Plum Crazy

The first was the revelation by artist Micah Wright that he was never an Army Ranger. Wright had been peddling this claim to his advantage for a while. At first it started out as a way to make his anti-war views appear more palatable to pro-war folks, but he didn't stop there. His publishers later asked him to write a book about his Army Ranger experience in Panama. Did he, at that point, confess to his publishers that he was thoroughly unqualified to write such a book, having never been an Army Ranger in Panama or anywhere else? No, he did not. Rather he researched the topic, taking stories from other people (both American and Panamanian) and presenting them as his own. He committed fraud.

He has now apologized for lying, but to me, true repentance would require restitution for his fraud. It is well within his ability to make such restitution. He could simply take the money he "earned" from the sales of this book (and any other works of art sold based upon this lie) and either give it to those whose stories he "borrowed" or donate it to charities benefitting servicemen and/or Panamanians. I have yet to see an offer on his part to do precisely that, so I question his alleged attack of conscience. Words are nice, but actions have a lot more meaning. If he truly feels remorse for what he's done, rather than attempting to 'fess up before his imminent outing in the Washington Post, then he should put his money where his mouth is. Until he does that, I have no particular reason, given his other lies, to believe that he really did confess because he could no longer live with the lies. He self-aggrandizingly lied on multiple occasions. Why should I trust that this is any different? Because he says so? If he truly expects that, he should get a grip. He's completely ruined his credibility, and he has no one but himself to blame.

The second event was the publication of this Ted Rall cartoon regarding Pat Tillman. Note the first panel, which essentially accuses Tillman of being a racist fuckwit who enlisted primarily so he could kill Arabs. Yes, that's right, according to Rall, Pat Tillman forewent a $3.6 million NFL contract so he could go legally kill himself some of those damn Ay-rabs! Now, I can understand being against the war (although I, myself, was not and am not against the war in Afghanistan). But to accuse somebody of such vile motives simply because he disagrees with you? Sorry, that's just disgusting. That's just pissing on that person, a person who isn't even alive any longer to defend his motives. Hey, Ted, fuck you.

Sure, Rall goes on to "explain" his intentions:

Rall, who risked his life in Afghanistan himself as a visiting cartoonist/writer after 9/11, told E&P: "The word 'hero' has been bandied about a lot to refer to anyone killed in Afghanistan or Iraq. But anyone who voluntarily goes to Afghanistan or Iraq [as a soldier] is fighting for an evil cause under an evil commander in chief."

"Tillman gave up millions of dollars," Rall added. "To that extent I think he's admirable, but the cause is not. ... He would have been a better person and a better husband if he took the $3.6 million and played football and left the poor and beleaguered people of Afghanistan and Iraq alone."

But given that first panel, I don't believe him. I could buy it based on the last 3 panels, which are primarily about GWB and Tillman being used. But that first panel speaks directly to Tillman's motives in enlisting, not the overall justness of the war. So, sorry Ted, but if you really meant to portray what you claim, you failed miserably. If you didn't know you were failing miserably at that by portraying the man as a racist just out to kill him some Arabs dead, then you're criminally stupid. And, you know what, I just don't believe you're criminally stupid.

Now, some may ask, "Don't you get mad when pro-war people make vile claims about anti-war people?" Yeah, sure I do. I could just spit nails every time I read another jackass claim that anti-war people just want to see more Americans die because it would benefit the cause. But it's different. It's different because I'm already distanced from those people.

In the end, I take a deep breath and remind myself that I was not anti-war* (specifically, anti-the war in Iraq) because of the other people who are anti-war. I was anti-war because I don't believe Iraq posed an imminent threat to the United States, nor were the terrorists responsible for 9/11 operating directly from Iraq and being hidden by the Iraqi government. No matter how disgustingly some others who are also anti-war might act, it doesn't change my underlying beliefs.

So I will not reconsider my anti-war position. I will not say I was wrong. But sometimes, it is really tempting.

*I say that I was anti-war, because I do think we need to stay in Iraq now and make sure there is an orderly turnover of power to the Iraqis. I think an immediate pullout would be a disaster. But I did not and do not believe that attacking Iraq in the first place was the right thing to do.