this question:

Does Churchland maintain that all, most or some things to which we refer with 'folk psychological' terms such as 'will' 'belief' and so on are in fact not really there, but only appear to be there?

Consider this analogical case: Phlogiston was a concept of a sort of fluid that flowed in and out of objects giving rise to thermal phenomena, but it turned out there was no such fluid. We discovered that things were like this: Observed from a macroscopic distance, the true microscopic phenomenon, kinetic motion of atoms and molecules, gave the appearance of a flowing fluid of some sort, but that was all there was to it; appearance, not reality.

Churchland at some times during this interview seems to claim that concepts such as will and memory may suffer a similar fate. Why does she say this? Because, following the analogy, we are learning a great deal about the microscopic phenomena that accompany mental phenomena.

But does it logically follow from this undeniable biological fact that such possibilities of radical illusion exist, i.e., does it follow from the data she presents that there really are no such things as acts of volition or memories or beliefs?

It is true that we use the term 'memory' to cover a whole host of mental phenomena, from 'remembering' how to ride a bike to 'recalling' what was for breakfast. That is undoubtedly true, but does it in any way follow from this that there is no such thing as memory going on? In so far as we access information previously laid down, even if it is a matter of fact that such information access is a brain process, this is nevertheless an exercise of memory is it not?

It is also undeniable that an aspect of certain of the processes we indiscriminately tag with the term 'memory' is that they are subjective experiences, first person phenomena. When I recall now what I ate or drank this morning, that episodic memory is first person. The fact that it is also a neural process does not subtract one iota from its reality. It is real in so far as I experience it. I cannot be mistaken about the having of that experience, even if I can be mistaken in the memory. This Cartesian point is unassailable. And, you do not have to be a 'ghost in the machine' dualist to admit this.

Now, mixed up with this talk of dispelling 'folk' appearances or illusions is much talk that just sounds like a good dose of respect for the findings of neuroscience, a chastisement of philosophers for poo-pooing that research in favor of conceptual analysis. In so far as that kind of arm chair theorizing goes on (I believe not as prevalently now as in the past) the advice is well taken. But, I don't think you need to go to the length of swallowing the strange, and deeply counter intuitive pill that is coated with this 'candy.' One can respect the science and still maintain that memories are after all, real things.

Interval

.

Whether as it was or as it should be
Out of the ruins of the new society
The skeleton of an older society
Arose, from which, all rickety, banging
Shank and bone, a society yet
More ancient and long of tooth; and so on,
Until there occurred a syncope in
The series, and so mercifully ceased
At last the long obscene succession,
Discovery, retribution, torture,
Death, eternity, the crunching of
The whole repulsive nutshell beneath
History's dumb indifferent bootheel.

Cross junction, northwest corner of The Loop, Chicago: photo by Daniel Schwen, 2007

Laughing Kookaburras

.

Laughing Kookaburras (Dacelo novaeguineae), with lizard prey, Cheltenham, New South Wales, Australia: photo by Mfunnell, 2006

We saw a fishpond all on fire and we had a laugh

Laughing Kookaburra (Dacelo novaeguineae), Blackbutt Reserve, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia: photo by Ymaup, 2005

I saw a house bow to a squire and I had a laugh

Laughing Kookaburra (Dacelo novaeguineae): photo by Descramble, 2006

I saw a parson twelve feet high and I had a laugh

Laughing Kookaburra (Dacelo novaeguineae), airborne, Alexandria Park, Alexandria, Sydney: photo by BenAveling, 2007

I saw a cottage near the sky and I had a laugh

Laughing Kookaburra (Dacelo novaeguineae), perched on a Silver Wattle (Acacia dealbara), Waterworks Reserve, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia: photo by Noodle snacks, 2010

I saw a balloon made of lead and I had a laugh

Laughing Kookaburra (Dacelo novaeguineae), Healesville Sanctuary, Victoria, Australia: photo by Dushy, 2007

I saw a coffin drop down dead and I had a laugh

Laughing Kookaburra (Dacelo novaeguineae): photo by KaiAdin, 2006

I saw two sparrows run a race and I had a laugh

Laughing Kookaburra (Dacelo novaeguineae), Milwaukee County Zoological Gardens, Milwaukee, Wisconsin: photo by Cburnett, 2006

I saw two horses making lace and I had a laugh

Laughing Kookaburra (Dacelo novaeguineae), Audley Royal National Park, New South Wales, Australia: photo by Quartl, 2009

I saw a girl just like a cat and I had a laugh

Laughing Kookaburra (Dacelo novaeguineae), immature, southwest Australia: photo by Cygnis insignis, 2008

I saw a kitten wear a hat and I had a laugh

Laughing Kookaburra (Dacelo novaeguineae), Frankfurt Zoo: photo by Jutta 234, 2010

We saw a man who saw these too, and he had a laugh

Laughing Kookaburra (Dacelo novaeguineae), perching in a tree: photo by Keelie Meek, 2007

And said though strange they all were true.

Laughing Kookaburras (Dacelo novaeguineae), Australia: photo by Henry Kerry (1857-1928), n.d. (Powerhouse Museum Collection, Sydney)

Text adapted by TC from traditional nursery rhyme, "I saw a fishpond all on fire"

Boughton talks out of both sides of his mouth over World Cup game celebrations

The dishonest one is at it again...

Oh, this is rich!

For those who have followed Boughton's misleading statements to the public over the years, his latest comment regarding the parade ordinance and the impromptu World Cup celebrations is laughable to say the least.

Here's the last honest man in Danbury in his own words addressing the parade ordinance just a few days ago:

Boughton said while the city does have an ordinance governing parades, the ones that follow soccer matches are impromptu events.

"These are spontaneous celebrations and there is nobody really organizing them," he said.

Did Boughton just say that the World Cup celebrations were impromptu celebrations that are not covered by the parade ordinance? Is this the same mayor claimed that the parade ordinance could be used to control the World Cup celebrations when he was selling his proposal to the public?

Lets take a trip back in time and see what Boughton said about the World Cup game celebrations when he was questioned about the parade ordinance by then News-Times reporter Elizabeth Putnam on the local access TV show Ideas at Work and Beyond:

Boughton in his own words, June 2007:

PUTNAM: Now the impetus for the parade ordinance however was impromptu celebrations, this does not really address that. Is there a way to address that?

BOUGHTON: I would disagree with that statement that it doesn't address that. I think this ordinance could be a better tool in the tool box in looking at impromptu celebrations. That wasn't the whole impetus, that was only part of the impetus and I'll explain why.

If you're talking about the parades after the World Cup game that were very controversial that happened in 2006, those are not impromptu parades. We spend a lot of time planning internally for those parades. If you know that is a World Cup game coming up on Sunday…the chief and I probably had two or three discussions/meetings about how many police officers we're going to bring in…and what type of enforcement activity we're going to have. So there is planning going on…

PUTNAM: …there's planning going on with your side…

BOUGHTON: …and there's planning going on their side as well. Those individuals know that when the game is over that they're going to be in the streets. We would take this ordinance, in addition to writing tickets for not being properly seatbealted and all the other issues that came up during that time period, we would also cite people for not having the proper permit for not being on Main Street if they're blocking traffic and/or holding up public safety vehicles so I think this is another tool in the toolbox to do that and I don't' necessarily agree with that statement that it won't do that.

In case you weren't' keeping scoring, lets review

LIE number 1: The Mayor says that the World Cup games were NOT spontaneous because he and the chief had "prior planning."

FACT: What the Mayor and police chief do in terms of addressing traffic concerns has NOTHING to do with the legal definition of prior planning as outlined by the ordinance.

JUST READ THE ORDINANCE!

Sec 11-15 (a):

Parade means any march, demonstration, procession, or motorcade, which the parade permit applicant believes will consist of more than twenty-five (25) persons, animals, or vehicles or a combination thereof upon the streets, sidewalks, parks or other public property owned by or under the control of the City of Danbury, for a common purpose as a result of prior planning that interferes with the normal flow of pedestrian or vehicular traffic upon said streets, sidewalks, parks, or other public property.

The term "parade permit applicant" MEANS A PLANNING COMMITTEE and NOT AN INDIVIDUAL and definitely NOT THE MAYOR OR POLICE CHIEF.

In other words, PRIOR PLANNING does not mean the following:

The Mets are one game away from winning the World Series. I'm at a bar and tell my buddies that if they win, we'll run up and down the street and celebrate with the other Mets fans.

NOR does it mean this...

I just graduated from high school and I drive my car up and down the road with my friends, which I'll probably see for the last time, because I finished High School.

NOR does it mean this...

I'm at my house watching the World Cup games and decide to jump into my car and drive up and down the street because my team won.

THIS is prior planning:

The local AOH plans to hold a St. Partick's Day parade. a planning committee is formed to organize the event.

OR

The police union plans on holding a demonstration in front of City Hall against the Mayor over the lack of a contract. A planning committee is formed to organize the event.

OR

A group of immigrant rights organizations plan on holding a rally down Main Street to protest Mayor Boughton and the fact that he uses the immigration issue for political purposes. They get together and plan the event.

LIE number 2: When called out on LIE number 1 by an then News-Times reporter Elizabeth Putnam, the mayor fumbled and stated that the celebrants had prior planning because they knew that they were going to go out in the streets after the game.

FACT: Prior planning does not apply to people deciding to celebrate in the streets spontaneously…you would think that a former high school teacher should know basic First Amendment law.

LIE number 3: The ordinance is another "tool in the toolbox" to help the police.

FACT: This so-called "tool" was not needed in the "toolbox" to address traffic concerns that stemmed from spontaneous parades (a.k.a. those pesky immigrants celebrating downtown). They are already LAWS on the books to address the problems that stemmed from the World Cup games in regards to traffic concerns.

From the parade ordinance debate in 2007, here's Minority Leader Tom Saadi outlining EVERY POINT I just raised in my debunking of Boughton's dishonest comment:



Even though opponents against the ordinance repeatedly stated that the parade ordinance could not be applied to impromptu celebrations, Boughton stuck to his dishonest statement throughout the parade ordinance debate until it was approved by the council…and he used the topic of immigration and the controversy surrounding the 2006 World Cup celebrations to do it.

Lets just say that honesty isn't one of Boughton's more well-known characteristics.

…to be continued.

Journalists to sources: We promise! This is off the record (except that it isn't).

And we reserve the right to determine when it isn't. So, says Jamie McIntyre in quite a few more words. [This is more fallout from the Hippy Lettuce Weekly / McChrystal fiasco.]

Sanka freeze dried version of JM's post:

1. All 'off the record' arrangements are unilaterally revisable contingent upon the judgment of the promise making journalist.

2. If such promises are to be broken, notice must be given to the promisee.

3. It being common knowledge that journalists do break such promises, no promisee should be naive' enough to believe that he can completely relax his guard.

McIntyre concedes that were he in Hastings' place he would find it difficult to determine whether or not the 'off the record' behavior of McChrystal and his staff warranted a breaking of the 'off the record' promise, but does give instances he believes would be much more clear cut for him. He also ultimately agreed with Hastings' judgment.

A problem for journalists lies in these murky grey areas though. For, if they do want to generate useful news of a 'nuanced' nature, as McIntyre suggests, and if it is also common knowledge that journalists do break 'OTR' promises, and it is also common knowledge that they do so, consequent to their judgment, AND it is also common knowledge that there are cases, such as the McChrystal case, that are admittedly 'grey', yet deemed sufficiently important to trigger the promise breaking and a subsequent publication, then one does have to ask the question that is begging, pleading, in fact yelling to be asked:

In the future, who in the military (or any other realm for that matter) will agree to arrangements such as that of Mr. Hastings? Would it not be more prudent simply to "just say no"?

If that becomes the pattern in the future, journalists will find their wells dried, or rather, capped.

For, I can imagine the position of someone who is much more responsible, and much more able to discipline his staff, before and during such an 'embed', (a Petraeus perhaps?) who may nevertheless think:

"Hey, journos still reserve judgement unilaterally with regard to OTR promises, and admit that grey areas sometimes trigger publication. Why should I subject myself to this risk? Why not 'just say no'? I'd be a fool to do otherwise."

That's a damn good question, and one with which journalistic ethics must contend as well.

This is an instance of a Kantian point. Promises become useless, impotent, and impossible to make in an environment where they are broken too frequently. And if an institution is built upon promises, it will collapse in such an environment.

The Gods are uneasy

Awesome pick from the UK's Daily Mail

Is it an omen, a sign of divine disfavor, or merely an electrical discharge?

The history of Danbury's last honest man: A primer

Mayor Boughton Nov 2005:

Mayor Mark Boughton said he will keep illegal immigration at the top of his agenda as he starts his third term in City Hall.

In fact, the Republican said his controversial stance on the issue helped win him re-election by a wide margin Tuesday. "People are very much concerned about illegal immigration in Danbury. That is evident. I think it was one of the top two or three issues in the election," Boughton said. "The public is genuinely frustrated."

[…]

Going forward, Boughton said he won't back off the issue of illegal immigration.

If illegal immigration is one of the top reasons Boughton was elected in 2005 (as he claims), why hasn't be made this a centerpiece of his campaign for Lt. Gov. Heck, if he's so proud of his anti-immigration record, then why is no mention of it on his poorly designed Boughton for Lt. Gov website:



Makes you wonder what Boughton is so afraid of…like people across the state finding out that when it comes to the issue of immigration, good ol' Mayor Mark has a LONG history of talking out of both sides of his mouth, punish people/organizations that oppose him, and controls his message by establishing a climate of fear within the immigrant community.

With the August Lt. Gov primary around the corner, it's important for people across the state to learn the REAL history behind the last honest man in Danbury...a history that Boughton is doing his best to keep off the radar.

...to be continued.

Things That Became Apparent After I Became A Parent Part II

Part I here.

1. 'Sleeping through the night' is a myth. If you do manage to get a few nights of uninterrupted sleep, baby will suddenly change it up by throwing in some teething, 2am play times, sickness or standing in her crib repeatedly, just to keep you on your toes.
   
   
2. Your toddler will be able to squeeze herself into spaces that seemingly only bunnies and tiny fairies could fit into.
   
   
3. Sometimes, your toddler will crawl faster than you can run.
   
   
4. It takes only a one-time showing for your toddler to learn a new bad habit.
   
   
5. Finding some "alone time" means spending five extra minutes in the shower.
   
   
6. Daddies come with an innate talent for throwing baby high up in the air and making her giggle uncontrollably.
   
   
7. Your little one may refuse to eat the healthy organic meal you spent an hour preparing but 10 mins later will instead choose to pick up and eat the kernels of rice that fell onto the floor.
   
   
8. Your toddler's first tricycle may be cooler than your first car.
   
   
9. Your toddler will know things and you will have no clue how they learned it.
   
   
10. There is nothing more heartwarming than seeing your parents play with your children.
    
    
11. No matter how hard you try and practice, "mama" will likely not be your baby's first word. However, she can say "dada", "dad" and "daddy" with perfect elocution.
    
    
12. Helpless babies turn into walking talking toddlers in the blink of an eye.

Any things you moms want to add to the list?

LOCAL ACCESS VIDEO: Danbury Live 06.27.10 broadcast

Note: Pay particular attention to this episode as it exposes Boughton's DISHONESTY when he claimed that his 2009-10 budget was "balanced" when in fact he MISLEAD the Common Council.

General Sherman handles the press. Lessons for today?

This article from American Heritage, 1987 describes a very fascinating find; a cache of Uncle Billy's wartime letters. They show he had, to understate things, an ambivalent relationship with the press during the Civil war. This is not news, but can serve as a good source of perspective for 21st century readers.

Reading these letters leads one to an inescapable conclusion; the wartime press of Sherman's day was far more irresponsible, than the press of today, and entirely too loose with information that was much more compromising than is the information that the press has seen fit to publish during our most recent conflict.

Sherman's hostility toward the press, documented to some extent in his memoirs, is much more prominent in these letters, expressed in his inimitably blunt yet gentlemanly voice, typical of the 19th century, something of a lost 'art' today.

In reading Sherman one cannot help but ask: how would he have dealt with Hippy Lettuce Weekly..er..Rolling Stone's request to have a stringer tag along with his staff for a week or two or three? To ask that question is to answer it. Sherman would not have seriously entertained the request, and would have relished writing the refusal.

Another question: How would Uncle Billy interface with a blogging community? One suspects far more deftly than do many generals today. In fact, one has to ask if Billy himself would have blogged if he had the benefit of the technology. The answer is clearly 'yes.' He wrote voluminously all through the war, on a daily basis. Makes you wonder what W.T. Sherman's facebook page would hold doesn't it? And, would he have commented on the New York Herald's or Time's facebook page? Oh yes, if he felt it necessary. And, no doubt he would feel it necessary over and over again! And, give the General access to the 'blogger' platform?

It would have been gold. Pure gold. As Ben Bradley states: "Generals who write always make me nervous" General Sherman would no doubt have controlled the narrative, and the press would have as a result been more circumspect, if not humbled. Public outrage at the loose practices would have been created.

Reading the letters presented in this article, and the brief perspective piece by Civil War historian Shelby Foote, as well as appended reflections by then (1987) editor of the Washington Post, Mr. Bradlee, one is struck by the fact that General Sherman dealt with press problems that hold no parallel today.

So, you think think the press today sometimes shows an alarming lack of judgment in publishing information that essentially becomes intelligence gold for the enemy? That failing as evinced by today's "scribblers" pales, yes pales in comparison to the carelessness of the Civil War era newspapers.

Sherman was quite rightly incensed by stories that gave detailed intelligence to the Confederacy, and quite rightly accused the press of his day, on more than one occasion, of having directly contributed to higher casualty rates than would otherwise have been if they had not published key information on troop movements and other logistical matters. Sherman was not the only person to complain. As is well known, Lincoln and Grant voiced similar criticisms. Sherman even brought up a correspondent on charges. That story is detailed in the American Heritage piece. Here are various excerpts that show the extent of the problem:

The cause of Sherman’s enmity toward the press is simple: Northern newspapers repeatedly and in great detail alerted the South that an attack was imminent. The telegraph, the railroad, and the daily press had made it possible to disseminate information at a rate and in quantities undreamed of a generation before, but the newspapermen still saw their job in the old, simple terms: get out the story. That the story could now be gotten out with a speed that put its subjects’ lives at hazard was not immediately apparent. Sherman was among the first—and was certainly the most vocal—of the military men who had to cope with the fact that the Industrial Revolution had overtaken the Bill of Rights. The dimensions of the problem became clear to him even before he went into battle.

On July 17, 1861, The New York Times reported: “The army in Virginia today took up the line of march for Richmond, via Fairfax and Manassas. The force starting today was fully fifty thousand strong … about three thousand Regular Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery, and fifty thousand Volunteers. …” On the same day, the Washington Star provided a detailed order of battle: “The column on the extreme right is commanded by Gen. Tyler. That consists of the following excellent troops, viz: the Maine Second, the First, Second and Third Connecticut regiments; the New York Second, the First and Second Ohio. …”

The First Battle of Bull Run ended catastrophically for the North, and whether or not the newspapermen were to blame, the indiscretion of the press before the battle still burned in Sherman’s mind two years later when he wrote his foster father: “Now in these modern times a class of men has been begotten & attend our camps & armies gathering minute information of our strength, plans & purposes & publishes them so as to reach the enemy in time to serve his purposes. Such publications do not add a man to our strength, in noways benefit us, but are invaluable to the enemy. You know that this class published in advance all the plans of the Manassas Movement [which] enabled [Gen. Joseph E. Johnston]… to reinforce Beauregard whereby McDowell was defeated & the enemy gained tremendous strength & we lost in comparison. …”

The Newspapers declare me their inveterate Enemy, and openly say they will write me down. In writing me down are they not writing the Cause and the Country down? Now I know and every officer knows that no army or detachment moves or can move that is not attended by correspondents of hundreds of newspapers. …

“They encumber our transports, occupy state rooms to the exclusion of officers on duty, they eat our provisions, they swell the crowd of hangers on, and increase the impedimenta. They publish without stint positive information of movements past & prospective, organizations, names of commanders, and accurate information which reaches the enemy with as much regularity as it does our People. They write up one class of officers and down another, and fan the flames of discord and jealousy. Being in our very midst, catching expressions dropped by officers, clerks, and orderlies, and being keen expert men they detect movements and give notice of them. So that no matter how rapidly we move, our enemy has notice in advance. To them more than to any other cause do I trace the many failures that attend our army. While they cry about blood & slaughter they are the direct cause of more bloodshed than fifty times their number of armed Rebels. Never had an enemy a better corps of spies than our army carries along, paid, transported, and fed by the United States.”

There is a section of the article, focusing on on a letter written before the battle of Vicksburg. It must be read in full. A more scathing moral condemnation from the pen of Sherman, or anyone else cannot be found:

“As I have more leisure than usual now I will illustrate by examples fresh in the memory of all, why I regard newspaper correspondents as spies & why as a servant of an enlightened government I feel bound in honor and in common honesty to shape my official conduct accordingly. A spy is one who furnishes an enemy with knowledge useful to him and dangerous to us. One who bears into a Fortress or Camp a baleful influence that encourages sedition or weakens us. He need not be an enemy, is often a trader woman or servant. Such characters are by all belligerents punished summarily with the extremest penalties, not because they are of themselves filled with guilty thought or intent but because he or she endangers the safety of an army, a nation, or the cause for which it is contending. André carried no intelligence back to Genl Clinton but was the mere instrument used to corrupt the fidelity of an officer holding an important command. Washington admitted the high and pure character of André but the safety of the cause demanded his punishment. It is hard to illustrate my point by reference to our past history, but I wish to convey the full idea that a nation & an army must defend its safety & existence by making acts militating against it criminal regardless of the mere interest of the instrument. We find a scout surveying our camp from a distance in noways threatening us but seeking information of the location strength and composition of our forces. We shoot him of course without asking a question. We find a stranger in our camp seeking a stray horse & find afterwards he has been to the enemy: We hang him as a spy because the safety of the army & the cause it fights for is too important to be risked by any pretext or chance. … I know the enemy received from the [press] … notice of our intended attack on Vicksburg & thwarted our well laid schemes. I know that Beauregard at Corinth received from the same source full details of all troops ascending the Tennessee and acted accordingly. I know that it was by absolute reticence only that Halleck succeeded in striking Forts Henry & Donaldson and prevented their reinforcement in time to thwart that most brilliant movement. And it was only by the absence of newspapers that we succeeded in reaching the post of Arkansas before it could be reinforced.

“I know that the principal northern papers reach the enemy regularly & promptly & I know that all the vigilance of our army cannot prevent it & I know that by this means the enemy can defeat us to the end of time. …

“Another view of the case. The Northern Press either make public opinion or reflect it. By gradual steps public opinion instead of being governed governs our country. All bow to it & even military men who are sworn officers of the Executive Branch of the Government go behind & look to public opinion. The consequence is & has been that officers instead of keeping the Executive Branch advised of all movements, events, or circumstances that would enable it to act advisedly & with vigor communicate with the public direct through the Press so that the Government authorities are operated on by public opinion formed too often on false or interested information. This has weakened the Executive and has created jealousies, mistrust, & actual sedition. Officers find it easier to attain rank, renown, fame, and notoriety by the cheap process of newspapers. This cause has paralyzed several fine armies & by making the people at home mistrust the ability of Leaders, Surgeons, & Quarter Masters has even excited the fears of parents so far that many advise their sons and brothers to desert until desertion & mutiny have lost their odious character. I’ll undertake to say that the army of the Potomac has not today for battle one half the men whom the U.S. pays as soldiers & this is partially the case with the army of the Tennessee & here.

“In all armies there must be wide differences of opinion & partial causes of disaffection—want of pay, bad clothing, dismal camps, crowded transports, hospitals rudely formed, & all the incidents of war. These cannot be entirely avoided & newspapers can easily charge them to negligence of commanders & thereby create disaffection. I do not say the Press intends this but they have done this and are doing it all the time. Now I know I made the most minute and careful preparation for the sick & wounded on the Yazoo, plenty of ambulances & men detailed in advance to remove the wounded—four of the largest transports prepared & set aside before a shot was fired & that every wounded man was taken from the field dressed & carefully attended immediately & yet I know that the Press has succeeded in making the very reverse impression & that many good people think there was criminal negligence. The same naked representations were made at Shiloh & I saw hundreds of Physicians come down & when our Surgeons begged & implored their help they preferred to gather up trophies and consume the dainties provided for the wounded & go back and represent the cruelty of the Army Surgeons & boast of their own disinterested humanity. I know this & that they nearly ruined Dr. Hewitt, one of the hardest working Surgeons in any army. I see similar attempts—less successful however—against Dr. McMillan. Not a word of truth, not even a pretense of truth, but it is a popular & successful theme & they avail themselves of it. What is the consequence? All officers of industry who stand by at all times through storm & sunshine find their reputations blasted & others—usually the most lazy & indolent—reaping cheap glory & fame through the correspondents of the Press.

“I say in giving intelligence to the enemy, in sowing discord & discontent in an army, these men fulfill all the conditions of spies. Shall we succumb or shall we meet and overcome the evil? I am satisfied they have cost the country hundreds of millions of dollars & brought our country to the brink of ruin & that unless the nuisance is abated we are lost.

“Here we are in front of Vicksburg. The attack direct in front would in our frail transports be marked by the sinking of Steamers loaded with troops, a fearful assault against the hills fortified with great care by a cunning enemy. Every commander who has looked at it says it cannot be done in front—it must be turned. I tried it but newspaper correspondents had sent word in advance & ample preparations were made & [enemy] reinforcements double my number had reached Vicksburg. McClernand was unwilling to attack in front. Grant ditto. Then how turn the position? We cannot ascend the Yazoo to where our men can get a footing. We cannot run our frail transports past the Vicksburg Batteries, so we resolve to cut a channel into the Yazoo at the old pass near Delta above & into the Texas by way of Lake Providence. Secrecy & dispatch are the chief elements of success. The forces here are kept to occupy the attention of the enemy, two steamers are floated past the Batteries to control the River below & men are drawn secretly from Helena & Memphis to cut the canals & levees & remove all the inhabitants so that the enemy could not have notice till the floods of the Mississippi could finish the work of man. But what avail? Known spies accompany each expedition & we now read in the Northern papers … that our forces here are unequal to the direct assault but we are cutting the two canals above. The levees are cut & our plans work to a charm but the enemy now knows our purposes & hastens above, fells trees into the narrow headstreams, cuts the side levees, disperses the waters & defeats our well conceived plans.

“Who can carry on a war thus? It is terrible to contemplate: & I say that no intelligent officer in this or any American army now in the field but would prefer to have his opponent increased twenty—Yea, fifty percent—if the internal informers & spies could be excluded from our camps … if the people could only see as I see the baleful effects of this mischievous practice they would cry aloud in indignant tones. We may in self defense be compelled to take the law into our own hands for our safety or we may bend to the storm and seek a position where others may take the consequences of this cause. I early foresee this result & have borne the malignity of the Press—but a day will come & that not far distant when the Press must surrender some portion of its freedom to save the rest else it too will perish in the general wreck. …

“I know I could have easily achieved popularity by yielding to … outside influences but I could not do what I see other popular officers do: furnish transportation at government expense to newspaper agents & supply them with public horses … [and] give access to official papers which I am commanded to withhold to the world till my Employer has benefit of them. I could not do these things & feel that I was an honest man & faithful servant of the Government, for my memory still runs back to the time when … an officer would not take a government nail out of a keg on which to hang his coat or feed his horse out of the public crib without charging its cost against his pay. …

“Again the habit of indiscriminate praise & flattery has done us harm. Let a stranger read our official reports & he would blush at the praise bespattered over Regiments, Divisions, and Corps for skirmishes & actions where the dead & wounded mark no serious conflict. …

“I have departed from my theme. My argument is that newspaper correspondents and camp followers, writing with a purpose & with no data, communicate facts useful to the enemy and useless to our cause & calculated to impair the discipline of the army & that the practice must cease. We cannot appeal to Patriotism because news is a salable commodity & the more valuable as it is, the more pithy and damaging to our cause. … The law gives me the means to stop it & as an army we fail in our duty to the Government, to our cause, & to ourselves when we do not use them.”

The newspapers had upbraided Sherman not only for incompetence and insanity but also for what they considered a disregard for his men and a willingness to sacrifice them heartlessly. Nothing incensed Sherman more than this. “Among all the infamous charges,” he wrote to friends in St. Louis, “none has given me more pain than the assertion that my troops were disaffected, mutinous, and personally opposed to me. This is false, false as hell. My own division will follow me anywhere. …” As indeed Sherman’s troops were to prove to the nation time and again. To Senator Ewing, in his long letter of February 17, Sherman wrote:

“Every soldier of my command comes into my presence as easy as the highest officer. Their beds & rations are as good as mine & certainly no General Officer moves about with as little pomp as I. They see me daily, nightly, hourly along the picket line afoot, alone, or with a single orderly or officer, whilst others have their mighty escorts and retinue. Indeed I am usually laughed at for my simplicity in this respect. … Many a solitary picket has seen me creeping at night examining ground before I ordered … [the men] to cross it & yet other lazy rascals ignorant of the truth would hang behind sleep or crouch around the distant campfire till danger was passed, and then write how Sherman with insane rashness had pushed his brave soldiers into the jaws of death. … When I praise I mean it & when troops fall into disorder I must notice it, but you may read my reports in vain for an instance when troops have kept their ranks and done even moderately well but I have encouraged them to a better future. … I know that in trouble, in danger, in emergencies the men know I have patience, a keen appreciation of the truth of facts & ground equalled by few, and one day they will tell the truth. …”

Throughout the war Sherman, like all in high command, was besieged by petitioners appealing for all manner of benefits. He disappointed many, cutting them short, which probably prompted the Cincinnati Commercial to judge him proud and haughty. From this charge, too, Sherman defended himself to his foster father:

“Abrupt I am, & all military men are. The mind jumps to its conclusions & is emphatic, & I can usually divine the motive of the insidious cotton speculator, camp follower, & hypercritical humanity seeker before he discloses his plans & designs. An officer who must attend to the thousand & one wants of thirty thousand men besides the importunities of thousands of mischievous camp followers must need be abrupt unless the day can be made more than twenty-four hours long. A citizen cannot understand that an officer who has to see to the wants and necessities of an army has no time to listen to the usual long perorations & I must confess I have little patience with this class of men. …”

Two days after delivering his deposition against the press, Sherman learned that a military court had found Thomas Knox not guilty of the charge of giving intelligence to the enemy, or of being a spy. The court did find him guilty of willfully disobeying Sherman’s order by accompanying the army down the Mississippi (although it “attaches no criminality thereto”) and of causing his dispatch to be printed in the New York Herald without the sanction of the general in command (as required by War Department General Order No. 67, August 26, 1861). Accordingly Knox was sentenced “to be sent without the lines of the army, and not to return under penalty of imprisonment.”

The New York Herald was among the strongest supporters of Lincoln’s administration, and the paper appealed at once to the President, who countermanded the sentence on the condition that Grant, Sherman’s superior, agreed. Grant would not. He told Knox that only if Sherman himself gave his consent would Knox be allowed to remain. Knox therefore was forced to appeal directly to the man he had defamed. He was proud and formal: “I should be pleased to receive your assent in the present subject matter,” adding an expression of his “regret at the want of harmony between portions of the Army and the Press. …”

Sherman must have taken some pleasure in writing his answer. “Come with a sword or musket in your hand, prepared to share with us our fate … and I will welcome you as a brother and associate; but come as you now do, expecting me to ally the reputation and honor of my country and my fellowsoldiers with you as the representative of the Press which you yourself say makes so slight a difference between truth and falsehood and my answer is Never!”

Sherman thanked Grant for handling Knox’s request as he had. The court’s decision had been less than a clear-cut victory in Sherman’s eyes, but he satisfied himself with the realization that the trial and then banishment of Knox had a sobering effect on other correspondents, some of whom voluntarily abandoned the Vicksburg area. Sherman went on to play a prominent role in the campaign, his 15th Corps carrying out prodigious forced marches. In the final push against Vicksburg, Sherman’s corps occupied the right flank of the encircling Federal army. The indiscretion of the press would cause Sherman no serious harm again until the campaign in North Carolina.

Having focused more on the military perspective, let's turn things toward the 'scribblers': What are the takeaways in this history for the press of the 21st century? What lessons lay in these letters for newspapers, blogs, and etc.? I would say, a lesson in humility and the need for circumspection:

If today the head of an established press organization can look back, as Bradlee does in the 'afterward', over the approximately 150 year gap and recognize over-reach and galling lack of judgment, should todays press not also be able to focus that same regard on their actions today, and temper those actions in light of the elementary moral principles that pressmen of that day so clearly neglected?

And, I also think that something of the methods utilized by Grant and Sherman with regard to Mr. Knox might be extracted, modified, modernized and implemented with regard to information outlets that are considerably less circumspect in what they choose to broadcast than the established newspapers and internet institutions. Might the proper course of action with regard to the detestable WikiLeaks organization and Mr. Asschapeau..er..Assange..be gleaned from Sherman's letters?

In fact, the more I think about it, the press during the Civil War resembled Wikileaks more than it does the establishment press or the new media of today. Something to think about if the evolution of information technology and distribution brings us more and more Wikileaks organizations, or lone wolves that emulate Assange and his ilk.

Need I say, read the whole darned article?

Campaign Chests

I saw these (minus the side tables - maybe they were sold already) at Frontier Sales on Saturday.

Somebody PLEASE buy them and do this...

or this...

or this...

images via Little Green Notebook, Matters of Style

Who Killed Cock Robin? A Mystery

.

European Robin (Erithacus rubecula), on the bank of the Lauch, above Herrlisheim, near Colmar: photo by Katz, 2007

European Robin (Erithacus rubecula), Milton Country Park, Cambridgeshire: photo by DemonTraitor, 2007

Who killed Cock Robin?

I, said the Sparrow,

with my bow and arrow,

I killed Cock Robin.

House Sparrow (Passer domesticus), male, Kolkata, West Bengal, India: photo by J. M. Garg, 2010

Who saw him die?

I, said the Fly,

with my little eye,

I saw him die.

Fly: photo by Hedwig Storch, 2009

Who caught his blood?

I, said the Fish,

with my little dish,

I caught his blood.

Blue Betta (Betta splendens): photo by Editor at Large, 2007

Who'll make the shroud?

I, said the Beetle,

with my thread and needle,

I'll make the shroud.

Lady Beetle (Harmonia axyridis): photo by Thomas G. Moertel, 2006

Who'll dig his grave?

I, said the Owl,

with my pick and shovel,

I'll dig his grave.

Tawny Owl (Strix aluco): photo by K.-M. Hansche, 2006

Who'll be the parson?

I, said the Rook,

with my little book,

I'll be the parson.

Rook (Corvus frugilegus): photo by AndronovIN, 2007

Who'll be the clerk?

I, said the Lark,

if it's not in the dark,

I'll be the clerk.

Rufous-Naped Lark (Mirafra africana athi), Sweetwaters Game Reserve, Kenya: photo by Jerry Friedman, 2007

Who'll carry the link?

I, said the Linnet,

I'll fetch it in a minute,

I'll carry the link.

Linnet (Carduelis cannabina): photo by Pawel Kuzniar, 2006

Who'll be chief mourner?

I, said the Dove,

I mourn for my love,

I'll be chief mourner.

A pair of White-Winged Doves (Zenaida asiatica), considering a nest site near a Yucatán cenote: photo by Jim Conrad, 2008

Who'll carry the coffin?

I, said the Kite,

if it's not through the night,

I'll carry the coffin.

Black Kite (Milvus migrans): photo by Ferdinand Grossman, 2005

Who'll bear the pall?

We, said the Wren,

both the cock and the hen,

We'll bear the pall.

Marsh Wren (Cistothorus palustris), Iona, Scotland: photo by Greg7, 2008

Who'll sing a psalm?

I, said the Thrush,

as she sat on a bush,

I'll sing a psalm.

Hermit Thrush (Catharus guttatus): photo by Dave Menke, 2008 (U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service)

Who'll toll the bell?

I said the bull,

because I can pull,

I'll toll the bell

Bull (Bos primogenius taurus), Oostvardersplassen, The Netherlands: photo by Rex, 2005

All the birds of the air

fell a-sighing and a-sobbing,

when they heard the bell toll

for poor Cock Robin.

British Robin (Erithacus rubecula melophilus), Merrion Squre, Dublin: photo by David Jordan, 2008

Is the sad tale of Cock Robin a murder archetype in a nursery rhyme, a kind of children's story employed by a culture to resolve issues symbolically through catharsis, so that violence and danger, while recognized as real, may be moved off, in the child's mind, from the world of humans, where evil exists, to that of nature, where there had previously been an innocence that would, in a world like this one, be perhaps too much for a grown person to bear?

European Robin (Erithacus rubecula), on the bank of the Lauch, above Herrlisheim, near Colmar: photo by Katz, 2007

Who Killed Cock Robin? origin unknown, first published in Tommy Thumb's Pretty Song Book, c.1744, extended version first published c. 1770

Smokey and the Vader

Very clever amalgam of Smokey and the Bandit and Star Wars. Enjoy.

Rimbaud in Africa

.

He left his fortune to the Harar boy
Djami, whose name rhymes with friend,
The sole human he ever loved or trusted,
His young factotum, his faithful duidar
Dead before the poet's legacy reached him,
A suitcase full of silver thalers bearing
Maria Theresa's outdated head.

Market in Harar: photo by Arthur Rimbaud, c. 1883, image by Andro96, 2006
Street scene, Harar: photo by Bain News Service, 1900, image by Andro96, 2006 (George Grantham Bain Collection, Library of Congress)
Cemetery outside old city of Harar, Ethiopia: photo by Ahron de Leeuw, 2006
Montage en rouge: Arthur Rimbaud et éruption volcanique: image by PRA, 2007

In Honor of General Custer: Bill Cosby's coin toss

Just hang in there. You'll get the connection. Sitting Bull won the toss. Today is the anniversary of Little Big Horn.

LOCAL ACCESS VIDEO: Ideas At Work and Beyond 06.24.10 broadcast

Sec. of State release primary list

The Secretary of State's office released a list of the 44 primaries, which will be held on August 10...

World Cup fans show their pride on Main Street

Although the final score between the Brazil and Portugal was 0 to 0, that didn't stop fans of two World Cup teams from showing their pride along Main Street this afternoon.

After watching the match at the Atlantic Restaurant on Osborne Street, I went to check the scene on the corner of Main and Keeler Street. There were about 20 cars with people honking their horns and waving flags after the game.

From what I could see from my location, the flow of traffic downtown moved very smoothly downtown although things cleared immediately on Main Street once the police re-opened the side roads (even Chief Al Baker was on hand directing vehicles).

For the most part, people were very respectable on Main Street and had a great time…and then there were the anti-immigrant locals.



Two members of the United States Citizens for Immigration and Law Enforcement parked across the street from the Casa Nova restaurant and showed a complete lack of class. Infamous former Common Council member Pauline Basso and anti-immigrant colleague Patricia Kadet felt the need to "observe" the situation…complete with Kadet receiving a round of boos as she taunted people with her "thumbs down" hand gestures. Happily the two irritants left the scene once they noticed yours truly had a camera pointed directly at them.

Here's a brief video clip of the scene along Main Street.