On August 30, the worldwide news media and Internet blogosphere exploded with breathless commentary about the publication of a coloring book describing the historicity of the 9/11 attacks. The pundits and spokespeople decried the comic book as disgusting, hateful, and disturbing. The publisher responded by explaining it was a tool for parents to teach their children about the underlying facts of that awful September morning.
Now why, I wondered, would a parent need a teaching tool for 9/11? Then it hit me—maybe because outside the home their children are hearing that a fact-based comic book is disgusting, hateful and disturbing, instead of being told that Muslim Jihadists are disgusting, hateful and disturbing.
I searched out the offensive comic book, assuming it would have pictures depicting, oh, I don’t know—Muslims dancing in the streets at the news the Towers had fallen. Maybe a picture of Daniel Pearl screaming in agony as members of Al-Qaeda sawed off his head while chanting “God is great!” And at least one picture of the president of Iran at the podium, proclaiming Israel should be “wipe off the map.” Sure, all these events are real. And really happened. And are parts of American history. But, but, but—talking about them isn’t sensitive, because it might “offend” the American Muslim community.
Here’s what I found inside that the hateful publication: An illustration of a news anchor reporting that Osama Bib Laden had been identified as the mastermind behind the attack; an illustration of someone crying from grief; George W. Bush addressing the nation; Osama Bin Laden cowering behind one of his wives as a Navy SEAL arranges for his expedited delivery to paradise; and finally, a picture of the Founding Fathers. Aside from the hateful pictures, the words—the dreadful words—that seem to have taken the coloring books over the edge into hate-speech is the description that the men who participated in the 9/11 slaughter were “freedom-hating, radical, Islamic Muslim extremists.”
And the problem is?
Okay, yes… the writing is childish. But the target market is parents wanting a way to explain mass murder to their—wait for it—children. Why does the writer use both of the words “Islamic” and “Muslim”? I don’t know—but I’ll bet you a $1,000 it has something to do with the fact that the average American child doesn’t understand that a “Muslim” is someone who practices a religion called “Islam.” That said, it’s probably best to use obvious, declarative terms when communicating with children. I mean, you’re probably not going to get a lot of Santa-mileage if you tell Johnny that Santa “exercises fiscal restrain when encountering morally ambiguous kids.”
The claims against the comic book also allege Islamophobia, which one would decipher to mean “a fear of Muslims.” Man, we love our phobias these days, don’t we? I don’t have Islamophobia, but here’s one I do have: Strapped-into-a-jet-going-600-miles-an-hour-with-a-suicidal-terrorist-in-the-pilot’s-seat-phobia. I hear we have lots of warriors in Iraq and Afghanistan who are bothered by a mild case of trying-to-keep-peace-and-help-build-a-functional-and-free-government-when-a-suicide-bomber-denotes-near-me-phobia. And, apparently, there are several thousand kids with growing-up-without-a-parent-beacause-of-9/11-phobia.
Our fear of “inspiring fear” within the American population is ponderous. Consider this: There are thousands of children who’ve actually lost a parent in the War on Terror who’ve never seen the video footage of the 9/11 attacks. Let me ask you: When was the last time you saw it? Unless you’ve tracked it down on the Internet, you haven’t seen it in 9 ½ years. Why? Because the media/government complex—even Fox News—decided that the footage was too “incendiary” for us to see anymore. It might result in a backlash against the American Muslim community. Aaaaand, poof! It was gone. Although the tenth anniversary of 9/11 will have passed by the time you read this, I’m betting in advance there won’t be a lot of telecasts showing the raw horror of the slaughter, followed by the sublime bravery of young men and women who joined the military to fight for freedom. I’m betting there will be lots of mourning, and remembrances, and video essays on the mistakes we’ve made, and exposes on the foolishness of invading Iraq. What I doubt we’ll see is anything as starkly truthful as the coloring book in question: Muslim extremists did this, so we did this.
Should we include the story of the collateral damage caused by our war on terrorism? Sure, why not. Self-flagellation has become an American pastime, and if feeling bad about America makes you feel good, have at it. Just remember: We didn’t draw first blood in this war.
In closing this missive, I think it fitting to end with a commentary about the illustration drawing the most outrage: The one of Osama Bin Laden getting shot. Why? Because I’ve been asked by dozens of friends, “Do you think killing Bin Laden has made America a safer place?”
I had to ponder that a while, and here’s the answer I believe is true: No, killing Bin Laden didn’t make America safer. But you know what it has done? It’s gotten terrorists and dictators and warlords all over the world sleeping with one eye open. Why? Because it showed that if you murder innocent civilians in our nation, we will track you down and shoot you dead. Even if it takes 10 years. Even if the sitting President is a left-leaning Democrat who opposes war. You can run, but you cannot hide.
That’s a fact so simple, even a child could grasp it. Maybe we should send copies of the comic to the terrorist leaders.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Don't tell me. Seriously. Don't...
Well, it appears the unpleasant task of speaking up on the repeal of Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell has fallen to me.
Before I begin, however, let me say I have no negative feelings towards gays. What a king does inside his castle is of no concern to me. I should also point out that I am going to limit my opinion on the integration of openly gay men to the Marine Corps, as that’s the only branch where I served.
To start the discussion, let’s start at the top: The issue of repealing Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell is currently big news, because the paper-pushing Generals and Admirals at the Pentagon have released a “study” that says it wouldn’t affect readiness, morale, or good order and discipline. Well, let me give you a little education about Generals and Admirals, and members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: They have about as much in common with the frontline gunfighters as Barack Obama has with his brother… the one who lives in a box… in Kenya. For the men who do the front-line fighting and dying, the worries and concerns and political aspirations of the Pentagon Brass are irrelevant. As a result, that’s the category where I’ll file their study—under irrelevant.
Next, let’s discuss the issue of culture: When young men join the Marines, they do so because they are patriots, willing to fight and die for their country. They make a conscious decision to join the toughest branch of service. Why? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure it out: They join the Marines because they want to prove themselves worthy of the legend of the Corps—and its reputation for taking civilians and turning them into tough men willing to fight on the front lines.
Kids who choose the Corps are either already tough, or they are like I was—decidedly not tough, and hoping to earn that adjective. In Boot Camp and Officer Candidate School the Corps takes boys and makes killers. Yes, Killers. Not well-rounded men, not renaissance men, not poet-warriors… killers. Every fresh graduate from Boot Camp or OCS is itching for a chance to prove himself in combat, and proving yourself means “showing courage under fire and killing lots of the enemy.” Personally killing them. Note, please, that I’m talking specifically about the culture among 17 to 29 year-old Marines, not among the “older and wiser” lot who’ve had some years to mature. I’m talking about the lads who are getting shot and maimed, yet refuse evacuation and bleed to death in order to keep fighting alongside their buddies. These are men who redefine “macho,” and their definition has nothing to do with wash-board abs.
So, gentle reader, do you think that maybe you could make an informed guess about the personality traits of these young men? What do you think they talk about in the barracks? What magazines do you think they read? How many do you think want to “discuss the issue” when they are insulted or threatened? What percentage do you think cuss, drink to excess, and pursue women with less than marital intentions? And what percentage do you think act sensitively when they see what they perceive to be an “oddity” in the man who is supposed to guard their flank?
Now, let’s discuss you, if you are one of those who Americans who think the Marines should be forcibly integrated with openly gay men. Who, exactly, do you think you are? If you’ve never served in a Marine Corps combat unit, what makes you think your opinion even matters? I can hear you already, whining, “If you substitute ‘black’ for ‘gay’ and ‘white’ for ‘straight,’ you’re offering the same argument used against racially integrating the military.” Not true: The Marine Corps is, whether you like it or not, an uber-macho gun culture. As a result, it takes a black Marine about a day to win the respect of a white Marine. That’s because performance is performance is performance. What you see is what you get—and the homogeny of the all-green brotherhood remains in tact.
Homosexuality, however, is a divisive issue, particularly among young men who grew up in a hard-scrabble environment, and not in the ivy-covered walls of private schools and country clubs. Should it be? That’s completely irrelevant. I’ve been there, and I’ve served with these men, and I can tell you that in their world the word “gay” is used as an uber-insult, not to describe “an alternative lifestyle.”
Now, let’s discuss where the rubber meets the road: In combat, and in company level tactics. The worst part of being a Marine Officer in combat is it is you who will pick the platoon or squad that does the hardest job. Translated, you will pick which men are probably going to die. Unlike in the movies, you don’t ask for volunteers to “rush that machine gun nest,” you order men to do it. Guess what? Most men don’t want to die! Yes, believe it or not, they want to kill the enemy, but they don’t want to die. So why do they do it? Because the Skipper said to, and the Skipper is the man with the plan. And then they rush the machine gun nest because it’s their turn, and they aren’t going to let down their buddies. But what happens if you cloud this life-and-death moment with doubt? If you add in an element of mistrust? Here’s how it happens:
The Company Commander is openly gay, and he has three Infantry Lieutenants under his command—two straight, and one gay. And now it’s time for him to send a platoon of fifty well-armed men to die… men who don’t want to die, even if it means being heroes. The Company Commander picks the Lieutenant he believes will do the best job and will arrive at the objective with least casualties. If he chooses the gay Lieutenant, then the potential problem is 49 enlisted men thinking, “He picked us because our Lieutenant is gay, and he wants to appear unbiased to the Battalion Commander. I ain’t dying for that.” If he chooses a straight Lieutenant, the potential problem is 49 enlisted Marines thinking, “He picked us because he doesn’t want that gay Lieutenant to get hurt. I ain’t dying for that.”
Will this scenario happen? It doesn’t matter—the potential of a disruption of the good order and discipline of the unit is there. Those young men deserve to serve in an environment where we have done everything humanly possible to eliminate distractions while increasing readiness, morale, and esprit de corps. And if integrating the Corps costs a single Marine’s life—ever—then those who voted to repeal Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell will have his blood on their hands.
If I thought people would read it, I could write another 1,000 words. Additional issues need to be discussed, like discrimination lawsuits, fraternization issues, promotion boards, unwritten quotas, hate/insensitive speech, security clearance, and the cost of retrofitting facilities on land and sea and air.
The bottom line is this: The young men who stand on that wall and provide you with the blanket of freedom under which you sleep don’t want gay men in the ranks. Why that is doesn’t matter. It’s just the truth. And I’m sorry if you can’t handle the truth.
Before I begin, however, let me say I have no negative feelings towards gays. What a king does inside his castle is of no concern to me. I should also point out that I am going to limit my opinion on the integration of openly gay men to the Marine Corps, as that’s the only branch where I served.
To start the discussion, let’s start at the top: The issue of repealing Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell is currently big news, because the paper-pushing Generals and Admirals at the Pentagon have released a “study” that says it wouldn’t affect readiness, morale, or good order and discipline. Well, let me give you a little education about Generals and Admirals, and members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: They have about as much in common with the frontline gunfighters as Barack Obama has with his brother… the one who lives in a box… in Kenya. For the men who do the front-line fighting and dying, the worries and concerns and political aspirations of the Pentagon Brass are irrelevant. As a result, that’s the category where I’ll file their study—under irrelevant.
Next, let’s discuss the issue of culture: When young men join the Marines, they do so because they are patriots, willing to fight and die for their country. They make a conscious decision to join the toughest branch of service. Why? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure it out: They join the Marines because they want to prove themselves worthy of the legend of the Corps—and its reputation for taking civilians and turning them into tough men willing to fight on the front lines.
Kids who choose the Corps are either already tough, or they are like I was—decidedly not tough, and hoping to earn that adjective. In Boot Camp and Officer Candidate School the Corps takes boys and makes killers. Yes, Killers. Not well-rounded men, not renaissance men, not poet-warriors… killers. Every fresh graduate from Boot Camp or OCS is itching for a chance to prove himself in combat, and proving yourself means “showing courage under fire and killing lots of the enemy.” Personally killing them. Note, please, that I’m talking specifically about the culture among 17 to 29 year-old Marines, not among the “older and wiser” lot who’ve had some years to mature. I’m talking about the lads who are getting shot and maimed, yet refuse evacuation and bleed to death in order to keep fighting alongside their buddies. These are men who redefine “macho,” and their definition has nothing to do with wash-board abs.
So, gentle reader, do you think that maybe you could make an informed guess about the personality traits of these young men? What do you think they talk about in the barracks? What magazines do you think they read? How many do you think want to “discuss the issue” when they are insulted or threatened? What percentage do you think cuss, drink to excess, and pursue women with less than marital intentions? And what percentage do you think act sensitively when they see what they perceive to be an “oddity” in the man who is supposed to guard their flank?
Now, let’s discuss you, if you are one of those who Americans who think the Marines should be forcibly integrated with openly gay men. Who, exactly, do you think you are? If you’ve never served in a Marine Corps combat unit, what makes you think your opinion even matters? I can hear you already, whining, “If you substitute ‘black’ for ‘gay’ and ‘white’ for ‘straight,’ you’re offering the same argument used against racially integrating the military.” Not true: The Marine Corps is, whether you like it or not, an uber-macho gun culture. As a result, it takes a black Marine about a day to win the respect of a white Marine. That’s because performance is performance is performance. What you see is what you get—and the homogeny of the all-green brotherhood remains in tact.
Homosexuality, however, is a divisive issue, particularly among young men who grew up in a hard-scrabble environment, and not in the ivy-covered walls of private schools and country clubs. Should it be? That’s completely irrelevant. I’ve been there, and I’ve served with these men, and I can tell you that in their world the word “gay” is used as an uber-insult, not to describe “an alternative lifestyle.”
Now, let’s discuss where the rubber meets the road: In combat, and in company level tactics. The worst part of being a Marine Officer in combat is it is you who will pick the platoon or squad that does the hardest job. Translated, you will pick which men are probably going to die. Unlike in the movies, you don’t ask for volunteers to “rush that machine gun nest,” you order men to do it. Guess what? Most men don’t want to die! Yes, believe it or not, they want to kill the enemy, but they don’t want to die. So why do they do it? Because the Skipper said to, and the Skipper is the man with the plan. And then they rush the machine gun nest because it’s their turn, and they aren’t going to let down their buddies. But what happens if you cloud this life-and-death moment with doubt? If you add in an element of mistrust? Here’s how it happens:
The Company Commander is openly gay, and he has three Infantry Lieutenants under his command—two straight, and one gay. And now it’s time for him to send a platoon of fifty well-armed men to die… men who don’t want to die, even if it means being heroes. The Company Commander picks the Lieutenant he believes will do the best job and will arrive at the objective with least casualties. If he chooses the gay Lieutenant, then the potential problem is 49 enlisted men thinking, “He picked us because our Lieutenant is gay, and he wants to appear unbiased to the Battalion Commander. I ain’t dying for that.” If he chooses a straight Lieutenant, the potential problem is 49 enlisted Marines thinking, “He picked us because he doesn’t want that gay Lieutenant to get hurt. I ain’t dying for that.”
Will this scenario happen? It doesn’t matter—the potential of a disruption of the good order and discipline of the unit is there. Those young men deserve to serve in an environment where we have done everything humanly possible to eliminate distractions while increasing readiness, morale, and esprit de corps. And if integrating the Corps costs a single Marine’s life—ever—then those who voted to repeal Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell will have his blood on their hands.
If I thought people would read it, I could write another 1,000 words. Additional issues need to be discussed, like discrimination lawsuits, fraternization issues, promotion boards, unwritten quotas, hate/insensitive speech, security clearance, and the cost of retrofitting facilities on land and sea and air.
The bottom line is this: The young men who stand on that wall and provide you with the blanket of freedom under which you sleep don’t want gay men in the ranks. Why that is doesn’t matter. It’s just the truth. And I’m sorry if you can’t handle the truth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
