Made in China...
I was shopping in the local Wal-Mart a couple of days ago and I noticed something that I had never noticed before, probably because I was in a Urban Hell-induced trance. Almost every item I picked up in that store had a little white label on it, and that little white label invariably said "Made in China".
Which led me to start thinking: are they making EVERYTHING in China these days? I guess since the Chinese government introduced the "One Child" policy and they aren't making Chinese all that much anymore, so they have to direct their energy into something else.
Porcelain coffee cups: Made in China. Lord of the Rings, Part 3 Video tape: Made in China. CD-RW discs: Made in China. Flat screen TV: Made in China. Linen Towels: Made in China. Shopping cart: Made in China.
What was made in America? Doritos, for one thing. And cigarettes.
Which led me to think about something else: What the heck, if anything, DO we make here? I'm going to do some research on this because it's something that quite litterally never occured to me before and I need an edumakashun. If anyone has any actual data on this, I'd like ot hear about it. In the meantime, I'm going to hit the books and the 'net and see what I can find out because I find it not only odd, but ominous.
Wednesday, June 16, 2004
Initial Impressions...
Well, now that I have finally taken the plunge and moved south of the Mason-Dixon, let me tell you a little bit about the lay of the land.
I have found Southerners, so far, to be polite and courteous. Of course, I'm sure every one of them is thinking they'd like to ship my behind back north while they're being polite and courteous, but that's another story. Open hostility has not been displayed. Here's a major difference between the South and New York: a New Yorker is pretty much ALWAYS openly hostile, even if it's only a flash of the eyes. Nothing may be said, but rest assured, your average New Yorker would love to add an insult paranthetically to anyting they say to you. Some might even harbor visions of smashing your head in with a brick because you made the mistake, either by looking or speaking, of invading his/her personal space. I can already feel the invisible barrier that extends 3" from every New Yorker's nose falling away. I'm finding that a display of good manners and courtesy is infectious, and I think I've already lost some of my edge. That's a good thing.
There is room here. Lot's of it. Charlotte is a relatively small city (only about 600,000 people) but it's very spread out. Distances here to what a Northerner might consider "amenities" like shopping, church, school, etc. Are vaster than we're used to. This has it's down side (you MUST drive here), but on the whole, I believe it's a good thing because I've always harbored a theory on how space affects people. When people have elbow room, they tend to be more relaxed, less hostile and polite. I've seen this in the West and I'm seeing it here too. When you live in a crowded urban enviornment, certainly New York qualifies as a concrete jungle, you're always, even subconsciously, fighting for space.
This is what I have kinda-sorta figured out in my first two weeks. As soon as I can recognize any other major differences, I'll be sure to let you all (I mean, y'all) know.
Well, now that I have finally taken the plunge and moved south of the Mason-Dixon, let me tell you a little bit about the lay of the land.
I have found Southerners, so far, to be polite and courteous. Of course, I'm sure every one of them is thinking they'd like to ship my behind back north while they're being polite and courteous, but that's another story. Open hostility has not been displayed. Here's a major difference between the South and New York: a New Yorker is pretty much ALWAYS openly hostile, even if it's only a flash of the eyes. Nothing may be said, but rest assured, your average New Yorker would love to add an insult paranthetically to anyting they say to you. Some might even harbor visions of smashing your head in with a brick because you made the mistake, either by looking or speaking, of invading his/her personal space. I can already feel the invisible barrier that extends 3" from every New Yorker's nose falling away. I'm finding that a display of good manners and courtesy is infectious, and I think I've already lost some of my edge. That's a good thing.
There is room here. Lot's of it. Charlotte is a relatively small city (only about 600,000 people) but it's very spread out. Distances here to what a Northerner might consider "amenities" like shopping, church, school, etc. Are vaster than we're used to. This has it's down side (you MUST drive here), but on the whole, I believe it's a good thing because I've always harbored a theory on how space affects people. When people have elbow room, they tend to be more relaxed, less hostile and polite. I've seen this in the West and I'm seeing it here too. When you live in a crowded urban enviornment, certainly New York qualifies as a concrete jungle, you're always, even subconsciously, fighting for space.
This is what I have kinda-sorta figured out in my first two weeks. As soon as I can recognize any other major differences, I'll be sure to let you all (I mean, y'all) know.
Movin' On...
I have left the blighted landscape of the People's Republik of Bloombergia, also known as Sodom-on-the-Hudson, for the sunnier pastures of Charlotte, North Carolina. It took a couple of weeks for my stuff to catch up with me, hence the extended abscence and lack of updates.
Moving is almost never an easy experience, especially when one is leaving home, family and everything that is familiar. Not in this case, though. This was an easy choice to make. if I need to list the reasons, here they are:
1. I cut my rent from 1/3 of my monthly income to 1/7.
2. Cigarettes are $5 per pack cheaper here, and there is not a brigade of prissy, mostly-homosexual non-smokers looking to crucify me for lighting up.
3. People will actually say "Good Morning" to you, even if it isn't.
4. These accents are killer.
5. I've gotten more sun in two weeks than I have in 30 years.
6. Where else could you have a pond full of ducks outside your back window?
7. There are trees here.
8. BBQ is a staple food.
9. Wal-Mart.
10. Two swimming pools on the grounds.
11. 700 miles between my mother and myself.
12. It's actually quiet here at night.
13. "The Diversity" behaves itself.
14. Cable TV for less than what you would get for the average, ready-to-transplant kidney.
15. My blood pressure and cholesterol probably dropped significantly as soon as I got on the train.
All in all, while it was a difficult thing to do, in the end it all evens out. In fact, I think I'm going to make out on the deal. And perhaps be a bit happier.
I have left the blighted landscape of the People's Republik of Bloombergia, also known as Sodom-on-the-Hudson, for the sunnier pastures of Charlotte, North Carolina. It took a couple of weeks for my stuff to catch up with me, hence the extended abscence and lack of updates.
Moving is almost never an easy experience, especially when one is leaving home, family and everything that is familiar. Not in this case, though. This was an easy choice to make. if I need to list the reasons, here they are:
1. I cut my rent from 1/3 of my monthly income to 1/7.
2. Cigarettes are $5 per pack cheaper here, and there is not a brigade of prissy, mostly-homosexual non-smokers looking to crucify me for lighting up.
3. People will actually say "Good Morning" to you, even if it isn't.
4. These accents are killer.
5. I've gotten more sun in two weeks than I have in 30 years.
6. Where else could you have a pond full of ducks outside your back window?
7. There are trees here.
8. BBQ is a staple food.
9. Wal-Mart.
10. Two swimming pools on the grounds.
11. 700 miles between my mother and myself.
12. It's actually quiet here at night.
13. "The Diversity" behaves itself.
14. Cable TV for less than what you would get for the average, ready-to-transplant kidney.
15. My blood pressure and cholesterol probably dropped significantly as soon as I got on the train.
All in all, while it was a difficult thing to do, in the end it all evens out. In fact, I think I'm going to make out on the deal. And perhaps be a bit happier.
Friday, May 28, 2004
Al Gore: Poster child for mental health...
By now 62,000 independant pundits, pedants and paranoids have published or opined on former-Vice President Albert Gore's self-destruction in front of an NYU audience. I will take great pride in being number 62,001.
If it wasn't already obvious prior to the 2000 election debacle that Albert Gore was somewhat unhinged, last week's venomous diatribe spelled it out for the not-so-swift. This man needs serious medical attention, a massive dose of Zoloft (it works!) and a rubber room at the luxury containment facility of his choice. Either that or Tipper should have him put to sleep before he snaps again.
The rant was instructive on several points (in no particular order):
1) Gore is STILL a sore loser.
2) The democrats have no effective, logical response to George W. Bush and can do no more than slander and demonize the man. Unfortunately, that sometimes works.
3) John Kerry STILL hasn't got a prayer with the line-up he has in his dugout. Gore, as someone who's "been there and done that" should have been his biggest weapon, somehow.
4) Gore-as-president would have been the next best thing to an American Ayatollah.
5) Logic and reason are still not staples of the American political landscape.
6) NYU is full of wanna-be hippies and the people who supposedly teach them.
7) The dem's have learned nothing from the Clinton Impeachment mess: Americans are turned off by gratuitous mudslinging and the appearance of a vendetta.
8) Opposition to the War on Terror has nothing to do with national security, world peace, logic, principle or a sense of history: it has everything to do with WHO is running it.
9) Had Gore actually sued his way to the Presidency, we could have looked forward to at least a dozen more 9/11's.
10) I'm glad I'm leaving New York because it's even more painfully obvius today that the kind of person that has invaded and infiltrated my city eat this kind of crap up with their breakfast cereal.
All of us should get down on our knees and pray to whatever we hold holy that this lunatic (and I know a lunatic when I see one) was unable to circumvent the electoral process and find himself in the Oval Rubber Room.
By now 62,000 independant pundits, pedants and paranoids have published or opined on former-Vice President Albert Gore's self-destruction in front of an NYU audience. I will take great pride in being number 62,001.
If it wasn't already obvious prior to the 2000 election debacle that Albert Gore was somewhat unhinged, last week's venomous diatribe spelled it out for the not-so-swift. This man needs serious medical attention, a massive dose of Zoloft (it works!) and a rubber room at the luxury containment facility of his choice. Either that or Tipper should have him put to sleep before he snaps again.
The rant was instructive on several points (in no particular order):
1) Gore is STILL a sore loser.
2) The democrats have no effective, logical response to George W. Bush and can do no more than slander and demonize the man. Unfortunately, that sometimes works.
3) John Kerry STILL hasn't got a prayer with the line-up he has in his dugout. Gore, as someone who's "been there and done that" should have been his biggest weapon, somehow.
4) Gore-as-president would have been the next best thing to an American Ayatollah.
5) Logic and reason are still not staples of the American political landscape.
6) NYU is full of wanna-be hippies and the people who supposedly teach them.
7) The dem's have learned nothing from the Clinton Impeachment mess: Americans are turned off by gratuitous mudslinging and the appearance of a vendetta.
8) Opposition to the War on Terror has nothing to do with national security, world peace, logic, principle or a sense of history: it has everything to do with WHO is running it.
9) Had Gore actually sued his way to the Presidency, we could have looked forward to at least a dozen more 9/11's.
10) I'm glad I'm leaving New York because it's even more painfully obvius today that the kind of person that has invaded and infiltrated my city eat this kind of crap up with their breakfast cereal.
All of us should get down on our knees and pray to whatever we hold holy that this lunatic (and I know a lunatic when I see one) was unable to circumvent the electoral process and find himself in the Oval Rubber Room.
Sunday, May 09, 2004
All the News that's Fit to Print...
Recently came across something very telling, and justa little too funny, in the Staten Island Advance last week. For those of you who do not know it, the Advance is the local Newhouse Fishwrap for us, the woebegotten residents of Staten Island, NY. It's a local paper full of stuff like wedding announcements, feel-good pap from the local neighborhoods and advertisements for local businesses. If it wasn't for the comics, it would not be worth reading at all.
Anyway, the Advance does try, at least, to look like a real newspaper. It carries AP reports on just about everything, or occasionally, has a reporter of it's own write something. One of these reporters recently was detailed to cover a story in which a local couple's home was raided by police and federal agents (April 29th edition). The authorities found a virtual arsenal inside the home, weapons, ammunition, and even some minor explosives.
Somewhere in this story, however, the reporter (Jeff Hemmel) somehow decided that this little tidbit of information was relevant to the story. I quote:
"Politically, Boschi (one of the suspects) is a registered member of the Conservative Party."
Why is that in there? How did that get through the editorial process? The answers, of course, have nothing to do with the press and their first duty to humanity, which is to disseminate information, but has everything to do with the media's belief that they have a sacred duty to shape public opinion the right way. They're way.
The message from this one line is, simply: All conservatives are gun-wielding, ammo hoarding fanatics, secretly stockpiling arms and explosives to begin a counter-revolution that will send us back to the ghastly days before Jimmy Carter. Conservative are evil mental cases that have no regard for anyone but themselves and who would endanger an entire neighborhood by having a houseful of guns and ammo.
Mr. Hemmel is probably just trying to advance (no pun intended) his career; perhaps you must prove your liberal credentials to the New York Times or something like that. What better way than to make sure that your work includes irrelevant information, but irrelevant information that makes a political statement?
I myself never read the Staten Island Advance because it's a piece of crap with political pretense on every page, and never would have seen this story if I didn't have to take a dump at my sister's house and grabbed the first newspaper that came into view. Just my luck it was a week old, I guess.
The media is clueless. They continue to be obvious with their insanity and then wonder why no one buys newspapers or watches network news anymore.
Recently came across something very telling, and justa little too funny, in the Staten Island Advance last week. For those of you who do not know it, the Advance is the local Newhouse Fishwrap for us, the woebegotten residents of Staten Island, NY. It's a local paper full of stuff like wedding announcements, feel-good pap from the local neighborhoods and advertisements for local businesses. If it wasn't for the comics, it would not be worth reading at all.
Anyway, the Advance does try, at least, to look like a real newspaper. It carries AP reports on just about everything, or occasionally, has a reporter of it's own write something. One of these reporters recently was detailed to cover a story in which a local couple's home was raided by police and federal agents (April 29th edition). The authorities found a virtual arsenal inside the home, weapons, ammunition, and even some minor explosives.
Somewhere in this story, however, the reporter (Jeff Hemmel) somehow decided that this little tidbit of information was relevant to the story. I quote:
"Politically, Boschi (one of the suspects) is a registered member of the Conservative Party."
Why is that in there? How did that get through the editorial process? The answers, of course, have nothing to do with the press and their first duty to humanity, which is to disseminate information, but has everything to do with the media's belief that they have a sacred duty to shape public opinion the right way. They're way.
The message from this one line is, simply: All conservatives are gun-wielding, ammo hoarding fanatics, secretly stockpiling arms and explosives to begin a counter-revolution that will send us back to the ghastly days before Jimmy Carter. Conservative are evil mental cases that have no regard for anyone but themselves and who would endanger an entire neighborhood by having a houseful of guns and ammo.
Mr. Hemmel is probably just trying to advance (no pun intended) his career; perhaps you must prove your liberal credentials to the New York Times or something like that. What better way than to make sure that your work includes irrelevant information, but irrelevant information that makes a political statement?
I myself never read the Staten Island Advance because it's a piece of crap with political pretense on every page, and never would have seen this story if I didn't have to take a dump at my sister's house and grabbed the first newspaper that came into view. Just my luck it was a week old, I guess.
The media is clueless. They continue to be obvious with their insanity and then wonder why no one buys newspapers or watches network news anymore.
Wednesday, May 05, 2004
Boo Frickin' Hoo...
Lot's of news reports lately about "anti-Muslim" bias in America, especially in California. To this I say:
Are Muslims being rounded up and shipped off to camps?
Are Muslims being lined up and shot out of hand?
Have state, local and federal authorities been given permission to begin a systematic program of street executions?
Are mosques being blown up on a daily basis?
Are schoolbuses full of Muslim children being targeted for RPG's and suicicde bombers?
Are hospitals turning away people of obvious Middle-eastern extraction or Islamic tendencies and denying them emergency treatment? Surgery?
Is the US Government equipping, funding and encouraging Americans to strap explosives to themselves and blow up shopping centers frequented by Muslims? Is it adding rat poison, manure, caustic chemicals and possibly biological agents to the shrapnel from such devices?
Has there been a law passed stating that it is now illegal to buy, sell, trade in, import or export halal foods? Is there a law stating that new construction of mosques or any buiulding that could be conceivably used for the purposes of practicing the Muslim religion is expressly forbidden?
Is it illegal to read the Koran?
Are Muslims being killed in the streets, their bodies subject to desecration by rowdy crowds without jobs, and then hung from the Golden-Gate bridge?
Are American television stations showing hooded Muslims having their throats cut or their brains blown out by their captors/tormentors as an example of something to celebrate or emulate?
Are Catholics, Protestants and Jews issuing fatwas calling for the deaths of all Islamic nutjobs, the destruction of what passes for their culture and the complete erasure of their progeny and posterity from the face of the earth and claiming that God has commanded them to act that way?
Since the answer to all of the above is NO, I recommend that anyone who is complaining take a pork-fat enema and call me in the morning.
In case you haven't noticed; there's a war on. And while I'm positive that not all Muslims are of the fur-breasted, kill-the-Jews, Death-to-the Great-Satan variety, there will, of course, be those who cannot, or will not make the distinction --- in fact, I've written enough nasty stuff about Islam to claim membership in the latter, but that's only because I sometimes let my mouth engage before my brain. No excuse, but there ya go --- human nature at work.
It could be worse. After all, you could be a Halliburton truck driver trying to help rebuild a bombed-out country full of ungrateful masses of lunatics.
Lot's of news reports lately about "anti-Muslim" bias in America, especially in California. To this I say:
Are Muslims being rounded up and shipped off to camps?
Are Muslims being lined up and shot out of hand?
Have state, local and federal authorities been given permission to begin a systematic program of street executions?
Are mosques being blown up on a daily basis?
Are schoolbuses full of Muslim children being targeted for RPG's and suicicde bombers?
Are hospitals turning away people of obvious Middle-eastern extraction or Islamic tendencies and denying them emergency treatment? Surgery?
Is the US Government equipping, funding and encouraging Americans to strap explosives to themselves and blow up shopping centers frequented by Muslims? Is it adding rat poison, manure, caustic chemicals and possibly biological agents to the shrapnel from such devices?
Has there been a law passed stating that it is now illegal to buy, sell, trade in, import or export halal foods? Is there a law stating that new construction of mosques or any buiulding that could be conceivably used for the purposes of practicing the Muslim religion is expressly forbidden?
Is it illegal to read the Koran?
Are Muslims being killed in the streets, their bodies subject to desecration by rowdy crowds without jobs, and then hung from the Golden-Gate bridge?
Are American television stations showing hooded Muslims having their throats cut or their brains blown out by their captors/tormentors as an example of something to celebrate or emulate?
Are Catholics, Protestants and Jews issuing fatwas calling for the deaths of all Islamic nutjobs, the destruction of what passes for their culture and the complete erasure of their progeny and posterity from the face of the earth and claiming that God has commanded them to act that way?
Since the answer to all of the above is NO, I recommend that anyone who is complaining take a pork-fat enema and call me in the morning.
In case you haven't noticed; there's a war on. And while I'm positive that not all Muslims are of the fur-breasted, kill-the-Jews, Death-to-the Great-Satan variety, there will, of course, be those who cannot, or will not make the distinction --- in fact, I've written enough nasty stuff about Islam to claim membership in the latter, but that's only because I sometimes let my mouth engage before my brain. No excuse, but there ya go --- human nature at work.
It could be worse. After all, you could be a Halliburton truck driver trying to help rebuild a bombed-out country full of ungrateful masses of lunatics.
Monday, May 03, 2004
Pots and Kettles...I'm sure we're all shocked, SHOCKED, that American GI's have apparently been abusing Iraqi POW's. From what I can tell, this abuse has included:
-Making them stand naked in front of women.
-Having their pictures taken in compromising positions.
-Allegations of the use of electrical equipment in interrogations.
-Making them wear hoods when posing for photographs.
-Embarrassing them and denying them dignity.
This, of course, from people who have no compunction about ethnically cleansing their homelands of "apostates", Jews, and those that defy the strongman-du-jour. The same folks believe it virtuous and a reason for a party when they desecrate our dead, embarrass and humiliate our prisoners. The same critics who hold the United States Military to standards they won't even abide by, of course, have no problems with indiscriminately killing non-combatants who either happen to be in the way or who have (had) utility as human shields.
You know what? They should be overjoyed that their POW's haven't been fried, shot or gassed, because if they thought they could get away with it (and they often do), ours would be. We're somewhat handicapped in Iraq by the facts that reporters are everywhere, we're a free society that requires and demands audit of our troops and their actions, and laboring under the misapprehension that the other side will play nice if we do too.
Fallujah should have been leveled. Najaf should have been leveled. Iraq should have been leveled and Iran should be made unihabitable for even insect life for the next 10,000 years. Then perhaps Muslims that delight in the slaughter of 3,000 innocents, get bent out of shape by an Israeli fence, and routinely attack peole trying to supply them with food, medicine, order and basic services, would have a point.
Remember this: The United States has it in it's power to completely and permanently destroy what passes for Muslim civilization and doesn't. The United States has the ability to make sure that the only place that Arabic or Farsi can be spoken is in the deepest depths of Hell, and it restrains itself.
You guys cut men's throats or blow their brains out on television and call it justice. Your sense of propriety is completely warped, you know that?
-Making them stand naked in front of women.
-Having their pictures taken in compromising positions.
-Allegations of the use of electrical equipment in interrogations.
-Making them wear hoods when posing for photographs.
-Embarrassing them and denying them dignity.
This, of course, from people who have no compunction about ethnically cleansing their homelands of "apostates", Jews, and those that defy the strongman-du-jour. The same folks believe it virtuous and a reason for a party when they desecrate our dead, embarrass and humiliate our prisoners. The same critics who hold the United States Military to standards they won't even abide by, of course, have no problems with indiscriminately killing non-combatants who either happen to be in the way or who have (had) utility as human shields.
You know what? They should be overjoyed that their POW's haven't been fried, shot or gassed, because if they thought they could get away with it (and they often do), ours would be. We're somewhat handicapped in Iraq by the facts that reporters are everywhere, we're a free society that requires and demands audit of our troops and their actions, and laboring under the misapprehension that the other side will play nice if we do too.
Fallujah should have been leveled. Najaf should have been leveled. Iraq should have been leveled and Iran should be made unihabitable for even insect life for the next 10,000 years. Then perhaps Muslims that delight in the slaughter of 3,000 innocents, get bent out of shape by an Israeli fence, and routinely attack peole trying to supply them with food, medicine, order and basic services, would have a point.
Remember this: The United States has it in it's power to completely and permanently destroy what passes for Muslim civilization and doesn't. The United States has the ability to make sure that the only place that Arabic or Farsi can be spoken is in the deepest depths of Hell, and it restrains itself.
You guys cut men's throats or blow their brains out on television and call it justice. Your sense of propriety is completely warped, you know that?
An Interesting Dichonomy...
The 9/11 Commission, we're told, is supposed to investigate all relevant evidence regarding government (in-)action vis-a-vis the Spetember 11, 2001 attacks upon the World Trade Center. Once the commission has reviewed all the evidence (such as it is) relating to how the government failed us on that day, it is supposed to recommend a bunch of changes that will "streamline" the process so that such mistakes become either a rarity or impossible to repeat.
That's the public explanation, anyway.
What will happen, of course, is that the poilitical points will be scored, the taxpayer's money will have been spent, and the Beltway Folks can point to their (ultimatly failed) efforts to make "government more responsible to the needs of the people". The purpose, we're told, is to make sure our intelligence agencies "work" the "way they were intended to".
In the end, this commission will fix nothing, or at least, fix something way too late to be of any use, and government will find a way to fail us again that had nothing to do whatsoever with what has been investigated. The nature of bureacracy is that it will ultimately collapse for one reason, and when that is corrected, it will find another excuse to collapse, and the new reason will be just as pregnant with political intrigue. You can bet on it.
"Your government" no longer exists to ensure that the citizen "has hhis/her needs" met. It no longer exists to be responsive to the people who pay for it and it not longer exists yo even pretend that it speaks and acts on behalf of the people who foot the bill. If you ever doubt this, just ask yourself when was the last time government ever did anything that had more than a momentary, transitory effect on your everyday life?
Government is NEVER held accountable for it's breakdowns by the public at large because for all intents and purposes, no one knows just WHO the government is. You have senators and Congresspersons, but they are just the face on the TV screen. The real government is stashed away in various federal bureacracies and toils away anonymously. The sentaors, congress-critters, and Presidents all come and go. The heads of various federal agencies do likewise. However, the vast bulk of the government consists of unknown bureaucrats that are never identified (unless they show up on your doorstep with a warrant) and without accountability (ever get the "I don't make the policies, I just enforce/follow/abide by them" spiel from a bureaucrat?).
If you don't think so, try asking the Social Security Administration just how it is that when they possess four tons of paper pointing out that you are disabled, numerous, repetitive requests for further information (duly answered), and a mountain of consent forms for further investigation, just how it is they can go about denying the benefits you were taxed for? The response I got was: "it is policy to reject at least 90% of all claims the first time around". The reason? "That's just the way it is --- listen, I don't make the rules, I just have to follow them, okay?"
Submit all the evidence you wish. Review every policy your little heart desires. In the end, it is not the faces on the commission, nor the ones in Congress, nor even the ones that sit in the White House that will run anything. It will be an anonymous voice on the other end of the telephone telling you "this is how it works, now shut up and eat it".
We expect the government to work when it comes to things like terrorism, but somehow, no one gets bent out of shape when the government doesn't bring forth a promised benefit even when all the bureaucratic sumersaults have been duly done. The FBI and CIA will never work as long as the Social Security (Mis-) Administration doesn't.
The 9/11 Commission, we're told, is supposed to investigate all relevant evidence regarding government (in-)action vis-a-vis the Spetember 11, 2001 attacks upon the World Trade Center. Once the commission has reviewed all the evidence (such as it is) relating to how the government failed us on that day, it is supposed to recommend a bunch of changes that will "streamline" the process so that such mistakes become either a rarity or impossible to repeat.
That's the public explanation, anyway.
What will happen, of course, is that the poilitical points will be scored, the taxpayer's money will have been spent, and the Beltway Folks can point to their (ultimatly failed) efforts to make "government more responsible to the needs of the people". The purpose, we're told, is to make sure our intelligence agencies "work" the "way they were intended to".
In the end, this commission will fix nothing, or at least, fix something way too late to be of any use, and government will find a way to fail us again that had nothing to do whatsoever with what has been investigated. The nature of bureacracy is that it will ultimately collapse for one reason, and when that is corrected, it will find another excuse to collapse, and the new reason will be just as pregnant with political intrigue. You can bet on it.
"Your government" no longer exists to ensure that the citizen "has hhis/her needs" met. It no longer exists to be responsive to the people who pay for it and it not longer exists yo even pretend that it speaks and acts on behalf of the people who foot the bill. If you ever doubt this, just ask yourself when was the last time government ever did anything that had more than a momentary, transitory effect on your everyday life?
Government is NEVER held accountable for it's breakdowns by the public at large because for all intents and purposes, no one knows just WHO the government is. You have senators and Congresspersons, but they are just the face on the TV screen. The real government is stashed away in various federal bureacracies and toils away anonymously. The sentaors, congress-critters, and Presidents all come and go. The heads of various federal agencies do likewise. However, the vast bulk of the government consists of unknown bureaucrats that are never identified (unless they show up on your doorstep with a warrant) and without accountability (ever get the "I don't make the policies, I just enforce/follow/abide by them" spiel from a bureaucrat?).
If you don't think so, try asking the Social Security Administration just how it is that when they possess four tons of paper pointing out that you are disabled, numerous, repetitive requests for further information (duly answered), and a mountain of consent forms for further investigation, just how it is they can go about denying the benefits you were taxed for? The response I got was: "it is policy to reject at least 90% of all claims the first time around". The reason? "That's just the way it is --- listen, I don't make the rules, I just have to follow them, okay?"
Submit all the evidence you wish. Review every policy your little heart desires. In the end, it is not the faces on the commission, nor the ones in Congress, nor even the ones that sit in the White House that will run anything. It will be an anonymous voice on the other end of the telephone telling you "this is how it works, now shut up and eat it".
We expect the government to work when it comes to things like terrorism, but somehow, no one gets bent out of shape when the government doesn't bring forth a promised benefit even when all the bureaucratic sumersaults have been duly done. The FBI and CIA will never work as long as the Social Security (Mis-) Administration doesn't.
Tuesday, April 27, 2004
Islam: The Other White Meat...
The more I delve into the tortured history and ideology of Islam, the more I'm convinced that there is a serious mental disconnect embedded in it's very foundations. The Prophet Muhammad, at various times and sometimes all at once, seems to be:
a) Political revolutionary
b) menatlly-deranged, self-professed messiah
c) A communist before his time
d) One of those bar-room loudmouths that finally got off his ass and did something
e) Used car salesman
Islam, for those of you who aren't up on it, litterally means "submission". In this case, submission to the Word of God, as revealed by Muhammad. All religions to a certain extent act this way, but many do not impose a rigorous social system that is intended to both prop up the religion and to prevent any challenge to it's authority. Those that have in the past (Christianity comes to mind) have found themselves confronted by that most pernicious virus of human nature. Hence, Christianity and Judaism have had things like Reformations, Enlightenments, and reality intrude and have had to adapt or wither. Islam firstly denies human nature (much like Communism), and has had nothing approaching the moderating effects of a schism between political and religious power such as that brought about by Martin Luther or the Diaspora.
Islam remains firmly rooted in it's past and has resisted change since it's inception. Change is anethema to Islam in the same way as it is to democrats, in that both will continue to advance ridiculous, utopian agendas in the face of reality.
So, just what is it about Islam that makes it such a nasty little bug? I have several theories:
1. The Me-too religion: Islam claims descent from Abraham, the very first Jew, and respects the tenets laid out by Jesus in his ministry, although it denies Christ's divinity and refers to him as only a prophet. I will not debate these issues, since I'm not a theologian. However, in it's very formation there is a hint that Islam was more than willing to absorb or co-opt that which it admired, that which it needed from these other religions, and then discard the rest. Jews are a people apart, the distinction of being the chosen people of God naturally leading to a feeling of superiority and seperateness from others. Islam grafted itself onto the Jewish tradition by claiming descent from a bastard son of Abraham (Ishmael). Muslims now too, could be the chosen people without having to actually be born Jewish (denoted through female lineage). That sense of superiority enjoyed by the hated, but tolerated Jews, could now belong to any desert-dwelling piece of shit that was willing to mouth the proper prayers, without having to keep some of the more esoteric Jewish laws.
Jewish law was also quite attractive to Islam both because it delineated not only just who was a believer but also provided a common set of rules by all to abide by without creating undue friction between two sets of peoples living side-by-side. It also made Islam an attractive choice for disaffected Jews to rally to the cause of Muhammed; they could have their cake and eat it too.
2. The Glory of the Caliphate: Islam repeatedly turns it's eyes back to it's heyday in the 7th-10th century when it was busy overrunning Europe, Anatolia, Persia, Africa, India and parts of China, as the the epitome of it's "civilization". Certainly, if you consider the vast size of the territory conquered and subjected, the riches that were extracted from them and the sheer number of people living within Islamic borders of the time, then yes, it was a heyday.
However, many would have you believe that Islam brought with it some sort of civilizing influence that ordinarily wqould not have been present in those places prior to it's arrival. We've heard time and time again about how Muslims were performing C-sections, drinking coffee, etc, etc hundreds of years before the now-more-civilized West, and somehow we're supposed to believe that Islam created this dynamic culture spread across the globe. Nothing could be further from the truth. Islam merely overran or converted regions in which thriving civilizations already existed: Persia, the Hellenistic Greek world in the Levant and Anatolia, Constantinople, Aryan India. It inherited administrations and social orders that had been spiced and strengthed by Greco-Roman traditions, the Indian Caste system and the Confucian thought of China. It co-opted those institutions and customs that it could not eradicate and then we pretend as if Islam invented it all. As with it';s grafting itself to the Jewish tradition, Islam grafted itself into the existing cultures of whatever was there before. No mean feat, and certainly no argument for some kind of "Islamic Cultural Renaissance".
The fact that within a few hundred years of it's apex, Islam was sliding backwards into anarchy and disorganization is conveniently forgotten, unlike the examples usually given for failing Western systems, like Rome.
The difference is that the Western Greco-Roman/Judeo-Christian systems survived because of their dynamism and cohesion, the Chinese and Indian systems survived due to their vast size and numbers of people involved. Islam petered out because it refused to face reality: there was only a limited number of Arabian elite to go around and when they had exhausted their numbers trying to administrate something so vast and unwieldy they left themselves open to other, more numerous, peoples to take over, hence the Ottomans and the Moghuls, the Mamelukes and the Berbers. Yet, the Arabian nature of Islam still remains as much as the Roman law still remains today. The difference is that Islam continues to fight that which it cannot control instead of bending with the wind --- a by-product of submission to the will of God. Roman law has stayed with us because it was practical, egalitarian and easily understood by everyone who could read. Islamic law stays because it is the last redoubt of power left to those who would force the submission of others.
Islam boils down to this:
1. We hate the Jews, but we're perfectly happy to insist that we have Jewish roots.
2. We hate Christians, but only because they believe their prophet is better than ours.
3. Western civilization is evil, unless it's existing structures and abilities to produce all sorts of really neat things can be co-opted. Anything that resists co-option must be destroyed.
4. Western civilization is neat when it comes to doing things like producing abundant food, providing adequate health care and education, producing and distributing wealth, but it is just too indiviualistic for Islam, so, they'll take the good and chuck what they consider the bad, without realizzing it's the bad that makes the rest of it good.
5. Any return to the "good old days" of Islamic Spain and India is a good idea, and all Muslims are honor bound to enure it happens. If there happens to be people already enjoying their lives under a rival system, no problem, they can either be converted or killed. Preferably killed.
6. We can continue to pass a second-hand ideology and religious system off as something unique for as long as stupid people continue to procreate. Anyone who isn't stupid, must be elimninated.
The more I delve into the tortured history and ideology of Islam, the more I'm convinced that there is a serious mental disconnect embedded in it's very foundations. The Prophet Muhammad, at various times and sometimes all at once, seems to be:
a) Political revolutionary
b) menatlly-deranged, self-professed messiah
c) A communist before his time
d) One of those bar-room loudmouths that finally got off his ass and did something
e) Used car salesman
Islam, for those of you who aren't up on it, litterally means "submission". In this case, submission to the Word of God, as revealed by Muhammad. All religions to a certain extent act this way, but many do not impose a rigorous social system that is intended to both prop up the religion and to prevent any challenge to it's authority. Those that have in the past (Christianity comes to mind) have found themselves confronted by that most pernicious virus of human nature. Hence, Christianity and Judaism have had things like Reformations, Enlightenments, and reality intrude and have had to adapt or wither. Islam firstly denies human nature (much like Communism), and has had nothing approaching the moderating effects of a schism between political and religious power such as that brought about by Martin Luther or the Diaspora.
Islam remains firmly rooted in it's past and has resisted change since it's inception. Change is anethema to Islam in the same way as it is to democrats, in that both will continue to advance ridiculous, utopian agendas in the face of reality.
So, just what is it about Islam that makes it such a nasty little bug? I have several theories:
1. The Me-too religion: Islam claims descent from Abraham, the very first Jew, and respects the tenets laid out by Jesus in his ministry, although it denies Christ's divinity and refers to him as only a prophet. I will not debate these issues, since I'm not a theologian. However, in it's very formation there is a hint that Islam was more than willing to absorb or co-opt that which it admired, that which it needed from these other religions, and then discard the rest. Jews are a people apart, the distinction of being the chosen people of God naturally leading to a feeling of superiority and seperateness from others. Islam grafted itself onto the Jewish tradition by claiming descent from a bastard son of Abraham (Ishmael). Muslims now too, could be the chosen people without having to actually be born Jewish (denoted through female lineage). That sense of superiority enjoyed by the hated, but tolerated Jews, could now belong to any desert-dwelling piece of shit that was willing to mouth the proper prayers, without having to keep some of the more esoteric Jewish laws.
Jewish law was also quite attractive to Islam both because it delineated not only just who was a believer but also provided a common set of rules by all to abide by without creating undue friction between two sets of peoples living side-by-side. It also made Islam an attractive choice for disaffected Jews to rally to the cause of Muhammed; they could have their cake and eat it too.
2. The Glory of the Caliphate: Islam repeatedly turns it's eyes back to it's heyday in the 7th-10th century when it was busy overrunning Europe, Anatolia, Persia, Africa, India and parts of China, as the the epitome of it's "civilization". Certainly, if you consider the vast size of the territory conquered and subjected, the riches that were extracted from them and the sheer number of people living within Islamic borders of the time, then yes, it was a heyday.
However, many would have you believe that Islam brought with it some sort of civilizing influence that ordinarily wqould not have been present in those places prior to it's arrival. We've heard time and time again about how Muslims were performing C-sections, drinking coffee, etc, etc hundreds of years before the now-more-civilized West, and somehow we're supposed to believe that Islam created this dynamic culture spread across the globe. Nothing could be further from the truth. Islam merely overran or converted regions in which thriving civilizations already existed: Persia, the Hellenistic Greek world in the Levant and Anatolia, Constantinople, Aryan India. It inherited administrations and social orders that had been spiced and strengthed by Greco-Roman traditions, the Indian Caste system and the Confucian thought of China. It co-opted those institutions and customs that it could not eradicate and then we pretend as if Islam invented it all. As with it';s grafting itself to the Jewish tradition, Islam grafted itself into the existing cultures of whatever was there before. No mean feat, and certainly no argument for some kind of "Islamic Cultural Renaissance".
The fact that within a few hundred years of it's apex, Islam was sliding backwards into anarchy and disorganization is conveniently forgotten, unlike the examples usually given for failing Western systems, like Rome.
The difference is that the Western Greco-Roman/Judeo-Christian systems survived because of their dynamism and cohesion, the Chinese and Indian systems survived due to their vast size and numbers of people involved. Islam petered out because it refused to face reality: there was only a limited number of Arabian elite to go around and when they had exhausted their numbers trying to administrate something so vast and unwieldy they left themselves open to other, more numerous, peoples to take over, hence the Ottomans and the Moghuls, the Mamelukes and the Berbers. Yet, the Arabian nature of Islam still remains as much as the Roman law still remains today. The difference is that Islam continues to fight that which it cannot control instead of bending with the wind --- a by-product of submission to the will of God. Roman law has stayed with us because it was practical, egalitarian and easily understood by everyone who could read. Islamic law stays because it is the last redoubt of power left to those who would force the submission of others.
Islam boils down to this:
1. We hate the Jews, but we're perfectly happy to insist that we have Jewish roots.
2. We hate Christians, but only because they believe their prophet is better than ours.
3. Western civilization is evil, unless it's existing structures and abilities to produce all sorts of really neat things can be co-opted. Anything that resists co-option must be destroyed.
4. Western civilization is neat when it comes to doing things like producing abundant food, providing adequate health care and education, producing and distributing wealth, but it is just too indiviualistic for Islam, so, they'll take the good and chuck what they consider the bad, without realizzing it's the bad that makes the rest of it good.
5. Any return to the "good old days" of Islamic Spain and India is a good idea, and all Muslims are honor bound to enure it happens. If there happens to be people already enjoying their lives under a rival system, no problem, they can either be converted or killed. Preferably killed.
6. We can continue to pass a second-hand ideology and religious system off as something unique for as long as stupid people continue to procreate. Anyone who isn't stupid, must be elimninated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)