*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
{ Sila lawat Laman Hizbi-Net - http://www.hizbi.net }
{ Hantarkan mesej anda ke: [EMAIL PROTECTED] }
{ Iklan barangan? Hantarkan ke [EMAIL PROTECTED] }
*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
UNDILAH PAS DAN BARISAN ALTERNATIF
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
----- Original Message -----
From: "M G G Pillai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "SK" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Sangkancil"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 12:11 PM
Subject: [sangkancil] [MGG] The Bali bombing: The world held to ransom
> A few nights ago, at a diplomatic reception, three European
> diplomats were livid I would suggest, as I did in an earlier
> piece, there might be more to the Bali bombings than meets the
> eye, that it could be a cynical Washington attempt to get both
> Indonesia and Australia on firmly on its side in this egregious
> war on terror. They focussed their complaint on the carnage, and
> how could I dare say Washington would do it. I said there is
> still doubt about the fourth plane that crashed in the
> Pennyslyvania fields was deliberately shot down as its target was
> the White House. In statecraft, such cynical moves are not only
> common but necessary. Just look at President Bush's demand that
> President Saddam Hussein be overthrown. When self-interest is
> all that matters, what is a few hundred, or even a thousand,
> lives lost? In Vietnam, it was nearer 60,000. Those involved in
> that do not shed a tear as the families of the dead. Many still
> think what they did was right.
>
> There is a worldwide conspiracy, backed by the United
> States, to link, still without evidence, Al Qaeda and its
> tentacles for the bombing. Within hours of the blast, President
> Bush was clear in his mind it was the Al Qaeda network. And
> others fell in line. But the Australian prime minister, Mr John
> Howard, waffled his way through a BBC interview when pressed on
> it. There is as yet no beep from the Australian foreign
> minister, Mr Alexander Downer, on the challenge the Jemaah
> Islamiyah leader and alleged Al Qaeda operative, Mr Abu Bakar
> Bashir, to repeat his allegations to his face. Nothing in the
> news these days would deviate from this official line. It is the
> single-minded demonising whom it wants demonised. But is that
> proof it did what the world says it did?
>
> All we have so far is this demonising belief in Washington,
> Singapore, Canberra that it is JI and Al Qaeda that did it. It
> fits in with the official view of Islam as an enemy. So it is
> not challenged. For Islam replaces the Communist as the ogre of
> the day. Unfortunately, when battle lines are drawn on such
> simplistics basis as if you are not with us, you are against us,
> a lot of people would, and do, get hurt. In the Bali bombings,
> other factors could well be at work. Osama, Al Qaeda and JI
> could have done it; so could the nationalist Indonesian angry at
> Australian meddling in East Timor in the runup to its
> independence from Indonesia; the armed forces in an attempt to
> provide the conditions of utter chaos which only they could
> resolve; internal religious conflicts; to destabilise the
> government of President Megawati Sukarnoputri; an extension of
> the religious conflicts that have emerged in Indonesia in recent
> times; a deliberate Machivellian act by the US government -- not
> necessarily officially but through one of its agencies, like the
> CIA -- to warn Indonesia of the dangers of waffling in the face
> of a threat Washington insists she faces, with the side product
> of getting the Australian peoples mad and angry enough to agree
> with what their prime minister, Mr John Howards, as Washington's
> sergeant major in this war on terror.
>
> No one asks why the Bali bombings happened. But all are
> quick to link it with the global enemy of choice: Osama and his
> ubiquitous Al Qaeda. But people are arrested today for their
> involvement with Osama bin Laden and his network at a time when
> they were bankrolled by Washington and the CIA. As recently as
> 1999, the State Department, in a Congressional hearing, described
> the Taliban not as fundamentalist Muslims but as conservative
> Muslims it could deal with. Yet two years later they had to be
> destroyed as Washington perfected its 'regime change' model. In
> the 1980s, the US backed Osama bin Laden and his fundamentalist
> crusade so they could be unleashed on the Russians in
> Afghanistan. When he and his organisation turned their
> fundamentalism on the US, they became the ultimate evil. But as
> you sow, so you reap. Suddenly, the officially-encouraged
> activities that led many a Malaysian Muslim to cavort with the
> Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan at the time when Washington
> approved it, to detention under the Internal Security Act when
> they became the enemy. As others elsewhere in the region.
>
> The deaths are tragic. So many lives wasted for no purpose.
> But so the thousands when the US bombed Afghanistan, and the
> hundreds of thousands of Iraqis under UN sanctions. No one sheds
> a tear for them. They are subhuman, it seems, but not the
> citizens of the backers of the war on terror. Death and
> destruction by any side -- the United States and the terrorists
> -- must be condemned. But when one side indiscriminately bombs
> innocents, so would the other. So this breast-beating at the
> carnage in Bali counts for nothing when it is not reflected in
> breast-beating in Afghanistan or Iraq. Or are lives on your side
> more valuable than on the other? Or is one life from the
> developed world equal to a thousand from the developing world?
>
> But what we do not have so far is the motive. When it is Al
> Qaeda and its links that must be condemned, there is no need for
> one. The ready made enemy is at hand, so why bother about what
> happened. All it did, though, is to get the Muslims united as
> never before. They are as rabidly united as the Christians were
> when they went to do battle for Christianity against the Muslims
> in the Crusades.
>
> But there are other possibilities. The strongest -- and
> which got the diplomats terribly upset -- is that Washington
> could have deliberately orchestrated the carnage. The Gulf of
> Tonkin resolution which brought the US into Vietnam turned out,
> as the Pentagon Papers showed, was based on a lie; as the claim
> by the 15-year-old daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador that she
> saw Iraqi soldiers in Kuwait removing respirators from newly born
> babies. But it was enough reason for Congress, in anger, to act.
> By the time it was found out, the action had begun, and it
> became moot.
>
> What makes it difficult to assess all this is the deliberate
> lying, the half-truths, the public relations spiel about the
> demonic nature of the enemy, the insiduous propaganda in the
> runup to a war, compounded by the speed with which the story must
> come out. One does not have hindsight in advance. One trusts
> one's instincts. When working in Indochina as a journalist in
> the 1960s, I had the instinctive feeling that the US would become
> a cropper. I was derided for it at the time, and called the same
> epithets as I am now -- Commie lover and all that -- but ten
> years later it did. As I believe in this war on terror. And
> this not from a fanatical Muslim, but a mild-mannered Hindu!
>
> M.G.G. Pillai
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> URL:www.mggpillai.com
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
( Melanggan ? To : [EMAIL PROTECTED] pada body : SUBSCRIBE HIZB)
( Berhenti ? To : [EMAIL PROTECTED] pada body: UNSUBSCRIBE HIZB)
( Segala pendapat yang dikemukakan tidak menggambarkan )
( pandangan rasmi & bukan tanggungjawab HIZBI-Net )
( Bermasalah? Sila hubungi [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pengirim: Nazar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
