Augustine on sovereignty

Maybe we don't all like St. Augustine so much. Still, check this out (ripped from Ryan Spencer Reed's website):

“In the absence of justice – what is sovereignty but organized robbery."

Clowns Without Borders: Sudan

During my time in Egypt, the girls home received two very special American guests: Gwen and Elisa, young Philadelphian clowns. The clowns had simple costumes and props, and they waltzed into our house with energy, joy, and creativity, performing a routine that had us all giggling and smiling, one the girls haven't forgotten, and one that convinced me of the importance of play and creation in the lives of all children (even very poor children- especially very poor children).

Since then, the clowns have returned to Egypt and performed in Cairo at orphanages, schools for kids with disabilities, and Sudanese refugee schools. This summer, they've taken their act to Nairobi, Kenya and Juba, South Sudan, visiting schools, hospitals, IDP camps, and a prison.

Don't be fooled by the red noses or the youthful enthusiasm- their clowning is a powerful and subversive shot at hope and even peace-making. I encourage you to read Elisa's May 21 blog entry about clowning at a prison for youth in Juba.

defining Hamas

I just read a news article that used the clause "the Islamists pledged to the destruction of Israel" to identify Hamas, the way one might use the phrases "former Republican Vice-President" and "popular British singer and infamous wildchild" preceding the names of Dick Cheney and Amy Winehouse, respectively.

That's how we know Cheney and Winehouse, and that's how we know Hamas. But Hamas could just as well be "the Palestinian political party once supported by the U.S. and Israel." Hamas could be "the winners of a 2006 democratic Palestinian election."

So which is it? How about all of the above?

I feel like I've been harping on the categorization of Hamas for forever. But I don't see any solution in the narrow- and inaccurate- definition of Hamas as a terrorist organization. This is a dilemma for newswriters- how to sum up a complex conflict- and for Israel, too.

I don't think that you have any chance of making peace with someone you have labeled your enemy. You must be able to imagine them a viable partner. And that's not idealism- that's history. That's how it happened in Northern Ireland, and if peace ever comes to Israel-Palestine, it has to come by accepting the possibility of partnership.