The month of January has been a sad one for folks like me, who treasure the music of the 60's and 70's and had some of my best times in life with the great artist's creations in the background as a sound track. 

David Bowie, Glenn Fry. Dale Griffin, and now Paul Kantner.

Bowie and Kantner leaving are real sad notes. I have great memories of both my teen years and my first years of real freedom in Japan listening to those guys.

I was a Jefferson Airplane fan because my sisters were Jefferson Airplane fans. And as they morphed into Jefferson Starship, I remained an active fan. The band in the 70's was awesome. I even loved them when they went on divergent paths in the 80's and 90's. "In June 1984, Paul Kantner, the last remaining founding member of Jefferson Airplane, left Jefferson Starship, and then took legal action over the Jefferson Starship name against his former bandmates. Kantner settled out of court and signed an agreement that neither party would use the names "Jefferson" or "Airplane" unless all members of Jefferson Airplane, Inc. (Bill Thompson, Paul Kantner, Grace Slick, Jorma Kaukonen, Jack Casady) agreed. " Thus Mickey Thomas formed "Starship" and later went on to do "the worst song ever made. ( Which I love by the way).

Fortunately, Kantner reestablished Jefferson Starship in 1992, and so allowed me to enjoy them immensely my first wonderful year in Japan.

I played the CD for Deep Space / Virgin Sky till it was worn out. My favorite song on the album is this one:

I loved their music and the sense of rebellion that was the back story in its lyrics.

?God grant them all rest and peace.

God decided to play a cruel joke on American politics by holding a recall election of His own. The winner was Justice Antonin Scalia.

The loser will be the rest of the United States, that is left behind to watch the Constitutional farce that will be the nomination of his successor. More on that in a bit.

If you search the archives of this blog, you will find that there was a time when I actually defended Antonin Scalia. It was in this post here. For the record, I have not changed my mind, The Citadel should still be all male and Justice Scalia performed a service by eloquently pointing out why the arguments of the plaintiffs were flawed from both a legal and educational standpoint.

But the larger picture, as I have recognized some 8 years later, is that , by and large, the majority of the American people no longer care about the validity of mine and Justice Scalia's viewpoint. The court made that obvious in VMI, when only one justice voted no. Sadly, it did not recognize that in cases that were far more important to the national polity.

Consider his key role in Heller, Citizens United, and Bush vs Gore. Not to mention voting to gut the Voting Rights act. 

And then there is this:

This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is "actually" innocent. Quite to the contrary, we have repeatedly left that question unresolved, while expressing considerable doubt that any claim based on alleged "actual innocence" is constitutionally cognizable.

That, is among many of his dissents-a head slapper. How can anyone argue that way-even from a strictly legal standpoint?

Antonin Scalia was a brilliant legal mind and definitely worthy enough to be a Supreme Court Justice. Unfortunately, his brilliance was so often squandered on ideas that were just flat out bad. Charles Pierce sums it up well:

I believe the United States would be a better country if none of these remarks ever were made.

So now we will have the national mourning, and the lying-in-state, and the state funeral, all of which Antonin Scalia deserves. Giving 30 years of your life to public service at the highest level is something worthy of respect, even if it was largely in service of a political philosophy that derides public service at almost every other level of government. And his death on Saturday certainly is a seismic event in our politics. It raises the stakes in the upcoming election to almost unimaginable levels. How do we know this? Because Mitch McConnell, the majority leader of the United States Senate, already has thrown the Constitution out the window for purely political purposes.

That a sitting Senator, much less the Majority Leader of the Senate, could make such a bold statement, in direct opposition to the requirements of the Constitution is really astounding. It is really a sad commentary of  the damage our tea sniffing fellow citizens, aided by the lazy 50% who can't even be bothered to exercise their civic rights to vote; the damage that having really lousy legislators causes.

McConnell and by extension the two children, Cruz and Rubio who echoed it, don't have a leg to stand on.

Of course, this is all my bollocks. In 2012, the "American people" decided that Barack Obama should appoint justices to the Supreme Court to fill any vacancies that occurred between January of 2013 and January of 2017. Period. Just because Mitch McConnell is a complete chickenshit in the face of his caucus doesn't obviate that fact. The 36 percent of eligible voters who showed up for the 2014 midterms, the lowest percentage in 72 years, don't get to cancel out the expressed wishes of the majority of the 57.5 percent of eligible voters who turned out to re-elect the president in 2012. And before this meme really picks up steam, 17 justices have been confirmed during election years, including Roger Taney, which sucks, in 1836, Lewis Powell and William Rehnquist, who were appointed in 1972, and Anthony Kennedy, who was appointed in 1988.

(And it should not be necessary to point out that any argument made by this Congress on the basis of political tradition or legislative politesse inevitably will cause Irony to shoot itself in the head.)

If you weren't thinking about voting before, you have a really good reason to now. I know I will vote the hell out of this election and I will be supporting someone who does not endorse the legacy of cruelty and selfishness that the current GOP has wrapped its loving arms around.

As the previous post indirectly reported, Pat Conroy passed away on March 4, 2016. He was 70 years old.

If one is a graduate of a certain prestigious military college on the banks of the Ashley River in Charleston, S.C. , Pat Conroy is a figure you know and revere. He graduated in 1967, an English major, and moved on to the rather scary and worthwhile adventure that is life out side of Lesene Gate. He taught English in Beaufort after graduation, then moved on to accept a job as a teacher on Dafuskie Island, S.C.

Conroy was an interesting character as a cadet. He rebelled against the Citadel's harsh military system, which in the 1960's became particularly harsh-in part as a reaction to the emotional chaos that was going outside the campus in the 1960's. Despite that,  one could always tell he developed the same affection for the place that most of the rest of us have, recognizing it, for better or for worse, as one of the key defining experiences of our lives. I know my time at the Citadel was for me, and only my time in Japan rivals it for shaping my perspective on life. Read into that, what you will. 

Conroy has said his stories were heavily influenced by his military brat upbringing, and in particular, difficulties experienced with his own father, a US Marine Corps pilot, who was physically and emotionally abusive toward his children, and the pain of a youth growing up in such a harsh environment is evident in Conroy's novels, particularly The Great Santini. While living in Orlando, Florida, Conroy's 5th grade basketball team defeated a team of 6th graders, making the sport his prime outlet for bottled-up emotions for more than a dozen years. Conroy also cites his family's frequent military-related moves and growing up immersed in military culture as significant influences in his life (in both positive and negative ways).

Conroy's first book was The Boo.  It was written when Conroy was newly graduated from The Citadel, self published in 1970. It is a collection of letters, short stories, and anecdotes about Lt. Colonel Thomas "The Boo" Courvoisie. As Assistant  Commandant of Cadets at the Citadel, Courvoisie was a friend and father figure to many of the college's cadets. It really is an insiders kind of book-if you have not worn the uniform or wear the ring, a lot of its meaning will be lost upon you. I wrote about The Boo earlier on this blog in posts here and here.

The book was not a great commercial success until many, many years later. But his later books were: The Great Santini, The Water is Wide, The Lords of Discipline, My Losing Season, The Prince of Tides, Beach Music, South of Broad, My Reading Life, and The Death of Santini. Oh,  he also published a cookbook too. Several of the books were made into movies.

Conroy could use words like an artist uses a paintbrush, skillfully, to paint rich pictures in words that could fill up your mind. I like to think that it was the professors of the Citadel English department that gave him that gift, but I suspect that is only partially true. His reading before, after and during his Citadel experiences probably fixed within him a rich appreciation of the beauty of the written word. What I also suspect is that the Citadel did instill him a quick and sarcastic wit. It does in all of us who wear the ring-its part of how you make it through the experience.

And Charleston and the South Carolina low country was inevitably his backdrop for a good story.

It was my father who called the city the Mansion on the River. He was talking about Charleston, South Carolina, and he was a native son, peacock proud of a town so pretty it makes your eyes ache with pleasure just to walk down its spellbinding, narrow streets. Charleston was my father's ministry, his hobbyhorse, his quiet obsession, and the great love of his life. His bloodstream lit up my own with a passion for the city that I've never lost nor ever will. I'm Charleston-born, and bred. The city's two rivers, the Ashley and the Cooper, have flooded and shaped all the days of my life on this storied peninsula.— From the novel South of Broad.

Words just seemed to flow in Conroy's books. They were not written for the intellectually impaired of today who want work memos to be "short and bulletized", they were written in flowing prose that was meant to immerse you in the picture he was trying to paint. Conroy was good at painting those pictures.

…I have a need to bear witness to what I saw there.  I want to tell you how it was.  I want precision.  I want a murderous, stunning truthfulness.  I want to find my own singular voice for the first time.  I want you to understand why I hate the school with all my power and passion.  Then I want you to forgive me for loving the school.  Some of the boys of the Institute and the men who are her sons will hate me for the rest of their lives.  But that will be all right.  You see, I wear the ring. — From the novel The Lords of Discipline

Much of what is now being written about Pat Conroy is indeed laudatory and giving him the high praise he deserves. However, it is also interesting for me to see that many of the younger graduates are not privy to the struggle that went on between Pat Conroy and his beloved alma mater for many years. As a graduate of the 1970's, I saw much of it played out in headlines and later in e-mails and letters.  I firmly believe that Conroy wrote the Lords of Discipline to somehow try to work out the conflicts that the 4th class system of the 60's had, the camaraderie it built- contrasted with the emotional violence that underpinned it.

The struggle with the college came to a head in 1995, when Shannon Faulkner, using falsehoods, lies and deceptions, applied for admission and was accepted, omitting her gender from the application. ( Which was in part the college's fault, there was no Male/ Female block on the form. Why would there be? Women were not to be a part of the Corps and why would they apply to a place they could a not and should not attend? (Yes I wrote and italicized that last part. Screw you feminists)).

Conroy later, after Faulkner had failed miserably after only one week, paid her way through Converse College. He thought it was the right thing to do-suffice it to say that I did not think so at the time, and still do not think so now. But that takes nothing away from his skills as a writer nor my admiration for his ability to tell a story. It also takes away none of my admiration for the fact that he survived to graduate during a tough time in the college's history. It is a disservice to the record, however, to not point out that his love-hate relationship with the college was a long one, only healed in the first decade of the 21st century.

In 2001, Pat Conroy gave the commencement address at The Citadel.  He gave a great speech and at the end he said this:

In closing, class of 2001, I cannot thank ya’ll enough for doing this for me. I did not exactly pencil this speech into my schedule of coming attractions, and you do me the highest honor by bringing me fully into my Citadel family. And I was trying to think of something I can do because a graduation speaker needs to speak of time—time passing. Usually, I tell graduation classes I want them to think of me on their 40th birthday, but I got something else I want to do for ya’ll because I’m so moved at what you’ve done for me. I would like to invite each one of you in the class of 2001 to my funeral, and I mean that. I will not be having a good day that day. . . but I have told my wife and my heirs that I wanted the class of 2001 to have an honored place whenever my funeral takes place. And I hope as many of you will come as you possibly can because I want you to know how swift time is, and there is nothing as swift—and you know this—from the day you walked into Lesesne Gate until this day—a heartbeat, an eye blink. This is the way life is. It is the only great surprise in life.

So I’m going to tell you how to get to my funeral. You walk up. . . You find the usher waiting outside, and here’s your ticket. . . You put up your Citadel ring. Let them check for the 2001, and each one of you, I want you to say this before you enter the church at which I’m going to be buried. You tell them, "I wear the ring."

A lot of the members of the Class of 2001 and a lot of members of other classes, as well, showed up for Pat Conroy's funeral. And mind you, this is a class that still has a lot of members serving around the globe-some in combat zones.

May God grant Pat Conroy rest and peace. And may his memory to us be a blessing.

One final postscript that I would like to pass along. It is fashionable these days to berate people who do not study the "hard sciences" as it were. The so called STEM disciplines as they call it. It seems to me, and always has, that this emphasis is very misplaced. Science and Engineering are all noble pursuits and very necessary,  as was pointed out in the movie Dead Poet's Society. But imagine the tragedy it would have been, had Conroy been shoved by an emotionally unforgiving and short sighted viewpoint into some other major besides English.

The beauty of a liberal arts military college is that it instills a "system" of studying that imparts a great set of skills, regardless of what you study. I believe Pat Conroy benefited from it, as did I. 

After all, we both wear the ring.

When I got to work this morning and heard the news about Brussels, I just cringed because I knew that on top of an unspeakable tragedy, the traditional merry-go-round of the  American blame game will begin yet again.

First things first. A terrible thing happened in Belgium today. It IS terrible, horrifying, the terrorists succeeded in murdering more than 30 innocent people and injuring hundreds more. Our prayers, our sympathy and our good will should be going out to all the Belgians today.

What the United States and Europe especially does not need now is this:

Predictably, here in America, the usual suspects, of course, of course, wasted no time in blaming the president. This is what they do. Fix blame, by reflex, and leap to wild suppositions without waiting for evidence, and then offer the usual solutions. Genocide. Torture. Bloody murder.

Nor does it need this:

"You'll note Cruz doesn't explain HOW exactly police will spot radicalization in progress from their cars as they cruise the neighborhood."

( Oh, and while we are on the subject of Cruz, when interviewed on Fox , Cruz, ever the cynical politician, made a point to extend sympathies to "Mormon missionaries" in Belgium. Not a word about the Belgian people as a whole or the non-Mormon victims of the attack. I'm sure the Utah caucuses had nothing to do with it.)

Now it should be clear, as an American who lives in Europe and travels all over the continent and the world, I am very concerned about this trend of attacks, in Paris, in Instanbul and now Brussels. I do have concerns about how effective the police in some of these countries and the actions they are taking to prevent attacks before they haappen.

But I will not allow myself to sink to the same level as a worthless piece of shit like Matt Walsh when he says that we have to put aside all our notions of equality and rule of law, and decency, just because we are afraid..

And what is worse, is that the armchair evangelist really doesn't offer a practical solution other than to do what? Kill 1.9 Billion Muslims? Deny then rights under the law and separation of church and state-and in effect lower ourselves to the same level of the terrorists. Really? What does that accomplish?

Ask the Israelis if that is possible.

Israel has been dealing with attacks like this for over 60 years. They have a "strong" leader. They definitely have a strong military and a strong intelligence service. And yet just two weeks ago they had a terrorist attack in Tel Aviv.

It doesn't stop just because we bomb a lot of people. If anything it spreads the disease. The war in Iraq proved that.

We are all Israelis now.

We in the West are now in common with Israel because we have an enemy that hates us. And in part, and only in part,  was provoked through our own actions and inaction. But is also very much dedicated to a philosophy that is evil and repulsive.

We are all Israelis now.

Because we have an enemy we will always be able to hurt militarily in far greater numbers than they can hurt us, but that we can't seem to exterminate entirely.

We all Israelis now.

Because we crave security and the ability to live our lives in peace. And because we do , we will turn on faith to anyone we believe can bring us that security. As did Israelis, when they chose to re-elect Bibi to the Prime Minister's chair. In America, we have a population that is willing to turn to either a demagogue or a zealot with a messianic complex.

We are all Israelis now. 

Because we will trade away rights for security. Because there is this:

There has been both a bitter and judgmental tone to Israeli media commentary on the attacks. The bitterness stems from the sting of jealousy that each terror attack in Europe unleashes a flood of shock and sympathy around the world, while similar violence in the Middle East and Africa, from stabbings to bombings, are considered so common they often barely register beyond the region.
The judgment comes from a sense that Europe, unlike the United States, and certainly unlike Israel, has not yet fully grasped that the threat of ISIS and other extremists will not go away soon, and that long-term changes need to be made to tighten security in so-called “soft-targets,” like theaters and restaurants, and to improve security cooperation across Europe. 
 

We are all Israelis now.

Because we will have to make changes that impact our lives. 

Israel’s Ben-Gurion Airport has been invoked in several of the European analysis of what went wrong in Brussels. The explosions occurred at the check-in area – a “soft target” where, in most western countries, travelers enter unimpeded.  Not so in Israel. As any vehicle approaches the airport, several kilometers away from the terminal, they must go through a checkpoint that requires every car to stop, while an armed guard peers into the car and exchanges a few words with drivers and passengers to get a quick read on who is entering. Anyone who appears suspicious is pulled over for more extensive questioning. Then, while approaching the terminal on foot, anyone who enters comes under the scrutiny of security guards at the entrance to the terminal. Full security screenings take place before check-in – one waits in a security line before the check-in counter in addition to the standard X-rays of carry-on baggage. 
It is just one example of the grand sacrificial trade that Israelis are willing to make daily – trading total privacy for increased safety. Israelis submit to inspection everywhere and anywhere – from shopping malls to restaurants to soccer stadiums, obediently opening car trunks, handbags and briefcases when asked, because they know it’s worth the slight inconvenience and mini-invasion. It is the behavior of a population that has felt too much loss and pain to object. 
 

We are all Israelis now.

Because we will have to deal with the threat, but we will not allow it to defeat us.  But as we go on, the way will never be clear cut and it will not be black or white-just grey:

"The key point in the moral struggle against terrorism, is to make clear that terror – the murder of innocent people – has no justification anywhere. Not in Instanbul, not in the Ivory Coast, and not in Jerusalem.

"Whoever does not condemn terrorism, supports terrorism."

Accent on the "innocent."

This, then, is the lesson:

Whoever does not acknowledge the killing of innocent people by his own side – whoever blames the other side for the killings we ourselves have committed – supports the killing of innocent people.
So there you have it. There you have us.

One side is too self-congratulatively radical, too giddily middle-school wonderfully progressive for words, too reflexively condescending and exclusionist about it, to ever fix anything here.

The other side is too self-congratulatively hardline and egoist and messianic and militarist and oh-poor-little-me and We-Own-Zionism and We-Own-The-Truth and Everybody-Hates-Us and That-Proves-We're-Right about it, to ever fix anything here.

They are not going to solve one goddamned thing. Or save one life. But they'll feel so good about themselves while they're at it."

 

We are all Israelis now.

And I did not write it.

But I wish I had. Jim Wright of Stonekettle Station did, and its worth the couple of minutes it will take to read it in it's entirety.

15 years ago today 19 shitheads attacked America.

They killed 3000 of us.

And then … America got its revenge for 9-11.

Yes we did. Many times over. We killed them. We killed them all. We killed their families. We killed their wives and their kids and all their neighbors. We killed whole nations that weren't even involved just to make goddamned sure. We bombed their cities into rubble. We burned down their countries.

They killed 3000 of us, we killed 300,000 of them or more.

8000 of us came home in body bags, but we got our revenge. Yes we did.

We're still here. They aren't.

We win. USA! USA! USA!

Right?

You goddamned right. We. Win.

Except…

 

 

Read the rest of the post here.

UPDATE! From Jim Wright:

Facebook removed my 911 post because it didn't meet community standards.

Make of that what you will

UPDATE TO THE UPDATE! Facebook may not like the post, but others did.

I regret nothing.

There seems to be an impression among some people that a blog or a Facebook or Twitter account is about what pleases them and what they want to read, rather than the message(s) the owner of these accounts wishes to convey. And that, if those messages are ones that the readers disagree with, it is the fault of the owner of said account for posting them. Total and complete nonsense. My blog, Facebook and Twitter are about the messages I want voice-for myself.

So, I regret nothing.

And that includes advocating for the corporeal demise of one Donald J. Trump. Because the rise of Trump is THE central tragedy of America now in history. It is impossible to overstate what a calamity it is, a calamity that was enabled by the laziness and apathy of a 100 million Americans who did not vote, coupled with the stupidity of 62 million who did. Less than 25% of the US population have imposed this worthless demagogue and tyrant upon the rest of humanity. Their sense of victim hood, resentment, and desire for revenge, overcame the obvious and palpable flaws exhibited by this charlatan, to plunge the land of my birth onto a disastrous course of events. It is hard to think of a president-elect less versed in the workings of the world than Donald Trump.

These are events that threaten me personally-both physically and financially. The threat posed by this short fingered vulgarian is real. It is bothersome beyond words. Since I have not yet taken leave of my common sense and knowledge of the world as it is, as well as the history that got it there, I wish to speak out against it. If my sense of outrage offends you, then I recommend you head for the exit. I have no use for Trumpism or its acolytes. It is destructive for both of us.

2016 has cost me friends and acquaintances, and, with the advent of Trump, forced me to stop writing this independent publication. That troubles me deeply. Even more troubling, however, is this hypocrisy that some people have embraced by becoming cheerleaders for a so-called “movement” advocating “revolt against elites” and supporting events that are truly awful for the countries where they have taken place. (Yes, this means Brexit and the other harbingers of misguided nationalism). It is a dangerous set of beliefs that will lead to nothing good. The last time America turned inward was after the first world war and the consequences were calamitous. Coupled with other countries’ jealous nationalism, it is nothing short of an extinction level threat. As global politics is poisoned, America will be impoverished and its own anger will grow, which risks trapping us in a vicious circle of reprisals and hostility. It is no accident that anti-Semitism has infected the bloodstream of American politics for the first time in decades. The hypocritical people cheerleading this “movement” are playing with fire, a fire that is easily able to rise and destroy them.

I cannot, and will not, be a part of such nonsense. It is wrong and I won’t accept it or be a part of it. I fear that the ability to resist this danger has been weakened by the very technology that we thought would improve Civic nationalism and universal values, such as freedom and equality.  The information tools like Twitter and Facebook were supposed to improve the goal of political commonwealth, not destroy it. Sadly, that has proven to be just the opposite. Thanks to the single-minded evil of some reprehensible individuals it has fostered an ethnic nationalism that is destructive to nations and to people. If we are lucky enough to survive it, we must find safe havens in which to rebuild our shattered lives. 2017 will represent the start of my search for such a haven for myself.

Every bad thing is now possible. A world is collapsing before our eyes.

Till the world either ends, or sanity is restored-I wish you well.

Goodbye.

Skippy-san

I have nothing of substance to contribute to the assessment of his career right now but just wanted to add my condolences. I’ve spent as much time as anyone bad mouthing him in my earlier years-and I did not agree with all of his positions. I will agree with those who say he was better than a lot of our current crop of Senators at getting things done legislatively.

My biggest question will be how long the discussion about this event can stay civil. My bet is not very long.

The tragic events at Fort Hood, happened as I was in transit last Thursday. I've been going back and forth as to whether to write about it-and indeed what to write.

First of all-I have found myself pretty saddened by much of the reaction of the news and the blogosphere-who have, in general missed the point, namely that this was a criminal act more so than any part of some terrorist conspiracy.

Many right wing blogs have gone overboard about two things: 1) the fact that Hasan was a Muslim and should have been caught and identified earlier and 2) Obama has handled things wrong here and this is proof he is bungling the war on terror. I partially accept the first conclusion and totally reject the latter. This is not a matter for the President per se-its a matter for the Army to fix itself.

Guys like this one-don't just snap. I think the signs that he was a substandard performer must have been there for a while. I can't help but think that had he been in any profession within the military besides the medical one-he would have been shoved out the door a long time ago.  To have an army psychiatrist giving talks on Jihad in a military context and not have anyone call him on it, or take measures to monitor him, or challenge him is -well, just amazing.

However, that does not make it more than what it was- a criminal act made by a man who had lost his judgement. Substitute the words  "angry Christian anti-abortion fanatic" in the place of the words" crazed Muslim fanatic" and you have the same crime nonetheless. The key issue here is not to overreact or go on a tirade. Either American is true to its ideals or it is not-and that means people have the freedom to worship as they see fit. Even in the military. They do not have the freedom though to violate the norms of the dialogue of their profession and its clear Hasan was allowed to do that.

This is a tragic crime-nothing more, nothing less. Those who are trying to read anything more into it-are asking for trouble.

Could it have been prevented? Perhaps-especially given the signs this guy put off. Then again maybe not.  I do believe that he could have been he could have been driven out of the Army earlier-especially since its apparent he was not the pick of the litter. 

Thomas Ricks has some great points that I do agree with:

1. The shooter obviously was a low performer. Why was he shuffled along through the system, instead of simply being let go? I worry that the military often keeps the bottom 5 percent of performers simply because it is easier than getting rid of them.

2. Was he not let go for fear of appearing prejudiced? If so, someone is guilty of moral cowardice, of failing to do the hard right thing instead of the easy wrong.

3. If, as reported, he tended to rant instead of practicing medicine, keeping him on a disservice to the wounded soldiers he counseled. What was his record of treatment, compared to other therapists? Did soldiers complain about him? This should all be reachable information.

4. Did Walter Reed have such a file of complaints about him? If so, was Fort Hood made aware of this when he was transferred? Or was this a classic case of dumping a difficult soldier on another command, in this case with catastrophic results?

5. There appear to have been a number of warning signs. Obviously, it is easy in retrospect to see them. But is there anything that can be done differently? General Casey, the Army chief of staff, said over the weekend that he is worried about a "backlash" against Muslim troops. I think the best way to prevent such an overreaction would be to re-assure soldiers that the Army is uncovering and dismissing Muslim soldiers who veer into extremism. 

There are no larger conclusions to be drawn here. I'd love to point out that this gives a big lie to the "fight them there-so we don't have to fight them here" argument in favor of protracted war in the Middle East, but I can't. Even if we were not in Iraq or Afghanistan, this thing could  have happened-and has happened before. I remain opposed to continued presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, however its not germane to this particular topic.

Its also pretty silly to draw some of the other conclusions that have been drawn-like the one from the idiot at Slate Magazine-who believes that since the gunman was brought down by a female MP, it somehow should drive the Army to lift its ban on women in combat units. Apples and Oranges and has been for a long time now.

Its also not a reason to go on some big witch hunt of profiling, or anything else. The rules were there to get this guy already-it seems apparent they were not followed.

Its also pretty stupid to try to excuse this as PTSD or anything else. Its a crime and if he wakes up-he needs to be tried and punished. I think this guy did not want to go on deployment-tough. Its not an excuse.

I do wish the Chief of Staff of the Army had not said this: ""I think the speculation could potentially heighten backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers. And what happened at Fort Hood was a tragedy, but I believe it would be an even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty here," Casey said."

Diversity is not worth talking about here-criminal conduct is.

Dead at 74.  I have always been a fan of his. Spike has a pretty good piece on his life. He was a unique actor who brought a voice to many of us Boomers.

Yes, I remember exactly where I was that day. I had been out and about and had just returned to the BOQ where I was living then. The S.O. called me and told me the World Trade Center had been attacked. I thought there was a mistake in translation somewhere. I flipped on NHK and then saw the truth-right about the time the first tower collapsed.

I know people who were working in the Pentagon that day. That was equally horrific as was the tragic loss of Flight 93 that day.

Jeffery Goldberg has expressed it well-“That is the crucial truth of 9/11. Osama Bin Laden had gathered to him men who were devoid of love, and who found in al Qaeda a vehicle for expressing their hatred of humanity. On the 10th anniversary of the murderous rampage committed by soulless men, we should remember the victims, and count our own blessings, and recommit ourselves to the suppression of evil and the protection of the innocent. ”

I will always remember and will never forget. But in doing so, it also means that I will never forget what came in its aftermath, much of which was-to put it bluntly-misdirected effort, in response to a unique event, the likes of which most of us had never seen before.

Its important, therefore, to look at 9-11 for what it is, a deliberate act of cold blooded murder. The fact that is so does not, however, provide a blanket absolution for the the myriad of flawed events that followed in its wake.  We have extracted our vengance for that horrible day a 100 times over.  The cost of doing so has been huge-and we will debate the wisdom of those subsequent decisions for years.

Guys like Dick Cheney, and George Bush and others-believe the horror of 9-11 gives them a pass on responsibility for flawed decision making subsequent to the event. I say no. The rat holes of the wars that have been pursued in the years following , and the very avoidable -and equally tragic-costs, cannot be just wiped away just because we were the victims on a particular day.

We can though, remember that day with honor-and vow to move forward into a better future than what those murderers tried to inflict upon us. All of our worlds changed that day-and I for one wish that day could be undone.  I want my world of September 10, 2011 back. But its never coming back.

9-11 will always be with us. But we can work hard to restore the world that once was before.

Comments are closed on this post.

I wanted to wait a while before writing about the genuine sadness I felt when I heard about the death of Christopher Hitchens. He was a great writer, a man who understood how to paint a picture with words, and as an Englishman who cared deeply for the United States-probably saw the politics in that country with more clarity than many "native Americans" did. Not that he was 100% right all the time-his endorsement of the Iraq war and Bush's misguided "freedom agenda" are calls he got very wrong. But even when wrong-he was eloquent. And more importantly he could carry an argument on the strength of his words-even when the strength of his ideas-were prone to disagreement.

Now those who hated Hitchens-really hated him.  I think primarily, because his ability to be contrary , just really annoyed them-and so rather than take on the arguments he made on merit, they chose to attack him personally. Especially after 2007 when he published his book, "God is not Great" wherein he laid to waste a lot of deeply held beliefs of others. The assholes among us-would say he got his just desserts. What they fail to realize is that we are all poorer for not having his insight and erudition. What people never realized, as one writer expressed in a eulogy, was that :

 It would be easy to simply say that nobody is perfect and dismiss Hitchens’ support for some nasty right-wing causes as blemishes in an otherwise admirable career, but that would not do the man sufficient justice. While many of his political positions were mistakes, the important thing to take away from his stalwart defense of them is that Hitchens never pandered to an audience. Having arrived at his positions through careful moral deliberation, Hitchens would aggressively advocate for them until either his goals were achieved, or further deliberation caused him to change his mind. Hitchens would not hesitate to alienate his existing fans if he thought it would be necessary to do so in order to confront injustice. Today, when most newspaper columnists appear to simply express positions calculated to best corner the market potential of a particular slice of the political spectrum, Hitchens’ approach is more needed than ever, even if it makes us angry from time to time.

Furthermore, Hitchens relished the role and meanings of words and speech-in a way that most of us can only wish we could attain. He found-in his arguments ways to praise those he disagreed with-even when most of us could not. Otherwise, how could he have written some of his praise of the King James Bible, while being totally skeptical of the contents therein?

In a way that seems odd to me-but totally on context with American thinking-people remain fixated with Hitchen's atheism. I actually find it totally understandable-even if I don't come to the same conclusions that he did. As my Canadian counterpart wrote:

Under no circumstances would I associate myself with anyone running around Africa and telling the locals that AIDS was bad, but condoms were worse, so I quit. But I would never presume to say that Church's position wasn't biblically sanctioned because it is. I just happen to believe that the sanction is moronic and demonstrably lethal to the most vulnerable people on earth. If you believe that "God hates fags", you sure as shit better not have a tattoo while doing so because that just happens to be the next verse in Leviticus.



Essentially, that's what God is Not Great is about. If you wrap yourself in some supernatural, superstitious ceremony, you should also be called to account for the true – and sometimes breathtakingly so  – evil that's done in it's name. If the world was populated with rational adults, rather than overly tall children, that book would not have been as controversial as it was. 



The facts are the facts. And the facts are that the Catholic Church didn't renounce the biblical interpretation that the Jews were responsible for the murder of Christ – the basis of 1,000 years of Christian-propagated pogroms – until Vatican II, seventeen years after the Holocaust ended. And, to my way of thinking, that's more than enough reason to renounce Christianity. 

I personally believe that Hitchens' non-belief was prompted by his anger at God's non-interventionism, which in the face of the tremendous amount of suffering in the world-is a rather reasonable and moral position. Hitchens expressed his sheer surprise at this irrationality by denying the existence of God. There he and I part ways. I firmly believe in God-but I also acknowledge that-when it came to Deities-mankind lost the toss, and got one that was more than happy to be vindictive and unfair. As has been acknowledged in other texts-the Bible does a very poor job explaining suffering. But the fact that it does-does not lessen the possibility that God exists, rather that-like Lucy-He's still got a lot of explaining to do. In that regard the Gospels are a little light. Hitchens took the path of refusal. I prefer that of resigned acceptance-with just a tinge of resentment that he does not intervene to fix our problems. I think that elsewhere on the other inhabited planets-there are deities using their godlike powers to help the mortal members of that planet's population. It just is not happening here. And that's kind of the point, He can do that whether we like it or not-only God is God.

But it still does not lessen my admiration of a man who could express his contempt so eloquently-and with a biting wit and cutting language.  In the face of his demise-he wrote words that were simply brilliant. Borrowing from the Canadian Counterpart again:

 

One can't truly appreciate Christopher Hitchens without exploring the way he conducted the last 18 months of his life. Instead of engaging on a maudlin celebration of his own mortality, Hitchens instead used his esophageal cancer as a point of intellectual exploration, especially in his Vanity Fair column. If you read anything today, it should be "Topic of Cancer" and  his most recent essay "Trial of the Will."

It was on the topic of his own mortal illness that he truly broke through a journalist, and produced some of his most beautiful writing.  There was no sentimentality or self-pity in those columns, particularly "Trial of the Will", published just a week before his death. It was an intellectual and philosophical exploration on what it is to die, written by someone who was in the process of doing just that. "Tuesdays With Morrie" it wasn't. 

We are all much poorer for his loss. And for the nitwits who criticize him even in death-well, that just confirms they are nitwits.  Your time is coming."It didn't matter if you agreed with him or not because he was smarter than you are and would argue circles around you. Even when he was wrong, he could make a persuasive case that he was right. That isn't normally the job of a journalist, but it is the raison d'etre of a writer. "

And above all else. more than I can ever hope to be-Hitchens was a writer.

God rest you and give you peace.

And yes-its perfectly fine for a believer to wish that -as we should for all men. For those who don't believe that-I have nothing but contempt. I just wish I could express that contempt as well as he did.

When I woke up this morning , as I made the coffee and stumbled to my computer-it seemed like it was going to be a good day.

After I got the computer on line-I knew differently. This is a terrible day and so will the days that follow. A widely followed blogger, an able and versatile aviator, and a professional officer-well versed in the literary arts is dead.

I feel bad in a lot of ways-and I feel that there is a big hole in the "community" so to speak-it represents a tragic loss, not just for his family and friends-but for the "discussion' of events.

Now,  cards on the table-my blog has a complicated relationship with his-and the words written here about his opinions were not always complimentary. Especially in recent years. I did not agree with his take on national politics-nor did we agree on other things, and we had different views of what the Naval Profession was about..The reasons for that are long, complicated and involved-and had a lot to do with the fact that we were at the same duty station once, on different sides of an intercine Naval Aviation civil war-as well as other issues. I retract or regret none of what I wrote-they were valid criticisms at the time and they remain so today. They were aimed not so much at his content-but at the reactions of his commenters, who contrary to what they believed,  could be downright mean and intolerant.   At some point down the line I will attempt to explain these issues in greater detail. 

Now is not the time.

But there was always deep seated respect-tinged with a more than bit of envy of his new employment. While I had stopped commenting over at his blog a couple of years ago-I still read it everyday. He was getting to fly and do something really exciting-unlike most of us mere non pilots who ended up in retirement walking the floors with cubicles.

Lex, on the other hand, had found a way to break those shackles and return to the skies he so clearly loved. His writing about flying was truly a thing of beauty and I always enjoyed reading his flying stories.

And what Lex could do was fly. As was written in the book "Flight of the Intruder" he put an airplane on, wore it -as a man would wear a well fitting suit- and moved about with precision. That is a unique skill-not given to very many men.

Lex will have the distinction of being mourned by literally thousands of people he never met. While it is no consolation-he at least was in the process of doing something he truly loved. Probably in the grand scheme of things-that's a pretty good legacy in and of itself.

It has been a really lousy week all things considered-perhaps indicative of the way the rest of the year is going to go I suppose. This week has been full of nothing but bad news and death. Two bloggers-both of whom I knew on active duty have perished.   Of Lex-and the tragic accident that took his life far too young- you probably have already heard and will hear a lot more about. This evening and this weekend he will be remembered fondly with hosted pints of Guinness in pubs all around the country.

In all fairness, the no-fly zone concept is not completely without merit. An informal survey of aviators from all services produced this list of the NFZ's finer attributes:

· Something to do on six-month cruise besides eat, sleep, and go to the bathroom (Navy only).

· Six-to-twelve week temporary overseas duty every couple years or so provides excellent excuse to complain about quality of life (Air Force only).

· Makes taxpaying public think it's getting its money's worth.

· Counts for Air Medal points.

· Brings families together. Multiple generations can swap firsthand Southern Watch stories at reunions.

· Get issued neat-o desert cammies and flight suits.

· Flying over barren, scorched desert makes you thankful you weren't born there.

· Great deals on cool aviator watches in Bahrain and Dubai.

· Operating in high stress, irrational-to-the-point-of- lunacy environment prepares military aviation's best and brightest for futures as general and flag officers.

· Something to bitch about.

Among the best-sounding justifications for no-fly zones is that they provide a long-term refinement process for the joint force air component commander (JFACC) concept. Standing NFZs, this argument states, constitute a living laboratory of joint air power command and control–sort of a wild purple yonder petri dish. Still, hard-bitten cynics continue to beg the question, "Are we accomplishing anything with this cockamamie NFZ malarkey, or are we just JFACCing around?"

Clell Hazard: I am not a "peacenik", Captain; I just don't agree with the reasons behind this particular war, and I feel if we're gonna fight it we oughtta goddamn fight it right. –from the movie Gardens of Stone.

Not that any Americans might have noticed this week, but the 2000th American died in the War in Afghanistan this week. I mean,  its hard to pay attention to the  tragic sacrifice of brave young men-when there are such meaningful issues like "what is real rape?" to argue about, after all.

The man's name was Specialist James A. Justice. He was from Grover NC and he was assigned to the 503rd Regiment, 173rd Airborne Combat Brigade. He was 21 years old. He died of injuries suffered during a small arms fire fight in Afghanistan.

Now I have made my opposition to America's endless war on terror pretty evident over the years. I am not proposing to re-hash that here. But I do want to ask just one simple question: "Why is no one in this election discussing the sacrifice this and 1999 other Americans made-and what it will it take to stop 1000 more Americans from losing their lives in the region North of the Khyber Pass?"

After all 98% of Americans will never know what it was like to experience the danger he did. The country does not ask it from them-and so they can live lives of blessed ignorance that there are a relatively small group of Americans being put at risk every day-for an Afghan government and an Afghan people that have yet to prove they are worthy of the sacrifice.

This a subject more important than silly arguments about abortion and rape. We dishonor these brave folks sacrifice if we don't understand why they were where they were-and what it will take to bring the rest of the US forces home. As soon as possible.

The country needs to be talking about the fact that 2000 Americans have died in this far away land. When will we?

It is with great sadness, that I note the death of Lou Reed, at 71. He was a master artist of his generation-and contrary to what Phib thinks, added much to the general discourse. As did most of the baby boom generation.

My favorite song by Lou Reed was not so popular. Nonetheless, it was a great song to sit by the fire-with a glass or four of Scotch,  and contemplate one’s life.

Let me give you a piece of advice,  Phib. The Baby Boomers produced some of the greatest minds of the last 60 years.

Nelson Mandela passed away at the age of 95 yesterday. Clearly the world has lost a great man. He was great not just because of his struggle against apartheid-but when the tables finally turned, he did not give into the natural instincts to take vengeance on his oppressors-but to seek a middle path that made a nation that needed all of its citizens regardless of the color of their skin. South Africa will now find out if his legacy can survive or if the nation will go down the same rathole that other nations have gone down. Given the track record of his successors, I am less than totally optimistic.

Now cards on the table-I am one who is very much ambivalent about British colonialism. While I recognize its racial underpinnings and the foolishness there in, at the same time I side with Niall Ferguson who made the conclusion that the nations that were once part of the British Empire have, in general, fared much better than those that were not. In spite of the many bad things that British colonialism engendered-the simple truth about Africa remains that there are too many nations on the continent and until they start to unify and put their tribalism behind them,  they will accomplish little of greatness.

And thanks to Nelson Mandela, South Africa could be a leader in that process. His legacy is unique one.

Which is why I shake my head in such complete astonishment, at the sheer buffoonery of some commenters -who have keyed on just his early life. Nelson Mandela's life cannot be examined in an American context. Those who try to do so are fools and idiots.

I advise anyone who rants and raves about the idea of Mandela being a communist, to go back and read "Cry The Beloved Country" sometime. And then go read it again. Apartheid stayed afloat on a river of violence and oppression, and while South African tried to halt the advance of history, the world went on to pass it by. What made Mandela great was that when he finally got the chance to assume power-he well understood the powder keg of emotions that had been repressed for so many years-and worked to make the transition to black majority rule a lot more orderly than many would have expected. For the complicated world of South Africa, that was nothing short of a miracle.

Most Americans who rant and rave about Mandela's Marxism don't understand context-nor do they appear to understand much of South African history since the "vortrekkers" arrived in the 1800's.  First and foremost, Mandela was an advocate of economic and social justice. There is nothing wrong with that-and if anything he was ahead of his time. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". The National Party used the fear of communism much to its advantage all through the 60's and 70's. And like it or not-the United States aided them for a long time in that effort. Or do we forget the fact that even Saint Ronnie aided and abetted apartheid?

Ronald Reagan was angry. It was October 1986, and his veto against the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act had just been overridden — and by a Republican-controlled Senate, at that.

He had appeared on TV a month earlier to warn Americans against the Anti-Apartheid Act, decrying it as "immoral" and "utterly repugnant." Congress disagreed, and one month later, it produced the two-thirds majority needed to override Reagan and pass tough new measures against South Africa's apartheid government. These measures included a ban on bank loans and new investments in South Africa, a sharp reduction of imports, and prevented most South African officials from traveling to the United States. The Act also called for the repeal of apartheid laws and the release of political prisoners like African National Congress (ANC) leader Nelson Mandela, who had spent the last 23 years in prison.

It is difficult to fully comprehend the evils of apartheid today. Blacks were denied citizenship and the right to vote. They were forcibly relocated into impoverished reservations. People of color were barred from operating businesses or owning land inside white areas, which comprised most of the country. Sexual relations or marriage between people of color and whites was strictly forbidden. Racial segregation was enforced in public areas, including schools, hospitals, trains, beaches, bridges, churches and theaters. To enforce apartheid, the government often resorted to police brutality, the imprisonment and assassination of political dissidents, and the murder of black protesters.

The United States had a complicated relationship with South Africa. Hawks in the U.S. national security complex had argued since 1948 that South Africa was an important ally in the fight against communism. Their arguments persuaded presidents from Truman to Nixon to stifle criticisms of apartheid in the interest of maintaining good relations with the white South African government, whose leaders surpassed Joseph McCarthy in their anticommunist zeal.

Reagan thought he was right. But he was wrong. And so are people who are fixated with Mandela's so called "communism". Like a lot of my viewpoints of today and yesteryear-the world in the aggregate has rejected them. I my long for the sun never setting on the British Empire and all male warships-but the world has passed those ideas by. It is what it is.

Let me repeat. You cannot look at Nelson Mandela's life through any prism but a South African one. Go back and study some of the history.

And then honor a truly great man who hopefully set his country on better course than many of his counterparts in Africa. He's not Ghandi. But South Africa is not India either. 

"What's the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter?" Which side of the aisle you are on. 

And never forget he lost 27 years of his life to a prison cell. That changes people.

God speed and give you rest and peace, Mr Mandela.

Today is Memorial Day-and fortunately for me, I am alive, and spending it at home. For a lot of Soldiers, Sailors, Airman and Marines that is not true.  So it is very important that we remember their sacrifices-and honor their memories. Today I wanted to re-post about one such sacrifice-one that I wrote about a few years ago, of a brave man who gave his life so that his shipmates may live. Fate and his duty as a Plane Commander had placed him in this position and as the post lays out below, it was a terrifying event to be sure. In memory of Steven Zilberman:

Spent the last five days in France. It was outstanding-especially as we went to visit the Normandy Beaches. Pix to follow over the next few days.

So here is where I spent my 4th-no fire works, but a lot of sincere feeling for the folks who can never leave this place:

“Not for the dead, not for the more than fifty million real dead in the world’s worst catastrophe: victors and vanquished, combatants and civilians, people of so many nations, men, women and children, all cut down. For them, there can be no new earthly dawn. Yet though their bones lie in the darkness of the grave, they will not have died in vain, if their remembrance can lead us from the long, long time of war to the time of peace. ” -Herman Wouk

I wanted to write a quick note about the tragic loss of Robin Williams. His death will most probably be ruled a suicide. And I expect ( and in some of the worst corners of the internet-we are already seeing) the holier than thou brigades are already spouting venom-not understanding in the least the struggles one must deal with, once you get the Scarlett “AA” tagged upon you.

Its common knowledge that Williams struggled with issues from addiction. What most of the do-gooders seem to ignore, is the heavy burden America’s system of shoving you into the hell that is AA does to you. Addiction treatment is not about stopping drinking. Plenty of people do that for protracted periods of time with no effort. It is the idea that they foist upon you that you can never do it again-that creates the inner conflict that grows and grows and grows. Especially since it is complete and total bullshit-most alcoholics recover on their own, and do perfectly fine drinking again, once they realize that there is personal responsibility. The treatment industry is about control-not fluids. It’s about their iron clad demand that you cede control of your life to someone who in all probability is more fucked up than you are. And they stick a double whammy on you in that they tell you, that you can never take that control back.

Only by rejecting their ideas-and demanding to live your life on your own terms can you ever get some peace back. I know, because I lived through the hell of having a worthless bastard tell me how I had to live my life. It took luck and a great deal of anger and planning to escape from the shackles of the “program” he abandoned me into. I don’t think I can ever forgive him for his callousness and indifference.

What does this have to do with Robin Williams? Well, a lot I think. The conflict of being a talented individual, knowing you are talented, and then being forced to be subjected to an idea that you are worthless and powerless-is a huge conflict. It creates inner struggles and a feeling of futility at being told you are not “like everyone else”. Even when you are. it takes a great deal of struggle to break free.

Not everyone is up to the struggle-no matter how successful they are.

So all the people who so easily dismiss his struggle-I have no use for. The trolls who have been coming out and writing really reprehensible things-I also have no use for. They may think it can never happen to them-trust me, it can. And don’t kid yourself, your so-called friends and allies will abandon you in heartbeat. Such is the nature of America’s coerced treatment machine.

So God rest the soul of Robin Williams, and if he is any just will grant him access to glory. To all those who attack him after the fact-I spit upon you.

I loved a lot of his movies and I think he was a gifted and talented man. Since I was aware of him from my college years-his work literally spanned the length of my adult life. And he was great.

He deserves peace and a place in heaven. Those who think otherwise, can leave my sight now.