HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Citizen, 2008-01-31, Page 5THE CITIZEN, THURSDAY, JANUARY 31, 2008. PAGE 5.
Bonnie
Gropp
TThhee sshhoorrtt ooff iitt
Different strokes
So I get this e-mail from a sender I don’t
recognize and it’s headlined ‘Books ‘n
Blankets’.
Against my better judgment, I open it and
discover it’s legit. It’s from someone I do, in
fact, know and she tells me her brother is a
member of the Canadian military serving in
Kabul. In his spare time over there
he is personally handing out donated
clothing, blankets and toys to needy Afghani
kids.
The details are heartbreaking. The e-mail
includes photos of a Canadian soldier doling
out second-hand running shoes and used
sweaters to solemn-eyed grade-school age
kids who are barefoot or in sandals.
This, in an Afghanistan winter.
“If anyone has gently used warm clothing
items, blankets, shoes or toys to donate,” the e-
mail says, “you can…drop them off at my
place and I’d be happy to take care of the
mailing.”
What a splendid idea! We pack up a bunch
of blankets, wool socks and sweaters that have
been sitting at the back of our closet for years.
We call the e-mailer up to see what time we
can deliver the goods.
“Please don’t,” she says.
She has been totally overwhelmed at the
response and can’t possibly handle the
volume.
Another goodwill gesture gone awry. It’s not
the first time that the best of intentions from
outsiders have been frustrated in that baffling
and beleaguered corner of the world. Back in
2004, somebody in the 1st Infantry Division of
the U.S. Army serving at a base about 30
kilometres north of Baghdad had a similarly
splendid idea.
Iraqi kids, it seems, are soccer crazy. They
love the sport and play pickup games in vacant
lots, on empty streets – wherever they can.
But they’re poorer than dirt. Often they used
wadded-up rags in place of a ball.
Why not, some Yank wondered, as a
goodwill PR gesture, hand out free soccer
balls? The Army brass came onside,
“Operation Soccer Ball” was born and
eventually a five-ton truckload of soccer balls
was ordered up and dispatched.
Eager GIs lowered the tailgate, slashed open
the first of dozens of cardboard boxes and
found…
Soccer balls, yes – but deflated. And nobody
had thought to include a pump or a needle
valve to inflate them.
Army mechanics were baffled. They had the
equipment to inflate the tires of HumVees and
jeeps, but not soccer balls.
The sergeant in charge of Operation Soccer
Ball radioed HQ and informed them of their
dilemma. The order came down the line: “The
Iraqis should be grateful. Hand ‘em out
anyway.”
Orders are orders. The soldiers loaded the
boxes into their vehicles and drove through
towns and villages tossing out flaccid soccer
balls to every kid they saw.
It was a PR disaster.
“Kids were wearing them like hats,” one
soldier said. “They were in trees. They were
floating in canals. They were everywhere.”
What was supposed to be a goodwill gesture
came off as a sneer, an insult. And the kids
were pissed.
“On our way back, kids were throwing rocks
at us,” the same soldier reported. “Maybe if we
had given them inflated soccer balls, they
would have been out playing soccer instead.”
So it goes when one blunders into another
culture of which one has little or no
understanding.
Which got me thinking about that e-mail I
received. I wondered why is this Canadian
soldier – God bless him – but why is he
reduced to handing out second-hand clothing
in his spare time over in Kabul? Why isn’t the
entire frickin’ military handing out warm
clothing – with a signature maple leaf logo on
the label – full time?
Bound to be cheaper than bombs,
tank rounds or ammo clips for AK-47s,
right?
Canada is spending $100 million a month on
military operations in Afghanistan. Experts
reckon if the operation is still going on in
March – and you know damn well it will be –
the price tag for Canadian taxpayers will be
cresting at $7.2 billion.
We managed to put in some Tim Horton
outlets over there. We set up hockey rinks for
our troops’ rest and rec.
Could we maybe slide some pullovers, tube
socks and a Hudson’s Bay blanket or two onto
the tab?
Canada’s hardest working folksinger, James
Gordon, said it best in a song a few years ago:
Bomb them with butter, with rice and with
bread
Bomb them with medicine and clothing
instead.
Kill them with kindness, compassion and
care.
Let them drink from clean waters, not the
well of despair.
Get them right where they’ll expect it the
least
Bomb them with butter, attack them with
peace.
Just a thought.
Arthur
Black
Other Views
Bomb them with blankets
One sign of how far Ontario’s once
mighty Progressive Conservative
party has fallen is the scarcity of
candidates to lead it.
Incumbent John Tory lost an election and his
seat, which normally would be enough
disaster to change leaders, in October, and the
party in a few weeks will consider whether it
wants him to stay.
This party has ruled the province for 50 of
the last 65 years. Anyone it chose leader
almost automatically became premier. Only
one of its leaders in that time failed to make it
– Larry Grossman, who was made leader in
opposition in one of its rare slumps and lost an
election, his seat and quit.
Conservative leader has been the most
coveted job in Ontario politics, but aspirants
for it are not lining up. More people queue in
any fast-food outlet on a cold winter’s night
just to buy coffee.
One deterrent is Tory, who says he will fight
hard to stay. He has strengths, but no divine
right to hold on.
The Conservatives also do not have many in
their upper echelons who have demonstrated
leadership qualities.
But a third reason challengers are not lining
up is being Ontario Conservative leader does
not provide the assurance of becoming
premier it once did. It is not the prize it was.
There were signs of this in 2004, after Ernie
Eves left having been defeated as premier.
Tory had to fight off only former deputy-
premier Jim Flaherty and former minister
Frank Klees to take his place.
This contrasted with a couple of years
earlier, when premier Mike Harris stepped
down undefeated with his party still in power
and five senior current or former ministers,
Eves, Flaherty, Elizabeth Witmer, Tony
Clement and Chris Stockwell, ran to succeed
him.
When Conservative premier William Davis
retired in 1985, four even more household
names ran for his job, Frank Miller, a finance
minister homespun so many could identify
with him, Grossman, smart but abrasive; Roy
McMurtry, whose gift of the gab was
compared to the Kennedys and Dennis
Timbrell, an efficient if colourless health
minister.
When premier John Robarts retired in 1971,
five top ministers ran: Davis, bland but
reliable; Al Lawrence, a thoughtful rebel;
Darcy McKeough, on his way to being an
innovative treasurer; Robert Welch, a supreme
negotiator; and Bert Lawrence, brimming with
ideas.
And when Leslie Frost left in 1961, no fewer
than six ministers and one MPP ran, including
Robarts, Kelso Roberts, an attorney general
admired enough he led on the first ballot, and
the versatile Robert Macaulay.
The only previous time in six decades the
Conservatives have found few willing to run
for leader was after Grossman lost the 1987
election and they bottomed with only 25 per
cent of the vote and 16 of 130 seats.
The Conservatives put off choosing a full
leader for three years, but the big names
expected to be candidates still found
irresistible reasons for staying close to home
and hearth – nothing to do with their party’s
reduced chances of winning, of course.
These included Timbrell, who had twice
come close, Bob Runciman, such a terror of
governments it is ludicrous he has never run
for leader, Tom Long, who as party president
did a lot to reorganize it back on its feet, and
Tory, who had been Davis’s principal
secretary, but said he had to put his young
family first.
The only candidates the party could find in
the end were Dianne Cunningham, who had
just won a memorable by-election but lacked
experience, and a little known backbencher,
Mike Harris.
Harris won and this small race proved
highly productive, because two elections later
he regained power for the Conservatives in a
landslide with his policies of cutting
government and taxes.
The Conservatives had so much difficulty
finding a candidate to run in one riding in the
last election they advertised in a newspaper.
Do they now have to advertise for one for
leader?
Eric
Dowd
FFrroomm
QQuueeeenn’’ss PPaarrkk
Tory leadership no longer prize
Aradio station I frequently listen to plays
a ‘fabulous funny’every day. It features
a variety of comedy sketches and
music ranging from the inane to the more
complex.
The other day a listener’s e-mail was read on
air. The writer had requested that the radio
station no longer include any Monty Python or
Jerry Seinfeld in this daily feature as neither is
funny. It was straight to the point, leaving no
room for discussion. This had nothing to do
with an opinion, but was pronounced with the
certainty of one who believes their view is
shared by everyone. The comedy did not appeal
to him, so it seemed that was proof enough that
these were unpopular choices.
Well, I was flummoxed. The features with
Jerry Seinfeld have never finished without have
coaxed at least one giggle from me. And
Python? Well, come on, it’s Python.
Needless to say the radio announcers too
were a little flabbergasted. After all Seinfeld’s
Seinfeld is one of the most successful television
sitcoms ever, and Monty Python is classic,
featuring some of England’s most respected
talents.
But perhaps even more surprising is that this
person could proclaim such an embarrassing
assumption, that he doesn’t like them so they’re
just flat out not funny. It seems he forgot that
one person’s Carrot Top is another person’s
Johnny Carson. No brainer. It’s the way the
world works. We don’t all like the same food.
We don’t like the same books or music. What
one person will find attractive another does not.
How boring society would be if all of our
likes and dislikes were the same. Not to
mention crowded. Imagine how impossible it
would be to get tickets for something, if that
something appealed to everyone in the world.
The dating scene could be rough for blondes
and brunettes if only red hair mattered. And
‘twould be a sad day for skinny if the hourglass
was not just the preferred choice but the only
choice.
Diversity is one of the most incredible
realities of this world, particularly as it applies
to humanity. It takes all kinds of people, with
different feelings and different views, to keep
this eclectic world spinning. Recognizing that
everyone doesn’t see things the same way, or
like the same things, and being comfortable
with that is a sign of an open and accepting
mind.
But sometimes, it’s pretty difficult not to
shake your head. Making the news recently is
the story of the ‘pet’ girlfriend. Dani Graves of
England, and Tasha Maltby made the news
after a bus driver refused to allow them to
board. The problem, it seems, was that Graves
has Maltby on a leash. The couple complained
to the bus company, while the young woman
defended their lifestyle to the media saying she
enjoyed being a pet.
Now I pride myself on at least trying to open
my mind to different lifestyles and opinions.
After all, if they aren’t harmful, if no one is
being hurt and endangered, if they aren’t
bothering me, then what right do I have to cast
judgment and say that what they are doing is
any less normal than what I choose.
I try. I really do. Different strokes, right?
Maybe I’m not comfortable in a collar, but if it
makes this girl happy, I ask, so what.
That it does, however, ultimately just made
me depressed. One can only hope that it’s
harmless rebellion or immaturity on her part.
Because the only other explanations are just
plain sad. And I think that might be one thing
at least most of us agree on.
“Only those who will risk going too far can
possibly find out how far one can go.”
– T.S. Eliot
Final Thought