 Author |
 Post
|
 |
|
irina
Joined: Aug 3, 2004
Posts: 3 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Tongue-tied
User is
Offline
Country: India
|
terrorism
September 12, 2004 - 03:48 AM
|
|
Dear TIG members,
Below you will find a letter which I wrote on September 3, when terrorists killed children in Beslan. I did not know the exact number of victims then. Our officials and media reported that about 300 people were taken as hostages. This number seemd me aweful. But when we learnt that more than 1000 people were in Beslan's school we were shocked. Did our goverment and mass-media lie us those days? Who knows the truth about terrorists, conficts etc which happen in Russia? why they happen, how to prevent them? What is a real situation in Chechnya, Ingushetiya, Dagestan, Severnaya Osetiya? I have no answers now, questions only...
I would like you hear opinions of Russian (and not only) youth about current situation in Russia concerned this terrorist&coflict issue. What is your vision? Why it happens? How to resolve this problem? Who can do this and how? How you see this problem in global contest? The role of youth in resolving this really complicated and dangerous issue.
Irina
*********************************************************
The letter of solidarity and grief
Dear TIG members and website visitors,
At the moment citizens of Russia were faced with tragical events. Within one month we have collided a number of acts of terrorism which have been directed against citizens of Russia. And several days ago victims of terror became children and their parents. They come to celebrate the beginning of academic year - First day of September. I do not know the reason why more than one thousand people were taken as hostages. I do not want to know the reason - there is no excuse to these actions!!
We collide with violence everywhere, all over the world. Tragical events occur in Iran, Chile, Japan, the USA, Israel, Yugoslavia, Palestine, Sudan and many other countries. Somewhere there is a war, somewhere people are grasped in hostages - in most cases peaceful citizens suffer! Politicians, the military, religious leaders and terrorists manipulate with our life, they kill peaceful citizens of different countries who represent various nationalities, cultures and religions. It is inadmissible! I think the majority of people (including youth) want to live in the world without violence, war and terrorism.
I address to you, young people, I want to hear your opinions on how can we resist to violence. I suggest to discuss these problems in a new discussion group. I would like to hear opinions of those who is engaged in researches on the given theme, and those who is the direct witness of similar events. Please share your visions and thoughts on how to solve this problem. Is it possible or not?
I express the solidarity with those who has suffered during tragical events on September, 1 -3, 2004 in Beslan, Republic Severnaya Ossetia of the Russian Federation. I also express the condolences to all who's relatives and friends were lost or have suffered during confrontations or acts of terrorism (wherever and whenever it occurred.) There is no excuse to the deaths of peaceful citizens.
Irina Chernenkaya
Moscow, Russia
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
PAMELA
Joined: Jul 21, 2003
Posts: 1 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Tongue-tied
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Female, 29
Country: Peru
Province/State: Lima
|
terrorism
September 12, 2004 - 06:09 AM
|
|
Hola pienso que mientras exista la brecha entre los paises pobres y ricos pues siempre existirá el terrorismo,este se da por el odio y resentimiento que existe por el dominio de paises ricos a pobres.
Originally posted by Rayovac :
Su mensaje no explica a muchos miembros ricos del al Qaeda que son terroristas. También no explica millones de dólares que son donados a las organizaciones del terrorista. ¿Por qué hay tan muchas naciones con mucha gente rica y pobre junto que no tenga terrorismo? Convengo que odiado y el resentimiento es causas. No pienso que la abundancia o la pobreza hace que la gente asesina a gente inocente sin embargo.
God Bless
Dear Rayovac tienes razón,pero debe existir una causa que impulse a estos seres vivos hacer lo que hacen ,si tan solo se les pudiera preguntar por que lo hacen.
Pamela
Existen muchas formas de terrorismo como el terrorismo social,el terrorismo suicida ,creo ademas que estos diferentes tipos de terrorismo deben de tener algo en comun,aqui en Perú el terrorismo fue causa de dejar olvidados ciertas regiones del pais y estas perdieron la fe y esperanza la gente entonces comenzo a sentir odio ......fue muy tarde cuando se quizo remediar el daño ,a nadie le interesaba esto hasta que vivieron el terrorismo en carne propia ,con apagones, coches bombas etc .....
Pamela
Nota : el terrorimso esta muy relacionado con el narcotrafico y,la venta ilegal de armas.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Ray Ovac
Joined: May 12, 2004
Posts: 255 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Country: United States
|
terrorism
September 12, 2004 - 07:17 AM
|
|
Originally posted by ecopame
Ho pienso que mientras exista la brecha entre los paises pobres y ricos pues siempre existirá el terrorismo,este se da por el odio y resentimiento que existe por el dominio de paises ricos a pobres.
Su mensaje no explica a muchos miembros ricos del al Qaeda que son terroristas. También no explica millones de dólares que son donados a las organizaciones del terrorista. ¿Por qué hay tan muchas naciones con mucha gente rica y pobre junto que no tenga terrorismo? Convengo que odiado y el resentimiento es causas. No pienso que la abundancia o la pobreza hace que la gente asesina a gente inocente sin embargo.
God Bless
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Ray Ovac
Joined: May 12, 2004
Posts: 255 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Country: United States
|
Re: terrorism
September 12, 2004 - 07:49 AM
|
|
Irina:
Sadly, I think that the only language that such people understand is force.
Once a person's ideaology has crossed the moral line where innocent civilians and children are not only 'expendible' in achieving their goals but are actually 'targets', then they have (in my mind) yielded any rights to a peaceful deliberation of their demands.
It is ironic, but to maintain a civilized world we may need to work outside of accepted 'civil' methods to deal with such tactics.
I am not suggesting that we ever act outside of the accepted rules of armed conflict (which is an ironic idea on its own) and lower ourselves to the level of these barbarians.
However even the managed, measured, and controlled use of violent force is unacceptable in all but the most extreme of challenges. Unfortunately, if the premediated harming and murdering of innocent children does not qualify, I cannot imagine an act that does call for force.
Of all of the evil done by these individuals, the most horrid may be the response that their actions mandate...for it forces us all to exercise the worst of our capabilities and do precisely what it is that we strive to avoid in the hopeful maturity of mankind and civilization.
However, when we consider the alternatives and the staggering harm that could come from inaction (or improper action) by having faith in the notion that all men can be reasoned with, then it becomes clear that a limited but effective application of force is the only way to prevent future horrors and allow us to have the opportunity to seek solutions to future greivances before they get to such a point.
In short, for those who committed these acts, the time for talk has ended and there is only one solution: to remove them either by capturing and confining them or by destroying them. For those who have not yet crossed this moral line, though, we need to use the other hand that is not wielding a sword to offer a hand so that we can help those who would get to such a point before they are too far gone.
I know that some of my thoughts may seem a bit strong, but I am hopeful that by capturing or destroying all of those are already prepared to stop at nothing to harm us and our children, we give ourselves the opportunity to improve the world so that future generations never feel the need to go so far to be heard.
God Bless!
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Luke Lieberman
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 3007 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 33
Country: United States
Province/State: California
|
Re: terrorism
September 13, 2004 - 03:19 AM
|
|
I agree with Ray 100%
After Sept 11 New York Mayor Gulliani said "The people who did this lost all right to have their views heard or understood"
When a masked terrorist is wiring a school with explosives - who cares "why" he is doing it. I don't care what his cause is - he has already lost his humanity - lost his soul - who cares what reasons he think he has?"
While I think Russia will have to come to better terms with the Chechins - as I think for instance the Israelis must with the Palestinians -
there is no excuse for targeting innocent people with random acts of extreme violence.
I hear all these apologists who explain how tough it is growing up in Chechnia or Palestine - as though this was an excuse for their actions -
but that is like telling me that a serial killer was beaten as a child -
- or that a rapist was once molested.
- or that a herion dealer grew up without a father
The fact is that these are dangerous people and must be dealt with as threats to peace in the world.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Haseeb
Joined: Apr 21, 2003
Posts: 159 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 32
Country: Afghanistan
Province/State: Kabol
City: Kabul
|
Sympathy!
September 13, 2004 - 04:54 AM
|
|
I am feeling sad and sorry for all that happend to the kids and the others in that School .
It was an act of evil and a terrible way to stand for what you want . Unjust , inhuman and cruel it was .
But then ,force is not the solution . One has to try and undrestand why are they doing it . There were many women amongst the hostage takers and that is not normal .
I think for Russia , the best solution is to just give up hopes on Chechneia! Its proving too costly for them and for the Chechens too . Life is no where close to normal in Chechneya ,and its getting tough in Russia too .
I don't think if the struggle on both sides is worth the terrible destruction of Grozny and these brutal killing of kids.
Let me push again that , More Force will Mean More Violence ! As every action has its Re-action and I am praying it doesn't happen!
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Luke Lieberman
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 3007 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 33
Country: United States
Province/State: California
|
Re: terrorism
September 14, 2004 - 04:22 AM
|
|
I agree that the underlying political situation needs to change -
but 2 things - the reason Russia doesn't want to let go of Chechnia isn't because they want Chechnia - it is because there are other "states" in Russia that would start demanding independance - and Russia could well lose its integrity - as in it could break into a bunch of singular states instead of one Russia.
Obviously the U.S.S.R. broke up - and this could be an even deeper break up.
That is why they won't let it go.
After they let the Chechins go - what happens when another territory wants independance? - they may well take a bunch of school kids hostige - if Russia shows that this will convince them to cede the territory.
As to the action re-action - yes this is a problem - which is why I think collective punishment is the wrong approach - because it is wrong and also creates more problems then it solves -
but the Russian government should crack down on the terrorist organizations in Russia with all its power.
And the threat that they might attack again if Russia comes after them is hollow - because they intend to attack anyway.
It is like telling the cops they cannot arrest a murderer for fear their efforts will push him to muder further - he is already guilty.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Ray Ovac
Joined: May 12, 2004
Posts: 255 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Country: United States
|
Re: terrorism
September 14, 2004 - 10:42 AM
|
|
Originally posted by luke
After they let the Chechins go - what happens when another territory wants independance? - they may well take a bunch of school kids hostige - if Russia shows that this will convince them to cede the territory.
Luke:
You are 100% correct.
This is one of the logical problems with terrorism as a vehicle to achieving a groups demands (of course, ignoring the obvious moral problems with it for the moment).
By using terrorism, in spite of how valid the demands of the terrorist group are, they basically destroy their chances of ever having success.
Why? Because no matter how "right" the terrorists are, anyone who gives in to their demands invites additional terrorism (and, therefore, death and destruction) from future groups with different grievances.
By not using terrorism, especially if a group has a legitimate grievance and can logically justify their case with reason, they give their opponent the ability to moderate their position and eventually negotiate and come to agreement without losing face.
By using terrorism, they make it impossible for their opponent to yield without inviting additional acts.
It doesn't take a political genius to understand that to get anyone to give something up, you need to give them a way to do so without conceding defeat...further, you need to minimize any potential losses of theirs.
Bowing to terrorism not only is a blatent concession of defeat, but it increases the chances of greater losses in the future. This is precisely why people don't negotiate with terrorists.
...and yet it continues.
God Bless!
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Ashraf
Joined: Jan 31, 2004
Posts: 628 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 39
Country: Saudi Arabia
|
Re: terrorism
September 15, 2004 - 01:33 AM
|
|
The Chechen war was nothing short of a genocide. There is no excuse for committing genocide by the Russian troops in Chechnya as there is no excuse to target school children intentionally by any rebel group.
I think you need to define what terrorism is first and whether it is applied for only a specific color, race or religion.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Luke Lieberman
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 3007 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 33
Country: United States
Province/State: California
|
Re: terrorism
September 15, 2004 - 02:23 AM
|
|
Sigh -
Palestinian - lets be clear about something because you are continually apologizing and rationalizing terrorism -
The French Resistance was not blowing up buses full of civilians - they were sabotaging supply lines and attacking Nazi troops.
The Warsaw Uprising for instance - the Jews did not take a bunch of German school children hostige.
They fought German troops who were attempting to liquidate the ghetto.
When the French resistance was sabotaging supply lines - they were attacking legitimate military targets and had a real effect on the Nazis ability to control the country.
When Palestinians blow up a bus it accomplishes absolutely NOTHING - it does not help the Palestinians at all.
What concrete benefits are there from this for the Palestinain people - to blow up a bunch of kids and 40 year olds on a bus?
All it does is harden the Israelis in their position - and make the Israelis more determined to crack down and exert control over the situaiton.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Haseeb
Joined: Apr 21, 2003
Posts: 159 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 32
Country: Afghanistan
Province/State: Kabol
City: Kabul
|
Re: terrorism
September 15, 2004 - 03:01 AM
|
|
Luke , How should the Russian government fight terrorst organizations?
I don't think if there is any big organization active in Chechenya, but all those people who have suffered because of the Russian war on Grozny in particullar and in Chechnay in general are now doing these evill and ill stuff to take revange . I know we guys are normal and ok and we are calling it evil and immoral , but for them this is probably the only way to calm their inner self, unless Russia does things the other way .
Now luke , why doesn't any state in USA ask for independence ? Why doesn't New Jersey for example stand say it wants to be a country ? Its because the people are happy as part of the USA and they are fine with the goevrnement is doing , they have an equal voice in whatever is happening .
I don't give Russia or anyother country the card to oppress people , kill or torture when those people want to be free and on their own . Whats wrong with it if anyother state after Chechneya comes up and asks for independence ? I know its a blow for Russia and it will hurt them . But , why do they want independence ?
Simple , thats because they are equally humans as we in Afghanistan and you in the States are , and they deserve just as we deserve to live free and on their own well .
I am finding it hard to undrestand what points you really defend , luke! In some occassion you prefer and you advocate for peoples will and choice and some places you allow powerful's to have a control of the people ! Just as here.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Haseeb
Joined: Apr 21, 2003
Posts: 159 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 32
Country: Afghanistan
Province/State: Kabol
City: Kabul
|
Luke!
September 15, 2004 - 03:10 AM
|
|
Luke , we have always said that the Bus blowing up and the succide bombing by the Palastinians or anyone else are no way human acts , and by no means a help or a route to the solution they only worsen the conditions and give their cause blow .
But , why do they do so ? is a question to address and you have never done it .
But lets keep Keep the Israeli-Palastienien conflict away from this discussion.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Ashraf
Joined: Jan 31, 2004
Posts: 628 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 39
Country: Saudi Arabia
|
Re: terrorism
September 15, 2004 - 04:13 AM
|
|
If we go back a little in history, we will see that several people were called terrorists by the powers which dominated or controlled their land. I need not remind everyone of the terms the Nazis used to refer to the Jews in Poland, or the French resistence in France during WWII.
If it is right for the Lithuanians or Estonians to seek independence from the former Soviet Union, then why is it morally and politically wrong for other races to do the same knowing that all races and ethnicities in the USSR were equally oppressed by the central government?.
Is it maybe the desire of the Chechens to establish a Muslim state that ignited the whole conflict?
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Ray Ovac
Joined: May 12, 2004
Posts: 255 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Country: United States
|
Re: terrorism
September 15, 2004 - 04:39 AM
|
|
Originally posted by Haseeb
Now luke , why doesn't any state in USA ask for independence ? Why doesn't New Jersey for example stand say it wants to be a country ? Its because the people are happy as part of the USA and they are fine with the goevrnement is doing , they have an equal voice in whatever is happening .
Haseeb:
I get your point on this, but I just wanted to add some clarification.
While I think that just about every state in the US today feels that it is better off being part of the US, I would say that one of the reasons (at least for the last 130 years or so) that no state has tried to leave the US isn't because "they have been happy". Unfortunately, it is because trying to leave the union is illegal and would be dealt with as an act of war by the Federal Government.
As I suspect you know, this happened in what is probably the most painful war in US history (worse than Vietnam or anything else for that matter), The American Civil War.
In the lead - up to the war, the Southern States of the US (the "Confederacy" decided that their economic system (agricultural based on slave labor) wasn't being represented in an equitable way by the nation at large. So, they voted to leave the "union".
They didn't declare war on the North, they just wanted to leave. The US (the North) then basically declared war on the South citing their actions as illegal.
In essence, this was the largest "law enforcement" action in the history of the US...but it was war none the less.
So, as I said, I understand your point: it is easy to persuade a state to stay in a nation if the state benefits from being a part of the nation or if it believes that it has a fair voice in the running of the nation.
It is just that even with the US, being a state is not like being in a "club" that you can revoke your membership in if you don't like the rules.
Still, I agree that if a state or region of a nation decides that it wants to leave, then just as when a people decide that their tyrannical government has left them with no choice that to rebel against the government should be the last, but a viable option.
Even in the US, the citizens are keenly aware of the importance of their ability to rise above the government and take it back if the need should ever arise. This is one of the main reasons that the debate in the US on gun control has been (in my opinion) so strong.
BUT, no matter what the motivation for civil war is or even if it is justified or not, there are certain moral boundaries that mankind has generally accepted should not be crossed *even in warfare*...the targeting and murder of innocent civilians is such a boundary.
Aside from the point that I made earlier about the political stupidity of using terror as a weapon, consider this: Could a legitimate nation *ever* rise from a civil war victory which was gained through the murder of innocent people...even if they were citizens of the "enemy"? How much trust and faith could the innocent civilians of this new nation place in their own government knowing that the morality of such leaders is so low? Could they trust that their lives would be of any more value than the lives of other innocent civilians? Further, how much pride could they take in their nation knowing that it was formed not from blood on the battlefield fighting the armed military of the enemy but from the blood of innocent children and women and using tactics of cowardice (such as hiding from the enemy military and instead putting fear into the hearts of the innocents)?
I think such a new nation would be doomed from the start...and would then be subject to the additional murder of innocent civilians within its own boundaries as rebel forces attempt to overthrow *it* having already accepted killing innocent people as being an acceptable tactic.
Consider the intense anger of the American people after 9/11. Further, think about the inability of thousands of families to "get" the people who murdered their loved ones because the killers were already themselves dead. In addition, even the people who actually led this and who were still alive were not easily found.
In our desparation and our inability to strike back at a clear target, what if we had said that our new policy was going to be to explicitly tagret and murder not the enemy but the innocent people in Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia who the enemy cared about? I'm not talking about an invasion where in the course of military action civilians are unintentionally killed, I'm talking about taking such action with one objective: to kill innocent people to both avenge the innocent Americans that were lost and to send a message to Bin Laden that until he stopped we would keep doing it.
What would the world think of the US then? Would they be trying to figure out what triggered this and what the root cause was? Better yet, would this strategy even remotely have an impact on someone like Bin Laden?
Of course not...if the US Administration adopted such a policy *I* (and probably every American on this forum) would be in the streets or (if need be) arming ourselves to overthrow our own government. Why? Because even in war there are lines that cannot be crossed...and because for the US to do such a thing it would not only destroy the image of the US and her people forever but it would be a scar on the history of mankind...a permanent lowering of the universal ideal of human decency and civility.
So I do agree with your comments, Haseeb...and I think that countries like Russia and the US need to be aware of the greivances of people and work harder to be fair and compassionate to ensure that people never reach such a level of desperation that they feel that the murder of innocent people is their only recourse. However, once they have crossed that line the people who have used terror (not the more general group with the same grievances) cannot be bargained with or somehow made civil. They have opened a door that can't be closed again.
Of course it is probably very easy for me, someone who doesn't live in Chechenya to profess such "high minded" ideals. Still, I don't think that any of us can deny the the truth.
God Bless!
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Luke Lieberman
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 3007 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 33
Country: United States
Province/State: California
|
Re: terrorism
September 15, 2004 - 06:04 AM
|
|
Haseeb, thank you for your thoughtful reply.
I agree, lets leave the Israeli/Palestinian example out of this.
I think one of the things you have to reolize about America is that is is one of the only places where ethnic diversity is not a problem but a benefit.
The Chechin's want independance in part because they are on the whole of a different ethnicity and religion than the rest of Russia.
Therefor the differences are larger and clearer.
The reason New Jersey does not want to become its own country - besides the reason that Ray gave - is because at this point New Jersey has large numbers of Whites and blacks, Jews and Christians, Asians, Hispanics etc.
Itherefor it is not united into ONE group which differs greatly from the rest of America.
if it was made entirely of Africans for example, there might be more of a movement to become independant.
So I think the social structures of America and Russia are very different.
As an example look at Canada - this is a perfectly reasonable government which treats its people well - and yet the French Canadians are trying very hard (through peaceful means) to seperate and become their own country where French is the official language etc.
this is because they have a cultural identity which is distinct from the country as a whole.
New Jersey does not have a cultural identity which is distinct from the rest of America - if you were to drive from southern New Jersey into Maryland - you would not know you had done so unless I told you or you saw a sign.
you understand?
Now then - you are asking how to accomplish goals without terrorism against a far more powerful adversary -
- I would submit to you that the most successful battles for civil or national rights - have been waged without firing a shot.
When Gandhi wanted the English occupation of India to end - did he start blowing up their houses?
No - he waged a peaceful, spiritual campeign which sought the moral highground -
- you see rightousness is a powerful force, often times more powerful than an army - Ghandhi understood this.
he also understood that rightousness cannot be held by hands stained in innocent blood.
And he moved the British Empire out of India without firing a shot. He simply demonstraited to them they moral repugnance of what they were doing.
In my own country - America - Blacks were long treated very poorly.
In America when Blacks were living in oppression - there were 2 conflicting views in the African American community
One came from the Nation of Islam and Malcom X. He thought that black communities should arm themselves and fight against the local police - white communities in general.
They regarded white people as evil, and people with whome no peace was possible - it was a xenophobic and essentially racist organization.
After Malcom X made a pilgramidge to Mecca - he learned on this pilgramidge that good people come in all colors - he met good Muslims of all races - and that whiteness was not a sign of evil.
He understood that he was preaching against racism - with another form of racism
Malcom X came back and started preaching a different philosophy - ane which saw co-existance and even cooperation with whites as a goal.
For this change in views the Nation of Islam - an organization he headed - assasinated him.
The other vioce - and a more pursuasive and powerful vioce in the Black community was Martin Luthar King Jr.
He was inspired by Ghandhi and he knew that military struggle against the United States government was DOOMED TO FAILURE. He knew that the Black minority would be slaughtered and much more greatly oppressed if they engauged in subverive militry acts.
He knew that racism in its essence stems from fear - and that to make the Whtie community afraid of the blacks would only isolate the black community and engourage the American government to react harshly against blacks.
again it was obvious to him that he could not further the cause of Black freedom by encouraging hostility among a much stronger force.
He knew that this was a losing tactic - just as it has been a losing tactic in Palestine for all this time.
As Sun Tzu - the great Japanese warlord wrote in "The Art of War" - and I am paraphrasing "avoid armed struggle whenever possible and only enguage in it when you either have no other choice - or you are probably going to win."
Martin Luthar King found the moral highground - he lead a peaceful people who wanted only to be free - only wanted to be respected.
They marched, they protested, and when the White cops turned their hoses & dogs lose - The Blacks only kept singing their spiritual hyms.
And when the average White Americans saw this struggle, saw these peaceful peace being treated brutally for simply wanting their rights and to be treated as equal citizens -
then the value of the moral highground became apparent - before long many white Americans (particularly Jewish ones) joined in Dr. Kings marches.
White Americans started to sit with him in prisons - and in a march one of the goals was to fill the jails beyond capacity.
The average Americans saw injustice being done to Blacks on their televisions.
within a few short years Martin Luthar King shifted entirely the attitudes of White America - he had reached their hearts, and made them feel the shame of their actions against his community.
You see he believed that rightousness was the greatest power - and that rightousness cannot be held by hands stained in innocent blood.
That is why the Palestinians (for instance) cannot hold it. That is why they never really have the world behind them - because it is hard to support a group of people who blow up buses full of innocent people.
I am in NO WAY suggested apathy, or that the Chechins simply do nothing -
- both of those movements were VERY well organized and had exceptional leadership (Ghandhi and Dr. King) which could articulate and utalize the energy of their people)
Dr. King also concentraited on economics and exploiting the dependance of the powerful on the efforts and money of the poor.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
|
Display posts from:
|
Home
Community
