It is said that perceptions can sometimes be as strong and as real as the
real thing; and if there is any element of truth in that, it can be safely
argued that the perception of what "American Values" stands for leaves a lot
to be desired; as far as certain parts of the world are concerned.

I remember a demonstrating Pakistani, when the US bombing of Afghanistan
started, asking whether America has done any introspection to find an answer
to the question "why are Americans hated so much in certain parts of the
world?". This, to me, is a very important question that American foreign
policy makers should constantly ask them selves and try to find an answer
to.

Even though America has done a lot of good for mankind, even if it were
primarily for "American interests" only, it has also wronged many. Despite
the fact that we have all been fed the American dream to the extent that
many of us even want to be Americans, there are certain "American interests"
that are not evryone's interest. This, I believe, is something that they
should be mindful of especially when taking decisions that can cost lives.

The following is an article culled from the Islamic website ummah.com. I
must say that the site has a lot of information about many things,
particular those dealing with Islam.

While I don't see "American hypocricy" and the "war on terrorism" the same
way the writer of the following article sees them, I share some of his/her
sentiments. Please read on.

Have a good day, Gassa.

=====================================================================

The new world disorder ?

The United States led "war on terrorism" represents the beginning not of a
new world order, but a new colonialism and chaos. The West now reserves the
right to intervene in, and occupy any part of the Muslim world it sees as a
threat to the existing status quo. And, because it is only Muslim masses
that are seeking to change that order (to achieve their freedom from the
remnants of the last colonial era), they are the target.

The principles and direction of this "New War" were clearly defined in the
few days after the September 11 atrocities. The US-led alliance, in anger
revealed their true feelings about Islam and Muslims, before realising their
mistake and attempting a cover up. It was a "Crusade"; a monumental struggle
between "good and evil"; "a clash of civilizations", the civilized against
barbarians; a war of the "free" world against those who hate freedom; a war
of those who stand for human rights against those who crush them and oppress
women.

The principles of this Final Crusade have also been laid down. The Western
Alliance declared, "An attack on one is an attack on all". The United States
claimed they had the right to self-defence and retaliation for the attacks.
They have the right to hit anyone who "aids, abets, harbours or supports"
those they allege are terrorists. They can attack anyone in pursuit of the
protection of their values and interests. A suspect is now guilty on the
basis of circumstantial evidence that will not stand up in court. The
evidence does not need to be presented because it is gained secretly. One
Government Minister stated, "We know he’s done it and they know that we know
he’s done it". The West has the right to assassinate anyone they suspect of
being a "terrorist" and to get rid of governments that harbour and support
"terrorists" and replace them with a government of their choice. The
property and assets of legitimate businesses and charities can be
confiscated without evidence. Even our rights to speak out against such
injustices are to be curtailed as you are either "with us or against us".

The West however has not thought through the consequences of its principles.
What if Muslims too were to adopt the same principles? An attack on one
Muslim country is an attack on all? Who should the families of one million
Iraqi children killed by UN sanctions seek retaliation against? What of the
people of Afghanistan, Chechnya, Kashmir and Palestine; do they not have the
right to defend themselves against those that attack them , in pursuit of
their freedom?

The principles and logic of this new war are exactly the same as those of
the old imperialism; Might is right. Western civilization through threats,
intimidation, bullying and "international sanction" is to impose its will on
the Muslim world. The rich and powerful, against the weak and the oppressed.
The free world against, those fighting for freedom. If the natives resist
this is now to be labelled terrorism. In Afghanistan, one of the weakest
nations on this earth, the Taliban are expected to simply hand over Osama
Bin Laden, without evidence, extradition or even negotiation; because the
United States is the sole superpower. The Taliban’s request is perfectly
legitimate and reasonable. Even those arrested in Britain, are not
extradited until evidence is presented to court. But the Taliban and
Afghanistan are expected to do as they are told. In resisting the United
States the Taliban are standing up against the principle of "might is right"
but also for international law, justice, and self-determination.

Kashmiri Muslims have taken on an invading Indian army of 600,000 for the
last 10 years. The children of Palestine have been fighting the might of the
Zionists for 53 years, with no sign of weakening. Three thousand Chechen
Mujahideen, having already defeated the Russians once, have now been
fighting an army of 200,000 for the last two years. The Israeli army was
defeated by a Mujahideen force in Lebanon, where Arab armies failed. This
latest David and Goliath struggle is also of Biblical proportions. A nation
so poor that its people scavenge for food and use donkeys and horses for
transport against the most powerful and modern military machine on earth.

This conflict has divided Muslim and non-Muslim. The entire Muslim peoples
of the world are opposed to the bombings, and almost the entire Western
world is in support of them. This new colonialism is a continuation of the
age-old crusade against Islam and Muslims. The difference is that this
colonialism has no boundaries. Only Muslims are earmarked for this unique
kind of treatment. If five million Christians in Afghanistan were faced with
starvation you can bet they would not be attacking that country. If Osama
Bin Laden was a Christian, a Milosevic, Karadic or Putin he would simply be
a war criminal or a dictator, not the devil incarnate and simply bringing
him to trial would be sufficient.


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>

To 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]

<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>