[lit-ideas] Re: Alternatives to genocide or waiting meekly for terrorists to strike

  • From: "Helen Wishart" <hwishart@xxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 12:52:36 -0400

re: JOhn McCreery's post quoting Hunter ----"a color-coded system of enforced national panic"

That's the truth. My daughter made the error of leaving her grandmother's house in Canada this morning to return to university in Georgia. She has been caught at the Buffalo border for the last four hours. Apparently the documentation she used the last several times she visited Canada is no longer sufficient to prove that she isn't a threat. I can't communicate with her now because cell phones are forbidden the holding areas. The waiting to hear is distressing.

I'm glad that my dog and I crossedf the border last weekend.

Helen A Wishart




----Original Message Follows----
From: "John McCreery" <john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Alternatives to genocide or waiting meekly for terrorists to strike
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 10:38:38 +0900


I've been staying out of the Omar vs Phil, Eric, Lawrence debate
largely because it has long since fallen into the "dance of anger"
pattern familiar to marriage counselors, in which both sides frame the
debate in black and white terms that admit of no compromise. Labels
are bandied about and the only possible resolutions exhaustion, mutual
silence, or murder.

In forlorn hope of disrupting this pattern, I offer two examples of
strong and sensible answers to Phil's question, "What would you have
us do?" that demand neither genocide nor waiting like an abused wife
for the terrorists to strike again.

Here is Hunter, whose diary was frontpaged on dailyKos today.

"Although we do not yet know the scope or details of today's announced
counterterrorism bust, it's generally worth noting that the British
are a hell of a lot more competent in wrapping potential terrorism up
than we seem to be, and that the British have accomplished this via
normal law enforcement techniques coupled with apparently excellent
human and signals intelligence. It's also worth noting that at
present, foreign involvement with the plot seems at this early stage
to be primarily Pakistani in origin -- one of those countries that has
unambiguous ties to terrorism, as opposed to oh, say... Iraq.

"That seems to be one big difference between U.S. and U.K. efforts in
the War on Terror. Despite the obvious political and strategic bungles
of the Blair government, the U.K. is beginning to show a history of
wrapping up terror plots and arresting those involved, and seems even
to have managed to have done so within the context of law.

"The rather less serious and competent U.S. response, on the other
hand, seems to be to reduced to making sure that from now on, nobody
can take bottled water onto airplanes.

"In the U.S., we have spent the last five years deciding the rule of
law is insufficient; we engage in kidnappings and illegal renditions;
we promote and practice torture; we invent a color-coded system of
enforced national panic; we declare that presidential authority has no
boundaries in wartime, or in anything that any administration figure
might construe as being wartime; we engage in an overscoped,
unprecedentedly broad explosion of espionage against American citizens
that has created the world's largest and least successful haystack; we
entered into a preemptive war with a country that had no meaningful
ties whatsoever to the actual war on terrorism. (OK, the British
definitely did that last one too.)

"At the same time, our human intelligence efforts are nearly nil, port
security continues to be ignored, our military services are tossing
out fluent Arabic translators for the transgression of being gay, and
the funding of meaningful "homeland security" efforts is being treated
like it was a carnival game by the Republican congress, which cannot
fundamentally distinguish between security efforts and required "pork"
patronage.

"I don't feel safer, today. And I didn't need the color-coded Rainbow
of Terror, which has been even further debased by being hauled out
like the world's most transparent political fear-o-meter during every
election season, to tell me that."

The rest of Hunter's remarks can be found at,

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/8/10/164332/285

Next, here is a statement by RayH, writing on the Raising Kaine blog
(http://raisingkaine.com/frontPage.do)  in support of James Webb for
U.S. Senator from Virginia.

"Jim Webb has had experience as a journalist on the ground in Lebanon,
as Secretary of the Navy, as a soldier in Vietnam. His understanding
of these issues surpasses Allen's, and he's right to criticize
policies that undermine our nation's security. I like the Webb
philosophy of holding back on the use of military force, using the
threat of force as a deterrant and negotiating tool, and resorting to
violence as a LAST resort. Allen and Bush rush to violence before
considering other options."

These are people whose remarks I am inclined to take seriously as
suggestions for rational courses of action.

John

--
John McCreery
The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN

US CITIZEN ABROAD?
YOU'RE THE DECIDER!
Register to Vote in '06 Elections
www.VoteFromAbroad.org
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html


------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: