179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← back to listing · view thread

From:
Gabriel Cyr
To:
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Date:
Tue, 25 Sep 2001 14:42:26 -0500
Subject:
[idm] Fwd: Revenge Comes Home
Msg-Id:
<F229j4l4pK64nrT6OMs00008a28@hotmail.com>
Mbox:
idm.0109.gz
quoted 285 lines From: "rafeeq hasan" <rafeeqhasan@hotmail.com>>From: "rafeeq hasan" <rafeeqhasan@hotmail.com> >To: bakhtiar13@hotmail.com, teenbeat27@aol.com, >thestrongestmanalive@hotmail.com, dokeefe@wesleyan.edu, >gabrielcyr@hotmail.com, gfxmith@aol.com, harelshapira@hotmail.com, >hshapira@midway.uchicago.edu, johnpatrickleary@yahoo.com, >jpleary@midway.uchicago.edu, julietib@eden.rutgers.edu, >bakhtiar@midway.uchicago.edu, kimmer9123@aol.com, kacasady@uchicago.edu, >lindadaugustyn@avenew.com, m_waggaman@hotmail.com, src@uchicago.edu, >betasarah@yahoo.com, jonathancwu@hotmail.com >Subject: Fwd: Revenge Comes Home >Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 07:40:55 -0500 > > > >Revenge Comes Home > >By Sonia Shah > > > > >"What are you looking at, terrorist bitch?" > >So said a surly gentleman on a Manhattan-bound subway >to my sister, who violated the rules of >overcrowded-island etiquette by stealing a glance at >him as he discussed the pros and cons of prejudice. > >Ordinarily, racist slurs would make her angry. As it >was, having just watched stricken people jump from >burning towers to their certain deaths, her eyes >filled with tears and she hurried off the train. > >A few days later, some thugs visited my cousin's >convenience store/gas station, demanding "Where are >you people from?" and "Why don't you have a flag up?" >My cousin rushed out and bought two gigantic flags and >installed them prominently on his house and the store. > >At least five South Asian or Middle Eastern Americans >have been slain so far and dozens of incidents of >harassment, intimidation, and terror have been >reported, against Arab-Americans, Muslims, Sikhs, >Pakistanis, and other South and West Asians, according >to the Asian Pacific American Legal Center. In Mesa, >Arizona, a Sikh man was shot, the suspect shouting "I >stand for America all the way" as he was handcuffed. >In Los Angeles, an Egyptian American man was shot; a >Persian woman was beaten; a gun was shoved into >another woman's face; a Spanish-speaking woman was >attacked after being told "you foreigners caused all >this trouble!"; and another was attacked after being >told "America is only for white people." In San >Francisco, a bag of blood was thrown on the doorstep >of an immigrant-services center. In Chicago, 300 >people waving flags and shouting "USA! USA!" tried to >march into a mosque; a firebomb was tossed into an >Arab-American community center; and a Morrocan man was >attacked with a machete. In New York, two Pakistanis >were killed on Coney Island, a Sikh man was attacked >with a baseball bat; two others attacked with a >paint-ball gun; another was fired upon with rubber >bullets; a taxi driver was pulled out of his cab and >beaten; and a Pakistani woman was chased by a car, >whose driver threatened to kill her for "destroying my >country." In Cleveland, a Sikh temple was attacked >with lit bottles of gasoline. In Tulsa, a Pakistani >was beaten by three men. In Dallas, a Pakistani grocer >was shot dead; elsewhere in the state shots and >firebombs were lobbed at mosques, and a Molotov >cocktail was thrown at the Islamic Society building. > >There have been others. Most of those who suffer such >attacks won't report them. They'll just hide, lay low, >wear baseball caps or bindis, as the Indian >consul-general advised, and pray they won't be >targeted again. As word spreads, their friends and >families will do the same. Even my liberal family says >I shouldn't take my small boys to the anti-war >rallies, because they have brown skin, hair and eyes, >and even Muslim names. What if they are targeted? What >if someone throws a rock? > >Hate crimes hotlines have been set up, and I hope >anyone who witnesses or suffers harassment or violence >will use them, at least so this wave of violence can >be accurately recorded for posterity. For anti-Asian >violence organizations, calling these episodes of >domestic terror "hate crimes" is tragically >understated. For the news media and administration >officials, however, it is offensively, dangerously >hypocritical. These are not just isolated acts >committed by crazed individuals, driven mad by fear >and trauma. This wave of violence is a necessary >extension of today's warmongering patriotism as >defined by our political and media elites. > >"There is only one way to begin to deal with people >like this," said former Secretary of State Lawrence >Eagleburger on CNN, "and that is you have to kill some >of them even if they are not immediately directly >involved in this thing." "People like this need to >feel pain," said National Review editor Rich Lowry in >the Washington Post. "This is no time to be precious >about locating the exact individuals directly involved >in this particular terrorist attack," wrote syndicated >columnist Ann Coulter in the New York Daily News. > >In other words, indiscriminate revenge, whether on >millions of Afghans or against some random brown >person on the subway, is what flag-waving patriots >must do. "They" need to be punished, commentators say, >whoever "they" may be. On a recent episode of PBS's >Newshour with Jim Lehrer, even the learned >commentators couldn't or wouldn't distinguish between >Arabs, Muslims, Afghans (who are not Arabs), >fundamentalists, and terrorists. All were just simply >"they." > >It must be clear to most now. "We" are white. "They" >are brown. "They" celebrated--not only in Palestine, >as the news media would have us believe, but also in >Pakistan, in Nigeria, and elsewhere. This is taken as >evidence of their inhumanity. But of course when the >jocks in the sports bar in my old neighborhood cheered >when Scud missiles hit Iraq years ago, that was good >old red-blooded Americanism in action. "They" hate >"us" not because of our government's violence and >arrogance, but because?well, because "we" are so damn >great. Because we are so modern, so advanced, so free, >and so rich. > >How sad to have to say that all of this is nothing >compared to the carnage of the plane attacks, and will >be entirely insignificant compared to the massive, >sustained slaughter of innocent people that Bush is >threatening. Bush's tepid response to the wave of >anti-Asian violence at home was to say that the >perpetrators should be "ashamed" of themselves. >Ashamed? Like how you feel when you steal a cookie >from a baby? Like how you feel when you think you >might be reproached? Will Bush be "ashamed" when his >bombs kill, maim, and further impoverish desperate >men, women and children in South and West Asia? > >POLLS PAINT PUBLIC OPINION RED > >And who is this "we" who hate some unspecified, brown >"them" so much and are so willing to forego all the >rules and procedures usually insisted upon (for even >the most disgusting, murderous American thug) in order >to hunt "them" down and kill them?whoever "they" are? > >A spate of polls paid for and trumpeted by the >warmongering news media in the two weeks following the >September 11th attacks told us who. They are us. > >But these polls asked loaded questions to handfuls of >people who by any measure were still in shock. Their >"findings" intensified in each re-telling, as >reporters referred to them in their articles, >columnists referred to the articles, and letter >writers referred to the columnists. The sense of >widespread blood-thirst calcified into a basic truism >rationalizing the rush to war. > >Although most news reports on public support for war >simply cited "numerous polls" or some such, most >referred to the two ongoing, nationally representative >polling efforts on this topic--by CBS News/New York >Times and by Gallup/CNN/USA Today. Both circumscribed >and contained people's potential responses to paint a >portrait of a vengeful, angry America, one that will >support Bush's war in South Asia and not >coincidentally, sell a few newspapers too. > >Questions aren't neutral. Their timing and wording >reveal the questioners' expectations and assumptions. >Gallup's and CBS News's crude questions seem designed >to gauge the extent of U.S. rage and vengeance and >couldn't have captured a complex, nuanced perspective >even if they wanted to. > >For instance, on the dark evening of the attacks >themselves, CBS pollsters called 402 shell-shocked >people and asked them the following incendiary >questions. "Are these attacks another Pearl Harbor? >they wanted to know. "Should the U.S. retaliate even >if innocent people are killed?" About 6 in 10 said >yes, 2 said no, and 2 said?well whatever they said >went unrecorded. Then the interviewers went on to goad >people into apportioning blame--at least toward the >two immediate culprits they could think of. "Should >U.S. intelligence have known about the attacks?" they >asked. "Could the attacks have been prevented by >tighter airport security?" And then, click, interview >over. The "findings"--two-thirds of Americans want >retaliation even if innocents are killed, as they put >it--were trumpeted eagerly. "America Wants >Retaliation" their headline proclaimed. > >The next day, our intrepid pollsters bothered another >638 people. Do you feel bad? Do you feel angry? >Horrified? Or shocked? pollsters asked. Assuming each >respondent picked just one answer (a big assumption, >unilluminated by CBS's poll website), about 80 percent >felt one of those ways. > >So how did the other 20 percent feel? Nobody asked. >(How about scared? How about sad? That's how I felt.) > >About 25 percent said they were angry, and despite the >fact that pollsters had no idea how many people would >have said they were angry the previous day (it's >within the realm of possibility that some portion of >Americans are always angry)--CBS announced that >"Americans are no longer shocked, they're angry." >Seventy-one percent wanted retaliation, they found. > >Over the next two days--Thursday September 13 and >Friday September 14--our pollsters again took to the >phones. They demanded answers from 959 people. They >asked essentially the same questions, except this time >they added a new one. > >"Are Arab Americans more sympathetic to terrorists?" >they wanted to know. > >Twenty-seven percent said yes, CBS noted ominously. > >(But this is a meaningless question, by itself. Which >terrorists? Irish ones? Sympathetic how? Like they >know how to pronounce their names? Like they know >where they are coming from? Like they'd give them >loads of cash and their passport? What?) > >The Gallup Organization, "one of the world's leading >management consulting firms" according to their >website, in partnership with USA Today and CNN have >also been conducting ongoing much-cited national >polling. They asked much the same questions that CBS >did, with much the same results, but they also wanted >to know how many people attended memorial services, >cried, displayed a flag, or prayed in response to the >attacks. > >How many wrote letters to their editors? How many gave >flowers to their Muslim neighbors? How many attended >peace rallies? Gallup won't say. The unasked goes >unanswered. > >Since my whole argument here is that these polls are >worse than useless, it may not be fair to note one >underreported finding. When asked whether the U.S. >should act immediately against known terrorists or >only against those responsible, over sixty percent >said that only the proven perpetrators should be >targeted. > >Doesn't that just blow all the other findings about >wanting war, indiscriminate revenge, and all the rest >of it out of the water? > >Gallup's and CBS News' numbers frighten me. But I'm >going to try not to make much of them either way. As a >statistician friend of mine who used to work at Harris >Polls says, "polling companies burn through hundreds >if not thousands of phone numbers to get the sample >sizes they need. But there is probably good reason to >think people who refuse to participate, who aren't >home, who don't answer the phone, who don't have >phones would respond quite differently from those >people who do participate." > >"In other words the samples are not truly >representative of the American public," he says. > >That's good to hear. > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! >Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com >
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org