John just reminded me of an old editorial of mine I had completely forgotten (I had to google it).
This was posted on the day after 9/11.
I remember walking home ten minutes after seeing the second tower fall, and I suddenly thought: my god, this is the least of it, they are going to use this to try to create a police state, and war, aren't they.
15 comments:
My hat is off to you, Eo. Many of us figured this out soonest, but to have had this kind of clarity of thought on the following day speaks of pure wisdom.
"One thing is crucial, though: While even my thoughts (and I am a peaceful individual) turned to revenge (or at least to Justice, which often looks deceptively like revenge) when I learned about it, we need to keep our cool."
Eolake,
While trying locally here (Sinincincinnati) to throw cold water on the idea of a new jail, I've had a similar insight.
"Justice" does not prevent crime. Revenge does not prevent crime. They cause crime.
Revenge/justice is part of our animalistic genetic heritage that ought to become as vestigial as our tail, but has not, yet.
agreed upon with all. bush did what the terrorists wanted and played right into their hornets nest. foolish man that he is.
voilence begets voilence. besides he illegally and sinfully attacked iraq who had nothing to do with 9/11, it was bin laden, but after all, bush clearly wanted saddam and his oil for his own keeping.
now 3000 deaths later he still refuses to exit. he will stand before God and give an account.
"... about revenge"?
Perhaps you sell yourself short? ... in some self deprecation, some modesty of sorts?
Here, all along, I have believed you wrote urging a noble, compassionate response.
I'm not sure I understand. It's just a title for the post.
People have said it can be hard to tell when *I* am being sarcastic, but I think you take the prize in that category, Adam.
It makes it confusing to communicate with you, which is a shame, for you seem like an excellent person.
Lucid,
Although it's all but obvious in the USA, the Bible is first of all the Book of the Jews. It would seem that even american evangelists don't feel too bound by it. :-(
Not that bigots (synonym : hypocrites) ever feel bound by more than their self-sufficient blind "faith". Synonym : fanatism.
Say, these synonyms could make a clever poem...
Roses are red
All through the bush.
Iraq has bled,
Allah bless Bush. ):-P
If there are some media-involved people here, please help me spread the word "theocrisy", which I hereby release in the public Domai, I mean, domain!
"reacting with violence is utter lunacy"
It makes perfect sense to the planetary arsonists who hoped for just such an arse response. 9/11 wasn't a war, just a very efficient casus belli that hit the mark... and lit the fuse. Why do you think Bin Lulu made that speech just prior to the 2004 elections, hunh? Because his mortal enemy Bush is his best ally, with his one-digit IQ.
(A note to those who feel I am being too kind : zero is ALSO a digit!)
When violence and blind hatred rules, the terrorists have truly won. And the biggest loser is the side of civilization, to which the USA once clearly belonged. Before some sadly notorious prison names...
"Going on the offensive after the fact was a ridiculously foolish move"
Yes and no. Nullifying the very likely NEXT attack isn't a bad move. But going after Mullah Omar while Bin Aladdin went down his rabbit hole WAS meshuggenah. Just as going and getting stuck in non-accomplice Iraq. At least, if Iran had been invaded instead, it would actually be an extremist and officially terrorist regime that would have been toppled. But since I am no White-Anglo-Saxon-Protestant big kahuna, I'm probably much less sensible than I believe. :-P
"the American public's dehumanization of the terrorists"
There's only ONE circumstance in which torture might be deemed legitimate : self-defense. In case obtaining information that will save more innocent lives is impossible by other ways, then, MAYBE. Let's say it's reasonably open to debate. Free barbary isn't. There's no justice or nobility in it (to say the least!).
Besides, I believe what allowed for Saddam's capture wasn't "interrogation techniques", but the very motivating reward that somebody received. Food for thought, Mr Cheney... (Or are you on a diet?)
I'm not even bothering to comment on the abuse and/or bombing of innocents. "denying them basic human dignities lowers us to the same level as those we hate" said it all.
I remember finding a "humour" american site treating of 9/11. At least half these vengeful jokes were openly racist. Like the "new map of Afghanistan", where it is replaced by a sea after the USA have... "justly retaliated". When Russia was the greatest enemy, what was the position of the russian citizens? They were the first victims!
I've heard of a TV crew that interviewed an old Afghan guy after a US raid leveled his house. They showed him photos of the burning WTC:
"Do you know what this is?
- No idea, mister. Never seen it before.
- Do you know who sent these planes that raided your house?
- Well, wasn't that the Soviets?..."
No kidding, in some countries it really IS like that. If I had voted for Bush, I'd feel slightly uneasy...
Why the hell should a "savage's" life be worth less than that of a blue-blooded American? Because they're uneducated? Okay, they often are. So they fairly deserve to be educated. Not eradicated. Ethics class in Med School is a course that I feel should have been given in high school instead, considering the vital importance of the human dignity concept to any self-proclaimed cultivated person.
"In this case, a defensive strategy would have served us better the whole way through."
Are you claiming that good domestic intelligence could have prevented 9/11? You're just as radical as the guys who made this report. [A very interesting link, I believe.]
"our attempts at policing the rest of the world are only making us more enemies."
MAYBE, if these attempts were a little more sincere and sensible, they would have different results. One example I am well placed to mention : Lebanon. A key piece in the World Peace puzzle. Well after the Syrians had to leave, many of their former collaborators turned enemies have unflinchingly used the biased syrian-made electoral law to seize control of the country. Which basically is still a corrupted and inept police regime, with just two differences : lebanese leaders, and Hezbollah now riding solo (solo regarding the lebanese scene). There was a golden opportunity to instate a clean democracy there, to finally take a good start in the "Great Middle East" semi-utopia, with many political figures (assassinated or marginalized today) capable of doing the job. Instead, it would seem that today's "deciders" are favoring the very classic formula of instating a friendly corrupt dictatorship and calling it "democratic". Like in the Eighties' Latin America...
Did anybody consider that by ensuring this country's people their long-awaited rights (since at least 1975), their simple gratitude would have turned them into the most loyal friends there can be? I just can't believe, sometimes, that people cunning enough to reach a western country's highest positions could be so blind, and act so stupidly.
And if they aren't, they sure have me fooled, because I definitely have no clue or suspicion about their super-secret surprise plan for equity.
Provided there is one... :-(
Well thank you doode. :)
Couldn't agree more. Frig, the very first time I heard that Bush Sr. had a son who was running for president, my balls slunk into my body and an ice cold feeling crept up my spine. I mean it's like handing a loaded gun to drugged eight-year-old.
Terry,
Thank you for reminding me once again that one can be very religious-speaking and at the same time be the opposite of idiot fanatics like KGB. I've always known it, but some things are never repeated too often. It's guys like you that make this world a difficult place to become prejudiced. :-)
Adam,
Thank you for reminding all of us that Iraqis are people too. (Some say it's more like 150.000 dead.) I've just finished a sci-fi novel ("Reproduction Interdite", Jean-Michel Truong) about a very scarily realistic 21st century where cloning is not only legal, but human clones are considered as "things" because the media, corporations and Church agreed on spreading the notion that only God makes humans, and therefore artificial creatures cannot be human or have a soul. It's pretty horrible : clones are genetically deprived of some genes necessary for speech, and used as slaves and a source for spare parts.
The basic moral is simple : Mankind never learns that we are all the same, there's always somebody eager to lead us into forgetting that with falsely noble talk, to justify/cover "profitable" abominations.
Since the last war operation in Lebanon, not a day goes by without some civilian, usually children, getting injured or killed by an israeli cluster bomb sub-ammunition. According to reliable NGOs, they also used chemical weapons.
This just in : the world organism for the suppression of chemical weapons has complained that some countries refuse to sign the banning treaty. The USA? Iran? China? Nope, not this time. The reluctant pacifists are : "North Korea, Egypt, Israel, Syria, and... Lebanon!" No comment...
"What kind of chem weapons could Lebanon POSSIBLY want to use?" Well... there was this plan to collect used diapers and dirty army socks, and throw them over the Zionist border. And we have secret falafel stocks for the soldiers who are about to be sent to the front lines. Whoa mamma, VERY nasty stuff!
"Intelligence has limits. Stupidity doesn't." -- (Patrick Sébastien, french comedian)
"Eo is obviously connected to God."
Possibly. Definitely to the beauty of His creation, at the very least.
;-)
But guess what : God's number isn't unlisted. We all just need to listen when the phone rings.
That allright, Eo? Did I defend your modesty in a satisfying manner?
:-)
"Because He is infinite we can only glimpse parts of Him."
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: if we are to meet/see God in the Afterlife, there are going to be a lot of surprised fellas. Hey, even though I know to expect the unexpected-because-unconceivable (like the Sphere in Flatland), I expect to still be very surprised!
But somehow I don't think the South Park guys got it right. ;-)
"Really pascal, I would hope you'd think me more intelligent than that. ;)"
Well, you should make your impressions more... intelligible. :o)
More seriously, you know by now that calling you a "radical" was just irony aimed at KGB the First. A.k.a. King George the Worst.
"conspiracy theorists [...] All they know how to do is run around in circles while screaming unintellibably at the top of their lungs"
Makes them multitasking experts. Because the headless chicken I saw once wasn't doing a very good job, vocally. Still, considering the results, a beheaded chicken reaches the same nil result with half the effort, making it a better corporative choice...
You might also want to try the housefly-on-its-back. Nice spin, nice sound, and always draws attention.
"I think some of what I said stems from the deeply held belief that the current administration shouldn't be (and never should have been) allowed to do anything, period."
I'll go with "never should have been". Starting with campaigning for Presidence in Y2K. God only knows how long it'll take to fix all that damage. That is, if even God knows, which hasn't been proven!
"Bush [...] Maybe he's a nice guy"
Well, I've always felt sympathy for the mentally challenged. But maybe the term should also apply to the approximate 50% of voters who "liked" him!
There are definitely some very un-nice people pulling his strings. Or maybe I've been watching too many Pinocchio re-runs? :-(
"I mean it's like handing a loaded gun to drugged eight-year-old."
Lebanese proverb : "The weapon, in the hand of the shit-head, it hurts."
I've heard this one a lot, since the war started in 1975...
"Eo" is a prefix meaning "most primitive". Or "earliest".
The second one is a lot better. But still I prefer to think it means "original".
"In the meantime methinks I'll seek a home outside the country."
Lucid, you're welcome to come spend a few days here in scenic Lebanon. And after that, you'll probably be very happy to return to good ol' Bushistan. :-/
Isn't the Theory of Relativity great?
Mister, you come to Lebanon as a tourist, "or else!"...
("Or else what?" Well, um... For instance, we could detain you!)
Okay, I confess, we're getting pretty desperate regarding the state of our tourism industry over here. Last summer was wartime season...
But we're still better off than Gaza and Baghdad. Hey, it's always comforting to find a bigger misery than yours!
While I am thoroughly entertained by all of these postings, I am amazed by how ridiculous they are. Pascal, the Bible is not first the book of the Jews, just to clarify. Perhaps you meant the Old Testament which, I agree, belongs first to the Jews. But if you did mean that then surely you would have been struck by all the examples of God calling Israel to go and attack and utterly destroy other nations that worshipped "false gods." Not that I am saying the War in Iraq was God telling George Bush that the Middle East needed to be cleansed of its false gods. Rather, my point is that America is only Christian by association and not in any other way. I profess to have faith and trust in the Lord Jesus Christ. I am a Christian. But the idea that America is a nation full of Christians is as unfounded as blaming Islam or all of the Middle East or Afghanistan for the 9/11 attacks. In fact Bush's professed faith has little to do with the war either. His faith has little to do with anything, actually. While I love your word "theocrisy" (I found this wonderful discussion by googling that word because I have forged my own beliefs about a different kind of theocrisy), America is not a theocracy or theocrisy. Were our founding fathers Christian? Yes, many of them were. But look at our morally bankrupt society and try to tell me that God is pleased with "Christian America!"
Post a Comment