Opinions
Serving justice amid intolerance
America is irrevocably forged out of diversity
I was reading the paper on my tablet one morning last December when an email arrived from an agent in the FBI’s Washington Field Office: “I have a subpoena to serve to you.”
I put down my coffee and thought I perhaps shouldn’t have tweeted that morning to the president that he’s a lying clown. I started listing current and former police chiefs who could vouch for me. But Special Agent Keith Palli explained that subpoenas are just standard court procedure. I had been identified as a witness in the case of a retired foreign service officer named William Patrick Syring who was indicted for making criminal threats.
Ten years ago, after Dr. George Tiller was murdered in his church by an anti-abortion terrorist, I wrote a column titled “Pro-Gay, Pro-Choice,” explaining my support for my sisters’ reproductive freedom. Someone named Pat S. emailed me calling me an abortionist and saying, “The only good abortionist is a dead abortionist.” A columnist expects criticism, but that sounded like a threat. I called a friend at the Metropolitan Police Department, who arranged an interview with the FBI.
Fast forward to December 2018, when I met with Palli and lawyers from DOJ’s Civil Rights Division for witness prep. They opened a witness binder and handed me a printout of my email exchanges with Syring, which the FBI had obtained from his laptop after executing a search warrant on his home.
I smiled as I reviewed my old correspondence, in which I tried to reason with a crackpot. Syring had trouble making distinctions, such as between being pro-choice and performing abortions, between abortion and murder, and between murder and genocide. He did not understand why I considered my personal views irrelevant to a woman’s reproductive decisions, nor why I regarded such decisions as none of the government’s business.
The lawyers asked why I argued with someone who threatened me. I responded that I argue for a living, and I don’t like being threatened.
It did not surprise me to learn that Syring had behaved no more rationally toward the main victim in the case, Dr. James Zogby of the Arab American Institute (AAI). I ended up not being called as a witness at the trial in early May, which was not surprising considering how much less frightening Syring’s threats against me were than those against Zogby and his staff over a longer period.
As DOJ stated in a news release after Syring was convicted, “from 2012 to 2017, Syring sent over 700 emails to AAI employees, culminating in five death threats in 2017.” His threats were based on the employees’ race and national origin and their encouragement of civic engagement by Arab Americans.
Zogby’s father immigrated to America from Lebanon in 1922. Like his parents, Zogby is Catholic. I spoke with him and his wife outside the courtroom after the sentencing hearing on August 15. He described times when he picked his daughter up from school, and she looked at him and said: “He wrote to you again, didn’t he?”
To terrify a man, his family, and his staff with the possibility that on any given day your threats may escalate into violence, including death, is intolerable. U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss sentenced Syring to five years, of which he has already served six months. He is barred from Internet access. Prosecutors sought a sentence considerably longer.
This all happens within a wider context. Trump senior adviser Stephen Miller is back in the news for his restrictionist policymaking on immigration. His anti-migrant polemics, his hypocritical insistence that immigrants already be English speakers (his own great-grandmother spoke only Yiddish), and his longstanding ties to white supremacists reveal someone at odds with the enriching diversity out of which America is irrevocably forged.
I attended the sentencing hearing to show solidarity with Dr. Zogby, who has demonstrated fortitude and grace as a voice for Arab Americans while being so much greater a target for bigots like Syring than I; and to show my respect for the public servants at FBI and Justice, whose example in upholding American freedoms at a time when they are under siege should inspire us all.
Richard J. Rosendall is a writer and activist. He can be reached at [email protected].
Copyright © 2019 by Richard J. Rosendall. All rights reserved.
Opinions
Vote NO on Initiative 83 in D.C.
If you want a say in primaries, then register and join a party
There are two parts to Initiative 83 and many agree they should never have been put together in one initiative.
One part was designed to create an open primary system allowing voters who are unaffiliated with a political party to vote in any party’s primary election. If this passes, those who call themselves ‘independent’ voters could vote in a Democratic primary to help choose the candidate who would represent the party in the general election. If you look at current national polling for president, you see close to 50% of so-called ‘independent’ voters are planning to vote for Trump. I don’t want any of those voters helping to select a Democratic nominee. Just imagine the games they could, and would, play.
I urge those who claim to be independent to speak out and get involved in the political process. Not everyone is going to be as involved as I am, having worked for a progressive congressperson, Bella S. Abzug (D-N.Y.); as coordinator of Local Government for the City of New York; written campaign speeches and helped write candidate platforms; and raised money for many Democratic candidates. But nothing stops any independent from doing all those things. If you choose not to, but still find one of the candidates running in a Democratic primary, or for that matter in the Green Party, or Republican Party primaries, and want to support them, D.C. makes that really easy. You can register for that party up to 21 days before the primary. You can do it online. If you are not even motivated enough to do that, you shouldn’t get to vote in the primary.
The initiative also establishes ranked-choice voting (RCV) for elections in Washington, D.C., beginning in 2026. A ranked-choice voting system is an electoral system in which voters rank candidates by preference on their ballots. If a candidate wins a majority of first-preference votes, he or she is declared the winner. If no candidate wins a majority of first-preference votes, the candidate with the fewest first-preference votes is eliminated. First-preference votes cast for the failed candidate are eliminated, and counting the next-preference choice indicated on those ballots. A new tally is conducted to determine whether any candidate has won a majority of the adjusted votes. The process is repeated until a candidate wins an outright majority.
The person who initially proposed this initiative in D.C. is Lisa D.T. Rice, a Ward 7 ANC commissioner, who claims independent voters are currently disenfranchised. Lisa, you have disenfranchised yourselves when it comes to a primary. It is your choice to not register for a party. We know from history that ‘independents’ lean either Republican or Democratic. They have no independent platform. Generally, initiatives like this are brought to you by one of two groups. One thinks they are being “progressive;” the other simply deems getting involved in party politics not worth their time, or beneath them.
I have spoken to several people who support this initiative, and they think it’s fine to let others fight over the party principles and platform, and then step in and tell the party who should represent them in the general election. Others, including some Republicans, have told me they think open primaries would be a great way for them to have a voice in choosing the Democratic candidate. They recognize in D.C., which is overwhelmingly Democratic, the winner of the Democratic nomination nearly always wins the general election. My response to them is, if they want to help choose the Democratic candidate, just register as a Democrat. You can still vote Republican in a general election. Also remember, D.C.’s Home Rule charter ensures two members of the Council be non-Democrats.
People usually choose a political party when they register to vote based on the general philosophy of that party. Then they work within it to bring to the fore issues they care about. Today there is a huge difference between political parties on issues. So, I question what makes the decision so difficult for some.
The reason you have party primaries is not everyone in the party agrees on a candidate. I support the idea we should not have candidates representing us in the general election who can’t get 50% of the primary vote. The answer to that is simple. Hold a run-off election between the top two candidates, if no one reaches 50%. These run-offs can be held two weeks after the initial primary. This has been done successfully in many cities and states. Some question the cost of this. But that is irrelevant in D.C. where the City Council passed legislation to spend millions on public financing of candidates, making it so easy to access that money, we end up with seven, eight, and even nine candidates for each office. Most of them having no chance in hell of winning.
Some claim RCV brings out more voters. Fair Vote, the national group promoting RCV, and funding a lot of this initiative, agrees there is no definitive research to prove that. With RCV you have the real chance for games as we saw in New York’s ranked choice mayoral primary, when Andrew Yang and Kathryn Garcia cross-endorsed each other, suggesting each of their voters give the other their second vote, even though they had totally different platforms.
The two ideas proposed in Initiative 83 are not positive change for the voters of the District of Columbia. I urge a NO vote on Initiative 83.
Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.
Madness is the monster in the closet as Election Day approaches. For example, Donald Trump says Kamala Harris wants to ban cows and windows.
Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank, after pointing out that Trump said the same thing about Joe Biden in 2020, writes, “Four years later, there are still 87 million head of cattle on U.S. farms. And the multibillion-dollar U.S. window market is growing steadily. Yet it didn’t occur to Trump to defenestrate these wacky claims.”
Defenestration is execution by throwing people out windows. Someone once told me defenestration is a synonym for masturbation, which is true only if it is done with extreme carelessness.
This election could be a referendum on America’s original sin, embodied in the hypocrisy of a slave owner declaring that “all men are created equal.” The contrast between our creed and our conduct has driven 248 years of struggle.
We are days away from learning whether our constitutional republic will endure or be ripped apart by people who object to being called racist while voting for a man who says, “We’re like a garbage can for the rest of the world to dump the people they don’t want.”
Vice President Harris, the most qualified presidential nominee in living memory, is the only real alternative to a disastrous return to power by Trump. Those who say they don’t know enough about her are hardly credible, considering they know enough about her opponent to disqualify him many times over.
Trump says “one rough hour” by police will end crime. He is not referring to his own crimes.
Soviet-era Russia made it a crime to possess a photo of anyone who had been purged and rendered a non-person. Hitler’s Germany forced the exile of sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld, whose Institute for Sexual Science was looted and its books burned by Nazis in 1933.
What makes anyone think Trump, who admires Putin and echoes Hitler in calling minority populations vermin, would spare queer folk?
As for me, it is fruitless to try to erase the hundreds of commentaries I wrote that remain online, including my 2015 year-in-review in the Washington Blade titled “Year of the Arsonist” and illustrated with a photo of the Reichstag Fire. The arsonist, naturally, was Trump.
In the intervening years I have cursed and mocked him, sometimes simultaneously. I might as well throw myself on the mercy of the court.
Honestly, any fear I might have is overcome by indignation. Those commentators willing to kowtow endlessly to an ignorant thug are already with him.
The rest of us will go down writing.
Harris showed the right stuff with her strong, confident handling of a hostile interview with Bret Baier on Fox News. She did not let herself be rolled. Afterward, Baier said he “made a mistake” by running the wrong clip of Trump. Was it a mistake when he repeatedly talked over her? Harris didn’t let him get away with erasing Trump’s talk of an “enemy from within” and threat to use the military against domestic opponents.
Why be intimidated by a man who, as Harris points out, is unhinged and doesn’t know what he’s talking about? His abuses are too many to review here. He may hope to win by wearing us down.
A British friend advises me to keep a packed bag ready in case I find myself like Humphrey Bogart in “Casablanca” taking the last train out of Paris. I live in a town where every other person thinks they’re the lead character, so the train will be awfully crowded.
Trump is deteriorating before our eyes; but he was never a prize. Facebook reminds me of something I posted in 2019: “Trump’s ignorance and refusal to prepare are a continual source of embarrassment. He called Italian President Sergio Mattarella ‘President Mozzarella.’ He called American DefSec Mark Esper ‘Mark Esperanto.’ He calls the Asian countries Nepal and Bhutan ‘Nipple’ and ‘Button.’ He referred to the nonexistent African country Nambia. Next he’ll invite General Tso to a summit meeting.” (General Tso, it turned out, was too chicken to show up.)
Worse than stupidity are fascism (which has threatened America before) and disrespect for our fallen warriors. Neither can ever be accepted.
Trump has said so much beyond the pale that for people to continue supporting him shows they like him for his sociopathy rather than despite it.
Our Founders, in declaring independence from Great Britain, pledged “our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.” Upholding honor, decency, and sanity requires electing Kamala Harris.
Richard J. Rosendall is a writer and activist. Reach him at [email protected].
Growing up with a Christian mother and Hindu father, neither religious, Diwali and Christmas were my two favorite holidays because it meant gifts were to be received and delicious food was to be served! Hostess with the mostest, my mother would go out of her way to make each holiday special, where I felt lucky to celebrate all the American, Christian, and Hindu holidays (thinking Jesus was a Hindu God for the longest time.)
Each fall, we would help my mother, aka Indian Martha Stewart, clean our house and garnish the entrance with vibrant decor, only to welcome the VIP Goddess Laxmi — a symbol of wealth, prosperity, beauty, and power. The origin dates back to 5064 BC, the year Ram came back to Ayodhya with Sita after killing Ravana. As Ram and Sita returned back to India from Sri Lanka, the kingdom lined up and lit oil lamps to welcome their arrival. Thus the festival’s name comes from the Sanskrit word “Deepawali,” which means “rows of lights.”
Flash forward to today, where for us Indian American Hindu’s — Diwali is not just a celebration of the new year, it is the most auspicious annual event recognizing the triumph of good over evil. Over a billion people globally are joining hands while praying that their hopes, desires, and dreams come true.
Queerness in Hinduism
An outspoken teenager confused about religion, I took it upon myself to learn about all faiths and their views on homosexuality, afterlife, and the consequences of sin. In studying Hinduism beyond what my peers shared — I learned that Hinduism is the most liberal and open-minded group of teachings to exist. So liberal in fact — it is very queer. I don’t know if the Mughal conquerors or the British colonizers are to blame for India’s conservative nature — but when one digs into our scriptures — our holidays are all a celebration of mind, body, and soul.
- First Transgender Gods: Vishnu and Shiva have both been noted for transforming into female form — where Ardhanarishvara means “The Lord whose half is a woman.”
- Kama, most recognized in the Kama Sutra, is a tenet stating the desire for passion, pleasure, and emotion is a spiritual goal that is rewarded, not punished. If you are still reading this, google “Khajuraho.” The erotic art sculpted into a series of temples built around 885 CE and 1000 CE depict relations among men, women, and groups. Scholars will argue that British colonialism shaped India to be a conservative culture, shaming its history of sexual freedom.
- The tenet of reincarnation and resharing moments in the future with those in your current life is set to be believed around one’s soul, not gender. In my next life, not only may I be reincarnated as a cisgender woman — depending on how I treat others, I could be reincarnated as nonhuman — such as an insect.
If you are looking to join in the festivities — light your candles and make note of your financial and career goals. The prosperity the holiday brings is the best time to manifest your destiny, welcoming positive energy in your home. I also welcome everyone to visit a local Indian clothing store — us Indian’s love and welcome cultural appreciation.
Wishing everyone a Happy Diwali filled with light and laughter!
-
Opinions3 days ago
Wash Post can’t recover from endorsement debacle — Bezos must sell it
-
District of Columbia3 days ago
D.C. voters’ guide: Council, school board, Initiative 83 on ballot
-
District of Columbia1 day ago
D.C. police investigating anti-gay assault at 14th & U McDonald’s
-
Politics1 day ago
Meet the LGBTQ candidates running in key races from U.S. Senate to state houses