Chapter 76.1: A Contrast in Humanitarian Crises

Clearly, all the world is aware of the two natural catastrophes that befell countries in Asia recently. Cyclone Nargis ravaged Myanmar/ Burma days before a massive earthquake rocked the Sichuan region of China.

Neither Myanmar, which has been under military rule for the better part of forty-five years, nor China, the last Communist power in the world, is known for being the bastion of humanitarian work. Indeed, protests against Chinese treatment of Tibet have seemingly called into question the legitimacy of this summer's Beijing Olympic games. And that's not even the half of the atrocities that have been laid at the feet of numerous Chinese strongmen.

But this quote in a New York Times article reflects one important difference between the emergency response in China and that of the military junta government in Myanmar:

“I am Grandpa Wen Jiabao,” the prime minister said as he watched two children being pulled from the rubble, according to Xinhua, the official state news agency. “Hold on, kids! You’ll definitely be rescued.”

The difference is a level of humanity. A matter of respect. But a question lingers: Is it real?

Of course, it's a comment from a politician. And politicians, in general, lie through their teeth. The article goes on to describe terrible acts of dehumanization in which parents are not allowed to view the bodies of their children. These are accusations by the people, not ironclad facts, but one fact remains clear: the people of China are devastated. I can only imagine how bad it is in Myanmar, where bodies may lie festering in the Irrawaddy delta; or perhaps worse, they may have been removed by a government that fears what might happen if the people were allowed to know the truth. They might rise up and topple them.

Neither of those nations deserve praise for their response to these humanitarian relief efforts. Indeed, for the country of Myanmar/Burma it may be the beginning of the end of military rule. Surely, no one can be so insulted without striking back. If I were a survivor in the Irrawaddy delta, I'd consider the actions of the Burmese leaders to be dehumanizing. And like a ghost, I'd arise.

I'm proud that this country neither deserves nor desires such revolution. I'm no fan of the Bush administration. I don't trust many of the words that come out of the White House; for that matter, I take the statements coming out of Democratic-controlled Congress with several grains of salt. But at least here we have a media that is generally able (albeit not always willing) to root out the bullshit and find the truth. They, like the government, need to be prodded but not eradicated.

In the wake of the Katrina tragedy, the Bush administration was raked over the coals for responding too slowly, for allowing too many people -- too many African Americans, especially --to be left vulnerable and powerless. It was a life-changing time for many in the United States; those fools who didn't recognize what 9/11 meant for this nation I hope recognized what Katrina meant and still means. But President Bush took his criticism and I believe he is well aware that his legacy will reflect his lack of leadership during the Katrina debacle. I respect that he's willing to be criticized and possibly vilified by American history; he's not going to try to rewrite it.

This isn't Myanmar; this isn't China.

Chapter 69.95: The Cat Trial of the Century

As the owner now of two cats, I can't help but respond to this recent article that appeared in the New York Times. Apparently, a bird watcher shot a cat with a .22 calibre rifle because he believed it was killing the birds. He doesn't deny that he shot the cat. The point of contention in the suit is whether the cat was feral.

I don't know how the law treats questions of feralness (ferality?), but this sounds like a clear case of animal cruelty to me. We took in a stray kitten just this week, gave it a name the other night, and are slowly introducing it to our other cat -- who probably wishes he had a .22 in the closet right now that he could use on the small quadriped that's taking some attention away from him -- and I'd say this cat is no longer feral. She's quite comfortable living here, accepting our pets and attention in return for lots of purrs, soft mews, and an inordinate amount of methane gas. (Surely those field mice and moles have worked through you system by now, Oreo. What on earth is wrong with your intestines?!)

Beyond that, how can a man who loves animals shoot and kill a cat? Is he not human?

Humans care for those who are less fortunate than themslves, like Texas toll collector John Newland, who named Mama Cat. The cat lived under a toll bridge but gladly accepted food and toys and bedding from Mr. Newland. I won't get into the vitriolic debate between bird bloggers and cat bloggers, who are writing hateful posts about the other, but I'll say this: a man who would kill a defenseless animal (I don't think the claws and teeth were any threat to the admitted cat killer) is no better than a thief. He deserves punishment.

I don't think it's as heinous a crime as rape or murder of a person, but it's despicable and cannot be condoned. The two years and $10,000 he faces seem appropriate to me.