Posts

Ratzinger, Pope Benedict XVI and Harry PotterInteresting development. The rebellious action by a few women is not going to cause a chink in the massive fortress called The Vatican. Even among the faithful who do not always agree with the church this will not mean much.Nevertheless, there is always a first time. In that sense it was a bold move. Nine women defy Vatican.I found Peter Grafton's "Reading Ratzinger" (The New Yorker July 25,2005) heavy going. Mr. Grafton analyzed the pope's background and positions from various documents and wrote about the direction the pope might take.It confirmed what I had previously read about the new pope. Catholics should not expect any liberalization of the doctrines. If anything, Pope Benedict will remain intractable on issues that affect those Catholics who find it difficult to adhere faithfully to the teachings of the church.I was startled to read that a few years back Cardinal Ratzinger "..........endorsed a German critic's attack on the Harry Potter books....."Mr. Grafton commented:"A prelate who fears that the 'subtle seductions' of J.K. Rowling will stunt the spiritual growth of young Christians may find it harder than he thinks to take on modernity in all its sprawling strangeness."Pope Benedict will have plenty of company among the Pentecostal Christians who always find satanic symbols in books and other artistic creations.You wonder about people who spend time worrying about the evil influence of Harry Potter stories. They claim to represent God and interpret God's views. Really ? Weird.

A nightingale did not sing in Berkeley SquareInitial reports stated that the Brazilian man, Jean Charles de Menezes, 27, was escaping from the police (did not stop when ordered) and was connected to the explosions that morning.On July 23rd the authorities in London admitted that he had no connection with the terrorists.BBC "Shot man not connected to bombing"There will be an inquiry to find out what went wrong. Why did Mr. Menezes ignore commands to stop; why did he try to outtrun the police; what was he escaping from? Perhaps answers will emerge. Perhaps not. From published accounts it seems that Mr. Menezes was followed because he came out of a building which was suppposedly being used by suspected terrorists and was under surveillance. His appearance (swarthy complexion) could have been a factor.Under the present conditions--of fear and distrust--that exist in London such incidents are predictable. Could happen again. So, the late Mr. Menezes was indirectly another victim of the terrorists. Collateral damage. But then in a terrorist attack that is usually the case. The attacks are rarely directed at specific individuals. Their goal is to kill as many as possible, destroy whatever that comes within the range of their weapons. The victims happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.The silence of Islamic clergy to take a position and condemn such acts is utterly reprehensible.On the flip side, there is killing and destruction in the unjust war now in effect. Long before the insurgents in Iraq became a force to contend with our attacks resulted in large scale loss of civilian lives. Now we are battling the insurgents.....and they keep coming. Hapless Iraqi civilians continue to suffer death, injuries, and destruction of property. It has been established that not all of it can be attributed to the insurgents. So, we too have blood of innocent victims on our hands. No wonder that in 2002 we refused to be a signatory to the International Criminal Court treaty.From Chaz Bufe, The Devil's Dictionaries ("American Heretic's Dictionary" section:"REGRETTABLE NECESSITY, n. An avoidable atrocity. The term is often employed by presidents and prime ministers when announcing bombings of civilian targets and invasions of small countries." "FREEDOM FIGHTER, n. A State Department term referring to: 1) A mercenary attempting to install an authoritarian regime friendly to U.S. business interests; 2) A heavily armed islamic fanatic who wishes to impose his religious views upon others through the use of violence." Comments Wayne World — 2005-07-25 Musafir, the whole thing is just so sad!!I cannot believe that humanity is getting sucked into this downward spiral!!Where are all of the intellects and critical thinkers of our time? Why are they so silent?

Joel Achenbach's nostalgia for summer*There are days when I write about the season(s). Just think out loud; what I like, what I don't like. Frankly, I love them all. That could very well be due to where I live. Here in the San Francisco Bay area the seasons are milder compared to some other parts of the country. I detest humid weather. We are fortunate to experience low humidity. Except for change in gear there is hardly a break in my routine of outdoor activities. I have heard remarks about the monotony of sunny, blue sky day after day. Well, I'll take that over hot muggy days or wake up to snow and rain few months a year.A great column by Joel Achenbach appeared in The Washington Post on July 17th. Achenbach's "A Man For One Season" touched on all seasons but ended with nostalgia for summer. "Summer makes him so happy he could just grunt"The autumnal equinox is two months away but there are signs---almsost imperceptible signs that each passing day is bringing it closer. For some, especially parents with children, the reopening of schools means the end of summer. A few days back a friend and I went for a hike and stopped to have a picnic on the grass. She mentioned noticing when she goes on her early morning walks that lightness in the sky takes longer to appear. Comments Wayne World — 2005-07-25 Musafir, it sounds as if your location matches your personality exactly!The weather in your area is conducive to your lifestyle!!!You must be in heaven!!Are there any drawbacks? musafir — 2005-08-05 Any drawbacks? The answer has to be the high cost of living.

"The rise of the Christian right in American politics has added impetus to an already huge and growing market in evangelical fiction, ........."(The Guardian,UK)*The Christian right! Reminds me of the saying about the Moral Majority, that it was neither moral nor a majority. Not only are the authors financially well-rewarded for their efforts, but they are taken very seriously. Imagine millions of people waiting for the Second Coming when they will ascend to heaven. Good for them, you think. However, what the authors have in store for the rest of us is far from pleasant. All sorts of dreadful things are going to happen to those who do not belong to the fold. If you don't want to be left behind it is not too late to join them.The following excerpt is from an article published in The Guardian,UK, on July 9th about the boom in Rapture fiction. Interesting. I don't write the adherents off; their fanatical devotion is not a laughing matter. I find them repulsive."None of those cited above is a "literary" author, but to merely write them off -with a sardonic metropolitan titter - as pulp fiction for the born-again brigade is to underestimate their growing influence. Market forces shape so much of contemporary publishing - and in an America gripped by a new Great Awakening, the realisation has hit home within the business that this stuff sells." "Selling Rapture" by Douglas Kennedy, The Guardian,UK.. Comments Unknown — 2005-07-22 My list has the same books but a new title. "What Not To Read, Ever."

*Insurgents are not the only ones responsible The spinmeisters do their thing; stand in front of a board with pointers in their hands and rattle off numbers. It is their job and some of them even believe what they say.We are now almost two and half years into Operation Iraqi Freedom. What a name! I wonder if the people responsible for creating the name feel good about it. The mounting civilian death toll, however, cannot be hidden under the rug, cannot be disputed. cannot be served with frills. No matter what euphemism (cost of war, collateral damage,etc.) is used to describe it, the number speaks out loud and clear---nearing 25,000 according to IBC report quoted by the BBC.The lies about Iraq's WMD have long been disproved. Now we are in Iraq to liberate the Iraqis and introduce democratic government. But first we had to use "shock and awe" tactics to soften the insurgents. In the process we killed thousands of civilians. The insurgents seem to come from an endless pool.We claim that most of the civilian deaths are caused by the insurgents. Not so according to a report on BBC's web site:"Shock and awe invasions using massive air power and overwhelming force caused a far higher concentration of deaths, injuries and child fatalities than even the intense insurgency we are experiencing now," he said."This is a fact which must be taken on board if hearts and minds are ever to be won back."Iraq's catalogue of death By Robert GreenallDossier of Civilian Casualties in Iraq 2003-2005, dated July 18, 2005. The UK-based Iraq Body Count (IBC) includes academics and peace activists. Comments musafir — 2005-07-21 Not only that, in 2002 the Bush administration withdrew from ratification of the ICC treaty (International Criminal Court). "The US has vehemently opposed the setting up of the ICC, fearing its soldiers and diplomats could be brought before the court which will hear cases of war crimes and crimes against humanity." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1970312.stm

*"Iraq's descent into bombing quagmire""The US and British governments saw the invasion of Iraq as a liberation, a way of getting rid of a particularly nasty regime. Instead, things are getting much worse.The casualty figures mean that on average as many people are now dying here every day as were killed in the London bombings nearly two weeks ago.It has become a civil war, fought out with car bombs and shots to the head, while the foreign forces, US and British and the rest, look on, incapable of stopping it. This isn't how things were supposed to turn out here."The above is from a firsthand report filed on July 19th by the BBC's world affairs editor, John Simpson. Comments musafir — 2005-07-20 Hope you are right. Blair,too, is reported to be a religious zealot like our Born Again Christian president although in Bush's case it was perhaps just a matter of political expediency. I don't see much of a difference between the Jihadi Moslems and some of the fire and brimstone Christians. But majority of the Brits are not supportive of Blair and his policies. Wayne World — 2005-07-21 >But majority of the Brits are not supportive of Blair and his policies. I might be wrong, but I also think it's the same in the US with Bush! So, how do they keep getting re-elected? Unknown — 2005-07-22 yeah...how do these creeps keep getting elected...could it be the money and the conservative corporations running the whole damn planet?

*Tony Blair fails to convince Britons"Two-thirds of Britons believe there is a link between Tony Blair's decision to invade Iraq and the London bombings despite government claims to the contrary, according to a Guardian/ICM poll published today."Guardian/ICM pollUneasy Rider, a cartoon by Steve Bell, The Guardian,UK.

*Ban on Imports from CanadaThe reasons given by the Canadian government for taking action to stop the flow of prescription drugs to North American consumers are suspect. More likely the measures resulted from pressure at high level; the Bush administration went to bat to protect the obscene profits made by U.S. pharmaceutical giants.However, American consumers are not going to suffer in the near future. Supplies have already begun from other countries and some Canadian suppliers are involved in making the arrangements. Instead of the drugs being shipped from Canada they are being routed through other countries. The Internet marketplace is full of opportunities for the unscrupulous as well as legitimate entrepreneurs.The High Cost of AdvertisementsOne area where high costs for drugs could be reduced is direct advertisements to consumers. Apart from costs the advertisements mostly reward the pharmaceutical industry and not the consumers. The administration is adept at paying lip service to Americans who cannot afford prescription drugs while taking care of those who provide funding for the party. Simple matter of quid pro quo. The big-money corporations win over sick Americans who need prescription drugs. Nothing new."But a major question is to what extent the drug industry itself adds to the demand by aggressively promoting drugs to consumers and doctors. In 2000 the industry spent close to $16 billion doing that."A bulletin issued by AARP contains full details.Not too long ago, AARP's board took flack for supporting the president's prescription drug plan which provided very little relief for the majority of the sick and elderly. It deserved the ire of its members. However, on advertisements for prescription drugs its position is laudable.The legislators know that they have a proverbial hot potato on their hands; the runaway costs of drugs is an issue that is not likely to fade into the background. The fact that the Republicans, after years of supporting the pharmaceutical industry's every demand, are talking about the need for controlling advertisements about prescription drugs, is a sign of unease among them. On July 1st, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist issued a statement calling for "............drug companies to voluntarily restrict direct-to-consumer advertising efforts during new drugs' first two years on the market.The key words are "voluntarily restrict". If it is left to the industry, we can forget about any meaningful steps being taken. One can imagine the pressure, not only from the drug manufacturers but also from broadcast and print media that benefit from huge amounts spent on advertisements. So, how far the politicians will go remains to be seen. Frist is reported to be a contender for the White House in 2008. He will need money---a lot of it. Can he afford to alienate the pharmaceutical and advertisement industries or is he just making some noise?

*Definition of profanity"The Supreme Court of the United States upheld this act of censorship in 438 U.S. 726 (1978). The words occurring in Carlin's monologue were: shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker and tits. Carlin's routine using these words has since been broadcast, however. In the early 1960s, Lenny Bruce had been taken to court for using some of these same words in his own comedy routines." (Souce: Wikipedia)That was then. We have come a long way since the justices of the Supreme Court ruled on this issue. Their ruling has not been able to prevent the widening use of profanity in the media. Let's face it--the Genie cannot be put back into the bottle.Eve Ensler deserves credit for the stage production of The Vagina Monologues. Her approach to the word "cunt" (described by some as the worst of them all) was bold, novel, and amusing.One can spend days reading about the so called "taboo" words without learning exactly when they were declared unsuitable; why they were classified as vulgar and who decided on doing so.Geoffrey Chaucer (1343-1400) used the word frequently albeit with a different spelling, "queint" or "quaint". This is what I found in "The Street Names of England" by Adrian Room:"York's Grape Lane was thus Grapecuntlane in the 14th century, while a hundred years earlier the City of London had its Gropecontelane and Oxford its Gropecuntelane. The 'four-letter word' that lies at the heart of the name is given its earliest citation by the Oxford English Dictionary (which admitted it to its pages only in 1972) from its occurrence in the Oxford street name, which dates from about 1230."There is no good reason why vagina is acceptable but cunt is not. Ditto for penis and cock. Can you imagine a man or woman telling a friend "last night I had a great intercourse"? It just does not sound right. At one time all of them were in use in England and there was no stigma attached to them. Somewhere between the 12th and 16th centuries, influence of Puritans began to manifest itself. Probably some gray beards got together and classified certain words about body parts and/or with sexual connotations as vulgar, not suitable for use by the gentry. They went looking for dirt and found it; it was in their minds.British author Peter Fryer's "Mrs Grundy: Studies In English Prudery " contains an anecdote. To the best of my recollection, it went something like this. A young woman from a wealthy family went horseback riding. On her return to the stable, the groom came forward to take charge of the horse. While dismounting, the young lady lost her footing and fell on her back. Her skirt flew up. She quickly got up and settled her attire. She was flustered and said "John, did you see my agility?". The groom replied, "Yes maa'm but in the kitchen we call it cunt." A good, succint word; it has a bite to it.The following verse by the late Ogden Nash is a bit outdated but still fun to read. When I came across it I thought the Republican hypocrites were at it in the thirties and still carrying on blathering about our morals in 2005!"Senator Smoot (Republican, Ut.)Is planning a ban on smutOh rooti-ti-toot for Smoot of Ut.And his reverent occiput.Smite. Smoot, smite for Ut.,Grit your molars and do your dut.,Gird up your l--ns,Smite h-p and th-gh,We'll all be KansasBy and By." -- Ogden Nash, "Invocation," 1931 ...

*There are jokes galore about the president's gaffes with syntax. Nothing new about that. He continues to butcher the English language for a simple reason. He is not able to recognize his errors. Eugene Robinson's column in The Washington Post is an amusing look at this topic.Shed no tears for Judith Miller of the NY TimesJudith Miller serving time for staying mum about her source(s) related to the outing of Valerie Plame. Yes--in comfort.I am among those who have no sympathy for Ms. Miller because of the damage done by her series of reports about Iraq's non-existent WMD. Reports for which her source was the Iraqi con man Ahmed Chalabi. The San Francisco Chronicle carried a report by Rosa Brooks on July 12, 2005, that described the impact of the basless reports. The NY Times is not blameless for publishing them. It did eventually offer a sort of mea culpa but it was more of a face saving gesture.More on Judith Miller in the Asia Times online edition July 15, 2005.