http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/03/03-1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Thomas

Ajit, let me get at straight, so Helen Thomas an octogenarian,a reporter with utmost integrity, is being Obtuse or Deranged or conspiring to Pull President Obama’s leg, by asking a simple question .
While Mr Obama(a certifiable war criminal and violator of Geneva accord by now), being the leader of “Strongest nation” and “Civilized world”, while planning to spend Billions of dollars(borrowed from China) and hungreds of American and thousands of other lives in this conflict, does not have a spine to answer a simple question truthfully and he is still our hero!

Akbar, I am not trying to ban the word ‘Muslim’ but trying to understand it better. Is it a universal religious identity or a universal political identity ? Must everyone everywhere stop all conflicts with every Muslim to avoid inviting violence from any Muslim anywhere ? Should Nigerian students go berserk because of the sufferings of Palestinians ?

This is not to downplay what is happening to Palestinians – just as in my previous example I did not mean to suggest Christians are not having serious difficulties in parts of India and Pakistan that the respective societies need to address urgently.

But why?
And Helen thomas asked that same.question. and I quote.

Thomas: “Why do they want to do us harm? And what is the motivation? We never hear what you find out on why.”

But why isn’t there a frank discussion by America’s leaders and media about the real motivation of Muslim anger toward the United States? Why was Helen Thomas the only journalist to raise the touchy but central question of motive?

Now your postiion to me crystalizes as follows, we drop the word “Muslim ” from the discourse and get busy confronting the fanatics without wasting time in understanding their logic or illogic ,motivation or lack of motivation etc, .

I respect your opinion but disagree that it is solution to anything and there is overwhelming evidence for that, as we say in urdu ‘Dard bahrta gia joon joon dawa kee’.

Again probably unwittingly you are implying that more than 1 billion Muslims all are thinking like underwear bomber

In fact they are not. But clearly some are. I was pointing out that a similarly tiny minority from other religious persuasions could make the world a much more violent place.

That is not true. It is not justifying the attacks. What he points out is a lack of debate about what is motivating the fanaticism of these individuals and I quote

So, Washington’s sanitized discussion about motives for terrorism seems more intended for the U.S. domestic audience than the Muslim world.

Commentators who are neither naïve nor afraid are simply shut out of the Fawning Corporate Media (FCM). Salon.com’s Glen Greenwald, for example, has complained loudly about “how our blind, endless enabling of Israeli actions fuels terrorism directed at the U.S.,” and how it is taboo to point this out.

And McGovern a decades long retired CIA Analyst is not alone in his eagerness to debate the motivation of these individuals. Here is Stephen Walt raising the same question.

My point is not to rehash the whole debate over the invasion of Iraq (although to be honest, I don’t think there’s much debate to be had over the folly of that particular decision). My point is simply to reiterate that any serious effort to deal with our terrorism problem has to be multi-faceted, and has to include explicit consideration of the things we do that may encourage violent, anti-American movements. Only a complete head-in-the-sand approach to the issue would deny the connection between various aspects of U.S. foreign and military policy (military interventions, targeted assassinations, unconditional support for Israel, cozy relations with Arab dictatorships, etc.) and the fact that groups like al Qaeda keep finding people like al-Balawi to recruit to their cause.

http://walt.foreignpolicy.com

Juan Cole also chimes in on the same theme as above

But from a social science, explanatory point of view, what we have to remember is that there can be a handful of al-Balawis, or there can be thousands or hundreds of thousands. It depends on how many Abu Ghraibs, Fallujahs, Lebanons and Gazas the United States initiates or supports to the hilt. Unjust wars and occupations radicalize people. The American Right wing secretly knows this, but likes the vicious circle it produces. Wars make profits for the military-industrial complex, and the resulting terrorism terrifies the clueless US public and helps hawks win elections, allowing them to pursue further wars.

So the point is not to justify or rationalize the violence that “Muslims” or individuals with Muslim names want to visit on “West”, but to discuss what motivates them, right now the competing theories are
Muslims/Islamists/Islamicates are inherently deranged and violent and looking for rvenge Vs they are freedom fighters and heros trying to reverse the Western oppresion and avenge the honnor of Ummah.
To me None of these narrative is whole truth or even closer to truth. And that is why opening up the debate on their motivation is not equivallent to condoning what is being done.
Now as for you suggestion to drop word “Muslim” from the discourse, it will be th ultimate sanitizer, but does it help solve any conflict.

” The world would be a scarier place than it is if followers of other religions thought in this way”

Again probably unwittingly you are implying that more than 1 billion Muslims all are thinking like underwear bomber, and that is precisely why thoughtful people like McGovern want this discussion so earnestly.

Which is why I asked the question I did. The world would be a scarier place than it is if followers of other religions thought in this way. For instance, do you think the violence against Christians that has occurred in India and Pakistan in recent years is reason enough for every “Christian” country and her citizens to launch attacks against those two countries and any of their allies ?

Morally speaking, al-Qaeda is twisted and evil, and has committed mass murder. Neither the US nor Israel is morally responsible for violent crackpots being violent crackpots. Al-Qaeda or a Taliban affiliate turned al-Balawi to the dark side. Gandhi and Martin Luther King taught us the proper response to social injustice (and it should not be forgotten that Gandhi had a significant following among the Pashtuns). But from a social science, explanatory point of view, what we have to remember is that there can be a handful of al-Balawis, or there can be thousands or hundreds of thousands. It depends on how many Abu Ghraibs, Fallujahs, Lebanons and Gazas the United States initiates or supports to the hilt. Unjust wars and occupations radicalize people. The American Right wing secretly knows this, but likes the vicious circle it produces. Wars make profits for the military-industrial complex, and the resulting terrorism terrifies the clueless US public and helps hawks win elections, allowing them to pursue further wars. And so it goes, until the Republic is bankrupted and in ruins and its unemployed have to live in tent cities.”

http://www.juancole.com/

Ajit I hope you went through the article as Mr McGovern is trying to shine some light on the elephant in the room, that is the US Policy towards lesser humans. As you can see the fiftten countries whose population will be screened if ever comes to US Airports are all Muslim countries except Cuba.

I guess discussion of global politics would be boring if it read like,
‘A humane and progressive human in White house ordered to liquidate some “Bad” humans in distan mountains. Unfortunately when the order was excuted some other humans including children and women also had their lives terminated prematurely’. And like wise
‘ A BAD human somewhere in caves ordered another human to blowup in a plane full of humans’
Also what will happen to the job prospects of people who are fond of pairing Muslims or Islam with terror, fascism, savages etc etc,

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/01/09-1

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/declassified/archive/2010/01/02/white-house-advisor-briefed-in-october-on-underwear-bomb-technique.aspx

I wrote this note on my group in response to the above news. comments welcome.
Another terrible bombing, this time in Lakki Marwat. It seems the suicidal maniac was headed for a peace committee meeting but could not get there due to heavy security, so he hit the wall of a playground and went to meet the 72 virgins short of his final target. Sadly, there was a volleyball game going on in the playground and there were a lot of spectators. TV is saying 70 or more are dead and the death toll could rise.
Since this particular tragedy has struck poor pathans in a small town, its not going to register for too long on the minds of the Pakistani elite, who will no doubt be back to discussing blackwater safehouses within two days max. But while some vague sense of outrage and disorientation still exists, I am going to throw out some random thoughts and make some predictions…the purpose is to invite all of you to make some predictions of your own. Predictions are what distinguish science from fantasy. Social change is too complex to be modeled like the physical sciences (at least at this point) but still, unless we can make a prediction, our models are worthless…so here goes.
1. I think the neo-wahabi paradigm which lies at the heart of the jihadi operation in Pakistan (the network obviously extends into Afghanistan and other places and crucial sources lie in Saudi Arabia, but the largest physical node is in Pakistan) is not compatible with “normal” existence in the globalized world and its going to be slowly and painfully pushed further and further away from the mainstream. This process of separating it from its “mainstream” supporters like the high command of the Pak army is going to accelerate. Friends who believe the army is irreversibly pro-jihadi are not correct. The army WAS pro-jihadi and is still terribly confused about whether they can save “good jihadis” for future use against India , but they will be pushed to give them up by circumstances. The army and the jihadis will stand against each other one day. GHQ may not know it, but one day it will even fight against old friends like Masood Azhar and Hafiz Saeed. Maybe not in weeks or months, but certainly in years.
2. Recurrent waves of anti-Americanism and “paknationalism” will confuse the process. Old Nationalists will struggle with their 60 years worth of anti-indian training with the need to make an accomodation not just with the Indian state but with our own Indian heritage.Old leftists will struggle to align their anti-imperialist models and their issues with capitalism with the need to cooperate with the imperial war machine.Swarms of ex-foreign secretaries and retired generals will display their utter confusion on TV for many months to come. But the fact is, the jihadi paradigm is retrogressive, indiscriminately violent, and unable to deliver relief from ANY of the multiple real grievances and conflicts that various classes and groups have against others all over the world. All this sound and fury will blow over and most of these people will end up compromising deeply held beliefs to deal with this menace. Being human, they will do so without necessarily admitting it even to themselves, but in whatever messy form, they will do it.

3. Many respected commentators will take a while to overcome their own habits of automatic self-censorship. Lesser known commentators will push the envelope first and better known ones will step forward more aggressively only after they realize that A, B or C can actually be said without the heavens falling. Some friends will be surprised at how dramatically the tone will shift from hunting for Jews and Hindus under every bed to openly identifying the jihadis AND their fellow travellers as a terrorist menace that will have to be dealt with before we can come back to the arguments about imperialism and “the metropolitan XYZ”…in other words, before we can become just another “normal country”, stuggling with all the issues raised by the existence of 7 billion unequally placed humans on one planet…

http://wichaar.com/news/284/ARTICLE/18052/2009-12-30.html

Pakistan, my friend, is insolvent ever since its inception. Whatever solid infrastructure it has, was mostly developed with the help of China(KARAKORAM HIGHWAY,Gawadar Port,Chashma Power plant etc)
Korea,(MOTORWAY), Russia(steel mills)
The debauchry of its eastablishment and elites has been funded through our “western” friends and Saudis with strings attached. That is the main dilema, Lebanon a country of few millions, can show the middle finger to the Bullies and can stay intact while look at what is happening in Pakistan.

The article posted above mainly looks at the events from a conservative military expert and scholar ‘s perspective,Andrew Bacevich, whose son incidently died in Iraq war. He uses the term long war as the US policy maker use it as alternative to GWOT.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/12/23/2009-12-23_obama_tell_me_how_this_ends_is_afghanistan_just_a_new_war_of_attrition.html

“In his 1937 short story with an unforgettable title — “In Dreams Begin Responsibilities” — Delmore Schwartz’s unnamed narrator imagines himself “as if” in a “motion picture theatre.” He’s watching a silent film — already then a long-gone form — “an old Biograph one, in which the actors are dressed in ridiculously old-fashioned clothes, and one flash succeeds another with sudden jumps.” It’s not any movie, however, but one about his parents’ awkward, uncertain courtship, and there comes a moment when his character suddenly leaps up in the crowded theater of his dream life and shouts at the flickering images of his still undecided (future) parents: “Don’t do it. It’s not too late to change your minds, both of you. Nothing good will come of it, only remorse, hatred, scandal, and two children whose characters are monstrous.”

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/12/23-0

It is self evident,as Bill Clinton once said and I paraphrase, ‘No matter how heavily armed, 4% of world population(that is USA) cannot hold rest of the world hostage indefinitely by force.’ So a little good will can a long way. Especially with “Muslim World” as it is not competing with USA, the competitors are as you know, Eurozone, South america uniting behind Brazil and argentina, SCO(Russia,China).
Now if you can step in the shoes of a Muslim American, who is contributing his tax dollars and soon to be 18 ,sons and duaghters to a never ending war policy under the Neo con/Neo Liberal narrative, US nationalism( West) Vs Islam, then the concern is obvious and urgent.

As of “Muslim World” that is Ali Khan’s term, If there was such a thing (hence good will), united entity with a counetr weight then this all would not be happening or would be playing out differently.

Btw, what do you think “the muslim world” is doing to generate goodwill all over the world? Or is it only the US that must “generate goodwill”?