"NEVER
HAVE SO MANY DEPENDED UPON SO LITTLE FOR SO MUCH!..""NEVER
HAVE SO MANY DEPENDED UPON SO LITTLE FOR SO MUCH!.."
(Quote not attributed to Winston S. Churchill)
I was sitting here listening to more of that annoying Baroque Era classical stuff that I so dearly love to hate (a close friend of mine once dissed me with the observation that since I prefer the Romantic Era composers, this is evidence of my attenuated intellectual development--he can actually stand to sit--play on words intended--through the entire Bach Brandenbarf Concertos, or worse yet, Handel's Royal Water-closet Music....), pondering the thickening fusillades of political-economic effluent that has been issuing from the 'White House' on the pending American Power Play in Iraq, and wondering what more I can say to bring the heightened absurdity of what the Bush Gang is up to at present into sharper focus. Frankly, the nature of this entire business of committing the United States to a war, when such a terribly expensive undertaking is NOT justifiable by any logical arument, is entirely beyond my grasp.
[The
title above, in the event you are still wondering, refers to the apparent intellectual
deficit exhibited by the Bush Administration and has no association with either
that other infamous Imperialist half-American, Winston Churchill, or the Second
World War (when at least the line dividing moral takes on war seemed
a bit more distinct--even though it wasn't, as always!). I'd also like
to clarify that the photographs above and right do not show, as many
have suspected, RAF Squadron Leader Chuthbert T. Renfrew IV, OBE, DSC, DFC,
BFD about to board a Dakota, prior to undertaking a secret mission for
MI-5. These are only recent images taken of yours truly in the kit of a WWII
RAF 'Eagle Squadron' volunteer at our local air museum (for city-wide Museum
Day). Sadly, these pictures were taken less than a few hours after news
had reached us of the STS-107 flight's tragic re-entry catastophe, so I will
have ample reason to recall the day vividly even after advanced senilia or the
ravages of Alzheimer's have in future confered the figurative equivalent of
a pre-front lobotomy on me. The uniform shown, for the benefit of historical
recreators who may wish to know, is an example of the excellent reproductions
of such items that are available from an outfit in Salinas, California, named
WHAT PRICE GLORY. Owner Jerry Lee has
these replica uniforms custom-made in Pakistan by professional uniform makers
who have been in the tailoring trade for many years (they even made original
RAF kit for fliers in the 40s). Reasonably priced and accurate to a high degree
of exactitude, when compared side by side with originals, there are few discernible
differences (other than perhaps the fact that the fabric is a slight
degree darker than the WWII originals). Unless you are an expert in this field
of military panoply, you'd not be able to tell and they have fooled a goodly
number of retired WWII RAF officers, so authentic are they.]
The rather stark contrast that my defense affairs interests poses to my well-known 'left of center' views on political topics has often given friends and acquaintances recurrent pause for thought, in trying to reconcile the many oddly polar 'strange bed-fellow' objects of my time & attention. Frankly, I have long since given up trying to bring these disparate interests into some sort of explainable harmonious balance. The Japanese, who are among the most culturally homogenious people in the world, typically resolve this sort of perplexing schismatic disparity by regarding those individuals with radically polar proclivities as being 'exceptionally complex individuals' (somewhat akin to their treatment of 'gaijin' as either honored guests or absolutely shunned and ignored social 'freaks'), and therefore (at least so goes the theory) the 'honorable exception' that proves the rule. That's always been good enough for me, although as I get further along on the path of life, I find myself more firmly convinced than ever that I know and less about anything, with any certainty.
[The picture at left appeared on the front page of the San Francisco Chronicle
on 14 Feb 03, accompanying a story about how the 'spiritual needs of the men
in uniform are being met in that distant land'. Regardless of whether or not
it was simple minded lack of sensitivity to place it there, this image sends
a wonderful message to all the non-Christian (Islamic) countries in the Southwest
Asian region. Any Islamic person over there who previously may have allowed
the US the benefit of the doubt for its motivations to remove Saddam is probably
now firmly convinced that Bush is plotting a 'Holy War' against the whole Islamic
world.]
Continuing to plumb the present dilemma that the world faces, as America (read: George Bush and associates) prepares to ride a whirlwind into Iraq, I recently had an article by Newsweek staff writer Christopher Dickey ("A Great Divide", Newsweek, 22 Feb 03) draw my attention to something that I have heretofore not fully considered as an important driving motivation in Bush's amazing determination to plunge the world into further chaos with his 'preventive war strategy'. That 'something' is the 'born again Christian' factor, as I have chosen to isolate it on the festering petri dish of fanatical religious beliefs. Mind, I am not a conventionally religious individual; as has been referenced before in the Mayday Cafe, in my childhood I was baptised a Catholic, confirmed an Anglican, and produced as the natural by-product of a Catholic and Presbyterian confluence of religious zeal. For whatever reason, I was able to break through the glass ceiling of finite religiosity and blossom into the non-believer I am today--that is, a person who believes in nothing except the possibility that humanity, for all its eternal yearning to be special, is after all nothing more than a clever (and circumstantially unique) joining together of certain basic organic chemical elements (found all over the universe) to produce a (coincidentally) sentient (must use that word cautiously, as I am not entirely convinced that certain of its members--like GW Bush--are actually sentient) life-form.
All
that having been said, Dickey's article made a point of drawing my attention
to the fact that Bush is a 'dyed in the wool' 'born again Christian'.
In trying to fathom his grossly inexplicable behavior, as directed to Iraq,
I had not stopped to focus on possibilities implicit in this consideration and
the motivations it may possibly provide for his rabid seizing upon the 'evil'
and 'Godless' character of Saddam Hussein's regime. Yet, it may offer some useful
insights (assuming that Bush is sincere in his erstwhile 'Christian' beliefs
and not just using Christianity as a convenient political rallying factor, which
is distinctly possible, also), as I shall attempt to illustrate. [Image at right
from 8 Feb 03 issue of The Economist].
Dickey opens the matter about halfway through his article by stating:
"Another problem is God. Americans are religious in ways that many Europeans find almost incomprehensible. 'We could never imagine putting IN GOD WE TRUST on our money', says one Parisian intellectual. A series of surveys by the University of Michigan since 1981 suggests that on a spectrum of traditional versus secular values, with religious values being a key test, Americans are closer to Turks, Indonesians, and Iranians, than to Italians or the French, Belgians, or Brits. In most societies, the survey suggests, affluence brings self-expression and self-expression reduces religiosity. But less so in the USA.
Why? Because in the USA religious faith is increasingly tied to freedom of choice. Europeans grow up in their Roman Catholic or Protestant cultures, and often feel free to ignore them. Americans search for a faith until it's a good fit. Some 200 years ago that prompted legendary French bishop, diplomat, and cynic Charles Maurice de Tallyrand's quip that '...the states of America are a country where there are 32 different religions, but there is only one course at dinner--and it's bad'.
To most Americans, it seems natural enough that George Bush, a born again Christian, would incorporate religious references into his speeches. His Manichaean descriptions of good versus evil, with us or against us, are rooted in his reading of the Christian Bible and strike many in the USA as strong, righteous, and decisive. But all this sounds to Europeans very much like the kind of theology--or ideology--that led them to slaughter each other for centuries. 'It's ludicrous and counterproductive', says a philosophy professor at the Nederlands' Leiden University. And since the events of 9/11 this American religiosity seems especially inappropriate to many in Europe. 'How do you go around denouncing Muslim fundamentalism when in every one of Bush's speeches he talks about God?' asks Pierre Assouline, editor of the popular French literary magazine LIRE.
In Britain, the resistance to Bush's perceived 'praise the Lord and pass the ammunition' brand of religion is especially virulent. The new Archbishop of Canterbury has spoken out against the threats of war in Iraq. During the protests last weekend, playright Harold Pinter called the American president a 'hired Christian thug'. And Prime Minister Tony Blair finds himself under attack not only for supporting the threat of war, but for sharing Bush's Christian commitment. In two TV interviews over the past month, Blair has been asked if he prayed with the (US) president. An American politician would be proud to say yes. Blair's response to Jeremy Paxton on the BBC was a terse 'No, we don't pray together, Jeremy, no!' "
Rather startling analysis coming from
a mainstream American magazine, but quite astute in my opinion. Beyond the
obvious, as stated above, the hard-line Christian religious edge in Bush's
continuing public exhortations to battle the 'forces of evil' (i.e. Iraq's
Saddam Hussein and the radical Islamic terrorists, for the moment) clearly
exacerbates the existing polarity that already has driven a formidable wedge
between the 'Christian West' and the 'Islamic Middle East'. The implications of
an implied 'Christian Jihad' or 'Christian Holy War' lurking in the haze behind
all of Bush's public rhetoric is more than disturbing to those of us
'westerners' who skeptically analyse everything in depth as a matter of habit,
but most exceptionally repugnant to the broad spectrum of 'ordinary' Islamic
peoples spread throughout the world, who see in it ugly residual vestiges of the
infamous Christian Holy Crusades of the Middle Ages against the
"Islamic Infidels". [Image at left was taken in Kuwait, which has now is so full
of US troops--183,000 as of 25 Feb 03--that Kuwaiti has become a virtual US
dependency; as a result, Kuwaiti citizens' freedom of movement in their own
nation has become severely constrained & restricted].
Recently (8 Feb 03 issue of The Economist, from which publication the photo at left was 'borrowed') another interesting analysis of this topic was made by Columnist Lexington (page 33). Lexington raises similar questions to Dickey's, but true to the conservative bias of The Economist, puts his own boogeyman to rest by ultimately dismissing the possibility as an exercise in faulty political analysis. Ironically, before lowering his 'raised-for-effect' eyebrow, Lexington raises many salient points. Consider the following excerpts:
"Only one thing unsettles George Bush's critics more than the possibility that his foreign policy is secretly driven by greed. That is the possibility that that it is secretly driven by 'God'. War for oil would be bad. War for God would be catastrophic: the beginning of a 'clash of civilisations' that would pit Christians and Jews against Muslims.
Is there anything to this? The war-for-God crowd can certainly point to bits of evidence. The current White House is the most religious since Jimmy Carter's days. In his memoirs of his time as a presidential speech writer, David Frum says that the first words he heard in the Bush White House were 'Missed you at Bible study'. Mr. Bush, a born-again Christian who turned to God after many years of hard drinking, starts each day kneeling in prayer. Michael Gerson, his main speech writer, is a master at clothing public policy in religious language.
The second piece of evidence is that America, despite a decline in church-going, is a much more religious place than Europe, supporting more than 200 Christian television channels and over 1,500 Christian radio stations. Religion is particularly important to Mr. Bush's party. Republican voters attend church more frequently than Democrats do. Evangelical southerners constitute the praetorian guard of the Republican Party.
The third piece of evidence is the scariest: some right wing Christians seem to be spoiling for a clash of civilisations. Jerry Falwell has called the Prophet Muhammed a 'terrorist'. He has since apologised, but Pat Robertson, who called him a 'wild eyed fanatic', a 'robber', and a 'brigand', has not. Franklin Graham, son of Billy, has branded Islam 'evil'. Many American evangelicals believe that a complete restoration of the nation of Israel is a prerequisite for the Second Coming. Thwarting Arial Sharon is thus tantamount to thwarting God's master-plan.
A born-again president; a highly religious country; a bunch of extremist Republican storm troopers: doesn't this all add up to a clash of civilisations?"
The rest of the column spin-doctors all of these very real arguments raised right out of existence, but this 'dissing' is quite clearly a predictable performance by a 'house political physician', who must after all hew to The Economist's bottom line pro-Capitalism bias. Regardless of Lexington's sweeping dismissal of religion as an underlying issue of great relevance in Bush's 'Christian crusade' against the infidels, his argument for dismissal isn't quite that easy to swallow. It is a well know fact that conservative Christian influence is an extremely powerful force within the Republican party, however much sober, clear-eyed intellectual secular conservatives in that party wish to de-emphasise its importance. And it is also very difficult to ignore or otherwise overlook the fact that conservative Christians almost universally support the Israeli fight to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian homeland. Therefore, whether Bush is a sincere 'born-again Christian' or merely skillfully channeling all that anti-Islamic fervor to support his political policies, the end result is exactly the same: a very hard to deny possibility exists that there is much more to this "Christians against Muslims" hypothesis than anyone is comfortably prepared to acknowledge.
Most ordinary Americans, of course, haven't a clue about the real theological workings of the Islamic faith, or the equally powerful beliefs that accompany it. Having lived and worked in Saudi Arabia for many years, I myself have been considerably sensitised to these issues, whereas most Americans who have never set foot out of this nation have virtually no basis of understanding or experience upon which to form an intelligent opinion on the matter. I well understand, aside from the basic fact that we do not need this Bush-inspired war against Iraq (any more than human beings need to cease breathing air), that if the present Administration wishes to preserve any sense of credibility in the airing of its perceptions of present reality to the rest of the world, it MUST absolutely leave off the heavily dogmatic 'Christian' ('born-again') fundamentalist overtones of religiosity from its political arguments!
The point is not lost on cogent observers of the issue that this heavy infusion of 'Christian' religion (again, whether genuine or simply a convenient rallying tool for use in herding more 'basic-minded' Americans to the cause...) in the Bush Administration's arguments for going to war runs strictly contrary to one of the most basic founding principles of American Democracy, anyway! The basic founding principle I refer to is strict separation of 'Church and State', a concept which in the past Republican era of governmental influence appears to have suffered heavy setbacks. All very, very disturbing reflections to mull over for the conventional American, but certainly not in the least lost on individuals such as myself (and many thousands of others, fortunately) who suspect that 'God' (any or all Gods) really has nothing at all to do with this present set-to by America against the Islamic religion.
Once again, the ultimate, supremely ignorant irony about all religion returns like a boomerang to strike one squarely in the face, as all religions continue their endless argument about whose God is the only true God! And all this time you thought the human race was getting wiser and more enlightened as it evolved, didn't you? Groan.....
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(New
subject:) Fitness in America.
Recent reports have shown that gross (or morbid) obesity has become an almost
epidemic problem in the United States. This is true of children and adults alike,
as a walk through any common commercial avenue here in the US will readily demonstrate.
Everywhere I go, I am personally appalled by the huge guts, thighs, haunches,
and bottom extremities exhibited by the average individuals one runs into. Whole
families of grossly, disgustingly overweight people can be seen everywhere one
looks and they can't ALL be suffering from glandular problems, can
they? Meanwhile, Americans continue to eschew human powered alternate means
of transportation for their gas-guzzling automobiles and the nation continues
to be turned into a coast-to-coast mass of parking lots and highways; all of
this, as the automobile and petroleum industries persist in sustaining the average
individual's addiction to (highly inefficient and wasteful) personal 4-wheel
(gas-powered) transportation. Ya gotta love it!
When
I was in Saudi Arabia, we expatriates had far more constraints on our lives
than we had in the West, due to the strictness of Saudi Wahabist Islamic
dogma that was stringently enforced throughout the Kingdom. However, that notwithstanding,
we simply had to persevere a bit more to sustain a healthy lifestyle in a nation
where any social occasion involved eating copiously and little else. Fortunately
for myself and my colleagues, we had fully air-conditioned gyms in which to
work out (right), as well as a huge pool (seen above at sunset). Many of us
were also bicyclists and runners. Living in a compound by the National Guard
Hospital in Riyadh, I was able to bicycle to and from our round of cardiac surgeries
each day. This was supplemented by running about 3 miles each day and a half-marathon
on weekends. Additionally, after work each day, I spent a couple of hours in
the gym working out. Thus, all parameters were covered, with both muscular and
cardiovascular conditioning included in each day's agenda.
Although
I have been a runner for nearly all my life, it was in Saudi Arabia that I virtually
made a religion out of staying fit. Of course, most of this activity had to
be confined to the (large) grounds of the National Guard compound, since riding
a bicycle on any Saudi city street runs near suicidal risks, and exposure of
any skin in public (as in running shorts) was a fast way to draw the unwanted
attention of the nearest Muttawain ('religious police'). The few times
we dared to run on the streets of Taif (summer capitol of the Kingdom), we were
nearly run down by fanatics in passing cars who regarded such physical activity
as a sort of blasphemous display.
Picture on left shows the peak result of my
training, which was probably reached in 1995 (at the age of 49). I've never
been a muscle-bound ox, attributable to a refusal to take steroids and a belief
in natural muscle toning rather than 'bulking up', but I have
always felt that a well-toned physique is preferable to the Schwartzenegger
look, anyway. When I returned to the US shortly thereafter, I knew that it would
be a challenge to maintain a similar state of physical fine-tuning, but fortunately
I have found a partial solution to 
having
to return to a desk job and a daytime routine of shuffling papers: since I live
only 5 miles from the office, I am able to commute to my worksite via bicycle.
At about 20 mph average speed, my commute each way takes about 12-15 minutes
or so, depending on prevailing headwinds, etc. This is enabled through use of
a Pinarello "Cross" bike (shown at right), which is a combination of a mountain
bike and a straight road-bike. It's a beautiful bike that was intended to be
usable both on the street (as in Ironman type competition), or on rough
terrain (such as actual rough mountain biking). I modified the gearing a bit,
adding a 54 tooth high gear on the front end, but otherwise leaving the stock
gearing intact. This permits speeds on the daily (5 day a week) commute (on
city bike lanes) as high as 25 mph, although I've occasionally clocked just
under 30 mph. The distance is so short that it is almost a sprint, too, so this
high-speed transit has a major 
conditioning
benefit. As for the weekends, a 4 mile run in the early morning along the nearby
Sacramento River levy makes for a good cardiovascular conditioning exercise.
Then, not to overlook upper body strength, I have a home gym with lat tower
attachment, on which to spend about 30 minutes after I get home each day.
All of this activity is not anywhere near the total amount of work I was able
to get in while in KSA, but at least it helps make up for the absolute lack
of inertia my present work presents me with.
Although not an absolutely rabid bicycle fanatic,
I have always had and used bicycles throughout my life. Picture at below right
shows my Japanese made mountain bike used in Saudi Arabia. Surprisingly, there
were several good bicycle specialty shops in the Riyadh souks while
I was there (probably because of all the expats who were cyclists). My first
'serious' bike was a Schwinn Super-Sport (10 speed 'racing' bike that was only
a step below the Schwinn Paramount), bought for use when I was in the Air Force
in North Dakota (mid-60s). After my military service ended and I returned to
Berkeley, I bought a Peugeot PX-10, in 1971 one of the finest 'serious' road
bikes you could buy without going the custom frame route. This bike (shown above
left, with white frame) cost me 
$177.00
new and out the door and weighed only 21 pounds (which at that time was considered
amazingly light). Interestingly, I still have that faithful old Peugeot PX-10
(which is now a classic) and all of the original equipment that it came with
(Mavic wheels, brakes, and Campy gear), although I just recently had it updated
with new brakes, derailleur, and new lightweight clincher wheels. It is not
my daily 'commute' beast, however, since I much prefer the Pinarello for this
task. A third bike I have is a KHS Montana Accent mountain bike (seen
immediately below), acquired (along with the Pinarello) from an old Berkeley
friend who IS a fanatic wheelman; he was getting some new bikes, so I was able
to buy both his old mountain bike and the Pinarello for $300--somewhat of a
great deal, I now see in retrospect. I have added some higher gearing
(a 53 tooth high gear sprocket) to the mountain bike, so that I can use it for
winter commuting, when the bike lanes are strewn with all sort of unbelievable
crap that can puncture tires in a heartbeat.
Riding
a bicycle on city streets in a town like Sacramento (CA), which is full of yahoos
in big SUVs and pick-up trucks, is surely responsible for the nearly all-grey
beard that I now have and commuting alongside cars on city streets is not something
one can ever relax and enjoy (several bicyclists have been hit and
killed in the last month here alone). Although my ride to work takes place at
0630 in the early morning (well before any major traffic starts to fill city
thoroughfares) and my afternoon ride is usually done at 1630 hours (before the
offices let out and people are traveling homewards), one still feels like a
rabbit on the run among the traffic (and particularly around the local "Metro"
buses). Sometimes I imagine that the big reflective "SLOW TRAFFIC" rectangle
on my backpack is actually a bright red bulls-eye, such are the stupid (dangerous)
liberties drivers seem to delight in taking around bicycle riders. On more than
one occasion I have nearly lost it and done something REALLY stupid, out of
sheer frustration over the collective bad manners of many of these automobile
bound idiots. I keep wondering when I will finally do so and end up as a headline
in the evening news on the order of "Berserk Bicyclist Drives
Kamikaze-style
Straight into harassing Automobile!" We shall see!
At any rate, I am constantly reminded of that delightful story of the little elderly lady who was spotted bungee-jumping off a high bridge in Australia, a few years ago. The message on the T-shirt she wore summed life up quite succinctly, I think. On the reverse side it said "Exercise hard, eat properly, die anyway!" (Or something like that). The point being, of course, that we will all die some day anyway, regardless of how fit or unfit each of us is. Might as well live a fit life, however, than one as a human elephant. Besides, I have witnessed far too many cardiac bypass surgeries up close and personal to wish that procedure on anyone! I have no doubt that there will be further 'Mayday Cafe' columns dedicated to personal explorations of health & fitness in future, since it is a universally timely topic. But until then, live well (moderately), but prepare for more outpourings of absolute horse exhaust from the White House, as all America continues to be reminded by the Bush Administration why we absolutely MUST have another war in Iraq.....
Cheers, C2, March 2003----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Some links to worthy articles & opinions on the Bush Iraq War madness appear below: ]
Molly Ivins opinion (columnist): "Cozying Up to the Fringe Right", Texas Star-Telegram, 9 Feb 03
Arianna Huffington opinion (columnist): Syndicated commentary, 22 Feb 03
Mark Morford opinion (columnist): "Bush Gives You the Finger!", SF Chron, 21 Feb 03
Robert
Scheer opinion: "Bush Pushes the Big Lie Toward the Brink",
SF Chron, 5 Mar 03
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--Return to AEOLUS AEROSPACE--
