One particular Sunday morning, watching a television show's "in memoriam" segment, I did a subsequent channel "surf", and found our then Secretary of Defense shamelessly selling to the press his own war program, hence the following became quite clear.
POWERFUL YET POWERLESS
by
MICHAEL J. NARVAEZ
A killing is never good...
or is it?
Gastronomically speaking of course it's essential for sustenance.
That is obvious...
or is it?
For example,
Secretaries of Defense will point out the importance of the "pawn of war"...
its utility absolute,
and today's perpetual Middle Eastern exercise,
expresses its horror,
as good soul after good soul...
enter the slaughterhouse.
In such a civil servant's mind,
this kind of butchery is nothing other than solid stable nation building.
Not unlike how we;
snap a chicken's neck,
pluck its feathers,
rip out its insides,
decapitate,
"de-claw",
then package and ship to the nearest food distributor,
sell it by the pound,
so that someone on the fortunate end of the devouring spectrum,
can roast...
bake or fry,
dress and serve,
slice-chew-swallow...
digest only to then defecate!
Blood sustenance at its purest form,
or is it just solid stable body building?
When I see an In Memoriam of Lance Corporal John or Jane's war sacrifice,
I envision John's neck being snapped and Jane's uniform being plucked...
both of their insides mangled and their either decapitated or amputated bodies,
twitching on the so called hallowed ground,
and their lifeless being then packaged to the nearest undertaker at a price...
a practice in and of itself disgusting in that the death business is nothing but!
I then envision that same Secretary of Defense,
not unlike Shylock in Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice,
demanding his "pound of flesh!"
As I tearfully read about our sacrificial lambs posing as Honor Guards,
defending our liberties with their lives like pawns moving fervently forward...
I keep seeing that roasted chicken!
To understand the rationale behind killing
you only need to accept the food chain.
(The poem written in 2005 continues on for several more verses.)