Back in the 'good old days' when I had, as I had been taught, placed my faith in the federal government I would have eagerly lapped up the non-stop media coverage of the Boston Marathon Bombing (BMB) and immediately accepted all that was said and written about it as fact. Now I find I don't even give stories like this the time of day.
While working earlier yesterday a customer asked if I'd heard of the 'Tragedy at the Boston Marathon'. 'Nope', I confessed. 'I don't pay any mind to the news of the day.' He proceeded to tell me, in a very abbreviated fashion, the story then ended his news brief with: 'you know who set bombs at the finish line, don't you?! It's another terror attack!'
'Another terror attack?' said I, 'Did another Army soldier fashion fertilizer bombs?'
That brought a confused stutter: 'Oh, ah - no, No! The T.V. says it's more mooslims!!'
Says I: 'You know... I'll bet the bombs came, postage due, from a Mideast nation.'
'I'll bet your right!!!' said he.
'Yeah', I thought, I'll bet I'm correct, too.
And that interaction, and a few more that came later in the day from other people eager to regurgitate what they had just watched or heard via the Media, is the sum total of what I know about the BMB. I could have looked it up online or turned on a TV or radio and tuned into the Story. But, to be frank, I don't really care to watch it or read of it or listen to any media whore fill me in on the official details. That there were humans murdered and burned and disfigured on in this event yesterday is despicable. I'm genuinely sorry for them. Human life - indeed all life - deserves better than to face pain and death via a government - any government.
But my 'presence' as a viewer or listener or reader stops none of it. And were I to take part in the traumatic programming by plugging in to what I'm certain was orgiastic, non-stop coverage by the media, none of the shock and pain felt by the victims would be mitigated. Thus, I freely chose (and still choose) to actively avoid it (and if one's going to avoid the 'news' today one can only do so actively).
As I'm a curious person, in the coming days I'll be interested to read the take offered by other bloggers in regards to this story. But I won't submit myself to the federalized media's interpretation of events. Even knowing next to nothing I will offer this: That between the all-encompassing security complex operated by the federal government and its tentacles reaching into state and even local police forces I find it absolutely unbelievable that anyone could plant a few bombs in Boston set to explode on a day that coincides with the marathon and Patriot Day. Now if a few bombs were to explode in an Iowa cornfield or a desolate 15,000 acre cattle ranch in S.E. Oregon, I might reasonably conclude that a 'terrorist' might have been able to build, then place, then detonate the bombs. A major American city? Nope. Sorry. Ain't buyin' it. Not in 2013.
All that leads me, in a roundabout way, back to that story mentioned in the first sentence of this post.
The 47 year old man man pictured below spent more than half his life living off the land (and, apparently, the belongings of some neighbors and campers) in the backwoods of Maine.
 |
| Yeah, he looks strange, but he's an endangered species: A 21st Century American Frontiersman |
Christopher Knight 'disappeared' as a 20 year old. He spent the ensuing 27 years living out of doors in Maine, likely enjoying the brief summer months and enduring the long cold winters. He was finally 'captured' by tripping a sensor planted near a campsite. The DA's office plans to 'throw the book' at Knight because he stole food and camping equipment from rural cabins and campgrounds. But as I was thinking of Knight's story (and admittedly I know next to nothing about it as well) I thought of how one would live outside of 'civilization' or if it is even possible today. What if Knight, rather than stealing food and clothing, equipped himself with a rifle and a fishing pole and had a head filled with knowledge of the outdoors? Would he have been arrested decades ago for hunting outside of the sanctioned season? Would he have been fined or even jailed for not having purchased hunting tags and licenses? Incarcerated for fishing out of season and/or not having those licenses either? Once the agents caught wind of Knight shooting animals and using their skin and fur for clothes and bedding would they have trespassed him for daring to live on so-called Public Lands? Of course.
I don't believe Knight would have lasted even one year living his 'lifestyle' if he intended to do so like a 19th century frontiersman. He was more anonymous in his petty thievery than he would have been truly living off the land.
It is especially cruel to take a man like Knight who has spent the better part of his life living as freely as he apparently felt he possibly could and lock him away in a concrete and steel cage. And it further exposes the immorality of that thing we call The Government when a man, hemmed in by laws and rules and 'civilized society' has no way in which to live outside the system if that's his choice. Clearly for Knight, his 'pursuit of happiness' did not involve trading hours each day for pieces of paper called Dollars nor did it involve a domestic lifestyle. That he chose to make an unconventional life for himself will very likely result in prison. That he could not choose that unconventional life without breaking one law or another further proves 'freedom' in this judeo/falsechristian land is a word who's definition is as hollow as the 9-11 Commission's Report. And when the State goes as far out of its way to capture and arrest Knight as it did, it surely has the resources and capabilities to prevent a few terrorists from blowing up parts of Boston.
No comments:
Post a Comment