-------- Original Message --------
Subject:        Raptis / Stop the bloodbaths! / Dec 02
Date:   Sun, 3 Dec 2006 05:22:28 -0800 (PST)
From:   ZNet Commentaries <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:     [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Sustainers PLEASE note:

--> You can change your email address or cc data or temporarily turn off mail 
delivery via: 
https://www.zmag.org/sustainers/members

--> If you pass this comment along to others -- periodically but not repeatedly 
-- please explain that Commentaries are a premium sent to Sustainer Donors of 
Z/ZNet and that to learn more folks can consult ZNet at http://www.zmag.org 

--> Sustainer Forums Login:
https://www.zmag.org/sustainers/forums

Today's commentary:
http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2006-11/24raptis.cfm

==================================

ZNet Commentary
Stop the bloodbaths! December 02, 2006
By Nikos Raptis 

The (latest and current) bloodbaths are: 9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, 
Madrid bombing, London bombings, Lebanon, Gaza (again), ...

 
The killing of Americans, British, Spaniards, and other Westerners by 
non-Americans is called "terrorism".

 
The killing of non-Americans by Americans, British, and other Westerners is 
called "war on terror".

 
Bush (the Second) stated that the non-Americans (mostly the Arab Muslims) 
started the bloodbaths because they hate the Americans for being free, 
democratic, etc.

 
Assuming that humans are rational, there is no doubt that they wish that the 
bloodbaths should stop. Also, being rational, they wish to stop the killing 
without using violence.

 
George W. Bush (and his collaborators) claim that the only way to stop the 
bloodbaths perpetrated by the "terrorists" is through violence (even preemptive 
violence).

 
The "terrorists" claim that as long as the American Government (et al) are 
murdering their children they are obliged to retaliate by kill ordinary 
Americans (and their "willing" collaborators).

 
But, does the American Government kill Arab children, etc? And, if it does, are 
the ordinary Americans aware of these killings. An effort to answer both 
questions was made in previous (ZNet) Commentaries starting with the one of 
December 13, 2001. The answer to both questions, then, was that: Yes! They are 
aware. The results of the US congressional elections confirm that this claim is 
correct. The US elites and their collaborators (Israelis, British, Australians, 
etc) kill innocent people and the ordinary Americans are aware of it.
 

So, how do we (all the peoples of the World) put an end to the bloodbaths?
 

Let us start with the (ordinary) Americans: "If there was ever a time for [the 
US] to look closely at itself in the mirror, now is the time... Shame on us if 
we don't have a very aggressive debate about what we should be... We need to 
take responsibility as a people..."  Who uttered these words is irrelevant. If 
an individual states that 2 plus 3 equals 5 the truth of the statement 
supercedes the education, the profession, etc of the individual. 
 

The above quoted statement, after replacing [the US] with the correct original 
word "Louisiana", belongs to Mitch Landrieu, the lieutenant governor of 
Louisiana and the occasion was a meeting funded by the United Engineering 
Foundation and organized and hosted by the American Society of Civil Engineers, 
the Georgia Institute of Technology, and several other universities in the 
region to discuss the rebuilding of New Orleans.  
 

What would the ordinary Americans see in the mirror, if they were to decide to 
look in it? They would see a people that did not react MASSIVELY:
 

- When Madeleine Albright, after killing half a million Iraqi infants (through 
Clinton's embargo), said: "We think it was worth it."
 

- When Barbara Bush, mother of George W. Bush, said that the New Orleans blacks 
were lucky to be in the luxury of the "Louisiana Superdome", after Katrina 
drove them away from their miserable homes.
 

- When the son of Barbara said that only 35,000 Iraqi civilians were killed 
(obviously, an insignificant number) and that the number of 650,000 of Johns 
Hopkins University was inaccurate.
 

One could argue that the ordinary Americans did react massively with their 
votes on November 7. Or, even, that Johns Hopkins is an American university 
that had the moral power to come up with the above number. The answer to this 
is that the reaction of the ordinary Americans has to be deep. Very deep! Not 
the rather shallow (if not irrelevant) "traditional" electoral process, no 
matter how praiseworthy the Johns Hopkins report.

 
But let us now turn to the other side, the (so-called) "terrorists". There are 
two kinds of them. To the first kind belong those that hit towers, bomb 
subways, etc. To the second kind belong those that resist a foreign force that 
invades and occupies their country. Therefore, the term "terrorists" does not 
apply to them. For example, in (the brutal) reality of Iraq they should be 
considered Resistance Fighters (comparable to the Resistance Fighters against 
he Nazis during the Second World War).
 

Historically it has been proven that the first kind, who indiscriminately kill 
civilians, etc, are nothing but "assistants" to the murderous dominant powers. 
If there was no 9/11, Bush (the second) would have been non-existent, Ashcroft 
would not have released his religiously psychotic "patriotisms", Rumsfeld would 
have impressed with his virile postures no one but the ladies of his local 
Christian congregation, Rove, etc, etc.
 

So, if the first kind of reaction (through indiscriminant killing) is not only 
immoral but also helps the murderous dominant powers, then what can those 
harmed by them do? The only answer is found in the overwhelming power that 
resides in the number  (the massive number) of the women and the men of the 
world. 
 

The ordinary Americans have this power and they have the moral duty to use it 
in order to bring about a deep, a very deep, change. This duty becomes even 
more imperative due to the fact that they are free to exercise it. A freedom 
that in reality does not exist in other "democracies".
 

This very deep change will be accomplished by bringing to justice the war 
criminals: Bush, Blair, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rove, Rice, and the rest 
of the murderous individuals who were responsible for the killing, raping, and 
torturing of hundreds of thousands of humans.
 

What is important is not which will be the tribunal that will judge them, or 
how  this is going to be accomplished, or if there are legal "tools" available. 
What is of paramount importance is that the American women and men should make 
known to the war criminals that they DEMAND their punishment. The use of terms 
as the International Criminal Court (of Rome), the Geneva Accords, etc only 
weaken the effort. There is a single word that describes in the most powerful 
and most accurate way the (moral) intentions of the women and men not only of 
America but of the entire word. The word is: NUREMBERG! This should be the 
motto for all of us. Nuremberg for all the war criminals and their minions. 
 

The first step has already been taken! 
 

A few days ago (on November 14, 2006), German and American lawyers "asked a 
German prosecutor to investigate Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on 
allegations of war crimes..." [International Herald Tribune, Nov. 15, '06]. It 
is up to ALL of us to elevate this moral struggle to a higher level and not let 
it become only "a lingering irritant" for Rumsfeld, "who is soon to lose the 
legal protection of his cabinet post...should he decide to travel overseas as a 
private citizen..." [IHT, page 8] 
 

However, this effort should aim even higher than Nuremberg. The American people 
and the rest of the world should find the moral courage to face the fundamental 
problem between them:
 

- The American people should apologize to the world for the grave crimes that 
the American Governments have been committing against the peoples of the world 
(at least) for the last 60 years, in the name of the American people.
 

- The peoples of he world who have been harmed by the American Governments 
should accept this apology and should declare that they will stop exercising 
active Resistance by violent means against the Americans and their 
collaborators.
 

Thus, without "terrorism" as a weapon in the hands of Bush (and any future 
Bush)  to terrorize the ordinary Americans this could become a more peaceful 
and moral world.
 
 
 
 
[Note 1: To be really successful, an effort to stop the bloodshed should take 
into account the following tragic and unbelievable fact: "By the beginning of 
the 1990s the income of those in the top 20 percent worldwide was almost 60 
times as much as the income of those in the bottom 20 percent". (This according 
to the Worldwatch Institute). However, I am told that the correct number is 
close to 600 or 700 times!] 
 

[Note 2: The Katrina case of New Orleans is equally instructive as the numbers 
in the above Note 1. An estimated 460,000 pre-Katrina residents have not 
returned. "Nearly 79,000 families have applied to the $7.5 million program to 
rebuild Louisiana. Only 1,721 have been told how much grant money they will 
receive. And just 22 have received access to the cash, which was provided by 
federal taxpayers..." (New York Times, Nov. 11, '06). Meanwhile, $ 32.5 million 
were spent to restore the Louisiana Superdome (of Barbara Bush fame). Finally, 
it is reasonable to wonder if, as an adult, Rumsfeld has ever thought how much 
human misery could have been eliminated with the money he spends for a single 
week in Iraq? End of Notes.] 
 



_______________________________________________
FRIENDS mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.sffreaks.org/mailman/listinfo/friends

Reply via email to