Thursday, August 4, 2005

From the Queen on down, they represent nothing but themselves

In email, from P.McK..

Quoted by Lowell Green, CFRA, these were Michaelle Jean's remarks, shortly after Sept. 11, 2001:

"Well, the attacks in New York and Washington were, in a way, foreseeable."
This passes the smell test, as a typically weasely Canadian way of saying those people deserved to die, but can anyone source this outside of a third hand report on FD?

12 comments:

Christopher Trottier said...

I take issue with the phrase "typical Canadian way". I am Canadian and I don't agree with those statements.

Lisa said...

Christopher;

Okay, so maybe you are not a typical 'Canadian', so why are you bothered by the above 'statements?'

If the standard we are using to judge and characterize the 'typical' is the majority opinion, then what better way to understand what that might be but to examine the policies and 'philosophies' of the officials popularily elected at cardboard booths? Have you a different standard? Do you defy your elected representatives?

Meaning ... Mike's characterization of the Canadian way stands. We are talking of herds here, and their ballot box tendencies.

Meaghan Champion said...

Mike, if somebody published 10 years before Sept 11th, 2001 the prediction that America's Foreign Policy was going to result in this kind of horror ... does that mean that they were trying to say "They deserved it"?

I'm curious.

Meaghan Champion said...

Ok.. just to be perfectly clear...

It was clear to some Jewish people, at a certain point in Germany, it became foreseeable that Jews who remained in Germany would have bad things happen to them...

We know this was forseeable.. because many Jewish people did see it coming, and for that reason, they fled the country...

Would you dare to argue that because they forsaw it... that those who didn't see it, and stuck around "deserved it"?

If you would not say that there.. then why would you say it in a parallel situation?

Mike said...

Edward, I don't hold the premises you seem to attribute to me in your last two paragraphs, so I guess I don't understand what you're getting at.

gm said...

Versaille... resulted in the holocaust! It was the fault of the British and the French.

Meaghan Champion said...

Mike

The point I was trying to make, perhaps clumsily was that there is a difference between assigning blame, or guilt to people, and seeing causes of events and their consequences.

I do not believe that *anybody* deserved to die in Sept 11th. I think it was a heinous and vile act carried out by wicked and disgustingly evil *people* (if you can call the terrorists that)

However, this does not erase the fact that there have been some absolutley insane foreign policy decisions by multiple generations of American Administrations over the past 30+ years. The LP of the United states has been screaming about this for years, and people within the LP and Libertarian movement have been warning people for over 20 decades that sooner or later something horrible was going to happen to America and Americans as a consequence. For instance, do you remember the bombing of the US Cole?

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

To be 100% absolutely clear. Nobody is assigning guilt to American citizens... especially to the civillians who died on Sept 11th. Those people were NOT guilty of ANYTHING. They were not culpable. They did no harm to anybody. At worst they are only guilty of living in a country where those who hold a monopoly on the use of instigatory force have use it to do ill-advised things for a long long time.

Something which even hints that people who have warned about the danger of the American government getting the country into messy foreign entanglements are somehow "blaming" people for their own deaths on Sept 11th is troublesome to me.

Chris Sciabbarra has an excellent essay on this topic, over at his notablog. It was on the subject of Ayn Rand, Ward Churchill, and a long look at the Taggart Commet Tunnel disaster.

I personally think Rand was wrong when she seemed to be implying that the people on the train were complicit and culpable in their own deaths because they believed in certain things, and propagated certain ideas...

I think it is a monstrous idea to propose that any innocent human being should or deserves to suffer or die because of what their government has done to others.

But again, this would all come down to how one feels about the morality of voting, paying taxes etc if you know that your government is using your sanction to legitimate it's on-going predation of others, OR it is using your taxes to inflict untold numbers of terrible harm upon others.

I think it's sloppy thinking to try and make the case that if somebody says something like "Sept 11th was Forseeable" that means they think American's deserve to die... especially when I know people, in America who have been tearing their hair out for a very long time trying to warn their countrymen, and their politicians that America, and Americans were being put into severe and terrible mortal danger by pursuing many of their foreign affairs policies.

If saying "it was forseeable" after the fact, is a damning indictment of the morality of those saying it, on the basis you've suggested... I can just as easily see it being used to condemn people who actually did forsee it happening, or something similar probably going to occur, and warned of it as often and as much as they could. But damn few people was listening or paying attention.

That is all.
Immediately after the US Cole was attacked, AND before then, slightly after Bin Laden declared war on the United States of America... there were people in the US that were fairly certain that further attacks like this were bound to occur, AND that they ultimately happen in America to Americans.

And damn few people paid ANY attention....including the United States Government, Foreign Affairs Department, Administration.

Do you remember the bombing of the Aspirin Factory in Sudan, back during the Clinton Administration? The claim was made that the factory had been tested and found to have precursors to RX gas.

Do you want to know who I would primarily put the blame of Sept 11th upon? William Jefferson Clinton...by a long shot, more so than anything done by George Bush.

He used Osama Bin Laden, as a prop in the stage-craft of his spin-machine to avoid impeachment. Now...THAT is evil.

I just worry that the condemnation being levied against people for saying "this could be forseen" has the potential, in the very screwy world that we live in today, to be used as a charge against people who did actually have forsight.

Do you think the libertarians who warned about these kinds of things happening were guilty of appeasing terrorists? Or that they were Saddam Sympathizers? Or that they were part of the "Blame America First" crowd?

I can see mushy-headed moo-cows making that kind of leap in logic...
It worries me.

Do you remember the OKC bombing? Do you think people who say "If Waco had never happened... it's unlikely that Tim McVeigh and his co-conspirators would have carried out OKC?"

That would be a flat-out denial of reality. OKC occured on the anniversary of Waco. Federal Prosecutors even argued in Court that McVeigh carried out his evil act because he was so angered about Waco.

To be clear, nobody blames the people who died at OKC, on the Federal Government of the United States. Nobody suggests that McVeigh was right to murder hundreds of people.

It's simply an acknowledged FACT that McVeigh did carry out his bombing because of Waco. By pointing to these facts, nobody is suggesting that OKC Victims deserved to die.

I don't see Sept 11th any differently than I see OKC. In both cases, evil vicious monsters murdered hundreds or thousands of people for their own sick twisted reasons.

Why is it that if people talk about McVeigh's motivations... this is not reacted to in the same way, as when people talk about Bin Laden's motivations?

McVeigh is no different than BinLaden. Both are/were terrorists. Both were driven by hard-line whacked out ideologies, that they use to justify everything they do/did... even if it meant murdering hundreds or thousands of people to accomplish their goals.

Meaghan Champion said...

Over 20 decades... should read "Over 20 years"

gm said...

If you mean the Policies that were altruistic and collectivist... I would agree!

Crazed maniacs do not analyze the nuance of foreign policy... they evaluate on superstition and irrationalism!

Superstitious fascism is not to be reasoned with, much like the blood brother communism.

Meaghan Champion said...

GM

100% agreed.
There is no reasoning with these people. However, it is smart, and reasonable to try and determine why these evil people, like McVeigh, or Bin Laden do what they do.

And I simply don't buy that Bin Laden attacked the United States because he hates their freedom... or any of that stupid nonsense.

I doubt Bin Laden thinks that way at all. He has however capitalized on a number of things to increase the popularity in the muslim world for his Jihad.

And that is just sickening. In order to fight Bin Laden and Al Zawahiri properly you need to fight them in a way that actually hurts them, and doesn't make them more popular and supported.

For instance... one of the things which sould have immediately happened after Sept 11th, was for the State Department to broadcast VERY VERY loudly the names and pictures of Muslims who died in the attack to the Muslim World.

It is an unforgiveable sin in Islam to kill a fellow Muslim. This could have been effective tool to beat the living shit out of Bin Laden in a public relations effort. To paint Bin Laden as somebody who murdered muslims.

But this was not done. It was not even mentioned.

Do you see... I'm not suggesting people look at the root causes of the terrorists like McVeigh or BinLaden to try and justify what they do, or excuse it, or rationalize it. My interest in looking at root causes and the driving forces behind Sept 11th, is because I want America to take steps that will stop it from happening again.

gm said...

The "root" cause of the gulag was philosophical the root cause of terrorism is philosophical. Psychology plays a role, but irrational ideas will ultimately be the root cause. Of course, Bin Ladan hates freedom. He would not allow any one to pursue happiness...

Pietr said...

Confirmed.