trees

Maybe it’s silly, but I develop a sort of relationship with certain trees. I grow fond of them; it pleases me to see them when I’m in the vicinity. It’s something about the shape of the tree, or maybe where the tree is located—who knows how these things begin? What matters is there are specific trees that make me happy.

This is one of them:

That one off to the left—the one that looks sort of like a mitten from this angle—that’s the tree. I actually shot this photo of the feral cat that followed me around one foggy day. See that little white speck? That’s the cat; the little bugger paced me for half an hour or so, never getting any closer than this. But even though I shot the photo of the cat, I made sure the tree was in the frame.

I like that tree for several reasons. I like the way the bike path curves gently around it. I like that crows and hawks hang out there (though not at the same time). I like the fact that unlike some of the other trees along this stretch of the bike path, it was never trimmed back to make it ‘pretty’. It’s just a friendly, accessible, pleasant, unpretentious, somewhat disorderly tree.

It’s a nice tree, isn’t it.

They tore it down.

By ‘they’ I mean city workers. They’re refurbishing the bike path, partly because it’s in a flood plain. Two or three times a year the nearby creek (it’s just on the other side of the tree line) floods. It’s always done that. In fact, the worst train wreck in Iowa history took place just up the road, a result of flooding. Last summer, nearly 300 people had to be evacuated from their homes along the flood plain. So the city bought the property, moved the people, and set about ‘correcting’ the problem. Which required tearing down that tree.

I quizzed the workers about it. As much as I hate to admit it, they seem to have had a legitimate reason for removing the tree, though the reason was incomprehensibly technical. But the men I spoke to assured me no other trees would be removed. And, in fact, they’ve encircled the more tame and orderly trees with plastic snow fencing and yellow caution tape. I guess it makes me feel a tad better.But only a tad.

I miss that tree every time I ride or walk that stretch of the path. Eventually I suppose I’ll get used to not seeing the tree. And that will be a little sad too.

burying the brother

I’ll be leaving in a couple of hours to go bury the brother. It’s a weird, dissociative feeling—like when you wake up inexplicably in the middle of the night and you get out of bed and go get a drink of water and nothing in your house looks quite right—as if everything in the house has been removed and replaced with nearly perfect replicas. That’s sort of how I feel. Just a wee bit distant from myself and everything in the material world.

Soon I’ll be surrounded by grieving and sympathetic people, who will say shit like “He’s in heaven now” or “He’s probably looking down on us now and smiling” and I’ll be nice about it and maybe nod in agreement. Almost everybody there will be some brand of Christian and they’re going to talk a lot about God. “We don’t understand God’s plan,” and “He works in mysterious ways.” If they find comfort in that notion, who am I to disagree? But I don’t believe it.

This is what I believe. My brother lived a moderately good life—and that was about the only thing he ever did in moderation. He was a firefighter and he was given to all the sins and graces of firefighters. He sometimes drank too much, he took too many risks, he never quite grew up, and he gave the best parts of himself to the job—sometimes to the detriment of his wives and children. But he also saved some lives and he mitigated some disasters and he spent most of his life putting himself at risk to help strangers. He could have been a better person, but—and this, I think, is what matters—he was the best person he could be.

I’m going to miss him. I miss him already.

terrorism works

I’m a criminologist by training, though I haven’t been actively studying it for the last four or five years. Like most folks, my initial response to the horrific events in Oslo and Utroya was almost purely emotional–shock, horror, some anger, a free-floating sense of unreality.

But good training always asserts itself and after a while I found myself paying attention to how individual people and the news media were responding to the event. Almost immediately people, including professional journalists, were speculating the attacks were the work of Islamic terrorists. They’d phrase it carefully, with comments like “This has the trademark signatures of Islamic terrorism” or “It could be some other group responsible, but the coordinated nature of the attacks suggests the perpetrator studied the tactics of Islamic terrorism.” The implication was always there–even if the bombing and shooting weren’t being done by Islamic terrorists, Islamic terrorists were still indirectly responsible for them.

I looked at the opinions voiced on FreeRepublic.com, one of the most vitriolic right wing conservative websites and found comments like these:

“Western Europe has but two choices: 1. Boxcars, or…2. Burqhas.”

“We’re fighting this war on terrorism the wrong way. Instead of us just reacting to the threats and spending trillions of dollars in the process, what we need to do is that every time there’s a terrorist bombing we should select a Muslim city, at random, and bomb a few square blocks…”

“May the soulless Muslim terrorists who did this, and who attacked innocent young people at a camp on an island, be caught promptly and dealt with swiftly, preferably without a trial”

When it became clear the perpetrator was a white Christian right-wing extremist, the people at FreeRepublic shifted their response:

“This would be a dream come true for MSM and the Democrat buddies.”

“I bet my bottom dollar, either the guy was schizophrenic/mentally ill or is linked to the Muzziggers.”

“I more than suspect it is a plant. Conservatives do not slaughter innocent children for any purpose. But a lib, a socialist deviant, would slaughter children while proclaiming to be a conservative in order to bring down conservatism.”

When they thought the perpetrator might be a Muslim, he was representative of the entire religion…but when he turned out to be a white Christian conservative, he became either a liberal stooge or a lone nut case. But surely, it would be irresponsible for people to think he could be representative of all white Christian conservatives.

What’s alarming is that what was being said on FreeRepublic.com was more extreme than what was said by mainstream news media, but they were making the same basic point: it’s either Muslims or somebody inspired by Muslims or a lone nut.

Here’s a true thing: the European Union’s “Terrorism Situation and Trend Report, 2010” reported that in 2009 there were “294 failed, foiled, or successfully executed attacks” in six European countries. How many of those 294 were perpetrated by Muslims or Islamic terrorists?

One.

This isn’t to suggest that Islamic terrorists groups aren’t a threat–of course they are. But it’s important to keep that threat in perspective. Islamic extremists didn’t invent terrorism; it doesn’t belong to them. Those alleged ‘trademark signatures’ aren’t even trademark signatures. Coordinated attacks have been used by terrorists (and, for that matter, by military organizations) for centuries. The vehicle bomb? An anarchist opposed to capitalism packed explosives in a horse-drawn cart and and set it off on Wall Street in 1920–killed nearly 40, wounded around 400. And the first known motor vehicle bomb was detonated in 1927 by a white conservative Christian man in Bath, Michigan angry about taxes.

And guess what. It was a coordinated attack–the alleged signature of Islamic terrorists. Andrew Kehoe set off a firebomb at his house. While the authorities were fighting that fire, he detonated a bomb he’d planted in the local elementary school. When the police and firefighters and parents rushed to the school, Kehoe drove up in his car–which was packed with nails, metal tools, bits of steel machinery, anything that could act as shrapnel–and detonated the explosive. The butcher’s bill was 45 dead (38 of whom were children) and several dozen wounded. What was it somebody said on FreeRepublic.com? Conservatives do not slaughter innocent children for any purpose?

Terrorism doesn’t belong to any one group. It’s a tactic that’s been embraced by extremists of all stripes. And as shown by the responses in FreeRepublic.com, it’s a tactic that works. Those people have been thoroughly terrorized.

he quipped

Some words annoy me. Quip is one of them. Not the noun–I have no real problem with the noun. It’s the verb that offends me, and it offends me especially when used as a dialog tag. “Blah blah blah,” he quipped.

Dude, if you have to tell me it’s a quip, it’s not a very good quip. If you have to point out the quippy nature of the line, then you’ve failed in your job as a writer. If the context isn’t enough to reveal the level of quipitude–if you have to rely on a 16th century verb usage to rescue you–then just delete the fucking line and start over.