Wednesday, March 30, 2005

WARNING: Important News, aparently

3/30/2005
Nothing better to do tid-bits, celebrities attacked, abashed, and ridiculed by agencies that are mad because “they” –the wealthy, talented, and good looking- don’t fit certain ideologies which dictate their lives, nor do they sit back and let such agencies usurp their personal lives. Here are several examples, which one may wish to satirize, of recent issues of celebrity attacks in which the attacks may be more entertaining than the entertainers themselves.

Catholic Leaders Blast Madonna and Ritchie
Madonna and her film-maker husband Guy Ritchie have infuriated religious chiefs following their decision to attend a party dressed as a nun and the Pope respectively - at a time when Pope John Paul II is becoming increasingly frail. Madonna and Ritchie celebrated the Jewish holiday of Purim by dressing up for a Kabbalah bash in London last Thursday - angering Catholic leaders. America's Catholic League president William Donahue says, "It just goes to show you what a moral slug this man (Ritchie) is that he would get dressed up as the Pope at a time like this. We're quite disappointed. We Catholics thought we had finally gotten rid of the witch when she (Madonna) discovered Kabbalah." However, Madonna's publicist says, "No disrespect was intended."


Tristan says: Oddly enough, you think the American Catholic League president would show some compassion and spirit of forgiveness. Obviously, for those so high up in religious rank, they can forgoe the teachings of Christ, and lambaste with holy tongue’s so vile, call people witches. The Vatican, surely supports these curses, and so sponsors them entirely by religious creed alone. The name of the Catholic Church will be infamous in attacking Madonna, a pop-singer/diva, for having a costume party. And whether or not the Pope is ill, dressing up as someone –say Plato or Jesus, is of no consequence to a sick a dying man, and he should be so grateful people remember him enough to dress the part, if to remember him at all. What he should not be grateful about –is to be remembered for the man whose religion deemed a free woman a “bitch”…or witch. Accusations of such unrighteous slander can so often be easily confused for their vulgarity if not their intent. It is doubly funny that a man who follows the teachings that he, who judge shall be judged by God, would so pass judgment on witches where there are none. We only have Diva singers and film makes here. Good luck in your next life, oh wait, not a Buddhist. Never mind then.

Here’s another:

PETA: 'Lopez Forced Billboard to Drop Our Ad'
Animal rights charity People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals (PETA) have accused Jennifer Lopez of bullying Billboard magazine into removing their full-page ad, which lambasted the star for wearing fur. The music magazine had agreed to run PETA's advert, which features a gruesome photo of a skinned animal beside an open letter to Lopez, attacking her for glamorizing fur in her new Sweetface clothing line and encouraging the "sadistic slaughter" of rabbits, minks, foxes and chinchillas. But on Monday Billboard cancelled the $5,000 ad, leading PETA Vice President Lisa Lange to conclude that the magazine "caved to pressure" from Lopez's record label Sony Corp's Epic Records and her publicist Nanci Ryder of Baker-Winokur-Ryder. Ryder admits, "I'm doing my job, which is protecting my client. I don't understand why PETA want to meet with Jennifer. In my opinion, there would be nothing worse than a meeting, unless in the meeting we could commit to not wearing fur and not using fur in fashion. Unless we could do that, I didn't quite understand where the meeting would go." PETA have retaliated by emailing the banned advert to hundreds of radio stations nationwide.


Tristan says: I would say more, but I agree with Lopez’s agent. She should be protected from freaks like PETA. Attacking those who wear furs is stupid in this day and age of capitalistic consumerism. They can’t attack the retailers, nor can they attack the hunters of such furs. They seem, apparently, only to be good enough to attack those who wear coats made of furs –synthetic or otherwise. I’m sure that Lopez, like the mad scientist she is, genetically grew these poor endangered species from stem cells of pond scum, and no animals were harmed in the making of this new clothing line that would not have been so entirely flattened by an 18-wheeler otherwise. Not to mention Lopez is not her own costume designer, and the furs she wears in music videos and film are probably pre-scripted by an art designer or costume designer. It seems this organization would attack a woman known for showing more of her own skin than the skins of animals, seems so absurd I can hardly believe it.

These articles can be found at their original source: http://www.imdb.com/news/wenn/2005-03-30/#2

The opinions of this author do not reflect those of the original articles or those parties involved. The ideas and comments by the author are purely a personal analysis and commentary should not hold accountable such idiotic actions by people, nor should it influence others’ to idioticness. The only desired outcome is a little common sense and a lot of decency, and should the author’s commentary influence other’s opinions or ideas, it is because they share the author’s good moral judgment, and should not be held accountable for their wise agreement, nor should their intellect come under attack by those who find it absolute to attack morality at any turn without showing compassion. These who wish to join the fray of personal slander and libel should worry that perhaps those who don’t pity them may in fact comment on them in satiric allegory, and at the very least flat out mocking ridicule.

Sunday, March 13, 2005

Monday, March 07, 2005

Let Freedom Reign

By: Tristan Vick
March 6, 2005


In Response to Myself. An expansion of my theories, and War: what is it good for?
Retrospect: Let Freedom Reign.


Recently I have gone back and reread my December 13 article on WAR. I surprised myself how, I unintentionally wielded the rhetoric of dogma to excuse a need for war. As I firmly believe in the positive and negative energies various influences on the world, I am as surely confident that humanity seems to pick up on the negative, and bad energies. We somehow act as sponges, and those week constitutions and souls will be overridden with such tainted beliefs and corrupted morals –a seeping in of thick sticky intollerance and hate. Fear and hatered are the two vexations to such weak dispositions, and give tyrrany the tools it needs to dominate –forever battling in the world around it what it percieves as vile, in actuallity is fighting the evil it sees in itself. I mean to say, that this hate builds to such a frenzy within the fragile vessels of corruption, that they will shatter under the weight of anything that calls upon them to change for the greater good. That their very own identities be called into question, their actions, their immorality, and their failings be examined –is too much so, that it causes a backlash at the rest of the world. For what sinister folly it finds in itself, a deeper calling wishing to be pure and hands clean, reacts by blatently attacking the world around it. This sharp and painful retrospect cannot occur to those who do not wish to change for the better, and the immediate reaction is to blame the outside world for your own suffering. In all actuallity, the fault lies only in the individuals who uphold such corruptions which would seek to enslave their brothers in issues political, terrorist, fanatical, and dogmatic.


Terrorism is, and has been, at the heart of much debate recently. In responding to my December 13th article, I noticed that perhaps, although my reasoning justified –and my intent of reaching a peaceful means both spiritually and morally, was perhaps an argument in which I took a vary narrow standpoint. For those that don’t rely on faith, and see blind dogmatic obediance as the greatest intollerance, it would appear that in all consideration, I failed most greatly in my justification of War. Yet if we believe in the transfer of positive (good) and negative (bad) energy, one can readily see how the human soul –a type of energy in itself, whether of divine origin or natural creation, can and is affected by such invasive energies. I would go one step further in acknowleding that when people dwell on the negative, they absorb more readily the undesired side effects, and alarmingly will find that they have soaked up more sin than they were previously aware of.


In the example of my fellow pier Francoise, I wanted to point out a skeptacism and paranoia that would explain a sense of anti-American sentament. I may have been wrongly manipulative of the context, but the overly conscious patriot in me didn’t want to offend my own diginity –for I whole heartedly believe that America is one of the greatest and most liberated of all of the FREE nations of this world. For my own sake, I couldn’t stomach the thought that I would be sponsoring such anti-Americanism as has rampently spread across the politically charged climate of today’s global ecconomy. My colleague may have been correct in assuming that in order to have an everlasting peace and harmony, we must first allow people the freedom of choice. However, I disagree as to the application of admittance in who may be allotted this choice. Perhaps that seems socialistic, but in todays world, where terrosism lurks readily willing to strike down another set of towers, I think we must realize that unhindered freedom of choice comes at the cost of responsibility. Those who show such responsibility –to make the world a better place, and live harmoniously together, should indeed be allowed such a choice.


I think Salman Rushdie summed it up quite eloquently in his October (2001) address on The Attacks on America (Rushdie, Step Across This Line), in which he stated: “Let’s be clear about why this bien-pensant anti-American onslaught is such appalling rubbish. Terrosim is the murder of the innocent; this time, it was mass murder. To excuse such an atrocity by blaming U.S. government policies is to deny the basic idea of all morality: that individuals are responsible for their actions. Furthermore, terrorism is not the pursuit of legitimate complaints by illegitimate means. The terrorist wraps himself in the world’s grievances to cloak his true motives. Whatever the killers were trying to achieve, it seems improbable that building a better world was part of it.”


I couldn’t have put it better. When I talk about responsibilty I mean that moral obligation which builds a better, more just, more tollerant, more caring, and merciful world which primary principle should be love. This and only this will lend to true everlasting peace, as much as a dream of an Utopia as it may be, I’m glad to be in a country which can assure we lucky citizens a momentary comfort of such a concept as freedom. I can not fully believe that we will ever reach this pristine and holy place that we would like to call a perfect world, for as I have mentioned there are always the negative energies which will be a constant torment and dissposition to our easily pliable human natures. The only way to combat such negative forces, in my experience, is to deflect or transform the negative energies into positive energy. The Japanese martial art-form of Aikido, created by the legendary Zen thinker and founder Morihei Ueshiba, who believed Aikido to be an expression of the spirit of Love for all living things, and what’s more a manifestation of a way to reorder the world of humanity as though everyone were of one family. “Ki” or a vital energy life force is a main concern of Ueshiba. He understood that any attack on the person or soul could be channeled into possitive, constructive energy, and by doing so would liberate both opposing forces by showing that there is no fine line of separateness –that in fact, everything exists primarily as part of the same energy strand that exists in our very Universe that God created. Those who believe in God call it a “soul” and those who believe in scientific reasoning and practicality may call it an essential life energy force. Those who don’t believe in it, and choose a more atheistic stance, are indeed not scientists –for even modern physics and quantam mechanics has defined the very core energy which makes up our spirit. To this end, we must learn to be responsible human beings, and learn to redirect negative energies so that they may become positively utilized. To grant any person a free choice would only cause more irrisponsible actions –an event quite probable in any account. We must first endeavor ourselves to rise to the task of self discipline and contemplative wisdom, and secondly teach others how to be responsible and positive thinking too. If the rest of the world had these skills, then such individuals could help themselves –and not blame the rest of the outside world for their woes, nor direct their hate towards any of their fellow kind.


“The fundamentalist believe that we believe in nothing. In his world-view, he has his absolute certainties, while we are sunk in sybaritic indulgences. To prove him wrong, we must first know that he is wrong. We must agree on what matters: kissing in public places, bacon sandwiches, disagreement, cutting-edge fashion, literature, generosity, water, a more equitable distribution of the world’s resources, movies, music, freedom of thought, beauty, love. These will be our weapons. Not by making war but by the unafraid way we choose to live shall we defeat them.” Mr. Rushdie again speaks my mind, and gives a wonderful example of turning such negative energies into a positive aspect of living. Life should not be suffering, and if the voices from our great philosophers of humanity -Jesus, Buddha, and Rushdie all preach love as the anti-thesis to evil and corruption, then I too must agree with them. Are these forementioned things worth dying for? Would we be so empowered by our own freedom that we would wish to defend it? I think War in this sense, if need be, is fully necessary. However, currently we have many examples of imposing forces and ideologies which give nobody a choice but to adhere or assimilate to -our notions of freedom. This is, perhaps, irresponsible? If we have learned anything from this step by step examination of a formula that we can abide by, one that will undeniably change our lives for the better, it is first to be sincere in our responsibility to love each other. In closing, I must restate my firm belief that ALL men and women are created equal, that -Our business is their business because peace and harmony and the love of God should be granted to all people. With further analysis of age old philosophies, we can gain better insite into our role and our duty to each other, further propelling a discussion of ideas which do not impose or shackle another’s individual beliefs, rights, or freedoms, but rather, a method of true freedom of speach and a practice which raises our fellow brothers’ and sisters’ up as equals –as family, and gives us repose in knowing our shared love will benafit the entire world, ultimately enlightening us.

More on Aikido can be found here at: http://www.aikiweb.com/

Past blog:
http://theblackforeststudios.blogspot.com/2004/12/war-what-is-it-good-for.html