Today it rained again, much to my near indifference. The consequences for me- which is all that weather should ever really be about- are few. A rug I picked up from the side of the road ( they throw things out here, too) was almost dried in the sun yesterday, recovering from previous rains; today it is again water-logged and lamely carpeting the spacious backyard lawn, now doubtlessly festooned with brown leaves. The carpeting of carpeting....
My sister is an inveterate leaf-blower. She battles leaves like she battles snow, without a touch of tenderness for the beauty that is natural excess. She battles the lawn, the broad growth that unreasonably insists on increasing, like our heads of hair we bother over as a society, to the tune of billions.
I like the spillage of leaves, the detritus of moistened,decayed cellulose. New England greenery is a source of sweet melancholy- if that is not too antiquated an expression in this age of digital vibes. The leaves themselves remind me of my humble origins as a writer; they are humbler than most, because I wrote a couplet which is the quintessence of dull:
Leaves in Fall tumbling down,
They fall down, they turn brown.
Looking back at this petite poem, I see that it was not as bad as all that. However, the call of bigger deeds tempted me into dishonesty. Keeping with the season, I submitted another poem the following year to the summer camp for it's literary project. It was something I lifted from Mad Magazine or the like:
O autumn is the time of year
when witches and goblins and ghosts appear;
they hoot and scream and scowl and stare,
so all you people had best beware.
And so on. Why I plagiarized this I cannot now say: it could be that I thought too low of myself as a writer, yet longed for recognition. It certainly did no harm to anyone but myself to fake this creation. It was not until I caught the literary bug again at the age of 14 that writing meant anything to me. By 16 I discovered that my neighbor, Stewart Allen ( rest his soul) was an English teacher; not merely one, but a man with aspirations to write ' The Great American Novel'- a work that, I'm afraid, perished with him, incomplete.
Literature and Philosophy became my passions, though being a teenager, they were not my only ones. And what did I derive from Stewart Allan? A standard of high excellence in writing, joined with an infantile inhibition preventing me from marketing myself liberally. The latter is a disorder from which I have yet to recover. In fairness, it was not Stewart who infused this mentality in me: it was his own tendency- one born of insecurity- dovetailing with my own adolescent angst and directionlessness.
Stewart's friend ( and your grandfather's), James Lee Burke, was his colleague at the time at a local community college. My father preferred him, though they both frequented my house ( Stewart living literally on the other side of the wall). Both men drank heavily, but Jim was a drunk who drowned quite regularly, hardly able to stagger back to his car with his wife's help. Jim was and is a great man, and a great writer. His books have become bestsellers, and he is regarded among the very top in his genre: detective novels. He has also been sober for what must now be 30 years. That has made all the difference.
When I think of you girls and the business you are up to as a result of school, it makes me wonder how dreams can actually grow in a person when they there is no time to breathe. My own creative work has been a flurry of initiatives, interrupted time and again by the drama of love and work; or is this merely the story I tell myself? I know that now I at least have achieved a greater seriousness and sense of purpose about my music. I use it at school every day, and I am getting a reputation through shows. I have been playing guitar now for 40 years! It is nothing if not a marriage: a great one! I can see how members of old married coupled still profess not to really know one another. I still do not know my guitar!
Not a single person or thing is left untouched by the business world, which is the world of capitalism. Yet the essences of beauty and love themselves remain pure. I cannot describe how this is. No matter what you are able to do in the marketplace with your passions for music and literature and dance and theatre, you have the chance to treat these crafts as your beloved, and exalt your relationships to them by the practice thereof. That it what it takes to be great. The rest is luck.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Afghanistan
Download the original attachment
Resin to Believe: Hash Gets a Boost in Afghanistan
VIENNA – Afghanistan is not only the world's largest supplier of opium, it also is the global leader in hashish production, the United Nations said Wednesday, in a press release that corresponded with a smoke-a-thon set up in the General Assembly Hall.
The U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime said it estimates that 10,000 to 24,000 hectares (24,700 to 59,300 acres) of cannabis are grown in Afghanistan every year and that this is used to make an estimated 1,500 to 3,500 tons of hashish annually. Said one official, who was in a stupor but still somewhat coherent,” We feel that the prominence of the opium industry is appropriate to the levels of pain presently endured by the Afghani people. Furthermore, it makes a right nice perk when our reps go down there for spring break.
"While other countries have even larger cannabis cultivation, the astonishing yield of the Afghan cannabis crop ... makes Afghanistan the world's biggest producer of hashish," UNODC chief Antonio Maria Costa said in a prepared statement that was visibly stained by some sort of resinous oil.
Afghanistan produces 145 kilograms (319 pounds) of hashish per hectare of cannabis, compared to about 40 kilograms (88 pounds) per hectare in Morocco, Costa said. Of the 47 billion dollars dedicated to the Afghan war effort this year, a return of 11 billion has already been realized from the ‘ Seeds of Development Program’, a spin-off of the military operations in that country. The program pays subsidies to marijuana and opium farmers who devote a portion of their arable land to narcotics production. ‘ Already my farm has brought an additional $1.5 million this year. That’s an increase of $1.5 million over last year. I’m high as a kite’, said one toothless old peasant, now sporting a coat and tie and fancy trousers.
Hashish is the resin produced from cannabis, also known as marijuana.
Basing its findings on information from 1,634 Afghan villages in 20 provinces, UNODC said it is three times cheaper to cultivate a hectare of cannabis in the country than it is a hectare of opium. As a result, it said, the net income of a hectare of cannabis is $3,341 (euro2,490) — compared to $2,005 (euro1,495) per hectare of opium. “ Less buzz per buck, but more bucks per Hectare”, observed Afghan Minister of Agriculture, Asif Rahami, who did not appear publically at the press conference, unless you consider a stream of smoke from under a bale of hay public.
In total, 17 of Afghanistan's 34 provinces — mainly in the country's unstable south — have large-scale cannabis cultivation according to the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime. Of late, pain-crazed Gis as well as wounded citizens have taken advantage of the ‘Buzz for Bombing’ program instituted by President Hamid Karzai, which gives free pain killers to all innocents as well as combatants in the conflict. Of late, however, Taliban officials have complained of their opium supply being cut with talcum powder.
Since cannabis has a short shelf life and is grown in summer when less water is available, Afghan farmers continue to prefer opium to cannabis, it said. Last year, more than two-thirds of cannabis farmers also cultivated opium. ‘ It’s good to diversify’, opined Abdul Hadi Argandiwal, Minister of the Economy. ‘We may even start growing some rice, just to mix it up a little”.
Afghanistan supplies 90 percent of the world's opium, the main ingredient in heroin, and the highly lucrative crop has helped finance insurgents and fuel corruption, thus cutting U.S. pay-offs to Afghan officials and saving U.S. taxpayers a heap of dough.
‘Cannabis also benefits rebel groups, not just the government’, Costa warned.
"All drugs in Afghanistan, whether opium or cannabis, are taxed by those who control the territory, providing an additional source of revenue for insurgents or government agents. It’s a win-win situation’, Costa muttered, his head rolling about loosely on his shoulders, a slow fountain of drool collecting on his lapel.
Resin to Believe: Hash Gets a Boost in Afghanistan
VIENNA – Afghanistan is not only the world's largest supplier of opium, it also is the global leader in hashish production, the United Nations said Wednesday, in a press release that corresponded with a smoke-a-thon set up in the General Assembly Hall.
The U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime said it estimates that 10,000 to 24,000 hectares (24,700 to 59,300 acres) of cannabis are grown in Afghanistan every year and that this is used to make an estimated 1,500 to 3,500 tons of hashish annually. Said one official, who was in a stupor but still somewhat coherent,” We feel that the prominence of the opium industry is appropriate to the levels of pain presently endured by the Afghani people. Furthermore, it makes a right nice perk when our reps go down there for spring break.
"While other countries have even larger cannabis cultivation, the astonishing yield of the Afghan cannabis crop ... makes Afghanistan the world's biggest producer of hashish," UNODC chief Antonio Maria Costa said in a prepared statement that was visibly stained by some sort of resinous oil.
Afghanistan produces 145 kilograms (319 pounds) of hashish per hectare of cannabis, compared to about 40 kilograms (88 pounds) per hectare in Morocco, Costa said. Of the 47 billion dollars dedicated to the Afghan war effort this year, a return of 11 billion has already been realized from the ‘ Seeds of Development Program’, a spin-off of the military operations in that country. The program pays subsidies to marijuana and opium farmers who devote a portion of their arable land to narcotics production. ‘ Already my farm has brought an additional $1.5 million this year. That’s an increase of $1.5 million over last year. I’m high as a kite’, said one toothless old peasant, now sporting a coat and tie and fancy trousers.
Hashish is the resin produced from cannabis, also known as marijuana.
Basing its findings on information from 1,634 Afghan villages in 20 provinces, UNODC said it is three times cheaper to cultivate a hectare of cannabis in the country than it is a hectare of opium. As a result, it said, the net income of a hectare of cannabis is $3,341 (euro2,490) — compared to $2,005 (euro1,495) per hectare of opium. “ Less buzz per buck, but more bucks per Hectare”, observed Afghan Minister of Agriculture, Asif Rahami, who did not appear publically at the press conference, unless you consider a stream of smoke from under a bale of hay public.
In total, 17 of Afghanistan's 34 provinces — mainly in the country's unstable south — have large-scale cannabis cultivation according to the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime. Of late, pain-crazed Gis as well as wounded citizens have taken advantage of the ‘Buzz for Bombing’ program instituted by President Hamid Karzai, which gives free pain killers to all innocents as well as combatants in the conflict. Of late, however, Taliban officials have complained of their opium supply being cut with talcum powder.
Since cannabis has a short shelf life and is grown in summer when less water is available, Afghan farmers continue to prefer opium to cannabis, it said. Last year, more than two-thirds of cannabis farmers also cultivated opium. ‘ It’s good to diversify’, opined Abdul Hadi Argandiwal, Minister of the Economy. ‘We may even start growing some rice, just to mix it up a little”.
Afghanistan supplies 90 percent of the world's opium, the main ingredient in heroin, and the highly lucrative crop has helped finance insurgents and fuel corruption, thus cutting U.S. pay-offs to Afghan officials and saving U.S. taxpayers a heap of dough.
‘Cannabis also benefits rebel groups, not just the government’, Costa warned.
"All drugs in Afghanistan, whether opium or cannabis, are taxed by those who control the territory, providing an additional source of revenue for insurgents or government agents. It’s a win-win situation’, Costa muttered, his head rolling about loosely on his shoulders, a slow fountain of drool collecting on his lapel.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Going Negative on the Presidency
Going Negative on the Presidency
Edmund J. Smith
Call me names. I’m used to it. Today is a time of liberal giddiness, admixed with the resigned acceptance ‘ no one can do everything’, now frequently joined to the exhortation that we must each do what we can to make the world a little bit better. About the latter, though, I wonder: is this supposed to be a new orientation? Maybe before, when the boogie man was in power, even this modest proposal was impossible to fulfill.
A political science honcho, or even a plain old news junkie, could call me out as an ignorant lout, with no right to speak. Ask me who my home state’s Attorney General is. Dunno. Ask me who the governor is. I know her first name. Jody…something…
I’m good at certain kinds of historical facts. Like I think I am probably a couple million people closer to knowing how many we killed in the Vietnam War.
I’ve decided to shave with Occam’s razor. That’s about paring issues down to their essence. In the case of presidencies, it comes down to this for me: what is the presidency? This leads back to the question of what the United States is as a political entity. If it is an empire (which I and many others maintain) then the position of president is similar to that of emperor.
Even emperors are not all powerful. Those who rule absolutely would be called dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Bush, Caesar); if they share power or are dominated by their adversaries, we call them moderates (Eisenhower, Kaiser Wilhelm, Kerensky), but they still are part of a dictatorship. Ultimately, if the power sharing doesn’t work, they can purge their adversaries or may themselves be purged either by coups, impeachment, or assassination.
Having lived through ten administrations (about a fourth of the U.S. presidents have paraded through office in my lifetime), I think I am seeing a pattern. Through each presidency, there have been wars, coups, and plentiful interventions on a lesser scale. By way of experiment, I voted for Clinton- the first and last time I would vote. This vaunted liberal, in league with his buddies, demolished social welfare, ushered in NAFTA, joined NATO in destroying Serbian Bosnia, maintained the economic isolation of Cuba, and economic embargo on Iraq, and, and…. But this was a liberal, progressive president.
The reasons I point these things out is because you don’t. The biggest criticism I heard about Clinton during his time in office was his sexual improprieties with Monica what’s her name. That was the stuff of SNL routines, like jokes about Dan Quayle’s spelling of potatoes and Sarah Palin’s studied know-nothingism. Apologists for progressives frequently use the ‘his–hands-were tied’ excuse. Well, I guess Clinton was able to overcome his bondage, since the U.S. was able to drop bombs as part of the NATO alliance while his hands were tied!
So, having spanned fifty years and ten presidents since WWII, we are up to Obama. A breakthrough, many say. Let’s see. What about the other breakthroughs. Have we fully appreciated them yet? What about Colin Powell. Hey kids: 1st African American Secretary of Defense. His military leadership guided us through the first destruction of Iraq, featuring 200-500,000 casualties, including many birth defects due to the use of depleted uranium. Oh well, but he was Black! Then there was Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. First African American Secretary of State. And what has she done? Supported U.S. backed dictatorships everywhere from Columbia to South Korea. Played a major role in promoting lies about weapons of mass destruction. Point-person for supporting proxy regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq. But she is African American…and a woman!
But there have been all kinds of breakthroughs for oppressed groups lately. Let us not forget ‘No-Right-To-a- Speedy-Trial’ Gonzalez, surfing on his water board. Has he not been championed in our public schools as ‘America’s first Hispanic Attorney General’? More progress.
As an estimated two million people make there way to Washington to hail the new Chief, I see that m job is cut out for me. In electoral terms, this would be called ‘going negative’.
Obama, still as senator, has taken the lead in backing the bail-out plan for the trillion-dollar thieves known as the Banking and Mortgage companies. Did that money evaporate? Does anyone ask about getting at least a chunk of it back from these profiteers? No, let’s just underwrite their new leases on life. Has Obama promised to end the war in Iraq? Presently there are no plans to close any of the military bases there. Perhaps instead of a hot war we’ll have a perpetually occupying Army (like Israel on the West Bank). Of course he did promise to win the war in Afghanistan. Hmm…what could that mean? And he did promise to ‘bring Ben Laden to justice’. That means more incursions into Pakistan. As far as the Palestinian question is concerned, his new progressive Secretary of State (a woman!) had already threatened, when she was still a presidential candidate, to level Iran if it attacked Israel.
The man who has the political acumen to invoke such figures as Martin Luther King and Abraham Lincoln had voted, as senator, to protect media monopolies from lawsuits for spying on phone calls and emails. But is that not consistent with the goals of the Patriot Act and the office of Homeland Security?
One could always invoke the ‘he-had-no-choice’ argument. He had to appease the financial community to get their support. He had to appease the military-industrial complex (remember them?) by promising some sort of intervention in order to win their confidence.
And if Obama was not young, handsome, intelligent, and well-spoken he would not have won your endorsement, despite his having himself endorsed all these terrible things. And it must feel good to have voted in (another euphemism) a Black person, though it is hard to avoid recognizing that he will preside over the murder of many innocents of all colors. Let’s look at Gaza.
For three weeks, Israel reigned death on the people of Gaza, mostly women and children, while the U.S. blocked U.N. ceasefire initiatives, supported Israel’s actions as self defense, and anyway supplied Israel with most of these weapons (including the chemical weapon, white phosphorus). During this time, Obama had the ‘good manners’ to refrain from decrying these war crimes, citing the proper protocol expected of an incumbent. Israel showed appreciation for his restraint, promising to withdraw their troops from Gaza in time for the inauguration. It is the equivalent of a killer cleaning up the family room where the murder took place in time for guests to arrive for dinner later in the day.
Now, who is expecting Obama to be sworn into office, clear his throat, and state unequivocally that the state of Israel is guilty of crimes against humanity? Oh, that might be rude. Why lay blame? Why go negative?
Edmund J. Smith
Call me names. I’m used to it. Today is a time of liberal giddiness, admixed with the resigned acceptance ‘ no one can do everything’, now frequently joined to the exhortation that we must each do what we can to make the world a little bit better. About the latter, though, I wonder: is this supposed to be a new orientation? Maybe before, when the boogie man was in power, even this modest proposal was impossible to fulfill.
A political science honcho, or even a plain old news junkie, could call me out as an ignorant lout, with no right to speak. Ask me who my home state’s Attorney General is. Dunno. Ask me who the governor is. I know her first name. Jody…something…
I’m good at certain kinds of historical facts. Like I think I am probably a couple million people closer to knowing how many we killed in the Vietnam War.
I’ve decided to shave with Occam’s razor. That’s about paring issues down to their essence. In the case of presidencies, it comes down to this for me: what is the presidency? This leads back to the question of what the United States is as a political entity. If it is an empire (which I and many others maintain) then the position of president is similar to that of emperor.
Even emperors are not all powerful. Those who rule absolutely would be called dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Bush, Caesar); if they share power or are dominated by their adversaries, we call them moderates (Eisenhower, Kaiser Wilhelm, Kerensky), but they still are part of a dictatorship. Ultimately, if the power sharing doesn’t work, they can purge their adversaries or may themselves be purged either by coups, impeachment, or assassination.
Having lived through ten administrations (about a fourth of the U.S. presidents have paraded through office in my lifetime), I think I am seeing a pattern. Through each presidency, there have been wars, coups, and plentiful interventions on a lesser scale. By way of experiment, I voted for Clinton- the first and last time I would vote. This vaunted liberal, in league with his buddies, demolished social welfare, ushered in NAFTA, joined NATO in destroying Serbian Bosnia, maintained the economic isolation of Cuba, and economic embargo on Iraq, and, and…. But this was a liberal, progressive president.
The reasons I point these things out is because you don’t. The biggest criticism I heard about Clinton during his time in office was his sexual improprieties with Monica what’s her name. That was the stuff of SNL routines, like jokes about Dan Quayle’s spelling of potatoes and Sarah Palin’s studied know-nothingism. Apologists for progressives frequently use the ‘his–hands-were tied’ excuse. Well, I guess Clinton was able to overcome his bondage, since the U.S. was able to drop bombs as part of the NATO alliance while his hands were tied!
So, having spanned fifty years and ten presidents since WWII, we are up to Obama. A breakthrough, many say. Let’s see. What about the other breakthroughs. Have we fully appreciated them yet? What about Colin Powell. Hey kids: 1st African American Secretary of Defense. His military leadership guided us through the first destruction of Iraq, featuring 200-500,000 casualties, including many birth defects due to the use of depleted uranium. Oh well, but he was Black! Then there was Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. First African American Secretary of State. And what has she done? Supported U.S. backed dictatorships everywhere from Columbia to South Korea. Played a major role in promoting lies about weapons of mass destruction. Point-person for supporting proxy regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq. But she is African American…and a woman!
But there have been all kinds of breakthroughs for oppressed groups lately. Let us not forget ‘No-Right-To-a- Speedy-Trial’ Gonzalez, surfing on his water board. Has he not been championed in our public schools as ‘America’s first Hispanic Attorney General’? More progress.
As an estimated two million people make there way to Washington to hail the new Chief, I see that m job is cut out for me. In electoral terms, this would be called ‘going negative’.
Obama, still as senator, has taken the lead in backing the bail-out plan for the trillion-dollar thieves known as the Banking and Mortgage companies. Did that money evaporate? Does anyone ask about getting at least a chunk of it back from these profiteers? No, let’s just underwrite their new leases on life. Has Obama promised to end the war in Iraq? Presently there are no plans to close any of the military bases there. Perhaps instead of a hot war we’ll have a perpetually occupying Army (like Israel on the West Bank). Of course he did promise to win the war in Afghanistan. Hmm…what could that mean? And he did promise to ‘bring Ben Laden to justice’. That means more incursions into Pakistan. As far as the Palestinian question is concerned, his new progressive Secretary of State (a woman!) had already threatened, when she was still a presidential candidate, to level Iran if it attacked Israel.
The man who has the political acumen to invoke such figures as Martin Luther King and Abraham Lincoln had voted, as senator, to protect media monopolies from lawsuits for spying on phone calls and emails. But is that not consistent with the goals of the Patriot Act and the office of Homeland Security?
One could always invoke the ‘he-had-no-choice’ argument. He had to appease the financial community to get their support. He had to appease the military-industrial complex (remember them?) by promising some sort of intervention in order to win their confidence.
And if Obama was not young, handsome, intelligent, and well-spoken he would not have won your endorsement, despite his having himself endorsed all these terrible things. And it must feel good to have voted in (another euphemism) a Black person, though it is hard to avoid recognizing that he will preside over the murder of many innocents of all colors. Let’s look at Gaza.
For three weeks, Israel reigned death on the people of Gaza, mostly women and children, while the U.S. blocked U.N. ceasefire initiatives, supported Israel’s actions as self defense, and anyway supplied Israel with most of these weapons (including the chemical weapon, white phosphorus). During this time, Obama had the ‘good manners’ to refrain from decrying these war crimes, citing the proper protocol expected of an incumbent. Israel showed appreciation for his restraint, promising to withdraw their troops from Gaza in time for the inauguration. It is the equivalent of a killer cleaning up the family room where the murder took place in time for guests to arrive for dinner later in the day.
Now, who is expecting Obama to be sworn into office, clear his throat, and state unequivocally that the state of Israel is guilty of crimes against humanity? Oh, that might be rude. Why lay blame? Why go negative?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)