When men start to believe in exorcisms that are not ancestral they normally they have already begun to believe in ghosts. How could that not be? (Implication dual, but not symmetric.)

I would like to make something clear. I do not even know what a blogger is. I started to keep diaries in a Mac word processing application back in 1993. I created a web site that I used solely to post those diaries and update them as diaries do get updated by converting MSWord documents into simple HTML, and then loading it. This was in 1998 I believe, I could tra . . . and that's that.

Forget it. Life's already been historical (freak out if you can't understand that.

Implication i

Appalachian woman

I want an audit trail on every transaction and I want the transactions to come online in realtime. I want a daily tally book every morning in every post office across the nation. I want the physical movements of Mr. Paulson recorded on constitutional grounds and made available every morning for his movements of the previous day (no need to know the exact coordinates, just where he was and who he was with and what it was about, however trivial: but that is exactly the point, when this bill is passed nothing that man will ever do can be trivial to American public again). I don't care whether the secret service does this or they tag him with a GPS device against my better angels, I just want it constitutionally mandated and carried out. I want all information about his private wealth and private financial arrangements on homes and cars and leases and the investment mechanisms he holds on public record and published monthly as they update themselves as long as he holds his current position. I want the FBI to watch his every move on Wall Street with Wall Street anything having the remotest smell of Wall Street when he has retired back to that lair.

I want similar legal arrangements for every member of congress who gives an aye vote. I want the president to be audited by the IRS for conflicts of interest as regards any of the many possible details of the bill when it is passed for the rest of his life. I want that written out as a constitutional right of the American citizen - taxpayer.

Chancellor Merkel of Germany declared today that she "expects America to pass a bill by the end of the week." I don't know much about this center-right Christian Democrat (except that of course, and the defections to her righter daughter parties a few days ago consistent with Austria). I do know about her public statement (meaning intended for public consumption and made in a public forum) that any new Mosques going up in Germany must not be higher than any of the Churches (Christian ones I must presume). I am not a naturally malicious person but I can just imagine her squeezing her butt in and tightening her anus as she shouts "Sieg Heil!" It's a phenomenon specific to that particular Reich salute (that's not a joke).

Les astute femmes who who have nothing with which to declare their gender but an organ sticking out between their legs came out in full smug force today in the EU. EU Commissioner Johannes Latenberger: "The turmoil that we are facing has originated in the United States. It has become a global problem." Mr. Johannes Bach Latenberger: "The U.S. has a special responsibility in this situation ... We expect that the decision (on the bailout) will go through soon," the male said at a press conference today. I can't help quoting a paraphrase of the eunuch femme Johannes: "Laitenberger said rescue measures agreed by European governments for three troubled banks showed that public authorities in Europe were able to "live up to the task of providing financial stability"." Haven't hear any riffs to the tune of 700 Bs from this Boy Wonder. Anyway, it is true, European governments take these decisions on the fly all the time, that's the way the undemocratic EU works (the EU folk of always use the word "authorities", we are in this respect of a more democratic hue in the US): decisions are more easily taken as they do have to confer with constituents as our Congressmen do on these matters (except for their fluffy referendums).

We certainly don't want the EU to evolve into a Soviet style RVHP. We certainly don't want to follow the social paths (sociopaths) of the EU and with our nationalization transactions and methods later entrenched we might get too tempted to get caught up in the act. That we don't want.

Where is CATO? Why do I have to do this? Where is the Audubon Society and the Conservationists? Audubon was a graphic polemicist, so where are they?

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml

Well boys, the party's over now. (Black Sox 1917 was it, all 'round?) The official definition of fascism is inside the house now. The government is going to nationalize "the" losses (the article, when it does exist in a language, is a dangerous thing) of investment banks' pride of purchasing deregulated Inc. - deposit-based papers, commercial banking. It is going to nationalize corporate assets - I don't care if they are old deeds on medieval dungeons, they are still assets, but it is of course a certainty that the bloated mostly males there will choose to sell only things it appears can never again exist except on paper. Welcome to the citizen-morass. Welcome to the singular IED of financial crime.

When the bill is passed - well, which means when the individual whores and the two whorehouses on either side of the aisle, as the president said today, find a mode of rapprochement with consciences if they have any, but more importantly when they feel that they are covered comfy like the little babes that they are in downy feather blankets whose contents to all purposes they be tarred with - I am going to withdraw my principal loyalty to the present constellation of the US government and transfer it back to the US Constitution where clearly presently belongs until the Constitution gets returned to where it belongs (which means I will still be loyal to my Government). I will by asking myself the following question for years to come: will the bitched men and women of this Congress ever be charged with High Crimes?

Saturday marked the anniversary of Reinhard Heydrich's appointment as Reichsprotektor in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia (the man put in charge of protecting the millennial presence of the German Reich in annexed Czechoslovakia). Having begun his career in earnest with Himmler in domestic, i.e. very local and regionally coordinated counter-espionage and counter-intelligence, in other words state terror), he became known as the "Blond Beast." There must have been a reason for that.

The far, far right-wing two parties in Austrian took 30% of the Austrian representative votes today. It has been attributed to a "lack of leadership on the Left", i.e. what more than a few often call and are presently calling a "protest vote." "Protest vote" is a useful reference label only for those who know that a 'protest vote' is a complex emotional event, not sufficiently or even with moderate accuracy describing or able to describe what a 'protest vote' actually is. The so-called "deficit of leadership parties" (used to explain the today's Austrian phenomenon by more than a few also) led to a principally identical voting event in Bavaria today: The Giant Sucking Sound is the same, the percentages are nearly identical. That is much less than a joke or a callous play on words and older events.

I was told many years ago over a Thanksgiving dinner been that my Uncle's father, Colonel Ray, who was attached to FDR in some advisory or sub-cabinet level capacity (I do not remember), told my Uncle that the day (or one of them) when FDR walked up onto a stage and told the press and the American people that America would not enter this war, the executive orders for war were already drawn up for approval to congress and sitting in an attache case held either by Colonel Ray or someone else there. Just a lie. Oh yes I am sure FDR had his reasons. Big lie. 9/11. Nearly 3000 people died of a lie.

Hey, what happens when the 'bailout' does not mutate appropriately?

Paul Newman died yesterday. That is a sad event. One man can't be remembered for just one monologue with God (or I guess it's a dialogue when it's with God, right?), a man should be remembered for all of his published talks with God. Luke said to God, prayed, spoke, "You've got to admit You ain't dealt me no cards in a long time. It's beginning to look like You got things fixed so I can't never win out. Inside, outside, all of them... rules and regulations and bosses. You made me like I am. Now just where am I supposed to fit in? Old Man, I gotta tell You. I started out pretty strong and fast. But it's beginning to get to me. When does it end? What do You got in mind for me? What do I do now? Right. All right." Perhaps Paul Newman went out with the same candor but for all I know almost satisfied way that Butch Cassidy and Sundance went out with.

Somehow appropriate.

Hold on! My mad Uncle Ant's arms are flailing! (Couldn't help it, yeah I'm really laughing today amigos.)
Don't forget, the bailout only happens when the top corporate manageresses (for they'll be mostly male) declares his/her/their desire to sell one or some or all of the papers they don't want anymore.

Goodbye, good luck, see you again on the superhighway, if you happen to be in Iraq or Afghanistan, take care and reject any stupid missions until you come home.

IED
FDR with briefcase
Infamy at Pearl Harbor
Infamy at 911

High crimes
Pivatize american citizens, nationalize private investement losses on deposits based
what if it does not mutate?
Austria - protest vote, emotionally complex thing, not just a protest (meaningless).
Austria : Bavaria - no leadership left, same sucking

Ibsen: 'The minority is always right.' That says: Dramatize nothing, but watch everything. [Doesn't Euripides do this, where Sophocles doesn't? There are differences that must be matters of serious textual judiciousness, else they fail (that is a virtue that sometimes should be drawn to attention). But they never do, and in any case, where is that not the case? (There is no where where that is not the case.)]

The minority is always right. But: The real minority, for there are many of them (factionalists: associations of bitched men - in business, in politics, in the military, in the industries - clubs of women with gutted quims and dry minds - in business, in politics, in the military, in the industries -, etc., etc.). Lukac can be pulled out of the basket to add the necessary grist, as with a pharmacists bottle of vitamin B tablets.

There seem to me to have been no inordinate crises or sudden exceptions in the evolution of man, so far. Nor do I think that there possibly could be. That is the very strong impression I get from my only 39 years on the planet, and I believe that it would stand up to some more detailed scrutiny than this (well, there is none here).

I did give a lot of diligent study to physics for a few years, but unfortunately (?) my thoughts on the particular matters that quite genuinely interested me were not very good adhesives to the common lot of institutional physics or to the singularly more interesting threads in indepdendent physics (two broadly undefined terms, I admit). I tended to think of my thoughts on certain matters of physics as scrutable in a general sense, that I could detail out to some degree.

For example, I still believe that mathematics is only, and only the fascinating reality we get from a long mental list of particulars that have built up but which have no sense unless they are, so to speak, given the benefit of being subjected to the morphic liability placed on things by otherwise neutral functors that do kill-off residual information (this relation of not having meaning unless there is a rule saying 'add context x', is called a syncategorematic relation); thus the precision of mathematics, when we then have it in our hands. Mathematical realism is actually the final output of that, I would think.

This does not mean that I think that mathematics has an ontogenetic nature nor that it does not have one. I believe that its realism is as true as the law as literature thread is true, as the literature as law thread is true. Maybe this sounds like a lot of relativist poop. I submit. I submit to any criticism or ridicule.

On another hand, after all of this is done and made ready as well, I can't think it would be less interesting to subject that realism to the similar or to the same tools that made and make it possible. Of course this will be done with a consciously philosophical and analytical attitude (probably a mistake in itself), which could never be equal to the more natural way that the stuff got born from in the first place. But there is a danger here, I do concede that to myself and to a friend of mine, that one can end up being an aspect-monger or a paradox-monger, or any kind of monger, with this attitude. That's for sure. Otherwise a guy or gal would have to attend an intellectual funeral every day, and that would be depressing, unless your name is Harold.

But Stendhal and Ibsen were for all of that penetrating analysts and gifted dramatists and interpreters of the march of human events (that which other people call history, not I, I am not so Manichean as that, not yet).

I have no time for fundamentalist Dominionists, Opus Dei, Pope Benedict's support of Opus Dei, the NED, the CNP, MoveOn, NATO, the EU, the OSCE, the Council of Europe, the Georgian president, the Dalia Lama (still on a CIA, now NED, stipend), the Pentagon, the NSA, and pimps. I do have time for gays, transvestites, bisexuals, sadomasochists, gigolos, and prostitutes, and occasionally for Greenpeace. But why don't we have Anthropic-Peace, or Every-Human-Pigment-Peace?

The Mahatma Gandhi made salt in defiance of the British and preached the sermon on the mount, Thoreau wouldn't (and never did) pay taxes for the repair of one his shoes and went to Walden Pond to the prove the sustainability of dietary and mental sovereignty, Martin Luther King wept for mankind and took them to the Mountaintop sure as anything, Leo Tolstoy wrote the postscript to War and Peace (and War and Peace itself) on the arbitrariness of the sequences of human actions which end up being revised as history, founded civil disobedience and protested Russia's pogroms and policy towards the Jews, built schools for his Souls. George Orwell submitted to tuberculosis with good knowledge about its eventuality, submitted to poverty in Paris, wrote Homage to Catalonia, essays on the English language, the short autobiographical story Shooting an Elephant, gave us the insight that Jonah's entry into the whale was the alternative that Henry Miller offered to us all in the Tropic of Cancer, and exposed Tolstoy for having the same failures which he (Tolstoy) hated King Lear and its author for having. Isn't it our turn now ? . . . not to hate Shakespeare, of course, that's not what I mean.

If we were not so lost in our personally native inventions we might be better off in all senses. Whether the personal is universal is not even an appropriate poetical topic. Surely our world is good enough all by itself with the addition that we inhabit it. I find nothing quarrelsome about this. It is a very odd notion that we should so often apologize. History always gets a strong makeover anyway. This so often doesn't even make us blush. Too often. So often that war and other polluted tributaries come one after another, over and over. Why should it not be true that history is always a sly spirit doing its best to pre-date remembrance? I do not say that it is only that. It is not not going to happen anyway and the very act of correction can be the most moral of things. So I'm not complaining. But there is no such thing as native fate. Or call it what you will but it is pure nonsense. I am so little interested in our grievances of non-consensus and so overly-familiar taunts. They just aren't good enough. Never have been. Never will be. However the consensual and familiarizing mouths will never shut up. I will definitely shut up though.

A critical pentad is already predictably existent (I can give more elucidation on Burke's pentad at another time perhaps). Literally though it harbors (harbors is the right word) compassion and soulful things. It does not abhor matters of history and its usages that can be made of it in our own hands should we choose to do so at any time, nor does it abhor the textual interpretation in a single judicial moment, with or without understood references to things which have been read of a specific nature.

Of course the most extreme conscious expressions of these matters have been so far written by Capote and Mailer. Of course there have been many others but they have not been so consciously so - which of course they don't need to be, as nothing needs to be anything and that's not even a trifle quarrelsome.

I could note, with an undesired expenditure of more energy however, that there are things which we entertain and the parts of which hold only mutual indifference to one another. I cannot think of any -ism for any of those things so I will let it go.

Without taking chances there's no story, there's no tale to tell, no tale to get told.

With one syncategorematic element tagged to one step in a Malthusian progression I can deny Malthus all of his mathematical rights.

The police crunch me. The writing police. The winners of all of the stupid gentile awards and prizes, that is craven, officious - those winnings, those awards. It does not matter. I am careful of ghosts, including those that I have not placed myself. Am I speaking of the [literary] establishment? Of course.

First things first: from numerous reports, high ranking military officials, and experts, we have learned that there are more terrorists now than there there were before the invasion of Iraq. We have also learned from these sources that Iraq is now an extremely fertile breeding ground for a new age of terrorism; for new generations. There is nothing special about this, it is common knowledge which bears mentioning.

But what is so disturbing is that just a few days ago Mr. Bush repeated some Iraq rhetoric that he has used before on many occasions. The use of it now is particularly craven and disingenuous. The item at hand is: "We will fight them over there (in Iraq) so that we don't need to fight them here." This is trash-rhetoric that should never issue from the mouth of a president. I am used to Bush's rhetoric. It used to be effective and disarming for the uninformed. Now it is bordering on some official definitions better not mentioned in public.

Bush made his recent remarks in a speech that addressed the Iran situation as well. To cut it short, there seems to be a formula: invade a country (Iraq), insurgency rises (insurgencies rise in nearly all full scale military invasions), blame the insurgency on a neighboring country (Iran, which has certainly participated in the insurgency), use that as a pretext for military intervention in the neighboring country. This smacks of Germany's Reich in not all, but in some key areas.

I'll leave it at that so as not to risk a backlash on this posting, except to say that we should keep an eye on the upcoming GAO Iraq report. Still, further investigation is left to the discerning reader.

Listen to stevedores. They are custodians and stewards. Know history. Know Yalta; and don't distort it. As Mr. Bush would have you do if he knew anything about it. Custodianship and stewardship reach deep - you are not immune from them. They reach into memory and into the boundaries of present existence. That is why it is so important. Your best stevedores are to be found in conscientious writers and journalists. They have discovered the substance of freedom. Some that come to mind are William Styron, François Bizot, Jorge Semprum, and Seymour Hersch. Two Americans, one Spaniard, and one Frenchman.

These men have discovered the ways in which life is a matter of literature when accurately accounted for and that literature is a matter of life when accurately accounted for. It is symmetric. All three of the men listed above manage to communicate this in their work. This is a great thing to communicate. It must not be understated. By all means it must not be underestimated.

Trivial philosophy starts where reportable knowledge ends. This is not to say that there is only trivial philosophy. Burns and others are contemporary examples of non-trivial philosophy. Reportable knowledge is a central function in J.L. Austinian linguistics.

Journal intime

Is the DMZ exempt from the 'craft manifold'? It's a term I invented. It has a long history of gestation. Perhaps the path to righteousness is to imagine things as they are.

The truth is that I've been running up against motions for years, motions of the human brand.

Gide had the exact same complex about his birth-sign as I have had since I was a boy. I did not know this until recently though. But he had it down to the very identical date and item of concern. It is that identical item of concern that is so full of childhood memories, and so complicated, as a result of all of the hard gestations of life that have followed since then.

I cannot hide from Gide - not even as an obscure figure in the darkness, or in the nether fields of the world. It's rather glorious, that strangulation. In the worst moments, it's mundane, boring. It saps you. In the best, it's glorious strangulation.

I do not see through the same eyes, and I do not think with the same brain anymore. The years have done that. The places have done that. The Arab world has done that, but it is not the fault of the Arab world. It is the fault of the Anglo-Saxon psychotics that I met in the Arab world.

I very often feel the primordial pain of the wolf. It manifests itself in headaches and dreariness. The eyes feel grey and stunned from the wretchedness of that existence. Never mind that the wolf has gotten a bad wrap. But it's true. Only a fool stereotypes a wolf - unfortunately there are many such fools.

I doubt that I will ever escape Gide. It is hard to imagine living that existence. He was a moral fascist, and worse. And I cannot escape him. It is because of his medium and his craft. But I can't countenance his acts. I can't countenance such crude and menial egoism that his acts manifested. Egoism of certain other sorts is another matter. So this is the way it is.

We have memory, dream, logic. We have, aside from the predicate-structure of languages, 3 universally hard-core linguistic devices: the tense, mood, and aspect of verbs.

And I am supposed to take, in any measure, seriously the idea-machines of idea-pimps. . . politicians, 'thinkers'? They had might as well be pissing into a jar.

Another thing: an armchair never substitues for the actual dangers of life.

One more thing: the presence of American radar and anti-rocketry in the Czech Republic is as cyncical a geopolitical move can get. The spin, that it is a Nato obligation, makes it even more so . . . since this has nothing to do with Nato, in terms of the protocols of initial flirtation and final acceptance and implementation. Further investigation is advised and left to the reader. I will say, that we simply know nothing about Russia, or that it is, as I said, a cynical provocation. Let's hope that Putin and the wishes of the Czech population win-out on this one . . . which would certainly not be a counter-provocation. Putin is not Iran yet, we can only make him so. And he would be within his rights. So let's hope for the best.