Ivo Skoric on Thu, 8 Nov 2001 12:42:35 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> ivogram x2: 2 interesting articles + roman defense |
[digested @ nettime] "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net> 2 interesting articles from Guardian, 1 from Herald Tribune, <...> Roman defense? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From: "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net> Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 14:56:51 -0500 Subject: 2 interesting articles from Guardian, 1 from Herald Tribune, and the life in general Academics in US silenced. Torture debated as a possibility. The double-speak of American goals in the war on evil. Meanwhile: CDC warned of the shortage of the flu vaccine in the US - but many web sites and magazines suggested the flu vaccine as a good way to ward yourself against the anthrax-like flu symptoms, so that you know when the 'real thing' hits - even Giuliani urged New Yorkers to get flu vaccine. So, now, no doctor has it. And the department of health locations are overbooked, meaning a lot of people simply can't get the vaccine. http://www.ci.nyc.ny.us/html/doh/html/imm/immclin.html Also, there is a curious delay with payments of unemployment compensation by the Department of Labor in New York State - I know that since I live in the neighborhood where a lot of people receive them - people are edgy: some didn't get their check for past three reporting cycles, and they are arguing at the local post office. Last week I spent in Rutland, Vermont - the city of a population that would fit in one of the WTC towers - there nearly every house flies American flag outside, and the general support for American war on evil is unquestioned. But that does not mean that there is a lack of healthy suspicion of government and foreign policy. In other words, bombing per se is not automatically endorsed. People would like to see OBL, Al Qaeda, Taliban and the rest of the terror network gone. However, they are not buying into the black and white, good and evil story. They do understand that the past and present US foreign policy has a lot to do with existence of the terror network. It became clear to me that people even outside of big urban areas in the US use common sense in assessing the TV news and comparing them with various Internet resources. > International Herald Tribune > Growing numbers of pundits are openly discussing allowing U.S. > law enforcement to use torture against suspects. That has > critics worrying that perhaps a barrier to the mistreatment > of the accused is in danger of falling. (11/06/01) > http://www.free-market.net/rd/572080741.html The Guardian Tuesday November 6, 2001 Sound of silencing US academics who dare to discuss the Allied bombing face censure, says Lee Elliot Major An academic uprising is brewing to defend the right to speak out against US government policy, amid growing concerns that government and university officials are disciplining lecturers who question the response to the September 11 terrorist attacks. Hundreds of academics have signed up to a statement advocating the right to hear critical and dissenting voices over US foreign policy and the Afghanistan bombing campaign, which the campaigners are planning to publish in the New York Times. It follows a series of attacks on academics daring to question the Bush administration publicly. The US government is also planning to introduce new powers forcing universities to disclose confidential details about overseas students as part of a new computerised tracking system to prevent terrorists from entering the US on student visas. The statement, which is circulating widely among academics in the US and UK, says: "In the crisis precipitated by the terrible events of September 11, members of academic communities across the US have participated in teach-ins, colloquia, demonstrations, and other events aimed at developing an informed critical understanding of what happened and why. "Unfortunately, some participants in these events have been threatened and attacked for speaking out. Trustees of the City University of New York are planning formal denunciations of faculty members who criticised US foreign policy at a teach-in. There have been similar efforts to silence criticism at the University of Texas at Austin, MIT, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, and elsewhere." It concludes: "We call on all members of the the academic community to speak out strongly in defence of academic freedom and civil liberties, not just as an abstract principle but as a practical necessity. At a moment such as this we must make sure that all informed voices - especially those that are critical and dissenting - are heard." The American Association of University Professors has not signed up to the statement, but its general secretary, Mary Burgan, has warned against an anti-intellectual backlash. "It is predictable that after we had passed through the initial phases of reaction to September 11, we should want more subtle analyses. And so the discourses of academics - passionate as well as cool - have commenced," she said. "And so have the voluble reactions of those who believe that thinking out loud in our colleges and universities is so subversive that it ought to be stopped, somehow. A distrust of intellectuals has always lurked beneath the surface of American popular opinion. Now it has begun to leak out again." In one of several recent attacks, academics at City University of New York who suggested that US foreign policy was partly to blame for the terrorist attacks were publicly denounced by the university's chancellor for making "lame excuses" for the terrorists. A professor at the University of Texas at Austin, meanwhile, attracted the wrath of the university's president for publishing an article arguing that the US itself has perpertrated "massive acts of terrorism" in its dealings with other countries. Students have also been calling for the heads of academics who questioned the US government's actions. A political science professor speaking at a vigil at California State University, Chico, was heckled by students, and has been bombarded with hate letters. A survey by Harvard University's Institute of Politics has shown that nearly four out of five college students support the airstrikes in Afghanistan, and more than two-thirds back the use of US ground troops. The US Senate has stepped back from initial proposals to ban new visas for overseas students after it was reported that one of the September 11 hijackers entered the US on a student visa. The government is, however, introducing a tracking system that will give police information about the names, universities, dates of attendance and degree subjects of some 500,000 overseas students. Initial indications suggest that overseas student numbers to the UK could be boosted by the US moves. There is little sign that UK academics are being censured. In one incident, however, anti-war posters were taken down at the University of Keele. Views on how September 11 has affected the academic sector feature this week at www.EducationGuardian.co.uk UK university centres related to Middle East studies Birmingham Cambridge Derby Durham Edinburgh Edinburgh Institute Exeter Glasgow Institute of Ismaili Studies London School of Economics Lancaster Leeds Manchester Oxford SOAS St Andrews Wales Lampeter US university centres for Middle East studies Arizona Binghamton California at Berkeley Chicago Columbia Harvard Indiana Georgetown Michigan New York Pennsylvania Portland Texas UCLA Utah Washington Yale Other centres for Middle East studies Ben-Gurion Bergen Birzeit Hamburg Tel Aviv Academic associations for Middle East studies American Institute for Yemeni Studies Arab Social Science Research The British Society for Middle Eastern Studies The Canadian Committee of the Middle East Studies Association The European Association for Middle Eastern Studies The Institute for Palestine Studies Middle East Studies Association of North America US peace studies experts ________________________________________________________ _________ Our war aims - in general AL Kennedy Monday November 05 2001 The Guardian And now our daily news report from Washington - your other national capital. Today, in our series of Clean Cut Americans - General Elmer Coyote, former commander of Gamma Force: So, General, how can you help the tiny minority who are feeling wobbly to understand the sad necessity of our War Against Badness, as currently conducted by our wise and restrained leaders? Thank you kindly, I'd be glad. First off, I'd have to say that anyone who is, as we put it in military circles, a real live normal human being will, by their very God-given nature, accept that everything we're doing over in Afghanistan and on the home front is absolutely for the best. As you know, the United States, and your United Kingdom never interfere with foreign powers, but once we are roused, we act. The way may be stony, still our will is strong and our war aims are absolutely clear, although subject to the secrecy which must inevitably arise in matters of virtuous defence. You couldn't give us a teeny clue about them, though? We seek not to overthrow the Taliban, but to overthrow the Taliban, which may take a while, or not that long at all, if you compare it to Vietnam - not that you ever, ever should - and after victory we will allow the Afghan people to elect a new government, or we will allow them to elect the new government provided, which will be based, or not based, around the Northern Alliance which is either a really keen bunch of patriots, or a rabble of camel-jockey terrorists slightly less well-equipped than the Taliban, and we will find Bin Laden and we will kill him, or bring him to justice in another deadly way resulting in his law-abiding and perfectly reasonable death when vengeance will be ours, but not in a vengeful way. And when this is all over, Afghanistan will be a happy land, full of merry, hopping children - hopping, mind you, not because they are amputees, but because they are living in an earthly paradise of recognisable banking and investment systems. We are fighting to defend our way of life and don't you forget it. Amen. And could you expand a little on the qualities that make our way of life so very, very good? I had the honour to teach the current commander of the US forces when he was a student at the College of Death Studies and he is a fine, warm man. I think of him now, because often we would sit up nights and discuss what made our way of life so precious. And it's, quite simply, this: cowards, terrorists, communists and Muslims, they kill civilians on purpose, whereas we in the west kill civilians as a sad necessity. We don't enjoy it. Some lunatics and subversives would say that, either way, you still end up with innocent casualties, mutilated babies and so forth. That is war and war is hell. And if they're so innocent, what are they doing in Afghanistan, anyway - the place is a shithole. And if, for example, a mother knows we decapitated her daughter with the very best of intentions, really as a kind of accident, it will surely make all the difference to her. And I know your prime minister agrees. That's part of what makes the special relationship so special. Yes, what about that special relationship? It's special. It's full of specialness and it's really a relationship. Which means? That Britain and the Britishers, above all others, understand that UK politicians should be able to come stateside and pretend they have more influence than a bucket of hog piss over the most powerful country in the world. And you also understand that, when all's said and done, we're going to do what we damn well like, because our interests are the finest interests in the world, but you can come along for the ride and peripheral dividends. And we could get a little sickened by all this whining about grenades that look like bandage rolls and "won't people get confused?" and "why keep bombing Red Cross stations?" And the rumours that all US infantrymen who enter Afghanistan carry a length of pipe with instructions to connect and lay them in the direction of the Caspian? Whatever this war is about, it is not about control of the vast Caspian sea oil deposits. The United States has never had any interest in oil. President Bush has never had any interest in oil. Neither the United States or the United Kingdom have ever cynically exploited a conflict for their own commercial advantage, or made a profit out of death. So no worries there, then. Thanks. Copyright Guardian Newspapers Limited - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From: "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net> Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 14:57:59 -0500 Subject: Roman defense? http://www.ohr.int/ohr-dept/presso/bh-media-rep/round- ups/default.asp?content_id=6206 >>One of the subjects discussed was the "Roman Defense" plan and its further implementation. According to Dnevni List’s source, the plan contains a point of "integrating or assimilating two of the peoples in BiH, Bosniaks and Croats, whereas the third, Serb people would remain intact in the environment that the entity itself created." That would solve two problems. Croats would no longer be a national problem with their nationalistic demands for a third entity or perhaps even for a secession, which otherwise could cause a new crisis in the region, while, on the other hand, Muslims would become a Europeanized people without any special segregation or deviations from the "European standards" of modern states, except for the religious characteristic, but that would be alleviated by assimilating them with Croats.<< I don't know what do I find more offensive in this statement: 1) that it was so blatantly put on the Office of the High Representative page giving it a stamp of officialdom... 2) that it so brazenly outlines the foreign interference in the inter- ethnic relations in Bosnia... 3) that it codes the operation as 'Roman Defense' cynically comparing itself with the Roman Empire and their historic lack of respect for the wishes of the local population - celebrating the 'divide et impera' principle... 4) that it choses to openly admit that crime pays - by letting "Serb people [..] remain intact in the environment that the entity itself created" - this clearly rewards and justifies use of force, violence, ethnic cleansing and war crimes in any future attempt to 'create an entity' anywhere else in the world, doesn't it? 5) that it proposes the elimination of Croatian "national problem" through eliminating the separate Croatian identity in Bosnia by 'merging' it with Bosniaks - not even communists before 1948, while they were still under Stalin's influence dared to attempt such a radical social engineering - what is this with the OHR is behaving like The Borg: "You shall be assimilated. Resistance is futile."? Don' t they see that this is a proposition for heightening the tensions within the Bosnian federation, and possibly a renewal of violence between Croats and Bosnians? Is that what OHR really wants? 6) that it openly humiliates Bosnian Muslims by saying that they "would become a Europeanized people without any special segregation or deviations from the 'European standards' of modern states, except for the religious characteristic" through assimilation with Croats - did the September 11 events managed to totally erase the perception of Bosnian Muslims that the world had so far as highly secular, highly Europeanized people? 7) that it, in that context of Europeanization through assimilation, by letting "Serb people [..] remain intact in the environment that the entity itself created", relegates Serbs in Bosnia to the isolation chamber chosen for them by their past war criminal leaders, punishing those among them who would wish to become parts to European integrations. Shame on OHR. I think Petritsch should apologize to Bosniaks, to Croats and to Serbs in Bosnia for this statement. When I read things like that I get deeply depressed - thinking that the worldly policy-makers, the wealthy, the powerful really understand only the language of violent force, and this is precisely the thinking that made the disastrous events of the September 11 possible. ivo --------------------------------------------------------- Ivo Skoric 19 Baxter Street Rutland VT 05701 802.775.7257 ivo@balkansnet.org balkansnet.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net