Garvey's Ghost: Black Talk

Like I Said...

It would seem that my posting here has become less and less frequent. Indeed it is but not for lack of reading or time, but sometimes I get really annoyed, aggravated at some of the foolishness I see "a gwan." over at Znet there is an article which picks up on a point that I made earlier. When the US goes about supporting coups and randomly killing folks without "due process." there is much danger. Yesterday Israel killed the leader of Hamas, an elderly man who "sent" out suicide bombers to Israel. In other words he was killed for running an organization, perhaps making a few "incendiary" speeches. But physically he did nothing himself. You could say that he was a "white collar terrorist." This assassination reminds me of when a blind cleric (the name escapes me) was convicted by the US government for "inciting or exhorting" the persons who first bombed the Twin Towers. It struck me as odd that a person could be tried and convicted of suggesting that someone commit a crime. It would be like me telling someone to go kill his or herself, and after they do it, being arrested. It's not my fault they actually did it. For a nation that prides itself on the concept of personal responsibility it seems it too likes to do the group think mentality. Therein lies the problem with suicide bombers and the like. the real lawbreaker usually dies in the act. There really is no one else to blame except perhaps the bomb maker. But if we assume that all persons involved even if not directly, are criminally accountable, then that would mean all kinds of things for the US. Of course, I think that many in power know this and it is why the US is not a signatory to the World Court. Anyway I'm off topic. As it stands the assassination of Yassin, among others by the IDF who uses US made military machinery, means that the US is criminally accountable for the actions of those who use it's material. That is exactly the argument used against so-called "Al-Qaida" and it is exactly what various Palestinians will say. What is worse, and the writer over at Znet agrees is that like the backing of a Coup against a democratically elected president, backing assassinations will send the message out that everybody is fair game. A kind of street mentality will rise to new levels. the street mentality being: "get him before he can get me." Of course Bush already made it known that such an ideology was what he was going to practice. But oh how quickly it spreads. And when such a mentality spreads all are potential victims of crossfire. But alas, the US decision makers don't take public airlines or public transportation. With the exception of the Pentagon bombing, they do not have to come into contact with the consequences of their decisions. But the "terrorist" does live with the consequences. they know that "martyrdom" is a helicopter missile away and "still they rise."

I tell anyone who will listen that the number of attacks and deaths due to "terrorism" is not limited by security but by the imagination. ego and moral limitation of the "terrorist." Once the "terrorist" realizes that ego targets are not necessary, then the real body count will begin. People will be killed in malls, parking lots, buses, sidewalks, nightclubs, ferries, playgrounds, amusement parks, factories, Universities, high schools. There will be random murders here and there with "no clues." They will avoid big cities and kill off small towns. Poison fields of wheat. perhaps kill off some dairy cows. everything and anything to keep the US on a constant state of fear and push investors to leave. force enough money from educational and social services to do massive damage to the social wellbeing of the nation. What is worse is that the people making the decisions have not even begun to see how far this will go. People take movies like The Matrix and Terminator as a joke. Sit down and take a long think about the premises of these movies and look at what the government is proposing to do or actively trying to do. In all of Human history there has always, ALWAYS been war. How does this or any other administration think it will "end terrorism" without dealing with the underlying causes? There is no military means to "end terrorism." No, that's not true; there is a military means to end terrorism: genocide.

quote:
But there was something infinitely more dangerous in all this. Yet another Arab - another leader, however vengeful and ruthless - had been assassinated. The Americans want to kill Osama Bin Laden. They want to kill Mullah Omar. They killed Saddam's two sons. The Israelis repeatedly threaten to murder Yasser Arafat. It's getting to be a habit.


No one has begun to work out the implications of all this. For years, there has been an unwritten rule in the cruel war of government-versus- guerrilla. You can kill the men on the street, the bomb makers and gunmen. But the leadership on both sides - government ministers, spiritual leaders - were allowed to survive.


Now all is changed utterly. Anyone who advocates violence is now on a death list. So who can be surprised if the rules are broken by the other side?


With all their own security, Bush and Blair may be safe, but what about their ambassadors and fellow ministers? Leaders are fair game. We will not say this. If, or when, our own political leaders are gunned down or blown up, we shall vilify the killers and argue a new stage in "terrorism" has been reached. We shall forget that we are now encouraging this all- out assassination spree

Links:
http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=5191§ionID=40