bob's blog

Have you been to the Coliseum? People die there with glory. They stand fearlessly facing off in the ultimate fight to the death. Some will walk away or perhaps limp away to the acclaim of thousands. The others will be relegated to the dust bin of history. The losers. The ones without the luck who managed to not pull off the fatal blow, who ducked instead of rolling to the left. The ones who should have held their shields up high or further to the left.

Why do they go there day after day? If memory serves, they are condemned, fighting for freedom as they entertain the leisure class spending a warm day in the stone amphitheater. If for some the match ends in death, they died with honor defending their right to face an enemy in the ultimate battle. A role model for those who are willing to wrestle the grim reaper.

The spectators are the beautiful people. They would never consider taking up the sword or the spear or chance staining their togas with blood. They witness the event for edification. To improve their moral understanding of life and living.

Have you purchased your ticket? Even if you can’t afford the expensive seats, near the center, you can still witness the event from the pits.

The difficult job is cleaning up after the fact. All those arms and legs, broken shields and torsos scattered over the killing field of blood.

You can’t have a war if nobody watches. They do it for you, the audience. If the audience stays away, the war comes to an end. Nobody kills just for the killing. They do it to make you free.

I feel that freedom descending on me now as Iwalk away. I turn my eye for lust of battle to search my inner soul for truth. I will sit quietly with a young child on my lap and make music with a reed. Draw pictures in the sand. Watch the waves lap the shore.

If someone here wants to harm me, come forward that we may have a cup of tea as civilized men and toast health to each other. Then, you can leave me in peace and kill me from behind. When no one is watching.

Not even me.

I will have lived without glory.

Singing songs of love.

Free from being compelled to watch others clutching combat in the search for glory.

Bob

Posted by Bob at 08:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thoughts and the words they give rise to are my only tools.

The doctrine of preemption is riding on one outcome. Our ability to re-construct the country we are de-constructing. If in the next few years we manage to do what all the King’s men couldn’t do, create a democratic Arab State, we will be vindicated. If we manage to do it with the blessing and financial assistance of the European Union, we will be exalted. That seems to be hinging on our ability to spread the profit beyond Haliburton, et al. If French companies profit, they’ll be with us. If the Russians get their Soviet era loans repaid via the lucrative oil contracts they had with Saddam’s regime, they also will be onboard. In that case, might will be deemed to have been right. Allah the almighty will confer his blessing on the ends even as he opposed the means.

The doctrine the Bush administration is advancing is not new, we have been reminded. There was Grenada, Panama, and Somalia.. Those of course represent the overt actions. There was Allende, for a brief time, an elected non-dictator, the first domino of the South American domino theory that had to be nudged slightly by our covert troops working with bags of money and little or no transparency. An operation that moved quickly to decapitate a foreign government in a Sovereign Nation that did not pose even a hint of threat to our national security. Let’s not go there publicly and face that truth. In a world dominated by a super power able to operate over the airwaves the seawaves, and the outer reaches of the atmosphere, is there a doctrine that allows unilateral force to be exercised that is not suspect? One man’s preemption is another man’s war of aggression to paraphrase an old idiom.

I always like the schoolyard analogy. Hermann Hesse explores that world in “Demian” and advances the scenario that overcoming a powerful bully requires an alliance with a benevolent arm twister. An Elliot Ness guardian angel that fears no evil, carries a big stick and a small gun. One just big enough to command respect yet easy to conceal. The reason to conceal the gun is so you can walk down the street without frightening too many people. The reason for the big stick is to let everyone know that you mean business. The way to confront the bully is on your terms when everyone is watching. You walk upright, face forward, speak your piece and flash your gun. The others don’t see the gun, they only see the bully’s face turn white. They see the bully walk away and cheer the hero. The schoolyard is safe once again.

Would that things were so simple. The reality is that the bully too has alliances, an organization of leg breakers and hit men. They see you flash the gun and go to your house and kill your little sister, rape your mother and smash your windows. They use violence and intimidation to send a strong message to the entire schoolyard. This is our playground and we make our own rules. Things seem pretty hopeless for awhile until you get them for tax evasion, or conspiracy, coming in the middle of the night with search warrants and klieg lights.

The bully never operates with impunity for long. There is a mitigating force. Ghandi called it Satyagraha. The truth force. It doesn’t work with guns, it works with reason. This is what we have as individuals to counter the alliance of evil. The evil that is practiced by those who use violence and rule by decree.

Law is an evolution of thought put into words. As we confront the way humans interact in circumstances previously unforseen, we develop a vocabulary of action. In each case we present the best arguments we can muster and make decisions based on the best available advice. When thing go bad out there, we do some soul searching and refine our course of action. That is the narrative of the last five thousand years of creating and utilizing law to govern the affairs of man.

There is review. There is always constant review and over time we hold up the candle to the darkness and shed light on ignorance and stupidity. That is the tradition that we adhere to in all cultures to create justice in the affairs of men.

What happened in the past few days that wiped out the memory of law as a truth force and installed a killing machine to eradicate our personal definition of evil?

Where is it written that in order to maintain the world’s highest standard of living and the consumption of the lions share of world resources, it is permissible to undo other governing structures? Are we so blinded by arrogance that we can tolerate no other system of governance but our own? What of the system that gives voice to women in equal share to their numbers?

The world is a complicated place. There are many systems of governance that discriminate against some or all of their citizens. Can we use violence to overturn them all? If we manage to create a better Iraq, will Saudi Arabia, or Kuwait feel more secure?

Those who are best served by the status quo of governance cannot for a moment feel secure if their system is unlike our own. That includes some of our closest friends.

The movement toward a system of governance that is universally accepted as the best Political System Available puts our own imperfect system at risk. When our system has shed it’s imperfections, then we can export it. Until then we would do well to spare the world any more violence.

The world it seems is ruled by those with money. They will not relinquish that hold willingly but by necessity. The system that replaces money as a tool of power will look a great deal more like a system of collaboration than what we have. It will give women a much greater voice in their political life.

Bob

Posted by Bob at 11:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Giving Tommy Hisfinger

I’m all wound up like the Duracell bunny with no place to just do it. I want to give Tommy Hisfinger but I don’t want to start a panic. It seems like these people are trying to brand me with a small alligator. I too, “know my needs”, Ricardo, and it has nothing to do with a Cordoba. It’s more like a brand new Nubira from Daewoo. I just like saying that. The car does nothing for me. In fact most cars do nothing for me. When I want sex, I don’t thumb through new car catalogues. I go for “yeah, baby” Victoria’s Underwear!

I’m always impressed by how much gold chain rappers have to wear. It has the same effect on me as seeing an ornamental tattoo on a holocaust survivor. O.K. it’s a free country and all, but if you want to distinguish yourself why wouldn’t you just shave your head and wear prison stripes. People would notice. Especially if you’re a bit anorexic.

I’m simply not buying in to the premise that other people are impressed if I spent an obscene number of Euros for a mere hint of fabric to cover my nudity. Versace me, so I can walk a runoff with Zoolander at St. Bart’s waterfront. Inundate me with J-Lo posters in a thirty peso panama weave that, because it hangs on Front St. is suddenly worth something the itinerant peasant will never imagine, or see. J will get her cut of course. Am I to trade my next Cherry kitchen for the chance that this week, right now even, I can be..... “like hello”! Just get me a palm frond to cover my member ship in the public domain, the rest of me can be wide open. The way they do it on the other side of the Island. Did you ever notice how naked guys always stand at the nude beach? They put their hands on their hips! A totally arrogant posture that says “here I am, I’m naked, deal with it!”

The aspect of advertising I hate the most is the affront to my intelligence. What does Rolex have over the generic Asian chip. The one that whispers the split between $3.95 real time and a $15,000 fashion statement. I can picture all the guys at the Rolex Cup pounding into the waves lined up on the rail of a hundred million dollar effort to shave thirty seconds off last year’s boat model when Mr. Rolex does a fly over and holds up a sign that says “show us the Rolex”.

The bemused sailors do a frantic search and come up with a message board that says “it’s being polished”. You don’t have to polish a plastic watch. It doesn’t care. It’s impervious to water, never tarnishes, keeps time in six zones, tells you what the moon is doing and has an alarm to remind you that this could be the day you get lucky with your girl friend. The GPS model even tells you when your off your game. Oops. Wrong Bar!

Martha took the blush off the rose, from the inside. Can you believe it? Some people never have enough. Poor little rich bich. The thought of losing the K-mart account drove her to do it. Calvin warned her to keep the razor blades out of the mirror aisle, to stick to the fabric and plant thing and stay away from where the boys play with fast and loose. I have to tell you Martha, I make my own art, and it’s not for sale.

I came through the airport in San Juan with a mirror in a really nice wood frame. I made the frame myself. Cherry, with a satin finish. Everyone looked twice to see if I would take out a razor blade every time I sat down. I kept apologizing profusely. “Excuse me, I have a mirror.” As if they didn’t notice. One TSA guy looks at the mirror and says “Coke?” out loud. Everyone turned to look. “Not me man, unlike Winona, I don’t do BRANDS!”

The clerk at the Tanzanite shop put the whole phenomenon into perspective for me. “How much is the woman worth to you? A carat? A carat and a half?”

I blurted out “half that.” “But make it zirconium silicate. It looks much bigger at night, under the sheets.”

“Like the rest of the package?” she retorted.

I’m half american. I live in the best half to be sure, though I’m not native. I mean when my ancestors came to America they were talking about the portion above 49 degrees north latitude. That’s Canada to most of you, but They are American. They also must resent the way, we, here in the United States, declare that we are American. People from Guatemala are American. People from Chile are American. Peruvians are American. Where do we get off calling them Mexicans and Canadians. They are Americans. Along with the Sioux, the Cherokee and the Utes. Now they’re the true Americans. We branded them Indians. Who’s confused? They didn’t have a name for the Continent. We could have told them anything. We could have branded them Nahuatlanians. It would have been a bit closer to the truth.

I did the calculation. OHMYGOD that’s an obscene markup. Juanita was making 0.02 Guatemalan Pesos, Demitri made .06 Drachmas for shipping, and it’s being marketed in St. Barts for 80 Euros! There is no way I’m gonna wear that garment with the tag on the outside. I’d rather wear something from Wally World with a moose embroidered over the breast pocket, and an action stripe diagonally across the front.

It’s not that I want a bigger piece of the fashion pie. I just don’t want to be suckered into giving Jenny or Liz a premium for running a sweat shop and working the spread between equal rights.....and justice. Brand? When the product comes from Bengladesh? What brand are you?

Posted by Bob at 09:53 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Coup de foudre, coup de folie.

The first time an Atomic bomb was dropped on civilians, the justification given was that military lives would be saved. When the Emperor of Japan saw how destructive the weapon was to his countrymen, it was argued, he would realize the futility of continuing his military campaign against the United States. The loss of such a large civilian population was meant to demoralize the enemy and shock them into laying down their arms. The punishing blows to cities the size of Nagasaki and Hiroshima were undertaken within the context of the firebombing of Dresden, rocket attacks against London and near constant air war against large cities on both sides of the conflict. The waging of war had evolved from military combatants confronting each other in trench warfare to a campaign of terror from the air, dropping explosives from airships and planes over densely populated cities. These acts of barbarism demonstrated the complete breakdown of civilized behavior between nations.

The Draft Rules of Aerial Warfare, which were presented at The Hague, February 1923 specifically stated that Aerial Bombardment for the purpose of terrorizing the civilian population, of destroying or damaging private property not of military character, or of injuring non-combatants was prohibited. The Rules were supported by the United States but never enacted. Again on September 30, 1938, by unanimous resolution of the League of Nations Assembly, the following principles were recognized;

1) The intentional bombing of civilian populations is illegal;

2) Objectives aimed at from the air must be legitimate military objectives and must be identifiable;

3)Any attack on legitimate military objectives must be carried out in such a way that civilian populations in the neighbourhood are not bombed through negligence.

On September 1, 1939, the President of the United States, FDR, sent the following Appeal to the Governments of France, Germany, Italy, Poland and England.

“The ruthless bombing from the air of civilians in unfortified centers of population during the course of the hostilities which have raged in various quarters of the earth during the past few years, which has resulted in the maiming and in the death of thousands of defenseless men, women, and children, has sickened the hearts of every civilized man and woman, and has profoundly shocked the conscience of humanity.

If resort is had to this form of inhuman barbarism during the period of the tragic conflagration with which the world is now confronted, hundreds of thousands of innocent human beings who have no responsibility for, and who are not even remotely participating in, the hostilities which have now broken out, will lose their lives. I am therefor addressing this urgent appeal to every government which may be engaged in hostilities publicly to affirm its determination that its armed forces shall in no event, and under no circumstances, undertake the bombardment from the air of civilian populations or of unfortified cities, upon the understanding that these same rules of warfare will be scrupulously observed by all of their opponents.”

The Nuremberg Principles of 1945 established as a War Crime the wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

Resolution 1653, adopted by the United Nations, declares that a) The use of nuclear and thermo-nuclear weapons is contrary to the spirit, letter and aims of the United Nations and, as such, a direct violation of the Charter of the United Nations;

b) The use of nuclear and thermo-nuclear weapons would exceed even the scope of war and cause indiscriminate suffering and destruction to mankind and civilization and, as such, is contrary to the rules of international law and to the laws of humanity; c) The use of nuclear and thermo-nuclear weapons is a war directed not against an enemy or enemies alone but also against mankind in general, since the peoples of the world not involved in such a war will be subjected to all the evils generated by the use of such weapons; d) Any State using nuclear or thermo-nuclear weapons is to be considered as violating the Charter of the United Nations, as acting contrary to the laws of humanity and as committing a crime against mankind and civilization;

On July 8, 1996, the International Court of Justice rendered the following opinion;

The opinion of the International Court of Justice (“World Court”) came in response to a request from the United Nations General Assembly. The Court found that the threat or use of nuclear weapons “would generally be contrary to the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict.” However, the Court was unable to make a determination “in an extreme circumstance of self-defense, in which the very survival of a State would be at stake.”

The United States of America has by its words and actions unequivocally threatened to replace the Government of Iraq, which act would by its very nature threaten the survival of the Republic of Iraq. It has threatened to drop over 3,000 bombs many of which will undoubtedly kill civilians and non-combatants, in the major cities of Iraq. Is mobilizing a substantial army of occupation on the borders of Iraq with a war plan that encompasses a blitzkrieg offensive into the very heart of the major cities of Iraq. This is a Coup-de-Foudre.

The premise for this action is the abiding fear that Iraq has in its possession a weapon of mass destruction, and the ruthlessness to use it. This is the Coup-de-Folie.

One action leads to the next. Who shall we blame?

Our President in an attempt to make the world safe for the United States is holding a loaded gun to the head of a madman he believes has a nuke, whereabouts unknown, moving about the countryside in a semi. The President through his actions is speaking these words;

“If you have the nuke, use it right now, in either case you’re a dead man.”

He will only succeed if the madman has an epiphany, begs forgiveness, tells him where to find the nuke and gives him a few token gold coins to make the execution quick and painless.

In all other scenarios, he fails.

BOB

p.s. Would this work against Kim Jong Il

Posted by Bob at 12:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)