Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
thereby perpetuating the cycle of violence:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7752625.stm
or click on signature
"Then, the "foreign looking, fair skinned" men, as Mr Mishra remembers them, simply carried on killing. "
....
Gaffar Abdul Amir, an Iraqi tourist from Baghdad, says he saw at least two men who started the firing outside the Leopold Cafe.
He was returning to his hotel from the seaside with a friend when he saw two men carrying bags and brandishing AK-47s walking in front of them, shooting.
"They did not look Indian, they looked foreign. One of them, I thought, had blonde hair. The other had a punkish hairstyle. They were neatly dressed," says Mr Amir.
.....
Would you mind fleshing out your concept of "extreme but temporary domestic security measures"?
Disclosure: My initial reaction is, Jeezuz, WTF is this person talking about?
For acknowledging the following:
That such attacks are heinous, despicable, unjustified and barbaric, and serve absolutely no good purpose, and deserving of no lauding whatsoever, whatever the underlying grievances that supposedly inspired them. This needs to be said because, apparently, there are some who appear to be ok with, even cheer on, such attacks. (Yes, the left has its despicable nuts too, and I'm specifically referring to some far-left types who were recently banned from Digby's blog, who cheered on the Iraqi insurgency and deaths of US troops.)
That the immediate emotional desire to exact massive and indescriminate revenge on these people and their compatriots is natural and normal, and part of what makes us human.
That NOT giving in to such emotions despite the often overwhelming urge to do so is what makes us civilized and HUMANE--and also smart--as opposed to merely human.
That the underlying grievances that inspired such heinous attacks were often directly inspired by the actions of the US and its allies, and need to be rectified, if such attacks are to be abated in the future. People generally don't intentionally kill other people for no reason. Take away the reasons, and you'll reduce such killings drastically (but not entirely, of course, as there will likely always be some malcontents no matter what we do, but that doesn't make seeking to act more morally any less necessary and laudable from both a moral and pragmatic point of view).
The far right, of course, being psychologically if not physiologically incapable of such relatively "complex" thinking and feeling (i.e. rational and empathic) , will fail to acknowledge, let alone agree with it, making it a danger that we will have to contend with forever. (I can only imagine what hateful idiocy and insanity is currently being spewed forth on RW talk radio and blogs.)
Anyone "shocked" by what's going on in Mumbai (as opposed to outraged and depressed) is living in a fantasy world. There is absolutely nothing surprising about it, given the behavior of the US and its allies around the world (but also of many of its enemies and adeversaries, of course--the US is certainly not unique in acting in a consistently immoral and stupid manner).
The photos and clips of Indian soldiers with single shot rifles going up against terrorists with machine guns say a lot about the courage of the soldiers and the results we too would get if libralz like Glenn were to "fix" our defense budget.
Notice the Indians know better than to even pretend to negotiate with the terrorist scum. They go room to room ferreting them out.
Chavez is also a scum bag. The idea there is to win one election and make that election the last election. So he disqualifies his most effective opponents, undermines his neighbors' democracy, takes control of the media and forms alliances with fellow scum bags such as Putin.
In the meantime, the housewives of Caracas are faced with runaway inflation and massive food shortages.
None of this gets noticed by useful libral idiots like Glenn Greenvalt.
Correcting the scene
By puttin' out fires
With gasoline...
In my view, this excellent and important analysis goes a little wobbly in the last two paragraphs.
In the penultimate paragraph, it's not clear to me whether the ideas expressed are wholly attributable to the Padgaoonkar editorial or not. In any event, while I understand the points being made, I believe, much more than fear or emotional satisfaction, something akin to racism (in function and in spirit), plays a much larger role. In other words, more than fear and even more than vengeance, it's a hateful disregard for the lives of others (and a corresponding belief in one's own superiority) that plays the biggest role in coloring the response(s) to terrorism under review.
With regards to the last paragraph, while I wholeheartedly agree that this is about much more than "what the Bush administration did", your analysis is still constrained by time, i.e., it relates only to the time-frame of the Bush administration. Whereas I believe the roots run much deeper into the past, both in terms of US government malfeasance and the complicity of the media and other institutions.
And it's the response that the attackers hope to provoke.
Exactly. The fact that we followed Osama's script to the letter is completely lost on nearly everyone in the media. If a bunch of terrorists in caves can plan strategically, you'd think we could.
Perhaps when there's such a tragedy, responsibility for a calculated response should be handed over to a neutral body-- say something along the lines of the United Nations? There's a reason victims and their friends and family members aren't allowed to serve on the juries of the accused victimizer. Clear thinking is in order; I hope India's leaders realize how dismally we've failed and follow the example set by one of their own great leaders.
Thank you for sharing that, even if it is truly frightening to read.
When those who have devoted their life to studying the mechanisms of terror fall prey to its intentions then where do we turn to find the messages we need if we are to avoid the abyss it represents?
Where is our Gandhi? And if he were alive today, would his voice be allowed to find an audience?
GC! - I would love to see the old farm signs.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
