
![]() | |
October 2011
September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003
|
Greetings! You are reading an article from The Mudville Gazette. To reach the front page, with all the latest news and views, click the logo above or "main" below. Thanks for stopping by! April 25, 2008 Getting A GripBy GreyhawkRep Paul Broun's anti-"porn" Bill has caught some notice in ye olde blogosphere. We discussed it yesterday at MilBlogs (starting with Badger6's post from Iraq), and I think we've beat it damn near to death. (Or at least until it's rather limp and fading fast.) Still, watching the blog discussions, I'm struck that many well-intentioned folks are missing the real issues here. 1. This isn't about "our boys in Iraq" - they've never had porn available in the BX/PX over there. (It's too late to be outraged about that now - you missed the boat in 1990.) Here in the 21st century their porn supplies are limited to whatever meager amounts they can bring into country on the 1 TB external hard drives they plug into the personal laptop computers they also bring over, boosted by whatever "trading" they do with their comrades or obtain downtown. (All of which is a violation of General Order One, and I have no personal knowledge of any of our troops actually doing this and I'm sure the Army has employed several thousand inspectors to vigorously scan those personal computers not on the network for secret hidden password protected folders containing things that might make Congressman Broun blush with shame especially if it's gay porn with hot girl-on-girl action.) It's about bases in the good ol' USA - none of which are in Congressman Broun's district. BUT 2. It's not about banning Playboy - it's about banning Maxim, FHM (which currently are available in the combat zones), and a host of other sources (the Victoria's Secret catalog, for instance) of pictures of smutty, perverted, disgusting filth such as "any part of the female breast below a horizontal line across the top of the areola with less than an opaque covering" - among other things defined by this bill as "nudity". R-rated movies (and some PG-13) would be right out. (Please read this post in which we examine the Bill instead of the media coverage of the Bill prior to arguing this point.) But bare in mind that if passed, "our boys" (and girls) won't be unable to obtain said items, they'd simply be forced to walk across the street and buy their copies of "Showgirls" with John Q Public at Best Buy - or order them online (even in Iraq). BUT 3. Because taxpayer funds are not involved directly in the AAFES acquisition and distribution of this material, Broun's spokesman explained that the indirect use of taxpayer funds - in that taxpayers provide the salaries of the soldiers that might purchase said items - validates a congressional ban. So, ignore the outrage over whether or not our brave GIs will be able to get at least one of their hands on this material - I suspect they'll manage. (And by the way, even though it has 16 cosponsors, I suspect this Bill is going to die in committee). Instead ask yourself if you're comfortable with the precedents set in items 2 and 3 above. And ponder the comments from SFC SKI. Read carefully, he might be talking to you. It’s good to know that those 16 backers have taken care of all the other problems the military faces and are now taking care of this issue. Posted by Greyhawk / April 25, 2008 9:51 PM | Permalink 9 Comments |
November 26, 2010America@war [Greyhawk]
I think anyone who's ever pondered the "comment" option - once only available on blogs and bulletin boards, now ubiquitous on almost any web site - will appreciate this:
The so-called faculty of writing is not so much a faculty of writing as it is a faculty of thinking. When a man says, "I have an idea but I can't express it"; that man hasn't an idea but merely a vague feeling. If a man has a feeling of that kind, and will sit down for a half an hour and persistently try to put into writing what he feels, the probabilities are at least 90 percent that he will either be able to record it, or else realize that he has no idea at all. In either case, he will do himself a benefit. That's wisdom from the past, captured for posterity at the US Naval Institute, shared via the web on the institute's 137th anniversary. From their about page:
"The Naval Institute has three core activities," among them, History and Preservation: The Naval Institute also has recently introduced Americans at War, a living history of Americans at war in their own words and from their own experiences. These 90-second vignettes convey powerful stories of inspiration, pride, and patriotism. Take a look at the collection, and you'll see it's not limited to accounts from those who served on ships at sea, members of the other branches are well-represented. I'm fortunate to have met USNI's Mary Ripley, she's responsible for the institute's oral history program (and she's the daughter of the late John Ripley, whose story is told here). She also deserves much credit for their blog. ("We're not the Navy nor any government agency. Blog and comment freely.") We met at a milblog conference - Mary knew (and I would come to realize) that milbloggers are the 21st-century version of exactly what the US Naval Institute is all about. Once that light bulb came on in my head, I mentioned a vague idea for a project to her - milblogs as the 21st century oral history that they are. "Put that in writing," she said (of course - see first paragraph above!) - and here's part of the result. Shortly after the first tent was pitched by the American military in Iraq a wire was connected to a computer therein, and the internet was available to a generation of Americans at war - many of whom had grown up online. From that point on, at any given moment, somewhere in Iraq a Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine was at a keyboard sharing the events of his or her day with the folks back home. While most would simply fire off an email, others took advantage of the (then) relatively new online blogging platforms to post their thoughts and experiences for the entire world to see. The milblog was born - and from that moment to this stories detailing everything from the most mundane aspects of camp life to intense combat action (often described within hours of the event) have been available on the web... And et cetera - but since you're reading this on a milblog, you probably knew that. And you know that milblogs aren't just blogs written by troops at war, that many friends, family members, and supporters likewise documented their story of America at war online in near-real time, as those stories developed. The diversity in membership of that group is broad, the one thing we all have in common is the impulse to make sense of the seemingly senseless, and communicate the tale - for each of us that impulse was strong enough to overcome whatever barriers prevent the vast majority of people from doing the same. Everyone at some point has some vague idea they believe should be shared - we were the people who, from some combination of internal and external urging, found and spent those many half hours persistently trying to write it down. But where will all that be in another 137 years? Or five or ten, for that matter. That's something I've asked myself since at least 2004 - when I wrote this:
Membership in the ghost battalion has grown in the years since, and an ever growing majority of those abandoned-but-still-standing sites are vanishing. Have you checked out Lt Smash's site lately? How about Sgt Hook's? If you're a long-time milblog reader you know the first widely-read milblog from Operation Iraq Freedom and the first widely-read milblog from Afghanistan are both gone from the web. If you're a relative newcomer to this world you may never even have heard of them - or the dozens upon dozens of others who carried forth the standard they set down. If you have a vague notion that something should be done about that, (a notion I've heard expressed more than once...) then you and I and the good folks at the US Naval Institute are in agreement. Preserving the history documented by the milbloggers is just one of the goals of the milblog project, the once-vague idea that we're now making real. And it's a big idea, if I say so myself - too big to explain in one simple blog post, so stand by for more. Likewise, it's too big a task to be accomplished by just one person. So if you're a milblogger (and exactly what is a milblogger? is a topic for much further discussion on its own) I'm asking for your help. All I'll really need is just a little bit (maybe just one or two of those half hours...) of your time, and your willingness to tell the tale. We've already made history, it's time to save it. (More to follow...) Posted 4:02 PM | Permalink |
Comments (0) |
|
The Mudville Gazette is the on-line voice of an American warrior and his wife who stands by him. They prefer to see peaceful change render force of arms unnecessary. Until that day they stand fast with those who struggle for freedom, strike for reason, and pray for a better tomorrow.
![]() Furthermore, I will occasionally use satire or parody herein. The bottom line: it's my house. I like having visitors to my house. I hope you are entertained. I fight for your right to free speech, and am thrilled when you exercise said rights here. Comments and e-mails are welcome, but all such communication is to be assumed to be 1)the original work of any who initiate said communication and 2)the property of the Mudville Gazette, with free use granted thereto for publication in electronic or written form. If you do NOT wish to have your message posted, write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the subject line of your email. Original content copyright © 2003 - 2011 by Greyhawk. Fair, not-for-profit use of said material by others is encouraged, as long as acknowledgement and credit is given, to include the url of the original source post. Other arrangements can be made as needed. Contact: greyhawk at mudvillegazette dot com ![]() Tending Distant Far from hearth and home, watching What tales we'll tell When things grim Some distant sunset, vision fading Saluting fallen friends whose names - Greyhawk, Baghdad, December 2004 |
It always scares me when legislators and bureaucrats think they know best about what we should or shouldn't buy. Of course, good order and discipline must be maintained, and we agreed to give up certain privileges for that, but these things just smack of ignorance.
I'm reminded of these 'Brokeback Mountain' DVD's that sat on the shelf out at the Camp Ramadi MCX for a few months back in 06. There was about 15 of them or so, and they just sat there for at least 3 months (but probably 6 months), with dirt and dust accumulating until one day they just disappeared. Maybe one was sold, but I always think that if so, it must've been a gag gift or something. To me, seeing them sit there and take up space just brought up more questions. What bureaucrat sitting back in Washington DC or somewhere CONUS thought- you know what those boys out there in Anbar really need to improve their morale? Let's be PC and give them a good old sensitive flick like Brokeback Mountain. Now wouldn't that be great? Haha....
But...
It was 19.95 at the px - or $3.00 next door in the Haji shop. And the Haji version was on a disc with 5 other movies that had been nominated for Academy Awards that year. And if you really wanted to save cash, you could buy FOUR DVDs FOR 10 DOLLARS, or 48 MOVIES FOR THE PRICE OF ONE IN THE EXCHANGE. And by the way, the Haji DVDs were available THE DAY THE MOVIE OPENED IN THEATERS.
None of which is said to disparage the courage of the convoy drivers and security - and the route clearance crews and the aviators escorting them all - who risked their lives to bring Brokeback Mountain to Ramadi.
(Nor is my use of the term of affection "Haji" intended to insult my fine Iraqi friends who also very much risked their lives to sell us the latest DVDs.)
Also, there's no truth to the rumor that the Brokeback DVDs were then shipped to Balad Air Base where they sold out overnight.
"the indirect use of taxpayer funds - in that taxpayers provide the salaries of the soldiers that might purchase said items - validates a congressional ban."
So, can I start telling congressmen and senators what they can't buy? I'm pretty sure that they're paid with tax dollars, some of which comes from this non-drinker's salary.
Also, there's no truth to the rumor that the Brokeback DVDs were then shipped to Balad Air Base where they sold out overnight.
By lunchtime, sure...
Isn't there a constitutionally-mandated minimum age for people to be elected to Congress? How did Broun and these other arrested-development adolescents make it? Idiocy is not an excuse, though in their case it may be a partial explanation.
Come to think of it, how come there hasn't been more about this nonsense in the MSM? After all, it's a REPUBLICAN Congressman making an idiot of himself...
Regarding the indirect use of taxpayer funds, Rep Broun misses the bigger picture. You're a taxpayer, right? If you buy porn with "your own" money, then you are actually paying for it with taxpayer funds.
This is why Republicans have so much trouble attracting libertarians. Every single on of the bill's sponsors is a Republican. Even when they are in the minority they can't help but try and dictate what is moral and what isn't. This group of congressmen and woman might be more comfortable in Iran.