-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (99)Page 1 of 1 pagesWonderfully accurate and well written. I just wish that the author, pictured on the cover, was not quite so damn good looking. I am deathly tired of the American media’s recent move to present our ‘news’ through a growing legion of ‘Hollywood’ looking females. That this author is so beautiful, yet has such apropos things to say, is kind of oxymoronic in new day and age.
Posted by jamesstrauss on Jun 7, 2003 at 6:53 PM I can’t believe someone complimented an article that is anti-american and encourages a revolution. She makes it seem as if she’d encourage a military attack, if only it would work. She says that terrorism isn’t good because it gives Bush an excuse to go after them. Never mind that terrorism kills innocent people.
Lets not even bother with how she said that the poor or paying for the war. Is she serious? Who pays more taxes, the rich or the poor? Not to go number-crazy but 83% of the salary of the average person who earns 53,000 or more goes back to government (through income, sales tax etc). So the rich are paying a lot more than the poor.
This lady says that she wants Pentagon oversite meetings to made public, why? They’re classified for a reason.
She says that we’re misspending our government money. That’s the first thing this pinhead got right. We’re misspending when we send a hundred million dollars to medicare people who don’t need it. Or when we send welfare to people who use it on drugs and alcohol.
She says that we decimated Iraq. She can’t be serious. We put a stop to the rape and the torture and the mass graves. We should be sorry that we interfered with that at least thats what she is saying.
She says that us making Iraq have a US-style economy is a bad thing. It worked for Japan.
Unlike what Strauss said, this is not a good article, its a ridiculous anti-US rant that encourages terrorist attacks if they could work. She better hope that we don’t pre-emptive strike her.
Posted by Brad on Jun 9, 2003 at 1:18 AM Brad,
I am interested in knowing why you feel you have the right to invade other countries.
Posted by Faf on Jun 9, 2003 at 1:58 PM This article is in many ways highlights problems associated with meddling in another country’s affairs. Premptively attacking one based on poor intelligence and failing to protect existing infrastructure only places the agressor in a poor light. These actions in Iraq underscore the problem of an uninformed public (Iraqi threat) in the U.S. Now that the war is over, the true threat to this country (wmd’s) appears to have been created to sway the opinion of said public. We now hear that even though no wmd’s have yet to be discovered, we have saved the iraqi people from a terrible fate (we have) but that was not the reason for this war. Perhaps with that line of reasoning we should be prepared for an endless stream of conflict with the MANY other republics and countries that oppress their citizens. No, liberating the iraqi’s should not override the facts that we the people of the U.S were in fact misled by our government. Expecting your leaders in power to present facts vs. assumptions is not asking too much. When an administration plays on the fears of it’s citizens to advance it’s foreign policy then it’s time to worry less about straightening out the affairs of other countrys and concentrate on putting our own house in order. Hopefully in 2004 this will occur thru the election process. Arundhati’s article only shows how worldwide perceptions of this country( right or wrong ) are shaped by the action of a country or it’s people.
Posted by cynical sam on Jun 9, 2003 at 4:54 PM What at great piece of writing. What is happening to our beloved democracy? Just look at the countries in Latin America that tried to embrace the” American Corporate Democracy”. A disaster:Argentina,Ecuador, Chile and Nicaragua. After all the bloodshed and lost lives,Nicaragua is back in the dungeons.The democratically elected presidents have plundered what little treasure was left after heavy borrowing and begging for economic assistance.
Posted by Pablo Ruiz on Jun 9, 2003 at 5:05 PM People’s sanctions are an excellent idea. A coordinated program of using cars less would also work to affect the Bush pocketbook. Maybe Arundhati Roy could work with MoveOn.org to institute this program.
Posted by Carol on Jun 9, 2003 at 7:44 PM Faf, do you realize that if you got your way the torture and the rape would still be going on? Doesn’t that bother you?
Posted by Brad on Jun 9, 2003 at 10:25 PM Great article… I hope she survives the experience. The freedom of speech guaranteed by the US Constitution is tenuous at best, thinking of the Dixie Chicks and anyone who dares to question Bush the Lesser, his cronies and their policies. (If he had been a Democrat, he would have long since been impeached.)
Of course, gutting education is very smart on his part. Stupid, uneducated people don’t ask questions. They go where they are told to go, they do what they are told to do. Sort of like all the Americans who support the government’s lies and deceit and throw rocks (verbally if not physically) at those who dare to question.
Posted by Diane on Jun 10, 2003 at 1:40 AM I’m sorry Diane, how would Bush have been impeached? Were the Dixie chicks arrested for speaking out? No. People were angry at their statements and some of them decided not to buy their cds. I believe their cd is selling fine now anyway, so what are you trying to say?
Posted by Brad on Jun 10, 2003 at 1:50 AM Interesting that one could view this speech as anti-american…I suppose in some ways it is, or at least could be construed as such. The speech is anti-american in that it views nationalism as a close-minded, unevolved way of thinking. So it is anti-american in the same way that it is anti-canadian, or anti-german, or anti-venezuelan.
However, its tone is decidedly “american,” recalling to some degree, the US Declaration of Independence.“WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness—That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security. “
Many of the things Arundhati Roy advocates in her speech are things that I immediately associate with American idealism - working together for social justice and equality, building friendships and mutually beneficial partnerships, demanding responsibility from all and to all at every level.
So, anti-american? I guess it really depends on your notion of america.
If anyone would like to watch/listen to this speech, streaming download available here: http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/05/15/1615215
Posted by mike on Jun 10, 2003 at 2:20 AM I saw her give this speech on CSPAN2 late one night. It was incredibly inspiring and when she got to the line about revolution, I stood and cheered in my own home. I had to think though; how sad it was that it took a small woman from a nation on the other side of the world not blessed nearly with our advantages socially or economically to articulate so clearly what we are so afraid to admit ourselves. I wanted to replay it hourly on cable for 48 hours straight.
Posted by Thom Waters on Jun 10, 2003 at 3:08 AM “She says that us making Iraq have a US-style economy is a bad thing. It worked for Japan.”
Posted by: Brad on 6.8.03 | 8:18 pm from New YorkI see irony is not dead in the US.
Posted by andrea on Jun 10, 2003 at 3:36 AM Brad,
My way is not that Saddam stays. I am glad he is gone. What I wanted to know was why you thought that the US had the right to deal with Iraqi affairs. Would you feel the same way if the circumstances were reversed?
Posted by Faf on Jun 10, 2003 at 9:21 AM Ms Roy has hit the nail right on its head. All her points about democracy are relevent. Americans seem to feel we have this devine right to stick our nose and guns in the faces of anyone who disagrees with our policies. If Iraq had anything but oil underneath the soil this war would never have been called. These bunch of bully-boy Reagan rebates will surly need “devine guidence” if they think the whole world will stand by and watch them roust everyone in their way to a totalitatian government. Ms Roy thank you for caring enough to speak up for our human family.
Posted by Barbara on Jun 10, 2003 at 2:26 PM It looks as though Brad is the lone dissenter here. I hope he and those of his ilk are just as outnumbered in the polls in 2004. No matter what the outcome, it was WRONG to invade a soverign nation without the blessing of the rest of the world. We are not the leaders of the world. Might does not make right. Just the fact that Bush had to lie to get the blessing of his own followers should be a giant red flag to all who are paying attention.
Posted by John on Jun 10, 2003 at 3:23 PM Why do people resort to the"anti-american” label? Anytime you don’t agree with the policies of a “corporate controlled” president,they say you are” un-american”. I don’t wave flags on my house or on my car.I don’t wear t-shirts or caps with american flags on them;but I voluntarily joined the army during the Vietnam war because it was my duty to a country that gave me refuge from the oppression of a dictator.
Posted by pablo on Jun 10, 2003 at 4:49 PM Reading this article was a real treat. I fully share every word in it. The only way we have to try and stop the world’s destruction is creating a conscience on the effects of the now unmasked building of the American Empire on thousands of millions of people in the world, plus the depletion and contamination of natural resources by the depredatory sub-species . We have no means, no channels of participation, just our suffering minds and our determination not to let ourselves be fooled. Is that enough? Some nights I am very pessimistic about it, some mornings I want to believe that if we join forces we might have a chance. Right now, still in the morning hours, I feel we are so many we have to continue our struggle against the “axis of greed and lies” but let’s be frank about it: our main weapon is word (printed or spoken) and we will see if it’s true that “The pen is mightier than the sword”. Best wishes to you all.
Maria Luisa (Argentine living in Costa Rica)
Posted by Maria Luisa Etchart on Jun 10, 2003 at 5:48 PM “..this is not a good article, its a ridiculous anti-US rant that encourages terrorist attacks if they could work. “
- Brad*snorts* Alright, you just keep thinking that..
Posted by Amanda on Jun 10, 2003 at 6:05 PM Pablo, I don’t know if I made it clear on why it is anti-american. this speech was anti-america because it calls for the bringing down of america. It says that military attacks would be her first choice, but they can’t work. I agree that not having a flag on your house is not anti-america, I don’t have one.
Amanda:
How does this not advocate terrorism? “Terrorist strikes only give the U.S. government an opportunity it is eagerly awaiting to further tighten its stranglehold. To argue against U.S. military aggression by saying that it will increase the possibilities of terrorist strikes is futile.” That says that terrorism is futile because it wouldn’t work.Barbara, I think you have it backwards, WE don’t have a totalitarian government, IRAQ used too.
Oh and John, surely you cannot think that inthesetimes.com is a cross-section of America. This website/magazine is very left-wing, as are its readers. (which isn’t a bad thing)
Posted by Brad on Jun 10, 2003 at 7:24 PM What an outstanding piece! If only everyone truly understood these issues, and cared enough about them to actually do something. Roy is absolutely right that we need to UNITE as Americans and fight these awful abuses of power, and once we do we will be greeted joyously by the rest of the world. We have to reach out to the “Brad’s” too, and help them understand why they are mistaken.
We need to draw a distinction between America and the government. They are not the same thing. When the government uses patriotism to manufacture support for wars, we cannot buy into it. The real patriots are the ones that care enough about this country to stand up and speak out against the powers at be that have all the “Brad’s” convinced it is okay to wage “pre-emptive” warfare in the name of “freedom.”
Unfortunately, the problems with our empire (militarism, a lying media, and corporate corruption to name a few) will not be fixed by another election, as cynical sam hopes. As the people of the US we need to boycott ALL the corrupt corporations that are controling our government. We need to bring our war criminals to justice for misleading our country to war, and killing hundreds of innocent Iraqis, as well as our American soldiers. Nothing short of a revolution is going to fix the problems that we are discussing here, and the fight may seem impossible given the extreme means of control the government now has to silence our opposition (the PATRIOT Act). But the people will triumph because we outnumber them, and we are fighting for what is RIGHT! It’s time to join the good fight.
If anyone has any more specifics of how to accomplish reforming the system, please share them. Thanks.
Posted by walter on Jun 10, 2003 at 7:45 PM I think it is wonderful to have a lone dissenter here. Nothing more boring than preaching to the converted.
Posted by Faf on Jun 10, 2003 at 9:04 PM Brad,
I agree. The US is not run by a totalitarian government. We should probably ignore the fact that 34 of the last 43 Presidents have been of the same bloodline, going back genetically to Charlemagne. We should probably ignore the fact that W. is a 13th cousin of the Queen of England, and a 13th cousin once removed of Prince Charles, making him a direct descendant of Henry III and of Henry VIII’s sister Mary Tudor, wife of Louis XI of France.
I know I sleep better knowing it is a country in which absolutely anyone can be President. Anyone from the ruling class that is.
Posted by Golondrina on Jun 10, 2003 at 9:17 PM brad, for you to call her a pin head is really amusing. That’s like dan quayle calling einstein stupid. you obviously do not know much about what is happening in the world. Yeah, saddam was bad, but where are the WMDs? Where is hussein? where is bin laden? bush is a demogogue that uses fear to get what he wants. and rumsfeld and cheney have been planning this little take-over of iraq since george the first first bombed. we were never at risk of being bombed by iraq, but north korea can bomb the west coast in a matter of months (i believe—any way, very soon). if georgy-boy was so worried about human rights, what about human rights in africa, north korea, chiapas, for that matter? please, i beg you, brad, read some books.
Posted by christine on Jun 10, 2003 at 9:17 PM Christine, are you saying we should go to war with N. Korea?
First of all what do human rights violations in Africa have to do with the human rights violations of Iraq? Just because there are violations in many parts of the world doesn’t mean we shouldn’t stop some of them. The bad behavior of Africa does not condone the bad behavior of Iraq. Also, I don’t know where Saddam or Osama is, but I do know our government’s lookign for them. Whats your point anyway? That we should not have gone into Afghanistan or Iraq because it would be hard to find these guys? Please.
Golondrina, I agree that you can’t be president unless you come from a affluent background. I don’t know if any of what you said is true, or where you got it from, but even if it is, how does that not make us democratic? The people still choose the president (well, most of the time) and that’s the definition of democracy.I also belive that Reagan and Carter did not have a lot of money growing up.
Posted by Brad on Jun 10, 2003 at 9:50 PM brad, what is YOUR point? i don’t condone violence or genocide by anyone anywhere, neither by saddam, hitler, nor bush (yes, the us govt not only condones torture, it teaches it to latin american soldiers in fort benning georgia - with tax payer money). My question was, why is cbr (cheney/bush/rumsfeld) going after iraq? a country where a half a million children have died because of our sanctions. we ‘saved’ the people of afganistan, that’s what you would say, but what is happening there now? do you really think these people have a better way of life post-cbr? all cbr has done is promoted and escalated terrorism and hate everywhere. like i said before, brad, read a book. (by someone other than rush limbaugh.)
Posted by christine on Jun 10, 2003 at 10:37 PM Please don’t insult the author’s intelligence just because she tells uncomfortable truths. Shame on us who believe and think that we’re trapped but praise to those who won’t stop questioning and demanding justice. Read and make a difference!
Posted by Mylu on Jun 10, 2003 at 11:34 PM Brad, it sounds like you think the Bush administration went into Iraq for the sake of liberation and to bring down a murderous dictatorship (which it was). If the bush adminisration (ie. cheney, Rumsfeld) hates these types of governments why did they help support worse governments throughout Latin and South America under Reagen (Just as an example, the list could go on). The U.S. has supported everyone from Suharto to Pinnochet who commited torture and rape, the very crimes you seem to despise. You also don’t seem to mind the 5 to 10 thousand innocent people the U.S. killed in the war. I think you been watching a little to much CNN and not thinking for yourself. This article was exetremely well written. The author speaks truthfully and doesn’t allow the mainstream misinformation to put her on the defensive. It’s nice to read some really honest writing that doesn’t pander to Bush’s arguments.
Posted by Derek on Jun 10, 2003 at 11:54 PM This is a powerfully strong dissertation, and I agree with 90% of it. Some of the other things you say are a little scary. It is quite an undertaking you seek (revolution), but a little revolution now and then is a healthy thing I think.
I, myself, am still battling Gale Norton and Bush’s thugs on the genocidal destruction of our planet’s environment, i.e.; our forests, mountains, oceans, rivers and beautiful earth.
The evil is fear…fear is the real culprit in, not only the U.S.‘s demise, but of other nations as well. Think about it. What is that saying? “Absolute power corrupts absolutely”....Bush, Hussain, Arafat, etc. etc. And all for the God almighty dollar! The whole world is going to hell, and it’s not just Bush leading the way. But fear is still the real enemy. Think about it again.
Posted by Donna Plaisted on Jun 11, 2003 at 1:25 AM Donna, what you wrote about fear was interesting. How do we combat fear?
Posted by Steve on Jun 11, 2003 at 1:28 AM “Who pays more taxes, the rich or the poor? Not to go number-crazy but 83% of the salary of the average person who earns 53,000 or more goes back to government . . . She says that us making Iraq have a US-style economy is a bad thing. It worked for Japan.”
- Bradyeah, and those rich people are the ones whose necks are put on the frontlines; oh, please forgive me if I find your figure of 83% preposterous.
If you remember, Japan had no real resources. They went around trying to conquer the pacific and SE Asia in order to secure natural resources. That is, there was no incentive for the U.S. governemnt and corporations to practice the sort of exploitation of natural resources that I’m afraid started even before the dust settled in Iraq.
The revolution we need is not necessarily a revolution of arms but one of hearts, voices, and minds; we need Americans and the world to stand up to the despotic machinations of Bush and his cronies, not simply for the betterment of the world but also for the salvation of American democracy as a beacon to the world. This democracy needs THE PEOPLE to stand up and make themselves heard and felt.
Posted by Jon on Jun 11, 2003 at 4:34 AM brad, Please spare us your super-patriot babble. Democracy is based on the concept it’s people can disagree with the policies of it’s leadership. Because all don’t share your view doesn’t make them anti-american. Fortunately there are people out there unlike yourself willing to analyze and ask the questions our vaunted corporate media won’t. Wrapping yourself in a flag and turning a blind eye to the fact that this administration operates in a cloak of secrecy, i.e supression of congressional report of events surrounding 9/11 etc. is a clear warning that re-election is more important than truth. Pres. Bush is either a liar or simple and can be easily manipulayed by those around him. All the claims of Iraq being a credible threat to our security now seem bogus. Were there actually massive amounts of WMD’s in that country then he failed miserably in safeguarding them after the initial invasion (tuwaithwa? nuclear facility) by not immediately deploying troops to maintain security around this facility and deter looting. Perhaps now terrorists have the radioactive materials neccessary for dirty bombs etc. Sorry brad but as more facts emerge about this invasion and how it was justified only the truly naive individuals could rationalize this as proper. As far as impeachment is concerned, should Bush be found to have created or manipulated facts to congress as a basis for war, that could be considered a high crime under the constitution’s impeachment clause. We can only hope!
Posted by bob on Jun 11, 2003 at 2:18 PM Please, when dole out statements like America’s poor, black and latinos, don’t forget that the largest number of poor in America are White Americans. It’s disinjenuous and ignorant to neglect to mention poor white Americans. If we forget to acknowledge poor whites it becomes and us versus them mentality.
Herb
Posted by Herb Bell on Jun 11, 2003 at 3:52 PM Brad,
“Golondrina, I agree that you can’t be president unless you come from a affluent background.”
Does that sound like democracy?
Posted by Golondrina on Jun 11, 2003 at 4:39 PM Actually Golondrina it does, considering all democracy means is that the people choose the president. People like to have presidents who are somewhat successful in other areas. Like I said before Reagan and Carter didn
t have a lot of money so it is possible.By the way the 83% is figure is true, but understand that it is the AVERAGE of people who make OVER 53,000. That stat can definitely be misleading if interpreted incorectly.
Posted by Brad on Jun 11, 2003 at 6:15 PM Very, very good. I agree that the United States is taking a very arrogant, imperialist approach to foreign policy. In the words of Sen. John Kerry, we do not need a regime change in Iraq as much as we need a regime change in America.
Posted by Alex on Jun 11, 2003 at 7:36 PM In some ways it is all very wonderful, isn’t it. As the darkness grows, the champions of light can come more into focus. We now have the opportunity to realize how bad it is becoming, and so we now have the opportunity to realize the truth. It all works together, but I have always liked to be on the side of light, and love. But remember one can only be a champion of truth when another is playing the role of villian. I have been there too.The champions of fear aren’t evil, they are just in the dark. They are doing the world a favor, they help us to see the truth. The revolution has already started. It started as soon as we percive the lies, because the lies expose the truth so clearly. Look how nicely the creation works!
Posted by oklahuma on Jun 12, 2003 at 11:40 AM Brad, reading what you have written reminded me of myself when i was a blind republican. I believed in everything the news told me, especially Bill O’Reilly.
Let me ask you something, if your neighbor thinks you’re not treating your children the way he’s treating his, you think they have the right to come over, beat you up and take your children away from you?
Granted we all agree that Saddam is a menace to Iraq. Who are we to come in, lie about the reasons for war, and put someone out? it is not anti-american… It is merely approaching and treating the rest of the world fairly. The problem with a lot of americans these days are they’re happy with their gas-guzzling SUV’s, big screen TV, Sunday night football, they don’t realize what’s going on in the rest of the world. And if they do, it’s fed to them by the corporate controlled Media.
Fox News had a survey that said 70% (i think) of Americans think the war is justified even if we don’t find any weapons of mass destruction. What have we turned into as a nation? I’ll tell you, big, fat arrogant fools who think we should control the rest of the world because we know better.
God Bless Arundhati Roy for standing up and voicing her opinions.
Wake up fellow Americans. We are hated for a reason.
Posted by kenneth on Jun 12, 2003 at 1:44 PM It sounds like many of you want ot do action beyond the standard march in DC to protest whatever. I think it is great but it seems like we need a focus point. A definite leader or group of leaders. However, there is so much bickering and inplay between those on the left that it is hard to see any as a leader. The Dems are losing for this reason. The DLC is another point of evil. They hold the same elitest point of veiw in terms of who can be leaders as the GOP. Before we can reconstruct our country we have to reconstruct our party.
Posted by E on Jun 12, 2003 at 2:52 PM Roy writes:“The National Museum was second on that list. Yet the museum was not just looted, it was desecrated. It was a repository of an ancient cultural heritage. Iraq as we know it today was part of the river valley of Mesopotamia. The civilization that grew along the banks of the Tigris and the Euphrates produced the worldís first writing, first calendar, first library, first city, and, yes, the worldís first democracy. King Hammurabi of Babylon was the first to codify laws governing the social life of citizens. It was a code in which abandoned women, prostitutes, slaves, and even animals had rights. The Hammurabi code is acknowledged not just as the birth of legality, but the beginning of an understanding of the concept of social justice. The U.S. government could not have chosen a more inappropriate land in which to stage its illegal war and display its grotesque disregard for justice.”
As we now know, the museum was not looted. Read Lost from the Baghdad museum: truth
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,974063,00.htmlIf in her efforts to condemn the US, Roy is willing to turn a lie into an elaborate metaphor because it suits her argument, why should we even listen to her? Come on, folks. There are plenty of good reasons to question the actions of our government, to protest against them, and to take action to force change. Roy’s heart may be in the right place but her literary instincts betrayed her. The world is not an on-going, neatly organized Greek or Shakespearean tragedy, and ideas about what is really going on cannot be built upon lies to serve an argument. All Roy really does is reveal her bias and her anger and her gift for metaphor. The truth? That’s a harder bird to catch. But if we progressives refuse to be disciplined about what facts we use to build their arguments on, we might as well be writing fiction.
Posted by Spencer McNair on Jun 12, 2003 at 4:27 PM Spencer, I would ask why it is that you try to decieve. What are your intentions? What is your agenda?
Check your dates.
The link you provide is to an article dated 6/10/03. Roy’s speech was written a month earlier. What was the best available information in early May?
Posted by mike on Jun 12, 2003 at 5:09 PM “Let me ask you something, if your neighbor thinks you’re not treating your children the way he’s treating his, you think they have the right to come over, beat you up and take your children away from you?”
The thing is Kenneth, if you’re treating your children poorly, the government can come over and take your kids. But I got your point. If we all agree that he needed to be stopped, then who else was going to stop him?
Posted by Brad on Jun 12, 2003 at 6:15 PM Talk about lost opportunity. Folks, bottom line: the invasion of Iraq was a good thing. It was a “good thing”, however, only from the perspective that a vile, sick animal and his brood were removed from power. No one here can say that isn’t a good - even noble, thing.
It’s too bad that’s as far as it goes.
I say there was a missed opportunity here, because the U.S. has totally fumbled the chance to enact real, positive change in the world. Getting rid of Hussein was proper. But the arrogance, the lies/deceit - just horrible. The motives, of course, remain questionable at best, and the integrity of the U.S. is basically shattered.
The loathsome PNAC is right on one count, and one count only: the U.S. is the unquestioned “heavyweight” of the world, and I feel with such might comes moral and ethical responsibility.
What if Dubya & Co. had said, hey - we and many of our allies fucked up in a big way by supporting Iraq and other asswipe dictators. We need to, along with our allies, correct that horrible wrong. We need to lead the charge against despots, terrorism, etc. We need to eliminate ALL WMD - including our own. We need to use our fearsome military judiciuosly, only in cases of extreme need, and in concert with the needs and wishes of the world community.
Yeah… what if?
Posted by Gary on Jun 12, 2003 at 6:58 PM Mike: I know the dates and I have no agenda. My point is that we need to question the information that seems to further our arguments as closely as we question the information that does not. I think Roy and others who were against the war took the looting story and ran with it, never questioning its validity because it served the argument so well. Did you question its validity? I just think its a weakness in the anti-war, anti-Bush camp to immediately seize upon any news story that is critical of the Administration and proclaim See!, see! only to find out later that it wasn’t true. Even if the essence of what you’ve said is true, you end up looking like a fool.
Posted by Spencer McNair on Jun 12, 2003 at 7:20 PM Spencer, I can appreciate your point, and if you say you have no agenda, I apologize for the accusation. We all want the truth. My point is that you are, intentionally or not, obfuscating it. The focus of Roy’s comment was the US disregard for Iraqi institutions that were not the Ministry of Oil. She could just as easily have made mention of nuclear waste facility that has since been looted.
On May 6th, John Ashcroft commented: “From the evidence that has emerged, there is a strong case to be made that the looting and theft of the artefacts was perpetrated by organised criminal groups.”
No one was disputing that the looting took place. There simply was no reason to question the validity.Things must be viewed in their historical context. Much like the issue of whether or not this war was a “good thing” for the mere matter of the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. It must all be viewed in context. Hussein came to power with the aid of the US. We’ve all seen the picture of Rumsfeld shaking hands with the despot in ‘83, with the US complicit in Saddam’s actions at the time. The US pulled out of the Gulf War as the anti-Saddam uprising began and allowed the regime to retake their airspace, which ultimately led to many of the “mass graves” others have mentioned. It is now clear, 2 months after the latest war ended, that at the very least, Saddam posed no “immediate” threat to the US, which was the justification for a preemptive war.
So what is the truth?
Posted by mike on Jun 12, 2003 at 8:56 PM Why is it so hard for some to see things that are so obviously wrong? One word, two syllables : TRAVEL (outside of the U.S.)
Posted by Mylu on Jun 12, 2003 at 9:16 PM Absolutely one of the most inspiring, intriguing, and truthful articles I have ever read
Posted by Mike Murray on Jun 12, 2003 at 10:10 PM Bush is a gangster, his regime bloodthirsty criminals. They kill for Christ, they kill for Halliburton, for the Carlyle Group, for the republican dream of turning back the clock to the 19th century.
What they prefer are economic slaves. They accept no challenge to their control of the planet’s resources. They may be in collusion with al Qaeda. They probably allowed the September 11th attacks to occur so as to capitalize on their overwhelming military force.
They despise even their own troops, cutting their health benefits, exposing them to radiation and expermental vaccines against the Geneva conventions.
They are the greatest criminal force on the planet at this time. The planet may strike back along the lines of their own pre-emptivve doctrine.
Posted by Jack on Jun 13, 2003 at 5:22 AM The following is from thirdworldtraveler.com. Also on this site: “When Democracy Failed: The Warnings of History” by Thom Hartman…read it.
“Those in power are blind devotees to private enterprise. They accept that degree of socialism implicit in the vast subsidies to the military-industrial-complex, but not that type of socialism which maintains public projects for the disemployed and the unemployed alike.”
William O. Douglas, former U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1969
Posted by lenats on Jun 13, 2003 at 2:53 PM Jack, you’re an idiot. That’s all there is to it. No use in even trying to argue with someone how thinks the US could be in league with Al-Qaeda and more than likely allowed the Sept. 11 attacks. But the most ridiculous part is that you probably spend more time vilifying George Bush than Saddam Hussein. you really sound like an idiot when you accuse the US government of being gangsters and killers when they overthrow an indisputibly more brutal government. In other words, Saddam is the bad guy.
Posted by Tom on Jun 13, 2003 at 5:31 PM How refreshing to have a rug pilot criticize the U.S. - kind of like a leper criticizing a teenager with acne. Maybe you should go back to New Delhi, Sahib, and wade in that cesspool of a river you call the Ganges and wash the camel feces out of your eyes and ears. India is an open toilet and you are one brown turd that got away. The world would be a much better place if India was turned into a smouldering, thermonuclear parking lot!
Posted by Tailgunner Joe on Jun 13, 2003 at 8:30 PM Hey Tailgunner, you wouldn’t happen to have your own Fox News program would you? I hear they’ve been looking to add intellectuals like yourself to balance their left-leaning lineup. Good luck!
Posted by mike on Jun 13, 2003 at 8:57 PM Tailgunner, you can’t be real. No one of such low mentality could possibly have found this story. You just wrote those things so you could see how many people would react to it. Nice job, I am sure there will be plenty of people taken in by your supposed bigotry and outright fascism. Next time you post don’t forget to toss in ‘lesbo’ as well.
If you need any other help in how to write obnoxious and low life comments ask our friend, Brad, to help you clean up your vocablulary. He seems to be able to write arguments that are seemingly cogent given his little acquaintance with facts. But I suppose that he watches more corporate media than he does reading well thought out articles such as Roy’s as his comments merely echo those that can be found on Fox, MSNBC, CNN, and the rest of corporate controlled news media.
Posted by Mark on Jun 14, 2003 at 2:25 AM Mark, I agree, tailgunner’s remarks were purely to get attention, and then you had to turn into an insult on me (thanks for complimenting me on my ability to argue, i think). I read both corporate media and sites like inthesetimes because they are completely different takes on the news (if you don’t think there is opinion in every article on this site, your nuts) but just like FoxNews, I have to stay fair and balanced (alright, that was a joke)
Secondly, statements like tailgunner’s only increase the stereotype that all conservs. lack any sophistication of any kind. Its not true, just like its not true that every liberal is a hippie or a communist.
Posted by Brad on Jun 14, 2003 at 2:52 AM I don’t have too much to add to the discussion here, other than I think we all need to be realists about the situation in America. I see so many good ideas here, and I urge each and every-one here(barring tailgunner, if he/she exists, they are obviously too closed minded to change their mind when the truth emerges from a rational discussion of known facts. Brad, I want to let you know that the what you’ve said here gives me hope that the republicans and democrats in this country who actually believe the actions of bush and his compadriots are acting in best interests of the US and humankind as a whole can be reasoned with. I’d like to ask brad and some of the other members of this discussion to visit other “Fringe-Liberal” like this one, and then go read far-right news and discussion sites. I’ve done it, and I noticed the tone at sites like these is usually very positive and non-violent, while at the far-right sites, its not uncommon to hear comparisons of liberals to communists, and some gleefully claiming they wouldn’t mind a nuclear war with N.Korea because california would probably be the first place bombed. For the sake of the world and the US, I think it should be goal of every american to discover what the different contenders to Bush offer and then come together on an agreed contender in a grassroots campaign like none ever seen before. For this purpose, I urge everyone who reads this message to check out moveonpac.org. Its a website dedicated to voter education about alternatives to Bush, focusing on the contenders, rather than on the wrong-headed policies that our current leaders have carried out.
thanks!
Posted by Justin Wilson on Jun 14, 2003 at 7:16 AM ugh, just read my post, pardon the run-ons and grammatical errors, its past 3 in the morning here.
Posted by Justin Wilson on Jun 14, 2003 at 7:19 AM thank GOD for you Ms.Roy! the truth is so needed, and the u.s. CITIZENS have got to start realizing that the COMMUNITY is not the government. that hollywood and the media are the real DEVIL. HYPOCRISY exists not democracy, ( AND SINCE WHEN HAS THE government ABIDED BY THE TRUE CONSTITUTION, they SLAP-ON AMMENDMENTS SO they CAN JUST DO WHAT THEY WANT) I AM NOT a murderer, a slaughterer, a theif, a liar, greedy, or power-hungry, and that is exactly what the WORLD thinks of the CITIZENS of the u.s. BECAUSE WHETHER YOU REALIZE IT OR NOT , IT IS OUR HARD EARNED MONEY THAT GETS SPENT IN THE NAME OF TAXES TO KILL , TO SHOCK AND AWE, TO POISON AND MAME, I cry everyday for humanity, and apologize to my 23 month old son for bringing him here to the Devils Lair. the INDUSTRIALISTS RUN THE WORLD AND THEY ARE ALSO KILLING THE PLANET, there is NO GOVERNMENT of the u.s., only fat ugly YES MEN who have no sense of REVERENCE because they have no sense of self-worth, they have no true feeling of GOD, and when ugly troll-face bush mentions GOD in his speeches, I pray he is struck down. how dare he even mention GOD???????????????????????????? he breaks one COMMANDMENT after another. does anyone in this country realize the brutality and torture people, especially little children!!!!!!!!!!!! ALLOVERTHEWORLD experience as a direct result of u.s. intervention and support? PEOPLE OF THE STATES OF NORTH AMERICA TAKE RESPONSIBILITY, LOOK THE DEVIL IN THE FACE AND HELP DISMANTLE THE BEAST. BE FREE THINKERS NOT SHEEP. start with,LOVE THY NEIGHBOR. OH, DON’T GET ME STARTED….................................
Posted by sacha voski on Jun 14, 2003 at 3:18 PM Part one of three—
I got onto this site to read an article on the US real
estate market. Ms. Roy is a very good writer and
speaker. That she musters facts and figures in an
unsound way at times is understandable given her zeal
and her vocation. Almost more than the article I enjoyed reading the comments which follow it. I like Americans as people, they are by and large good hearted. Unfortunately, if the world is to survive and evolution is to continue, the USA as a social and political entity will have to be dismantled. This is a truth that a great many throughout the world have
realized in the last 2-3 years. Once enough
people realize it, and the second great truth about the US: that virtually everybody in the world—including the people who live in the area now known as the USA—will not only survive but actually be better off in a world without the USA, it will not be difficult to achieve this necessary dismantling.
There really is not too much to be done to topple the
USA anyway, even without box cutters: the US economy is a tragic oil tanker (tragic as it takes so many hundreds of millions worldwide to keep it afloat). The stock market figures which scare investors so much are actually much worse than what is shown, as
they are inflated by the short term boost from the
invasion of a sovereign state (sovereign—regardless of
what fruit flies like ‘Brad’ have been programmed to
think about its leadership). Without the
invasion-related figures, the Dow Jones would be
somewhere near the 5000 mark. And US manufacturing is likewise a mirage—the US only actually produces advertising, music videos, movies and lots of weapons. Almost everything that is bought in the US is made elsewhere (except for some very fine outdoor gear produced by small companies in the Western States). Do you think I am exaggerating? Just for fun try to go a day without buying something ‘made in China’.
Posted by christopher on Jun 14, 2003 at 5:33 PM I won’t go through the rest of the alphabet. It is
not working; the USA, that is. Nobody’s happy, Not
the rest of humanity that is keeping this foul system
alive, not nature (Brad—talk about rape!), not even
the Americans themselves. The Americans are just too
afraid to change.We’ll help you.
I’ll close with another quote from this overall very
good article: “It would be naive to imagine that we can directly confront empire. Our strategy must be to isolate empireís working parts and disable them one by one. No target is too small. No victory too insignificant.”We’ll all have a nice day.
Posted by christopher on Jun 14, 2003 at 5:37 PM Part 3 of 3
I won’t go through the rest of the alphabet. It is
not working; the USA, that is. Nobody’s happy, Not
the rest of humanity that is keeping this foul system
alive, not nature (Brad—talk about rape!), not even
the Americans themselves. The Americans are just too
afraid to change.We’ll help you.
I’ll close with another quote from this overall very
good article: “It would be naive to imagine that we can directly confront empire. Our strategy must be to isolate empireís working parts and disable them one by one. No target is too small. No victory too insignificant.”We’ll all have a nice day.
Posted by christopher on Jun 14, 2003 at 5:37 PM Part 2 of 3
It is simply a matter of time until the world figures
out that emulating the USA is suicide. What the
American system has done best is sell the world
the image of itself as great and indispensable. But
the world is starting to realize that it is just a
sales job: the American dream is just that. For example, increasing numbers of Europeans, are realizing that average American is a)undereducated—ignorant and unable to think (like ‘tailgunner’, who whether or not he exists is a poster child for a sizeable percentage of citizens in the USA), b) unhealthy—fat and overmedicated, the average American lives less long than the average person in the other northern countries, with more allergies and dependencies on chemicals to just make it through the day (Prozac et al.), c) unfree, both in the workplace and in society—the average American worker works more days of the year than that of any industrialized nation (most Europeans get five weeks of paid vacation a year, really!) and the USA has a greater percentage of its own population behind bars than any other country in the world (and for things like smoking marihuana or nonviolently trying to stop illegal government and business activities in their own backyards), d) unhappy and afraid—looked at together, suicide rates and alcoholism rates are higher in the USA than elsewhere in the industrialized world, not to mention astoundingly higher rates of crime violence (shooting deaths etc.) and mood elevating medication intake. And fear, well, I believe that even Americans won’t deny that the USA is the land of fear these days; mean ‘pre-emptive strikes/collateral damage is okí fear,
Posted by christopher on Jun 14, 2003 at 5:39 PM Part 3 of 3
e) uninformed and lied to—the ìfreeî press of the USA is truly incredible. To quote Ms. Roy in this article: “In a strange, convoluted way, the sound and fury that accompanies the legal and conceptual defense of free speech in America serves to mask the process of the rapid erosion of the possibilities of actually exercising that freedom. The news and entertainment industry in America is almost entirely controlled by a few major corporationsóAOL-Time Warner, Disney, Viacom, News Corporation. Each of these corporations owns and controls TV stations, film studios, record companies, and publishing ventures. Effectively, the exits are sealed. And yet Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission Michael Powell, the son of Secretary of State Colin Powell, has instituted even further deregulation of the communication industry, which will lead to even greater consolidation.” One company, Clear Communications (they who blocked “Imagine” after 9/11), practically owns USA radio and music industry—listen to your “local” KISS FM sometimes.
I won’t go through the rest of the alphabet. It is
not working; the USA, that is. Nobody’s happy, Not
the rest of humanity that is keeping this foul system
alive, not nature (Brad—talk about rape!), not even
the Americans themselves. The Americans are just too
afraid to change.We’ll help you.
I’ll close with another quote from this overall very
good article: “It would be naive to imagine that we can directly confront empire. Our strategy must be to isolate empireís working parts and disable them one by one. No target is too small. No victory too insignificant.”We’ll all have a nice day.
Posted by christopher on Jun 14, 2003 at 5:40 PM i have an idea i’m working on to unit the people and create a revolutionary force to make heavy effective changes. i need help with this plan contact me please… 808-248-7056
Posted by james cuffe on Jun 14, 2003 at 7:08 PM Christopher-
What is your definiton of a free press? Mine is that the press operates independant from government. Which our press does.
To the charge that I have been programmed and that I believe the lies of the administration about Saddam, even the most staunch supporter of the peace movement would have to admit that Sadam was horrdendous on human rights and the tortures. To say that the average American is undereducated is incorrect. In fact, Americans are one of the world’s most college educated countries.
To say that Americans are “worse” because more of us take some type of med. is uninformed. In a study, it was found that two/thirds of Americans who took ritalin didn’t need it, just thought it would give them an advantage.
The point of your message was to say that the US is not the world’s top nation and would be better of without it. Ask all of those countries who’s economies would collapse if they were to stop receiving aid from us.
You wrote you lived outside the US, what country are you from?
Posted by Brad on Jun 14, 2003 at 8:00 PM A free press is a press who’s interests are free and unbiased. The profits should depend on the quality of the news reporting being produced. The buisness interests related to media that the dominant corporations have are only a minority of thier overall buisness interests. They depend on advertising more than veiwership and ratings which obviously has an effect on the product.
Posted by Derek on Jun 14, 2003 at 9:13 PM yes and christopher is correct, the fear factor is the control lever for the citizens. and the extent that it is put into play is unfathomable i feel. punch fear in the face everyone! boycott the media, throw out hollywood, do not watch television, do not BUY the papers or magazines, do not eat fast foods, for many reasons, and believe me, peace of mind starts brewing. hug change like a warm blanket and every day you will feel more resilient. close down the brain a bit and adhere to the heart. compassion is freedom.
Posted by sacha voski on Jun 14, 2003 at 9:25 PM Derek, you’re right and wrong. Yes, news channels make money off advertisements, but ratings are essential for them as well. Advertising money does not come unless people are watching. News companies are biased in that they only want people to watch, so that they can in turn get advertisers which will give them so cash.
That’s how it works, and thats how it will always work.
Posted by Brad on Jun 14, 2003 at 11:26 PM Corporate media is biased because it represents the interests of the corporate class (of which it belongs). The evidence is overwhelming in favor of this view. The average american believes about 100,000 people died in vietnam. Their was actually 2-3 million. What would americans think if the average German thought 300,000 jews were killed in the holocaust. I think we both know. Why is American culture so misinformed? The article says “When the United States invaded Iraq, a New York Times/CBS News survey estimated that 42 percent of the American public believed that Saddam Hussein was directly responsible for the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. And an ABC News poll said that 55 percent of Americans believed that Saddam Hussein directly supported al-Qaeda.” That demonstates just who misinformed and depolitisized the culture has become. The population is also to blame for becoming so passive and uninvolved, but that doesn’t excuse the media. If people looked they could find more independant forms of media and disspell the illusions that are being shoved down their throats and shed the fear and blinded pride that keeps them in line.
Posted by Derek on Jun 15, 2003 at 1:04 AM Derek, speaking of surveys, there was a national poll printed in the paper yesterday that found:
34% of Americans think that the US has found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. And, even better…
22% think that Iraq used chemical or biological weapons in the current war.Puts me at a loss…
To quote Ani DiFranco,
“Ive been around the world now
and I can see this about America
the mind control is steep here, man
the myopia is deep here.”
Posted by mike on Jun 15, 2003 at 5:20 PM Articulate piece that will probably raise the ire of any knee-jerk “patriot” here in the US….whenver a bully challenges a game of king-on-the-hill, the best offense is to gang up on him. Since most Americans don’t know or don’t care about what the rest of the world thinks and feels, it will be up to the rest of the world to demonstrate how intergrated and interdependent the people on this planet are.
Posted by Ken Goode on Jun 15, 2003 at 7:09 PM The US views India in its own right as a fellow democracy and a strategically significant power, with growing weight in the global economy and in the international system.
It is in recognition of this growing strategic stature that Washington is inviting India to send troops to Iraq, say senior administration officials, denying the theory that the US is supplanting its own troops to save them from local hostility. They point out that the US is seeking only one division of Indian troops in Iraq, whereas the US itself has deployed up to 300,000 in Iraq.
“The fact is, if you want to be a big player, you have got to first learn to play,“one administration official said on the background, while maintaining that a negative Indian response would not have any adverse effect in bilateral ties “except to show that India is not yet ready for the big stage and the risks involved in getting there.”
Although US officials do not make a direct link between the two in keeping with their policy of dehyphenation, an Indian ‘no’ will open the way for Pakistan to send its troops to Iraq.
Pakistan’s military leader Gen. Pervez Musharraf has said he would like to send his troops, but judging by the US overtures to India, Washington appears more keen on Indian troops possibly because of their greater acceptability in Iraq and the greater credibility it would bring to the US presence in the country.
Posted by Alex Ashley on Jun 15, 2003 at 11:49 PM I want to take this opportunity to reiterate some of the article’s sentiments - if the USA is so desperate to make money at any cost to the rest of the world, not buying the products of our oppressors is fundamental to curtailing their strength.
I come from the UK, where we are similarly being stripped of our human rights and where the media is completely warped and contorted, ensuring that pro-Blair propaganda is mistaken for truth and beamed into the homes of millions via the television. What about not watching television?
Now is the time to take some action, to feel empowered and to stop accepting the oppression and empire building that we, reasonable people, are being drawn into by very bad men. We can make a difference.
By the way, I found Brad’s description of Ms Roy amusing - for someone of his apparently limited worldly understanding to refer to a highly acclaimed Booker Prize winner as a ‘pin head’ is pretty funny. You should spend a little bit more time looking out of your box, Brad. Get some fresh air and perspective before you go bothering people with your innane threats to pre-emptively strike people who are just airing their views, exercising what I thought you guys in the US want to kill the rest of the world to protect - free speech.
Posted by Lou on Jun 16, 2003 at 12:29 PM Open-ended question, with no real strings attached…
Ok, as much as it hurts - being a U.S. citizen and all - I gotta admit things in America are a bit, um… how would one say…
“FUCKED UP”??
Obviously there’s room for change here, room to right the ship. But I ask the question of those who hammer the U.S., what is the model we should follow? What countries in the world would you consider NOT fucked up, to some degree? Again - not looking to pick a battle, just hungry for some more input. Thanks!
Posted by Gary on Jun 16, 2003 at 9:14 PM Lou, when you say we are “killing the rest of the world.” You’ve got to be kidding. There are six billion people in the world, the death toll in Iraq was less than 10,000 (I believe). Don’t tell me I’m impeding on her free speach, I called her a pinhead for saying terrorist attacks would be appropriate if they could work. How did I pre-empitively strik her? I have no idea what you mean by it. (For the record, I was RESPONDING)
Posted by Brad on Jun 17, 2003 at 1:59 AM Brad, On what grounds do you think the attack was justified?
Posted by Derek on Jun 17, 2003 at 5:33 AM Brad - ‘Unlike what Strauss said, this is not a good article, its a ridiculous anti-US rant that encourages terrorist attacks if they could work. She better hope that we don’t pre-emptive strike her.’
Was what you wrote, Brad. God you’re so thick you can’t even understand a reference to a comment you wrote yourself a few days ago. I’m not going to be reading any more of this because I have other things to do, but you really are a sad little man. I hope you get better soon.
Posted by Lou on Jun 17, 2003 at 1:39 PM News companies are biased in that they only want people to watch, so that they can in turn get advertisers which will give them so cash.
That’s how it works, and thats how it will always work.hi brad. that’s the way it will always work? hmm. good thing rosa parks didn’t agree with you. or copernicus. or darwin. or einstein. or ghandi. or even that crazy guy who several thousand years ago invented the friggin wheel. here’s to visionaries, brad, and the short-sighted masses that surround them.
Posted by greg on Jun 18, 2003 at 7:43 PM Greg, your argument makes no sense. Is it supposed to be some kind of rebuttal to the obvious fact that news companies are driven primarily by ratings? What does that have to do with Rosa Parks and Ghandi? I really can’t see the parallel here, so please clarify it for me.
Posted by Ted on Jun 18, 2003 at 10:07 PM It has become obvious as well(even a little embarrasing) that the specter of war in Iraq has once again aggrivated that peculiar divide in the political left between humanitarian interventionists and anti-imperialists. To be sure, all across the political spectrum view Saddam Hussein’s very presence on the world stage as an affront to international human rights, the left is surely no exception. But the reality that humanitarian interventionists must confront is this: “You want Saddam out of power. Bush wants Saddam out of power. Do you and Bush want Saddam out of power for the same reasons, and are your priorities also his priorities?” It is a logical fallacy to conclude that if two people seek the same goal, that they do so for the same reason, but this is what the humanitarian left who support this war are guilty of.
Even beyond the fact that the Bush administration has been able to convince many Americans that the conquest and occupation of a nation-state that has not previously attacked or threatened the U.S. is justified and necessary, what is really marvelous is that the administration has done so after so stridently campaigning on a we-are-not-the-global-police platform in 2000. Mr. Bush has long decried nation-building and excessive peacekeeping missions, sharply evincing this indolent attitude when he threatened in the fall of 2002 to immediately suspend nearly all U.S. aid to U.N. peacekeeping missions around the world if the U.S. was not to be granted immunity from the International Criminal Court. Do these seem like the actions of one who places a high priority on international democratization? One must wonder what has the president so eager about embracing a situation he once publicly loathed. Duty? Please. Let’s start making decisions based on evidence and solid prudence, not emotions such as fear or even duty.
Posted by Anthony Lopez on Jun 19, 2003 at 5:45 AM Greg,
You know better than to listen to Brad. In another article tag he said the death penalty should only be an instrument of foreign policy.
Hmm.
Posted by Frank on Jun 19, 2003 at 9:07 AM Where was the ‘Peace’ movement in 1999?
Where was Ms. Roy in 1999, when Nato and the U.S. were bombing the Serbs? Where were all the ‘peace’ demonstrators? The attack on Serbia was just as illegal as the attack on Iraq, yet no one crying out so loudly now against the U.S. said anything back then.
Conclusion:
The anti-war movement is not really anti-war or even anti-imperialist.
Posted by A. Coward on Jun 19, 2003 at 12:50 PM “We might as well accept the fact that there is no conventional military force that can successfully challenge the American war machine. Terrorist strikes only give the U.S. government an opportunity it is eagerly awaiting to further tighten its stranglehold.”
And what exactly is this supposed to mean?
Is she saying that if terrorist strikes against the U.S. could work, then someone should organize an attack?
What if I said that terrorist strikes against India by the oppressed Muslims of Kashmir probably wouldn’t work to free Kashmir from Indian control, what would she say about that?
So I think here we have someone making a qualified endorsement of terrorist attacks against the U.S.
Posted by A. Coward on Jun 19, 2003 at 1:01 PM “...to refer to a highly acclaimed Booker Prize winner as a ‘pin head’ is pretty funny…”
The Booker prize highly-acclaimed?
First of all, that’s poorly written, Lou, but perhaps you were writing in haste. Second, I don’t think the Booker is that respected, isn’t it a bit like the Pulitzer Prize over here in the States?
I haven’t read Roy’s novels, but I would bet she’s not a very good writer, but wow, what a beauty!!
Posted by A. Coward on Jun 19, 2003 at 1:32 PM Lou,
Oops! I misread you, my apologies. I guess I was reading in haste. But I still think the Booker Prize is over-rated as is Ms. Roy as a writer.
Posted by A. Coward on Jun 19, 2003 at 1:35 PM Frank, do you have something against all wars? Isn’t war just giving your opponent the death penalty? Are you against us killing Sadam, or bin Laden? Would you have killed Hitler had he not kill himself? I can’t believe you. Trying to say that people shouldn’t listen to me when you just said that the death penalty shouldn’t be used in foreign policy, just cause we’re not lethally injecting people, it doesn’t mean we;re not killing them.
Posted by Brad on Jun 19, 2003 at 3:17 PM Yes Brad,
For some zany reason I think war is, believe it or not, not necessarily a good thing. For instance, I think dropping a bomb with a 200PSI pressure shock that sucks people’s lungs out through their mouths can also be construed as, yes, a bad thing. 3,000 of your cityfolk die horrendous deaths and we all feel for you yet when the same thing happens to people with unpronouncable names in a farflung country all we hear from the right are platitudes like: “Well it’s all part of the Good Fight!” or “Hey, people get killed in wars!” Where’s your humanity?
Posted by Frank on Jun 19, 2003 at 4:29 PM Frank, based on what you said, I think that you believe that war is good in some cases.
To compare 9/11 to any war is insane. 9/11 was a sneak attack, it didn’t even come from a specific country. Everyone killed in 9/11 was civilian. In the Iraq war the civilian casualties were kept to a minimum.
Posted by Brad on Jun 19, 2003 at 11:24 PM Brad, just so you know, the low estimate of civilian deaths is over 5000. The amount of injuries, especially cases where amputation is required, is much much higher. Oh and by the way, we’re still losing american lives over there, its growing into a situation that resembles the one in israel.
Posted by Justin Wilson on Jun 20, 2003 at 12:55 AM I’m sure the families of the civilians who were squashed, scorched and vapourised by US ordnance would be much reassured by your words, Brad.
Posted by Frank on Jun 20, 2003 at 10:34 AM The heart-breaker in all of this (to me) is that, despite the discussion & involvement here, when the polls open in Nov., 2004, there will be no reflection of this discourse UNLESS WE FINALLY GET UP & DO SOMETHING to restore the integrity of our country. The disasters of healthcare, the economy, the poor (of all colors), the hungry, our national disregard of any other country… how arrogant, & pathetic, & sad, & frightening. What are YOU going to DO to keep Dubbya from being re-elected? What are YOU going to DO to save us from our rhetoric-without-action? ‘Cause if we’re actually DOING anything to change the status-quo, I’m not seeing it…
Posted by Brenda B. Harding, RN, BSN on Jun 25, 2003 at 2:55 AM I have listened to Roy & read her book “God of Small Things”. She has much to say for critical thinking.
Posted by Mike on Jul 8, 2003 at 5:56 PM Democracy is malleable. It means something different in every country. In America it means elections and protests rights and appeals. Itís almost like we can disagree as long as we don’t act on it. That’s not real democracy is it? The founding fathers had something quite different in mind I think. Arundhati points a spotlight on the Bush"croni-capitalists"regime that has sprouted. He calls himself a conservative. Daddy’s favors got him into college and made him wealthy now he’s got to pay those favors back. Our country is being run by the bored idiot sons of the rich. I don’t know about revolution but something got to be done before it gets any worse. So how do we seize the time?
Posted by gabriel on Jul 8, 2003 at 10:21 PM Thank you for this literate, accurate, and timely article.
Would MS Roy please refer the source from which the Ashcroff quote on “liberties from God” is taken? This would be quite helpful to me.
Posted by Edward Simmons on Jul 15, 2003 at 5:51 PM “Lets not even bother with how she said that the poor or paying for the war. Is she serious? Who pays more taxes, the rich or the poor? Not to go number-crazy but 83% of the salary of the average person who earns 53,000 or more goes back to government (through income, sales tax etc). So the rich are paying a lot more than the poor.”
I think it’s unfortunate first of all that this statement ” I can’t believe someone complimented an article that is anti-american and encourages a revolution.” stands out at the top here. After that entire article I can’t believe someone could fail to see any cause for compliment, and being an american citizen fail to see any cause whatsoever for revolution.
That failure goes hand in hand with this “unbelievers” belief that somehow the wealthy are at a greater economic disadvantage due to the state than the poor under taht state are. Who is not being serious now?
The wealthy pay more taxes? Perhaps that is because the poor happen to get paid a sub-human income in this country which could not bear a greater tax than what is already taken. That is not if the rich wish to maintain their servitude. For many a full-time job is not sufficient to secure a roof over ones head, so I’d think too much greater of a tax burden is out of the question if you wish to keep your economic slaves anywhere.
Lets face it, the poverty of the poor has much to do with the wealth of the wealthy and has always been so. So the wealth of the wealthy which is taxed is dependent first of all on what? Where do they get their wealth from? Isn’t it from the those whom they pay their subhuman wages to? Perhaps if wealthy capitalists and such offered a less explotive compensation to their poor servants, then those workers would have more wealth to be taxed.
I’ve heared this ludicrous sentiment before, as if the poor are the greater beneficiaries of what those taxes go to pay for anyway. I suppose by the same reasoning, the monied interests that spend millions buying polititions also share the greater economic responsibility for the government.
I think one should question what the wealth of the wealthy is ultimately dependent upon before complaining about who share the greater burden.
Posted by sunghero on Oct 24, 2003 at 7:55 PM “Jack…you really sound like an idiot when you accuse the US government of being gangsters and killers when they overthrow an indisputibly more brutal government. In other words, Saddam is the bad guy.”
I saw this speech of A. Roy on “Democracy Now”. In the full speech she mentions Howards Zinns “Peoples History of the United States”. I’ve read the book, and the one indisputable truth one comes away from it with is that something akin to gangsterism and cold brutality stand at the forefront of the American powers’ historical development.
What Ms Roy speaks out against is only new in form, in scope, in time, but not in meaning.
The pretexts it takes place under, and the consequent popular delusions, are also not surprising, except in regard to their form, scope and time.
“...when they overthrow an indisputibly more brutal government”
Given the fact that the “indisputably more brutal government” was overthrown, by brute force, I see a contradiction in this statement.
If we don’t think our government is as brutal, perhaps it is because we don’t stand in the shoes of the innocent people killed by it elswhere. Perhaps because it’s brutality is taken out on the citizens of other countries.
In the same way, the settlers of America, whom the government gave away free land to, I’m sure may have missed the brutality invloved in providing that land by brutally wiping out it’s native inhabitants.
Again, it’s not necessarily a governments own citizens that feel the brunt of it’s violence. This does not necessarily make it more peaceful.
Posted by sunghero on Oct 24, 2003 at 9:43 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Arundhati Roy
- People vs. Empire
Only global resistance from below can counter repressive states - Seize the Time
Arundhati Roy charts a strategy against empire - The Ordinary Person’s Guide to Empire
- New World Disorder
War is peace. Now we know.
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1979 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
427 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2003 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
