Bugarry,

I can see that you have a lot energy sending all these
very interesting, insightful thought provoking stories
to the L. I definately enjoy reading them. Although
some of the stories are very reactionary, yet the
majority of them help one understand the global
political trend. Thanks once again

E Sillah.


 --- MOMODOU BUHARRY GASSAMA <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> The political roots of the terror attack on New York
> and Washington
>
> By the Editorial Board
> 12 September 2001
> Use this version to print | Send this link by email
> | Email the author
>
> The World Socialist Web Site unequivocally condemns
> the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and
> the Pentagon. Those responsible for the hijacking of
> four commercial passenger aircraft and their
> conversion into flying bombs are guilty of mass
> murder. Nothing of a socially progressive character
> will be achieved on the basis of such an
> indiscriminate and callous destruction of human
> life.
>
> These acts of homicidal terrorism manifest a toxic
> combination of demoralized pessimism, religious and
> ultra-nationalist obscurantism, and, it must be
> added, political opportunism of the vilest
> character. Terrorist organizations-notwithstanding
> their anti-American rhetoric-base their tactics on
> the illusion that random acts of horrific violence
> will compel the US ruling class to shift its
> policies. Thus, in the final analysis, they hope to
> make a deal with Washington.
>
> However it seeks to justify itself, the terrorist
> method is fundamentally reactionary. Far from
> dealing a powerful blow against imperialist
> militarism, terrorism plays into the hands of those
> elements within the US establishment who seize on
> such events to justify and legitimize the resort to
> war in pursuit of the geopolitical and economic
> interests of the ruling elite. The murder of
> innocent civilians enrages, disorients and confuses
> the public. It undermines the struggle for the
> international unity of the working class, and
> counteracts all efforts to educate the American
> people on the history and politics that form the
> background to contemporary events in the Middle
> East.
>
> Nevertheless, our condemnation of Tuesday's
> terrorist outrages does not in the slightest imply
> any lessening of our principled and irreconcilable
> opposition to the policies of the US government.
> Anyone who wishes to understand the why and
> wherefore of yesterday's events must study the
> historical and political record of the US in the
> Middle East, especially over the last 30 years. The
> unrelenting efforts of American imperialism to
> secure its domination over the oil resources of the
> region, which has entailed, among other things,
> unstinting support for the Israeli state's
> oppression of the Palestinian people, has placed the
> United States in violent opposition to the
> legitimate and irrepressible democratic, national
> and social aspirations of the Arab masses.
>
> In the immediate aftermath of Tuesday's events,
> politicians, editorialists and media pundits have
> declared over and over that Americans must recognize
> that the destruction of the World Trade Center means
> the United States is at war and must act
> accordingly. But the fact of the matter is that the
> US government has been engaged in direct warfare in
> the Middle East, in one form or another, for the
> better part of two decades.
>
> Putting aside the massive material aid that it
> provides for Israeli military operations, the United
> States has been bombing one or another Middle
> Eastern country almost continuously since 1983. US
> bombers and/or battleships have attacked Lebanon,
> Libya, Iraq, Iran, the Sudan and Afghanistan.
> Without actually declaring war, the United States
> has conducted military operations against Iraq for
> nearly 11 years. The ongoing daily bombings of Iraq
> are barely mentioned in the American media, which
> has made no attempt to ascertain the total number of
> Iraqis killed by US bombs since 1991.
>
> Given this bloody record, why should anyone be
> surprised that those who have been targeted by the
> United States have sought to strike back?
>
> The same media that is now screaming for blood has
> routinely applauded the use of violence against
> whatever country or people are deemed to be
> obstacles to US interests. Let us recall the words
> of New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, who had
> this to say to the Serbian people during the US
> bombing campaign in 1999: "It should be lights out
> in Belgrade: every power grid, water pipe, road and
> war-related factory has to be hit.... [W]e will set
> your country back by pulverizing you. You want 1950?
> We can do 1950. You want 1389? We can do 1389."
>
> The foreign policy of the US is a mixture of
> cynicism, brutality and irresponsibility. Washington
> has pursued a course that has inflamed the hatred of
> large sections of the world's population, creating
> an environment in which recruits can be found for
> bloody terrorist operations. In rare moments of
> candor, foreign policy specialists have acknowledged
> that the actions of the United States provoke hatred
> and the desire for retribution. During the Balkan
> War, former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger
> stated: "We've presented to the rest of the world a
> vision of the bully on the block who pushes a
> button, people out there die, we don't pay anything
> except the cost of a missile ... that's going to
> haunt us in terms of trying to deal with the rest of
> the world in the years ahead."
>
> This insight has not prevented the same Eagleburger
> from declaring Tuesday night that the United States
> should respond to the destruction of the World Trade
> Center by dropping bombs immediately on any country
> that might have been involved.
>
> George W. Bush's address to the nation Tuesday
> evening epitomized the arrogance and blindness of
> the American ruling class. Far from America being
> "the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in
> the world," the US is seen by tens of millions as
> the main enemy of their human and democratic rights,
> and the main source of their oppression. The
> American ruling elite, in its insolence and
> cynicism, acts as if it can carry out its violent
> enterprises around the world without creating the
> political conditions for violent acts of
> retribution.
>
> In the immediate aftermath of Tuesday's attacks, US
> authorities and the media are once again declaring
> that Osama bin Laden is responsible. This is
> possible, although, as always, they present no
> evidence to back up their claim.
>
> But the charge that bin Laden is the culprit raises
> a host of troubling questions. Given the fact that
> the US has declared this individual to be the
> world's most deadly terrorist, whose every move is
> tracked with the aid of the most technologically
> sophisticated and massive intelligence apparatus,
> how could bin Laden organize such an elaborate
> attack without being detected? An attack, moreover,
> against the same New York skyscraper that was hit in
> 1993?
>
> The devastating success of his assault would
> indicate that, from the standpoint of the American
> government, the crusade against terrorism has been
> far more a campaign of propaganda to justify US
> military violence around the world than a
> conscientious effort to protect the American people.
>
> Moreover, both bin Laden and the Taliban mullahs,
> whom the US accuses of harboring him, were financed
> and armed by the Reagan-Bush administration to fight
> pro-Soviet regimes in Afghanistan in the 1980s. If
> they are involved in Tuesday's operations, then the
> American CIA and political establishment are guilty
> of having nurtured the very forces that carried out
> the bloodiest attack on American civilians in US
> history.
>
> The escalation of US militarism abroad will
> inevitably be accompanied by intensified attacks on
> democratic rights at home. The first victims of the
> war fever being whipped up are Arab-Americans, who
> are already being subjected to death threats and
> other forms of harassment as a result of the media
> hysteria.
>
> The calls from both Republican and Democratic
> politicians for a declaration of war foreshadow a
> more general crackdown on opponents of American
> foreign policy. General Norman Schwarzkopf, who
> commanded American troops in the 1991 invasion of
> Iraq, spoke for much of the political and military
> elite when he declared on television that the war on
> alleged terrorist supporters should be conducted
> inside as well as outside the borders of the US.
>
> It is the policies pursued by the United States,
> driven by the strategic and financial interests of
> the ruling elite, which laid the foundations for the
> nightmare that unfolded on Tuesday. The actions now
> being contemplated by the Bush
> administration-indicated by the president's threat
> to make "no distinction between the terrorists who
> committed these acts and those who harbor them"-will
> only set the stage for further catastrophes.
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
=== message truncated ===

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~