Full Metal Jihad (dualities of foreign-policy short-termism)
Padraig L Henry
The Bush Administration's latest Number One Enemy, the Taliban regime
in civil-war torn, famine-stricken Afghanistan, has received tens of
millions of dollars from that administration in 2001. Why? Afghanistan
is among the world's largest producers of opium. The money is
compensation for the Taliban's explicit attempts to terminate opium
production. And just last August, an additional $1.5 million was
pledged by US Assistant Secretary of State Christina Rocca to further
assist the Taliban's shut-down of poppy production. As Afghanistan is
now one of the world's poorest countries (up to seven million out of a
population of 22 million may die of starvation over the coming
months), these dollar sums account for a sizeable proportion of the
Taliban government's annual expenditure.
All of this, of course, was part of another US war: the supposed "war
on drugs", also hotting up in South America (Why were there so many
Columbians who perished in the WTC attack?) . Such wars always follow
the same insular, short-term, hysterical logic: You announce your
resolve to rid the world of some terrible perceived menace that poses
a threat to all of "civilisation." Then you turn the other cheek and
enter into pragmatic alliances with all manner of thugs, despots, and
fanatics because, right now, they help you to achieve your immediate
goal. But all the time, in your eagerness to act, you remain oblivious
to the reality that such actions have totally unpredictable
consequences, and you are caught completely off-guard when confronted
by the resulting macabre ironies.
Before September 11, any criticism of the above "war-on-drugs" policy
would have been met, particularly by the tightly corporate-owned
media, with accusations of the anti-American kind. Only after, when
the mistakes become concrete, is it permissable to utter such
sentiments. Following Saddam Hussein's territorial excursion into
Kuwait and the subsequent US military response, it was no longer
deemed to be anti-American to question the wisdom behind previous US
support for him, that it was maybe not such a brilliant idea. And
after Osama bin Laden and his cronies turned their venom on America,
it suddenly became legitimate to contend that the involvement of the
CIA, which had significantly helped in the design, construction and
funding of bin Laden's training camps and expanding international
terrorist-cell network, might have been a bit of a mistake.
But to claim any of these things at the time was to be some lefty
anti-American extremist. In the same way that, at the moment, you are
unlikely to hear anything about the aforementioned US/Taliban
anti-drug alliance (rapidly censored by the aforementioned media).
Such "distractions" would only serve to "complicate" matters, and
complications, like Joker's Born To Kill/Peace slogans in FMJ, however
credible or truthful, deflect from the imperatives and rhetoric of
war-mongering. Such rhetoric never deals with realities, if only
because it is grounded in fiction.
Somebody I know has termed the processes that drive such war rhetoric
as the John Wayne Syndrome. Appropriate here, given its resonances
with Kubrick's FMJ. Wayne, of course, became synonymous with the
quintessential iconography of heroic, unflinching Americanism. So
persuasive was his portrayal that numerous people still insist in
believing that he was an actual war hero. That he cunningly evaded
actual combat leads us to the John Wayne Syndrome: the more
aggressive, inflammatory, and belligerent the war rhetoric, the
greater the chances that the war-mongerer has never actually
experienced a real war.
In FMJ, we repeatedly witness the macho posturings and the "wanting to
get into the shit" rhetoric of the inexperienced marine recruits. We
have again witnessed much of this during the past forthnight. On the
other hand, the real "tough" guys have been, or at least appeared to
be, restrained, dignified, calm and sober. Secretary of State Colin
Powell, who both fought in Vietnam and headed the US Armed Forces at
the time of the Gulf War turkey-shoot, has remained cautious, patient,
and cool to the ambiguities and crippling complexities of the modern
world. Similarly, New York Mayor Rudolph Guiliani, formerly one of the
most crude, insensitive, and offensive men in America, became a model
of decency and calm in the face of unprecedented tragedy.
Then there is George W Bush. It is entirely in keeping with his
profile that a man whose powerful family contacts secured for him a
cosy position in the Texas Air Reserve during the Vietnam War should
now exhault in Old Testament rhetoric and the language of dreadful
Wild West movies. A central feature of this mock-heroic rhetoric of
simplification, constantly repeated and broadcast by the establishment
media, is that this new war has no grey areas, no middle ground. We
are all obliged by these messages to make a stark choice: we must
either unconditionally, uncritically, totally support any actions that
the US chooses to take, or we will be labelled as terrorist
fellow-travellers. Such savagely stark rhetorical fundamentalism is
already clearly widespread (witness the recent poster at AMK
attempting to demonise Anthony Frewin, eagerly confusing and
conflating criticisms of US foreign policy with support for the WTC
attacks. Even respected, balanced and experienced war correspondents
like John Pilger and Robert Fisk are tired of pointing out, weary of
documenting, the often "murderous" effects of US foreign policy ...
and I'm growing tired of agreeing with them ...).
Nobody is obliged to accept these terms. They are self-contradictory.
First we are being told to accept that the attack on the US was an
attack on everyone, an assault not just on a nation but an assault on
such ideas as freedom, democracy, and civilisation in which our whole
culture and way of life is included. Then we are also told to
shut-up, that we have no right to articulate an opinion about the
nature of the reaction to the attacks, or about the underlying genesis
of those attacks. Though it is "our" war, we have no right to discuss
it.
The contradictory rhetoric rapidly moved, in the days after the WTC
attack, from "America under attack" to "a declaration of war" to "a
war on terrorism" to "America unites." But America is not a united
country right now. It has never been so divided since the civil rights
and anti-Vietnam movements of the 1960s. On numerous campuses
throughout the US, students are currently facing each other: Flags and
patriotic songs compete for space with peace banners, green armbands
and peace slogans. For instance, peace rallies began a few days ago in
Ann Arbor, Michigan, in response to attacks on the Arab-American
population in nearby Detroit, which is believed to have the largest
Arab population in the Western world. Elsewhere, the repressive
side-effects of the "war on terrorism" are now taking effect: millions
of undocumented Americans, or "illegal aliens", now live in fear,
afraid to travel. Numerous have already been summarily deported,
despite having lived in the US for many years. I know of a number of
"undocumented" Irish construction workers who were in one of the WTC
towers when it was attacked; their employer refuses to even
acknowledge their existence - for fear of being found out, while their
families are afraid to report them among the missing - for fear of
being deported themselves (incidentally, almost 2,000 Irish Americans
and Irish nationals were lost in the WTC attacks; compare that with
the 3,300 who have been killed over the past 30 years in the conflict
in Northern Ireland).
What will transpire over the next few months is of enormous importance
for everyone. On the one hand, failure to act decisively against the
perpetrators of the September 11 crimes against humanity will
effectively invite further actions that were previously restricted to
the confines of bad Hollywood blockbusters to become real (again, in
this light, Israel's intelligence agency, Mossad, the most
sophisticated in the world, is not telling us everything about the
attacks). On the other hand, the world will be a considerably more
dangerous place if the Bush Administration authorises the kind of
serial killing that is currently being actively contemplated. There is
also ominous talk of a perpetual, open-ended war, not merely on bin
Laden/Taliban, but on Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and - how
conveniently opportunistic - Cuba (as well as on the FARC rebels in
Columbia).
Fortunately, there is a substantive "middle ground" above these
apocalyptic choices: the creation of an International Criminal Court
to deal with all crimes against humanity, something which the US has
actively opposed for years (for reasons that are only too well
documented). It might also be remembered that acts of war were
declared illegal following the Nuremburg Trials after WWII, which is
one of the principal reasons, for instance, that the US never
"declared" war on Vietnam.
Padraig
FMD
>
> First we are being told to accept that the attack on the US was an
> attack on everyone, an assault not just on a nation but an assault on
> such ideas as freedom, democracy, and civilisation in which our whole
> culture and way of life is included. Then we are also told to
> shut-up, that we have no right to articulate an opinion about the
> nature of the reaction to the attacks, or about the underlying genesis
> of those attacks. Though it is "our" war, we have no right to discuss
> it.
>
It might be added that there's no reason to suppose that the state
department or any other branch of the government has anything approaching
a real understanding of the world. This was something that Joseph
Campbell noted as far back as the fifties when he was advising them on
dealing with non-Western nations. You must realize, he said (but they
showed no evidence of understanding) that some people ascribe completely
different meanings to states of affairs that we name with the most
honorific words. Thus, what we call "freedom" means, to much of the
world, sheer license, and what we call "democracy" means chaos. This
situation is worsened when Bush goes around telling people that "they"
hate freedom, as if we agree on the terms but simply disagree as to the
value of the phenomena they name.
M4RV1N
writes:
<snip superb observations>
I just want to excerpt part of this, because it's so insightful I wish it could
be tatooed on the forehead of every American politician and military
strategist:
>Such wars always follow
>the same insular, short-term, hysterical logic: You announce your
>resolve to rid the world of some terrible perceived menace that poses
>a threat to all of "civilisation." Then you turn the other cheek and
>enter into pragmatic alliances with all manner of thugs, despots, and
>fanatics because, right now, they help you to achieve your immediate
>goal. But all the time, in your eagerness to act, you remain oblivious
>to the reality that such actions have totally unpredictable
>consequences, and you are caught completely off-guard when confronted
>by the resulting macabre ironies.
>
Those who do not remember the past, and all that...
Mark Ervin
Mike Jackson
m4r...@aol.com 09/27/2001 5:13 PM went on about :
There was a headline I saw someplace on a story about the "Northern
Alliance" in Afghanistan that said something to the effect of "Meet Our New
Scary Best Friends".
It looks like the Bush administration is if they align themselves with this
lot to get bun Laden then they are just repeating the same mistake made with
supporting bin Laden against the Soviets so long ago...
I wish someone would delete the word "evildoer" from their speech writing
word processor at the White House too. Who's writing this stuff, former
comic book writers?
-----------------
Mike Jackson
Mental Pictures Photography & Graphic Design
http://guide.net/~mental/
(228) 696-2702 Phone/ Fax
(228) 918-4596 Cellular
Hidden Pers-----
>>Padraig L Henry
>writes:
>
><snip superb observations>
Padraig's is a terrific post that deserves a wider audience (IMHO).
It's the sort of thing that makes me lurk (well, not just lurk now) in
this newsgroup.
--
iHÐ
PT Caffey
>
><snip>
> ...Fortunately, there is a substantive "middle ground" above these
> apocalyptic choices: the creation of an International Criminal Court
> to deal with all crimes against humanity, something which the US has
> actively opposed for years (for reasons that are only too well
> documented). It might also be remembered that acts of war were
> declared illegal following the Nuremburg Trials after WWII, which is
> one of the principal reasons, for instance, that the US never
> "declared" war on Vietnam.
>
> Padraig
How precisely would the proposed "International Criminal Court"
apprehend those responsible for the September 11th atrocities? Issue
a subpoena?
PT Caffey
Bob K
> attack, from "America under attack" to "a declaration of war" to "a
> war on terrorism" to "America unites." But America is not a united
> country right now. It has never been so divided since the civil rights
> and anti-Vietnam movements of the 1960s. On numerous campuses
> throughout the US, students are currently facing each other: Flags and
> patriotic songs compete for space with peace banners, green armbands
> and peace slogans. For instance, peace rallies began a few days ago in
> Ann Arbor, Michigan, in response to attacks on the Arab-American
> population in nearby Detroit, which is believed to have the largest
> Arab population in the Western world. Elsewhere, the repressive
> side-effects of the "war on terrorism" are now taking effect: millions
> of undocumented Americans, or "illegal aliens", now live in fear,
> afraid to travel. Numerous have already been summarily deported,
> despite having lived in the US for many years. I know of a number of
> "undocumented" Irish construction workers who were in one of the WTC
> towers when it was attacked; their employer refuses to even
> acknowledge their existence - for fear of being found out, while their
> families are afraid to report them among the missing - for fear of
> being deported themselves (incidentally, almost 2,000 Irish Americans
> and Irish nationals were lost in the WTC attacks; compare that with
> the 3,300 who have been killed over the past 30 years in the conflict
> in Northern Ireland).
>
>
conservative and certainly no fan of the Bush clan. I have mentioned
in other posts that his proclaimed if not real isolationism and
willingness to step out of the negotiations that were so much a part
of the Clinton Presidency are misguided policies at best. However, a
free society will always have discourse even within a "united"
undercurrent. We will always have morons attacking innocents such as
the murders and attacks on people of apparent Middle Eastern origin.
Americans generally condemn this behavior while at the same time feel
an anger that has no focus. On our apparent divide (campus protesting
etc.), I will just say that the "unity" that you seem to doubt is not
necessarily a unified march toward retaliation. That is not what is
"unifying" us. Nor is it a unity that was orchestrated. It is a
unity that started on the ferry rides out of lower Manhattan as
horrified passengers saw those two towers collapse. It is a unity that
started on the streets of lower Manhattan as throngs ran to avoid the
encroaching cloud of dust and horror. It is a unity that started on an
aircraft in Pennsylvania when we learned of why it crashed there
rather than in Washington. We are not saying "we want war!" we are
saying, like Churchill, "do your worst and we shall do our best".
I feel for all lost in those towers. The Irish have a special place in
building this country. In particular the first wave of the 1850's
lost their lives on the Civil War battlefields of which this tragedy
has given us a small taste.
I understand and appreciate what you say about the duality of our
policy. Fair enough and true. There will be a time for us to
understand the implications of our complex geopolitical policies and
how they certainly played a part in this tragedy. Maybe one day I can
talk intelligently about how politics and policy makes curious
bedfellows (always has, always will). I can't do that now. I still
meet people in our cafeteria who cry when they recall what they saw
when they ran.
Sorry Padraig, the rhetoric that you see on CNN has nothing to do with
the unity that Americans feel right now and is not in any way
diminished because some of us may want retaliation and some of us may
want peace.
There will be injustices caused by this tragedy on those who do not
deserve it. Just as the injustice of our policies destroyed lives and
orphaned children who did not deserve it.
Bob
Wordsmith
Probably have Interpol bird dog them till they drop. By the way, don't
we already have a World Court? The US pretty much thumbs its nose at
it, so changing its name wouldn't do anything.
Wordsmith
>
> PT Caffey
Bryce Utting
>ptca...@yahoo.com (PT Caffey) wrote in message news:<84498e9.01092...@posting.google.com>...
>> apprehend those responsible for the September 11th atrocities? Issue
>> a subpoena?
>
>Probably have Interpol bird dog them till they drop. By the way, don't
>we already have a World Court? The US pretty much thumbs its nose at
>it, so changing its name wouldn't do anything.
And let's not forget that there *have* been, er, "operations" into the
Balkans (and possibly Rwanda) to apprehend indicted criminals.
See Chomsky for more on your point about the US thumbing its nose.
butting
OtiGoji
>You announce your
>resolve to rid the world of some terrible perceived menace that poses
>a threat to all of "civilisation." Then you turn the other cheek and
>enter into pragmatic alliances with all manner of thugs, despots, and
>fanatics because, right now, they help you to achieve your immediate
>goal.
While I respect (and fear) your formidable intellect and writing skills, I
still feel compelled to comment on your essay. As parts of it were written in
the second person, I did take it personally.
I agree with much of your clear and concise opinion of U.S. foreign policy but
I am dismayed that you wrote it at this time. Your list of U.S. geopolitical
follies and failures now reads like "Americans should have seen this attack
coming because they deserve it." There is much in your piece that seems overly
harsh and judgmental on the country that just had four passenger planes
hijacked and destroyed with two of those airliners flown into office buildings
full of people from all walks of life from all over the world.
I think the attack on the World Trade Center was an attack on the whole world.
I do think the attack on the World Trade Center was ">an assault on>such ideas
as freedom, democracy, and civilisation in which our whole>culture and way of
life is included."
I do not know ">Why were there so many
>Columbians who perished in the WTC attack?"
I did not know ">almost 2,000 Irish Americans
>and Irish nationals were lost in the WTC attacks"
Newspaper accounts in this country describe the victims as being from all parts
of society; many service employees that might never be actually identified
because they were not "legally" employed.
Many of your assumptions about Americans are sweeping generalizations.
I disagree with several things you wrote.
To keep this in a cinematic perspective, I disagree with the John Wayne
Syndrome. While ">the more>aggressive, inflammatory, and belligerent the war
rhetoric, the>greater the chances that the war-mongerer has never
actually>experienced a real war." might be valid for the human condition in
general, I doubt the films of John Wayne were written, produced and directed by
him.
I believe very few people think John Wayne was an actual war hero. I don't
think he ">cunningly evaded>actual combat" I think he was too old and
physically unfit for active duty. He better served his country during WW II by
starring in morale-building propaganda movies. John Wayne was no Trevor Howard.
His war movies (and other propaganda movies like Big Jim McLain, The Alamo and
The Green Berets) are not often watched or much remembered these days. (U.S.
Marines worship at the temple of Sands Of Iwo Jima, but that's another story.)
I think the real John Wayne was not nearly important to most Americans as the
characters he played in western movies.
The images most Americans retain of John Wayne are the characters from
Stagecoach or The Searchers, not The Fighting Seabees or Flying Leathernecks.
The myth of the American West is the setting for John Wayne's iconography.
In general, I am sorry that you, Padraig, hold the American people culpable for
the government's foreign policy. I write this with respect because I usually
enjoy reading whatever you write. I am sorry that my intellect and writing
skills are inadequate to express my negative reactions to your essay.
Otius Gojius
"If you don't like it, don't look at it." -- George Lopez
Winston Castro
>
>In general, I am sorry that you, Padraig, hold the American people culpable for
>the government's foreign policy. I write this with respect because I usually
>enjoy reading whatever you write. I am sorry that my intellect and writing
>skills are inadequate to express my negative reactions to your essay.
>
>
I think your thoughts and points are for the most part based on the
premise-
"Don't kick a man when he's down." And this viewpoint certainly has
some merit and carries with it some moral weight. However, it does not
supersede the fact and simple truth that American foreign policy is
generally horrendous and especially so in the middle-east.
Is it the proper time to talk about it? I'm not sure myself but
with all due respect to the numerous lives lost in the tragedy, I tend
towards the belief that 'now is as good a time as any.' It's important
for Americans to realize or at least have some general concept of the
true reasons so many in the world hate us. They did not attack us
because "we love freedom" or any such nonsense. The attack was a
direct result of American foreign policy in a particular region of the
world mixed in with a healthy dose of "blowback." Although painful for
many, the real issues at hand must be addressed instead of the
uttering of comic book platitudes on the subject of 'good vs evil' as
seems to be the trend.
This in no-way endorses the viewpoint "that we had it coming" in
any way, as no country, however vile its policies, ever deserves
massive, wanton slaughter of innocent working citizens. The worst
foreign policies imaginable could ever justify such a brutal attack on
civilians.
OtiGoji
>...American foreign policy is >generally horrendous...
>...the proper time to talk about it?
>...now is as good a time as any.'
Sure, I am all for amiable chatting with free discourse and dissent is always
welcome in my neighborhood.
>It's important>for Americans to realize or at least have some general concept
of the
>true reasons so many in the world hate us. ...>direct result of American
foreign policy in a particular region of the
>world
I think most Americans know that we (almost single-handedly) support Israel in
the bad business in the Middle East.
>a healthy dose of "blowback." Personally, I think the "blowback" is greatly
exaggerated. ObL was not one of "our" moujadeens; he said so himself in an
interview with Mr. Fisk of The Independent.
The real problem came when we dropped Afganistan to get involved in European
events as the Iron Curtain fell in '89. Our neglect allowed the Taliban to
seize Kabul.
>uttering of comic book platitudes on the subject of 'good vs evil'
Funny you should mention it but I AM uttering comic book platitudes on the
subject of 'good vs evil." But I do not expect my government to root out all
evildoers in the world, like the scoundrels who digitally inserted those people
into EWS.
>The worst>foreign policies imaginable could ever justify such a brutal attack
on
>civilians.
I know you meant "could *never* justify."
I find a lot of what the president says to be silly and not all Americans
support everything our government does.I don't mean to be frivilous, but not
every American voted for the current president, you know?
Padraig L Henry
wrote:
>ptca...@yahoo.com (PT Caffey) wrote in message news:<84498e9.01092...@posting.google.com>...
>> phe...@iol.ie (Padraig L Henry) wrote in message news:<3bb2e8f1...@news.iol.ie>...
>> >
>> ><snip>
>> > ...Fortunately, there is a substantive "middle ground" above these
>> > apocalyptic choices: the creation of an International Criminal Court
>> > to deal with all crimes against humanity, something which the US has
>> > actively opposed for years (for reasons that are only too well
>> > documented). It might also be remembered that acts of war were
>> > declared illegal following the Nuremburg Trials after WWII, which is
>> > one of the principal reasons, for instance, that the US never
>> > "declared" war on Vietnam.
>> >
>> > Padraig
>>
>> How precisely would the proposed "International Criminal Court"
>> apprehend those responsible for the September 11th atrocities? Issue
>> a subpoena?
These very issues are being urgently debated in many countries at the
moment. Moreover, tomorrow, October 1, the Irish government assumes
the Presidency of the UN Security Council. Constitutionally a
"neutral" country, the creation of such a criminal court, with
military backing, if necessary, will be foremost among its priorities
...
>Probably have Interpol bird dog them till they drop. By the way, don't
>we already have a World Court? The US pretty much thumbs its nose at
>it, so changing its name wouldn't do anything.
I'll assume that you are referring to the Haigue Court: that deals
with >war< criminals, principally from the former wars in the Yugoslav
republics ...and who is to say that the US is incapable of policy
reform?)
>
>Wordsmith
>>
>> PT Caffey
Padraig
Padraig L Henry
Bullingdon) wrote:
>Excelent article, Padraig. Are you a writer?
>
>
>
>L.B.
And I'm also a convicted troll-molester ...
Padraig
>
>
>
>
>P.S. please read my post "the evil and the manicheist temptation",
>with an interesting article on the same subject. The author compares
>Bush not to John Wayne, but to his 3 year-old niece.
Padraig L Henry
The only difficulty with this approach is that those who wish for
retaliation are not waiting for such a "time." They are already
acting: hundreds of special forces are already in Afghanistan
conducting covert operations. And today, a delegation of US
Congressmen are in Rome meeting with both representatives of
Afghanistan's opposition Northern Alliance along with the former
"King" of Afghanistan - with a view to taking action to depose the
Taliban and re-install an equally repressive monarchy.
>Maybe one day I can
>talk intelligently about how politics and policy makes curious
>bedfellows (always has, always will). I can't do that now. I still
>meet people in our cafeteria who cry when they recall what they saw
>when they ran.
>
>Sorry Padraig, the rhetoric that you see on CNN has nothing to do with
>the unity that Americans feel right now and is not in any way
>diminished because some of us may want retaliation and some of us may
>want peace.
>
>There will be injustices caused by this tragedy on those who do not
>deserve it. Just as the injustice of our policies destroyed lives and
>orphaned children who did not deserve it.
>
>
>Bob
And let's hope that the emotional, social, and spiritual cohesion that
results from the collective grief, loss, and numbness ultimately finds
its way into the political domain.
Padraig
Padraig L Henry
>>Padraig L Henry wrote:
>
>>You announce your
>>resolve to rid the world of some terrible perceived menace that poses
>>a threat to all of "civilisation." Then you turn the other cheek and
>>enter into pragmatic alliances with all manner of thugs, despots, and
>>fanatics because, right now, they help you to achieve your immediate
>>goal.
>
>While I respect (and fear) your formidable intellect and writing skills, I
>still feel compelled to comment on your essay. As parts of it were written in
>the second person, I did take it personally.
The "you" above referred to those specifically involved in the process
described above. It was not directed at >you<.
>I agree with much of your clear and concise opinion of U.S. foreign policy but
>I am dismayed that you wrote it at this time. Your list of U.S. geopolitical
>follies and failures now reads like "Americans should have seen this attack
>coming because they deserve it."
Nonsense. It reads like nothing of the kind. Those who subscribe to
the "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" cycle or spiral of violent
retribution soon become blind and toothless ...
>There is much in your piece that seems overly
>harsh and judgmental on the country that just had four passenger planes
>hijacked and destroyed with two of those airliners flown into office buildings
>full of people from all walks of life from all over the world.
>I think the attack on the World Trade Center was an attack on the whole world.
>I do think the attack on the World Trade Center was ">an assault on>such ideas
>as freedom, democracy, and civilisation in which our whole>culture and way of
>life is included."
>
>I do not know ">Why were there so many
>>Columbians who perished in the WTC attack?"
>
>I did not know ">almost 2,000 Irish Americans
>>and Irish nationals were lost in the WTC attacks"
>Newspaper accounts in this country describe the victims as being from all parts
>of society; many service employees that might never be actually identified
>because they were not "legally" employed.
>
>Many of your assumptions about Americans are sweeping generalizations.
>I disagree with several things you wrote.
>To keep this in a cinematic perspective, I disagree with the John Wayne
>Syndrome. While ">the more>aggressive, inflammatory, and belligerent the war
>rhetoric, the>greater the chances that the war-mongerer has never
>actually>experienced a real war." might be valid for the human condition in
>general, I doubt the films of John Wayne were written, produced and directed by
>him.
No, he acted in them. So?
>
>I believe very few people think John Wayne was an actual war hero. I don't
>think he ">cunningly evaded>actual combat" I think he was too old and
>physically unfit for active duty. He better served his country during WW II by
>starring in morale-building propaganda movies. John Wayne was no Trevor Howard.
> His war movies (and other propaganda movies like Big Jim McLain, The Alamo and
>The Green Berets) are not often watched or much remembered these days. (U.S.
>Marines worship at the temple of Sands Of Iwo Jima, but that's another story.)
>I think the real John Wayne was not nearly important to most Americans as the
>characters he played in western movies.
Thats the rub: the imaginary Wayne was more "real" than the real one.
>The images most Americans retain of John Wayne are the characters from
>Stagecoach or The Searchers, not The Fighting Seabees or Flying Leathernecks.
>The myth of the American West is the setting for John Wayne's iconography.
>
>In general, I am sorry that you, Padraig, hold the American people culpable for
>the government's foreign policy.
I'm uncertain how you arrived at that conclusion. My criticisms of
foreign policy made no mention of the American people, except insofar
as they are somewhat divided on the issue.
>I write this with respect because I usually
>enjoy reading whatever you write. I am sorry that my intellect and writing
>skills are inadequate to express my negative reactions to your essay.
>
>
>Otius Gojius
>"If you don't like it, don't look at it." -- George Lopez
Padraig
Richard Stevens
ptca...@yahoo.com wrote on 28/9/01 1:15 am:
For a start you are putting alot of UN staff in danger by tryinh him in an
international court, presumably UN. Not that Muslim Extremists don't hate
the UN already, there have already been 2 attempts to gas UN conferences in
the last 6 years
R
Richard Stevens
men...@digiscape.com wrote on 27/9/01 3:31 pm:
Evildoer, is biblical
R
Wordsmith
> On 29 Sep 2001 05:27:25 GMT, oti...@aol.comSPAMNOT (OtiGoji) wrote:
>
> >>Padraig L Henry wrote:
>
> >>You announce your
> >>resolve to rid the world of some terrible perceived menace that poses
> >>a threat to all of "civilisation." Then you turn the other cheek and
> >>enter into pragmatic alliances with all manner of thugs, despots, and
> >>fanatics because, right now, they help you to achieve your immediate
> >>goal.
> >
> >While I respect (and fear) your formidable intellect and writing skills, I
> >still feel compelled to comment on your essay. As parts of it were written in
> >the second person, I did take it personally.
>
> The "you" above referred to those specifically involved in the process
> described above. It was not directed at >you<.
Second person plural!
> >I agree with much of your clear and concise opinion of U.S. foreign policy but
> >I am dismayed that you wrote it at this time. Your list of U.S. geopolitical
> >follies and failures now reads like "Americans should have seen this attack
> >coming because they deserve it."
>
> Nonsense. It reads like nothing of the kind. Those who subscribe to
> the "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" cycle or spiral of violent
> retribution soon become blind and toothless ...
...and hard to look at.
> >There is much in your piece that seems overly
> >harsh and judgmental on the country that just had four passenger planes
> >hijacked and destroyed with two of those airliners flown into office buildings
> >full of people from all walks of life from all over the world.
> >I think the attack on the World Trade Center was an attack on the whole world.
> >I do think the attack on the World Trade Center was ">an assault on>such ideas
> >as freedom, democracy, and civilisation in which our whole>culture and way of
> >life is included."
> >
> >I do not know ">Why were there so many
> >>Columbians who perished in the WTC attack?"
> >
> >I did not know ">almost 2,000 Irish Americans
> >>and Irish nationals were lost in the WTC attacks"
> >Newspaper accounts in this country describe the victims as being from all parts
> >of society; many service employees that might never be actually identified
> >because they were not "legally" employed.
> >
> >Many of your assumptions about Americans are sweeping generalizations.
> >I disagree with several things you wrote.
> >To keep this in a cinematic perspective, I disagree with the John Wayne
> >Syndrome. While ">the more>aggressive, inflammatory, and belligerent the war
> >rhetoric, the>greater the chances that the war-mongerer has never
> >actually>experienced a real war." might be valid for the human condition in
> >general, I doubt the films of John Wayne were written, produced and directed by
> >him.
>
> No, he acted in them. So?
Is that you, Padraig? Is this you? :)
> >I believe very few people think John Wayne was an actual war hero. I don't
> >think he ">cunningly evaded>actual combat" I think he was too old and
> >physically unfit for active duty. He better served his country during WW II by
> >starring in morale-building propaganda movies. John Wayne was no Trevor Howard.
> > His war movies (and other propaganda movies like Big Jim McLain, The Alamo and
> >The Green Berets) are not often watched or much remembered these days. (U.S.
> >Marines worship at the temple of Sands Of Iwo Jima, but that's another story.)
> >I think the real John Wayne was not nearly important to most Americans as the
> >characters he played in western movies.
>
> Thats the rub: the imaginary Wayne was more "real" than the real one.
Paging Baudrillard!
Phildicksmith :)
Wordsmith
I thought the WC had broader powers. Hey, I'm not that up on it. Oh, indeed
we are capable of reform...just not always willing.
Wordsmith :(
> >Wordsmith
> >>
> >> PT Caffey
>
> Padraig
Bob K
> On 28 Sep 2001 07:00:07 -0700, rkr...@na2.us.ml.com (Bob K) wrote:
>
> >phe...@iol.ie (Padraig L Henry) wrote in message news:<3bb2e8f1...@news.iol.ie>...
> >>
> >>
> >
> The only difficulty with this approach is that those who wish for
> retaliation are not waiting for such a "time." They are already
> acting: hundreds of special forces are already in Afghanistan
> conducting covert operations. And today, a delegation of US
> Congressmen are in Rome meeting with both representatives of
> Afghanistan's opposition Northern Alliance along with the former
> "King" of Afghanistan - with a view to taking action to depose the
> Taliban and re-install an equally repressive monarchy.
>
...which would be worse for the people of Afghanistan than the
repressive regime that they already have. If only the current despots
would just kill their own people and leave ours alone we wouldn't be
forced to support these others out of self defense. Hardly attractive
choices either way. Always gets me to thinking what the people would
vote for if by some miracle they had the choice. What about the people
of Egypt? Saudi? Jordan etc etc. In spite of our stated national goal
of furthering people's governments, I'm not sure we would necessarily
like the outcome of free elections in these areas. Democracy is
messy. This is an area that cannot be messy due to the 70% of our oil
supply that they provide.
> And let's hope that the emotional, social, and spiritual cohesion that
> results from the collective grief, loss, and numbness ultimately finds
> its way into the political domain.
...more than that I hope it causes the demise of:
1. The 11mpg SUV for anyone other than ranchers
2. The 5,000 sqare foot house for people with 2 kids (McMansions)
3. Outdoor lighting sufficient to read by and drown out all but 4-5
stars
I can remember the gas lines of 74 when we only imported 30% of our
oil from the Mid East.
So far...encouraging signs.
Bob
Tobasco
Padraig L Henry
(Why were there so many
> Columbians who perished in the WTC attack?)
I know of a number of
> "undocumented" Irish construction workers who were in one of the WTC
> towers when it was attacked; their employer refuses to even
> acknowledge their existence - for fear of being found out, while their
> families are afraid to report them among the missing - for fear of
> being deported themselves (incidentally, almost 2,000 Irish Americans
> and Irish nationals were lost in the WTC attacks; compare that with
> the 3,300 who have been killed over the past 30 years in the conflict
> in Northern Ireland).
>
I've been looking for demographics on the WTC missing, without success. My
FEMA contacts are, so far, unable to provide much detail in this area of
interest; would you mind sharing your sources? According to these numbers,
nearly 1/3 of the missing are Irish - interesting. My maternal
grandmother's name was O'Bannon, does this make me Irish?
Tobasco
Mike Jackson
at richard....@btopenworld.com 10/01/2001 6:53 PM went on about :
> Evildoer, is biblical
> R
Even worse!
You know, Jesus and Mohammad are rapidly loosing stature in my vault of
favorite fictional characters...
I watched that new Star Trek series premiere the other night and found
myself wishing for an invasion of logical Vulcans to come and save us from
ourselves...
Bilge
>(Why were there so many
>> Columbians who perished in the WTC attack?)
Because there are a lot of Colombians in New York, actually. And several
international businesses had their headquarters in the WTC. Quite possibly,
some Colombian firms were housed there. This is hardly a surprise. Anyone
who walks down the street in New York City could have told you that anybody
who tries to inflict any kind of serious damage on this city would end up
killing a lot of people from other nations. About 40% of New Yorkers were
born outside of the US.
>
>I know of a number of
>> "undocumented" Irish construction workers who were in one of the WTC
>> towers when it was attacked; their employer refuses to even
>> acknowledge their existence - for fear of being found out, while their
>> families are afraid to report them among the missing - for fear of
>> being deported themselves
The Dept. of Justice here recently addressed this issue, btw. They
encouraged these people to report their missing, and stated,very clearly,
"Nothing will be done to you."
>
>
>I've been looking for demographics on the WTC missing, without success. My
>FEMA contacts are, so far, unable to provide much detail in this area of
>interest; would you mind sharing your sources? According to these numbers,
>nearly 1/3 of the missing are Irish - interesting.
There are a lot of Irish people in New York. I'm sure a number of those
missing were probably firefighters. There is a pretty sizable number (and
long tradition) of Irish-Americans in the FDNY.
love,
Bilge
Padraig L Henry
>
>>(Why were there so many
>>> Columbians who perished in the WTC attack?)
>
>Because there are a lot of Colombians in New York, actually. And several
>international businesses had their headquarters in the WTC. Quite possibly,
>some Colombian firms were housed there. This is hardly a surprise. Anyone
>who walks down the street in New York City could have told you that anybody
>who tries to inflict any kind of serious damage on this city would end up
>killing a lot of people from other nations. About 40% of New Yorkers were
>born outside of the US.
>
>>
>>I know of a number of
>>> "undocumented" Irish construction workers who were in one of the WTC
>>> towers when it was attacked; their employer refuses to even
>>> acknowledge their existence - for fear of being found out, while their
>>> families are afraid to report them among the missing - for fear of
>>> being deported themselves
>
>The Dept. of Justice here recently addressed this issue, btw. They
>encouraged these people to report their missing, and stated,very clearly,
>"Nothing will be done to you."
Well, that is great news, Bilge (I hope it works)..
>
>>
>>
>>I've been looking for demographics on the WTC missing, without success. My
>>FEMA contacts are, so far, unable to provide much detail in this area of
>>interest; would you mind sharing your sources? According to these numbers,
>>nearly 1/3 of the missing are Irish - interesting.
>
>There are a lot of Irish people in New York. I'm sure a number of those
>missing were probably firefighters. There is a pretty sizable number (and
>long tradition) of Irish-Americans in the FDNY.
>
>love,
>
>Bilge
Yes, Bilge. Your estimation is spot-on. About sixty per cent of the
workforce complement of the FDNY (with an approximately similar
percentage applicable to the NYPD) is Irish-American.
Living in Ireland, I've been constantly bombarded by reports and
broadcasts here of the effects of the WTC/Pentagon attacks on the
Irish diaspora in the US during the last three weeks. It has been a
devastating eye-opener for most Irish citizens (the government here
declared a National Day of Mourning for the Friday following the
attacks; the whole country completely shut down - yeah, even the
feckin' pubs; feck again, even much of the tabloid press; the only
drink to be had - publicly - was at the American Embassy in Dublin,
where thousands descended to sign the book of condolances and raise
the awl' glass in defiant solidarity), many of whom had
under-estimated the true extent of that diaspora in New York
(emigration from Ireland to the US/Britain/Australia etc having for
many years - or rather, decades - been complacently considered as "An
Irish solution to an Irish problem" eg.: "Unemployed? Get ta' fuick
out'a here on yer US Donnelly Visa pronto ya cute huer paddy!").
Needless to say, given that there are 42 million Irish Americans in
the US and that their first ports of call were mainly New York and
Boston, then the casualty figures from September 11 begin to make
"representative" sense.
As doubts have been expressed at AMK about the validity of the
previously reported statistics on Irish-American casualties, I have
included the following recent report - from the Irish Times newspaper
- detailing some of those casualties:
"The list of people dead and missing in New York mirrors the extent of
Irish input into American society, writes Mary Minihan.
The contribution of Irish people to American society is reflected in
the list of just some of those who died or are missing in the
aftermath of the September 11th terrorist attacks.
The website, www.irishtribute.com, contains information and
photographs of American people with Irish connections who died on
September 11th, 2001.
The parents of a large number of the young people listed left Ireland
in the 1950s in search of a better life. Two pairs of brothers who
worked for Cantor Fitzgerald, the financial securities company, came
from Irish backgrounds. Some of the young men and women had made plans
to marry in the near future. Others who already had families gave
their children distinctive Irish names.
The Department of Foreign Affairs has officially confirmed fifty Irish
nationals dead. A further eight are unaccounted for.
But the total number of Irish Americans and Irish nationals who died
may reach well beyond one thousand to as many as two thousand,
according to the Irish Consulate in New York. Among the New York
communities hardest hit were Irish-American strongholds such as
Woodside and Rockaway.
Professions which had traditionally attracted large numbers of Irish
workers also suffered greatly. Many firefighters, police personnel,
ambulance workers, labourers and carpenters with Irish names were
caught up in the disaster. The fact that many "undocumented" Irish
people worked in New York means that the identity of some victims may
never be discovered.
Ruth Clifford McCourt (44) from Cork and her daughter, Juliana
Valentine McCourt (4), died on one of the hijacked jets that crashed
into the World Trade Centre in New York. A scholarship fund for the
promotion of peace and racial harmony has been established in
Connecticut in memory of Juliana.
The list of the missing and dead also includes Patrick Currivan (52),
an engineer from Drimnagh, Dublin, who worked in Paris. Mr Currivan
was also on board the American Airlines flight.
Others on the list are: Martin Coughlin (53), a carpenter from
Cappawhite, Co Tipperary, who had been living in the Queens district
of New York for 14 years; Father Mychal Judge (68), the New York Fire
Department chaplain whose parents were from Co Leitrim; Ms Ann McHugh
(35), a stockbroker from Tuam, Co Galway who was due to get married
next month.
Also listed are: Kieran Gorman (35), a labourer from Carrowcurragh,
Lavagh, Co Sligo, who had lived in Woodlawn, the Bronx, for around
nine years; Joanne Cregan (in her 30s) from Churchtown, Co Dublin; Ms
Cregan had been employed by Cantor Fitzgerald for a number of years.
John Moran, an Irish-born businessman who had lived in Britain for
most of his life, is also named. He was in New York on a business trip
on the day of the suicide bombings.
Among the firefighters who died in the attack was Michael Lynch (30).
His father, Jack Lynch from Tralee, emigrated to New York in the
1950s. Michael was due to marry in November. Capt Timothy Stackpole
(42) is also listed. He was presented with the "Irishman of the Year"
award at the Great Irish Fair in Coney Island just a month before the
atrocity.
Glen Thompson (38) was a bond trader who worked for Cantor Fitzgerald
in the World Trade Centre. Mr Thompson's mother, formerly Ms Margaret
Dwyer, was from Athleague, Co Mayo. His father's side of the family
was also Irish. He had been married two months when he died.
Brian Monaghan (21) is also listed. A carpenter who grew up in Inwood,
Manhattan, his family originally came from north Belfast. Mr
Monaghan's body was recovered from the wreckage of the World Trade
Centre and his funeral took place at the Good Shepherd Catholic Church
in Inwood, while his relatives in Belfast attended a Mass in St
Patrick's Church, Donegall Street.
The body of Michael McCarthy (33) was recovered and he was buried in
Huntington, New York. His mother was from Roscommon. Mr McCarthy was a
trader with Carr Futures.
Michael Patrick McDonnell (34), an accounting manager for Keefe,
Bruyette & Woods who lived in Red Bank, New Jersey, also died in the
attack.
Patrick Woods (36), is also listed. He was a carpenter who was buried
in Staten Island, according to the Irish Voice.
Others listed include Andrew (39) and Timothy (35) Gilbert, brothers
who worked for Cantor Fitzgerald in the World Trade Centre. Their
mother, who now lives in England, was formerly Ms Mary Bones, of
Ballaghderreen, Co Roscommon.
Farrell (39) and Sean Lynch (36) were American-born brothers with
Irish parents who worked as traders for Cantor Fitzgerald. The two
were nephews of the Fine Gael TD for Sligo-Leitrim, Mr Gerry Reynolds.
Farrell lived in Centerport, New York and Sean in Morristown, New
Jersey.
Damien Meehan (33) also died in the attack. A financial adviser whose
parents moved from Donegal town to Manhattan in the 1950s. He was a
former president of the Donegal Association in New York.
Sean Canavan (39) died also in the atrocity. A carpenter whose father,
Kieran, was from Ballygawley, Co Tyrone, and mother, Rose, from
Crossmaglen, Co Armagh, emigrated to Long Island in the 1950s. He was
a cousin of the Tyrone GAA footballers, Peter and Paschal.
Also listed was Patrick Aranyos (22). His mother was the former Ms
Winifred O'Reilly from Ballinlough, outside Oldcastle, Co Meath. Mr
Aranyos, who worked for Morgan Stanley in the World Trade Centre, was
a second cousin of the Bishop of Meath, Most Rev Dr Martin Smith.
Among the other firefighters caught in the tragedy was Dennis McHugh
(34). His father, Mick, was from Killeenreevagh, Garrymore and his
mother, Olive, came from Aughavass, Leitrim. A memorial service for
Dennis took place at the Church of St. John in Piermont, New York on
Friday.
Another firfighter, John Tierney (27) was the son of Mr Sean Tierney,
formerly of Carrowkilleen, Hollymount.
Jimmy Gray (34) was one of the first firefighters to arrive at the
scene at the World Trade Centre. His father emigrated from Kilkenny to
the US in 1957. His grandfather still lives in Kilkenny. Timothy
McSweeney (37) was a firefighter whose mother came from Dundalk.
Joseph Berry was chairman and co-chief executive of the financial
company Keefe, Bruyette & Woods. A fourth-generation Irish American
who lived in Saddle River, New Jersey, he was listed in Irish-America
Magazine's Top 50 Wall Street Irish this year.
Joseph A Lenihan (41) was the company's executive vice-chairman and
was also included in the Top 50 list. He was a second-generation Irish
American whose family came from Wexford and Clare. He lived in Cos
Cob, Connecticut.
Christopher Duffy (23) was an assistant trader with Keefe, Bruyette &
Woods. His father is Mr John Duffy, president of the company, whose
mother came from Leitrim and father from Sligo.
Michael McHugh Jr (35) is also listed. He was a US-born broker with
Tradespark, whose father emigrated from Oldcastle, Co Meath in the
1950s. He lived in Tuckahoe, New York.
Jonathon M Connors (52) worked for Cantor Fitzgerald and had family in
Dublin. He was related to the McManus family in north Longford.
Michael Armstrong (34) worked for Cantor Fitzgerald and was due to
marry Ms Catherine Nolan on October 6th. He was the son of Gabriel and
Mary Armstrong, originally from Killoe, Co Longford.
Eamon McEneaney (46), from New Canaan, Connecticut, worked as a senior
vice president and limited partner with Cantor Fitzgerald. He attended
Cornell University. His family originally came from Castleblaney, Co
Monaghan. Bobby Linnane, a firefighter, was the son of the late Ms
Brodie Coughlan from Lissycassey, Co Clare. Matthew McDermott (34) of
Basking Ridge, New Jersey was an equity trader with Cantor Fitzgerald.
His brother lives in Dublin.
Brendan Dolan (37) was born in the Bronx. He worked as a broker for
Carr Futures and lived in Glen Rock, New Jersey. James Kelly (39), a
broker for Cantor Fitzgerald, lived in Oceanside, New York.
John Monahan (47), an operations supervisor with Cantor Fitzgerald,
lived in Ocean Township, New Jersey."
Tobasco
Padraig L Henry
> As doubts have been expressed at AMK about the validity of the
> previously reported statistics on Irish-American casualties, I have
> included the following recent report - from the Irish Times newspaper
> - detailing some of those casualties:
>
> photographs of American people with Irish connections who died on
> September 11th, 2001.
>
Yes, I visited the site several days ago - approximately 275 names are
listed on the tribute page. The site further states that an estimated 1000
persons with direct Irish connections are feared to be among the missing, a
number that >could conceivably< rise to as high as 2000 when the counting is
finished.
ONE would be too many.
I fail to see a purpose in exaggeration of numbers; and yes, the
imprecision in the original post raises doubts of various kinds.
David Culpepper
Faisal A. Qureshi
> >I've been looking for demographics on the WTC missing, without success.
My
> >FEMA contacts are, so far, unable to provide much detail in this area of
> >interest; would you mind sharing your sources? According to these
numbers,
> >nearly 1/3 of the missing are Irish - interesting.
There is a estimated breakdown list by nationalities of people missing. If
you do a search on the excellent website www.cryptome.org you'll find it
quite quickly. I would list a exact address but my laptop is running very
slow at the moment for downloading articles.
Best.
FAQ
JW Moore
wrote:
Or you can try CNN's site, which has an up-to-date file on victims;
also a click-on world map for nationality breakdowns.
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/main.html
~~Jack