Wow!
As a World War II Era Guy, I never thought I would see the day when the Prime Minister of Japan stood beside the President of The United States, on the White House lawn, receiving full military honors as a visiting head of state.
The fathers of these two men were on opposite sides in WW II, each with a mission to kill the other. Peace is a wonderful thing.
So it makes me wonder about the hue and cry from some latter day politicians over the prospect of the new Iraqi government grantng amnesty to insurgents who may have killed Americans.
Yes, I would like to see these guys tried, convicted and punished. But, how long must the cycle go on?
When I was in the Philippines, helping make arrangements to repatriate 10,000 Japanese soldiers held as POWs on Leyte, I was amazed at the lack of hostility that existed between the POWs and the American soldiers. In fact, one of the POWs painted a watercolor of a giesha girl and gave it to me. It hangs on my wall to this day. For both the Japanese and the Americans, when it was over, it was over.
Perhaps today, in Iraq, we should all say it is over... and mean it. Forget about an eye for an eye, etc. There has been a lot of killing already. I know of only one way to stop it... to say "It's Over".
Obviously everyone has to agree. You cannot release people who want to keep killing. But, if the time comes when the insurgents are willing to quit the fight, let's all shake hands and say, "It's Over".
Friday, June 30, 2006
Sunday, June 25, 2006
Se Habla Español
Literally, that means "They speak Spanish". But when it is lettered on the door of a retail shop, printed at the bottom of a newspaper ad, or super imposed over the end of a TV commercial, it means, "If you speak only Spanish, we still want your business and you will be served by another native Spanish speaker."
I've never had a problem with that, until president Bush said that people who want to become Americans should learn to speak English.
I am reminded of stories from my childhood when my father talked about the great wave of immigrants coming to America from Europe. That was probably some time before the first World War, but I don't know and don't care enough to research the time line.
He spoke about a feeling of "America For Americans", or some such, that opposed the seemingly endless flood of immigrants. As I recall, this movement eventually became anti-Jewish, then anti-African, then it became the Ku Klux Klan.
But, that is not where I am going today. Today, I am wondering if all those Europeans would have assimilated and learned English, if everywhere they turned a sign said "We speak Polish", or whatever.
So, I wonder what incentives for learning English are offered immigrants who are native Spanish speakers. In my state, New Mexico, essentially all official documents are printed in both Spanish and English. So every government agency and virtually every business can accomodate a Spanish speaker.
I studied Spanish for six semesters (after my 65th birthday) at New Mexico State University - just because I wanted to learn the language. Today I can read Spanish that is simply written. I can express myself in Spanish well enough to communicate with the gentle people of Juarez, Mexico. But when they speak, I am pretty much at a loss. So, I know it is damn hard for an adult to learn a new language.
In fact, I think the only way is complete immersion. Learn to understand the language or starve.
But, there is no immersion when everyone is willing to accomodate you in your native language.
So, maybe local governments and those commercial enterprises who so readily offer to speak Spanish, (Se habla Español) are actually hurting the immigrants who might well want to learn English but have a very full time job earning a living, and have no pressing immediate need to learn English.
Maybe.
Literally, that means "They speak Spanish". But when it is lettered on the door of a retail shop, printed at the bottom of a newspaper ad, or super imposed over the end of a TV commercial, it means, "If you speak only Spanish, we still want your business and you will be served by another native Spanish speaker."
I've never had a problem with that, until president Bush said that people who want to become Americans should learn to speak English.
I am reminded of stories from my childhood when my father talked about the great wave of immigrants coming to America from Europe. That was probably some time before the first World War, but I don't know and don't care enough to research the time line.
He spoke about a feeling of "America For Americans", or some such, that opposed the seemingly endless flood of immigrants. As I recall, this movement eventually became anti-Jewish, then anti-African, then it became the Ku Klux Klan.
But, that is not where I am going today. Today, I am wondering if all those Europeans would have assimilated and learned English, if everywhere they turned a sign said "We speak Polish", or whatever.
So, I wonder what incentives for learning English are offered immigrants who are native Spanish speakers. In my state, New Mexico, essentially all official documents are printed in both Spanish and English. So every government agency and virtually every business can accomodate a Spanish speaker.
I studied Spanish for six semesters (after my 65th birthday) at New Mexico State University - just because I wanted to learn the language. Today I can read Spanish that is simply written. I can express myself in Spanish well enough to communicate with the gentle people of Juarez, Mexico. But when they speak, I am pretty much at a loss. So, I know it is damn hard for an adult to learn a new language.
In fact, I think the only way is complete immersion. Learn to understand the language or starve.
But, there is no immersion when everyone is willing to accomodate you in your native language.
So, maybe local governments and those commercial enterprises who so readily offer to speak Spanish, (Se habla Español) are actually hurting the immigrants who might well want to learn English but have a very full time job earning a living, and have no pressing immediate need to learn English.
Maybe.
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
A message to today's Military - regarding the New York Times
If, during the course of duty you see that the New York Times has published a photograph or a news story demeaning your service, your mission or your personal conduct, don't take it seriously.
It really has nothing to do with your service; nothing to do with President Bush or Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, it is just the New York Times expressing its decades old hatred of the military. You see, when it comes to America's Armed Forces, The Gray Lady is no lady at all.
In 1946 I was assigned to Base K, AFWESPAC (Army Forces Western Pacific) at the village of Tacloban on Leyte, in the Philippine Islands. My job was running the Radio & Cable Section - a sort of message center that distributed all incoming messages to the proper organization, as well as sending all messages from the various Army units on Leyte.
I had a couple of G.I.'s and several Filipino civilians working in the office. We had an excellent relationship with the Filipinos. They taught me a lot about their culture, and even taught me a smattering of their local Bisayan dialect. I learned enough that I was later able to work the main gate, assissting Filipinos who had business with the Army.
In October of 1946, the New York Times sent a reporter to the Philippines. His story, under the dateline of October 20, 1946, said:
If, during the course of duty you see that the New York Times has published a photograph or a news story demeaning your service, your mission or your personal conduct, don't take it seriously.
It really has nothing to do with your service; nothing to do with President Bush or Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, it is just the New York Times expressing its decades old hatred of the military. You see, when it comes to America's Armed Forces, The Gray Lady is no lady at all.
In 1946 I was assigned to Base K, AFWESPAC (Army Forces Western Pacific) at the village of Tacloban on Leyte, in the Philippine Islands. My job was running the Radio & Cable Section - a sort of message center that distributed all incoming messages to the proper organization, as well as sending all messages from the various Army units on Leyte.
I had a couple of G.I.'s and several Filipino civilians working in the office. We had an excellent relationship with the Filipinos. They taught me a lot about their culture, and even taught me a smattering of their local Bisayan dialect. I learned enough that I was later able to work the main gate, assissting Filipinos who had business with the Army.
In October of 1946, the New York Times sent a reporter to the Philippines. His story, under the dateline of October 20, 1946, said:
U.S. Manila Forces Held Slur On Army
The unchecked deterioration in the conduct and the appearance of the United States Troops here is doing inestimable damage to American prestige as well as alienating the people of this nation.
With morale at its lowest ebb, their carelessness in dress, their unconcealed dislike for the Filipinos and their slovenly demeanor, the American troops on occupation duties in the Philippines are being openly referred to as Ambassadors of ill will.
The reporter went on to accuse the G.I.s of breaking all traffic laws, wearing unpressed uniforms and unshined shoes, even of refusing to salute a superior officer.
When this message arrived at my office, it was retyped by one of my Filipino typists who wondered what in the world the newspaper was referring to. Okay, so we were not in Manila, but we saw none of what the Times reported. And, of course, the folks back home had no idea that not all of us were stationed in Manila.
The message of the Times news story was followed by a message from our commanding generals, who said: "This article has received such prominence in the last few days, that we, the Commanding Generals of AFWESPAC, 13th Air Force and Pacific Air Service Command, feel we must tell you, our soldiers that we believe this condemnation is unwarranted by the facts of our behavior and we resent this attack on you." The generals went into a great deal more detail, which I will not repeat here.
In case you wonder what we were doing in the Philippines at that time, I offer this: We had 10,000 Japanese POW's on Leyte, alone. They had to go home. We had hundreds of tanks, trucks, Jeeps and every other sort of supplies that had been on cargo ships on the way to the anticipated invasion of Japan. When the Japanese surrendered, this cargo was all dumped on Leyte. We had to properly dispose of this material.
Our relationship with the Filipinos was great. They openly adored the American soldiers, and we had great respect and admiration for them. They had suffered greatly at the hands of the Japanese. But, of course, the Times reported nothing of this.
Remind you of some of the stories coming out of Iraq? It should.
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Champagne, anyone?
1.4 billion dollars. That's is how much FEMA money was scammed in the Katrina relief effort. Our tax dollars... money you and I worked hard to earn... was stolen to buy expensive goodies, like $400 bottles of champagne, vacations to the tropics, etc.
And, they say it gives emergency management a black eye. I say it gives Congress, and even the White House, a black eye. Why in the world were they so committed to pour all those billions into hurricane relief? Did someone in Washington send that hurricane on its destructive mission? Did we taxpayers cause it to happen?
If we didn't do it, why are we having to pay for it? I proudly admit that I did not (willingly) contribute a dime to Katrina relief. Since when is the government (taxpayers) responsible for a natural disaster that stikes someone else?
Every day in America some family's home burns to the ground, through no fault of its occupants. Homes slide off hillsides in California as a result of heavy rain. If the homeowners didn't have insurance - tough luck!
In 1964 I built a radio station in central Kansas. The construction came after a seven year battle before the FCC to obtain a broadcast license. Seven years of working two or three jobs at a time to earn enough to pay the lawyers and engineers necessary for the proceedings. When the station went on the air, it appeared that the waiting and the hard work were worth it. The station achieved immediate success.
Four months later, the Johnson Administration, in a round of military base closings, shut down the local Air Force base, throwing our town into an economic tailspin. Our radio station never made another 10 cents profit. We held on for seven years, then were forced to give up. I had invested 14 years of my life, and every dime I had earned in that period, but I walked away, dead broke. That was a direct result of an action by the Federal Government. There was no compensation for me from the Feds. Or from anyone else!
But, a hurricane hit New Orleans and people who had stupidly occupied houses that were below sea level, people who had refused to evacuate when warned to do so, are suddenly our responsibility and become the recipients of our hard earned dollars.
Can anyone explain this to me?
1.4 billion dollars. That's is how much FEMA money was scammed in the Katrina relief effort. Our tax dollars... money you and I worked hard to earn... was stolen to buy expensive goodies, like $400 bottles of champagne, vacations to the tropics, etc.
And, they say it gives emergency management a black eye. I say it gives Congress, and even the White House, a black eye. Why in the world were they so committed to pour all those billions into hurricane relief? Did someone in Washington send that hurricane on its destructive mission? Did we taxpayers cause it to happen?
If we didn't do it, why are we having to pay for it? I proudly admit that I did not (willingly) contribute a dime to Katrina relief. Since when is the government (taxpayers) responsible for a natural disaster that stikes someone else?
Every day in America some family's home burns to the ground, through no fault of its occupants. Homes slide off hillsides in California as a result of heavy rain. If the homeowners didn't have insurance - tough luck!
In 1964 I built a radio station in central Kansas. The construction came after a seven year battle before the FCC to obtain a broadcast license. Seven years of working two or three jobs at a time to earn enough to pay the lawyers and engineers necessary for the proceedings. When the station went on the air, it appeared that the waiting and the hard work were worth it. The station achieved immediate success.
Four months later, the Johnson Administration, in a round of military base closings, shut down the local Air Force base, throwing our town into an economic tailspin. Our radio station never made another 10 cents profit. We held on for seven years, then were forced to give up. I had invested 14 years of my life, and every dime I had earned in that period, but I walked away, dead broke. That was a direct result of an action by the Federal Government. There was no compensation for me from the Feds. Or from anyone else!
But, a hurricane hit New Orleans and people who had stupidly occupied houses that were below sea level, people who had refused to evacuate when warned to do so, are suddenly our responsibility and become the recipients of our hard earned dollars.
Can anyone explain this to me?
Monday, June 12, 2006
An Analogy For Islam
when soldiers are not busy with official duties, or entertaining themselves in the way soldiers like to be entertained, they sit around and tell stories.
Since any small group of soldiers may include men from across the country, these stories are often both interesting and informative. Occasionally, however, there is a clinker. Some Private, who has already demonstrated that he is not the brightest bulb in the string, will relate a story, preceded by a bit of a threat. Typically, a tale may go as follows:
"I'll tell you a strange story my mother told me. She knew this to be a fact, and anyone who says it is not true is calling my mother a liar. There was this young girl, about five years old. Every night she would save a little bit of her supper and take it outside. Everyone thought she just liked to finish eating outdoors, but one night her daddy followed her just to see what she did.
"She went out behind the barn and as her daddy watched from a distance, she fed her remaining food to a huge rattlesnake. Her daddy stayed out of sight, but as soon as the little girl returned to the house, he grabbed an axe and killed the snake. The next day the little girl died."
Obviously some other dim bulb would hear and believe the story, because I heard it told the same way by soldiers in different parts of the world.
I always felt these wild stories were born of ignorance. They were retold by people who lacked the mental capacity to rationalize the story and dispute its accuracy. Doesn't that remind you of Islam?
As I understand it, Islam began when the Prophet Muhammad went out from his village to some caves where the Quran (The Recitation) was repeated to him (by some unnamed spirit)until he committed it to memory. (It seems a lot of religions started in a similar fashion, but that is a subject for later exploration.)
All this wisdom was supposed to be recited from memory, but some people later decided it should be written and the book of the Quran was born.
To perpetuate the religion, the children of devout adherents are kept in ignorance of much of the world's accumulated knowledge, and forced instead to memorize the recitation. Like the soldier's story of the little girl who fed the snake, Islam requires a massive helping of faith and not a shred of rational thinking.
I will admit that I have not read the Quran, but what is most apparent to a casual observer is that Islam teaches complete intolerance of any other religion or belief system. After all, we could spoil the soldier's story by pointing out that rattlesnakes eat only live prey - mice, small birds, etc., not left over chicken and dumplings. Similarly, a knowledge and understanding of other religions and belief systems may well lead the Muslim child down the path of tolerance of other teachings and doubt in his own.
So long as intolerance is an integral part of a belief system, there is the liklihood that someone will consider it their mission in life to express their intolerance violently. We see it in racial intolerance, and in the utter hatred some direct toward persons of a sexual persuasion different from their own.
Will there ever be a change? I am doubtful.
when soldiers are not busy with official duties, or entertaining themselves in the way soldiers like to be entertained, they sit around and tell stories.
Since any small group of soldiers may include men from across the country, these stories are often both interesting and informative. Occasionally, however, there is a clinker. Some Private, who has already demonstrated that he is not the brightest bulb in the string, will relate a story, preceded by a bit of a threat. Typically, a tale may go as follows:
"I'll tell you a strange story my mother told me. She knew this to be a fact, and anyone who says it is not true is calling my mother a liar. There was this young girl, about five years old. Every night she would save a little bit of her supper and take it outside. Everyone thought she just liked to finish eating outdoors, but one night her daddy followed her just to see what she did.
"She went out behind the barn and as her daddy watched from a distance, she fed her remaining food to a huge rattlesnake. Her daddy stayed out of sight, but as soon as the little girl returned to the house, he grabbed an axe and killed the snake. The next day the little girl died."
Obviously some other dim bulb would hear and believe the story, because I heard it told the same way by soldiers in different parts of the world.
I always felt these wild stories were born of ignorance. They were retold by people who lacked the mental capacity to rationalize the story and dispute its accuracy. Doesn't that remind you of Islam?
As I understand it, Islam began when the Prophet Muhammad went out from his village to some caves where the Quran (The Recitation) was repeated to him (by some unnamed spirit)until he committed it to memory. (It seems a lot of religions started in a similar fashion, but that is a subject for later exploration.)
All this wisdom was supposed to be recited from memory, but some people later decided it should be written and the book of the Quran was born.
To perpetuate the religion, the children of devout adherents are kept in ignorance of much of the world's accumulated knowledge, and forced instead to memorize the recitation. Like the soldier's story of the little girl who fed the snake, Islam requires a massive helping of faith and not a shred of rational thinking.
I will admit that I have not read the Quran, but what is most apparent to a casual observer is that Islam teaches complete intolerance of any other religion or belief system. After all, we could spoil the soldier's story by pointing out that rattlesnakes eat only live prey - mice, small birds, etc., not left over chicken and dumplings. Similarly, a knowledge and understanding of other religions and belief systems may well lead the Muslim child down the path of tolerance of other teachings and doubt in his own.
So long as intolerance is an integral part of a belief system, there is the liklihood that someone will consider it their mission in life to express their intolerance violently. We see it in racial intolerance, and in the utter hatred some direct toward persons of a sexual persuasion different from their own.
Will there ever be a change? I am doubtful.
Monday, June 05, 2006
Puh-leeeze!
This past Memorial Day weekend I spent most of three days assisting my wife at her booth at the New Mexico Wine Grower's Festival, held at the Southern New Mexico State Fair Grounds. As always, I mostly just watched the crowd. You see all kinds of people at this sort of event, and most seemed like good folks just out to enjoy perfect weather over a holiday. But, sometimes their choice of attire, and how they wear it, taxes the patience of this old man.
I have been wearing "jeans" for about 57 years. When I reported for duty at my first radio job, in July of 1949, I was mightily embarrassed because my luggage did not arrive on the same bus I rode into that small New Mexico town. My new employer, a woman named Beulah Shirk, was a jewell. She said, "Don't worry about it. This is the 'Land Of Mañana'. Just go buy yourself a pair of Levis and you'll be fine." So, I went to a dry goods store and bought a pair of blue denim pants.
When I wore them into the station, the boss looked at me in surprise and said: "Those are not Levis... they are gardner's pants!" Oops! Back to the dry goods store for the purchase of a pair of Levis 'Shrink to Fit' 501 jeans (price: $2.65). Actually I didn't hear them called 501s until a number of years later, but they are my jeans of choice to this day.
After so many wearings - especially if you are active in the outdoors - you end up with a rip or a tear here and there. The knees are often one of the first places to go. Once they are torn, denim jeans fray, and look tacky. For all these years, a rip in the knee was a signal to amputate the legs of the jeans and turn them into a pair of cut offs. Continuing to wear torn jeans was not cool.
But, alas, something happened along the way. Affluent young people - mostly those who did not actually work for their affluence, suddenly wanted to look poor and deprived. So, continuing to wear frayed jeans became some sort of status symbol.
Now, most of these kids have not done anything strenuous in their jeans (no longer Levis... but some designer brand which probably cost their parents about $80.) so there are no naturally obtained rips or tears. How to look cool? They cut their jeans, then wash them a couple of times so they will fray.
Trouble is, they've never owned a pair of "honestly" worn and torn jeans, so they don't know how to fake it. I saw two different teenage girls who had cut a neat, rectangular hole in the knees of their jeans. After a couple of washings, these openings were a little frayed, but not enough to disguise the perfectly cut openings.
I wanted to ask these girls what sort of work would create these neat, rectangular holes in the knees of their jeans. But, aside from being silly, these girls seemed like nice people, and I just didn't have the heart to embarrass them.
My advice? Check out some really poor kids' jeans if you want to learn how to fake your jeans to make you look authentically poor and deprived.
This past Memorial Day weekend I spent most of three days assisting my wife at her booth at the New Mexico Wine Grower's Festival, held at the Southern New Mexico State Fair Grounds. As always, I mostly just watched the crowd. You see all kinds of people at this sort of event, and most seemed like good folks just out to enjoy perfect weather over a holiday. But, sometimes their choice of attire, and how they wear it, taxes the patience of this old man.
I have been wearing "jeans" for about 57 years. When I reported for duty at my first radio job, in July of 1949, I was mightily embarrassed because my luggage did not arrive on the same bus I rode into that small New Mexico town. My new employer, a woman named Beulah Shirk, was a jewell. She said, "Don't worry about it. This is the 'Land Of Mañana'. Just go buy yourself a pair of Levis and you'll be fine." So, I went to a dry goods store and bought a pair of blue denim pants.
When I wore them into the station, the boss looked at me in surprise and said: "Those are not Levis... they are gardner's pants!" Oops! Back to the dry goods store for the purchase of a pair of Levis 'Shrink to Fit' 501 jeans (price: $2.65). Actually I didn't hear them called 501s until a number of years later, but they are my jeans of choice to this day.
After so many wearings - especially if you are active in the outdoors - you end up with a rip or a tear here and there. The knees are often one of the first places to go. Once they are torn, denim jeans fray, and look tacky. For all these years, a rip in the knee was a signal to amputate the legs of the jeans and turn them into a pair of cut offs. Continuing to wear torn jeans was not cool.
But, alas, something happened along the way. Affluent young people - mostly those who did not actually work for their affluence, suddenly wanted to look poor and deprived. So, continuing to wear frayed jeans became some sort of status symbol.
Now, most of these kids have not done anything strenuous in their jeans (no longer Levis... but some designer brand which probably cost their parents about $80.) so there are no naturally obtained rips or tears. How to look cool? They cut their jeans, then wash them a couple of times so they will fray.
Trouble is, they've never owned a pair of "honestly" worn and torn jeans, so they don't know how to fake it. I saw two different teenage girls who had cut a neat, rectangular hole in the knees of their jeans. After a couple of washings, these openings were a little frayed, but not enough to disguise the perfectly cut openings.
I wanted to ask these girls what sort of work would create these neat, rectangular holes in the knees of their jeans. But, aside from being silly, these girls seemed like nice people, and I just didn't have the heart to embarrass them.
My advice? Check out some really poor kids' jeans if you want to learn how to fake your jeans to make you look authentically poor and deprived.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)