In all the arguments about Muslim terrorism and what we should do
about it, there is the general assumption that bin Laden is 'evil
personified'. With this starting point it isn't surprising that the
right and 'pro-war' left can argue that Islamist terrorism has not been
influenced by the West's bombings and invasions in the Middle East and
therefore there is no alternative to the 'war on terror'.
But what is the difference between bin Laden's sanctioning of civilian deaths now and Mandela's sanctioning of civilian deaths up until the ending of apartheid.
If you doubt that Mandela did sanction the killing of innocent civilians then here is the evidence."At least 16 people were killed and more than 130 people injured in a car bomb explosion in South Africa's capital city, Pretoria.
The explosion happened outside the Nedbank Square building on Church Street at about 1630 hours - the height of the city's rush hour.
More than 20 ambulances attended the scene and took the dead and injured to three hospitals in and around Pretoria.
Police sealed off the surrounding area with a barbed-wire fence as emergency personnel sifted through the rubble looking for bodies.
Bomb disposal experts were called to the scene to search for a possible second bomb.
The outlawed anti-apartheid group the African National Congress has been blamed for the attack.
Bled to death
A huge pall of smoke rose hundreds of feet into the air as debris and bodies were strewn around the scene of the explosion.
It is understood the bomb had been placed in a blue Alfa Romeo car outside the multi-storey building, which houses the South African air force headquarters.
It exploded at the height of the city's rush-hour as hundreds of people were leaving work for the weekend.
Glass and metal were catapulted into the air as shop-fronts and windows were blown out.
Many passers-by had limbs amputated by the flying debris. Others bled to death.
South Africa's Minister for Law and Order, Louis le Grange, who visited the scene immediately, blamed the attack on the ANC.
He said: "I have no doubt who is responsible for this despicable attack."
He said the explosion was the "biggest and ugliest" terrorist incident since anti-government violence began in South Africa 20 years ago.
He added: "Most of the victims were civilians, but some were air force personnel in uniform, black and white. Quite a number of those killed were black.
The ANC is committed to overthrowing the minority white government.
Oliver Tambo, who is the organisation's acting president while its senior figure, Nelson Mandela, is in prison, said the Nedbank Square building was a legitimate target, although he did not admit carrying out the attack.
General Mike Gedenhuys, Police Commissioner, said: "Many of the victims are so badly mutilated they have not yet been identified."
General Magnus Malan, South African's defence minister, described the explosion as a "cowardly, criminal deed in the Communist war being raged against South Africa".
He said more than 40,000 civilians had died as a result of terrorism in the past five years in Africa and 83,000 armed men had died.
South Africa has nearly five million whites, 21 million blacks, nearly one million Indians and about 2.5 million people of mixed race.
The government's apartheid system denies citizenship rights to black people except in 10 remote homelands.
The ANC has warned it intends to step up its campaign to bring an end to white minority rule."
But the cause of black majority rule in South Africa was a good one, I hear you cry! However does that actually make any difference. A lot of people would argue that bin Laden's cause of one Muslim state in the Middle East is a just cause. Certainly it is undeniable that there have been a lot of Western backed dictatorships which have repressed democracy there.
Now I would argue that both bin Laden's current motives and the West's previous motives in the Middle East have been anti-democratic. This anti-democratic meddling by the West has allowed extremists like bin Laden to develop and foster his movement by giving him a legitimacy he otherwise wouldn't have had.
Of course the added complication here is the power of the Islamic religion, which unlike Christianity has largely not adapted to modern values and is stuck in some 8th Century timewarp (although some Christians in the West are similarly misguided).
The big question is can Islam adapt away from Sharia rigidity or do we have to persuade Muslims to turn their back on Islam altogether.
Like all irrational beliefs, Islam is dangerous, but like Christianity it also has contradictions and different interpretations of its texts. Christianity has largly been pacified and Islam can be too. Because Islam has many professions of peace within its scriptures as well as dodgy stuff about stonings (the same as Christianity does), then I believe that religion is not the driving force here. If a similar religion like Christianity can be pacified then so can Islam.
So if Islam is not the core problem, what has been the driving force for bin Laden and his large support amongst Muslims.
The answer, as was the case with Mandela and in Northern Ireland, is political injustice. Now this is something that does give us an alternative to the relentless never ending 'war on terror' which is proving so obviously counter-productive. Just like hard line tactics didn't defeat the ANC and the IRA, we are losing the battle against the notional al-Qaida and the Islamist terrorists they inspire.
Mo Mowlem advocated negotiation with al-Qaida, she realised that the situation was no-different to Northern Ireland. It would be better to negotiate now than to wait until the situation develops beyond our control. In the 1960's Mandela winning the Nobel Peace Prize and being President of South Africa was as unthinkable as bin-Laden around the negotiation table. Just because we are taking a hardline with bin-Laden now, don't be surprised if he is as lauded a Statesman as Mandela in the future.
This re-writing of history that our governments do, was one thing that Orwell got spot on when he wrote 1984! The freedom fighter isn't someone who makes war on innocent women and kids or the elderly or plants bombs or mines in civilian areas. a terrorist is entirely a different thing .Some perfect examples of terrorists are Robert macbride and Andrew Zondo ...OKOKOK well
Most of the ANC/MK can be classed as terrorists , A terrorist kills innocent people not involved in the battle ,they prefer unarmed women and children and elderly or infirm people as targets, about whom they can then easily go an tell their Heroic stories to the equally cowardly comrades back home about how BRAVE they all are. I dont see them different from each other. And they dont have any right to say that what they are doing is justified.
Its quite simple: its a matter of whether you are talking about a person before or after the change of power. When the Nats were in charge in South Africa, uMkhonto we Sizwe were terrorists. Now that the ANC is in power, they were Freedom Fighters. Also, it depends on who is describing whom to whom: Osama, talking about Bush to his (Osama's) followers, Al Queda, would refer to Bush as a Terrorist that is destabilising Afghanistan and Iraq. Bush, talking about Osama to Americans, would say EXACTLY the same thing.
But what is the difference between bin Laden's sanctioning of civilian deaths now and Mandela's sanctioning of civilian deaths up until the ending of apartheid.
If you doubt that Mandela did sanction the killing of innocent civilians then here is the evidence."At least 16 people were killed and more than 130 people injured in a car bomb explosion in South Africa's capital city, Pretoria.
The explosion happened outside the Nedbank Square building on Church Street at about 1630 hours - the height of the city's rush hour.
More than 20 ambulances attended the scene and took the dead and injured to three hospitals in and around Pretoria.
Police sealed off the surrounding area with a barbed-wire fence as emergency personnel sifted through the rubble looking for bodies.
Bomb disposal experts were called to the scene to search for a possible second bomb.
The outlawed anti-apartheid group the African National Congress has been blamed for the attack.
Bled to death
A huge pall of smoke rose hundreds of feet into the air as debris and bodies were strewn around the scene of the explosion.
It is understood the bomb had been placed in a blue Alfa Romeo car outside the multi-storey building, which houses the South African air force headquarters.
It exploded at the height of the city's rush-hour as hundreds of people were leaving work for the weekend.
Glass and metal were catapulted into the air as shop-fronts and windows were blown out.
Many passers-by had limbs amputated by the flying debris. Others bled to death.
South Africa's Minister for Law and Order, Louis le Grange, who visited the scene immediately, blamed the attack on the ANC.
He said: "I have no doubt who is responsible for this despicable attack."
He said the explosion was the "biggest and ugliest" terrorist incident since anti-government violence began in South Africa 20 years ago.
He added: "Most of the victims were civilians, but some were air force personnel in uniform, black and white. Quite a number of those killed were black.
The ANC is committed to overthrowing the minority white government.
Oliver Tambo, who is the organisation's acting president while its senior figure, Nelson Mandela, is in prison, said the Nedbank Square building was a legitimate target, although he did not admit carrying out the attack.
General Mike Gedenhuys, Police Commissioner, said: "Many of the victims are so badly mutilated they have not yet been identified."
General Magnus Malan, South African's defence minister, described the explosion as a "cowardly, criminal deed in the Communist war being raged against South Africa".
He said more than 40,000 civilians had died as a result of terrorism in the past five years in Africa and 83,000 armed men had died.
South Africa has nearly five million whites, 21 million blacks, nearly one million Indians and about 2.5 million people of mixed race.
The government's apartheid system denies citizenship rights to black people except in 10 remote homelands.
The ANC has warned it intends to step up its campaign to bring an end to white minority rule."
But the cause of black majority rule in South Africa was a good one, I hear you cry! However does that actually make any difference. A lot of people would argue that bin Laden's cause of one Muslim state in the Middle East is a just cause. Certainly it is undeniable that there have been a lot of Western backed dictatorships which have repressed democracy there.
Now I would argue that both bin Laden's current motives and the West's previous motives in the Middle East have been anti-democratic. This anti-democratic meddling by the West has allowed extremists like bin Laden to develop and foster his movement by giving him a legitimacy he otherwise wouldn't have had.
Of course the added complication here is the power of the Islamic religion, which unlike Christianity has largely not adapted to modern values and is stuck in some 8th Century timewarp (although some Christians in the West are similarly misguided).
The big question is can Islam adapt away from Sharia rigidity or do we have to persuade Muslims to turn their back on Islam altogether.
Like all irrational beliefs, Islam is dangerous, but like Christianity it also has contradictions and different interpretations of its texts. Christianity has largly been pacified and Islam can be too. Because Islam has many professions of peace within its scriptures as well as dodgy stuff about stonings (the same as Christianity does), then I believe that religion is not the driving force here. If a similar religion like Christianity can be pacified then so can Islam.
So if Islam is not the core problem, what has been the driving force for bin Laden and his large support amongst Muslims.
The answer, as was the case with Mandela and in Northern Ireland, is political injustice. Now this is something that does give us an alternative to the relentless never ending 'war on terror' which is proving so obviously counter-productive. Just like hard line tactics didn't defeat the ANC and the IRA, we are losing the battle against the notional al-Qaida and the Islamist terrorists they inspire.
Mo Mowlem advocated negotiation with al-Qaida, she realised that the situation was no-different to Northern Ireland. It would be better to negotiate now than to wait until the situation develops beyond our control. In the 1960's Mandela winning the Nobel Peace Prize and being President of South Africa was as unthinkable as bin-Laden around the negotiation table. Just because we are taking a hardline with bin-Laden now, don't be surprised if he is as lauded a Statesman as Mandela in the future.
This re-writing of history that our governments do, was one thing that Orwell got spot on when he wrote 1984! The freedom fighter isn't someone who makes war on innocent women and kids or the elderly or plants bombs or mines in civilian areas. a terrorist is entirely a different thing .Some perfect examples of terrorists are Robert macbride and Andrew Zondo ...OKOKOK well
Most of the ANC/MK can be classed as terrorists , A terrorist kills innocent people not involved in the battle ,they prefer unarmed women and children and elderly or infirm people as targets, about whom they can then easily go an tell their Heroic stories to the equally cowardly comrades back home about how BRAVE they all are. I dont see them different from each other. And they dont have any right to say that what they are doing is justified.
Its quite simple: its a matter of whether you are talking about a person before or after the change of power. When the Nats were in charge in South Africa, uMkhonto we Sizwe were terrorists. Now that the ANC is in power, they were Freedom Fighters. Also, it depends on who is describing whom to whom: Osama, talking about Bush to his (Osama's) followers, Al Queda, would refer to Bush as a Terrorist that is destabilising Afghanistan and Iraq. Bush, talking about Osama to Americans, would say EXACTLY the same thing.
No comments:
Post a Comment