Christmas. Ah, the time to be generous.
People buy expensive gifts for their family.
But some people do a lot more than that. It's the time when people adopt a kind soul for a day, and visit the sick in the hospital and take medicine, visit orphaned children, things like that.
They go to the section where people have cancer, and take aspirin and antibiotics. Not doctors and funds for cancer research, or even morphine, or an open discussion of the future of their family, and teachings on the meaning of death. Aspirin. It's what they got donated.
Then they go to the section where people have heart problems, and bring aspirin and antibiotics. Also no doctors, no hearts, no operations.
They visit the children who have no parents. They bring toys. Not parents, real or adopted. No campaigning for better schools, food, or treatment of children all year round. Teddy bears.
It's better than nothing, they say. Yes - it's more than nothing. Barely.
Then, the next day, they go back to work, not caring anymore, valuing money above all things, and not worrying about whether their companies create more suffering in the world or do anything useful for humanity. Just how much they make. They work for the oil industry, the weapons industry, automobiles, banking, any corporation - as long as they get money.
Christmas is over, after all.
Monday, December 25, 2006
I propose a law against killing people.
We could start there. That's what I'd like.
People say there's already such a law. Yes, but it doesn't work, because people are killed all over the place.
People die in so-called accidents, when everyone suspects it was not. Powerful people frequently order up secret killings. In war, not so secret, thousands are killed, and nobody is made responsible. People are killed in state executions. People are afraid of being killed for openly saying their opinions. Business people make and export weapons useful only in killing, with war and arms traffic an integral part of such business. Nobody is found responsible.
People kill for self defense, kill people on their property. They kill those they accuse of something. The police kills. Criminals of all varieties kill - powerful and destitute, wealthy and poor, organized internationally or lone fools.
The truth is, everyone can own weapons, say they'd like to kill, threaten to kill, then arrange some way to get away with killing. They most likely would even say they are in favor of law, and against homicide.
Well, a law that outlaws killing including some paragraphs such as:
- All killing is a crime, in all cases. There is no justification.
- The sentence, in all cases, is to work to repair the damage done to society. To publicly be shamed until apologizing. To work for the well being of the survivors of those killed, or of other families broken by deaths, help children whose parents were killed, or mothers, fathers, and brothers of those killed. All of the killers wages, labor, time and efforts are to go to helping people, until some decision is reached that they have repaired their damages.
- Soldiers, politicians, policemen, in particular, must repair the damage done for their killing. As professionals, trained and paid to defend life, society, and prevent fear in general, they must be trained to never have to actually use their weapons. If they do reach the point of having to use their weapons, and actually kill anyone, it's because they either didn't do their job right, failing to prevent a situation of violence, or just killed outright. In either case, they must also repair the damage they have done.
- There is no longer any such thing as "justified" killing. Killing a person who is violent and dangerous is in itself also violent and dangerous. Other methods must be used to prevent violence. If someone kills and feels it was justified, there is still damage done to society, there are still friends and family of the dead, who suffer, and need help. The killer is still responsible for their well being. The reason for killing is not relevant.
If such things are not done, we will continue in an eternal circle of killing, resentment, vengeance, and more "justified" killing. The only medicine is complete - no more killing, no more reasoning of why and when killing is permitted.
We could start there. That's what I'd like.
People say there's already such a law. Yes, but it doesn't work, because people are killed all over the place.
People die in so-called accidents, when everyone suspects it was not. Powerful people frequently order up secret killings. In war, not so secret, thousands are killed, and nobody is made responsible. People are killed in state executions. People are afraid of being killed for openly saying their opinions. Business people make and export weapons useful only in killing, with war and arms traffic an integral part of such business. Nobody is found responsible.
People kill for self defense, kill people on their property. They kill those they accuse of something. The police kills. Criminals of all varieties kill - powerful and destitute, wealthy and poor, organized internationally or lone fools.
The truth is, everyone can own weapons, say they'd like to kill, threaten to kill, then arrange some way to get away with killing. They most likely would even say they are in favor of law, and against homicide.
Well, a law that outlaws killing including some paragraphs such as:
- All killing is a crime, in all cases. There is no justification.
- The sentence, in all cases, is to work to repair the damage done to society. To publicly be shamed until apologizing. To work for the well being of the survivors of those killed, or of other families broken by deaths, help children whose parents were killed, or mothers, fathers, and brothers of those killed. All of the killers wages, labor, time and efforts are to go to helping people, until some decision is reached that they have repaired their damages.
- Soldiers, politicians, policemen, in particular, must repair the damage done for their killing. As professionals, trained and paid to defend life, society, and prevent fear in general, they must be trained to never have to actually use their weapons. If they do reach the point of having to use their weapons, and actually kill anyone, it's because they either didn't do their job right, failing to prevent a situation of violence, or just killed outright. In either case, they must also repair the damage they have done.
- There is no longer any such thing as "justified" killing. Killing a person who is violent and dangerous is in itself also violent and dangerous. Other methods must be used to prevent violence. If someone kills and feels it was justified, there is still damage done to society, there are still friends and family of the dead, who suffer, and need help. The killer is still responsible for their well being. The reason for killing is not relevant.
If such things are not done, we will continue in an eternal circle of killing, resentment, vengeance, and more "justified" killing. The only medicine is complete - no more killing, no more reasoning of why and when killing is permitted.
Friday, December 15, 2006
Today Rumsfeld gave his goodbye and left. I don't know why all the honors, if he's screwed everyone. A farewall speech? Military honors?
The man might still be tried for war crimes, and they are giving him honors!
What really got me was his speech.
“Today, it should be clear that not only is weakness provocative,” Mr. Rumsfeld said, standing at a lectern with President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney at his side, “but the perception of weakness on our part can be provocative as well.”
I can see where he's coming from, or better yet, where's going with this - but it's a lie, and a mistake.
It's a lie for Rumsfeld, because he knows it's false. It's a mistake for many other poor folks, who will believe him.
Following that logic, if I don't carry a weapon, Rummy says I am provoking confrontation. Little girls, says Rummy, are provocative, as well as old people. Anyone, according to him, who is not the absolute most poweful of all, is provoking a confrontation. In sum - if someone or something cannot or does not defend themselves, says Rumsfeld, they are provocative.
It's a good idea to be strong and defend oneself.
It's quite a different thing, however, to go around shooting people at random from a tank or an airplane, killing hundreds of thousands of people, and then claim you are defending yourself from them.
And that's exactly what has been doing, and is trying to get others to continue to do.
As if it weren't enough, he nearly says he would rather have more terrorism within the United States!
The man might still be tried for war crimes, and they are giving him honors!
What really got me was his speech.
“Today, it should be clear that not only is weakness provocative,” Mr. Rumsfeld said, standing at a lectern with President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney at his side, “but the perception of weakness on our part can be provocative as well.”
I can see where he's coming from, or better yet, where's going with this - but it's a lie, and a mistake.
It's a lie for Rumsfeld, because he knows it's false. It's a mistake for many other poor folks, who will believe him.
Following that logic, if I don't carry a weapon, Rummy says I am provoking confrontation. Little girls, says Rummy, are provocative, as well as old people. Anyone, according to him, who is not the absolute most poweful of all, is provoking a confrontation. In sum - if someone or something cannot or does not defend themselves, says Rumsfeld, they are provocative.
It's a good idea to be strong and defend oneself.
It's quite a different thing, however, to go around shooting people at random from a tank or an airplane, killing hundreds of thousands of people, and then claim you are defending yourself from them.
And that's exactly what has been doing, and is trying to get others to continue to do.
As if it weren't enough, he nearly says he would rather have more terrorism within the United States!
Sunday, December 10, 2006
In New York, people don't exist. OK, OK... it's not quite like that, it's just that you aren't treated as a person, recognized as a person. Store attendants don't say hello, goodbye, or look at the person the money came attached to. Everyone grumbles when you talk to them. And so on. It's as if nobody existed, nobody cared if others exist, everyone wanted to be alone.
Saturday, November 25, 2006
So these lying politicians claim to be "open to all proposals" on how to get the USArmy out or Iraq, stop the civil war, and end the killing and dying, of Iraqis and Americans.
Sure they are. And I am the sole inheritor of a Nigerian billionaire.
If they are open to proposals, here are some items for them to debate openly. Let us see some actual debate.
1 - Following the example of the pan-african peace force, and the UN peace forces, form a peace force of arabic/islamic democratic countries, together with African countries, under supervision from the United Nations, to keep the peace in the country. Remove all military forces from countries of the "coalition" coerced together by the US. Including the underground and undercover Israeli and CIA "advisors", psychological warfare agents, "intelligence" questioning torture centers, and other assorted US-sponsored terror forces.
2 - Re-open full elections in Iraq, this time with no undue outside influences and pressures from the US. Give each city a wide range of independence in everything apart from armed groups.
3 - Guarantee 100% of Iraqi oil profits go to Iraqi city, village and community organizations. Get the US completely out of the Iraqi oil ministry, oil field development, repair, pipeline repair, fuel supply and transportation, and leave that completely in the hand of Arabic companies and governments.
4 - Allow US soldiers to speak freely to the media, removing all "security" and other restraints on them, to inform the US public of what they really see and do there. Allow US soldiers to actually become conscientious objectors, refuse orders they consider illegal or even just plain disagree with. Allow US soldiers to have their brain back, in other words.
5 - Allow reporters to go where they want and film and photograph what they want, publish in US media without censoring disguised as "reprimanding" "Security screening" from US Governemental agencies.
6 - Allow Iraqis to come to the US and tell their stories to universities, forums, through video, internet, and other communication means.
Why, if the objective was actually "arabic democracy", the US could actually claim victory at that point! Of course, it wouldn't and won't be, because "us victory" would actually mean US corporations controlling oil extraction and commerce, along with some government friendly enough to allow most, or all, profits to be siphoned discreetly out of the country, as has happened for decades in many other countries.
Sure they are. And I am the sole inheritor of a Nigerian billionaire.
If they are open to proposals, here are some items for them to debate openly. Let us see some actual debate.
1 - Following the example of the pan-african peace force, and the UN peace forces, form a peace force of arabic/islamic democratic countries, together with African countries, under supervision from the United Nations, to keep the peace in the country. Remove all military forces from countries of the "coalition" coerced together by the US. Including the underground and undercover Israeli and CIA "advisors", psychological warfare agents, "intelligence" questioning torture centers, and other assorted US-sponsored terror forces.
2 - Re-open full elections in Iraq, this time with no undue outside influences and pressures from the US. Give each city a wide range of independence in everything apart from armed groups.
3 - Guarantee 100% of Iraqi oil profits go to Iraqi city, village and community organizations. Get the US completely out of the Iraqi oil ministry, oil field development, repair, pipeline repair, fuel supply and transportation, and leave that completely in the hand of Arabic companies and governments.
4 - Allow US soldiers to speak freely to the media, removing all "security" and other restraints on them, to inform the US public of what they really see and do there. Allow US soldiers to actually become conscientious objectors, refuse orders they consider illegal or even just plain disagree with. Allow US soldiers to have their brain back, in other words.
5 - Allow reporters to go where they want and film and photograph what they want, publish in US media without censoring disguised as "reprimanding" "Security screening" from US Governemental agencies.
6 - Allow Iraqis to come to the US and tell their stories to universities, forums, through video, internet, and other communication means.
Why, if the objective was actually "arabic democracy", the US could actually claim victory at that point! Of course, it wouldn't and won't be, because "us victory" would actually mean US corporations controlling oil extraction and commerce, along with some government friendly enough to allow most, or all, profits to be siphoned discreetly out of the country, as has happened for decades in many other countries.
Friday, November 03, 2006
Sunday, September 17, 2006
I've spent some time thinking of war, and what causes it. Why do people get so stupid, to kill eath other, and not even know for certain if there is a reason for it?
To be efficient to combat the problem, we need to define what it is, and a plan as to what to do about it.
The problem is violence and its destruction. Not just war, but violence hidden in the hearts of people. With practice, one can see it, and sometimes predict their behaviour, just by talking to them.
It begins with lack of faith. NO, not somebody's arbitrary god, in which some dishonest investor tells you how to behave, or some naive person repeats rules blindly.
Each person needs faith in the future, in other human beings, and in oneself as a human being.
Without faith, there is fear. Fear leads to violence, then destruction.
Look at the politicians trying to get their wars, which is to their advantage in some way. They preach fear. They make the enemy enormous, scary, dangerous. They speak of future calamities, wars, destruction. The people feel fear, and support war. They volunteer for the war - to defend themselves, of course! Then commit the acts they were afraid of. War, destruction, and calamities.
If its not with war, it is with crime, or races, or religions, or immigration, that fear of some people is preached, then violence is preached, organized, and done, from some armed group upon another group.
So our problem - or as some would say, our enemy - is not some ideology, economic theory, or group of people, or technology.
The problem is lack of faith. And we experience it as lack of faith in the neighbor, the fellow citizen, the other human beings.
I'd like to try to reduce violence, death, destruction.
If you want that also, I'd say let's try to have faith in them, in yourself, and your own ability to talk or learn to talk to them.
To be efficient to combat the problem, we need to define what it is, and a plan as to what to do about it.
The problem is violence and its destruction. Not just war, but violence hidden in the hearts of people. With practice, one can see it, and sometimes predict their behaviour, just by talking to them.
It begins with lack of faith. NO, not somebody's arbitrary god, in which some dishonest investor tells you how to behave, or some naive person repeats rules blindly.
Each person needs faith in the future, in other human beings, and in oneself as a human being.
Without faith, there is fear. Fear leads to violence, then destruction.
Look at the politicians trying to get their wars, which is to their advantage in some way. They preach fear. They make the enemy enormous, scary, dangerous. They speak of future calamities, wars, destruction. The people feel fear, and support war. They volunteer for the war - to defend themselves, of course! Then commit the acts they were afraid of. War, destruction, and calamities.
If its not with war, it is with crime, or races, or religions, or immigration, that fear of some people is preached, then violence is preached, organized, and done, from some armed group upon another group.
So our problem - or as some would say, our enemy - is not some ideology, economic theory, or group of people, or technology.
The problem is lack of faith. And we experience it as lack of faith in the neighbor, the fellow citizen, the other human beings.
I'd like to try to reduce violence, death, destruction.
If you want that also, I'd say let's try to have faith in them, in yourself, and your own ability to talk or learn to talk to them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)