We are not innocent , see the facts, then help to stop terrorism

[Guest guest]

Dear List members:

 

Share

This Article With A Friend

Featured Views

Published on Wednesday, September 12, 2001

The War Comes Home

by Rahul Mahajan

 

 

The war that the United States has been waging against the nonwhite

peoples of the world for over half a

century came home yesterday.

 

Nothing does, nothing can, justify the brutal terror attack that may

have killed thousands of innocent civilians. It

is a crime against humanity of the highest order, and the sympathies

of all right-thinking people must be with the

families of the victims.

 

But we must understand what led to it, and draw the right lessons

from it, or as Santayana suggested, we may be

condemned to relive it.

 

Let us not pretend that this was the only harvest in history that was

never sown.

 

The main practitioner of attacks that either deliberately target

civilians or are so indiscriminate that it makes no

difference, is no shadowy Middle Eastern terrorist, but our own

government.

 

Where was the justified rage of commentators, analysts, and talking

heads when the United States attacked

civilians on a massive scale during the Gulf War, even referring to

Basra, a city of 800,000, as a "military target."

Where was it when they deliberately destroyed the water treatment

systems of the country, and then spent ten

years carefully rationing the chlorine needed to treat the water and

the medicines that could be used to fight an

explosion of water-borne disease, while over 1 million Iraqi

civilians died?

 

Where was it when the U.S. invaded Panama, in blatant violation of

international law, shelled a lower-class

civilian neighborhood of Panama City for hours, broadcasting commands

for the people to surrender in English,

not Spanish, and then bulldozed most of the estimated four thousand

(mostly civilian) dead into unmarked mass

graves?

 

Or during Guatemala's genocidal dirty war against the indigenous

Mayan population, inaugurated after a CIA-sponsored military coup

in 1954, and supported by the United States through the 1980's, which

killed a

quarter of a million people? When the United States financed an army

of thugs to rape, torture, and murder innocent peasants in Nicaragua

whose only crime was that they wanted to control their own lives?

 

When NATO destroyed the civilian infrastructure of Serbia? When, on

hundreds of different occasions since

December 1998, U.S. planes dropped bombs on Iraq?

 

None of these victimizations of innocent people in other countries by

our government justifies the victimization

of innocent Americans by any foreign agency (and we must remember

that as yet there is no conclusive

evidence about who committed these atrocities). But they do help to

explain the anger many people feel

against the United States, and the symbols of its power.

 

Everybody (so it seems) is beating the drums of war, in a way we have

not seen in this country since the

much-referred-to attack on Pearl Harbor. George W. Bush, in his

speech to the nation yesterday, said "We will

make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these

attacks and those who harbor them," suggesting

that retaliation will not only be swift and severe but

indiscriminate, that it will involve targeting the innocent

citizens of the country from which the perpetrators happened to plan

this attack.

 

Unfortunately, it seems that most Americans are choosing to learn the

wrong lessons from this. Instead of

learning that the imperial fantasies of being able to destroy entire

countries without incurring a single American

casualty, of being able to antagonize half the world and somehow

assure complete safety by intelligence

operations have crumbled when brought into contact with reality, they

have decided that what we really need is

more of a failed and completely untenable policy.

 

In this Orwellian world we have lived in for almost six decades, we

have internalized the debasement of

language so thoroughly that we rarely question it. We have spent all

that time being told, and thinking, that

"national security" is imperiled by Cubans' desire to live free of

external domination, by anything that threatens

U.S. corporate profits, that it is something that has to do with the

ability of our government and our corporations

to control the rest of the world.

 

Now, confronted with the first significant real threat to national

security in a long time, we should finally be able

to see that our genuine security is not enhanced by military

aggression against other countries, by buildup of

expensive military equipment that could not possibly have helped

against an attack like this, or by attempts at

total economic domination of the Third World.

 

Massive retaliation will just keep us locked in a cycle of violence.

We have come to the sharp limits of the

security that can come from the boot on the neck, and must, if we are

to be secure, try what can come from the

open hand.

 

Mutual disarmament and peace based on global justice are the only

way. Let us be first in peace as we have been first in war for so

long.

 

Hare Ram Krishna

 

Your well wisher

 

C.S.das

[Guest guest]

Hi!

 

Nobody is innocent.

 

Some nations have presidents, some Chancellors or prime ministers, some

kings or dictators etc. But let us take "president" as the common nomenclature

for the deciding "ruler".

 

In a few letters from US citizens, in TV reportage, people say, "We stand behind

our President!"

 

This may be good, but is sad. Better to hear would be, "Our president is behind

us!" Still better, "Our President is with us!"

 

Abe lincoln spoke of a government FOR THE PEOPLE! Frederick the Great of

Prussia, who lived in a modest way - his "palace" was no bigger than that of a

millionaire on long island, the audience hall has a polished appearance, but his

living quarters hardly better than mine! - said about 250 years ago: " I am NOT

the First citizen of this kingdom, but its Chief Servant!"

 

Some thousands of years ago there was a lady rishi in south india, called Avvai.

when she visited a certain kingdom the king bowed down to her and asked for her

blessings. She laid her hand on his head and said "May the bunds (dykes) of the

fields rise!" The king was rather disappointed and asked why she had not blessed

him. She answered, "But I have: when the bunds rise, the water level will rise

and the grain-stalks will grow higher and thicker, yield more grain. The more

the grain, the greater the prosperity of the people. The more prosperous the

people, the happier you, the king, will be!"

 

The earlier presidents of the US were concerned only with the prosperity of the

US people. The more recent ones have forgotten this, are more interested in

gaining power - and so-calledc prestige - for the US State and "nation". To do

this they are apparently even willing to sacrifice sections of their own people.

There are enough reliable reports about the US government having exposed their

citizens to dangerous radiation delibertely. (This is apparently and very

likely true for Germany too!)

 

We, the Silent Majority, the arm-chair politicians, must find a way to establish

a vestige of dharma in politics. I know that truth has almost never existed in

this field: the mahabharatha and the machinations of Chanakya show this. It is

perhaps NOW the time to fight for truth in politics. But how?

 

regards

Mani

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The greatest man of the 20th century was not Gandhi or M.L.King etc. but

Gorbachev. His books reveal a tremendous feeling for the people. His glasnost

was not lip-service. He gave up his empire to free the people. He has been put

on the shelf, as was jimmy Carter, the freedom he gave used to slaughter one´s

neighbours!

[Guest guest]

Excellent Article!

-Venkat

 

> Dear List members:

>

> Share

> This Article With A Friend

> Featured Views

> Published on Wednesday, September 12, 2001

> The War Comes Home

> by Rahul Mahajan

>

>

> The war that the United States has been waging against the nonwhite

> peoples of the world for over half a

> century came home yesterday.

>

> Nothing does, nothing can, justify the brutal terror attack that

may

> have killed thousands of innocent civilians. It

> is a crime against humanity of the highest order, and the

sympathies

> of all right-thinking people must be with the

> families of the victims.

>

> But we must understand what led to it, and draw the right lessons

> from it, or as Santayana suggested, we may be

> condemned to relive it.

>

> Let us not pretend that this was the only harvest in history that

was

> never sown.

>

> The main practitioner of attacks that either deliberately target

> civilians or are so indiscriminate that it makes no

> difference, is no shadowy Middle Eastern terrorist, but our own

> government.

>

> Where was the justified rage of commentators, analysts, and talking

> heads when the United States attacked

> civilians on a massive scale during the Gulf War, even referring to

> Basra, a city of 800,000, as a "military target."

> Where was it when they deliberately destroyed the water treatment

> systems of the country, and then spent ten

> years carefully rationing the chlorine needed to treat the water

and

> the medicines that could be used to fight an

> explosion of water-borne disease, while over 1 million Iraqi

> civilians died?

>

> Where was it when the U.S. invaded Panama, in blatant violation of

> international law, shelled a lower-class

> civilian neighborhood of Panama City for hours, broadcasting

commands

> for the people to surrender in English,

> not Spanish, and then bulldozed most of the estimated four thousand

> (mostly civilian) dead into unmarked mass

> graves?

>

> Or during Guatemala's genocidal dirty war against the indigenous

> Mayan population, inaugurated after a CIA-sponsored military coup

> in 1954, and supported by the United States through the 1980's,

which

> killed a

> quarter of a million people? When the United States financed an

army

> of thugs to rape, torture, and murder innocent peasants in

Nicaragua

> whose only crime was that they wanted to control their own lives?

>

> When NATO destroyed the civilian infrastructure of Serbia? When, on

> hundreds of different occasions since

> December 1998, U.S. planes dropped bombs on Iraq?

>

> None of these victimizations of innocent people in other countries

by

> our government justifies the victimization

> of innocent Americans by any foreign agency (and we must remember

> that as yet there is no conclusive

> evidence about who committed these atrocities). But they do help to

> explain the anger many people feel

> against the United States, and the symbols of its power.

>

> Everybody (so it seems) is beating the drums of war, in a way we

have

> not seen in this country since the

> much-referred-to attack on Pearl Harbor. George W. Bush, in his

> speech to the nation yesterday, said "We will

> make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these

> attacks and those who harbor them," suggesting

> that retaliation will not only be swift and severe but

> indiscriminate, that it will involve targeting the innocent

> citizens of the country from which the perpetrators happened to

plan

> this attack.

>

> Unfortunately, it seems that most Americans are choosing to learn

the

> wrong lessons from this. Instead of

> learning that the imperial fantasies of being able to destroy

entire

> countries without incurring a single American

> casualty, of being able to antagonize half the world and somehow

> assure complete safety by intelligence

> operations have crumbled when brought into contact with reality,

they

> have decided that what we really need is

> more of a failed and completely untenable policy.

>

> In this Orwellian world we have lived in for almost six decades, we

> have internalized the debasement of

> language so thoroughly that we rarely question it. We have spent

all

> that time being told, and thinking, that

> "national security" is imperiled by Cubans' desire to live free of

> external domination, by anything that threatens

> U.S. corporate profits, that it is something that has to do with

the

> ability of our government and our corporations

> to control the rest of the world.

>

> Now, confronted with the first significant real threat to national

> security in a long time, we should finally be able

> to see that our genuine security is not enhanced by military

> aggression against other countries, by buildup of

> expensive military equipment that could not possibly have helped

> against an attack like this, or by attempts at

> total economic domination of the Third World.

>

> Massive retaliation will just keep us locked in a cycle of

violence.

> We have come to the sharp limits of the

> security that can come from the boot on the neck, and must, if we

are

> to be secure, try what can come from the

> open hand.

>

> Mutual disarmament and peace based on global justice are the only

> way. Let us be first in peace as we have been first in war for so

> long.

>

> Hare Ram Krishna

>

> Your well wisher

>

> C.S.das