Watching for quite a while the media and the politician misinform, mislead, invent, fabricate and otherwise fulminate about the murderer of Ft. Hood was a surrealistic experience. The only facts certain in this case are the murder itself, the murderer and his rather troubled career in the military. Most everything else is, at best, suspect.
A common claim is that Hasan performed an act of terrorism. According to Wikipedia, "Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a lone attack), and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants." While murder is violent it is doubtful whether Hasan intended to create fear, had a clear ideological goal and obviously didn't disregard non-combatants. Logically and with the current knowledge Hasan cannot be called a terrorist. But the, terrorism has become, in the whole world, a label one affixes to anything they don't like including non-violent acts.
Both the media and many politician did a disservice to their own reputation by piling on. A recent article contains many of the falsehoods we used in this case and many others. Robert Wright,
Who Created Major Hasan?, will be a vehicle to look at the unfunny circus we live in.
He start by showing the difference in viewing Hasan by the right and the left. Although, the picture is not misleading, we all know tht right and left differ on security, health care, banks and the price of meat. Discussing the differences, therefore, is futile.
Wright says that "[b]y all accounts he was pushed over the edge by his perception of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars." We actually don't know this. We don't have the flimsiest reason to believe that unless: either you buy what some media says or assume that Muslims tend to be pushed by the named wars. Neither of this two options has any foundation. The paragraph continues with: "He also drew inspiration from a radical imam, Anwar al-Awlaki. But as Major Hasan got more radicalized by two American wars and God knows what else, the Internet made it easy to reconnect via e-mail." We don't know that Hasan drew inspiration from a radical imam; we didn't talk to the imam or Hasan. His infrequent emails to the imam are a sign of reconnection. According to what?
We now get closer to one of the mantras of the people objecting to the war. You see, objecting to a war on a moral basis is not good enough. You have to invent a more fascinating reasoning to object to a war. Wright says; "The Fort Hood shooting, then, is an example of Islamist terrorism being spread partly by the war on terrorism — or, actually, by two wars on terrorism, in Iraq and Afghanistan." May be it is not the wars but deteriorating condition in the countries. May be if you go to war in several countries and treat them as you treat Goldmand Sachs, i.e. pour money on them, terrorism will not only grow but Osama will ask for a handout as well.
All we know is that in countries where poverty abound or the political system is oppressive the population reacts by resistance. Be it Iraq or Peru, Afghanistan or Philippines. It is not peculiar to Muslims and is not restricted to wars.
I agree with Wright, "It’s true that Major Hasan was unbalanced and alienated — and, by my lights, crazy. Any religious or ethnic group includes people like that." But I wouldn't use crazy, Hasan may be suffering from a mental illness, we no longer call such people crazy.
Wright seems to me as a logical person burdened by an environment that is crazy. He would do better to stay away from the influence of half truths, fabrications and preconceptions that were never checked against reality. Every one of us should keep an open mind and not dress events with one size hats. Hasan may end up being a radical or may not. He clearly has a way to go before being a terrorist, unbalanced and radical.
No comments:
Post a Comment