[thechat] Thanks and other thoughts

[Tara]

Hi everyone,

This is a very long post that has been building up for a long, long,
time. Read it if you have time.

I am one of those lurkers that is very thankful for this list. It really
has kept me going these days when I couldn't take any more CNN jingoism
and felt that the whole world was crying for blood (on both sides). I
haven't posted so far because I felt as if my emotions and thoughts were
so strong that I couldn't put them in type without screwing up the
meaning of what I was trying to say. And maybe I still can't...

I've gone through many emotions since Sept 11. After the initial shock,
the hours plastered to the TV, the grief, more hours reading posts here
and stuff off the web, mostly I've felt fear. I think the first time was
on the evening of Sept 11 when I was in a Yahoo chat room and I got
called all kinds of nasty names for advocating peace and a thoughtful
response that didn't include killing all of the "brown bastards" (as one
of the guys in the chat room called Arabs). It frightens the crap out of
me that people can think that way, and say that without being challenged
by the majority of people in the chat room. Since then, there have been
all kinds of awful attacks on Muslims, and (in Canada at least) Sikhs
too. I'm so glad there hasn't been anything like that here. Thanks for
the sanity on this list. You give me hope.

I guess what scares me the most is what could happen. 

I see so much rhetoric and rah rah rah war coming from the US media,
president and (some) public that I can't see any way out, a way to back
down while saving face, without a serious and bloody war. I don't think
they'll be satisfied with catching Osama Bin Laden, especially if they
catch him quickly. I know that some of it _is_ just sabre rattling, but
when Bush used the term "crusade" to describe this new "war" I nearly
shit my pants. Crusade is a terribly offensive term to Muslims and
especially Islamic fundamentalists who see the crusades as the beginning
of Western Imperialism in their region. How could that term slip past
all of the speech writers? How can the use of that term not serve to
push Islamic countries away, how could it not be deeply offensive and a
sign that the US wants another "crusade" to rid the world of Muslims?
I'm not saying that I think that the US wants to do that, I just can't
believe that they used that term by mistake, I think they wanted to
cause anger.

As for the "if you're not with us, you're our enemy" talk... Oh boy, how
far does a country have to go to be on your side? Is it a line in the
sand that will be drawn today - so you don't knowingly harbour
terrorists, you're okay - to later redrawn - you aren't doing enough to
combat terrorism, so change your security and immigration laws or you'll
be our enemy - to - you must add your military, intelligence, and other
resources to ours and join the war actively. I just don't like it. It
doesn't serve to show that the US is _not_ imperialist. It shows that
the US, when it decides to, will force the world to join it, on penalty
of being an enemy and seeing the wrath of it's military might. I think
it also scares me, being a Canadian, because we _are_ being asked to
change our laws to so that they are more "in line" with US immigration
and security laws. (Who knows what will happen to our civil liberties).
What if we like our more open policy towards refugees and refuse to
comply? Then the US will (first) tighten up their border, destroying our
economy, then... who knows. We don't really have much of a choice. They
call the shots. 

I also am terrified that no one is ruling out nuclear weapons. Ever
since I was a kid, I've had horrible nightmares about nuclear bombs.
They are not a solution. Anytime. If you think Hiroshima and Nagasaki
were bad, remember that today's nukes are 8 to 40 times as destructive.
Hundreds of thousands died then, what would the "collateral damage" be today?

I think it's also important to remember that the US is not the only
country with nuclear weapons. Pakistan supposedly has 20 or so. What
happens in the event that the Pakistani government is destabilized by
internal fighting and one of those weapons falls into the wrong hands?
What about chemical and biological weapons? I know this is a worst case
scenario, but read it anyway.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/special/attack/pages/analysis_0922_f6_1.html

This is what I'm scared of. 

Finally, I want to cry. I want to grieve for those who died, without my
worrying that my grief will be taken as a call to war, or a call for
revenge. I support justice, not war. Justice to me means a trial, it
means getting those who were involved and _no_one_else_. Because a war,
and killing innocent civilians, who are already beaten and starving, is
not justice. I did cry on the night of Sept 11. I bawled my eyes out. I
couldn't deal with what I had seen on TV, what I had heard. It is
incomprehensible to me what the terrorists did. I can not fathom it. I
can try to understand the "root causes" but I can never understand what
makes someone kill. Barbara Walters interviewed the some of the
relatives of those who were killed and one of the women said (I'm
paraphrasing 'cause I don't have a transcript) "My husband was
politically aware and he would be mortified to see that people are
calling out for revenge for his death... ...I don't see why someone
else's husband has to die because my husband was killed." I feel exactly
the same way. I don't think it's possible not to have civilian
casualties in the "war" that they are starting. I don't want a war. I
don't want revenge. I don't want "infinite" justice. I want justice.

Thanks for letting me vent.

Tara Cleveland