In 1976, I dreamed that a matron who had worked in one of the Nazi concentration camps, Dachau, I believe, came into a torture room in Chile to apply electric probes to my genitals.
Brava, Deena! As always, you compress so many issues into a brief, beautiful, disturbing space. Your words give courage, which is exactly what is most needed at this time.
Your words and your dream and your quest and your mission and your passion ring bright and true to me.
As Tobi & Marc prepare to journey next week to Joshua Tree to listen to the Land, I send them this prayer, my wish, inspired by your heart and include your invocation:
“This is our grace: To be a note
In the exact chord that animates creation.”
My wish:
Let there be bells and chimes in the desert to call forth harmonic resonations from every woman and man and every being relation.
Though they may not be within actual earshot, know that they, and we, and I, will feel it and know it in their (our) bodies.
Place a bell or a chime here and there (in the Walk That Is The Land) such that those coming upon them may ring them in prayer, in harmony, in joy, in community.
Let the sound(s) be heard, and felt, from near, and from afar.
To this eloquent and alarming piece, I I would like to add my eyewitness account of the Vermont court hearing from yesterday: I spent this morning in the Vermont District Court where Rumeysa Ozturk’s case was heard. It has yet to be decided. The day began with a huge crowd outside the courthouse singing “Woke up this morning with my mind/ it was set on freedom.” And in many ways the outcome for Ms. Ozturk will be the outcome for freedom of speech in our country.
More and more I feel that we are living in the world of Nazi-occupied Amsterdam, and never more so than when viewing the video of Rumeysa Ozturk as she was abducted by masked plainclothes officers. Her captors snatched her through New Hampshire to Vermont, while her lawyers desperately tried to find her and filed a motion to keep her in Massachusetts. The judge granted it, but by then she was long since in Vermont. Just overnight, though, before they took her out of my local airport to Louisiana where she has been imprisoned since March 25.
When the Massachusetts judge ruled that her case had to be heard in Vermont, I rejoiced. Not just because she has a better chance of a fair trial here rather than in Louisiana (as the government prefers), but also because it meant that I could personally show up for this woman who has suffered so much at the hands of our government. Deprived of her asthma medication, deprived of contact with anyone in her life for 24 hours, deprived of a prayer rug and space to pray. Deprived of her human dignity by being handcuffed and shackled. The purposeful cruelty of the ICE actions is especially horrifying when applied to a young woman who is obviously no threat to six plainclothes agents. She thought she would be killed for the first hours of the abduction.
They picked the wrong victim this time: an unimpeachable 30 year old Fulbright Scholar whose academic focus is on how young people can use social media for the good. The Washington Post released an exclusive story this morning which reveals that the State Department could find no evidence that Ms. Ozturk supports Hamas as her persecutors contend. Her only “crime” is co-writing an op ed protesting the genocide of more than 50,000 Palestinians, and urging Tufts University to divest of investments that support that. Everyone who could possibly come forward on her behalf has done so: the University President, her union, her colleagues, her advisor, rabbis.
If there was ever a test case in which the government appears to be so thoroughly in the wrong, this seems to be it – at the common sense level. Whether that will be true legally remains to be seen. The basis of Ms. Ozturk’s case is the right of habeas corpus, literally “You shall have the body.” This fundamental, enshrined right stems from 1679 English common law, designed specifically to prevent unlawful imprisonment at a time when the King could lock up anybody he wanted to.
This morning, I awoke at 5:30, anxious about how things would go. I was sure Ms. Ozturk was awake, too, and how much more anxious she must have been. We hastened to get ready and were downtown a little after 8:00, where a crowd had already gathered. It was a bright, cold morning, and our Federal building was blocked off with four or five gleaming Federal Protective Service vehicles parked nose to toe, the kind of with cages in the back seats. At least 200 people showed up in the end, probably more. After some thought, I decided to try to be among the people in the courtroom. A little after 9:00, the four towering men in bullet proof vests parted ways to let us in – when their watches said it was time, not when our Unitarian church bells rang. The Vermont police inside were a different breed altogether, genial and efficient, offering to keep people’s phones if they didn’t get the memo about leaving them behind.
Another quick wait, and we were inside the courtroom, a space like a really nice hotel conference room with good wood and carpet and spacious seats. The bench was at least 30 feet away but the sound system worked well. Between us and the bench were the spaces for the lawyers: one grey-haired man with his back to us who represented the government, Michael Drescher, and on the other side three young women attorneys representing the Ms. Ozturk: Noor Zafar, Jessie Rossman, and another whose name I didn’t catch.
In almost three hours of proceedings, the atmosphere was invariably respectful. It was what one would hope for in a small state with reverence for the rule of law. Judge William Sessions III was thoroughly prepared and questioned both sides in depth about the legal issues and niceties, to ensure that he fully understood all of the arguments. For the lay person, it’s not worth reviewing them in depth. Here are some highlights.
The government put a lot of emphasis on the discretion the Executive Branch has to detain non-citizens, but Ms. Rossman had a ready answer for that: “There is not discretion, even in immigration law, for the government to violate the Constitution.” The review of what Ms. Ozturk was subjected to was chilling – and the case she is making is that she was specifically arrested and is being detained because of her exercise of her First Amendment rights, and her Fifth Amendment rights to due process of law have also been violated.
A key question is the legitimacy of the original filing. Ms. Ozturk’s attorneys filed the habeas petition (a request to review the legality of someone’s detention) in Massachusetts because, in the absence of information they vainly sought from ICE, they wrongly assumed that she was still in that state. They named ICE Field Office director Patricia H. Hyde and her superiors as the people responsible for the arrest who had the power to remedy it. One of the key legal issues is that the habeas petition must be made in the jurisdiction where the person is actually located, and must name the “immediate custodian” of the person.
On the first point, the question of Ms. Ozturk’s whereabouts was confused by what the Judge described as “this rather unique proceeding” of her being moved from state to state, a process her attorneys termed “hopscotching.” As to the “immediate custodian,” the Judge asked Mr. Dresher who that actually is. Mr. Dresher said he didn’t know, and Ms. Ozturk’s attorneys pointed out the absurdity of requiring them to identify that person when the government itself cannot do so. They also argued strongly that the government has not come forward, during the three weeks of Ms. Ozturk’s detention, with a single charge other than her coauthoring the op ed. Even that “charge” is guilt by association with a campus organization that was briefly banned, a tactic reminiscent of the red scare in the 1950s. ICE decided to detain her because of her speech. Ms. Ozturk’s Constitutional rights continue to be violated as long as she is in detention, and have an intended and chilling effect on the larger community.
While it’s not clear how the Judge will rule, he seemed inclined to retain jurisdiction in Vermont, move Ms. Ozturk here, and hold a bail hearing as soon as possible. Her attorneys pointed out that, far from being a flight risk, she is eager to get back to Tufts University to complete her doctoral degree.
Whatever the ultimate conclusion may be, in this one courtroom in this one small state, the judicial branch functioned as it should -- at a time when the country is almost severed in two, and a writer can be abducted by masked plainclothes officers and locked up. Everyone was heard, and everyone listened. It can still happen.
Mary, thank you for including us in your firsthand experience and sharing so much detail about the case. The more we continue to share what needs to be shared, the safer we'll all be.
In this age of media overload, there is still no substitute for the human eye and ear, and one person's telling reaching another. Thanks for responding.
Today May 21, from Drop Site: Microsoft has quietly implemented a policy blocking employee emails containing the words “Palestine,” “Gaza,” or “genocide” on its internal Exchange servers, according to No Azure for Apartheid, a group of pro-Palestine Microsoft employees. The automated filter, which silently prevents such emails from reaching recipients was first detected on Wednesday—just after Microsoft’s Build developer conference faced repeated disruptions by the activist group.
Microsoft has been rocked by internal dissent over its collaboration with the Israeli military and government amid the ongoing assault on Gaza. The company has faced disruptions to its events, including protests from employees over its provision of cloud services and other critical infrastructure used by the Israeli military.
Yes, redeem the dream...says Cory Booker
deepest bow. one of your most important letters in this time when words are the only arrows we may have. thank you. LOVE. m
Brava, Deena! As always, you compress so many issues into a brief, beautiful, disturbing space. Your words give courage, which is exactly what is most needed at this time.
Dearest Deena
Your words and your dream and your quest and your mission and your passion ring bright and true to me.
As Tobi & Marc prepare to journey next week to Joshua Tree to listen to the Land, I send them this prayer, my wish, inspired by your heart and include your invocation:
“This is our grace: To be a note
In the exact chord that animates creation.”
My wish:
Let there be bells and chimes in the desert to call forth harmonic resonations from every woman and man and every being relation.
Though they may not be within actual earshot, know that they, and we, and I, will feel it and know it in their (our) bodies.
Place a bell or a chime here and there (in the Walk That Is The Land) such that those coming upon them may ring them in prayer, in harmony, in joy, in community.
Let the sound(s) be heard, and felt, from near, and from afar.
I’ll be listening.
Aho and Shalom.
Love,
Dan
I am deeply moved by your courage, grit, vision, and sheer persistence in leaning into TRUTH, BEAUTY, VISION, and HEALING POWER. Thank you, Deena!
Grateful for your words
Thank you. Pluto means treasure - who knew, and how important.
To this eloquent and alarming piece, I I would like to add my eyewitness account of the Vermont court hearing from yesterday: I spent this morning in the Vermont District Court where Rumeysa Ozturk’s case was heard. It has yet to be decided. The day began with a huge crowd outside the courthouse singing “Woke up this morning with my mind/ it was set on freedom.” And in many ways the outcome for Ms. Ozturk will be the outcome for freedom of speech in our country.
More and more I feel that we are living in the world of Nazi-occupied Amsterdam, and never more so than when viewing the video of Rumeysa Ozturk as she was abducted by masked plainclothes officers. Her captors snatched her through New Hampshire to Vermont, while her lawyers desperately tried to find her and filed a motion to keep her in Massachusetts. The judge granted it, but by then she was long since in Vermont. Just overnight, though, before they took her out of my local airport to Louisiana where she has been imprisoned since March 25.
When the Massachusetts judge ruled that her case had to be heard in Vermont, I rejoiced. Not just because she has a better chance of a fair trial here rather than in Louisiana (as the government prefers), but also because it meant that I could personally show up for this woman who has suffered so much at the hands of our government. Deprived of her asthma medication, deprived of contact with anyone in her life for 24 hours, deprived of a prayer rug and space to pray. Deprived of her human dignity by being handcuffed and shackled. The purposeful cruelty of the ICE actions is especially horrifying when applied to a young woman who is obviously no threat to six plainclothes agents. She thought she would be killed for the first hours of the abduction.
They picked the wrong victim this time: an unimpeachable 30 year old Fulbright Scholar whose academic focus is on how young people can use social media for the good. The Washington Post released an exclusive story this morning which reveals that the State Department could find no evidence that Ms. Ozturk supports Hamas as her persecutors contend. Her only “crime” is co-writing an op ed protesting the genocide of more than 50,000 Palestinians, and urging Tufts University to divest of investments that support that. Everyone who could possibly come forward on her behalf has done so: the University President, her union, her colleagues, her advisor, rabbis.
If there was ever a test case in which the government appears to be so thoroughly in the wrong, this seems to be it – at the common sense level. Whether that will be true legally remains to be seen. The basis of Ms. Ozturk’s case is the right of habeas corpus, literally “You shall have the body.” This fundamental, enshrined right stems from 1679 English common law, designed specifically to prevent unlawful imprisonment at a time when the King could lock up anybody he wanted to.
This morning, I awoke at 5:30, anxious about how things would go. I was sure Ms. Ozturk was awake, too, and how much more anxious she must have been. We hastened to get ready and were downtown a little after 8:00, where a crowd had already gathered. It was a bright, cold morning, and our Federal building was blocked off with four or five gleaming Federal Protective Service vehicles parked nose to toe, the kind of with cages in the back seats. At least 200 people showed up in the end, probably more. After some thought, I decided to try to be among the people in the courtroom. A little after 9:00, the four towering men in bullet proof vests parted ways to let us in – when their watches said it was time, not when our Unitarian church bells rang. The Vermont police inside were a different breed altogether, genial and efficient, offering to keep people’s phones if they didn’t get the memo about leaving them behind.
Another quick wait, and we were inside the courtroom, a space like a really nice hotel conference room with good wood and carpet and spacious seats. The bench was at least 30 feet away but the sound system worked well. Between us and the bench were the spaces for the lawyers: one grey-haired man with his back to us who represented the government, Michael Drescher, and on the other side three young women attorneys representing the Ms. Ozturk: Noor Zafar, Jessie Rossman, and another whose name I didn’t catch.
In almost three hours of proceedings, the atmosphere was invariably respectful. It was what one would hope for in a small state with reverence for the rule of law. Judge William Sessions III was thoroughly prepared and questioned both sides in depth about the legal issues and niceties, to ensure that he fully understood all of the arguments. For the lay person, it’s not worth reviewing them in depth. Here are some highlights.
The government put a lot of emphasis on the discretion the Executive Branch has to detain non-citizens, but Ms. Rossman had a ready answer for that: “There is not discretion, even in immigration law, for the government to violate the Constitution.” The review of what Ms. Ozturk was subjected to was chilling – and the case she is making is that she was specifically arrested and is being detained because of her exercise of her First Amendment rights, and her Fifth Amendment rights to due process of law have also been violated.
A key question is the legitimacy of the original filing. Ms. Ozturk’s attorneys filed the habeas petition (a request to review the legality of someone’s detention) in Massachusetts because, in the absence of information they vainly sought from ICE, they wrongly assumed that she was still in that state. They named ICE Field Office director Patricia H. Hyde and her superiors as the people responsible for the arrest who had the power to remedy it. One of the key legal issues is that the habeas petition must be made in the jurisdiction where the person is actually located, and must name the “immediate custodian” of the person.
On the first point, the question of Ms. Ozturk’s whereabouts was confused by what the Judge described as “this rather unique proceeding” of her being moved from state to state, a process her attorneys termed “hopscotching.” As to the “immediate custodian,” the Judge asked Mr. Dresher who that actually is. Mr. Dresher said he didn’t know, and Ms. Ozturk’s attorneys pointed out the absurdity of requiring them to identify that person when the government itself cannot do so. They also argued strongly that the government has not come forward, during the three weeks of Ms. Ozturk’s detention, with a single charge other than her coauthoring the op ed. Even that “charge” is guilt by association with a campus organization that was briefly banned, a tactic reminiscent of the red scare in the 1950s. ICE decided to detain her because of her speech. Ms. Ozturk’s Constitutional rights continue to be violated as long as she is in detention, and have an intended and chilling effect on the larger community.
While it’s not clear how the Judge will rule, he seemed inclined to retain jurisdiction in Vermont, move Ms. Ozturk here, and hold a bail hearing as soon as possible. Her attorneys pointed out that, far from being a flight risk, she is eager to get back to Tufts University to complete her doctoral degree.
Whatever the ultimate conclusion may be, in this one courtroom in this one small state, the judicial branch functioned as it should -- at a time when the country is almost severed in two, and a writer can be abducted by masked plainclothes officers and locked up. Everyone was heard, and everyone listened. It can still happen.
Mary, thank you for including us in your firsthand experience and sharing so much detail about the case. The more we continue to share what needs to be shared, the safer we'll all be.
In this age of media overload, there is still no substitute for the human eye and ear, and one person's telling reaching another. Thanks for responding.
Agreed.
Today May 21, from Drop Site: Microsoft has quietly implemented a policy blocking employee emails containing the words “Palestine,” “Gaza,” or “genocide” on its internal Exchange servers, according to No Azure for Apartheid, a group of pro-Palestine Microsoft employees. The automated filter, which silently prevents such emails from reaching recipients was first detected on Wednesday—just after Microsoft’s Build developer conference faced repeated disruptions by the activist group.
Microsoft has been rocked by internal dissent over its collaboration with the Israeli military and government amid the ongoing assault on Gaza. The company has faced disruptions to its events, including protests from employees over its provision of cloud services and other critical infrastructure used by the Israeli military.
I never realized now prescient this poem by Jane Hirshfield is:
On the Fifth Day
Jane Hirshfield -
On the fifth day
the scientists who studied the rivers
were forbidden to speak
or to study the rivers.
The scientists who studied the air
were told not to speak of the air,
and the ones who worked for the farmers
were silenced,
and the ones who worked for the bees.
Someone, from deep in the Badlands,
began posting facts.
The facts were told not to speak
and were taken away.
The facts, surprised to be taken, were silent.
Now it was only the rivers
that spoke of the rivers,
and only the wind that spoke of its bees,
while the unpausing factual buds of the fruit trees
continued to move toward their fruit.
The silence spoke loudly of silence,
and the rivers kept speaking
of rivers, of boulders and air.
Bound to gravity, earless and tongueless,
the untested rivers kept speaking.
Bus drivers, shelf stockers,
code writers, machinists, accountants,
lab techs, cellists kept speaking.
They spoke, the fifth day,
of silence.