Hitchens asks: "But must one not also measure intention and motive?"
the american intention and motive is revealed post facto in its shutting down an investigation of the consequences of the bombing. this is what turned the us bombing into a state terrorist act, whatever the initial intention and motive. plus, hitchens refuses to understand how important chomsky's point was at the time that it was made: after the bombings, many were ready to take quick and massive revenge, and chomsky was rightly warning us off escalating the cycle of unjustifiable violence. More importantly, Hitchens writes: "In my version, then as now, one confronts an enemy who wishes ill to our society, and to his own (if impermeable religious despotism is considered an ill). In Chomsky�s reading, one must learn to sift through the inevitable propaganda and emotion resulting from the September 11 attacks, and lend an ear to the suppressed and distorted cry for help that comes, not from the victims, but from the perpetrators. I have already said how distasteful I find this attitude." hitchens underestimates the depth of popular support in the arab world for strikes against symbols of US military and economic power. it is in fact quite disturbing to recognize that such attacks could have some substantial measure of support or at least not motivate the strongest possible repudiation? Should we turn a deaf ear to this? As an American, I would certainly like to. moreover, given the regimes that the US supports, the only forms of opposition that are going to survive on such politically parched land are the egyptian jehadi and Al-Quaeda--that is, clandestine, hierarchical, militaristic, and thoroughly hideous organizations. With that as the only form of organized dissent in tact, people have nothing else to rally around. If the US does not allow democratic movements to develop in the region which will fight against the terms of trade turning against the raw materials exporters and for redistribution of the wealth in the region as a whole, people will indeed join or become fellow travellers of these terrorist organizations. With such popular support for such hideous groupings, the pro US govts will find that they cannot take too aggressive police action without risking their own toppling. At this point, this is a political reality even if hitchens would like to ignore it. Look at what is happening in Pakistan. many people (the young in particular) think Osama bin Laden will deliver the wealth of the Muslim world to them. They have lost hope in the US; they fought and died for the US, and didn't even get a Marshall Plan. They were abandoned. Now the Pakistani govt has no legitimacy to do the civilized thing of bringing Osama bin Laden to justice. Whose fault is this? The problem will never be solved unless the US learns to live with regimes which due to their suspectibility to democratic pressures do not willingly create ever more adverse terms of trade by ramping up oil production during a US recession because the elites derive more money from Wall Street than the sale of oil. The US govt has to learn to live with democratic regimes that may not always channel massive dollar (or EURO!) reserves in a manner that suits it. Only such democratic Arab and Central Asian govts--representing the people who circulate in the region as a whole; the Arab people obviously do not respect the lines in the sand--will be able to aggressively root out clerical fascists without risking their own overthrow. It is impossible to explain what transpired on 9/11 or the present difficulties in annihilating clerical fascists without putting US policy at the center of the picture. Does Hitchens deny this? If only Eqbal Ahmad were here to give Hitchens the pillorying that he so richly deserves. Rakesh ps people are wondering what's up with hitchens. fame once achieved is hard to let go of. once dennis miller called hitchens the smartest man in america on monday night football, hitchens wasn't going to say anything to jeopardize his standing among such television celebrities. herman and chomsky understand the confines which hitchens has accepted in his faustian bargain; thus hitchens cannot but engage in mad diatribes against them.
