radicalized replaces Brainwashed. Back in the late 40's and through
the 50's and 60's, the 200% Americans cried out that it was the
weak-minded folk who were brainwashed by Commie Propaganda.
Remember, the best defense is a strong offense. When someone dares to
point out a flaw in our American Corporate Empire, just stand up, puff
out your chest and shout, "You've been radicalized".
Carl Jarvis
On 12/10/15, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
‘When were they radicalized?’ is not the right question
Middle East
Rev. Graylan Scott Hagler on December 9, 2015
Tashfeen Malik and Syed Rizwan Farook were photographed at Chicago's O'Hare
International Airport in 2014.
The big question these days dominating the airwaves is when was Syed Farook
and Tasheen Malik radicalized; or who radicalized them; and how were they
radicalized? This question is a perplexing one because it assumes that
without outside influence everything would be all right and that there are
no valid grievances, or anger, and no desire for revenge or justice no
matter how misguided those desires might be manifested.
This is a strange line of query because it presupposes that without external
forces radicalization would be impossible. This line of questioning
illustrates a blind patriotism of empire proportion that believes that
anyone upset and acting out is either demented or has fallen under the
influences of a political/religious ideology that exploits the weak minded
or the mentally deranged. To even ask the question is to make the assumption
that everything is ok around us and in our world and would be regarded as
such if it were not for outside influences. But this perspective has a
tendency to ignore the realities of what so many people live under and have
to endure daily. It is often from personal experiences, relationships with
those impacted by what most of us don’t see or care about are the
radicalizing factors. The present queries act as if there are no valid
grievances, no real anger, and as if there is innocence on the part of the
powerful, the US and others. But this is not the way that peoples of the
Middle East, North Africa and Asia see the US or the West.
The US and its partners have been at war for more than 14 years in
Afghanistan. The US began an unprovoked war in Iraq in 2003 and virtually
destroyed the country where today ISIL is filling part of the vacuum created
by that war, and the President of Afghanistan literally is presiding over
nothing but the capital city of that country, Kabul. The US under the cry
of removing President Bashar Hafez al-Assad in Syria by helping to
orchestrate and sustain a civil war has created a displacement crisis of
epic proportion and caused the deaths of more than 250,000 people.
Conditions in many countries have worsened under the wars and the remaking
of the Middle East and North Africa in the West’s image. Our continual
military support of Israel against Palestinians challenges the view that
everything is ok without the influences of “outside agitators” radicalizing
people and calling them to arms. According to Ha’aretz, an Israeli
newspaper, in an August 2014 report it states concerning military aid to
Israel,
“Since it began in 1962, American military aid to Israel has amounted to
nearly $100 billion. For the past decades The United States has been
regularly transferring aid of about $3 billion annually. In recent years,
the aid has been solely for defense purposes. Additionally, The US has been
giving Israel generous military aid for projects important both to it and
Israel.”
Even in light of Israel’s continued human rights violation Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu in November 2015 traveled to Washington, DC to request an
increase to the amount of aid his country receives from the US.
Then there is also the US drone program designed to make killing more
antiseptic and distant. However in a 2013 speech before the National
Defense University President Obama said,
“It is a hard fact that US strikes have resulted in civilian casualties.”
He did not go on to cite numbers or further details, yet Micah Zenko, a
scholar at the Council on Foreign Relations and lead author of a 2013 study
of drones, is quoted in an April 23, 2015 New York Times article on drone
strikes, in reference to the President’s 2013 comments,
“Most individuals killed are not on a kill list, and the government does not
know their names.”
The program has not been as clean as government leaders would have liked for
us to think. Or lastly among many examples, a November 2014 article in the
Guardian cites:
“A new analysis of the data available to the public about drone strikes,
conducted by the human-rights group Reprieve, indicates that even when
operators target specific individuals – the most focused effort of what
Barack Obama calls “targeted killing” – they kill vastly more people than
their targets, often needing to strike multiple times. Attempts to kill 41
men resulted in the deaths of an estimated 1,147 people…”
The assumption that “radicalization” is not based in some reality is an
empire or White supremacist notion where everything is ok save for those
rabble-rousers, outside agitators, and purveyors of hatred. Every time I
hear some newsperson or pundit drone on (excuse the pun) about when, how and
who did the radicalization I am reminded of J. Edgar Hoover, former Director
of the FBI during the Civil Rights era and the status-quo politicians of the
time looking under every rock for communist agitators from Moscow who had
inflamed and radicalized the Black folks to march, demonstrate and rebel!
It is an empire and White supremacist notion to believe that all is fine
save for outside influences. The assumption is ‘who would not be happy with
our way of life, our agendas, or ways we see the world.’
Keep in mind that I am not condoning acts of violence by any side or carried
out in any name of God or nationalistic identifications. I am simply
pointing out that it is real conditions and experiences that have given
credence to the so-called “radicalization” process. There are agents
recruiting and organizing people to join their cause, but it is recruitment
based on some stark and harsh realities produced by war, greed, and
attempting to fashion entire regions in the United States’ political image.
Therefore it stands to reason that to combat so-called radicalization the US
and its partners need to ethically evaluate it motives and initiatives and
stand to be judged in a world court where warranted. The US and its allies
need to allow countries and regions to develop without interference,
manipulation or control. The mechanisms of radicalization would be muted
and impotent if the US and its partners addressed human rights violations
carried out around the world by itself, its partners and its allies. There
would be no fertile ground to recruit from if people felt the processes were
fair and just rather than exploited by a few nations and corporations at the
expense of everyone else. This is a part of what needs to happen to thwart
radicalization. The US and its allies must right the wrongs they have done
and attempt to restore regions and people to govern their own selves no
matter how those structures might look in the end.
As far as who, when and how Syed Farook and Tasheen Malik and the countless
others were radicalized? The answer to this question is found in a world
that has been ravished by war and greed; in the conditions of despair that
has been created; in the powerless feeling pushed around by the powerful;
and it is there in refugee camps and at funerals from drone strikes that we
will find the agents of anger that breeds radicalization that we claim we do
not understand.
‘When were they radicalized?’ is not the right question
Middle East
Rev. Graylan Scott Hagler on December 9, 2015 28 Comments
• Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not
valid.
• Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not
valid.
• Adjust Font Size
Tashfeen Malik and Syed Rizwan Farook were photographed at Chicago's O'Hare
International Airport in 2014.
The big question these days dominating the airwaves is when was Syed Farook
and Tasheen Malik radicalized; or who radicalized them; and how were they
radicalized? This question is a perplexing one because it assumes that
without outside influence everything would be all right and that there are
no valid grievances, or anger, and no desire for revenge or justice no
matter how misguided those desires might be manifested.
This is a strange line of query because it presupposes that without external
forces radicalization would be impossible. This line of questioning
illustrates a blind patriotism of empire proportion that believes that
anyone upset and acting out is either demented or has fallen under the
influences of a political/religious ideology that exploits the weak minded
or the mentally deranged. To even ask the question is to make the assumption
that everything is ok around us and in our world and would be regarded as
such if it were not for outside influences. But this perspective has a
tendency to ignore the realities of what so many people live under and have
to endure daily. It is often from personal experiences, relationships with
those impacted by what most of us don’t see or care about are the
radicalizing factors. The present queries act as if there are no valid
grievances, no real anger, and as if there is innocence on the part of the
powerful, the US and others. But this is not the way that peoples of the
Middle East, North Africa and Asia see the US or the West.
The US and its partners have been at war for more than 14 years in
Afghanistan. The US began an unprovoked war in Iraq in 2003 and virtually
destroyed the country where today ISIL is filling part of the vacuum created
by that war, and the President of Afghanistan literally is presiding over
nothing but the capital city of that country, Kabul. The US under the cry of
removing President Bashar Hafez al-Assad in Syria by helping to orchestrate
and sustain a civil war has created a displacement crisis of epic proportion
and caused the deaths of more than 250,000 people. Conditions in many
countries have worsened under the wars and the remaking of the Middle East
and North Africa in the West’s image. Our continual military support of
Israel against Palestinians challenges the view that everything is ok
without the influences of “outside agitators” radicalizing people and
calling them to arms. According to Ha’aretz, an Israeli newspaper, in an
August 2014 report it states concerning military aid to Israel,
“Since it began in 1962, American military aid to Israel has amounted to
nearly $100 billion. For the past decades The United States has been
regularly transferring aid of about $3 billion annually. In recent years,
the aid has been solely for defense purposes. Additionally, The US has been
giving Israel generous military aid for projects important both to it and
Israel.”
Even in light of Israel’s continued human rights violation Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu in November 2015 traveled to Washington, DC to request an
increase to the amount of aid his country receives from the US.
Then there is also the US drone program designed to make killing more
antiseptic and distant. However in a 2013 speech before the National Defense
University President Obama said,
“It is a hard fact that US strikes have resulted in civilian casualties.”
He did not go on to cite numbers or further details, yet Micah Zenko, a
scholar at the Council on Foreign Relations and lead author of a 2013 study
of drones, is quoted in an April 23, 2015 New York Times article on drone
strikes, in reference to the President’s 2013 comments,
“Most individuals killed are not on a kill list, and the government does not
know their names.”
The program has not been as clean as government leaders would have liked for
us to think. Or lastly among many examples, a November 2014 article in the
Guardian cites:
“A new analysis of the data available to the public about drone strikes,
conducted by the human-rights group Reprieve, indicates that even when
operators target specific individuals – the most focused effort of what
Barack Obama calls “targeted killing” – they kill vastly more people than
their targets, often needing to strike multiple times. Attempts to kill 41
men resulted in the deaths of an estimated 1,147 people…”
The assumption that “radicalization” is not based in some reality is an
empire or White supremacist notion where everything is ok save for those
rabble-rousers, outside agitators, and purveyors of hatred. Every time I
hear some newsperson or pundit drone on (excuse the pun) about when, how and
who did the radicalization I am reminded of J. Edgar Hoover, former Director
of the FBI during the Civil Rights era and the status-quo politicians of the
time looking under every rock for communist agitators from Moscow who had
inflamed and radicalized the Black folks to march, demonstrate and rebel! It
is an empire and White supremacist notion to believe that all is fine save
for outside influences. The assumption is ‘who would not be happy with our
way of life, our agendas, or ways we see the world.’
Keep in mind that I am not condoning acts of violence by any side or carried
out in any name of God or nationalistic identifications. I am simply
pointing out that it is real conditions and experiences that have given
credence to the so-called “radicalization” process. There are agents
recruiting and organizing people to join their cause, but it is recruitment
based on some stark and harsh realities produced by war, greed, and
attempting to fashion entire regions in the United States’ political image.
Therefore it stands to reason that to combat so-called radicalization the US
and its partners need to ethically evaluate it motives and initiatives and
stand to be judged in a world court where warranted. The US and its allies
need to allow countries and regions to develop without interference,
manipulation or control. The mechanisms of radicalization would be muted and
impotent if the US and its partners addressed human rights violations
carried out around the world by itself, its partners and its allies. There
would be no fertile ground to recruit from if people felt the processes were
fair and just rather than exploited by a few nations and corporations at the
expense of everyone else. This is a part of what needs to happen to thwart
radicalization. The US and its allies must right the wrongs they have done
and attempt to restore regions and people to govern their own selves no
matter how those structures might look in the end.
As far as who, when and how Syed Farook and Tasheen Malik and the countless
others were radicalized? The answer to this question is found in a world
that has been ravished by war and greed; in the conditions of despair that
has been created; in the powerless feeling pushed around by the powerful;
and it is there in refugee camps and at funerals from drone strikes that we
will find the agents of anger that breeds radicalization that we claim we do
not understand.
