9/12 ramblings

So where was I in August? I don’t recall being too busy, so WTF? No entries, no excuses, no worries.
If I’m back, it means I must be worried. Irate might be more accurate. I’m looking at the exchange rate ahead of a November trip to Thailand, and the exchange rate sucks. The upside to having a crappy, weak currency is that we should be awash in foreign tourists. Granted, I’ve seen a few running around downtown this summer, but we’re hardly “awash.” I blame the Bush Administration for acting unilaterally to the point that nobody wants to visit -- not to mention the heightened security measures that make it such an incredible drag for legitimate tourists (with big euros to spend) to even get in the door. It does seem some auto sales offset our huge trade imbalance, but not by much. So I’m just pissed.
Beyond that, looking at the aforementioned “enhanced security measures,” I have mixed feelings. On one hand, I believe in vigilance. I don’t like the thought of loose borders -- at least, not as long as you have borders -- and I don’t think being transported by private companies is a right. This means that if US Airways wants to strip-search every passenger flying, or if I get questioned more thoroughly if the Irish Republican Army starts killing people again and I have an Irish surname, that’s fine. But I don’t appreciate this thought that we’re helpless and need protecting.
Take 9/11. The passengers on those planes didn’t stay in their seats because they were scared. They remained in their seats because they thought that was the prudent course of action. The freaks hijacking those planes told them they wouldn’t be hurt if they cooperated. History largely backed that lie. The passengers could guess that their respective planes would be landed and the psychos would begin making demands from the tarmac, as had been standard operating procedures. Thanks to cell phones, however, word got to Flight 93 that other planes in the same situation were being used as weapons. Suddenly, the rules had changed. Accordingly, the passengers attacked and won. They may not have been able to save themselves, but they did something more important: They stopped the hijackers. I’m certain it wasn’t a question of those Flight 93 passengers being more brave, but simply having more information.
It’s not so hard to execute a sneak attack against Americans. Part of our cultural nature is that we don’t like duplicity. We appreciate straight talk, transparency, open dialogue. We often don’t get it, but it’s what we like. It’s that nature that makes a Pearl Harbor possible. And then we defeated Japan. Sixty years later, it made 9/11 possible. And then Richard Reid tries to light his “shoe bomb” on a loaded flight from Paris to Miami, and no sooner is he putting flame to shoe tongue and knocking down flight attendants, then do passengers and crew have him quietly subdued with plastic handcuffs, seatbelt extensions, headphone cords and a happy dose of valium.
The point is, at least for the remainder of this chapter, I think we’re on to them. People look to the Patriot Act and similar measures and say, “It’s working. We’ve not been attacked since 9/11.” Horrendous attacks have been made, though. Not on U.S. soil, but they have been made -- all the while our espionage is said to be even less restrained overseas. It was little help to London or Madrid. What has protected the United States, primarily, is education. Al Qaeda educated us.
Can we be attacked again? Sure. But it’s going to have to be in some way radically different than on 9/11. Those fellas got their shot. They took it. They did some damage. But now they’ve got to hide from Americans. And from Britons and Spaniards and Australians and Jordanians. Our government can tell our military where to go. But it’s we, the people -- including those same citizen soldiers -- who really keep us safe at home.

The religion entry

I am embarrassed today for Congressional Democrats in light of the legislation being proposed by Senators Warner and Lugar. Their bill seems to find ground that everyone can agree on. For the most part, it gets U.S. personnel out of the nation-building, but allows for some measure of security. We get off the streets, but remain in the country keeping Syrians and Iranians out; target foreign terrorists, but not Iraqi sects; and offers some protection to U.S. interests. Why was that so hard?
It’s actually in our best interests to let these power struggles play themselves out. In the security vacuum we leave, clandestine Iranian efforts will move in to support the Shias. Meanwhile, the Saudis have said before that they may feel obligated to move in to Iraq to support the Sunnis. Let them. Saudis and Iranians at war, if indirectly, can only help us -- at least in the short term. Both sides will need to finance their efforts with oil money, possibly attempting to under-price one another. As these sides deal with their own messy animosities, we can use the time to furiously develop ways to wean ourselves off petroleum. And by maintaining a presence in Iraq, we’ll be right there in case al-Qaeda turns out to be the winner in a local struggle. If Iranian Shias and al-Qaeda and Saudi Sunnis want to have it out, we shouldn’t stand in their way. That fight has so very, very little to do with Americans.
The only religious struggle that should be on America’s plate today is remorse for the shameful outburst against the Hindi prayer in Congress. The protesters, I understand, call themselves “Christians” and “patriots.” I’ll give them their Christian designation, but to think themselves patriotic by taking aim at one of our greatest strengths -- religious tolerance possibly unequaled anywhere else in the world -- is downright un-American.

Mein Mugabe?

In this quick news story about Zimbabwe's rapidly running downhill President Mugabe, Agence France Presse included what I assume is a recent photo. So is that just a patch of darker skin under his nose, or has this notorious homophobe taking his manscapinig cues from Hitler? If so, his press secretary should let him know that it's somewhat poor p.r. Perhaps it's been there all along, hiding (ahem) right under his nose?

Mission mostly accomplished

OK, except for reading Manji, I fulfilled my July 4 plans. Though I did walk past her book on the shelf several times.... Regardless, the view of the fireworks was lovely. Especially so, in that the National Mall's show was just the centerpiece. In every direction from our roost at P and 8th NW, we could see shows both professional and pedestrian. It seems that when the country is mired in shit, displays like these illustrate that we have a awfully optimistic national psychology. It all just looked so hopeful.

Independence Day, 21st Century Style

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Immigration Now!

The lag in entries was due to the Pride season in the capital: Youth Pride, followed by Black Pride, then Capital Pride. For the local gay press, this is our crunch time. Think of the mall -- consumer, not national -- between Thanksgiving and Christmas. Thankfully, that’s all done. Our next guaranteed boom isn’t till One In Ten throws our local LGBT film festival in October, Reel Affirmations. Ahead of that, I can count on a couple of lost weekends screening choppy copies of independent movies for the sake of 200-word blurbs. Meanwhile, it’s just hosting out-of-town guests and keeping cool.

Since writing last, however, that “Too Many People” entry holds ever more firm. It just seems obvious that sharing the wealth by increasing our population through immigration versus reproduction makes sense. For the left, it’s a very PC way to help those who were born with fewer opportunities. For the right, it nearly guarantees that your fewer offspring who share less of their inheritance and are born into the advantages of citizenship from Day 1 will have an advantage over immigrant labor. So everybody wins, right? I don’t see a downside. An added bonus for Neo-cons bent on spreading democracy is the cost-savings of spreading it to foreigners inside our own borders. We don’t have to pay to bring democracy to them, but instead bring them here for lessons. That’s got to offer a substantial savings, especially considering that when we send “democracy teachers” abroad, we often have to pay to arm them heavily and risk losing them to roadside bombs.

Too many people

I've decided that all my feelings of doom can be traced by to those 1970s-era predictions of overpopulation. It's not something you hear about much today. To the contrary, we're told the planet can hold a few billion more. I'm not buying it. I think we've surpassed our comfort level. And why do citizens of rich countries need to reproduce at all? There are millions -- if not billions -- of poorer people dying to get in. Some would argue that massive immigration will change our national character. Yeah, well, so what? Time alone will change our national character. And that's why we have a living Constitution. We're not bound by creed or borders or cultures. We're everything. And, as Americans, we hold certain truths to be self-evident, as our "founding fathers" put it. So, that said, any chance we can get the golbal population down by a couple billion in the next couple centuries? Please? My birthday is coming up in a couple months, and that's at the top of my list. Along with a new bottle of Chanel Pour Monsieur; I'm almost out.