2001-10-18 - 10:03 p.m.

On the internal soundtrack: Another one of those technical exercises for the piano. I have to dig that book out and find the names.

I've been avoiding talking about the war, because of the acrimony among journalers on this issue, but this is ridiculous. This journal is supposed to reflect the things I'm thinking about and going through at this point in my life, and the war is certainly one of them. So I'm just going to talk. Hell with it.

If you choose to comment on any of the political stuff I'm mulling over, I'll definitely read it and think about it, and especially will read any links to a well-argued alternative point of view, but will not be trying to defend anything I say. I'm not making an argument here, I'm just thinking about the limited information I have.

So, I'm trying to figure out what's going on with this Bush/Palestinian state thing. Mainly, I am wondering, if he says we are at war with terrorism, blah blah blah, then why is he essentially rewarding Palestinians for their terrorism against Israel all these years? The viewpoint just seems to contrary to what Bush appears to be trying to accomplish that I'm baffled by it. I'm wondering if he's bluffing, or trying to force someone's hand. It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me. If he thinks the terrorists have a good point, and that Israel should let the Palestinians have their state, then why doesn't he pull the U.S. out of the Middle East like the terrorists attacking us seem to want? Why the exception for Israel? Or does Bush intend to pull out of the Middle East soon? If so, he'd sound a lot more consistent if he announced it now.

I suppose Bush could be of the "Isreal should not exist" persuasion. I wish he'd talk more about why, then. My understanding is that however the concept of Israel was started, and whoever helped "create" it, in the end Israel fought a war for the land, and they won. It's a messy business, but if you're gonna say Israel shouldn't exist for that reason, then neither should just about every other country in the world, should it?

You could say that the U.S. was created by a bunch of people who didn't like paying taxes on their tea, and pushed the Native Americans out of the way with no regard to how they might have liked to handle things. Seems to me, then, that we should turn the U.S. back over to the Native Americans, then, shouldn't we? And then after that, we should send everyone back to the countries where they came from ... hm ... would I go to Ireland, Italy, Germany, Scotland, Spain, or the Netherlands? I think I'm something over 1/4 Irish, and that's the largest proportion of anything that I'm descending from. Poindexter is 3/4 Irish so at least we both get to go back to the same place.

Well, all I know is I'd like Bush to explain the seeming contradiction. I could very well be missing something.

The good thing, at least, is that Israel seems to be open to the idea of a Palestinian state. If nothing else, if Palestine is a recognized government, any terrorist action by a Palestinian against Israel will be considered an act of war, so that ambiguity will disappear.

So, the anthrax thing.

Intellectually, I'm not terribly worried, for several reasons. One is that only one person has died. I feel really terrible for that person -- what a way to go, and how unfair! -- but so far it does not sound like an epidemic. Another reason is that, well, the people are sending this stuff to us in the mail. If anybody had something better, they'd be using that, wouldn't they? I'm sure they're working on something better, but the fact that they don't seem to have it yet means we have some time to work on defense.

My subconscious, on the other hand, is being ridiculous. I constantly go around with the feeling that I have powder on my hands and have to wash it off. The good thing about this, though, is that I wash my hands more and touch my face less, which is a good thing to do if you're trying to avoid catching a cold. I do so hate colds. And last night, I dreamt that I'd gotten gastrointestinal anthrax. Lovely.

BTW, I am irritated with people who are writing online and in the news, for all the world to see, ALTERNATIVE SUGGESTIONS FOR THE TERRORISTS of better ways to kill a bunch of people cheaply! I think the reason people are doing this is in the hope that the necessary defense measures will be put into place. But instead, I am afraid they're going to just give terrorists new ideas. Argh. Especially since I've heard (can't substantiate it, but the person who told me is a discerning reader of political news) that sometime during or after the 1993 WTC bombing trial, it was mentioned that the WTC towers could withstand a 737 flying into it. I wouldn't be surprised if somebody's paying attention to that kind of information. I guess all I can do is hope that if the terrorists were looking for cheaper, easier ways to kill people, they wouldn't be sending us anthrax in the mail right now.

On my way into the city last night, I drove past the Pentagon. Yeah, that side.

I don't know how to write about what it's like. The Pentagon is a huge building. It looks like a fortress. And now there's a big, gaping, blackened hole in the middle of it. You can see partial rooms, partial hallways at the ragged edges. Pieces of the infrastructure dangling.

Ugh, if I try to find the words for what it feels like to look at it, I feel like I'm writing flowery prose and it feels unnatural. It looks broken, and it makes me mad, and it hurts. I don't know how to explain it.

previous index next