this was a letter I wrote to Blabbermouth.net (a great news site by the way) regarding the comments Barney Greenway (vocalist of Napalam Death) made in the wake of 9/11. if you haven't read his comments, go to Blabbermouth news archive first...
just thought it might spark some discussion 'round here...
----------------------------------------
20 September 2001
Dear Blabbermouth:
Im a long-time Napalm Death fan. I always enjoy Barneys perspectives on political matters. Hell, the guy writes damn good album reviews too! Unfortunately, I thought his take on September 11s terrorist attack slipped into the same kind of simplistic thinking and demonization he finds repellent in the people and institutions he opposes.
Needless to say, we agree that the wider picture has long predicted this escalation of terrorism. America obviously has some screwed-up foreign and military policies that have earned it enemies around the world. But in the same sentence, Barney breezily implies that our rush to find the culprits is perhaps a rush to smear Arabs, like the last time in Oklahoma. First of all, the last time America was attacked wasnt Oklahoma, it was October 2000 in Yemen when bin Laden bombed the USS Cole, killing 17 people and the time before that was August 1998 in the Sudan when bin Laden bombed two US embassies killing 224 and lets not forget the December 2000 capture of a bin Laden-trained Algerian trying to enter the US with a carload of explosives intent on bombing Los Angeles. So to imply that law enforcement shouldnt make reasonable assumptions (Arab terrorists) defies logic. As for the Oklahoma blast, the speculation of Arab responsibility lasted all of two days until McVeigh was caught but, quite frankly, that was eminently reasonable given prior attacks on American targets: Beirut (88), the World Trade Center (93, bin Laden) as well as the killing of 18 US soldiers in Somalia (93) that bin Laden claimed responsibility for and led to his expulsion from that country.
As for America, Britain, NATO et al., arrogantly interfering in other nations affairs, these incursions arent spurred on by grandiose ideas of Hey, what group of helpless f.ckwits can we can we screw over today?, theyre usually caused by the begging of besieged populations being slaughtered wholesale by despots like Milosovic. Is there too much rah-rah, look-at-us jingoism accompanying the saviors and not enough actual peace that results a lot of times? Of course. Way too many innocents were killed in Yugoslavia. And NATO sure as sh.t hasnt done enough to stop ethnic Albanians from exacting revenge on the Serbs. But you could just as easily make the opposite charge: that organizations like NATO havent arrogantly interfered enough (e.g. Rwanda).
As for self-interest, America has never denied that it acts in its own self-interest. Humanitarian-interest is self-interest these days. Overpopulation, refugees swamping borders, global economies, nuclear arsenals, even the internet is making the world smaller every day. You wanna see hell on earth, dont try to keep Yugoslavia from imploding, dont try to protect your oil interests in the Middle East. Believe me, Im not saying America, NATO or anyone else hasnt made monumental f.ck-ups left and right, but all these situations are as infinitely complex as the human nature driving them. They certainly cant be reduced to simplistic sloganeering from either side.
About Bush, hey, I think the guy is anl idiot (Dan Quayle with a better wristwatch). And Im as sickened by his environmental policies, missile defense system and Christian Right ties as you. But lots of Americans are and believe me, we aint nowhere near done fighting. But to seriously equate the USs Israeli/ Palestinean policy with good old ethnic cleansing is ridiculous. America has consistently dragged both sides back to the table over and over. Nothing would be in our self-interest more than Mideast peace. Do we have monumental moments of inconsistency, like when were preaching harmony, doves and good feelings foreveryone then selling tanks to Israel? Yeah, and its embarrassing, shameful and wrong. But to call our actions toward Palestine ethnic cleansing uselessly overspends a moral currency. And understand, we Americans do know how to ethnically cleanse just count how many native Americans are still around.
That said, attempts to link the September 11 attack with general Muslim anger towards America might be painting with too broad a brush. Bin Laden has little interest in the political plight of the Palestinians or any other Muslims. His is a religious fundamentalist fervor, a desire to destroy America for defiling Islams holy lands by its very presence in the Mideast and he has explicitly exhorted fellow Muslims to murder Westerners on sight. Matter of fact, he also despises any number of his Muslim brothers as theyve rejected his radicalism and his "fatwa" against the West.
Bush is just as bad as Saddam Hussein? Cmon, Barney. You must see the distinction between the elected leader of a flawed but basically open democratic society and the dictator of a violent, repressive totalitarian regime. There are some reasonably pleasant aspects of Western society, arent there? At the very least, you get to openly make great music and I get to listen to it, right? I mean, our music scene is considered "undergound" because of its limited commercial viability (not to mention most mainstream listeners just don't have the good sense and good taste to get into it!) But try checking out the "underground" music scene in Afghanistan where possession of any music -- or radios, or TV, etc -- will get you murdered in, of all places, a football stadium! Exagerrated political rhetoric and demonization only blunts real discussion of the deadly serious differences between the kind of "conservatives" (even fundamentalists) Bush and his ilk represent (in countries who have the ability to repudiate them) and those like Saddam Hussein.
As for theres already been talk of Bush authorising random attacks before they can even prove who did it. Yeah, well, Im sure you heard the Reverends Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson say the attacks were caused by God getting mad at gays, abortionists, feminists, etc. and you didnt believe them, did you? I know its aggravating reading the militaristic sh.t people post on boards, Ive been reading it too. And the news isnt much better, with reports of hate crimes against innocent Muslims, etc
But my point is yeah, it doesnt help when people get into a bomb the bastards mentality. But it also doesnt help when, of all the things you can wish for in the aftermath of 6000+ people dying, you wish only that theyd flown a plane right up Bushs arse!
Anyway, those are my thoughts. Just wanted to let em be known.
Best,
Bollthrower (a guy, not the band)
just thought it might spark some discussion 'round here...
----------------------------------------
20 September 2001
Dear Blabbermouth:
Im a long-time Napalm Death fan. I always enjoy Barneys perspectives on political matters. Hell, the guy writes damn good album reviews too! Unfortunately, I thought his take on September 11s terrorist attack slipped into the same kind of simplistic thinking and demonization he finds repellent in the people and institutions he opposes.
Needless to say, we agree that the wider picture has long predicted this escalation of terrorism. America obviously has some screwed-up foreign and military policies that have earned it enemies around the world. But in the same sentence, Barney breezily implies that our rush to find the culprits is perhaps a rush to smear Arabs, like the last time in Oklahoma. First of all, the last time America was attacked wasnt Oklahoma, it was October 2000 in Yemen when bin Laden bombed the USS Cole, killing 17 people and the time before that was August 1998 in the Sudan when bin Laden bombed two US embassies killing 224 and lets not forget the December 2000 capture of a bin Laden-trained Algerian trying to enter the US with a carload of explosives intent on bombing Los Angeles. So to imply that law enforcement shouldnt make reasonable assumptions (Arab terrorists) defies logic. As for the Oklahoma blast, the speculation of Arab responsibility lasted all of two days until McVeigh was caught but, quite frankly, that was eminently reasonable given prior attacks on American targets: Beirut (88), the World Trade Center (93, bin Laden) as well as the killing of 18 US soldiers in Somalia (93) that bin Laden claimed responsibility for and led to his expulsion from that country.
As for America, Britain, NATO et al., arrogantly interfering in other nations affairs, these incursions arent spurred on by grandiose ideas of Hey, what group of helpless f.ckwits can we can we screw over today?, theyre usually caused by the begging of besieged populations being slaughtered wholesale by despots like Milosovic. Is there too much rah-rah, look-at-us jingoism accompanying the saviors and not enough actual peace that results a lot of times? Of course. Way too many innocents were killed in Yugoslavia. And NATO sure as sh.t hasnt done enough to stop ethnic Albanians from exacting revenge on the Serbs. But you could just as easily make the opposite charge: that organizations like NATO havent arrogantly interfered enough (e.g. Rwanda).
As for self-interest, America has never denied that it acts in its own self-interest. Humanitarian-interest is self-interest these days. Overpopulation, refugees swamping borders, global economies, nuclear arsenals, even the internet is making the world smaller every day. You wanna see hell on earth, dont try to keep Yugoslavia from imploding, dont try to protect your oil interests in the Middle East. Believe me, Im not saying America, NATO or anyone else hasnt made monumental f.ck-ups left and right, but all these situations are as infinitely complex as the human nature driving them. They certainly cant be reduced to simplistic sloganeering from either side.
About Bush, hey, I think the guy is anl idiot (Dan Quayle with a better wristwatch). And Im as sickened by his environmental policies, missile defense system and Christian Right ties as you. But lots of Americans are and believe me, we aint nowhere near done fighting. But to seriously equate the USs Israeli/ Palestinean policy with good old ethnic cleansing is ridiculous. America has consistently dragged both sides back to the table over and over. Nothing would be in our self-interest more than Mideast peace. Do we have monumental moments of inconsistency, like when were preaching harmony, doves and good feelings foreveryone then selling tanks to Israel? Yeah, and its embarrassing, shameful and wrong. But to call our actions toward Palestine ethnic cleansing uselessly overspends a moral currency. And understand, we Americans do know how to ethnically cleanse just count how many native Americans are still around.
That said, attempts to link the September 11 attack with general Muslim anger towards America might be painting with too broad a brush. Bin Laden has little interest in the political plight of the Palestinians or any other Muslims. His is a religious fundamentalist fervor, a desire to destroy America for defiling Islams holy lands by its very presence in the Mideast and he has explicitly exhorted fellow Muslims to murder Westerners on sight. Matter of fact, he also despises any number of his Muslim brothers as theyve rejected his radicalism and his "fatwa" against the West.
Bush is just as bad as Saddam Hussein? Cmon, Barney. You must see the distinction between the elected leader of a flawed but basically open democratic society and the dictator of a violent, repressive totalitarian regime. There are some reasonably pleasant aspects of Western society, arent there? At the very least, you get to openly make great music and I get to listen to it, right? I mean, our music scene is considered "undergound" because of its limited commercial viability (not to mention most mainstream listeners just don't have the good sense and good taste to get into it!) But try checking out the "underground" music scene in Afghanistan where possession of any music -- or radios, or TV, etc -- will get you murdered in, of all places, a football stadium! Exagerrated political rhetoric and demonization only blunts real discussion of the deadly serious differences between the kind of "conservatives" (even fundamentalists) Bush and his ilk represent (in countries who have the ability to repudiate them) and those like Saddam Hussein.
As for theres already been talk of Bush authorising random attacks before they can even prove who did it. Yeah, well, Im sure you heard the Reverends Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson say the attacks were caused by God getting mad at gays, abortionists, feminists, etc. and you didnt believe them, did you? I know its aggravating reading the militaristic sh.t people post on boards, Ive been reading it too. And the news isnt much better, with reports of hate crimes against innocent Muslims, etc
But my point is yeah, it doesnt help when people get into a bomb the bastards mentality. But it also doesnt help when, of all the things you can wish for in the aftermath of 6000+ people dying, you wish only that theyd flown a plane right up Bushs arse!
Anyway, those are my thoughts. Just wanted to let em be known.
Best,
Bollthrower (a guy, not the band)
