 |
| 2.26.2007 |
| On Death and Morbidity |
The following passage is copied directly from my thoughts notebook. It is the first short essay-like thing I wrote in it and at times is entirely nonsensical and grammatically appalling. The boy mentioned within (now my boyfriend) never in fact committed the act written about; however, the fact of its actuality is extraneous to the point of the essay. [...] denotes unintelligible writing on my part. Enjoy.
It was only when my morbid curiosity resurfaced that it became hauntingly clear that it had never vanished in the first place, but merely subsided. As my clinical depression became more a daunting reality than its lesser predecessor, the ubiquitous daunting possibility, and a temporary religious establishment laid claim to my head; the mere concept of death, in itself, lessened as to its position (and possession) of an existential wonder. No longer holding the place of a great mystery, death became, quite simply, the last item on my to-do list.
What precisely ignited by queer sense of attraction to morbidity is inherently a debate of intrinsic and extrinsic variables. I have come to realise, though, that I have, indeed, morbid attraction. A girl I know told me that a boy I know, and quite frankly, am attracted to...had attempted to commit suicide and [...] henceforth brags about it. This may very well be an unsupported and unfounded claim, but just having heard it spoken, vocalised about this individual only heightened my attraction. Magnified (as in relation to previous magnitude), even.
Immediately thereafter I reflected on the truth that this supposed attempt at killing himself actually turned me on. It certainly came nothing short of minute deliberation to arrive at the conclusion that this attraction would not be in the least bit socially acceptable. In a situation of psychological [...], who does one talk to, and is it even an issue? It's not in a similar vein as the fetish community but rather, merely the probable result of an abnormal anomaly.
What is it, then, that causes the same attraction to green eyes or intelligence or Southern drawls or having a common interest in books or movies? Are these hard-wired into our brain patterns in much the same way that orientation is? One must recall the biological [...] of attraction between the sexes is to propagate the species (and speculation leads to homosexuality as a barrier to overpopulation). Thusly, it would be in our genetics' best interest to lead us to a mate best genetically suited so as to have hardy offspring. So why, I begin to wonder, would be genetics want to draw me to the morbid?
It isn't, in vain, a move of desperation or desire to be viewed as "dark". Let us be careful in the recognition of the realisation of this anomaly. As the recognition and realisation --- realisition? --- is contained, for all the time being, within alluded pages, it comes to figures that there is no present desire to be anything.
It is more an inquiry of continuation of the life journey than "morbid fascination", in perspective. Fascination and fascism share many letters. Perhaps a root in fixation and mental possession? I want so much to know the mental process that accompanies a suicide attempt. How does one decide the manner in which to dispose of themselves? Death, so silent and permanent, ought be achieved by means symbolic. The shotgun suicide so quickly became the trend vanguard. An act now devoid of symbolism other than the emotional hardcore scene.
Why is the subject of death and departure so taboo? Life is the worst STD of them all...sexually transmitted and 100% rate of fatality. The death of a being is inevitable. While it may be disconcerting to attempt to come to terms with the death of the people around you, it should never be a cause for fear of your own death. Such a fear is to be likened to a dear of the sun rising or the Earth rotating. There is really no course of action by which to postpone --- scratch that, no means by which to avoid definite actions integral to the way of the world. Once this utterly desolate fate is reduced to simple a layman's truth, it becomes quite a lot simpler to perform daily tasks sans morbid preoccupation. It is only once someone has accepted the perishing of all things that a so-called "morbid" preoccupation or fixation. [?] Only then can one begin to [...] death from an existential perspective.
Creation and the beginning of space have generally been scientifically worked and reworked until something generally lacking in spirituality and lodged in cold fact were acceptable. The neural processes mapped and named, our breathing and talking [?] and blinking all scientifically supported. Even the means by which an individual can produce and put forth another for the good of the species and the associated maternal instincts.
But no explanation of death is prepared for educational and biological exploitation. There is certainly only one way to be conceived, from a maternal carrier process (left intentionally vague). But the permutations with which this being can be destroyed are innumerable, the possibilities for annihilation so vast that death is always a more random (at least in notion) happening. Almost any situation or object that can be existentially quantified can ultimately result in a death. I'm heard pressed to find any such a universal place where there is no possibility of casualty of death --- quite possibly because no such a palce exists.
What is it that breeds such tendencies? In my family's history, a trend of clinical depression becomes evident. My grandfather committed suicide. My dad sought psychiatric counselling during his lifetime. I can only hope that this trend does not continue to be debateably unique.
Morbidity is arbitrary.Labels: attraction, death, morbidity, suicide |
posted by Ianthe. @ 10:11 PM  |
|
|
|
|
| On The Formulation and Usage of Words |
The following is copied from a notebook I keep in my purse for jotting down thoughts which oftentimes evolve into short essays. Here we go.
Who first put forth the socially accepted dictionary definition of 'arbitrary'? As with all definitions presented, the agreed-upon meaning of 'arbitrary' is, in itself, arbitrary. So when someone says they are 'reclaiming' a word, what really is there to claim? I could decide that the word 'happy' manes 'filled with virulent anger'. Who is in a place to argue a counterinterpretation when theirs is equally arbitrary? The published definition of a word is simply the most commonly accepted.
In this mindset, one could entirely picture the complete and total subversion of modern linguistics. If the writers of the major newspapers and the anchors of the major news networks decided that "chicken" was a definite article and books were called "fries", the public would have no choice but to begin to accept the redefinitions in order to stay in touch with the world around them.
One might believe that this need to keep up with lingua popular is akin to the morphing aspect of slang. "Groovy" and "hip" and "far out" have fallen out of popular use since the end of the 1960s and 70s. When was the last time you called someone a jive turkey? Didn't think so. In the 80s we got tubular and your leg warmers were totally radical. In the 90s you were bummed out (bummer, man) in your acid washed jeans. The phrases in this contemporary day are items like "I heart you" or "fo shizzle". The introduction end evolution of slang terminology that hence permeates our modern vocalisation and usage is quite a baffling topic. Where does it come from?
Media influence in this matter is profoundly staggering. As Paris Hilton coined 'that's hot' or Juelz Santana popularised 'no homo', and websites such as UrbanDictionary.com gained popularity, the lingua popular of this day and age becomes something of a game of Tips --- bouncing back and forth, our language variables feeding off of one another's. Many (American) people I know have begun calling their mothers 'mum' and spelling words the British way simply because one person, and then two people, and soon many people caught the fever that is British slang. Movies and music start the trends. When Snoop Dogg began the appending of -izzle to a word in his songs, who could ever know that it would shape our youth culture?
A culture where 'fo shizzle mah nizzle' actually means something.
There is, in fact, the perfect portmanteau in existence to categorise and label this: slanguage. Not officially recognised by Merriam-Webster, as most slang is not. It would become increasingly difficult to stay accurate, the way slanguage exists: as a living, breathing entity constantly and incessantly rewriting and reinventing itself. "Far out". "Bodacious". "Jammin'". Gone with the raging tides of our world.
Slanguage.Labels: language, linguistics, slang, words |
| posted by Ianthe. @ 9:58 PM |
|
|
|
| 7.24.2006 |
| Existential Quandary |
This is a bit of a deviation from my core blogging topics, but as I put a lot of thought into this I figured it was worth some mention.
This is in response to a friend's blog entry on MySpace about his thoughts about the meaninglessness of life and questioning why people like the things that they do and things of that nature.
You have seemingly brought an existential quandary upon yourself, and, upon having read this, I have decided it warrants a response.
In my opinion, one of the greater problems is a lack of existentialism and an abundance of willful ignorance (the worst kind). So many people live their lives in pursuit of some (often unattainable) goal, in search of "the master plan" or something to that extent. As cliché as it sounds, there are too many people living for tomorrow instead of today. Too many people entirely detached from the world around them.
I honestly never really thought that there was a "big picture" or "grand scheme of things". We're here and, well, that's that. So if, as a whole, humanity is not moving towards something, why are we here? What's the point? Because, honestly (big fan of that word), in the end the Earth is going to go spinning into the sun or something and humans will be destroyed. If ultimately we will not be rewarded with anything we might as well make living the reward. If, in the end, it won't matter if you were in the Navy, a CEO, a late-night talk show host or just a housewife trying to make ends meet, what is the point of even being any of those things? I think that if your life is, after all is said and done, pointless; you might as well have fun and be happy during your run. It only makes sense. So that every action, and every goal set by a person directly contributes to their happiness in some way, shape, form or fashion.
As dismal as it is, eventually you will be forgotten. All of us will be forgotten. So what people need to learn to do is live more for themselves than for other people. In the end you will be alone. All you will have is yourself and your memories. Life is extrinsically meaningless. It is not (in my opinion and based on my findings, at least---but what do I know? I've barely broken the surface of being a teenager, let alone life experience) a journey to some great end. Living is not the path to some destination, it is the destination. The same of love --- you know love has meaning in and unto itself. It is not the the means to some end. The beauty of a rose is meaning enough --- it does not lead anywhere, it simply exists as a beautiful thing and its beauty is enough.
Jumping back to personal tastes. I've been wondering about that a lot recently, what makes people like the things that they do. My youngest sister, for example, is the shining, walking stereotype of a 'girly girl'. Loves to play with mum's makeup and wear skirts that are far too short to be appropriate, and talks about her dreams of being a cheerleader. While myself and my other younger sister are considerably more tomboyish and effectively shun all of that. (Mum once said she's "all my hopes and dreams rolled into one child" which was amazingly depressing.) She abso loves horror films and I get scared if I see a branch swaying outside my window. She loves roller coasters, I'm frightened to death of them. So it seems she has a higher tolerance for and fulfillment from fright, while I simply don't see the appeal in being scared out of your mind. Where do these things come from? I was raised on Christian sing-a-long cassette tapes and now am part of the Metallica and Motley Crue fanbase. Why do I hate R&B music? I don't know. I just do. Perhaps there's some heavy metal gene that I got that cancelled out my fingerpuppet Jesus upbringing.
But, then again, I think there is some level of mental conditioning one can apply to make themselves like something. For example, I wanted to like the energy drink Bawls (the name was definitely a reason why, as well as knowing I'd need a shocking caffeine boost at some point in the future to assist me in staying up at night), so I drank it a lot and tried to force myself to like it. And after a while of this I actually did begin to enjoy drinking it. The same with Mountain Dew (not saying this only applies to caffeinated drinks). I had never had it before my week with JNSLC but I convinced myself I would like it and, lo and behold, 2+ bottles every day (as you may or may not have noticed). Perhaps it's just one of those "grows on you" type of deals. I used to be bored to sleep by instrumental music, but now my iPod is brimming with Explosions in the Sky, Mogwai and Godspeed You Black Emperor. After repeated listening I slowly began to appreciate that music is music with or without lyrics. And really, lyrics direct you to what the song should be saying to you when instrumental music sort of lets you create your own experience and interpretation --- but I digress.
My short response has quickly developed into a novel, and I really haven't made a point; this was just sort of an outlet for ranting since nobody reads this stuff anyway. I guess my point is there really is no meaning to life, and the whole point of living is to be good to yourself because in the end that's all you'll have.
I'm eating fortune cookies while typing this and the 2 I just opened up read "The future seems far away right now so focus on the present." and "Every thinker puts some portion of an apparently stable world in peril." Maybe those cookies really know what they're talking about.
|
| posted by Ianthe. @ 1:20 AM |
|
|
|
| 5.11.2006 |
| Marijuana in Tijuana |
Ah, it's been a while since I posted. So here's a short update.
Yesterday in health class we read an article about drug legalization. "Mexico votes to legalize small amounts of cocaine, heroin and marijuana" the headline touted.
To sum it up, "The bill says criminal charges will no longer be brought for possession of up to 25 milligrams of heroin, 5 grams of marijuana (about one-fifth of an ounce, or about four joints), or 0.5 grams of cocaine -- the equivalent of about 4 "lines," or half the standard street-sale quantity (though half-size packages are becoming more common)."
So the general concern is this: will the lure of legal drugs be much too strong for American youths to overcome? It seems like it definitely would be. Just think about the number of teenagers that will be pouring across the border in search of drugs, knowing that they won't be busted --- but wait.
Some of these teenagers only do the drugs for the risk factor. "Ooh, I'm going up against the LAW! I am REBELLIOUS!" In this way, the legalization could keep some people from indulging in the drugs. But obviously it will probably just open a whole new gateway for drug addiction.
The basis for the bill is that by leaving people alone to use small amounts of drugs they can spend more time going after the big dealers rather than jailing every individual. This reminds me of a ruling concerning the downloading of music in Canada. It was ruled that downloading the music for personal use was perfectly legal, but uploading it for others to download was still illegal.
Back to the issue of American drug users. Perhaps the law will be revised to state that only Mexican citizens are applicable, which would solve that border-crossing issue...at least on paper. Because obviously, if you have a drug problem, inside or outside the law you will get your fix.
I'm not entirely sure where I personally stand on the whole issue. I'm a proponent of marijuana legalization in the States, even though I'm straightedge myself. I believe in lots of personal freedom. Besides, if cigarettes are legal and just as cancerous I don't see why marijuana shouldn't be legal as well.
I really haven't much to say on the issue, just wanted to bring it to your attention with this short little update.
x |
| posted by Ianthe. @ 8:19 PM |
|
|
|
| 2.07.2006 |
| State of the Union: what the hell was he talking about? |
The President's State of the Union address is always game for picking apart. So here's my take on the SotU 2006.
Below are snippets from Bush's State of the Union, taken from the transcript at WhiteHouse.gov
Abroad, our nation is committed to an historic, long-term goal -- we seek the end of tyranny in our world. Some dismiss that goal as misguided idealism. In reality, the future security of America depends on it. On September the 11th, 2001, we found that problems originating in a failed and oppressive state 7,000 miles away could bring murder and destruction to our country. Dictatorships shelter terrorists, and feed resentment and radicalism, and seek weapons of mass destruction. Democracies replace resentment with hope, respect the rights of their citizens and their neighbors, and join the fight against terror. Every step toward freedom in the world makes our country safer -- so we will act boldly in freedom's cause.
This reads to me: Fight 'em over there so we don't have to fight 'em here. Great strategy, really. IF THERE WAS ANY POSED THREAT. It's kinda like saying "Well, that man over there could possibly injure me in the future, so I should kill him now to end any chance he might have to hurt me in the future." Like, WHAT? What kind of logic is that? So, by imposing our will upon people that's supposed to make us safer? If someone came up to me and started telling me what to do, I personally would be more inclined to hurt them. "You'll thank me later." Um, yeah. Maybe the rest of the world is getting along fine without us. And even if they aren't, is it our place to tell them there's a better way to solve things? Reminds me of mothers --- "Don't tell me how to raise my children!"
In a time of testing, we cannot find security by abandoning our commitments and retreating within our borders. If we were to leave these vicious attackers alone, they would not leave us alone. They would simply move the battlefield to our own shores. There is no peace in retreat. And there is no honor in retreat. By allowing radical Islam to work its will -- by leaving an assaulted world to fend for itself -- we would signal to all that we no longer believe in our own ideals, or even in our own courage. But our enemies and our friends can be certain: The United States will not retreat from the world, and we will never surrender to evil.
Intelligence versus honor. Sure, retreat is never particularly manly or honorable, but staying in a war for no reason is probably not the smartest move. 'There is no peace in retreat'. WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? So is there peace in slaying thousands of innocents? That makes so much sense. 'By allowing radical Islam to work its will' --- y'know what, I think that right now, radical Christianity poses more of a threat to the American way of life than radical Islam ever will. And you would not be "signaling that you no longer believe in your own ideals". You will simply have not won once. Don't be a sore loser. Accept you can't always have your way.
America rejects the false comfort of isolationism. We are the nation that saved liberty in Europe, and liberated death camps, and helped raise up democracies, and faced down an evil empire. Once again, we accept the call of history to deliver the oppressed and move this world toward peace. We remain on the offensive against terror networks. We have killed or captured many of their leaders -- and for the others, their day will come.
....could you get more full of yourself, honestly? Right, I forgot, the solar system revolves around the stability and heroicism of the United States. Because we're always the heroes, the white knights. By the way, if we don't like your leadership, we'll cut their nuts off. See how they like terrorizing the center of the universe then.
We're on the offensive in Iraq, with a clear plan for victory. First, we're helping Iraqis build an inclusive government, so that old resentments will be eased and the insurgency will be marginalized.
VICTORY. AGAINST. WHAT?! Will someone PLEASE tell me what we're fighting against? I don't think anyone knows. At least invent some enemy that we're fighting against, honestly. Obviously the plan isn't so clear. And why MUST we help the Iraqis? Did they ask for our help? No. We just kinda went over there and kicked their door in and said "Ummm, yeah. We don't like what you're doing. So we're gonna take over and you're gonna LIKE IT."
Our work in Iraq is difficult because our enemy is brutal. But that brutality has not stopped the dramatic progress of a new democracy.
*stabby mcstabstab* Will someone please tell me who and/or what the enemy is? Or is supposed to be? I'm writing a letter.
I am confident in our plan for victory; I am confident in the will of the Iraqi people; I am confident in the skill and spirit of our military. Fellow citizens, we are in this fight to win, and we are winning.
*rips out hair* What are we fighting to win? WHAT?! WHAT?!
The road of victory is the road that will take our troops home. As we make progress on the ground, and Iraqi forces increasingly take the lead, we should be able to further decrease our troop levels
Read: They come home when I say they come home. So shut up plzkthx.
Members of Congress, however we feel about the decisions and debates of the past, our nation has only one option: We must keep our word, defeat our enemies, and stand behind the American military in this vital mission.
*death* What....enemies...are you .. talking .... about?...
The same is true of Iran, a nation now held hostage by a small clerical elite that is isolating and repressing its people.
The same is true of the United States, a nation now held hostage by a small idiotic elite that is isolating and repressing its people.
Tonight, let me speak directly to the citizens of Iran: America respects you, and we respect your country. We respect your right to choose your own future and win your own freedom. And our nation hopes one day to be the closest of friends with a free and democratic Iran.
Read: We'll give you a couple more years before we invade you, too.
So to prevent another attack –- based on authority given to me by the Constitution and by statute -- I have authorized a terrorist surveillance program to aggressively pursue the international communications of suspected al Qaeda operatives and affiliates to and from America. Previous Presidents have used the same constitutional authority I have, and federal courts have approved the use of that authority. Appropriate members of Congress have been kept informed. The terrorist surveillance program has helped prevent terrorist attacks. It remains essential to the security of America. If there are people inside our country who are talking with al Qaeda, we want to know about it, because we will not sit back and wait to be hit again.
There's a difference though: you abused it. Yes, the federal courts approved the use of that authority. You went behind everyone's backs like a little sneakface. "The terrorist surveillance program has helped prevent terrorist attacks." It's also put the entire country on edge and brought censorship to a whole new level. From now on, I'm going to say "May the president be assassinated" as opposed to "goodbye, Janice" when I'm hanging up the phone. I wonder if I can say that on my blog? =X
In a dynamic world economy, we are seeing new competitors, like China and India, and this creates uncertainty, which makes it easier to feed people's fears.
Read: WE WILL NOT BE SECOND TO COMMIES
In the last five years, the tax relief you passed has left $880 billion in the hands of American workers, investors, small businesses, and families -- and they have used it to help produce more than four years of uninterrupted economic growth.
Babe, we're in trillions of dollars debt. This is not the time to be giving away money. I don't know your definition of 'economic growth', but I'm pretty sure most people don't think it's increasing the deficit.
Because America needs more than a temporary expansion, we need more than temporary tax relief. I urge the Congress to act responsibly, and make the tax cuts permanent.
*whines* Clinton...please slap some sense into this man...
Keeping America competitive requires us to open more markets for all that Americans make and grow. One out of every five factory jobs in America is related to global trade, and we want people everywhere to buy American. With open markets and a level playing field, no one can out-produce or out-compete the American worker.
Which is exactly why everyone and their mother are outsourcing to India and China for cheap labor. Because nobody can out-produce or out-compete the American worker. And we want everyone to buy American, except for ourselves. Keep buying Chinese, America!
Congress did not act last year on my proposal to save Social Security -- (applause)
I just wanted to point out those were the Democrats clapping.
And to keep America competitive, one commitment is necessary above all: We must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity.
Read: WE WILL NOT BE SECOND TO COMMIES
America is a great force for freedom and prosperity. Yet our greatness is not measured in power or luxuries, but by who we are and how we treat one another. So we strive to be a compassionate, decent, hopeful society.
A compassionate, decent, hopeful, powerful society who lives in luxury. :rolls eyes:
A hopeful society depends on courts that deliver equal justice under the law. The Supreme Court now has two superb new members -- new members on its bench: Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Sam Alito.
...*cries* I'll talk about them later...
Human life is a gift from our Creator -- and that gift should never be discarded, devalued or put up for sale.
Thank you, Jesus. I didn't realize you looked so much like George Bush.
In New Orleans and in other places, many of our fellow citizens have felt excluded from the promise of our country.
Because you fucked up.
This State of the Union business wears me out.
x |
| posted by Ianthe. @ 11:36 PM |
|
|
|
| 2.05.2006 |
| Our once-sensible neighbors to the north |
First of all, I would like to apologize for not updating in ... half a year! Ouch, has it really been that long? I'll make a point to update more.
Anyway, I'm sure you're aware of the results of the Canadian elections. Someone in America might say, well, it's Canada! Why should we be particularly concerned about their leadership?
You very well might not be. However, Canada has always been the older, wiser, more sensible and liberal older (yet younger) sibling to the United States. They achieved independence without war, and in more modern times have become one of the first countries to legalize same-sex marriage and support the Kyoto Protocol. These actions make Canada a great role model for progressive politics (despite the fact that our government refuses to listen to anybody).
But Canada has voted, and they have voted in conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Harper's relationship with George Bush reminds me somewhat of a little brother who wants to be just like his older brother; so he copies everything that he does in hopes that he can become the spitting image of his older brother. It's kinda like that.
According to StephenHarperSaid.ca, "Stephen Harper’s No. 1 priority is to reduce taxes until they are lower than those in the United States." This doesn't make any sense to me. At all. Isn't Canada renowned for its free health care? How do you plan to continue to support one of the best things Canada has to offer while slashing taxes? We complain about rising taxes, but in the end, we all know that we need to pay them to support government programs, which in turn support us.
Harper says some things that concern me. One such quote from him reveals his views on the impoverished: “In terms of the unemployed, of which we have over a million-and-a-half, don’t feel particularly bad for many of these people. They don’t feel bad about it themselves, as long as they’re receiving generous social assistance and unemployment insurance.” So, basically he doesn't care about the impoverished because they're lazy, and clearly the unemployed simply don't want jobs.
I know I'm jumping around a lot here, but it's 4am and I'm just trying to get some ideas out.
So I've been reading the electoral platform documents on Conservative.ca. I've been very drawn to gay rights and issues lately, so I skipped right on down to 'Giving MPs a free vote on marriage'. It reads:
"The Liberal legislation abolishing the traditional definition of marriage passed only on a whipped cabinet vote. We believe that Parliament alone, based on a completely free vote, should be able to determine the definition of marriage." Fabulous. So apparently the first time it didn't count. So you thought you got same-sex marriage? I don't think you guys were sober when you voted on that. So let me first appoint all my conservative friends and then we'll ask them what they want. And it'll be a completely unbiased and free vote.
Canada, Canada. I can only imagine the destruction Stephen Harper, George Bush, and Tony Blair combined will bring upon the earth. Harper could single-handedly undo the Canadian progressive politics I so admired.
Stephen Harper: Heads I win, tails you lose.
|
| posted by Ianthe. @ 2:51 AM |
|
|
|
| 9.03.2005 |
| New Orleans --- a separate country? |
I trust that you all are aware of the horrible events following the hit of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. One of the most beautiful cities in the United States of America has been completely destroyed and will never be the same again. But before I get into the more political aspects of it, let's take a technical look at how the city was being protected and what happened to cause the flooding.
New Orleans is a city up along the Gulf of Mexico, and it was protected by levees. A levee is, by definition, "a barrier constructed to contain the flow of water or to keep out the sea". The New Orleans levees were never built to withstand more than a Category 3 hurricane. Katrina was a Category 5. Additional funding was sought from the government, to the tune of $27 million to help upgrade the levees. The Bush adminstration met that request with $3.9 million, and Congress eventually scraped up something like $5.6 million. Not nearly enough. The Tucson Citizen explains, "Katrina pulled water from the Gulf of Mexico eastward into Lake Pontchartrain and the extra water resulted in very fast flow through the canals that carry the water through New Orleans and back into the gulf. That extra flow resulted in breakage of the levees."
Now, there is definately no way to prevent a hurricane from occurring. However, a quote from Atrios reveals that "President George W. Bush said the other day that no one expected the levees to break." This is completely and totally ridiculous. The quote continues: "Well, with all respect, study after study, including FEMA's own tabletop exercises last year, all included the breaking or the giving of the levees. Everyone who had studied the issue knew that with a Category 3, 4 or 5 storm, that was a very strong likelihood." Of course it was a very strong likelihood! The government barely provided enough money to even begin to strenghten the levees in preperation for such an occurance. Neo-cons will tell you that this is because all of the funds are going towards the war. A war that needn't be fought. Let's look at the facts.
- "All of the money is going towards the war." It needn't be repeated that it's already a war for a pack of lies, however, it's pointless dying over there and pointless dying over here.
- The people who would be helping keep a sense of organization and control over the chaos are all off serving in Iraq.
- Bush took a 5-week vacation in the middle of all of our problems. 5 weeks! In the middle of war and gas price spikes, he takes off.
- Condoleezza Rice was spotted a few days ago in a store buying $2000 worth of shoes. Even in the horrible aftermath of Katrina, Condi finds herself in need of new pumps.
There used to be a joke that New Orleans was like a separate country from the rest of the US. It's entirely true and not a joke now. The people seeking refuge in the Dome and convention centers look like people who have been living through a disaster in a 3rd world country, not the United States of America, one of the richest countries in the world. There is no sense of order there. The plumbing has been ruined and people are resorting to burning holes in chairs and placing buckets underneath for toilets. Women and children have been raped and killed. Perfectly sensible people who held jobs are stealing from each other just to survive. Diabetics are in desperate need of insulin, and here's the kicker: the federal government didn't even know about the convention people until a day ago. These people have been suffering for a week, waiting for supplies. The Red Cross was not permitted into the area for safety reasons. What kind of crap is that? Finally these people will get some relief, and the government decides it won't be safe. I am so thoroughly disgusted.
So that's what I've gathered so far about the extent of the damage.
x |
| posted by Ianthe. @ 8:19 PM |
|
|
|
| 8.10.2005 |
| The obligatory link post |
We certainly have some gems today...
Spider-Man Reviews Crayons
Spider-Man (as an action figure) takes it upon himself to review every one of Crayola's crayons in their new 96 crayon box. While the page is not fully completed (it's only 1/3 of the way done) what is there is hilarious enough to last until the next installment.
The cool thing about "Yellow" is that you always end up needing it a lot more than you anticipate. Nobody ever picks yellow out of the box just for the Hell of it, but once you start coloring in whatever coloring book or colored coloring you colored, there's a 99.9% chance you'll eventually need the yellow for something. In that I cheerfully liken it to bay leaves.
Gym Class
Gym Class is a short film about one boring day in gym class interrupted by a bold finger gunfight. While the beginning was mildly startling the rest proved to be a few minutes of sheer amusement. Rated PG: V
The Dead Letter Office
The premise is a simple one: you have just died. You don't know why, or how, all you are certain of is you are dead. This is your chance to write one letter to the world, using as many or as few words as you want. You can anonymously submit your entry to the Dead Letter Office where it will be shuffled into the other 6500 or so. Or you can browse through other Dead Letter entries. |
| posted by Ianthe. @ 5:26 PM |
|
|
|
Tears Shall Drown The Wind |
|
| |
|
|
