"Them" vs. "Us"

Once upon a time, two young Fort Lupton boys were gifted by their grandmother with a subscription to National Geographic.

It was a wonderful present. In addition to the monthly color-picture magazine that occasionally featured bare-breasted African women, various world maps would often be included.

For a time, it seemed the sun rose and set in the Geographic. Daydreamy stories abounded about faraway lands, bizarre animal life, strange humans. One could reasonably become a fan of the Geographic.

It was the truth that was stranger than fiction, the printed truth augmented by photographic evidence.

Sadly, this is no longer so. These days, the truth is being systematically twisted by this prestigious magazine.

(You are muttering to yourself, “If Mr. Tommy can land on the Denver Catholic Register, I guess he can land on the National Geographic.”)

I see the Geographic mostly in waiting rooms. I still retain that boyhood thrill when the yellow-framed magazine cover meets my eye. I like to tag along when Laura has an appointment to get her nails done or something.
(Editor’s note: I got my nails done once. In 1981, early summer.)

But lately my eagerness has been diluted by the magazine’s politically correct stance. How so? Read on.

Several months back, the Geo had a full-length story about bananas. There’s a fungus loose in banana land which is killing all the banana plants. Soon, very soon, said the Geo, the banana will be extinct.

For myself, having just helped Laura finish off two great big loaves of banana bread, I think the story was bogus. I mean, I’m sure the banana faces threats. But we’re not noticing any shortage.

The Geo’s warning about the extinction of the banana as a plant was a little, er, preposterously premature. Perhaps the report was false altogether.

So flip forward in the Geo to a more recent edition. You’ll find photos of starving people over the world – you know, skinny babies with flies in their eyes, emaciated mothers with nothing to feed their babies.

In another section, the same issue decries the “loss of the rain forest.” What’s happening to the rain forest? Is it suffering the same fate as the endangered banana?

No, no, a thousand times no! The rain forest is being removed so that the land can be used to raise crops, to grow food for starving people. So which is it, National Geo, save the people or save the rain forest?

What exactly is “lost” when the rain forest is made into farmland is never clear. Perhaps the yellow-nosed titmouse is threatened. Long live the yellow-nosed titmouse!

Worse, perhaps tribes of naked jungle primitives will have to, er, grow up, learn useful vocations, get jobs, become doctors and teachers, contribute charity and work to society, buy cars and houses. Is that a loss?

It’s well documented that hunger in this world is one hundred percent caused by political situations.

It’s not that we can’t grow enough food. It’s that because of politics, genocide, tribal wars, military dictatorships, we can’t get the food we grow to the people who are hungry. Fair enough? More farmland is a good idea. Lost rain forest doesn’t sound like much of a loss.

Who is protecting the rain forest? “They” are. “They” are the same people “protecting” the timber wolf and driving leather tanneries out of business.

Which brings us to Global Warming. What a crock. We have scientific evidence going back hundreds of years showing the earth varies in temperature. Any junior high kid who pays attention in his science classes can tell you that.

To be sure, we’re not talking about stewardship or conservation here. We’re talking about the use of stewardship and conservation as emotional issues to promote suspicious personal goals.

The thread of the global warming hoax is beginning to ravel anyway. It’s a hard theory to promote when the temperature outside is zero, colder than last year at this time.

So where does all this come from? Guess what, the global warming scheme is directly related to the abortion campaign. Abortion is directly related to the banana crisis, which is related to embargoes on oil exploration.

It’s all related to that neat little package known as “them vs. us.”

“They” (my own mother was one) are people who irrationally fear overpopulation, who refuse to see that starvation is caused by man’s avarice, not a shortage of something to eat. In fact, the world’s population is in decline, due to birth control and abortion. True!

“They” are people who’ve apparently never flown over Colorado, Utah, Idaho. “They” are people unable to look down from the sky to see just how much irrigable land is going unused simply because there isn’t a ready market for the grain or corn which could be raised there.

“Us” are the people who believe that the only moral form of birth control is abstinence. “Us” instinctively know global warming is a farce, that estimates of our “carbon footprint” are unadulterated horse pucky.

We are not warming the earth with our bodies or our cattle or our banana consumption, let alone by heating our homes or driving our cars. It’s all contrived, scare tactics, devices “they” use to control “us.”

Currently, because we have elected too many of “them,” we are in very real danger. “They” are the alarmists who tell us we are running out of water, running out of air, running out of soil, running out of energy.

“They” are the people who make it significantly difficult to open a bottle of mouthwash – “for your protection.”

“They” are the people who bring you daylight savings time – just an annoying little biennial reminder that “they” are in charge of harassing “us” in the name of a fully fabricated false economic benefit.

“They” are behind the cranberry scare (50 years ago, a test case) the jalapeno scare, the lead-base paint scare, the mold scare, the smoke detector industry, the fire extinguisher inspection racket, the helmet law farce.

“They” are the same people who desire to regulate the world’s population through abortion, while simultaneously making law to force motorcyclists to wear helmets for “safety.”

Right. Bikers have to be safe, but you unborn infants, look out, you guys are on your own. Same people support both.

-0-

Word of the Week: Hiatus. From the Latin, hiare, to gape. It means a break or a gap where a part is missing or lost. This could mean a blank place in a manuscript. So you can now comprehend it when Mr. Tommy says, “There were no Friday Letters for the past two weeks because we were on hiatus.”

Next week’s word: Hibernation.