Tweet
Ran accross this article from a Canadian newspaper; some interesting stuff here:
http://www.vancourier.com/102101/opinion/102101op2.html
OPINION
U.S. would do well to contemplate the 'why?' question
By Geoff Olson
"Why do they hate us so much?" The question was asked by anguished Americans in the days following September's atrocities-but with all the opportunities for analysis in the media feeding frenzy that followed, the attempts to decode the mystery of militant Islamic hatred were few. George W. Bush's answer in his State of the Union address summed up the level of reflection in the beltway and beyond: "They hate us for our freedoms." The question, 'why do they hate us so much?' was apparently rhetorical.
As I indicated last week, the CIA poured one billion dollars of support into the muijadeen's war against the Soviets (resulting in 50 per cent increase in the global heroin trade). They also backed the most ruthless elements among the fundamentalists, paving the way for 'blowback'-an intelligence term meaning unforeseen fallout from an operation.
Thousands of rebels from 40 Islamic countries had learned their lesson well: instructed by CIA agents that holy Islam must be protected against foreign devils, they looked around after the Soviet defeat and noted the overwhelming presence of Uncle Sam in the Gulf States, and throughout much of the Mideast. They saw corrupt Arab leaders propped up by oil-hungry western interests, in countries bled dry through bad deals brokered by the 'Great Satan's' proxies, the IMF and World Bank. They saw their nations importing what they regarded as offenses against Islam: alcohol, gambling, and pornographic imagery in advertising and films.
For bin Ladin, a Saudi, the critical nexus was the establishment in 1990 of permanent American military bases in Saudi Arabia, the location of two of the holiest sites of Islam, Mecca and Medina. Emboldened by victory over one global superpower, the Islamic militants decided the time had come to test another.
It goes without saying-but it has to be said-that none of this justifies or rationalizes the terrorists' crimes against humanity in the U.S. There is no justification for the death of innocents. Ever. That's just the point.
Relevent in this instance is the exchange on CBS in 1996 between Madeleine Albright, then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, and CBC reporter Lesley Stahl. Albright was maintaining that sanctions had yielded important concessions from Saddam Hussein.
Stahl: "We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And you know, is the price worth it?"
Albright: "I think this is a very hard choice, but I think the price is worth it."
They read that exchange in the Middle East. It was infamous all over the Arab world.
A recent issue of the Wall Street Journal published a survey of opinions of wealthy and privileged Muslims in the Gulf region (bankers, professionals, and businessmen with close links to the U.S.). The Muslim elite expressed displeasure with the U.S. involvement in supporting Israel against Palestine, and supporting repressive anti-democratic regimes throughout the region, as well as the genocidal sanctions on Iraq. Media critic Noam Chomsky, commenting on the Wall Street Journal article, puts it this way: "Among the great majority of people suffering deep poverty and oppression, similar sentiments are far more bitter, and are the source of the fury and despair that has led to suicide bombings, as commonly understood by those who are interested in the facts."
As the western world prepares for war, it might help to understand how the enemy thinks and the depth of his rage. It might help American leaders to meditate, if only for a moment, on their own culpability in all this. Commenting on a likely attack by coalition forces on the training camps in Afghanistan, Robert Fisk of The Independent asserts there will be no problem targetting the sites. "After all, they were built by the CIA," he dryly notes.
An expression comes to mind that should be familiar to all "people of the book," Christians, Jews, and Muslims alike: reaping the whirlwind
http://www.vancourier.com/102101/opinion/102101op2.html
OPINION
U.S. would do well to contemplate the 'why?' question
By Geoff Olson
"Why do they hate us so much?" The question was asked by anguished Americans in the days following September's atrocities-but with all the opportunities for analysis in the media feeding frenzy that followed, the attempts to decode the mystery of militant Islamic hatred were few. George W. Bush's answer in his State of the Union address summed up the level of reflection in the beltway and beyond: "They hate us for our freedoms." The question, 'why do they hate us so much?' was apparently rhetorical.
As I indicated last week, the CIA poured one billion dollars of support into the muijadeen's war against the Soviets (resulting in 50 per cent increase in the global heroin trade). They also backed the most ruthless elements among the fundamentalists, paving the way for 'blowback'-an intelligence term meaning unforeseen fallout from an operation.
Thousands of rebels from 40 Islamic countries had learned their lesson well: instructed by CIA agents that holy Islam must be protected against foreign devils, they looked around after the Soviet defeat and noted the overwhelming presence of Uncle Sam in the Gulf States, and throughout much of the Mideast. They saw corrupt Arab leaders propped up by oil-hungry western interests, in countries bled dry through bad deals brokered by the 'Great Satan's' proxies, the IMF and World Bank. They saw their nations importing what they regarded as offenses against Islam: alcohol, gambling, and pornographic imagery in advertising and films.
For bin Ladin, a Saudi, the critical nexus was the establishment in 1990 of permanent American military bases in Saudi Arabia, the location of two of the holiest sites of Islam, Mecca and Medina. Emboldened by victory over one global superpower, the Islamic militants decided the time had come to test another.
It goes without saying-but it has to be said-that none of this justifies or rationalizes the terrorists' crimes against humanity in the U.S. There is no justification for the death of innocents. Ever. That's just the point.
Relevent in this instance is the exchange on CBS in 1996 between Madeleine Albright, then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, and CBC reporter Lesley Stahl. Albright was maintaining that sanctions had yielded important concessions from Saddam Hussein.
Stahl: "We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And you know, is the price worth it?"
Albright: "I think this is a very hard choice, but I think the price is worth it."
They read that exchange in the Middle East. It was infamous all over the Arab world.
A recent issue of the Wall Street Journal published a survey of opinions of wealthy and privileged Muslims in the Gulf region (bankers, professionals, and businessmen with close links to the U.S.). The Muslim elite expressed displeasure with the U.S. involvement in supporting Israel against Palestine, and supporting repressive anti-democratic regimes throughout the region, as well as the genocidal sanctions on Iraq. Media critic Noam Chomsky, commenting on the Wall Street Journal article, puts it this way: "Among the great majority of people suffering deep poverty and oppression, similar sentiments are far more bitter, and are the source of the fury and despair that has led to suicide bombings, as commonly understood by those who are interested in the facts."
As the western world prepares for war, it might help to understand how the enemy thinks and the depth of his rage. It might help American leaders to meditate, if only for a moment, on their own culpability in all this. Commenting on a likely attack by coalition forces on the training camps in Afghanistan, Robert Fisk of The Independent asserts there will be no problem targetting the sites. "After all, they were built by the CIA," he dryly notes.
An expression comes to mind that should be familiar to all "people of the book," Christians, Jews, and Muslims alike: reaping the whirlwind
Comment