No Surprise - Terrorism Is
|Neither Wears a White Hat
Anyone who thinks that the 'so called' War on Terror has had any success, is sorely mistaken. Those who
commit acts of violence and cause suffering from their Terror are inflicting results that few are willing to admit. It never
ceases to amaze the denial that most bring to this subject. What's the surprise, EVIL is the normal condition . . .
that does not make any part of this deplorable situation acceptable. It only illustrates the extent of the derangement that
occupies the twisted minds of the participants, and is at the core of the conflict.
Let no one have any doubt that
acts of violence are wrong, always wrong. When Ari Fletcher coined the phrase "homicide bomber", he is entirely correct. The
popular reporting of the term "suicide bomber" is lacking in distinction. Now we are introduced to the description from Hamas
that these fanatics should be called "martyred bombers". Talk about irrational perspective . . .
The reason that Terrorism
is seen as the ultimate foe of governments, is the nature of the warfare. Let no one mistake the stakes. Those who are willing
to die to deliver chaos and turmoil are dangerous. But more than that, they are unstoppable. Such an assessment may be unpopular
but consider the facts. Regimes and prosperous societies have much to loose. Alienated and hostile adversaries that place
little value on life, are no match for standing armed forces. By denying the temperament of the attacker and responding with
overwhelming force, the inevitable futility of the end result; is guaranteed. Even tactics of aggressive proactive search
and destroy strategy, fails to address or eradicate the underlying conflict. The battle may be won short term, but the war
By reasonable standards from the Western perspective, the peace settlement offered to Yassar Arafat
during the Camp David process, seems equitable. The summary of the December 2000 Clinton proposal for Israeli-Palestinian peace plan, speaks for itself. Popular interpretation has Arafat’s rejection of
making peace with Israel, a clear demonstration of the intent to wage a continuous war to the death. That might be a stretch,
but it certainly proves that peace has never been his prime motivation.
The Palestine culture has been shaped from
a fierce and eternal hatred toward the Zionist State. That is a historical reality. The reasons for such an animosity are
too long to cite, and truly define the meaning of biblical, in the all time - blood feud. But when did the Koran become the
purview and vision of wickedness, taught by depraved Muslim Mulla's? Clerics are supposed to elevate the spirit, not encourage
and endorse the carnage of the innocent. But just who are the blameless?
Infants and young children, for sure. Beyond
that point, it become argumentative. The case for the Palestine cause is being made to the world. The international media
has long been sympathetic to Arafat, especially that coming out of Europe. Now, the recent incursion of the Israeli panzers
into the west bank, and the images of overwhelming force, is now raising doubts in America. Absolute support for Israel is
being questioned. Just who is without blood on their hands, in this neverending conflict?
Sharon's incursion has failed
because the world is less likely to condemn the terror that is generated from the followers of Arafat. Facts bear evidence
that the "Intifada" resistance is often indiscriminate and collateral damage is intended. That cannot be defended. When Ariel
Sharon and other members of the Likud Party marched to the Temple Mount - Haram al-Sharif, the war began. Many Israelis dispute this interruption. While discussions as to blame are circular at best, what matters is that world opinion is
being effected through the criminal and injurious deeds of maniacs. What should be a clear cut response of universal condemnation,
often takes on the appearance of understandable desperation. Much of the globe adopts this view.
So why is Sharon unwilling
to work with the American intiative to stop the violence? His recent remarks are troubling:
"They (the Americans) have problems in the region, that's true, but I informed them that our activity
will continue - and it will continue."
In an age where image is perception and becomes reality, how can one separate the good from the evil? Moral
relativism is not the sole problem, but equivalent depravity bears much of the indictment. How can anyone conclude or defend
either side, when disregard for all life, is the only common bond both demonstrate?
It would be impartial to submit
that both leaders qualify under the narrowest version as terrorists. Their history of personal revulsion, irrevocably damages
even the most remote possibility for a peaceful resolution. It would seem that a "High Noon" show down is inevitable. The
appropriate venue would be Arafat leaving Haram al-Sharif and Sharon departing from the Wailing Wall, marching towards each
other - for the final duel, winner takes all! If peace was that simple . . .
Since we know it isn't, haven't the terrorists
already won? The prospect for relief rests upon practicing the teaching that both religions and cultures have rejected. Followers
of Yahweh and Allah have ignored the gospel of Jesus. Who could conclude that any brotherly love exists within this troubled
land? Terrorism can only be defeated when the minds of men reject its practice. Superior fire power only breeds further terror.
Much of Europe, after centuries of tragic conflicts has learned this lesson. When will America grow sincere and wise - reaching
that same understanding? Little hope exists that the vendetta among the Semite clans will ever end. Almost makes you think
that one religious tradition has the answers . . . while the others prefer to remain blind. Eye for an eye, produces only
SARTRE - April 12, 2002