THE MEETING OF THE WORLD BLIND UNION
                       AND RELATED MATTERS
                       by Kenneth Jernigan

     As Monitor readers know, the International Federation of the
Blind and the World Council for the Welfare of the Blind came
together in 1984 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, to form the World Blind
Union. Although the National Federation of the Blind was a member
of both founding organizations, we did not for a number of
reasons attend the Riyadh convention. At a meeting in Washington
late in 1984 the North America Region (consisting of the United
States and Canada) met for the first time, elected officers, and
began to function. Bill Gallagher, the head of the American
Foundation for the Blind at the time, was elected Regional
President, and I was elected to the Executive Committee. 
     The World Blind Union is structured to emphasize the
importance of its regions. There are seven of these regions:
Europe, Africa, the Middle East, East Asia/Pacific, Asia, Latin
America, and North America (which in 1986 became North
America/Caribbean). The WBU officers consist of those elected at
the General Assembly every four years (President, Vice President,
Secretary General, and Treasurer) plus the immediate past
President and the seven Regional Presidents. The Executive
Committee consists of the officers plus three additional members
from each region and one representative from the international
members. Thus, there are thirty-four members of the Executive
Committee, including the twelve officers.
     From its beginning in 1984 our regional organization has
functioned constructively and well. As to the World Blind Union
at the international level, my first real contact with it came
during the meeting of the WBU Executive Committee in New York in
1986. At that time Sheikh Abdullah Al-Ghanim of Saudi Arabia was
President. It was at that meeting that Pedro Zurita of Spain was
elected Secretary General. The New York meeting was more than a
little chaotic, and a number of us wondered where the
organization was attempting to go and whether it would get there.
     In 1987 Bill Gallagher resigned as Regional President, and I
was elected to fill his unexpired term. Elections occur every
four years, and I was returned to office as Regional President in
the fall of 1988, and again this year. Therefore, my term is
scheduled to continue until the time of the General Assembly in
1996. 
     The second General Assembly of the World Blind Union was
held in Madrid in the fall of 1988, and we sent a sizable
delegation. Duncan Watson, the Chairman of the Royal National
Institute for the Blind of the United Kingdom, was elected
President, and Dr. Euclid Herie of the Canadian National
Institute for the Blind was elected Treasurer. Enrique Elissalde
of Uruguay was elected Vice President, and Pedro Zurita was
returned to office as Secretary General.
     The third General Assembly was held in Cairo during the
first week of November of 1992, and seven of us attended from the
NFB: Mrs. Miller, who is a member of the staff at the National
Center for the Blind; Don and Betty Capps; President and Mrs.
Maurer; and Mrs. Jernigan and I. I am writing this article to
give you my overall impressions of the Cairo meeting and to tell
you something about the places I visited en route. 
     It is no secret that airplanes and I don't get along, but on
a trip like the one to Cairo there isn't any reasonable
alternative. Also, if you select your itinerary carefully, it is
just about as cheap to make several stops along the way to study
programs for the blind and meet new people as it is to go
straight from Baltimore to Cairo--so that is what Mrs. Jernigan
and I did.
     We left Dulles airport on Lufthansa Airlines on Monday
evening, October 19, for an overnight flight to Frankfurt, where
we transferred to another Lufthansa plane for Athens. Larry
Campbell, who heads up Perkins's overseas program and seems to
know everybody in the world connected with blindness, had made
arrangements for us to have a guide and interpreter in Greece.
She was Christiana Zotou, and a very conscientious and capable
guide she proved to be. We stayed in Athens from Tuesday
afternoon, October 20, (Mrs. Jernigan's birthday) until Friday
morning, October 23--and our visit was not only enjoyable but
extremely productive.
     Let me give you a few impressions and then tell you
something about the people we met and the programs we saw.
Remember that what I am going to say reflects only my own
personal opinions and observations. Athens is one of the most
crowded cities I have ever seen--so much so, in fact, that cars
with even-numbered license plates are permitted in the downtown
area one day and those with odd-numbered plates the next. There
is such a continuing influx of people from the rural areas that
the government tries to provide financial incentives to get them
to move back to the villages--with, I might add, limited success,
judging from the crowds I saw. When I use the word incentives, I
do so advisedly; for if you are drawing any kind of government
subsidy (assistance to the blind, for instance), you get maybe
twice as much if you live in a rural area as if you live in
Athens.
     Since Greek food has always been a favorite of mine, I had
looked forward to eating at an authentic Greek restaurant. We
have a fine one here in Baltimore, and before going on the trip,
I asked the proprietor (a Greek native) to make suggestions. He
gave me the name of what he said was the best restaurant in
Athens, and I went there--but his restaurant in Baltimore is
better, much better. When I told my daughter this, she expressed
surprise. I asked her whether she thought if she went to Greece
and opened a restaurant featuring Southern cooking, the food
would be less authentic or tasty than it would if she cooked it
in Maryland--or, for that matter, Louisiana or South Carolina.
     Mrs. Jernigan and I spent the better part of a day with the
leaders of the Panhellenic Association of the Blind, the
counterpart of the National Federation of the Blind here in the
United States. The President, Elias Margiolas, is a very
knowledgeable, tough-minded individual, who knows what he wants
and is determined to get it. Some of the specifics of what the
organized blind of Greece are trying to achieve may differ from
those we are seeking, but the basic objectives are the same--
self-determination and control by the blind of their own destiny.
Moreover, it must be kept in mind that the economic conditions
and political climate make a difference. Here, in no particular
order, are some of the things Mr. Margiolas and his colleagues
told me: 

     The law requires public and private employers to hire blind
telephone operators instead of sighted ones. Beginning this year
legislation has been passed exempting blind people from paying
income tax. The blind do not pay import taxes on cars. As with
the blind of our country, the blind of Greece are required to
work fewer years than others in order to earn enough coverage for
full retirement. The blind pay half-fares on public
transportation.     

     Mr. Margiolas and his colleagues told me that the
Panhellenic Association was established in 1932 and that it
started local chapters about seven years ago. They said that
there are approximately 21,000 blind people in Greece and that
about 4,000 of them belong to the Association. The voting members
are blind, but there are sighted honorary members. Officers are
not paid, and I think I was told that there are ten local
chapters. As is often the case with organizations of the blind,
lack of money is one of the principal problems. However, the
Association does own a certain amount of real estate, from which
it gets rent to help with its expenses, and it is actively trying
to initiate new fundraising programs. I shared with them some of
the methods and techniques we are using. I felt real kinship with
these independent-minded blind people, who have organized for
self expression and are determined to control their own lives.
They are our kind of people.
     Mr. Margiolas made it clear that the Panhellenic Association
disagrees on many issues with the local Lighthouse for the Blind.
Apparently, however, there has been a recent move to engage in
dialogue and to try to resolve differences.
     The longtime head of the Lighthouse, Emmanuel Kefakis,
retired recently, and there is now an acting director. I met with
her for several hours and had a thorough tour of the Lighthouse.
In addition to the rather traditional sheltered workshop, there
are some interesting projects in electronics, as well as a
variety of other activities. Here is part of what the Lighthouse
brochure says. Keep in mind that this is the agency's evaluation
of itself, not necessarily what I can verify:

     The Lighthouse was founded in 1947. It provides, according
to the brochure, a variety of services, including: 

     1. Sheltered workshops that employ about 35 persons on a
permanent basis, guaranteed legal wages, full social security,
and other benefits as provided by a labor law. Useful items such
as brushes and brooms manufactured at these workshops are
purchased through the provisions of a special law, by the armed
forces and other state agencies.
     2. A training program of switchboard operators, through
which 700 blind men and women have been trained, so far, as
telephone operators, of which 650 are already successfully
employed in public agencies, banks, hospitals, hotels, and
various private enterprises.
     3. A printing shop produces books in Braille. We are trying
to include in our publications representative books of
educational, scientific, technical, cultural, and recreational
value as well as music Braille books for piano, violin, guitar,
and accordion.
     4. A complete recording studio for the production of talking
books on tapes and cassettes. These comprise text books and other
reference books for blind students attending the university, as
well as literature and fiction.
     5. A lending library through which books in Braille and
talking books are loaned to interested blind readers. 
     6. A Braille monthly magazine, edited and printed at the
center, is distributed free to blind persons all over Greece. 
     7. An adjustment program for newly blinded persons ....
     8. A Department of Social Services, which deals with
problems of blind persons and their families (social case work).
     9. Since 1983 the Lighthouse for the Blind has become a
training center for social workers ....
     13. A training program for blind church cantors. Byzantine
music has traditionally been a vocational outlet for a small
number of blind persons. Some years ago a rehabilitation law for
the handicapped was passed which, among other things, provides
that all churches should hire preferably a blind cantor if such
qualified and trained persons are available ....
     15. Music is also taught.
     16. A folkloric song group, accompanied by an orchestra, has
been formed by blind singers and musicians whose objective is to
spread the knowledge of the genuine Greek music.
     17. A new training program of mechanical, electrical, and
electronic work has been started. The trainer is himself blind.
     
     This, in part, is what the Lighthouse says about its
programs. As I have already indicated, I spent only part of one
day at the Lighthouse and, therefore, cannot express an informed
opinion about the substance (or lack thereof) of some of the
items listed. Again I say that the leaders of the Panhellenic
Association of the Blind are critical of the Lighthouse programs
although, I gather, less so now than formerly. I have not given
the entire list of the Lighthouse catalogue of program
activities, but item 18 might be interpreted quite differently by
many of our members from the meaning which the Lighthouse
undoubtedly intends to convey. Here it is:

     18. Modern social philosophy and socio-economic changes
require a broader and more active participation of blind persons
in programs for their own welfare (self-help activities). Along
these lines we have organized a new Department for Public
Relations, Legislative and Social activities. Four blind persons
are in charge of this office, helped by a committee of blind
people with special skills. This Department is responsible for
cultural and social activities by and for the blind, pursues
legislation and regulations concerning the blind, and helps in
the solution of legal, social, or family problems for blind
individuals. 

     This is a direct quote from the Lighthouse brochure. Whether
an agency doing work for the blind can meaningfully set up a
program to advocate for the blind and give the blind an
increasing say in their own affairs, or whether this is a job
that, by definition, the blind must do for themselves is not only
an open question in Greece but also here in the United States as
well. Certainly it is being debated and attempted in all of its
permutations, with little evidence that the final answer will
soon be given. 
     The Lighthouse lists some of its other programs as follows:

     19. Establishment of a permanent exhibit and sales room for
the provision of modern technical and technological aids and
devices for the blind.
     20. A program for guide dogs, which has been established for
the first time in Greece.
     21. The Lighthouse for the Blind, bearing in mind the
technical difficulties which prevent blind persons from coming
into direct contact with the national treasures exhibited in our
museums, decided to open a tactual museum in which exact copies
of the most important statues, bas-reliefs, and vases are
reproduced and put on display in such a manner as to make it
possible for blind people from all parts of the world to enjoy
the aesthetic beauty of ancient Greek sculpture through the ages.

     This is an abbreviated list of what the Lighthouse says that
it does, and Mrs. Jernigan and I thoroughly enjoyed our tour and
found the staff friendly and hospitable. I should add one
personal footnote about the statues. There were quite a number of
them, and I have no doubt that they were visually appealing; nor
do I question that some blind people would find them
aesthetically pleasing. However, my peasant nature asserted
itself. I dutifully felt most of the statues--noses, ears,
foreheads, chins, arms, legs, and torsos--but I must confess that
I remained unmoved. The visual beauty eluded my tactual grasp,
which prefers the feel of glossy plastic or highly polished stone
or wood. I came away with nothing for my effort except dirty
fingers and an unenlightened mind. I also came away wondering
what blind people see in such things but with a sense of
satisfaction that I had at least shown good manners and given
polite attention. Ah, well! A peasant, when all is said and done,
is still a peasant--and there is no help for it.
     As I understand it, there are two residential schools for
the education of blind children in Greece, one in Athens and the
other in Thessaloniki. Each has something like a hundred
children. In addition, students are now being mainstreamed in the
upper grades. We visited the school in Athens and were favorably
impressed. When I go to such schools, I always like to visit the
bedrooms. You can tell a great deal about an institution by the
way the place smells, what kind of furniture there is and how it
is arranged, and whether the beds feel clean and well kept. From
my superficial examination, the school in Athens passed with high
marks. Of course, I was not there long enough to make definitive
judgments about the quality of the programs or the academic
excellence, but the children seem happy and loved. Regardless of
the efforts of staff, such things cannot be faked. By their
actions children tell you how they are treated and whether they
are respected. The climate was right for academic accomplishment,
and I suspect it is occurring.
     There is a good deal more that I could say about my
impressions of Greece, but space must be left for other portions
of the trip. On Friday morning, October 23, Mrs. Jernigan and I
left Athens for Istanbul on Olympic Airlines. We had not
originally intended to go to Turkey, but circumstances dictated
otherwise. 
     In mid-September, two blind Turkish university students came
to the National Center for the Blind for a three-week training
period. There had been a Kurzweil reading machine in Turkey for
almost a year, but they did not know how to use it. Also they had
recently acquired an Arkenstone reader and needed to learn about
it as well. In addition, they wanted to work with the Braille 'n
Speak, and they also wanted help in mobility and to learn about
the programs of the Federation. During part of the time they were
with us, Fatos Floyd, who is a native of Turkey and grew up
there, came to the National Center to help with interpreting and
to give general assistance. It was a very successful experience.
     Kurzweil sent a representative to work with the students for
a day, and Blazie Engineering provided personnel to give
instruction on the Braille 'n Speak. In fact, Fatos and the
students, working in concert with Blazie personnel, modified the
Braille 'n Speak so that it can now function in Turkish. This was
accomplished in a single week of intensive effort.
     Shortly after the students returned home, I received an
invitation to give a lecture at Bosphorus University in Istanbul
and to hold meetings with officials of the Turkish government to
discuss programs for the blind. It seemed a good opportunity, and
since I was already going to that part of the world, I changed my
itinerary and agreed to go.
     One of those principally responsible for making the
arrangements was Arlene Brill, an American woman who teaches at
the Uskudar School in Istanbul. She and Emin Demirci, the
President of the Turkish Federation of the Blind, visited the
National Center for the Blind somewhat more than a year ago, and
she was the one who made the initial contacts for the Turkish
students to come last fall.
     Arlene and Emin met us at the airport in Istanbul, made most
of the arrangements for our itinerary while we were there, and
gave us hospitality of the type that engenders lasting
friendship. The Uskudar School is a truly unusual institution.
Until a few months ago, it was a girls' school, but it is now
becoming co-educational. All of the teachers are native American
speakers, and English is the only language used. Uskudar is said
to be the best school in the country, and I believe it. I was
told that competition for entrance is keen, that national tests
are given, and that only the top one percent of the applicants
are accepted. Students enter at about age eleven, and by the time
they finish high school, they speak flawless English, with
scarcely a trace of accent. In passing, it seems worth noting
that Fatos Floyd is an Uskudar graduate.
     I lectured at Uskudar and distributed NFB literature. Many
of these students will be the future leaders of Turkey, and it
seemed important to inform them about blindness and our
philosophy. Later, when I held a press conference (which received
a considerable amount of national coverage) Uskudar students did
the interpreting--and it was obvious that the job was done well.
     There were many high points of the Turkish visit, among
which were the following. We spent an evening with Fatos Floyd's
mother. She speaks no English, but there were a number of
competent blind university students to interpret. It was a
memorable occasion.
     The leaders of the Turkish Federation of the Blind and I
spent almost an hour with Turgut Ozal, the President of Turkey. I
told him about the organized blind movement in the United States
and talked to him about blindness in general. He was keenly
interested--in our philosophy, in technology that might be of
help to the blind, and in my ideas about programs which might be
put to use in Turkey. He was warm and friendly and did not rush
the conversation or show any hurry to break off the discussion.
It was a productive meeting, which I hope and believe will bring
beneficial results to the Turkish blind. 
     On my last morning in Turkey I gave a lecture at Bosphorus
University. Arrangements had been made by the blind students who
attend the institution. There are between twenty and thirty of
them, and they demonstrate a high degree of initiative and
intelligence. They had made thorough and extensive plans, and
there were close to a hundred people in attendance. Although many
of those present spoke English, a number did not, and my remarks
were interpreted by one of the blind graduate students. Again I
distributed literature and established relationships which should
be ongoing and productive.
     Besides these group sessions I had a number of one-on-one
meetings with government officials, university personnel, and
civic leaders. Mrs. Jernigan and I also found time for a little
sightseeing and cultural enhancement. We visited mosques, early
Christian churches, and the bazaar. Yes! The bazaar! There were
crowds of people, narrow streets, small shops, and a freewheeling
atmosphere of bargaining and haggling for merchandise. It was a
delight and a joy. 
     We never know when and where we will learn a new truth, or
have one that we already know confirmed and reinforced. This was
brought home to me quite forcefully as I was leaving the bazaar.
I was reminded, as I have often been before, that negative
attitudes about blindness are not innate. They are acquired--
learned from the culture and passed on from generation to
generation. Children, before they are corrupted, have no such
misconceptions. 
     As we moved through the crowd on our way out of the bazaar,
we encountered a small boy (probably seven or eight) who was
selling tops. With no embarrassment and without a moment's
hesitation he took my hand and showed me how to hold the string
to make the top spin. He spoke only enough English to tell me how
much money he wanted, and I have no knowledge of Turkish--but we
communicated. He had absolutely no self-consciousness about my
blindness at all. He was simply a young entrepreneur trying to
make a sale--and although I had bargained vigorously in the
bazaar, I was so struck by his manner and initiative that I paid
him exactly what he asked without a word of protest. No, more
than that! I paid him with joy in my heart. Enterprise and proper
attitudes about blindness should be encouraged. If he keeps to
his present path, he may well be a future prime minister--or
maybe I am just a soft touch. On the other hand, he didn't want
very much--and later, when two boys (slightly older) tried to
fleece me as I was about to enter a mosque, they got different
treatment.
     I should discuss one more item concerning the Turkish
Federation of the Blind. Its leaders told me that a federal law
was passed ten or twelve years ago requiring that every
nonprofit, nongovernmental organization dealing with the same
issue or disability group must combine into one federation. Thus,
the Turkish Federation of the Blind has about eighteen
affiliates. Moreover, all disability groups must join into an
overall coalition of the disabled. Therefore, the Turkish
Federation is one of four components of the larger disability
group.
     Let me be clearly understood. The law of Turkey makes it
mandatory that the nonprofit, nongovernmental organizations
combine. There are civil and, for all I know, criminal penalties
for violation. I asked the Federation leaders what would happen
if ten or fifteen blind people decided to get together every
Monday for breakfast. They said this would be all right. Then
how, I asked, does the law work? They said that if a group simply
held an informal meeting there would be no problem but that if
that group wanted to raise any money or attempt in any way to
influence public policy or opinion, it must submit its
constitution to the government for approval and must combine with
all other groups purporting to work in the same area. Although
this system seemed strange to me, I did not hear a lot of
discussion about it, so I couldn't be sure of all of its
ramifications or how burdensome it was in actual practice.
     As was the case with Greece, there is much more I could say
about Turkey, but space has to be left for the rest of the trip.
On Monday, October 26, Mrs. Jernigan and I boarded a Turkish
Airlines plane for Amman, Jordan, where we were met by employees
of Sheikh Abdullah Al-Ghanim and taken to his home. Although I
first met the Sheikh sometime during the 'sixties, I have only
truly come to know him since 1986. Since that time I have worked
with him on a continuing basis, and year by year my respect for
him has steadily increased. He has been the driving force in
making life better for the blind of the Middle East (and, for
that matter, in a number of other parts of the world), and he has
done so from motives of true generosity and concern for his
fellow blind. I have now visited Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Egypt,
and Jordan--and in each of these countries there is clear
evidence of his energetic and imaginative work.
     The Regional Centre for Rehabilitation and Training of Blind
Girls in Amman is a perfect example. Mrs. Jernigan and I visited
the Centre and saw it in operation. It is impressive and is
obviously doing good work. Young blind women are brought in from
villages throughout the country and are given instruction in a
variety of skills and activities. 
     Some of the training and routine is traditional in nature--
weaving, music, and the like--while other parts of the program
are innovative. Telephone switchboard training is emphasized, as
is the use of the knitting machine. I had never seen a knitting
machine. Through a series of levers and other controls it permits
the rapid mechanical knitting of sweaters and other items. The
instructor is blind and is obviously an effective teacher. I was
told that the machines are produced in Switzerland and cost about
$1,000 apiece.
     Each graduate of the course is given a knitting machine of
her own and start-up material for making sweaters and other
items. She works in her home and can sell the finished products,
going at her own pace. Alternatively the Centre will undertake to
sell the products for her. This is not merely a make-work
project. The sweaters are quality merchandise. Mrs. Jernigan
brought one home, and anybody would be proud to have it.
     As I have already said, we stayed with the Sheikh while we
were in Jordan, and he has a beautiful home. We talked
extensively about the upcoming meeting of the World Blind Union,
the future of the organization, and the situation of the blind
throughout the world. We also found time for a few normal tourist
activities.
     We went, for instance, to Petra, the historic site of a pre-
Christian civilization called the Naboteans. We saw an entire
city, much of it underground and accessible only through a
steeply descending narrow gorge. The guide told us that all of
the private rooms and public facilities were hollowed out of
solid rock by use of flint implements. The work obviously
involved decades (perhaps centuries) of patient labor. I examined
the rooms and carvings, and the experience was both unusual and
fascinating. 
     There was something else on the Petra trip that I will
always remember. For the first time in my life I rode a camel--
as, incidentally, did Mrs. Jernigan. As far as I am concerned,
the camel is a much maligned and misunderstood (possibly even a
noble) creature. This camel did not (as the conventional wisdom
would have it) spit at me or try to bite. He did not smell bad,
show ill temper, or try to kick. In fact, he knelt down for me to
mount and laid his head peacefully on the sand. When I was on the
saddle (this, incidentally, was a one-hump camel, and the saddle
was on top of the hump), the camel sedately rose to his full
height, and we started the ride. For anybody who cares to know,
the camel gets up on his hind feet first, and then he gets up on
his front feet. It was a kind of rocking motion, and I was fairly
high in the air; but it was a thoroughly satisfying experience.
     While we were in Jordan, we also went to the bazaar, with
the usual fun of bargaining and haggling about prices--but all
good things must come to an end. So on Thursday evening, October
29, Mrs. Jernigan and I, Sheikh Al-Ghanim, and Saleh Al-Majid
(or, as most of us fondly call him, Sammy) boarded an Egypt
Airlines plane and headed for Cairo. The preliminaries were over,
and we were ready for the third General Assembly of the World
Blind Union.
     Certain things strike you immediately about Cairo. It has
between thirteen and fourteen million inhabitants, and every time
you get on the streets, you think at least half of those millions
are there with you--and I mean close at hand. Somebody said that
the only reason Cairo has red lights is so that you can fix blame
when an accident occurs--and I believe it. The traffic jams are
worse than New York; every motorist seems obsessed with the
notion of blowing his or her horn on a constant basis; and you
spend more time in gridlock than moving. This is not to criticize
Cairo or to say that it is unpleasant, for it isn't.
     Before I deal with the WBU business, let me get a few other
things out of the way. The NFB delegation went to a lovely
private home for an evening of dinner and conversation, and while
we were there, we not only had the unforgettable experience of a
charming hostess, tasty exotic food, and a palatial residence,
but also the excitement of a mild earthquake. The house shook,
and some of the lights went out; but as far as I was concerned,
it was better than riding in an airplane. At least, it didn't
last as long. 
     We spent part of an afternoon going to the pyramids and
riding again on camels. In fact, the print edition of this
month's Monitor has a picture of all of us on our camels facing
the camera. With respect to the pyramids my peasant nature came
to the front again. I enjoyed climbing about a hundred feet up
the side of one, and I ventured a few steps into the entrance--
but I let Mrs. Jernigan, Mrs. Miller, and Mr. Maurer go the rest
of the way into the depths. As you entered the pyramid, you had
to stoop quite low and walk down a slanting board under a grubby-
feeling rock, which somehow jarred with my notion of the majesty
of it all. The Cappses, Mrs. Maurer, and I waited outside, and I
contemplated the glory that was Greece and the grandeur that was
Rome--not to mention the splendor that was ancient Egypt, and
probably also Babylon and Nineveh into the bargain. Well, as I
have already said, a peasant is a peasant--and there is an end of
it.
     This is not to belittle the pyramids, even though I am not
moved to climb down inside of one. They are properly called one
of the Wonders of the World. We were told (and I believe it) that
the big one we visited right outside of Cairo required
unbelievable effort and ingenuity to construct--probably 100,000
men working for twenty years to put into place some 2,300,000
stones, each weighing 2-1/2 tons. The base of the structure
covers the area of several football fields, and it is as high as
a forty-story sky scraper. Time, sand, marauders, and tourists
have not been kind to the pyramids--but they still stand, a
monument to human labor and a symbol of spirit and imagination.
Let me revere them; let me admire them; let me marvel at them--
but let me not crawl around inside them. Solipsism would have
been understood by the pharaohs. Let it remain between them and
me.
     Finally, as in the other Middle East countries I visited,
there was the bazaar--filled with teaming humanity, crowded with
fascinating shops, and characterized by wonderful encounters in
the give and take of matching wits and bargaining for prices.
Give me the bazaar with its human drama, and I will forego the
rest. I remember the time at the end of the WBU meeting when Don
and Betty Capps and I went down a narrow crowded street into the
upstairs back room of a small shop and engaged in a thirty-minute
verbal combat with the shop's proprietor over the price of two
music boxes. We got the merchandise, and very nearly at the price
we offered--but I would have traded it all for the joy of the
doing.
     But enough! Let us turn to the WBU. The organization is now
on a firmer footing than it has ever been, but even yet I
sometimes have qualms. Over a hundred countries were represented,
and the participation was reasonably good--but the meetings tend
to be cumbersome. Undoubtedly this is partly due to the need to
speak slowly for the benefit of interpreters and to the problem
of differing languages, but that is only part of it. It seems to
me that the method of handling things and the style of chairing
are also contributing factors.
     As an example, consider the method of voting. We used a
secret ballot in electing the Vice President, the one office
which was contested--and I think it would require a good deal of
charity to say that the method was efficient. All delegates were
required to stay in their seats (yes, required), and the doors
were literally locked for several hours while we balloted. We
began with a roll call of more than 100 countries. As each
country's name was called, the election committee went to that
country's location and gave ballots to authorized delegates. Then
the roll was called again, and the same committee went back to
the same locations to collect the ballots. If paper ballots were
to be used, it would have been simple for the committee to have
stationed itself at a table outside the meeting room and let
delegates come there to vote. There was an approved list of
delegates and proxies, and it would have been no trouble to cross
off names as delegates put their marked ballots through a slot
into a sealed box. This would have allowed the business of the
organization to go forward without needless interruption,
avoiding the problem of having hundreds of delegates come from
all over the world at great expense to sit twiddling their thumbs
while the committee moved among the tables. What purpose was
served by locking the delegates in while the votes were cast is a
mystery to which I have no clue, but that is the way it was done.
     With respect to the rest of the voting, most of it was done
by voice, which seemed reasonable and efficient. However, the
style was one that we are not accustomed to. When the President
presided, he did not call for those in favor of a motion to vote
for it and those opposed to vote against it. Rather, he would
ordinarily say something to the effect, "Are you happy with
this?" or, "Do you agree?" He did not ask for a vote from those
who were not happy or who disagreed, and although there was very
often a clear majority of yeses, there were many times when the
yes votes seemed scattered and by no means conclusive. We were
told with some annoyance by somebody sitting near our delegation
that "This is the way we do it in our country," but it seemed to
many of us that it might have been fairer and more effective
simply to take yeses and nos.
     There was also the question of general leadership, and I say
this with full knowledge that I am one of the officers and,
therefore, supposedly one of the leaders. The handling of the
attempted amendment of the constitution is a case in point. At
the conclusion of the Madrid meeting in 1988 a committee was
appointed to review and revise the constitution. Eight people
were on that committee, of whom I was one. We met in Denmark in
the spring of 1990 and again in Baltimore in 1991. We worked for
several days at a cost to the organization (whether from the
individual countries or the WBU treasury) of probably at least
thirty thousand dollars. The committee's final draft (unanimously
agreed to) contained substantive amendments. The preliminary
document was presented to the WBU Executive Committee in 1990 in
Poland, and the final draft was discussed in detail at the
officers' meeting in Hong Kong in the fall of 1991. The finished
product was then signed by approximately a dozen of the
organization's leaders and circulated with an explanatory letter
to all of the delegates throughout the world.
     Yet, when we met in Cairo, almost nothing that had been
proposed was accepted. It is, of course, the right of a
democratic assembly to accept or reject the work of its leaders
or committees, but the method of handling and presentation
predisposed the outcome. The President decided that two or three
issues were the significant ones, took those out of context, and
presented them. Although there was relatively little public
objection, a number of the delegates later said that they felt
the procedure was unfortunate and unfair. Certain other
amendments (amendments, incidentally, which were favored by the
President) were offered as noncontroversial (even though some of
them were not) and summarily passed without discussion. The
greater part of the body of the proposed revisions was simply not
considered at all even though some of it certainly seemed to many
of us to be substantive and needed.
     As an example, the constitution now provides that countries
with fewer than two million people may combine to form a grouped
member if they wish. There is at present only one grouped member,
the Caribbean Council for the Blind. Both Jamaica and Haiti have
more than two million people, and the constitutional committee
thought (and there seemed no opposition to the idea) that the
population limit should be raised to solve the problem. Yet, this
amendment (which had been properly presented) was never even
allowed by the President to come to the floor for consideration. 
     Let me be clear about the problem I am discussing. I am not
saying that any of the committee's proposals should have been
accepted or rejected. I am saying that the process was
ineffective and wasteful of money, money which is badly needed
for programs in developing countries. If a committee was to have
been appointed at all, if it was to meet in various parts of the
world and spend days and months of labor, and if it was to use
twenty or thirty thousand dollars of resources, the
organization's leaders should have supported its work and tried
to pass the amendments. If the argument is that the committee did
not produce the kind of revision that was wanted, the officers
should have seen that a different committee was appointed and
that it had different instructions, or they should have served as
the committee themselves. If it is argued that the amendments
were not needed in the first place, then the committee should
never have been appointed at all, and the time and money should
have been saved. 
     I hope and believe that most of the World Blind Union
delegates agree with this position and that a valuable lesson has
been learned. If so, the money may have been well spent after
all, and the work of the committee may not have been in vain. 
     Much that was constructive occurred during the meeting. For
one thing, I believe that there is now a better spirit of harmony
than we have ever had. I also believe that the new officers will
work well together. As expected, David Blyth of Australia was
elected President without opposition, as were Pedro Zurita of
Spain as Secretary General and Dr. Euclid Herie of Canada as
Treasurer. Rodolfo Cattani of Italy (in a contested election) was
chosen as Vice President. His opponents were Rajendra Vyas of
India and William Rowland of South Africa, but Dr. Cattani had an
absolute and sizable majority on the first ballot. Duncan Watson
will, of course, serve as an officer in his capacity as immediate
past President, and there will be a number of changes in the
Regional Presidencies. Geoffrey Gibbs of New Zealand is the new
President of the East Asia/Pacific Region; Sheikh Al-Ghanim has
again become President of the Mideast Region; Shahid Memon of
Pakistan was elected President in Asia; Enrique Elissalde is
President in Latin America; Samuel K. Tororei from Kenya is
President of the African Region; Arne Husveg remains President of
the European Region; and I continue as President of the North
America/Caribbean Region. 
     As I have said, I think this group of officers will work
well together. We begin the quadrennium in better financial
condition than we have ever been. This is due to the work of many
people, including Arne Husveg and Sheikh Al-Ghanim, but much of
the credit must go to Dr. Herie. He has kept the books well and
has worked to achieve prudent fiscal management. 
     One of the major factors contributing to the success of the
meeting was the work of Sheikh Al-Ghanim. His contacts are
widespread and influential, and his generosity is so consistent
that there is sometimes danger that it will be taken for granted.
He was in charge of convention arrangements, and they were well-
handled. There was a farewell dinner on a boat on the Nile, and I
heard nothing but praise for it. We were also honored by having
Mrs. Mubarak, the First Lady of Egypt, officially open the
meeting. She went through a receiving line of the officers, made
a speech to the delegates, and examined technology. During one of
the evenings the delegates were taken to the opera house to hear
a performance by the Nour Wal Amal all-blind-girls orchestra. As
with the dinner on the Nile, the comments were uniformly
positive. In fact, all of the details of the convention were
skillfully handled, and a considerable amount of the credit must
go to Dr. Mohammed Abdel Salam El-Banna, Consultant on
Rehabilitation to the Minister of Insurance and Social Affairs
for Egypt. Dr. El-Banna was in charge of the day-to-day
operation, and he was always present and consistently courteous
and helpful.
     We headquartered at the Semiramis Inter-Continental Hotel,
and there was plenty of space for the general sessions as well as
for committee meetings and exhibits. With respect to exhibits,
they were varied and interesting. There was a considerable amount
of new technology.
     I think most people left Cairo feeling that the third
General Assembly of the World Blind Union was a success. There is
already talk about the location for the fourth General Assembly
in 1996, and a number of cities and countries have submitted
invitations. Hong Kong has made a formal proposal, and Canada,
Columbia, and Singapore have indicated possible interest. The
officers hope to settle the matter within a few months so that we
will not face the kind of crisis which prevailed as we kept
trying to find a location for the third General Assembly.
     Mrs. Jernigan and I left Cairo on Sunday morning, November
8, on Lufthansa. We transferred in Frankfurt and arrived at
Dulles in mid-afternoon. It was a longer trip than I like to
take, but it was certainly interesting and worthwhile.
     As I conclude this report, I want to add a few comments
dealing with a variety of unconnected subjects. Here they are in
no particular order of importance:

     1. At future WBU conventions I think we should set aside all
(or, at least, the major part) of a day to visit local programs
for the blind. This will require extra arrangements for
transportation and will take time away from other program items,
but I think it will be a valuable addition and will meet with the
approval of the delegates.
     2. I have now flown with more airlines than I care to
remember, and I have some definite impressions. I have always
heard that Lufthansa and KLM were absolutely tops, but I have not
found it so. My Lufthansa flights on the Cairo trip were (to make
a bad joke) almost pedestrian. They were certainly not
outstanding, nor were the flights I have had on KLM or, for that
matter, SAS. Strange as some of those who are fond of looking
down their noses at anything American may find it, my best and
most courteous service on overseas flights has been on TWA and
Northwest. I hasten to add that Varig, the Brazilian airline, and
Cathay Pacific have been equally good.
     3. When I was in Denmark in 1990, I made a decision that I
have faithfully kept ever since. It happened like this. Almost
everyone who met us said something to this effect: "Welcome to
our wonderful and beautiful country." A few days later, when I
went to Sweden, I was told what a wonderful country Sweden was
and how much better than Denmark. 
     That made me do some thinking. We Americans have fallen into
the habit of disparaging our country. Maybe we do it because
after the Second World War we had so much compared to the rest of
the world that we wanted to bend over backward to try not to act
superior. Perhaps we just got into the habit and never broke it.
Whatever the reason, it isn't helpful, and it doesn't reflect
reality. In many ways, and with all of its faults (and I have
some basis for judgment since I have been to almost thirty
countries) the United States is still the best place in the world
to live. We should not be cocky, but neither should we apologize
for being alive. We should be as proud of our country as others
are of theirs. I respected the Danish attitude, and I made up my
mind then and there that I would never say another disparaging
word about the United States when I was in a foreign country.
     4. While we're on the subject of things American and what is
and is not reality, let me deal with something else that, in my
opinion, is a myth. I refer to Swiss chocolate. I can hear the
howls of protest already, but I went to Zurich with an open mind-
-no, a prejudiced mind since I fully expected something
approaching perfection. I tasted--and it wasn't so. I believe
that many American chocolates are just as good as (and in some
cases better than) any Swiss chocolate that is made. If you doubt
it, make a test using unmarked samples and see for yourself--or
maybe this is simply my peasant nature again.
     5. On the other hand, I have always heard that British food
is unimaginative and dull. Not so. I have found some of the best
food I have ever tasted in both England and Scotland. 
     6. Wherever I go in the world, I find blind people who read
the Braille Monitor on a regular basis. Almost without exception
they tell me that they find it helpful in dealing with their
local problems and in giving them encouragement. Therefore,
although I think we should do what we can to give financial
assistance, I believe the most important thing we can do to help
blind people in other countries is to see that the Braille
Monitor is made available to them, freely and in quantity. This
will be costly, but it will pay dividends, for us and for the
blind of the rest of the world.

     As I sat through the Cairo meetings, I reflected on the
changes which have come to the blind during the past fifty years.
In 1940 the National Federation of the Blind was just getting
started and was mostly a dream. Today it is a far-flung
organization with power and prestige. Now, it is the turn of the
World Blind Union. What will it be when it is fifty years old? No
one can be certain, but I suspect that we of the National
Federation of the Blind will have a say in the matter. Cairo was
interesting, but I am glad to be home.