through the looking glass

Dear Professor,

from The Las Vegas Sun:

A 12-year-old boy allegedly shot the father of a 9-year-old boy after the man intervened when the two boys were fighting late Sunday afternoon, Metro Police said. Lt. Ted Snodgrass said the shooting happened at 4:45 p.m. near 21st Street and Sunrise Avenue east of downtown Las Vegas. The 12-year-old pulled a gun and allegedly shot the younger child's father in the leg during the dispute, Snodgrass said. The man was taken to a hospital with injuries not believed to be life-threatening. Police said the boy is a known gang member (???) and was taken into custody. Authorities haven't released the name of the boy because of his age.

comment- I don't even know where to begin with this one.

- Hoople

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Hoop,

So another newspaper found the freak scoop; that tasty morsel of human tragedy which keeps the eyes sharp and the elbows juiced enough to work the ink-stained pages. This time, a precocious pubescent boy is acting out his interpretation from our worst examples of adulthood so that we can sit in our easy chairs and take comfort in the knowledge that our opinions are still on course.

"There never was anything good gonna come out of these ghettos. Voting to increase spending to improve the infrastructure of these neighborhoods ignores the fact that these people are fundamentally different than us; they wouldn't know what to do with a new school anyway, but maybe tag it up with their spray paint and sell drugs to the kids there. So lets spend half that tax money paying cops to keep them in there place over there and outta my town."

Or perhaps:

"This is exactly why we need to spend money on schools and housing subsidies and outreach programs. People are dying in these streets and no one can convince me that a young boy should have no alternative to gang life and prison than becoming the victim of gang violence. Sex education, needle exchanges and HIV testing is essential to stop the cycle of premature deaths from preventable causes. Every child orphaned by an untimely death becomes another ward of the state system which is financially overstretched to begin with." . . .

and so the debate goes . . .

Law enforcement is represented by a well seasoned, powerful union skilled at directing money from state and local budgets to the payroll account of its members. Stories like this only keep the system strong by spreading the fear that without strong law enforcement, your neighborhood will be the home of the next victim. The problem has always been an impasse in the debate over who the victim or victims in this story are. I wonder what the world would look like if someone came into the picture with enough charisma to challenge the conventional approach to poverty, someone with a plan to starve these gangs of their attraction by offering a sexy alternative to poverty and the vacuum of drugs and violence it showcases.

These are the only perks that gangs can offer young recruits to compete with the healthcare and pension plans we in the "middle class" take for granted. Too many individuals from poor neighborhoods learn at an early age that they don't fit into the mainstream equation and channel their prepubescent hope and anger onto a more down-home system of gangland protocol, which at the very least bears a far greater familiarity to the tough homes they grew up into than some middle class society, which systematically refuses to absorb them. We spend our tax dollars quarantining "lost communities" and accept stories like this as the product of self-determination (like some twelve year old boy should spend the rest of his life shouldering the consequences of his underdeveloped choices); the inevitable sacrifices ; the "collateral damage" in the march toward progressing middle and upper class economies. This story happened to dispensable people who live in a parallel universe, untouched by me and me untouched by them; surreal horror stories from disposable pockets of the whole picture, safely contained by our high-octane police force and as relevant to our day to day experience as the struggle in Algeria, Lybia or last night's presentation of True blood.

Unlike many who suggest the answer lies in the slathering of tax dollars directly into programs focused on housing, heating, health and education, I object that these steps alone fail to address the eight hundred pound gorilla in the room. The latest threat to our Nation, described by the Office of Homeland Security as the number one threat to the security of United States was not Al Qaeda recruitment inside the country, not the destabilization of the Middle East by grassroots protests, but the collapse of the banking and securities industry in 2008 through today. The cycle of trust and honor that spent the last two hundred years capitalizing on our free market system, closing deals with a handshake, this same code of "ethics" manipulated the government of this country to deregulate the game to a degree so extensive, that any checks and balances legislated to prevent an implosion of the market were no longer in place and the system collapsed. (Think Sago or Knox mine disasters.)

The fact that a twelve year old boy chose to define himself as a thug might have just as much to do with his taste for a fundamental sense of control over issues unrelated singularly to poverty. I cannot help but think that the executives on Wall Street responsible for the housing scandal, the bundling of toxic assets for resale and inflated oil prices; who received immense government bailouts without forfeiting obscene bonuses; who developed intricate Ponzi schemes and broke the backs of orphanages, charities and pension plans for millions . . these princes from Wharton, Harvard and Yale were all the products of the very same system in whose absence we blame gang related crimes. This is not specifically a Black, ghetto thing. This is not specifically a product of academic or spiritual illiteracy; but is the manifestation of a condition called self-reliance and all the progress and consequences associated with it.

What answer could possibly explain the similarity between those crimes we simultaneously demonize and envy, such as the treasonous stock trading scumbags we punished with a slap on the wrist and the equally vulgar, petty crimes which reinforce our personal, smug sense of cultural elevation and moral superiority, such as those which stream out from our poor, dysfunctional neighborhoods. I will take a guess here and suggest that a twelve year old boy, carrying a loaded gun, a punk with the tenacity to pull the trigger at a human target, did not start his foray into the underworld a mere day or two ago. I will further speculate that the boy spent his first four years of life, like every one of us, absolutely dependent on his environment for food, clothing and other signals from his caretakers about social interaction, opinions, language development, and a sense of his own self worth. How can a couple of guys like you or me, from decent homes in suburban Long Island, comprehend the complex disfigurement of a personality who would assume the position of caretaker with rabid contempt? What does this baby, infant, toddler or child learn about his world and his place in it? How will more books, smaller class sizes and fresh painted halls undo five years, five immensely influential years, of abuse and indoctrination?

What this kid needed twelve years ago was an environment that instilled, at the most rudimentary level, a sense of safety. This above all speaks to our most fundamental instinct, our will to survive. Without a sense of protection and security, it is understandable that a system of values contradictory to the trust and compassion associated with them would develop, quite naturally filling the void. People cannot stop learning; knowledge cannot be shut off. I believe it is very probable the boy quickly learned to distrust anyone who showed compassion, people who don't see the world equation from his handicapped perspective, thus gradually developing a sense of contempt for them. By this process the population at large becomes dehumanized, and a moral dilemma for you and I, such as pulling the trigger on a gun aimed directly at another human being, is evaluated against an alternative schematic of responses, one that does not hesitate to cause suffering and injury to another person. In addition, the mind of a twelve year old boy, unlike his white collar colleague in crime, is also unburdened by the complexities of consequence. He has conquered a brief, vulnerable lifetime of insecurity and fear by making decisions to behave in ways that reinforce his skill-set at becoming feared.

From this perspective, it can be assumed that the consequences of an equation as intense and desperate as shooting someone in broad daylight do not include variables such as moral anxiety, a long prison sentence and/or loss of family, home and savings, but are instead about as comprehensive to our sensibilities as anything Alice might have imagined on the other side of the looking glass; to have spared his victim would have compromised his instinctive need to earn respect among some group of like-minded individuals who, for the first time in his life, vindicated the warped sense of reality he cultivated since infancy. By allowing his victim to walk away unharmed, he would have sacrificed his only chance to conquer the sense of personal vulnerability which has haunted him from his earliest recollection. It is important for him to pull the trigger and very little in the way of a social contract stands between his impulses and the tragedy; therefore the consequences resulting from a failure to shoot the man far outweigh the alternative.

But as I continue to repeat, redirecting money from cops into social programs, building new schools, handing out condoms and filling generous pots on the stoves of soup kitchens will affect only those individuals with an inclination to reach out for the help. How are all those two and three year olds, who arguably need help the most, going to reach beyond the parental figure who is already deep, deep under the radar in a cycle of drugs, neglect and self loathing. The traditional response is that no dollar amount will ever exceed the right of even one young, disenfranchised American to be saved from the cycle. I ask if this approach, though noble and romantically valid, can possibly approach its objective before breaking down under the weight of its own promise. How do I justify asking hardworking families to take money away from their communities to help a disenfranchised community rise up from hell when no guarantee can be made on any return on the investment? And how can I ensure that their success will not alienate me? What if they raise alternative cultural values and traditions out from the ghetto with them? Might it not make more sense to keep this demographic quiet by distributing paltry living handouts than unleash their numbers and potential onto an already dismal job environment.

On the other hand, what sense does it make to avoid answering these questions and instead continue to perpetuate the system of poverty begetting poverty and paying cops to mop up the overspill. Either way we complain about wasting money on imperfect half measures while the decades pass and these children start having babies of their own; start having their own gang tattoos and addictions; and our newspapers will peep through their little gloryholes, watching and waiting for the next human meltdown so they can continue to entertain and we can keep the standoff at the status quo. How do you reach a kid like this? What is the return on your investment? How can you maximize your return? Is it even possible to turn the situation around? These are the questions I believe we should be asking after reading this story.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Prof. Giov

Still trying to blame the commercial fishing industry for the actions of the Somalia Pirates, aren't you? This kid has no parents? Are you going to slam me with some shit like they are less fortunate and as such don't have some sense of social etiquette because of a funding issue?

I have a funding issue but I've chosen to use it to my advantage. I'm teaching my kid about working hard and working smart to avoid the situation I'm in and it's working. You're not going to save them jt. And just because they have thumbs doesn't predicate a mandate to do so. I really don't want to drop the survival of the fittest card but I have no choice but to do just that. What ever conclusions you've reached in searching for a solution to this problem are near impossible to employ. Look at the logistics. Just as the alcoholic must make the decision to put his or her drink down, the parent of this less fortunate twelve year old will have to start making changes on their own.

You can't force the hand of someone who would prefer to collect a government check, use it to stay doped up, and neglect the responsibility that they took ownership of the day that boy was conceived. You can try. The suggestion of a clean drug test to receive government assistance is something I've mention in the past and one idea that I thought would help to stimulate the thought process of coming around for some of these individuals. You said no. Somewhere along the line personal responsibility must be accounted for regardless of the environment that chance has placed individuals in.

No, Sir. This doesn't fall into the hands of misappropriated government spending. The schools are there. They may be a little crowded and have old poser pictures but, as I understand, correct social behavior is still being taught. When the kids get home, lessons learned should be talked about, parallel lines drawn and the good of it all reaffirmed, that is if they're interested in who he is, what he's doing, how he's progressing and the other things that come along with loving and caring about your children. The lack of good parenting is not because Bernie Madoff's abyssal soul drove him to the ponzi scheme, breaking the financial backs of many, but hey, I'm sure you'll agree they're all from a different neighbor anyway . . . right? That is how it goes, isn't it? We "don't have" so please excuse us from living in harmony with our brother and sisters? I don't think so.

Frustration with all of the "whys" does not exclude anyone from striving for a better way of life. You like to say that problems on Wall Street, mis-allocated funding, and the need for respectful folks to turn a blind eye has helped to fuel the fires of disdain beneath under achieving and poorly behaved youngsters. Maybe, and yes, its ultimately all wrapped together but that's only because the Ten Commandments apply to every aspect of life. If you were Al Gore you'd be able to bring Global Warming into this as cause and effect, but you are not Al Gore so I wouldn't buy it. Your passion for the misdirected agenda of society's ability to care for his brother is grand and definitely has a place in a debate. But what about this youngsters parents?

You've always said strength in numbers. For example, get everyone out to vote. Most of these folks can't come together in their own kitchen no less getting the community together and lobbying the government to help in a better direction. Society? They haven't helped the situation by demanding softer disciplinary actions because after all, it's a politically correct direction for the year 2011. "Don't yell at my boy 'cause you'll hurt his feelings". It was to someone's advantage to say "lighten up" so it was done and it has grossly snowballed. Some of these boys, if you don't mind me saying, really need a good ass kicking. We've been through our share of corporal punishment my friend and I think we came out the other side with good moral standards. I can't recall ever tagging the back of a Walmart with you. (mustaches on the pictures of local government figures at the mall not included) I certainly don't remember shooting a friend's Dad in the leg after an argument about whether I was safe or out either.

I'm aware I've skipped through the social sciences of your "what's happening to the inner cities" but I have to. I've made choices to improve my life and that requires my time and hard work. I'm not a bad guy or indifferent to the challenges that anyone of a number of communities face but the healing must start in the home. Reach out and eventually your hand will be received. I don't think I'm too far from general consensus. Just ask America. You can find them in anyone of your local Starbucks.

your friend,

hoop

the chains of democracy

a little Q and A for a snowy Friday

‎- Influence of campaign contributions on elected officials?
. . . imagine winning without them
- Influence of election results on House and Senate majorities?
. . . everything
- Limit to campaign contributions from anonymous individuals?...
. . . no limit
- Contribution status of Corporations as per recent Citizens United vs. United States decision of Supreme Court?
. . . Corporations are Individuals (aka: "persons") entitled to anonymously stuff as much cash into a campaign kitty as they can manage to scrape together
- Benefit of recent Tax Break extension approved by (Corporate friendly) Congress last month, for Corporations and remaining wealthiest 2% of Americans?
. . . continued reinvestment of American tax dollars into expansion of foreign job creation (major factor in job losses stateside) = continued tax free growth for these Global Corporations
‎- Benefit of same recent Tax Break, approved by Congress last month, for remaining 98% of middle and lower income Americans ??
. . . 9+% nationwide unemployment; cash strapped State economies; rising credit interest rates; steady pace of Home ...foreclosures; harassing phone calls from Filipino Debt collection clerks; little encouragement from Federal Officials that situation will/can reverse itself without cooperation of Capitalist (say "Corporate") intervention
- Status of these Corporations sending US jobs and salaries overseas?
. . . The US Supreme Court protects the right of these "persons" to use their foreign made fortunes to intimidate elections; stuffing both Houses of Congress with "representatives" who are inclined/beholden to perpetuate this cycle.
- Solution?
. . . Lets work to reverse the current Conservative/Tea Party/Big Business tendency to equate Federal Oversight or Regulations with Fascism or Communism and get some momentum from the significant population of remaining Americans to remind these Fat Cats and their hoodwinked minion Who does the real working and spending and soldiering and child rearing and writing and composing and cooking and welding . . . and lets regain the system's original intention of working for a decent quality of life for all off us here in America. Hell, somebody got these illegitimate ideas into the minds of millions of earnestly arrogant, "faith-based, real-Americans". I merely insist that Truth fits through the same sized door as Fiction. The real trick is figuring out how to clear the room to fit it. I will go to my grave believing in the superiority of a compelling articulation of the facts as the most effective option to accomplishing this. We must remind the Republican Congress that we are not serfs in some Capitalist nightmare, but are instead reasonably informed voters protected by one hell of a Constitution.
----------------------------------------------
Jen: We're not? War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength. The revolution is complete.
. . . . . (props and a nod to G.O.)
----------------------------------------------
Kevin: So, I should write a stern letter to my Congressperson and/or Senator? Then what? The receipt of a rubber stamped letter. A letter loaded with sincere rhetoric of empty concern and campaign jargon asking for my support. A letter loaded with all of the visions we see but will never be put forward to a vote because our representation has been bought. I’m not satisfied with the service either but it will take one hell of an action to change the course. Anyone up for it?

. . . thought I heard a cricket
----------------------------------------------
Prof. Hot Wind: Whenever I get frustrated about the size of the whole picture I do three things:
1] ask myself if the situation would improve if I did/said nothing.
2] give credit to the problem for its sheer enormity; to myself for getting my head around most of it; and forgive the public for being so exhausted by living it, fighting it and settling on the demands of the compromises it dictates, that they subcontract the media to distill their opinions for them . . . and
3] put my objections and thoughts on paper. Here I can reduce the situation into manageable pieces and function.
Get your friends to hear a second opinion. Be ready to expose a lie with aplomb.
Many an individuals impression of the current mess is formed by overhearing uninformed people pontificating in public places. The quantitative damage to the truth of this scenario might be better understood if we were describing someone with the flu, coughing freely into the confined space of a pub.

Remember: the bottom line in this game is the Vote. In itself the vote is free. The tools used to persuade the Voter however, are not. Sophisticated tools such as market demographic analysis and wide media exposure are generally an exclusive provision of large corporate interests with arsenals of cash, working to disfigure public agendas in a manner that caricatures their "personal" balance sheets at the expense of General Public works, wrestling for the same Federal allowance. This approach has the well exercised advantage of pimping the Truth into performing as its cell-mate bitch, which efficiently confuses the marginally attentive voter . . . . . The truth is NOT free!

I get my "facts" from Public Radio, the Times, Harpers mag, MSNBC and the Internet. The idea that these sources are reliable enough to form a Truth is a compromise I made some time ago to preserve my sanity. My occasional dalliances into Conservative media, (i.e.: The Journal, FOX news, Nat'l Review...) are helpful reminders that this is a very large, very diverse country, where Truth gets pounded against the ropes on all four sides of the ring by opposing heavyweights, quilting patchwork scenarios from the same box of rags in calculated, varying proportions. . . .

Want to do something to fight the Advantaged Elite sucking money away from your Health care for an extension on their summer home in Costa Rica?

Then give to the organizations who made you aware of Global Warming, of Tax breaks for the Rich, of the Oil Spill in the Gulf and the illegitimate War in Iraq . . .

Donate to NPR, subscribe to publications that match wits with your common sense. This is the best way for millions of us "financially insignificant" Americans to pool our resources and expose the "Corrupt-Truth" of the Powers-That-Be, currently taking control of OUR Congress.
------------------------------------------------
Kevin: I get it! Scream louder. Kinda like, as I understand the story, Barabbas won his freedom at the Passover Feast. So, we back our favorite "news" channel, get some pop-corn and wait for this to be played out in high definition, right? How about a system of accountability that doesn't allow the chosen ones, (voted into office on a platform of promises by which they won the right to represent us) permission to walk away after they compromised our visions? Sounds like something we have now . . . Election day!

It's not working. I find myself voting for the lesser of two evils. Don't get me wrong. I agree with your standards but the media methodology for finding a truth is just as corrupt as big business involvement in our government. Fact has turned into opinion. I'm not throwing my hands up but some cancers are unsurvivable.
Oh, and the Barabbas thing? That didn't work out too well . . .
------------------------------------------------
Prf H W: I'm moved to agree, by virtue of your passion, that you're "onto" something, but it would be a disservice to this dialogue to conclude that "something" is an understanding of me. We share a belief that the government is composed of people who increasingly pass laws much less representative of the needs and wishes of We the People and more favorable to the opposing special interests of an extremely powerful, fabulously wealthy minority.

I will liken good governance to the center of a Target. (I write "good" and not "perfect" governance to emphasize that there will never be progress absent the old "quid pro quo".) For the sake of understanding, I will calibrate my analogy by suggesting the creation of Social Security was a bulls-eye. (Others will surely disagree.)

I think its safe to state that in spite of all the rhetoric about individual marksmanship, our current Congress is far more focused on those matters existing outside the perimeter of our target than any red or white colored ring inside it. My whole contention is that we accept "good governance" as intending only that which legislates behavior on the basis of an analysis of all the available, objective facts. (Issues of morality and environmental protection, for example, score high on my scale of objective reasoning, as their neglect or abuse will, in every probability, create an acceleration of expanding conditions contributing to a deteriorating quality of life. )

One's marksmanship is analogous to one's understanding of, and relationship to, the facts. Big Business has been using the media to manipulate the general population, too preoccupied with job and family, by using their extraordinary media influence to move the target toward their own special interests and away from its proper, natural coordinates as the destination of the greater public good. In any sport, getting caught cheating is penalized . . . any sport I guess but politics.

Your frustration has possessed you to mistakenly conclude that the solution is to either close down and concede defeat or roll a cannon onto the target range. I like the image but reject the sentiment. I wrote above that votes are free to the voter but expensive for the campaigns. Good "Grouping" wins elections, but success for the "People" can only be served by "Grouping" one's arrows nearest the bulls-eye. It is the goal of the intellectual Progressive that everyone be educated to distinguish a legitimate target from a Corporate hoax when called on to pull the ballot lever. If information fell like leaves from the trees, Big Business would never succeed in influencing elections and our Congress would look remarkably different than it does today. Your cannon would create more collateral complications than our current economic situation could effectively contain.

The Truth however is not raked from the ground but harvested from the top-most branches of the tree. It takes work to form an educated opinion which is why America is so damn confused today. If you can't find a ladder, GIVE to those organizations you trust to harvest the data for you and bring it home to your intellectual kitchen.

Distrust of subcontracted Data Collection, (the feedback loop of the true paranoid) can be tamed by trusting in one's own reason and moral compass. I once learned that physics cannot explain how the helicopter lifts up and away from the ground; and yet it does. So when Oil-backed "experts" tell me that Global Warming is a myth, I make a withdrawal from my media accounts, like Scientific American or National Geographic where I learn about diminishing populations of Polar Bears and Emperor Penguins and choose to dismiss one source over the other. This news then squeezes into conversations with friends and strangers and eventually into the ballot box. This is called Democracy. And in spite of your anxiety Hoople, it works.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Kevin: Oh yes, democracy, very nice. Great theory and has worked well for so many years. But its in need of an overhaul, wouldn't you say? Democracy’s ability to be fair has been compromised. The very system you praise will prevent said system from evolving out of the corrupt state it’s currently in to one that’s fair and balanced for We The People. Loop holes have been exposed, fail safes have been compromised. The representation we’ve voted for needs to close the loop holes and stabilize the fail safes. This can’t be done without the compromise of the position they’ve been bought and paid to represent; a position that included campaign funding thus a nice job, and money for all the “toys”. Do you really believe sending a couple dollars to NPR and walking around with a sign declaring your discontent will sway a Senator from his/her current allegiance to big business? I think not.

Sir, I don’t have cannon to aim at What’ll never be fixed. But I’d be more than willing to give couple dollars to someone that does. When the smoke clears, you can thank me for eliminating the face you’ve continuously, and to no avail preferred to strike with a glove. I’m not trying to suggest trading in your powdered wig for a civil defense helmet but you may want to consider a gauntlet as opposed to a glove.
----------------------------------------------
Prf H W: You and I continue to talk past each other. Could it possibly be this difficult to talk someone off the ledge? You write in theory about replacing the current system by employing practices that are un-Constitutional. I write about re-energizing the voter base to use the Constitution to clean its own house. I sincerely believe my method represents the only remaining option to achieve our common objective. I believe also that you underestimate the persuasive power of ideas; the punch of a well reasoned, strategically delivered exposure of false truths.

I've only to ask you for an explanation, in light of your bleak, pessimistic evaluation of the health of our Congress and the Constitution, how the voice of American underdogs like Gays and Trans genders achieved the formal, legal representation they earned last month with the repeal of DADT.

How about the unregulated exploration for shale oil in the Country's subterranean world of precious, irreplaceable aquifers (called Fracking) that was recently ordered a degree of unprecedented protection against the reckless injection of dangerous chemicals previously endorsed by an environmentally unfriendly Bush administration? This took energy, intelligence and perseverance to make happen. . . But it happened.

From issues like Iraq to the Gulf oil spill, the government begins operations under the mistaken premise that it is somehow beyond the scrutiny of investigation and therefore immune from consequence. Somehow We the People stopped an unchallenged, open ended waltz into the oil fields of Iraq and demanded answers to the lies that "justified" it and a timetable to end it.

Obama's attempt to diminish the extent of the Exxon oil leak (manipulate the public's reaction) was also exposed by nonpartisan experts from the private sector and the truth that quantities of oil ten times the "official" estimates were hemorrhaging off the Louisiana coast became public knowledge. In both cases it wouldn't be a stretch to suspect that large Petroleum interests used their considerable influence to steer the course of Government outside the perimeters of public dialogue. What stopped them? What reversed the course of unchecked government autonomy and Big Business ruthlessness?

No Kevin, for you alone I'll hang on to my powered wig and gloves for the remainder of the dance , but God help the cad who tries to cut in.

----------------------------------------------------------
Kevin: The shooting of Congresswoman Gifford was truly unfortunate and my heart goes out to her family. Shot by a lunatic . . . a crazy man, so the media reports. Can you imagine if his actions were truly politically motivated? Could the media present this truth to the listening and upset public. Not just upset about the shooting itself but by the current political atmosphere as well? No, they need to tell us it was an isolated act of an imbalanced man. They had to tell us that he was a secluded thinker acting out of inner turmoils raised to an elevation so high that his only outlet was a violent act and his actions had nothing to do with politics.

How many other people might be on the edge of "going postal" over current conditions? His thinking may be twisted but if you recall his did post some youtube videos. In one, the burning of an American Flag showing his disdain for something. How out of touch are we, really? The media had to play this up as one person gone astray. I don't see myself picking up a weapon and charging the Capitol but I'm sure there is a growing movement of people that are tired of words alone, especially in Arizona. If you think that anarchy isn't on the doorstep of what should be done next, check out Europe.

Saying no, repeated, to a rapist usually doesn't work. Thus pepper spray, tasers, and the right to conceal carry. We aren't talking about one on one. This is one on millions, a passive oppression by our government with respect to We The People or one businessman on the financially stressed masses. When the public gets it's hackle up high enough and the court house doesn't seem to be effective, do you think for one minute the public won't deny themselves a lynching?

respectfully, Kevin (rope salesman on the unemployment line)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Prf H W: Maybe it's the models we're using; maybe it's the research we do; maybe it's the context we manipulate to frame the models; or maybe it's just a fundamental difference in how we view ourselves in the whole messy drama. My instincts lean toward every conceivable combination of the four. Whatever the explanation, we seem incapable of reaching one another on some important issues. But as long as you have a response; something to say that you want the world to hear, I promise to make every attempt to write back, provided we actually discuss things and avoid spinning in separate, rhetorical orbits.

Let me start by critiquing the models you are using to persuade me. In the first paragraph of your last message, you clearly describe a fact that you and I, to differing degrees, can use as a starting point of understanding: that Governments use "the Media" to control their "agenda(s)".

The surgical sting of this statement draws on a common phobia best articulated in the classic Orwellian call to due diligence, 1984 and the introduction of his sublime creation, Big Brother. Government unscrutinized will invariably fall to the temptation of power. That citizens are crushed to serve the ruling oligarchy is not insulting enough. No, you and I share Orwell's more sadistic vision that the public are being subliminally manipulated to resign their God given impulses and eventually, willingly, surrender their instincts. But this telling of the story alone is insufficient to sustain my suspicions of the current state of our national dilemma. Unlike the model, our real government is a fragmented body of many constituencies at odds over who should read the map and who should drive.

One body works to manipulate the press and the other body to expose, then shame, the first. What you and I continue to call "the Government" is in reality "the government" or "a government". The distinction is critical to our discussion, for without recognizing its significance we are sentenced to talk our talk on seperate sides of a thick glass wall forever.

I believe the key to understanding one another lies in examining our techniques. Though inspired by our day to day perceptions of everything the world has used to injure, to insult us; our witness to greed in all its raw, contemptible complexity, we essentially describe these events to each other in codes, in models, in extremes. Orwell could introduce us to his world only after he had offensively invented it, as it was the consequence of its existance and not its birth that established a point from which to begin; a consequence that was essential to his statement on the savagery of rule and the unforgiveable sin of complacency. 1984 was a model of the highest order, yet logically speaking, having been stripped of birth, an enigmatic orphan from its place among living, breathing political practicality, where it ironically enjoys undying acclaim.

But you and I are not writing a morality play here. We have been speaking to each other in maxims for too long now. Outside our comfort zones, we have chosen to focus in this discussion much too closely on the models which best express our anxieties, failing to remain faithful to the real world of government and hence, real world logic. We are attempting to create equations of life, from life, by distilling our impressions of life's hand selected offences and further reducing them to the least common denominator; not simply once, but over and over again.

Representatives who continue to write laws on behalf of you and me, only to have them defeated in caucus, deserve my attempt at understanding their struggle. It is my responsibility to go out in the real world and make people understand that these things need to be done; that those people are standing between getting them done and destroying any chance of doing them.

And as much can be said of the Press as I have mentioned of the government. From the top oozes the story, picked up by the dog, finished by the crow and buried by worms; enough stench to go around. Let's face it, the Press, like everything else in this country, is divided along as many philosophic alliances as there are communities, churches and social clubs across the land; some for sale, some bought, some independent. One editor's lie is another editors scoop. It is our responsibility, if we want to continue exercising our right to complain, to discern for ourselves whose story most logically fits the model we obsessively protect in our minds.

And this brings us to the worms, We the People. You speak quite a bit about people at the end of their rope, extremists and psychos with automatic weapons and counter-revolutionary organizations preparing to signal the attack; you even had a rapist in a cameo appearance some where in your most recent response. I will attempt to tie this line of debate up in one sack and pass any future reference to the topic over to the professionals who pay their bills keeping these guys looking over their shoulder.

For all the noise a single gun can make; I think of Lincoln and Kennedy
For all the noise a bomb can make; I think of Oklahoma and the Trade Towers
For all the noise a paramilitary bunch of suspended-pubscent Nazi Skin Heads can make; I think of the Civil War, Waco, the Weathermen and the Ku Klux Klan;


I think of how little effect these people and organizations had on our Constitution and the idiots in Congress who run it into the ground. I have just listed some of the most heartbreaking losses in our collective memory as a nation, but it is important to note that each and every one of these threats were met with our complete intelligence, justice and wrath.

For the purpose of our continuing dialogue, I ask/want you to examine certain choices you make when forming your anologies. The use of pepper spray for instance, or mace when confronted with a rapist would be a superb metaphor if our situation were no longer in the hands of men and women with whom we simply and vehemently disagree, but have acted outside the Constitution and parameters of international civility or law.

If you and I were discussing arrests without Miranda, the sanctioned use of violent force to silence any and all peaceful protests; the abduction of writers and leaders involved in the advance of opposition philosophies or perhaps the disappearance of innocent civilians, never to be heard from again, you would have scored some very big points with your example. But using a rapist to characterize the need for aggressive techniques to replace Constitutional law in our effort to stand against Congress' choice to extend income tax breaks for the wealthiest 2% of Americans, without the least regard for whether the lives of the remaining 304,000,000 Americans, our jobs or our children's future could benefit from them, well that's just what one might call a nonsequitor. They might be creeps but they ain't crazy. They simply don't give a damn. And on this point I yield the floor to my distinguished colleague from Las Vegas.

Mosque Heard 'round the World

All right. Its been quite a while since I worked this site. So much has happened in the world and in my personal life over the summer; situations that both needed attention and simultaneously prevented me from attending that I suppose the relatively large size of this post sabbatical exchange was inevitable.

People are talking about the plans by a moslem organization to build an Islamic Cultural Center and mosque in downtown Manhattan, two blocks from where the Twin Towers once stood. Let's have a listen . . .

_________________________________________
Posted by Demitri (the Welshman) on August 28,2010:

This just came from a good friend, a gentle and caring friend. She is definitely not a political activist. Like her, I think we should all hear this very important message.

It takes a Brit to put into words what we should be saying.
Wow...this is good.
Condell is a British stand-up comedian, but this video isn't comic, it's pure truth, and utterly brilliant.

It says everything, every American should be saying. - Bob

-------------------------- and Demitri's entreaty:

I am not asking you to accept this as DOGMA. Nor to embrace my obviously to-the-right politics. I only beg your attention with a sincerely open mind.

PLEASE LISTEN; THINK, and MEDITATE!!!

Cariad.

(To those not blessed with fluency in the WELSH language, "Cariad" translates as "LOVE" in English.)

Ol' Dimitri

Now, to see what Pat Condell has to say on the subject, I suggest you cut and paste the site address below. The whole of his thesis will take just over six minutes of your time. I promise that you will remember this exercise for the rest of your life.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/06/pat-condell-on-ground-zero-mosque-is-it-possible-to-be-astonished-but-not-surprised.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and here is the first response to Pat Condell and his meditating supporters:

Wow. This is the most fallacious argument against the mosque I have ever heard. Of course, it's not a mosque, but we'll skip that for now.

The speaker says, "Any religion that endorses violence is incapable of offering spiritual enlightenment...."
Have we forgotten about all of the violence done in the name of Christianity? The Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, the genocide of the Native Americans, slavery, murder of doctors that offer abortions, are just a few that spring to mind. In fact, didn't George Bush say he prayed about invading Iraq? Sarah Palin said something similiar.

Condell also talks about the building of mosques as a sign of conquest, such as the Cordoba mosque in Spain. Well, a lot of people during that time were conquering and reconquering parts of countries all over Europe, including Christians. (Refer to my first point.) Keith Olbermann said it best when he said that every church, and synagogue in the US is built on sacred ground-ground where Native Americans were eradicated in order to make room for European Christians. Why are their graves any less sacred than those who died on 9/11?

As for his claim that Islam rejects individual liberties, may I remind some of you tea partyers that England is a Socialist country. So the fact that England's popular opinion prevented a mosque from being built should not be our inspiration to do the same, unless we want to go down that Socialist road, which apparently, we are already on with Obama in the White House.

This rant is so blantantly racist and ethnocentric that it is an insult to say that it's what Americans should be saying. Comparing Islam to Nazi ideology? Referring to the Islamization of Europe? Judging an entire group of people (millions of Muslims) on the actions of a few? Telling people if and where they can build their houses of worship?It sounds to me like Condell took a page out of the Nazi playbook, not the Muslims.

If we give into this fear and hate, we are letting the terrorists win. They will have eroded the very values that Americans say we are defending. For him to sign off with a peace sign, and Harry to sign off with "love," makes me sick to my stomach. This vitriolic call to arms just confirms my support for the center. And for all those who care about this sacred ground: go there, take a look at the neighborhood 9 years after 9/11. Shops are closed, business is slow, but you can go to a strip club or look at the hallowed ground of a hollowed-out Burlington Coat factory. We haven't been able to build and revitalize this area in almost a decade. The city council approved the project (unanimously) because it will bring much needed revenue and jobs to this blighted area.

I am afraid for this country, but not from attacks by Muslim extremists, but by right wing extremist cloaking their bigotry and greed in the American flag. I am reminded of Voltaire's words in his Essay on Tolerance: "Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too." -- http://www.plexoft.com/SBF/V02.html

Jen Thomas

and a response to Ms. J:

Jen,

You pose an almost convincing argument were it not for its contraderived conclusions.

I reduce the oratory of religious freedom and so forth and agree that anyone of any faith is protected by our Constitution to establish and worship cum libertatus.

Were this Mosque erected anywhere, Ground Zero notwithstanding, our Constitution preserves the right so to do.

BUT; to plan its dedication by those deeply identified with philosophies strongly associated with 09/11/01 on the exacty 10th anniversary of the American Heartbreak demands logical defence. I am sure if they wanted to, they could refrain from rubbing our noses in their excrement.

Maybe now, you might understand the majority sense of INSULT.

Cariad,

Ol' Dimitri
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and my first response to Pat:

This is a reply to Pat Condell, British comedian and political pundit, and all those inclined to agree with his video presentation outlining the case against a proposal to build a large Islamic Cultural Center and Mosque in downtown Manhattan, two blocks away from the site where the World Trade Center was attacked and destroyed, killing close to 3000 innocent Americans and injuring thousands more on September 11, 2001. So let’s examine the June 4, 2010 video posting of Pat Condell, as he attempts to clarify the distinction between tolerance and gullibility in a post 911 world.
The most striking aspect of the video’s introduction is the authority with which he engages the viewer to join him on a six minute pleasure ride through his self-styled love-tunnel of misinformation and hate, disguised as “commonly understood facts” and his menacing predilection for the superiority of Western values and Christianity. He dispenses with negotiation from the outset, assuming a fraternal relationship with his audience, already disgusted by the “Islam-o-zation” of Europe. This melodramatic introduction was more than enough to spot him as just another lousy microphone with suspicious references; and right here, in the opening comments was the soft spot for any free thinking individual to cram his intellectual crow-bar to pry apart the tight seal he keeps on his unconvincing perspective of the whole Islamic debate. I have so far failed to find one reputable, authoritative acknowledgement or analysis of an “Islam-o-zation” effect or strategy being waged by anything less than a fanatical Islamic micro-fringe against our European cousins.
The migration of a predominant majority of moderate, peaceful Moslems into Europe was both a reflex condition of the world’s economic mess and Yusef the Plumber’s preference of an emigration choice more conducive to an anonymous and stress-free assimilation; a new start in a vast, prosperous territory; absorbed into a culture whose colonial ambitions and imperialistic violations relieve the awkwardness of the introduction ritual. British, French, Spanish, Dutch, German, Portuguese and Italian visionaries tamed the farthest reaches of the planet, uninvited, from the soft end of the whip for over five hundred years. We might refer to this as the “Christian-I-zation” of the Middle East, India, Indo-China, Africa, Australia, North America and South America. During such time, these exotic “savages” had their indefensible societies torn to pieces; ancient and sophisticated civilizations introduced not only to the interloping explorers and merchants condescending upon their villages and homes but concurrently exposed to the fact that somewhere far off in the west, a people had been extremely busy; some far away land of industrially advanced, conquering Christians.
Hell, wasn’t your great, great grandfather who told my great, great grandfather to look him up if I ever came to town? Well, I’m here.
Wealthy Moslems from the Middle East, India and the other remaining reaches of the former British Empire, and their descendants, have been lured to Universities in England, France and Germany for the better part of two centuries now, refining their new scholastic muscle and social-integration techniques, a key to cultural savvy and market worth. This is the accelerant behind Cordell’s bigoted, alarmist and irresponsible shout of fire.
And in this context he declares that “the moment of truth has arrived”. The only truth about this situation, namely the legitimacy of one group’s proposal to build an Islamic Cultural Center and Mosque within some indeterminate proximity to the site of the September 11 attacks, is that a stage has materialized in its place; a forum for the clash of polarized attitudes toward Christian attitudes toward Islam. On the one hand, the argument proceeds along the lines that the site of the disaster is desecrated by the mere suggestion of such a plan. It was a horrible attack by an organization who found spiritual endorsement within the Koran to stab the Old and New Testaments in the ribs. The fact that all worshippers of the teachings of Mohammad are equally to blame is a just tantalizing yet insignificant adjustment of the foul line; an inevitable conclusion no Christian or Jew with an ounce of common sense need wait until after the next 911 to embrace.
On the other hand, the infuriating liberals, agents of tolerance stand like deer in the headlights of progress, or worse, support the enemy by obstructing our swift national consensus and response. The politicians abusing their office in support of the Cultural Center are dismissed as ignoring the voice of their constituency for personal satisfaction. These are the ones who defend Islam as a legitimate, peaceful religion whose reputation was hijacked by a fanatical lunatic fringe, who no more represent the world’s Moslems than Charles Manson represented the state of California.
The way I see it, our major differences come from a predisposed caricature of the Islamic religion and most times independently, the people themselves. I began my public education in the middles 1960’s, when our nation was in critical need of a public relations overhaul. We were deep into an unpopular conflict in Vietnam and the Beatles were telling the world that “love was all you need(ed)”. The topic of the Middle and Far East was not addressed until a decade later, during my freshman year of high school, when a brief nine months was dedicated to finally exposing my generation to the trivial matters of the Middle East, Asia and Africa against the block-buster backdrop of our deep indoctrination of American capitalist dominance over the Soviet communist threat. This third team, the fez wearing, harem feeding, camel jockeys, had no legitimate place on the field to begin with, so let’s slog through a year of obligatory nonsense and get back to the good stuff next year. We learned all the rest we needed to know about shifty Islam from Hollywood and cartoons.
The Arabs of ninth grade public school were desert wandering Bedouins with sun baked faces crenelated with deep wrinkle lines, metaphorically mirrored in the parched soil of the hostile world they called home. The Pakistani Moslems washed their clothes in the local river, rubbing piles of sarongs against the rocks while sharing a laugh with their neighbors doing likewise. These were ancient, backward people living in an ancient, backward tradition. Ten years of indoctrination, the story of my own ancestry preceded our discovery of these unfortunate people; ten years of memorizing dates of Western milestones:

the Greeks; the Romans; the monks and medieval science; Leonardo, Columbus, the Pope, Henry the Eighth, Newton, Louis XIV, and of course the American Revolution.

I cannot fathom the maturity, the enlightenment required of a fourteen year old kid to watch the films, read the books and hear the lectures we were issued during that school year without concluding that our culture was superior to those adopted by Islamic societies. Who would learn about these discoveries and achievements yet prefer to live beating their wet robes against the smooth river stone? My own mother had no fewer than twelve, electric-motor driven household appliances, a washing machine chief among them. There was little evidence to support the notion that there was even one motor driven apparatus in the entire Pakistani village, much less the electricity or technology to supply it. This was simply a world that turned its back to progress, so it is only natural to assume their spirituality was as backward a system as their technology and politics. Christianity brought the West a form of Capitalism that inspired greatness; Islam was simply the voodoo of a primitive people. And just as greed was understood to be the radioactive rod of Capitalist power, Jihad was assumed to be the fuel of Islamic fanaticism; an important distinction between the two economies which simply stretched the masks of Christ and Mohammad over the opponents politics to energize their respective people. How can one fault Mr. Cordell for getting lost in this complex plot line?
I would like to now borrow from one of Pat’s own countryman, a certain bloke with whom I suspect he shares some particular degree of pride in homeland:

"If there is much misunderstanding in the West about the nature of Islam, there is also much ignorance about the debt our own culture and civilisation owe to the Islamic world. It is a failure, which stems, I think, from the straight-jacket of history, which we have inherited. The medieval Islamic world, from central Asia to the shores of the Atlantic, was a world where scholars and men of learning flourished. But because we have tended to see Islam as the enemy of the West, as an alien culture, society, and system of belief, we have tended to ignore or erase its great relevance to our own history." ,Prince Charles, lecture at Oxford University.
The context of the 70’s “zeitgeist” curriculum was a grievous miscarriage of national education, one I fear that foreshadowed the current reactionary fiasco now taking place in the Texas textbook debates; one that shaped the minds of generations of my own countrymen; honest, patriotic Americans preoccupied building businesses and careers, starting families and sending kids to college; people just too focused on the family and the neighborhood to bother with details like polishing up after ninth grade social studies. I hold no malice for all the Joe-the-Plumbers who despise my view of the issue. I simply chose to waste free time doing just that; reading and writing to repair the curtain of my over-stressed neighborhood, torn by irresponsible, influential loud mouths like Pat Condell. No greater case for the cause of a Cultural Center in downtown Tribeca can be made than by sloppy scholarship against it. Thank you Mr. Cordell; your effort was so poorly corroborated that I simply smile at the suspicion you are perhaps more calculating than I initially believed. Perhaps your “hair-trigger sensitivity to the slightest imagined” suggestion of the Islamic cultural center should have been a clue.
The popular mystery of the Cultural Center’s funding source, at this time in the public discussion, is simply too ironic to ridicule in light of recent findings. I’m curious whether he simply felt it unconscionable to let an opportunity to implicate the Saudi’s, void of evidence, slip through his fabricated web of a diabolic Islamic scheme to overthrow Tribeca. This might explain his swapping an implication of Saudi collaboration for an actual case involving them while still capitalizing on the dramatic emphasis of a dark, Islamic conspiracy. So I’ll spare him the shame of dwelling on way things turned out. He was on a roll; no absence of fact was going to put the brakes on his tasteless, pontificating momentum.
In fact a significant percentage of the plan is backed by finances from a certain Kingdom Foundation, created and run by Real Estate Investor and Philanthropist Alwaleed bin Talal, with major holdings in American corporations like Apple, Pepsico and a little media dynamo called News Corp., which also happens to be the parent company of FOX news. This, one may recall, is the same Kingdom foundation which offered ten million dollars to the city of New York as aide after the events of 911. Then-Mayor Guilani gained political points by showing all evil Arabs from the outset, that New York and America’s view of Islam was uncompromising in its resentment of the crime and singular in its focus on the guilty. He sent the money right back where it came from: Wall Street. It gives pause to speculate on both how much collateral damage was done in the area of America’s matured understanding of the Islamic equation and whether there would have even been a Guiliani campaign for the Presidency in 2008. And don’t simply take my word for it. As a matter of fact, I specifically adopted Mr. Cordell’s use of conjecture to frame the question. The implication that Moslem terrorists are involved in the planning or construction of the Islamic Cultural Center is near the core of this entire issue.
Further along in his tirade, Cordell proposes the statement that without the specific teachings of Islam, and specifically those passages outlining “jihad”, that a catastrophe like 911 could not have even existed. One hesitates to choose which part of his enlightenment to address first, the corruption by conservative, western pundits of the Koran’s definition of jihad or the false concept that terrorist tactics are the exclusive domain of the Islamic tool box. We are so conditioned by the media and men like Condell to fear the word “jihad”, that only a minority are left who actually know its true meaning and authority. In our mistrust of the religion, we’ve come to understand “jihad” to be some kind of mob hit or “contract” put out by some Imam on some infidel Jew or Christian. Don’t let the TV or Newspapers make a fool out of you; learn what it is so you can tell the difference between real Islam and a tiny mob calling itself Islam.
Mohammad speaks of three forms of jihadist expression and discipline. The first is concerned with an individual’s personal relationship with Allah. Mohammad struggled himself with this exercise, having a sense of personal dissatisfaction until the day of his death. Of the three faces of jihad, this first one holds the place of highest, spiritual regard. I for one cannot remember learning of any religion or philosophy which does not hold an equivalent gauntlet for its disciples. The Catholic registry of saints is full of them.
The second state of jihad is the written word. A couple of examples that immediately come to mind are St. Paul’s letters to the Corinthians and the Confessions of St. Augustine. Writing essays to defend the principles of your morality against slanderous accusations is nothing new and nothing we don’t call the work of hero-intellects in our history books. People like William Penn, Chief Joseph, Frederick Douglas, Martin Luther King, eloquent individuals speaking truth to power, or more often, to mob sensibilities. Which one of you doesn’t see the universal principle of this expression; this “Jihad”?
This brings me to the third and most co-opted form of Jihad, the “Physical” jihad. At this point in the discussion, a caricature of the garden variety Muslim as a foreign, dormant, fanatical cell, equally capable of murder and murder-suicide simply awaiting instruction to engage. We all know by now these instructions are dispensed upon order of an Islamic decree or “jihad”. Once such a Jihad is pronounced, no Allah fearing Moslem will dare to disobey. Every Moslem in every neighborhood in every county in every state in the country is a sleeper cell awaiting orders. The Mosque in question is designed, without question, to serve as some kind of evil laboratory for Operation Jihad: Infidel Overthrow. Mr. Condell would like to have everyone here in the states subscribe to this nonsense and I’m speaking today to let him know that we here in America distrust all loudmouths equally and reserve the right to discredit a lunatic from Britain with the same brush we use on his enemies under the bed, because here in America, all fanatics are humiliated equally.
Like the personal and written forms of Jihad, the physical remains a very strong and misunderstood flash point in any defense of the religion over one and a half billion Islamists subscribe to. Once again, I want to unravel the confusion by drawing on a corresponding principle used by worshippers and patriots of every faith and nationality to defend themselves against the aggressions of a predatory force which failed to respond to the first two jihadist appeals. In presenting it this way I am intentionally emphasizing the point that any claim to unleash offensive, violent strategies in the name of jihad is not prescribed by the Koran and represents a fundamental break with the teachings followed by our peaceful and patriotic Muslim countrymen.
You see, a time usually comes in the history of a people or congregation where the spiritual principles of the worshipping body contradict the larger social situation to which they belong. Whether or not we are talking about specific laws or cultural practices, an inevitable line is drawn to demarcate the trusted from the suspicious. For the Jews, something of a conflict could be illustrated in the seemingly trivial desire or need to handle money on the Sabbath or recognize Christ in a manner befitting the humor of the Pope de jour. For many American Christians the struggle to incorporate a sense of selfless charity, a principle for which the teachings of Christ define no specific extreme, within the parameters of a Capitalist sensibility have repeatedly proven the influence of business over the ideals of the church. History is rich with Monarchic rulers, Fascist dictators and Totalitarian oligarchies, herding the compliant masses while confounded by the strict objection of a small yet exasperating minority. The Egyptians and the Nazis had their run in with the Jews, the Romans fattened their lions on Christians and Gauls; the Aztecs were annihilated by the Spanish, the Buddhists wrestle with their Communists and centuries earlier, European global expansion encountered Islam.
In each case a caveat was composed into the holiest texts, wherein the peaceful survival of the subservient creed was to withstand any and all enterprises bent on its annihilation; was excused to rise in its own protection to meet the enemy’s offense with a reasonable and legitimate defense. The Jews had Abraham who held every life sacred, yet acknowledged ones man’s eye accountable for the loss of another’s. David met and slayed Goliath under the auspices of the same Jewish God. The Christians have their Revelations, wherein a compassionate Christ lies peaceful throughout the Gospels like the arrow, sleeping in the crossbow’s bed, until the day of reconciliation. Here Michelangelo in his Day of Judgment dispenses with our Lord’s halycon countenance; paints him with an athlete’s frame, a hangman’s face and purple robe thrown violently across his shoulder like the arrow, suddenly awake and bent on swift, surgical vengeance. “Onward Christian soldiers’ goes the hymn, “marching as to war”. Tyrants beware of your lust, the Day of Judgment will be your torment. It is an old saying, “There are no athiests in a fox-hole”.
The Islamic take on self-preservation is no aberration of the same concept we Americans accept as either patriots or Christians or something other. Physical jihad, or “jihad with the hand” actually precludes violence with an option to relocate beyond the influence of tyranny (Quran 2:218), and only then defend themselves against those who wage upon them, (Quran 22:39). The whole idea that Islam is a religious organization of 1,657,600,000 followers of a common mind bent on slicing American throats in our sleep is uninformed and juvenile. Most of you share a belief in an afterlife which eclipses your present earthly struggle with pleasures and powers in accordance to the seductive hints or suggestions of your respective religious organizations and is then enhanced to reflect contemporary cultural values. The Judeo-Christians envision weightless clouds and radiant skies from which the chorus of the Host rains down in perpetual orgasmic reward for a life time of sincere sacrifice or some battery of liturgically-sanctioned, sophisticated compromises .It would no doubt shock you to realize the number of Americans expecting an eternity of perfect powder on the slopes or tranquil naps beside some sacred fishing hole. The Moslems? A culture that prizes sexual abstinence before marriage, choosing seventy virgins and a waterbed as a romanticized after-life is logically consistent to me. Let them have it; sounds more practical to me than an eternity of choral Bach anyway.
His deeper insistence that the Koran endorses provocative assaults on Western targets is a thorough misrepresentation of the defensive nature of the jihad, further alienating the ranks of the Taliban and al-Qaeda from the vast mainstream Islam and exposing his tirade as the sniveling, divisive propaganda it is and nothing more. When he insists “any religion that endorses violence is incapable of delivering spiritual enlightenment” I am reminded of Truman Capote’s remark upon reading Kerouac’s “On the Road”, (albeit for a subtly different reason): “That’s not writing, that’s typing.” Perhaps Mr. Cordell has some unique, un-contradictory take on the century of terrorist activity between the Catholics and Protestants on the Emerald Island right next door. What does he make of Prime Minister Menachim Begin’s affiliation with Irgun, responsible for numerous provocative assaults on Arab targets, such as Deir Yassin, in which ten percent of the Arabs killed were Christian. As a matter of point, a number of recent studies have concluded that there is a striking disconnect between actual religion and the activities of organizations commonly referred to as Religious terrorists. A distinguished professor of political science, Robert Pape, founder of the Chicago Project on Security and Terrorism, was the first to document a comprehensive study on the phenomenon of suicide bombings from the period following the Iranian Hostage situation through the years immediately following the September 11 attacks. In his book, Dying to win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism, he insists “There is little connection between suicide terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism, or any one of the world’s religions.” This conclusion was reached after examining over 300 such assaults, wherein he concludes that these individuals gave their lives not for Islam, but in the cause of political activism. “Without Deir Yassin” remarked Begin, “there would have been no Israel.”
For claiming Islam to be a bigger threat to our freedom than Nazism ever was, Mr. Cordell must be either terribly ignorant of the past or pathologically insensitive to the truth. His fear and contempt for the world’s Moslem population makes him more of a bigot than I would normally dignify with such a lengthy response. Were it not for the potential grievous harm of the media resources at his disposal, I would have simply dismissed him as the insipid skin-head he truly is. No one labors to divide the world more industriously than al -Qaeda’s friends, right here in the West like Mr. Cordell, who incarcerate our society’s tolerance for diversity at the first hint of opportunity. Contradictions simply ooze from either side of his face, depending on his calculated sense of rhetorical timing. One can hardly maintain one’s equilibrium, with his dismissive contempt, on the one hand, for the those elected officials who demonstrate respect of tolerance and diversity and his equivalent condemnation of Islam’s intolerance for tolerance and diversity. Which is it? You can’t have it both ways. If his European precedent for diversity depresses him so, I ask him to please concentrate his efforts where he pays his taxes and stay out of American affairs; we are plainly far too complex and enlightened for his medieval sensibilities.
In keeping with the stylistic need to periodically engage his audience at the mercy of historical integrity, Mr. Cordell can hardly pull his tongue from our American boots long enough to regurgitate the sanitized recital of America’s triumphant prosperity in the unblemished glow of diversity and “respect for the individual liberties that make (us) what we are.” I for one am that unremarkable American who acknowledges my debt to the centuries of disrespect and oppression of those diverse cultures, the black slaves, the displaced, slaughtered Native Americans, the Chinese “coolies”, the marginalized women, the child laborers and every remaining civil rights struggle his White, Anglo-Christian sensibilities unjustifiably dismiss from the “larger picture”. I just want him to roll his tongue back into his face and find another pair of boots to clean.
And as if this all was not enough to get you to clean your rifle, suspicion is drawn to the name of the building, “Cordoba House”. I always thought the name was never pronounced better than when Ricardo Mantelban said it, but that’s an old Chrysler reference and better left asleep I guess. When the moors conquered most of the Iberian peninsula from the Visigoths who took it from the Romans who themselves conquered it a half millennium earlier, they established Cordoba as the provincial capital. That was 711AD. Like the Romans and the Visigoths before them they built many buildings, among them the world’s largest library and a Mosque, begun 73 years later on an abandoned construction site where the prior Visigothic church of St. Vincent was left abandoned. The erection of temples was nothing new. Cordoba during this time was a sophisticated city of 500,000 citizens who represented the vanguard of Christian, Jewish and Islamic culture. On June 29, 1236, it was again captured, this time by King Ferdinand III of Castile, during the Spanish Reconquista. The suggestion by Mr. Cordell that the Moslems have captured Manhattan and plan to build their Mosque headquarters on top of an old coat factory in accordance to their standard, thousand year old exemplar M.O., in light of the numerous points of clarification presented thus far, reminds one that he is first and foremost, a comedian.
And just as an ironic side note: I have on many occasions had the pleasure to attend music shows at a nearby arena, built in the 1970’s by construction crews represented by a significant number of tool belted Italians, former citizens or descendants of those same people responsible for the death of thousands of American GI’s only thirty years earlier during the Second World War. They named this arena “the Nassau Coliseum” or Coliseum for short. Isn’t this the same name as that immense round building in Rome, where over 700,000 men women and children; Christians, Jews and foreign prisoners; tigers, bears, dogs and elephants were slaughtered for the blood thirst/entertainment of the citizens of that enigmatic city so many years ago? Was it simply enough for my community to recognize the Italian dimension for its shocking inclusion of a brief period where unspeakable trespasses came to be and were subsequently forgiven. Or are we just replaying the ancient tapes; the un-reconciled feud between Brown skin and White; Moslem and Christian; Moslem and Jew; Western sensibilities and the rest of the world?
No my friends, we need this Cultural Center and Mosque just so people don’t have to come crawling back to Joe McCarthy, George Wallace, John Birch, Pat Roberts, Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh, Terry Jones and the whole lot of them! Nothing would hurt Al Qaeda more than proof in America’s resolve to defend our tolerance. A shoot-out with Islam is not the solution Mr. Cordell. It may disgust you to stand in a supermarket line with neighbors who place a greater significance on the life of Mohammad than that of Jesus,; who spell God with an “A”; who sport large, black untrimmed beards or who might even conform to a code of fashion you find peculiar; don’t sanitize your reality with propaganda bearing false witness against the juvenile goblins of your own, bigoted social development.
Islam was hurt deeply on September 11th. I was in New York City that day the planes struck; six hundred feet above the sidewalk, outside the Merrill Lynch building on 47th St. between Park and Lexington Avenue, hanging off a hod hoist scaffold in a jump harness and hard hat. I spent the next few days down at Ground zero trying to help. A few close friends of mine are permanently disabled from helping make something of the cursed crater. We’re not only Americans Pat, but more to the point, we’re New Yorkers who work, shop and mess around with the same Moslems you so vehemently hate. My recommendation is that you don’t drive an unreliable car through the Arizona desert or Death valley. The car that blows past you in the intolerable heat might be me, saving my gas and passenger seat for the first “sane” hitchhiker I find; Moslem or not.

This message has been recorded and is available on YouTube. Simply cut and paste the five parts listed in order:

part 1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=On5GhtHq44w&feature=channel
part 2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7O-4rlIGtk&feature=channel
part 3] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJs3sgwHCK0&feature=channel
part 4] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6PknDko6po&feature=channel
and part 5] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0nbFsxYEvM&feature=channel

Undocumented Bedfellows

Professor Hot Wind

Play this video:

WHITEHOUSETRESSPASSERS12-14-09.wmv (2.8 MB)

touche'

- frustrated U.S. job seeker

(What follows by playing the video is a member of Congress at the podium reading from a prepared speech about a letter he recieved from some woman from his district who questioned why the media referred to last year's White House party crashers as "unwelcome guests" and law breakers while millions of illegal immigrants are simply referred to as "undocumented citizens". He elaborates on a plan which he believes should protect the couple with services and rights currently afforded our "unwanted guests" from south of the border.)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Seeker,

I never fail to marvel at the enthusiasm some people express when providing the world a peek into their self indulgent, unaccomplished satirical drivelings. From a member of the United States Congress however, I would have expected a less forthright display of contempt for the principles of logic and humanitarian ethics.

Two dwellings are measured to provide one thousand square feet of living space. One is four hundred and seventy feet above the streets of the upper east side of Manhattan with a commanding view of the East river; the other is located in a low income area of Hempstead, Long Island surrounded by drug activity and gang violence. Would it be a legitimate complaint by attorneys for the occupant of the Manhattan condominium to lower his taxes to the same rate paid by his "privileged" neighbor from Hempstead by virtue of the of living space alone?

The party crashing couple, Tareq and Michaele Salahi, were motivated to perform a self-indulgent prank for the sole and contemptible purpose of fulfilling a serial need to hobnob with figures of historical potential and strengthen a television producer's interest in using them on a reality show. Evidence to support the fact that these two con-artists visited the White House banquet only after crashing other parties and scamming business associates surfaced during the weeks-long news and gossip fallout following the "incident".

United States buisiness' providing employment to undocumented workers at substandard wages and with zero benefits while avoiding payroll taxes are not in the same logical or ethical category of cause and effect as White House Social Secretary, Desiree Rodgers' arrangement of a guest list, cocktails and glazed lady fingers, which was in complete accordance with U.S. tax code.

With one's feet held to the fire of poverty, is it not a seperate case for an individual, brown or white, to reach out to any promise of relief? What the hell would you do? I assume this sanctimonious scumbag would simply allow his family to starve in accordance with some law while navigating the "second-class" labyrinth of futility we serve up as a visa-process, tailored exclusively for our brown skinned neighbors to the south; (a process not imposed on our European and Canadian brothers). It is far more likely to imagine this asshole dressed as a woman to claim a seat somewhere on a lifeboat dispatched from the sinking Titanic than to wet his wing tips in the icey North atlantic.

I hold this bastard in contempt for his refusal to acknowledge the complicity of United States business in the cycle of unwanted immigration; a well established, indispensible yet seldom addressed factor in the total equation.

"Touche'" my ass . . . .

Prof. G.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
prof. g

On immigration, whether brown skinned from from the south or fair skinned from the north, those who arrive legally or not and in a desperate situation are getting assistance from our government. I've been here in the US all 51 years of my life and have paid taxes for better than 30. Over the past year I've been searching for a job and in the most desperate situation of my life.

Through flagrant disregard, our government stood by and watched as our financial institutions ran rough shod over the average hard working citizen. In my time of need they turned their backs to me. If I broke the law to protect my family my feet would be held to the fire but Pedro is granted a get out of jail free card. I see these "poor and unfortunate refugees" here enjoying the American Dream, government sponsored that it is. They live better than you and by a landslide. I have no sympathy for any of them and the government can kiss my fucking ass for forgetting about my needs as well as every other America Citizen in the same situation. I hope getting the Hispanic vote was worth it.

- Frustrated Seeker
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Mr. Frustrated,

Undocumented/"illegal" trespassers into this country strain our local governments by receiving direct assistance and/or collatoral benefits without contributing to the budget with payroll taxes; without providing volunteer services such as joining the local fire department or coaching youth team sports; nor are they known for reinvesting their earnings into home repair or similar efforts to improve the quality of their neighborhood. All right, I get it. I understand this fact as well today as when I first realized the problem well over twenty years ago.

You have had a rough year. I understand the pressure of being unemployed. I was out of work for three years. During this time I was seperated from my wife, whom I still loved and failed in every attempt to mold a teaching format for my disabled daughter. I produced art that did not sell, hid from a landlord I could not pay and drove my unregistered, uninsured car into the white gloves of Johnny Law not once, but twice. Every morning, vans would pull out of the compound of cottages where I lived, stuffed with "brown-skinned", spanish speaking men on their way to work. Most of these guys were less skilled than me. They were working, I was not.

Did it hurt? Yes. Did I blame them? Not on your life. The owner of the home improvement company who owned the vans, simply found a way to hire some nonskilled workers who accepted substandard wages, no benefits and long hours. The owner increased his personal profits by not paying taxes. Who would agree to these terms? People who are escaping a wretched life in search of a better one would. Why do they come here? Because American business' have been calling for them to come.

What the hell are you referring to when you claim that "Pedro" would be excused for the same crime for which you would be punished? It is rhetoric like this which pisses me off and makes the Tea-Partys howl in joyous chorus. It sounds tough but is without substance. This problem will be solved only after we stop making excuses and step up to the plate. The same fine for you or me means deportation for "Pedro". If you think its fun living underground, try it. It speaks volumes to believe someone would choose this over the conditions back home. Who would come if no one here provided a job?

I paid my taxes for many years. In bad times I accepted work "off the books". Either way, I took work where I could get it. How am I any different than these other guys, simply because I had the good fortune to be born a citizen? You don't blame the raccoon for tearing into your garbage can. This only makes you look like a silly, frustrated and short-sighted man. Buy a lid. They'll go somewhere else.
-Prof. Giov
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Prof. G.

I've had the opportunity to work side by side with our brother from the south and for several years now. From their mouths I've heard that America is hear for the taking. "The US Government will give us everything we need". My personal favorite was, "We don't need to be honest with the loan officer at the banks when applying for a home loan. It's their job to find out if we're lying with respect to our income". I had an illegal from El Salvador me of his hatred for Mexicans and our government should do something to get rid of them. This guy owned a home and two news vehicles, supported a wife and four children. That's four children! "No bid deal. America will help with our irresponsibility". And if no family here, every dollar possible is sent "home". Home, right? They don't even consider this home and broke the law to get here. They put nothing back into our economy but for the rice and beans they consume. And as things are going dry they are leaving.

The notion of businesses hiring the illegal is who fault? If I can take the illegal immigration problem into my own hands then you can blame me for hiring an illegal. But let them stand on my door step and plead for a job to end their hunger; let me think about the tax breaks associated with this type of hiring. It's the governments job to keep these people off my fucking porch. I can't take this matter into my own hands. I say, if he wasn't here, he couldn't be hired. Everyone has been squeezed so tight that they will hire anyone off the street to save a dollar. Sure, as a business owner I hired off the street but I hired white Americans. I'm not prejudice but I wanted to give a job to Americans. You jump at the visa process established to control the flow of imagration from the south but that's exactly what it is designed to do. Do you really think this country has the means to take on a flood of all the world's burdens and still be in a position to oversea the implementation the constitution for the citizen of America? How many balls will President W.C. Fields and cabinet of straight men try to continue juggling before they drop all of them? For the protection of It's Citizens, America's borders must stand for something. Helping is one thing but not at the price of our stability. Let's pull some of our military out of the middle east and send them to Mexico. Get rid of the cartels and help to establish some justice and possibly help to create an environment that people don't wish to run from. And not even mentioning the overflow of crime on our southern borders.

And I hope you weren't trying to group me in as a Tea Party asshole. Those folks don't have the same agenda as I. They've been rallied together to represent an ideological way of though for the purpose of personal gain. You don't see me hiking around with a sign bought and paid for by Sean Hannity. The party must prevail. Fox News has to look good for ratings, right? My ass! I think on my own feet for myself.

Consider this. If any one of your brothers call and asked if they're family could move in with you as times were tough, you would say yes just as I would. Then another brother calls. Lets be realistic. How much could you handle? Would you be looked upon as unconcerned if a no answer was necessary? Limits need to be established for survival.

Do you where Levis? I hope not. All of their manufacturing was shipped south many years ago as so many did. They save big money on production with the benefit of the sweat shop. How many jobs went along with these moves? We should tariff this kind of import heavy to help the unemployed, not sneak in new taxes by calling them a fee. No, my friend. A line needs to be drawn as to where our allegiance ends. Call it a budget if it dulls the pain in humanitarian in you saying no but we need to do something to aid the United Sates of America, not The United States of the World. I'm praying that the President we elect in twenty twelve can think a little bit more along these lines. And I say again, nothing will change until we get rid of the corruption. We need term limits in the House and the Senate.

- Frustrated
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Frustrated,

You are mistaken if you feel any advantage over my beliefs because you worked "side by side" with immigrants from the south. I have spent many years myself digging pools, scaffolding, roofing and fixing embroidery machines with people from the south. My frame of reference on most of these issues comes from these relationships. Your scumbag friend from el Salvador sounds no different from many xenophobic Americans from whom I choose to distance myself from. Why should I even listen to the hate speech of one illegal immigrant against another? They either both suck or they both have some dimension to their situation. If they were only flooding into Syria or Pakistan they'd be called refugees. Tough luck for them, eh? (I took the liberty of assuming your friend from El Salvador is prospering in America illegally. Your reference to him being irresponsible for having four children reminded me of a family I once knew from Commack, but these people had six, were first generation Americans and paid their own way. Thank god they were white and from Britain, so they didn't have to wait five years for a visa. I'd probably be working in a coal mine near Swansea right now.)

How in good reason can you write "if he wasn't here, he wouldn't be hired"? What the fuck do you think brought him here? The promise of jobs, that's what. But you already knew that or you wouldn't have written, "As things are going dry they are leaving". I suppose you thought I wouldn't catch that, didn't you?

You claim that poor American businessmen were forced to dick the Nation because time are tough. That's not true. The home improvement and landscaping businesses were booming in the prosperous eighties, ninetys and the early 2000's, long before the big banks went bust as a result of three administration's worth of banking deregulation. Now we're suffering the legacy of our disrespect and gluttony. I'm just tone deaf to the whining.

You talk about "tax breaks associated with this type of hiring". Not paying taxes is not a "tax break" as you call it. Its just illegal. I've been there my friend. I've been hurt financially. I've been fucked by insurance companies; my 401k went to pay for hospital bills, blown trannys and other crisis de jour. I can't get a credit card or a bank loan because of my own tough luck situation. So should I just kick a Mexican? Fuck that!

Make it tough for businesses to employ undocumented workers and you will see the exodus. Don't blame the raccoon because you bait the trap. Let them all leave and wait two months and I bet you the media is all up in arms over the loss of affordable landscaping. Let the prices on the consumer rise; let the business world feel the pinch of paying all their taxes and I will show you the greatest exodus: American production flooding to foreign factories. Prices will rise just about the time when unemployment dwarfs the 10% we have today. If you want to keep kicking the little guy, you better get longer legs because just about the time you realize the big guy was responsible for orchestrating the whole mess, he'll already be in India and Indonesia, sitting on the beach avoiding taxes and thumbing his nose at you and me.

But you seem to have it all figured out. Numb to the effects our neurotic appetite for cheap foreign goods and labor have on the way we pick and choose our Federal spending priorities, you simply withdraw "some" troops from Afghanistan and invade Mexico. I hate to tell you hoop, but we just don't have the money or resources to beat up every low life on the block. We have just dismantled our "twenty-first century moon landing program" because we don't have the money. Maybe if we got an astronaut from Ghiana, we could pay him $7 an hour and save on the medical coverage. What then do we do with all the other "American" spacemen all suited up with nowhere to go? They might be available to kill pesky wet-backs trying to swim the Rio Grande. . . . but wait! . . that job's been hit hard by lay offs. Seems fewer and fewer brown skinned people even care to come over any more.

-prof. Giov
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Prof. Giov

I never realize how unrighteous I've become. Thanks for getting me to see the light. You did get one thing wrong. It's not an invasion of Mexico that I was looking for. We should just shove our assistance down their throat as our government has been doing to everyone for years. After all, they know what I need.

- Frustrated
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Frustrated,

Las Vegas must have softened your game. Does everyone out there fall for this kind of rope-a-dope? In your sarcastic return I recognize a barb twice turned, yet on its mark; a sniper's shot as viewed in a mirror. Knowing you as I do, it is clear enough that your gratitude is disingenuous, shining ironically on my own percieved Peck-sniffian "righteousness"; a posture you would sooner cross swords with than consider. Better, you have said, to "shoot from the hip" than "stick to the book".

It is just this crazy quilt of logic which keeps me writing my good friend. As long as poor research and contradiction are the chief spices in your philisophical kitchen, it might certainly appear that I default time and again to a fixed set of principles which you find immature and short-sighted. Your insistance, on the other hand, that we employ viscious tactics to win some peace, completely ignores the delicate balance of any surviving economic factors required to sustain the outcome of the greater majority of your proposed "solutions". You seem confident that industry should rise from the bomb craters of every war; whereas I insist that you simply cannot replace all the hostile cultures in the world with "middle American values" and throw a Honky-tonkin' pig roast to celebrate the victory. Civil obedience and cultural pride are as important to the equation of a civilization's self-reliance as the tools needed to repair the roads and the tractors needed to plow the fields. Money will buy tools, but each shop keeper, farmer and mechanic must have a home with a soul to return to at the end of each day. The United States can no longer spend our way out of these quagmires. We simply have too many economic troubles at home.

"According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris, in 2003, the world’s major countries gave $108.5 billion in combined foreign aid. Of this, the U.S. contributed $37.8 billion, or 35 percent, of the total."

and . . .

"According to Independent Sector, in 2003, Americans contributed an additional $266 billion worth of their time to charitable enterprises. This is based on a value of $17.12 per hour of time. But even if one assigns a value equal to the minimum wage, this noncash contribution still comes to about $100 billion."

Proof that money alone does not even approach what is needed to repair the stain our global reputation has "unjustly" suffered by unscrupulous diplomatic and industrial activities over the past seventy-five years can be found in the same report from the OECD, which says:

"In 2003, U.S. foreign aid [as a share of national income] came to just 0.34 percent, well below the world leading Dutch at 2.44 percent."

And for this we are percieved across the globe as stingy. I don't know about you, but I've got half a mind to spend that money creating jobs right here at home, were it not for two factors. Americans have less money these days to buy the very products produced by the imaginary factories built with this speculative windfall, despite the inevitable creation of the jobs needed to run these same factories. Thank you Wall Street and friends. (I wonder how many illegal immigrants worked on Wall Street at the time . . ) And secondly, pissing the global customer base off by thumbing our nose at the IMF, the World Bank and all other recipients of our philanthropy will only reduce further any incentive for foreign consumers to purchase goods made in America.

We the "little" people are nonetheless stained in the eyes of our global cousins by our tradition of quiet deference to the corporate invasion of their home lands. We are to them no less than an enemy soldier following "orders" from our superiors, contributors to the rape of vast resources from their own culturally immature, hence vulnerable regions; quite literally thieves. Our brief moments of international glory and compassion, including two world wars and the Marshall Plan, appear to weigh-in quite insufficiently on the scale of modern day global perceptions. We have delivered our vision, our wheel house into the hands of our own lowest navigational impulses: corporate greed and gluttony; throwing our moral compass over the rail and watching our glorious bow slice the foreign seas before us on well scripted High Definition television broadcasts; drunk on a conditioned need to consume. We have left entire regions cherry-picked and barren; we have used our diplomatic influence to manipulate regional politics and engineer wars for profits harvested by a nation of "fat, pale skinned Satans" half the world away. And by doing so we have created jobs at home and a new middle class of people who have money to spend and are dependent on spending it.

These activities over many decades have left deep scars across many nations, across many continents. Though the overwhelming majority of Americans are not consulted on these matters, we all play our roles in the scheme by working at our innocent jobs, turning our wrenches and pushing our pencils; buying our comfortable Norman Rockewell homes, watching our sitcoms and filling the air with our glade fresheners and carbon. This my friend is the perception of our "superiority" in the eyes of those who continue to upset the comfort and quiet you agonize over. They simply consider your suffering retribution and only the beginning. You and I have seventy years of abuse, oppression and rape before we understand the level of hatred we are up against in many parts of the world.

Another pragmatic reason to avoid "from the hip" logic is this reminder from our friends at Oxfam, who published the following statement in a paper, Meeting the Challenge of Poverty Reduction, published March 2, 2002:

"Some Northern governments have stressed that “trade not aid” should be the dominant theme at the [March 2002 Monterrey] conference [on Financing for Development]. That approach is disingenuous on two counts. First, rich countries have failed to open their markets to poor countries. Second, increased aid is vital for the world’s poorest countries if they are to grasp the opportunities provided through trade."

Now you and I both know that by 2010, our country has spent $710,000,000,000 on the war in Iraq, $256,000,000,000 on the war in Afghanistan; $4,616,5000,000,000, (that's trillions!!) bailing out the Banks while leaving a $1,2000,000,000,000 debt for us average Americans to bequeath our grandchildren. How many more services need to be cut to fix your immigrant problem? You see my dear friend, what on the surface appears to you a snivelling, sanctimonious approach to some of these problems is merely the recognition that too many of them are so self-inflicted, so-wrapped up in a candy-coated, flag waving distortion of the truth that it would exhaust me to have to play the same song before every game. My failure to do this however has taken for granted the short, selective memory of my good friend, and for this i sincerely apologize. Thank you for getting me to see the light.

If you haven't turned your computer off by now and dismissed me as a threat to all that is sensible and holy, I would like to step out of the pulpit and summerize the situation. You want to shoot the bad guy. I see his finger on a big red button. You go to pull the plug. I see an extension cord running from the plug into the next, glass enclosed room where it supplies juice to a machine that keeps a young child breathing. I am prevented from negotiating with the bad man because I'm too busy arguing with you over a need to try and save the child's life. The bottom line is that we are fighting with each other when we should recognize that we share the same fate and would profit most by working together. For me the process begins by peeling back the years of bullshit paint and spackle and fake paneling and formulate a solution at the core studs. Tearing down the house for me is no more an option than simply hanging another roll of wall paper. We as a Nation are not innocent victims to every problem that distresses us. My question is and always has been: Why are we, as a nation, so reluctant to address the facts regarding our own DNA at the crime scene? This is not "righteousness" at work my good friend. This is merely being effective.

Stop allowing Businesses to pay undocumented workers and undocumented workers will either go back home or become tax paying citizens. Those without a place to work yet choosing to stay will be reduced to a smaller, more managable sized group, illegal still, yet without American complicity.
-prof. G
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear P. G.


I would never point the scope on my snipers rifle at you, unless you consider yourself to be part of the problem. With respect to my game, what game do you reference? Perhaps you refer to a seat at the table of the survival game that the collapsed housing market has provided me. The game is old and very similar to tic-tac-toe. No winners or losers. Only the hopes of a win or the fears and panic that accompanies losing; a game of futility that is pointless to play. I would much rather sit in stands, eat my hot dog, and watch the game at this stage of my life.

On war, bring the troops home. I believe I've stated this on several occasions. But if you’re going to send them to do the work of embasaries, allow them to work and expect collateral damage. The growing theme of sensitivities can't allow one American soldier to die through a tactical change that will put us at risk. You shoot at me, I'm shooting back and God be with the unfortunate individual that your cowardly ass hides behind.

The issue of replacing all cultures with American values is not on my plate. If industry is to rise from bomb craters it shouldn't be from our bombs and it definitely shouldn't be our industry. Again, we don't belong there. If you feel so strongly about interfering with civil obedience, a foreign country's cultural pride, and the tools and tractors they require to maintain their fields, I suggest you join the peace core. There is no need to spend our way out of anything. All we need to do is keep the National Wallet in out fucking pocket.

And my research extends no further than the in box on my desk. I research ways to exists and pay my bills. You are right as I don't dedicate too much time to understanding the politics of the Afghan poppy fields and those whom control Afghanistan . I don't research the history of religious civil wars that have been going on for thousands of years to try and find ways to promote the humane treatment of the oppressed in the countries that we occupy. In short, I don't have the time or inclination to give a shit. My government has left me to stand alone with the collateral damage I suffer from their turning of a blind eye with respect to the mismanagement of an industry within our borders that has crippled my livelihood.

Love your research but I don't give a shit about how much money has been doled out and by whom in an effort to help the world. I've kick into my country's kitty for better that thirty years and a little quid pro quo is in order here.

With respect to the monies that have been wasted?, spent for a good cause?, call it what ever you'd like to, I do understand but I didn't to the exact dollar so I thank you for that. I do understand that the glutinous ways of the American people depend on the labyrinth of world business we forced across the globe. But I also understand we need to change how we do business. I've apparently misunderstood your views on world interference. I recall that you promoted “business as is”or we as a country would collapse. You have clarified your reasons for why things must remain as they are for now. These issues can't be changed on the turn of a dime but I don't see anyone doing anything about change whatsoever. Where ever it is we start will be painful for many but if we focus on the sensitivities of those who will be affected by pulling back we will never pull back. It's going to hurt someone and we'll, in our best political correctness, have to say tough shit.

You include a quote about trade. It's a great idea but many nations have nothing to trade. Many of them have only the business we've exported. We buy what we need from them and the business owners are the only ones that benefit from the savings of sweat shops. How about high tariffs on these goods. Maybe some business will come back as a result and yes the people working for those businesses abroad would be hurt by losing their jobs. (Sorry, I've lost my field of work and I live here.) But Senator Greedy would vote Nay as some lobbyist asshole has already guaranteed him lifetime supply of Levis for his vote. We need to get strong again then maybe someday we could continue with assistance on some level. As long as we just give they will just take and we will just lose. We can start trading right here. If you want us to give you a support check, give us a clean urine sample. Someone will get hurt, and I really don't want to say it but, you have to break a few what? Maybe with term limits in the House and Senate we would rid those who won't examine our own DNA.

To answer your question, if the illegals could become tax paying citizens I'm sure the majority would. But as they don't feel it comes up within their time frame, my final answer is "a". Just as due process applies to us, it needs to apply to them.

- F.U.S.J.S.