From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Fri Sep 28 2001 - 02:32:41 MDT
Jacques Du Pasquier wrote:
>
> Allow me to make a comment on this :
>
> Samantha Atkins a écrit (27.9.2001/02:02) :
> > See what happens to close minded people? They draw highly inaccurate
> > parallels and get somewhat insulting of those who think differently. It
> > obviously is quite important to recognize what it is that we do that
> > provokes terrorists activities and a great deal of hate toward this
> > country. Some of it is for our virtues, true enough. But more than
> > a little is also for our faults, especially faults of policy and of
> > action.
>
> The idea that you (the US) are somehow responsible for these attacks
> has some popularity here in France. But on this instance, it doesn't
> seem true. The islamists just want to impose their world order,
> according to their sense of justice. It has little to do with wrongs
> you would have done according to YOUR sense of justice.
>
Hmmm. Saying "the islamists" above implies all Islamic people
want
this. This is clearly false. Some radical fundie Islamic sects
want
this just like some radical fundie Christian sects want
something similar. But it would be incorrect to imply Islam
itself or Christianity itself requires any such thing of all its
adherents.
Wanting in general to produce such a world by itself would not
focus the energy on America in particular necessarily.
> A French editorialist (Serge July) ended an article recently saying :
> "we should remember that the only real solution to terrorism is
> justice". This is an illusion : you just cannot imagine that, the
> world being fair according to your sense of justice, a large group of
> people could want to kill you ; but as a matter of fact, that's the
> the way it is. According to their sense of justice, your very life is
> an offense to the Creator. They hate you. Not for what you have done
> to them ; for your (lack of) beliefs, for your way of living, for your
> Infidelity.
>
Such hatred is not compatible with much of most religious belief
systems or their literature. It is practiced by some subset of
some
religious groups. It is quite questionable even within their
religion. Such questioning by other members of their religion
of differening opinions is probably one of the fastest peaceful
ways to diffuse such "religious" hatred.
> > If we cannot admit where there are valid claims against us and
> > act to correct such things where possible then we are irresponsible
> > and dishonest as a nation and as individual citizens of that nation.
>
> The word "valid" is the problem. Their claims (like having Jews out of
> Palestine, and having US out of Saoudi, and finally extending islam
> over the planet) are valid according to them, but not according to you
> (well, to me at least). As this translates in attacks on you, you
> cannot afford so much tolerance as to treat them as "valid", even if
> they are valid in some sense (= they are consistant with their sense
> of justice).
Even without these very questionable things there are many
claims that are perfectly valid where we did in fact act in a
slimey and underhanded fashion. We can at least address those
honestly.
>
> > I personally find it quite disturbing when Bush said that other
> > countries are either with us and by implicaiton with our policies in
> > our "war on terrorism" or are with the terrorists. That is a very
> > dangerous and blatantly false dichotomy. One can be very much
> > against terrorism and still not believe the planned and proposed
> > actions are reasonable and not back them. The same is true of
> > nations. Just because we have been hurt badly is not an excuse for
> > polarizing the world into "for US" and "against US".
>
> Of course this is a bit of a constraint. But I think it is quite
> understandable. The US have been hurt, they seek back up. It doesn't
> seem very responsible from us (France) to decline it -- and then ask
> more support from you when things go worse.
>
Sure but this is not the point. France should not support US
policies and actions on this blindly any more than Americans
should. Freedom includes the right to freely question and to
disagree. It
doesn't make you or your country complicit in terrorism if you
do
disagree.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:11:02 MST