American GI Forum Resolution Condemns PBS & Ken Burns

From the American GI Forum Website:

AMERICAN GI FORUM OF THE UNITED STATES

RESOLUTION- PBS/Ken Burns Documentary, THE WAR

WHEREAS, The American GI Forum of the United States, is the only Congressionally Chartered Hispanic/Latino Veterans Organization in the United States whose primary purpose is to serve Hispanic/Latino Veterans and their families;

WHEREAS, The American GI Forum was founded by Dr. Hector P. Garcia in 1948 because of the inequities and discrimination inflicted upon returning Mexican-American Veterans after their distinguished service in World War II;

WHEREAS, Hispanic/Latino individuals, as members of the Armed Forces of the United States, served with valor and distinction during World War II;

WHEREAS, In World War II, Hispanic/Latino individuals fought and died for the principles of equality, justice and freedom for all.

WHEREAS, Hispanic/Latino individuals during World War II were the most decorated minority group to receive this Country's highest award, "The Congressional Medal of Honor";

WHEREAS, Hispanic/Latino Americans, as an ethnic group, made tremendous and significant contributions during World War II, for example:

. . . In 1940, while America was still at peace, two National Guard units from New Mexico, the 200th and 515th Coast Artillery (Anti-aircraft) battalions were activated and dispatched to the Philippine Islands. Largely made up of [Mexican Americans]-- both officers and enlisted men from New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas -- the two units were stationed at Clark Field, 65 miles from Manila.

On December 7, 1941, the Japanese Imperial Navy launched a surprise attack on the American naval fleet at Pearl Harbor, forcing America into war. Within days, Japanese forces attacked the American positions in the Philippines. Outnumbered and desperate, General Douglas MacArthur moved his forces, including the 200th and 515th, to the Bataan Peninsula west of Manila. Here, fighting alongside their Filipino comrades, they made a heroic three-month stand against the large, well-equipped invading forces. As the weeks passed, rations, medical supplies, and ammunition diminished and became scarce. On April 9, 1942, starving and greatly outnumbered, most of the surviving troops were ordered to surrender. After their capture, the American and Filipino soldiers had to endure the 12-day, 85-mile "Death March" from Bataan to the prison camps, followed by 34 months of captivity. Three years later, General Jonathan Wainwright praised the men of the 200th and 515th units, saying that "they were the first to fire and the last to lay down their arms and only reluctantly doing so after being given a direct order."

In the Pacific theater, the 158th Regimental Combat Team, known as the Bushmasters, an Arizona National Guard unit comprised of many Hispanic soldiers, saw heavy combat. They earned the respect of General MacArthur who referred to them as "the greatest fighting combat team ever deployed for battle." Company E of the 141st Regiment of the 36th Texas Infantry Division was made up entirely of [Hispanic] Americans, the majority of them from Texas. After 361 days of combat in Italy and France, the 141st Infantry Regiment sustained 1,126 killed, 5,000 wounded, and over 500 missing in action. In recognition of their extended service and valor, the members of the 141st garnered 31 Distinguished Service Crosses, 12 Legion of Merits, 492 Silver Stars, 11 Soldier's Medals, 1,685 Bronze Stars, as well as numerous commendations and decorations. In all, twelve Hispanic soldiers received the Medal of Honor for their services during World War II.

From 1940 to 1946, more than 65,000 Puerto Ricans served in the American military, most of them going overseas. The 295th and 296th Infantry Regiments of the Puerto Rican National Guard participated in the Pacific theater, while other Puerto Rican soldiers served in Europe.

(Excerpts from: Houston Institute for Culture, The Hispanic Experience, Hispanics in Military Service, Hispanic Contributions to America's Defense, by John Schmal. - Originally published by the Puerto Rico Herald, November 11, 1999.);

WHEREAS, The PBS (Public Broadcasting Service) has announced it is airing in September, 2007, the new Ken Burns documentary series, THE WAR. This seven-part, 14 hour, documentary series, is directed and produced by Ken Burns and Lynn Novick. It explores the history and horror of World War II from an American perspective. It follows the fortunes of so-called ordinary men and women who get caught up in the greatest cataclysm in human history;

WHEREAS, This documentary exposes the racism of World War II directed at African-American and Japanese-Americans, however, it fails to outline the same as it affected Hispanic/Latino Americans;

WHEREAS, This documentary purports to honor the heroism of all Americans, when in fact, it glaringly fails to honor those heroic Hispanic Americans who have earned such an honor;

WHEREAS, Whether intentionally or inadvertently, the contributions of Hispanic/Latinos in World War II were omitted;

WHEREAS, This oversight appears to have violated PBS's own policy on "Diversity" i.e.,

. . . Content diversity furthers the goals of a democratic society by enhancing public access to the full range of ideas, information, subject matter, and perspectives required to make informed judgments about the issues of our time. It also furthers public television's special mandate to serve many different and discrete audiences. The goal of diversity also requires continuing efforts to assure that PBS content fully reflects the pluralism of our society, including, for example, appropriate representation of women and minorities. . . .

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,

1. That the American GI Forum of the United States condemns this documentary as not presenting the contributions of Hispanic Americans during World War II and until such time as Hispanics are fairly and adequately represented, demands that it not be aired,

2. That the American GI Forum of the United States requests that the Public Broadcast System forthwith correct this omission.

3. That failure to correct this omission will result in the institution of a nationwide boycott of PBS and its affiliates. Further, we would lead an effort requesting that all public and private funding be curtailed.

For it was Abraham Lincoln who said, "History is not history unless it's true."

Adopted on the 13th day of March, 2007
By the American GI Forum of the United States
National Board of Directors Meeting in Las Vegas, NV
ANTONIO GIL MORALES,
National Commander & Board Chairman

How come I haven't seen this controversy discussed on the Jim Lehrer Newshour, BTW?

Unanswered Questions about NEH Role in Ken Burns Scandal

I sent the following email to the National Endowment for the Humanities about that organization's responsibility for the Ken Burns documentary that has caused such great offense to Hispanic-American veterans of World War II. So far, no answers. I'll let readers know what Dr. Bruce Cole's organization has to say in this regard, as soon as I get a reply...The following email was sent to NEH Public Affairs on March 31, 2007:

Dear NEH Public Affairs,

I have been reading about the controversy over Ken Burns' new documentary about World War II with interest, and would appreciate information on the NEH role, which presumably should safeguard historical accuracy against a filmmaker's "artistic license" in portraying historical events. I assume that is the purpose of academic review and the peer panel process.

Therefore, for publication on my blog, I would appreciate written answers to the following questions:

How much has NEH paid for this documentary? What were the conditions of the grant relating to historical accuracy and comprehensiveness?

Who are the historical advisors for this project?

Who reviewed the grant application for NEH--peer panelist names as well as staff names?

Who signed the final approval for this project?

Did anyone notice the absence of Latino veterans in the documentary prior to the current controversy--as part of the NEH peer review process?

I look forward to hearing from you in this regard.

Yours sincerely,
Laurence Jarvik
Laurence A. Jarvik, Ph.D.
http://laurencejarvikonline.blogspot.com

UPDATE: I have received an email from info@neh.gov calling the attention of "Noel" to this request. I assume that is Noel Milan, director of communications for NEH. So, I'll post NEH's answers to the above questions --once the NEH sends them to me...

Fred Thompson on Ayaan Hirsi Ali

The possible Presidential candidate, actor, and former senator had his say in National Review:

Ayaan Hirsi Ali can’t leave her Washington D.C. home without guards.

Born a Muslim in the African nation of Somalia, she was treated as property. Hirsi Ali, though, escaped a marriage, arranged by her father, to a cousin in Canada she’d never met.

Granted exile in the Netherlands, Hirsi Ali rose like cream and was elected to the Dutch parliament. She also wrote a script based on her experience volunteering in battered women’s shelters. There, she learned that her fellow Somali immigrants were maintaining the feudal ways she thought she had left behind.

Filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, the great-grand-nephew of the famous painter, made her movie — but paid for it with his life. His Islamist murderer used a dagger to pin a note, promising Hirsi Ali’s death, to the director’s chest. Unsafe, and unwelcome to many, Hirsi Ali came to America last year and was able to live pretty much like a normal person.

But her new autobiography, Infidel, is out now and the usual suspects are furious that she would argue for the liberation of Muslim women. Due to serious and credible threats, she is once again surrounded by guards.

There were many Germans and other Europeans who came to America and warned of the Nazi threat in the 1930s, including writers and filmmakers. Can you imagine that any of them would have ever needed bodyguards?

Hirsi Ali does — right here in America. Yet too many people still don’t understand what our country is up against. They might if they read her book.

Thompson recorded a radio spot with the same message available as an mp3 download here

Gerald Steinberg: Close Down EU-Funded NGOs in Israel

From The Jerusalem Post:

Furthermore, the scale of European government funding for Israeli and Palestinian political organizations that claim to promote human rights, peace and democracy is huge, and largely hidden. The massive Euro-bureaucracy has created a complex network of funding agencies for "civil society" in the region, and no central index or reporting system exists.

Until last year, the EU office in Tel Aviv violated its own principles of transparency and kept the list of Israeli NGO beneficiaries secret, ostensibly due to threats of violence. NGO Monitor's investigations led to a change in this instance, but funding for Palestinian NGOs is still largely covert.

THE CHANGE in Israeli government policy and a willingness to confront such anti-democratic manipulation, particularly by European governments (including non-EU countries such as Norway and Switzerland), marks an important step. Going beyond the terse statement, the Israeli representatives should bring a detailed file on the funding provided for politicized NGOs to every meeting between heads of state, foreign ministers and government officials.

If Europe expects to play a more important role in regional security and diplomacy, it cannot also continue to provide funding designed to undermine the Israeli government's positions, both internally and in the international arena.

In Europe, the amorphous entities known as "civil society organizations" and NGOs also need close scrutiny. These bodies are unelected, and their officials are not accountable.

In democratic societies, government officials who provide funds to these entities generally use this as a means to promote their own interests and objectives, without checks and balances or transparency. In closed non-democratic societies, such as Syria, Egypt and the Palestinian Authority, foreign government assistance for NGOs that promote democracy, tolerance, and human rights may have a positive impact, but only if this support is carefully monitored to prevent abuse. Europe's failure to provide such monitoring exacerbates the damage.

Israel, as a vibrant democracy, does not need, and should not be the target of "civil society initiatives" engineered by foreign governments, whether well-meaning or hostile. From this perspective, the example of Bimkom, the security barrier, and the British Embassy is small but highly illustrative.

The time has come to end this misguided and patronizing policy.

Belinda Acosta: "Deplorable" Ken Burns No Da Vinci

In the Austin Chronicle, Belinda Acosta weighs in against Ken Burns and PBS:

Perhaps the most perplexing response to date comes from Lionel Sosa, a Latino member of the PBS board of directors.

"Asking Burns to change his documentary is like asking Leonardo da Vinci to add another apostle to The Last Supper because somebody was left out," Sosa said in a Laredo Morning Times article by Tricia Cortez published March 20. "This is artistic. This is a film. It's not journalism."

Apparently, Sosa needs a dictionary to look up the definition of "documentary."

By comparing Burns to da Vinci, Sosa inadvertently strikes the crux of the matter. Burns' work is branded as the definitive statement on a subject. This brand comes largely because of his affiliation with PBS, the mandate of which is to serve the American public but much more so because of PBS's reach beyond television (already pervasive) as an approved "text" for use in classrooms across the nation.

Being ignorant – willfully or otherwise – of the flesh-and-blood impact of Latinos in World War II, not to mention the role of World War II in defining U.S. Latino history, is, in a word, deplorable. I don't expect PBS to impose its will on a filmmaker's vision – but it is painfully disappointing to discover that PBS's vision is little more than a few "diversity" dishes served at a card table near the banquet table. No, if PBS is truly interested in expanding its base, it means more than making room at the table. It means allowing other cooks in the kitchen when the meal is being prepared.

Sosa makes another interesting statement in the aforementioned Laredo Morning Times article. Although "disappointed" by the omission of Latinos in The War, he says it's up to Latinos, not Burns, to tell their stories.

"We have the talent in terms of writers, producers, directors, and historians to tell the story," he said. "And we have the resources to raise the money to make the films."

In that case, why bother supporting PBS at all?

Antigua Beats USA in WTO Dispute

The WTO has spoken in favor of Antigua's offshore internet gambling business and against American prohibitions--because the US permits domestic gambling. Slashdot reports that if the US doesn't change its policy, them Antigua has the legal right to retaliate against American sanctions--and may do so by permitting bootleg MP3 download sites for media. The Caribbean once hosted rum smugglers and real pirates...will it now become a haven for music and video pirates? This post from TechDirt raises the question:

TechDirt writes "For some time we've been following the ongoing conflict between the US and the island nation of Antigua surrounding internet gambling. Even before the passage of the most recent anti-gambling law, Antigua had gone to the WTO to complain that the US government's actions against online gambling were de facto protectionist measures, and thus violated international trade law. The WTO ended up siding with Antigua, although, quite predictably, the US did nothing to resolve the issue -- in fact, things have only gotten worse. Now the WTO is speaking out again, slamming the US government for its failure to abide by the decision against it. Once again, it seems likely that the US will ignore the decision, although that would give Antigua the right to retaliate. One possibility that's been thrown out there is that Antigua may turn itself into a haven for free music and software and set up some site like allofmp3.com. Of course, the US put pressure on Russia to crack down on that site, as part of the country's admittance into the WTO, but since Antigua is already part of the organization, the US would have no such leverage. Now, the WTO has spoken out again."

For Antigua's view of the dispute, here's a link to the Antigua Online Gaming Association.

First Review of Bernard Weinraub's "The Accomplices"

It hasn't opened yet, but Cameron's Theatre Snobbery at its Finest has published an early--and favorable--review of Bernard Weinraub's new play about Ben Hecht, Peter Bergson and the struggle to save European Jewry during World War II:

I'm having a hard time thinking of one negative comment I can make about Bernard Weinraub's The Accomplices, currently at Theatre Row in a production by The New Group. It's not a great play, but I left feeling that I had seen one of the most interesting and fascinating political dramas in a long while. Weinraub, a journalist by profession who is making his theatrical debut, tells the story of a fringe group in the early 1940s who tried to shine a light on Hitler's regime at a time when the Roosevelt administration was turning a blind eye to it. The performances are universally excellent: Daniel Sauli plays the protagonist (the son of a Palestinian rabbi) perfectly, while Zoe Lister-Jones hits all the right notes as the woman who loves him, and who has spent much of her life running from her Jewish heritage. Veteran David Margulies is superb as the Rabbi Stephen Wise, who chooses to scorn the radical movement in favor of blind support for FDR, and Jon DeVries offers great comic relief (and social commentary) as both the President of the United States and one of the movement's famous supporters, playwright Ben Hecht. Sign yourself up for this exemplary history listen.

Ken Burns Scandal Hits Philadelphia

The Philadelphia Daily News asks: "Que Pasa PBS?":

USUALLY a Ken Burns television documentary is greeted with great anticipation.

But hype for "The War," Burns' seven-part documentary about World War II that's scheduled to air in September on PBS television stations, has been anything but good, considering the outrage it has triggered among Latino organizations.

Burns' documentary, which looks at the war from the perspective of four cities and towns, excludes the contributions made by America's Latinos who fought in World War II, they say. Estimates are that about 500,000 Latinos served in the war. And 12 were awarded Medals of Honor. With a population of 44 million, Latinos are America's largest minority group.

Janet Murgula, president of the National Council of La Raza, sent a letter to Paula Kerger, president of the Public Broadcasting Service. Kerger will soon rule on how PBS plans to handle the omission.

The brouhaha shows Latinos will not allow [themselves] to be marginalized. Even in Philadelphia.

Iran Frees British Hostages

Whew! Glad that's over...

Though I don't know if Iran backed down under international pressure, Britain blinked when she kow-towed to hostage-takers, or if the lesson is, as this BBC report concludes, quoting a relative of one of the hostages :

"Whoever has been in the right or wrong, the whole thing has been a political mess, so let's just get them home," said his uncle, Ray Cooper.

Speaking of World War II Documentaries...

My film, Who Shall Live and Who Shall Die?, is officially released on DVD today by Kino International, in a special 25th anniversary edition that includes a copy of Billy Wilder's historically-significant short film Death Mills as an "extra".

For some unknown reason, I haven't seen any mentions in the press, not even in Dave Kehr's usually excellent NY Times DVD column. Netflix hasn't stocked it yet, either. Don't know why...

So, please go to your local video store to find a copy to rent or buy (or request your public library to stock it). If you live in the Washington, DC metro area our local Potomac Video has four copies in stock--or you can order a copy from Amazon.com here:

Tawfik Hamid on Islamist Extremism

From OpinionJournal.com (ht JihadWatch):

Progressives need to realize that radical Islam is based on an antiliberal system. They need to awaken to the inhumane policies and practices of Islamists around the world. They need to realize that Islamism spells the death of liberal values. And they must not take for granted the respect for human rights and dignity that we experience in America, and indeed, the West, today.

Well-meaning interfaith dialogues with Muslims have largely been fruitless. Participants must demand--but so far haven't--that Muslim organizations and scholars specifically and unambiguously denounce violent Salafi components in their mosques and in the media. Muslims who do not vocally oppose brutal Shariah decrees should not be considered "moderates."

All of this makes the efforts of Muslim reformers more difficult. When Westerners make politically-correct excuses for Islamism, it actually endangers the lives of reformers and in many cases has the effect of suppressing their voices.

Tolerance does not mean toleration of atrocities under the umbrella of relativism. It is time for all of us in the free world to face the reality of Salafi Islam or the reality of radical Islam will continue to face us.

Russian Translation of Cultural Challenges to Democratization in Russia

Thanks to the work of Professor Tatiana Samsonova of Moscow State University, my Winter 2006 ORBIS article, Cultural Challenges to Democratization in Russia, is now available in Russian.

Click here to download the Russian version: КУЛЬТУРНЫЕ ВЫЗОВЫ ДЕМОКРАТИЗАЦИИ В РОССИИ--Лоренс Джарвик (MS Word).

Rory O'Connor to Ken Burns: "Re-edit your precious art..."

PBS documentary producer Rory O'Connor chides Ken Burns & PBS for disrespecting Latino WWII veterans, on AlterNet:

As a documentary filmmaker myself, I'm definitely in favor of respecting the work of producers. But isn't respect for the audience also important? In a 14-hour documentary, couldn't Burns have devoted a few minutes (at least!) to include the WWII experiences of America's Latinos? I certainly am not asking for the imposition of any kind of "political litmus tests" for documentaries -- but I am calling for Burns to listen to and show respect for valid complaints from the public broadcasting audience and, in this case, to reassess his startling and ahistorical omission.

But to date both Burns and his PBS supporters seem instead to be circling their wagons and taking a defensive posture, instead of reaching out and trying to rectify the situation. "People, when they see the film, they will see the universality," Burns claims. But Latinos won't see themselves -- and that's the crux of the problem.

To acknowledge the ground that the film does not cover, Burns will begin each episode of the documentary with a title card acknowledging its limited scope. He has also asked PBS and CPB to back the related project of local outreach and production. "The film is done yet there are all these opportunities to tell all these other stories," Burns said.

In other words -- leave it to others to clean up the mess I've made ...

Come on, Ken -- you're better than that! You have fourteen hours in well-promoted prime time, coupled with the most extensive outreach campaigns ever tied to a national broadcast, so why not give it up? Do the right thing! Listen to the voice of the people and then re-edit your precious art ...

So far, however, Burns demurs. "It's not just me that can tell all these stories," he maintains. "This is public broadcasting."

Precisely ...

Happy Passover!

Wikipedia entry here.

Dorothy Rabinowitz on AIPAC's Trial

From The Wall Street Journal:

In October 2005, with pro bono attorney Plato Cacheris at his side, Lawrence Franklin pleaded guilty--a decision he could not avoid making, given the indisputable proof of offense--to keeping classified documents at his home. His indictment charged much more--conspiring to communicate national defense information to persons not entitled to receive it, meetings with representatives of foreign nation A (Israel), and Messrs. Rosen and Weissman, cited as furtherance of a conspiracy. The former desk officer for Iran stood charged with conspiracy to "advance his own personal foreign policy agenda" and influence people in government. One Washington insider, hearing this, tartly noted that if all government officials who leaked material to effect policy changes were charged and convicted, the prisons would soon be packed.

The guilty plea brought a sentence of 12 years, seven months--not a light one. Mr. Franklin's hope for reducing it hinges on the cooperation he gives government prosecutors in the trial of the lobbyists. The role assigned him has from the beginning been noteworthy--a reversal of norms. Government officials don't normally get to take part in stings of ordinary citizens. But Mr. Franklin, an official with top security clearance, sworn to protect classified information, is the one asked to wear a wire to amass evidence against the two men with whom he has allegedly conspired. It usually goes the other way around. There is a reason that the government official caught taking a bribe is the object of the law's pursuit, rather than the citizen who has tried to pay him off--and why it is the citizen, crooked as he may be, who wears the wire and gets the possibility of a deal. That reason, of course, is the higher standard expected of those sworn to uphold their offices. If nothing else, the role assigned Mr. Franklin testifies to the government's singular focus on nailing the AIPAC lobbyists.

Even so it remains to be seen what help Mr. Franklin will give the prosecutors at the forthcoming trial of Messrs. Rosenvand Mr. Weissman. In the course of his guilty plea, the otherwise respectful Mr. Franklin forcefully objected to the government's characterization of the self-typed paper about Iran he'd faxed to Mr. Rosen--a document at the heart of one of the significant charges against the lobbyist--as "classified."

"It was unclassified," Lawrence Franklin told the court, "and it is unclassified."

The government would "prove that it was classified," announced the U.S. attorney.

Mr. Franklin: "Not a chance."

What chance the defendants--who asked no one for classified information--have of acquittal and the avoidance of prison remains to be seen. Though Judge T. S. Ellis rejected defense motions to dismiss the charges on constitutional grounds, his early rulings have so far shown a keen appreciation of the meaning this case. In this he stands in sharp contrast to the nation's leading civil rights guardians, these days busy filing lawsuits against the government and fulminating on behalf of the rights of captured terrorists in Guantanamo and elsewhere, while accusing the U.S. of failing to provide open trials and assurances that the accused have the right to view the evidence against them. As of this day neither the ACLU nor the Center for Constitutional Rights has shown the smallest interest in this prosecution so bound up with First Amendment implications. Nor has most of the media, whose daily work includes receiving "leaks" from government officials far more damaging to national security than anything alleged in this case. In this as in the Scooter Libby matter, the desire to see Bush Administration officials nailed apparently counts for more than First Amendment principle.

The government has also moved (in the interest of protecting classified information) to impose strict limits during the trial, on the testimony the public and press will be allowed to hear. If the proposal is allowed, significant portions of the testimony will be available only in the form of summaries. Witnesses, furthermore, would not be allowed to deliver certain testimony directly to jurors, who would instead be told to look at secret documents. It will be, as a member of the Reporters Committee For Freedom of the Press, now opposing the government efforts, describes it, "a secret trial within a public trial." (Dow Jones, publisher of this newspaper, has joined the Reporters Committee in filing an objection.)

Will US Bomb Iran?

Russian News Agency RIA-Novosti seems to think so:

MOSCOW, March 30 (RIA Novosti) - Russian intelligence has information that the U.S. Armed Forces have nearly completed preparations for a possible military operation against Iran, and will be ready to strike in early April, a security official said.

The source said the U.S. had already compiled a list of possible targets on Iranian territory and practiced the operation during recent exercises in the Persian Gulf.

"Russian intelligence has information that the U.S. Armed Forces stationed in the Persian Gulf have nearly completed preparations for a missile strike against Iranian territory," the source said.

American commanders will be ready to carry out the attack in early April, but it will be up to the country's political leadership to decide if and when to attack, the source said.

Official data says America's military presence in the region has reached the level of March 2003 when the U.S. invaded Iraq.

The U.S. has not excluded the military option in negotiations on Iran over its refusal to abandon its nuclear program. The UN Security Council passed a new resolution on Iran Saturday toughening economic sanctions against the country and accepting the possibility of a military solution to the crisis.

The source said the Pentagon could decide to conduct ground operations as well after assessing the damage done to the Iranian forces by its possible missile strikes and analyzing the political situation in the country following the attacks.

A senior Russian security official cited military intelligence earlier as saying U.S. Armed Forces had recently intensified training for air and ground operations against Iran.

"The Pentagon has drafted a highly effective plan that will allow the Americans to bring Iran to its knees at minimal cost," the official said.

More Confessions From Iran's British Hostages

From the BBC:

All 15 Britons held by Iran accept they were in the country's waters despite the UK's insistence they were in Iraqi territory, Iranian state radio says.

The BBC report can be watched here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_6510000/newsid_6516700/6516753.stm?bw=nb&mp=rm.

The video names the British frigate involved as HMS Foxtrot.

A friend mentioned that this story reminds him of the Pueblo incident, when an American naval vessel was captured by North Korea on January 23, 1968, humiliating the United States during the Vietnam War. The commander of the USS Pueblo, Lloyd M. (Pete) Bucher was recommended for Courts Martial. The crew was kept prisoner in North Korea for 11 months--and the USS Pueblo remains in North Korea to this day...Wikipedia entry here.

The US Code of Military Conduct would seem to prohibit American POWs from delivering the type of public confessions broadcast on television by Iran's British hostages:

5. When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.

When questioned, a prisoner of war is required by the Geneva Conventions and this Code to give name, rank, service number (SSN) and date of birth. The prisoner should make every effort to avoid giving the captor any additional information. The prisoner may communicate with captors on matters of health and welfare and additionally may write letters home and fill out a Geneva Convention "capture card."

It is a violation of the Geneva Convention to place a prisoner under physical or mental duress, torture, or any other form of coercion in an effort to secure information. If under such intense coercion, a POW discloses unauthorized information, made an unauthorized statement, or performs an unauthorized act, that prisoner’s peace of mind and survival require a quick recovery of courage, dedication, and motivation to resist anew each subsequent coercion.

Actions every POW should resist include making oral or written confessions and apologies, answering questionnaires, providing personal histories, creating propaganda recordings, broadcasting appeals to other prisoners of war, providing any other material readily usable for propaganda purposes., appealing for surrender or parole, furnishing self-criticisms, communicating on behalf of the enemy to the detriment of the United State, its allies, its Armed Forces, or other POWs.

Every POW should also recognize that any confession signed or any statement made may be used by the enemy as a false evidence that the person is a "war criminal" rather than a POW. Several countries have made reservations to the Geneva Convention in which they assert that a "war criminal" conviction deprives the convicted individual of prison of war status, removes that person from protection under the Geneva Convention, and revokes all rights to repatriation until a prison sentence is served.

Recent experiences of American prisoners of war have proved that, although enemy interrogation sessions may be harsh and cruel, one can resist brutal mistreatment when the will to resist remains intact.

The best way for prisoner to keep faith with country, fellow prisoners and self is to provide the enemy with as little information as possible.

I wonder if this type of code applies for British military personnel?

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Wins Nobel Peace Prize

(April Fool)

On the other hand, here's a link to Mark Steyn's Chicago Sun-Times column:

On this 25th anniversary of the Falklands War, Tony Blair is looking less like Margaret Thatcher and alarmingly like Jimmy Carter, the embodiment of the soi-disant "superpower" as a smiling eunuch.

Gus Chavez: Ken Burns Documentary "Shameful"

From the San Diego Tribune:

SAN DIEGO – Gus Chavez of San Diego had five uncles who served in World War II, including two who were injured and one who was captured by the Germans. The uncle he's named after died during training for the war.

So Chavez took it personally when he learned that acclaimed filmmaker Ken Burns' seven-part documentary about the war, scheduled to air nationally on PBS in September, doesn't feature any Latinos.

“It's a misrepresentation,” said Chavez, a retired San Diego State administrator and longtime local activist. “You have a documentary that runs 14 hours and it doesn't mention the Latino experience? It's unacceptable. It's shameful.”

Chavez, 63, is helping spearhead a campaign called “Defend the Honor” to pressure Burns and PBS not to air the series until changes are made.

The campaign drew support this week from the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the American GI Forum, a Hispanic veterans group. Cartoonist Lalo Alcaraz – tipped off to the controversy by Chavez – has been lampooning Burns in his comic strip “La Cucaracha,” which runs in newspapers including The San Diego Union-Tribune.

In a written statement, Burns and co-producer Lynn Novick asked viewers to “refrain from passing judgment on our work until they have seen it.” The statement said:

“We are dismayed and saddened by any assumption that we intentionally excluded anyone from our series on the Second World War. Nothing could be further from the truth.

“For 30 years we have made films that have tried to tell many of the stories that haven't been told in American history. In this latest project, we have attempted to show the universal human experience of war by focusing on the testimonies of just a handful of people. As a result, millions of stories are not explored in our film.”

Carlos Guerra on Maggie Rivas-Rodríguez v. Ken Burns

From the San Antonio Express News:

It was at a meeting in New Orleans' World War II Museum last fall that Rivas learned about "The War," Ken Burns' seven-part epic that will air on PBS in the fall and will be followed by releases of a major book, a soundtrack CD, educational packages and a DVD box set.

"Carmen Contreras Bozak, who was a WAC during World War II, asked if women were (included in the 60-plus interviews) and the producer said that no, (only) women in the home front," Rivas says. Neither has Burns included Native Americans or Latinos in his series.

" 'We're not really looking at individuals' ethnic-group experiences, except for Japanese Americans and African Americans because of their experiences,' " one producer told them, suggesting, Rivas says, that "Latinos' experience wasn't rich and unique, and it was."

Rivas also adds that she won't be satisfied if Burns "finds and interviews someone named Garza and inserts it into this thing because it is being billed as a definitive look at World War II in our country.

"We need the Latino perspective included across the board, in that overall picture," she says. "But there is a much bigger, longstanding issue: Why do Latinos continue to be excluded from PBS specials and general history books across the board?"

If you think Burns' and PBS' blind spot is limited to Latino veterans' contributions, however, consider this: "The War" will premiere nationally on Diez y Seis de Septiembre [Mexican Independence Day].