Erratum

Paul and Annette Discuss Ida Lupino and Nothing Ever Was, Anyway

I, on my side, require of every writer, first or last, a simple and sincere account of his own life, and not merely what he has heard of other men's lives. -Henry David Thoreau, from Walden

An authorship that began with Either/Or and advanced step by step seeks here its consummating place of rest at the foot of the altar, where the author, personally most aware of his own imperfection and guilt, certainly does not call himself a witness to the truth but only a singular kind of poet and thinker who, "without authority," has had nothing new to bring but "has wanted to read through once again, if possible in a more inward way, the original text of individual human existence-relationships, the old, familiar text handed down from the fathers" -Søren Aabye Kierkegaard, from the preface to Two Discourses at the Communion on Fridays

Toward dawn, he dreamt he had hidden himself in one of the naves of the Clementine Library. [...] A librarian wearing dark glasses asked him: What are you looking for? Hladik answered: God. The Librarian told him: God is in one of the letters on one of the pages of one of the 400,000 volumes of the Clementine. My fathers and the fathers of my fathers have sought after that letter." -Jorge Luis Borges, from The Secret Miracle

When we concentrate on a material object, whatever its situation, the very act of attention may lead to our involuntarily sinking into the history of that object  Novices must learn to skim over matter if they want matter to stay at the exact level of the moment.   Transparent things, through which the past shines! -Vladimir Nabokov, from Transparent Things

This is the story.  This is the story that I have been writing.  It is the story I began long ago, and that I have been writing since.  The things I say I want, I had and lost, and have again, and have had again, and again, and have always had.  The story is my life.  This is not the story of my life, however.  My life is the story.  And, although I am not a character in this story, I am every character.  How could I not be?  I do not exist except in their eyes.  They do not exist except in my eyes.  The story is the world.  The story is the word.  The world does not exist without my witness.  I do not exist without the witness of the world.  The words in the story are stars in an endless universe.  The universe is but a word.  And lost?  And have always had?…lost, then, does not always mean gone?  The story is not here.  The story is everywhere, and nowhere.  Is it circular or linear?  I only ask because I do not know.  I am as frustrated as you with this story.  It seems to begin in the middle of something that has no middle.  And yet, within a word or two later, I (we) are in some other place, some other time, a time that is briefly the present, a time that recedes into a verifiable but ever shifting past.  The past itself is not shifting, but as we listen again to a piece of music, or read again a poem, we have changed, if imperceptibly, forever and ineluctably.  You, the reader, are no longer where you were or who you were when you began the story.  The evidence is everywhere, ubiquitous, incontrovertible, and ultimately irrelevant.  We all know that we are hurtling through space and time, and that we are composed of gyrating particles, which themselves are composed of smaller gyrating particles, and that solidity and tangibility are illusions.  And, this does not take into account entropy.  The story, then, is an illusion.  This is not an ontological assumption, but simply an observation that is also irrelevant.  It is not relevant to the act of writing, nor is it relevant to the act of reading.  It is for philosophers to undertake questions of being and not being.  Certainly Aristotle may make an appearance in the story, or Descartes may stroll through eating an ice cream cone.  Look, there is Kierkegaard clipping his toenails.  A moment later, one of these gentlemen may become either victim or murderer.  The delineation of his actions and his motives concomitant with their ultimate consequences, i.e. plot, theme, characterization, dénouement, will play differently in the infinite theaters of the mind upon which they are projected.  Who is speaking?  It is I and Thou.  Do you hear my thoughts, His thoughts, Her thoughts, or is this narrative (Is this a narrative?) homodiegetic?   Such terms: heterodiegetic, figural narrative, overt omniscience, will all lead in the wrong direction, toward narratology and semiotics.    Someone is speaking of these things within the story; perhaps Roland Barthes and Tzvetan Todorov are in a café in Prague discussing Kafka.  Barthes says,

"The death of the author is the birth of the reader." Am I dead?  Are you born?  The text will go on without either of us, or never was, or always was, and always is.  This is the story.  This is the story that I have been writing.  It is the story I began long ago, and that I have been writing since.  It seems to begin in the middle of something that has no middle.  Do you hear my thoughts?  The story is my life.   The evidence is everywhere.  Who is speaking?  The things I say I want, I had and lost, and have again, and have had again, and again, and have always had.    You, the reader, are no longer where you were.  This does not take into account entropy.  The story is an illusion.  It is I and Thou.  The words in the story are stars in an endless universe.  This is the story.  This is the story that I have been writing.

Death and Transfiguration of a Blog

In The World as Idea, Schopenhauer writes:

No truth therefore is more certain, more independent of all others, and less in need of proof than this, that all that exists for knowledge, and therefore this whole world, is only object in relation to subject, perception of a perceiver, in a word, idea.  This is obviously true of the past and the future, as well as of the present, of what is farthest off, as of what is near; for it is true of time and space themselves, in which alone these distinctions arise.  All that in any way belongs or can belong to the world is inevitably thus conditioned through the subject, and exists only for the subject.  The world is idea.

Certainly it is a continuation of the Cartesian notion, and certainly it allows for the writer as perceiver a reason to write or connote an idea.  Thus, perhaps, is the simplest justification for the existence of this blog: cogito ergo sum.  Yet to avoid the fulsome effluvium (a phrase stolen from Vonnegut) of cliché, would I not have to name it something like, Crack Whores and Cheese, and write without the use of pronouns or conjunctions?  As it has been, cliché may be the best I can say about it.  The worst of it is summed up by Yeats in his poem, Remorse for Intemperate Speech:

                                              

            I ranted to the knave and fool,

But outgrew that school,

Would transform the part,

Fit audience found, but cannot rule

My fanatic heart.

I sought my betters: though in each

Fine manners, liberal speech,

Turn hatred into sport,

Nothing said or done can reach

My fanatic heart,

The final stanza is less applicable (for me, not for Yeats), and, thusly, is omitted.  I have spilled the ink of my thoughts into an impenetrable Rorschach blot, ergo blog, where text becomes noise; the text separates into meaningless cuneiform, which dissipates further into the white noise that surrounds us.  Trying to define insanity is itself a form of insanity.  I had intended a few words that would tend toward the opposite of didacticism, toward Barthes’ description:

… poetry is a regressive semiological system that aims at reaching the meaning of things themselves.

However, as I stumbled outside of my sphere of influence, a circumbendibus in which I was pursued and preceded by mediocrity like my own shadow,  the daedal theses and antitheses became nothing more than intemperate speech; text gone wild.   These narrative excursions became very similar to my own quotidian exercise of going out the door with, let’s say, the above paragraph of Schopenhauer to contemplate on my daily walk, which I probably would refer to as my diurnal hegira, whereupon scarcely into my peripatetic journey of epistemological inquiry I would find the world as idea more accurately the world as distraction.  Shadows, sounds, smells, comforts, discomforts, the cracks in the sidewalk, and pragmatism suddenly all demanding my moronic attention; lists of quotidian details summoning themselves, all vying for pyretic position, and all just sticks fallen over like toppled Giacomettis.  By my return home I am aware of little more than my own breathing and paucity of verdure.  There is no narrative, only textual evidence of an attention deficiency disorder.  I have wandered into ordinary madness with new shoes. 

The point of all this is simple.  The National Institute for Technology and Liberal Education (NITLE) has a census of blog sites, 273,986 weblogs of which it has indexed, with approximately 2 billion weblogs in queue, not yet verified, and it estimates 180,830 active blogs.  To me this reads like mass hysteria.  Perhaps, however, we are so technologically Neanderthal that in the incipient future blogging will approximate striking two stones together.  Being that, however precariously, I am in the now, and not the ineluctable future, I must decline from screaming into the void.  If any catharsis is to occur, it will not be on the world wide web.  Governments, geopolitics, global economics, wars, crime, plagues, natural disasters, and the mountains of minutiae regurgitated by the ostensible main stream media in a self-actuated Marshall McLuhan nightmare (“And as our senses have gone outside us, Big Brother goes inside. So, unless aware of this dynamic, we shall at once move into a phase of panic terrors, exactly befitting a small world of tribal drums, total interdependence, and superimposed co-existence. [...] Terror is the normal state of any oral society, for in it everything affects everything all the time…”) and deconstructed infinitely by any of those 200,000 bloggers perpetually, time having become another irrelevancy, has caused me to reconsider that which I have been doing, thus, that which I have become. 

I had already reached the conclusion that the polemic of U.S. politics had become Kafkaesque in its absurdity and corruption, and Orwellian in its hegemonic and Judaic-Christian totalitarianism, be it ever so incipient.  Out of something like capitulation, I posted my last piece on July 20^th, halted by the shrill noise of my own intemperate speech, the screech of tires locked and careening toward my narcissistic diatribe.  Not quite an epiphany, the moment was more darkness than light.  I agreed with Mencken’s notion that, “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”   To end the vigilant and interminable perusal of every news source, of every article/op-ed/blog/book/periodical that may reveal the DNA code of our collective destruction, was suddenly and determinately the only choice.  What could I read in The Nation, that I had not already come to understand by reading Kafka’s, The Trial?  Indeed, one reading of Charles Maturin’s, Melmoth the Wanderer, would suffice to illustrate the intrinsic nature of our species, and all other literary works of fiction ultimately shine the light of truth  into the corners of human affairs, revealing the detritus of lives lived.  Without creating a paean to Art, I would humbly suggest to the reader a more sapient exposure to the works of individuals who have labored outside of the static, whose unique vision bears collective witness.  For my part, I returned to my fiction in progress and to articles on esoterica and Thoreauvian quiet desperation.  A respite from the inexorable flow of information and email into my laptop was requisite and welcome.

Then something like an actual epiphany occurred; I finally checked my email.  An old friend had located me after centuries, by stumbling across my blog.  The infernal regions of the house in Mark Z. Danielewski’s, House of Leaves approximated the internal fall into my own Gordian knot of fears, memories, illusions, and psychoses that reside within my inverse universe.  Realizing that someone from my youth was reading these harangues on the lunatic fringe, felt like looking up from the homeless sidewalk in any city where someday a real rain ‘ill come and wash all this scum off the streets, after a break in an otherwise ceaseless monologue to myself, to imagine that I recognize the face looking down at me in horror and disgust.  It was as though I was caught masturbating on a live feed to every television in the world.  Oh yeah, if you post your trivium (see McLuhan) on the internet, it may actually get read.  Of course, the specific memories of the friend’s indelible effect on me came back in a torrent of joy, horror, embarrassment, laughter, and ineffability.  I remember his mother, a sweetheart actually, had told him that I was a bad influence upon him; a perspicacious observation from a loving parent.  Nevertheless, his family took me along on their summer vacation, whereupon he turned the color of a horse chestnut and I burned every layer of epidermis, derma, sebaceous glands, and blood and lymph vessels, down to and including the bone.  He was a youth with ferocious talent who wrote beautiful compositions on the piano, played the double bass with unparalleled virtuosity (and could be playing today in the manner of Gary Peacock or Dave Holland, George Mraz or Christian McBride, Charlie Haden or Boris Koslov, who plays with the Mingus Big Band), and once wrote a poem entitled, A Sinner Who Died in a Fire, that I would present here if I could.  He was a prodigy, a talented basketball player, an enigma, and someone who would laugh hysterically at my most inane utterances.  In Denmark, as a bassist, he recorded an LP with the Erling Kroner Quintet upon which his composition, I’ve Grown Accustomed to the Race, shines in perpetuity.  What ever happened to the quintet’s original drummer?

This humble diary in its present form is at a point of repose.  I do, however, rage against the dying of the light; the light of our democracy, our liberties, our possibilities.  Perhaps there is no point of repose, the way in Steve Swallow’s composition, Sweeping Up; the simple chords in a modal progression of 7 bars never cease to be.  The original Erratum will stay up briefly, its embalmed body of work grotesquely on display for the perversely curious, after which the text will be cremated and spread upon the waters of moirés. 

To (re-)read this and all future posts go here.

The Art of War

17. According as circumstances are favorable, one should modify one's plans. 18. All warfare is based on deception. 19. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near. 20. Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him. -The Art of War, Sun Tzu. According to the Wikepedia definition, Misdirection is a form of deception, where one feints in a particular course, and then exploits the misled pursuer's mistake to escape, or remain undetected. It would not require political acumen or perspicuity to recognize that the Bush administration, with its shadow government of neocon advisors and planners use the art of misdirection as their deux ex machina to resolve issues that raise inquiry and to initiate actions that can not be easily undone. The day-to-day politics of this administration relies heavily on the shell game to misdirect a complacent (if not complicit) mainstream media into looking at the wrong story at the wrong time or the wrong aspect of the story or at a different story entirely, while the truth stealthily slips into oblivion. With the sudden nomination of John (or as Billmon calls him Bob) Roberts for the SCOTUS, the entire vacuous coterie of television prompter readers have been misdirected to the SCOTUS premature evacuation and away from the State Department Memo dated July 7, 2003, that informed top administration officials that the wife of ex-diplomat and Bush critic Joseph Wilson was a CIA agent, and that was passed around at the WH and on Air Force One resulting eventually (as in 7 days later) in the public revelation that Joe Wilson’s wife was (is) Valerie Plame, a CIA agent assigned to WMD. I would direct readers to peruse Justin Raimondo’s article on Antiwar.com, and in particular to overly peruse these paragraphs: The main thrust of this investigation – as well as parallel investigations into similar breaches of U.S. national security in recent days – is aimed at the "disinformation campaign" described in that footnote to the Senate intelligence report. Who ran that campaign, and on whose behalf – what government officials were in on it, and what help, if any, did they receive from foreign intelligence agencies? These are all questions, I believe, to which Fitzgerald is seeking answers. The Plame investigation is the result of the FBI's counterintelligence efforts, which have apparently uncovered the roots of the "disinformation campaign" referred to in the Senate report. The esteemed senators on the intelligence committee were too cowardly to dig too deeply into it, but "Bulldog" Fitzgerald is kicking up a lot of dirt. What the outing of CIA agent Plame has to do with all this is simple: whoever was out to get Wilson as a Mama's boy with a partisan agenda was also pushing the Niger uranium story. They knew its falsity, and what's more, they knew its provenance – and yet they ushered it, unexamined, through the intelligence-vetting process. The outing of Plame, which was part of the cover-up, wasn't the only blow aimed at U.S. intelligence capabilities by this group: whoever outed Plame also injected corrupted intelligence into the information stream that eventually washed up on the president's desk. Somebody burned the White House, and badly: that's why the Fitzgerald investigation has been allowed to proceed, and why it involves a lot more than violation of an obscure statute that has only been successfully prosecuted once. Luckily, for our sake, Fitzgerald is unlikely to be misdirected by the mainstream media’s ADD. However, the diabolical Bush Cabal is advancing other agendas simultaneously. The Patriot Act II, with all of the sundown clause provisions of Act I in place, is being pushed through both hoses of Congress with alacrity and without adequate scrutiny. Let’s do a bit of refresher reading now to get an immediate handle and minimal course of action, i.e. writing to your elected Congressional representatives. First I will refer you to my own views on the subject here. And then I would refer you to the following articles: • EFF Analysis of "Patriot II," • Patriot Act II Resurrected? • Patriot Act: To find right balance, keep debate wide open • Safe and Free There are obviously hundreds of articles on the subject; Google your own. But, by all means pay attention and let your voice be heard. The Patriot Act is as serious as it gets. At least read this article, which gives as much of an overview as you will need. While Blair is using Bush’s 9/11 rhetoric to explain the 7/7 London bombings to his country (they hate our freedom and way of life palaver), Wolcott points out some glaring omissions by US in the U.S. and bUSh in the U.K.; ouch! Iraq: • 9 Dismissed From Tribunal Trying Saddam • Hussein Tribunal Shaken by Chalabi's Bid to Replace Staff • Plan Called for Covert Aid in Iraq Vote • GET OUT THE VOTE • Tally puts civilian toll at 25,000 • Draft of Iraq charter looks to Islam Guantanamo: • Ruling Lets U.S. Restart Trials at Guantánamo (John G. Roberts was one of the three judges on the panel that handed Bush this significant victory) Bush’s nomination of John Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court is, of course, a salient issue that deserves the intense scrutiny that it certainly will receive. However, public discourse needs to rise to the occasion, and we need to stay focused on many issues that simultaneously affect the immediate health and character of the republic. Ten minutes of reading, let alone listening especially to those who are endorsing his candidacy, will give you a fairly accurate idea of the potential damage this man can do as a lifelong Justice of the Supreme Court. Fitzgerald…the State Department Memo and its ramifications…Patriot Act debate…IRAQ…

Anarchy in the U.K.

But after a while I felt that someone was entreating me for this lost story – some lonely soul, perhaps, standing far away at the window of his dusky room, or perhaps the very darkness itself that surrounded me and him and all things. So it happened that I told my story to the dark. – Rainer Maria Rilke, from Stories of God

On July 7th, beginning at approximately 08:50 AM GMT, bombs began exploding in London. Officially, as reported by the BBC, there were 4 explosions that ripped across central London causing the death of 52 persons and injuring more than 700 others. Last Thursday morning, I was among millions of other Americans who were having their morning coffee watching the news of the London bombings unfold on their televisions or computer screens; more death, more murder, more numbness and inertia. CNN hyperventilated TERRORISTS BOMB LONDON SUBWAYS, inserted al Qaeda into every sentence, and ratcheted up the domestic fear mongering rhetoric to Level RED. I don’t know what kind of a narcissist one would have to be to let the ineluctable inevitability of one day ceasing to be ruin his or her day. As Schopenhauer said, "We can regard our life as a uselessly disturbing episode in the blissful repose of nothingness."

However, that is rather a circumscribed description and does nothing to alleviate our diurnal manifestations of moral outrage, sorrow, joy, anger, and disgust, among other directed and misdirected emotions. I chose to sit out this range of possible mood swings and wait a few days to comment. It occurred to me that a few facts may shake out over the ensuing days of forensics and analysis of first-hand accounts. The senseless death of individuals who were merely going about their quotidian lives, the kind of death that is (and has been for years) inflicted upon thousands of Iraqis daily, the kind that arrived like a thunderbolt from the heavens at a wedding party in Afghanistan, with women, children, and men celebrating one of life’s hopeful ceremonies, snuffed out courtesy of the American military in erratum, still squeezes out of the withered core some amount of anger and shame, and leaves behind an indescribable sorrow that lives in darkness. Now begins the intellectual response.

The massive scale of death in Iraq being perpetrated by the insurgency and all manner of indigenous fringe groups, including the new and improved Iraqi police and army, not to mention our own military, counterinsurgency, paramilitary, and agents of mayhem, all seem to have a cause and effect kind of logic to the insanity. When a suicide bomber blows him/herself up in Israel, we know that this is a war of attrition being waged by Palestinians against a nation possessing massive military power, which will retaliate exponentially for any attack. We know that this conflict is perpetual or will end badly. And, as much as we try to understand how someone would choose to blow him/herself up for a belief that can not be proved, it is not impossible to make logical connections. There is a cause and effect. The bombings in London, however, require something of a suspension of disbelief. As we try to draw the lines of possible cause and effect, nothing seems to make sense. We must ask, as in any crime, what is the motive. Who, in whatever twisted logic, stands to gain? On the Sunday after the attacks I came across one possible answer in this Observer story:

Millions of personal email and mobile phone records could be stored and shared with police and intelligence officials across Europe to help thwart terrorist attacks. The Home Secretary, Charles Clarke, will propose new measures at an emergency meeting of European Union interior ministers which will discuss the implications of Thursday's London bombings. He raised the stakes dramatically by claiming they could 'quite possibly' have helped prevent such attacks, by identifying in advance suspicious patterns of behaviour by potential terrorists.

If one has been paying attention over the last 6 months or more, the British government, in the guise of Charles Clarke MP, Minister of State at the Home Office, who has overall responsibility for the work of the Home Office, civil emergencies, security, terrorism, expenditure and Civil Renewal, has been waging a very unpopular campaign of anti-terrorism legislation, national identity cards, and general abridgement of civil liberties. As a post-9.11 American, this has to ring familiar. I heard one Brit refer to the whole legislative campaign as Patriot Act Lite. However, from this writer’s perspective, the measures the British are trying to implement are beyond even the contentious Patriot Act II. So call it a coincidence, but one answer to the question of who stands to gain from these bombings is the politicians intent on subjugation of the general population. It’s nine-one-one déjà vu all over again.

Do I discount any possibility that radical Islamic elements are behind the bombings? Almost, but no. It is indeed, however, difficult to find the cause and effect logic of such an action. For those who would say there is no logic in any act of radical Islamic terrorism, I would contend that those individuals suffer from a deficit of knowledge relative to the foreign policy of the United States, specifically, as well as the British and French peripherally. I condone no violence against individuals by anyone for any reason, particularly innocent citizens merely going about their business, who, unfortunately are so often the targets of these assassins. However, attempting to understand the motivations of those who would commit crimes that are so heinous, to understand what level of grievance they feel they have suffered to equate this level of reprisal, and to try to be circumspect and empirical when measuring historical evidence seems the responsibility of all of us, as individuals, in this brave new world. Indeed, the efforts may be only “disturbing episode[s] in the blissful repose of nothingness”, but our struggle to understand our own existence may be the only reason not to opt for the least painful exit strategy available. Although, I have to admit there exists a delicate balance between asking the difficult philosophical questions and madness. Parents may find their reason to be in the eyes of their children. That does not preclude being a responsible citizen, however; demanding truth and responsibility from elected civil servants, from the Executive Branch of the Federal government on down to the crossing guard in your neighborhood. After all, one day you may find yourself in the back of a courthouse listening to one of your sons extrapolating perfunctorily like Dennis Rader, the congregational leader of the Christ Lutheran Church and serial murderer, on how his demons set in motion the dynamic that fueled his proud life. After that, I doubt that anything could ever be as difficult as finding beauty in a sunrise.

Today we have the British press reporting that the bombers (note: not terrorists) are (were purportedly) all English by birth and regular British citizens. One of the alleged bombers, Shahzad Tanweer, a 22-year-old British Asian of Pakistani ancestry, who,

ten days ago was playing cricket in the local park with his friends. It was something he loved to do. He was a sporty young man who loved martial arts, drove his dad's Mercedes and had many friends in the Beeston area of Leeds.

Evidently his accomplices were also all regular guys. Pardon me if my incredulity is as thick as a slab of fresh Parmesan. Throw in some cynicism and critical thinking and I just can’t get past the stupidity of all of the allegations, or, if true, the stupidity of the plot. A quick glance at the facts: •four young comrades in Islamic radicalism decide to commit a coordinated bombing for political purposes;

•they all carry their identity papers on them, wear identical rucksacks filled with their explosive and timing devices;

•they all get surreptitiously photographed (by the ubiquitous, Big-Brother style government cameras) upon entering the train station;

•they all blow themselves up, allegedly again since no DNA has proven otherwise, but manage to have their identification papers left in tact. (This is an interesting point from a national I.D. perspective. Make certain to carry yours to your intended bomb site.);

•not even the authorities know whether to call this a suicide bomb strike, in absence of corpus delicti, or simply a new breed of home grown terrorism.

•military grade weaponry, i.e. explosives were used;

•French sources are saying that these individuals had already been arrested months ago ( a charge vehemently denied by Charles Clarke).

Allow me to hypothesize on the advantage of creating the illusion of the latter. Today, here in the big, anticipatory terrorist target, the U.S., the Director of Homeland Security (can you imagine there even exists such a position), Michael Chertoff, who looks as though he could easily star in any psychological horror movie, laid out a reorganization plan for the department that includes a new assistant secretary for cyber-security and telecommunications. During an interview with Wolf Blitzer today, he kept referring to the terrorist bombings in England, and warned that this is why we need better surveillance capabilities. If the supposition is that there are new terrorist cells that are domestic, the surveillance would then have to be on citizens. Wolf mentioned that studies pointed to infiltration as the best way to battle these multifaceted terrorist cells. Chertoff basically said, yeah that too, but surveillance and technical abilities is where we need to focus. Almost simultaneously, in Britain Prime Minister Blair and Home Secretary Clarke are warning of more suicide bombings (really?) by, in Blair’s description, an "enemy whose roots lie in a poisonous and perverted interpretation of Islam". Mr. Clarke is intent on aggressively pursuing improved surveillance techniques and parameters in Britain as well. Just what the totalitarian doctor ordered.

The latest news is that British authorities are pursuing the “mastermind” behind the bombings, who is suspected, in fact, of being the bomb maker. As the New York Times reports here,

This fifth man is suspected of being the ringleader and possibly the bomb-maker, the official said, in the attacks last Thursday in the London Underground and on a double-decker city bus that killed at least 52 people. Investigators described him as a highly trained person.

I don’t know where this is going, but I feel like I should be reading it in a yellow covered paperback.

Meanwhile in Iraq, a suicide car bomber on Wednesday steered his sport utility vehicle toward a group of children who had crowded around a patrol of American troops and detonated his payload, killing as many as 27 people, nearly all of them children, government and hospital officials said. One American soldier was also killed. There are no words for this kind of horror. The NYT report reads:

The attack, in a poor, predominantly Shiite neighborhood of eastern Baghdad, left a wrenching scene of bloodshed, anger and despair. Children's colored slippers, pieces of flesh and shrapnel were strewn around the wide crater left in the street by the bomb. Women wailed and slapped themselves on the chest and face in a ritual of grief as bodies were placed in crude coffins and carried away.

The globe is stained with the blood of innocents. It has been this way throughout history. The men who wage war are political and diabolical, entreating those who will kill and die for their lies of convenience. There is no war on terror. Terror, unmitigated violence, and torture, inflicted upon other humans have been the staple of conquering hordes toward the indigenous inhabitants of conquered lands. Over time, the indigenous tribes use the same techniques of terror in an insurgency against the occupiers. Terror is as old as the darkness that resides in all of us. It is used as a heartless tool by the neo-cons to establish world hegemony. It is used by the disenfranchised to fight back against overwhelming force. It is an abomination against mankind in all cases. Who are we fighting? Is a world religion really at the heart of all our fear and loathing, and, more importantly, our capitulation to the politicians who have agendas of which we know nothing about? There are those who crave power and control, forces aligned and unholy alliances who would subjugate the world citizenry for their dystopian dream. We can’t really look to Schopenhauer or Hegel for guidance in this struggle against our own governments. Perhaps Chuck D. is more apropos: Fight the Power.

Look at the arrogance of our own political structure:

The intentional disclosure of a covert operative's identity is a violation of federal law. Under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, it is a crime for anyone with access to classified information to reveal intentionally the identity of an undercover intelligence officer. The punishment: a fine up to $50,000 and/or up to ten years in jail.

We can not get to the truth in a case where the blatant facts are attacked and regurgitated by the right-wing political machinery to obfuscate the obvious. Forgive me my cynicism, but I do not have faith in this electorate to see through the propaganda. And, if we lose this one battle, and the Chernoff and Clarke puppets to their masters get their way, even telling your story in the dark will be a crime.

Iran, So Far Away

Almost everything is outside of my sphere of influence. It is only in a chimerical consortium of other writers, readers, and citizens that I imagine a thought perhaps surviving beyond my own attempt to shape it into words. This is the fundamental conundrum of writing: why write. Without becoming overly existential, the answer is as Beckett’s Vladimir, in Waiting for Godot, declares, “I can’t go on. I’ll go on.” In a world that seems absurd and meaningless, it is up to the individual to create meaning. Of course, Camus took it further in his essay, The Myth of Sisyphus, who insists that it is our struggle, and Sisyphus’ struggle, that gives us meaning, that “One must imagine Sisyphus happy.” His argument is,

If the descent is thus sometimes performed in sorrow, it can also take place in joy. This word is not too much. Again I fancy Sisyphus returning toward his rock, and the sorrow was in the beginning. When the images of earth cling too tightly to memory, when the call of happiness becomes too insistent, it happens that melancholy arises in man's heart: this is the rock's victory, this is the rock itself. The boundless grief is too heavy to bear. These are our nights of Gethsemane. But crushing truths perish from being acknowledged. Thus, Oedipus at the outset obeys fate without knowing it. But from the moment he knows, his tragedy begins. Yet at the same moment, blind and desperate, he realizes that the only bond linking him to the world is the cool hand of a girl. Then a tremendous remark rings out: "Despite so many ordeals, my advanced age and the nobility of my soul make me conclude that all is well." Sophocles' Oedipus, like Dostoevsky's Kirilov, thus gives the recipe for the absurd victory. Ancient wisdom confirms modern heroism.

I am not as optimistic about the struggle. The absurdity we are up against at this historical moment seems intrinsically evil, a shadow upon reality. And, reality itself seems to be under manipulation, which indicates a success for those vying for control. Salvador Dali once noted,

I believe that the moment is near when by a procedure of active paranoiac thought, it will be possible to systematize confusion and contribute to the total discrediting of the world of reality.

Indeed, trying to understand the fighting in Iraq, distinct from the arguments of why the U.S. is there in the first place, is to descend into madness, paranoid speculation, conspiracy theories, and the realization that the worst of these scenarios is actually possible. The BBC announces,

An aide to Iraqi Shia spiritual leader Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani has been shot dead by unidentified gunmen in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad.

And the possibilities begin to unfold: Sunnis instigating a civil war/the CIA instigating a civil war/al Qaeda instigating a civil war/all of the above working in collusion. Adjunct Professor of English at West Chester University, Stacy Tartar Esch draws a correlation between Beckett’s work and our current modern existence:

…we're waiting all the time, too. Think about it: aren't we waiting for the war in Iraq to end, waiting to catch Osama bin Laden, waiting to win the war on terror? We're waiting for President Bush to smoke out the evil-doers. If you're a banker or a stockbroker you might be waiting for an end to bankruptcy court or class action suits or social security or taxes. Or an end to racism….an end to poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence… Many of us are waiting for environmental disaster, the next world war, the next flu epidemic, the next school shooting, the next terror attack… we're waiting for security, good times, that great vacation, that better job, that better wardrobe, that better car, that smaller computer, smaller cell phone; we're waiting for the perfect soul mate, the perfect body, the perfect moment… we're waiting for our hopes to be heard, our prayers to be answered, our wishes to be granted… we're waiting, and meanwhile, we're….here.

Are we waiting to discover if Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was one of the leaders of radical students who seized the Tehran embassy in 1979 and held 52 American hostages for more than year? This absurdity is the template upon which I shall attempt to build a road of understanding and shall attempt also to illuminate the ineluctable reality. Or to put it more directly, allow me to cut through the massive bullshit on this issue. In the issue(s) 1/24 and 1/31/05 The New Yorker, published a piece by Seymour Hersh entitled, The Coming Wars in which he wrote:

This is a war against terrorism, and Iraq is just one campaign. The Bush Administration is looking at this as a huge war zone,” [a] former high-level intelligence official told me. “Next, we’re going to have the Iranian campaign. We’ve declared war and the bad guys, wherever they are, are the enemy. This is the last hurrah—we’ve got four years, and want to come out of this saying we won the war on terrorism.

The extremely detailed article goes into the intricate maneuverings of Rumsfeld, who is authorized by President Bush to conduct this campaign, and the “war on terror” in general, “off the books”,

…free from legal restrictions imposed on the C.I.A. Under current law, all C.I.A. covert activities overseas must be authorized by a Presidential finding and reported to the Senate and House intelligence committees. (The laws were enacted after a series of scandals in the nineteen-seventies involving C.I.A. domestic spying and attempted assassinations of foreign leaders.) “The Pentagon doesn’t feel obligated to report any of this to Congress,” the former high-level intelligence official said. “They don’t even call it ‘covert ops’—it’s too close to the C.I.A. phrase. In their view, it’s ‘black reconnaissance.’ They’re not even going to tell the CINCs”—the regional American military commanders-in-chief.

Hersh continues to delineate how the Bush administration has consolidated power through secrecy and behind-the-scenes machinations to achieve the goal of being beyond the reach of the intelligence community and the congress. Mr. Hersh reveals that,

The Administration has been conducting secret reconnaissance missions inside Iran at least since last summer. Much of the focus is on the accumulation of intelligence and targeting information on Iranian nuclear, chemical, and missile sites, both declared and suspected. The goal is to identify and isolate three dozen, and perhaps more, such targets that could be destroyed by precision strikes and short-term commando raids. “The civilians in the Pentagon want to go into Iran and destroy as much of the military infrastructure as possible,” the government consultant with close ties to the Pentagon told me.

As a reader, one must decide to believe or remain skeptical about such reporting. (As a disclaimer, this reader has found the work of Seymour Hersh to be dead on and nothing short of amazing in its veracity.) Nevertheless, it is obvious that the Cheney Administration has designs upon Iran. I recommend the following articles as a place to begin, if you need to placate a nagging skepticism:

• Onward to Iran, by Richard Heinberg

• The U.S. War with Iran Has Already Begun, by Scott Ritter

• Archived Articles on the Threat of US Intervention in Iran (from the global Policy Forum)

Then there is the historical relationship over the years from 1953 on between the U.S. and Iran to consider. In 1953 the CIA engineered a coup to take out the Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh and reinstall the Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. In reality this was the first U.S.-British engineered regime change, and can be researched further here. The CIA enlisted Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf in the coup campaign. General Schwarzkopf, the father of the Persian Gulf War commander, had befriended the shah a decade earlier while leading the United States military mission to Iran. This inauspicious meddling in Iranian affairs by the U.S. and Britain can further succinctly be referenced here and here.

The cozy relationship between the Shah of Iran and the U.S. would come to an end in with the Islamic Revolution that began in 1978. The U.S. would turn its back on the shah and lend tepid support to the Islamists, but too little, too late. On November 4, 1979, Iranian activists seized the U.S. embassy in Tehran and took those inside as hostages. Any scrutiny of this period will reveal that this hostage crisis ended the re-election hopes of President Jimmy Carter. This is where the behind-the-scenes maneuvering of Reagan’s campaign director (and future CIA Director) William J. Casey and Reagan’s running mate, George Herbert Walker Bush (and former CIA Director, 1976-1977) thicken the plot, as they say. The allegations, vehemently denied by G.H.W. Bush, are that Bush, Casey, et al, met with Iranian agents in Madrid and Paris and brokered a deal to have the hostages held through October, until Reagan could defeat Carter in early November, and then be released. The hostages were in fact released on the very day of Reagan's inauguration, twenty minutes after his inaugural address.

Finally, for the purpose of this synopsis, came the ignominious Iran-Contra Affair. The Reagan Administration engaged in selling arms to Iran (the proceeds of which were diverted to the Nicaraguan Contras who were fighting the leftist Sandanistas) at a time when Iran was engaged in a bloody war with Iraq. Along with supplying money to the Contras, the purpose of these arms sales was to placate and appease the Iranians. However, later, when it looked as though the Iranians may actually win the conflict with Iraq, the U.S. began supplying Saddam Hussein with weaponry, as accounted here. The Iran/Iraq conflict served U.S. interests in truly Machiavellian ways. Not only was Bush, Sr. involved in all of this, but Reagan sent (present U.S. Secretary of Defense) Donald Rumsfeld to negotiate the deal with Hussein in 1983. All of this (almost) unfathomable espionage, counter-espionage, playing Islamic countries against each other for U.S. “interests” has been de rigueur for at least 52 years. The Middle East, for the obvious reasons of its being the major source of our oil and its strategic location to Israel (and now Afghanistan) is of such crucial importance to the U.S. and our foreign policy, as evidenced by our current conflict in Iraq, that the focus of our intelligence organizations on all of these countries, i.e. Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Egypt, and Iran is ubiquitous and intense. It is, therefore, with absolute incredulity that I watch the U.S. National Security Advisor, Stephen Hadley stand before the press corps and state that he does not know whether or not Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was one of the leaders of radical students who seized the Tehran embassy in 1979 and held 52 American hostages for more than year.

To exacerbate the political advantages of such a stance, President Bush has weighed in with his comments saying he has "no information, but obviously his involvement raises many questions." Are these guys kidding? Any cursory look at the photographs that are being compared reveal a discrepancy in the eyes, the beard, the nose, the hair, the chin, the mouth, the whole damn head. Moreover, are we to believe that a candidate (now elected) for the Iranian presidency does not have a massive dossier with the U.S. intelligence community? I would be amazed if they did not know Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s favorite vegetable, song, color, and sex position. So what is the purpose of feigning ignorance in this matter, and who are the Americans who would believe such a farcical posture? This brings the matter back to the themes of absurdity and nihilism in Waiting for Godot. Is writing this action or inaction? Is there any modicum of influence the individual can exercise over the insane, immoral, incongruous, and existentially dangerous policies of the United States in the world?

American support for the current war in Iraq, if you believe the polls, is waning rapidly. That we are there in the first place is beyond belief to many of us. Historically wars have been waged for reasons that, when placed under scrutiny, reveal delusions of grandeur, personal hatreds, imperialistic designs, tribal or regional conflicts, and any number of irrational motives. However, leaders have always used defense of country and honor as the primary motivational propaganda to rally the actual armies. The ultimate outcome has always been, is, and will always be death. The Bush Administration stands before us daily speaking to us as if we are absolutely stupid. Unfortunately, they are often correct in this assumption. CNN offers us politicians talking about “staying the course” (in Iraq), with varying ideas of what that means. What it means is a lot more deaths of American military. What it means is innumerable Iraqi deaths and the breeding of hatred that will last for decades or until total annihilation is achieved. And the designs upon Iran are obvious. There is an impending, and if we as individuals continue to “wait”, inevitable war with Iran looming. Are the decisions already made? Is the dynamic immutable and unstoppable? Does writing about this make any difference, or is our destiny out of our “sphere of influence”?

Camus begins his essay, Le Mythe de Sisyphe, with the sentence,

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. Deciding whether or not life is worth living is to answer the fundamental question in philosophy. All other questions follow from that.

He compares the absurdity of the existence of humanity to the labors of the mythical character Sisyphus, who was condemned through all eternity to push a boulder to the top of a hill and watch helplessly as it rolled down again. Camus takes the nonexistence of God for granted and finds meaning in the struggle itself. The individual in this absurd existence, Camus postulates, ultimately rejects suicide and declares that the only courageous and morally valid response to the Absurd is to continue living. “Suicide is not an option.” Further, Camus states that it is the responsibility of the individual to revolt, which is defined as a spirit of opposition against any perceived unfairness, oppression, or indignity in the human condition. I write to say, “I can’t go on. I’ll go on.” And, I write, while knowing that I may have a negligible “sphere of influence”, as an act of rebellion.

Courting Disaster: Bork to the Future

The propaganda series, Iraq:Road to Progress on CNN, along with Jaws V, Girls Gone Wild in Aruba, and Where in the World is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, will have to be put on hold, while Mr. Magoo Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider, Too Much Candy Crowley, Down Low Joe Johns, You are I John King, et al on that network, and all of their counterparts in the 24 hour and MSM news organizations focus on the resignation of Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. While Herr Frist was on the Senate floor delivering some pointless palaver, one of his sycophants came running in with the Wikepedia version of Justice O’Connor’s bio replete with appropriate encomiums. These tributes, of course, will be brief, as the focus shifts to the selection process, and the Republicans call for a strict Constitutionalist, which means someone who subverts the Constitution, and shuns “activist” judges, meaning those who are for protecting Constitutional rights. We’ve heard from Bush. We’ve heard from Senator Kennedy. Let the games begin.

I am including this list of resources from David NYC at Daily Kos:

Whatever happens with the Supreme Court nomination battle that is about to ensue, it's going to happen fast. Here are some things you can do right now:

• If you have a cell phone, sign up for People at the American Way's Mass Immediate Response site. This way, you'll be able to receive text message action items instantly as events break. (If you signed up during the nuclear option fight, you'll need to re-sign up.)

• Also sign up with the Save the Court, another PFAW website devoted specifically to this issue. • Recruit friends and family members to the cause.

• Write to the President, telling him he should choose a consensus candidate to replace O'Connor.

• Contact your Senators to tell them the same thing.

I’ll post on this later, when I finish my piece on Iran. My own feelings tend toward realizing as Bush consolidates power, a power that is hell-bent on taking away the rights previously guaranteed under the Constitution, for the purpose of controlling the domestic populace as he pursues his designs of global hegemony, this issue requires immediate action on the part of all Americans who value their Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms.

There is no change but radical change.

Take back America through revolution...NOW!

Duck and Cover

In his book, Bush at War, Bob Woodward, in a one-on-one interview, asked the President about how history would see this [the war], Bush responded with a shrug and, "History, we won't know. We'll all be dead."

Plutonium. It’s kind of a fun word to say. I, perhaps, would name a dog Plutonium, or even a son, if my last name were Zappa. With a half-life of 24,200 years, Plutonium certainly has staying power. It is a key fissile component in the making of modern nuclear weapons, and can be used to make radiological weapons or poison. So it was comforting to see this headline in the NY Times:

U.S. Has Plans to Again Make Own Plutonium

The Bush administration is planning the government's first production of plutonium 238 since the cold war, stirring debate over the risks and benefits of the deadly material. The substance, valued as a power source, is so radioactive that a speck can cause cancer. Up Close, a Plutonium Pellet and a Minor Slip of the Tongs (June 27, 2005) Federal officials say the program would produce a total of 330 pounds over 30 years at the Idaho National Laboratory, a sprawling site outside Idaho Falls some 100 miles to the west and upwind of Grand Teton National Park in Wyoming. Officials say the program could cost $1.5 billion and generate more than 50,000 drums of hazardous and radioactive waste. Project managers say that most if not all of the new plutonium is intended for secret missions and they declined to divulge any details. But in the past, it has powered espionage devices. "The real reason we're starting production is for national security," Timothy A. Frazier, head of radioisotope power systems at the Energy Department, said in a recent interview. "It's going to be a tough world in the next one or two decades, and this may be needed," said a senior federal scientist who helps the military plan space missions and spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the possibility that he would contradict federal policies. "Technologically, it makes sense." In 1964, a rocket failure led to the destruction of a navigation satellite powered by plutonium 238, spreading radioactivity around the globe and starting a debate over the event's health effects. In 1965, high in the Himalayas, an intelligence team caught in a blizzard lost a plutonium-powered device meant to spy on China. And in 1968, an errant weather satellite crashed into the Pacific, but federal teams managed to recover its plutonium battery intact from the Santa Barbara Channel, off California.

I’ve wanted to discuss the question of whether the U.S. is preparing military action against Iran. One indication to the affirmative on this comes to mind as I listen to CNN in the background where British Prime Minister Tony Blair is ranting against the new Iranian president-elect, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, followed by a live news conference of Bush and German Chancellor Schroeder, where Bush categorizes the elections in Iran as corrupt. Well, it would be just too easy for me to glibly reply glibly to that remark, so I shall resist. “Do you remember 2000 dipshit?” Sorry. Anyway, Iran is clearly on the table, as this ominous report indicates. And I do plan on writing at length on the subject. However, between the Supreme Court’s enigmatic and frustrating rulings and the issue of PLUTONIUM, my focus a just a bit disjunctive.

By the way, if Mr. Ahmadinejad is such a religious conservative, why does he dress like a used car salesman (with apologies to all used car salesmen)? And, not to non sequitur myself into a corner, but is the Supreme Court just fucking with our heads? The Ten Commandments, IN-OUT/right-wrong…but at the same time, The United States Supreme Court declined today to hear the cases of two reporters facing jail time for refusing to testify about conversations with their confidential sources.

The case now returns to the federal district court in Washington, where its chief judge, Thomas F. Hogan, is expected to hear arguments this week about when and where the reporters, Judith Miller of The New York Times and Matthew Cooper of Time magazine, will begin to serve their time. The special prosecutor in the case, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, is likely to ask that the reporters be jailed immediately. Lawyers for the reporters may ask Judge Hogan for permission to file additional briefs. "I am extremely disappointed," Ms. Miller said in a statement. "Journalists simply cannot do their jobs without being able to commit to sources that they won't be identified. Such protection is critical to the free flow of information in a democracy." Arthur Sulzberger Jr., the publisher of the New York Times, added: "It is shocking that for doing some routine newsgathering on an important public issue, keeping her word to her sources, and without our even publishing a story about the C.I.A. agent, Judy finds herself facing a prison sentence. "That 49 states and many countries around the globe provide broad protection for journalists who have promised confidentiality to their sources, makes today's decision even more disappointing. And it is doubly painful that the court rejected our case in the face of the plea of 34 state attorneys general, prosecutors who normally seek journalists' evidence, that anonymous sources are critical to provide information to the public."

But seriously, PLUTONIUM? How apocalyptically evil are this Administration’s designs on global hegemony? I guess the question by its implications answers itself. However, why don’t we all read Robert W. Merry’s, Sands of Empire, and discuss this in five minutes. Okay. The Physicians for Social Responsibility thought about this issue and offered this policy brief on 10/22/02, and excerpt of which reads,

The adoption of the dangerous venture of preemption as a pervasive security strategy is an unprecedented move by the United States, distancing the Bush administration’s national security policy from all before it. President Bush cites the need for such a strategy due to the nature of the threats facing the United States in a strategic environment wrought with terrorism. This new strategy, however, is at least partly motivated by the administration’s aim to maintain U.S. military dominance in the future, and both elements of this strategy carry more inherent dangers than do the threats cited by the Bush administration.

Another by-the-way; when William Kristol refers to this global hegemony wet-dream, he calls it Benevolent Global Hegemony. Meanwhile, back in the world of greed and money and global political chess moves, Krugman has this article in today’s NY Times, saying,

There's nothing shocking per se about the fact that Chinese buyers are now seeking control over some American companies. After all, there's no natural law that says Americans will always be in charge. Power usually ends up in the hands of those who hold the purse strings. America, which imports far more than it exports, has been living for years on borrowed funds, and lately China has been buying many of our I.O.U.'s. Until now, the Chinese have mainly invested in U.S. government bonds. But bonds yield neither a high rate of return nor control over how the money is spent. The only reason for China to acquire lots of U.S. bonds is for protection against currency speculators - and at this point China's reserves of dollars are so large that a speculative attack on the dollar looks far more likely than a speculative attack on the yuan. So it was predictable that, sooner or later, the Chinese would stop buying so many dollar bonds. Either they would stop buying American I.O.U.'s altogether, causing a plunge in the dollar, or they would stop being satisfied with the role of passive financiers, and demand the power that comes with ownership. And we should be relieved that at least for now the Chinese aren't dumping their dollars; they're using them to buy American companies.

Just a thought: perhaps China is one of the reasons the Bush Administration plans to again make its own PLUTONIUM.

(I split infinitives; they split atoms.)

Well, I think it’s time to go have some Fun with Dick and Jane, (this seems like a good one) check my Weekly Reader for subliminal messages, drink a bottle of tequila, see if I can get my hands on some percocets, and find a desk that I can crawl under.

buh bye.

"Only the Dead Have Seen the End of War" -Plato

Lance Cpl. Holly Charette, a 21-year-old from Cranston, R.I., finds one of her own letters as she sorts through Headquarters Battalion Marines' mail, March 17. Charette recently deployed here from her home base at Camp Lejeune, N.C. to serve in Operation Iraqi Freedom. (U.S. Marine Corps. photo by Sgt. Stephen D'Alessio)

Rhode Island, as everyone knows, is a small state. With 1,048,319 people living on a land area of 1,045 square miles, we only need one newspaper, the Providence Journal, to cover our local needs, generally speaking of course. Today’s front page featured this story:

A 2001 graduate of Cranston High School East was among the six U.S. military personnel killed in Fallujah on Thursday. Lance Cpl. Holly A. Charette, 21, a mail carrier for her division, was killed by a suicide bomber who drove a car into the convoy in which she was traveling, the Department of Defense said last night. Charette's family could not be reached. Charette delivered mail for the 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force, based at Camp Lejeune, N.C. She had one year left in her enlistment, and planned to apply for a job with the U.S. Postal Service afterward, she said in a May 3 Marine Corps news release. "I never really thought too hard about being a mail person, but it's really an important job, and people depend on me," she said in the release. Holly A. Charette was among 4 women killed and 11 wounded in a suicide car-bomb attack that military officials say may have specifically targeted female service members. Charette's death brings the total of Rhode Island combat deaths since Sept. 11, 2001, to 13. Of those, Charette is the first female Rhode Islander killed in the war. (Sharon T. Swartworth, a Judge Advocate General's Corps Officer originally from Warwick but living in Virginia was killed in Iraq in 2003.) In high school, Charette played on the field hockey team and was a cheerleader for the ice hockey team. Her yearbook shows her in her cheerleading uniform and in street clothes, arms around girlfriends, beaming in each photo. The quote she chose reads, "Don't say 'goodbye' because it's the end. Say 'nice knowing you,' because it was." (BY ELIZABETH GUDRAISJournal Staff Writer)

I sit at this keyboard daily writing about politics and ranting against this war, usually engaged in polemical outrage at the Bush Administration’s moral and ethical turpitude. The daily rhetoric of our politicians usually supplies ample fodder for a diurnal, finger-waving diatribe. I have no delusions regarding the efficacy of this minor blog to change anything other than my own choice of words. Nevertheless, I continue.

War is defined by death. It is a construct of politicians, promulgated by lies and subterfuge. As the famous Prussian militarist and author of Vom Kriege (On War), Carl von Clausewitz wrote,

"It is of course well known that the only source of war is politics -- the intercourse of governments and peoples. . . . We maintain . . . that war is simply a continuation of political intercourse, with the addition of other means."

Death and disfiguration of the body and spirit, however, are the only lasting effects of this “continuation of political intercourse”, as politics become corrupted and change like fashion and empires rise and fall; death is final and eternal. Bush’s invasion of and consequent war in Iraq, forged out of a policy of hegemony and propagated with prevarication, did not meet the definition of jus ad bellum and is thusly an illegal act. In the language of the Nuremberg prosecutors, aggressive leaders who launch unjust wars commit "crimes against peace." Bush’s neo-con advisors have set a policy, justified by the still uninvestigated crimes of 9/11, that is intent on perpetuating a state of global war exemplified by Clausewitz’s statement,

"If war is part of policy, policy will determine its character. As policy becomes more ambitious and vigorous, so will war, and this may reach the point where war attains its absolute form. . . . Policy is the guiding intelligence and war only the instrument, not vice versa."

At the beginning of this war, the ultra-hyped “shock and awe” part, the population was again, as in the Gulf War, whipped into a frenzy of blood lust, even though the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said portentously at the time,

"We need to condition people that this is war. People get the idea this is going to be antiseptic. Well, it's not going to be. People are going to die."

Not everyone saw the war as a jus ad bellum. War protesters staged events and rallies while intellectuals and writers spoke against the purported justifications for invading Iraq. The author of War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning, Chris Hedges said at the time,

I think the {Iraq} war is illegitimate not because civilians will die. Civilians die in every conflict. It's illegitimate because the administration has not, to my mind, provided any evidence of any credible threat. And we can't go to war just because we think somebody might do something eventually. There has to be hard intelligence. There has to be a real threat if we're going to ask our young men and women to die. Because once you unleash the "dogs of war" and I know this from every war I've ever covered, war has a force of its own. It's not surgical. We talk about taking out Saddam Hussein. Once you use the blunt instrument of war, it has all sorts of consequences when you use violence on that scale that you can't anticipate. I'm not opposed to the use of force. But force is always has to be a last resort because those who wield force become tainted or contaminated by it. And one of the things that most frightens me about the moment our nation is in now, is that we've lost touch with the notion of what war is.

Along these lines, the poet W.S. Merwin wrote:

It would not have been possible for me ever to trust someone who acquired office by the shameful means Mr. Bush and his abettors resorted to in the last presidential election. His nonentity was rapidly becoming more apparent than ever when the catastrophe of Sept. 11, 2001, provided him and his handlers with a role for him, that of "wartime leader", which they, and he in turn, were quick to exploit. This role was used at once to silence all criticism of the man and his words as unpatriotic, and to provide the auspices for a sustained assault upon civil liberties, environmental protections, and general welfare. The perpetuation of this role of "wartime leader" is the primary reason-- more important even than the greed for oil fields and the wish to blot out his father's failure-- for the present determination to visit war upon Iraq, kill and maim countless people, and antagonize much of the world of which Mr. Bush had not heard until recently. The real iniquities of Saddam Hussein should be recognized, in this context, as the pretexts they are. His earlier atrocities went unmentioned as long as he was an ally of former Republican administrations, which were happy, in their time, to supply him with weapons. I think that someone who was maneuvered into office against the will of the electorate, as Mr. Bush was, should be allowed to make no governmental decisions (including judicial appointments) that might outlast his questionable term, and if the reasons for war were many times greater than they have been said to be I would oppose any thing of the kind under such "leadership". To arrange a war in order to be re-elected outdoes even the means employed in the last presidential election. Mr. Bush and his plans are a greater danger to the United States than Saddam Hussein.

And yet, the Bush administration pounded the drums of war incessantly, before the country and before the world at the United Nations. Nevertheless, the case was made, as the Downing Street Memos show, with flawed and manipulated intelligence that was “being fixed around the policy”. There would be no stopping this initiative, and we were left with the result that, as Hedges put it,

Our whole civil society is being torn apart. Once again, as is true in every war, the media parrots back the clichés and jingoes of the state. Imbibes and promotes the myth. In wartime, the press is always part of the problem. And that we are about to engage in that ecstatic, exciting, narcotic that is war. And that if we don't get a grasp on the poison that war is, then that poison can ultimately kill us just as surely as the disease.

Politically, Iraq is so disjunctive that it is like a glass-ball world full of sworn enemies that has been shaken, and every individual has to look at those around him/her as that soul’s potential murderer. To read the daily news reports of death and destruction is to immerse oneself in incomprehensible pathos. There is no sense, no hope, no logic; only war profiteering, whatever delusions of grandeur the Bush cabal suffer from, and the immutable loss of life. Whatever hatred fuels the insurgency in Iraq, it is matched by the hubris, greed, and imperial ambitions of our own corrupt leaders. They are cowards who send children off to die for their delusional designs. Bush and Rumsfeld, et al, have even failed to protect the troops who risk their lives daily in this dystopian hell. They have blundered into a war of which they have lost control, of which is already lost.

Here is the Secretary of Defense in Iraq:

David Hume Kennerly/Getty Images During a visit to Iraq last year, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld rode in a Rhino Runner, a steel-reinforced vehicle that its maker says is designed to withstand 7.62 x 39-millimeter and 5.56-millimeter ammunition, overhead airbursts and explosive devices up to 1,000 pounds.

In War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning,

Chris Hedges argues that war is both a deadly addiction—a drug that offers an unmatchable intoxication, the thrill of being released from the moral strictures of everyday life—and a unifying force that provides a sense of meaning, purpose, and self-sacrifice that can wash away life’s trivial concerns. But the meaningfulness of combat, Hedges suggests, depends upon the myth of war. In reality, no matter what grand cause it is supposed to support, war is simply the basest form of aggression: “organized murder.” Once war begins, the moral universe collapses and every manner of atrocity can be justified in the eyes of those who wage it, because the cause is just, the enemy is inhuman, and only war can restore balance to the world. Hedges reveals the hollowness of such thinking and makes an impassioned plea for humility, love, and compassion as the human race’s only hope for survival. Only when a nation can accept its share of blame and see its enemy with compassion rather than hatred can war be averted and true peace prevail.

Later today, Donald Rumsfeld will appear on the Sunday talk show, Meet the Press. We can only hope that the obsequious Russert will ask him if he’s spoken to the parents of Holly Charette, and told them how grateful he is that she gave her life for…

War is defined by death. It is a descent into madness, into the “heart of darkness”. And as Neruda pleads in his last stanza of I'm Explaining a Few Things,

Come and see the blood in the streets.

Come and see The blood in the streets.

Come and see the blood In the streets!

Rove Rage

A late morning live news conference with President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister al-Jaafari just took place, attempting to present a united and optimistic front before the American public. Iraqi Prime Minister al-Jaafari read a statement that was almost word-for-word what Cheney recited yesterday during an interview with Wolf Blitzer, i.e. they said we would not defeat Saadam – we did. They said there would never be a sovereign Iraq – there is. They said we would never capture Saadam – we did. They said there would never be free elections – there were, etc. If they don’t want their puppet al-Jaafari to sound like a puppet, shouldn’t they at least give him a fresh text to read, one that does not mimic Cheney word for word?

The press corps was tepid as usual in their questions. The Downing Street Memos, while still exhibiting a half-life on the internet, are dissipating quickly in the mainstream media. Therefore, there were no questions regarding the legality/illegality of the Iraq invasion and occupation. No one asked President Bush about the divisive statements of his presidential advisor, Karl Rove, and why, in a supposed time of war, a spokesman for the Whitehouse would be instigating domestic political warfare. Of course, we already know the answer to the latter: this was another “pearl harbor scenario” of surprise political attack causing outrage and confusion, but also diffusing the issues under scrutiny. And notice the difference between their “controversial” attacks and those from Democrats. All of their team lines up behind the messenger. The Democrats caved in on Senator Durbin, when, in fact, they should have supported his charges and taken the implicit message in those words to the next level of outrage against the torture techniques that have been employed at Gitmo and elsewhere, and against the policy of extraordinary rendition.

Rove’s comments were the first shots fired in a new Administration initiative to re-sell and recast the Iraq war and occupation to the American public. Prior to the invasion of Iraq, the Republicans accused anti-war activists and anyone who even questioned the reasons behind the war planning of being unpatriotic at best and traitors at worst. This kind of lugubrious slander is diversionary in its tactic, a version of divide and conquer, and succeeds by being buoyed with a united front of propagandists who keep jabbing the wound causing a reactionary Left and the observing American public to lose sight of the issues that are adversely affecting the Administration. Witness the latest alignment of support for Rove’s statements:

A White House official said Friday the administration finds it ``somewhat puzzling'' that Democrats are demanding presidential adviser Karl Rove's apology or resignation for implying that liberals are soft on terrorism. ``I think Karl was very specific, very accurate, in who he was pointing out,'' communications director Dan Bartlett said. ``It's touched a chord with these Democrats. I'm not sure why.'' Congressional Republicans earlier joined the White House in standing solidly behind Rove, saying he shouldn't apologize and that he was outlining a philosophical divide between a president who sought to win the war on terrorism by taking the fight to the enemy and Democrats who questioned that approach.

The Durbin fiasco illustrates the impotence of a Left that lacks political and intellectual conviction, voice, and go-for-the-jugular determination. Now, we have Bush and al-Jaafari getting a national audience, a chance to espouse conviction and a positive description of events in Iraq, albeit a fallacious description, and state their case emphatically:

President Bush assured Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari on Friday ''there are not going to be any timetables'' for withdrawal of American forces and vowed victory over insurgents attempting to prevent establishment of a democratic government under a new constitution. ''This is not the time to fall back,'' al-Jaafari concurred at a joint news conference at the White House.

Except for a few self-serving moderate Democrats, like Joe Biden, no one in the Democratic party, and certainly not the party as a group, is talking about Iraq with a clear voice of opposition to the Administrations current policies, never mind discussing the consequences of yielding to the illegal manipulations of Bush and the neo-cons who went to war based on lies. Where are the senators who should be pushing for hearings on the Downing Street Memos, and who should be relentlessly pursuing the manifold illegal actions of this Administration prior to going to the U.N.? News conferences like the one today, remarks like Rove’s, and Cheney’s rare appearance in a MSM interview, albeit with a supplicant like Blitzer, will succeed in deflecting the DSM’s and all of the relevant documentation of the illegal selling of this war unless the Democrats bring this to the forefront immediately.

Reclaiming 9/11

“Short of a Pearl Harbor-like disaster this demonstrates the obsolescence of current systems and concepts of operations, the process of transformation will remain a slow one.” – From a report outlining the military challenges and hurdles of the new U.S. Administration (referring to a DOD need to restructure to fight “a different kind of war”) by The Project for the New American Century

“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.” September, 2000, from A Report of The Project for the New American Century, entitled, REBUILDING AMERICA’S DEFENSES Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century

The extant miasma of the American condition, inflicted upon us and perpetrated globally by the Bush Administration is predicated upon one thing: the co-opting of the 9/11 attacks. The profound, immeasurable, and incomprehensible pain of these attacks obliterated our sense of reality, and the ensuing emotional, political, intellectual, and nationalistic reactions were conflicted by proximity to the trauma. The American President, George W. Bush, had just come back from a month long vacation, the longest since Nixon was President, his poll approval numbers were in negative territory, his proposals to privatize social security and his foreign policy of anathema toward international treaties, called “exceptionalism” (the concept that the U.S.A. is the world’s only superpower and is thusly exempt of any necessity to comply with any treaties between the rest of the world’s countries) were both receiving vociferous criticism. The embarrassing incident of the U.S. aircraft that collided with a Chinese fighter and was forced down into the People’s Republic of China in April was slowly fading. Then, instantly, like a Phoenix, Bush stood upon the smoldering rubble of the World Trade Center, now called Ground Zero, and declared prophetically, "Just three days removed from these events, Americans do not have the distance of history, but our responsibility to history is clear, to answer these attacks, and rid the world of evil."

In our national state of Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome, the hyperbole and implicit machinations of the words “rid the world of evil” did not resonate within our perspicacity. Bush’s usurpation of our national tragedy is used without compunction. His latest weekly radio address used 9/11 as the reason we are in Iraq. This is, of course, as inaccurate as it is unseemly. The Downing Street Minutes and other related documents merely confirm what was, or certainly should have been, obvious from the beginning of the Bush Administration’s public shift of focus away from Afghanistan, while funds (and troops) were being secretly and illegally diverted, to Iraq. This article, at the time, asserted,

In 2002, troops from the 5th Special Forces Group who specialize in the Middle East were pulled out of the hunt for Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan to prepare for their next assignment: Iraq. Their replacements were troops with expertise in Spanish cultures. The CIA, meanwhile, was stretched badly in its capacity to collect, translate and analyze information coming from Afghanistan. When the White House raised a new priority, it took specialists away from the Afghanistan effort to ensure Iraq was covered.

If the DSM’s have true merit, it is that they are the catalyst that will provide the dynamic for re-scrutinizing all of the obvious fait accompli machinations of the Bush Administration during the period immediately following September 11th, 2001. In fact, invading Iraq and toppling Saddam Hussein were high on the agenda as the Bush Team was being assembled immediately following the 2000 elections, and even before Florida had been decided. The think tank, the Project for the New American Century, now an adjunct to the Department of Defense, had been advocating such a military intervention since at least 1997 (see this letter to Clinton). And, of course, George W. had his own personal reasons for enthusiastically endorsing such an action, i.e. Hussein had tried to assassinate George the Father in Kuwait after the Gulf War. It would seem evident that 9/11 in fact provided the removal of Hussein as a priority, given that he is captured and Osama Bin Laden has not been. This is an important fact relevant to U.S. security, since Al Qaeda had had almost 4 years to undergo a metamorphosis into, what has been called, a hydra-headed organization of thousands of cells and operatives. Osama Bin Laden, in fact, is merely a symbol of what Al Qaeda used to be, and is our real or imagined personification of 9/11. The pain of that day is still so graphic and unequivocal that words such as “Nine/Eleven”, “Osama”, “Al Qaeda”, “World Trade Center”, and “War on Terror” are psychological inducements toward fear, anger, and confusion, and these words are used precisely for this reason by Bush and his cabal. Progressives, Liberals, the Democrats, and the American people need to realize that these attacks happened while these people, i.e. the Bush Administration, were at the helm. This should be a point of shame and culpability for them, not a rallying cry and excuse for every abomination that they inflict upon our foreign policies, our civil liberties, our national security, and our international reputation. We need to reclaim the tragedies of 9/11 as a point of origin for a discussion that points a finger at the Bush Administration, not as the carte blanche that they were hoping for to run rampant over the status quo of humanity.

Where are we now? We are entrenched in a country that is still called Iraq, even though it is splintered into religious sects and tribal factions, green zones, Halliburton-built contractor and troop cities, fractured infrastructures, and living conditions that are execrable. Please read the most recent post from Baghdad Burning for a unique perspective of the diurnal quotidian attempts at normalcy, and the surrounding hypocrisy and lunacy.

Detentions and assassinations, along with intermittent electricity, have also been contributing to sleepless nights. We’re hearing about raids in many areas in the Karkh half of Baghdad in particular. On the television the talk about ‘terrorists’ being arrested, but there are dozens of people being rounded up for no particular reason. Almost every Iraqi family can give the name of a friend or relative who is in one of the many American prisons for no particular reason. They aren’t allowed to see lawyers or have visitors and stories of torture have become commonplace. Both Sunni and Shia clerics who are in opposition to the occupation are particularly prone to attacks by “Liwa il Theeb” or the special Iraqi forces Wolf Brigade. They are often tortured during interrogation and some of them are found dead.

The price of building materials has gone up unbelievably, in spite of the fact that major reconstruction has not yet begun. I assumed it was because so much of the concrete and other building materials was going to reinforce the restricted areas. A friend who recently got involved working with an Iraqi subcontractor who takes projects inside of the Green Zone explained that it was more than that. The Green Zone, he told us, is a city in itself. He came back awed, and more than a little bit upset. He talked of designs and plans being made for everything from the future US Embassy and the housing complex that will surround it, to restaurants, shops, fitness centers, gasoline stations, constant electricity and water- a virtual country inside of a country with its own rules, regulations and government. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Republic of the Green Zone, also known as the Green Republic. “The Americans won’t be out in less than ten years.” Is how the argument often begins with the friend who has entered the Green Republic. “How can you say that?” Is usually my answer- and I begin to throw around numbers- 2007, 2008 maximum… Could they possibly want to be here longer? Can they afford to be here longer? At this, T. shakes his head- if you could see the bases they are planning to build- if you could see what already has been built- you’d know that they are going to be here for quite a while.

The Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root is more entrenched in Iraq than the military, and even more incompetent in their bookkeeping. They have cost the American taxpayer billions in cost overruns, losses and waste, and a “black hole” corruption. The manifold aspects to the folly of our involvement in Iraq are so numerous and substantial that any one could provide a reason for immediate withdrawal. The absolute illegality and conspiracy of our involvement in the first place, as documented by the Downing Street Memos and countless pre-war military activities, such as thousands of target bombing raids by U. S. and British planes, allocated funding for “emergency construction capabilities” at “worldwide locations,” authorized by the Defense Department portentously (see this article @ theRawStory). Our concerted efforts must now be focused toward a clear demand for and articulation of the reasons that the U.S. must

a.) cease and retract all military operations from Iraq

b.) provide and solicit humanitarian aid for Iraq to help rebuild their infrastructure

c.) outline a strategy for of strong national defense supported by an internationally responsible foreign policy

d.) outline a strategy for a strong domestic security based on a fair, strong, and responsible economic policy, and

e.) a relentless campaign against every single oppressive, regressive, divisive, and obstructionist policy that this outgoing Bush Administration has inflicted upon the United States of America and the International community, that it will continue to inflict with the help of the Republican controlled Congress and the “dominionist” Religious Right.

We can not rely on the centrist, moderate Democrats who occasionally speak up tepidly. Recently Senator Dick Durbin stood before the Senate and spoke the truth about the abominations and abysmal treatment of detainees at Guantanomo. Writers on the Left were quick to applaud and support Senator Durbin for his accurate and courageous remarks, despite the smear campaign waged by the fully-revved Republican spin/lie machine. Unfortunately, the mainstream media only reported the spin and not the full statement of Durbin or the context or the source, i.e. the FBI. I, in fact, sent an email of support to Senator Durbin, praising his courage for telling the truth. Now it is I who feel the fool for thinking one of these politicians had the courage of his convictions. There is strength in numbers, which is why we need to organize, and quickly, to counter the very effective media management of the other side. Let’s not worry about the Joes Biden and Lieberman, the waffling Kerrys and Clintons, the impotent and irrelevant Gephardt and Edwards, or the nauseating recalcitrance of writers like Friedman or Isikoff who supported the war but now seem to suggest that their perspicacity and sagacity might offer solutions to “still win this thing”. I half expect Christopher Hitchens to say in a soused insouciance that he meant “Iran”, and that he always gets those two countries confused.

The beginning of this piece offers two quotes from separate publications (and authors) by The Project for the New American Century. Anyone interested in the true genesis of the Iraq invasion and our current foreign policy of global hegemony need only spend a few hours reading through the various policy papers, publications, and reports of this insidious and insipid theorists and power mongers. It is possible the Bush players, prior to their election did not even know the extant to which their policies would be co-opted. At the 2000 Republican Convention, the main foreign policy speech at the convention was by Bush's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice. And her main applause line--"America's armed forces are not a global police force, they are not the world's 911"— The irony is as cold as liquid nitrogen.

and a few words about Torture...

There is only one thing that arouses animals more than pleasure, and that is pain. Under torture you are as if under the dominion of those grasses that produce visions. Everything you have heard told, everything you have read returns to your mind, as if you were being transported, not toward heaven, but toward hell. Under torture you say not only what the inquisitor wants, but also what you imagine might please him, because a bond (this, truly, diabolical) is established between you and him.

Umberto Eco 1929 Italian Novelist and critic

Man torturing man is a fiend beyond description. You turn a corner in the dark and there he is. You congeal into a bundle of inanimate fear. You become the very soul of anesthesia. But there is no escaping him. It is your turn now...

Henry Miller 1891-1980 American Author

Sisyphus and Iraq

                                 

Last weekend brought the news of a U.S. led military assault in the western provinces of Iraq that resulted in the death of 40 “heavily armed insurgents”, just in time for the Sunday talk shows. That turned out to be hyperbole at best or an outright lie at worst. This weekend we have Operation Spear and Operation Dagger. Operation Spear is claiming,

“Approximately 50 insurgents have been killed since the operation began,” Marine Capt. Jeffrey Pool said from Ramadi, the provincial capital. A second campaign of about the same size, Operation Dagger, was launched Saturday — this one targeting the marshy shores of a remote lake north of Baghdad. About 1,000 U.S. Marines and Iraqi troops, backed by fighter jets and tanks, were participating.

Saturday seems to be a great day to launch these offensives, especially with the White House gearing up for a refurbishing of Operation Iraqi Freedom’s image. Unfortunately, even the stories that play up these impotent facts have the subtext of peripheral events such as:

A suicide car bomber slammed into an Iraqi army convoy in the Yarmouk neighborhood, killing two soldiers and wounding six near a dangerous highway — also known as the Street of Death — leading from downtown to the airport, police Lt. Thaer Mahmoud said.

and

An Iraqi reporter working for the Saudi-owned television network Al-Arabiya was shot in the neck while leaving a Baghdad restaurant, the station said. Jawad Khadim, believed to be in his mid-30s, was seriously wounded.

and

The body of a Sunni tribal leader also was found Saturday outside Mahmoudiya, about 20 miles south of Baghdad. Sheikh Arkan Shaalan Jassim al-Edwan, who had been shot, was sprawled on a roadside portrait of Saddam Hussein, police Lt. Adnan Abdullah said.

and, most tragic of all

10-year-old girl slain, Iraqi journalist injured In other violence Saturday, insurgents killed at least four people in Baghdad, including two Iraqi soldiers and a 10-year-old girl, hospital and police officials said. Twenty people — including an Iraqi journalist — were wounded. The girl was killed and two people were wounded when a roadside bomb missed a passing American military convoy, said Dr. Muhand Jawad of Baghdad’s Al-Yarmouk hospital.

but, then there’s

Nine coalition troops killed in Iraq and Some 14 Iraqi soldiers killed in bomb blast in Fallujah.

Nevertheless, our pet goat, President George W. Bush, via his weekly radio address has told us we will not withdraw from Iraq because the war is a "vital test" for American security. He continues here:

"The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight," Mr Bush said in his weekly radio address. Coming under renewed attack for his rationale for invading Iraq in March 2003, Mr Bush described the conflict as part of the broader US war on terrorism. He said stabilising Iraq and quelling the insurgency were important for American interests. "Some may disagree with my decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power, but all of us can agree that the world's terrorists have now made Iraq a central front in the war on terror," Mr Bush said. "By making their stand in Iraq, the terrorists have made Iraq a vital test for the future security of our country and the free world," he added.

So let me see if I understand this. We did NOT go to Iraq to secure and destroy the nuclear and other WMD that were extant in the Hussein regime. We went in for regime change and to make Iraq a terrorist flytrap battleground where we could fight them indefinitely, regardless of the cost of Iraqi and American lives. The “democracy in Iraq” afterthought to the war was also held up as a pastel pipedream:

"The terrorists and insurgents are trying to get us to retreat. Their goal is to get us to leave before Iraqis have had a chance to show the region what a government that is elected and truly accountable to its citizens can do for its people," Bush said in his weekly radio address. "We will settle for nothing less than victory" over terrorists there, he said later.

Evidentally the definition of “victory” is a defeat of the “insurgency”. Of course there was no insurgency before we got there. According to Wikepedia: An insurgency is an armed rebellion against a constituted authority, by any irregular armed force that rises up against an enforced or established authority, government, or administration. Those carrying out an insurgency are "insurgents." Insurgents conduct sabotage and harassment. Insurgents usually are in opposition to a civil authority or government primarily in the hope of improving their condition.

Does Bush actually believe that when U.S. troops leave the country another one or group of insurgents will not appear to oppose the Bushian imposed model government? Evidently not:

The administration insists no timetable can be set for bringing U.S. forces home from Iraq until enough Iraqi forces have been sufficiently trained to take over the fight against the insurgency. Anything else, the administration argues, would only embolden the insurgency.

And, Bush is still using 9/11 to justify his Iraq wet dream. “We went to war because we were attacked,” he said in this same radio address. Yeah, that was in Afghanistan!

Meanwhile, back in Afghanistan,

Al-Qaeda has ferried about half a dozen Arab agents into Afghanistan in the past three weeks, two of whom detonated themselves in suicide bombings in the south targeting a packed mosque and a convoy of U.S. troops, Afghanistan's defense minister said Friday. Rahim Wardak told The Associated Press he received intelligence that Osama bin Laden's terror group is regrouping and intends to bring Iraq-style bloodshed to Afghanistan. He also warned that the country could be in for several months of intense violence ahead of key legislative elections.

The invasion of Iraq was an internationally criminal act for which Bush will eventually have to answer. Moreover, all the unanswered questions about the 9/11 attacks, and his administrations culpability, will inevitably come to serious scrutiny.

By the way, Armando at DKos asks this question regarding all these insurgents we claim to be killing.

Finally, the Light of Reason has this story gleaned from the writings of Zachary Scott-Singley @ A Soldier’s Thoughts.

and

Happy Father’s Day to fathers & sons everywhere.

TV Guide

Out of some perverse curiosity, after watching the frightening interview of Kenneth Timmerman, author of Countdown to Crisis: the Coming Nuclear Showdown with Iran, on the Daily Show, (more on Mr. Timmerman later) I tuned to Letterman to check out Dave’s guest for the evening, the smiling, swaggering prevaricator Bill Clinton. The lilting cadence and timbre of Clinton’s speech is mesmerizing to the extent that after a few minutes one finds oneself doing a, “Huh? What?” kind of snapping out of it asking, “What did he just say?” The first, seemingly interminable part of Dave’s interview centered on open heart surgery, trying to establish camaraderie of sorts. Bill is too egocentric to play along with any perspective that requires sharing the narrative. So the ensuing minutiae of Clinton’s health, eating habits, and CSI-style medical observations ensued for several mind-numbing minutes. After a commercial break, Dave and Bill spent several minutes of talking about the Tsunami relief efforts, including encomiums from Bill toward George Herbert Walker Bush, “A nice man; I like him very much,” declared at least four times, Dave, when, out of nowhere asks, “So what do think about this Downing Street Memo? Have you heard of this thing?” (Quote approximate), to which Clinton asks, “What’s that?” He had that same, “I did NOT, have SEX, with THAT WOMAN,” look. Dave explained essentially what the documents were, what their implications are, and asked Bill C. to comment on their import. Clinton admitted he may have heard something about this, and mentioned how Cheney had been hanging around the CIA for all of those months leading up to the invasion, and that he wasn’t there having coffee. And, he also admitted that many in the Bush Administration had every intention of removing Saddam early on in their first months following the inauguration. Clinton should have known this, after all. He was sent this letter in 1997 by the undersigned strongly urging then President Clinton to do just that. Here is an excerpt with the signatories: Dear Mr. President:

We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.

Sincerely,

Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitage William J. Bennett Jeffrey Bergner John Bolton Paula Dobriansky Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad William Kristol Richard Perle Peter W. Rodman Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider, Jr. Vin Weber Paul Wolfowitz R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zoellick

Of course, Clinton espoused the same “moderate”, i.e. knows more than he’s saying, knows less than he’s saying, doesn’t know a damn thing, line of “staying the course” and other horse manure. Conspiracy theorists love to say that the Bush’s and the Clintons are significantly and surreptitiously aligned vis-à-vis the Trilateral Commission, Yale, and a mutual distaste for Al Gore. Clinton’s on his way to Kennebunkport this weekend to swing with Big George in some golfing, fishing, and lobster finger-fucking. Whether or not they smell each other’s fingers, I do not know. But there is definitely something fishy going on here.

Of course, yesterday had the Downing Street Memo hearing(s) on C-Span 3. The panel was well prepared and eloquent, while the House Representatives in attendance were succinct, tenured, and reserved overall. While nothing new was really expected, and certainly there were no revelations, the die was cast, the first step toward Congressional hearings was taken, and where it all leads remains to be seen. CNN prior to, during, and after the hearings was almost tacit on the subject, preferring to run propagandistic, 30 minute stories in series, of a family whose entire male contingent, four brothers and a father, have served or are serving in Iraq presently. No scenes of the insanity of war; only the pep talk by the CO, declarations of patriotism, and obligatory heart tugging familial scenes. Then there was a 20 minute piece on Ford motor vehicles that are being recalled because the cars are bursting into flames. Both stories could have been done much more succinctly without loss of efficacy. Wasn’t there a recent time when the White House called CNN to tell them not to play a certain clip where a young boy seated behind the podium falls asleep as the President is speaking? I got the feeling the networks had received a call from McClellan telling them to avoid the DSM hearing as well. No proof; just a hunch. When CNN did discuss the DSM memo today, it countered with a clip of Gephardt, sounding like a crazy uncle, saying that people should stop talking about how or why we got there (Iraq), and focus on winning. How about some cake and ice cream Dick?

Allow me to double back and discuss Jon Stewart’s guest Thursday night. First, remember Kenneth Pollack and his Next Stop Baghdad? Mr. Pollack was propped up as a ubiquitous talking head on every 24-hour news network during the swelling of the war and justification process. Now, if you’re paying attention it is Kenneth Timmerman, author of Countdown to Crisis: the Coming Nuclear Showdown with Iran, who has become ubiquitous, and equally as facile, psychotic, and fear-mongering in his approach to Iran. (See his Washington Times commentary today.) Iran is going through a transition that will change its geopolitical makeup for decades. The median age in Iran is 23 years old. Their internal politics is in flux, and the populace seems intent on modernization culturally, economically, and certainly politically. This is inevitable. An excellent book reflecting upon modern Iranian culture and political resistance is In the Rose Garden of the Martyrs, by Christopher de Bellaigue. This is a book for those who enjoy literature and quality writing. If you’d prefer more policy wonkering, you can poison you mind with Pollack’s, Persian Puzzle. Just beware the likes of Kenneth Timmerman, who the administration will be using to fortify their posturing toward Iran in the coming months.

Moving on, I don’t always agree with Mr. Jacob G. Hornberger (whisper: he’s a libertarian), but he sure as hell nailed the overview with this piece:

From Communism to Terrorism

Then read this post:

One of the reasons that the Iraq war will likely to turn out to be a disaster for the United States lies with the U.S. soldiers whom U.S. officials have been placed in a position of “Kill or be killed” in Iraq. Given the confusion over why President Bush invaded Iraq in the first place, the soldiers themselves have to be filled with confusion as to what they’re killing or dying for. WMD? Democracy-spreading? Liberation? Establishing an Islamic Shi’ite regime? Getting Saddam? Fighting the “war on terrorism”? Serving as magnet for “terrorists”? Vengeance for 9/11? Anger over the assassination attempt on the president’s father? Oil? Protecting Israel? Regime change? Each U.S. soldier has probably settled on one or two favorite rationales as a way to motivate himself. But how can he really be sure as to the real reason for going to war? And the disclosure of the smoking-gun Downing Street Memo only makes things more confused for the individual soldier. Imagine lying there on the ground in Iraq, dying with shrapnel in your gut and asking your commanding officer, “Sir, what exactly was this all about again?”

His piece yesterday on the Kurdish abduction of minority Arabs and Turkmen is also worthy of your consideration.

Also worthy of your consideration are the Bush appointments of Paul Wolfowitz to head the World Bank (done) and John Bolton to be ambassador to the United Nations. Both of these guys, as you recall from above, were signatories on that letter to Clinton in 1997. That’s because they both belong to this noble group, the Project for the New American Century (William Kristol, Chairman). Now, consider the ideas in this article by Ron Paul:

The “United Nations Reform Act of 2005” masquerades as a bill that will cut US dues to the United Nations by 50% if that organization does not complete a list of 39 reforms. On the surface any measure that threatens to cut funding to the United Nations seems very attractive, but do not be fooled: in this case reform “success” will be worse than failure. The problem is in the supposed reforms themselves-- specifically in the policy changes this bill mandates. The proposed legislation opens the door for the United Nations to routinely become involved in matters that have never been part of its charter. Specifically, the legislation redefines terrorism very broadly for the UN’s official purposes-- and charges it to take action on behalf of both governments and international organizations. What does this mean? The official adoption of this definition by the United Nations would have the effect of making resistance to any government or any international organization an international crime. It would make any attempt to overthrow a government an international causus belli for UN military action. Until this point a sovereign government retained the legal right to defend against or defeat any rebellion within its own territory. Now any such activity would constitute justification for United Nations action inside that country. This could be whenever any splinter group decides to resist any regime-- regardless of the nature of that regime.

And one further point for further consideration: Bush seemed to be implying early last week that he was giving serious consideration to the idea of closing Guantanamo. Then Cheney came sweeping down like a bird of prey to state emphatically that this will never happen (with the incoherent support of Rumsfeld). Perhaps the fact that another Halliburton company has a contract to build a $30 million jail at Guantanamo has something to do with Dick’s consternation in the matter. Read here. (I tried to cut & paste from the article five times, and five times Microsoft Word mysteriously had problems and had to shut down…”Paranoia will destroy ya.” –the Kinks). Anyway, did I say Cheney? I meant Tom Cruise.

Special "K"

I don’t think it would be facetious or fallacious to call Jose Padilla any number of nouns, with the appropriate adjectives, synonymous with meaning less than a nice guy. A synoptic look at his “sheet” since the early 1990’s, sans his juvenile record which is sealed, would reveal various run-ins with the law, despite a description by his Brooklyn neighbors that young Padilla was "a nice kid who always helped his mother" (courtesy of this BBC article).

Young Padilla, after his family moved to Chicago, had several gang-related encounters, including the infamous Latin Kings, with the police, even having been implicated in a gang style murder when he was just 13. Of course, as we know, it gets much worse from there on. Although brought up a Catholic, while in prison Mr. Padilla converted to Islam. He sought out contact with Al Qaeda, went to Afghanistan, and upon his return to the U.S.,

On 8 May 2002, he was arrested after flying into Chicago's O'Hare airport from Pakistan, for what the US authorities say was a reconnaissance mission. (From same BBC article) (also read here for background)

Jose Padilla was 31 at the time of his arrest. What is unusual about this arrest of AN AMERICAN CITIZEN is that he is being held as an “enemy combatant”, and thus has no Constitutional protections under due process, obliterating his rights as described in the eponymous Bill of Rights, and has been held without charges for over 3 years. Consider this:

The government defends its detention of Padilla by labeling him an “enemy combatant”; a term that originated in a right-wing think-tank to dispatch potential enemies of the state. It has no legal meaning, but its application assumes that the president has the authority to conduct the war on terror however he sees fit; using “all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided terrorist attacks”…or, in order, to “prevent future acts of international terrorism.” (Congress; Joint Resolution Sept 18, 2001) The Bush administration believes that this empowers the president to strip citizens of their constitutional rights and detain them without charges. So far, the courts have failed to stop this clear overreach of executive power. When Padilla’s case appeared before the US District Court, Judge Henry Floyd disputed the administration’s position saying, “If the law in its current state is found by the president to be insufficient to protect this country from terrorist plots, such as the one alleged here, then the president should prevail upon Congress to remedy the problem.” Indeed, it’s not the purview of the president to invent laws as he goes along, but to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”. The moniker “enemy combatant” creates the greatest constitutional crisis the nation has ever faced. It is a flagrant denial of the fundamental principle of “inalienable rights” by giving the president the power to determine who is entitled to the benefits of citizenship. In Justice John Paul Stevens scathing dissent (to the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the Padilla case, which they decided was filed in the wrong court) Stevens articulates the gravity of Padilla vs. Rumsfeld. He said the Padilla case poses “a unique and unprecedented threat to the freedom of every American citizen…At stake is nothing less than the essence of a free society…For if this nation is to remain true to the ideals symbolized by its flag, it must not wield the tools of tyrants even to resist an assault by the forces of tyranny.” Stevens is not exaggerating; the threat posed by placing our freedom in the hands of the president is incalculable. The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear Padilla’s case demonstrates their tacit support for the unlimited power of the president and their unwillingness to address the fundamental question of whether Padilla is protected under the Constitution. Their abject performance condemns Padilla to indefinite detention and proves their inability to meet the minimum requirements of their profession. A reasonable person might ask; what earthly purpose does the Supreme Court serve if not to clarify even the most basic points concerning constitutional protections and personal liberty? (The court stubbornly refused to even rule on Padilla’s habeas corpus petition, that is, whether he can be kept in jail without being charged with a crime) In his brilliant article “The Supreme Court and Enemy Combatants”, Marc Norton notes a critical opinion written by Judges Rehnquist, Kennedy and O’ Connor. (joined by Breyer) Norton says, “The key finding by this gang of four is to uphold the concept of enemy combatants, for citizens and non-citizens alike. ‘There is no bar to this Nation’s holding one of its own citizens as an enemy combatant,’ they boldly declare.” No bar to holding a citizen as an enemy combatant? What is the Bill of Rights if it is not a bar to the arbitrary power of the state??? The court’s finding is a clear vindication of Bush’s power-grab. (Complete article here.)

So it certainly is no real surprise that today the

U.S. Supreme Court Declines to Consider Padilla Terrorism Case

June 13 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Supreme Court turned down a chance to scrutinize the Bush administration's anti-terror tactics, refusing to intervene in the case of Jose Padilla, a U.S. citizen held without charges since 2002.

Let us be clear; the “charges”, not a legal term here, against Padilla are serious. However, they are accusations, and his intention to do harm against U.S. citizens is alleged. The detainees at Guantanamo are also labeled “enemy combatants”, but they are not American citizens. However, (from CNN)

A year ago, the court ruled the Bush administration was out of line by locking up foreign terrorist suspects at the Navy base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, without access to lawyers and courts. But justices declined to address a separate issue: whether American citizens arrested on U.S. soil can be designated "enemy combatants" and held without trial.

Today’s decision is not a surprise since a federal appeals court has not yet ruled on the issue. Arguments are scheduled for July 19 at the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia. But the issue itself is paramount to our discussion of the Bush Administration’s contempt for human rights, beginning with the rights of our own citizens, contempt for the Bill of Rights, contempt for the U.S. Constitution, and all-out power grab for a totalitarian, oligarchic executive branch that would operate with impunity. Beware the imminent drive to push the Patriot Act II through Congress, further diminishing any chance of passive resistance, let alone outright protest.

"There can be no doubt—"said K., quite softly, for he was elated by the breathless attention of the meeting; in that stillness a subdued hum was audible which was more exciting than the wildest applause—"there can be no doubt that behind all the actions of this court of justice, that is to say in my case, behind my arrest and today's interrogation, there is a great organization at work. An organization which not only employs corrupt warders, oafish Inspectors, and Examining Magistrates of whom the best that can be said is that they recognize their own limitations, but also has at its disposal a judicial hierarchy of high, indeed of the highest rank, with an indispensable and numerous retinue of servants, clerks, police, and other assistants, perhaps even hangmen, I do not shrink from that word. And the significance of this great organization, gentlemen? It consists in this, that innocent persons are accused of guilt, and senseless proceedings are put in motion against them..."

The Trial

Franz Kafka

Sunday Bloody Sunday

Western and Christian Civilization

With the weekend upon us and the Sunday talk shows, insipid as they are, about to discuss the Hieronymus Bosch week that was in Iraq, the marines were ordered to bring in the air strikes. Alas, more death and destruction, with the military claiming a clear victory of 40 dead “heavily armed” insurgents. What is heavily armed up against seven precision-guided missiles? Anyway, it’s all in the name of God and Freedom, so high five, up high, down low. Of course the Sunday news is still going to look something like this:

Insurgents in Iraq Go on Killing Spree

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- A former commando in the feared Wolf Brigade blew himself up after sneaking into the morning roll call at the unit's heavily fortified headquarters Saturday, one of a series of weekend insurgent attacks that killed at least 35 people including youngsters waiting to buy sandwiches and ice cream. Near the Syrian border, Marine airstrikes wiped out a band of 40 heavily armed militants.

The news clips show tattered, hooded men with ziplock-handcuffed hands behind their backs being loaded on to military vehicles. I have to support the Marines; it’s my duty as an American. Then, why does the whole scene come across as a nightmare of brutality, insane, pointless, and ineffably tragic, with nothing but victims? Civilians, those that were not killed or wounded in the U.S. led counter-insurgency, are wandering around crying and screaming in abject horror, with nothing but unimaginable pain and grief. When this grief turns to anger, who do you suppose it will be directed against? The marines do not know who is an insurgent, even in the Iraqi Army’s Charlie Company, as this article shows. Mercenaries, highly paid, ex-military hired to protect corporate executives and interests, are killing civilians at a rate of 12 civilians a day, in their zeal and impunity. The marines now have another enemy to worry about, and the recent incident, discussed here at length, give at least one side of the story; another voice in the Tower of Babel cacophony of insane rhetoric (from Bush & Cheney’s over-the-rainbow fantasy of optimism to the DOD spin to the incomprehensible voices of all the various factions vying for power in the new Iraqi government) that serves to illustrate the lugubrious, indefensible folly of this war. If these inhabitants of this ancient land have proclivities toward a civil war, then let them have it. It will be just another blight on humanity for the sake of the self interests of a few. However, get the U. S. OUT NOW. The blood stained psyche of the American people needs to heal, again; until the next war.

On Friday night last, I watched the endangered species and much truncated version of PBS’s NOW, no longer hosted by the always trenchant Bill Moyers, but rather succinctly and blandly helmed by David Brancaccio, and was delighted to find that Chris Hedges was one of the two featured guests. Judge Roy Moore was the other, not to be confused with Judge Roy Bean, although perhaps a comparison can be inferred. I had just read a beautifully written essay, published here, by Mr. Hedges that I believe every sentient human on earth should read. Here is a brief excerpt:

The vanquished know war. They see through the empty jingoism of those who use the abstract words of glory, honor, and patriotism to mask the cries of the wounded, the senseless killing, war profiteering, and chest-pounding grief. They know the lies the victors often do not acknowledge, the lies covered up in stately war memorials and mythic war narratives, filled with words of courage and comradeship. They know the lies that permeate the thick, self-important memoirs by amoral statesmen who make wars but do not know war. The vanquished know the essence of war – death. They grasp that war is necrophilia. They see that war is a state of almost pure sin with its goals of hatred and destruction. They know how war fosters alienation, leads inevitably to nihilism, and is a turning away from the sanctity and preservation of life. All other narratives about war too easily fall prey to the allure and seductiveness of violence, as well as the attraction of the godlike power that comes with the license to kill with impunity.

Mr. Hedges also touches upon the subject of which NOW concerned itself in the Friday broadcast:

This myth, the lie, about war, about ourselves, is imploding our democracy. We shun introspection and self-criticism. We ignore truth, to embrace the strange, disquieting certitude and hubris offered by the radical Christian Right. These radical Christians draw almost exclusively from the book of Revelations, the only time in the Gospels where Jesus sanctions violence, peddling a vision of Christ as the head of a great and murderous army of heavenly avengers. They rarely speak about Christ's message of love, forgiveness and compassion. They relish the cataclysmic destruction that will befall unbelievers, including those such as myself, who they dismiss as "nominal Christians." They divide the world between good and evil, between those anointed to act as agents of God and those who act as agents of Satan. The cult of masculinity and esthetic of violence pervades their ideology. Feminism and homosexuality are forces, believers are told, that have rendered the American male physically and spiritually impotent. Jesus, for the Christian Right, is a man of action, casting out demons, battling the Anti-Christ, attacking hypocrites and castigating the corrupt. The language is one not only of exclusion, hatred and fear, but a call for apocalyptic violence, in short the language of war.

The above paragraph describes the foundation upon which the current state of U.S. affairs, domestic and foreign, is built. In all international affairs where the U.S. inserts itself, Bush & Co. use the “good and evil” metaphor to show that this is an ontological war of Good, i.e. “us”, against abject Evil, i.e. “them” . The truth is, however, embroiled in economic/geo-political interests and objectives. It seems that the rote expression of the Biblical allusions, however, serves as a self-deluding mantra for the Christian Right that cleanses them of all guilt for the death and carnage left in the path to their objectives. Most of those objectives can be checked individually by each member of this coalition by going online and checking the balance in their individual checking accounts. Too harsh? Please!

Sample this quote from David Hedges Harper’s article (May 2005) entitled Soldiers of Christ II:

Since the reelection of George W. Bush in November, the rhetoric on the Christian right has grown triumphal and proud; rumors of spiritual war are abroad in the heartland, and fervent whispers of revolution echo among the pews and folding chairs of the nation’s megachurches. I have traveled to Anaheim, California, to observe the rising power of the evangelical political movement at first hand. Orange County, along with Colorado Springs, is a center of the new militant Christianity, and it is here, among friends, that the National Religious Broadcasters association—which brings together some 1,600 Christian radio and television broadcasters, who claim to reach up to 141 million listeners and viewers—is holding its annual convention. I am standing in line at the Starbucks in the Anaheim Hilton with Dee Simmons and her friend Samantha Landy. Around her neck Simmons wears a cross of gold studded with diamonds, and her face, which betrays neither line nor crease, is carefully highlighted with heavy makeup. Scores of men and women, all conservatively dressed in coats and ties or skirts, stand expectantly, waiting for a sign to beckon them next door to the Anaheim Convention Center, where speeches, booths, and seminars await. We’ve known each other just a few minutes, but already I can tell you that Simmons once led a life of constant sorrow, that in 1987 she was diagnosed with breast cancer and before long underwent a modified radical mastectomy. That tragedy led her, she says, to turn her focus away from the designer-clothes boutiques she owned in Dallas and New York. “When God gave me my life back,” she says, “I decided to make a difference in people’s lives.” And so she embraced nutrition. Simmons reaches into her purse and draws out several pamphlets from her company, Ultimate Living. She tells me about her books, which include It’s a Miracle! It’s a Green Miracle & It Saved My Life!, and mentions the numerous Christian talk shows she regularly appears on, including Pat Robertson’s The 700 Club, Hope Today, Praise, Something Good Tonight, and The Armstrong Williams Show. “I was saved and found Christ when I was three,” she says. “I’m sixty-four. My daughter is thirty-six.” She waits for the effect of her age, which she will repeat more than once, to sink in. I can’t take my eyes off her smooth face and sculpted cheekbones. Landy is also active in the life of faith. She tells me that she runs “Christian Celebrity Luncheons” in Palm Springs as part of her “salvation outreach for snowbirds.” Her ministry focuses on country clubs and golf courses, she says, because that’s where people feel comfortable. Landy, a redhead, never stops smiling. “I bring in celebrity speakers,” she says, “like Gavin MacLeod, he was the Captain on Love Boat, and Ronda Fleming, she was in over forty films and starred with Bing Crosby.”

Perhaps, I may be a bit gratuitous in choosing this quote, since it is but an introduction to a very important and circumspect article on the issue of Evangelicalism and Dominionism. However, I think it speaks volumes without the need for explication. NOW and David Brancaccio then gave Judge Roy Moore, the former Alabama Chief Justice who refused to remove a sculpted granite version of the Ten Commandments from his courthouse, a forum to discuss his belief that it is a Judaic/Christian God that is referred to in the Constitution, and that anyone offended by this notion is, therefore, offended by America. My reading is more literal: I read “Nature’s God” and the “Laws of Nature”, which are considered to be “universal truths” (from the Declaration of Independence), and are deliberately infinite with interpretations. The Constitution itself, which is often pointed out, deliberately does not mention God. Judge Moore has some very relevant things to say about moral decay in this country. The facts are extant to substantiate this statement; our current culture is, at best, debasing to us all. If only we could get the equivalent of Mr. Hedges and Mr. Moore to talk to each other, weekly, indefinitely, not to declare a winner, but to maintain an intellectual curiosity about diametrically opposed notions, even if they can never be reconciled. Then again, Pope Benedict XVI is blaming immorality, the culture of contraception, and depravity on AIDS in Africa. Fuck religion.

Out of the Air a Voice Without a Face...

Here comes the full court press of fear mongering by Bush & Co. to sell Patriot Act II, resurrecting Osama Bin Laden from the moth ball reeking Pandora’s Box of paranoia, fueling the domestic unease by arresting Muslims in the various corners of the country (for immigration violations that are so common amongst those from south of the border that “trumped up” is a gross understatement), and getting on the Patriot Act II bus tour to let Americans know that this legislation is not subverting the constitution and everyone’s individual liberties, but “has helped to defend” civil liberties and the Constitution. Oh really?

Bush: Patriot Act Helped to Nab Terrorists

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) -- President Bush on Thursday credited the Patriot Act with helping to convict more than 200 terrorists and dismissed accusations that the law has violated civil liberties.

Bush urged lawmakers to disregard what he called ''unfair criticisms of this important good law.'' He said the Patriot Act has been used to bring charges against more than 400 suspects, and more than half have been convicted. He also said it has been used to break up terrorist cells in New York, Oregon, Virginia and Florida.

Again, NONE (save the one exception, Iyman Faris, who was working with the FBI as a double agent) of the convictions were for terrorist related activities, but rather immigration issues (hassling) and overt discrimination against Muslims; more prevarication and deception on the part of our president/salesman. Listen to the President’s speeches of the last two days. Like a great salesman, Bush hammers away at the listener’s resistance to his product with repetition of words and phrases that a.) Create fear of what life would be like without the product, i.e. Patriot Act II such as “Osama Bin Laden”, “Al Qaeda”, “terror cells and networks”, “disorganized law enforcement agencies”, “ attacks like 9/11”, b.) Paint a picture of amelioration and safety with his product such as, “sharing of information”, “going after the money”, “apprehending terrorists”, and c.) Defusing any concerns about possible negative effects of his product, such as “protects civil liberties”, “strengthens our freedoms”, “abides by and even protects the Constitution”.

Today’s New York Times has a series of articles detailing the failures of the FBI in the months before September 11, 2001. What impeccable timing; it illustrates Mr. Bush’s point perfectly. Do you think this is a coincidence that this report is being made public now during the determined PA II campaign? However, the real obfuscation is in the fact that the parts of the Patriot Act that dealt with the improvement interagency communication are not the parts of which the citizenry, and the ACLU, et al, should be (are) concerned with. The ACLU does list the areas of grave concern here and summarily read like this:

• Makes permanent Patriot Act powers without safeguards

• Does not provide adequate safeguards to protect library and other private records.

• Eliminates prior court review of FBI library and other private records demands for intelligence gathering purposes.

• Strikes an existing First Amendment safeguard for records search powers.

• Further expands time limits for FISA surveillance

• Exacerbates using FISA as “end-run” around stricter safeguards for criminal surveillance.

• Creates new statutory authority for intelligence investigators to track mail of ordinary citizens.

• Expands greatly the amount of information obtained without probable cause through Internet surveillance.

Please take the time to read the entire memo at the above link.

Post 9/11, the ridiculously expedited Patriot Act formed the basis of the suddenly declared “war on terror”, although presumably our government was already engaged in anti-terrorist activities domestically and worldwide. The omnipotent word “war”, one that is now perpetual, engages the individual citizen at his/her core values of duty and patriotism. The most salient aspects of the Patriot Act were those concerned with abridgment of Fourth Amendment rights and legislated secrecy. It brought us one giant step closer to the totalitarianism described in the prescient novels of Orwell and Huxley, among others. The justification for the war in Iraq, the justification for Guantanamo, the justification for “Terror Alerts” (when was the last time, by the way, we had one, now that the election is behind us?), and the justification for a ubiquitous secrecy within every diurnal action of this administration that is unprecedented in our history. The Downing Street Memo, while worthy of our consolidated scrutiny and efforts to bring into the light of day via the MSM, is merely symptomatic of the “green light” that was given to Bush and his neoconservative cadre of advisors (puppeteers) by the U.S. Congress. Those who do not see that 9/11 was the most fortuitous political coincidence in our history are either still suffering from PTSD or are naïve beyond help.

So what do we do? First we do not allow secret committees, i.e. the Senate Intelligence Committee, to take away our Fourth Amendment rights. We BLOG this issue into oblivion through organization, mass mail (electronic and USPS), organized passive resistance, and threatening every single senator or congressman who intends to support expansion of the Patriot Act with accountability at the polls. Second, we wake up to the hegemony that is propagating in the U.S. and Great Britain through censorship and abridgement of civil liberties in the name of waging this fictitious “war on terror”. Of course there are those that would call these statements treasonous, since clearly we were attacked. However, we and every other nation/state/empire in history has been attacked by “terrorists” who have evil designs upon whatever that nation/state/empire stands for, owns, does in the name of its sovereignty, etc. We should NEVER forget 9/11/01, and we should NEVER allow history cease investigating its true origins and its true implications. Third, we need to either get the Democratic Party organized into something that stands firmly for progressive issues, civil liberties, the poor, working, and middle classes, and does so with aggressive and smart politics, or we need to organize a new party. The old guard, moderate, milquetoast Democrats who are criticizing Howard Dean for telling the truth need to be voted out of Congress. All of those same placating hypocrites are those Democrats who supported the Iraq war, vacillate on every issue that vaguely touches upon the “war on terror” for fear of appearing weak (which they are), and who cave into the Republicans in the name of compromise. Fuck compromise and Fuck the Republicans. Protest vehemently the Bush Administration’s attempt to extend the life of and the powers of the Patriot Act. This is going to require a LOT OF NOISE from the electorate to block. After all, this abomination is taking place RIGHT NOW in secret committee. It is just a matter of time before bloggers begin disappearing, their computers confiscated, and their readers put under surveillance. Apathy and complacency now may prove to be the final nail in the coffin of our republic.

What do those distant thunderheads betide?

Nothing to do with us. Not our disgrace

That the raped corpse of a fourteen-year-old, tied

With friction tape, is found in a ditch, and a tide

Of violent crime breaks out.

Yet the world grown

Wrathful, corrupt, once loosed a true floodtide

That inched inside the wards where the frail are tied

To their beds, invaded attics, climbed to disclose

Sharks in the nurseries, eels on the floors, to close

Over lives and cries and herds, and on that tide,

Which splintered barn, cottage and city piece-

Meal, one sole family rode the world to peace.

Think of the glittering morning when God’s peace

Flooded the heavens as it withdrew the tide:

Sweet grasses, endless fields of such rich peace

That for long after, when men dreamed of peace

It seemed a place where beast and human grace

A pastoral landscape, a Virgilian peace,

Or scene such as Mantegna’s masterpiece

Of kneeling shepherds. But that dream has grown

Threadbare, improbable, and our paupers groan

While “stockpiled warheads guarantee our peace,”

And troops, red-handed, muscle in for the close.

Ours is a wound that bleeds and will not close.

-Anthony Hecht (from Terms)

Terror allegations disappear from court filing

Different affidavit in Lodi father-son case given to media than used for court.

What else is new?

Deep In It Again

“An avidity to punish is always dangerous to liberty. It leads men to stretch, to misinterpret, and to misapply even the best of laws. He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” –Thomas Paine, from Dissertation on First Principles of Government (Paris, July 1795)

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground. This is so because those who gain positions of power tend always to extend the bounds of it. Power must always be constrained or limited else it will increase to the level that it will be despotic. It should be remembered, as an axiom of eternal truth in politics, that whatever power in any government is independent is absolute also ....that a bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular; and what no just government should refuse, or rest upon inference."-Thomas Jefferson (from a letter written to Judge Spencer Roane in 1819)

"Political language . . . is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind." –George Orwell (from Politics and the English Language)

For the most part, I find quotations tedious, although I am guilty of using them in context, usually to amplify an argument. I was never very good at memorizing passages of poetry or quotations of great thinkers. However, this is not to say that the words, particularly the poetry, did not seep deep into my consciousness, deep enough to become part of the very particles of which I am. Words, I learned very early, enable the archetypal instrument of freedom. Thinking is the quintessential act of freedom, and words the architecture of thought. Reasoning, imagining, contemplating, forming thought out of perception are by their very nature radical and revolutionary acts, subversive acts, a freedom outside of the domain of the laws of governments and men, that are ultimately free and should be protected as part of the sustenance of life. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” are our unalienable rights according to the Declaration of Independence, rights that are part of the “laws of nature”. Paine and Jefferson had distinct and declared ideas of what constitutes liberty of the individual within a system of government, and both were amply aware of the intrinsic dangers extant in any government. For all the warnings of our forefathers, writers, historians, and our own leaders and legislators, such as the late, distinguished Patrick Moynihan, we have evolved into a country on the verge of totalitarianism. Of course this statement would be dismissed as extreme hyperbole by a majority of citizens who actually believe our president, who sprinkles the word “freedom” as liberally throughout his rhetoric as nonpareils upon a child’s ice cream cone. Of course, he is the titular talking head of the conspiracy. The architects and perpetrators of subversion to the Constitution operate quietly and in closed-door, secret committees, such as the Senate Intelligence Committee, who yesterday voted 11-4 to expand, as well as extend, the powers of clandestine and subversive authority to the FBI, et al, via the Patriot Act, thus exponentially reducing our individual liberties without our representation or participation.

Senate Panel OKs Expanded Powers for FBI

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The FBI would get expanded powers to subpoena records without the approval of a judge or grand jury in terrorism investigations under Patriot Act revisions approved Tuesday by the Senate Intelligence Committee. Some senators who voted 11-4 to move the bill forward said they would push for limits on the new powers the measure would grant to law enforcement agencies. ''This bill must be amended on the floor to protect national security while protecting Constitutional rights,'' said Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md. Ranking Democrat Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., supported the bill overall but said he would push for limits that would allow such administrative subpoenas ''only if immediacy dictates.'' Rockefeller and other committee members, such as Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., also are concerned that the bill would grant powers to federal law enforcement agencies that could be used in criminal inquiries rather than intelligence-gathering ones. Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., said the bill places new checks and balances on the powers it would grant, such as new procedures that would allow people to challenge such administrative orders. He called the Patriot Act ''a vital tool in the war on terror'' and lauded the Democrats who voted for it in spite of misgivings. Portions of the Patriot Act -- signed into law six weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks -- are set to expire at the end of 2005. The bill would renew and expand the act.

The ACLU responded immediately with a press release that included:

"When lawmakers seek to rewrite our Fourth Amendment rights, they should at least have the gumption to do so in public," said Lisa Graves, ACLU Senior Counsel for Legislative Strategy.

"In the past few days, thousands of concerned Americans have called on lawmakers in Washington to reject this misguided - and secretive - approach."

"Americans have a reasonable expectation that their federal government will not gather records about their health, their wealth and the transactions of their daily life without probable cause of a crime and without a court order," Graves added. "We can give law enforcement the tools they need to protect us without sidestepping our Constitution’s fundamental checks and balances."

“Thousands of Americans” is less than an annoying gnat, easily swatted away, or grabbed and squashed, by those very same empowered agents of the government. Grassroots organization against the policies of secrecy, subversion, and encroaching totalitarianism needs to involve eventually, and quickly, millions of citizens willing to confront the highest institutions of power, namely the Congress and the White House, using physical protests, mass mailings, and mainstream media advertising. The Iraq War is both the manifest symbol of and most salient example of the foreign policy aspects of this dichotomy between the actual secret and subversive machinations of policy and the overt “selling” of that policy to the electorate. The Downing Street Memo, for one example, shows how the U.S. government has been acting illegally and without consent toward policies that are neither in the interest of the citizenry or presented to the electorate in such a way as to enable support or protest with informed consent or denial. Our shameful abuse of prisoners, i.e. detainees, at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, stigmatizing our entire nation and its citizenry as oppressors and thusly fostering hatred of us throughout the world, is another aspect of the chauvinistic concentration of power through government, i.e. military, secrecy that is the status quo.

The roots of secrecy in the United States government are historical and require a separate and scholarly scrutiny, which shall ensue in the days ahead. However, as we were reminded by Mr. William Mark Felt, Sr. recently, the last 60 years have been rife with secrecy by those in power who thought that their motives were unassailable. The rationalization for the Bush Administration’s deliberate covertness is, of course, the tragic events on 9/11 that allowed the inception of “the politics of fear”.

The Center for Public Integrity puts it this way:

That seismic date in our history, September 11, 2001, enabled those in power to strengthen the prerogatives of the Presidency in the name of national security, giving rise to a new politics of fear which has severely diminished what the public can know about its government. The Bush administration came to power already overtly hostile to openness and the public's right to know. In its first months, for example, it unsuccessfully attempted to ensconce George W. Bush's gubernatorial documents in his father's presidential library, outside the state's sunshine disclosure laws. The White House has tenaciously and more successfully kept from the American people information about public policy meetings on public property between energy company executives and top federal officials. A respected reporter's home telephone records were secretly seized in order to ascertain his next story and his confidential sources. Since 9/11, the country has seen a historic, regressive shift in public accountability. Open-records laws nationwide have been rolled back more than 300 times-all in the name of national security. For the first time in U.S. history, the personal papers of past presidents now may only be released with White House approval. A Justice Department "leak" investigation of the White House regarding an Iraq war-related news story has degenerated into a full-fledged witch-hunt against the news media and the First Amendment, with reporters facing imprisonment if they don't reveal their sources. Against this backdrop, thousands of people have been interrogated by law enforcement officials and hundreds illegally detained-in many cases held for more than three years without any charges filed against them, their right to counsel and court review denied, the customary arrest information withheld. White House and other senior government officials have defended such policies (some of which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down in June), as well as the physical and psychological abuse and torture of foreign prisoners, as essential to the "war on terror," disregarding the Geneva Conventions and continuing to systematically violate human rights.

The mythological “war on terror”, an intellectual concept impossible to describe, let alone defend, has provided the excuse for this administration to usurp power, individual liberty, and global accountability all at once. Domestically, the last week has seen three highly publicized FBI arrests of American citizens, all of whom are Muslims, in NYC, Florida, and the latest in Lodi, CA. None of these arrests have terrorist-related charges attached to them. Nonetheless, if you are not related to one of these individuals, or an ACLU lawyer, don’t expect adjudication on any of these “suspects” for many years, long after any but very few have remembered them. The problem implicit in these arrests, as well as with the detention of non-charged, non-convicted individuals at Guantanamo and the many hundreds that have been scooped out of their existence and sent away under “extraordinary rendition” is that we are all at risk of becoming one of them. The new and improved Patriot Act II, secretly coming to a neighborhood near you, is designed to blur the definition of criminal and terrorist. Bye, Bye, See ya.

As I mentioned above, this is not the first attempt at “controlling” the electorate through enforced secrecy. The Espionage Act of 1917 and its amendment, The Sedition Act of 1918 were the modern forerunners of Patriot Acts I & II. From Wikepedia:

The Sedition Act forbade an American to use "disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language" about the United States government, flag, or armed forces. The act also allowed the Postmaster General to deny mail delivery to dissenters. The Espionage Act made it a crime to help wartime enemies of the United States, but the Sedition Act made it a crime to express an opinion that contradicted that of the government. Socialist Eugene V. Debs was sentenced to 10 years in prison under this law. Both the Espionage Act and the Sedition Act were repealed in 1921.

We heard former Attorney General John Ashcroft utter similar phrases, as had Ari Fleischer, et al in this administration, toward those critical of its policies, always implying treason and sedition on the part of those in protest. And, of course we were reminded of the 1970’s this week, as John Podesta in these trenchant remarks at Princeton University in 2004 said,

The Pentagon Papers case of 1970, the Watergate hearings of 1973 and the Church Committee of 1975 exposed how secrecy could be used – not to protect national security – but to avoid responsibility, conceal illegalities and accumulate power. The result was a legacy of failed policies, wasted tax dollars and a sharp decline in the public trust.

Currently the Bush Administration is engaged - domestically, in terms of legislation and law enforcement, politically, in terms of obfuscation and propaganda, and militarily, in terms of global hegemony – in an extremely well orchestrated campaign of oligarchic secrecy that is as diabolical as it is fatuous. These are very dangerously stupid people leading us into oblivion. Let us not go gentle into that good night.   There are, of course, many writers out there intiating courses of action and outlining with skill and aplomb many of the issues mentioned here.  Not the least of these are: Arthur Silber, John McGowan (at Berube), and the stalwart Crooks and Liars.  Lies, conspiracies, secrecy, oligarchy, hegemony, and sedition.  And they give us shit about Howard Dean.  The truth for this administration evidently is like sunlight to a vampire.

Slippery Bush Grabs Rigid Cox for Hot SEC’s Position

"We have a world of pleasures to win, and nothing to lose but boredom.......You want to fuck around with us? Not for long."

-Raoul Vaneigem

Scores killed in Baghdad, intensity of attacks up

Iraq, Military, 6/3/2005

The wave of attacks and explosions continued in various parts of Iraq in the few past hours especially in the capital Baghdad and the cities situated to its north, thereby the flow of the Iraqi bloodshed continued, as some 800 Iraqis have been killed since the announcement of the government of Ibrahim al-Jaafari by the beginning of April.

The series of explosions and attacks by machine guns since Thursday morning resulted in killing at least 45 Iraqis and more than 70 were injured.

The most recent of these attacks resulted in killing five Iraqis including one policeman in the explosion of two booby trapped car before a cafe in Musil to the north of Iraq yesterday afternoon. Police sources said the twin explosion also resulted in wounding 13 persons. Witnesses said that the cafe is very often visited by members of the Iraqi security.

In an attack in Baghdad, news reports quoted police sources as saying that nine Iraqi civilians were killed by the fire of gunmen from speedy cars at a crowded market in al-Hurrieh area to the north west of the capital.

Some 12 Iraqis were killed and other 40 injured in a booby trapped car explosion before a restaurant in the downtown of Touz Kharmato city to the north of Baghdad on Thursday morning. Iraqi police sources said that the car targeted a procession carrying the guards of Rose Nouri Shawis, the Iraqi deputy prime minister. But Shawis was not in the procession. The attack was claimed by Ansar al-Sunnah army supporters in a statement issued on the Internet. -

On the issue of Iraq, Cheney told [Larry] King that he believes the insurgency there is "in the last throes." He also predicted the fighting would end before the Bush administration leaves office.

He’s talking about the fighting between progressive and moderate Democrats.

Eighteen Die in Relentless Iraqi Violence 

BAGHDAD (AFP) - Eighteen Iraqis including a Shiite cleric died in the country's latest round of unchecked violence as security forces pressed on with an operation to root out insurgents in the capital, Baghdad, sources said.

Five people, including a child and two Iraqi soldiers, were killed in several attacks north of the capital early Friday, security forces said.

In Samarra, insurgents took on a police rapid reaction force in a firefight that killed the child and one other person, while 10 Iraqis were killed and 12 wounded late Thursday in an attack north of Baghdad, the US military said.

"There was a suicide car bombing outside a home near Balad late Thursday. Ten Iraqis were killed and 12 wounded," said Major Wes Hayes.

An Iraqi translator working for the US military was also gunned down near Balad on Friday, police said.

In southern Iraq, gunmen killed Shiite cleric Ali Abdel Hussein in Basra overnight, his son said.

-"First, the insurgents tried to drive out the coalition from Iraq, but we're still there," [General] Myers said. "Next, they focused on Iraqi security forces, but (Iraqis) continue to sign up in record numbers. And then they attempted to intimidate the Iraqi people, but they went to the polls and voted for a representative government."

Even more amazing, he “said” this while Rumsfeld, in a tribute to Señor Wences, drank a glass of water

Suicide attacks soaring in Iraq Frequency of such bombings is unprecedented anywhere

BAGHDAD, Iraq -- Suicide bombings have become the Iraqi insurgency's weapon of choice, with a staggering 90 attacks accounting for most of last month's 750 deaths at the militants' hands, according to tallies by the U.S. military and news agencies.

Suicide attacks outpaced car bombings almost 2-to-1 in May, according to those tallies. In April, there were 69 suicide attacks -- more than in the entire year preceding the June 28, 2004, hand-over of sovereignty.

A suicide car bomber attacked the main checkpoint to Baghdad's international airport yesterday, wounding 15 Iraqis, the U.S. military said. The car bomb exploded by a security checkpoint where Iraqi workers were waiting in long lines in their vehicles to enter the sprawling airport grounds.

Hussein Muhsen, an aircraft engineer with Iraqi Airways, described a loud blast followed by a mountain of dust rising in the air. Blood and human limbs splattered down on the hoods and roofs of the cars, Muhsen said.

U.S. forces said insurgents opened fire after the attack. Witnesses said U.S. troops also fired. The airport road has been one of the most frequent scenes of insurgent attacks.

The frequency of Iraq's suicide bombings is unprecedented, exceeding the practice through years of the Palestinian uprising against Israel and other militant insurgencies, such as the Chechen rebellion in Russia. Baghdad alone saw five suicide bombings in a six-hour span Sunday.

How Not to Count in Iraq

"NPR: I want to start, Mr. Secretary, with something you said recently. You were at a meeting with troops, taking questions from troops. You talked about measuring progress in Iraq. Metrics as you called them, that were important to you. And you said what you measure improves. How are some ways that you are measuring progress in defeating insurgents in Iraq?

"RUMSFELD: Well, we've got literally dozens of ways we do it. We have a room here, the Iraq Room where we track a whole series of metrics. Some of them are inputs and some of them are outputs, results, and obviously the inputs are easier to do and less important, and the outputs are vastly more important and more difficult to do.

Inputs and Outputs are difficult. You know what’s easy; Pull Outs.

And, speaking of Donald Rumsfeld’s propinquity to obtuseness and prolific prevarication, check out the Mother Jones article here.

The News Blog featured Steve Gilliard at his best, nailing the dissemblers to the wall.

Matt [Yglesias],

Here's the problem. You and your Harvard classmates feel free to pontificate on Iraq from desks at think tanks, not the mess in Balad or Tikrit. Anyone who supports this war and will not fight in it, no matter how they defend it, is going to be regarded as less than seriously by the vast majority of Americans.

Not only were you wrong about the war, and people like Kos and me dead right, you continued to be wrong for over a year. The combat never ended, the government never worked, WMD never found. Yet, it took some of you well into 2004 to admit this whole colonial war was a horrible fiasco.

So why should anyone care about your opinions? I mean if you can't see a fiasco in fromt of your faces, how can you be trusted on anything else?

It's not really a divisive debate. It's a debate between the collabortionist wing of the Democrats and those who realize Bush's war is a folly and should end on our terms before it ends on the Iraqi terms. None of your friends are going to fight in Iraq, so why should the kids from Wal-Mart?

It is time to end this war. End it, withdraw and let the Iraqis solve their own problems. We can only do ill in Iraq, not good. No matter how many schools we build, hospitals we restore, we will be hated as all invaders are hated until we leave. We have brought death and misery to Iraq and there is no hope of it ending until we leave. As long as we stay in Iraq, Iraqis will seek to kill and maim us.

We can kick around various plans, but at the end, the only solution is to leave, the question is how, orderly or in a fighting retreat to Kuwait.

Now that’s a bitch slap.

Steve elucidated the most salient aspect of this illegal, immoral, and hypocritically waged military invasion/occupation called, with Pythonesque irony, Operation Iraqi Freedom; The House approved a bipartisan bill, 296 to 133, and the Senate voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq. Everyone who voted FOR that authorization, or who wrote in favor of going to war, either has to get their ass over there now or forever shut the fuck up; especially those who now concede that they were wrong. YOU are complicit in the death of 12,000 Iraqis and 1,666 American troops. Get the U.S. and coalition troops OUT NOW! After the civil war, humanitarians world wide will be more than willing to assist in rebuilding that tortured, ancient land and offer help to its citizens.

“…although the liberal state professes to protect and value the rights of man, in reality it only protects the rights of citizen-members. The rights of man… are an ideal that was never enforced or properly put into law. If they existed, they would be afforded to everyone without conditions by virtue of membership of the human race. The rights of citizens, on the contrary, are exclusive and conditional since they only apply to those who belong to a nation-state by virtue of legal membership. In the liberal democratic state, the rights of man are the foundation of all other rights, exemplified by the French Declaration of the Universal Rights of Men and Citizens and the American Bill of Rights.” -Hannah Arendt

Two respected human rights groups say there is prima facie evidence against Donald Rumsfeld and George W. Bush for war crimes and torture -- and they're asking foreign governments to do something about it. (read)

Both Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International USA say there is "prima facie" evidence against Rumsfeld for war crimes and torture. And Amnesty International USA says there is also "prima facie" evidence against Bush for war crimes and torture. (According to Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary, "prima facie evidence" is "evidence sufficient to establish a fact or to raise a presumption of fact unless rebutted.")

Of course, then there’s the DOWNING STREET MEMO:

AND

http://www.bigbrassblog.com/bba.html

Beyond the Memo

I know I am the proverbial fallen tree in the forest, but I intend to keep on talking to the other trees, although their silence is often deafening. Yesterday I wrote about the DOD press conference in which a room full of complacent and complicit idiots failed to mention, ask about, demand answers to the Downing Street Memo. Of course, all that was reported upon from that press conference was (also referenced with links in yesterday’s post) Rummy’s castigation of Amnesty International and his overt warning to Iran and Syria about harboring or medically assisting Zarqawi.

Let us first address Rummy and Bush’s coordinated opprobrium of Amnesty International, a Nobel Peace Prize winning organization used to justify the illegal war on Iraq by a U.S. led coalition, i.e.

On three separate occasions in 2003, Rumsfeld cited reports by Amnesty International as justification for the US-led invasion of Iraq. In the statements, the top Pentagon official noted Amnesty International reports about repression in Iraq under Saddam Hussein and the former Iraqi leader’s use of chemical weapons against Kurds in the Northern region of the Middle East nation. (See article here),

but now label them as “absurd” and “reprehensible”. I’ll offer this excerpt from an excellent piece by Ehsan Ahrari that I hope will be read in its entirety:

G K Chesterton wrote, "America is the only nation in the world that is founded on a creed. That creed is set forth with dogmatic and even theological lucidity in the Declaration of Independence ..." Eminent American sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset, expounding on Chesterton's preceding statement, observed, "Being an American ... is an ideological commitment. It is not a matter of birth. Those who reject American values are un-American." Such a concept is so unique that all believers in these values can lay certain claim to being Americans. The US - or America, as it is affectionately or even somewhat conceitedly called - has always stood for freedom, human dignity and the rule of law. and The US has to acknowledge the unfortunate transformation of its detention system (Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo) into virtual gulags and apologize for the behavior of American guards, who behaved anything but as interrogators of a democracy. Finally, it will have to allow the international community to see how those detainees and prisoners are treated. If the shoe were on the other foot, the Bush administration would not have accepted anything less.

Yesterday, I also wrote about going beyond the mere solidarity of posting links to and supporting AfterDowningStreet.org and U.S. Rep. John Conyers, and doing some actual legwork, i.e. get on the phone to respective senators and congressional representative, as well as to the mainstream press via local newspapers, national reporters, etc. to let them know that this issue is not going away. I am happy to see that Shakespeare’s Sister responded to my post (to her post) that Daily Kos by way of diarist smintheus, is also organizing an überblog, and that both SS and DK are listing the emails and telephone numbers of mainstream media, et al, to contact. This is a must if all of this work is to gain traction. And, look who’s jumping onboard: (for those too lazy to link & read, it’s Kerry):

"When I go back (to Washington) on Monday, I am going to raise the issue" he said of the memo, which has not been disputed by either the British or American governments. "I think it’s a stunning, unbelievably simple and understandable statement of the truth and a profoundly important document that raises stunning issues here at home. And it’s amazing to me the way it escaped major media discussion. It’s not being missed on the Internet, I can tell you that."

Well isn’t that special.

However, it is not just the Downing Street Memo that is the issue. It is the ongoing slaughter, civil war, human rights abuses (as in TORTURE/RENDITION) and human loss of dignity and hope that is being perpetrated daily, hourly, endlessly in Iraq. This story and this story and this story and this story and this story and this story illustrate the horror that continues as a result of the implications of the Downing Street Memo. This imperialist war was waged illegally, and its continuation is an abomination upon mankind in general and the U.S. in particular.

A few words on the Deep Throat revelation. First, why would anyone, unless it is purely as fodder for The Daily Show, interview Charles Colson, G. Gordon Liddy, or Pat Buchanan for a moral response on Mark Felt’s actions. What the fucking shit? My thoughts were expressed in a response to an article by Paul Krassner in yesterday’s HP:

When I was a teenager I worked, over the summer, in Chappaqua, N.Y. for my best friend’s mother and her “benefactor”, a retired Volkswagen dealer whose initials were E.E.E., and who was a rabid Nixon hater, for many reasons, not the least of which had to do with his ex-wife of many years past who had moved to California, met and fell in love with a lawyer who worked in the service of then representative Nixon, or as E. called him, “the incorrigible card cheat,”, and who, E. that is, was a compendium of Watergate minutiae. Several years ago I wrote a short story based on this very colorful character that began:

All during breakfast, while Arthur lectured from behind his newspaper, Michael, except for a brief fascination with the emerging Rauschenberg-like pattern of puissant yellow yoke bleeding into the black and white design of his plate, was silently, in his imaginary viewfinder, framing Arthur’s hands: the odd discoloration of those gnarled fingernails, chicken yellow, protruding from the ends of crooked little fingers like lucent, amber globs of hardened mucilage.

Arthur continued his endless discourse on “the legacy of unconscionable ethical vacuity” Mr. Nixon had created in his gubernatorial campaign in California against Mrs. Kahagen. It was the summer of the Watergate Hearings, and Arthur Ellis watched the televised proceedings day by day, hanging on every word of testimony like a tainted juror.

In the evenings, I would be invited out on the veranda of E.’s French provincial house that had a spectacular view of green hills and valleys, while he and my best friend’s mom would sip cocktails and discuss the various elements of the day’s proceedings, pedantically directing their remarks to me and my iced tea. What is most salient about the Deep Throat revelation, as [Mr. Krassner] so aptly pointed out, was that it was a time of enormous consequences for everyone concerned and for the United States, who’s Constitution was in jeopardy of being subverted, if not abrogated. Everyone should, at a minimum, visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate for a primer on this important and prescient period of American history.

What the H-E-Double Hockey Sticks…?

What the hell is going on?

Another DOD news conference today with Lying Bastard Rumsfeld, doing his standup comic routine (and the press corps complicit like a room full of hyenas), with the obsequious Mendacious Myers at his side…SILENCE from everyone in the room regarding the Downing Street Memo…Most of the propaganda took the form of stating how successfully the Iraqi campaign is going…Although this report, and this report, et al, tend to disagree… Of course, there was the outrage over and chastising of Amnesty International’s “gulag” attribution. I’ll let AI speak for itself:

May 31, 2005

Statement of William F. Schulz, Executive Director of Amnesty International USA, In Response to President Bush (Washington, DC) –

Today Dr. William F. Schulz, Executive Director of Amnesty International USA, released the following statement in response to President Bush: "What is 'absurd' is President Bush's attempt to deny the deliberate policies of his Administration, which has detained individuals without charge or trial in prisons at Guantanamo Bay, Bagram Air Base and other locations. What is 'absurd' and indeed outrageous is the Bush Administration's failure to undertake a full independent investigation, and that completed reports into human rights violations in these prisons remain classified and unseen.The network of secret detention centers operated by the US around the world must be opened to scrutiny by independent human rights groups and those responsible for torture, no matter how senior, must be held accountable. It is also worth noting that this administration never finds it 'absurd' when we criticize Cuba, China, or when we condemned the violations in Iraq under Saddam Hussein."

Also, there seems to be a mixed message being sent by Bush regarding North Korea. Maybe he’s just fucking with their heads (and ours). Read here, and here.

And, for the best damn perspective on Iraq…here is the entire post from Baghdad Burning that says it all:

Monday, May 30, 2005

Oops... Oh my.

Remember Muhsin Abdul Hameed? He’s the head of the Iraqi Islamic Party in Iraq- a Sunni political party that was basically the only blatantly Sunni party taking part in post-occupation politics in Iraq. For those who have forgotten, Abdul Hameed was chosen as one of the rotating presidents back in 2003. Mohsin was actually, er, Mr. February 2004, if you will. The last couple of days, we’ve been hearing about raids and detentions in various areas. One of these areas is Amriya. We’ve been hearing about random detentions of ‘suspects’ who may be any male between the ages 15 – 65 and looting by Iraqi forces of houses. It’s like the first months after the occupation when the American forces were conducting raids. We woke up this morning to the interesting news that Muhsin Abdul Hameed had also been detained! A member of the former Iraqi Governing Council, a rotating puppet president, and *The Sunni*. He is The Sunni they hold up to all Sunnis as an example of cooperation and collaboration. Well, he’s the religious Sunni. There is a tribal Sunni (supposedly to appease the Arab Sunni tribes) and that is Ghazi Al Yawir and there is the religious Sunni- Muhsin Abdul Hameed. The Americans are saying Muhsin was “detained and interviewed”, which makes one think his car was gently pulled over and he was asked a few questions. What actually happened was that his house was raided early morning, doors broken down, windows shattered and he and his three sons had bags placed over their heads and were dragged away. They showed the house, and his wife, today on Arabiya and the house was a disaster. The cabinets were broken, tables overturned, books and papers scattered, etc. An outraged Muhsin was on tv a few minutes ago talking about how the troops pushed him to the floor and how he had an American boot on his neck for twenty minutes. Talabani was seemingly irritated. He wondered why no one asked him about the arrest before it occurred- as if the he is personally consulted on every other raid and detention. The detention is disturbing. Now I am not personally fond of Muhsin Abdul Hameed- he looks somewhat like a dried potato, and he’s a Puppet. It is disturbing, though, because if this was really a mistake, then just imagine how many other ‘mistakes’ are being unfairly detained and possibly tortured in places like Abu Ghraib. Abdul Hameed is one of their own and even he wasn’t safe from a raid, humiliation and detention. He was out the same day, but other Iraqis don’t have the luxury of a huffy Talabani and outraged political party. Was it meant to send a message to Sunnis? That’s what some people are saying. Many people believe it was meant to tell Sunnis, “None of you are safe- even the ones who work with us.” It’s just difficult to believe this is one big misunderstanding or mistake. On the other hand, watching the situation unfold was somewhat like watching one of those annoying reality tv shows where they take someone off of a farm, for example, and put them in New York and then watch how they cope- what was it called? “Faking It”? How will Muhsin feel about raids and detentions now that he’s been on the other side of them?

- posted by river @ 11:37 PM

The Deep Throat story should provide inspiration to anyone who takes the time to revisit recent U.S. history. Then, as now, the complete subversion of the United States Constitution was at hand. Were it not for the dedication of a few individuals, the eventual illumination of the truth would not have happened. The Big Brass Alliance needs to get on the phone to respective senators and congressional representative, as well as to the mainstream press via local newspapers, national reporters, etc. to let them know that Rep. John Conyers is not spitting in the wind.

"All truth passes through three stages..."

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

-Schopenhauer

After just wasting nearly an hour listening to Bush bunt back the softballs that were tossed ever so gently his way, at the press conference in the Rose Garden, I am once again apoplectic. I am also incredulous, since what was not mentioned this day after Memorial Day, i.e. 5 more American military were killed today in Iraq, along with over 40 Iraqis, was that which remains the most salient and the most silent. I just checked the NYT’s, the WaPo, LA Times, et al, and had a very difficult time finding any mention of today’s news in Iraq. Here, here, here, and here are some examples of what should be in the headlines of U.S. newspapers and on CNN, etc. This silence constitutes COMPLICITY in the crimes of this illegal war. To show solidarity with those, who through the efforts of Shakespeare’s Sister, et al, who are NOT SILENT, I copy/past/link to the following:

Editorial: Memorial Day/Praise bravery, seek forgiveness, By the Minneapolis Star-Tribune http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=12 Smoking Bullet in the Smoking Gun? http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=11 Bloggers Support Call for Resolution of Inquiry http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=10 A plea from Military Families Against the War in Britain to friends in America http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=9 $1000 Reward for Getting Bush to Answer Question http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=8 ON THE RADIO http://www.thomhartmann.com Catch John Bonifaz and David Swanson on the Thom Hartmann Show, May 30, 1 p.m. ET. http://www.kiro710.com/show_details.jsp?iShowId=48635 Catch David Swanson on the Erin Hart Show, 710 KIRO in Seattle, May 30, 12:10 p.m. PT. http://1360klsd.com/jon_elliott.html Catch Bonifaz on the Jon Elliott Show on KLSD San Diego, June 5, 1:30 PT. http://www.kgoam810.com/complexshowdj.asp?DJID=3284 Catch Bonifaz on the Bernie Ward Show, KGO Radio San Francisco, June 6, 10 p.m. PT. http://www.lizzbrown.com/ Catch Bonifaz on the Liz Brown Show, June 7, 8 a.m. CT. DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT Write your Representative Now! http://www.democrats.com/peoplesemailnetwork/39 Sign Rep. Conyers' Letter to Bush http://www.johnconyers.campaignoffice.com/index.asp?Type=SUPERFORMS&SEC={0F1B03E0-080B-4100-B143-36A5985EF1E3} Contact Your Local Media http://capwiz.com/pdamerica/issues/alert/?alertid=7656046&type=ME Email Everyone You Know http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=2&page=1 Print, Copy, Hand Out Flyers http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=Downloads&file=index&req=viewdownload&cid=2

WHO WE ARE

www.AfterDowningStreet.org Is a Coalition of veterans' groups, peace groups, and political activist groups, which launched on May 26, 2005, a campaign to urge the U.S. Congress to begin a formal investigation into whether President Bush has committed impeachable offenses in connection with the Iraq war. http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=4

I also borrow this reference to a great poet (via The Light of Reason); Czeslaw Milosz’s

Song on the End of the World

On the day the world ends/ A bee circles a clover, /A Fisherman mends a glimmering net. /Happy porpoises jump in the sea, /By the rainspout young sparrows are playing /And the snake is gold-skinned as it it should always be./ On the day the world ends /Women walk through fields under their umbrellas /A drunkard grows sleepy at the edge of a lawn, /Vegetable peddlers shout in the street And a yellow-sailed boat comes nearer the island, /The voice of a violin lasts in the air /And leads into a starry night. And those who expected lightning and thunder/ Are disappointed. And those who expected signs and archangels' trumps/ Do not believe it is happening now./ As long as the sun and the moon are above, /As long as the bumblebee visits a rose /As long as rosy infants are born /No one believes it is happening now. /Only a white-haired old man, who would be a prophet, /Yet is not a prophet, for he's much too busy,/ Repeats while he binds his tomatoes:/ No other end of the world there will be,/ No other end of the world there will be.

And, because it is so important, here is a little redundancy:

1. After Downing Street is a Coalition of veterans' groups, peace groups, and political activist groups, which launched on May 26, 2005, a campaign to urge the U.S. Congress to begin a formal investigation into whether President Bush has committed impeachable offenses in connection with the Iraq war. The campaign focuses on evidence that recently emerged in a British memo containing minutes of a secret July 2002 meeting with British Prime Minister Tony Blair and his top national security officials.

2. The name is a reference to the Downing Street Memo, a British memo recently made public in the London Times, which contained the minutes of a secret July 2002 meeting between British Prime Minister Tony Blair and his top national security officials.

3. After Downing Street reports: In response to the release of the memo, “John Bonifaz, a Boston attorney specializing in constitutional litigation, sent a memo to Congressman John Conyers of Michigan, the Ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, urging him to introduce a Resolution of Inquiry directing the House Judiciary Committee to launch a formal investigation into whether sufficient grounds exist for the House to impeach President Bush. Bonifaz's memo, made available today at www.AfterDowningStreet.org, begins: ‘The recent release of the Downing Street Memo provides new and compelling evidence that the President of the United States has been actively engaged in a conspiracy to deceive and mislead the United States Congress and the American people about the basis for going to war against Iraq. If true, such conduct constitutes a High Crime under Article II, Section 4 of the United States Constitution.’"

4. Congressman Conyers is now seeking 100,000 signatures to sign a letter on the Downing Street Inquiry. Information available at Raw Story and dKos.

5. Sign the letter here. Write to your Congress people here.

We'll return here shortly with some thoughts on the current campaign of obfuscation by Cheney and other stories replete with errata, of which we shall expose.

Note: apologies for leaving some of the web addresses without links (although you can cut & paste).  Go here to get all of the pertitnent direct links.

Mr. Malaprop

Given the insipid and disjunctive logic of any given Thomas Friedman article, his op-ed pieces are an easy target for anyone with average high school reading and writing skills. However, Mr. Friedman is such a media star, and he is so adored by the average NYT’s reader, Charlie Rose audience, et al, that he needs to be called out on his misinformed and miscalculated (not to mention malapropos and mixed-metaphorical) bullshit on a regular basis. This article by Baghdad Burning should be required reading. Excerpted here:

Friedman says,

"If the Arab world, its media and its spiritual leaders, came out and forcefully and repeatedly condemned those who mount these suicide attacks, and if credible Sunnis are given their fair share in the Iraqi government, I am certain a lot of this suicide bombing would stop"

The Arab world's spiritual and media leaders have their hands tied right now. Friedman better hope Islamic spiritual leaders don't get involved in this mess because the first thing they'd have to do is remind the Islamic world that according to the Quran, the Islamic world may not be under the guardianship or command of non-Muslims- and that wouldn't reflect nicely on an American occupation of Iraq. Friedman wonders why thousands upon thousands protested against the desecration of the Quran and why they do not demonstrate against terrorism in Iraq. The civilian bombings in Iraq are being done by certain extremists, fanatics or militias. What happened in Guantanamo with the Quran and what happens in places like Abu Ghraib is being done systematically by an army- an army that is fighting a war- a war being funded by the American people. That is what makes it outrageous to the Muslim world. In other words, what happens in Iraq is terrorism, while what happens to Iraqis and Afghanis and people of other nationalities under American or British custody is simply "counter-insurgency" and "policy". It makes me nauseous to think of how outraged the whole world was when those American POW were shown on Iraqi television at the beginning of the war- clean, safe and respectfully spoken to. Even we were upset with the incident and wondered why they had to be paraded in front of the world like that. We actually had the decency to feel sorry for them. Friedman focuses on the Sunni Arab world in his article but he fails to mention that the biggest demonstrations were not in the Arab world- they happened in places like Pakistan and Afghanistan. He also fails to mention that in Iraq, the largest demonstration against the desecration of the Quran was actually organized, and attended by, Shia. Luckily for Iraqis, and in spite of Thomas Friedman, the majority of Sunnis and Shia just want to live in peace as Muslims- not as Sunnis and Shia.

“Operation Lightning”, frightening in its implications, sounds like something that could be implemented here in the U.S. very soon if things keep going as they are. Wake up kids; the spawns of the Patriot Act already being hatched in secret congressional committees and the already abused REAL ID ACT require ACTIVISM to defeat.

It Is a Wretched Subterfuge

Over the past week, I have found myself in a creative state of apoplexy caused by staring into the abyss of our government’s rapid and irrevocable decline into oligarchy and subterfuge. I say rapid because the fronts of the attacks that are happening simultaneously have increased exponentially since the beginning of this new administration and with alarming alacrity. Unfortunately, despite valiant efforts by writers on our side (a very broad aggregation of progressives, liberals, libertarians, and all manner of reasonable observers, i.e. the dispossessed) (see Thinkers on this site, et al), the diurnal battles, of which I shall delineate momentarily, are diversions from the utopian agenda of world domination that has been in planning, and now in execution, for over a quarter of a century (remember who was Vice President under Reagan's Administrations) by those whom we now call neo-cons, an innocuous sounding assignation for abject evil. Yesterday's speech by President Bush (at the United States Naval Academy Commencement) woke me out of my stupor. Before I outline the details of how we got to this perilous point in history, let’s take a look at the symptomatic diversions that simultaneously illustrate and obfuscate the endemic.

My previous post (see Fourberie, Hypocrisy, Bullshit, & Sedition within) dealt with the Newsweek debacle and the concomitant actual and documented evidence of Gitmo abuses and offenses (against the Qur’an and otherwise) as a means of diverting attention from such news as the Downing Street Memo and the embarrassing (for the U.S. Govt.) issue of Louis Posada Carriles. Unfortunately, most of the media’s attention, when not obsequiously mired in Jocko, Paris, Idol worship, DeLay’s daily detritus (his maze of illusive culpability is worthy of Daedalus), runaway brides, and other marginalia, has been on the pathetic arm wrestling of the Senate majority and minority culminating in an embarrassing and ineffectual deal, i.e. compromise, of shit-scared, sad old men who now see the Republic sinking. Meanwhile, the Pentagon keeps contradicting itself daily on how often the Qur’an was “mishandled” or if the Qur’an was mishandled, creating a pile of crap so high of which no reasonable citizen can any longer bear to witness. After all, the 9/11 Commission Hearings proved that the more boldfaced the lie, the more likely it is that the lie is to be laughed into obscurity. No one, absolutely no one from this administration has ever been found culpable of anything. As we have seen, the incompetent and criminally responsible individuals for 9/11 and its repercussions have either been bestowed promotions or official encomiums. The shell game, thus far, has been flawless.

Alterman sums up the current state of affairs in this portentous piece. And Mr. Silber has been bringing these issues to light daily. Through censorship (ostensible and actual), secrecy, obfuscation, fear mongering, subterfuge (legislative), power consolidation, instigation (the political tool of outrageous statements meant to fluster the opposition’s composure), and the persistent, profligate, and efficacious apparatus of prevarication the Administration’s stranglehold on the ruling Republican party and the Government at large is currently indomitable. Our individual liberties are being abrogated in secret committees, while the consolidation of power in the agencies of government, i.e. the FBI, the Dept. of Homeland Security, et al, as the new and improved version of the insidious Patriot Act is surreptitiously implemented, becomes the law of the land. It may be true that we can not suppress this omnipotent force until we win back some power in the 2006 elections. However, this does not mean that we should not organize, resist, shed light upon, and persist against the current Administration’s machinations.

Irrefutably, if the incredible set of astronomically implausible coincidences and mistakes that enabled the tragic attacks of September 11th, 2001 had not occurred, the Bush Presidency, the one that everyone knows was a Supreme Court hijacking of the country, would have been a one note samba of idiocy and, perhaps, the most unpopular administration in U. S. history. After all, Bush’s approval rating in August of 2001, after a steady monthly decline, was at 47% and dropping. He was on a seemingly endless vacation, perhaps in preparation for the imminent metamorphosis from blathering idiot to “Bring ‘em on, smoke ‘em out” King George. This snippet is from Literal Politics in August of 2001:

July 30-August 5

The Absentee President: Dubya leaves for a month long vacation at his Crawford ranch this week. I say, good riddance!! Take the next 3.5 years off!! Never mind that this is the longest vacation taken by any President since Richard Nixon. Never mind that the average American gets 2 weeks a year, and you already took 14 weekends at Camp David and that nice trip to Kennebunkport. Never mind that Dubya will have spent 42% of his residency on vacation thus far. Really, we forgive your lackadaisical approach to government, especially if you just stay home. (Read here, here, and here for a nostalgic trip and very familiar themes, such as Social Security privatization schemes and stem cell research stifling, in those few innocent months before 9/11.)

I am not about to espouse conspiracy theories. However, even a cursory reading by a high school student of the litany of events immediately prior to, during, and after the hijacking and subsequent crashing of airplanes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the crash of Flight 175, and also including the peripheral facts of the August 6th, 2001 presidential daily briefing, the Chicago airline stock trades, and endless pieces that all came together with zero forensic evidence ever remaining, should raise more than a bit of incredulity. It is now time to look at all of these facts, demand plausible answers, and scrutinize again and again (it is almost 4 years after all) every detail, and to force these issues into the mainstream. Right now, while the Republicans are showing stress fractures, the Religious Right (check this out and be very afraid) is starting to really piss people off, the Doctor Noe conspiracy in Ohio devolves into the fact that Act Two is also a fraud, the impotent Democrats are at least stalling for time, and scores of intelligent writers are watching the Fort, we need to reopen a relentless examination of the disaster that befell the citizenry, and continues to be afflicted upon the Republic, on 9/11/01. Immediately afterwards, the dynamic was in place for a nonresistant Congressional approval of the phantom War on Terror, the Patriot Act, and the consolidation of governmental powers and secrecy. Four years later, and “9/11” is peppered in every speech that Bush gives, every impromptu sound byte, along with the ubiquitous phrase “war on terror” (which was used no less than a dozen times in his bellicose commencement speech yesterday), to keep fear alive, and to perpetually rally the citizenry into a war mode even though the enemy is a phantom idea. I believe that this idea has also shown recent signs of vulnerability. Terrorism has been around for a long time, and will always be the last refuge of the desperate and the first option of the powerless religious or politically fanatical.

This rather lengthy piece discusses the origins, history, and evolution of terrorism. It certainly illustrates the folly of declaring a war upon a method as opposed to a government, country, dictatorship, etc.

The word 'terrorism' entered into European languages in the wake of the French revolution of 1789. In the early revolutionary years, it was largely by violence that governments in Paris tried to impose their radical new order on a reluctant citizenry. As a result, the first meaning of the word 'terrorism', as recorded by the Académie Française in 1798, was 'system or rule of terror'. This serves as a healthy reminder that terror is often at its bloodiest when used by dictatorial governments against their own citizens.

This excerpt from a book length interview with Howard Zinn comes at the issue from a different perspective. Here Mr. Zinn responds to a NYT headline from 9/23/01 that states, “Forget the Past: It’s a War Unlike Any Other”:

They want us to act as if we were born yesterday. They want us to forget the history of our government. Because if you forget history, if you were born yesterday, then you'll believe anything.

Putting aside for a moment the egregious assault on our individual liberties here at home, let’s take a cursory look at the ongoing Bush agenda facilitated by the benefit of a PSTD-inflicted citizenry post 9/11:

• the war in Afghanistan (supposedly over, but really ongoing and going badly) • the war in Iraq (nothing but good news there)

• military threats against Syria (former clandestine ally), Iran (former clandestine ally), North Korea, et al (and I mean just about anyone who does not possess nuclear weapons) that could become conflagrations at any moment • contempt, disdain, and non-participation in disarmament treaties (see today’s Daily Kos)

• contempt for, disdain for, and non-participation in manifold international treaties regarding global warming, the non-development of offensive weaponry in space, and any other treaty that does not fit into the Bush agenda of global domination

• ignoring the desperately in need of humanitarian aid (see today’s America Blog) while propping up the warring religious fanatics of Iraq (as well as those Americans who helped dupe us into the Iraq disaster: see Gilliard)

• dubious, at best, relationships with China, Russia, Uzbekistan, Saudi Arabia, et al (this list is too long and complex to delineate)

Backing this agenda, along with an ultra-conservative, theocratic oligarchy are the Christian-Right Fundamentalists. Please check out this post at Light of Reason for a scary view into their vituperative attacks on the betrayers of the Republican cause within the ranks. This brings up the teetering-on-the-brink-of-Brave New World domestic agenda of Bush & Co. Let’s start with this totalitarian nightmare of total, irrevocable loss of individual identity, sovereignty, and privacy. The economic machinations of this administration involve a consolidation of financial power in the hands of a minority ruling class of corporate controllers and monetary backers, such as the aforementioned ultra-rich Evangelists, along with a corrupt and manipulated Fed (see Krugman).

The subject of the neo-cons’ decades of planning to get to this point is one that deserves more space than I am willing to devote here and now. However, along with the crime of 9/11, wherever the culpability lies, these facts must be brought into the daylight of mainstream media, and only the bloggers can accomplish this by relentlessly writing about the truth and exposing the facts, which must be separated from the propaganda; not an easy task. There are many signs, some subtle, some obvious, that the Republican majority is vulnerable right now. However, they are going to be in power for at least two more years, even if we do not bring the lies into the light of day immediately and continuously. For my part, I will now postulate, excogitate, edify, speculate, and expose daily rather than intermittently. This speech needs to be read in its entirety to understand the intrinsic philosophy of the neo-cons’ vision of the incipient decades. The likelihood of an attack on Iran is becoming increasingly apparent. Read (or re-read) this piece by Seymour Hersh. Or, check out this talk by scary monster Richard Perle. The deeper we dig into the facts, the more insidious and apocryphal the web of secrecy and power seems to be.

Of course, this is going to seem like pure paranoia, but let me know what you think. Is it possible a deal with the devil was struck between the Clintons and the Bush’s as to, “you give me this election, and we’ll give you 2008,”? I do not have a shred of evidence to make this suggestion, other than the strange bedfellows’ scenarios that have been extant as of late. Actually, after watching Margaret Carlson kick the evil Novak’s ass yesterday on Crossfire (where Bob called stem-cell research “junk science”), I’d sooner her or Barbara Boxer or Diane Feinstein over Hillary. (Hey, check this out for a coincidence, at Shakespeare’s Sister.) But I digress.

This week Amnesty International shined the light on the U.S. perpetration of human rights violations on a scale comparable to the gulags of the Stalinist era. This is not an issue of, as Bill O’Reilly says, trying to reason with unreasonable people. It is a matter of putting into action the sanctity of human rights that this country professes to support, and that is part of our philosophical underpinnings. More torture in Iraq is discussed in the Guardian and, again, at Daily Kos. The thread here is the blatant disregard for international treaties, agreements, and common decency. It is a disregard based on arrogance, knowledge of impenetrable power, and the designs of which are unimaginable by most of us.

Newspeak vs. Oldspeak

 

Fourberie, Hypocrisy, Bullshit, & Sedition. The White House, via its repository of imbecilic spin and propaganda, Scott McClellan, the State Department, and the Pentagon are attempting to abridge our Constitutional right of a free press through punitive censorship and hyperbole that would be laughable were it not for its seditiousness of intent, efficacy within the plebian media, and abject evil in nature. With another sleight-of-hand campaign of misdirection and prevarication, the Bushies are feigning indignity at the Newsweek recant (after a week of thumbscrews) regarding, among other abuses at Gitmo, desecration of the Qur’an. To be certain, the mainstream press is infested with bad journalists, poor editing, and all manner of extremism in various guises and posturing replete with political agendas. However, the Newsweek piece was vetted by the Pentagon for 11 days prior to publication. The Pentagon is waging an all-out propaganda narrative of, “we would never...” regarding any defamatory treatment of the Qur’an. There is ample evidence to the contrary, here, here, here, and here, among others, including a pending lawsuit against Donald Rumsfeld by lawyers representing former Gitmo detainees for just this extant charge. (Another good source on the matter is here.)

The obfuscation is pointedly necessary now to avert our eyes from these salient and unbelievably under-reported stories: Luis Posada Carriles and The Downing Street Memo. Let’s link & summarize just a bit.

First, Mr. Carriles:

Washington D.C. May 10, 2005 - Declassified CIA and FBI records posted today on the Web by the National Security Archive at George Washington University identify Cuban exile Luis Posada Carriles, who is apparently in Florida seeking asylum, as a former CIA agent and as one of the "engineer[s]" of the 1976 terrorist bombing of Cubana Airlines flight 455 that killed 73 passengers. Read and Read.

Downing Street Memo: C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun "spikes of activity" to put pressure on the regime. No decisions had been taken, but he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections.

The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.

The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorisation. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be difficult. The situation might of course change. The Prime Minister said that it would make a big difference politically and legally if Saddam refused to allow in the UN inspectors. Regime change and WMD were linked in the sense that it was the regime that was producing the WMD. There were different strategies for dealing with Libya and Iran. If the political context were right, people would support regime change.

The two key issues were whether the military plan worked and whether we had the political strategy to give the military plan the space to work.

Any 10 year old will tell you that people in power lie to consolidate their control over those who are not in power. This is a social dynamic that becomes apparent everywhere on a daily basis. So how is it that we have a room, i.e. The White House Briefing Room, filled with educated adults asking superficial questions to a man whose job it is to lie to them? What an insane spectacle. And yet, the story, the facts, the truth that we need desperately to be reported upon is reduced to a seesaw of talking points that never achieve, not are they suppose to, equilibrium. Listening to an obstreperous debate between two (or more) individuals whose sole motivation is the protection of special interests is not reportage; it is torture, I mean, non-euphoria. There are not two sides to every story; there is the story and then there are the two sides who try to defend their positions through propaganda. Even if one side is correct, shall we say, his or her defense of that position is tainted by prejudice, and, even in the court of opinion, needs to be adjudicated. So, while the U.S. has waged a war based upon documented lies in which 100,000 + Muslims, i.e. Iraqi’s, have died (not including our 1,600 American brethren), the Bush Administration would have us believe that Muslim’s around the globe are rioting and causing death and mayhem based solely on an article in a mediocre American periodical. Blaming the murderous actions of a mob half way around the globe on American journalism is insidious enough to make the whole story a virulent cancer that is eating itself. Secondly, the quandary of the U.S. Government in how to deal with the request for asylum by Louis Posada Corrales, an accused (and admitted) terrorist with ties to the C.I.A. and George Bush, Sr. is like a, “Holy shit, somebody light Tom DeLay on fire while we get this asshole out of the country.” kind of a conundrum. The poor journalistic standard of Newsweek is not a story (and, quite frankly I am surprised more riots are not incited by its manifestly stupid existence). Take any issue of the magazine since its inception and spend 20 minutes of copy editing, and you will find enough grammatical and factual errors to fuel a cocktail party, albeit a boring one. Go to the website and read the Q & A: How Stars Beat Their Addictions or Kuntzman: Hot Dogs Wanna feel like a celeb? Try taking your pooch for coffee at a café…After 5 minutes you’ll be outside gasping for air.

There are too many salient issues facing this country, stories that need to be reported with aggressiveness and accuracy and that need to be expounded upon in the media without fear of repercussions, threats, or smear campaigns from our own government. Of course there exist other forces of censorship, such as malignant economic, political, and religious influences both overt and subversive. The key aspect of Newspeak is to remove all shades of meaning from language.

In addition, words with opposite meanings were removed as redundant, so "bad" became "ungood". Words with similar meanings were also removed, so "great" became "plusgood". In this manner, as many words as possible were removed from the language. The ultimate aim of Newspeak was to reduce even the dichotomies to a single word that was a "yes" of some sort: an obedient word with which everyone answered affirmatively to what was asked of them.

The Bushies talk of the Clear Skies Initiative or No Child Left Behind or Regime Change, or extraordinary rendition and the Bushspeak is just a Carl Rove adaptation of Orwellian thought control. We leave you with these:

Freedom of the Press, if it means anything at all, means the freedom to criticize and oppose. - George Orwell

You see these dictators on their pedestals, surrounded by the bayonets of their soldiers and the truncheons of their police. Yet in their hearts there is unspoken - unspeakable! - fear. They are afraid of words and thoughts! Words spoken abroad, thoughts stirring at home, all the more powerful because they are forbidden. These terrify them. A little mouse - a little tiny mouse! - of thought appears in the room, and even the mightiest potentates are thrown into panic. Winston Churchill

Two quick links for fun: First, “Are you fucking kidding me?”and, if this doesn’t make you laugh you’re dead.

The Red Doors

From the 49th floor of a building in Chicago, I am facing east, sitting on the concave ledge of a tall window that offers a view of rooftop gardens, streets that look like rivers within the deep caverns of tall city blocks, the yellow cabs like fish following unseen currents, taller structures that require an upward tilt forward to see their stretching apogees, and an expanse of Lake Michigan that, at this early hour, is a sliver of teal above which is a pearl grey fog bank. On the horizon an orange freighter seems suspended in air, like the abstruse symbolism of a Magritte painting.

I am walking in a part of the city, a different city, not far from the university, any university, in any city, where the neighborhood of large old houses with giant elms shading their gables and gambrels along a lazy street intersects a brief enclave of shops and restaurants in a square of minor commerce and social gathering, and the only signs of life are the commingling scents from the small bistros on either side of the street and the just lit signs of the shops, saturated and sexy in the crepuscular light. The sun has not yet set but has dipped below the trees and buildings, and its orange light barely catches the top of the deciduous trees whose leaves have just begin to hint of autumn. Then, down a side street, I notice the amber fireball caught in black fenestration of a red brick building, and for minutes the windows hold the reflection like a glint in a night eye. Now above the buildings and trees, in a wine stained sky, pink cumulous clouds are moving silently in from the sea like assigned dreams.

Later, lost in circular thoughts, in a different part of the city, I glance down a narrow street as I cross. Suddenly, I am struck with a sense of place that is at once familiar, a path often traversed, and yet wrong, as though the whole perspective has changed. Then I see what is no longer there. At the end of this street, across the thoroughfare it intersects sits a large granite Baptist church. Always, as I have walked this route, I have glanced down this street to view the beautiful wooden, arched doors, Chinese red, shiny and unfathomable against the grey granite. The composition always caught that part of the imagination that is comforted by a red hulled fishing boat moored in the blank grey of a foggy harbor, or of a red neon sign piercing the darkness and reflected in streaks along a city street in the rain, or a red lacquered box that reveals itself in a dusty old shop filled with detritus and fading memorabilia in desuetude. The red doors are gone. They have been replaced with steel framed doors of smoked glass that placidly blend into the grey stone and offer a requisite entrance. Those wooden doors, firehouse red with black strap hinges, formed a solid arch, a lid on a mysterious box, which took the courage of the convicted to open. Hundreds of times I have walked this way and glanced at those doors, and always consciously or subconsciously I was comforted by their contrast and composition. Once, many years ago, a summer evening on my way home, I was walking past this church and those doors were open. From within the halls of that vast church came the voices of hundreds of young gospel singers in rhythmic harmony, hands clapping in unison and musical shades of bright red illuminating a night sky. Parked along the street were three grey busses along the sides of which were the words printed in red, The Boys Choir of Harlem. The music was transcendent. I stood on the sidewalk for a few minutes, and then walked on listening as the sounds gradually faded. I am looking at those new doors with an illogical resentment; some sense of loss to the inevitability of change. Where ever it is that memories and dreams reside, those red doors still shine as the music seeps into the night. 

The Second Coming

When I was growing up I was taught that there were two things never to be discussed in social situations; one was politics, the other religion. This admonition seemed to make sense to me until my teens, when intellectual curiosity and a proclivity toward antagonism overwhelmed any sense of rhetorical restraint. As the broken stained glass of my Catholicism crunched under my bare feet, shards impaling and scarring the permanent surface upon which I would stand irrevocably, I walked bloody into the dark alleys of metaphysics, transcendentalism, orientalism, existentialism, and countless other –isms and –ologies, dousing myself in the cool waters of Kierkegaard, breathing the opiate smoke of Krishnamurti, and playing cat’s cradle with the challenging approach to dialogue by Martin Buber’s, I and Thou, which I mistakenly understood to describe “holding your ground” as an excuse for the confrontation of individuals, even on those previously ascribed subjects of taboo. My first attempt at a dialectical explanation of metaphysica generalis was in response to my father’s question, “Why aren’t you going to church?” However, the denouement was less than satisfactory and resulted in things getting broken, irreparably.

This is not an extraordinary story. It is the most common of stories. It is the story of anyone who has ever asked a question or taken a journey. It is the story of Siddhartha and the story of Odysseus as well as Huckleberry Finn, the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, and, it could be argued, all of literature, science, and philosophical inquiry. Therefore, in classrooms and amongst individuals engaged in robust dialogue, the ideas intrinsic to religious and political doctrines, however diverse, have always provided the dynamic of responsible dialogue. Occasionally, when the polarities were too great to find common ground and emotions fueled the debate, irreconcilable differences led to, well, wars, crucifixions, the Crusades, Fatwas, and every prefix of –cide based on intolerance of others’ belief systems. Today, in the U.S., the individual polarities of politics and religiosity are scrambled and recombinant in such a way and to such an extreme that dialogue is meaningless. Strident, dogmatic doggerel is screamed into microphones by idiots propped up by mass media to the abasement of us all by the likes of Hannity & Colmes, Crossfire, Chris Matthews, the Sunday morning masquerade of meaningful talk shows, and, of course, by the opposing team leaders of propagandist extremism, Rush Limbaugh and Air America. This is not to say that if one has enough time to waste listening or watching this polyphonic posturing that one will not hear a statement or two with which one may agree (which means to which someone else will disagree). It is the complete absence of critical thinking and of measured and extrapolating debate in any popular media. The so-called news outlets are merely the evolutionary result of the 80’s talk shows, such as Donahue, Geraldo, Oprah (old style), Sally Jesse Raphael, Springer, et al, whereby the host or moderator takes part in the argument, no matter how vile a subject, not just as devil’s advocate, but as instigator.

Unfortunately, this makes the “news” organizations part of the culture, rather than objective reporters of such. There exists no impartial, scrupulous, and analytic reportage and certainly no balanced debate. With global socio-economic and geopolitical dynamics such as they are, i.e. rapidly changing, unstable, unpredictable, and all of the world’s organized religions in sectarian crises, such as the schisms in the Muslim faith between Wahabiism, particularly Al Takfir Wal Hijra, and the many more moderate sects, i.e. the Sunni and the Shi’a and the more obscure sects, such as the Sufis and the Ismailis. The Catholic Church, with all its Papal supremacy and ecumenical posturing, is actually also in crisis. Its congregation as well as its clergy is shrinking within modern nations; the Church’s orthodoxy in conflict with modernity itself. However, it is the insinuation of these world religions into geopolitical battles, both metaphorically and actually, that causes the concern. In the U.S. it is the Evangelical Christian (political) Right, having insinuated itself into all aspects of government and cultural matters, that threatens to cause a schism of mutual and irreparable intolerance between those that follow their rigid Biblical interpretations and admonitions and everyone else, from the wholly secular to those who follow other organized religions but abjure a commingling of religion and government. So entrenched in overt political influence is this Evangelical movement, a phenomenon that saw its realization in the 2000 elections, that a historical perspective on Evangelism and Protestantism in America is necessary to understand the potentiality of their numbers and conviction.

Obviously, the liberating effects of the American Revolution were manifest in how individuals saw themselves within a social structure. Questioning the centricity of authority was a dynamic that affected not only individuals, and not only the secular aspects of freedom, but also the authority of various church orthodoxies in favor of the religious culture of insurgent populist preachers. A succinct excerpt that captures this period is quoted below from Ian Frederick Finseth’s, Liquid Fire Within Me:

The fifty years following independence witnessed dramatic changes in the character of American society. As is the case with all periods of momentous social change, the early national period generated both optimism and unease. While the Revolution had succeeded in throwing off the British yoke, it by no means resolved the fledgling nation's infrastructural, political and racial problems. Rather, in the sudden absence of imperial control, Americans of all stations were confronted with the task of structuring and preserving a viable society in a time of great uncertainty and flux, when internal political discord, unstable international allegiances and the disorienting surge of capitalist enterprise shook the foundations of tradition and security that they had long relied upon. Particularly distressing was the realization that political union did not necessarily entail cultural harmony, and that conflicts between Americans could become vitriolic and even violent, as exampled by the hysterical party warfare of the 1790s, by such eruptions of economic discontent as Shay's Rebellion, by ethnic- and class-based urban disturbances, and by the seemingly insoluble dispute over slavery. In many ways, American society seemed to be growing more rather than less fragmented.

Indeed this should ring a chord of familiarity with today’s readers. Although the U.S. electorate is currently equally divided between the two major parties, i.e. Republican and Democratic, the regional and local differences are more predominately one or the other than at any time in the nation’s history. Bill Bishop, as staff writer for the Austin American-Statesman puts it this way:

The result is that voters on average are less likely today to live in a community that has an even mix of Republican and Democratic voters than at any time since World War II. They are less likely to live near someone with a different political point of view and are more likely to live in a political atmosphere either overwhelmingly Republican or Democratic.

Between the 1790’s and the 1840’s the metamorphoses in American economics, politics, and intellectual culture had a counterpoint in the transformation of American religion, particularly as a Protestant phenomenon. This phenomenon became known as the Second Great Awakening and resulted in a lessening of the central power of established churches and an increase in the power of local preachers and their congregations. In American Methodism a plan of multiple meeting places known as circuits was established, and the preachers to whom these circuits throughout the land were charged were called circuit riders. Peter Cartwright (1785-1872), in his eponymous Autobiography, described the life of the circuit rider:

A Methodist preacher, when he felt that God had called him to preach, instead of hunting up a college or Biblical Institute, hunted up a hardy pony, and some traveling apparatus, and with his library always at hand, namely, a Bible, Hymn book, and Discipline, he started, and with a text that never wore out nor grew stale, he cried, 'Behold, the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world.' In this way he went through storms of wind, hail, snow, and rain; climbed hills and mountains, traversed valleys, plunged through swamps, swollen streams, lay out all night, wet, weary, and hungry, held his horse by the bridle all night, or tied him to a limb, slept with his saddle blanket for a bed, his saddle-bags for a pillow. Often he slept in dirty cabins, ate roasting ears for bread, drank butter-milk for coffee; took deer or bear meat, or wild turkey, for breakfast, dinner, and supper. This was old-fashioned Methodist preacher fare and fortune.

He describes a typical revival:

They would ... erect a shed, sufficiently large to protect five thousand people from wind and rain, and cover it with boards or shingles; build a large stand, seat the shed, and here they would collect together from forty to fifty miles around, sometimes further than that. Ten, twenty, and sometimes thirty ministers, of different denominations, would come together and preach night and day, four or five days together; and, indeed, I have known these camp-meetings to last three or four weeks, and great good resulted from them. I have seen more than a hundred sinners fall like dead men under one powerful sermon, and I have seen and heard more than five hundred Christians all shouting aloud the high praises of God at once; and I will venture to assert that many happy thousands were awakened and converted to God at these camp-meetings.

These 50 years following the revolution and encompassing the antebellum period also saw the rise of individualism in the form of Unitarianism and Transcendentalism. These proponents of a spiritual view whereby God is permanently and directly present in all things, a pantheistic and mystical world where individuals can experience divine contact with divinity during, as an example, a walk in the woods, where the objects of nature, including people, are all equally divine were best represented culturally by Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau. At a lecture in1880 before the Concord Lyceum, Emerson described Transcendentalism thusly:

It seemed a war between intellect and affection; a crack in Nature, which split every church in Christendom into Papal and Protestant; Calvinism into Old and New schools; Quakerism into Old and New; brought new divisions in politics; as the new conscience touching temperance and slavery. The key to the period appeared to be that the mind had become aware of itself. Men grew reflective and intellectual. There was a new consciousness.... The modern mind believed that the nation existed for the individual, for the guardianship and education of every man. This idea, roughly written in revolutions and national movements, in the mind of the philosopher had far more precision; the individual is the world.

Certainly there were social contexts within which these various schools of thought could flourish. Demographic change, with the effects of both a growing capitalist population in the cities of the northeast and suddenly expounding frontiers and opportunities westward and southward, formed the basis of the dynamic. Both the Treaty of Paris (with Britain, 1783) and the Louisiana Purchase (1804), which doubled the size of the new nation, offered the former colonists huge tracts of land and opportunities in remote areas where centralized government authority was much less of an influence. With the rise of wealth and capitalism came the social afflictions of greed, corruption, and economic upheaval, along with a steady growth in lawlessness and its concomitant moral apathy. America’s first financial crisis was the Panic of 1819 that resulted in foreclosures, bank failures, unemployment, and a recession in both agriculture and manufacturing.

The panic was frightening in its scope and impact. In New York State, property values fell from $315 million in 1818 to $256 million in 1820. In Richmond, property values fell by half. In Pennsylvania, land values plunged from $150 an acre in 1815 to $35 in 1819. In Philadelphia, 1808 individuals were committed to debtors' prison. In Boston, the figure was 3500.

The causes effects, and remedies of this economic upheaval deserve more attention. However, suffice to conclude that the modern conflicts inherent in our society took root, not the least of which was the issue of race that manifested itself in the Missouri Crisis. The crisis was ignited by the application of Missouri for statehood, and it involved the status of slavery west of the Mississippi River. Indeed, the debate over slavery in this context portended the inexorable dichotomy that would lead to the Civil War. John Quincy Adams wrote that the Missouri Crisis was on the “title page to a great tragic volume.” With the intractable tenets of Evangelism, in the dominance of the Methodists and Baptists (along with Presbyterians), taking root and rapidly spreading in the South and Midwest, and the orthodoxy of the Roman Catholic and the ascendance of the individual in divinity of Transcendentalism and Unitarianism firmly gaining ground in the urban Northeast, the present day demographics of social thought and religious influence saw its incipient foundation lain.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states first and foremost, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” Any overt influence of one religion within the institutions of government should quite rightly raise alarm. It is all too transparent that the peddling of influence in Washington D.C. by lobbyists representing every economic, political, and (yes) religious interest is de rigueur. As appalling as this is, particularly in the effectiveness of these influences and the co-opting of our elected representatives, the most insidious are those influences that infiltrate and diminish our constitutional rights. So, in 2005 A.D., in the U.S., it is time to suspend the familial etiquette of avoiding politics and religion in our quotidian rhetoric. The ominous signs of theocracy are permeating every aspect of our government through legislation, political rhetoric, and influence upon the “press”, i.e. media. Everywhere in the culture, religion, of a particular and specifically Christian bent, is rearing its sanctimonious head. If you are a breathing American, you can not be impervious to overt religiosity’s effects. Whatever your news media of choice, the predominant stories are imbued with religious overtones and implications, exhortations by right wing demagogues, and class warfare insidiously waged within the context of popular culture. Obviously the Terri Schiavo case was the apotheosis of overt Federal Government interventionism into the private sanctity of individual rights. However, the genesis of Evangelism’s becoming the strong right arm of the Republican party was Mr. Bush’s 1999 speech at Bob Jones University, where he told 6,000 students, almost all white, ''I look forward to publicly defending our conservative philosophy.'' It could be argued that Mr. Reagan’s speech 20 years prior at the same venue, stating his support of “states rights”, was the first step of political legitimacy for Southern Evangelicals. However, the fundamentalism of today did not really take root until Mr. Bush sold his political soul to this massive sleeping giant of religious and political extremism. Not only is it pay-back time; this huge block of the electorate is an investment in maintaining the status quo of Republican domination. On every extreme conservative issue, from reproductive rights to First Amendment rights, from stifling cultural expression to gay rights, the Evangelical right is funding, promoting, and demanding its agenda to the extent of using belligerent language, i.e. threats against “activist judges” to accomplish their ends.

Although I am as far from the tenets of Evangelism as an individual can get, I hesitate to admit I am reminded now of Yeats’ line from The Second Coming: Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; When we are yielding science to myth, as in teaching creationism along side (instead of) evolution, in a world where our educational standards are rapidly declining statistically on a global level, then we are certainly in crisis and not merely hashing out some nuances of perspective. When the Legislature allows by law companies to impose their censorship on the culture, whereby using electronic scrubbing devices or editing, these “moral watchdogs” clean up our movies, then we are frightening close to an Orwellian oligarchy. When a state legislature spends time policing the “moves” of Texas high school cheerleaders (cheerleaders!), then the culture is getting very close to imploding from irony. Consider the fact that the people who were in control of our security on September 11th, 2001 are either still in power, promoted, or awarded medals of honor. Consider the fact that these same people took us into an illegal war using false data to sell their initiatives and have managed to escalate international terrorism rather than “defeat” the enemy. Consider the fact that our economic standing in the world is in jeopardy of falling into oblivion. Consider the fact that our environmental policies have been set back 100 years, and that the damage possible in the next few years will be immutable in human years. Consider the fact that the unyielding Fundamentalists may, in the next few days, set back 200 years of legislative history and bring our government to a halt. Has anyone noticed that potholes are everywhere, that our bridges are unsafe, that we have a health care crisis, that corporate greed and conglomerations are rampant? Is no one concerned that in three years everyone in the U.S. will be legally required to carry a National I.D. card (“Your papers please!”)?

My mother was a wise and kind woman who taught me humility, compassion, tolerance, intellectual curiosity, and gave me an ethical and moral foundation gleaned from eons of human existence. She valued human industry and generosity, and she believed that is everyone’s duty to give something back to the society that protects its people. So it is with the good sense to question authority, which she also instilled in me, which I venture into the obnoxious world of inappropriate dinner conversation. Since the religious Right is insinuating itself into every aspect of our lives, and the legislated values of the nation are course and skewed toward the obscenely wealthy, those of us who value the freedom of the individual to choose his/her own spirituality, his/her own divinity, and who value freedom from government, must speak, nay scream, now, no matter the time, place, or social situation. Bush may circumnavigate the globe extolling “freedom”, but our individual liberties in the United States of America have never so much been in jeopardy.

Dreaming of Kafka

Lactantius said, “Ignorance of a man’s self, and the wont of knowledge wherefore and to what end he is born, is the cause of error, of evil…of forsaking the light to walk in darkness.”

Mr. Kalbec is soon to retire from a company that manufactures ball bearings, where he advanced over the years from a packer of parts, to an inspector, to a machine operator, and finally to a set-up man for other machine operators. In his pocket is forty-three cents. His daughter Catherine is herself a mother, of three girls. She tells them stories of the grandmother she never knew, and shows them black and white photographs of a beautiful young wife and mother wearing a checkered shirt with jeans. The woman in the photograph has full, dark lips and a white smile. Another photo shows her more closely. She is holding a baby. Her lips look black upon the child’s fat, white cheeks; sexy, like punctuation. Mr. Kalbec has read Skvoreky and Svetla, and has thought about the deportation of a million Lithuanians from their homeland, and about the liquidation of the Crimean Tatars. He used to show the same photographs to Catherine, and say, “This was my mother. She played the piano and sang and danced like an angel. She loved asparagus.”

Catherine could read whole sentences at two and a half. Her mother, Mr. Kalbec’s young wife Anezka, taught her this, and played Saties’s Gymnopdie for her on the piano. In the afternoons, Catherine and Anezka would have make-believe tea parties, where Anezka would read to her daughter the poetry of Emily Dickenson, and Catherine’s tiny mouth would tacitly form the name over and over, “Emily, Emily, Emily…”. When Mr. Kalbec would arrive home, late from his factory shift, he would immediately go to Phoebe’s room to smell the sweetness of her breath in the air. Now, all these years later, the sound of his lunch pail as he places it on the kitchen counter echoes through the dark hallways and empty rooms. The smell of machine oil makes itself at home like a fat cousin. He is thinking about Chotkovy Sadie, the park in which Kafka took long walks, in which he too hopes to take long walks, to view the islands and the bridges of the Vlatva. In bed he tries to dream of the city of alchemists, but inevitably the same dream/memory plays itself out:

He is fourteen, just getting home from school. The air is hot and thick with catalpa trees. He walks up the long driveway. For some reason the back door is locked. He cups his hands over his eyes and presses his face to the screen to peer inside. What he sees turns day to night and time inside out. He runs to the front of the house, climbs the porch and breaks the window to get in. He rights the toppled chair and stands on it trying to lift his mother’s body above the door frame from which it hangs. As the torn sheets come loose, she is too heavy for him, and they fall to the floor. Her shoulders and head lay upon his lap. Her legs are askew and lifeless. The torn sheets around her neck, white with pink roses, look like a scarf; her skin is the pale blue of a robin’s egg. Minutes or hours go by. In his hand he holds his pocket change, which he counts over and over, entranced by the variant weight and density, color and shine of one dime, one quarter, one nickel, and three pennies.

Say Hello to My Little Friend

Writing in 1542 A.D., Bartolomé de Las Casas, in the Preface to his A Short Account of the Destruction of The Indies wrote of the indigenous peoples of Hispaniola, Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Bahamas, Mexico, et al,

It was upon these gentle lambs, … that from the very first day they clapped eyes on them the Spanish fell like ravening wolves upon the fold, or like tigers and savage lions who have not eaten meat for days. The pattern established at the outset has remained unchanged to this day, and the Spaniards still do nothing save tear the natives to shreds, murder them and inflict upon them untold misery, suffering and distress, tormenting, harrying and persecuting them mercilessly. We shall in due course describe some of the many ingenious methods of torture they have invented and refined for this purpose, but one can get some idea of the effectiveness of their methods from the figures alone. When the Spanish first journeyed there, the indigenous population of the island of Hispaniola stood at some three million; today only two hundred survive. The island of Cuba, which extends for a distance almost as great as that separating Valladolid from Rome, is now to all intents and purposes uninhabited; and two other large, beautiful and fertile islands, Puerto Rico and Jamaica, have been similarly devastated. Not a living soul remains today on any of the islands of the Bahamas, which lie to the north of Hispaniola and Cuba, even though every single one of the sixty or so islands in the group, as well as those known as the Isles of Giants and others in the area, both large and small, is more fertile and more beautiful than the Royal Gardens in Seville and the climate is as healthy as anywhere on earth. The native population, which once numbered some five hundred thousand, was wiped out by forcible expatriation to the island of Hispaniola, a policy adopted by the Spaniards in an endeavour to make up losses among the indigenous population of that island. At a conservative estimate, the despotic and diabolical behaviour of the Christians has, over the last forty years, led to the unjust and totally unwarranted deaths of more than twelve million souls, women and children among them, and there are grounds for believing my own estimate of more than fifteen million to be nearer the mark.

This book, published 453 years ago, should be required reading in every high school in the Americas, and suggested reading to all of these suddenly ubiquitous religious fundamentalists. Most of the conquistadores cruelly mistreated the inhabitants of the regions they visited or conquered; killing, enslaving, raping and otherwise abusing them. One of those Spaniards, Juan Ponce de León, in 1513 while searching for Bimini and a miraculous fountain with restorative waters, discovered the east coast of the “island” that he would name Pescua Florida. Some have claimed that the story of his search for the “fountain of youth” was allegorical, that he was seeking a spiritual rebirth, with new glory, fame, and wealth. In any case, as destiny would have it, what he discovered was the land of the “hanging chad”, Sonny Crockett, Dan Marino, the Early Bird Special, and Elian Gonzalez’s relatives. Ponce de León was typical of the conquistadores of his age, believing that the spread of Christianity was such a great gift to the natives that their losses of freedom and life were of little consequence. Unfortunately for Juan Ponce, the indigenous Calusa were a bit hostile to that idea. In 1521 Ponce de León returned to Charlotte Harbor to attempt colonization. The Calusa attacked the search party whereupon Ponce de León was shot with a reed arrow causing a wound that would eventually prove fatal. A fierce battle ensued resulting in the conquistadores defeat. Juan Ponce was carried and placed aboard his ship, which set sail and conveyed him to Cuba, where he soon died.

Over the next 50 years, several more of these conquistadores, i.e. de Soto, de Vaca, et al would explore Florida in search of elusive gold and treasures, only to meet resistance from the indigenous tribes. In 1561, the Spanish Monarchy declared Florida of no further interest, willing to let Florida fall into obscurity. If only that were prophetic.

The world’s most dysfunctional peninsula, the sore thumb of the contiguous States (in lieu of the preferred phallic metaphors), is now officially more dangerous than when the greedy whores of yore tried to rape the “land of flowers”. Yesterday, Jeb Bush, with an NRA lobbyist at his side, signed the “Castle Doctrine”, the “shoot first, ask questions later” law eradicating the notion of a “duty to retreat” and replacing that with “meet force with force”, even deadly force and even if the threat is only perceived. Not that we needed another reason to stay the hell out of this corrupt swamp, where the various strata of feckless Americans go to breed like mosquitoes, but this rather seals the deal. I implore you, the American Family; stay the hell out of Florida. I know the lure of Walt Disney World, Universal Studios Florida (and Orlando), Epcot Center, Busch Gardens, Magic Kingdom, and many other worlds of simulacra that are like China White for kids is difficult to resist. But, imagine a scenario where you and the fam are driving around in your rental SUV and find yourselves a bit lost, though in a nice suburban neighborhood, where the front lawns are adorned with pink flamingoes and black jockeys. You decide to stop and knock on one of these doors and ask for directions to the nearest Applebee’s. What you hear after you ring the doorbell may go something like this:

“Honey, can you get that; I’m not quite finished dressing.” (male voice)

“Yes Dear.” (female, possibly Edith Bunker)

“Who is it anyway?”

“I don’t know. Some guy.”

“Well, why don’t you just blow him away through the peephole? Use the 12 gauge so you don’t miss.”

By now, hopefully, your ass is already planted back in the driver’s seat, and, despite the initial screech of trying to start an already running engine, you slam in into D1 and torque the hell out of there. Inevitably the worst domestic horror stories of any given week originate from the Sunshine State. And not just your quotidian horror story, we’re talking about the apocalyptically evil, obsidian, abysmally abhorrent kind of horror like the ineffably grotesque murder of nine year old Jessica Lunsford, followed almost immediately by another child murder, that of 13 year old Sarah Lunde (“In fact, Florida has only about 1.7 sex offenders per 1,000 people, while Texas has more than two for each thousand, according to state agencies,” quotes the weirdly proud Herald-Tribune) both of which sandwiched the debasement of the Terri Schiavo tragedy. In the last five years, beginning with the biggest political hijacking in the history of the world, we have been forced to stare at this Mecca for retirees like a car wreck with stories as diverse and polarizing as the Elian Gonzalez fiasco and just about any episode of CSI Miami. Come to think of it, except for Joe’s Stone Crab restaurant and Key Lime pie, we could do without this land of man-eating gators, Rush Limbaugh, and giant las cucarachas. Unfortunately I can hear Bush Senior saying, “Not gonna happen.”

As I listened to GWB’s speech to the SBA yesterday with near apoplectic incredulity, what struck me most was how sensible this would have sounded 35 years ago. Even more ridiculous than George Bush talking about alternative (to fossil fuel, his raison d’être) sources of energy saying, “Technology is key.” was CNN’s über-goober Mile’s O’Brian parroting the words “technology is key” as the station lost its satellite feed to the speech. Of course, later in the day Judy “Woodstock” Woodruff and the spittle-lipped, lying comb-over Bob Novak (is there anyone more repugnant?) would characterize the speech as “progressive”. Only the ever vigilant Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said Bush's speech "amounts to little more than half-measures and wrongheaded policies that will do nothing to address the current energy crisis or break the stranglehold that foreign oil has on our nation." (Oh, and then there’s this article in Business Week Online.) And what is with the First Stepford Lady’s 80% approval rating? What is an approval rating? Does she really think kids are listening to her “avoid gangs and drugs” advice? Does anyone in MS-13 know who she is? Let’s try a sit-down.

So Exxon made a cool $7.8 BILLION in its first quarter, while BP’s profits are up 29% in the same period. 90% of America’s GDP is a result of household sector indebtedness (addressed here by James Wolcott). And, unless you are an oil industry investor, owner, or holding hands with a Saudi Royal, you’re FK’d. The U.S. economy on every measurable level, domestically and internationally, is finding the path of least resistance to disaster.

Vortices of Tortoises Swimming Into Oblivion

This morning, as I was rinsing our salad spinner with scalding hot water, the clear plastic bowl sat in the kitchen sink in such a way as to block the drain, hence filling the sink with a few inches of water. When I lifted the bowl I was treated to the site of a perfect vortex with at least a one inch diameter of inner space swirling downward into oblivion, spinning clockwise, illustrating the Coriolus Effect of the Northern Hemisphere, and taking whatever thoughts I may have been having into the place from which even light can not escape. Vortices are visually beautiful and fascinating phenomena, both familiar and strange, occurring everywhere from the bathtub drain to hurricanes and tornadoes. If one is so inclined, there are innumerable resources available to read about vortex shedding and separation, the lift-generated vortices of aerodynamics, horseshoe vortices, vortex scourholes, and entire journals dedicated to Fluid Mechanics. However, I am using vortices here as a goddamn quotidian metaphor, so if you’re looking for equations or computer models, please feel free to commence your research.

Several years ago I read a New York Times article about a black hole in the constellation Aquila 40,000 light years from Earth that was being observed by astrophysicists and astronomers as spewing out matter at nearly the speed of light just before other material gets sucked into nothingness, a sort of recombinant ejaculation of light and matter that has been first eviscerated then recombined. Often I have felt my relationship to modern life, and reality in general, has been one of looking backward as I am sucked into a vortex behind me. By the word modern, I mean The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition, Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company meaning of “first recorded in 1585 in the sense of present or recent times, [which] has traveled through the centuries designating things that inevitably must become old-fashioned as the word itself goes on to the next modern thing. And, “looking backward” is a reference to the utopian novel of that name written by Edward Bellamy in 1877.

The late 19th and early 20th century saw quite a few either utopian or dystopian views of modernity, with Bellamy trying to fictively imagine the former, while Aldous Huxley and George Orwell graphically described the manifest destiny of the latter. Either way, the modern, which is essentially the present, is always disappearing into extinction, into the past, the only direction that our feeble awareness allows beyond the immediate. The problem with this is the political obfuscation of history, i.e. the past, the secrecy that annuls the past until revisionism attempts the impossible task of clarification. It is not just our government and this administration that is clandestine to the extreme; it is all organizational power structures, corporate, social, religious, familial, and otherwise. Try reading the NYT backwards, as in from back page to front page, to realize that on any given day the salient news is the least hyped and least likely to be discussed. The Pope, or any celebrity for that matter, may have his inconsequential day described ad infinitum while Greenspan’s prediction of economic gloom and the growing necessity to raise taxes (and Greenspan’s incongruous influence is itself an illusion in a vortex) is tucked into the back pages. What’s the chance that any of us know what forces are moving us forward into the unknowable?

In that NYT article from years past to which I referred, it was confirmed that at the center of the Milky Way, our own galaxy, exists a super-massive black hole, meaning that everything in our galaxy, including the Earth and the solar system, circles this huge vortex roughly 26,000 light years away. The metaphors tend toward oblivion. But isn’t there actually a darkness at the center of everything, a kind of sleep or dream? At the center of all that we can observe is a dream the recombines everything into everything else, somnolence into consciousness. At the center of Bellamy’s novel, though not specifically so stated, is the concept of Bildung, the reflectively rational pursuit of freedom and individuality, a proclivity toward lifelong education and self-education. Bildung described the world view of Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767-1835), German linguist and philosopher, who, in describing this central life force of individuals stated:

Those who do not take great care of this interior need, who do not already find in themselves an irresistible desire to measure all mankind against themselves, who suppress the expression of this supreme need even for the best of reasons, shall always be far from truth.

This distance from the truth is a matter of degree measured by how closely we observe the attempts at obfuscation taking place in front of us, as we are being thrown forward looking backward. Read excerpts from the recorded statement of Senator Bill Frist on the telecast Justice Sunday here to get a sample of the daily rhetorical obfuscation that exists as fact. Both sides in the argument over the filibuster offer recalcitrance in the form of factual sounding rhetoric. There is absolutely no story taking place in the media that does not reflect this level of absurdity. Objective reporting, if even possible, is rarely attempted. Without the comprehension of all of the facts in any given debate, and a clear understanding of one’s own assessment based on intrinsic values, i.e. ethics, morals, and beliefs, the distance from the truth is an exponentially receding past into infinity. In other words, critical thinking and a sustained pursuit of the truth is essential to avoid perpetual intellectual vertigo. How else can one approach such an article as this from Sign and Sight that states “there was no good military reason to destroy Dresden and Hiroshima and incinerate 100,000 souls. The motive for these unspeakable raids was to teach Stalin a lesson.”?

In a five-hour biopic of FDR on the History Channel, the central theme of which was that President’s proclivity for secrecy, the subject of whether or not Roosevelt knew in advance of the impending attack on Pearl Harbor was broached. While not stating this in the affirmative, it was stated emphatically that he knew Japan was about to attack on some level. Without being cognizant of these facts, how can any American today have an honest perspective of the last four years?

Sometimes while concentrically hurtling backwards into the future we get a glimpse of the past somehow overlooked. This article points out such a revelation, i.e. the discovery of the lost recordings of Thelonious Monk and John Coltrane in concert at Carnegie Hall on November 29, 1957. The tapes were recently discovered at the Library of Congress, and for some of us constitute the possibility of a wonderful unknown future where we can hear these past performances in the present. There were sets by other famous jazz performers at this concert, including Dizzy Gillespie, Zoot Sims with Chet Baker, and Sonny Rollins.

But it is Monk with Coltrane that constitutes the real find. That band existed for only six months in 1957, mostly through long and celebrated runs at the East Village club the Five Spot. During this period, Coltrane fully collected himself as an improviser, challenged by Monk and the discipline of his unusual harmonic sense. Thus began the 10-year sprint during which he changed jazz completely, before his death in 1967. The Monk quartet with Coltrane did record three numbers in a studio in 1957, but remarkably little material, and only with fairly low audience-tape fidelity, is known to exist from the Five Spot engagement.

Circa 1500 A.D. Leonardo da Vinci began studying flow dynamics in water. He built and sketched devices to record the flow of water into pools. He wrote:

Observe the motion of the surface of the water, which resembles that of hair, which has two motions, of which one is caused by the weight of the hair, the other by the direction of the curls; thus the water has eddying motions, one part of which is due to the principal current, the other to the random and reverse motion.

In 1957 John Coltrane historically teamed with Thelonious Monk’s band for a period of less than 6 months and recorded at New York’s Five Spot Café beginning in the summer of that year. The rhythm section of Art Blakey (drums) and Wilbur Ware (bass), combined with Monk’s frenetic piano provided the “principal current”, while Coltrane’s solos and his incipient “sheets of sound” provided the “random and reverse motion” recombining through these vortices into the eddying genius and beauty of sound. The discovery of new recordings, more of an idea than a fact to me, may someday once again through spinning discs and sound waves traveling at 770 mph spinning through the vortex of my inner ear recreate a past of pure truth, free from obfuscation, while I spin closer and closer to my beginning.

German Expressionism

Anecdotal evidence of how the cardinals voted has coalesced into roughly this consensus omnium:

In the first ballot, he got 40 votes with the same number of ballots going to Italy’s Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, it said. But by Tuesday morning, many of the undecided had begun to swing in favour of the former head of the key Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, the Vatican's top doctrinal authority. Tuesday's lunch break was key, with some liberal cardinals supporting Martini deciding to back Benedict XVI, although at least 10 cardinals refused to change camps, the daily said. The high prelates broke into an applause as the scrutineers announced the result of the vote, but tension remained until the new pope accepted his elevation to pontiff. Then there was further applause. Later that evening, the cardinals celebrated with a champagne toast at a dinner with Benedict XVI. - (from an article originally published on page 11 of The Star on April 22, 2005)

We know that the first few votes did not go Mr. Ratzinger’s way, and that, even though he was gaining, it could be another day before he reached the necessary two thirds majority. My purely fictional observation here is the sense of urgency that may have prevailed. Since Ratzinger was in the lead, the cardinals decided to rush him through the process before Wednesday, when a former Hitler Youth German would be elected Pope on Hitler’s birthday. Does anyone else find his countenance a bit scary? Where have I seen this face before? Was it in one of the portraits of Emil Nolde, Erich Heckel, Karl Schmidt-Rottluff, Max Pechstein, Ernst Ludwig Kirchner, Max Beckman, Otto Dix, or George Grosz? I can’t place it. F. W. Murnau’s Nosferatu? As a lapsed Catholic I feel I am piercing the cold darkness of a black haunted room with my bare hand waiting for something to grab it and pull me in. ________________________________________________________

For years I’ve been wondering how Thomas Friedman attained such exalted status at the New York Times and by seemingly reasonable people everywhere. I have always found his columns lacking in perspicacity, often absurd in his reasoning, and generally tedious in form. A couple of weeks ago, following the review of his new book, The World is Flat, a solipsistic allusion to his inner malapropisms, in the NYT’s Book Review, Mr. Friedman made an appearance on John Stewart’s The Daily Show, presumably to hype the book and to help wake America up to the wonderful world of globalization. Mr. Friedman’s self-described glimpse into his creative processes revealed a word association process of linear logic running off a cliff. Alas, we now offer thanks for Matt Taibi’s acerbic review in, New York Press, of Tom’s book that is both hilarious and dead on. We excerpt it here, and link to it here:

On an ideological level, Friedman's new book is the worst, most boring kind of middlebrow horseshit. If its literary peculiarities could somehow be removed from the equation, The World Is Flat would appear as no more than an unusually long pamphlet replete with the kind of plug-filled, free-trader leg-humping that passes for thought in this country. It is a tale of a man who walks 10 feet in front of his house armed with a late-model Blackberry and comes back home five minutes later to gush to his wife that hospitals now use the internet to outsource the reading of CAT scans. Man flies on planes, observes the wonders of capitalism, says we're not in Kansas anymore. (He actually says we're not in Kansas anymore.) That's the whole plot right there. If the underlying message is all that interests you, read no further, because that's all there is.

Taibi’s piece is well worth the less than five minutes it takes to read as it raises the important question of questioning. Critical reading, and listening, requires more than acquiescing to the, “Yeah, that seems to make sense,” kind of perusing of which many of us are guilty. You say you have no time for critical reading? How about thinking for yourself? Do you really need a guru to tell you that cell phones are changing the world? _______________________________________________________

The John Bolton confirmation hearings and concomitant revelations of his being a psycho-dick of a boss surely must pick at the wounds, whether freshly healed or scarred, of those many who have had to suffer the life-altering machinations of an egomaniacal middle management bully. That these generally useless messengers operate on a long leash of abstract job descriptions with zero culpability and possess the ability to fire on impulse, usually after ample prevarications to their immediate superiors, and that their self-loathing and impotence within the larger scale of the organization justifies within their obsidian consciences the acts of intimidation and obfuscation to produce the illusion of towing the company line makes their ubiquity and insidiousness a plague upon modern life. John Bolton does not possess the diplomatic skills to be ambassador to Cheney’s ass.  Actually, I think that is his job. He, and the millions of his middling ilk, deserves to fester in the purgatory of eternal middle management.

Gilly Develops Suriphobia

Today is the birthday of my brother-in-law, the renowned photographer, artist, surfer, and curator David Gilstein, bon vivant, man-bout-town, devoted husband and radical atheist. His story, while well known to artists and art historians, as well as viewers of almost all of Bruce Brown’s documentaries, is a modest gentleman who is remembered by me as “Davy”.

(Davy, in checkered shirt, pictured here with his yoga instructor.)

Glimpsed through the vapor, miasma, and torpor of senescence, the fear, beatitude, and concupiscence of my own childhood recede, coalesce, and conspire in the dark theater of my memory. The screen illuminates the architecture; the balustrades and cornices, the cupolas, fences, and fenestration, the streets, sidewalks, and paths, the towering trees and tall grass and all the slithery creatures therein. Thus through a synaptic snap, crackle, and pop, I am walking on my street with my paper delivery bag devoid of its 42 inky Herald’s, the gray canvas sheath now something to whip, twirl, and sling about like a flaccid trebuchet, in late July following a sudden downpour that is now visibly evaporating from the sun beaten macadam, the astringent, alkaline dust stinging the nostrils, and I am headed toward the cul-de-sac behind which rise tall reeds and damp woods, in front of which stands the stone bungalow of that strange boy David G. .

Master G., Davy, as he was known in his first four years and three months, possessed rare and profound facilities which first manifest themselves following a traumatic incident (and a brief period of catatonia) that seemed to cause the fissure through which the light of infinite possibilities pierced the, until then, dimly lit corridors of Davy’s consciousness. One morning, before the sun had burned off the lugubrious haze, following a breakfast of kasha and warm milk, dressed in his Oshgosh coveralls and white tee shirt, and under the loving, prophylactic gaze of his Mom, Davy went out the back wooden screen door with a bag full of olive green toy soldiers into the world of his back yard. The landscape with its fruit trees, grape arbor, small vegetable garden, and lush verdure was bound on two sides by a tall fence, and eventually sloped down toward the tall reeds and damp, thick woods at the far back edge. Engrossed in the ferocious battle of hand-held soldiers, replete with puckered cheek explosions and pronunciations of sudden mortality, Davy slowly became aware of eyes upon him other than the protective parental ones he was used to. Slowly turning his head over his right shoulder, D. was met with the paralyzing gaze of the luminescent, sanguine eyes of a gray wolf that was standing amongst the tall reeds. Minutes, hours, lifetimes passed in the ephemera of that silent intercourse, before the wolf turned away and disappeared into the trees. It was a few weeks before Davy, under the suppliant doting of confused and shaken parents, again spoke.

However, his first words were, “Was ich nicht weiss, macht mich nicht heiss.” It took several days for his parents to translate the German: “What I do not know does not affect me.” Though Davy (who now preferred to be called David, pronounced Dah` feet) occasionally spoke English, as well as manifold other languages and dialects, he conversed mostly in formal German, which astounded everyone since no one in his family spoke anything but English or Russian, and none of his ancestry were Teutonic. However, the precocious linguistics was but a mere precursor of things to come. An early 19th century mahogany upright piano, a family heirloom, had proudly adorned the G.’s parlor throughout their marriage. And, except for the rare single finger explorations of a passerby, including a disinterested Davy, the instrument was a stunningly polished, but absolutely tacit, piece of furniture. Until one day, when the Goethe quoting David, not yet five years of age, sat down and began playing Sonate cis-moll<>(Beethoven’s Sonata No.14 in C sharp minor, Op.27 No.2, “Moonlight”), followed by brilliantly executed and passionate extrapolations of Sonatas Nos. 19 and 13, and concluded by quoting LVB: “Art is long. Life is short.” (In German, of course.)

For the next 19 and a half years David G. performed in the world’s greatest concert halls, experimented with drugs, satiated himself with Knockwurst and Bratwurst, attended University, and met his inamorata. It was during winter break that the next paradigm shift would occur. Ice skating with his paramour and her family and friends, David found himself on the business end of “the whip”, and was catapulted into slush, bogs, and tall reeds, where, even though his glasses were broken, could feel those eyes upon him. No one else saw the wolf. Again, it was weeks before he spoke. But something was different. Now he conversed in regionally inflected English; New England parboiled with Yiddish diphthongs. And though not quite tone deaf, his musical abilities had decreased to nil. University had now become an amorphous postulate of impossible decisions.

David, who, for some reason, now preferred to be called “Gilly”, took up photography as a means to assuage his voyeuristic tendencies. As it turned out Gilly was something of a genius with the lens. His photographs, while often emblematically abstruse and repugnant, were at once de rigueur with the SoHo grandees. G. produced miniature monographs, slightly larger than 35mm proofs, and mounted each one in hand made, intricately ornate frames, approximately 2” X 2”. Now the enfant terrible of the art world, G. made his fortune. I recall the retrospective of Gilly’s work, 19 years ago at the Whitney, when G. was 59, his entire collection of some 2000 + prints were displayed in what had been a maintenance closet in the museum.

It was a month after that show closed that Gilly, who now preferred to be called “Davy”, gave up photography and began working for the Home Depot in the electrical department. His proficiency was such that on the weekends Davy would give “clinics” in such things as installing a GFCI outlet, extending a wire run, or installing a mercury-vapor light to the simpleminded proletariat. Davy remained with HD until his eventual capitulation of permanent residence at Shady Rest, a former hotel in Watch Hill, R.I. that was now occupied by…well, I’ve digressed. Walking along my street that sultry July afternoon, generally headed in the direction of the cul-de-sac and the G.’s bungalow, whipping my newspaper bag over my head concentrically, I caught a glimpse, out of the corner of my eye, of two incandescent, incarnadine feral eyes peering from behind the massive trunk of an elm. The sack flew out of my hand centrifugally, and I bolted like a startled bunny all the way to Davy’s house. I banged on the front door of the G.’s house screaming like a mademoiselle until Mrs. G. let me in, tried to calm me down, gave me lemonade and butter cookies, and called my parents to come and fetch their hysterical child. Just then little Davy summoned me with his curled forefinger and unintelligible German into the parlor. There he played for me Eric Satie’s Gnossiennes No. 6. .

From that moment until now, music has been my only solace, and every note reminds me of my friend Davy. Strange are the machinations of memory.

Happy Birthday Mr. Gilstein.

Sunday Driving

Though circuitous it was, the word insufficiently describes the randomness of our Sunday drive. After six days of recuperating from uterine embolization, M. was getting a bit antsy, and after listening to a morning’s worth of sophistry and fatuousness on Meet the Press, et al, despite the stack of ink-smudging newsprint still unread, it was time to get in the car and enter the parade of freaks that is the American highway on any given Sunday. I felt a genuine sense of foreboding, as though I were at risk of being sucked into an atramentous vortex or labyrinth of unimaginable and eternal suffering at any moment, even though a mean temperature hovering around 70 degrees Fahrenheit, ebullient sunshine, cobalt skies, and an irresistibly uplifting 4-chord piano progression from a Pharoah Sanders’ tune were the manifest destiny of the afternoon. Satan passed us on the right in a mid-90’s white Volvo sedan, with a furtive, behind-black-Wayfarers glance that caused me to hit the brake like passing a speed trap. M. didn’t seem to notice, so I thought mentioning either the Beast’s rude and illegal maneuver or my near fall into the abyss imprudent and thus stepped on the gas and turned up the music. I decided to head southeast toward the back roads of South Dartmouth, Massachusetts, where some of the farmlands and stonewalled meadows still look as they did back in the King Philip’s war. Not a popular subject of American history, the King Philip’s War was America’s most devastating conflict with a death rate nearly twice that of the Civil War. To quote Walter Giersbach,

King Philip's War (1675-76) is an event that has been largely ignored by the American public and popular historians. However, the almost two-year conflict between the colonists and the Native Americans in New England stands as perhaps the most devastating war in this country's history. One in ten soldiers on both sides were wounded or killed. At its height, hostilities threatened to push the recently arrived English colonists back to the coast. And, it took years for towns and urban centers to recover from the carnage and property damage.

Traveling the sun-dappled back roads of Westport and South Dartmouth, it’s difficult not to sense the history, nor to notice the creeping creeps of development spreading their tacky subplots in muddy deforested land, knocking down the colonial stone walls of property lines, and erecting cookie cutter houses on cul de sacs. Still, the expanses of absolute beauty were evident, as was the huge Lincoln traveling 15 mph with the yellow “Support-our-Troops” bumper sticker like a talk-to-the-hand palm in my face. The roads were too narrow and winding to attempt a pass, so resolved to the slow pace, we took in the scenery. However, that damned bumper sticker kept goading me. Is that just a blatant expression of moral superiority phrased as an imperative? Or is the sticker a reward for a donation of some kind? I started noticing how many of those yellow ribbons were smacked on the trunks of vehicles and was surprised to see an ample number of those Jesus fish as well. I know I should let these little things go, and that these random folks seem to be out of my sphere of influence, but the spreading virus of self-righteousness promulgated by the heretofore unseen, unheard radically conservative droves is getting me a little unhinged. Less than 5 minutes ago, C-Span playing on the TV in the background, at an Oklahoma bombing memorial, with gigantic crucifixes on either side of him, a Republican Congressional Representative from that state was giving a speech declaring that Americans should bless God, thanking Him for, well the list was long, and the tone was puritanical on steroids, and this guy got a standing ovation. Is this where after we are bombed we look to the sky and say, “Thanks, may I have another?” Bumper stickers are one thing, or maybe they are just part of the same thing, the insipient rhetoric of a religious war. Christianity was at the root of the King Philip War, even if used as a pretense for land grabbing and racial subjugation. Note this brief passage:

In January 1675, the Indian John Sassamon died at Assawampsett Pond, about 15 miles north of present-day New Bedford. Sassamon was literate and a Christian convert. He may have been acting as an informer to the English and was murdered, probably at Philip's instigation. Increase Mather, writing after the war, suggested he was killed "out of hatred for him for his Religion, for he was Christianized, and baptiz'd, and was a Preacher amongst the Indians...and was wont to curb those Indians that knew not God on the account of their debauchereyes".

To get a sense of how the Wampanoag and other tribes were betrayed by the English one needs to read a bit of colonial history, beginning with 1620 (as here and here) and the fact that the native tribes saved these English settlers from perishing. King Philip, actually named Pometacom, was the son of Massasoit, chief of the Wampanoag nation, and the brother of Wamsutta. In 1662, the court at Plymouth Colony arrogantly summoned the Wampanoag leader Wamsutta to Plymouth. Major Josiah Winslow (later Colonel) and a small force took Wamsutta, Philip's brother, at gunpoint. Soon after questioning, Wamsutta sickened and died and his death infuriated the Wampanoag nation.

King Philip acquiesced to a shaky peace with the English settlers, until the aforementioned Sassamon incident. If we look at the rise of religious fundamentalism that is wedging its way into our legislative bodies, media culture, and everyday rhetoric, there is a déjà vu sense of intolerance becoming the exegesis of society. There are extremes that can not coexist in a social fabric without eventual violence. When the stakes become this high, as in freedom from religion in government, the cost of defending that freedom versus those that would imprint their religiosity into the governing doctrines would be correspondingly as high, even unimaginable. The voices that are now silent, those that would demand that religion has no place in government, that spirituality is a private matter for individuals and families to practice, need to become strident before the very act of speaking such things becomes, by law, blasphemy.

Frog and Toad and Jesus Are Friends

Plutarch: The Life of Theseos, c. 110 CE

The feast called Oschophoria, or the feast of boughs, which to this day the Athenians celebrate, was then first instituted by Theseos. For he took not with him the full number of virgins which by lot were to be carried away [to the Labyrinth], but selected two youths of his acquaintance, of fair and womanish faces, but of a manly and forward spirit, and having, by frequent baths, and avoiding the heat and scorching of the sun, with a constant use of all the ointments and washes and dresses that serve to the adorning of the head or smoothing the skin or improving the complexion, in a manner changed them from what they were before, and having taught them farther to counterfeit the very voice and carriage and gait of virgins so that there could not be the least difference perceived, he, undiscovered by any, put them into the number of the Athenian virgins designated for Crete. At his return, he and these two youths led up a solemn procession, in the same habit that is now worn by those who carry the vine-branches. Those branches they carry in honor of Dionysos and Ariadne, for the sake of their story before related; or rather because they happened to return in autumn, the time of gathering the grapes.

Oh those perverse, preternatural, fun-loving pagans! At least they were not quoting the Heliconian Muses night a day, and everything was not “Zeus this,” and “Zeus that.” Now I don’t really care if a fellow citizen prays to Jesus or a Bufo alvarius (Colorado River Toad/Sonoran Desert Toad); I just don’t want to hear about it. And I certainly do not want my elected government officials, Federal, State, or local, inserting their religious dogma into the diurnal rhetoric, talking points, and legislative or governing process ever. In fact, I see very little difference between the ancient Greeks and American Evangelicals in terms of self-delusional idiocy. Of course, I am not about to soapbox atheism or agnosticism either because, I just don’t have a philosophical stake in the subject. However, there are things that need to be discussed with urgency and conviction, like the wholesale hijacking of the long term interests of the American people by Mammon worshipping, right-wing extremists who use perverse religiosity as a distraction, like carnie magicians, while pushing through cruel agendas that are crushing the middle class and the poor, and leaving future generations with a used up economy, environment, and way of life.

There are varying degrees of this hypocrisy being orchestrated on various fronts, such as Bill Frist’s circus of accusations against the Dems in order to explain his imminent attempt to kill the filibuster. There is the purely self-serving Tom DeLay throwing the rotten apples of desperation at the passing cars of anyone and everyone. There is the sensible sounding Sensenbrenner who, behind this curtain of reasonableness is a fanatical xenophobe who’d like to put bar codes on all out necks so that he could feel safer, even if the grapes (avocados, tomatoes, name your fruit or vegetable) of wrath wither on the vine. And all of these guys spew religious demagoguery like an oil slick of slippery logic in which all reasonable debate slides away.

Steve Gilliard attacks the problem from this perspective:

Now, everyone is blaming the wingnuts and fundies for this, but not me. It's like blaming a shark for eating a girl surfer's arm, that's what they do…So who do I blame for this rise of the Christian bund? Moderates.

But, I don’t much care for the “Moderates”. Their whole walking-on-eggshells, obsequious, “let’s be reasonable” approach is part of the pabulum, not the solution. Someone has to call these money-hoarding, planet-raping, class warfare promoting, rightwing criminals out. If the Democrats (exclusive of Barbara Boxer) do not have the integrity and temerity to challenge and defeat these incompetent liars, then another revolution may be inevitable. If we can not stop the likes of a John Bolton from being confirmed to a position for which he is clearly the antithesis of its purpose, and if we have to just sit and watch the criminal ravishment of the middle class by the credit card industry, sanctioned legally by the U.S. Congress, and if the citizenry can not protect the air it breathes from a reptilian Republican Congressman from Texas (see NYT article here), just as a few salient examples, then we must either organize quickly to defeat all of these slugs, or we must capitulate, move away, or start walking the streets narrating the texts of our insanity with footnotes like David Foster Wallace circumambulating a stygian labyrinth.

It is time, indeed, to stop screaming at our televisions when a CNN anchor soft peddles an interview with a prevaricating politician. Write a letter or email to the actual senator or representative, administration official or babbling bureaucrat and ask them politely to shut the fuck up.

Is the Pope Polish?

Several months before he died, my estranged father recorded 6 hours of audio tape, at my behest, narrating his youthful experiences in Poland before and during World War II. The adjective “estranged” may seem odd, but it is very significant to anything approaching an honest description of the man, especially to me. My request over the years for some kind of documentation of his early life must have finally become understood, or misunderstood, to be the search for explanations. Of course, and he would have known as well as anyone who had survived in Poland in WWII, some things can not be explained. At the time he wrote the pages of narrative and recorded the tapes he certainly did not expect to die anytime soon. Although he was on dialysis and enough different medications to fill his entire kitchen table, I also thought that he would be around for many years to come, if only because of his stubbornness. Unavoidably, the media saturation over the past week of Pope John Paul II’s death and transfiguration managed to seep into my consciousness. The biographical sketches in particular caught my attention. Karol Jozef Wojtyla was born on May 18, 1920 in Watowice, Poland. Six months and 13 days earlier, my father had also been born in Poland less than 100 kilometers from Watowice, in a town called Wola Brzostecka. When the Germans invaded Poland in September, 1939 Karol Wojtyla was 19; my father was 20 and already in the Polish Army. These two young men were in Krakow during the same time, and though there is no way to know if their paths ever crossed, and despite occupying the same historical nightmare, their divergence could not have been more extreme. PBS’s Frontline this week replayed a biopic on the Pope from a few years ago, an excellent documentary that pricked at this viewer’s scars of wounds inflicted from a collective past. The premise stated upfront: We spent two years researching this documentary. Over and over, we heard the following refrain: "To understand this Pope, you must go back to his Polish roots." Ultimately, everything we learned proved the deep truth of these words. All of the major themes of John Paul II's papacy can be traced to the shaping events of his life--a life whose roots are sunk in Polish soil. His Christian vision, his vocation, his very emotions draw their depth and intensity from the country he left to become Holy Father of the Catholic Church in Rome. Allow me to digress, confess, briefly for the sake of integrity. I was brought up as a Catholic, went through all the rites of passage, i.e. Baptism, Communion, Confirmation, and for a time was an alter boy and a postulant. Sometime during my fifteenth year I became an apostate, a doubter, and a possessed reader of alternative theologies and philosophies. I read voraciously the works of Pascal and Kierkegaard, of Buber and J. Krishnamurti, of Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, of Confucius and Thoreau, of the pre-Socratics through Aristotle, of Descartes and Marx, the Bible and Bukowski, et al, et al. I eventually found that my proclivities were toward those thinkers who found “God” an obstacle to understanding the nature of ontological being. For anyone who has ever been a Catholic, this is obviously a bit of self-delusion, since the indoctrination sinks unfathomably within. My spirituality now resides somewhere between the line of atheism and agnosticism and the outer limits of a cosmic postulant. Further, I must confess that in the last 28 years, except for the punch line, “Is the Pope Polish?” I haven’t given much thought to PJP II, although I have found myself politically pissed off at the Catholic Church many times. However, this past week, with the biographical sketches of Karol Wojtyla always originating in Poland, and the Frontline piece in particular, has caused me to examine the enigmatic origins of my “estranged” father (again), and to examine the question of how individuals evolve. Another character who will be introduced in all of this is my, also deceased, Uncle John, John of the same last name as me. As I listened this past week to the Pope’s recorded conversations in English, I noticed the exact rhythm, accents, timbre, and pronunciations as those of Uncle John. Although there was directness in my uncle’s speech, there was also a sense of calm, humor, and kindness that was absent in his brother’s, my father’s, locution. John was the oldest of four brothers, my father the youngest. John was the only person I ever saw receive my father’s affection. Although they spoke mostly in Polish when they got together, inevitably inclusive of others English would dominate the chatter. Uncle John’s accent was entirely different than my father’s; John sounded like the Pope, my father spoke like Tonto. He’d leave out articles, conjunctions, adjectives, participles, and other parts of speech that defied inflection and went straight for the meat and potatoes. Although understanding this singularly thick and stupid sound will never occur, I have to look at the history of these Polish folks for, at least, a source for understanding their dynamic. Frontline put it this way: Poland's pain lies behind every tree, every mound. The proud country remembers every wound. Adam Zamoyski is an historian and a member of the ancient Polish nobility. He has a confidence bred of centuries, an aristocratic pride that feels the wound in all its freshness. "As a Pole you were born into a bankrupt business, you weren't like other people. Every Pole has to confront- why have we made such a mess? Three hundred years ago we were a great power and a normal country. Then we'd become a pathetic country whose history no one knew. Every Pole has a question mark somewhere. For the Pope, for all of us growing up after the war, anybody going through the war, even people born in Poland after the war were born into its arguments. We are a people stung by history." The Polish nation has often only existed in the Polish mind. Having no geography, the Poles feel history must take its place. They give the oaks of their forests the names of lost kings. They bury and rebury their beloved leaders. The political, economic, and cultural conditions of Poland from 1935 on through 1947 and beyond are unimaginable to me. My father joined the Polish Army at 17 by lying about his age, found himself on the Russian front, and was quickly captured and incarcerated as a prisoner of war. He managed to escape with some comrades from the Russians, repatriated with his army, fought the now invading Germans for a time, then was captured and put into a German concentration camp, from which he again escaped. Now he was on the run, with a few other soldiers. There are hours of gruesome tales, of life saving heroics and abject fear, of nightmarish hunger, death, torture, and debasement. Eventually he was captured again by the Germans and sent to one of their labor assignments on a farm in Germany. Like Karol Wojtyla, my father saved lives of Poles who were Jews and who were Christians. He even saved the German farmer who for a long while had been his cruel natured overseer. What these men saw and what they survived, what all of Europe survived should never be forgotten, although understanding how humanity came to that point is unfathomable. My father’s parents had been born in Europe but emigrated to America, lived and prospered in Fall River, Massachusetts, and gave birth to two of their sons here, the oldest of whom was John. They had been landowners in Poland, and their parents and siblings were tending to the land. However, at the onset of WWI, my father’s mother’s mother in Poland was ill, and the family decided to move back to their homeland. My paternal grandfather joined the Polish Army and fought in WWI and his story is one of a tragic downfall, from freedom and prosperity to madness, humility, and death. The two oldest sons, having been born in the U.S. and keeping their citizenship, moved back to America to start their own careers and families in the States. When the Second World War finally sucked in the United States, John and his brother Thaddeus fought in the U.S. Army. My father, Stefan, for whom I am named, both suffered and witnessed inhumanities of such proportion (a word he used, and misused very often) that I have only begun to witness in this shameful time in which we live. There is even a story where he brought a pitchfork to a gunfight that will appear in some other form all the way. I am not sure how much of the atrabilious horror seeped into his consciousness and shaped who he became. I only know that I saw something evil and unyielding hiding way beneath the surface. His acts as my father, my mother’s husband, my sister’s father, and an American citizen will remain in my judgment separate and distinct from his life in Poland. Whether this is fair or not, it is immutable. In 1945, with the now allied Soviet troops liberating Warsaw and Auschwitz, entering Eastern Germany, the U.S. troops were liberating from the West, spilling into all parts of the Rhineland and Poland. My father had been imprisoned on the work farm in the southeastern part of Germany for almost two years. One day, early in the morning he was watching a white horse barely visible on a hill in the meadow through a thick fog. Suddenly four soldiers appeared at the top of the hill and began approaching. Absolutely mesmerized with fear and an uncanny sense of the familiar, my father recognized one of the soldiers as his older brother John, whom he had not seen in seven years. His brother had come to save him. The long search that John had taken, in the midst of battle, to find and liberate his brother, and the scene of that early morning is still one that plays and replays in my imagination.

Phase 2

The Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities

                           of the United States

      Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction

    Report to the President of the United States

                          March 31, 2005

“All warfare is based on deception” -Sun Tzu

618 pages of trenchant, dissonant sound-bite conclusions wrapped in obeisant lies:

We conclude that the Intelligence Community was dead wrong in almost all of its pre-war judgments about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. This was a major intelligence failure. Its principal causes were the Intelligence Community's inability to collect good information about Iraq's WMD programs, serious errors in analyzing what information it could gather, and a failure to make clear just how much of its analysis was based on assumptions, rather than good evidence. On a matter of this importance, we simply cannot afford failures of this magnitude.

Followed by the obsequious:

After a thorough review, the Commission found no indication that the Intelligence Community distorted the evidence regarding Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. What the intelligence professionals told you about Saddam Hussein's programs was what they believed. They were simply wrong.

Ok, which was it, “simply” wrong or “dead” wrong? I’d have to go with the latter considering the 1,533 American military dead (1,710 total coalition), 11,442 wounded American soldiers, between 17,000 and 20,000 Iraqi civilian deaths, and evidently untold numbers of dead Iraqi soldiers, freedom fighters, insurgents, i.e. the opposition. The coincidence of this report’s appearance, the sad passing of Terri Schiavo, and the imminent death of Pope John Paul II, should amass a quorum of earth’s individuals to be sufficiently focused on the existential question of what it means to be dead. Unfortunately, the contents of this admission- that we have made very dead some 30,000 humans based on bullshit, to the say the least, and deliberate prevarications, if one reads through the shit-will not receive adequate public scrutiny. The ceremony of the Pope’s passing into the “realm of God”, i.e. the spiritual over the ontological view, and the assumption by the “enlightened” that becoming dead is a journey to a better place will dominate the media for days upon days. Meanwhile, this fat confession of culpability, one that has enormous international implications, will sink like Numidian stone into a fathomless lapis lazuli pool of national apathy. Instead, the report will be used to justify the need for more fascist, clandestine maneuvering against U.S. citizens, a rationale for insertion of agents into a short list of “evil” regimes, and the preamble to endless wars that will allow millions the up-close-and-personal view of what it means to be dead.

Much more to come on this report, on Pope John Paul II, and on Phase 2, i.e. death.

Note: Phase 2, the person, is one of the innovators of urban art.

Snap Out of It!

“Do not fancy that an intermission of writing is a decay of kindness. No man is always in a disposition to write; nor has any man at all times something to say.”
-Samuel Johnson: Letter to Boswell

“How hard it is, when everything encourages us to sleep, though we may look about us with conscious, clinging eyes, to wake and yet look about us as in a dream, with eyes that no longer know their function and whose gaze is turned inward.”
-Antonin Artaud

Yesterday, out of obvious necessity, I visited my chiropractor, with the anticipation of pain, a bit of humiliation, and eventual relief. As I sat in the waiting room, I spotted a massive textbook called The Philosophy, Art and Science of Chiropractic on the table next to me. Despite the obvious heft of the thing and the risk of pain it could cause in attempting to lift it onto my lap, I succumbed to its weighty knowledge within. Actually, had there been a People magazine, Time, Newsweek, or anything with Terri Schiavo on the cover, I would have grabbed that. However, the textbook format actually had a calming effect, with its anachronistic headshots of the progenitors of the science, some looking like 60’s high school principals, others like characters from Deadwood, its layout of chapters with questions and topics for discussion at the conclusion of each, and an encyclopedic overview of the subject that would not disappoint. After a cursory reading of the first several pages, concerning the ancient origins of spinal manipulation, homeopathy, and such, I began simply perusing chapter headings. My eye caught several references to Plato, Aristotle, and Descartes, et al, in a heading discussing the philosophy of chiropractic. This evolved into further explications of bio/philosophy with boxed quotes and principles by men such as D.D. Palmer, Erwin Schroedinger, and R. Stephenson, all with the purpose of answering the inscrutable question, what is Life? This salient inquiry is one that has certainly crossed the mind of any person who has as much as heard of the Terri Schiavo case, never mind being inundated by the hyperbolic “discussions” of the matter by the media, Congress, the Federal Courts, the President, and writers from the loquacious to the vitriolic, from the fanatical right to the cruelly succinct left, the latter of which I tend toward, and everyone else who is adequately scared shit of dying. Reading this chiropractic textbook engendered a brief collegiate déjà vu, inspired last night’s dreams, and initiated a dynamic of word association with all the composite parts of the ongoing debate: life, coma, hunger, consciousness, death, and all demanded attention.

The NYT, this past Sunday, bifurcated the argument as Descartes’ cogito ergo sum versus Aristotle’s defense of reason, invention of logic, focus on reality, and emphasis toward the importance of life on earth. However, Aristotle also said, “The ultimate value of life depends upon awareness and the power of contemplation rather than upon mere survival.” Although the article did little to enlighten, the adjacent piece, Different Cultures, Different Debates around the World was informative and provocative. Clearly this is a universal question, endemic to all cultures and societies. Somehow, the brief glimpses into how Japan, for instance, has addressed these end-of-life questions, philosophically and legally, seemed to reveal an absence of the base, self-serving posturing that has been the substance of the debate in this country. A book came to mind, from several years back, about a French editor who suffered a massive stroke. Amazingly, the book is authored by the victim.

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, by Jean-Dominique Bauby is a narrative about the memories, loves, images, and appetites of Bauby’s life. In 1995, Mr. Bauby was the editor-in-chief of French Elle magazine, a father of two young children, and, by the end of that year, the victim of a brainstem stroke, causing a condition known as “locked-in syndrome”. The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke describes the condition:
“Individuals with locked-in syndrome are conscious and can think and reason, but are unable to speak or move. The disorder leaves individuals completely mute and paralyzed.” In Mr. Bauby’s case, he was completely paralyzed except for his left eye, from which he could see and, by blinking, “communicate”. With his left eye and the devotion of Claude Mendibil, the woman who transcribes letter by letter Bauby's sentences (together they developed a system of blinks to indicate individual letters of the French alphabet), this astounding diary is laboriously brought to its completion. The abject horror of awakening from a coma to realize that one is entrapped in ones own body, unable to scream or move, is nearly impossible for me to contemplate without feeling the panic of that claustrophobic reality. The conditional contrast is almost diametrical to that of Terri Schiavo’s. Whereas Mr. Bauby’s awareness, ability to think, reason, conceptualize, communicate, remember, etc. is perfectly intact, all other aspects of his physical existence are frozen in time and lifeless. The beautiful book he creates is an exceptional affirmation of cogito ergo sum. This is not to diminish the “life” to which Terri Schiavo clings.

All extant medical evidence indicates that she no longer thinks, remembers, conceptualizes, or has the capacity for reason. It is frightening to contemplate just how little the medical establishment knows about the human brain, however. Mr. Bauby’s existence, one that he recognized as such at least, ended with his stroke and subsequent coma in 1995. (He died in 1997, two weeks after the publication of The Diving Bell and the Butterfly.) After awaking from his coma and realizing his condition, Bauby puts it this way, “No need to wonder very long where I am, or to recall that the life I once knew was snuffed out over a year ago.” It seems to me that Terri Schiavo’s life was “snuffed out” some 15 years ago, following her brain death. Although her brain stem was not injured significantly, allowing her bodily mechanisms to function normally, the “she” of her had been erased and irrevocably submerged. However, one question that occurs to me, one that I have not seen addressed anywhere as yet, is the advancement, or lack thereof, of emergency treatment of cardio-pulmonary events, follow-up treatment and care, and emergency surgical options in the 15 years since Terri’s cardiac arrest. Is someone who suffers a similar event today more likely to survive intact, or within repairable reach?

The method of Terri Schiavo’s euthanasia requires a leap of faith for observers to be able to accept that she is not suffering. The decision to let her die with dignity seems compatible with my views, what I would presume to be my own wishes. Although the conditional circumstances require a very thorough and specific set of criteria if one is to delineate one’s wishes in advanced directives, i.e. a living will (see M. Bérubé’s excellent post here) It is the concept of “hunger” that causes me some pause, however, and references in my mind two (or three) excellent treatments of the subject, if at least metaphorically. Kakfa’s, A Hunger Artist, and Knut Hamson’s, Hunger (with Paul Auster’s lucid introduction), both of which require a fairly elastic imagination to draw comparison’s to Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube withdrawal, but, both of which deal with hunger as a metaphor for the will to live. Kafka’s story involves many themes confluent with the relationship of the artist to society, to his surroundings, to his art, and the veracity and integrity of his art; whether it is willed or inevitable, etc. Hamson’s novel, published in 1890, raises a whole separate set of polemics; the artist on the brink of starvation meandering about a city in alternating states of madness, paranoia, and despair. I would suggest the reader here take another leap of faith and read these brief works as, excuse me, food for thought in this whole affair.

Finally, as in almost all situations, a Seinfeld episode comes to mind. In episode #147 (called The Comeback), Kramer and Elaine are in a video store discussing whose “picks” each prefers. Elaine is drawn to Vincent’s picks, Kramer to Gene’s. Kramer ends up renting a movie called, The Other Side of Darkness, in which a woman enters a coma. He immediately decides that he would never want to spend the rest of his life in a coma, and he goes to an attorney to draw up a living will with Elaine as his Executor. (Kramer and Elaine nix or yeah various conditions the lawyer rattles off as sustain or desist, to our amusement.) Of course, this is only a subplot in the episode. And, as it turns out, Kramer never finished watching the video. When he finally does, he realizes that it is possible to come out of a coma and decides to negate his living will. However, before he has the opportunity, Kramer gets hit in the head with tennis balls and goes into a coma. Ah, the hilarious dénouement.

I wonder if it is possible to contemplate the question of what life is, even avoiding linear definitions, without locking oneself in a tiny, lightless room, bereft of food and water for days, until the answer reveals itself.

NOTE
Because my links do not seem to be working as they should, I here provide the addresses to some of the references:
• http://www.chiropraktik-bund.de/Adobe-Dateien/Was%20ist%20Leben.pdf
• http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/lockedinsyndrome/lockedinsyndrome.htm
• http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0374525285/ref%3Dpd%5Fsl%5Faw%5Falx- jeb-7-1%5Fbook%5F2514505%5F8/104-5788270-9696728
• http://www.bmts.com/~vilja/33principles.html
• http://www.bookbrowse.com/index.cfm?page=title&titleID=120&view=excerpt
• http://www.tvtome.com/Seinfeld/season8.html
http://www.michaelberube.com/

Flowers of Evil

(ED. Note: This post was begun two days ago, before the confluence of appalling news stories, conflated and distorted by the media, caused an immutable stasis.)

In less than 12 hours the moment that signifies the astronomical beginning of spring in my hemisphere, in my neighborhood, on my street, and in my back yard will arrive, as it has for aeons; without a rimshot, unless I can time it just right.  One of the rites of spring, of which I am a reluctant participant, includes a sojourn to the annual New England Flower Show, if only to spend inestimable time with the lovely Ms. M.  It isn’t actually a rite; I’ve only been once before, although for M. it is a requirement of emblematic proportions, a renaissance, a living tableau, and, this year, an eventual disappointment.  The degree of anxiety that these kinds of events induce, i.e. those that take place in arenas, civic centers, exposition halls, malls, fairs, carnivals, anything outside of my house in fact, is equivalent to the moment my primary care physician snaps on the latex glove.  However, yesterday was a gorgeous day with my semiotic interpretations of a.) the yellow Volkswagen that was filling-up along side us at the Shell station, b.) the ethnically rich population of kids that was spilling out of nearby school with faces that expressed the inherent hope of a weekend, c.) the sky that was as blue as my tee shirt and any attempt to name would be impossible, and d.) the superb mix on my CD, beginning with Pharoah Sanders and continuing with Patato y Totic, et al, inspiring and conspiring to indicate spring with all its petals and puddles.  

Then the traffic hit; the Friday afternoon hegira to and from the city, “the dark-eyed ancient tribe that never rests…” and the hyper-alert, defensive driving protocol took over to avoid the unbridled aggression of the archetype soccer mom driving the behemoth SUV while talking on a cell phone at 70 mph, lane changing at will, regardless of the implausible physics required to fit the 18′ vehicle into a 4′ length between the unfortunate vehicles in the destination lane.  Nevertheless, after 45 minutes of this stop-&-go-&-avoid-crashing-while-trying-to-move-over-to-the-exit-lane intensity, we reached the

Boston

Exposition

Center

and were delighted to fork over $12 to park.  I was even more delighted to pay $17 @ to go inside to look at plants that grow abundantly for free outside.  However, this event is more about the simulacra of nature (and its marketability) than a naturalistic perspective.  In fact, the vendors outnumber the actual designs (that receive blue, and only blue, ribbons, which one must read to decipher the bestowed honor), a fact that fortuitously led to my discovering the kiosk for the Iguana Grill that boasted to make the Boston Area’s best margarita, oh boy.  Now, I don’t know what I was expecting at a flower show, after all, and perhaps I am a margarita chauvinist, but my disappointment was palpable.  Later, Ms. M. asked me if I felt anything from the margarita.  Alas, other than heartburn, I had to admit I did not, to which she concurred. 

Too bad actually; a slight tequila adjustment of the synaptic firing system may have alleviated the encroaching depression of watching over 50% of the attendees, those in the incipient 2 to 3 years of life, and those in the final 2 or 3 years, being wheeled around in either strollers or wheelchairs to ponder the bizarre recreations of natural settings in a giant, smelly room.  Last year M. had come here with her sister, which I hope will become a future tradition, and found the exhibits inspired and inspiring.  She enjoys cultivating, landscaping, planting and such around our small plot of urban land, and I enjoy watching her.  But after an hour of wandering this Borgesian labyrinth of Interior/Exterior confusion (mixed with the carny’s flare for a sales pitch), we decided to head home. Somewhere on I-93 South, after having missed the entrance to the

Diamond Lane

, now stuck reductively in bumper to bumper traffic again, and opting for news, after a few minutes of vying-for-pyretic-position music, we began listening to All Things Considered on NPR, and this is where the narrative eats its own tail. 

One of the reasons I had acquiesced to M.’s desire to go to the flower show, aside from its being the right thing to do, was to seek out some hopefulness and leave behind the headlines and talking points of the CNN’s, et al regarding the tragic and emotionally/intellectually conflictive stories, from the Atlanta murders (and apotheosis of Ashley Smith) to the heartbreaking Lunsford case in FLA (who does not immediately think of a familiar child and suffer empathetic pain) to the uncomfortably public spectacle of, ultimately, the most personal of extant decisions, in the Schiavo case.  Please don’t get me wrong; it is not the facts, which are horrible enough, that cause consternation.  It is the way in which the media portrays these events in the least factual and most salacious of ways possible, although I am always being surprised by the depth to which they sink.  Even more salient is the fact that these stories are the last of which we should be discussing. Congress has just said “fuck you” to millions of years of geographical evolution and the Earth by voting to open up the ANWR wilderness to rape by Big Oil; concomitantly they have also cut the balls off the American lower and middle classes by passing the Bankruptcy Bill (Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 that rewards the largest contributor to the Republican party, the MBNA, as reported on Daily Kos by Maryscott O’Conner, 03/06/05), summarily ignored the U.S. Foreign Trade Deficit in the portentous amount of $666 billion,  the lies the Bush Administration told about North Korea selling nuclear material to Libya, when in fact the transfer of said material was to Pakistan, who bought and then sold these materials to Libya, the disgraceful appeasement to the political pressuring of corporate interests (to the detriment of the majority of the population) in such areas as international trade agreements (see CAFTA), illegal immigration, global warming and environmental issues, ad infinitum.  Watching the U.S. Congress on a daily basis is like observing the development of scum on a stagnant pond.  The corruption and incompetence is rampant and obscene.  And, now with the national shame of its obtrusive and unconstitutional stance in the Terry Schiavo case, we have succumbed to the strident hypocrisy of the religious zealots.  Mr. BTK was an active church member and registered Republican all during his years of terrorism and deprivation. 

Perhaps, for me, watching the unconscionable actions of Tom Delay and his ilk regarding the Schiavo issue are personal.  Read the post entitled Symphony of Sorrowful Songs – Gorecki (so titled because it was a piece of music that spoke to me during this period, which a quick read of the post entitled Minor Epiphanies will also elucidate) to understand.  Like millions of other families, I was faced with these same impossible and cruel choices.  If anyone outside of my brain would have offered an opinion in this matter I would have gone nuclear.  Observing this ongoing Congressional pornography, one can hear the final words of Kurtz in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, “The horror! The horror!” 

Chain of Fools

• Tom Delay

• Rick Santorum

• Bob Novak

• Bill Frist

• This is going to take too long…so,

• The

  U.S.

  Congress
• The Bush Administration
• CNN, MSNBC, FOX News, etc.

I can’t go on. I’ll go on.   

The list is endless, and for full disclosure, I am also on the list for crimes against my own body.

Moveable Parts

In his first Inaugural Address, Thomas Jefferson said, "Others... may condemn what they would not if seen in all its parts."

I’ve been reading William T. Vollmann’s 750-plus page novel, The Royal Family, which means I’m at least two novels in the weeds trying to keep current on his fiction.  So it surprised me, a couple of Sundays ago to be perusing the NYT Book Review and to notice that there is a new biography of the sanguinary former Khmer Rouge leader Saloth Sar, known as Pol Pot, written by Phillip Short, reviewed by none other than the über-prolific Mr. Vollmann. In fact, I was drawn to the title, Pol Pot, Anatomy of a Nightmare because I was actually watching the 1984 film, The Killing Fields, while I was reading the Sunday newspapers, and had recently been thinking about the amazing story of the expatriate Cambodian actor, Dr. Haing S. Ngor and his tragic life, his amazing performance, and his violent death in Los Angeles in 1996, whose own experiences are as compelling as the “real life” character he portrays in the film, Dith Pran. Aside from the unfathomable fact that W.T. has time to read a 537 page biography at all, moreover to intelligently and uniquely deconstruct, illuminate, eviscerate where necessary, and justly ascribe validation to the author’s attempt to controversially expose certain truths, the book, the review, and the film coinciding on a Sunday afternoon, unfortunately, expose the desultory observation of my own that Sam Waterston, who portrays the New York Times journalist Sydney Schanberg in the film, has his hair parted on the right side.

The reason I made this very less than perspicacious observation at all was the fact that I had only a few days earlier rented the 1973 teleplay version of Tennessee Williams’, The Glass Menagerie, starring Katherine Hepburn as Amanda Wingfield, and Sam Waterston as her son, Tom Wingfield.  Clearly in this instance, Mr. Waterston’s hair is parted on the left.  And, anyone who has happened to watch the very successful NBC drama Law and Order in the last 10 years will have seen the character of Jack McCoy, brilliantly portrayed by Sam Waterston, parting his luxuriant head of increasingly salty salt-n-pepper hair on the left.  Sadly to admit, this got me wondering how often the ambi-partitioning Mr. Waterston has changed his hair part, and what has been the process of determining which side to select as the diminutive, or is it dominant, parting side.

My immediate intuition led me to conclude that the part may reflect a political proclivity.

Executive A.D.A., Jack McCoy is an Irish Catholic, anti-death penalty, tough but liberal advocate for justice.  However, Sydney Schanberg has always been seen, although his actual written opinions seem to obfuscate this point, as leftist.  So why the right side part?  Pictures of Mr. Schanberg from that time show that he was a right-parter (he has since lost enough hair to make the actual parting moot), thus historical accuracy may have been Mr. Waterston’s sole determinant.  What then has been the deciding factor of part choice in all of the fictional characters he has portrayed?  He has acted in four of Woody Allen’s films, for example, and chose the right side part but once (Interiors).  However, a quick sampling of other roles reveals a certain fetishist inclination for this attributively “feminine” right side characteristic.  A short listing of right side parts includes:

            Heaven’s Gate

            Serial Mom

            Mindwalk

            Capricorn One

            Shadow Conspiracy

            The Visionaries

            Games Mother Never Taught You

            In the Hands of the Enemy

A brief list of flip side examples is thus:

            Interiors

            The Great Gatsby

            Savages

            The Glass Menagerie

            Law and Order

Abe Lincoln in

Illinois

(Mr. Waterston has some renown for his portrayals of   Abraham Lincoln, some parting on the left, as here, and some parting on the right.  Evidence here shows that Mr. Lincoln was also a part-shifter.)

Fitzwilly and

The Man in the Moon (highly recommended if you dig Elvis and great cinematography)

The more I examine this dichotomy of left-side brain, right-side brain randomness, if it is indeed random and not insidious, the more confounded and angry I become.  The audacity of this hirsute pedant to thumb his nose at the millions of men afflicted with male pattern baldness, depilation, alopecia, and widow’s peaks.  What is he, some kind of psycho or schizoid bi-partisan?  This guy is a loaded gun, comb, whatever.  William T. Vollmann has written volumes on whores, Cambodian and otherwise, drug addicts, and other transitory individuals living beautiful lives of pathos on the fringes.  And, he hasn’t changed his slightly left of center part in tens of thousands of pages.  Sam Waterston is mocking not only the looking glass, but those of us trying to get a handle on reality.  How are we supposed to know if we are looking at something real or a reflection of reality?  Now, after ten years of left parting on Law and Order (although I have seen publicity shots for this same series with a right part; the gall) the cocksure Waterston states with impunity here, “I’m the D.A.; I can do It.”, (says Executive Assistant District Attorney Jonathon James “Jack” McCoy).  Somebody, please, get this guy off the streets.

Incredulity

In the past few days, the current events in my Weekly Reader are like a set of Zen koans, intended to free the mind from logical thinking: Senate votes to open ANWR for oil drilling…Bush nominates Paul Wolfowitz to head the World Bank…Condoleeza Rice taps Karen Hughes for State Dept. position to spin the U.S.A. to the international community…John Bolten nominated by Bush to be next U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations…Robert Blake acquitted…180 million Americans volunteer to lethally inject Scott Peterson…Social Security fixes itself…

Minor Epiphanies

There is a singular moment.  I am lying in a bathtub in a very small but very sunny room with a slanted, wainscoted ceiling above my head.  It is more than 16 years ago, and although most of those years are cross-referenced in my neocortex under such headings as burnt toast, squeaky bed, cocaine, Bad Religion, tincture of methiolate, Padanaram, mescaline, Public Enemy, linguica & eggs, Josef Škvorecký, Miles of Coltrane, every ray of sunshine, every drop of rain, and millions of antediluvian smells, tastes, and dialectics of pleasure and pain, all or at least most of these files are inaccessible from here.  This day, however, and I should not say “day”, since no other minute of whatever date this was is within my cognizance, this moment I am listening to one particular passage of extemporaneous compositions by keyboardist Keith Jarrett on a recording of his solo concerts in Bremen/Lausanne (and, as difficult as it is not to devolve into a dissertation on Mr. Jarrett’s low stature with me at that time contrasted with the obvious influence of Paul Bley, it is nihil ad rem) which moves me to tears, to abject crying that is at once all of the sadness I have ever felt to this point and pure joy.  The moment, inextricably bound to the music, extant in the music, exists now like a photograph or dream that can be accessed at will, but still has such poignancy as to require only rare visits.

Perhaps it is the fact that the warm bath, cleansing and womblike, and all manner of hierarchical psycho-sexual symbolism amidst a personal historical period of shame, or at a minimum, difficult transition, that this singular moment is imprinted with such clarity. No.  What this illustrates is the asomatious power of music; transformative, evocative, metaphysical, spiritual, cognitive, emotive, and unique.  I’m not talking simply about how Sly Stone’s, Hot Fun in the Summertime either brings one back to the beach, or a school parking lot, or an inamorata’s back yard, although that may be part of the connection.  It is the singular experience of hearing a piece of music as though for the first time.  And, if one is truly listening, it is always the first time.  An Eric Dolphy solo, (listen to the bass clarinet solo on Something Sweet, Something Tender, from Out to Lunch, on Blue Note 1964) when it meets the right ears at the right time has the potential to deconstruct and reassemble an entire lifetime of priorities.  Who knows, potato chips could fall to number three or four and the need for a cool hat could become priority one.

Of course context, mood, surroundings, and whether or not the experience is solitary or not will have an affect on one’s predilection toward Denilo Perez’s cover of Stevie Wonder’s, Overjoyed or a preference for the original. These transient propensities are amusingly denoted by Nick Hornby in his book High Fidelity as product placement:

..."Have you got any soul?" a woman asks the next afternoon. That depends, I feel like saying; some days yes, some days no. A few days ago I was right out; now I've got loads, too much, more than I can handle. I wish I could spread it a bit more evenly, I want to tell her, get a better balance, but I can't seem to get it sorted. I can see she wouldn't be interested in my internal stock control problems though, so I simply point to where I keep the soul I have, right by the exit, just next to the blues.

In my own case, I am often surprised at the amount of soul I have in reserve at any given moment.  Here I’d love to have the time to offer a counter argument to Stanley Crouch’s abasement of Hip-Hop, purely on a musical basis.  The cultural diaspora of his contentions are dispersed like the extrapolations on Ornette Coleman’s, Free Jazz (A Collective Improvisation) and stand on their own merit. True, I can not imagine being either spiritually subjugated or reaching the crossroad of a minor epiphany upon listening to Mos Def, whereas John Coltrane’s, A Love Supreme is always going to produce a state of awe.  But, strangely, it would be a certain grand alignment of sentient surroundings and open mind that would allow McCoy Tyner’s piano solo on My Favorite Things to change me ontologically forever. 

How music reaches inside us and fires the synapses that create these major and minor epiphanies has been the subject of much inquiry.  Certainly, the ability to compose music has been addressed eloquently in such books as Douglas Hofstadter’s, Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid.  But why we feel music so deeply, at least some of us, is an area of inquiry we are just beginning to unravel scientifically.  Not that I need to know.  Music is life; it reaches the universe inside as well as the infinite destinations of the spirit.

Fragments:

Roland Barthes said, “…writing is the destruction of every voice, of every point of origin. Writing is that neutral, composite, oblique space where our subject slips away, the negative where all identity is lost, starting with the very identity of the body writing.”

1980, Roland Barthes met his death on a Parisian street, run over by a laundry van.

Chekhov wrote, “It is time for writers to admit that nothing in this world makes sense. Only fools and charlatans think they know and understand everything. The stupider they are, the wider they conceive their horizons to be. And if an artist decides to declare that he understands nothing of what he sees — this in itself constitutes a considerable clarity in the realm of thought, and a great step forward.” (To Alexei Suvorin, May 30, 1888)

After his death, Chekhov's remains were locked up in a refrigerated train car marked, "For Oysters" and shipped back to Russia from Germany for burial.

Honore de Balzac wrote in The Pleasures and Pains of Coffee,

“Coffee roasts your insides. Many people claim coffee inspires them, but, as everybody knows, coffee only makes boring people even more boring.”

Balzac's addiction to caffeine drove him to eat coffee, as some schizophrenic patients are observed to do today, and may have killed him.

Two highly recommended pieces, and somewhat related, for their relevance today:

John Cage’s last long mesostic poem, Overpopulation and Art

and Buckminster Fuller’s, GRUNCH of Giants

Stop Me If You've Heard This One

A giraffe walks into a Soho bar and orders a mojito.

“Sorry,” announces the bartender, “We don’t serve giraffes in here.”

“Ugh, I guess the turtleneck didn’t fool you, huh?”

“Wait a minute,” the barkeep asks incredulously,

“You mean you really are a giraffe?  I thought you were Gwyneth Paltrow.”

“I get that a lot…I’ll see you around.”

“Wait a minute,” says the young man, “I was only kidding about the giraffe thing.  Do you want that straight up or on the rocks?”

He glances at the book she had placed on the bar upon arriving and deciphers the title as The Pound Era, by Hugh Kenner.

“I never really got into the whole metric thing.” says the dark and comely young man as he begins his mysterious mixological manifestations.

“What’s your name, handsome?” Gwyneth cautiously asks.

“Dick V, as in Roman Numeral Five.” Dick replies, and asks, “And what do they call you sweetheart?”

“JoJo.” she says, as she watches Dick muddle the mint and simple syrup and then inquires,

“So, you’re from a long line of Dicks?” staring at the heart-shaped American flag on his collar.

“No, I’m from a long line of nuts.” he laughs.

He puts the drink in front of her, and as she goes to take a sip their hands briefly touch.  The mojito is perfect, and for the first time today she is content to be where she is.  The TV is playing with both the sound and the closed captioning on.  It is situated right above Dick’s head, and he seems to be engrossed in the Karl Rove sound bite on CNN. 

“So, you’re a Bush man?” JoJo asks.

“I hate the son-of-a-bitch, and I hate that bastard even more.” he says gesturing with his head toward the TV, while polishing a wine glass.  “Evil genius.  Fucking evil genius.” Dick seethes.

“Well,” says JoJo looking at his collar, “I couldn’t help noticing you had a heart on.”

“Yeah, fuck it,” he says.  “I’m just as patriotic as those red state sisterfuckers.” 

“You picture the red states as one big trailer park?” she asks with a smile.

“Nah, I’m just an asshole,” he smiles back, “But they’re the ones getting screwed by this Administration.  Today it looks like the Bankruptcy Bill is set for passage, and it’s all the red states that rank in the top ten most in credit card debt.   And they’re getting fucked by farming cutbacks, education cutbacks, and today Bush is spouting some energy bill crap that is such hypocritical double speak…He set back the planet 50 years.  Even Reagan, who blamed pollution on trees, didn’t have the corrupt omnipotence to get all this shit over.  And, now he’s trying to take credit for every political dynamic on the planet, as though Arafat didn’t fucking die and Hariri wasn’t assassinated (probably by the CIA), and ‘freedom is on the march’…whatever.”

“Tell me how you really feel.” jokes JoJo.

“Do you know what Pound said about freedom?” she asks.

“The actor?” Dick says.

She stares at him blankly for a moment, as though contemplating a profound postulate, then responds, “What actor?”

“Never mind, what’d he say?” Dick segues, aware of his unawareness.

After a pause, she says, “There is no freedom without economic freedom.”

“Of course,” she adds, “He was an anti-Semitic fascist who was declared insane…one of the great poets of the 20^th Century though.”

“He’s right though,” Dick concludes, “There is a class war going on even if asswipes like Bob Novak keep spitting that phrase back at liberals as one of our unconscionable accusations like sour pabulum.”

“Did you ever see the Bob Greenwald film, Uncovered: The Whole Truth that clearly shows the illegal selling of this war to the American public?” Dick asks, and continues,

“The Joseph Wilson, Niger yellowcake, cum Valerie Plame outing (fucking Rove) and all that shit?”

Yes,” she replies, “But, even though I support the conclusions, I don’t like didactic, one sided arguments, you know, without counterpoint.”

“Fuck that,” Dick says, “All the goddamn talking points everyday, day in and day out are right wing propaganda, shoved down our throats and deep into the general public’s consciousness; it’s evil genius.”

“Look at today’s atrocities in Iraq,” he continues, “Hussein wouldn’t have lasted more than a few more years.  Now that country is an Hieronymus Bosch painting.  It’s a joke without a punch line.”

“But isn’t that what this is?” she asks.

Dick scratches his head and laughs to himself.

JoJo says to Dick, “I subscribe to this slick, generally useless magazine called Real Simple that has this hysterical piece by Jonathan Safran Foer in it on being, or not being, a vegetarian.  The last line of the piece is, ‘But last night sushi felt right’.  What feels right to you Dick?

“Do you live around here?” he asks.

“I’m staying at the Soho Grand,” she answers and writes her room number on a cocktail napkin.

“I’ll be by later.” he promises.  “Shall I bring anything?”

“A Château Cheval-Blanc would be nice…and maybe a step ladder.”

Are You Syrias?

Has anyone ever compared the similarities of the two novels, Brett Easton Elis’ American Psycho and Huysmans’, A Rebours ? (I came across one article, but, alas the short shrift was in Dutch and, therefore, I was also in Dutch)  The idea, or question, came into my consciousness as I pulled into my driveway this afternoon, and, as I was shutting down the car, the sound of the music, along with the afternoon light, combined with a certain olfactory hint of leather caused what we refer to as a déjà vu, otherwise as a Proustian epiphany, or fall down the rabbit hole, whatever.  Then it was a short synaptic journey from Proust (via Baudelaire, Rimbaud, Bataille, Wilde, et al, and I mean who knows) to Huysmans and his alter-ego in repair des Esseintes.  The dynamic of both novels derives from, in a succinctly simplistic way, the eventual ravages of ennui.  Both Patrick Bateman, the protagonist/antagonist of AP and des Esseintes are wealthy aesthetes of their age; albeit, Bateman is as shallow as the music to which he listens (and the emollients he uses and the food he eats…) and is inclined to deconstruct from time to time. (Bateman goes on for some 30 pages in an apotheosis devolving into hysteria about how Whitney Houston is the greatest American Jazz singer of the 80’s, with further extrapolations of Huey Lewis and the News and Genesis.) Both central characters also vacillate between accepting reality as it is and displacing it with a Baudrillardian hyperreality.

"The age of nature," says des Esseintes, "is past; it has finally exhausted the patience of all sensitive minds by the loathsome monotony of its landscapes and skies."

Both of these books are breviaries of sorts as well.  Of course they each go into excruciating detail about “products” and the senses and, in the case of A Rebours, supplies, rather obviously, the prototype for such books as Patrick Suskind’s, Perfume and Diane Ackerman’s, A Natural History of the Senses.  As in this passage:

            "Indeed, each liquor corresponded in taste, he fancied, with the sound of a particular instrument. Dry curaçao, for example, resembled the clarinet in its shrill, velvety tone; kümmel was like the oboe, whose timbre is sonorous and nasal; crème de menthe and anisette were like the flute, both sweet and poignant, whining and soft. Then to complete the orchestra come kirsch, blowing a wild trumpet blast; gin and whisky, deafening the palate with their harsh eruptions of cornets and trombones; liqueur brandy, blaring with the overwhelming crash of tubas, while the thundering of cymbals and the big drum, beaten hard, evoked the rakis of Chios and the mastics." (from À Rebours)

Patrick Bateman’s narration begins the novel with similar expositions on consumer products with full declination of brands and designers, etc.  The eventual debasement that the reader has to endure, in both novels, is so extreme and hyperbolic (not to mention its simulacra) that the result is a perverse humor that becomes as serious as Wile E. Coyote running into a tunnel painted on a rock wall.  Splat!  Both novels stirred a public outcry in their day.  Unfortunately, I have rambled incoherently into another of those situations that I suspect will be my plea upon meeting the Grim Reaper, “Whoa, whoa, whoa…let me fuckin’ start over.”  Like I said, it was just a thought. 

Actually, what was on my mind at the time of the sudden literary spasm was today’s further strident and bellicose remarks by George and Condi regarding the speech by Syrian President Bashar Assad before his Parliament, who said that he was going to withdraw Syrian troops from Lebanon over the next few weeks.  Assad said his plan would put

Syria

in full compliance with international agreements and U.N. demands.

"By carrying out this measure,

Syria

will have fulfilled requirements of the Taif agreement and implemented U.N. Resolution 1559," the Syrian leader said.

It seems to me that the Lebanese people deserve what they’re asking for, in the way of autonomy and freedom from foreign occupation and influence.  Questions arise, however, in the dynamic of these current events.  Obviously the assassination of Rafik Hariri on February 14^th of this year began the pro-liberation movement and ascension of the Lebanese opposition movement, of which Hariri was part.  It is perplexing to me that

Syria

would be directly involved in such a politically vacuous action. 

Israel

seems to be maneuvering behind the scenes.  It was initially reported out of

Israel

that they had proof that the assassination was planned, ordered, and executed out of

Syria

.  Of course, a week later, the Bush administration began saying it had the same “proof”.  This is where I become incredulous.  The dynamics are in place for another peaceful transition (see

Ukraine

, see

Poland

, on and on) through the will of the people.  Meanwhile, the Administration jumps into the tough talking sheriff, “get out of Dodge” mode, and I can only imagine most people screaming, “Shut the fuck up” at their televisions.  I don’t trust any of these players;

Syria

,

Israel

,

Lebanon

,

France

, the Saudis, and certainly not anyone in this Administration.  The hypocrisy of the United States telling another country to pull its troops and agents out of a sovereign nation immediately, to let them hold their own elections without foreign influence, and not to meddle in the affairs of other countries is beyond caricatural; its is dangerously unfunny.

I would suggest a cursory reading of

Lebanon

’s recent, i.e. last century, history to understand the amazing political and ethnic/religious upheavals this small strip of land has endured in such a brief period.  Let these people have what they want for once.  It’s only going to last about five minutes anyway. 

Syria

,

Iran

,

North Korea

, Africa,

Saudi Arabia

, et al, all have targets on their backs. 

Lebanon

, via

Israel

, will most likely become an adjunct base for

U.S.

military operations, like protecting our new oil.

And, since when did we start assassinating (or tying to) Italian journalists?  Giuliana

Sgrena is duly pissed.  Then there is this story in today’s NYT to stir your patriotism.

I’m out.  Once again I’ve reached that point,

“Whoa, whoa, whoa…let me fuckin’ start over.”

How do you Camus?

Outside View: Bush, Camus and Sartre

By Ronald Aronson

Outside View Commentator

Published 3/3/2005 2:03 AM

The quote, "freedom is a long-distance race," was ripped from its context, one that establishes beyond doubt that Camus' words were not meant straightforwardly. No, a careful reading makes clear they were intended as a spoof of the thought of his former good friend, Jean-Paul Sartre.

President Bush was speaking to a group of ordinary folks in Westfield, NJtoday on Social Security and other existential topics. “Why does man not see things? He is himself standing in the way: he conceals things.” Bush asked, quoting from Nietzsche's Daybreak, then saying that he understands that Social Security is a “safety net”, but that it is one with a hole in it, “and we need to hang on to this safety net.”  The crowd of 257, all of whom had been vetted, paid, fingerprinted, stripped and given a full body-cavity search, shown a short “film” under sensory deprivation conditions, and given huge doses of Lithium, were rapturous, and exploded in thunderous applause at Bush’s every punctuation mark.  Jacketless, with rolled up sleeves, the President, head bobbing and shoulders shrugging, said that he had been talking to a lot of older folks and younger individuals, not to mention Jacques Chirac and Putin, and Brittany, who understood where he was coming from on these issues, and,

“In addition to my other numerous acquaintances, I have one more intimate confidant. . . . My depression is the most faithful mistress I have known- no wonder, then, that I return the love.” inexplicably and incongruously quoting Kierkegaard.

Applause began and abated sporadically in various parts of the room as Bush stared at his shoes for a moment, then muttered,

"We sometimes encounter people, even perfect strangers, who begin to interest us at first sight, somehow suddenly, all at once, before a word has been spoken."

“Ugh, I’ve been listening to Crime and Punishment on tape, and I, ugh…”

"The subject that is most on my mind right now is getting Syriaout of Lebanon, and I don't mean just the troops out of Lebanon, I mean all of them out of

Lebanon, particularly the secret service out of Lebanon-- the intelligence services,"

"This is non-negotiable. It is time to get out. ... I don't think you can have fair elections with Syrian troops there," Bush continued.

He asked the crowd how the people of a nation trying to forge a democracy could possibly hold legitimate elections and attempt political unification while foreign troops and agents were occupying their country. 

“Who do these Syrians think they are?” Bush inquired, and added,

“My buddy Camus put it this way, ‘The twenty-one deaf men, the war criminals of tomorrow, who today negotiate the peace carry on their monotonous conversations placidly seated in an express train which bears them toward the abyss at a thousand miles an hour.’…I love that, ‘a thousand miles an hour’ the President laughed.

“Freedom is on the march” Bush proclaimed, punctuating “march” with a one-legged goosestep for emphasis. 

“Camus,” (who Bush pronounces “Caymus”, like the Cabernet Sauvignon made by Charlie Wagner) “says ‘Freedom is nothing but a chance to be better.’, and who doesn’t want all these Middle Easterners to be better?”

"When we say withdraw we mean complete withdrawal -- no half-hearted measures," Bush suddenly said. "Syrian troops, Syrian intelligence services must get out of Lebanon now."

“And, we are going to hunt down Asama bin Laden, and smoke ‘em out, and Social Security has a hole in the net…but,” Bush pointed his finger for emphasis, “Schopenhauer said, ‘Every nation ridicules other nations, and all are right.’, so I must be right.”

“Freedom’s not just another word for nothin’ else to lose…it’s, well let me quote Sart here:”

“For I declare that freedom, in respect of concrete circumstances, can have no other end and aim but itself; and when once a man has seen that values depend on himself, in that state of forsakenness he can will only one thing, and that is freedom as the foundation of all values.”

The President then launched into an anecdote about the time his mother took him to the circus, and there were these brothers on the trapeze who would fly through the air and spin and summersault and catch each other, and they didn’t have no net, not even one with a hole in it, and they didn’t need no net, cause they didn’t fall.  He said they may have been short and muscular but they didn’t smell as bad as the clowns, who scared him, anyway, and were always sneaking up on you…

After twenty minutes or so of a story that ended with ice cream and fried pork rinds and a kiss goodnight from mother, the President ended with a quote from André Malraux that he said summed up the war in Iraq:

“The great mystery is not that we should have been thrown down here at random between the profusion of matter and that of the stars; it is that, from our very prison, we should draw from our own selves images powerful enough to deny our nothingness.”

DETROIT, March 3 (UPI) -- A careful reading of "The Fall" reveals that President Bush's quote from Albert Camus in Brussels was an astonishing mistake. Many of our European friends may now be laughing up their sleeves at the United States' head of state. To those who know Camus, a White House speechwriter may have created a spectacle, in which the president unwittingly parodied himself.

...and in a related story, the United States of America took part in a marathon circle jerk with Martha Stewart, who made "organic" cappuccinos with the seemingly endless amount of froth.

Hierarchies

The Bush propaganda machine, one that would have Goebbels in awe, which now includes the likes of Wolf Blitzer Judy Woodruff, and Andrea Koppell and just about every other vapid voice on CNN, has hijacked the American language and planted their mine field of buzz words, i.e., freedom, as in “on the march” (not to be confused with liberty, as in civil liberties; There was a time when we had liberties of our own.  Thanks to people like Viet Dinh, et al, the Ashcrofts & his ilk were just the shills, we will soon be taking on issues

that we recently would have assumed as inalienable rights.

'If you'd told me five years ago I'd be spending the majority of my time fighting over whether reporters could keep sources confidential, you could have knocked me over with a feather.'

Media lawyer Nathan Siegel As quoted in Attack at the Source
By Douglas McCollam/em)

and, compassion, as in “armies of compassion” referring to faith-based community initiatives and laid the groundwork for taking credit for every election taking place anywhere in the world and spinning the events in Lebanon and Egypt as though they are inevitably linked to the Iraqi War.  Clearly, there are chess pieces being moved to set up the inevitable attack on Syria by the U.S., regardless of lies on both sides , as we listen to Condiment Rice saying she has proof that the recent attack in Israel was planned, ordered from and executed out of Damascus (as though we hadn’t already heard this days ago from Ariel Sharon ).  And these chess pieces are lining up in some very scary and puzzling ways:

France

suddenly aligned with the

U.S.

on the political pressuring of

Syria

, while

Russia

is aligned with

Iran

in its recent nuclear deal, Iran is aligned with Syria (and Joe Biden is hair-plugging his usual pabulum of political irrelevance in saying Syria is a bad actor; not as bad as Ben Affleck, perhaps, but nonetheless).  So with all this hierarchical maneuvering in this Oliver Stone plot of absurdity, I started to think about hierarchies in general, i.e. natural orders like the food chain and where some of us are located on it, and I realized that most of these hierarchies are self-imposed, either by the electorate, in the political sense, or through acquiescence, in the corporate sense.  However, like recombinant viral strains, these hierarchies combine in frighteningly virulent ways.  The same thing happens in the workplace, the family, and in relationships, particularly between women and men.  Several years ago a book entitled, You Just Don’t Understand, by Deborah Tannen explored some of the ways in which these systems occur:

            Boys like to play outside and in large groups. They have a hierarchical structure, always having a group leader who tells others what to do and how to do it and resists what other boys propose. The ability to give orders and have other obey is what helps them achieve status and a since of independence. Boy’s games have winners and losers and provide opportunities to show their skills. Girls like to play in small groups or in pairs and tend to have a best friend that is the center of her social life. For girls intimacy and connection are what matters. Their activities generally don’t have winners or losers (like playing house). Girls don’t give orders or try to show that they are better than the next girl. They are more concerned that they are liked by the others.

(Her most recent book, He Said, She Said: Exploring the

Different Ways

Men and Women Communicate, elaborates on these hierarchies of communication further.)  As a society, we Americans create the hierarchy of news that the mainstream media regurgitates, such a the Michael Jackson trial, the Academy Awards and all the splay of topics off of it, by tuning in to the pornography of anti-intellectualism that constitutes the diurnal broadcasting of hundreds of channels on television.  Hey, I like CSI with a grilled cheese just like everyone else. But I don’t like my news to also be escapist entertainment.  Why are there music, percussion, and video-game sounds playing as Wolf reads his teleprompter in a movie trailer voice? 

I could keep on bitching, but I am concerned about the inordinate amount of times I drop the soap during my average shower.  As it is, I have a bad lower back, and I seriously think there is something wrong with my gripping abilities.  Not to mention my wife uses so many oils in the bath and shower that the tub has almost zero friction, which means that standing requires 100% concentration.  At least we are only 20 days out from Bach’s Birthday .

I guess it’s an eye-for-an-eye time.  From the BTK killer, to Syria, to Russia with love, the justification of killing to accomplish justice, or establish freedom, i.e. democracy ( as though a republic or other hierarchy of organization can not support such an intangible), or to establish hegemony.

This article illustrates one of the extremes of the problem of achieving justice within such insanity.  Can there be justice when everyone is wrong? 

Reading this article (below) got me to thinking about the whole “within one’s sphere of influence” philosophical view of individual thinking/action/concern.  It may be the central question determining how humans will or will not succeed in either peaceful coexistence or annihilation.  All philosophies and religions intersect at this question of individual pursuits vs. the common good.   Other aspects of this can be found here.  Don’t get me wrong, I don’t agree with Andrew Sullivan’s Luddite observations in this regard.  I think I can enjoy my Chinese take-out while listening to my iPod while typing this while observing myself staring into the abyss.  Every day should include a radical act, if only in writing, or discussion, or in either rejection or acceptance, to balance the mediocrity and indulgences.   

I think that … does not believe in God or Heaven. "Thou shalt respond at once and completely to all suffering" would be a perverse Commandment anyway. Someone who spent all her or his time agonising over distant atrocities would be useless to family, friends, associates and compassionate bystanders. People besieged in

Sarajevo

yearned for precisely the daily pleasures and little decencies enjoyed by denizens of peaceful places. As in N' Dhomhnaill's "Black", shock and outrage may for a time overshadow such considerations completely. But "life goes on".

Perhaps the most ancient subject of poetry is war. Ironically, the South Slav area, in which the recitation from memory of ancient epics has been in modern times a communal custom, has provided models for scholars studying the origins and transmission of the epic poems eventually written down as The Iliad and The Odyssey. Epic was until recently regarded as the most serious and important sort of poetry, but the epic may have fed Serbian racism. In our century, epic treatment of war has become impossible. "War Poetry" has emerged, a genre reserved for men at arms and civilians directly caught up in conflict. "Anti-war Poetry" is another new genre, a species of committed verse. Christopher Logue's versions of parts of The Iliad, which "deconstruct" Greek heroism, are in effect "anti-war poems".

As more and more huge corporations merge, eventually into one ubiquitous, omnipotent global controlling entity, and language itself seems to be a falling away of words from meaning,  and such juxtapositions are part of our diurnal existence, this question shape the discussion I will have with myself until…

"If her blood is not avenged, I will do it myself, in a way not yet seen," said Auerbach, claiming that his daughter was a descendant of King David on both sides of her family. He called on Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Mossad chief Meir Dagan, both of whom served with him in the army, to avenge her death.

Then there's this insanity/and this chaos/and this corporate merger...

Pinot Envy

My daily routine includes dropping my wife off for work in the afternoon to save the exorbitant fees of the parking garage; a daily parting moment that always feels wrong.  I then drive home along a well-worn, circuitous route that happens to take me past the train station.  Yesterday, about a hundred yards past the station, one of the greatest performances of the air guitar I have ever seen was in full swing, with the State House as a backdrop.  This cat was fully planted, knees slightly bent, feet spread wide, a black watch cap pulled down to meet his black Wayfarers, about six inches of hair poking out of the hat where his ears would be, iPod attached, clad in a black Gortex coat and pants, black sneakers, and arms fully extended in, technically, a bass guitar stance, head snapping back and forth, torso lilting up and down, while accenting the air with the neck of the instrument-fully rocking out; absolutely amazing, although definitely a had-to-be-there kind of thing.

I turned right and descended into a series of turns and hills, down then up.  On the CD player was a remix of Beautiful by Mos Def and India Arie, gently swaying yet determinately guiding the Acura along its rote, serpentine route. It caused me to wonder what the guitar dude was groovin’ to.  If he were indeed “playing” bass, would it be something classic like John Paul Jones on a Rickenbacher driving Good Times Bad Times, or something contemporary like Mike Frantantuno on L.G.I.Started?  If I had to guess, I’d go with a Les Claypool rock-out on a fretless Carl Thompson “Rainbow” 6-string to, perhaps, My Name is Mud.  I guess there is an outside chance that he was “airing” to a Michael Henderson groove on Miles’ Live Evil, but he was definitely not doing a Steve Swallow or Dave Holland.  On the other hand, he looked like one of the Muppets, so maybe it was very old John Entwistle.  My CD kicked into Erykha Badu’s Danger, a viscous groove that obliterated all but the present, including air man, until I turned into my driveway and started thinking about the Herbie Hancock concert we attended the night before at Symphony Hall.

Now, one can usually expect a certain level of disappointment at any of these “living legend” concerts, especially with artists such as Sonny Rollins or Dave Brubeck.  They’re not even shadows of their former selves.  And even McCoy Tyner and the great vibraphonist Bobby Hutcherson have “mellowed” into a kind of platinum card safe place, where the overwhelming emotion of the listener is fear of death based on the lost youth of the performers.   Herbie’s band, however, was on fire, at least when they did the ensemble thing.  Occasionally, fascination with synthesized effects and new technology morphed into tedious solo excursions of the self-indulgent sort.  But overall, there was virtuosity and swinging improvisations and amazing solos by each player that would cascade into the best ensemble work I’ve heard in a while.  Of course, I rarely leave the house, so…But, speaking of “cascading”, Terri Lynne Carrington, on drums, was a river of sound and rhythm, accents and crashes, supporting, leading, following, and hot as flowing lava.  Her drums are pitch perfect, and her technique is jaw dropping, while her musicality is foremost and unforced.  Like Tony Williams, another Boston Drummer who at 17, in 1963, joined Miles Davis, TLC was a prodigy, who studied with the great, late Alan Dawson, as did TW.  Her sound is honed, undoubtedly, from Tony Williams, Jack DeJohnette, and Elvin Jones (though with Alan Dawson as a teacher the influences would include Max Roach, Roy Haynes, Billy Higgins, et al). 

This could easily digress into a discussion of the “schools” of drumming and their perceived hierarchies, i.e. Milford Graves vs. Andrew Cyrille or Elvin Jones vs. Rashied Ali or the aforementioned Tony Williams vs. Jack DeJohnette, etc.  Although a more interesting topic would be jazz drummers vs. rock drummers; unrealized drum wars between Julio Barreto and John Bonham or between Billy Cobham and Will Calhoun.  Overlooked, however, would be the classical percussionists, who are taken for granted in their required virtuosity.  Playing as I am writing this is Maurice Ravel’s La Valse (Poème chorégraphique).  Try playing the percussion parts to the closing 8 bars that descend into “frenetic self destruction”.  Or, perhaps, give the single-percussionist solo in Stravinski’s, L’Histoire du Soldat a go. 

Anyway, the Herbie Hancock show was more exploratory and exciting than a lot of other former innovators-gone-catatonic that I’ve seen (like Roswell Rudd last summer).  The older guys who are still creating “new” and amazing music are Cecil Taylor, Milford Graves, Ornette Coleman, Andrew Hill, Roy Haynes, and Paul Bley, among others.  Like all art, Dostoevsky’s theory of the “new word” is the standard by which things change, move forward, whether or not subversively or radically.

So, after watching the first two weeks of this season’s Real Time with Bill Maher, I am perplexed by his (or his producer’s) choice of guests.  Who thought that Robin William’s, the world’s most onanistic performer, would enhance a panel discussion on the Iraqi elections, i.e. the failed Bush exercise in hegemony, among other salient topics.  Senator Joseph Biden, another ineffectual barking-dog Democrat, was even more irrelevant than usual.  Even the impotent Tommy Thompson came off better.

And, if Bill Maher keeps sliding in Bush’s direction, he may as well join the all-time fucking hypocrite Dennis Miller on one of the verbal diarrhea networks.  This week’s show started with a brilliant, incisive spoof of those annoying Levitra commercials, harpooning Vioxx along the way.  Then the show, following a tepid monologue, launched into, a surreal interview with Jose Canseco, who Maher could not keep his hands off. Bill praised Canseco’s “refreshing honesty”, translate: hugeness, in his expose of steroid use in professional baseball.  So trenchant.  Let’s validate the masturbatory insanity of a 40 year old, hormone induced slab of roid rage who rats out his former friends to get his needle marked gluteus out of debt.  When the hell will the Soprano’s be back anyway?  What the fuck.

This N.Y. Times article is another irritant.  But for this, I have to be more introspective and self critical, for I am a wine snob.  And, this is like when a book that one thinks one has discovered, and has privately extolled to the point of apotheosis, appears on the N. Y. Times Best Seller List; why are these troglodytes toying with something they can not possibly fathom?  Marketing, media, whatever…the lowest common denominator of pretentiousness mingled with the demographic that watches Survivor, Oprah, and, yes, the Soprano’s is now sipping CA Pinot Noirs, from Santa Barbara of all places.  The most ineffable, capricious, feminine, and delicate of all grapes, the reigning varietal of Burgundy, as well as the most abused by acolytes, and tortured by hack winemakers is the new cocaine.   I love to hear some neophyte oenophile refer to a “stinky” pinot as “Bergundian”, when it’s Brettanomyces that’s being smelled and tasted. OK. Take one of those prized 2002 Au Bon Climat or Sanford’s and taste it next to a 2002 Vosne-Romanée.  Then shut the fuck up.  So Pinot Noir goes the way of Nike, iPod, 7-Up, and Wal-Mart…I’d rather drink Moxie (really, I like it) than any of those pedestrian pinots.  I knew I would come off badly in all this.

It seems they have caught the BTK killer, and I suddenly feel like getting in the car and ordering from a drive-through.  Bird flu pandemic?  Don’t I have enough to worry about with killer mold, Nuclear North Korea, and an unemployed Craig Kilborn? The Pope is fucking kidding me, right? My father died with more dignity, and the last time I saw him, he was supine on a gurney, in a silent ICU room, all the usual life sustaining machines turned off, and backlit by a fluorescent light behind a room divider, with a foot-plus length of intubator tube still protruding from his mouth.  He looked like he was snorkeling into oblivion. The Pope’s going to mime Sunday Mass?  This is like watching Weekend at Bernie’s IV.  Now, Andrew McCarthy is someone who should be a panel guest on Real Time.

My day is about to wind down into going to pick up my wife from work (if you can guess her profession, and I don’t know you, I’ll send you an autographed tee shirt), pick up a pizza from Fellini’s (half barbequed chicken, half tomato-pesto), and regret writing any of this.  For the last hour, Pulp Fiction has been playing in the other room (the movie, not the CD).  The narrative is a lot easier to follow when one is just listening to the dialogue and not doting on the imagery.  There is a lesson here somewhere.