Sofia wrote:I feel like I'm pushing a bit, but I hope you'll consider this.
I almost brought this article in. I thought it was a point of interest that should be discussed. It is news.
The picking and choosing of what is acceptable news, and what is an agenda of incitement may bear more scrutiny. You aren't the only one, who dismissed it. Almost everyone else has said--don't worry so much about this--or they've tried to change the subject off of this group, and on to another... I fail to see why we couldn't have talked about these people, this group, their actions, history, words... Why are they beyond scrutiny and criticism?
It makes me sad that the one who brought the article bears the brunt of the criticism. He may have brought the two, because no one else here will. Isn't it fair for him to be able to discuss these issues, without his motives being instantly suspect?
I haven't seen the other article, but doesn't this one merit a viewing and discussion?
<Tired. Off to bed. But, sincerely want to know if anyone can address my questions.>
I think Craven has sort of answered this one, Sofia - but I have been thinking more about your question, partly because it was interesting to me to look at how I react to material of this sort. Here, for what they are worth, are my personal thoughts/feelings.
When I see material about people reacting with joy to slaughter, I am sickened. I think it is obvious that, for most of us in western countries, the scale, situation, extensive coverage, iconic status of the targets and, most of all, I feel, our identification with the people suffering and dying, made September 11th 2001 a special horror. It was US, HERE, suffering and dying - not them, there - psychologically speaking. This affected me as deeply as anything ever has.
On the other hand, I knew that this was going to be reacted to as no other terror attack has ever been, I think - because of the factors I have mentioned above - and, most of all, because this was the USA - whatever happens in the USA is writ large. Many people - perhaps more of them US citizens than citizens of most other countries - are ignorant of the ongoing tale of terror in the world - many are ignorant of US and western sponsored terror (the irony of Chile, especially, was in my head even as I watched and cried). This knowledge gave me a sort of odd, jarring, double vision - a feeling that I did not want the many other victims to be forgotten in the drama surrounding THIS attack, which would be seen as so especially cataclysmic because it was America, even as I FELT it as especially cataclysmic myself.
So - this cognitive/emotional dissonance affects me whenever I am thinking about 9/11 - I want to acknowledge the horror - I also feel some resentment and anger about the special status accorded it (by me, too) - this means I always have a desire to balance the story -both internally and publicly.
Re the article about the (as it happens, apparently cancelled, Moslem extremist celebrations) - other tensions around all this include, in no particular order:
* My dislike of fundamentalism (except any which I myself possess, of course!) - which I sort of struggle against as being a bit strong, or mean, or something.
*My tendency to find much about Islam repellent - especially its (or, as some argue, not its, but the culture of some of the countries in which it took roots') treatment of women - which is a tendency I struggle about internally, (along the lines of "that is disgusting prejudice - no it isn't, it is fact") and hence feel some ongoing cognitive/emotional dissonance about.
*My semi-belief that Islam was almost picked on as the necessary enemy by the US when communism wasn't there any more. Does anyone else feel that the US needs an enemy? Maybe we all do...
So - after hearing way more about the rather confused workings of this little brain than you ever wanted to, I am sure, what all this boils down to is, that when I hear the actions of extreme Moslems criticized, especially re 9/11, I find the issue hard to leave alone because:
I worry that all Moslems will be included in any consequent rage storm (which is the issue already delineated by Craven) and I feel a need to present a balancing voice.
I battle with the "double vision" thing I spoke about above, and I want to present a balancing voice.
I struggle with my own internal prejudices, and don't want them to win, so I present a balancing - or sometimes angry - voice.
I wonder if this comes across as (or really is, because it is an uncomfortable area for me - and perhaps, similarly, for some others?) a desire to make Moslem extremists " beyond scrutiny and criticism"?
