Patrick, it was I that wrote. My concern is that the use of the word terrorism, in itself, lends itself to official determinations about who is and who is not a terrorist. That to me is very frightening. I am sorry if my post led to some misunderstading. On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 02:03:41PM -0400, Patrick L. Mason wrote: > > > None of the postings that I am responding to, especially the one appended > below by P. Bullock, has to do with whether an individual is or is not > considered a terrorist by the US govt. The federal government's terrorist > list is clearly constructed for political ends and since it omits state > terrorists who are friendly to US and may include as terrorists anyone the > state department currently finds objectionable, e.g., Yassir Arafit was on > the terrorist list in the past, but is off today, and may be included again > in the future if it suits the objectives of the federal government. Rather, > the discussion has to do with what do people on this list consider > terrorist behavior. > > I don't know what it means to say that I'm making the mistake of thinking > rationally in irrational times. Precisely, when is it appropriate to equate > British self-defense against a Nazi invasion or the African National > Congress liberation struggle with the aimless massacre of 5,000 people > associated with the destruction of the WTC? > > I have a student in my class. Her pregnant sister died in the WTC. I have a > work-study student in my office who lost two uncles in the WTC. What, > precisely, is a rational explanation for their loss? Or, even an acceptable > irrational explanation? > > For me, there is unbridgeable moral chasm between mindless murder and > legitimate self-defense/liberation struggles. > > peace, > patrick l. mason > > > At 10:16 AM 9/17/01 -0700, you wrote: > >Ridiculous or not, he was on the State Department terrorist list. The > >talk of terrorism means that anybody whose policies the government > >dislikes can be a terrorist -- the category is not grounded in objective > >behavior as Patrick suggests. Patrick, you are mking the mistake of > >thinking rationally in irrational times. > > > >On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 01:13:44PM -0400, Patrick L. Mason wrote: > > > > > > > > > This discussion is bizarre. Mandela, a terrorist!!! Pure garbage. > > > > > > To conflate terrorism with a legitimate freedom fighter is mind boggling. > > > Everyone on the face of the earth who cared to know, knew the purpose of > > > the ANC's struggle. On the other hand, no one knows (for certain, at the > > > moment) who was behind last week's insanity or what possible goal the > > > perpetrators were trying to achieve. > > > > > > People who target buildings with day-care centers are simply evil. The WTC > > > included people of every religion, political ideology, economic class, > > skin > > > color, sexual preference, etc. among human beings. The only definable > > > target was human life. > > > > > > Blowing up the world trade center (through the suicidal hijacking and > > > destruction of planes that also contained a vast variety of people) is an > > > extraordinarily vicious, utterly futile, and stupidly meaningless act. > > > America has an $8.5 to $9.0 trillion GDP. This senseless act will have > > zero > > > longrun economic impact. Politically, it will only make it more difficult > > > to create a more humane world. This horrific event eliminated all > > > discussion of the World Conference Against Racism from the print and > > > electronic. > > > > > > The public works injection associated with rebuilding New York and > > > expanding the military will increase the size of the GDP. The American > > > military-industrial complex will only be made stronger. Neither the > > > Palestinians nor any Arab/Islamic political group fighting for a more > > > democratic government or any form of economic justice will be helped by > > > this act. > > > > > > To equate Mandela and the African National Congress with the > > > nation/organization/individuals that carried out the actions of the past > > > week is deeply insulting to anyone who thinks that morality, ethics, > > > values, and the preciousness of life, especially human life, are something > > > more than "contemptible bourgeois concepts." The ANC had as its policy > > that > > > only economic infrastructure and military targets were legitimate targets. > > > > > > Only degenerate, hedonistic, psychopaths murder thousands of people for > > the > > > sheer joy of killing. > > > > > > Maybe, I don't understand the mentality of some on "the left" anymore. > > > Maybe, I never did. Many leftist wish to save whales, protect rain > > forests, > > > stop the senseless of baby seals, and (some) encourage humans to quit > > > eating meat. Okay, that's all good. > > > > > > I'm all for saving whales, rain forests, and old growth forests and > > spotted > > > owls. But, I also think human life is worthy of salvation. I'm totally > > > against the senseless murder of animals. I live in a wooded area with > > > rattlesnakes, mocassins, copperheads, and coral snakes. I'm even against > > > killing these deadly snakes. > > > > > > I have no idea who carried out this horrific action, but common decency > > > would suggest that the perpetrators have nothing in common with the ANC or > > > British teenagers training to fight off a Nazi invasion. > > > > > > patrick l mason > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 04:48 PM 9/17/01 +0100, you wrote: > > > >During the WW2 British boy scouts, from the age of 11 to 16 were > > taught how > > > >to sabotage an expected German invasion force, in ways which were almost > > > >certainly 'suicidal'... ... no doubt we might have regarded this as > > > >terrorism if we were with the Wehrmacht. > > > > > > > >Your question is strikingly naive, if you will excuse me saying so. > > > >Mandela, Makarios, and many other post colonial leaders were well > > > >established 'terrorist' leaders. > > > > > > > >What are the 'objective' or material causes of these acts? that is the > > > >point. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > > >From: Chai-on Lee <conlee@chonnam.ac.kr> > > > >To: ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu <ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu> > > > >Date: 17 September 2001 11:21 > > > >Subject: [OPE-L:5922] RE: Re: Re: Re: the wages of war > > > > > > > > > > > > >Dear All, > > > > > > > > > >Could anybody distinguish between the terrorist and the guerrilla? > > > > >I am purplexed. > > > > > > > > > >Chai-on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > >Michael Perelman > >Economics Department > >California State University > >Chico, CA 95929 > > > >Tel. 530-898-5321 > >E-Mail michael@ecst.csuchico.edu > -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael@ecst.csuchico.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Oct 02 2001 - 00:00:05 EDT