Michael
I was responding to the rhetoric that has been beginning to burgeon in the
last few days.
In no way was I trying to diminish the actualities of what has happened to
people in the US.
But language is the province of any true poet, and resistance to a rebirth
of the old rhetoric of the State is essential. I was genuinely shocked when
I heard the closing moments of the memorial service at St Paul's, I thought
it a sick parody at first, with its apostrophising of Liberty and John
Brown's Body being sung by a massed choir in the background.
To find out tonight that it was a specific request by the US govt was an
even further shock.
That empty language can easily be a mask for murder.
The unanswered question about this tragedy is why did the terrorists become
terrorists? What does the US do that makes the poor of the Middle East hate
them so much? What makes someone want to become a suicide-bomber?
And, I'm afraid, my ellipsis wasn't meant to suggest that I think witholding
grain from Afgahnaistan a desirable act.
I entirely agree with your criticism of the Taliban though.
Best
Dave
David Bircumshaw
Leicester, England
A Chide's Alphabet
www.chidesplay.8m.com
Painting Without Numbers
www.paintstuff.20m.com/default.htm
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/david.bircumshaw/default.htm
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Snider" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 6:35 PM
Subject: Re: WTC
> On Friday, September 14, 2001, at 01:20 PM, david.bircumshaw wrote:
>
> >
> >> If they do not, they are harboring a murderer, and must accept the
> >> consequences of that.
> >
> > Michael, you are a poet, I suggest you ponder the meaning here of
> > 'accept
> > the consequences of that'.
> >
>
> We are both poets, David, though I don't know whether being poets has
> anything in particular to do with what I'm sure is out mutual wish that
> the killing stop. We both know it isn't going to stop immediately -- the
> difference between us lies in what we see as the best course to end it
> soonest.
>
> > And too 'The Taliban' is not synonymous with the population of
> > Afghanistan,
>
> Of course this is true.
> > who would be most those 'accepting the consequence'.
>
> The Taliban are themselves one of the sources of Afghanistan's misery --
> particularly for its women and for non-fundamentalist Muslims. The
> Afghani people are so tired of war that the Taliban now relies on
> soldiers from elsewhere -- people like bin Laden. Of course, it is also
> true that the Taliban are in power now partly as a result of US actions
> in the long struggle against European Communism -- a struggle often
> characterized by short-sightedness and sheer stupidity on both sides.
>
> > Pakistan is now the
> > sole supplier of grain to Afghanistan, and I presume if pressure were
> > brought to bear ...
> >
>
> I fervently hope for this. I do not expect it.
>
> >
> > David Bircumshaw
>
|