happy holidays, everyone. i haven't been to la Zona much since the election way back in november, but a few things since then have finaly made me angry enough to lace up my boots and climb back up the tree.
1: California. I always knew those people were full of shit. All holier than thou inclusive and then you pull prop 8 on us. Prop 8, probably the most inhumane doctrine to come out of the United States since the WWII internment camps, and those had at least some pretense of justification. And now, it looks like they want more. Right, they aren't happy with not letting others be happy, they want to make sure that anyone who might have become happy while they werent looking gets a nice solid kick in the cunt. By that, I mean they are looking to nulify some 18,000 same sex marriages that were preformed when the state was still pretending to be reasonable and humane. Keep in mind, that happened under Bush. Its amazing to me that we as a nation can actually seem to move BACKWARDS in our evolution. This isnt fucking Kingston, you guys.
to all my gay brothers and sisters, if you are worried about this, move to the Comonwealth of Massachusetts, or else its retarded little sister, Connecticut. Its cold half the year but at least you wont be prosecuted for the way god made you. See, California? The most puritain of states, where you cant by beer on sundays in some cases, is gonna be cool because we arent raging, hyperfecavoric assholes. Yeah, i made that word up, but if you know any latin its still a fucking word, and it fits the California legislature to a T.
story here.
2: Militant Atheists. I'm fucking sick and tired of you people. You decry "organized religion"'s persecution of you throughout the centuries by what method? Whats that again? Oh, right, persecution. Religious persecution, i might add, because anyone who thinks atheism isnt a religion is sorely mistaken about a great many things. I have a religion, and I've never ever ever ever, not once, tried to cram it down your throat or tried to prove to you that there is a god or any of that shit, so get the fuck up out of my face. Or i will cut you. Seriously, I spent all last sunday sharpening my survival knife.
3: Another thing; folks who assume I am an atheist just because i dont wear a fucking argyle sweater and say "golly gee". What is this, 1954? Lets get it straight right here, right now. I am alot of things; anarchist, socialist, wanker, lazy, christian, crooked, smoker, chef, alcoholic, animist, cat lover, buddhist, pool shark, gardener, sexual tyranosaurus, heretic, and pagan, but i am NOT an atheist. And no, I'm not "agnostic", either. In fact i think i am quite fucking gnostic, thank you.
4: To tie it all together, other Theists who are astounded that i can violently oppose prop. 8 and yet still believe in god. There isnt much i can say to you except this: at some station along the development of your beliefs, you COMPLETELY MISSED THE POINT.
that is all.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Friday, November 21, 2008
CALLED IT!; or Obama gets an early start with his human-rights-abuse-by-proxy
Got this email from Simo. Pretty much sums it up. LIke I said, you cant trust ANY OF THEM.
Sup guys. Did y'all hear who Obama's Attorney General pick is? Eric Holder....the same guy who is a "defense lawyer for Chiquita Brands international in a case in which Colombian plaintiffs seek damages for the murders carried out by the AUC paramilitaries - a designated terrorist organization. Chiquita has already admitted in a criminal case that it paid the AUC around $1.7 million in a 7-year period and that it further provided the AUC with a cache of machine guns as well. "
Anyway, just wanted to go on record saying I don't like where this is going. This is not a Kennedy-esqu coup against the establishment by outsiders (albeit well-established outsiders). This is business as usual, united under a dream candidate...
So yeah. Business as usual indeed. Well, at least it gives me something to stay vigilant about. Many dream of peace; I seem to thrive on anger. Oh well.
Simo titled his email "Meet the New Boss...", an obvious reference to the Who lyric that ends "Same as the old boss". My only consolation for now is that the song that lyric is from is, of course, called "Won't Get Fooled Again".
Sup guys. Did y'all hear who Obama's Attorney General pick is? Eric Holder....the same guy who is a "defense lawyer for Chiquita Brands international in a case in which Colombian plaintiffs seek damages for the murders carried out by the AUC paramilitaries - a designated terrorist organization. Chiquita has already admitted in a criminal case that it paid the AUC around $1.7 million in a 7-year period and that it further provided the AUC with a cache of machine guns as well. "
Anyway, just wanted to go on record saying I don't like where this is going. This is not a Kennedy-esqu coup against the establishment by outsiders (albeit well-established outsiders). This is business as usual, united under a dream candidate...
So yeah. Business as usual indeed. Well, at least it gives me something to stay vigilant about. Many dream of peace; I seem to thrive on anger. Oh well.
Simo titled his email "Meet the New Boss...", an obvious reference to the Who lyric that ends "Same as the old boss". My only consolation for now is that the song that lyric is from is, of course, called "Won't Get Fooled Again".
Monday, November 10, 2008
Obama; or that's great, but never give them the benefit of the doubt
So the democrats took the election and Barack Obama will be our new president. I wound up voting after all (the state ballot questions were allmost all very important to me, as it turned out), and i voted for Obama, so i was pretty happy about that. In the days that have followed, i keep getting more and more good news. it would appear that our national nightmare is nearly over. Mr. Obama is allready going over the ruinous policies instated by the bush "team" and slating many, presumably, for reversal. that makes me very happy. will we be able to close gitmo? will we finaly see the USA PATRIOT act recognized as the treasonous newspeak that it is? will i run out of things to be angry oubout and change the color of my blog to green?
all of that remains to be seen. while Obama does exude a great deal of promise for us progressives, we must continue to remain vigilant. no matter what else he is, the man is a politician. he will be lobbied by the same lunatics that lobby bush as we speak. the question is; will he allow himself to be controled by them?
so i'm keeping the page black for now. it was very recently that i witnessed citizens being stopped and searched illegaly by a border patrol that was hundreds of miles out of it's jurisdiction. it was only a few months ago that martial law was illegaly put into effect in our nation's capital. the war(s) on "terror" continue unabated. we have lost allot of our freedom, and we must be sure we get it back before becoming complacent. everything feels like its going to be allright now, but dont let yourself get too comfortable. when you are dealing with these kind of people (politicians, leaders in general), you have to be very very careful.
check back frequently for updates; the next couple of years are going to be very interesting.
all of that remains to be seen. while Obama does exude a great deal of promise for us progressives, we must continue to remain vigilant. no matter what else he is, the man is a politician. he will be lobbied by the same lunatics that lobby bush as we speak. the question is; will he allow himself to be controled by them?
so i'm keeping the page black for now. it was very recently that i witnessed citizens being stopped and searched illegaly by a border patrol that was hundreds of miles out of it's jurisdiction. it was only a few months ago that martial law was illegaly put into effect in our nation's capital. the war(s) on "terror" continue unabated. we have lost allot of our freedom, and we must be sure we get it back before becoming complacent. everything feels like its going to be allright now, but dont let yourself get too comfortable. when you are dealing with these kind of people (politicians, leaders in general), you have to be very very careful.
check back frequently for updates; the next couple of years are going to be very interesting.
Monday, October 20, 2008
in the wee, small hours of the morning, or; who knew that generic tylenol had caffeine in it?
another sleepless night at la zona. we went out to dinner with my whole family, which is rare and very special to me. my youngest brother had his 19th birthday and we celebrated with a sushi dinner. afterwords, ms. giles and i returned home and tried to watch game 7 of the ALCS, but due to a very fun weekend and several zombies and kirins with dinner, we quickly fell asleep and missed the last game of the year for our beloved red sox.
after sleeping a few hours on the couch (and wasting a sam addams brown ale), we retired to bed. i slept well until about 3am, at which point i got up to use the bathroom and let the cats out. my head ached, and i didnt want to wake up that way at 6:30, so i decided to take two tylenol even though i am not supposed to because of a dormant kidney disease that i discovered in 1999.
i felt ok, got into bed, and about 20 minutes later i was still awake. then an hour later, still awake. fully two hours passed before i came into some semblance of sleep, and that was troubled by the kind of restless, repetitive dreams that drive me insane. they seemed to revolve around me not being able to figure out what time it was, although it was obviously far later than i needed it to be, and not being able to take a shower because of construction or uninvited guests in the house. to make it worse, i believed that i was actually awake despite sharp differences between my experience and what i know to be reality. at one point i went out to go to the office and was forced to return home when boston was destroyed by a cluster of massive tornados. wtf?
anyway, i think i'll go to bed early tonight.
after sleeping a few hours on the couch (and wasting a sam addams brown ale), we retired to bed. i slept well until about 3am, at which point i got up to use the bathroom and let the cats out. my head ached, and i didnt want to wake up that way at 6:30, so i decided to take two tylenol even though i am not supposed to because of a dormant kidney disease that i discovered in 1999.
i felt ok, got into bed, and about 20 minutes later i was still awake. then an hour later, still awake. fully two hours passed before i came into some semblance of sleep, and that was troubled by the kind of restless, repetitive dreams that drive me insane. they seemed to revolve around me not being able to figure out what time it was, although it was obviously far later than i needed it to be, and not being able to take a shower because of construction or uninvited guests in the house. to make it worse, i believed that i was actually awake despite sharp differences between my experience and what i know to be reality. at one point i went out to go to the office and was forced to return home when boston was destroyed by a cluster of massive tornados. wtf?
anyway, i think i'll go to bed early tonight.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Free Soup; or, in the Good Old Days, everyone was broke, and it was OK
this seems largely to be a time of verging. everything seems to be poised on the edge of one thing or another. last night the Red Sox squoze under the door of the ALCS, thankfully buying us another week or so of perfect entertainment. and, we are going to need it. the news comming out of manhattan, and now most of europe, is dire indeed. those of us, myself included, who have been thinking for years that our course of action has run far to closeley paralel to that of the Roman empire, are wringing our hands in near panic, because we learned this before in a high school history class. the overextended military, the crumbling infrastructure, the rampant political and economical recklessness, it all adds up to what the romans themselves called hubris, and historicaly speaking, it always preceeds a fall. This has been repeated in more recent times by the british, and then the soviets, and now, apparently, our own empire has begun to slide. Once it starts you cant stop it; the only hope is to ride it out and learn from it.
This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. True, we are all going to have to tighten our belts and get used to the way our grandparents lived. But how many of you have ever heard your grandparents claim that times are better now than they were then?
The most recent cover of Time magazine summed up nicely, if (probably) unintentionally, what I’m trying to get at here. The cover is a photograph from the Depression of the 1930s, a picture of a line of men outside of a soup kitchen. The headline is “The New Hard Times”, and it is a picture I’ve been waiting for them to run for about 3 weeks now (at least they have stopped the damned Obama-McCain-Palin bobblehead theme that ghey got stuck on last month sometime). Anyway, take a look at the picture when you get a chance. The men are lined up next to a building with a large window. On that window is a sign that reads “FREE SOUP”. Take a minute to think about that.
After 9/11, everyone was talking about how strong the country was, how together everyone felt, etc. I was cynical and thought that it would all change pretty quick, and I was right, although looking back, I feel that things may have been different if bush hadn’t begun to sodomize the COTUS right away. But try for a moment to remember that feeling, that idea that no matter what happened, everything would be OK because we were all Americans now and forever, and we were going to stick together and get through it. The Free Soup sign reminds me of those days, those brief couple of weeks when it almost seemed like the attacks had had a bright side, in that they had caused such unprecedented (at least in our collective amnesia) solidarity.
So if we go crashing into financial ruin (and it seems that we will, my friends), if our standard of living gets set back about 80 years, if times are tough, if luxury grows scarce, we will grow stronger as a people, even as our empire weakens to the point of irrelevance. We will start to see things in our character as Americans that will remind us of what it used to mean to be an American, of what is good about this country; not it’s might, not it’s hegemony, but the ability of it’s People to pull together and surmount any obstacle, to get the most out of “hard times”, and to come out the other side wiser, stronger, and better for it. Remember, money isnt’ everything. It isn’t even close. We stand to loose vast sums of it in the coming months, and perhaps we deserve to, and perhaps we need to.
BTW, I am having a hell of a time quitting smoking.
This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. True, we are all going to have to tighten our belts and get used to the way our grandparents lived. But how many of you have ever heard your grandparents claim that times are better now than they were then?
The most recent cover of Time magazine summed up nicely, if (probably) unintentionally, what I’m trying to get at here. The cover is a photograph from the Depression of the 1930s, a picture of a line of men outside of a soup kitchen. The headline is “The New Hard Times”, and it is a picture I’ve been waiting for them to run for about 3 weeks now (at least they have stopped the damned Obama-McCain-Palin bobblehead theme that ghey got stuck on last month sometime). Anyway, take a look at the picture when you get a chance. The men are lined up next to a building with a large window. On that window is a sign that reads “FREE SOUP”. Take a minute to think about that.
After 9/11, everyone was talking about how strong the country was, how together everyone felt, etc. I was cynical and thought that it would all change pretty quick, and I was right, although looking back, I feel that things may have been different if bush hadn’t begun to sodomize the COTUS right away. But try for a moment to remember that feeling, that idea that no matter what happened, everything would be OK because we were all Americans now and forever, and we were going to stick together and get through it. The Free Soup sign reminds me of those days, those brief couple of weeks when it almost seemed like the attacks had had a bright side, in that they had caused such unprecedented (at least in our collective amnesia) solidarity.
So if we go crashing into financial ruin (and it seems that we will, my friends), if our standard of living gets set back about 80 years, if times are tough, if luxury grows scarce, we will grow stronger as a people, even as our empire weakens to the point of irrelevance. We will start to see things in our character as Americans that will remind us of what it used to mean to be an American, of what is good about this country; not it’s might, not it’s hegemony, but the ability of it’s People to pull together and surmount any obstacle, to get the most out of “hard times”, and to come out the other side wiser, stronger, and better for it. Remember, money isnt’ everything. It isn’t even close. We stand to loose vast sums of it in the coming months, and perhaps we deserve to, and perhaps we need to.
BTW, I am having a hell of a time quitting smoking.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Nicotine Dreams; or, sleeping with a patch on will send you on a roller coaster ride through the very bowels of hell itself.
So I’ve decided to quit smoking cigarettes again. Ive tried this twice before. Once I went 8 days and then bought a pack on the way home from work. The other time, I went three days. The problem both times (I think) has been facing the difficulty of the task; months (if not years) of cravings, irritability, and general discomfort is not an appealing prospect. This time I’ve armed myself with a box of nicotine transdermal patches (the patch) couressy of the Commonwealth of massachusetts.
The patch system works thus: You have four different strengths of patch in the box. An average smoker (pack-a-day plus) starts with level one for X weeks, then weens down to level 2, etc. Smokers like me, who smoke less than 10 per day on average, are instructed to start at level 2, which is a 14MG dosage over 24 hours. I think my biggest difficulty is that I tend to smoke less that FIVE a day, except on weekend nights at parties. So even the 14MG dose is pretty strong for me, especially during the day, when I tend not to smoke at all.
Anyway, the first night was a complete disaster. Despite the warnings of just about everone I know, I followed the instructions on the box and left the patch on overnight. Do not attempt this. EVER. You will be rewarded with the worst, least restfull night of sleep you have ever had. As an extra bonus, your night will be chock full of the most ball-shrivellingly terrifying nightmares you have ever had. Your dreams will be filled with images of such pure, unadulterated evil, that your mind’s ability to withstand them without snapping will force you to question the existence of god, the devil, and your mortal motherfucking soul.
So yeah, try to avoid that.
Then last night, I slipped and smoked three butts. (don’t worry, I took the patch off first). This leads me to believe that my smoking habit has less to do with an addiction to nicotine, and more to do with a compulsive habit. (insert your best “oral fixation” joke here). Luckily, I am not discouraged by this lapse. The literature that came with the patch stresses that you will lapse and smoke, but that you must not give up. Having one (or three) one night doesn’t mean that im not quitting. It just means I fucked up.
So I’ll keep you up to date, my dear Zona, with my progress. Hopefully I can do it this time. I’m tired of butts anyway. As Renton said, “with God’s help, I will conquer this terrible affliction”.
The patch system works thus: You have four different strengths of patch in the box. An average smoker (pack-a-day plus) starts with level one for X weeks, then weens down to level 2, etc. Smokers like me, who smoke less than 10 per day on average, are instructed to start at level 2, which is a 14MG dosage over 24 hours. I think my biggest difficulty is that I tend to smoke less that FIVE a day, except on weekend nights at parties. So even the 14MG dose is pretty strong for me, especially during the day, when I tend not to smoke at all.
Anyway, the first night was a complete disaster. Despite the warnings of just about everone I know, I followed the instructions on the box and left the patch on overnight. Do not attempt this. EVER. You will be rewarded with the worst, least restfull night of sleep you have ever had. As an extra bonus, your night will be chock full of the most ball-shrivellingly terrifying nightmares you have ever had. Your dreams will be filled with images of such pure, unadulterated evil, that your mind’s ability to withstand them without snapping will force you to question the existence of god, the devil, and your mortal motherfucking soul.
So yeah, try to avoid that.
Then last night, I slipped and smoked three butts. (don’t worry, I took the patch off first). This leads me to believe that my smoking habit has less to do with an addiction to nicotine, and more to do with a compulsive habit. (insert your best “oral fixation” joke here). Luckily, I am not discouraged by this lapse. The literature that came with the patch stresses that you will lapse and smoke, but that you must not give up. Having one (or three) one night doesn’t mean that im not quitting. It just means I fucked up.
So I’ll keep you up to date, my dear Zona, with my progress. Hopefully I can do it this time. I’m tired of butts anyway. As Renton said, “with God’s help, I will conquer this terrible affliction”.
Friday, August 8, 2008
Dr. Catlove; or, how i learned to love the bomba and stop worrying
first of all, i'm proud as hell of that title. if you dont get it you are missing out on one of the best movies ever made.
so yesterday, Bomba went missing. for those who havent met him, he is the black one. in the picture on my profile, i mean.
we let him and Doolin outside at about 5am because they wouldnt stop jumping on our heads as we slept. usually, they both come home after a few hours to grab a snack. but by 11:30 i was on my way to work and still no sign of Bomba. this was very worrysome, especialy since it was raining hard all day.
once it got dark and he still wasnt home, i really started to worry. I called animal controll and reported him missing. I posted on craigslist, and i used my office printer to make missing posters. It was at about this time that i realized that i am rediculously in love with my cats.
now, i know men arent supposed to like cats. we are supposed to think of them as efeminite, for some reason. but my cats arent. they are little badasses who tear the heads off of everything in their path. i mean that quite litteraly.
so i was freaking out, to put it mildly. i left work early and biked around my neighborhood for almost an hour looking for him. then i went home and decided i had to try to get some sleep somehow. luskily, Cobb and Weathers had come over to keep Katelyn company. Katelyn was worse than me; a complete wreck. After Mike and Jess left, we had a few beers and tried to stay positive. We were just getting ready to go to bed when we heard a distinctive "mew...mewww" at the front door. and just like that, our boy was back. soaked to the bone, but no worse for the 20 hours of wear.
i realised two things last night. One, Bomba can take care of his shit and i shouldnt worry about him. Two, I really do love those cats. Between them and Katelyn, i have an axis of stability that keeps me ballanced, happy, and sane.
To Bomba and Doolin: may their whiskers never fall out.
so yesterday, Bomba went missing. for those who havent met him, he is the black one. in the picture on my profile, i mean.
we let him and Doolin outside at about 5am because they wouldnt stop jumping on our heads as we slept. usually, they both come home after a few hours to grab a snack. but by 11:30 i was on my way to work and still no sign of Bomba. this was very worrysome, especialy since it was raining hard all day.
once it got dark and he still wasnt home, i really started to worry. I called animal controll and reported him missing. I posted on craigslist, and i used my office printer to make missing posters. It was at about this time that i realized that i am rediculously in love with my cats.
now, i know men arent supposed to like cats. we are supposed to think of them as efeminite, for some reason. but my cats arent. they are little badasses who tear the heads off of everything in their path. i mean that quite litteraly.
so i was freaking out, to put it mildly. i left work early and biked around my neighborhood for almost an hour looking for him. then i went home and decided i had to try to get some sleep somehow. luskily, Cobb and Weathers had come over to keep Katelyn company. Katelyn was worse than me; a complete wreck. After Mike and Jess left, we had a few beers and tried to stay positive. We were just getting ready to go to bed when we heard a distinctive "mew...mewww" at the front door. and just like that, our boy was back. soaked to the bone, but no worse for the 20 hours of wear.
i realised two things last night. One, Bomba can take care of his shit and i shouldnt worry about him. Two, I really do love those cats. Between them and Katelyn, i have an axis of stability that keeps me ballanced, happy, and sane.
To Bomba and Doolin: may their whiskers never fall out.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Holy Fucking Shit, Batman: or, i honestly think Dark Knight is the best movie i've seen since Jaws
so i just got back from my local theater to see Dark Knight. I've been a fan of Batman all my life; even the old serial when i was a kid. Needless to say, the later installments of the franchise that Burton started in '89 didnt sit very well with me, but Batman Begins I liked.
this, though. Jesus. Until now there have only been two sequels that were as good or better than the orriginal film, and those are The Godfather II and Terminator 2: Judgement Day. Until tonight, I thought T2 was the only trully good action movie since French Connection, but this shit makes T2 look like a fucking power rangers movie.
its not that its an excellent action film, which it is. Its not that its a good superhero movie, because its not really a superhero movie at all. And its not Ledger's preformance, although that guy is a fucking scary actor. Was. Sorry.
Anyway, i cant put my finger on it, so i'll have to go and see it again when Giles gets home. Maybe if i watch it in IMAX ill figure out what makes it the best goddamned movie since Star Wars.
this, though. Jesus. Until now there have only been two sequels that were as good or better than the orriginal film, and those are The Godfather II and Terminator 2: Judgement Day. Until tonight, I thought T2 was the only trully good action movie since French Connection, but this shit makes T2 look like a fucking power rangers movie.
its not that its an excellent action film, which it is. Its not that its a good superhero movie, because its not really a superhero movie at all. And its not Ledger's preformance, although that guy is a fucking scary actor. Was. Sorry.
Anyway, i cant put my finger on it, so i'll have to go and see it again when Giles gets home. Maybe if i watch it in IMAX ill figure out what makes it the best goddamned movie since Star Wars.
Saturday, July 12, 2008
OBAMA = McCAIN = BUSH; or: i cant remember why i used to say i would never vote. seems a silly thing to... oh. right.
well folks, i gotta tell you, they nearly got me this time. my guard was down. i actually registered to vote this year. went right to the belly of the beast and gave them all my info, as if they didnt know it. i was gonna vote for Senator Obama, as you may have guessed. Actually, i was going to vote for Ron Paul, but it seems that that ship has sunk.
and thats totaly beside the point.
many of you (both of you) may remember me saying that voting was pointless, waste of time, waste of energy, waste of innocence. I used to say it all the time; that everyone was the same and if they were different, the game was rigged, loaded dice, no point at all. i turned my back on democracy and started wearing an anarcho-syndicalist flag on my chest and writing a blog that two people read and typing out angry, borderline suspicious letters to my congressman (Markey) on a 1956 Hermes Rocket manual typewriter, like some kind of goddamn revolutionary. I even sampled the old school and wrote "THIS MACHINE KILLS FASCISTS" in sharpie on the typewriter case. Jesus.
sometime in the spring, i seem to have had a lapse in judgement. this Obama guy seemed to really have his shit together. not only that; he seemed to know exactly where this country was needing to go, providing we were still playing by the rules. so i was gonna vote for him. i wanst going to encourage anyone to do the same, or get a yard sign or a bumpersticker, because a) those are tacky as fuck, and b) im not a goddamned missionary. But i was intending to cast my vote as a good citizen.
well, the events of this past Wednesday took all that momentary hope and flushed it down the toilet. then, they fished it out of the septic tank, shot it full of holes, raped it in all orifices, soaked it in whiskey and set it to burn on my fucking porch.
On Wednesday, July 9, 2008, Obama turned to the Bush camp. He turned to the Dark Side. and if you think im exaggerating, you'd better check your facts.
OK, lets break this down, in simple terms, and without too much bullshit.
Remember a few years back when the news broke that the department of homeland "security" had been reading our emails, listening to our phone calls, and opening our motherfucking mail?
the bumbling man-child who is our president had to admit that he had authorized this, and that it was illegal, based on a 1978 FISA law and a little thing called the FOURTH GODDAMN AMENDMENT to the COTUS. (from now on, i'll refer to the Constitution of the United Sates as COTUS, cause it's cute.)
now, according to the oaths everyone has to take, at that point king george should have stepped down, and if he didnt his vice president should have forced him to, and if he didnt, then the US Marine Corps should have stepped in and forcibly escorted them out of the capital building and into a prison to await trial on charges of treason and corruption of COTUS.
but we all know that's just make-believe. oaths mean fuck all these days. there is WAY too much money to be had.
instead, several years went by, and the ACLU, among other, decided to sue the telecom corporations for their role in turning over said emails, phone calls, etc. to the government (they've allready got your mail, unless you use UPS or FEDEX exclusively and never go to the post office). Well, bush, or more likely, someone he hired to think for him, realized that if the telecoms went to trial, eventually it was all going to wind up in the laps of the administration, and then they would, if the law was followed, go to fucking federal prison. so, they decided to write up a bill known as HR 6304, the title of which, i shit you not, is
To amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to establish a procedure for authorizing certain acquisitions of foreign intelligence, and for other purposes.
did you catch that last part? yeah. thats the part that says that the law as it stood last Tuesday, including the FOURTH AMENDMENT OF THE COTUS, no longer applies. by the way, if you havent read the fourth amendment (like i told you to, damnit), its the one that promises that the government will never come into your home and take your shit, search your purse, or hold you without probable cause. Yeah, thats all gone now. better find a really good place to hide your weed.
anyway, why did all this change my mind on the whole voting thing? well, i think the voting record speaks for itself. Thats right my friends, Senator Obama voted in favor. He voted "yea". he raised his hand and said that, in essence, the "change" this country needs is the removal of our bill of rights, one step at a time.
So, i knew it, i should have never let them fucking talk me into registering. in fact, i should never listen to these fuckers at all. litteraly everything they say, ever is a fucking lie. i'm never voting for anyone, ever again. I used to tell my self all the time that "anyone who wants to be president is suspect", and i cant believe i forgot that. seriously; why would anyone spend upwards of $50,000,000 to get a four-year job that pays $400,000 a year?
im so angry right now that its retarded, and im angry at myself. for being duped. for forgetting my stance. those fuckers tricked me. i said they allways trick you, and then i let them trick me.
well, thats not going to happen again.
if you are going to vote in November, if you must vote, take a line from one of my favorite movies; Brewster's Millions:
VOTE "NONE OF THE ABOVE".
Thursday, July 10, 2008
evildoers beware! or; how i became a crusader for truth and justice
i've been riding the bike to work for the past few weeks. seemed to make more sense than running a strait-6 that gets 12.5 mpg and getting fatter by the day. Anyway, bicycling is great. one of the things i like about it most is that you get to see things you dont notice driving. and you can stop and interact with situations as they happen.
today in harvard square, a hit-and-run took place right in front of me. In fact, the jerk who caused it nearly hit me and then he sideswiped a red sedan and then just kept on going. Luckily, his license plate was clearly visible since i was like 2 feet away from it. So i followed the sedan into a side street while the driver got out to check the damage, which consinted of pretty much the whole rear bumper being fucked. She was pissed, and when i gave her the dude's plate number, i saw a gleam of anger in her eye so righteous that it would have scared me if it hadnt been fucking awesome.
No need to thank me, ma'am. All in a days work for... THE SHITTY MOUSTACHES BICYCLE CLUB.
today in harvard square, a hit-and-run took place right in front of me. In fact, the jerk who caused it nearly hit me and then he sideswiped a red sedan and then just kept on going. Luckily, his license plate was clearly visible since i was like 2 feet away from it. So i followed the sedan into a side street while the driver got out to check the damage, which consinted of pretty much the whole rear bumper being fucked. She was pissed, and when i gave her the dude's plate number, i saw a gleam of anger in her eye so righteous that it would have scared me if it hadnt been fucking awesome.
No need to thank me, ma'am. All in a days work for... THE SHITTY MOUSTACHES BICYCLE CLUB.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Independence Day
what did you think i would post today?
(Adopted by Congress on July 4, 1776)
The Unanimous Declarationof the Thirteen United States of America
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.
He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.
He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.
He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:
For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing taxes on us without our consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:
For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:
For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:
For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:
For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.
We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.
New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton
Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery
Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott
New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris
New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark
Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross
Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean
Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton
North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn
South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton
Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
Source: The Pennsylvania Packet, July 8, 1776
(Adopted by Congress on July 4, 1776)
The Unanimous Declarationof the Thirteen United States of America
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.
He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.
He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.
He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:
For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing taxes on us without our consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:
For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:
For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:
For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:
For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.
We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.
New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton
Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery
Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott
New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris
New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark
Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross
Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean
Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton
North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn
South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton
Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
Source: The Pennsylvania Packet, July 8, 1776
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
"smell like a sound"; or, how i discovered the fart humor in '80s pop music
it happened this past sunday. Katelyn, my brother Ethan, and I were driving through Hartford on the way to my grandparents' 60th wedding anniversary. Katelyn had put in a mix CD with alot of good, old '80s new-wavey stuff on it. One of the tracks was Duran Duran's Hungry Like the Wolf.
As I drove along, listening to the lyrics, i heard it; one verse that stuck as both irritatingly obtuse and yet, at the same time, almost blindingly simple: "smell like a sound".
My mind seized on this image the way it tends to do with most abstract things. Almost instantly, i saw what it meant, what it HAD to mean.
"Smell like a sound" can only mean one thing: a fart.
think about this. a fart is the only thing that is at once a smell and a sound. You can walk into a room and exclaim that it "smells like a fart in here", and yet at the same time you can say that something "sounds like farts". There is nothing else on earth, at least that i can think of, that fitts these criteria.
And i tried to think of other things, believe me. I thought, you can say something smells like fish, like soap, like ass, like dirt; but you cant say that something sounds like any of those things.
Converseley, you can say that something sounds like thunder, like a scream, like a freight train, like a whisper. But if you name one thing that smells like either of those i'll eat my hat.
and yet, the Fart. a smell like a sound. Jesus.
I didn'd get how it fit in with the rest of the lyrics, which seem to be about sexual conquest, until i remembered that the members of Duran Duran were at least probably bisexuals. Im going to leave it at that for the sake of decency, which is something i do very, very rarely.
that is all.
As I drove along, listening to the lyrics, i heard it; one verse that stuck as both irritatingly obtuse and yet, at the same time, almost blindingly simple: "smell like a sound".
My mind seized on this image the way it tends to do with most abstract things. Almost instantly, i saw what it meant, what it HAD to mean.
"Smell like a sound" can only mean one thing: a fart.
think about this. a fart is the only thing that is at once a smell and a sound. You can walk into a room and exclaim that it "smells like a fart in here", and yet at the same time you can say that something "sounds like farts". There is nothing else on earth, at least that i can think of, that fitts these criteria.
And i tried to think of other things, believe me. I thought, you can say something smells like fish, like soap, like ass, like dirt; but you cant say that something sounds like any of those things.
Converseley, you can say that something sounds like thunder, like a scream, like a freight train, like a whisper. But if you name one thing that smells like either of those i'll eat my hat.
and yet, the Fart. a smell like a sound. Jesus.
I didn'd get how it fit in with the rest of the lyrics, which seem to be about sexual conquest, until i remembered that the members of Duran Duran were at least probably bisexuals. Im going to leave it at that for the sake of decency, which is something i do very, very rarely.
that is all.
Sunday, June 22, 2008
none of you will read this, but you really, really should
i talk allot about the Constitution here. there arent many things that i capitalize of punctuate properly, but that is one of them. i never thought of myself as a patriot until i saw the potential of our nation through the lense of the Constitution, and through the contrast of the war-whore she has become.
if i'm going to keep referencing and quoting it, i'd better at least link to it so as to shore up my credibility.
so here it is, in its entirety.
honestly, though? i wouldnt trust this one. i dont trust the internet at all. go to your library and sit there for a half an hour with a coffee or an ice tea and read the thing. all of it. even the boring parts (which is most of it). you will be amazed at what you are supposed to be entitled to, what you are supposed to be allowed to do, by law, which you aren't.
if you dont know where your library is find it here, at least if you live in the commonwealth of massachusetts.
if i'm going to keep referencing and quoting it, i'd better at least link to it so as to shore up my credibility.
so here it is, in its entirety.
honestly, though? i wouldnt trust this one. i dont trust the internet at all. go to your library and sit there for a half an hour with a coffee or an ice tea and read the thing. all of it. even the boring parts (which is most of it). you will be amazed at what you are supposed to be entitled to, what you are supposed to be allowed to do, by law, which you aren't.
if you dont know where your library is find it here, at least if you live in the commonwealth of massachusetts.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
our bad; or, some people claim that theres a government to blame, but i know its our own damn fault
dark times in los estados perdidos. you've been reading; you know. undeclared (and unsanctioned) martial law in DC. border patrol roadblocks in southern new hampshire (live free or die trying?). and now, the sobering realization that when you boil it down, its our fault. my fault. your fault. oh yes. there is no sense in denying it. because when you turn your back on the meanest kid on the playground, you dont get to complain when your mouth is filled with sand and broken teeth.
you remember back in the 2nd grade when you first heard the phrase "of the people, by the people, and for the people", and you wonder where that went wrong. you think, if the government is of the people, why dont i get a say? i'll tell you. you let it go. you shut the hell up. we all did. so did our parents. it started with cynicism, when people would joke about voting for "the lesser of two evils". it gained strength through fear, and it ripened and began to fester on the vine with legislation that took away the voice you had never heard; your own.
there is a popular bumper sticker that says "take my civil liberties; i wasnt using them anyway". well, shit, people. first off, these things that are now called "civil liberties"? about ten years ago, we called them "our rights". we suposed that they were "god given" and "unalienable". now, they are granted to us ever so condescendingly in packages like free-speech zones, and we forget that this entire country is a free-speech zone, acourding to the First Amendment.
and yes, why the fuck werent we "using them"? why is it that when you start quoting the Constitution, people look at you as if you were babbling on about the end is near, repent now? It isnt enough to say that we werent using them because most of us didnt know about them. they said "shit" on south park, we all remember that, and yeah, wasnt it good to live in a country that had freedom of speech. Oh, by the way, if you need to protest, please do it over here. yes, around the block from where the mayor is speaking. yes, behing this razor wire. oh, the dog? that's just molly. careful, she tends to go for the jugular once she smells tear gas, hippie.
how did i get started on this? oh yeah, it was this quote from my favourite turncoat, senator mccain:
"My friends, I will have an energy policy which will eliminate our dependence on oil from Middle East that will then prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East."
Right there; did you catch that? if you ask me, thats a full-on admission that our current clusterfuck in the Former Republic of Iraq had fuck all to do with WMDs, "Iraqi freedom", "spreading democracy", or even staying the course. it was, and is, about oil. plain and simple.
But Mr. Conklin, you ask, if it was about oil, then why are we paying so much for gas???
Answer: when your boss is the vp of an energy company, and your godamned secretary of state has a motherfucking oil tanker named after her, do you really want "cheap gas"?
bit im off track, as usual. point being, WE FUCKING KNEW IT WAS ABOUT OIL. come on. i mean, a year before the war, Pakistan got the Bomb. we didnt give a fuck. they said they were going to use it on India, friends of ours, and we did nothing. a fe years into the war, the DPRK actually DETONATED A NUCLEAR GODDAMNED MISSLE in the sea of Japan. what did we do? we said it was "provocative". anyone who was paying attention knew that the WMD line was just that, a line.
so heres the problem, and its two-fold.
most of us werent paying attention. because we've got precious little of that shit, because we are so used to 30 second summaries of what is going on. bad fucking news.
so ok, maybe those people are excused. but the rest of us, myself included, the people that pay so much attention that their hair is falling out and their desks are littered with eyelashes, WE FUCKED UP. it was up to us to stop this. it is, or was at the time, a government OF THE PEOPLE.
oh well. we sure screwed the pooch on that one. im gonna go distract myself and pray for forgiveness. my apologies to the dead. on both sides.
you remember back in the 2nd grade when you first heard the phrase "of the people, by the people, and for the people", and you wonder where that went wrong. you think, if the government is of the people, why dont i get a say? i'll tell you. you let it go. you shut the hell up. we all did. so did our parents. it started with cynicism, when people would joke about voting for "the lesser of two evils". it gained strength through fear, and it ripened and began to fester on the vine with legislation that took away the voice you had never heard; your own.
there is a popular bumper sticker that says "take my civil liberties; i wasnt using them anyway". well, shit, people. first off, these things that are now called "civil liberties"? about ten years ago, we called them "our rights". we suposed that they were "god given" and "unalienable". now, they are granted to us ever so condescendingly in packages like free-speech zones, and we forget that this entire country is a free-speech zone, acourding to the First Amendment.
and yes, why the fuck werent we "using them"? why is it that when you start quoting the Constitution, people look at you as if you were babbling on about the end is near, repent now? It isnt enough to say that we werent using them because most of us didnt know about them. they said "shit" on south park, we all remember that, and yeah, wasnt it good to live in a country that had freedom of speech. Oh, by the way, if you need to protest, please do it over here. yes, around the block from where the mayor is speaking. yes, behing this razor wire. oh, the dog? that's just molly. careful, she tends to go for the jugular once she smells tear gas, hippie.
how did i get started on this? oh yeah, it was this quote from my favourite turncoat, senator mccain:
"My friends, I will have an energy policy which will eliminate our dependence on oil from Middle East that will then prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East."
Right there; did you catch that? if you ask me, thats a full-on admission that our current clusterfuck in the Former Republic of Iraq had fuck all to do with WMDs, "Iraqi freedom", "spreading democracy", or even staying the course. it was, and is, about oil. plain and simple.
But Mr. Conklin, you ask, if it was about oil, then why are we paying so much for gas???
Answer: when your boss is the vp of an energy company, and your godamned secretary of state has a motherfucking oil tanker named after her, do you really want "cheap gas"?
bit im off track, as usual. point being, WE FUCKING KNEW IT WAS ABOUT OIL. come on. i mean, a year before the war, Pakistan got the Bomb. we didnt give a fuck. they said they were going to use it on India, friends of ours, and we did nothing. a fe years into the war, the DPRK actually DETONATED A NUCLEAR GODDAMNED MISSLE in the sea of Japan. what did we do? we said it was "provocative". anyone who was paying attention knew that the WMD line was just that, a line.
so heres the problem, and its two-fold.
most of us werent paying attention. because we've got precious little of that shit, because we are so used to 30 second summaries of what is going on. bad fucking news.
so ok, maybe those people are excused. but the rest of us, myself included, the people that pay so much attention that their hair is falling out and their desks are littered with eyelashes, WE FUCKED UP. it was up to us to stop this. it is, or was at the time, a government OF THE PEOPLE.
oh well. we sure screwed the pooch on that one. im gonna go distract myself and pray for forgiveness. my apologies to the dead. on both sides.
Saturday, June 14, 2008
i can has fundamental human right of habeas corpus? kthnxbye.
well, well, well. things didnt go so well today for the people who are running this nation into the ground. remember me raving about the Military Comissions Act of 2006?
you know, when they suspended the Great Writ of Habeas Corpus, eliminating in one fell swoop the fundamental human right of due process prommised not just in the US Constitution (No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. and also The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it. {we can quibble about this, and i'd actually love to, but 9/11 was neither a rebelion nor an invasion}), but perhaps more notably in the motherfucking MAGNA CARTA of 1215? and yeah, thats the motherfucking YEAR 1215.
in case you missed it, that pic at the top is that shit going down. protection, indeed. protection from the oldest recognized human right, that even serfs in medieval england got to have.
anyway, its time to roll out the barrels, because salvation has come from the strangest of places; the Supreme Court of the United States, who yesterday reached a decision in the case of Boumediene vs. Bush.
I suggest you read it. Otherwise, just google that shit and learn all about how your children have been saved from concentration camp-style imprisonment without charge or trial.
im not exaggerating, either.
Thursday, June 5, 2008
1984 comes 24 years late, give or take 7 years
in the latest outrageous, flagrant act of disregard for the Constitution or the Rights of the Citizenry, the washington dc police have announced plans to restrict access to parts of their city. by "restrict access", they aparently mean setting up monitored checkpoints, and ejecting under threat of arrest any person who is not a resident of the area. no, really.
http://www.examiner.com/a-1423820~Lanier_plans_to_seal_off_rough__hoods_in_latest_effort_to_stop_wave_of_violence.html
where have we heard this kind of thing before? police Chief Cathy L. Lanier claims it has been "done in other cities", and therefore she is "not worried about constiturionality". she's right, of course. it has been done in other cities. just, not in the united states. mostly in former soviet bloc countries. in cities like warsaw, stalingrad, belgrade, and of course east berlin. also, in south africa under apartheid. and more recently, good old bagdad. so yeah, thats a safe precedent, right? jesus fucking christ.
now, i understand that there are some pretty fuckin scary parts of dc. and yeah, something should probably be done about that. clearly, if people dont feel safe on the streets, thats not an acceptable state of affairs, and they should do something about it. but this kind of martial-law style tactic is insane, and its fucking terrifying.
if this kind of thing is going on in our nations capitol, then my friends, its the end of the line. there is no more america as we knew it. the land of the free is officially no longer free. and most of us probably never would have heard about how it began in the ghettos of dc.
i saw my first real proof of this trend on memorial day weekend, when i was driving back from the annual camping trip in the white mountain national forest. for some reason, the united states border patrol had set up a blockade / checkpoint on the southbound lane of interstate 93, in between exits 31 and 30. all traffic was forced to stop. american citizens were seized, in the deffinitive sense of the word. some cars were searched, with dogs.
it is this seizure in the definitive sense that absolutely floored me. the border patrol was acting not only out of it's jurisdiction (about 250 miles out), but was acting in direct violation of the fourth amendment to the Constitution (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/).
so i ask you, friends, what is happening here? I want anyone who reads this to think about what this means. nothing is being done about this stuff. its happening all around us, and we dont like to think about it so we shrug it off and go about our business like good citizens.
except that we are not being good citizens. if we were we wouldnt allow this kind of thing. the constitution doesnt stand up for itself. its the responsibility of the citizenry to make sure that it is adhered to. this is done partially through electing people to office whom we trust with it's care, but also through standing up and stopping it's abuse like we would stop the abuse of our own family.
i'll admit, i didnt do that. i hid my knife (which i always bring camping), put gum in my mouth (i had three beers the morning before we left the site), and stopped my car. i felt exactly the same way i did in grammar school when i pretended i didnt notice the bully throwing dirt at me. i felt self loathing and a rage that i could feel looking inside me for a place to hide and fester and eventually explode. i should have said something, asked for an explanation, even though it would surely result in my car being searched and possibly in my arrest, even though i wasnt doing anything illegal.
i dont know whats to be done about it. i need ideas.
any thoughts?
http://www.examiner.com/a-1423820~Lanier_plans_to_seal_off_rough__hoods_in_latest_effort_to_stop_wave_of_violence.html
where have we heard this kind of thing before? police Chief Cathy L. Lanier claims it has been "done in other cities", and therefore she is "not worried about constiturionality". she's right, of course. it has been done in other cities. just, not in the united states. mostly in former soviet bloc countries. in cities like warsaw, stalingrad, belgrade, and of course east berlin. also, in south africa under apartheid. and more recently, good old bagdad. so yeah, thats a safe precedent, right? jesus fucking christ.
now, i understand that there are some pretty fuckin scary parts of dc. and yeah, something should probably be done about that. clearly, if people dont feel safe on the streets, thats not an acceptable state of affairs, and they should do something about it. but this kind of martial-law style tactic is insane, and its fucking terrifying.
if this kind of thing is going on in our nations capitol, then my friends, its the end of the line. there is no more america as we knew it. the land of the free is officially no longer free. and most of us probably never would have heard about how it began in the ghettos of dc.
i saw my first real proof of this trend on memorial day weekend, when i was driving back from the annual camping trip in the white mountain national forest. for some reason, the united states border patrol had set up a blockade / checkpoint on the southbound lane of interstate 93, in between exits 31 and 30. all traffic was forced to stop. american citizens were seized, in the deffinitive sense of the word. some cars were searched, with dogs.
it is this seizure in the definitive sense that absolutely floored me. the border patrol was acting not only out of it's jurisdiction (about 250 miles out), but was acting in direct violation of the fourth amendment to the Constitution (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/).
so i ask you, friends, what is happening here? I want anyone who reads this to think about what this means. nothing is being done about this stuff. its happening all around us, and we dont like to think about it so we shrug it off and go about our business like good citizens.
except that we are not being good citizens. if we were we wouldnt allow this kind of thing. the constitution doesnt stand up for itself. its the responsibility of the citizenry to make sure that it is adhered to. this is done partially through electing people to office whom we trust with it's care, but also through standing up and stopping it's abuse like we would stop the abuse of our own family.
i'll admit, i didnt do that. i hid my knife (which i always bring camping), put gum in my mouth (i had three beers the morning before we left the site), and stopped my car. i felt exactly the same way i did in grammar school when i pretended i didnt notice the bully throwing dirt at me. i felt self loathing and a rage that i could feel looking inside me for a place to hide and fester and eventually explode. i should have said something, asked for an explanation, even though it would surely result in my car being searched and possibly in my arrest, even though i wasnt doing anything illegal.
i dont know whats to be done about it. i need ideas.
any thoughts?
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Monday, May 19, 2008
a statement made by one who should have been in bed hours ago.
so, im thinking that this post will be largely unitellagable, and perhaps just downright stupid.
Im ready for all possible equations.
that being said, i'd preffer not to have to fight.
THAT being said, i've been sharpening my knives of late.
mostly because next weekend is camping.
Ahh, Tripoli. I wish Ben and Mel would join us, but they have theyre reasons not to.
Peace be unto you all, and unto me, and mine.
so long, fuckers.
Im ready for all possible equations.
that being said, i'd preffer not to have to fight.
THAT being said, i've been sharpening my knives of late.
mostly because next weekend is camping.
Ahh, Tripoli. I wish Ben and Mel would join us, but they have theyre reasons not to.
Peace be unto you all, and unto me, and mine.
so long, fuckers.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
dont panic! or, things are nowhere near as bad as you think
i imagine its fairly safe to say that we've all been under more stress than usual lately. what with the high gasoline and food prices, most anyone who would have any reason to read this is probably feeling more than a bit of a lightness in the walet.
on top of that, the country has become like a screaming child that needs our help, but which we cant find for some reason. its like a nightmare. what do we do about it? Our generation, those of us born around the end of the seventies and on, we are going to be properly fucked when it comes time to foot the bill for all the cockswill our forbears have been up to lately. if a war costs FIVE HUNDRED NINETEEN TRILLION DOLLARS (and climbing faster than the cost meter on a gas pump, check it our here: http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home), that money has to come from somewhere. and someday, it has to get paid back. so when do we get to cash in on the social security they take from our paychecks? keep dreaming. which means we dont get to retire. and oh, thats just the one war. theres another one, remember? and probably one more by the time i turn thirty (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2008/05/a_secret_afghanistan_mission_p.html?nav=rss_blog) which will almost definitely be MORE expensive than our current hemmohage.
these things, coupled with whatever stress we already have, and the now-allmost-comfortable stress we have all been under since 2001, can make life seem pretty damned bad.
but hey, DONT PANIC. you cant possible imagine how good you have it.
first of all, gas isnt very expensive. at all. sure, i cringe when i see the $3.70 price tag for a gallon of unleaded. but check this out: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7p8vXpX_93bNF2BuPKYY2fwPVe3gbGYQ32btBRAByAv4q2h864ATKmhioSVtVzjaobQcSnh302kkshLqtrH7Jk2lPkneLY5zk_Z5DbzURLWamE0w7FDVRXSR3ov7B28WFu0Ag8qtneuax/s1600-h/GASOLINECARSCOOp2.jpg.
turns out we spend less, alot less, on gasoline than all of europe. a Fin spends more than $9.00 USD on a gallon of it. So meh, we're not doing so bad.
now, i was going to have a whole comparative section here on how much better life is for us than almost anyone else on earth, but instead i think ill throw some thoughts out that should make you feel ok.
how far do you have to walk from your home to the closest source of clean, drinkable water? if you are reading this, i'm guessing the answer is no distance at all, as you have an endless suply of it available at the twist of a spiggot. and yes, that water is clean, trust me. its probably cleaner than your evian.
how much food do you eat every day? if it is more than "nothing, but i eat about 3 times a week", you are better off than about 80% of the rest of humanity. Haitians these days are eating dirt, literaly (http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2008/01/31/haitians_trick_empty_bellies_with_dirt_cookies/). think about that. dirt.
do you have to worry about a mosquito bite giving you a fatal disease, like malaria? nine hundred million people around the world catch that shit every year. the worst thing ive ever had from a mosquito bite was an irritating itch that lasted two days. my life rules. seriously.
ok, all of that is a bit depressing. lets try another aproach.
think about this for a minute:
when was the last time someone told you they loved you?
if you can remember, you are better off than alot of people. If it was recently, and you said it back and meant it, your life is pretty much fucking awesome. I did it thismorning, and it ruled, and i was glad.
heres another one:
if you were to find yourself without a home suddenly, who would take you in?
if you can name someone within the first ten seconds of thought that you KNOW would take you in, your life is bitchin. You really dont have to worry. I can think of about seven different places i could go. i wouldnt want to, of course; it would be an imposition and a burden, but the people that love me would suffer it for my sake. that means my life is wicked sweet. im serious about this. lots of people get evicted from an apartment and thats it, its the streets for them. think about that.
ok, im done for the night. just thinking about this stuff allot lately. ive got it made. you do to, just think about it.
on top of that, the country has become like a screaming child that needs our help, but which we cant find for some reason. its like a nightmare. what do we do about it? Our generation, those of us born around the end of the seventies and on, we are going to be properly fucked when it comes time to foot the bill for all the cockswill our forbears have been up to lately. if a war costs FIVE HUNDRED NINETEEN TRILLION DOLLARS (and climbing faster than the cost meter on a gas pump, check it our here: http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home), that money has to come from somewhere. and someday, it has to get paid back. so when do we get to cash in on the social security they take from our paychecks? keep dreaming. which means we dont get to retire. and oh, thats just the one war. theres another one, remember? and probably one more by the time i turn thirty (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2008/05/a_secret_afghanistan_mission_p.html?nav=rss_blog) which will almost definitely be MORE expensive than our current hemmohage.
these things, coupled with whatever stress we already have, and the now-allmost-comfortable stress we have all been under since 2001, can make life seem pretty damned bad.
but hey, DONT PANIC. you cant possible imagine how good you have it.
first of all, gas isnt very expensive. at all. sure, i cringe when i see the $3.70 price tag for a gallon of unleaded. but check this out: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7p8vXpX_93bNF2BuPKYY2fwPVe3gbGYQ32btBRAByAv4q2h864ATKmhioSVtVzjaobQcSnh302kkshLqtrH7Jk2lPkneLY5zk_Z5DbzURLWamE0w7FDVRXSR3ov7B28WFu0Ag8qtneuax/s1600-h/GASOLINECARSCOOp2.jpg.
turns out we spend less, alot less, on gasoline than all of europe. a Fin spends more than $9.00 USD on a gallon of it. So meh, we're not doing so bad.
now, i was going to have a whole comparative section here on how much better life is for us than almost anyone else on earth, but instead i think ill throw some thoughts out that should make you feel ok.
how far do you have to walk from your home to the closest source of clean, drinkable water? if you are reading this, i'm guessing the answer is no distance at all, as you have an endless suply of it available at the twist of a spiggot. and yes, that water is clean, trust me. its probably cleaner than your evian.
how much food do you eat every day? if it is more than "nothing, but i eat about 3 times a week", you are better off than about 80% of the rest of humanity. Haitians these days are eating dirt, literaly (http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2008/01/31/haitians_trick_empty_bellies_with_dirt_cookies/). think about that. dirt.
do you have to worry about a mosquito bite giving you a fatal disease, like malaria? nine hundred million people around the world catch that shit every year. the worst thing ive ever had from a mosquito bite was an irritating itch that lasted two days. my life rules. seriously.
ok, all of that is a bit depressing. lets try another aproach.
think about this for a minute:
when was the last time someone told you they loved you?
if you can remember, you are better off than alot of people. If it was recently, and you said it back and meant it, your life is pretty much fucking awesome. I did it thismorning, and it ruled, and i was glad.
heres another one:
if you were to find yourself without a home suddenly, who would take you in?
if you can name someone within the first ten seconds of thought that you KNOW would take you in, your life is bitchin. You really dont have to worry. I can think of about seven different places i could go. i wouldnt want to, of course; it would be an imposition and a burden, but the people that love me would suffer it for my sake. that means my life is wicked sweet. im serious about this. lots of people get evicted from an apartment and thats it, its the streets for them. think about that.
ok, im done for the night. just thinking about this stuff allot lately. ive got it made. you do to, just think about it.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
fare thee well, fare thee well; i loved you more than words can tell.
232:=838=658=XROQDF>23239:6743346ot1lsi">
Cooper D. Conklin, the Greatest Dog who Ever Lived, has died.
Cooper was born in 1995 and sold into servitude at a pet store at the Solomon Pond Mall. There he spent the early months of his life in a small plastic cage, until one day my mother and I happened upon him. He asked us to take him home, promising a lifetime of unconditional love and companionship.
Over the years, Cooper was many things to many people. Confidant, Blanket, and Drinking Buddy. Companion, Patient, and Garbage Disposal. But always, he was my friend. We had a few spats and once he even bit me, and i hit him in the face. But the majority of the time Cooper was what we all should aspire to be; a radiator of love and contentment, no matter what the circumstances.
Goodnight, sweet Coop. Sleep the sleep of the just, know the peace of the bossom of the earth.
Saturday, March 29, 2008
"EARTH HOUR", or; fuck you, goolge, my screen has allways been black
La Zona has been light on the comedy lately, and for that, i apologize. i promise a joke at the end of this post.
so tonight at 8:00, cities across the globe will be turning out their lights for an hour. im going to assume this includes only interior lighting, as the results of switching off traffic and airplane-warning lights would be too hilarious to imagine, and would almost certainly require "yaketty sax" to be broadcast via PA thoughout the city.
but heres my problem with this. one hour. 60 minutes. the lights will be out for 60 minutes. this is going to achieve about as much as "we are the world" did. a bunch of self promoting assholes held hands and sang about how much they loved their fellow man, and then went back to making coke comercials, thus ensuring that their fellow man would continue to work in deplorable conditions in places like colombia, where they woud be murdered by their supervisors when they tried to organize and petition for their rights (no seriously, check this out: http://killercoke.org/crimes.htm)
holy shit did i fall off topic. what im trying to say must be obvious: turning off your lights for an hour does fuck all to mitigate our energy conumption. its like not being a junky for an hour. the building i work in has its lights on 24/7, never shuting ANY of them off, ever. every other building in this fair city is the same. one hor is a bunch of assholes holding hands and singing.
i propose we do it for a week. just shut down the grid for one week. to be gentle, we'll do it on a warm week. let everybody feel what its like to live the way nature intended. then, at the end of that week, turn it back on and see how that feels. i bet you there will be alot of people who really enjoyed the freedom of no power after the first few days.
of course, this could never happen. so we will sing and hold hands and shut the lights off for one hour, and the only good that will come of it is that maybe the floods will happen an hour later than they were going to.
anyway, i promised a joke, and here it is.
q: how come helen keller couldnt drive a car?
a: she was a woman.
so tonight at 8:00, cities across the globe will be turning out their lights for an hour. im going to assume this includes only interior lighting, as the results of switching off traffic and airplane-warning lights would be too hilarious to imagine, and would almost certainly require "yaketty sax" to be broadcast via PA thoughout the city.
but heres my problem with this. one hour. 60 minutes. the lights will be out for 60 minutes. this is going to achieve about as much as "we are the world" did. a bunch of self promoting assholes held hands and sang about how much they loved their fellow man, and then went back to making coke comercials, thus ensuring that their fellow man would continue to work in deplorable conditions in places like colombia, where they woud be murdered by their supervisors when they tried to organize and petition for their rights (no seriously, check this out: http://killercoke.org/crimes.htm)
holy shit did i fall off topic. what im trying to say must be obvious: turning off your lights for an hour does fuck all to mitigate our energy conumption. its like not being a junky for an hour. the building i work in has its lights on 24/7, never shuting ANY of them off, ever. every other building in this fair city is the same. one hor is a bunch of assholes holding hands and singing.
i propose we do it for a week. just shut down the grid for one week. to be gentle, we'll do it on a warm week. let everybody feel what its like to live the way nature intended. then, at the end of that week, turn it back on and see how that feels. i bet you there will be alot of people who really enjoyed the freedom of no power after the first few days.
of course, this could never happen. so we will sing and hold hands and shut the lights off for one hour, and the only good that will come of it is that maybe the floods will happen an hour later than they were going to.
anyway, i promised a joke, and here it is.
q: how come helen keller couldnt drive a car?
a: she was a woman.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
ALL YOUR FEARS ARE LIES. well, this one is, anyway.
from the CFR publication Foreign Affairs --
www.foreignaffairs.org/20...enemy.html
Is There Still a Terrorist Threat?: The Myth of the Omnipresent Enemy
By John Mueller
From Foreign Affairs, September/October 2006
Summary: Despite all the ominous warnings of wily terrorists and imminent attacks, there has been neither a successful strike nor a close call in the United States since 9/11. The reasonable -- but rarely heard -- explanation is that there are no terrorists within the United States, and few have the means or the inclination to strike from abroad.
John Mueller is Professor of Political Science at Ohio State University and the author of "The Remnants of War." He is currently writing a book about reactions to terrorism and other perceived international threats that will be published early next year.
For the past five years, Americans have been regularly regaled with dire predictions of another major al Qaeda attack in the United States. In 2003, a group of 200 senior government officials and business executives, many of them specialists in security and terrorism, pronounced it likely that a terrorist strike more devastating than 9/11 -- possibly involving weapons of mass destruction -- would occur before the end of 2004. In May 2004, Attorney General John Ashcroft warned that al Qaeda could "hit hard" in the next few months and said that 90 percent of the arrangements for an attack on U.S. soil were complete. That fall, Newsweek reported that it was "practically an article of faith among counterterrorism officials" that al Qaeda would strike in the run-up to the November 2004 election. When that "October surprise" failed to materialize, the focus shifted: a taped encyclical from Osama bin Laden, it was said, demonstrated that he was too weak to attack before the election but was marshalling his resources to do so months after it.
On the first page of its founding manifesto, the massively funded Department of Homeland Security intones, "Today's terrorists can strike at any place, at any time, and with virtually any weapon."
But if it is so easy to pull off an attack and if terrorists are so demonically competent, why have they not done it? Why have they not been sniping at people in shopping centers, collapsing tunnels, poisoning the food supply, cutting electrical lines, derailing trains, blowing up oil pipelines, causing massive traffic jams, or exploiting the countless other vulnerabilities that, according to security experts, could so easily be exploited?
One reasonable explanation is that almost no terrorists exist in the United States and few have the means or the inclination to strike from abroad. But this explanation is rarely offered.
HUFFING AND PUFFING
Instead, Americans are told -- often by the same people who had once predicted imminent attacks -- that the absence of international terrorist strikes in the United States is owed to the protective measures so hastily and expensively put in place after 9/11. But there is a problem with this argument. True, there have been no terrorist incidents in the United States in the last five years. But nor were there any in the five years before the 9/11 attacks, at a time when the United States was doing much less to protect itself. It would take only one or two guys with a gun or an explosive to terrorize vast numbers of people, as the sniper attacks around Washington, D.C., demonstrated in 2002. Accordingly, the government's protective measures would have to be nearly perfect to thwart all such plans. Given the monumental imperfection of the government's response to Hurricane Katrina, and the debacle of FBI and National Security Agency programs to upgrade their computers to better coordinate intelligence information, that explanation seems far-fetched. Moreover, Israel still experiences terrorism even with a far more extensive security apparatus.
It may well have become more difficult for terrorists to get into the country, but, as thousands demonstrate each day, it is far from impossible. Immigration procedures have been substantially tightened (at considerable cost), and suspicious U.S. border guards have turned away a few likely bad apples. But visitors and immigrants continue to flood the country. There are over 300 million legal entries by foreigners each year, and illegal crossings number between 1,000 and 4,000 a day -- to say nothing of the generous quantities of forbidden substances that the government has been unable to intercept or even detect despite decades of a strenuous and well-funded "war on drugs." Every year, a number of people from Muslim countries -- perhaps hundreds -- are apprehended among the illegal flow from Mexico, and many more probably make it through. Terrorism does not require a large force. And the 9/11 planners, assuming Middle Eastern males would have problems entering the United States legally after the attack, put into motion plans to rely thereafter on non-Arabs with passports from Europe and Southeast Asia.
If al Qaeda operatives are as determined and inventive as assumed, they should be here by now. If they are not yet here, they must not be trying very hard or must be far less dedicated, diabolical, and competent than the common image would suggest.
Another popular explanation for the fact that there have been no more attacks asserts that the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, although it never managed to snag bin Laden, severely disrupted al Qaeda and its operations. But this claim is similarly unconvincing. The 2004 train bombings in Madrid were carried out by a tiny group of men who had never been to Afghanistan, much less to any of al Qaeda's training camps. They pulled off a coordinated nonsuicidal attack with 13 remote-controlled bombs, ten of which went off on schedule, killing 191 and injuring more than 1,800. The experience with that attack, as well as with the London bombings of 2005, suggests that, as the former U.S. counterterrorism officials Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon have noted, for a terrorist attack to succeed, "all that is necessary are the most portable, least detectable tools of the terrorist trade: ideas."
It is also sometimes suggested that the terrorists are now too busy killing Americans and others in Iraq to devote the time, manpower, or energy necessary to pull off similar deeds in the United States. But terrorists with al Qaeda sympathies or sensibilities have managed to carry out attacks in Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and elsewhere in the past three years; not every single potential bomb thrower has joined the fray in Iraq.
Perhaps, some argue, terrorists are unable to mount attacks in the United States because the Muslim community there, unlike in many countries in Europe, has been well integrated into society. But the same could be said about the United Kingdom, which experienced a significant terrorist attack in 2005. And European countries with less well-integrated Muslim communities, such as Germany, France, and Norway, have yet to experience al Qaeda terrorism. Indeed, if terrorists are smart, they will avoid Muslim communities because that is the lamppost under which policing agencies are most intensely searching for them. The perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks were ordered generally to stay away from mosques and American Muslims. That and the Madrid plot show that tiny terrorist conspiracies hardly need a wider support network to carry out their schemes.
Another common explanation is that al Qaeda is craftily biding its time. But what for? The 9/11 attacks took only about two years to prepare. The carefully coordinated, very destructive, and politically productive terrorist attacks in Madrid in 2004 were conceived, planned from scratch, and then executed all within six months; the bombs were set off less than two months after the conspirators purchased their first supplies of dynamite, paid for with hashish. (Similarly, Timothy McVeigh's attack in Oklahoma City in 1995 took less than a year to plan.) Given the extreme provocation of the invasion of Iraq in 2003, one would think that terrorists might be inclined to shift their timetable into higher gear. And if they are so patient, why do they continually claim that another attack is just around the corner? It was in 2003 that al Qaeda's top leaders promised attacks in Australia, Bahrain, Egypt, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United States, and Yemen. Three years later, some bombs had gone off in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Yemen, and Jordan (as well as in the unlisted Turkey) but not in any other of the explicitly threatened countries. Those attacks were tragic, but their sparseness could be taken as evidence that it is not only American alarmists who are given to extravagant huffing and puffing.
TERRORISTS UNDER THE BED
A fully credible explanation for the fact that the United States has suffered no terrorist attacks since 9/11 is that the threat posed by homegrown or imported terrorists -- like that presented by Japanese Americans during World War II or by American Communists after it -- has been massively exaggerated. Is it possible that the haystack is essentially free of needles?
The FBI embraces a spooky I-think-therefore-they-are line of reasoning when assessing the purported terrorist menace. In 2003, its director, Robert Mueller, proclaimed, "The greatest threat is from al Qaeda cells in the U.S. that we have not yet identified." He rather mysteriously deemed the threat from those unidentified entities to be "increasing in part because of the heightened publicity" surrounding such episodes as the 2002 Washington sniper shootings and the 2001 anthrax attacks (which had nothing to do with al Qaeda). But in 2001, the 9/11 hijackers received no aid from U.S.-based al Qaeda operatives for the simple reason that no such operatives appear to have existed. It is not at all clear that that condition has changed.
Mueller also claimed to know that "al Qaeda maintains the ability and the intent to inflict significant casualties in the U.S. with little warning." If this was true -- if the terrorists had both the ability and the intent in 2003, and if the threat they presented was somehow increasing -- they had remained remarkably quiet by the time the unflappable Mueller repeated his alarmist mantra in 2005: "I remain very concerned about what we are not seeing."
Intelligence estimates in 2002 held that there were as many as 5,000 al Qaeda terrorists and supporters in the United States. However, a secret FBI report in 2005 wistfully noted that although the bureau had managed to arrest a few bad guys here and there after more than three years of intense and well-funded hunting, it had been unable to identify a single true al Qaeda sleeper cell anywhere in the country. Thousands of people in the United States have had their overseas communications monitored under a controversial warrantless surveillance program. Of these, fewer than ten U.S. citizens or residents per year have aroused enough suspicion to impel the agencies spying on them to seek warrants authorizing surveillance of their domestic communications as well; none of this activity, it appears, has led to an indictment on any charge whatever.
In addition to massive eavesdropping and detention programs, every year some 30,000 "national security letters" are issued without judicial review, forcing businesses and other institutions to disclose confidential information about their customers without telling anyone they have done so. That process has generated thousands of leads that, when pursued, have led nowhere. Some 80,000 Arab and Muslim immigrants have been subjected to fingerprinting and registration, another 8,000 have been called in for interviews with the FBI, and over 5,000 foreign nationals have been imprisoned in initiatives designed to prevent terrorism. This activity, notes the Georgetown University law professor David Cole, has not resulted in a single conviction for a terrorist crime. In fact, only a small number of people picked up on terrorism charges -- always to great official fanfare -- have been convicted at all, and almost all of these convictions have been for other infractions, particularly immigration violations. Some of those convicted have clearly been mental cases or simply flaunting jihadist bravado -- rattling on about taking down the Brooklyn Bridge with a blowtorch, blowing up the Sears Tower if only they could get to Chicago, beheading the prime minister of Canada, or flooding lower Manhattan by somehow doing something terrible to one of those tunnels.
APPETITE FOR DESTRUCTION?
One reason al Qaeda and "al Qaeda types" seem not to be trying very hard to repeat 9/11 may be that that dramatic act of destruction itself proved counterproductive by massively heightening concerns about terrorism around the world. No matter how much they might disagree on other issues (most notably on the war in Iraq), there is a compelling incentive for states -- even ones such as Iran, Libya, Sudan, and Syria -- to cooperate in cracking down on al Qaeda, because they know that they could easily be among its victims. The FBI may not have uncovered much of anything within the United States since 9/11, but thousands of apparent terrorists have been rounded, or rolled, up overseas with U.S. aid and encouragement.
Although some Arabs and Muslims took pleasure in the suffering inflicted on 9/11 -- Schadenfreude in German, shamateh in Arabic -- the most common response among jihadists and religious nationalists was a vehement rejection of al Qaeda's strategy and methods. When Soviet troops invaded Afghanistan in 1979, there were calls for jihad everywhere in Arab and Muslim lands, and tens of thousands flocked to the country to fight the invaders. In stark contrast, when the U.S. military invaded in 2001 to topple an Islamist regime, there was, as the political scientist Fawaz Gerges points out, a "deafening silence" from the Muslim world, and only a trickle of jihadists went to fight the Americans. Other jihadists publicly blamed al Qaeda for their post-9/11 problems and held the attacks to be shortsighted and hugely miscalculated.
The post-9/11 willingness of governments around the world to take on international terrorists has been much reinforced and amplified by subsequent, if scattered, terrorist activity outside the United States. Thus, a terrorist bombing in Bali in 2002 galvanized the Indonesian government into action. Extensive arrests and convictions -- including of leaders who had previously enjoyed some degree of local fame and political popularity -- seem to have severely degraded the capacity of the chief jihadist group in Indonesia, Jemaah Islamiyah. After terrorists attacked Saudis in Saudi Arabia in 2003, that country, very much for self-interested reasons, became considerably more serious about dealing with domestic terrorism; it soon clamped down on radical clerics and preachers. Some rather inept terrorist bombings in Casablanca in 2003 inspired a similarly determined crackdown by Moroccan authorities. And the 2005 bombing in Jordan of a wedding at a hotel (an unbelievably stupid target for the terrorists) succeeded mainly in outraging the Jordanians: according to a Pew poll, the percentage of the population expressing a lot of confidence in bin Laden to "do the right thing" dropped from 25 percent to less than one percent after the attack.
THREAT PERCEPTIONS
The results of policing activity overseas suggest that the absence of results in the United States has less to do with terrorists' cleverness or with investigative incompetence than with the possibility that few, if any, terrorists exist in the country. It also suggests that al Qaeda's ubiquity and capacity to do damage may have, as with so many perceived threats, been exaggerated. Just because some terrorists may wish to do great harm does not mean that they are able to.
Gerges argues that mainstream Islamists -- who make up the vast majority of the Islamist political movement -- gave up on the use of force before 9/11, except perhaps against Israel, and that the jihadists still committed to violence constitute a tiny minority. Even this small group primarily focuses on various "infidel" Muslim regimes and considers jihadists who carry out violence against the "far enemy" -- mainly Europe and the United States -- to be irresponsible, reckless adventurers who endanger the survival of the whole movement. In this view, 9/11 was a sign of al Qaeda's desperation, isolation, fragmentation, and decline, not of its strength.
Those attacks demonstrated, of course, that al Qaeda -- or at least 19 of its members -- still possessed some fight. And none of this is to deny that more terrorist attacks on the United States are still possible. Nor is it to suggest that al Qaeda is anything other than a murderous movement. Moreover, after the ill-considered U.S. venture in Iraq is over, freelance jihadists trained there may seek to continue their operations elsewhere -- although they are more likely to focus on places such as Chechnya than on the United States. A unilateral American military attack against Iran could cause that country to retaliate, probably with very wide support within the Muslim world, by aiding anti-American insurgencies in Afghanistan and Iraq and inflicting damage on Israel and on American interests worldwide.
But while keeping such potential dangers in mind, it is worth remembering that the total number of people killed since 9/11 by al Qaeda or al Qaedalike operatives outside of Afghanistan and Iraq is not much higher than the number who drown in bathtubs in the United States in a single year, and that the lifetime chance of an American being killed by international terrorism is about one in 80,000 -- about the same chance of being killed by a comet or a meteor. Even if there were a 9/11-scale attack every three months for the next five years, the likelihood that an individual American would number among the dead would be two hundredths of a percent (or one in 5,000).
Although it remains heretical to say so, the evidence so far suggests that fears of the omnipotent terrorist -- reminiscent of those inspired by images of the 20-foot-tall Japanese after Pearl Harbor or the 20-foot-tall Communists at various points in the Cold War (particularly after Sputnik) -- may have been overblown, the threat presented within the United States by al Qaeda greatly exaggerated. The massive and expensive homeland security apparatus erected since 9/11 may be persecuting some, spying on many, inconveniencing most, and taxing all to defend the United States against an enemy that scarcely exists.
www.foreignaffairs.org/20...enemy.html
Is There Still a Terrorist Threat?: The Myth of the Omnipresent Enemy
By John Mueller
From Foreign Affairs, September/October 2006
Summary: Despite all the ominous warnings of wily terrorists and imminent attacks, there has been neither a successful strike nor a close call in the United States since 9/11. The reasonable -- but rarely heard -- explanation is that there are no terrorists within the United States, and few have the means or the inclination to strike from abroad.
John Mueller is Professor of Political Science at Ohio State University and the author of "The Remnants of War." He is currently writing a book about reactions to terrorism and other perceived international threats that will be published early next year.
For the past five years, Americans have been regularly regaled with dire predictions of another major al Qaeda attack in the United States. In 2003, a group of 200 senior government officials and business executives, many of them specialists in security and terrorism, pronounced it likely that a terrorist strike more devastating than 9/11 -- possibly involving weapons of mass destruction -- would occur before the end of 2004. In May 2004, Attorney General John Ashcroft warned that al Qaeda could "hit hard" in the next few months and said that 90 percent of the arrangements for an attack on U.S. soil were complete. That fall, Newsweek reported that it was "practically an article of faith among counterterrorism officials" that al Qaeda would strike in the run-up to the November 2004 election. When that "October surprise" failed to materialize, the focus shifted: a taped encyclical from Osama bin Laden, it was said, demonstrated that he was too weak to attack before the election but was marshalling his resources to do so months after it.
On the first page of its founding manifesto, the massively funded Department of Homeland Security intones, "Today's terrorists can strike at any place, at any time, and with virtually any weapon."
But if it is so easy to pull off an attack and if terrorists are so demonically competent, why have they not done it? Why have they not been sniping at people in shopping centers, collapsing tunnels, poisoning the food supply, cutting electrical lines, derailing trains, blowing up oil pipelines, causing massive traffic jams, or exploiting the countless other vulnerabilities that, according to security experts, could so easily be exploited?
One reasonable explanation is that almost no terrorists exist in the United States and few have the means or the inclination to strike from abroad. But this explanation is rarely offered.
HUFFING AND PUFFING
Instead, Americans are told -- often by the same people who had once predicted imminent attacks -- that the absence of international terrorist strikes in the United States is owed to the protective measures so hastily and expensively put in place after 9/11. But there is a problem with this argument. True, there have been no terrorist incidents in the United States in the last five years. But nor were there any in the five years before the 9/11 attacks, at a time when the United States was doing much less to protect itself. It would take only one or two guys with a gun or an explosive to terrorize vast numbers of people, as the sniper attacks around Washington, D.C., demonstrated in 2002. Accordingly, the government's protective measures would have to be nearly perfect to thwart all such plans. Given the monumental imperfection of the government's response to Hurricane Katrina, and the debacle of FBI and National Security Agency programs to upgrade their computers to better coordinate intelligence information, that explanation seems far-fetched. Moreover, Israel still experiences terrorism even with a far more extensive security apparatus.
It may well have become more difficult for terrorists to get into the country, but, as thousands demonstrate each day, it is far from impossible. Immigration procedures have been substantially tightened (at considerable cost), and suspicious U.S. border guards have turned away a few likely bad apples. But visitors and immigrants continue to flood the country. There are over 300 million legal entries by foreigners each year, and illegal crossings number between 1,000 and 4,000 a day -- to say nothing of the generous quantities of forbidden substances that the government has been unable to intercept or even detect despite decades of a strenuous and well-funded "war on drugs." Every year, a number of people from Muslim countries -- perhaps hundreds -- are apprehended among the illegal flow from Mexico, and many more probably make it through. Terrorism does not require a large force. And the 9/11 planners, assuming Middle Eastern males would have problems entering the United States legally after the attack, put into motion plans to rely thereafter on non-Arabs with passports from Europe and Southeast Asia.
If al Qaeda operatives are as determined and inventive as assumed, they should be here by now. If they are not yet here, they must not be trying very hard or must be far less dedicated, diabolical, and competent than the common image would suggest.
Another popular explanation for the fact that there have been no more attacks asserts that the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, although it never managed to snag bin Laden, severely disrupted al Qaeda and its operations. But this claim is similarly unconvincing. The 2004 train bombings in Madrid were carried out by a tiny group of men who had never been to Afghanistan, much less to any of al Qaeda's training camps. They pulled off a coordinated nonsuicidal attack with 13 remote-controlled bombs, ten of which went off on schedule, killing 191 and injuring more than 1,800. The experience with that attack, as well as with the London bombings of 2005, suggests that, as the former U.S. counterterrorism officials Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon have noted, for a terrorist attack to succeed, "all that is necessary are the most portable, least detectable tools of the terrorist trade: ideas."
It is also sometimes suggested that the terrorists are now too busy killing Americans and others in Iraq to devote the time, manpower, or energy necessary to pull off similar deeds in the United States. But terrorists with al Qaeda sympathies or sensibilities have managed to carry out attacks in Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and elsewhere in the past three years; not every single potential bomb thrower has joined the fray in Iraq.
Perhaps, some argue, terrorists are unable to mount attacks in the United States because the Muslim community there, unlike in many countries in Europe, has been well integrated into society. But the same could be said about the United Kingdom, which experienced a significant terrorist attack in 2005. And European countries with less well-integrated Muslim communities, such as Germany, France, and Norway, have yet to experience al Qaeda terrorism. Indeed, if terrorists are smart, they will avoid Muslim communities because that is the lamppost under which policing agencies are most intensely searching for them. The perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks were ordered generally to stay away from mosques and American Muslims. That and the Madrid plot show that tiny terrorist conspiracies hardly need a wider support network to carry out their schemes.
Another common explanation is that al Qaeda is craftily biding its time. But what for? The 9/11 attacks took only about two years to prepare. The carefully coordinated, very destructive, and politically productive terrorist attacks in Madrid in 2004 were conceived, planned from scratch, and then executed all within six months; the bombs were set off less than two months after the conspirators purchased their first supplies of dynamite, paid for with hashish. (Similarly, Timothy McVeigh's attack in Oklahoma City in 1995 took less than a year to plan.) Given the extreme provocation of the invasion of Iraq in 2003, one would think that terrorists might be inclined to shift their timetable into higher gear. And if they are so patient, why do they continually claim that another attack is just around the corner? It was in 2003 that al Qaeda's top leaders promised attacks in Australia, Bahrain, Egypt, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United States, and Yemen. Three years later, some bombs had gone off in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Yemen, and Jordan (as well as in the unlisted Turkey) but not in any other of the explicitly threatened countries. Those attacks were tragic, but their sparseness could be taken as evidence that it is not only American alarmists who are given to extravagant huffing and puffing.
TERRORISTS UNDER THE BED
A fully credible explanation for the fact that the United States has suffered no terrorist attacks since 9/11 is that the threat posed by homegrown or imported terrorists -- like that presented by Japanese Americans during World War II or by American Communists after it -- has been massively exaggerated. Is it possible that the haystack is essentially free of needles?
The FBI embraces a spooky I-think-therefore-they-are line of reasoning when assessing the purported terrorist menace. In 2003, its director, Robert Mueller, proclaimed, "The greatest threat is from al Qaeda cells in the U.S. that we have not yet identified." He rather mysteriously deemed the threat from those unidentified entities to be "increasing in part because of the heightened publicity" surrounding such episodes as the 2002 Washington sniper shootings and the 2001 anthrax attacks (which had nothing to do with al Qaeda). But in 2001, the 9/11 hijackers received no aid from U.S.-based al Qaeda operatives for the simple reason that no such operatives appear to have existed. It is not at all clear that that condition has changed.
Mueller also claimed to know that "al Qaeda maintains the ability and the intent to inflict significant casualties in the U.S. with little warning." If this was true -- if the terrorists had both the ability and the intent in 2003, and if the threat they presented was somehow increasing -- they had remained remarkably quiet by the time the unflappable Mueller repeated his alarmist mantra in 2005: "I remain very concerned about what we are not seeing."
Intelligence estimates in 2002 held that there were as many as 5,000 al Qaeda terrorists and supporters in the United States. However, a secret FBI report in 2005 wistfully noted that although the bureau had managed to arrest a few bad guys here and there after more than three years of intense and well-funded hunting, it had been unable to identify a single true al Qaeda sleeper cell anywhere in the country. Thousands of people in the United States have had their overseas communications monitored under a controversial warrantless surveillance program. Of these, fewer than ten U.S. citizens or residents per year have aroused enough suspicion to impel the agencies spying on them to seek warrants authorizing surveillance of their domestic communications as well; none of this activity, it appears, has led to an indictment on any charge whatever.
In addition to massive eavesdropping and detention programs, every year some 30,000 "national security letters" are issued without judicial review, forcing businesses and other institutions to disclose confidential information about their customers without telling anyone they have done so. That process has generated thousands of leads that, when pursued, have led nowhere. Some 80,000 Arab and Muslim immigrants have been subjected to fingerprinting and registration, another 8,000 have been called in for interviews with the FBI, and over 5,000 foreign nationals have been imprisoned in initiatives designed to prevent terrorism. This activity, notes the Georgetown University law professor David Cole, has not resulted in a single conviction for a terrorist crime. In fact, only a small number of people picked up on terrorism charges -- always to great official fanfare -- have been convicted at all, and almost all of these convictions have been for other infractions, particularly immigration violations. Some of those convicted have clearly been mental cases or simply flaunting jihadist bravado -- rattling on about taking down the Brooklyn Bridge with a blowtorch, blowing up the Sears Tower if only they could get to Chicago, beheading the prime minister of Canada, or flooding lower Manhattan by somehow doing something terrible to one of those tunnels.
APPETITE FOR DESTRUCTION?
One reason al Qaeda and "al Qaeda types" seem not to be trying very hard to repeat 9/11 may be that that dramatic act of destruction itself proved counterproductive by massively heightening concerns about terrorism around the world. No matter how much they might disagree on other issues (most notably on the war in Iraq), there is a compelling incentive for states -- even ones such as Iran, Libya, Sudan, and Syria -- to cooperate in cracking down on al Qaeda, because they know that they could easily be among its victims. The FBI may not have uncovered much of anything within the United States since 9/11, but thousands of apparent terrorists have been rounded, or rolled, up overseas with U.S. aid and encouragement.
Although some Arabs and Muslims took pleasure in the suffering inflicted on 9/11 -- Schadenfreude in German, shamateh in Arabic -- the most common response among jihadists and religious nationalists was a vehement rejection of al Qaeda's strategy and methods. When Soviet troops invaded Afghanistan in 1979, there were calls for jihad everywhere in Arab and Muslim lands, and tens of thousands flocked to the country to fight the invaders. In stark contrast, when the U.S. military invaded in 2001 to topple an Islamist regime, there was, as the political scientist Fawaz Gerges points out, a "deafening silence" from the Muslim world, and only a trickle of jihadists went to fight the Americans. Other jihadists publicly blamed al Qaeda for their post-9/11 problems and held the attacks to be shortsighted and hugely miscalculated.
The post-9/11 willingness of governments around the world to take on international terrorists has been much reinforced and amplified by subsequent, if scattered, terrorist activity outside the United States. Thus, a terrorist bombing in Bali in 2002 galvanized the Indonesian government into action. Extensive arrests and convictions -- including of leaders who had previously enjoyed some degree of local fame and political popularity -- seem to have severely degraded the capacity of the chief jihadist group in Indonesia, Jemaah Islamiyah. After terrorists attacked Saudis in Saudi Arabia in 2003, that country, very much for self-interested reasons, became considerably more serious about dealing with domestic terrorism; it soon clamped down on radical clerics and preachers. Some rather inept terrorist bombings in Casablanca in 2003 inspired a similarly determined crackdown by Moroccan authorities. And the 2005 bombing in Jordan of a wedding at a hotel (an unbelievably stupid target for the terrorists) succeeded mainly in outraging the Jordanians: according to a Pew poll, the percentage of the population expressing a lot of confidence in bin Laden to "do the right thing" dropped from 25 percent to less than one percent after the attack.
THREAT PERCEPTIONS
The results of policing activity overseas suggest that the absence of results in the United States has less to do with terrorists' cleverness or with investigative incompetence than with the possibility that few, if any, terrorists exist in the country. It also suggests that al Qaeda's ubiquity and capacity to do damage may have, as with so many perceived threats, been exaggerated. Just because some terrorists may wish to do great harm does not mean that they are able to.
Gerges argues that mainstream Islamists -- who make up the vast majority of the Islamist political movement -- gave up on the use of force before 9/11, except perhaps against Israel, and that the jihadists still committed to violence constitute a tiny minority. Even this small group primarily focuses on various "infidel" Muslim regimes and considers jihadists who carry out violence against the "far enemy" -- mainly Europe and the United States -- to be irresponsible, reckless adventurers who endanger the survival of the whole movement. In this view, 9/11 was a sign of al Qaeda's desperation, isolation, fragmentation, and decline, not of its strength.
Those attacks demonstrated, of course, that al Qaeda -- or at least 19 of its members -- still possessed some fight. And none of this is to deny that more terrorist attacks on the United States are still possible. Nor is it to suggest that al Qaeda is anything other than a murderous movement. Moreover, after the ill-considered U.S. venture in Iraq is over, freelance jihadists trained there may seek to continue their operations elsewhere -- although they are more likely to focus on places such as Chechnya than on the United States. A unilateral American military attack against Iran could cause that country to retaliate, probably with very wide support within the Muslim world, by aiding anti-American insurgencies in Afghanistan and Iraq and inflicting damage on Israel and on American interests worldwide.
But while keeping such potential dangers in mind, it is worth remembering that the total number of people killed since 9/11 by al Qaeda or al Qaedalike operatives outside of Afghanistan and Iraq is not much higher than the number who drown in bathtubs in the United States in a single year, and that the lifetime chance of an American being killed by international terrorism is about one in 80,000 -- about the same chance of being killed by a comet or a meteor. Even if there were a 9/11-scale attack every three months for the next five years, the likelihood that an individual American would number among the dead would be two hundredths of a percent (or one in 5,000).
Although it remains heretical to say so, the evidence so far suggests that fears of the omnipotent terrorist -- reminiscent of those inspired by images of the 20-foot-tall Japanese after Pearl Harbor or the 20-foot-tall Communists at various points in the Cold War (particularly after Sputnik) -- may have been overblown, the threat presented within the United States by al Qaeda greatly exaggerated. The massive and expensive homeland security apparatus erected since 9/11 may be persecuting some, spying on many, inconveniencing most, and taxing all to defend the United States against an enemy that scarcely exists.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Andrew Caless
and god shall wipe away all the tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
revelation 21:4
for i reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy of comparisson with the glory which shall be revealed in us.
romans 8:18
My best friend since childhood lost his father last night. The circumstances are not of relevance here. I know that very few people will read this, and i'm not sure what i can say about it. my usual faculty for eloquence is just a mask, of course, and in the face of death im as mute as everyone else. I might be able to write about this later, when ive sorted it out in my own head. i might not. maybe i shouldnt try, maybe its not for me to do. in the meantime, my thoughts are with ben and abby and emily and jenny and everyone else that loved Andrew and learned from him.
revelation 21:4
for i reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy of comparisson with the glory which shall be revealed in us.
romans 8:18
My best friend since childhood lost his father last night. The circumstances are not of relevance here. I know that very few people will read this, and i'm not sure what i can say about it. my usual faculty for eloquence is just a mask, of course, and in the face of death im as mute as everyone else. I might be able to write about this later, when ive sorted it out in my own head. i might not. maybe i shouldnt try, maybe its not for me to do. in the meantime, my thoughts are with ben and abby and emily and jenny and everyone else that loved Andrew and learned from him.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Sixth Declaration of the Lacondon Jungle
(im reposting this from it's home at http://www.ezln.org/documentos/2005/sexta1.en.htm, mainly because its hard to find in english and everyone shoudl read it. if anyone associated with EZLN has a problwm with it's presence here, please ask and it will be taken down. -s)
ZAPATISTA ARMY OF NATIONAL LIBERATION.MEXICO.
Sixth Declaration of the Selva Lacandona
This is our simple word which seeks to touch the hearts of humble and simple people like ourselves, but people who are also, like ourselves, dignified and rebel. This is our simple word for recounting what our path has been and where we are now, in order to explain how we see the world and our country, in order to say what we are thinking of doing and how we are thinking of doing it, and in order to invite other persons to walk with us in something very great which is called Mexico and something greater which is called the world. This is our simple word in order to inform all honest and noble hearts what it is we want in Mexico and the world. This is our simple word, because it is our idea to call on those who are like us and to join together with them, everywhere they are living and struggling.
I - What We Are
We are the zapatistas of the EZLN, although we are also called "neo-zapatistas." Now, we, the zapatistas of the EZLN, rose up in arms in January of 1994 because we saw how widespread had become the evil wrought by the powerful who only humiliated us, stole from us, imprisoned us and killed us, and no one was saying anything or doing anything. That is why we said "Ya Basta!," that no longer were we going to allow them to make us inferior or to treat us worse than animals. And then we also said we wanted democracy, liberty and justice for all Mexicans although we were concentrated on the Indian peoples. Because it so happened that we, the EZLN, were almost all only indigenous from here in Chiapas, but we did not want to struggle just for own good, or just for the good of the indigenous of Chiapas, or just for the good of the Indian peoples of Mexico. We wanted to fight along with everyone who was humble and simple like ourselves and who was in great need and who suffered from exploitation and thievery by the rich and their bad governments here, in our Mexico, and in other countries in the world.
And then our small history was that we grew tired of exploitation by the powerful, and then we organized in order to defend ourselves and to fight for justice. In the beginning there were not many of us, just a few, going this way and that, talking with and listening to other people like us. We did that for many years, and we did it in secret, without making a stir. In other words, we joined forces in silence. We remained like that for about 10 years, and then we had grown, and then we were many thousands. We trained ourselves quite well in politics and weapons, and, suddenly, when the rich were throwing their New Year's Eve parties, we fell upon their cities and just took them over. And we left a message to everyone that here we are, that they have to take notice of us. And then the rich took off and sent their great armies to do away with us, just like they always do when the exploited rebel - they order them all to be done away with. But we were not done away with at all, because we had prepared ourselves quite well prior to the war, and we made ourselves strong in our mountains. And there were the armies, looking for us and throwing their bombs and bullets at us, and then they were making plans to kill off all the indigenous at one time, because they did not know who was a zapatista and who was not. And we were running and fighting, fighting and running, just like our ancestors had done. Without giving up, without surrendering, without being defeated.
And then the people from the cities went out into the streets and began shouting for an end to the war. And then we stopped our war, and we listened to those brothers and sisters from the city who were telling us to try to reach an arrangement or an accord with the bad governments, so that the problem could be resolved without a massacre. And so we paid attention to them, because they were what we call "the people," or the Mexican people. And so we set aside the fire and took up the word.
And it so happened that the governments said they would indeed be well-behaved, and they would engage in dialogue, and they would make accords, and they would fulfill them. And we said that was good, but we also thought it was good that we knew those people who went out into the streets in order to stop the war. Then, while we were engaging in dialogue with the bad governments, we were also talking with those persons, and we saw that most of them were humble and simple people like us, and both, they and we, understood quite well why we were fighting. And we called those people "civil society" because most of them did not belong to political parties, rather they were common, everyday people, like us, simple and humble people.
But it so happened that the bad governments did not want a good agreement, rather it was just their underhanded way of saying they were going to talk and to reach accords, while they were preparing their attacks in order to eliminate us once and for all. And so then they attacked us several times, but they did not defeat us, because we resisted quite well, and many people throughout the world mobilized. And then the bad governments thought that the problem was that many people saw what was happening with the EZLN, and they started their plan of acting as if nothing were going on. Meanwhile they were quick to surround us, they laid siege to us in hopes that, since our mountains are indeed remote, the people would then forget, since zapatista lands were so far away. And every so often the bad governments tested us and tried to deceive us or to attack us, like in February of 1995 when they threw a huge number of armies at us, but they did not defeat us. Because, as they said then, we were not alone, and many people helped us, and we resisted well.
And then the bad governments had to make accords with the EZLN, and those accords were called the "San Andrés Accords" because the municipality where those accords were signed was called "San Andrés." And we were not all alone in those dialogues, speaking with people from the bad governments. We invited many people and organizations who were, or are, engaged in the struggle for the Indian peoples of Mexico, and everyone spoke their word, and everyone reached agreement as to how we were going to speak with the bad governments. And that is how that dialogue was, not just the zapatistas on one side and the governments on the other. Instead, the Indian peoples of Mexico, and those who supported them, were with the zapatistas. And then the bad governments said in those accords that they were indeed going to recognize the rights of the Indian peoples of Mexico, and they were going to respect their culture, and they were going to make everything law in the Constitution. But then, once they had signed, the bad governments acted as if they had forgotten about them, and many years passed, and the accords were not fulfilled at all. Quite the opposite, the government attacked the indigenous, in order to make them back out of the struggle, as they did on December 22, 1997, the date on which Zedillo ordered the killing of 45 men, women, old ones and children in the town in Chiapas called ACTEAL. This immense crime was not so easily forgotten, and it was a demonstration of how the bad governments color their hearts in order to attack and assassinate those who rebel against injustices. And, while all of that was going on, we zapatistas were putting our all into the fulfillment of the accords and resisting in the mountains of the Mexican southeast.
And then we began speaking with other Indian peoples of Mexico and their organizations, and we made an agreement with them that we were going to struggle together for the same thing, for the recognition of indigenous rights and culture. Now we were also being helped by many people from all over the world and by persons who were well respected and whose word was quite great because they were great intellectuals, artists and scientists from Mexico and from all over the world. And we also held international encuentros. In other words, we joined together to talk with persons from America and from Asia and from Europe and from Africa and from Oceania, and we learned of their struggles and their ways, and we said they were "intergalactic" encuentros, just to be silly and because we had also invited those from other planets, but it appeared as if they had not come, or perhaps they did come, but they did not make it clear.
But the bad governments did not keep their word anyway, and then we made a plan to talk with many Mexicans so they would help us. And then, first in 1997, we held a march to Mexico City which was called "of the 1,111" because a compañero or compañera was going to go from each zapatista town, but the bad government did not pay any attention. And then, in 1999, we held a consulta throughout the country, and there it was seen that the majority were indeed in agreement with the demands of the Indian peoples, but again the bad governments did not pay any attention. And then, lastly, in 2001, we held what was called the "march for indigenous dignity" which had much support from millions of Mexicans and people from other countries, and it went to where the deputies and senators were, the Congress of the Union, in order to demand the recognition of the Mexican indigenous.
But it happened that no, the politicians from the PRI, the PAN and the PRD reached an agreement among themselves, and they simply did not recognize indigenous rights and culture. That was in April of 2001, and the politicians demonstrated quite clearly there that they had no decency whatsoever, and they were swine who thought only about making their good money as the bad politicians they were. This must be remembered, because you will now be seeing that they are going to say they will indeed recognize indigenous rights, but it is a lie they are telling so we will vote for them. But they already had their chance, and they did not keep their word.
And then we saw quite clearly that there was no point to dialogue and negotiation with the bad governments of Mexico. That it was a waste of time for us to be talking with the politicians, because neither their hearts nor their words were honest. They were crooked, and they told lies that they would keep their word, but they did not. In other words, on that day, when the politicians from the PRI, PAN and PRD approved a law that was no good, they killed dialogue once and for all, and they clearly stated that it did not matter what they had agreed to and signed, because they did not keep their word. And then we did not make any contacts with the federal branches. Because we understood that dialogue and negotiation had failed as a result of those political parties. We saw that blood did not matter to them, nor did death, suffering, mobilizations, consultas, efforts, national and international statements, encuentros, accords, signatures, commitments. And so the political class not only closed, one more time, the door to the Indian peoples, they also delivered a mortal blow to the peaceful resolution - through dialogue and negotiation - of the war. It can also no longer be believed that the accords will be fulfilled by someone who comes along with something or other. They should see that there so that they can learn from experience what happened to us.
And then we saw all of that, and we wondered in our hearts what we were going to do.
And the first thing we saw was that our heart was not the same as before, when we began our struggle. It was larger, because now we had touched the hearts of many good people. And we also saw that our heart was more hurt, it was more wounded. And it was not wounded by the deceits of the bad governments, but because, when we touched the hearts of others, we also touched their sorrows. It was as if we were seeing ourselves in a mirror.
II. - Where We Are Now
Then, like the zapatistas we are, we thought that it was not enough to stop engaging in dialogue with the government, but it was necessary to continue on ahead in the struggle, in spite of those lazy parasites of politicians. The EZLN then decided to carry out, alone and on their side ("unilateral", in other words, because just one side), the San Andrés Accords regarding indigenous rights and culture. For 4 years, since the middle of 2001 until the middle of 2005, we have devoted ourselves to this and to other things which we are going to tell you about.
Fine, we then began encouraging the autonomous rebel zapatista municipalities - which is how the peoples are organized in order to govern and to govern themselves - in order to make themselves stronger. This method of autonomous government was not simply invented by the EZLN, but rather it comes from several centuries of indigenous resistance and from the zapatistas' own experience. It is the self-governance of the communities. In other words, no one from outside comes to govern, but the peoples themselves decide, among themselves, who governs and how, and, if they do not obey, they are removed. If the one who governs does not obey the people, they pursue them, they are removed from authority, and another comes in.
But then we saw that the Autonomous Municipalities were not level. There were some that were more advanced and which had more support from civil society, and others were more neglected. The organization was lacking to make them more on a par with each other. And we also saw that the EZLN, with its political-military component, was involving itself in decisions which belonged to the democratic authorities, "civilians" as they say. And here the problem is that the political-military component of the EZLN is not democratic, because it is an army. And we saw that the military being above, and the democratic below, was not good, because what is democratic should not be decided militarily, it should be the reverse: the democratic-political governing above, and the military obeying below. Or, perhaps, it would be better with nothing below, just completely level, without any military, and that is why the zapatistas are soldiers so that there will not be any soldiers. Fine, what we then did about this problem was to begin separating the political-military from the autonomous and democratic aspects of organization in the zapatista communities. And so, actions and decisions which had previously been made and taken by the EZLN were being passed, little by little, to the democratically elected authorities in the villages. It is easy to say, of course, but it was very difficult in practice, because many years have passed - first in the preparation for the war and then the war itself - and the political-military aspects have become customary. But, regardless, we did so because it is our way to do what we say, because, if not, why should we go around saying things if we do not then do them.
That was how the Good Government Juntas were born, in August of 2003, and, through them, self-learning and the exercise of "govern obeying" has continued.
From that time and until the middle of 2005, the EZLN leadership has no longer involved itself in giving orders in civil matters, but it has accompanied and helped the authorities who are democratically elected by the peoples. It has also kept watch that the peoples and national and international civil society are kept well informed concerning the aid that is received and how it is used. And now we are passing the work of safeguarding good government to the zapatista support bases, with temporary positions which are rotated, so that everyone learns and carries out this work. Because we believe that a people which does not watch over its leaders is condemned to be enslaved, and we fought to be free, not to change masters every six years.
The EZLN, during these 4 years, also handed over to the Good Government Juntas and the Autonomous Municipalities the aid and contacts which they had attained throughout Mexico and the world during these years of war and resistance. The EZLN had also, during that time, been building economic and political support which allowed the zapatista communities to make progress with fewer difficulties in the building of their autonomy and in improving their living conditions. It is not much, but it is far better than what they had prior to the beginning of the uprising in January of 1994. If you look at one of those studies the governments make, you will see that the only indigenous communities which have improved their living conditions - whether in health, education, food or housing - were those which are in zapatista territory, which is what we call where our villages are. And all of that has been possible because of the progress made by the zapatista villages and because of the very large support which has been received from good and noble persons, whom we call "civil societies," and from their organizations throughout the world. As if all of these people have made "another world is possible" a reality, but through actions, not just words.
And the villages have made good progress. Now there are more compañeros and compañeras who are learning to govern. And - even though little by little - there are more women going into this work, but there is still a lack of respect for the compañeras, and they need to participate more in the work of the struggle. And, also through the Good Government Juntas, coordination has been improved between the Autonomous Municipalities and the resolution of problems with other organizations and with the official authorities. There has also been much improvement in the projects in the communities, and the distribution of projects and aid given by civil society from all over the world has become more level. Health and education have improved, although there is still a good deal lacking for it to be what it should be. The same is true for housing and food, and in some areas there has been much improvement with the problem of land, because the lands recovered from the finqueros are being distributed. But there are areas which continue to suffer from a lack of lands to cultivate. And there has been great improvement in the support from national and international civil society, because previously everyone went wherever they wanted, and now the Good Government Juntas are directing them to where the greatest need exists. And, similarly, everywhere there are more compañeros and compañeras who are learning to relate to persons from other parts of Mexico and of the world,. They are learning to respect and to demand respect. They are learning that there are many worlds, and that everyone has their place, their time and their way, and therefore there must be mutual respect between everyone.
We, the zapatistas of the EZLN, have devoted this time to our primary force, to the peoples who support us. And the situation has indeed improved some. No one can say that the zapatista organization and struggle has been without point, but rather, even if they were to do away with us completely, our struggle has indeed been of some use.
But it is not just the zapatista villages which have grown - the EZLN has also grown. Because what has happened during this time is that new generations have renewed our entire organization. They have added new strength. The comandantes and comandantas who were in their maturity at the beginning of the uprising in 1994 now have the wisdom they gained in the war and in the 12 years of dialogue with thousands of men and women from throughout the world. The members of the CCRI, the zapatista political-organizational leadership, is now counseling and directing the new ones who are entering our struggle, as well as those who are holding leadership positions. For some time now the "committees" (which is what we call them) have been preparing an entire new generation of comandantes and comandantas who, following a period of instruction and testing, are beginning to learn the work of organizational leadership and to discharge their duties. And it also so happens that our insurgents, insurgentas, militants, local and regional responsables, as well as support bases, who were youngsters at the beginning of the uprising, are now mature men and women, combat veterans and natural leaders in their units and communities. And those who were children in that January of '94 are now young people who have grown up in the resistance, and they have been trained in the rebel dignity lifted up by their elders throughout these 12 years of war. These young people have a political, technical and cultural training that we who began the zapatista movement did not have. This youth is now, more and more, sustaining our troops as well as leadership positions in the organization. And, indeed, all of us have seen the deceits by the Mexican political class and the destruction which their actions have caused in our patria. And we have seen the great injustices and massacres that neoliberal globalization causes throughout the world. But we will speak to you of that later.
And so the EZLN has resisted 12 years of war, of military, political, ideological and economic attacks, of siege, of harassment, of persecution, and they have not vanquished us. We have not sold out nor surrendered, and we have made progress. More compañeros from many places have entered into the struggle so that, instead of making us weaker after so many years, we have become stronger. Of course there are problems which can be resolved by more separation of the political-military from the civil-democratic. But there are things, the most important ones, such as our demands for which we struggle, which have not been fully achieved.
To our way of thinking, and what we see in our heart, we have reached a point where we cannot go any further, and, in addition, it is possible that we could lose everything we have if we remain as we are and do nothing more in order to move forward. The hour has come to take a risk once again and to take a step which is dangerous but which is worthwhile. Because, perhaps united with other social sectors who suffer from the same wants as we do, it will be possible to achieve what we need and what we deserve. A new step forward in the indigenous struggle is only possible if the indigenous join together with workers, campesinos, students, teachers, employees...the workers of the city and the countryside.
(To be continued...)
From the mountains of the Mexican Southeast.
Clandestine Revolutionary Indigenous Committee - General Command of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation.
Mexico, in the sixth month of the year 2005.
Translated by irlandesa
ZAPATISTA ARMY OF NATIONAL LIBERATION.MEXICO.
Sixth Declaration of the Selva Lacandona
This is our simple word which seeks to touch the hearts of humble and simple people like ourselves, but people who are also, like ourselves, dignified and rebel. This is our simple word for recounting what our path has been and where we are now, in order to explain how we see the world and our country, in order to say what we are thinking of doing and how we are thinking of doing it, and in order to invite other persons to walk with us in something very great which is called Mexico and something greater which is called the world. This is our simple word in order to inform all honest and noble hearts what it is we want in Mexico and the world. This is our simple word, because it is our idea to call on those who are like us and to join together with them, everywhere they are living and struggling.
I - What We Are
We are the zapatistas of the EZLN, although we are also called "neo-zapatistas." Now, we, the zapatistas of the EZLN, rose up in arms in January of 1994 because we saw how widespread had become the evil wrought by the powerful who only humiliated us, stole from us, imprisoned us and killed us, and no one was saying anything or doing anything. That is why we said "Ya Basta!," that no longer were we going to allow them to make us inferior or to treat us worse than animals. And then we also said we wanted democracy, liberty and justice for all Mexicans although we were concentrated on the Indian peoples. Because it so happened that we, the EZLN, were almost all only indigenous from here in Chiapas, but we did not want to struggle just for own good, or just for the good of the indigenous of Chiapas, or just for the good of the Indian peoples of Mexico. We wanted to fight along with everyone who was humble and simple like ourselves and who was in great need and who suffered from exploitation and thievery by the rich and their bad governments here, in our Mexico, and in other countries in the world.
And then our small history was that we grew tired of exploitation by the powerful, and then we organized in order to defend ourselves and to fight for justice. In the beginning there were not many of us, just a few, going this way and that, talking with and listening to other people like us. We did that for many years, and we did it in secret, without making a stir. In other words, we joined forces in silence. We remained like that for about 10 years, and then we had grown, and then we were many thousands. We trained ourselves quite well in politics and weapons, and, suddenly, when the rich were throwing their New Year's Eve parties, we fell upon their cities and just took them over. And we left a message to everyone that here we are, that they have to take notice of us. And then the rich took off and sent their great armies to do away with us, just like they always do when the exploited rebel - they order them all to be done away with. But we were not done away with at all, because we had prepared ourselves quite well prior to the war, and we made ourselves strong in our mountains. And there were the armies, looking for us and throwing their bombs and bullets at us, and then they were making plans to kill off all the indigenous at one time, because they did not know who was a zapatista and who was not. And we were running and fighting, fighting and running, just like our ancestors had done. Without giving up, without surrendering, without being defeated.
And then the people from the cities went out into the streets and began shouting for an end to the war. And then we stopped our war, and we listened to those brothers and sisters from the city who were telling us to try to reach an arrangement or an accord with the bad governments, so that the problem could be resolved without a massacre. And so we paid attention to them, because they were what we call "the people," or the Mexican people. And so we set aside the fire and took up the word.
And it so happened that the governments said they would indeed be well-behaved, and they would engage in dialogue, and they would make accords, and they would fulfill them. And we said that was good, but we also thought it was good that we knew those people who went out into the streets in order to stop the war. Then, while we were engaging in dialogue with the bad governments, we were also talking with those persons, and we saw that most of them were humble and simple people like us, and both, they and we, understood quite well why we were fighting. And we called those people "civil society" because most of them did not belong to political parties, rather they were common, everyday people, like us, simple and humble people.
But it so happened that the bad governments did not want a good agreement, rather it was just their underhanded way of saying they were going to talk and to reach accords, while they were preparing their attacks in order to eliminate us once and for all. And so then they attacked us several times, but they did not defeat us, because we resisted quite well, and many people throughout the world mobilized. And then the bad governments thought that the problem was that many people saw what was happening with the EZLN, and they started their plan of acting as if nothing were going on. Meanwhile they were quick to surround us, they laid siege to us in hopes that, since our mountains are indeed remote, the people would then forget, since zapatista lands were so far away. And every so often the bad governments tested us and tried to deceive us or to attack us, like in February of 1995 when they threw a huge number of armies at us, but they did not defeat us. Because, as they said then, we were not alone, and many people helped us, and we resisted well.
And then the bad governments had to make accords with the EZLN, and those accords were called the "San Andrés Accords" because the municipality where those accords were signed was called "San Andrés." And we were not all alone in those dialogues, speaking with people from the bad governments. We invited many people and organizations who were, or are, engaged in the struggle for the Indian peoples of Mexico, and everyone spoke their word, and everyone reached agreement as to how we were going to speak with the bad governments. And that is how that dialogue was, not just the zapatistas on one side and the governments on the other. Instead, the Indian peoples of Mexico, and those who supported them, were with the zapatistas. And then the bad governments said in those accords that they were indeed going to recognize the rights of the Indian peoples of Mexico, and they were going to respect their culture, and they were going to make everything law in the Constitution. But then, once they had signed, the bad governments acted as if they had forgotten about them, and many years passed, and the accords were not fulfilled at all. Quite the opposite, the government attacked the indigenous, in order to make them back out of the struggle, as they did on December 22, 1997, the date on which Zedillo ordered the killing of 45 men, women, old ones and children in the town in Chiapas called ACTEAL. This immense crime was not so easily forgotten, and it was a demonstration of how the bad governments color their hearts in order to attack and assassinate those who rebel against injustices. And, while all of that was going on, we zapatistas were putting our all into the fulfillment of the accords and resisting in the mountains of the Mexican southeast.
And then we began speaking with other Indian peoples of Mexico and their organizations, and we made an agreement with them that we were going to struggle together for the same thing, for the recognition of indigenous rights and culture. Now we were also being helped by many people from all over the world and by persons who were well respected and whose word was quite great because they were great intellectuals, artists and scientists from Mexico and from all over the world. And we also held international encuentros. In other words, we joined together to talk with persons from America and from Asia and from Europe and from Africa and from Oceania, and we learned of their struggles and their ways, and we said they were "intergalactic" encuentros, just to be silly and because we had also invited those from other planets, but it appeared as if they had not come, or perhaps they did come, but they did not make it clear.
But the bad governments did not keep their word anyway, and then we made a plan to talk with many Mexicans so they would help us. And then, first in 1997, we held a march to Mexico City which was called "of the 1,111" because a compañero or compañera was going to go from each zapatista town, but the bad government did not pay any attention. And then, in 1999, we held a consulta throughout the country, and there it was seen that the majority were indeed in agreement with the demands of the Indian peoples, but again the bad governments did not pay any attention. And then, lastly, in 2001, we held what was called the "march for indigenous dignity" which had much support from millions of Mexicans and people from other countries, and it went to where the deputies and senators were, the Congress of the Union, in order to demand the recognition of the Mexican indigenous.
But it happened that no, the politicians from the PRI, the PAN and the PRD reached an agreement among themselves, and they simply did not recognize indigenous rights and culture. That was in April of 2001, and the politicians demonstrated quite clearly there that they had no decency whatsoever, and they were swine who thought only about making their good money as the bad politicians they were. This must be remembered, because you will now be seeing that they are going to say they will indeed recognize indigenous rights, but it is a lie they are telling so we will vote for them. But they already had their chance, and they did not keep their word.
And then we saw quite clearly that there was no point to dialogue and negotiation with the bad governments of Mexico. That it was a waste of time for us to be talking with the politicians, because neither their hearts nor their words were honest. They were crooked, and they told lies that they would keep their word, but they did not. In other words, on that day, when the politicians from the PRI, PAN and PRD approved a law that was no good, they killed dialogue once and for all, and they clearly stated that it did not matter what they had agreed to and signed, because they did not keep their word. And then we did not make any contacts with the federal branches. Because we understood that dialogue and negotiation had failed as a result of those political parties. We saw that blood did not matter to them, nor did death, suffering, mobilizations, consultas, efforts, national and international statements, encuentros, accords, signatures, commitments. And so the political class not only closed, one more time, the door to the Indian peoples, they also delivered a mortal blow to the peaceful resolution - through dialogue and negotiation - of the war. It can also no longer be believed that the accords will be fulfilled by someone who comes along with something or other. They should see that there so that they can learn from experience what happened to us.
And then we saw all of that, and we wondered in our hearts what we were going to do.
And the first thing we saw was that our heart was not the same as before, when we began our struggle. It was larger, because now we had touched the hearts of many good people. And we also saw that our heart was more hurt, it was more wounded. And it was not wounded by the deceits of the bad governments, but because, when we touched the hearts of others, we also touched their sorrows. It was as if we were seeing ourselves in a mirror.
II. - Where We Are Now
Then, like the zapatistas we are, we thought that it was not enough to stop engaging in dialogue with the government, but it was necessary to continue on ahead in the struggle, in spite of those lazy parasites of politicians. The EZLN then decided to carry out, alone and on their side ("unilateral", in other words, because just one side), the San Andrés Accords regarding indigenous rights and culture. For 4 years, since the middle of 2001 until the middle of 2005, we have devoted ourselves to this and to other things which we are going to tell you about.
Fine, we then began encouraging the autonomous rebel zapatista municipalities - which is how the peoples are organized in order to govern and to govern themselves - in order to make themselves stronger. This method of autonomous government was not simply invented by the EZLN, but rather it comes from several centuries of indigenous resistance and from the zapatistas' own experience. It is the self-governance of the communities. In other words, no one from outside comes to govern, but the peoples themselves decide, among themselves, who governs and how, and, if they do not obey, they are removed. If the one who governs does not obey the people, they pursue them, they are removed from authority, and another comes in.
But then we saw that the Autonomous Municipalities were not level. There were some that were more advanced and which had more support from civil society, and others were more neglected. The organization was lacking to make them more on a par with each other. And we also saw that the EZLN, with its political-military component, was involving itself in decisions which belonged to the democratic authorities, "civilians" as they say. And here the problem is that the political-military component of the EZLN is not democratic, because it is an army. And we saw that the military being above, and the democratic below, was not good, because what is democratic should not be decided militarily, it should be the reverse: the democratic-political governing above, and the military obeying below. Or, perhaps, it would be better with nothing below, just completely level, without any military, and that is why the zapatistas are soldiers so that there will not be any soldiers. Fine, what we then did about this problem was to begin separating the political-military from the autonomous and democratic aspects of organization in the zapatista communities. And so, actions and decisions which had previously been made and taken by the EZLN were being passed, little by little, to the democratically elected authorities in the villages. It is easy to say, of course, but it was very difficult in practice, because many years have passed - first in the preparation for the war and then the war itself - and the political-military aspects have become customary. But, regardless, we did so because it is our way to do what we say, because, if not, why should we go around saying things if we do not then do them.
That was how the Good Government Juntas were born, in August of 2003, and, through them, self-learning and the exercise of "govern obeying" has continued.
From that time and until the middle of 2005, the EZLN leadership has no longer involved itself in giving orders in civil matters, but it has accompanied and helped the authorities who are democratically elected by the peoples. It has also kept watch that the peoples and national and international civil society are kept well informed concerning the aid that is received and how it is used. And now we are passing the work of safeguarding good government to the zapatista support bases, with temporary positions which are rotated, so that everyone learns and carries out this work. Because we believe that a people which does not watch over its leaders is condemned to be enslaved, and we fought to be free, not to change masters every six years.
The EZLN, during these 4 years, also handed over to the Good Government Juntas and the Autonomous Municipalities the aid and contacts which they had attained throughout Mexico and the world during these years of war and resistance. The EZLN had also, during that time, been building economic and political support which allowed the zapatista communities to make progress with fewer difficulties in the building of their autonomy and in improving their living conditions. It is not much, but it is far better than what they had prior to the beginning of the uprising in January of 1994. If you look at one of those studies the governments make, you will see that the only indigenous communities which have improved their living conditions - whether in health, education, food or housing - were those which are in zapatista territory, which is what we call where our villages are. And all of that has been possible because of the progress made by the zapatista villages and because of the very large support which has been received from good and noble persons, whom we call "civil societies," and from their organizations throughout the world. As if all of these people have made "another world is possible" a reality, but through actions, not just words.
And the villages have made good progress. Now there are more compañeros and compañeras who are learning to govern. And - even though little by little - there are more women going into this work, but there is still a lack of respect for the compañeras, and they need to participate more in the work of the struggle. And, also through the Good Government Juntas, coordination has been improved between the Autonomous Municipalities and the resolution of problems with other organizations and with the official authorities. There has also been much improvement in the projects in the communities, and the distribution of projects and aid given by civil society from all over the world has become more level. Health and education have improved, although there is still a good deal lacking for it to be what it should be. The same is true for housing and food, and in some areas there has been much improvement with the problem of land, because the lands recovered from the finqueros are being distributed. But there are areas which continue to suffer from a lack of lands to cultivate. And there has been great improvement in the support from national and international civil society, because previously everyone went wherever they wanted, and now the Good Government Juntas are directing them to where the greatest need exists. And, similarly, everywhere there are more compañeros and compañeras who are learning to relate to persons from other parts of Mexico and of the world,. They are learning to respect and to demand respect. They are learning that there are many worlds, and that everyone has their place, their time and their way, and therefore there must be mutual respect between everyone.
We, the zapatistas of the EZLN, have devoted this time to our primary force, to the peoples who support us. And the situation has indeed improved some. No one can say that the zapatista organization and struggle has been without point, but rather, even if they were to do away with us completely, our struggle has indeed been of some use.
But it is not just the zapatista villages which have grown - the EZLN has also grown. Because what has happened during this time is that new generations have renewed our entire organization. They have added new strength. The comandantes and comandantas who were in their maturity at the beginning of the uprising in 1994 now have the wisdom they gained in the war and in the 12 years of dialogue with thousands of men and women from throughout the world. The members of the CCRI, the zapatista political-organizational leadership, is now counseling and directing the new ones who are entering our struggle, as well as those who are holding leadership positions. For some time now the "committees" (which is what we call them) have been preparing an entire new generation of comandantes and comandantas who, following a period of instruction and testing, are beginning to learn the work of organizational leadership and to discharge their duties. And it also so happens that our insurgents, insurgentas, militants, local and regional responsables, as well as support bases, who were youngsters at the beginning of the uprising, are now mature men and women, combat veterans and natural leaders in their units and communities. And those who were children in that January of '94 are now young people who have grown up in the resistance, and they have been trained in the rebel dignity lifted up by their elders throughout these 12 years of war. These young people have a political, technical and cultural training that we who began the zapatista movement did not have. This youth is now, more and more, sustaining our troops as well as leadership positions in the organization. And, indeed, all of us have seen the deceits by the Mexican political class and the destruction which their actions have caused in our patria. And we have seen the great injustices and massacres that neoliberal globalization causes throughout the world. But we will speak to you of that later.
And so the EZLN has resisted 12 years of war, of military, political, ideological and economic attacks, of siege, of harassment, of persecution, and they have not vanquished us. We have not sold out nor surrendered, and we have made progress. More compañeros from many places have entered into the struggle so that, instead of making us weaker after so many years, we have become stronger. Of course there are problems which can be resolved by more separation of the political-military from the civil-democratic. But there are things, the most important ones, such as our demands for which we struggle, which have not been fully achieved.
To our way of thinking, and what we see in our heart, we have reached a point where we cannot go any further, and, in addition, it is possible that we could lose everything we have if we remain as we are and do nothing more in order to move forward. The hour has come to take a risk once again and to take a step which is dangerous but which is worthwhile. Because, perhaps united with other social sectors who suffer from the same wants as we do, it will be possible to achieve what we need and what we deserve. A new step forward in the indigenous struggle is only possible if the indigenous join together with workers, campesinos, students, teachers, employees...the workers of the city and the countryside.
(To be continued...)
From the mountains of the Mexican Southeast.
Clandestine Revolutionary Indigenous Committee - General Command of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation.
Mexico, in the sixth month of the year 2005.
Translated by irlandesa
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
