Redeeming the Pope: Preface

Right in the middle of our dual howls, Spartacus still managed to set down his flintlock long enough to weigh in on one other point in our two big Sunday-tirades. In it – during my turn at the steaming mike – I mentioned a photo at a particular UK website, adding that the site's owner-writer

 […P]uts credence in the much ballyhooed claim that the Vatican was a Nazi collaborator up to and during World War II. I want to address that in another blog – this ludicrous assertion is demonstrably untrue (despite the photograph Condell offers out of any context, showing a pair of smiling cardinals shaking hands with Hitler), and it walks along the same intolerant path as that strode by the Holocaust-deniers.

Spartacus's comment to me on that posting included this statement, which floored me:

Regarding the pic of the Cardinals & Nazis -- I don't know the context of that pic, but I am under the impression that it has been fairly well established that the Catholic Church, if not outright collaborators with the Nazis, certainly didn't go too far to inconvenience themselves by opposing Hitler either. Of course, the Catholic Church was hardly unique in that regard -- other than a handful of courageous individual clergy, it's my understanding that organized religion was mostly mute on the subject of the Nazis?

I'm easily one of the top poster-children demonstrating the sad fact that there are some folks out there who have a modicum of brains, yet who've also taken as true an oft-repeated slander/slur or simple piece of hearsay. (My own cases in point being too numerous to mention; I'm confident they've been showing up here from time to time.)

Add to this a naïve-streak that I'll likely never grow out of (which isn't the same thing as a sweet innocence): having known Sparkster since Vietnam was the Iraq of its day, and well aware of his broad swath of skills and fields of knowledge, I was startled (and actually, unreasonably, angry) that he had come to accept this calumny.

My naïveté here is my automatically, non-consciously assuming that a good friend knows what I know.

There was only one thing for me to do, of course. With apologies to Spartacus, with whom I want to start looking at some immediate fallout from my posting of last Sunday's tirades, I'm pulling hard on the brakes of what I'd been mentally lining up for the next couple weeks here – picture, in fact, a huge brake lever that looks like the traditional railroad-track switcher. The image is apt – I’m sidelining the other stuff for now while I work on, and post here when complete, a document / response / essay I can also send out whenever I run into this particular bit of silliness (including to that UK chap). I hope to have it up in a few days.

Stay tuned, folks… and start opening your minds, too – it's the only way to fill them. To once again quote the good admiral, Robert Heinlein, from Time Enough for Love:

If "everybody knows" such-and-such, then it ain't so, by at least ten thousand to one.


Blue Dog commented:


Blue Dog Aug 20, 2007
I will look forward to it. I basically assumed that there was no truth to those particular conspiracy theories. But my default position on most such theories is disbelief until I look into them myself. So it will be nice to get educated via your response.

Tirade the Second: The Powerlessness of Joe Every(wo)man

The second rant Spartacus and I are barking and growling over springboarded from the first, which I detailed in my previous posting here. That other issue – anti-Islam boneheadedness in the UK (and the US, by extension) – was triggered by a link Sparks had sent me, which took me to a British bloke's vide(tu)torial on how to be refined, pleasant, and still an intolerant jerk.

I bumped into another video while researching online in… I don't know; I think it was anti-Bush politics and humor after having sent Spartacus my reply. I'd planned (mostly out of paranoia) not to post the link here… but once again my neck is out a bit – so to speak; I've never been detained against my will and constitutional protections, and would rather not trigger the mechanism to earn that Dubya – I mean, dubious – privilege.

But I will include the link here; the video addresses (humorously) the issue of the limitations of American free speech. Much as with my previous posting, I do not endorse what the fellow appears to be saying behind his actual words, nor the image flashed up onscreen for a brief moment. But I like the humor in it, and really hope the young gentleman speaking on it doesn't find himself residing in a certain piece of American turf in Cuba, or behind a set of bars, somewhere far away from here, that officially do not exist.

Anyway, as a second followup to Sparty's original email to me, I sent him the following email. Do please bear in mind that my comments are entirely keyboard-in cheek:

Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 4:29 PM
Subject: RE: Provocative Video?

Now, here's how a provocative video should be done!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEQOvyGbBtY

The language is clean, it's funny… and may just motivate some folks to corrective action. But you didn't hear it from me.

Regards,

L. H. O'Swald

Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play? -- Andrew Johnson, 1865

Again, this was all in good, clean (but very irreverent) fun, and nothing more. I respect, and regard highly, the office of Commander-in-Chief (US)… just not the individual currently occupying that position. Heed the comedian's actual words, and ignore what you may think might be behind them, okay children?

Spartacus responded to me:

Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 12:37 AM
Subject: Re: Provocative Video?

Not that it would do much good--W is just the idiot figurehead, and by now the coup has pretty much realized its goals and is firmly entrenched.

Orwell's biggest mistake was calling it "1984".

JUST KIDDING--everything is doubleplusgood!

Winston

So I answered:

Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 4:15 PM
Subject: RE: Ungood!

Plus it would put Captain Sneer constitutionally in charge, rather than merely the fist (badly concealed) in W's glove. Thank God that this badministration's been propelled and guided by shortsighted greed and agendas – this nation would be doomed if George II's string-pullers had lined up a clear successor.

Now the rest of this country – more broke than before, and more polarized than ever – is left to clean up his horrid mess. Domestically, yeah, we can fix that. But it's too likely the US has been permanently ruined in the minds and eye of the rest of the reeling globe, vis-à-vis Iraq, and much of the Third-World world.

'Minds me of a quote of Heinlein's, from "Glory Road":

"Vox populi, vox dei" usually translates as "My God! How did we get into this mess?"

Regards,

Jubal Handsaw

At this point, a series of followup emails began slamming into my inbox:

Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 5:36 PM
Subject: Re: Ungood!

Dear friend, you are much more optimistic than I. As I said previously, the coup is over, and is well entrenched. We are now living in the fiction that was the late Roman Republic--a democracy in name only. In reality, we are living in an oligarchic dictatorship. Mark my words, the next president of the USA will be a Repugnantcan, not that having a Democrap at this point would make ANY difference. The rule of law has been overwritten, the Constitution is a sham, any opposition has been effectively hamstrung.

Once the sheeple at large begin to realize the enormity of what has happened in the past years things will only get worse as belated, yet ineffective opposition grows.

Better grab a copy of 1984--it's our new survival guide. Better yet, try to get off the grid now, arm yourself and head for the hills.

Never be afraid to laugh at yourself, after all, you could be missing out on the joke of the century. -- Dame Edna Everage

"Democrap" and "Repugnicant" are party labels I devised during the contentious 2000 presidential election that gave us the aforementioned "Vox populi, vox dei" quandary. Sparkly was as much the sour curmudgeon then, and voted (IIRC) with nadir – I mean, Nader. Sparkles' next email:

Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 9:10 PM
Subject: The Junta Has Decreed:

You Have No Rights

http://www.truthdig.com/interview/item/20070814_rothschild_transcript/

Yikes! While that one was still bouncing off my inbox's back wall, this one flew in:

Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 9:28 PM
Subject: This Hits It Right On The Head

From the comments section of the transcript link I sent you. This sums up my position perfectly:

Bush and his minders are just the latest corporate-sponsored mandarins in a 50-year war on the middle and working classes of America.

In 1956 Eisenhower warned America about the military industrial complex and how it robs the citizen and all humanity of its democratic rights.

Obviously...Ike saw what was coming and he left the soiree before it became the tragedy that is today.

Democracy is already dead...the only thing keeping America functioning as if it is a democracy is the momentum of traditional expectations among the lumpen who still believe the bullsh*t that is being shoveled at us through bought-off politicians and corporate-owned media.

Soon, with financial collapse, Peak Oil, systemic collapse and global warming on the horizon… the gloves of our authoritarianized government will have to come off in order to keep the working poor in their place. THE DISMANTLING OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS AND THE U.S. CONSTITUTION BY THE LATEST ASMINISTRATION IS FACILITATING THIS. Then most of America, duped into thinking that they have wealth through credit and a measure of control in their daily lives, will taste the bitter end of the holographic illusion we have been living in for the last 51 years.

BUSH and CHENEY are not pioneers in this extractive capitalism scheme that is truly returning America to a feudalistic state....they are merely the current handpicked players carrying out their orders from the richest of the rich who truly run this country. And they despise intellectualism, liberty and any social contract that benefits the "lower classes".

My advice to any American who owes more than they're worth or makes less than $300,000 a year: dig in, get off the grid, pay of your debt, know your friends and exits, prepare to do without, learn how to fight, and get ready to see unbelievable violence, death and misery in this country in the wake of the neocon revolution.

Brother! This was getting bleak!! And here came his next email:

Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 10:17 PM
Subject: Yet Another Bullseye

This article goes far to explain what is/was at stake, and why/how it is suppressed/subverted, crushed.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/15/1432250

This one's another sober read. I skimmed it – Naomi Klein argues her point(s) with genuine intellect and familiarity – but I still need to give it a much more thorough read, and mull it further.

At this point online, I was finally able to get an email in edgewise:

Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 11:30 PM
Subject: RE: Yet Another Bullsarse

Pardon my bluntness, bud, but who lit your short fuse?

As long as we live, we have hope (and have to hope) – dum spiro, spero, as St. Andrew the Apostle is reported to have said. And you've got two very crucial reasons to hope, right there under that roof: wife, and kid(s). No matter how evenly you and the Mrs. have split your respective roles down the middle, you are still fully responsible for their lives, their security… and their futures. You start making like the average ostrich and cramming your head in the sand, you might just as well tell the man to stick it to you.

 (Excuse me.)

This country, yes, is largely in the hands of the military-industrial complex, wisely feeding the sheeple all the bread and circuses they want, and then some. However, and nota bene, my friend: we've not been disarmed of a) our firearms (much as I detest them) and b) our means of speedy communication. Granted, a good EMP could take down the Net (cell and computers both) faster than you could say "pap fills my skull". But just let 'em try.

So long as a huge groundswell doesn't suddenly yank [away] all the corporate benefits and breaks (much as that's badly needed), then the evil pigs on top of the heap will allow the transition from Repugnicant to Democrack, since either major party has a vested interest in keeping that pipeline open.

The current badministration will fall next Fall, and it is likely that a Democrap will take it. I agree that – at this point – Hilary is too polarizing (not her fault), and Obama is too inexperienced; and Edwards might just be a bit too far from the front of the fray. But we are in too much of a cesspit (excuse me again) overseas for the lemmings to vote in[to office] more of the same. There will be a change.

What must change (and just for starters; these are the biggest) are ludicrous governmental policies toward a) education funding; b) health-care funding; c) environmental repercussions; d) the military as an extension of immediate national "interest". These can be accomplished under either party (e.g., King Ahnold of Kellifonnya has been able to thumb his nose with ease at his own party), though the Dems seem more committed toward these ends.

And for now, much of this can be done without pinching the corporate hawgs beyond their limits of tolerance. "Hogs"? Shoot; I'm picturing something that combines the worst traits of lolling pigs, and cruising, hungry sharks. But whatever; you keep them fed, though gradually more leanly, and they'll largely ignore us while we work at the littler things (for beginners: health care, adequate money for our schools). Later, we can begin dismantling some of the ludicrous, entrenched legislation (how about term limits for our representatives? And let's flush the idea of funding government by casino!).

My faith provides me a foundation that gives me cause to hope for humanity, despite our insistence on repeated self-rape. [Excuse me once again, folks; I'd told him I was going to be blunt!] It also pushes me to do more than just either ignore, or seethe at, the injustices of the world. Thus far I've done little against them… but even a bag of old shirts dropped off at Goodwill, a handful of money stuffed in the Salvation Army kettle, does something positive. So does pressuring our legal representatives, regardless of their (and our) party-affiliation.

We do need to seethe about the injustices, the disparities, of course – and as loudly and publicly as possible. The raving man on the corner, half a century ago, has been supplanted by a dozen pasty-faced geeks posting video and photos of elected crooks being busted yet again, and setting up and maintaining laudably iconoclastic websites. These actions need to be encouraged… but I'd like to figure a way, as well, that doesn't risk desensitizing us, or leading us into feeling that all/any action is futile. And it must not stop at simply ranting and chanting, either.

I do not, and will not, give up, sir. I urge [of] you the same.

Regards,

Patrick Heinrich

I'd been picturing poor Spartacus getting gloomier and gloomier as further discouraging news rolls in to Sparks Central. I needn't have fretted; he answered me:

Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2007 1:55 AM

Thank you for your passionate reply.

If I gave you the impression that I've given up hope, well, that was not my intention. If I had really given up hope, I wouldn't be reading any of this nor passing it on. I'm like a pendulum, swinging from a desire to not have to think about such things, because the enormity of it all is overwhelming, and a desire to not bury my head in the sand, because I think the IDEAL of America is worth fighting for. It is these conflicting impulses, plus the indifference and widespread lack of understanding among the American people which I find so frustrating.

And yes, I am acutely aware of my wife and child(ren)--without them, I would be bandolier bedecked, in DC, h(a)unting politicians.

We are on the verge of martial law. It has already been instituted in some places/circumstances (Nawlins post Katrina), and against individuals (post 9/11 dragnet detainees). Precedents have been set (suspension of habeas corpus, trampling the Constitution), other mechanisms are in place (Patriot Act, stacking the judiciary, neutering Congress). Overt or covert, bit by bit, we are falling under the yoke of repression.

"> We do need to seethe about the injustices, the disparities, of course - and as loudly and publicly as possible. ...These actions need to be encouraged... but I'd like to figure a way, too, that doesn't risk desensitizing us, or leading us into feeling that all/any action is futile. And it must not stop at simply ranting and chanting, either."

I agree with you--but [not] what/how to do. What frustrates me so much is a) too many people seem to think there are no real fundamental problems, or b) think the current political landscape will bring about any effective change.

Last election, Democraps swept into office with much ballyhoo. What has been accomplished--NOTHING. D & R, R & D, it makes no difference--they are just the dog and pony show to keep the plebes distracted while the real playahs continue to run things from behind the curtain.

You have too much faith in the system. The system cares nothing for us, and will do nothing for us. It rewards our faith by feeding us platitudes and decoys while slowly bleeding us dry. You can't work within a system which is totally rotten.

I'm afraid the only way to effect real change is to return to the militant mindset of the '60s & '70s (17 and 19). Subvert, resist, revolt.

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. -- J.K. Galbraith

"I think the IDEAL of America is worth fighting for" – Hear, hear!! Today we stand – or squat – terribly far from the ideals on which this proud nation was founded, and on which it flourished for so very long. But, no, I don't have a whole lot of faith in the system. However, I’m also not ready to join an armed rabble (not that this is what Spartan is getting at). I do agree with the idea of reviving the Vietnam-era (and Revolutionary-era) outlook on building, rebuilding, and saving our country.

I think it's already rolling, in fact. We've seen a wonderful series of rallies and other movements against the Iraq war, for just one example. The groundswell that put the Dems back into a (tiny) majority of Congress rode in on the outrage of the masses. I believe that this is more than the "dog and pony show" that it looks like to Spartacus. But, yes, it's deeply frustrating and terribly disappointing that they've not yet accomplished more this year – my expectations were higher… but the remain so, also.

Further bottom line: I repeat that we have at least a bit less to be anxious about, in that there really is no "son of George" standing in the rightist wings, ready to don George Jr.'s dollar-stuffed, Halliburton-furnished, mantle. A true coup looking to ensconce itself permanently would have furnished solid continuity, a clear successor. This is what I meant in the first place by saying that this gang of crooks and idiots has been shortsighted.

Thank God.

 

Hatred… With a Stiff Upper Lip

Via email, friend Spartacus and I are engaged in two parallel online tirades – he's been singing lead, and I'll take up a bit of a harmony-vocal, but then I swing into counterpoint before he and I clear our throats and sing our tunes a little more clearly. We never hit all the same notes; and generally this makes for good music, though (by the nature of music as such) it can also quickly degrade into a horrid, jarring cacophony.

The first of our joint tirades began with a brief email he sent me late this week:

Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 8:06 PM
Subject: Provocative Video?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=418_1176494781

The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern. -- Lord Acton

The worm looked like it was worth a nibble, so I checked it out. And let me propose a neologism: videtorial. This is an editorial comment/rant disseminated via video, generally through email, or by YouTube and its cousins. So if you hear anybody use the word "videtorial", you heard it first here, folks. Royalties not necessary, but thanks for the kind offer. (Whoops; the word's already been coined – Google pulls up "about 271" instances of its use out there. Oh, well; I've got others.)

And speaking of royalty: the above link takes you to a videtorial videorecorded by an interesting British chap by name of Pat Condell, Apparently he's an iconoclastic standup comedian – in the true, historical sense of iconoclasm, in fact. His website's tagline reads: "Hi, I'm Pat Condell. I don't respect your beliefs and I don't care if you're offended. Cheers." Some of his comments are downright funny to me, especially most of his Rosco the Pig cartoons.

But he also puts credence in the much ballyhooed claim that the Vatican was a Nazi collaborator up to and during World War II. I want to address that in another blog – this ludicrous assertion is demonstrably untrue (despite the photograph Condell offers out of any context, showing a pair of smiling cardinals shaking hands with Hitler), and walks along the same intolerant path as that strode by the Holocaust-deniers. Again, though, that is too big an issue for this current tirade – I'll get to it; don't worry.

Let's go back to Condell's video. In case it gets pulled down, I'm tacking its full text down on the bottom of this posting, after Spartacus and I remark on it a bit. Mr. Condell's focus is on the handful of vociferous, incendiary, jihadist brand of radical Islamic clerics, and their brain-dead followers, who are causing much consternation in various countries – in the UK, in this instance. Since they get the lion's share of the press coverage on present-day Muslims, it's easy for superficial people (of all levels of intelligence) to make the shallow intuitive leap that these represent all of Islam.

I wrote back to Spartacus that same evening:

Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 9:16 PM

Yes, provocative video – thanks.

Most of the videtorial is well reasoned, and the gentleman has a lovely accent, and delivers quite well. (And loses points for his one utterance of a no-no word.) But that simply doesn't fully hide the wide tarbrush he's using.

What if we replace some of his occurrences of "Muslims" with, say, "Blacks"? Or "Hispanics"? How about "women"? Blood bubbling over now?

It's the old, old argument of condemning the whole group due to a loud (but dangerous, yes) minority within it.

I’m thinking about tracking down his text, or even transcribing the barmy thing myself, and posting a quick rail about it. Hmm…

Might just send it over to Anon E. Mouse first, and see how quickly she and her NRA-saluting buddies jump into their gunrack-adorned pickups and head over to the nearest mosque – I believe there is one within half an hour of her home, in fact.

Now if you can excuse me, I need to go f!reb0mb a synagogue.

Regards,

David Puke

My signoff is, of course, a reference to America's favorite white supremacist, David Duke. And if you do, yourself, have occasional inclinations toward superficiality, let me assure you that I did not send the link to my conservative friend, Ms. Mouse, whom I love dearly and whom I've respectfully skewered here for her convictions. ("Convictions make convicts", quoth Robert Anton Wilson. It's a great line, but I disagree.) And of course I was not at all serious about the synagogue!

I've expounded here before on the issue of jihadism vs. true Islam – and though I'm Catholic, I do feel I have an understanding of, and some educated feel for, Islam that Mr. Pat Condell lacks. Here are a couple instances where I've tried (likely futilely) to straighten out some folks' attitudinal myopia on Islam; let me not repeat myself:

http://1mt2mb.blogspot.com/2007/04/lost-legacy-black-white-and-blue.html

http://1mt2mb.blogspot.com/2007/03/soul-survival-continued-iffy-on-biffi.html (about three quarters of the way down)

…except to point out that Condell, in his videtorial, is subtexting about a lack of tolerance in the more radical faction of the UK's Islamic community… yet himself shows no tolerance for these folks.

Just one example of his own intolerance (lurking under calm, smiling face and cultivated accent) is his whine on Muslim English women wearing the niqab, or veil covering the face. How, sir, does this differ from our Jewish cousins (including one of my brothers-in-law) wearing a yarmulke? Do you know any Christian men or women who wear crosses/crucifixes? Wiccans and their star? Why do you draw the line here if the woman chooses voluntarily to wear it?

He leads off with the smug, assuring statement that "here in the UK, religion was always pretty dormant until Muslims came along". I suppose he's forgotten about wholesale purge and persecution of Catholics under Henry VIII and Elizabeth I. In the UK, religion was at times anything but dormant.

This puts me in mind of an animated scene in Pink Floyd's "The Wall" film, where a Union Jack is standing proudly above a war-ravaged countryside. Then the diagonals drop off, piece by piece, and we're left with a stark white cross, standing there rigidly on the ruined landscape and leaking blood, which trickles into a dirty gutter-grate. I couldn't find an online image, but was able to create this one…

…from a chilling video, which includes that sequence, from the fillm. While digging around on the 'net, I also happened on this image, which is even more frightening - and likely an abomination to nearly every Brit walking this Earth; I don't blame them.

While we're abominating, here's the text of Pat Condell's videtorial. (I'm using British spelling, and a modicum of British punctuation as well… except I really do prefer to use commas.) Please note: I'm posting this to inform, but most certainly not to endorse. I support the right of individuals to express their opinions peacefully (which he has done), and other individuals to express their own counterpoints just as peacefully, which I've done.

Hi. I'd like to say a few words about Islam — if I may.

Now, here in the UK, religion was always pretty dormant until Muslims came along and started burning books and passing death sentences and generally demanding special treatment for no good reason. But they've shown everybody else what can be achieved by bullying and intimidation, so now, every crackpot in the country feels entitled to respect for their precious beliefs — beliefs often lifted wholesale from the ramblings of some ancient desert nomad with a psychological disorder. It does seem quite ironic to me, that the very people who have clearly made no attempt to think for themselves are always the most vocal in demanding respect for their "ideas".

But some Muslims go further than this and claim that they are being victimized in British society. But I don't really believe that's true. I do think a lot of people are getting fed up with hearing about Muslims all the time, and they wish that Muslims would shut up and get on with their lives, instead of constantly bellyaching about nothing — but that's not the same as being victimized.

But because we live in a liberal democracy, and therefore have certain double standards to maintain, any criticism of Islam, or of Muslims, always draws the immediate accusation of "Islamophobia": a dishonest word, which seeks to portray legitimate comment as some kind of hate crime — when the truth is that Islam has a chip on its shoulder the size of a mosque, and it looks to take offence at every opportunity. Some Muslims, it seems, are almost permanently offended about something or other, and yet you never hear a peep out of any of these people when some young Muslim girl is murdered for bringing dishonour upon her insane family. Suddenly, everyone's looking at the floor, then.

They keep telling us that Islam is a religion of peace, but all the evidence points to a religion of war. Its holy book urges Muslims to conquer the world and subjugate everyone to the rule of God.

If Islam had its way, elections would become a thing of the past, and the rest of us would be living in the past, for the foreseeable future. And some people are very keen to bring this situation about — especially the loud-mouthed, rabble-rousing Islamic clerics, who we always hear praising the suicide bombers as "glorious martyrs".

And yet, curiously, you never hear about any of these enthusiasts blowing themselves up for the glory of God; they are always very keen to delegate that particular honour — despite the guarantee of all those luscious virgins waiting for them in Heaven; these guys are so selfless that they can always find somebody more deserving.

Now of course, the whole seventy-two virgins scenario has become something of a comedy staple, and with good reason. But it does have one serious problem, and that is that the virgins are likely to be good, wholesome Islamic virgins, because there won't be any Infidel riffraff in Heaven. So, presumably they'll have brothers and cousins and uncles who are all determined to defend their honour by killing anyone who makes eye contact with them.

They haven't really thought this whole thing through, it seems to me. For this, they blow themselves up? Wouldn't it be easier just to get an inflatable woman and blow her up? And then if one of your friends happens to glance at her with lustful eyes, why, you can simply stone her to death and get another one, in the usual way.

Also, I think, Muslim women in Britain who cover their faces are mentally ill. Now, I realize that in some parts of the world women don't actually have any choice in this matter, governed as they are by primitive pigs, whose only achievement in life is to be born with a penis in one hand and a Koran in the other. But it just seems to me that if God had intended you to cover your face, then, in His wisdom he would have provided you with a flap of skin for the purpose. Of course, if it gave you any sexual pleasure, it would have to be removed. That goes without saying.

But I don't want to be too hard on Islam, here, for two reasons. Firstly, because I don't want to be murdered by some hysterical, self-righteous, carpet-chewing, book-burning muppet with sh!t for brains. And secondly, I think we do need to make allowances for Islam, because we have to remember it is quite a young religion. So, maybe right now it's just going through a "difficult age" — a little headstrong, full of itself, thinks it knows all the answers. But, I'm sure it will learn.

I think years from now, a lot of intelligent Muslims will be looking back at all this mediaevalism and jihad nonsense with embarrassment and shame — like the Germans do with the Nazis. And maybe then we can all have a good laugh about it.

But in the meantime, I think that any religion that demands earthly vengeance, and retribution, for any reason, is not really a religion at all, but an illness, and should be treated as such.

Peace. And I mean that most sincerely.

 

Followup: a comment came through a year and a half later:

Sujit Patwardhan Feb 21, 2009
Absolutely hilarious and had me laughing out loud. You leave me asking for MORE!!!!!!!!!

Epilog: One More Look at Jane

Listening now to 1980 music in my car, and thinking still about the words and feelings I'd blogged here a couple days ago, I nearly ran up over the sidewalk this morning when I caught the lyrics early-on in "Against the Wind" by Bob Seger and the Silver Bullet Band. It's the title track from their best-selling album, and hit the music stores just half a year after Jane and I had our surprising, boundless summer.

Listening closely to the words Bob sang, nearly every single one of them sounded like my own thoughts on looking back. With the exception of "like a wildfire out of control, till there was nothing left to burn, and nothing left to prove", and "she swore that it would never end", I could have been singing the song myself. (There was no lack of control, nor anything burning up and away; but we also had no conscious sense of its never ending – rather, we just lived in very-real, very-intense and sweet now. Baba Ram Dass would have been proud of us.)

I mentioned on Monday several songs with passages, or note-structure, that still seem to describe bits and pieces of The Summer of Jane. I forgot about this one, though – I was looking at songs that were playing even while she and I sat and whispered under the night sky, or held hands at Pizza Hut ®. I have no memory of being mentally clobbered at the time, back in May of 1980 when the song peaked… nor of feeling the least bit guilty with my girlfriend, when/if we heard it together. But I must have noticed some of the parallels then; I guess the memory of that thought has long-since evaporated.

So I went out on the 'net earlier this afternoon, in search of the lyrics in order to post them here – easy to find, of course. But what I couldn't track down was the copyright information, so once again my neck might be jutting out just a bit, legal-wise. I can find where Bob Seger is credited with writing both the music and the lyrics; the album itself was released in February of 1980 by Capitol Records under Catalog Number 724358431629 (technically, that number's for the remaster). More than this I haven't been able to dredge up – so for that purpose, let me paraphrase here the legal disclaimer from a lyrics-posting site:

These lyrics are the property of, and copyrighted by, their owner(s), and are provided here for educational and illustrative purposes only, okay? Thank you.

Against the Wind 

It seems like yesterday,
But it was long ago:
Janey was lovely, she was the queen of my nights,
There in the darkness, with the radio playing low.

And the secrets that we shared,
The mountains that we moved:
Caught like a wildfire out of control,
Till there was nothing left to burn, and nothing left to prove.

And I remember what she said to me,
How she swore that it never would end;
I remember how she held me, oh so tight—
Wish I didn’t know now what I didn’t know then…

Against the wind,
We were running against the wind:
We were young and strong—
We were running
Against the wind.

And the years rolled slow past,
And I found myself alone,
Surrounded by strangers I thought were my friends;
I found myself further and further from my home.

And I guess I lost my way;
There were oh-so-many roads:
I was living to run, and running to live,
Never worried about paying — or even how much I owed.

Moving eight miles a minute for months at a time,
Breaking all the rules that would bend,
I began to find myself searching,
Searching for shelter again and again.

Against the wind,
A little something against the wind:
I found myself seeking shelter
Against the wind.

Well, those drifter's days are past me now;
I’ve got so much more to think about:
Deadlines and commitments;
What to leave in, what to leave out.

Against the wind:
I’m still running against the wind;
I’m older now, and I’m still
Against the wind, against the wind… 

I'm being really disproportionate, by the way, in spotlighting this memory here (again!). Jane and I had maybe two or three special months, if even that, together, before the world started back up and spun us each off in very different directions. Certainly since then (and even before), I've had girlfriends (and a wife!) who've had much more profound effects on my heart and life. 

Spartacus weighed in yesterday morning with these words:

WOW--heck of a poem, and heckuva blog entry! The whole thing was somewhat evocative of the feelings I get when listening to Bob Seger's "Night Moves". Though obviously our experiences were different, there still seems to be an almost universal element to what you described--when the world was fresh and young, before commitments and experience irrevocably changed things, an intensity, novelty...

Starship's "Jane", "My Sharona", etc… the musical citations are like Proust's Madeleine, evoking emotions far out of proportion to their (apparent) mundane pop culture footnote (or cookie) status. As you rightly point out, these are part of the soundtrack to (y)our lives--anybody who enjoys music could empathize.

Yikes, I gotta quit before I dissolve into even more incoherent blabbering. You've got a poet's soul, and the verbal/written chops to let it shine!

(Interesting bit with the Proust, there, Sparty – that was a new one on me; but from what I've read online to grasp hold of your reference, you seem to have hit the nail very well with my head; thanks!)

My memories of the women who've graced my life (even the one I backed myself into divorcing) are nearly all good in all ways. Each one has added her own share of the patina that makes my heart shine, and even the occasional dent, ding, or/and scar left in their wake has – in the long run – left me the stronger… and added rich "character" to the finish.

I hope their own experience and recollection are either as warm, or much more forgetful and forgiving. Where I'm still in touch, now and then, with a couple of them, I, uh, don't dare ask. If ignorance isn't bliss, then at least it should be allowed to reinforce the compassionate amnesia.

Followup: a comment came through over a year later:

witch1 Dec 31, 2008

Simply Wow!…Thank you and Blessings

The Friendly Workplace

I do still regularly hear from my recently former coworkers (or cow-orkers, as Scott Adams prefers to spell it). Yesterday, UK-born HeyJude dropped me a quick note, simply saying:

Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 1:20 PM

Hi AgingChild,

How are you Mr.?

We miss you around here. Have you got any news on the job you interviewed so well for? Was thinking about you and thought I'd touch base.

Take care,

HJ

Sweet! I answered:

Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 2:05 PM

Aww… <insert blush here>

No, those folks finally hired someone else, though it was quite a challenge… so I turned it around and offered to help them out as a volunteer. You'll remember, maybe, that their focus is on providing (including through construction and renovation) housing for the needy – much like Habitat for Humanity, brought down to the local/community level.

Anyway, they took me up on their offer – but not to wield a hammer and sawhorse, but rather to assist around their office! So I replied to their outbound executive assistant just this morning that I'd be happy pitching in a few hours a day, every few days, if that wouldn't be too little help. As always, we'll see; answer soon, I hope.

I've been wallpapering the greater [local] area with my résumé, and there've been some nibbles, but I haven't hooked any decent fish yet. (This leaves me free to continue painting the house!) Concentration this week will be on linking up with the various local staffing agencies – some years back, I somehow impressed one so much they put me in their own office as the front-desk person! So I've been sending the agencies my résumé, and there are more to go; I'll follow up with in-person visits, either by appointment or even unannounced drop-ins.

Meanwhile, you guys and gals have been on my mind also, of course. (Had a bizarre dream early this morning that Gülden and I were walking through a shopping center, talking about the job market, when a salesman grabbed me and put me to work. And I don't do retail anymore! Gülden probably woke up giggling, with no idea why.) I hope your workload has lightened, Miss HeyJude – and that all you guys take it easy on the new admin, and don't insist s/he keep chocolate at their desk.

Bet everyone's lost a few pounds, too. I know I have.

Take care, Miss Funny-Face – and send my happy hellos around; I'm doing okay and staying busy. Ciao bella!

PS for Aurelio: let him know that a news commentator on MSNBC made an accidental (and embarrassing) play on words a couple weeks ago: he was reporting on that terrible bridge collapse, and noting how incredibly few people had been killed or even injured. He summed it up: "Those folks on the bridge sure got some big breaks." He paused maybe a quarter-second and added firmly, "That was not a pun." Yeah, it was.

Regards,

AgingChild

Must have been a rare slow day at the office. I had HeyJude's reply fairly quickly:

Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 2:35 PM

Hi AC,

Good for you that you volunteered some of your time to assist around the office. It sounds like a very worthwhile cause.

I'll be thinking positively regarding your job hunt and I'm sure you will find something to suit you real soon.

I've passed the pun from the MSNBC commentator to Aurelio for his enjoyment (that was definitely a bad pun if ever I heard one).

Take care & good luck with the house painting.

Best,

:)))

H. A. Jude

Finally, after getting yesterday's blog straightened out, I sent back:

Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 9:15 PM

Hey, same to you!

I'd've responded sooner, but I was struck by the muse, and had to put up a blog that'll probably make you cry (with my apologies in advance, of course):

http://agingchild.wordpress.com/2007/08/13/from-the-quill-a-prayer-for-jane/

I typed it up easily, and quickly had it posted online around 3:00… then spent the next six bleedin' hours fixing some really frustrating formatting issues (I have got to learn more HTML and XML coding!!). Now it looks great… and the world (i.e., both my occasional readers) must think I'm depressed – which I'm not. I just wish the blasted blog-provider had something a little more user-friendly. And this is why I didn't open your email until just a few minutes ago.

[HeyJude had also asked me about a piece of office equipment that was driving a coworker nuts. But since I'm several weeks out of practice with the machine (though I'd trained it to cooperate), I couldn't offer a clear/simple solution. I recalled, though, that Woodie, another coworker (and USN CPO), had a similar piece of equipment at his own desk:]

Way back in my day, the manual was on top of the file cabinet behind my desk – though I may have put it in a file folder, before I grabbed my cardboard parachute and jumped out the window (Mick pushed). Woodie, being more organized than his admin was, should have the manual ready to offer… and tell him to salute and say "Ma'am! Yes Ma'am!" as he hands it over… or I'm going to sink his battleship.

Have a great remainder of the week! And let your barmy brother know that I'm still looking for his beer. Toodles, poodles!

Regards,

AgingChild

HeyJude can hug easily via email; here's what I received from her this morning:

Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 10:47 AM

Hey AgingChild.

Thank you Mr. and don't worry about the delay in response. I know you have other things to do other than chit chat with me via e-mail.

Unfortunately for us, our Mr. Wood is on vacation so we don't have our usual resource. Anyway, it's just not the same around here without you. Everyone still talks about how Acey used to do things and it's just such a mess and so not much fun anymore.

I'm going to the U.K. tomorrow for a week to attend my dear Aunt (God Mother's) funeral. I'll definitely get in touch when I come back.

Keep plugging away at the job market. You will find something that is suitable soon, I'm sure.

Take care,

HJ

See what I mean?

Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 12:18 PM

You are a sweet friend. (And fortunately for your family, you don't have any single sisters who might be as kind to ornery Americans!)

Speaking of family, of course – I'm sorry to hear about your godmother. Will the time spent with family reminiscing over her, sharing warm memories and tears and prayer, also allow you a moment or two to give our cousin Lady Haw-Haw [a delightfully wacky friend in the London office] a wave? If so, do please pass her a personal hello from me. If I had time, and were a bit closer, I'd give you a box of Cheerios for her.

And re the office – I know; I miss the crew, and the work, and the regular silliness… just not the commute and the horrid early-to-bed / early-to-rise hours I needed to maintain. I do wish I'd been able to convince Mr. FedEx and Mr. UPS to bubble-wrap the building and mail it up to [here] (using real stamps, of course). Ah, well – likely they'd actually considered using the interoffice mail system, but discovered it would have resulted in the whole thing landing somewhere in Sri Lanka, or Malaŵi!

Regards,

AgingChild

I'm a bit clueless on greater-UK geography, so HeyJude set me straight:

Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 1:44 PM

Hi Aging,

I unfortunately won't be in Haw-Haw's neighborhood. It would have been great to meet her in person but the funeral is in Banbury, Oxon and quite far from Gosport, Hants.

[I know "Hants" is "Hampshire"… but the word still looks like "Pants" to me… which also means something a little different to the British.]

I'm definitely planning to make a trip next year though and will try to coordinate a meeting with her. She is so funny.

Have a good day today and talk soon,

:)))

HeyJude

Yeah, it was fun working there – ignoring the burnout of the long commute, of course. HeyJude's notes got me to thinking about who else there has a good, reliable tension-busting sense of humor. Former sub-boss Kendra comes to mind; though she always seemed on the edge of burnout herself, she's a quarter-century veteran of that firm, and likely works harder than anyone else. And her hyena-bark of a laugh (often at herself), heard easily from halfway across the building, was so contagious that I would get to giggling no matter what I was focused on at the moment.

Aurelio's great, too, and will go far – he's another hard-working, hard-playing person… though often more likely to fall into silence or seriousness than silliness… which isn't a bad thing. I hope he's been keeping his pun-muscles flexed.

I'll have to suggest to HeyJude that she not overlook Priscilla when in need of a laugh. A contemporary of Kendra's, Priscilla's mix of sweet maternal personality and ornery youngish never-grew-up fifty-something joke-cracker is what that office still could use.

Just a few days before I left, Priscilla returned to work after spending most of a month in Italy. One morning she paused at the general-notices bulletin board by my desk, where I'd posted a reminder about that week's informal lunchtime guest-speaker event, titled "The Friendly Workplace".

Priscilla glanced at the notice while looking at the cafeteria menu, then snorted and said – pardon me, gentle readers – "'The Friendly Workplace'? What the he||'s that sh!t?" …and started giggling as she walked away.