Gratitude for 'Cups of Tea' author - by Judge Jim Gray

Editor's note: Instead of his regular column, James P. Gray this week has decided to share a letter he sent to "Three Cups of Tea" author Greg Mortenson.

Mr. Greg Mortenson

Central Asia Institute

P.O. Box 7209

Bozeman, Montana 59771

Dear Greg,

In your travels, and carrying out your many obligations in helping to establish schools for boys and girls in Pakistan and Afghanistan, you meet many people. As such, you will probably not recall me, but I was the last person for whom you signed a copy of your latest book, "Stones into Schools," after you gave your presentation at Freedom Fest in Las Vegas in January.

During our short time together, I tried to communicate to you my pride in what you are doing for Pakistan, Afghanistan, our great country and the world in helping to educate so many people — especially girls. This is certainly not easy in Central Asia! Now that I have finished reading your new book, I am even more in awe of your accomplishments.

Not only has your Central Asia Institute been successful in building schools and educating people, you have put into reality the lesson we tried to learn in the Peace Corps, which is that a project is only really successful if it can get along without you as the founder. This you demonstrated by CAI's assistance, but without your personal involvement, in the building of its most distant school — almost literally on the roof of the world — in Bozai Gumbaz in Northern Afghanistan. Congratulations!

From my perspective, you are actually doing what other people and even governments only really dream of doing. For only modest amounts of money you are building institutions of literacy, self-confidence, self-sufficiency and global good will. In other words, like the sub-heading of your book says, you are promoting peace with books not bombs in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

To further that wonderful effort, please accept not only this enclosed financial contribution, but also my fervent thanks and best wishes. And also please receive my strong hope that you will take extra precautions for your safety in the future while you travel in these dangerous and remote areas in these difficult times!

But this letter also comes with a request. During our brief discussion, I mentioned to you my deeply felt belief that our nation's policy of drug prohibition is literally causing almost unimaginable problems here and all around the world. Yes, many of these drugs can be harmful, but it really is the drug money that is causing the greatest harm. So I particularly noted the comments in your book about the damage inflicted by the Taliban due to the growing of the poppy flower to make opium and heroin, and the resultant problems with addictions and smuggling that come from these acts.

So my request is that you use your future presentations in part to tell people the truth as you have seen it on this subject, wherever it is. My own understanding of that truth is synthesized by a quote from Winston Churchill, who said that "If you destroy a free market, you create a black market." From your perspective, and using your insights, please tell the world what this black market has done in Afghanistan and surrounding area, and the results you have seen.

From the deepest part of my heart, thank you again for what you have done and for what you continue to do. I know that CAI is not faith or religious-based, but nevertheless you are truly doing God's work.

Of course, so much remains to be done. Like you say at the end of your book, today there are over 120 million school-age children on this planet who remain illiterate and are deprived of education — two-thirds of them being girls — due to gender discrimination, poverty, exploitation, religious extremism and corrupt governments.

You further tell us from your own observations that educating girls leads to increased income not only for the girls, but also for their families and nation. At the same time educating girls generally increases nutrition and sanitation and reduces the birthrate, and infant and maternal mortality. Plus, educated women are more likely to insist upon the education of their own and neighboring children — especially the daughters. And in addition, educated girls and women are more likely to stand up for themselves, resist violence, and take part in government, which, in turn, reduces violence and corruption in government.

In our military actions in the regions you serve, our government is also trying to achieve the same goals as you are, but with fewer positive results, and a great deal greater human and financial cost. Why has the Taliban not attacked the schools your organization has established? Because the elders and other leaders of those communities requested the schools to be built in the first place, and actually provided the land, labor and some of the materials for the construction. Thus, attacks on those schools are seen as an attack upon the communities themselves, and the Taliban does not want to alienate those communities. In fact, in some cases the communities have persuaded the Taliban that an attack upon the schools would be seen as an insult to Islam itself!

Greg, you have been responsible for effective and lasting positive change in one of the most difficult regions of the world. I have met you, and even with all of your success, you are truly a humble man. But in reality you are a gift to us all. So thank you again for what you are doing for the world. Bless you, and go with God!

JAMES P. GRAY is a retired judge of the Orange County Superior Court, the author of "A Voter's Handbook: Effective Solutions to America's Problems" (The Forum Press, 2010), and can be contacted at JimPGray@sbcglobal.net or through his website at http://www.JudgeJimGray.com.

“THE ANSWER IS: IT DEPENDS” = by Judge Jim Gray

“THE ANSWER IS: IT DEPENDS” - by Judge Jim Gray 08/10/08

One of the lessons I learned in law school was that the answer to most questions is: it depends. What does that mean? Well, before you can give a reasoned answer to a question, you should know the circumstances and the context in which the question arises.


Another and slightly bawdy way of saying this is illustrated by one man asking another man the question “How’s your wife?” with the answer being: “Compared to what?”


Children often do not understand or employ the “it depends” way of thinking. For them things are usually “all or nothing.” But when they mature they begin to realize that the answers to most questions depend upon the situation, and the risks or benefits of action or inaction. Even though most adults innately do understand this approach, many do not employ it consciously.


One example of where a question cries out for an “it depends” answer is whether or not we should drill for oil off our coasts and in Alaska. For people to think only in terms of “drill everywhere,” or “drill nowhere” is shortsighted to the extreme. Some important issues to consider are: Where is the oil? How can it be reached? What are the risks of oil spillage or other potential pollution problems at a particular site? Will the extracting company be bonded for environmental problems? Of course all of our land is sacred, but is this site particularly unique or picturesque? In addition, will new developments in technology allow the oil to be extracted a longer way from the drilling site? Only when we get answers to those and other similar questions can we begin to make intelligent decisions on the issue.


The same myopic arguments of all or nothing were utilized by some people in the debate several years ago about whether or not we should have constructed the Alaska pipeline. Fortunately, other more sophisticated people used a risks and benefits analysis, made some modifications to the original proposed plans, and then went ahead with the project. Not only has the pipeline been successful, I am actually not aware of any significant problems with it at all. So for our elected officials now to take positions of all or nothing regarding offshore or Alaska drilling is irresponsible, and even insulting. We are smarter than that; why aren’t they?


When you think about it, most issues lend themselves to a similar risk and benefit analysis, as symbolized by the “it depends” answer. That even includes issues about our country’s security. For example, should our government be able to wiretap telephone conversations between people here and countries like Libya, Pakistan and Iran? The answer is (all together now): it depends. What is the threat to our security, and how immediate is that threat? What are the opportunities for the government agents to seek and obtain a judicial warrant? What do our Constitution and judicial precedents say about this situation? In other words, what are the risks and benefits both regarding our security and also regarding our precious liberties?  


The same is true about so-called mandatory minimum sentences in criminal cases. Should a defendant be sentenced to a minimum of 15 years in prison if he has been convicted of a particular offense? The answer once again is, it depends. What were the circumstances of the offense? Who is this defendant, and what is his background and past criminal record? Who were the victims and how severely were they injured, if at all? It is simply not possible for the legislature, or anyone else, to come up with an appropriate sentence in advance, because there is no way they can have answers to those and other similar critical questions. These laws have resulted in some criminal sentences that are deeply inappropriate both for the defendants and their families, and also for the taxpayers.


But there must be some issues that are so clear that the “it depends” answer is not necessary. For example, what about questions concerning the safety of our children? Well, here again it depends upon the situation. Should we not trust any children to cross any street by themselves until they are in high school? That is a certainly a risky activity that can threaten our children’s safety. But it depends. What are the ages of the children? What kind of streets are involved, and what are their safety features? These questions should be answered before decisions are made. Similarly, there are also definite risks in dating, so should girls not be allowed to date until they are 21? So once again, even though these are important issues, the answer still is that it depends.


Nevertheless, we do not want to descend into moral relativism either. There certainly are some things about which a moral society will not compromise, and in those cases the “it depends” answer does not apply. For example, the answer to questions about slavery, apartheid, the sexual abuse of children, and Hitler’s extermination of millions of Jews, gypsies and others is not “it depends.” In my mind there are ambiguities about many or even most issues in the world, but not those. In fact, I will go so far as to say that in some areas there is even an Absolute Right and an Absolute Wrong Answer, but I may not always be intelligent or perceptive enough to know what that answer is. But to further elaborate on those areas of religion and philosophy is far beyond the reach of this column.  


So what is the point of this column? Too often many people, particularly those in government, fall into an “all or nothing” discussion about issues that is based upon politics or emotion or both. Instead, I hope this column will help you to encourage those people publicly and privately to use a cost/benefit approach. That will result in more intelligent decisions being made for us all.


Finally, should a cost/benefit approach be utilized in the next important issue that you will be confronting? The answer is, of course: it depends.

James P. Gray is a Judge of the Superior Court in California, the author of Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed and What We Can Do About It - A Judicial Indictment of the War on Drugs (Temple University Press, 2001) and Wearing The Robe - The Art And Responsibilities of Judging In Today's Courts, has a blog at http://judgejamesgray.blogspot.com/. http://www.judgejimgray.com, and can be contacted at www.judgejimgray.com.