Oh Manhattan my New York

To chowk staff ... in other articles by me .. can you please include my Beautiful Dawn article/story?

-Yasser Hamdani

Well Said Farangi Kush ...

````Injustice where ever it maybe should be condemned```` Indeed. But Charity Begins At Home. Please examine the abuses of the justice system in Africa, Middle East, and South Asia next time. Perhaps even in Farangi Kush`s favourite Afghanistan and Iran.

ylh:#50

Faryad ki koi laay naheen hai

Naala paband e nai naheen hai

(tr:There is no set tune to do supplication

The wail is not in want for the flute-notes)

ALLAMA I Q B A L

Never let anybody teach you how to cry or get angry.If it gets orchestrated & organised then it loses its punch.The idea is to arouse the public to action rather than wait for applause.Leave those to `professional` poets.

You did a great job.Let the fires smoulder!!!!!

````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

wassalaam

anyway I think that this poem is soon going to leave the main page .... so a final thought

``Injustice where ever it maybe should be condemned``

No where did I castigate anyone .... I feel outraged that person can be shot 41 times because of his color and I hope you all feel the same way no matter where you live or what your color is!

Thankyou once again for the voice of reason that Sakina is!

My friend Omar Mirza has a great point that most of us forget in the throes of righteous indignation. We in the US benefit from the fairest justice system. Mind you, I didn`t say the perfect justice system. All those who are ready to pounce on the system and cops and Mayor Giuliani should take a pause and reflect. AFter all most of us wouldn`t even be allowed a protest against a trial of police officers that could probably be never held in Pakistan, India, Bangladesh or Saudi Arabia. Next time some of us want to castigate the justice system here, please compare it to the one you left behind.

Frankly my friend Mr Omar Mirza I am very sorry to say but your arguments stray away from factual analysis but instead border on Personal insults ......

``you are a fob`` (Omar Mirza)

you know how many times I have claimed that I am one because I have no hang ups. Atleast the circles I grew up in Pakistan were more literate and aware than most desi circles here ...

I personally was previleged enough to receive a very good education mashallah taking British Alevels and American APs and excelling at them ...

Accepted at NYU I opted for Rutgers because it was seriously now I feel that I as better off going to London School of Economics and Political Science .....

While I was in Pakistan I was involvd in many organizations committed to solving the Society`s problems and ills .... now IF I WISH TO WRITE ABOUT AN INJUSTICE HERE IT IS MY decision and you cant stop me ....

I dont understand why my harmless poem offended you so much ... I have no idea why you would go on a verbal rampage against me like this

Guys(and gals), I hadn`t ventured into this thread till the rapid change in the reply count made me curious :-).

About ylh`s poem, well I don`t know. About raising the Diallo issue on this forum when terrible injustices take place elsewhere, well, why not. As long as its clear where such an incident sits in the perspective of the humanity`s situation in the rest of the world, especially back where we come from(and have spent most of our lives, many of us), its ok. There is indeed a tendency of desis to get an out-of-proportion sense of events in the US because of the media circus here. Lets just be aware that if every wrongful death/travesty of justice back home got the same amount of air time and newspaper column space as it does here and inspired the same outrage and activism from us (ir)responsible citizens, we`d have much much juster societies and happier people back home than we do.

Which brings me to the Diallo case. I must admit I was really angered by the verdict. But I realised that by all accounts it was a fair trial, except maybe the prosecution could have tried harder to give the sense of the victim as a human being cut off in his prime for no fault of his own(paraphrasing this from an Op-Ed).

But ultimately I see a couple of different issues here. Firstly, that its not a failure of the justice system, its a failure of proper procedure/training and of local politics. I couldnot understand why 4 plainsclothed policemen in unmarked cars with arms couldnot be less confrontational. Observe the suspect, sidle up to the guy from behind, overpower him, strike up a casual conversation whatever. Even given the dangerous situation out there in copland, I think there is still some imagination that can be used to reduce the incidence of ``stop or I`ll shoot`` in these ambiguous encounters given the great decrease of crime in NY.

But its a question of feeling the need to do so. They(the city administration)would surely do a lot more pondering about procedure if whites were being mistakenly killed instead. A study published in the NYTimes showed how cops in other big cities have found ways to reduce crime and also reduce or avoid just such incidents. Something is stopping the NYPD from realising that its worth learning from those lessons.

Which brings me to the political issue. Mayor Guiliani could have prevented all this hullabaloo just by saying a few soothing sentences, such as ``We are extremely sorry for the way things turned out, we are sorry for the wrongful death of any inhabitant of this city``. He could have promised to consider more or different training, anything which didnot provide ammunition to his political opponents, but soothed the tempers of ordinary citizens. Anything to concede that the minorities are equal citizens worthy of fair trial and protection on par with others and with the cops in this case. He ought to know what to say, thats his job and he`s a politican. Instead he seemed to be crowing at the vindication ``I was right, my cops were right, nothing more to think about``.

That really did it where I was concerned. I doubt his attitude would be this way if there were plenty more black millionaires and potential contributors. Guiliani acted like a petty bureaucrat, he always seems to do so when these racially charged issues come up like stop and search or the other shooting incidents.

In all this Sharpton is making the most of the absence of the right language from the city authorities. He`s a politican like anyone else. Anyway, the minority communities are right to organize protests and make a political issue of it as far as I am concerned. Thats a great way to demand accountability from politicians and their administrations apart from funding campaigns :-).

Sadhana

excerpt from article repreinted by Sakina (#40):

``The defense depended on whether the officers` suspicions were ``reasonable`` – an argument which depends completely on context. But the judge did not allow, and the prosecution did not offer, the context which would show how totally, insanely unreasonable was the officers` fantasy that they were about to be killed by a smallish, quiet person in his own doorway, not making a single aggressive move, on a quiet street in an ordinary family neighborhood, looking out at and then trying to protect himself from four armed men acting like they were about to kill him -- which in fact they did.

...The people say something different: guilty of murder as charged.``

The reason court proceedings, including what the jury may regard and disregard, are regulated by a judge , is to discourage verdicts based on emotionalism, an attitude that may make for very printable newspaper articles, but quite undesireable when justice is to be administered.

Let`s point out a few flaws in the excerpt above:

1. A ``smallish, quiet person`` isn`t any less capable of pulling a trigger than a strapping guy. So it was NOT ``insanely reasonable`` for the officers to have felt their lives endangered. (I might add that there was no way of the police officers knowing that Diallo was ``quiet``, if indeed he was.)

2. Murders (cop-killings and otherwise) are known to take place in ``ordinary, family neighborhoods`` in the Bronx.

3. In the absence of that little thing called `motive`, the jury had no choice but to base their verdict on the ``fantasy`` of the police officers, uncorroborated as it was.

4. ``the people`` are represented by the jury. They HAVE spoken, and the verdict was `not guilty.`

5. Even had they been found guilty, itwould not be for murder, as that was not the charge.

I should hope right minded folks would not fall prey to such emotionalism. Yes, the cops may have been reckless in this case, and yes, NYPD cops may be given to excesses. But context is not something to be overlooked. Omar1974 has provide some startling statistics on racial profiling. Not that this should lead to stereotyping, but surely one can begin to understand the anxieties of the police officers on the street.

Sakina, you point out that ``there have been about a dozen cases of people being shot by cops in the past five or six months`` in NYC. That may sound alarming, but I would like to know (Omar, perhaps you can help out here) the numbers for attacks on police over the same period. Then, perhaps we can begin to discuss whether their fears are justified or not.

Besides, 2 controversial cases a month in a city the size of NYC is not really a very high rate (statistically speaking-- to those that perceive danger-- of course, every case is one too many) If you feel insecure by these occurences, might it not be due to the sensationalist media coverage given them?

regards,

PM

I agree with Sakina`s sentiments and also with the author`s(as I have previously mentioned). Working in the area, I have come across many perturbed souls, who were mad at the judge`s verdict. The locals have not overcome the sad story yet and to add fuel to the fire, we have another shooting that took place recently.It makes one wonder,``is it safe to be in the city in the evenings ?``. The recent case of another shooting in the City was enough to bring back the bad taste from Diallo`s story.

Though I must say, that the issue in hand will be of some concern to those who live in Manhattan or are in the vicinity, for others it will be only a human rights violation case. Unfortunately, our world is full of SUCH CASES. Therefore, the tendency to be desensitized is not uncommon.

Thankyou Sakina ... I am so glad that atleast someone has stood up for the issue.

-Yasser Hamdani

Dear Omar-

I think you are really way off with your

comments regarding the Diallo shooting.

I am fwding you an article to offer you

another more sensible view point.

________________________________________________

The People`s Verdict: Guilty as Charged

by -- Naomi Jaffe

The verdict of the criminal justice system is that police officers who shot an unarmed youth to death in his own home did nothing wrong. The verdict of the people is different – thousands of us, in New York, in Albany and all over this country, in the streets, on whatever media will listen, and in the court of public opinion say the officers who shot Amadou Diallo are guilty of murder. The verdict of the criminal justice system sends a message that communities of color are free fire zones, that youth of color are suspect, and that people of color have no rights that a police officer is bound to respect. The people`s verdict sends a different message: that whatever perversion of justice can find murderers not guilty if they are police officers and white, and their victim is black, the people will carry forward the struggle until we have changed the conditions that allow that to happen.

What was it that allowed this verdict to happen? The answer is that all the parts of a corrupt and racist criminal justice system came together to protect its own. The change of venue, the inadequate prosecution, the judge`s rulings, and a jury selected for being from a predominantly white jurisdiction all came together to pervert and manipulate the fair trial process. Every defendant is supposed to be entitled to the presumption of innocence, to the benefit of the doubt – but these defendants received the benefit not of doubt, but of white privilege and the protection of the powerful.

When the venue was changed to Albany, it was clear that the system would go to any length, including violating its own rules, to obtain an acquittal. The people of the Bronx, either in a jury trial or through their elected, Black woman judge, would never have acquitted these police officers – no matter how weak the prosecution – because they are familiar with the context in which this shooting took place. A room full of New Yorkers spontaneously all laughed out loud when they heard the officers claim that they approached Amadou Diallo saying. ``Sir, may we have a word with you?`` But even in Albany, the system had to go to great lengths to ensure that the jury did not come to the obvious conclusion. The prosecution and the judge both had to conduct a trial in such a way that the officers appeared human – but Amadou Diallo was just a shady possible robber or rapist slinking around in a dimly lit doorway. The defense depended on whether the officers` suspicions were ``reasonable`` – an argument which depends completely on context. But the judge did not allow, and the prosecution did not offer, the context which would show how totally, insanely unreasonable was the officers` fantasy that they were about to be killed by a smallish, quiet person in his own doorway, not making a single aggressive move, on a quiet street in an ordinary family neighborhood, looking out at and then trying to protect himself from four armed men acting like they were about to kill him -- which in fact they did.

Judge Joseph Teresi conducted a trial to produce the outcome it produced – from rulings limiting the scope of what could be introduced as evidence, to a pace that allowed no time for this jury to become familiar with the context in which the shooting took place, to charges and instructions that did not make any distinction between the officers` fantasies and reality. No other defendants could have argued a self-defense justification based on fantasy alone, unsupported by any reality whatsoever, and been found to have been reasonable. Whether they actually believed what they said they believed is not a matter that anyone can decide – it is not possible to go inside another person`s head. If their fantasy alone was the basis for their defense, then the judge should have made them argue they were not guilty by reason of insanity. Justification by the standards of a reasonable person requires some support from external reality.

Judge Teresi, in a series of biased rulings, allowed context favorable to the officers but not context favorable to the prosecution. He allowed testimony that they faced danger, that they were afraid because they knew officers had been killed, that they were searching for a rapist. He didn`t allow, and the prosecution made little attempt to offer, testimony that they and the Street Crimes Unit routinely engaged in racial profiling, three of them had shot before, they had harassed innocent youth on the very same night that they murdered Amadou Diallo.

Who could have spoken for Amadou? To say, `` I just went out for some air, or a cigarette, or to take out the garbage, and these four white men are driving by slowly, staring at me, I better go back inside, I turn to go inside, I look from the steps to make sure they are gone, they stop, back up, they are getting out of their car, they are coming toward me I can see they have guns, they are aiming at me. I better get back in my house quick, my keys are in my wallet, the wallet is in my pocket, they are coming closer, shouting something at me, a couple of them are shouting at the same time, I can`t understand what they are saying but it`s clear they are trying to rob me, I have to get back in my house, I am trying to get my keys, my hands are shaking and I can`t get my wallet out with my keys in it, they are trying to kill me and rob me, I have to get into the house, they are shooting at me, they are hitting me. I don`t want to die.``

Nobody spoke for Amadou. Amadou was dead. But his friends and roommates could have spoken, to say what he was probably doing and thinking based on their knowledge of his character and habits; or his parents; or other young men who had been approached in the same way by the street crimes unit in plain clothes could have said what fears and perceptions one is likely to experience; or other New Yorkers could have testified to the likelihood, based on multiple experiences, that the officers said, ``Excuse me, sir...``

No one spoke but the shooters, and they said what they wanted to say, to save themselves, uninterrupted by a reality check from the prosecution – that Amadou was irrational, not they, that they spoke clearly and politely, that they could see enough to tell that he looked like a rapist from their car but not enough to distinguish a wallet from a gun at less than ten feet.

And a system of power that is set up to incarcerate our children by the thousands with inadequate public defenders that force them to plea bargain for ten or eleven years of their lives for carrying a weapon that they didn`t use, did what it is set up to do and said Amadou deserved to die because these cops had a fantasy that he was a dangerous Black killer rapist robber.

The people say something different: guilty of murder as charged.

Maybe there were somethings you just assumed ... so let me clarify ...

1) I think USA in comparison to Pakistan is so much better ... still that doesnt give you a right to tell me not to write about an injustice which was heartfelt by me.

2) I am in the US right now and I am condemning injustices here ... eventually I ll go back to pakistan and play my part in improving the situation in Pakistan .....

3) I have never ever denied that issues in Pakistan need to be talked about yet I dont see why I cant talk about Amadou Diallo ...

I had also submitted a few other articles ....

and you will see whats in them

To Ylh,

Go to Pakistan (only a plane ride away from ``this night of oppression`` called USA) and start publically calling for EQUAL TREATMENT of minorities, including Ahmadis under the Law, see if you can organize a bunch of students at Karachi University in favor of that, or even get all your own family and relatives to agree in favor of that simple principle of non-discrimination. (Which btw, the vast majority of Americans subscribe to). Then call for EQUAL (non-discriminatory) treatment of womyn under the LAW in Pakistan, regardless of outdated religious conventions preached by Obscurantists as the path to Nirvana. Tell womyn they are FREE to CHOOSE whether to wear a hijab or Burqa, or no not to. See how far you get. Then try playing MUSIC (any kind of music) on Campus at Karachi University ... you`ll soon discover you can`t, because the Jamaatis won`t let you do ANY of this, and you`ll become a political target for these extremists. THEN TALK about a betrayal of FREEDOM & the ideals of Equality in the USA if you still have any breath left after arguing with them, (but perhaps you don`t think any of these causes worthy yourself, noble & blind humanitarian that you are?) Yass-man. Here we live in a tolerant society, even people like FARANGI KUSH are free to express their opinions in public. Try the same thing on Karachi University Campus for any of the causes i have mentioned.

I agree 100% with comments made by P.M & Nushmia Zia Khokhar. I think there is a consensus on Chowk on the literary AND substantive merits of your poem. If your heart is in the right place, i hope you can recognize INJUSTICE in Pakistan when you return, and speak out just as forcefully there against it. Frankly, almost all of us residing in the U.S are quite happy here with ``this night of oppression`` we ``endure`` here daily, or we`d be back in Pakistan like FARANGI KUSH. Good luck on your mission to save oppressed humanity in the U.S, hopefully you`ll have the same fervor when you return to Pakistan, to serve humanity there and espouse worthy humanitarian causes.

OMAR MIRZA

A few relevant facts about the AhmedouDiallou case:

1) The passageway in which ADiallou was standing was poorly lit. The area was a high crime neighbourhood.

2) He reached into his backpocket, for his wallet, but the cops didn`t know that. Instead, one of the four cops slipped and fell, triggering a panic, and under the idea that they were being fired upon, the cops fired back in unison in self-defense, emptying their guns. When you think your life is in danger thats how you react.

3)A couple of weeks prior, a NYC cop hesitated for a split second in deciding whether to fire or not. This was on everyone`s mind at the time of the shooting.

Frankly, the cops were tried under a color blind system of law, that is by a large the fairest in the world. They were acquitted by a jury of citizens that heard the case. Frankly, i don`t even really think this incident really reflects racism in the U.S. Its just been blown out of proportion by black politicians, and overly sensitized citizens/newspapers who are more concerned about what it looks like when 4 White cops shoot a black man, than the actual details a jury deliberates behind closed doors before making a decision.

The set of facts outlined above make it clear why your poem has not evoked much of a response. Now compare this to the routine, daily, INSTITUTIONALIZED persecution of religious minorities in Pakistan, and the treatment of women by society & by law in Pakistan. In the U.s the system is Fair & Just by and large barring abberations, in Pakistan there is not even 1 rule of law for everyone.

Frankly Yassir, i think most everyone on Chowk is amused by your misplaced

sense of outrage at the U.S & the Statue of Liberty, made all the more RIDUICULOUS because your are FOB (fresh off the boat). Its common among FOBs to criticize everything in their host country and try and find fault with it, and overlook the much larger problems in the country they are coming from. You just chose to make a Public display of it. We have a name for this syndrome: CULTURE SHOCK.

OMAR MIRZA