ANZAC Day and similar _____________________ soldier: a man engaged in military service. Military (service): a. pertaining to soldiers, arms, or war. (These definitions come from Collins English Dictionary, 1974.)     I immediately observe, of course, that 'woman' is not included in the above definition of 'soldier'. I therefore add this, as of my free-will.     Also, in this essay, I am regarding all Military personnel (Army, Navy, Air-force and so forth) as 'soldiers'. No person presuming to be in the pay of the Military, is exempt, so this must include all personnel such as those in 'Intelligence', ancilliary staff and so forth.     I submit that the definition of 'soldier', is, at least in 2003, a misnomer. Even considering that the Salvation Army (for example) has, for many years before 1974, had 'soldiers' to pronounce their adherence and allegiance to a god but in no way (as far as I understand and know) implies violence, which the word 'soldier' or 'Military' bring to mind given dictionary definitions and the reality. I am therefore, in this essay, using the word 'soldier' to mean the original dictionary meaning, with my provisos as declared. A soldier is one of many things, not the least of which produce two notions, viz.: a)    A soldier is a person who desires to conform to the rites of his self-elected controllers by enlisting. Thus s/he accepts the consequences of that action and the responsibilities. These are the disillusioned 'Flag-wavers', the 'Red/White/Blue' brigade; the 'Stars and Stripes' brigade (stripes off your back!). But not the 'black', unless they are useful). b)    A soldier is also a person who does not desire to conform to the rites of the so-called controllers but is none-the-less drafted/conscripted/hi-jacked/enlisted or otherwise coerced/inveigled into a plot to use him as such. They do not, in my view, ever become 'soldiers'. Also, such 'soldiers' are generally known as 'cannon-fodder', which is mostly what they become.     In either case, the word 'soldier', of course, does not account for the personality of such an individual, nor their individual proclivities as to their own notion of what they are joining or may be asked/made to perform.     Put it this way, some people, for their own reasons, wish to join up for the Forces i.e. the Military. They may join for any number of reasons, altruistic or otherwise. However, the crux of the matter is that having joined, (considering they have done their homework and realising what they may have let themselves in for) they are then subject to the rules and regulations of the outfit they have chosen. In other words, they have to take what comes. They have made the choice, they must accept the responsibilities of that choice.     This may be not always true, as, seeing what they might be having to do, may open their sensibilities and they may rebel.     Whatever else these soldiers do, they fight under the control of politicians of some kind (whether kings or presidents).     The 'other' soldier, the person conscripted (by whatever means) is of major concern. These  'soldiers' are not where they are put because they want to be. They may feel right about the 'Cause' (because it has been embellished to account for their sensibilities, viz. the old adage 'women and children first'), but equally, they don't want to fight; nor, of course, should they be made to.     These soldiers are the people ANZAC Day (and similar) should be concerned with, therefore, we should honour them not with accolades of how brave they were but with a deep sense of sadness for these unwilling souls who were killed by those who sent them; the enemy within.     Most decent people, which accounts for probably 99 per cent of the population of the world, have no interest in a War, conflict, act/s of terrorism, or whatever the local jargon is. These acts of aggression are created by controllers for their own greed. and also feed off the greed of others; copy-cat stuff. They may even be the scape-goats that controllers want to justify their means of aggression; all of which is mostly lies.     We can often be made to be aggressive, even if we are pacifist. That is part of our human nature, I believe. The controllers are good at this and will stop at nothing to make others feel aggression, even towards the innocent. They will stop at nothing, I say. They will kill their own to make their point, for them. There is overwhelming evidence that this is precisely what the Americans achieved on so-called September the 11th (I think we have forgotten the year, except those who lost innocents).     The 'soldiers' who were inveigled into this, were the innocent people who were killed. They were killed to justify future 'wars', (Afghanistan and then Iraq and onwards). Worse, they were killed by their own side!     In a sense, of course, all soldiers who are conscripted (compelled by whatever means, including lies, subterfuge and possibly/probably no real threat) are killed by their own side. Not only that, I submit that this action was premeditated murder.     I don't think I am saying any new here, but I do believe that we have been made to forget what evil people are those that send people to war, whether they have enlisted or been compelled to fight.     What we have to do, (despite all the hatred against protesters by those who know no better, the 'couch-soldiers'), is to protest however we can. This has to be done peacefully, otherwise we are as bad as they are.     With 99 per cent of the world peace-loving, how have we allowed a few despots to rule us? We have allowed others to make ourselves to think globally but we cannot act globally. This is not within our human abilities (any more than we are able to conceive the speed of light). Within our abilities, though, is our excellence at thinking and acting locally.         It's the local that becomes global, not the other way round. It's the small local actions that lead to increases on a larger scale. These small local actions are most often most seen in violence because that is part of the mechanism of the controllers, usually via their media, that leads us to believe it is a violent society we live in. I do not believe this. I believe that most people are honest and good and positive. However, they have allowed themselves to be swayed into believing lies.     We all understand that violence breeds violence, likewise, goodness breeds goodness. The latter is not what controllers want; it would not suit them at all! So the goodness is played down and the violence takes front page. This is what they tell you, you want. And you believe it because you have been conditioned since birth to believe in so-called 'authorities'. This is all, in my opinion, rubbish.     As individuals, we are ultimately responsible for our own choices and the responsibilities that go with those choices. It's no good blaming someone else, the, 'I didn't-ask-to-be-born', syndrome. If we allow others to make the choices for us, then that is our choice also. We must accept the consequences and accept the responsibilities.     No-one has an entitlement, under any circumstances, to make a choice for any other fauna or flora where it is for personal advantage, either for ideas/ideals or bits of ground. The notions of these are suspect since they are personal and how far away is an advantage?     We are, however, entitled to make decisions but again, not for personal advantage. The 'personal advantage' is the crux.     As with something like ANZAC Day, we are told: 'We must remember them!'     Those who lost folk in all our controllers' wars and other carnage, will remember them, we don't have to be told or reminded. We don't need a special day! Every day we remember those we have loved and who are no longer with us. In the same breath, we are told, however, that war is evil. Why do these people then continue their machinations? What are they trying to prove by their ceremonies? That they are the evil ones who caused the wars in the first place. We are not stupid, we know. A great many people forget that their folk went away (and never came back) for reasons which no-one with half a brain would want in the first place.     'Our glorious lads' (who come home), 'Our glorious dead' (who don't) are other epithets. This is nonsense!     If you want to fight dirty, that is your choice, accept the consequences and responsibilities. If you don't want to fight, resist with everything in your power bar violence. Violent, you are the same as the persecutors.     God is within the machine, not out of it.     I wrote the following poem back in the 1970's for my then wife. In context with the above, read it as you will: In the song of Life the words don't rhyme; music falls on tone-deaf ears. The baton falls, the conductor's gone to sleep but the musicians play on, disharmonious, even though the music's there. But some notes ring true, my love, just a few; especially, I love you. Peter K. Sharpen

Return to CONTENTS page