Today, is the first day that the universe at large becomes aware that it was I; Mike Labor who actually coined the (dumb) phrase "shoe bomb". That knucklehead Reid (I am fairly sure) was not on my Christmas card mailing list in 1998. It was three years later that the goon tried to kill himself and others with my idea! The bastard.
Re-reading a few old C.P.E.s, this one stands out a bit in my memory. It is kinda humorous, in a twisted sort of way, and entirely inappropriate as Christmas material! Enjoy; and on with it!
I'm supposing over here, that we all know what a "shoe" is? It's one of those things that you put on your foot. Wearing the gizmo, you don't feel the sharp stuff on the ground nearly so much as you would going barefoot. Or perhaps for you, it's one of those things to stick somewhere in a closet because the durn thing doesn't fit anymore, and besides that; the color is hideous in any case!
Now, supposing it existed, a "shoe bomb" might be a device that looked like a shoe, but in fact was designed "to go boom". This much is apparent to us all.
If obvious then why couldn't there also be an "un shoe bomb" to consider? Very likely, such an artifact might well appear to be a "shoe bomb", but was never designed to blow up; a decoy to draw us away from the actual threat then! We may all feel quite confident that such a thing is an option here, don't you think?
But, I am concerned. In terms of escalation, wouldn't creation of such things very likely spawn a "double un shoe bomb" next , for us to contend with? Such an object, clearly appearing to be (yet another) decoy, but in fact; a decoy of a decoy, and thereby explosive! What a truly terrible thing to have happen to any shoe; nicely colored or not.
All this makes a guy wonder. Given this cold war type of escalation of footwear munitions to consider, wouldn't just this sort of series lend itself quite easily to the potency of a "non un double un shoe bomb" to consider in the future? I'm just saying. . . Could we predict then, the possible development of something that would appear to negate the simple old "double un", thus converting it back to a "single un shoe bomb" (thus a safe decoy)? But what if it (insanely) did not!?
What if our now triply redundant "non" feature is speaking not so much of the blast, but the footwear? I mean, seriously; wouldn't the generic "non shoe" portion correctly describe the vast majority of objects now in existence on the planet? Exactly just how many kinds of "un shoes" are there anyhow? Do we all grasp then, that such a monstrous invention would indeed prove to be a bomb, but (hideously!) not appear to be a shoe! Gadzooks, but such would be diabolically clever.
I hereby propose the unilateral disarmament of all nations, forever banning the manufacture, or deployment of bombs, un bombs, and non un bombs, especially if any of the above even mildly resembles a shoe. This shall be duly filed in the United Nations charter, and our great grand children shall praise our wisdom. Thank you, have a nice day, and please do not litter.
Those future generations may well be tempted to raise the ban we just now established, yet the prudent course before both they and us remains certain. We all feel very strongly about this, and for our children to be able to sleep peacefully at night, the spectre of exploding shoes, and things which don't explode, but look like they might, and things which don't appear to what they are, must never again be built!
The so called "common knowledge" that none such as described, exists; nor is anybody stupid enough to begin even the design of such, we reject. Are you the one who is personally able to exhaustively prove that no single knucklehead on the planet is as of today, designing or building weapons of foot destruction? Isn't the responsible thing for us all to do, the simple and forever and forever guarantee (by committee rules) that he just doesn't begin? I mean, what if the man built a bomb which appears to be a decoy, but not a decoy shoe? Are we actually prepared for that contingency? Get real!
Taking responsibility then, for what we've made, and owning up to what we've done, isn't it just this we mean by the descriptive word, "human"? Although we can (truthfully) say; "There is no such thing" when others point to what we have made, we yet fail to believe the testimony we just now gave of ourselves! That is to say; the twisted, and contrary things we build within ourselves, do in fact exist, but not visibly, not publicly.
Uniformly, the things we make, are made because we thought it was "right" to do so, we adhere to principles. And even mad foot bombers believe (of themselves) bombing was the "right" thing to do! Are the inner principles wrong, or is it simply wrong to be a "principled" person? What if both sides of the scheme collapse?
That is to say, our ideals we hold to be dear, and high. We would defend (we think) our freedoms to the death. Surely, surely our lofty ideals can't be wrong. . . can they? Yet it is just exactly by our ideal of humanity that we privately conclude that it is always, always the "other guy" who is nuts. Each of us privately conclude; "I am right, you are wrong", we just fail to say it outloud sometimes. We mean by it, "I am principled, you are not", but clearly such an assertion is insane. We are normally prevented from noticing that.
Ever since our folks' eviction from Eden, we humans have done this very thing. We divide up, realists versus idealists, and whichever side you personally prefer, you are forced by the system to conclude; "We are sane, they are crazy, we wear shoes, they explode them, that is the simple reality".
But the actual factual here is that such formats as an insoluable problem, if we insist that we must solve from the inside of the set. We, rushing in to "fix" things, and to "cure" people of their mad schemes; is precisely that which blinds us from noting that it is I and we in need of repair. The unsolved aspect remains, in that we (privately) reserve the "rightness" of our own selves, and of our "side". Thereby, we are doubly damned, provably both unable to notice, and unwilling to seek aid, it is always always the "other" who must first change their tune! Thus and thereby, both as persons and as peoples we are similarly hung out to twist in the wind.
Shall it be the needs and ambitions of the individual, or the good of the nation as a whole; which best guides us? Answer me! Is it "workability" or "principles" which must navigate the course? The inner division within us, is also manifesting "out there" in the world. We can never repair it, for the excellent reason that we believe that by it, we repair all else!
Oddly thus, we as persons and also we as peoples are "in principle" opposed to our own best interests! We, of ourselves, we by ourselves, can never shake the madness out of things, out of others, or out of ourselves. Nor are we able to cease trying to do so!
The broken Body, the empty tomb, the blast-off from the hill side, he is crashing in to our wrecked system, from "the outside". The responsible thing to do is to point our shoes (exploding or not) toward Him. The situation has never been good versus evil, with me-us as good, and you-them as evil. And our chronic pointing of that idiotic weapon at Him proves the point!
Our parents never did voluntarily devote themselves to wickedness as an operating system. They proposed instead; "an alternate, a competing good"! The situation on the ground then, has never been good versus evil. Actually it is He The Good (One), versus our shabby assed imitation mock-up version of good. The reason we hold on to error, is because we think we are right! Sin in us, is formatting as a bizarre form of "excessive right-ness".
The responsible thing for us to really do would be to verbally plead with the Almighty that His news of peace (with Him) be spread to the four winds. Our land, and all lands coming to "find" a new and freely given ability to admit that; "I, and we all, were only able, (of ourselves) to think we were right, and we were afraid to be wrong". It is just here, this fear of being found out as the wrong, which is the "secret" locking feature to our corrupted patterns. For Him to repair that flaw in us, "in principle"; changes everything!
The new creation is begun, long live the King! The Eternal One is born, the ever Living One dies, the All Seeing Champion wakes from the dead. Everything is changed, He coming to dwell with the low, and is raised above all. And dig this, we are being drawn there!
Merry Christmas '98