Saturday, September 24, 2005
Perspective
Once again, I rely on David Rossie, who contextualizes what is happening in Washington today, in the form a recipe for what he calls "Morality Play Pudding."
His ostensible subject is the war protestors who spilled blood, I believe it was their own, on various objects, including an American flag, at an military recruitment office somewhere in upstate NY on St. Patrick's Day, 2003; they were protesting the up-coming invasion of Iraq, and henceforth became known as "The St. Patrick's Four."
His recipe is unusual in that after giving the ingredients, Mr. Rossie explains how to uncook them; a few years back I might have used the word "deconstruct, but the usefulness of that word started to waste away from the day that David Horowitz et al realized its usefulness to making the case that university English departments across the nation pose a national security threat, if not a threat to Western Civilization itself.
The demonstration Rossie is addressing is not the one our good friend and blog-mate, Riggsveda, is attending today, along with other notable female bloggers, as noted here, it is a more recent one, in support of The St. Patrick's Four, who, having successfully defended themselves in a previous trial by using their anti-war views as a defense, are now facing Federalper prosecution, where such a defence has already been ruled out.
Speaking of the gathered crowd, Rossie notices:
See what you think? Read the whole column, it's well worth it. Then let's discuss in comments. Not just about opposing this war, but also about what choices and venues we have to do so.
His ostensible subject is the war protestors who spilled blood, I believe it was their own, on various objects, including an American flag, at an military recruitment office somewhere in upstate NY on St. Patrick's Day, 2003; they were protesting the up-coming invasion of Iraq, and henceforth became known as "The St. Patrick's Four."
His recipe is unusual in that after giving the ingredients, Mr. Rossie explains how to uncook them; a few years back I might have used the word "deconstruct, but the usefulness of that word started to waste away from the day that David Horowitz et al realized its usefulness to making the case that university English departments across the nation pose a national security threat, if not a threat to Western Civilization itself.
The demonstration Rossie is addressing is not the one our good friend and blog-mate, Riggsveda, is attending today, along with other notable female bloggers, as noted here, it is a more recent one, in support of The St. Patrick's Four, who, having successfully defended themselves in a previous trial by using their anti-war views as a defense, are now facing Federal
Speaking of the gathered crowd, Rossie notices:
The others need no introduction; they're old acquaintances in a way. They may be divided philosophically, but they are united by a single objective that has become a cliche: Support Our Troops. The antiwar people want to support them by bringing them home. The pro-war people, it would appear, want to support them by keeping them in the midst of an escalating civil war, thereby increasing their chances of getting killed or wounded. Some support.Rossie suggests he could be accused of cynicism for what he has to say. I respectfully disagree; what I'd call him is tough-minded.
Prominent among the antiwar activists outside Binghamton's Federal Building on Monday were a number of men wearing shirts and caps that identified them as "Veterans for Peace." If there was a comparable contingent of "Doves for War," it was not apparent.
The nearest thing to that category was a gaggle of college kids from Ithaca who showed up on Sunday to whoop it up for the war -- provided, of course, that some other, non-college kids were fighting it.
See what you think? Read the whole column, it's well worth it. Then let's discuss in comments. Not just about opposing this war, but also about what choices and venues we have to do so.
