May 19, 2005

"I find your lack of faith disturbing."

  Not that anybody asked, but this whole Newsweek story got me to thinking, and one of the reasons I set up a blog in the first place was so that I would have a public soapbox from which to spout my opinions, knowing that they would be read and given careful consideration by a discerning audience of five or six people who are bored at work. So that’s what I’m doing! Here goes:

  What this story highlights for me more than anything is why I will never be a member of the Faithful. It makes me sad sometimes, because I was raised in a very religious household and I still have the occasional fond memory of how comforting it was to believe that the whole universe was being run by a kindhearted, white-bearded Santa Claus type who had a plan for everything and would make sure that it would all turn out right in the end and everybody would get what was coming to them. That last part of course worried me, convinced as I was by the age of six that I would probably end up in eternal torment one way or another, although just what I thought I’d done by that age to merit God’s eternal wrath escapes me now. I just remember realizing that there were a lot of rules and that it seemed pretty impossible to obey them all and I was sure I’d screw it up.

  I did believe in God for a long time and did everything I could to hold onto those beliefs until I finally just broke down under the silliness of all of it. One too many half-hearted “it’s a mystery” and “maybe it’s God’s will that we not know the answer” bromides from some harried, well-meaning Sunday school teacher trying to field yet another skeptical question from that Banjo Kid Who Never Shuts Up, I guess. But I do on occasion wistfully yearn for that cherished feeling of going to bed at night secure in the knowledge that the kindly white-bearded guy would be watching over me because he loved me (especially when I was asleep and therefore not likely to be doing much sinning). I envy the Faithful their peace of mind sometimes, when I’m not busy mocking them for believing in patently ridiculous things.

  And this is where the Newsweek Koran-flushing story comes in. One of the reasons I know I will never number myself among the ranks of the Faithful is because I just can’t imagine a scenario where the threat of book-desecration would worry me more than the threat of a good old-fashioned prison guard beat-down. I mean, I value books a lot, but ever since I found out about these fancy gadgets called printing presses that allow a book to be printed in seconds instead of the months it used to take for a monk to copy one by hand, I’ve adjusted my outlook.

   Here’s how I see that scenario playing out, should it ever happen to me:
Note: In order to avoid touching off violent protests or having a Salman Rushdie-style fatweh issued on my blasphemous ass, the holy book I have named as the sacred text of my faith will be “I Am a Bunny”, by Richard Scarry.

  The scene is a drab, windowless room lit by a lone light bulb, which dangles from a cord affixed to the ceiling. Cinder block walls are covered in peeling green paint. A burly uniformed guard stands in front of the room’s only door, a four-inch thick iron affair that is bolted from the inside. In the corner of the room is a dingy toilet streaked with orange water stains.

  An interrogator dressed in civilian clothing sits at a table which is covered with various objects, including four or five different varieties of blunt instrument, some dental tools, a car battery with a pair of protruding wires terminating in a set of electrodes, a copy of “I Am A Bunny”, and some unidentifiable object that looks like a whoopie cushion with a long tube attached to the narrow end. Mr. Banjo is seated in the room’s only other chair, nervously eyeing the items on the table with great interest.

Interrogator: Now, Mr. Banjo, I’m sure you know why we’re having this conversation. It seems as if your answers to our previous interview may have been, shall I say less than informative?

Flaming Banjo: I told them everything I know! Look, it’s like I said, I’m not even a Shriner! I just happened to be staying at the hotel where they were having their convention!

Interrogator: Yes, it says that right here in the transcript: “Denies all involvement.”

Flaming Banjo: Exactly! I’m an innocent bystander!

I: Ah yes, an innocent bystander. Well, I guess you have nothing to worry about then, do you Mr. Banjo? Still, you won’t mind if I ask you a few questions before we let you go, just to make sure you really are as innocent as you say? It’s just a formality, really, while we’re finalizing your release paperwork. You see, my boss insists that I be thorough – this may surprise you, but sometimes people –unscrupulous people, you understand, not like you Mr. Banjo – sometimes people will tell us that they’re innocent even when they’re really not, just to get out of this place.

FB: I guess some people will say anything to save their skins, huh?

I: Exactly. But since you are innocent, you shouldn’t have any problem. So let’s get down to business, shall we?

FB: Can I have a glass of water?

I: No. Who’s your superior in the organization, Mr. Banjo?

FB: (snorts) My superior? You mean my boss?

I: Alright, Mr. Banjo. I can see how this is going to be. I want you to know that you did this to yourself – I’m just trying to ask you a few simple questions, but you had to be Mr. Smartass.

FB: You know, you’re not the first person to --

I: Shut up. Just remember, you did this to yourself! I notice you’ve been looking at the items on this table in front of me.

FB: Are those electrodes?

I: These?

FB: No, not those. Next to them.

I: These? Yes, these are electrodes.

FB: I see. Are you sure I can’t have that glass of water? Because I’m really thirsty.

I: I’m sure you’re familiar with this book, Mr. Banjo? This book I’m now holding in my hand?

FB: I’ve never seen that book before. Is it a good one?

I: Really? You’ve never seen it before?
He walks over towards the toilet in the corner.
So you won’t mind if I just tear out some pages and see if they’ll go down the toilet?

FB, in full br'er rabbit-in-the-briar-patch mode: You bastard! Give me the electrodes! Anything but that!

I: Who’s your superior?
He begins ripping a page from the book.

FB: No!!! What are you doing?

I: He drops a page into the toilet.
Ooops! Butterfingers! There it goes!
He flushes.

FB: Aaarrrrgh!! Sinister fiend! Give me the electrodes! Hook them up to my testicles! Go on, I can take it!

I: Where's your Richard Scarry now, Banjo? Why hasn't he come to your rescue? Where's your all-powerful Richard Scarry now?!
He rips another page.

FB:You monster!

I:We can do this all day, Mr. Banjo.

FB: Alright, fine! (Sobs melodramatically.) I’ll tell you whatever you want to know. Just please stop it...

I, Producing pen and paper: I’ll need names and addresses.

FB, still sobbing: Poor little bunny, never hurt anybody...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Seriously. I mean, I understand having deeply felt beliefs and all, but I just find it hard to get my head around people getting more upset about somebody defacing a Muslim holy text than about somebody defacing Muslims. Allegations have been circulating about prisoner abuse in Guantanamo and other places pretty much since day one. The current Attorney General wrote a legal brief for the White House specifically stating that the Geneva Convention does not apply to prisoners there. Why would that be necessary unless they were using interrogation methods outlawed by the Geneva Convention? And now people are up in arms because a book might’ve gotten soggy?

And what about the administration? They’re currently vilifying Newsweek for printing the story without double-sourcing it (while being careful to stay away from the question of why the original “highly-placed” source would report such an incident in the first place if there was no substance to it), but they pretty much admit to shipping people off to countries where torture is legal to conduct interrogations? So, “Yeah, we beat the hell out of them, hosed them down, stripped them naked and set the dogs on them, but we would never dream of ripping up a book. We’re not savages.”

The priorities of religious outrage remain mysterious to me.

Posted by flamingbanjo at May 19, 2005 03:10 PM
Comments

couldn't the brer rabbit analogy go a little further? that by denying damage to a book, talking about a book, they get people to look at the book and think about the book rather than the other methods of torture?

Posted by: anne at May 19, 2005 10:17 PM

and also: "bush promises probe into saddam underwear" are they kidding?

http://www.blurbomat.com/archives/saddamheadline.php

Posted by: anne at May 20, 2005 01:07 PM

A couple of days after the initial reports of rioting over the "Newsweek" article, somebody, somewhere pointed out that during the pillaging and burning of the National Museum immediately after the fall of Baghdad, something like a dozen or so Korans (most of no small historical significance) were destroyed by the mobs of looters, all of whom were presumably of the Muslim Faith. But, I don't recall any outraged protests over that.

So, is it only when Americans desecrate the Koran that they take issue with it?

Posted by: KING COMTE i at May 21, 2005 01:49 PM

Well, Comte, it does make the "We're occupying your country to liberate our Muslim brethren!" line a little harder to sell...

Posted by: molly at May 24, 2005 12:49 PM

So, is it only when Americans desecrate the Koran that they take issue with it?

Oh for--

Of COURSE it makes a difference if it's Americans desecrating the Koran. I mean look-- if an Israeli were to flush a Torah down the toilet it'd upset a lot more people than if, say, a German were to flush a Torah down the toilet. That's pretty easy to understand, don't you think?

What I'm amazed by is everyone standing around going, "Geez, why're they so upset about this?" The fact is that most people will forgive someone for kicking their ass-- but nobody's going to forgive someone for kicking their ass and then pissing on them. It's totally irrational, but it's also completely understandable and, as much to the point, absolutely predictable.

IMHO.

Posted by: Joshua at May 24, 2005 04:09 PM

I got my more/less relationships reversed up there, but I assume you can still see my point.

Posted by: Joshua at May 24, 2005 04:10 PM

Good point. Thus the expression "adding insult to injury."

I still think that all the focus on the incident reported in Newsweek (as well being reported on in many other sources before the Newsweek article) largely serves as a distraction from the real issue of torture. Amnesty International just issued their annual report (which you can read about here), which claims that U.S. disregard for internationally-recognised norms regarding the treatment of prisoners is setting the tone internationally, contributing to a worsening human-rights situation worldwide:

"When the most powerful country in the world thumbs its nose at the rule of law and human rights, it grants a licence to others to commit abuse with impunity."

My main point is that I think the "injury" part of the equation is as important, if not more so, than the "insult" part. Lingering questions regarding prisoner treatment at Bhagram, Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, as well as the use of "extreme renditions" (the practice of sending detainees to CIA-maintained interrogation facilities in countries that allow torture) continue to go unanswered, while the Newsweek incident is yet another example of the administration's "attack the messenger" strategy, which it has pursued so successfully in other cases. I find their blustering denials about book-moistening to be neither reassuring nor indicative of genuine concern for human rights.

And I continue to find it odd that so many people seem more concerned with the welfare of inanimate objects than with human life. But people are funny, I guess.

Posted by: flamingbanjo at May 25, 2005 10:58 AM

Joshua,

In the Islamic faith the Koran (or Quran if you will) is considered the "literal voice of Allah", not just a record of his disciples writings, and as such ANY desecration of it is regarded as an act of blasphemy, punishable to the fullest extent of Islamic law. Individuals of the Muslim faith have frequently been sentenced to life imprisonment or worse for such desecration, so it's not like there's no precedent for such actions against those who practice Islam as opposed to "infidels".

The point being that the average Muslim normally WOULD get terribly upset if someone of their own faith were to flush the Koran down a toilet, but that in the instance of the Baghdad library looting a definite double-standard seems to have been in place that went beyond mere anti-American sentiment.

Posted by: KING COMTE I at May 25, 2005 11:25 AM

I love the "I am a Bunny" metaphor. It's so ridiculous, we don't have to think twice that the bunny isn't real. "The Faithful" fail to realize the difference between reality and metaphor. For instance, I think the "promised land" is a metaphor for the spiritual quest. You'll spend a lot of time in the desert, wandering in circles because it's not an easy path to take. Life is a mystery... it's supposed to be that way... it isn't easy... accept it.

The fact that so many cling to a metaphor that made sense 2000 years ago and are unable to update it into something that makes sense today is one of the reasons why the world is in so much doo doo these days... but that's just me.

I like your blog.

Posted by: susan at June 8, 2005 12:52 PM