Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiBritain and US Urge India and Pakistan to Keep Talking
![[
Indian Muslims,protest against terrorist attacks in Mumbai, ...
AP
Sat Nov 29, 8:03 AM ET
Previous 111 of 457 Next
Indian Muslims,protest against terrorist attacks in Mumbai, as a placard reads ' Kill terror not terrorist ' in Ahmadabad, India, Saturday, Nov. 29, 2008. Indian commandos killed the last remaining gunmen holed up at a luxury Mumbai hotel Saturday, ending a 60-hour rampage through India's financial capital by suspected Islamic militants that killed people and rocked the nation.
(AP Photo/Ajit Solanki)]](http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/mumbai1129.jpg "mumbai1129.jpg")
The
United States and Britain are urging India and Pakistan to act with
restraint and do nothing that could set back the recent thaw in their
relations in the wake of the Mumbai terror attacks. But a direct public
accusation by India yesterday that the perpetrators were linked to
Pakistan risked rekindling tensions.
With signs of a growing rapprochement between the nuclear-armed neighbours linked to hopes for a more effective US and Nato-led military effort against al-Qaida and the Taliban in Afghanistan, the stakes for the south Asian region could hardly be higher, diplomats and analysts said.
"We are privately encouraging them not to do anything that could derail this process," a senior British official said.
Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, is to discuss the crisis with foreign secretary David Miliband in London before a Nato ministerial meeting on Monday.
Whether by chance or design - some experts believe it was a goal of the terrorists - the Mumbai attacks came days after Ali Asif Zardari, the Pakistani president, made striking overtures: to withdraw his country's first-strike nuclear threat, sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, create an EU-style economic zone with India and allow visa-free travel.
Illustrating this progress, Pakistan's foreign minister, Shah Mahmood Qureshi, had just finished talks in Delhi with his Indian counterpart on terrorism, trade and visas when the terrorists struck.
But the fragility of the rapprochement was underlined too when Manmohan Singh, India's prime minister, said the attacks were probably masterminded by a group based in an unnamed "neighbouring country" - usually code for Pakistan.
India's foreign minister, Pranab Mukherjee, went further yesterday by saying that "initial evidence" showed "elements with links to Pakistan are involved".
International alarm at this finger-pointing was tempered by relief that Pakistan is behaving so helpfully. Zardari condemned the attacks and agreed yesterday to send the head of the powerful ISI intelligence agency, Lieutenant-General Ahmed Shujaa Pasha, to India to review evidence on the Mumbai atrocities.
Analysts said this suggested the Pakistan military was confident that no direct links will be revealed by India. Pakistan is keen to avoid a repeat of the near-war situation following the assault on the Indian parliament in December 2001.
But there were hints that the Pakistani authorities might acknowledge the existence of indirect links with terrorist groups: when Zardari telephoned Singh yesterday to again condemn the attacks, he said that "non-state actors" were responsible. "Non-state actors wanted to force upon the governments their own agenda but they must not be allowed to succeed," Zardari's office cited him as saying.
"Do not play politics into this issue," Qureshi warned. "This is a collective issue. We are facing a common enemy. We have to join hands to defeat this enemy."
The US state department said it, like Britain, was sending investigators to Mumbai to help the Indian authorities.The wider US concern, however, is about what one diplomat predicted could be "significant deterioration" in the process of Indo-Pakistani reconciliation. That has been boosted since Zardari, widower of the assassinated Benazir Bhutto, replaced Pervez Musharaf to become Pakistan's first civilian president since 1999.
Barack Obama, the US president-elect, has signalled that this will be a priority for him and for General David Petraeus, head of US central command. The aim is to persuade Pakistan to pay less attention to India and more to the al-Qaida and Taliban fighters in the border tribal areas.
On a visit to Afghanistan in July, Obama highlighted the regional aspect of the fight against the Taliban in that country and, increasingly, inside Pakistan. "A lot of what drives motivations on the Pakistan side of the border still has to do with their concerns and suspicions about India," he said. Pakistan continues to station the larger part of its army not on the Afghan border but along the line of control in Kashmir.
The two countries have fought three wars since independence in 1947 and nearly did so again in 2002 after the attack on India's parliament. Pakistan for years supported militants battling Indian forces in Kashmir but reined them in after the 9/11 attacks on the US. While seeking Pakistani cooperation in the "war on terror," the Bush administration also drew closer to India.
110 Comments so far
Show AllThe Bush/Cheney Doctrine have done more to spread Terrorism that any of us could imagine. To think they are going to walk out of the White House after lining their pockets and their cronies pockets for the 7 years and not pay for any of their mistakes.
As for the Religious Right wing bible thumping war freaks, Jesus would have turned the other cheek on attacking and destroy two country's.
Next time we declare war , all those in favor send their kids first, I mean Washington and the right wing lunatic war freaks.
India and Pakistan, tow nuclear powers are at each others throats.
Thanks George and Dick, now get out, and find a place to spend the rest of your lives spending your money, but please leave us real Americans alone.
BornFreeMen
Yes...so far it looks like India and Pakistan are showing more restraint than any of the western big 3 have ever shown.
They are now in a position to show the world how peace and justice can be made.
I wish them and all of us luck.
It is amazing how the United States and the United Kingdom are now advising restraint when both rejected such advice in the past. I am sure that at this time advise from either the United States or the United Kingdom is being taken with a grain of salt.
"India and Pakistan are being urged to act with restraint" by the Dali Lama, no, let's see, was it Archbishop Desmond Tutu, no, how about Code Pink? No, it was by the US and Britain, aka the coalition of the willing, who for the past 6 years have been waging savage warfare against Iraq and Afghanistan with the excuse that it was a "war on terror". Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!
Both India and Pakistan should tell the US and Britain, "clean up your own act before you go around telling us what to do" (or however that might be translated into euphemistic diplomateese). Now we hear that Rice and Miliband will "confer on the crisis". With reality like this who needs the Daily Show, Colbert Report, or even Saturday Night Live.
Poet
Joe Hope, I hope you are kidding.
"Al Qaeda must be defeated even if it means chasing them "to the gates of H-E-L-L"."
In order to chase them them to the gates of hell, we have to do exactly what it takes to pass through the gates of HELL.
You first Joe. Write back and tell us what hell is like after you get there.
I would prefer using proven Intelligence and surgical strikes. Or , use law enforcement to capture these criminals.
We can not afford to go to war with every country that terrorists run to after we invade a harboring country to engage them.
Unless of course you buy into all this crap believing that we are after terrorists and not Imperial domination.
Wake up Joe, America cannot afford to continue to be brainwashed for the sake of a handful of war profiteering corporations.
We are broke, and a very small percentage of Americans benefit from the war machine.
You can do it Joe, start searching the internet for the real reasons on the war on terror.
Global Domination and control, one third world country at a time.Pax Americana.
BornFreeMen
Right on the money, Bornfreeman! Check my new comment to Stephen a few comments back.
We have to be aware just how heavily indoctrinated we are with Western Judeo-Christian capitalist imperialist propaganda. We must expose it for what it is: crap!
www.dangerouscreation.com
I customed a bumper sticker........Who's Terrorism?
If this tragic event had happened in Israel or the US, by now we'd be going after Pakistan by force. However, since it is happening in India, there's way too much discussion about "peace talks". India has been a very patient country and has yet suffered the greatest number of terror attacks, a lot of them worse than most of the ones in the US and Europe. I doubt that all those "peace talks" are helping to solve the terror crisis between Pakistan and India. While I don't support the idea of a war between the two, something needs to be done past "peace talks". I'm amazed that India hasn't been taken over by either the fundamentalist Christians or Muslims in all these years. However, I fear that a lot of us who want to learn from the Hindu culture and traditions will be unable to do so in the future if this kind of terrorist attacks keeps up. No culture is perfect but even the Hindu culture deserves to be saved.
Al Qaeda must be defeated even if it means chasing them "to the gates of H-E-L-L".
You would be chasing shadows my good friend Joe. Forever. I often wonder if Al Qaeda ever existed in the first place. The gates of hell you refer to may very well begin in Washington DC.
Conservatives everywhere are directly responsible for all the terror and turmoil in the world.
Far too simplistic a response, eze. Do you mean fiscal conservatives? Social conservatives? Those with a conservative wardrobe perhaps( OK that's a bit much, but you get the point)..
I would say that there are responsibilities for the world's condition that can be laid at the door of our own inflated lifestyle, that we the people are so enamored of our credit cards and silly toys that we agree tacitly to ignore the burdens our bloated "luxurious living" places upon the have-nots.
In far too many cases it is at the behest of American corporations that unsuitable and avaricious leaders are foisted upon nations in order to create a stable environment from which wealth can flow uninterrupted. After many, many decades of such the people we ignore from behind our flat screen TV's get pretty darn tired of the mistreatment, the malnourishment, the lack of opportunity for their children, etc. and are susceptible to the blandishments of extremism.
I do not mean to suggest that the above is the only reason such hatred and violence exists, but I do believe it is a major reason. That some, if not many, conservatives favor the existing system is unquestioned. That blame be assigned to an entire political ideology seems extreme.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Suddenly from out of nowhere, a previously unknown group (Deccan Mujahedeen) carries out a highly effective and well coordinated assault on one of the global economy's nerve centers. The group prepares no statement of intent nor makes any demands. The media labels it "India's 9/11" and emphasizes the attack's toll on Western and Jewish victims. Before the shooting stops the Indian government and U.S. intelligence services point the finger at Pakistan based Lashkar-e-Taiba.
Who's interests were ultimately served by America's 9/11? The US troops in Iraq and soon to be surged into Afghanistan are the answer to that question. Who's interests would be served by a war, even if it included a nuclear exchange, between India and Pakistan? The dire state of the US economy and US imperialism's flagging fortunes in the region should be considered.
Some really great posts! A plus today for CommonDreams. Let us be respectful of each others opinions.
The excessive passions of spirituality cannot be limited only to religion. In fact, organized Christianity has pretty much divorced itself from spirituality in order to control and perpetuate its' own power. Most of the practising Christians in the U.S. worship wealth rather than the radical social teachings of Christ. That is what makes conservative Christians such good war mongering patriots.
In turn, much of Islamic terrorism is not unleashed for religious reasons but for nationalistic reasons like the U.S. invasion and theft of oil and the oppression and intrusion of U.S. corporate imperialism.
However, as a human society, we cannot avoid the passions of spirituality, in fact we need more. Democracy when properly nourished is meant to be an exercise of the human spirit but an unregulated corporate capitalistic culture is the destroyer of both democracy and spirituality. .
What we have in the world today is not a clash of civilizations or religions but a clash between the oppressive forces of corporate capitalism and the liberating forces of spirituality.
What the U.S. needs to do is recognize the immense error and futilely of fighting terrorism with U.S. high-tech terrorism, to do some honest introspection, in some way apologize to the world, and begin to fight terrorism with coodinated international police action. Hopefully this will be the answer to the recent terrorist attack in India. Maybe the U.S. and the British have had an awakening.
Sioux Rose
STEPHEN: A largely unimpeachable argument shared with wisdom and enlightenment. Many thanks.
Stephen, if we made the world a place where there was equality then terrorism would disappear. Those who control us are desperately trying to make us hate terrorists and terrorism because they don't want us asking searching questions about the way our world is run.
But surely the people who engage in terrorist activities do so because of what the rich nations do to them and their countries: we exploit them, take their land, take their resources, treat them as inferiors, try to manipulate their governments, try to push our Western religion onto them and denigrate theirs, encourage friendly dictators (like the Saudis) to continue dictating to them, invade and occupy them, kill them by the hundreds of thousands, etc.
What those who control us are asking us to hate is what is caused by them. The West, the Judeo-Christian, greedy imperialist, capitalist West is the cause: terrorism is the outcome.
DavidG, so beautifully said!!!!!
India and Pakistan should unite to defeat Al Qaeda.
The attack shows all the hallmarks of Al Qaeda.
They have a common enemy.
"The attack shows all the hallmarks of Al Qaeda"
I realize that is the current media construct,
but we need to look past media spin. So far
there is almost nothing to go on except
motivations.
As I recall it was a scant score of Saudis that gave their lives on 9/11.
The people of Afghanistan and Iraq had nothing to do with it and yet we have destroyed both nations and America as well. Bury the dead and discover what problem caused this.
C.G.Jung opined that the real cause of a disaster is to be found in any mirror.
US is Funding Terrorism
Deepak Chopra Blames Washington For Mumbai Terrorist Attacks
India's Leaders Need to Look Closer to Home
The Assault on Mumbai By Tariq Ali
And so it goes...
As I recall it was a supposed 19 PEOPLE that willingly gave their lives on 9/11. And tens of millions of other PEOPLE's lives were ruined in return.
I'd like us to stop grouping everyone by the imaginary lines drawn through geography by people (often racist and power-hungry people). From space there are no man made lines drawn through the terrain. There are people, lots of us, and we all share one goal: we want our lives to have meaning. And "meaning" is all relative. Maybe if we started working together to give our lives meaning, things like this would stop happening.
There is no difference between a mother's grief in the United States and Afghanistan. Collective punishment is a crime against humanity.
Bob Marley had it right: One Love
.Very eloquent, and deeply true.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
I am an Indian citizen myself and I am very very upset by what has happened. I came to know about the attacks as a news flash and I was so horrified that I could not watch the television for several days. I only today started reading about the events and I am just shocked. Terrorism is always a horrible phenomenon but there is something just uniquely sick about terrorists shooting innocent people indiscriminately in the middle of a busy city.
I agree that restraint is very very important. Remember, we still do not know who was responsible for the attacks, in this light the worst thing would be for India to act against the wrong party or upset its delicate relationship with Pakistan, which again, may or may not be involved in these attacks.
I pray for ALL the victims of this senseless attack, and I think Mumbai, being the vibrant city that it is, will probably come back to its usual vibrant, chaotic self.
But the question of what can be done about the global menace of terrorism is still a very open one.
"but the question of what can be done about the global menace of terrorism is still a very open one"
well......eliminate the motivations. if you want to think of terrorists as mosquito's (chomsky) you can't kill all of them. drain the swamp. the 'swamp' is their motivations. mostly american foreign policy. arizonaforever
I share your concerns. I think US foreign policy is a big problem, but not the only problem that is causing terrorism. I do not think terrorists would go on the rampage murdering innocent Indians if they were angry at the US.
The bottom line is that Mumbai took place and Al Qaeda exists because there is great inequality in the world and because the ridiculous fantasies of religion still hold sway in the minds of many.
Judeo-Christian Capitalist nations are running the world for their own advantage and are uncaring about those who are starving and those who they are exploiting.
You cannot destroy Al Queda because it is a simple an expression of frustration by those who are sick of centuries of Western abuse and exploitation.
To stop 'terrorism' simply bring about a world where equality prevails and greed doesn't. Simply get rid of all armaments and militaristic nations like America and Israel. Simply get rid of all religions which only serve to addle people's minds and divide them.
P.S. My post on the farcical American Missile Shield might interest you!
www.dangerouscreation.com
I'll keep my religion if you don't mind. And I haven't found its addled my mind. Not even once.
You would have nothing left but a few underdeveloped countries if you rid the world of all the militaristic nations and they can't even feed themselves.
Equality? How exactly do you do that (without destroying 98% of the worlds nation's as you suggest) and aside from that, exactly what does it mean?
may the revend john hagee permeate your soul. praise jesus.
bligh4
I believe that the attacks on this board against Christians- basically that they are superstitious, brain addled morons that believe in some "guy in the sky"- unlike the more enlightened members of this community, are really an attack on the beliefs of Muslims.
They are afraid to attack Muslims directly, so they use the red herring of Christianity- which is more acceptable to attack.
After all, the things that they find so offensive about religion- faith, belief in a God who created the world, Scriptures, ect- are very prominent in the Muslim faith.
I think azjoe and company should come clean with their hateful attitudes against these other "people of the book>".
I say honestly i love Jesus Christ and Arab people from my heart, I would never think wrongly of Allah or the lord i look to. i am sorry for my non-Christian attitude. please accept my apologies.
That is disgusting. Give Thomas More a chance please !
Jason Jordan
Sandpoint, Idaho
LOL !!
I don't see how you cannot find that offensive. No wonder Thomas More finds your remarks offensive at times.
Jason Jordan
Sandpoint, Idaho
Thomas, given your indoctrination I realize that it is difficult to get your mind around the idea that perhaps the way the world is is not how it should be.
We are never going to change our world, make it a peaceful place, unless we cease engaging in the things which divide us, things which have been around for ten thousand years.
Religion, which is a complete fraud, divides us. Capitalism and greed divides us. War divides us. Nationalism divides us. Racism divides us. Elitism divides us.
Surely these things need to be changed if the world is to change!
www.dangerouscreation.com
Religion is a complicated thing. Obviously it can be used in a hateful way. It can also be a source of kindness, strength and compassion.
Joe
Huummmm....DavidG. Interesting concept that religion is indoctrination while atheism or agnostisim is not. I've seen arguments that these are not "faiths" which of course they are. Or beliefs if you prefer. And of course they both are.
How did you come to the conclusion that my "indoctrination" led me to believe (which I don't) that the world is as it should be? Interesting but puzzling conclusion.
"We are never going to change our world, make it a peaceful place, unless we cease engaging in the things which divide us, things which have been around for ten thousand years"
Mostly true, but we are so far from all coming together I'd settle for a peaceful planet myself.
"Religion, which is a complete fraud, divides us. Capitalism and greed divides us. War divides us. Nationalism divides us. Racism divides us. Elitism divides us."
The first I of course disagree with you on. I know too many good people that are not frauds. And think of it this way, given your goals, is that any more a leap of faith than God? I think not. Not that I'd suggest you "get" religion of course. Everyone has their own. No matter what it is.
Capitalism as it was meant to be, regulated capitalism brings people closer together than any other economic syatem that I've seen. What we have now (unregulated capitalism) does not. Sheer greed and political corruption.
As the rest of the world is practising Nationalism, raising it to new highs, I don't see how we would keep on denying our own citizens a fair deal?
Racism does divide us, but not nearly as much as it used to. A few more generations in America and it will be an oddity in America I think. Europe and other parts of the world are far behind us in solving racism. They don't have the advantage of a multiracial society like ours and in fact some, like Hollad are practising multiculturalism, which promotes racism and division.
Elitism is indeed the worst problem I think. Business elites feel they should get all the benefits of our society, they also promote racial problems to benefit themselves. Academic elites are more dangerous because they are convinced only they know "the truth", that only they know what should be done, that their way is the only way.....most dangerous and devisive of all is their politization of education. Then the political elites. Oh boy, they don't care one jot for the average American citizen.
I got carried away! Sorry.
"Surely these things need to be changed if the world is to change!"
I do agree some of these things need to be changed. We might not agree on how perhaps.
I think you need to understand a bit more fully what agnoticism actually is.
An agnostic simply says they do not have the knowledge to confirm or deny the existence of a deity. There are differing types, for example some claim that the existence or non existence of a deity is unknowable now and in the future (such a type is called 'strong agnosticism'). Others say that at the present the existence of a deity is unknowable but they do not count out the possibility of future knowledge proving or disproving the existence of a deity (a weak agnostic).
Agnostics are concerned about 'knowledge', whilst Deists and Atheists concern themselves with 'belief'.
Hence I would venture that agnostics are not likely to fall prey to 'indoctrination', although not impossible highly unlikely if 'verifiable knowledge' is the guiding factor.
Thanks for that little lesson Barra. When you scrape away all the grit and scum on the board you actually come across well thought out posts that inform you (me certainly).
well i agree with david g.............we need to do away with this mind-numbing religious crap and concentrate on more important things like living in harmony with nature and each other. (and if it's not too late..........do something about the runaway global warming/climate change.)
our energy could be better spent on saving the planet earth, than squabbling about religion.............(and causing deaths because of it.)
coco and Carla
"well i agree with david g"
Many do. Thank you for your civility.
Thomas,
I go away for a couple days and when I return I find you fully suited up, (Full goaltenders gear) stopping pucks that are flying all over the place. (LOL)
I respect those who are religious, trust me. My husband is somewhat religious and so is my father. My friends and relatives are also religious. It's just that I don't like it when people misuse religion to justify crime and abuse. I turned atheist due to bad experience. If I had not been one of the victims of religious abuse as a child, I would have most likely stayed a Christian.
i respect people who are religious but i do not respect religion in any way. i especially despise christianity, it being the mechanism behind the abuse and neglect of the first 25 years of my life. i am also atheist as a result. christianity is a terrible doctrine teaching us we are all "Born sinners" because of what 2 people supposely did. and a bunch of other obnoxious, toxic crap. only when religion no longer hold so much sway over people's minds, might we see a hope of peace.
I gave up religion a long time ago and I don't regret it. Religion is often misused to control others to the point of fascism as I learned the hard way. As a matter of fact, a lot of the religious fundies, regardless of religion, often team up with the pro-war anti-environmental groups to make the most of their own profit at the expense of the rest of us and the environment. Pakistan and Afghanistan need to be secular or at least democracies just like India, US, Iran, and Turkey for a change.
."We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another." Jonathan Swift
"The mind in its own place, and in itself, Can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven." Milton, Paradise Lost
"Prisons are built with stones of law,
and brothels with bricks of religion." William Blake
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
There is a very vicious and prolific commentator, a bigot called Clara Waters, posting comments such as follows, which appeared with a similar article in CD. I for one have flagged that comment and asked CD that this person be banned in future.
“If Muslims would quit being a bunch of rogue criminals and terrorists that they are and stop trying to impose their fascist shit on a secular democracy, then they wouldn't be in trouble. They're getting around to being the biggest welfare queens in the US and India and are even trying to suck it off in Europe by playing the victim game to rig the system any way they can. Hell, at times, they even make the worst rightwing evangelicals "liberal" in pale comparison.”
For my part I can happily ignore her and her drivel. I would invite others to do the same. Personally I cannot condone people using these forums to peddle their bigotry and hate and can only wonder if they are paid by the word. This is exactly the kind of thing that feeds divisions and violence between people.
Lucitanian thank you. I have flagged her also. She is reposting my posts and using them for her own ends. Everyone should report this woman so that she is banned.
At least she quoted your posts appropriately and did not plagiarize them. People quote each other's posts when they want to make a point or rebuttal. I guess I should be reporting your comments for quoting other people but I don't believe in censorship and fascism. Why don't you learn to debate others who have different points of view no matter how weird they may sound? And your incessant name-calling and grouping of users I also find offensive and I could turn you in for libel and ask CD to ban you as well but I'm not a tattle taler so I won't. You sound more like Neil Boortz and Rush Limbaugh by calling for banning people. Either learn to debate and reframe the issues so that we all and others out there can learn or find yourself a private forum of your own. This is a public forum, not a private one.
Jason Jordan
Sandpoint, Idaho
You folks on this site are completely hilarious. What's the use of banning people. A discussion can involve disagreements. There are plenty of posts that may sound offensive but banning people? I thought the Internet was the last beacon of democracy. You people need to grow up.
Terrance Mitchell
Redfield, South Dakota
If you cannot tell the difference between disagreement, offence against 1/4 of the worlds people, and hate mongering, all of which does nothing to contribute to any understanding of the subject of the articles, that's tough, but the internet is only free because people use that freedom with some basic respect for each other. What this person writes is promoting hate. That is something else, and has no place on CD. Nothing to do with my growing up.
Just because something has no place on a certain site doesn't mean you have to resort to banning to solve your problems. I never saw you trying to debate Carla Waters's posts. Choosing to tattle tale and ban people just because of a comment is just plain cowardly. Carla may have sounded offensive when she made a remark about bombing Afghanistan but I don't see you people reframing the debate and countering her posts that you deem offensive. People could learn from discussions. That's what the Internet should be used for. Banning people only makes people more prejudiced. Do you want to be another Rush Limbaugh that bans people instead of debate them? As for promoting hate, what about those anti-Israel posts you have been engaging in? Those could just as well be reported as hate posts. You need to proof read your own hate talk posts before posting let alone complaining about others promoting hate talk.
Jason Jordan
Sandpoint, Idaho
Understand that terrorism is the violent expression of hate for political ends. The terror attack in Mumbai was not to kill Brits, Americans, Jews, or Indians, it was to inflame Indians against Muslims and visa versa, and to put a wrench into moves of harmonizing relations between India and Pakistan. When people use a forum like this to further hatred and disharmony on religious, or national prejudices they are doing exactly what the terrorists and those behind the terrorists want. In short they are furthering the interests of terrorism.
Secondly, there is no proof positive that the people behind these acts are who they appear to be even if their training was in Pakistan and they appear to have Pakistani, or British/Pakistani identities. Remember, a number of alleged 9-11 perpetrators turned up alive in their countries and identities were wrong. The scale and senselessness of this act does however suggest outside influence trying to act upon the overall geopolitical situation. Things are never what they seem to be. There are people here on this discussion, so filled with hate, and others who may be even paid propagandists, who try to get the innocent public very quickly to the point of condemning a country and a whole religion for acts that may have been dreamt up and planned in Langley, London or Haifa to all intents of purposes. And Jason Jordan of Sandpoint, Idaho cannot say with absolute certainty or even insinuate with some evidence that these heinous crimes were not planned afar any more than Clara Waters can say with any certainty that the bad apples of Pakistan are to blame for this atrocity.
That said I would ask you to point out to me where in anything I have written I promote hate. I have quoted two Israeli ex-Prime Ministers’ words, to give examples of the involvement of other parties in fostering aggression between India and it's neighbour Pakistan, the relationship to security, armament and terrorism, and the concept that these people precisely, (not Israelis or Jews in general) see a terrorist act as a "benefit" to their Zionist nationalism and territorial occupation and have stated intent against Pakistan.
I hate no-one, not even those people who use terrorism. I just want to stop them causing suffering and causing more hate by their action and I will use my every effort including this writing, trying to silence their guns, their bombs, and them as well as their agents. I will do everything I can to stop people who help them and I do not care if they are Jews, Christians or Atheists, working with Hindus or Muslims or pretending to be Muslims or whatever; or if their nationality is British, Mauritian (as apparently one of the attackers was reported to be), Pakistani, Indian, Israeli or American.
This has nothing to do with censorship, or dictatorship of personal standards. This kind of sloppy thinking and lack of clarity is not “my problem” it is everybody’s problem when it is used to supports more hate, and I hope I helped you to understand my point of view, even if you cannot share it.
Ok, my apologies for the misunderstanding. I don't know about you but where I live at, I have to put up with hate talkers everyday. I'm glad that I came across an interesting progressive author named GEORGE LAKOFF and his books to help us all reframe the issues and the debate. I don't live in a staunch blue area or even remotely close unlike some on this site so just telling the truth isn't going to work in my town. I'm all for knowing and understanding what makes up the hate talkers and finding ways to structurally undo the kind of hate mentality that's showing up everywhere. I know this will sound abstract to you but if you were to tell my neighbors that Muslims are suffering mass genocide in Iraq, Israel, India, etc ..., they would just react and tell you "Well, yeah Muslims are terrorists and deserve to die". I would find that offensive but this is where I would try to reframe the debate by asking them this. "How do you like it that your taxpayer dollars are being directed towards arming and financing the terrorists groups and why should we punish all Muslims when only a few of them are the culprits?" Out of 10 of those, I would then get 4 of them on my side. I'm not saying that I can convert everyone to understanding reality. Yes, there will be closed-minded individuals just like the ones I find on this site. However, the more people understand one another, the less you and I will have to feel bad about the victims of terror attacks. By the way, in case you did not notice, a Democrat who ran for Congress in my District 1 won because he knew how to best reach out to people who were otherwise conservative and he was not all that conservative either.
Jason Jordan
Sandpoint, Idaho
" I never saw you trying to debate Carla Waters's posts."
You are kidding right ? This drivel she/he spews out is hate speech pure and simple and does not require debate !!
Are you sure? I live in a state where hatred and bigotry are widespread and yet I am able to put people out of their hate and spew. Carla Waters pales in comparison. You should live in my state and see for yourself.
Jason Jordan
Sandpoint, Idaho
I do not much approve of flagging and banning. I don't flag. Flag not lest ye be flagged. It can lead to sterility of thought. It is much better to contend with differences, as exhausting as it can get.
But I do think there can be a limit on how many times one can post on one article or some word limit. The discussions on the Mumbai attacks have attracted an unusual number of rabid, repetitive, garbled, hate-filled and confused posts that taken as a whole interfere with a productive discussion.
Joe
Joe I ageee with you. Actually it is silly and a waste of time "flagging" remarks. I comment with as few words as possible to comments I chose to comment on. (lol) (I rarely comment on the article itself.) Others I chose to simply ignore.
Most people who comment here on CD and very thoughtful and considerate.
Please see what Carla said below. The desire to ban her is because of her hate filled posts. Anyone who is pro-Genocide on this site needs to be banned. There's freedom of speech and then there's hate speech directed against whole races of people. Hate speech is wrong.
Carla Waters November 27th, 2008 5:09 pm Afghanistan article
"On this issue of bombing Pakistan and Afghanistan, I say let it happen. The innocent ones are already lifeless for the most part and we would do them a double favor by pulling them off the tubes and wiping out the disease."
Could you learn to reframe the issue and debate accordingly please? Perhaps you could have told her something like this:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Afghans do not have to be forced to suffer. We need to inform and educate the American people that our government is supporting the Taliban and the drug lords and we need to reform or get rid of bad agencies that claim to keep us "safe" but are actually causing harm to other nations and compromising our national security. There is no need to put innocent civilians in a dictatorship to death. Let us focus on cutting down on shipping weapons and focus on giving aid to Afghanistan to repair the country's infrastructure and let them decide what religion they want. If they want to vote Muslim, let them. If they want to be secular, let them. The civilians may not feel that they have any hope but it is not impossible to undo the damage.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instead of complaining about hate speech simply because you do not understand others, why not try to understand and reframe the issue. People who show hate against someone or something simply misunderstand. Banning people means you don't want to have a discussion, plain and simple. Children tattle tale, not adults.
Jason Jordan
Sandpoint, Idaho
"learn to reframe the issue"
So a torturer comes to a forum of medical practitioners discussing how to alleviate suffering to advise that he has found a slower and more painful way to kill people. And, you would suggest the doctors listen to him carefully and "reframe the issue". Yaa, there is no way of dealing with hate and genocidal delusions by applying "reason" and logic. Of course I feel compassion for the suffering that haters feel but I have learned that most of the ones that spout that kind of rubbish here are in fact, doing just that, trying to reframe the issue towards their brand of hate, and by dialoguing with them it encourages them more and in fact they have succeeded. So you may waste your time, I won't waste mine.
And who said I do not understand the venom of this poor person. I feel sorry for her in her simple blindness. People who hate are not simply misunderstood. They are obsessed with their own righteousness to wish for the destruction of others as a whole, that is insane, anti-social and requires treatment, tolerance without restraint will not work. That is not my opinion. That is a fact. And you are right, there is nothing to discuss with hate. It only breeds more hate.
Sioux Rose
LUCITANIA: I know you're offended by the careless manner in which she threw out some half-considered thoughts. About a week ago, I offered Carla some spiritual understanding because I feel she is screaming out for HELP in this forum. She made it clear that she was abused as a child, and this turned her towards atheism. I spent MY time explaining that it was her lesson to grow through forgiveness, and related that (reflecting what she had exposed in one of her many postings) her father had in fact experienced what some would call a miracle in HIS reformation.
We all project. Much of what we talk about is what we are struggling in ourselves to overcome. Carla identifies in broad stroke verbal displays of anger what she has not yet processed in herself. She would like to be part of a glib, intellectual forum and could indeed learn much here. I know I do. I would not like to see her banned, but I would hope that she might realize that we all bring different strengths to this discussion board, and it only makes one look foolish to comment in an area in which they have no basis for making an informed comment. Perhaps it's a good thing that she found her way here. Like so many on this wounded planet of too-long warring tribes, she is searching for peace and wholeness.
One by one humanity risks the changes that a healing of mass consciousness would deliver to this tried and trying world. The old paradigm is literally collapsing before our eyes. First the metaphor of 911, and the COLLAPSE of the buildings that signify the temple of mammon (and since apart from the fraud of hedge funds and "derivatives" much of its claim to wealth has been made on resources co-opted by force from other lands) and Mars (Pentagon, also went down in part). And now 7 years later, the money that held it all together also comes apart.
No. We cannot bandaid this mortal blow to what was. And out of the chaos comes the seeds of what is next. It is a search for healing... let's offer our hands to one another, and each make it a habit to lessen whatever hatred s/he by reflex tends to spew.
Sioux Rose,
Well put. I tried to get these people to reason with Carla and they flatly refuse although they finally explained why. The way I see banning people, it's no better than the death penalty or even life time imprisonment. Instead of banning people, they should be allowed to stay and let time decide whether they're improving or not. In time, either Carla will stay or she'll leave herself. Banning people only promotes more hatred in the long run. I myself used to be a hard boiled conservative and a self-righteous rascal until I had to rescue my wife from her illness and then I gave it all up. I hope that not everyone has to be made to learn the hard way. I am saddened to see this board filled with mafia-style users who call for banning others like crazy. I put up with hateful people every day. The good news is some learn, some don't but that doesn't mean hating them in return. It only promotes more hate. I too hope Carla does not get banned because she really could learn more and I think she needs some lessons of restraint too as I've often noticed that she too often falls into the libertarian trap of "I've got mine screw you" but then again I could say the same of DCBeltway1 given her mean spirited posts but I made it clear that because I do not believe in censorship or fascism, I wouldn't turn her in. Hang in there Sioux, we'll get some civility even if the lynching mobsters on this board don't want any.
Jason Jordan
Sandpoint, Idaho
My posts are not in the least bit mean-sprited. Carla called for the genocide of the Afghan people, my husband's people. She has also taken upon herself to repost items that I have posted without my permission to serve her own purposes of defaming Muslims. Carla has attacked me, my husband, and others on this board. She is the one who is cruel and meanspirited. I am a long time poster to commondreams and people know this. I always post with civility but when attacked I will respond and not sit there.
Like I said, I deal with cruel and mean spirited people too but I know how to handle it and talk some sense. Sometimes I succeed, sometimes I don't but I just give it a go. Anyway, let's try to have a useful discussion for a change. For example, your husband is interesting since your husband is Afghan. Does he serve in Afghanistan or does he live here and what can he tell us about Afghanistan that isn't reported here? I always hear everything bad in Afghanistan but nothing positive. There's got to be something good to say about the country and perhaps some of that could be used to improve conditions in the country. What do you think?
Jason Jordan
Sandpoint, Idaho
Ok, my apologies for the misunderstanding. I don't know about you but where I live at, I have to put up with hate talkers everyday. I'm glad that I came across an interesting progressive author named GEORGE LAKOFF and his books to help us all reframe the issues and the debate. I don't live in a staunch blue area or even remotely close unlike some on this site so just telling the truth isn't going to work in my town. I'm all for knowing and understanding what makes up the hate talkers and finding ways to structurally undo the kind of hate mentality that's showing up everywhere. I know this will sound abstract to you but if you were to tell my neighbors that Muslims are suffering mass genocide in Iraq, Israel, India, etc ..., they would just react and tell you "Well, yeah Muslims are terrorists and deserve to die". I would find that offensive but this is where I would try to reframe the debate by asking them this. "How do you like it that your taxpayer dollars are being directed towards arming and financing the terrorists groups and why should we punish all Muslims when only a few of them are the culprits?" Out of 10 of those, I would then get 4 of them on my side. I'm not saying that I can convert everyone to understanding reality. Yes, there will be closed-minded individuals just like the ones I find on this site. However, the more people understand one another, the less you and I will have to feel bad about the victims of terror attacks. By the way, in case you did not notice, a Democrat who ran for Congress in my District 1 won because he knew how to best reach out to people who were otherwise conservative and he was not all that conservative either.
Jason Jordan
Sandpoint, Idaho
Thank you again Lucitanian. How on earth can hate speech be reframed? It cannot. It is what it is. Its wrong. I do pity Carla and agree her self-righteousness has led to her extreme views. The world is not simply black and white its shades of gray.
You live in DC I take it where 93% of the voters are solid blue so I take it that you have been insulated from conservative America which is understandable. Heck, even Northern VA from what I hear is solid blue these days although the rest of the state isn't. Likewise, Prince George and Baltimore are solid blue while eastern and rural MD are solid red. However, I don't share that kind of fortune. I live in rural America and especially in the most crimson red of states where I have to put up with people of self-righteousness everyday. Luckily, I came across a progressive professor from Berkeley named GEORGE LAKOFF whose advice on framing and reframing the issues and the debates has proven to be invaluable. Heck, even my District 1 went Democrat. You don't win an argument against a self-righteous opponent by also being self-righteous. Instead of overreacting, you could learn some civility yourself. Otherwise, I fail to see how you are any better than those you accuse of being self-righteous and extreme.
Jason Jordan
Sandpoint, Idaho
When somone calls for the genocide of my husband's people I do not overreact to condemn such hatred. I call someone on that. This has nothing to do with liberal vs. conservative two paradigms I do not fit into as an independent voter and thinker. I too grew up in rural America and see nothing wrong with rural America. My family is from there. My family is majority Republican. You are doing your damndest to box me in Jason with your own ideas of who I am and what I am about.
"You are doing your damndest to box me in Jason with your own ideas of who I am and what I am about."
First of all, I don't know who you are for the most part and that's just fine. I only base my judgement on your posts. Second, I don't see how you can jump to such a rash conclusion. However, I'll leave you alone on that one.
"I too grew up in rural America and see nothing wrong with rural America. My family is from there. My family is majority Republican."
Your family, Republican? Your husband, Afghan? That's interesting. Since you keep mentioning your husband who is Afghan and have just mentioned that your family is Republican, perhaps you wouldn't mind telling the rest of us and Afghans abroad how you actually succeeded in marrying an Afghan despite your family being Republican. Now maybe I'm wrong but usually if a family is lower/middle class and votes Republican, the vote is based mainly on social issues such as guns, abortion, same sex marriage, religion, war, patriotism, etc ... and maybe a little on taxes whereas if the family voting Republican is upper class, it's usually based mainly on the economic issues even though they may be socially libertarian/liberal. To make this even more complicated, Christians usually have love marriages whereas Hindus and Muslims have arranged marriages. Just out of curiosity, was your marriage a love or arranged one? A few months ago, I came across one of my coworkers whose son, Christian white, is interested in marrying a Pakistani born Muslim who came to the country a few years ago on a VISA permit because she wanted to finish her education and work for some years so that in time she could help her parents pay off her debt. The trouble is both parents are uncomfortable about the idea of them marrying even though the two of them are getting more attracted to each other the more they know each other. I assume you must have had a mountain of hurdles to climb as inter-racial marriages aren't always easy even though they might not be as difficult as they used to be. Please explain.
Jason Jordan
Sandpoint, Idaho
You are correct.
"an unusual number of rabid, repetitive, garbled, hate-filled and confused posts that taken as a whole interfere with a productive discussion."
You are correct and the haters have worn on me. I will stop.
Thank you Joe. We may not agree on a lot of things but discussions can always give us all food for thought. I'll admit that this terror attack really pissed me off because it reminded me of 9/11/01 and I apologize if anyone felt offended by some of my remarks because they might have been too rough. I'm just so sick and tired of these terrorist attacks going haywire all the time. But I also don't believe that carrying out terrorist attacks, be they on the World Trade Center, subways, business hotels, etc ... are going to address the needs of the poor in the Muslim world. Sure, these poor civilians may jump for joy in revenge for one minute. However, because they did not get together like a community and stand up to their own tyrannical misleadership and press for better leadership that would stand up to the rigged capitalist system, they're setting themselves up for risking their lives. It's just like the way we keep electing bad leaders in Washington by not paying attention to local and state level elections which could instead pave the way for better leadership in Washington in time.
"Sure, these poor civilians may jump for joy in revenge for one minute."
Who stands to gain from this. Why was this done. The Muslim world has
nothing to gain from this, and the neocons have everything to gain.
I realize our media has been making hay while the sun shines "An
Al Queda style operation". You have jumped on to this wagon
pointing the finger, and trying to drum up as much racist hate as possible.
Which is what the real perpetrators wanted.
This attack is obviously meant to appear like one thing, when it is really something else. The “experts” spout their two cents worth on the mind numbing, brainwashing mass media and trot out the usual buzz words, Muslim Extremist, Al Qaeda style, bla… bla… all feeding the agendas of their “masters” or in other words what the Financial/MIC who are divided only by their various factions of power with various axes to grind. So you are left to think only what they want you to think. But, these bits of info and half truths, sometimes deliberate lies, mostly speculation get you no closer to truth, but are excellent at firing up prejudices and antipathies, between religions, states, and peoples, and founding absolute convictions of righteousness, getting the flags waving, the words of gods and men quoted, country threatened, heroes praised….. That is called brainwashing.
What is absolute and certain is, America, Israel, Britain, India and Pakistan are all countries in which organized state and/or non state players working alone or together are cable and have in the past conducted false flag actions using non national operatives.
A lot of the information made available by the media so far has suggested that the attack might have been perpetrated by a previously unheard-of Muslim extremist group, working out of Pakistan, with possible connections to Al Qaeda (who ever they are?)… Etc. Well, it makes no sense. And, one would hope that the public is starting to get wiser to the fact that, in these types of events when all the “talking heads” seem to agree and are trying to tell you its one thing, you can more or less bet, they haven’t got a clue but are providing the “approved” smoke screen.
The only achievement (and perhaps the only goal) of this attack carried out with military preparation, training and precision has been to make Muslims more marginalized in India, strengthen the anti-Muslim religious based political groups who depend on bigotry and ignorance, causing further religious tension internallt and interfering with the rapprochement between India and Pakistan. That terrorism is devious, and seems like pointless violence is an understatement, but no such action is ever taken without calculating the full and far reaching consequences. None of these results could furthers any of the interests of any Muslim group in general or in particular… It makes no sense. (Saying they were aiming at British and Americans, also doesn’t make sense, they could have killed far more. They killed mostly Indians indiscriminately. Attacking the Jewish centre was deliberate, but could equally well have been a ploy, certainly forbidden under the Koran). Again, it does not make sense.
This is an age of mind wars, in which speculation, prejudice, innuendo, half truth, and double-speak is the currency and has been the death and destruction of millions mostly innocent, across Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Darfur, DR Congo, Chechnya, Kosovo, Georgia etc....
This blatant waste of life does not make sense, neither did 9/11, nor 7/7 nor Bali, nor any other similar waste of innocent life, commonly termed as terrorism, (a term originally used to define the actions of certain Jewish groups in Palestine). But, these events have all been used to justify, further use of violence, aggression and war. The beneficiaries of these events may seem quite surprising and out of place in retrospect. For example reading the comment from Benjamin Netanyahu, reported on April 16, 08 in Haaretz, "We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq," Ma'ariv quoted the former prime minister as saying. He reportedly added that "these events swung American public opinion in our favor."
I for one hope that the leaders of India and Pakistan could in fact use this terrible tragedy to reverse the effects, by coming together to jointly fully investigating, finding the real culprits, and unmasking the guys behind the curtain, and for a change, confound the perpetrators of this attack. Now, that makes real sense.
Sioux Rose
LUCITANIA: Truly fine analysis. Thank you for sharing it.
The Christians, Jews, Hindus, etc ... have been under terrorist attacks from the bad apples in the Muslim community. These bad apples deserves the death penalty for taking innocent lives away. Unfortunately, too many otherwise good Muslims have been trained to "respect" even the bad apples and have no intention of seperating good from evil. Just look it up in the Quran and ask the moderate Muslims. This leaves others no choice but to hold those who commit OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE accountable. Until the good Muslims undo the hijacking of their religion and purge the evil doers, they will be the victims of their inability to stand up for justice and will unfortunately have to reap the consequences.
The Christians, Jews, Hindus, and especially the Arabs, etc ... have been under terrorist attacks from the bad apples in the American/Zionist community. These bad apples deserves the death penalty for taking innocent lives away. Unfortunately, too many otherwise good Americans have been trained to "respect" even the bad apples and have no intention of seperating good from evil. Just look it up in the Bible and ask the moderate Christians. This leaves others no choice but to hold those who commit OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE accountable. Until the good Americans undo the hijacking of their religion and purge the evil doers, they will be the victims of their inability to stand up for justice and will unfortunately have to reap the consequences.
This incident needs to be fully investigated before any actions are taken. All the evidence should be presented to the international community. Criminals should be brought to justice. Calls for more violence are wrong and will escalate things.
How long will that investigation take and what does the international community have to do with it when it is between Pakistan and India? And just how do you plan to bring the criminals to justice if the international community doesn't find the criminals guilty?
Jason Jordan
Sandpoint, Idaho
"All the evidence should be presented to the international community."
And after the evidence has been presented to the International Community, what are they going to do about it? Actually, what could they do about it?
There is the World Court and there are laws. Unfortunately the US has chosen not to sign on.
Joe
Nor will we. Nor should we. I'm beginning to think that a mistake has been made as I read more of the posts here.
Thomas - once again your desire for pithiness leaves some things unexplained :)Please let us know what mistake you are talking about? Also, why do you think we shouldn't be part of the World Court, if you think it is appropriate to discuss it here? The only explanation I have ever heard is that they could try people like Cheney, Rumsfeld and Kissinger, which would not bother me very much.
Joe
Isn't the World Court powerless or at least controlled by monied hucksters or something?
I was wondering the same. The international community rarely does anything about this anyway. Besides, isn't it outside their control?
Terrance Mitchell
Redfield, South Dakota
"what are they going to do about it?"
Nothing. What they should do is force Pakistan to genuinely dismantle its terrorist infrastructure, which is very much in place and functioning very well judging by the carnage they've been able to wreak. The U.S. needs to cut off its $10 billion aid to the Pakistani military. The U.S. should completely stop supporting an endless series of Pakistani dictators and puppets. The long, devious and insidious history of U.S.-Pakistani military to military contacts must end. None of these steps will take place and once the breastbeating and pontificating is over, life goes on as usual till the next terrorist strike ... this time hopefully in Washington D.C. ot Islamabad.
"The U.S. needs to cut off its $10 billion aid to the Pakistani military. The U.S. should completely stop supporting an endless series of Pakistani dictators and puppets."
Thats the truth. If we keep doing it, we may gain control which of course is what the idiots have been trying to buy. And it would be the worst thing for everbody.
"life goes on as usual till the next terrorist strike ... this time hopefully in Washington D.C. ot Islamabad."
Are you serious about that wish? Surely you said that without thinking?
"Are you serious about that wish? Surely you said that without thinking?"
He'll be allright. He doesn't really mean it. He has plenty to lose if that happens and he wouldn't want that coming his way. :)
As for the military aid, we need to ABOLISH the CIA if we're going to stop allowing the Pakistani military to snatch $10 billion of our taxpayer money year after year.
Hurry up with the investigation and hold the criminals accountable already. All evidence is already presented and crystal clear. How many more 9/11s does this planet need?
I suspect that the Pakistanis got tired of burying their women and children
after Predators dropped Hellfire and damnation on them from the heavens.
The Beltway is too far to send a message but Corporate America's 'back office' is handy.
Funny, if Israel or America is attacked just like that, we shoot first ask later whereas if India or Pakistan is attacked like crazy, we urge "peace". It was the US and Britain that got this terrorism started in the first place. Why isn't anyone calling for an abolition of the CIA which is involved? When Israel and America can "defend themselves", India can just as well do the same. Let India destroy Al Queda so the US doesn't have to.