bin laden didn't blow up the projects
did you remember to 'never forget' today?
just checking.
posted by wayne&wax @ 11:13 AM
wayne&wax
linkthink re: hip-hop, reggae, the US, jamaica, and anything else wayne wants to wax on
9.11.2006
did you remember to 'never forget' today?
just checking.
7 Comments:
Huh? Yea, he just blew up immigrants and others working in, and just outside office buildings.
not denying that, or trying to slight the innocent victims of that heinous act. but the WTC and pentagon were strategic targets for obvious reasons. it is not so obvious why, in retaliation, we have bombed and supported the bombing of vast numbers of civilians and civilian areas. (and don't give me any "human shields" crap.) so that's where -- alongside the mighty mos def -- i would like to put the emphasis on this dark fifth anniversary. call me pessimistic. i don't know what else to say at this point.
but thanks for your clarification.
there is this obscure passage in a largely forgotten document i think its called "the bill of rights." something about free speech.
no small irony that nothing could be more hazardous to your health.
tempting as it is to allow fox and msnbc to spoon-feed us their candy-coated dogma, i think i'll pass.
but it warms the cockles of me heart to know that there are people out there, like Wayne, for which the term rational-critical debate still holds some meaning.
"Strategic targets for obvious reasons" Yea, I've read the cliched Chomsky analysis and I still don't see your point. The attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon did nothing to help Arab citizens in any part of the world, and did not cause the military-industrial complex or American capitalism to change its ways.
Apparently only US supported bad political acts get pointed out here. I am still waiting for Wayne to weigh in on Darfur, or authoritative regime abuse in Syria, China, and countless other places around the world.
i haven't read the chomsky analysis on 911, but it seems pretty obvious that the attacks targeted symbols of american economic and military dominance. their efficacy in terms of making gains for "Arab citizens" is another question entirely. but who knows? it's hard to say what the middle east would be like without being subject to the self-interested and hypocritical -- it's about oil, not democracy -- application of american military and economic power. (and let's not be too strident about the strength and stability of the military-industrial complex -- even if it signs your paycheck -- you never know what's around the corner.)
i'm not here to blog comprehensively about the political problems of the world, but i write about what's on my mind -- and i try to direct my critiques at myself and my fellows (e.g, americans) more than at others. believe me, i'm no apologist for authoritarians anywhere, but you gotta start from yard, knamean.
there's a reason boots riley wanted to knock down the towers around the same time as bin laden. it's not jihad.
Boots wanted to knock down the power that resided in the Towers, not actually target and kill individual citizens, I think.
To tie this back in with the subjects that I turn to your website for (reggaeton, reggae and more), may I point out that despite censorships threats and parental stickers on cds in America, there is a lot more freedom to listen to reggae and reggaeton then there would be under an Al Queda-supported Taliban regime that destroyed historic Buddhist sculptures and outlawed the listening and playing of popular music.
Of course we need to question how US tax dollars are spent, especially if they are spent in a manner that results in the deaths of innocent civilians, but I don't get how you seem to be trying to justify violent attacks on the WTC that killed many people who were not in positions of power, but were merely folks trying to feed their families and maybe even buy a reggaeton cd or 2.
well, i think that bin laden (or at least some al qaedites) might have also been more interested in knocking down the power than killing innocent individuals. they simply may not have had an easy way to extricate the two acts (at least they hit the towers early in the morning, before they were filled to the gills -- not that i'm implying that that was a strategic decision; bin laden's discussion of the attacks has certainly offered no such sympathy to the victims).
and it's not as if the US is able to extricate its own power grabs from the terrorizing and killing of innocent civilians. that's what i'm mostly tryna get at with the "blow-up the projects" reference (e.g., falluja, shiite beirut, etc.).
but your point is well taken, all the same. i should say, since it doesn't seem clear, that i am not out to justify bin laden's attack on the WTC. not at all. i am out to decry our pitiful, problematic, play-into-their-hands response (not to mention the insidious politicization of 911). believe me, i wouldn't want to live in an al-qaeda caliphate and, fortunately, according to most polls, neither would most of the "Arab citizens" about which you seem rightfully concerned.
and don't worry, i'll get back to the reggae, etc., as i always do. but my perspectives on music and culture and such are inextricable from my perspectives on politics and society, so you gotta deal with this stuff too sometimes. at any rate, i thank you again for your clarification and your interlocution.
now get back to work. ;)
Post a Comment
<< Home