|
Monday, September 17, 2001
I grit my teeth every time I hear the blind cry for vengeance. As my fellow posters have already pointed out, violence perpetrated upon innocents will only bring more violence. So the first question which arises is how do we apprehend those responsible without making matters worse? I'm not going to answer this question (because I can't), but I will say that America has done her best to disrupt world stability and international cooperation over the last fifty years. By supporting evil dictatorships in the name of preventing communist governments (even if popularly elected by the citizens), by carrying out direct (e.g., Iraq, Bosnia) or indirect (e.g., Chile, Nicaragua) murder of civilians in many third world nations, by its blind support of Israel, etc., the U.S. has made many enemies. Most third world countries despise and distrust America, so we cannot expect their help in bringing the guilty to "justice". If instead the U.S. had used its power to strengthen international ties and support world peace, we might be in the situation right now where there didn't even exist an Osama bin Laden or a Saddam Hussein or whoever was behind this terrible deed. Additionally, there might be in place a true UN police force which would have jurisdiction in such matters of international crime, whose investigative powers would be welcomed and honored by the leaders of nations in a cooperative world. A point which I believe has not been addressed is the form of justice to be meted out if and when the guilty parties are caught. There is no question that some form of punishment must be dealt, but what should be done? Ultimately, the choice should be guided by the method which has the greatest effect in discouraging events similar to those of September 11th from happening again. In this country, the most obvious choice of punishment is the administering of the death penalty. Not withstanding the fact that most civilized nations frown upon capital punishment, there are other good reasons that the death penalty is not a good choice. First off, as numerous studies have shown, the death penalty actually fails to serve as a deterrent to future crimes. This is especially true in this case, were the perpetrators have already shown a willingness to die for their cause. Additionally, there is the risk of turning the guilty into martyrs for others who would "take up the cause" against America. I would say these factors weigh heavily against the death penalty. The other obvious choice is life imprisonment. This also has associated risks -- if we take Northern Ireland as an example, we know that imprisonment of terrorists will lead to further violence and/or hostage taking by those who would seek the prisoners' release. And there is the problem that like capital punishment, imprisonment seems to serve as no real deterrent to further heinous acts. If you were willing to die for the cause, would you not also be willing to be imprisoned? So what should be done? I don't know...
Sunday, September 16, 2001
I was mistaken in my earlier post. Bush has repeated his vow to "rid the world of evil" two more times. Apparently it's a speaking point or in the script. I accept the need for some form of retaliation if we know with certainty who did it. This was a slaughter of civilians on our own soil. If Bush is going to take on bin Ladin's network without alienating the Muslim world, build a world-wide coalition to guard against future terrorism and beef up our own security - well, I'd say that's a full plate. Declaring war on terrorism across the globe doesn't seem like the act of a man who spent the last campaign chanting that military goals should be well-defined and acheiveable. Will we be going after the IRA or the Protestant paramilitary groups in Ireland?
A Newsday headline: "Our President Shows He Is No Giuliani." Ouch. The chorus is singing: Rudy, we've hated your race-baiting and your concept of decent art, but you've been an extraordinary leader during this crisis. Let me add my voice to the song then. And he's done all of those press conferences without any kind of politicking, without calling for war (but rather warning against attacks on Arabs in the city (and price-gouging)), without teleprompter and notes (while remembering all the numbers), and with straightforward honesty and leadership and compassion, soot on his shoes and shoulders the entire time. Meanwhile Bush can't convincingly read off of a cue card while flying to Defcon One, Nebraska.
Saturday, September 15, 2001
I agree with M.A.D.--the loss of innocent lives and an architectural marvel are heartbreaking--but now the country is being "unified" by blood-lust and the Wombat's call-to-arms. Justice should be served but I'm afraid the military will lose the plot and Afghanistan may become another Vietnam or worse...I actually heard a radio caller suggesting tactical nukes....Dr. Strangelove, anyone? Random idiots are also making threatening phone calls to mosques and Afghani/Pakistani restaurants...they've found a new scapegoat to direct their ridiculous hatred--as long as the media and various politicians are making WWII comparisons, how about Nazi Germany, 1938.
Here’s what Dubya -- ahem, President George W. Bush -- said today: ”You will be asked for your patience,for the conflict will not be short. You will be asked for resolve, because the conflict will not be easy. You will be asked for your strength because the course to victory may be long.” [Note the ominous Orwellian use of passive voice.] Here’s what Gore Vidal said in 1981: "The memory of Lincoln was -- and is -- a constant stimulus of the ambitious chief magistratewho knows that once the nation is at war his powers are truly unlimited, while the possibilities of personal glory are immeasurable." I think the perpetrators of Tuesday's bloodcurdling crimes should be brought to justice. I also think clamoring for war is a bad idea. We still live in a democracy (as far as I can tell), so it's a good idea to question our government now, rather than later when it's too late. And don't let the mainstream media fool you into thinking American "unity" means blind loyalty to our federal government. "Unity" might also mean seeking justice and vengeance through sane and efficient means, without conferring limitless powers to an incoherent moron like our President.
Friday, September 14, 2001
NY Senator Schumer has the most astute statement I have seen so far. Success in our struggle is contingent upon our persistence in targeting those who espouse violence for its own sake, not any nation, religion or ethnicity. Whether consciously or not, those who elected Bush voted not for him, but his advisors. I just hope they live up to the promises.
I'm more than a little afraid that Bush is the guy who decides how we will respond as a nation to the events of this past Tuesday. The group responsible for the attack should be held accountable. It appears we are finding out the identity of the perpetrators and may ultimately be able prove Osama bin Laden was behind the attack. If that is indeed the case, he (and anyone who helped in the planning and execution of the plan) should face severe justice. However, our pursuit of that justice shouldn't cost the lives of any innocent people. I heard a congressman (I wish I made note of his name) say that we shouldn't hesitate to use deadly force against the people responsible, even if it meant killing innocent civilians of another country because "they" didn't have any compunction about killing our innocents. Nevermind the obvious fact that he was lumping guilty and innocent together in his use of "they" (lumping all Muslims, Afghanis, or whoever he actually meant) as if the innocent civilians of some Arab nation ordered the attack, the very idea that perpetuating the cycle of violence, that creating more embittered orphans, would somehow make things right is patently ridiculous. Sickeningly ridiculous. There's also the talk of holding the nations that harbor terrorists responsible for the actions of those terrorists. I agree that governments sponsoring or sheltering terrorists should be held accountable and complicit, but we should be very careful in determining how we deliver justice. Sparking a war that would cost more lives does nothing to honor our dead. Also, there is our government's role in the sponsorship of terrorism and oppression around the world to consider, specifically our prior support of bin Laden (see Neil's link below) and our support of the Taliban -- there's that whole thing about glass-house dwellers and stone throwing. Ethel the Blog has some excellent links and commentary, well worth checking out. I've written more (from a different angle) at my side-blog, Sports Takes. Mark has some commentary up now at Cheek.
Sometimes I have to shut off the TV and sometimes I can't. I've heard everything Bush has said and in a sense, he's saying all the things we need to hear, but his words are completely uninspiring and he looks like a deer-in-the-headlights delivering his lines. No one wants to criticize the president at a time like this, but I cringed when I heard Bush's first broadcast after the attack, the one delivered in front of the Florida schoolkids. First of all, you don't deliver this kind of statement standing in front of children. Then he said we're going to get "those folks responsible." Goddamn, you don't call the hijackers "folks." You'll notice his next statement was videotaped and the night address was scripted. This attack has made a mockery of at least two things. First, that missile defense can protect us from terrorism. And second, the prevailing wisdom from our last election that it doesn't really matter who's president when the economy is strong. Bush's handlers seem terrified that he might actually speak to the American people or answer a question. Not to mention the running around in circles - we're going/not going/ going again to New York. Presidents like Clinton or even Reagan would have an instictive knowledge that yes, you have to be seen in the White House and yes, you have to go to New York and no, they weren't folks. Neither of them would need to gloom onto Guilliani to seem like a leader. Sometime late Tuesday, Senator Dodd noted the parallels being made to World War II and said that we made a mistake at that time in our treatment of Japanese-Americans. We should not repeat that mistake, he said, with hostility to Arab-Americans. He was the first person I heard make this statement. That mistake is so obvious yet we seem to walk right into it. Conservative Ann Coulter wrote in her syndicated column: "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them all to Christianity." Patriotism, death threats, drive-bys, firebombs. It's so predictable and stupid. At about noon on Tuesday, I heard Senator McCain call this "an act of war." This took me aback at first but really, it's not that strong a statement. If the terrorism was ordered or financed by a state, it is an act of war, declared or not. Assuming we don't want to refight the Crusades, here's another mistake we can't make: giving Bush a Gulf of Tonkin-style blank check. Bush's spokesman Ari Flieshman mentioned that Congress might declare war on terrorism and Bush himself has declared his intent to "rid the world of evil," which must have been another unscripted moment. Retaliation is called for, but I have a hard time seeing where this ends. "War on terrorism" is pretty open-ended. Assuming the Taliban will not hand over the dozens and dozens of people our government will want, assuming even if they did we would not be satisfied, and assuming we cannot possibly bomb their ability or desire to repeat this act out of them - what are we going to do? destroy all their knives and boxcutters? - this seems to end with Afghanistan as a moonscape with or without a puppet government. Of course, they had a puppet government not too long ago and look where we are. Last night, I said we should bomb the hell out of Afghanistan and then give it to the Palestinians. I was half-joking. I know what's coming is going to look a lot like war, I doubt what will follow will look anything like peace.
I doubt that there is anything new I can contribute in the way of personal stories, news links, pictures, scoops, opinion/commentary, etc. But here's a couple things I've found in the last couple minutes that are a little different/interesting that maybe haven't gotten the mileage they should (and blogging does seem to help my nerves a little bit):
If I had to spew, my initial reaction has been:
01:10 Neilman comment £ Wednesday, September 12, 2001
Just got online. Charisse and I are fine. More later if I can. Thanks for your thoughts, guys.
Once again, religious zealotry and political fanaticism combine with disastrous results...I can't believe this crap is still going on..The Middle East, Northern Ireland...and a lot of lives lost in N.Y.C.--I just keep thinking of the Chinese proverb/warning "may you live in interesting times"...I hope Neil and Rob are O.K.
Tuesday, September 11, 2001
Neil! Check in with us and tell us you're OK...
Monday, September 10, 2001
I thought Cluttered was MIA/RIP, etc, but apparently he's back, so people should check in.
Sunday, September 09, 2001
A portable VCS. Pretty damn cool if you ask me. Too bad it's limited to just 10 games but at least they are activision games. It's only 19.99 to boot. Being the retro gamer that I am I'm going to have to buy one.
Replacement Refs Suck. I mean, the Patriots are capable of losing a game all by themselves. They don't need scab refs helping out. The refs called a good three and a half quarters of football and then blew it on the Patriots last two drives when they were down by six. Three bad calls. One bad spot, forcing the Pats to punt, one terrible call putting the Pats at third and seventeen - even the announcers admitted that they seemed to use college rules of "in the grasp" and this was the hole they couldn't dig out of - and topping it off on the very next play by overturning the call on the field with a less than "indisputable" video. There's a world of difference between first and ten at the Bengals' forty and third and seventeen on your own twenty-five. I'm not saying the Patriots would have won, but geesh, let them lose it on their own.
Moving sucks. Plain out suckity-uck-ucks. Little things left here and there. Back pain from lifting incredible heavy things. Tons of driving back and forth. I could go on. Still when the choice is between being on the verge of bankcruptcy for the next 15 years, getting a second job that would add 15 hours of work a week to my life, or moving back to a rent free home I'll chose moving back home. Sure there is the whole "your 30 and you live at home" stigma but those voices will fade when I have the cash flow to buy a condo or house if I want a few years from now. Living at home won't be the end of the world.
Saturday, September 08, 2001
Been a while since I posted, my last are about to drop off the page, so I figure it's about time I at least dropped a 'what I've been up to lately' blog to remind everyone I still exist. Mega starts the moving out process today and this time next week I'll have a new roommate moving in. J.R. (the new guy) is a staunch Republican and a Shrub backer so he's going to find himseld being berated for spouting idiocy quite a bit. The good news is he's a sports junkie with the proper allegiances, which means I won't have to see Mega's Yankees cap lying about the place. I've been missing Madison a bit more than usual the last couple weeks and wishing I'd made the time to take a trip out there this summer. In the span of a couple days KP wrote to talk baseball, Trish called to plan a trip out here in the fall (then, sadly, called back to cancel), Susan and Jennifer both sent emails, Christi sent a bacon recipe (you can never have enough), and one of the guys in my new-hire training class at work is from Sun Prairie -- so we've been talking about the Madison bar scene. Another year without going to Quivey's ... whatta shame. A couple of folks have asked recently how my niece is doing and I'm happy to report she's doing well and is one happy little toddler. We don't really have a good idea yet what her vision is like, until she starts talking it's hard to test, I guess. Jeremy and Kristy have decided to stick with contacts and glasses for a couple of years before considering intra-ocular surgery to have new lenses inserted to replace her natural ones, which were taken out when she was an infant so she could see at all. On a totally unrelated note, Jeremy's thinking about getting a tat of our family crest on his arm and I've got a half a mind to demonstrate a little brotherly solidarity and do the same. I don't suppose I actually Dread God as our motto dictates, but the more appropriate Get Hammered wouldn't fit into the design as well. This weekend is kinda downtime. Next weekend I'm going out with a group of folks from work, the following weekend I'll be going back to CT to visit the bonedaddy compound, the weekend after that Desrosiers will be in NYC so I'll take a day to go down there and visit, and somewhere in there is the Built to Spill show -- I might try that a little less housed this year than when Mega, Steve, and I caught them on tour last year.
Wednesday, September 05, 2001
Thanks for the plug about 'Schizoid Man', M.A.D.--oh, there'll be more..don't you worry!!
The Red Sox continue to self destruct. Duquette is doing a great job at keeping player moral up. With an idiot like him at the helm it's suprising they got anywhere this year.
|
© 2000-01 by Triptych Cryptic
TC: fouling the web since March, 2000.