Stefan, I am reassured by your thought and words. I hope many others feel
the same way as we do about this.
Jean from New Mexico

on 9/29/01 11:55 AM, Stefan Jöst at [log in to unmask] wrote:

> Hi Liza,
> 
> you said:
>> There's no question in my mind that Bin Laden, the Taliban,
>> and others closely connected are responsible for this.
> 
> In my mind there are still some questions. But I admit that all
> evidence speakes for your hypothesis so far.
> 
>> Or, to put it
>> more broadly, every human who is not a fundamentalist radical muslim.
> 
> OTOH this reduces the problem to a small group of fundamentalists
> which makes it easier, I think. A broad support by muslimic groups
> would be much more difficult to handle.
> 
>> Has the United States helped to create this problem? Yes, in the sense
>> that we are the biggest, most visible embodiement of the being on the
>> lucky end of capitalism.
> 
> And in the sense that the U.S. are the symbol of imperialism for
> some people.
> 
>> But the United States, and your country Germany, and many other
>> Democratic countries, have values which are VERY different from the
>> values espoused by Bin Laden and radical fundamental Islam.
> 
> Indeed.
> 
>> And they
>> HATE our values, and believe we should be wiped out, that that is the
>> only solution to the problem of how to make the world one of radical
>> fundamentalist Islamic values instead of Democratic values.
> 
> This is the point where I speak of mental illness. One can dislike
> the values of others and find them stupid. But the consequence to
> wipe out those others is mentally sick, IMHO.
> BTW I find some of the so called values of muslimic fundamentalists
> ridiculous and primitive, e.g. their thinking about the roles of men
> and women.
> 
>> Now Stefan, do YOU want to live like that? Bin Laden wouldn't allow you
>> that choice, because he hates you for being a Westerner, and wants you
>> dead. But if you COULD choose, can you honestly tell me you would choose
>> such a world? I don't think you would.
> 
> You know my answer to this rhetoric question already. No, this is not
> how I want to live. It's completely unbearable.
> 
>> I'm speaking here for you, but
>> you and I have now known each other through these email groups for
>> what - some seven years? From what I know of you, I think you DO in fact
>> feel strongly about people's right to choose how they want to live.
> ...
>> I think you like having these freedoms.
> 
> Yes, to both of your statements!
> 
>> Well, Bin Laden doesn't believe you should. And he will stop at nothing
>> (which is the problem) to destroy what has been created to allow you to
>> have these freedoms.
> 
> I'm not sure that this is really his aim. Partially yes. But if there's
> a minimal portion of realism left on his side, he will know that such
> ideas are not suitable to the modern world. They are good for his ancient
> world of primitive people. Most of the planet has left this level of
> development.
> 
>> What I would love help with is in thinking about the how part. The
>> "whether" or "why" part is clear to me.
> 
> I still think that only patiently and stubbornly following the road
> of supporting democratic governments, insisting on the human rights
> to be observed, helping the poor and urging battling parties to make
> peace is suited to change the problem of global terrorism.
> 
>> I do
>> believe that two things must be done - the ugly thing, and the humane
>> thing following immediately after.
> 
> If the ugly thing means punishing the helpers and supporters of the
> attack on the WTC and the Pentagon, I agree. I don't think, that
> much more ugly things should be done - else we would leave the grounds
> of our civilization.
> 
>> What we really value here is "turn the other cheek."   That is NOT the
>> way things are viewed, or "felt" would be the better word, in
>> Afghanistan. The culture there is just different. The "eye for an eye"
>> philosophy of dealing with problems - where retribution is THE key
>> currency - is highly respected, seen as morally right, superior.  To not
>> respond with retribution is seen as cowardly, shameful, irresponsible,
>> wrong.
> 
> Let's just leave this problem to them. Everything else would mean
> that they force us to go down on their primitive moral level.
> 
>> So retribution is important in that sense because we are "speaking" to
>> each other in our acts and symbolic gestures. We are carrying on a
>> conversation with that world.
> 
> Don't forget that most of the world does not subsist on a primitive
> moral level like that of the Taliban.
> 
>> The grievance is
>> that they don't want Western culture and values to exist in the world.
>> They want to wipe you off the face of the earth, and your mother, and
>> your uncles, nieces, best friend, me, my kids, all our books and our art
>> and music, and Orthos.  They will not stop until this is accomplished.
> 
> I agree that those people do not practice a culture of tolerance. But
> I'm sure they know that it is unrealistic to change the whole world
> to their primitive standards.
> Therefore I am    n o t    in fear of further attacks. I see the
> current attack as a symbolic deed to show, that America is vulnerable.
> And letting out all the cumulated anger, aggression and hatred.
> But no chance to destroy the Western culture. More like a stitch with
> a needle.
> 
>> So we have no choice but to stop them. You may feel more strongly after
>> some terrorist strike in Germany, which there will most certainly be.
> 
> I am thinking of this being a single symbolic attack which will not
> be repeated within the next 10 or 20 years.
> And until then we should have managed to make this a more peaceful
> planet.
> 
>> But from
>> everything I read, stories writting by Afghanis, old books and stories
>> from that part of the world, it is not a pretty history. It's a history
>> of vicious, barbaric, murderers.  Not warriors fighting for goodness,
>> simply warriors fighting for power over enemy tribes. It is not a place
>> you would want to move to, to live a peaceful life.
> 
> Thom Hartman's "The last hours of ancient sunlight" comes into my mind
> at this point. He explains that the old tribes became mentally sick at
> some time and began to fight their neighbours. Unfortunately he could
> give no explanation for this radical change in behaviour. I can. I think
> it was the beginning neolithic age and the strong changing of the nutri-
> tion (introducing grains and more and more cooked foods) which caused
> this mental sickness. There we are again at the topic of this list.
> 
>> I apologize for the rambling, disorganized nature of this post. I'm
>> banging out words here - too fast - too many thoughts and I havent'
>> fully formed them yet.
> 
> I understand your situation and hope you can arrange your emotions
> such that a clear idea of what is appropriate to do forms in your mind.
> 
>> But I appreciate your friendship, and the connection with other people
>> on this list that I've now know for a few years, and I hope we can help
>> each other to think clearly now.
> 
> Yes, the same for me. Thank you for your long explanations.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Stefan