Why You Should Read Lolita Before Traveling In the U.S.A.: American Travelers Are Lolita, and The TSA Is Humbert Humbert

In 1955 Vladimir Nabokov, a Russian emigre to the United States, published Lolita, a tale of a linguistically and aesthetically talented pedophile who runs off with his 12 year old step daughter, "Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul. Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta" (first lines of Lolita).

Lolita was not published in the U.S. until 1958 due to its pornographic subject matter. Nabokov intensely hated cruelty to others and sexual deviants. So why did he write a book from the viewpoint of the pedophile, Humbert Humbert, who has conned several generations of readers and academics with the beautiful account of his love and "protection" of a 12 year old girl?

Nabokov hated evil. He had escaped the Bolsheviks in Russia, then later, escaped the Nazis with his wife of Jewish descent and their young son. They arrived in America and fell in love with it. Nabokov's wife, Vera, promptly purchased a gun to replace the one she had left behind in Europe, and learned to drive.

Nabokov, a seemingly absent-minded butterfly-chasing professor with an innocence about him that relied upon his wife's ferocity and protection liked to look at things from a very detailed and scientific perspective. He hated evil and studied it, dissected it, and understood its minutest detail. He climbed into the mind of evil when he wrote Lolita, shocking readers and enchanting millions with the beauty of his language.

Lolita was a triumph and proved how easily a population can be tricked into accepting evil, calling it beautiful, spending entire lifetimes studying its details without ever getting to its ultimate meaning. Anyone can tear apart an engine, or dissect a body and name the parts and figure out how they operate, but most cannot figure out the ultimate meaning -- why was this human body created, what is its purpose? How does one get into the mind of the creator via the act of dissection and cataloguing of the parts? It is impossible if one has no love or passion driving them. Creators and inventors generally have more love and passion which compels them to work harder and longer at something, creating a thing that changes the world for better.

Most inventions and creations were initially designed for the betterment of mankind or to add beauty or freedom. But many inventions are corrupted and used for evil purposes. The written word was made to better the world, but evil tries to corrupt it. The same goes for all art. We see technology abused, being used to make life harder rather than easier. Even Lolita, meant to show us evil from its own perspective, has been corrupted and adopted as a wonderful and dreamy tale by many gullible girls and joking young men, none of whom are aware that they have been artfully conned and that Nabokov proves his case of how evil survives and is accepted into the world.

Nabokov, the great enchanter and magician deceives many with his artistic slight of hand, keeping our focus upon the aesthetic, causing us to accept Humbert Humbert's defence because it is merely art and has no ultimate meaning or moral. If art is only aesthetic, then beauty has no meaning, thus what is the point of creating it?

Nabokov, a talented lepidopterist, studied butterflies and moths and was fascinated by their beauty. These creatures are patterned in ways that attract and enchant us, but also hide them from evil. Some butterflies blend in with their surroundings while others mimic dangerous animals to avoid being eaten. Nabokov learned that a butterfly's patterning is not merely aesthetic, but also enhances its survival. And this is what art's purpose is. Art is not merely aesthetic, but driven by truth and survival. If we cannot learn from art how to be wiser, better, kinder, and more graceful to others; to have pity, then art has no purpose, much as a shiny car has no meaning or purpose without an engine. A car is nice to look at, but without an engine it gets us nowhere.

The reason I expound upon Nabokov's Lolita and art is that more than ever America is deceived by the Humbert Humberts who claim they love us and want to protect us, while molesting us in various ways. We are made to pass through Naked Body Scanners, which undress us and expose us to dangerous mutagenic radiation. We are searched and groped by TSA officials as we travel the country, much as Lolita was groped by Humbert Humbert along the highways and byways of America. The stories now include "enhanced" searches that have left many feeling sexually violated after having had their penises, anuses, labia, and breasts felt by TSA screeners.

Now, does Humbert's love for Lolita feel nice and beautiful? Sure, he attacked the pornographic movie maker that ran off with Lolita, because that kind of art is immoral and degrading; but what of Humbert's protective and fatherly love for her? More than ever Nabokov's Lolita is important, for we all are her.

Was Lolita clean and innocent as the wind-driven snow? Was she faultless? No. But was that any excuse for Humbert Humbert to molest her? Was Lolita a kind and sweet child? No. She was obnoxious and sometimes crude. Was she more deserving of Humbert's sexual predation because of this? No. Americans are like this 12 year old girl and even though we are annoying and obnoxious and immoral it does not mean that we deserve to be treated by our states, by our fellows that work at TSA, as criminals in need of being stripped down or molested as we travel. Humbert Humbert protected Lolita as much as our airports are protecting us.

This is not beautiful, this is not America. This isn't even Nazi Germany. This is worse. This is worse for numerous reasons. Firstly, it's far worse and more abusive passing through United States airport security than in the rest of the world. America is supposed to be less abusive than the rest of the world. Second, the atrocities of the Nazis and American eugenicists and corporations in the first part of the 20th century are not so far removed from memory that we have forgotten them and what they looked like -- and what is going on in the United States right now resembles these past times.

The TSA's arrogance is only a small, yet extremely visible HINT as to what period of history we have regressed to. If a Naked Body Scanner, a long line in which one is divested of their possessions and shoes, hurried along, and subjected to physical searches which involve humble and silent endurance while one's anal and sexual reproduction areas are touched by uniformed employees of the government before being boarded upon crowded vehicles traveling somewhere doesn't wake us up and cause deja vu; then far worse than what happened in Nazi-controlled areas of Europe awaits us.

Rather than humbly lining up like the Jews, believing they'd eventually return home, we should stop cowering in embarrassment and start saying to hell with the "law," which breaks every law written into our soul. American travelers aren't terrorists and neither are visitors from other countries. The terrorists are the ones that apply for TSA jobs, and willingly carry out the orders of their superiors. If TSA employees were intelligent Americans they'd go on strike until they no longer were made to mistreat their fellow Americans. The terrorists are the ones groping for your wallet and now, your genitals. Soon, the women and children will be divided from the men, then the children from the women as enhanced airport security. It's already happening on an individual level. What next? Confiscation of Passport and Citizenship? Child sacrifice? When will their appetite be filled?

Wake up, America. Don't let the lives lost of the millions of Jews and others be for nothing. It's time to wake up out of our self-righteous and false morals. We are imperfect, we are obnoxious, we are all sinners, and we're not afraid of it. The Nazis were afraid of sin and imperfection and tried to hide it and eradicate it. We don't have to fall for that lie.

America wasn't founded as a utopia away from imperfection, but a place that would toughen up and accept it. That First Amendment isn't for the perfect or the safe people, but to protect the imperfect and those that speak unsafe things even if they are the truth and offend others. Our entire Constitution was designed to protect the so-called "impure," the "unsafe," the "sinful," the obnoxious, the rude, and the human. If the Constitution was only for the perfect and the moral, then our Founding Fathers would not have had any rights.

According, to Britain the American Revolutionaries were a bunch of terrorists, criminals, and tax evaders. And, according to our side of history they were brave, courageous, educated lovers of freedom. It all depends on who is writing history as to what the words "terrorist," "art," "pedophile," and "free" mean. We want to be on the right side of history. The trick is figuring out what the "right" side is. Usually, it's the side that is willing to break the law to show pity and hospitality to others when they are traveling in an inhospitable world.

America, this is not ancient Sodom where travelers were subjected to rape when visiting that town. Why are we forcing ourselves upon travelers? How does it protect us to treat citizens and visitors to this country this way? We are not Nazis, not Humbert Humbert, not Sodomites -- are we?

image: George Washington, Commander of the Terrorist Americans who threatened Britain's safety and health, also known as The Father Of Our Country, The United States Of America.

American Travelers Uncovered At Their Own Expense

I'll be traveling soon and have been studying the TSA site in hopes of passing the security exams I will encounter along the way. And I wonder to myself, if it's really this dangerous to fly, then why isn't it banned altogether as so many other health risks are these days?

It's amazing how much fear our government is in when it comes to travelers. Every particle must be examined and X-rayed. And now, passengers must stand in a Stick 'Em Up pose and have naked photos taken. Why would someone willingly give their government which is supposed to protect them, not expose them, a naked photo of them self, but not dear Granny or their own child?

Granny would take better care of that naked body shot than anyone else and protect it from all other eyes because it embarrasses her to even have such a thing, and she's embarrassed for you. She'd probably tear it into a million pieces, then burn it to make sure no one ever saw it.

And most children would also be embarrassed to possess a nude photo of their parent, and would hide it from any friends that may see it. Any parent who gave their child a naked photo of themselves would be considered a pervert. Conversely, any parent that gave a stranger a photo of their child naked would be a pervert. Any parent so afraid of their own child that they forced them to strip down upon entering and leaving the house needs help. And any child old enough to stand up for them self should never allow this kind of abuse from a parent. If a child is this dangerous, then they should be confined behind barbed wire and constantly monitored by professional guards.

What if you were a woman and had been raped by a knife-wielding man and from that point on demanded that all men, including relatives, entering your house submit to a strip search to make sure they weren't carrying any weapons or other dangerous objects? People would pity this woman and think her paranoid and in need of psychological help in order to regain her confidence and ability to live in a world were most are harmless and only a few dangerous. Wouldn't it also help such a woman to own a gun and learn self-defense techniques? America is this woman and has been attacked, but she hasn't been given the tools and confidence to face the world again.

Why would we trust the government and an invisible viewer with an image of our naked body but not a close friend or relative? It seems that a relative or close friend would be a better guardian and more respectful of this image than a person or government that has no personal love or interest in us. Not all of us are Playboy Play Mates or gigolos and there's a reason for that.

We live in a society that is image-obsessed, thinking that image is everything, and tells us everything about a person. Yet, increasingly, we are afraid of human touch and contact. We are paranoid of physical touch, which is not a cold image.

I've observed this fear of human contact around my little town. I've seen girls snap at men for touching them in the smallest way or by accident when passing by. I've seen guys stand like statues, their arms crossed over their chests in large crowds, glaring at anyone who dares tap them on the shoulder.

I've overheard girls talking about "the circle," an invisible area that others should know better than to enter. Evidently, there is an unspoken rule these days that says "thou shalt not cross within a few inches of any other person at any time." These girls were agreeing with each other that it was very rude of others to get too near, even though they were in a crowd. And this wasn't even about being touched or bumped up against, this was about getting too near although never having made physical contact. Yet, these same girls will post their image and every detail of their lives online and dress attractively. If one really doesn't want to be touched or have anyone get near to them they should refrain from bathing several days before going into public, step in a fresh dog pile, dump an ashtray over their head, and spill a glass of whiskey and coke on their clothes, and write "leper" across their forehead.

If you wanted to keep me at a distance you'd put on too much perfume. It works every time. My eyes roll up into my head, I feel as if a plastic bag is being wrapped around my head, and I wish there was a tobacco smoker in the vicinity to hide the smell (incidentally, where I live the indoor tobacco ban supposedly includes perfume, incense, candles and other strong smells in the air. I doubt that anything other than the tobacco ban is enforced).

Anyway, I'm not so much offended by the radiation factor of the full-body scan in airports, as by our society's willingness to give a government such power and a nude photo, which they never paid for. I don't know about you, but giving away naked photos of myself wasn't what I paid for when I bought my airline ticket. It offends me and breaks my heart when I see people standing in a pose reminiscent of a crucifixion.

Once, a long time ago, a man was hung on a cross, judged between two criminals. His crime was that he was a king, a person with dignity and who desired all people be royalty and their nakedness covered. He was naked and the entire world saw him and became obsessed with the image of him naked and bleeding, prone, unable to cover himself from our gaping and disrespectful eyes. And now, we are all like him, naked, being judged with the terrorists although we are royalty.

Anyone who thinks a naked body scanner protects them from death is a hypocrite. That America is this weak, this afraid is sad. A naked body scanner cannot save us or protect us from evil. Uncovering people has never saved anyone from crime. Whenever people are uncovered, laid bare, and treated as criminals by their master or government it has been a time of great suffering and hatred.

Can a naked body scanner read a heart? If it could I'd put the things at the entrance of every state capitol building and in Washington, D.C., for this is where the most danger to American safety resides. These few men and women have images that appear clean and safe, but are their hearts free of terrorist threats, do they use their pens as weapons of defense against evil or to enact evil upon women and children by stealing freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and fought for by a few belligerent and brave souls during the Revolutionary War?

I'm not Jesus and I won't sacrifice my life for a government that is afraid of me. If I sacrifice my life and my dignity it will be for those I love and for freedom and those brave enough to love me.

What is America so afraid of, what is our government afraid of? Why do we believe it makes us safe to hand over our freedom and ease of travel to a government agency? When a government restricts and controls freedom of movement and travel, rather than increases it we should be very concerned. When a government accuses all citizen travelers of being potential threats, then we must wonder why. Has America grown so weak and prone, so exposed and defenseless that it fears everything and everyone? What happened to the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave? Where are those who remember these words and what they mean?

Free doesn't mean tobacco free, sugar free, or free from something. It means free to DO something. Freedom is an action, not something that is excluded from the mix. We've twisted the word free to mean something is missing and that somehow this is a good thing. We now identify ourselves as free from this or that, rather than free to do this or that. America is not free if it thinks it's terrorist free. America is free when it's free to do, to take action, to move about, to stand for freedom, to stand against evil -- because evil is everywhere and always will be.

The only way to fight evil is with freedom to do, not freedom from.

Note: I will be requesting a pat down in place of the full body scan wherever possible. I can see who is touching me and prefer this human touch, even if slightly invasive and humiliating. I'd rather not lie to myself that I am fully clothed by stepping into the full body scanner. I much prefer the truth and the truth is often quite unpleasant -- which is why so many silently step into the scanner.

image: Amelia Earhart

Russia Says Smoke More For Healthy Economy, While U.S. and E.U. Tell People To Chew Coal Tar Candy To Help Weaken Economy

That's it, I'm going to Russia.

Russia's finance minister, Alexei Kudrin is telling "people to smoke and drink more, explaining that higher consumption would help lift tax revenues for spending on social services" ("'People Should Smoke and Drink More,' Says Russian Finance Minister," Telegraph, 1 Sep 2010).

According to the Telegraph article Kudrin says, "People should understand: Those who drink, those who smoke are doing more to help the state."

Really? Tell that to Europe and the Unites States of America, land of pharmaceutical phascism.

Those dumb Russians. They must be stuck in the Stone Age. Don't they know that the Western world all chews or sucks scabs of coal tar now? Haven't they heard of Chantix, which boosts the health of society and the economy by turning sane people into suicidal maniacs and diabetics? Jeepers, where's Nikon and his anti-tobacco league of nose-slitters when you need them?

I hear that tobacco use is popular in China too. China's government grows the stuff since they don't like importing it or relying upon the U.S. for their supplies.

If Russia's finance minister says that buying tobacco and alcohol helps the economy and even "[upholds] birthrates" (Telegraph), then conversely not buying these must harm the state coffers and the economy.

Kudrin would say that a ban upon these items and others is harmful and unpatriotic.

Hypothetically speaking, if you wanted to undermine another country's morale, economy and peace what would you do? You'd send out the agents of dissent and fear to propagandize and create confusion and panic so as to immobilize, paralyze, and silence.

Hypothetically speaking, how would you invade another country and move in right under their noses and never let them know what was happening so that they would not retaliate against you because they had no idea that they were even under attack, instead pointing fingers at each other?

Instead of openly invading the enemy country, instead of sending hundreds of thousands of troops across the ocean to attempt a new Normandy invasion, instead of dropping bombs and other expensive and finite devices you would buy people. You'd pay out several million, or billion dollars to a few experts and highly respectable personalities and let them spread ideas and false beliefs. These false beliefs would spread across the land and many would fall in line spreading the lies and hate, never realizing that they were helping the enemy agenda, never getting paid for their work.

This has occurred before, especially within Communist movements. There are a few paid subversives and many unpaid and ignorant adherents that spread the ideas until they become mainstream and no longer recognizable as dangerous. This is why joining any mass movement, be it religious or political is highly dangerous, perhaps nearly suicidal.

What I am trying to get at is that hypothetically speaking, smoking bans may actually be propaganda campaigns planted by foreign states to undermine the strength and stability of Europe's and America's economies as well as unity of their peoples.

No smoking ban has ever benefited a city, state, or country. Billions of dollars in revenue and taxes have been lost, unemployment increased, guilt increased, and hatred of fellow citizens increased.

A tobacco or alcohol ban keeps the populace busy blaming each other, wasting millions of dollars in enforcement, and divides them against each other. A tobacco or alcohol ban causes large segments of society from gathering together, removes them from benefiting society with money, ideas, or courage. The enemy wants us afraid of each other, separated, hidden, and guilt-ridden.

If smoking tobacco is healthy for Russia, then why nowhere else?

Do Europe, the United States and Canada really believe that undermining their own morale and economies with tobacco and alcohol prohibitions is healthy or wise? Do we really believe that forcing at least 25% of the population into hiding is good for the economy and for health? Do we really believe that forcing 25% of the population onto toxic and foreign coal tar-derived gums, candies, and patches is good for society? Do we really believe the delusion that prescribing varenicline to war veterans with shell shock, making them into homicidal maniacs at home is better for health and family than using tobacco products?

We know that most Nicotine Replacement "Therapy" is produced in foreign countries. We know that states, such as Ohio are spending 3 million dollars to collect 1 million in fines. We know that the states are pushing million dollar add campaigns to force people onto toxic NRT products and drugs. We know that children are being recruited in schools to spread the campaign of hate and fear. We know that tobacco farmers are being reduced to poverty, and millions have lost their jobs due to the trickle-down affect of tobacco bans.

What we know is that to "save" lives and money lost to tobacco use, our states are spending even more on enforcement and dangerous NRT promotions. How many of our state and federal representatives are agents of foreign governments? Who is paying them? Where is the money coming from? It makes no sense to undermine E.U. or American stability unless one is working specifically to do so with the purposeful intention of destroying us. I.G. Farbenindustries worked to subvert American strength throughout the 1920s and 30s in preparation for war.

It will be shown in future years that the tobacco bans along with the pushing of dangerous NRT products was a deliberate attack upon America and Europe. It will be shown that these bans were enacted to waste our money, to stop the flow of money, and to divide the people. All tobacco and alcohol restrictions benefit the enemy, whoever they may be. All tobacco and other bans are deliberate distractions and propaganda campaigns.

There is only one way to protect one's self from being duped by any kind of propaganda campaign, be it foreign, religious, or political -- Grace.

Because one can never know what the truth is at any one time, because one can never have all the information or knowledge, there is only one way to prevent one's self from being used against their own country and friends. Grace.

When we stand back and look objectively at things we can see a larger picture and see that those who incite us to hate others or fear them are the true enemies. It is un American to live in fear of food, tobacco, alcohol and other common parts of life. If a society is paralyzed by fear of the common, noncriminal, the ordinary parts of life how will it ever stand against real enemies and evils?

If a cigarette makes a "strong" Christian quake, if a chubby child is repulsive to the First Lady, if a stumbling drunk has the power to endanger a town's safety then we must be the most spineless and softest people that has ever walked the face of the earth. I'm embarrassed.

I'll be visiting Russia before I visit California. If Russia's not afraid of me, then I'll be boosting their economy and sunbathing in Red Square on a beach of snow and slathered in a heavy coat and hat as I watch the waves of tanks roll past on their way out towards the sea of Western arrogance and atrophied muscle. C'mon America, spit out the coal tar candy. Man up and light up before it's too late.

Proving Citizenship In America

"The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.... He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands" (The Declaration of Independence, 4 July 1776).

Would you be able to prove that you are a legal citizen of the United States of America if asked to prove so while questioned by a police officer? Are you sure? Do you carry a birth certificate and a passport in your car or on your person?

Sure, you could pull out your driver's license, latest pay stub, show that you've paid taxes, served in the military, own a house, and countless other pieces of paper, but none of these would be sufficient.

Are you so very sure you have a birth certificate in the file cabinet? And even if you do, will you be allowed to go home and get it, or will you be locked up in the local jail? How long will you have to sit in jail, waiting for a birth certificate to arrive from the Vital Statistics office of the county you were born in?

Is that birth certificate any good? Most of us don't give this much thought.

I have a grandmother who could not receive social security benefits because her birth certificate didn't have her first name on it, only listing her as "Baby." It took quite awhile to prove she was that particular baby.

I haven't the foggiest idea where my birth certificate is. I hear rumours that it, along with the birth certificates of my siblings may have been tossed away with the turmoil and selfishness that occurs in family ruptures, not to mention a transient lifestyle.

And take a look at your child's birth certificate. Notice the past few years that, for some reason, the copy obtained these days is not always a certified birth certificate.

Really, it's amazing how much of life can be lived without ever having to think about one's birth certificate or the authenticity of it, although the latest presidential election and the anti-Mexican law recently passed in Arizona should cause us a bit more personal paper searching before we point fingers at others.

It would take quite awhile to prove myself a bona fide citizen. I have a family tree that goes back to Adam and Eve and dirt, but that wouldn't prove anything in front of a judge.

I wonder where I'd be deported to? Hopefully, New Zealand or Panama City, Panama.

Before one gets excited about Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, ask if it's a foot in the door to your house, under the guise of a boot to foreigners. Then, go look in the mirror, pull the log out of your eye, and use it to bare the door.

Why We Fight

I have been reading The American Revolution, Writings from the War of Independence, selected by John Rhodehamel, part of Penguin Putnam's Library of America collection.

The selections alternate between British and American writings by various authors. Many of the writings are journal entries and record the constant ups and downs of those for and against independence. After hundreds of pages of battle, starving, travel, and exposure to the elements; we suddenly come upon Sarah Wister, a very young woman living at Gwynedd, Pennsylvania (not far from Valley Forge), excited that her home is to quarter General Smallwood of the Contintental Army.

Sarah Wister's little heart goes pit a pat with all of the brave young company filling her home, and she falls in love with a handsome young Major Stodard of Maryland, who "has the softest voice never pronounces the R at all." As she closes her diary the first night of blushing excitement she says, "adieu I am going to my chamber to dream I suppose of bayonets and swords, sashes, guns, and epaulets."

And Major Stodard, his weary soul filled with hospitality, food, peace, and beauty goes to sleep to dream of pretty Sarah Wister who represents life, liberty, and happiness. She put on her best dress for this young soldier, and he put up his best fight for her.

And not far from Sarah Wister, is Albigence Waldo a surgeon with the Continental Army, who is ill, and homesick for his wife and children in Connecticut, who write to him that they have no money or food, and wish he would come home to take care of them. Albigence has no money, he eats a paste of water and flour, and breathes the smoke of the campfires every day while in Winter Quarters at Valley Forge. He writes on Christmas Day, 1777:

"We avoid Piddling Pills, Powders, Bolus's Linctus's Cordials and all such insignificant matters whose Powers are Only render'd important by causing the Patient to vomit up his money instead of his disease."

But a couple days earlier, December 23, he records, "This evening an excellent Player on the Violin in that soft kind of Musick, which is so finely adapted to stirr up the tender Passions, while he was playing in the next Tent to mine, these kind of soft Airs it immediately called up remembrance of all the endearing expressions, the Tender Sentiments....

"....and filled me with these tender emotions, and Agreeable Reflections, which cannot be described, and which in spite of my Philosophy forced out the sympathetic tear. I wish'd to have the Musick Cease, and yet dreaded its ceasing, least I should loose sight of these dear Ideas, which gave me pain and pleasure at the same instant."

This is why beauty and art cannot be neglected, ever. They are not mere entertainments and diversions, but lifters of the soul, healers, keys that open doors of sweet remembrance. Although it may be against the "philosophy" of many brave and war-torn souls, there are acceptable and quiet moments when a cleansing is required so that peace can be regained, and morning made to shine sweeter. How many dirty, sick, and starving soldiers were replenished and washed with memory of home, love, and warm tables by that unnamed violinist? How many remembered what it felt like to be human, and that this is why we fight--for our natural desire to live as humans, not drudges?

"The Man who has seen misery knows best how to enjoy good" (Albigence Waldo, Valley Forge, Dec. 1777).

image: Renior, Woman Playing Guitar