Dawood Khan

Archive for the ‘thinking out loud’ Category

, , , ,

Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional!

In Politics, Religion, Stupidity, thinking out loud on June 1, 2012 at 12:08 am

The US Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston held that Gay Marriage bans are unconstitutional.  America’s promise as a truly egalitarian home of liberty and freedom shines through today.  The bigots have lost this battle.  The fight goes on as I’m sure that the Christians will not give up their targeted attacks on this minority.  The current witch hunt will go on.  Christians are nothing if not dogged in their desire to constantly attack weak and marginal peoples.  The use of the Bible has long been a favored tactic of Christians to hold others down and to demonize someone, anyone as long as it makes them feel good about themselves.  The fact is that many Christians only feel good when they are attacking something as ungodly or blasphemous.  They are second only to Muslims in their desire to force their religious absolutism on anyone but themselves.

Christians constantly attack gay marriage by terming it blasphemous and calling homosexuality an abomination.  The Sanctity of Marriage must be upheld, they love to scream irrationally.  Yet, some 50% of Christians obliterate the sanctity of their sacred marriage rites through the dissolution of their own marriages with divorce.  Usually, those divorces are sought because one or both spouses committed adultery or the marriage dissolves over finances.  Yet, no one screams about the sanctity of marriage at these times.

One of the champions of Sanctity of Marriage laws is Rush Limbaugh.  Dear Rush has been divorced at least three times and is a drug addict.  Allegedly, he cheated on each wife with the next.  I’m sure he isn’t finished with his ride down divorce alley.

The Battle will continue as the bigoted Christians will not concede defeat in their battle for the “Sanctity of Marriage.”  No matter how many of the bigots are divorced themselves, they will demand that others be held to a higher standard.  After all, Christians are not expected to be perfect.  They’re only expected to hold others to that higher standard.

Hypocrites and bigots seem to be attracted to the Christian cause.  This is simply the latest example in centuries of overt bigotry, racism and persecution of minorities and “the other.”

BOSTON (AP) – A federal appeals court Thursday declared that the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutionally denies federal benefits to married same-sex couples, a ruling all but certain to wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court.
In its unanimous ruling, the three-judge panel of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston said the 1996 law that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman discriminates against same-sex couples because it doesn’t give them the same rights and privileges as heterosexual couples.
The court didn’t rule on the law’s other politically combustible provision, which said states without same-sex marriage cannot be forced to recognize gay unions performed in states where it’s legal. It also wasn’t asked to address whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry.
The law was passed at a time when it appeared Hawaii would legalize same-sex marriage. Since then, many states have instituted their own bans on same-sex marriage, while eight states have approved it, led by Massachusetts in 2004.

Population Segment Have Been Divorced No. of Interviews
All adults 33% 3792
Evangelical Christians 26% 339
Non-evangelical born again Chrisitans 33% 1373
Notional Christians 33% 1488
Associated with non Christian faith 38% 197
Atheist or agnostic 30% 269
All born again Christians 32% 1712
All non born again Christians 33% 2080

, ,

Thinking about a New Tattoo

In thinking out loud on May 31, 2012 at 1:57 pm

, , , , ,

Will America Grow into the Promise it once Held?

In thinking out loud on May 28, 2012 at 8:01 pm

I’m reading Lennon by Tim Riley. I can not fathom why the FBI would waste time and money following Lennon and Yoko Ono around New York City and the rest of the country.

Hoover must have been the biggest joke in the history of America. Collosal waste of resources. I’m sure Nixon had something to do with it as well.

Sometimes, I have a hard time reconciling the actual America to the America in which I grew up believing. They seem different places. Sometimes I feel that way about the present.

The America that Christians envision for us is definitely not an America in which I want to live. Superstition, bigotry…these are not things that should be encountered in an enlightened nation with an intelligent people.

Perhaps, America has yet to exist.

America is a 200 plus year work in progress.  The fundamentalist Christians would take us backward to the days of superstition and backward thinking.   They would have the laws of their petty God codified into our legal system.  If they get their way, America will be little better than a Christian Taliban State.

I hope that the people of my nation truly believe in Liberty, Freedom and Justice for all.

, , , ,

The Story Behind the National Anthem

In thinking out loud on May 27, 2012 at 5:39 pm

1.  They were States and not colonies.

2.  Fort McHenry not Fort Henry.  There would have been very few women or children in the Fort as described in the piece.  Probably a few drummer boys and Officer’s wives.  A laundress and seamstress, perhaps.  Probably a few slaves.

3.  19 ships….not hundreds

4.  We weren’t fighting the the British for independence nor were the Brits fighting us for dominance. It was a war over commerce and British support of the Natives out West.

5.  Had Fort McHenry fallen, the people would not have become British citizens.

6.  The British Commander would have understood American unwillingness to surrender. Fort McHenry was a bastion. It was strong. Cannon balls would not have taken that Fort alone. The British would have had to storm it with troops to have taken it.

7.  The Brits actually called off the attack after several unsuccessful maneuvers to get around Fort McHenry’s defenses.

8.  The attack was aimed at taking Baltimore.

9.  God had nothing to do with it. 12,000 fighting men in built up fighting defenses and a huge Fort was what protected the city and that Flag.

That’s just off the top of my head without fact checking stringently.

This kind of inaccurate nonsense is exactly what Glenn Beck did on his Fox Talk  Show.  Half lies, half truths and outright lies.  I wouldn’t be surprised if Glen Beck produced this nonsense.

MORONS!

, , ,

Lady Gaga

In thinking out loud on May 25, 2012 at 2:36 pm

This is the start of a long night of drinking.  Why?

Because I’m about to be off to see Lady Gaga in a few hours.  I got shianghai’d into this gig when one of Unny’s friends had to go to Japan for work.  Thanks Pimmy…mooooooo

I suppose it might be fun.  A night of strangeness and a hell of a lot of ladyboys and assorted other LGBTs.

Actually, I don’t mind Lady Gaga music or Ladyboys for that matter.  I’m pretty much down for anything.

, , ,

Class is in Session

In thinking out loud on May 23, 2012 at 12:28 pm
International 3rd Graders

International 3rd Graders

I had a great and unique experience this morning.  I gave a presentation on Afghanistan to a group of 3rd Graders at an International School in Bangkok.  There were students from Thailand, China, Korea and America in attendance.  Actually, it was two classes as the teacher next door brought her class over for the presentation.

The kids were all great and attentive (for 3rd Graders).  I put together a little Powerpoint slide show and brought along a few items that I’d purchased in Afghanistan.   My Jam Minaret carpet that COL Barakzai gave me in Chagcharan, a few necklaces, a big piece of Lapis, Afghan coins and bills, two of the knives that I bought at the bazaar on Camp Warehouse and a few other items were on display.  I let the kids handle almost everything.

One of the kids was blind and he was probably the most intelligent and inquisitive of the bunch.  Of course, the little gals were all adorable.

It was a good day.  Hope I can do it again.

, ,

The Left Loves Fox News

In thinking out loud on May 22, 2012 at 8:29 pm
FOX NEWS or FAUX NEWS

The Left’s Witch Hunt

I always find it comical that so many who abhor Fox News seem to be so intimately acquainted with it.  These people then go on to publicize Fox News via their constant yammering about Fox News.  I don’t watch it.  I don’t watch any news really.  Not a big TV person anymore.  I get most of my news via Twitter and other net resources.  Rarely do I go to Fox.  Not because I do or do not like them but because they are obviously biased.  I don’t want to read an O’Reilly or Beck or whomever opinion on every event.  I want to read about the event unfiltered and without left or right slant.  Then I wish to form my own opinion or slant, if you will.  After that, I find it interesting to see just how the Left or Right will slant it.

Folks on the Left give Fox too much credit and go a long ways towards giving them much  free publicity with the constant cries against them.  Half of the time that I do go to Fox, it’s because some Lefty has whined about them.  I go there to see what the fuss is all about and more often than not am let down by the whole leftist “much ado about nothing” whirlwinds created by Liberals.

Then I go to CNN or MSNBC and see programming thereon throwing a left slant on news in a political mirror image of Fox News and somehow no one except for a few right loonies seems to care.

Fox News is the Witch Hunt of the left.  The Christians have their homosexuals.  The far left has it’s Fox News viewer.  Both sides led by the nose for the political advantage and profit of the DNC or GOP elite.

, , ,

Religion, the Divine and the Edge of Chaos

In thinking out loud on May 22, 2012 at 1:55 am
Chaos Star

Chaos Star

I was reading about Chaos Theory and came across a theory concerning the “edge of chaos.”  It struck me that religion lies across this nexus.  Religion offers the hope of  becoming something more than what we could be, but, so often makes us something less than what we are.  It offers us the hope of an eternal and divine perfection, yet, so often those who are religious superficially (as so many are) as well as those who breathe deep of it’s air become so filled with hatred or disdain of those who do not share their beliefs as to make them less than what they could be.

We each have the divine in us.  Religion can draw this out.  There are many examples of this in history (Buddha, Jesus, Mohammad).  Yet, so many of us are base creatures.  We live out our hatreds using the words of the Gods or their prophets as justification for our hates, prejudices and pettiness.  The wisdom of our collective religions are bursting with exhortation to love one another and to be “our brother’s keeper.”  Too often, we fail to heed this calling choosing instead to condemn those who are different.  We use the spiritual wisdom of the ages as division when we should choose brotherhood and unity of purpose.

The order that Religious Wisdom should bring instead becomes chaos by our own choosing.


It’s The Only Good Fight There Is

In thinking out loud on May 21, 2012 at 6:26 pm

“If you’re going to try, go all the way. Otherwise, don’t even start. This could mean losing girlfriends, wives, relatives and maybe even your mind. It could mean not eating for three or four days. It could mean freezing on a park bench. It could mean jail. It could mean derision. It could mean mockery–isolation. Isolation is the gift. All the others are a test of your endurance, of how much you really want to do it. And, you’ll do it, despite rejection and the worst odds. And it will be better than anything else you can imagine. If you’re going to try, go all the way. There is no other feeling like that. You will be alone with the gods, and the nights will flame with fire. You will ride life straight to perfect laughter. It’s the only good fight there is.”

Charles Bukowski

 

, , ,

The Authority of the Self

In thinking out loud on May 20, 2012 at 1:05 am

Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using his intelligence; he is just using his memory.

Leonardo da Vinci

I was “debating” with this irksome fellow on my blog not too long ago.  The guy went on and on.  Not an original thought in his head.  Every response was filled from beginning to end with quotes of some other.  Not once did he simply throw his own thought at me.   Unless you count his little petty digs at my intelligence.

He never really understood anything that he read.  I don’t think he understood the authoritative quotations that he hurled at me.

This annoys me.  Folks who can’t or won’t think for themselves.  If there isn’t a Google quote or some “expert” to whom one can point for support, these folks will not accept your argument or your reasoning.  These folks are sycophantic intellectual parasites.  Memorize and quote.  Their whole game.

If one can not think for oneself, the thoughts of others will do that person no good.  There is only emptiness behind the quotes.  There is no person.

What’s funny is that after a series of insults that he denies, I erased him and spammed this ridiculous faux intellectual.  Still, he (or she) pops up from time to time to stalk me.  It’s quite comical.

Be your own authority.  Think for yourself.

 

, ,

The Ballad of Loco Oh No

In thinking out loud on May 19, 2012 at 4:31 pm

Boys in the game.

Bangkok nights.  No shame.

One might come or go.

Still twas on with the show.

The other three were steady.

For the night, quick and ready.

Then came the one.

The spirit of Ono.

The end of the night.

No morning, just haze

The unholy roller.

An emotional craze

Misery she bears

Like a plague, she infects

The curse that she shares

Fearing love, she rejects

Relishing pain

Forever envious of the joys

That others will gain

, , ,

Dave the Cook…NOT!

In thinking out loud on May 16, 2012 at 8:02 pm
Helping Unny grind up the Tam with a mortar and pestle

Helping Unny grind up the Tam with a mortar and pestle

 

No idea what I’m doing…but it was funny

 

, , , , ,

The Student Athlete Conundrum

In thinking out loud on May 16, 2012 at 7:21 pm
One and Done Crisis is about Greed

One and Done Crisis is about Greed

Why do we expect more from Student Athletes than we expect from the general student population?

Only 53% of the general student population graduates within 6 years of entering college.  Only 36% graduate within 4 years of entering College.   The average College Student graduates in 6 years if he graduates at all.

If a talented mathematician departs school after one year for employment with Google or Microsoft, we applaud him.

Why is one path a mockery and the other a triumph?

A Career is a Career.

The one difference that I can see is the race component.  If all Student Athletes leaving early for the NBA were white and all talented mathematicians leaving early were black would we be having these conversations?

The other difference that I can see is that Student Athletes (especially the highly talented Student Athlete) are basically indentured servants who make the NCAA and the Media millions each year.

I would venture to say that these arguments do not have the best interest of the student athlete at heart.  They are concerned about profits and the bottom line.

, , , ,

I agree with Obama on Same Sex Marriage

In thinking out loud on May 12, 2012 at 8:27 am

The idea of homosexuality as abomination  originated with the Israelites worship of Ba’al. In order to keep the Israelites from leaving their GoD and, therefore, their tribe the Judges/Leaders of Israel declared [for GoD] that all activities associated with the worship of Ba’al were abominations before GoD. One of the primary rites of the Temple of Ba’al was the practice of homosexual sexual relations. Ba’al liked his adherents to get it on…with everything and everyone. “GoD” didn’t give a damn about homosexuality until his “Chosen” started getting their funky groove on in the worship of another GoD. As he states countless times in the Bible, GoD is a Jealous God. He didn’t take kindly to his children having fun in some other God’s temple.

The Jewish God is a stifling prick who seems to have Victorian sensibilities. The GoD of Christianity is everything that one would NOT want in a spouse. He’s a nagging, insecure, jealous person.  That is the GoD that declaims homosexuality as an abomination.

That incident is the traditional starting point for Christian opposition to homosexuality and, now, homosexual or same sex marriage.

I had a conversation with a friend about Same Sex Marriage.  It went as usual along these lines:

FRIEND:   The Same Sex (gay) Marriage movement is not about marriage for those advocating it. Homosexuals are not standing in line waiting to get married. Its about a cultural change. They are using this as a tactic to coerce people into approving their lifestyle.

DAVE: I’ve touched on this before, but, I’ll do it again. This is you. This is not Gay people. This is you planting your ideas into their heads. You can’t do that. You can not speak for people whom you obviously do not understand. You can not make assumptions and use those assumptions to legislatively coerce people into acts that are against their nature.

Well, you can and it has been done before. For example, White Americans of European descent made the assumption that slavery was good for the African American. They made the assumption that Black Slaves from Africa did not actually mind being slaves and were actually pre-disposed to being slaves.

White Southerners in America made the assumption that Black people were an inferior race and that they would be better off segregated. Culled away from White people.

So, of course, you can make all of the assumptions that you want. People in America have a long, nefarious history of making bigoted assumptions about other people.

FRIEND: They have the same rights as you and I. They can marry a person of the opposite sex.

DAVE: Marriage is not a right. It is a tradition. There is not place in the Constitution that states that the Right of a Citizen to Marry shall not be abridged. Not in any Constitution that I’ve read.

Traditions evolve. They have always evolved.

For instance, it has been traditional to marry a member of the opposite sex in order to have children that are NOT considered BASTARDS by people who make these kinds of assumptions. The word bastard has more or less left the modern vocabulary in this meaning. It has been traditional in many cultures to marry a woman for reasons such as prrocreation and, as in Greece and Rome, to then take lovers of any sex for enjoyment, companionship, etc.

Traditionally, marriage in America as well as most of the West, meant that the woman became chattel property. A woman entered marriage by being given away by her Father. That signified the changing of possession.

When Christians were fighting to keep divorce illegal in America, not a one of them showed any concern for women who were being beaten, raped and otherwise abused and humiliated.

Traditionally, marriage has taken on many forms.

What are the divorce rates amongst Christians. Is that part of the tradition of Christian marriages.

Have you scoured the planet to search for instances of homosexual marriage in other cultures?

After all, America is the great cultural melting pot. We were once very proud of that. Back when WHITE Folks dominated the political and cultural landscape.

FRIEND: Just because who they choose to love doesn’t fit the traditional definition of marriage, they want to radically redefine marriage regardless of the consequences.

DAVE: In so far as I am aware, these new “Sanctity of Marriage Laws” are a first attempt at legally defining marriage. Homosexuals are attempting to be included in a tradition that has never truly been defined until now.

This “defining moment” came about because Christians, as usual, want to control the lives of others and take away FREE WILL.

This is the time honored and practiced tradition of Christians. Something new comes about. Christians grow fearful and then strike out at something that need not truly concern them.

Need I list all of the instances of this occurring.

Heliocentric Theory, Round Earth Theory, Rock n Roll, Inter-racial marriage in America (for it had been happening in the rest of the world for thousands of years), Racial Integration, Abolition of the African Slave in America on up to the now RAGING FEAR concerning homosexual marriage.

FRIEND: It basically makes marriage meaningless if one just defines as people who love each other. Look for polygamist and incestuous marriage to be the next “civil rights” issue.

DAVE: Meaningless? You mean meaningless like 50% of marriages ending in divorce? Something like that? Adultery raging across the landscape? Something like that. But those are marriages between men and women.

Or do you mean women being raped in the Marriage bed. I suppose we should go back to that. When women were obliged to have sex with their husbands even if they were dripping wet with syphilis and gonorrhea wrought outbreaks of sores and cankers. Yeah, let’s go back to that tradition.

It was tradition to discipline one’s wife as well. We can go back to that tradition as well.

Not so long ago, who I chose to love may have been a Black woman. In America, that was non-traditional. Therefore, Christians were arguing that it should remain non-traditional and be illegal.

Tradition is funny.

Of course, Christians love to bring incest and polygamy into the debate.  I have no problem with polygamy. If a group of 50 people want to enter into marriage with one another. So be it. I’m all for that God Given FREE WILL that Christians seem to hate.

Incest: Amongst consenting adults. Why not? The Romans did it. The Greeks did it. It’s all over the Bible.

The European Monarchs are infamous for it as it eventually caused madness and other problems in their offspring.

Christians don’t like to admit that whole “Ba’al episode.” Most of them aren’t even aware of it or it’s significance culturally on the Israelites.

It has been noted that many, if not most, Christians do not actually read the Bible. Most simply follow what their Pastor says and take that as the “Gospel Truth.”

Here is another example of Christian fear mongering in response to Homosexual Marriage:

You can monkey around with marriage, gender roles, raising children, etc all you want. Everything will be fine. We’ve come to figure out so much in our post modern age. All the wisdom of the ages is really not worth reflecting on. We’re pretty sophisticated now. Culture and society will thrive and reach new heights with our new post modern attitudes. Jack and Jill or Jack and Jim. Totally interchangable.

Homosexuals are a very small percentage of population. They have always been a very small percentage of the population. More than likely, they will always be a very small percentage of the population who are homosexual.

If one wishes to defer to the wisdom of the ages, homosexuality was openly practiced by the Greeks, Persians, Romans and many other pre-Christian societies.

This so called “wisdom of the ages” comes from about 1600 years of Christian history. And even then! Homosexuality has always been with us. Despite the very worst of the Churches attempts to weed it out.

The Church of Rome started the spin against homosexuality. Before the COR, it was a non-issue.

The Church has always needed enemies.  Witches to burn.  Heretics to torture.  Windmills against which to tilt.

Homosexuals were the last safe victim.  I’m sure there will be others in the future.  Homosexuals are the group at whom they’ve decided to tilt their vicious lances for now.

Leonardo da Vinci would be familiar with the plight of homosexuals.  He was one of the GREAT EVIL TOOLS of Satan in his day.  Designing those devilish machines that we use today had the Church hot on his trail.  We’re only now re-discovering the brilliance of Da Vinci thanks to the Wisdom of the Ages and it’s Champion Christianity.

With all that in mind, I have a request for Christians.  Please don’t make me and others like me vote for Obama.  I don’t want to do it.  I certainly do not want to vote for a candidate who wishes to thrust us morally back into the dark ages, either.

, , , , , ,

The Media and the NCAA

In thinking out loud on May 11, 2012 at 6:15 am
OXYMORON: Sports Journalism

OXYMORON: Sports Journalism

Every summer, there’s a scandal and investigations and media created brouhaha.

Pete Thamel and the rest come out of their caves to stalk some 17 or 18 year old kid and his entourage.  I wonder how it feels to have your life revolve around the lives of 15 to 18 year old kids.  Pete Thamel knows all about it.  The guy has a disease.  I wonder if he surfs the Russian internets to find kiddie porn.  He’s obviously obsessed with children and their naughty little secrets.  Maybe Thamel envisions himself in a Nun Habit spanking 6′ 8″ Black kids on the rear for being naughty.  I’m sure his ultimate fantasy is spanking that same Black kid while he’s wearing a Kentucky Basketball Jersey.

These folks have a sickness.  They speak of College Basketball as if it’s some sacred institution.

Hey Pete!  Here’s a clue.  It’s a game.

These same morons (Pete Thamel, Pat Forde, et al) speak in hushed tones about John Wooden ~ The Wizard of Westwood.

What’s the difference between John Wooden and Tark the Shark?

Wooden’s Boosters weren’t caught until AFTER Saint John retired and was already Canonized by the NCAA and the Sports Media.  Once the Media Canonizes you, they will not admit the mistake.  They might seem imperfect.  And we all know that the Sports Media are so perfect and blameless as to make Jesus Christ seem the Mass Murderer.

Had Sam Gilbert been caught while Wooden was winning his multiple Championships, the media would have crucified Saint John.  Coach Wooden was already long retired and long the Holiest Man in College Basketball when the truth of Sam Gilbert came out.

A straight THUG purchases abortions, shoes, cars, clothing and gives “pocket money” to a decades worth of athletes at UCLA while Wooden is winning successive Championships.  This is the same era that ended with Kentucky getting a near death penalty.  Kentucky was hammered for much less than the rulebreaking that went on for a couple of decades under the “watchfully” blinkered eyes of Saint John the Wizard.  I reckon his magic only worked on the ball court.  He certainly wasn’t omnipotent off the court or he’d have known what was going on with his players and Sam Gilbert.

One could take the “crimes” of Tark, Calipari, Pearl, Harrick, Sampson and Sutton and still not have a sum total near that of the crookedness of the College Basketball Program of John Wooden.

That Wooden Era is supposedly the Golden Era of College Basketball.  The days to which all of these sports morons like Pete Thamel and Pat Forde wish to return.

I have a question for Pete Thamel, though.  Who is covering the programs over at Syracuse.  Isn’t that your area?  While kids are getting molested by an old man in the Syracuse Basketball program, Pete Thamel is investigating kids at Kentucky and Georgetown.  All the while turning a blind eye to Syracuse Boosters and their child molesting assistant coaches.

I bet there has never been a scandal at Syracuse, so, good ol’ Petey got bored and decided that his career of riches would start with John Calipari.

I’ve noted time and again on this blog the hypocrisy of the NCAA and the Sports Media.  Their treatment of Bill Self, John Wooden, Roy Williams.  These guys cheat and the media turns a blind eye.  They may write a story about it.  However, it doesn’t become a scandal.  One of their chosen could rape a 5 year old and the Sports Media would bury it.  They’d choose instead to write an unsubstantiated story about a Kentucky recruit for whom a homeless man bought lunch while said recruit was 5 years old.

That’s your Sports Media.  What’s worse is that so much of the following in Sports buys into the utterly contemptible garbage spewed forth by these morons.  Makes me wanna curse…and then laugh.  Gullibility in the sports world is almost as ubiquitous as unprofessional journalism while “Sports Journalism” has become as oxymoronic as Military Intelligence.

, , , ,

A Marine meets an Insurgent

In thinking out loud on April 22, 2012 at 11:11 pm

A Marine squad was marching north of Fallujah when they came upon an Iraqi terrorist who was badly injured and unconscious. On the opposite side of the road was an American Marine in a similar but less serious state.

The Marine was conscious and alert and as first aid was given to both men, the squad leader asked the injured Marine what had happened.

The Marine reported, I was heavily armed and moving north along the highway here, and coming south was a heavily armed insurgent. We saw each other and both took cover in the ditches along the road.

I yelled to him that Saddam Hussein was a miserable, lowlife scum bag who got what he deserved. and he yelled back that Barack Obama is a lying, good-for-nothing, left wing Commie who isn’t even an American.

So I said that Osama Bin Laden dresses and acts like a frigid, mean-spirited lesbian! He retaliated by yelling, Oh yeah? Well, so does Nancy Pelosi!
And, there we were, in the middle of the road, shaking hands, when a truck hit us.

, , , , ,

HEROES!

In thinking out loud on April 22, 2012 at 12:05 am
“We shouldn’t be looking for heroes, we should be looking for good ideas.”

― Noam Chomsky

I hate the word “hero.” It’s become cliche’ these days. Everyone who does anything is a hero. There was a time when the title was reserved for those who went above and beyond the call of duty.

Now, anyone who puts on a uniform is a hero. All of the Fobbits who sit on comfy bases in Iraq and Afghanistan and have never taken fire and those who do everything that they can to stay away from combat, we call these people heroes.

I do not apologize for saying this:

The guy who sits on his ass in a TOC for 9-12 months and sends other men out to fight and die IS NOT a hero. He’s an armchair warrior.

A guy who sits on Camp Phoenix and injures himself via his own carelessness is not a hero.

The guy who plans poorly and runs a convoy each and every day at the same time and gets hit by an IED is not a hero. He’s a fool who lazily and irresponsibly put others lives at risk.

A hero is someone who goes out and works his ass off no matter the dangers to ensure that the mission is accomplished. A hero is aware of danger and puts him or herself in harms way regardless.

A hero is someone who is out there taking the fight to the enemy.

Let’s reserve honors for those who deserve it. If everyone in the military was a hero, they’d all have Medals of Honor. There is a reason that they don’t give those out to every Jane, Dick and Henrietta who arrives in theatre.

Being in the military can be a demanding job. It takes one away from one’s family and can lead to enormous deprivation and comes with the POSSIBILITY of great danger. Not everyone, however, faces those dangers.  Not even everyone in Afghanistan faces danger. During a tour of duty in Afghanistan, a service member can come out on the other end of his
deployment without ever having faced an iota of real danger.

There is definitely an element of risk in simply being in country.  However, that risk for at least 80% of the personnel in country is minimal.

I’ve a notion that this wont to hail everyone as a hero is  a result of the MISTREATMENT of Vietnam Veterans.  People are over-compensating for that ill-considered behavior by attempting to create this vision of “service as heroism.”  Whereas, I believe that heroes are those who act in times when action is requiredas opposed to anyone who happens to volunteer without knowing that into which they are getting themselves.

I know of and know some genuine men and women whom I would call hero.  They are, however, far and few between.  Most of the folks over here, and I include myself in this, are just blokes with a job.

THE FOBBIT

THE FOBBIT

, , , ,

Terrorism Equals Cowardice?

In thinking out loud on April 21, 2012 at 12:05 am

Nagasaki = Terrorism?

TERRORISM? Atomic Bombing of Japanese Civilians in World War II
I know it’s popular to say so, but, acts of terrorism as executed by groups such as al Qaeda and al Jihad are not rooted in cowardice. These are not cowardly acts.

Blowing up innocent people is a terrible act. That, however, is not the goal of the act. All acts of terrorism do not consist of blowing up innocent people.

The governments of the world take part in acts consistently of which the end result is the death of innocents. Blowing up, shooting or in some other way killing innocent persons occurs all the time at the behest of the most powerful nations on this planet to include the United State, Great Britain, Australia and Russia. Smaller nations also conduct operations of this sort.

How is this different?

Each time the United States enters into a conflict such as the invasion of Iraq or Afghanistan, we do so in the full knowledge that innocents will die by our hand. We make these decisions consciously. Are we cowards for doing so?

Terrorism is naught but a form of war. It’s a war conducted by a smaller “power” against a larger power. Both parties have goals at which end they deploy the means at their disposal. For Arab insurgents and terrorists, the means at their disposal is partly small scale targeted bombings meant to produce psychological terror on a target population. For the US and other greater powers, we have greater means to produce terror and to intimidate or cause the destruction of our enemies.

A person who takes a bomb into a crowded market place or who drives up to an armed guard station with the intent to inflict damage is not a coward. The act is not that of a coward. The act may be heinous. It may be cruel and devastating. Cowardly, though, I think it is not. These people are acting in a cause in which they believe. No different than the belief of a soldier fighting for a State.

Their methods may be criminal in that they oft times target civilians, but, they are not cowards. It makes us feel good to call them cowards, but, it’s simply feel good politics to label them as such. And that label works to our detriment. These folks are dedicated fighters. Insanely dedicated in many ways but dedicated they are. No coward can commit him or herself to a goal and no coward is willing to die for a cause.

The United States has knowingly killed innocent people in the process of apprehending or killing it’s enemies. Are we cowards as well?

The Colonists engaged in psychological terror in the rebellion against the crown. Sherman’s March to the Seas was directed at Civilians. We decimated cities such as Dresden in World War II wherein we specifically targeted civilians. We detonated two atomic bombs over civilian populations. Were those cowardly acts?

The difference, the only difference, is that we rationalize these decisions as necessary to our war aims. Terrorists do the same.

From wikipedia:

“Terrorism” comes from the French word terrorisme,[10] and originally referred specifically to state terrorism as practiced by the French government during the Reign of terror. The French word terrorisme in turn derives from the Latin verb terreō meaning “I frighten”.[11] The terror cimbricus was a panic and state of emergency in Rome in response to the approach of warriors of the Cimbri tribe in 105 BC. The Jacobins cited this precedent when imposing a Reign of Terror during the French Revolution.[12][13] After the Jacobins lost power, the word “terrorist” became a term of abuse.[6] Although “terrorism” originally referred to acts committed by a government, currently it usually refers to the killing of innocent people[14] by a non-government group in such a way as to create a media spectacle.[15] This meaning can be traced back to Sergey Nechayev, who described himself as a “terrorist”.[16] Nechayev founded the Russian terrorist group “People’s Retribution” (Народная расправа) in 1869.

In November 2004, a United Nations Secretary General report described terrorism as any act “intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act”.[17]

This is one of hundreds of definitions of terrorism:

A definition proposed by Carsten Bockstette at the George C. Marshall Center for European Security Studies, underlines the psychological and tactical aspects of terrorism:

Terrorism is defined as political violence in an asymmetrical conflict that is designed to induce terror and psychic fear (sometimes indiscriminate) through the violent victimization and destruction of noncombatant targets (sometimes iconic symbols). Such acts are meant to send a message from an illicit clandestine organization. The purpose of terrorism is to exploit the media in order to achieve maximum attainable publicity as an amplifying force multiplier in order to influence the targeted audience(s) in order to reach short- and midterm political goals and/or desired long-term end states.”[23]

If we accept this as a definition of terrorism, then the NATO Air War in the Balkans was an act of terror. The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were as they were targeted violence against a civilian populace designed to produce the response of capitulation from the Imperial Japanese government. The genocide of the Native populations of the Americas were acts of terror. The targeted bombings of civilian populaces in World War II on the European front were acts of terror. The British reaction to the IRA and others were acts of terror. The acts of Southern governments in the pre-1970s USA directed at the black populace were all acts of terror. Historical and ongoing US support of despotic governments such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Yemen, the UAE and Iraq are all acts of terror. Chinese governmental acts to control their populace through fear are acts of terror. The Shahs use of Savak in Iran was terrorism.

The question then is who are the terrorists? When did the war on terror begin and which party is actually fighting against terrorism or are both parties fighting different types of terrorism? Why is the US government supporting nations who regularly use terror to control their populace while we are fighting a “war on terror.”

Who are the terrorists?  US or THEM?  Both?  If we use terror to fight terror, are we cowards as well?

, ,

Freedom isn’t Free. It costs a buck o’ five.

In thinking out loud on April 20, 2012 at 6:42 pm

, , , , ,

Assassination vs War

In thinking out loud on April 19, 2012 at 8:59 am
Saddam Hussein the day of his capture

Saddam Hussein the day of his capture

How is it that we (civilized society) consider it less immoral to go to war and in the process murder/kill/maim/dispossess hundreds of thousands than to kill one man and his family of butchers?

This I do not understand and likely never will.

US Policy on Assassinations (CNN)

History of US Targeted Killings (Assassination) Policy

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 43 other followers