Monthly Archives: July 2006

4th of July

two flags
three houses apart
same wind
one flaps
the other lies dead
against its pole

i don’t think
it means anything more than
what looks like a steady wind
that should blow all flags the same way
sometimes isn’t

i’ve never spoken
to the neighbors
who own these flags

i’m buying a flag myself
tomorrow
two flags in fact
one old glory
one with a peace sign

i’ll hang them
on the same pole
and see what happens
see how each of them moves

the dead flag just snapped out straight
as if it has something to prove


German

He announces that the poem
he’ll be reading is a gift
from the ancient ones
unveiling the dangers of the coming
ultrafascism.
Then he begins in German
and if he could speak German
at anything more
than a freshman level
we might find
less menace to his voice.
Instead the elementary cadence
marches uninflected
over art into history.
We catch snips of words
and phrases, some in English:
holy war,
Taleban,
Allah,
Jehovah,
Freemasons,
KGB.

We shift in our seats,
startle when he reaches
under his shirt. Nothing
is forthcoming but no one
relaxes. His voice rises
to a near shout. He concludes
with English: “man cannot destroy
the earth, he is of the earth.” We
are not comforted, we who are in
this room full of smart people terrified by
a strange man reading a bad poem
in halting German. But when he is done
we applaud, looking around to see
who is applauding, who is not, who sees us
applauding.


happy birthday, america

Weekend update:

playing catch, playing pool, new amp, drinking, smoking, fireworks, poetry, beer, band names, shopping, laying about, playing, visit someone in hospital.

I promise a return to coherence soon.


Recent reading:

I just finished reading (in like two days) the new book by Ron Suskind, “The One Percent Doctrine,” which is an inside view of the war on terror and the bizarre policy that drives its conduct: the idea, formulated by Dick Cheney, that a one percent possibility that something might happen should be dealt with and responded to as if it were a certainty.

So if a piece of information gleaned from research and surveillance MIGHT have a one percent bit of credibility to it, the Administration’s policy (known in the inner circles but never voiced in public) is that they will hit it with all resources available.

A tip from an informant in Cairo suggests that a “sleeper cell” might exist in New York, or was it Philadelphia, and they might have a member who might have met bin Laden once and maybe they were in the vicinity of al-Qaeda’s training camps when it happened? Round up the guy and all his relatives.

Add in the bureaucratic infighting, the struggle between the career analysts and the policy makers, and the sheer volume of information being collected, and you have the roots of our current state of perpetual fear out for all to see.

It’s a good read, if not a particularly well written one — Suskind uses a sort of breathless narrative that I think was probably a sincere attempt to not bog readers down in a technically obtuse quagmire of details — and I would recommend it to anyone looking for some clarity on the mess.

I bought the book after listening to Suskind on NPR. During the call in section of the show, a woman called in to say (sarcastically) that she thought the policy was great. She went on to wonder how our responses to things like Katrina and global warming would have been different if the same thinking had prevailed there. Interesting and sobering thought, no?