« WILL OUR CHILDREN BE THE NEXT TO DIE? | Main | Fleeing Children Shot in the Back, Blown Apart and Burned to Death »


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Beslan, Russia: A Liberal Guide to Better Understanding Freedom Fighters:

» Understanding Freedom Fighters from TacJammer
I've already thown up enough in the last 24 hours. If I hadn't, I'd be likely to take David Kaspar's advice. (Via Glenn, who has a roundup.)... [Read More]

» Belsan Perspective from King of Fools
David provides a little needed perspective on the Belsan incident. Required reading lest you foolishly let the casualty count make you angry or possibly hateful.... [Read More]

» Hoisting The Black Flag from Chapomatic
The good Captain abandons his light tone for this Friday's Musing, and he's looking at the same thing I'm looking at. In the post below I made a dispassionate list of just one week of major groups of murders by Al Qaeda-supported, Islamist, terrori... [Read More]

» Blaming the Victim Again from Classical Values
Leave it to that quasi-governmental body, the E.U. (which even my girl in Paris dislikes), to disrespect the dead, second-guess those who respond to crisis, and blame the victims: Putin has long tried to paint the Kremlin's conflict with Muslim... [Read More]

» Russia's 9/11? from Welcome to Castle Argghhh! The Home Of Two Of Jonah's Military Guys.
I'm not going to blog extensively about what just happened in Russia. Others are doing it effectively, and I have nothing useful to add to the discussion. If you've been visiting this blog for any length of time, you know... [Read More]

» BBC should call them terrorists from The Acorn
The Chechen hostage-takers were terrorists BBC World TV repeatedly referred to the Chechen hostage-takers as an 'armed gang'. Never mind that they were heavily armed and some of them outfitted to be suicide-bombers. Never mind that they took a sch... [Read More]

» So True from Just Some Poor Schmuck
Davids Medienkritik: Beslan, Russia: A Liberal Guide to Better Understanding Freedom Fighters Link from Instapundit... [Read More]

» "NEWS" from one of the Two Americas. Guess which one. from Who Tends the Fires
The Word for the Day is: "Gilligan's Candidate" It's getting harder to find a good news story to go with the Word for the Day. Kerry needs to come out of media seclusion so we can pick on him more... [Read More]

» Humor calms crisis! from Classical Values
When I first saw this report in the Washington Times, I was a bit taken aback: The United States and Russia clashed yesterday over a way to end the conflict in the breakaway republic of Chechnya, with Washington calling for... [Read More]

» Others' words are better than mine from Kesher Talk
Read this. Read this. A comment from Tom's blog:I have another quote in mind. Jeremiah 32:35:And they built the high places of the Ba�al, which are in the valley of Ben-hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass... [Read More]


Besser wäre "A Gutmensch-Guide to Better Understanding Freedom Fighters". Wie übersetzt man "Gutmensch" adäquat ins englische?

Exactly, just as I've been saying all along, "who are we to judge militant seperatist activists"? Obviously they were provoked and had no other choice. Just like the Madrid train bombing was Aznar's fault, Putin is to blame here. He should have been more open and sensitive to the protests of the activists and should have waited to send in UN officials to help work out a multilateral deal to free the hostages. Instead Putin just adding to ongoing cycle of violence.

//Moonbat #16123

It's the psycological outcome of knowing too little about the human character, and believing that one's is so wrong, that self-hatred emerges.

"After all, there can't be THAT much wrong me, THEREFORE everyone like me is wrong... THEREFORE my whole country is wrong.... THEREFORE western civilization is wrong..." and so on.

It makes people think that by being reflexively critical and cynical, that they are intelligent. It's a fool's trap. They get addicted to the idea of thinking themselves smarter than everyone around them who doesn't agree with them.

And once you realize you're wrong, you get embarassed thinking that you have to admit it. So you don't, not at any cost.

Might I add those two favorite words....



It's in there already. Check 1.

Steht tatsächlich im Spiegel:

"Segbers: Zumindest hat Putins Vorgänger Boris Jelzin 1995 bei der Erstürmung eines Krankenhauses im russischen Budjonnowsk verhandelt und den freien Abzug der Geiselnehmer garantiert. Heute stehen aber die verschiedenen Terroristengruppen weltweit in Konkurrenz. Ein Primärziel ist nun ihr Kampf um die Medienöffentlichkeit. Die Anschläge auf zwei Flugzeuge vergangene Woche, dann der Terrorakt vor der U-Bahnstation in Moskau und nun die Geiselnahme haben nicht nur eine russische Dimension. Wir erlebten auch den Hamas-Anschlag in Israel und weitere Anschläge in Pakistan und Malaysia.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Sie meinen, die Geiselnehmer in Nordossetien wissen, was in Israel passiert?

Segbers: Sie wissen zumindest über CNN und al-Dschasira, welche Aktionen im Vordergrund stehen und wie effektiv sie gewesen sind. Und nach dieser Logik müssen sich die Terroristen mit ihren Aktionen immer weiter steigern, um zumindest für eine gewisse Zeit die Medienagenda dominieren zu können.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Warum haben sich die Terroristen gerade Nordossetien ausgesucht für ihre Aktion?

Segbers: Anlass waren ja die Präsidentschaftswahlen am vergangenen Sonntag in Tschetschenien. Aber es ist denen eigentlich egal, ob es Nordossetien, Dagestan oder Inguschien ist. Sie haben es nur aus logistischen Gründen gewählt. Das Risiko, Waffen und Attentäter nach Moskau zu schaffen, wäre höher. Es ist sehr viel einfacher, sich in einer der Nachbarrepubliken Tschetscheniens ein weiches Ziel auszusuchen."
Segbers: Ja, aber man muss mehrere Gruppen unterscheiden. Die einen werden getragen von Menschen, die Familienangehörige verloren haben - seien es Väter oder Söhne. Bei ihnen ist Blutrache ein tragendes Element. Andere wollen einen Gottesstaat etablieren und agieren grundsätzlich gegen ein plurales, weltliches System. Eine dritte Gruppe sind ganz ordinäre Kriminelle, die über Morde und Geiselnahmen ihre Kriegskasse auffüllen wollen. Das ist eine Melange, die es auch so schwierig macht, Verhandlungen mit ihnen aufzunehmen.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Warum gibt Russland nicht einfach Tschetschenien auf?

Segbers: Neben emotionalen und sentimentalen Gründen gibt es andere Punkte: Geschichtlich gehörte das Land zur Sowjetunion, und nach dem Fall des Systems haben sich alle ehemaligen Unionsmitglieder und Satellitenstaaten abgelöst. Nun will man nicht auch noch die russischen Teilrepubliken aufgeben. Außerdem könnte eine erfolgreiche Abspaltung ein Vorbild für Inguschien und Dagestan werden. Ich bin auch sicher, dass sich die Geiselnehmer und ihre Unterstützer nach einer möglichen Unabhängigkeit nicht zur Ruhe setzen würden und versuchen würden, gottesstaatsähnliche Gebilde auch in der Nachbarschaft zu etablieren. Schließlich müssen diese Gruppen nicht über Geldmangel klagen - finanziert werden die Kämpfer im Nordkaukasus von frommen Stiftungen aus Jemen und Saudi-Arabien.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Ist das der Endpunkt oder der Auftakt einer Terrorserie?

Segbers: Weder noch, es wird immer mal wieder kulminieren. Ich rechne damit, dass wir nun ein paar Monate erst mal nichts hören werden und es dann zu neuen Aktionen kommen wird.

Das Interview führte Lars Langenau

Klaus Segbers, 49, ist Politikwissenschaftler an der FU Berlin und Osteuropaexperte.


Oh, thank you for pointing that out to me. I am glad to see it is also listed at number 1. I have to admit I threw up before I got to that point and just missed it.

This does bring up a very good question. How is the war on "root causes" proceeding? I really know little about how one determines sucess in this phase of the war.

Are the trade agreements Berlin are signing with nations that support terror considered to be victories in this war?

Once "social justice" is again established in Germany, will it be exported to these nations? Will it become a weapon in the war against "root causes"?

Is this the weapon of choice for Iran?

I must admit I feel much safer knowing Germany and france are engaging Iran and the "root causes" found there.

In an appearance on National Radio's "All things considered" that coincided with the RNC in New York, Wolfgang Ischinger, Germany's Ambassador to the US took stock of this year's presidential election campaign.
"From a german point of view, the US election campaign presents some good and and some less good news:

First, to the good news: Boths Democrats and Republicans - demonstrate their customary american optimism.......

Now the less good news:
First on Mayor Giuliani's comment that Germany released terrorists after the 1972 Olympic Games:
I am extremely unhappy about this statement because it might create the false impression that Germany is soft on terrrorism. The opposite is true. We have successfully confronted our domestic terrorism of the 1970s and the 1980s and we are united today with America in fighting international terrorism at home and abroad. Germany is one of America's best allies in this fight, and Germany is also the only country so far which has successfully undertaken the prosecution of a person suspected of participation in the 9/11 attacks.

Now let me add a more general observation about the election campaign: I am not impressed by the quality of the debate on national security and terrorism. This debate tends to focus on the "war" on terrorism, implying that we are at war to which there is a military solution. Of course, the fight against international terrorism requires the capacity for military action, but military action alone will not solve the terroism problem today, and most certainly not in the future.
Why is there not more of a debate on how best to reach out to and stop young people in the islamic world from drifting into the terrorist camp? When I listen to the rhetoric, some Republicans - and some Democrats as well - ACTUALLY SEEM TO LIKE BEEING AT WAR. Leadership is measured in terms of military qualities, but isn't political leadership far more complex? I Hear a lot about war making, and not enough about peace making. Where is America the peace maker?"

Yes, we are still the warmongers. Let's reach out and touch somebody and show them our softer side.

I agree with almost everything, but I do think it's important to speak out about Russian human rights violations anyhow. I would never ever accept this as a justification for these unspeakable atrocities, but I still think one shouldn't be blind to the fact that Russia is oppressing the Chechen people and has some very troubling tendencies with regard to civil liberties, free media / free speech etc. I think it's important to talk about this because Russia is an important crossroads, and the Western world should take care that it chooses the right direction. This means: the hardest possible reaction against the terrorist is acceptable to me, but human rights violations against the Chechen population as such are off limits. As in the Abu Ghraib case: Things that cannot be accepted have to be called by their name.

This doesn't change a bit about the utter contempt I feel for those beings who commit such crimes that can never be anyhow justified or understood. And it doesn't change a bit about my belief that those people have to be captured or killed. I will support President Putin in that regard, but for all my sympathy in the fight against terrorism, that doesn't keep me from saying when I think he's on a dangerous road.

Osama Bin Laden schreibt über Medienkampagnen!

An: Mullah Omar
Von: Osama Bin Laden
Datum: 3. Oktober 2001

Hochverehrter Führer der Gläubigen, Mullah Muhammad Omar, Oberster Kämpfer, möge Gott ihn schützen...

1 - Wir schätzen Ihre Botschaft, die Ihren grossherzigen, heroischen Einsatz zur Verteidigung des Islam und Ihren Kampf gegen die Symbole der Ungläubigen unserer Zeit unterstreicht.

2 - Ich möchte betonen, welch eminente Bedeutung Ihre Erklärungen für die islamische Welt haben. Nichts schadet Amerika mehr als Ihre entschlossene Reaktion auf die Haltung und die Erklärungen der Amerikaner. Es ist daher sehr wichtig, dass das Emirat auf jede Drohung oder Forderung der Amerikaner mit der Gegenforderung reagiert, Amerika solle seine Unterstützung für Israel beenden und seine Truppen aus Saudi-Arabien abziehen. Solche Reaktionen neutralisieren den Einfluss der amerikanischen Medien auf die öffentliche Moral. Aus Zeitungsberichten geht hervor, dass laut einer jüngeren Umfrage sieben von zehn Amerikanern nach den Angriffen auf New York und Washington unter psychischen Problemen leiden.

Obwohl Sie bereits entschlossene Stellungnahmen abgegeben haben, bitten wir Sie, diese in verschärfter Form zu wiederholen, um der Medienkampagne des Feindes etwas Gleichwertiges entgegenzusetzen.

Die Drohung der Amerikaner, in Afghanistan einzumarschieren, sollte mit einer Drohung Ihrerseits beantwortet werden, dass Amerika nicht an Sicherheit denken kann, solange Muslime in Palästina und Afghanistan keine Sicherheit haben.

3 - Bedenken Sie, dass Amerika gegenwärtig mit zwei widersprüchlichen Problemen konfrontiert ist:

a) Wenn es auf Dschihad-Aktionen nicht reagiert, wird es an Prestige einbüssen. Es wird seine Truppen aus dem Ausland abziehen und sich auf seine eigenen Angelegenheiten beschränken müssen. Damit wird sich Amerika von einer Supermacht in eine drittklassige Macht wie Russland verwandeln.

b) Andererseits wird ein Krieg gegen Afghanistan langfristig enorme wirtschaftliche Probleme mit sich bringen, die Wirtschaft wird weiter kollabieren, so dass Amerika nur die Option hat, wie sie seinerzeit der Sowjetunion offenstand: Abzug aus Afghanistan und Zusammenbruch.

Mit Blick auf diesen Krieg sollten wir uns auf Folgendes konzentrieren:

- der amerikanischen Wirtschaft einen schweren Schlag versetzen, also die Wirtschaft weiter schwächen und das Vertrauen in die amerikanische Wirtschaft erschüttern. Dies wird dazu führen, dass Anleger nicht in Amerika investieren und sich nicht an amerikanischen Unternehmen beteiligen, und dies wird den Zusammenbruch der amerikanischen Wirtschaft weiter beschleunigen.

- eine antiamerikanische Medienkampagne durchführen, die sich auf die folgenden Punkte konzentriert:

a) eine Kluft zwischen der amerikanischen Bevölkerung und der Regierung herbeiführen, indem man den Amerikanern zeigt, dass die Regierung für weitere Verluste an Geld und Menschenleben sorgen wird, dass die Regierung die Menschen den Interessen der Reichen, besonders der Juden, opfert, dass die Regierung sie in den Krieg führt, um Israel zu verteidigen, dass Amerika sich aus dem gegenwärtigen Kampf zwischen Muslimen und Juden heraushalten soll...

Auf diese Weise soll erreicht werden, dass die amerikanische Bevölkerung Druck auf die Regierung ausübt, den Krieg gegen Afghanistan zu beenden, weil die Bevölkerung durch diesen Krieg erhebliche Opfer erleiden wird.

Es muss unbedingt klar sein, dass wir auf den Krieg gegen Afghanistan mit Vergeltungsschlägen gegen Amerika antworten werden.

Ich glaube, dass wir, wenn Sie einverstanden sind, mehrere Reden halten können, die grossen Einfluss auf Amerikaner, Pakistaner, Araber und alle Muslime haben werden.

Abschliessend möchte ich betonen, wie sehr wir es schätzen, dass Sie der Führer der Gläubigen sind. Ich möchte Ihnen versichern, wie sehr wir Ihre historische Position im Dienst des Islam und zur Verteidigung der Tradition des Propheten würdigen. Wir bitten Gott, diese Position zu akzeptieren und zu belohnen.

Wir bitten Gott, der islamisch-afghanischen Nation unter Ihrer Führung den Sieg über die amerikanischen Ungläubigen zu schenken. So wie er diese ehrenvolle Nation dazu ausersehen hat, die kommunistischen Ungläubigen zu schlagen.

Friede sei mit Ihnen und die Gnade und der Segen Gottes.

Ihr Bruder
Osama Bin Mohammed Bin Laden

Alan Cullison ist Moskau-Korrespondent des Wall Street Journal und Nieman-Fellow
an der Harvard University.

Aus dem Englischen von Matthias Fienbork

© Atlantic Monthly, September 2004


8) "CYCLE OF VIOLENCE" - "taz"

"Mit der Geiselnahme von Kindern hat sich der tschetschenische Widerstand nachhaltig diskreditiert."

"Wenn die Toten in Beslan gezählt sind, ist das Drama keineswegs beendet. Die Gewaltspirale wird sich weiter drehen."

Thomas, how could Russians oppressing anyone? Afterall, if Russians were doing anything wrong there certainly would have been protests throughout Germany and the rest of Europe:

But really, of course the Russians were/are brutal in Chechnya. But apparently the Russians can behave in anyway they want and still be part of the French/German/Russian alliance, while Bush=Hitler. But whatever the Russians did or haven't done is not relevant to the school tragedy.

@ SleepyInSeattle

I couldn't agree more. That's exactly how I feel.

What I find interesting: It seems to be beyond doubt now that at least ten of those terrorists were Arabs. How come they are still talking about root causes and cycle of violence whereas these people aren't even Chechens and should have no quarrel with Russia themselves?

@ all

Talking of "cycle of violence":
"Süddeutsche Zeitung" has it as well, although with a slight variation:
"Kaukasischer Teufelskreis"
"Es war nichts als Härte zu erwarten. Von den Terroristen. Und auch von Wladimir Putin."

Oh, I see that in the "Tagesspiegel" it's also "Kaukasischer Teufelskreis":

You missed at least one point. The necessary vote in the UN Security Council permitting 'hostage rescue operations' to be mounted. All permanent members may interpose their veto of course.....

Yeah, and watching CNN the terrorists are still being reffered to as "Chechen separatists". Many are apparently not Chechens at all. They may be separatists, but when you partake in such an sinister act you now a terrorist, there should be absolutely no uncertainty that these are terrorists. But what's going on seems to be a smokescreen to make it seem that terrorist acts are far more localized than they are (they're just separatists, palestinian militants, rebels, activists, etc.), just sort of random acts of violence. The media does not apparently want people to believe that there is a bigger picture and that Islamists are actually taking part in an organised terror campaign against infidels. We have quite a number of Islamists beheading people in the mid-east, we have two Russian airliners bombed, we have several trains simultaniously bombed in Madrid, we have several bombings in Turkey, we have busses bombed in Israel, we have "militants" raiding compounds in Saudi Arabia, we have genocide in Sudan, and the school horror in Beslan.

People need to connect the dots, the west (YES, EUROPE THAT MEANS YOU TOO) has a very REAL ENEMY, an enemy that isn't tolerant in any way, not liberal, not democratic in nature, not multi-cultural, not accepting of gay marriage or homosexuality at all, would not tolerate dissent of any kind, not environmentally conscious and anti-abortion (post-birth abortion is acceptable and perhaps encouraged though).

For a pessimistic commentary on this topic you may want to check out Leon de Winter's piece in Cicero: "Wacht auf, wir sind im Krieg!"

Link: http://www.cicero.de/97.php?ress_id=1&item=230

Thomas wrote
>> one shouldn't be blind to the fact that Russia is oppressing the Chechen people and has some very troubling tendencies with regard to civil liberties, free media / free speech etc

Oh, shut up.

@ Pamela

Come on, it's the truth. We can't sit here and talk about promoting freedom and democracy to the Middle East and keep silent when the largest country on this planet shows some clear signs of heading in the wrong direction. If the West wants Russia to become (remain?) a real ally, a country with democracy and Western values, these things must be mentioned.

This has nothing to do with the terrorists' attacks. I would never be willing to even think about their "justifications". They have to be hunted down. Period. In this regard, President Putin has my support and I am as much against all talk about "root causes" as you seem to be. But supporting Russia against terrorism doesn't mean supporting mistreatment of non-combattant civilians, manipulating elections or stifling dissent. All those things aren't good for the West, and they're not good for the Russian people, as well. So why not say so?

It must be clear to everyone now that AQ is hoping through atrocities to provoke a war between Islam and the West.

You are severely demented. The people who committed these heinous acts against children are evil, cowardly murderers. President Bush WILL be re-elected and the USA will be united in KILLING THESE ARAB_MUSLIM SCUM. FUCK ALL WEAK ATHEISTIC EUROPEAN SOCIALIST BITCHES. FUCK YOU!!!

Islam out of Europe within 20 years.

Thomas: Do you for a second believe that any amount of "repression" justifies the slaughter of schoolchildren?

Think carefully before you answer: someone out there may decide that he has what you would term "justifiable" grievances against YOU.

And wouldn't THAT be sad?


Very good satire. You left out guaranteed access to the scene by concerned BBC reporters who repeat the grievances of the terrorists while intoning distrust of the authorites.

While I think some of your points trivialize some important issues, you are probably on the right track. I think, however, one crucial detail should not be forgotten:

These childrean and families are victims. They need our sympathy and support. And we must do everything possible to prevent this from happening to anyone else.

The Russian government - which in this case was not harmed materially, but may have been in other ways - is NOT the victim. It is not a civilian. It has practiced violence against civilians in Chechnya. It is perpetuating the violence which has spilled over into other parts of Russia which are not in dispute. It is part of the problem. In so far as violence begets violence, and this may be an action in response to Russia's RECKLESS campaign of violence in Chechnya, they need held responsible for negligence, and for their own acts of "terrorism" in Chechnya.

These Chechnyan terrorists - if that is what they are - deserve highest scorn for their behavior. And punished they should be. But do not ask me to let Russia get by with the same kinds of acts. Russia's violence against Chechnya, and its invitation to violence against its citizens by its irresponsible behavior which predictably would lead to violence against its own citizens (predictable since it has before). Let us remember both parties of violence, and let us be angry at who deserves anger, and have mercy on who deserves mercy, but not forget the two.

I hope that notion does not offend anyone, but that it is something you can heartily agree with.

from an (American) liberal :) [which I guess makes me not very liberal]

". . .deserve highest scorn for their behavior"? Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot? as we say it in the US Armed Forces. They deserve nothing less than a slow death in the most miserable manner possible. Child killers deserve nothing less. The deaths of these children were not incidental to the terrorist operation, they were central to it.

What is ruefully amusing about the European distaste for the largely Anglo-American war on terror is all of the clucking from our so-called allies. What you do not yet realize is that we are not retrograde, as we are who we have been since the end of World War 2. We just never became as effeminate as the continentials, because we had no one to hide behind as we faced the evils in the world. That tends to happen when one is the Western world's sword wielder and shield bearer. Your free ride is ending. We largely killed off the Soviet bear. We all face the snakes together. You'd best start realizing that the vipers of the post-Cold War world do not care if your politicians are trying to appease their irrational demands, they strike anyways because of what they are. It's their nature, and it is past time to make radical Islamists an extinct breed.

I got bad news for you. Your holiday from history is over. The alarm clock just rang again. You are late. Smell the coffee. Its burning on the stove. The noise you hear is the cries of your children being shot in the back by ISLAMO-NAZI TERRORISTS (there I said it, deal with it).

Panic. Pull on jeans. Run out to the street. Scream in horror.

There is a war on. Its name is World War IV. (You slept through III, the Soviet Union surrendered and peacefully discorporated so as not to rouse you). Your lawyers, your philosophers, your sociologists and your diplomats will be just as useful to you as your pastry chefs, your accordion players, your dancing girls and your heroin addicts.

What are you going to do? Join Jacques Chiraque in his never ending quest to find somebody to accept his surrender. It won’t help you kufir. Weakness only enrages them.

Will you stand with us and fight? Will you go with us, when we go, as shall be required to, into Iran and Syria and North Korea, to clean out their lairs, shut down their armories, close their banks and sterilize their foul scat? Do you have the stomach for that?

First you must remember something very important. You are mortal. You will die. The only questions are how and when.

Do you wish to die as a free man or a slave? Is the title dihimi comfortable to you, will you enjoy walking in the gutter and being kicked and cursed? Will you be properly obsequious when you pay your tax? Perhaps you will join them, its not so bad you say, to lock the women in purdah, to teach your children superstition in a foreign tongue, to cut yourself off from western civilization, after all don’t we know that western civilization is the source of our shame and their rage?

We would rather die as free men. Our Navy flies a flag. It shows an indigenous snake, the eastern diamond-back rattlesnake, and has the motto: “Don’t Tread On Me.” The rattler is poisonous, but it has a rattle and it gives fair warning of its presence, and it usually only bites when its been stepped on. We have been stepped on, we are at war. Our motto is “Live Free or Die.”

"Islam out of Europe within 20 years"

Oh god I hope not! I've had two visions of this. The less bad vision is something like the forced exodus of the 'Pied Noirs' from Algeria to France after they were forced out. The worse vision is closer to the partition of India in 1947-48. 7 million people died due to the limited vision of Jinna and Nehru.

"Will you stand with us and fight? Will you go with us, when we go, as shall be required to, into Iran and Syria and North Korea, to clean out their lairs, shut down their armories, close their banks and sterilize their foul scat? Do you have the stomach for that?"

I'd like to think they do have the will to confront evil, but I know deep down that they don't really even retain the capacity to recognize evil when it presents itself. That is amply demonstrated by the euroleft's equating President Bush to Adolf Hitler. If there is a more specious and odious comparison, I am unaware of it.

--Will you go with us, when we go, as shall be required to, into Iran and Syria and North Korea, to clean out their lairs, shut down their armories, close their banks and sterilize their foul scat? Do you have the stomach for that?--

They can't Robert, they have parameters on what they can do. Something about the 30s and 40s, made them sign a document.

Come to think of it, made the Japanese sign one, too, but they're a little more adventurous.

They had mothers choose which of their children could leave, everyone. If there were 2 kids there, one had to be left behind.

Joe, I don't htink that any of the US pols and partisans like being in a war, it is that some of them accept the fact that this is a war, and act accordingly.

As for the softer side, etc, we can send diplomats to many places where there are conflicts, and both governmental and non-governmental agaenices as well to put forth a softer side, and some of them are rewarded with kidnappings and killing for their troubles, what response do you have to that?

THere are some groups you can negotiate with and avert tragedy and war, but there are some who you cannot, and those must be dealt with in a more forceful manner.

David this is a great site, I don't read the German papers as much as I should, considering I live here, but your site provides a great service.

Hey American liberal Ben

You offer The standard-issue, impassioned semi-defense of terrorism, to wit: well-fed, middle class people do not take up arms to address their grievances. Poverty and violence cause terrorism. Oh really? Tell that to the 9/11 widows and orphans whose family members were murdered by well-fed middle and upper class Middle Easterners. Conversely, if dire poverty and hardship causes terrorism show me the terrorists rising up from the refugee camps in the Sudan. Wouldn't it be more accurate to call the Sudanese soldiers, raping and tormenting and killing, terrorists?

Beware of the sinister conjunction: but. As in, "Yes it is terrible to murder innocent children shooting them in the back but...." Do you really know enough to begin apologizing for Chechen terrorists?

For God's sake, man, listen to yourself! That conjunction "but" is the difference between Barbarism and Civilization. Are you saying that Chechniya cannot make its case to the living? That it is OK to start slaughtering kids? Are you saying that there exists no world forum for the Chechniyan's to try to make their case? That's what that "but" signifies. The liberal left is always crying out about the many peaceful means by which nations should work with each other, to resolve problems, the UN, etc. Yet when terrorist monsters start murdering children you get very patient, analytical and understanding of the terrorists' plight. I don't hear any clamor that they should take their case to the UN. Instead I hear hints that their terror is OK because they have been brutalized by X Y or Z.

At the point that someone, I don't care who, starts slaughtering your kids, you have every right not to care about their cause - because they have declared war on innocence. Causes are nurtured within human communities and a root fact of common human life is that children are inocent. Slaughtering innocent children takes you out of the human community. Are you prepared to say that the children are not innocent?

"Well, they are innocent but..."

I'll let you finish the sentence.

Dear Sir:

The BBC calls the terrorists - hostage takers and the children - pupils. How nice to be so neutral as to neuter your reporting of a story. These murderous thugs killed children and adults. For what: Publicity; To embarrass the Russian Government; to obtain the release of fellow terrorists. I do not think so. To me they wanted to make a statement - that they will stop at nothing. Well. They made their statement. Now it is time for the world to react with the horror this act deserves. No plattitudes, just action. We are dealing with the same sort of fascist thugs that have appeared throughout the ages. It doeesn't matter what ideology these thugs hide behind. They act like fascists and should be treated as such.

We are in a world war. Islamic fundamentalists want to destroy the western world, our society, our way of life.
As one Islamic radical put it to the western world, "Your grandchildren will be Muslims".
We need strong leaders that will fight this war to protect our western society and not turn the world backwards 400 years to religious tyranny and oppression

@ DaveP.

Please read and think before you attack me. I have made clear that, no, nothing could ever justify what these people did. (Btw: I don't even believe that these people were of those who are oppressed by the Russian government, at least those ten Arabs certainly were not). My criticism of the Russian government has nothing to do with "trying to understand" or "justifying" the terrorists. They can't be understood and their deeds can't be justified. They have to hunted down and punished and that's it.

But please, it must still be allowed to be critical of the Russian government when it behaves in ways that don't fit our Western standards. I am not indifferent to the future development of Russia, and I want it to be a democratic, free country that holds civil liberties dear - and fights terrorists with the utmost resolve. I don't want Russia to fall back into authoritarianism, I don't want it to give up free speech and free media and I don't want it to mistreat civilians who have nothing to do with terrorism. All these tendencies do exist and they worry me. And I will continue to say so and I think we all should if we care for freedom.

You are all insensiteive. The first thing we must do is hold a candlelight vigil, and I'm stunned that none of you see that.

Yes R. Flink, we are in a world war. A religious world war. Their religion against the rest of the world. All you liberal appeasement monkeys out there better get the hell out of the way. The hammer is about to fall. The coalition of the willing will grow and we will have the 3 W's going for us (the Weapons, the Way to deliver them, and the Will to do it). Flight 93, Live Free or Die.


"I agree with almost everything, but I do think it's important to speak out about Russian human rights violations anyhow...Please read and think before you attack me. I have made clear that, no, nothing could ever justify what these people did."

As we read in Proverbs, Thomas, there is a time for every purpose under heaven. Regardless of your protests to the contrary, your criticism of Russia and Putin at a time like this, in the context of this discussion is, objectively, both a justification of and a collaboration with terrorism.

@ Helian

Now you are really making me angry. I won't have somebody saying something like this to me. I'm living in a free country and I have the right to free speech. I absolutely agree with the vast majority of things that have been said here. I have only commented on the fact that I think the Russian government ought to be criticised for some things because some comments made it appear as if we should now totally close our eyes to the realities of Russia, and I think we shouldn't. I have made perfectly clear that in my eyes these crimes had nothing at all to do with anything the Russian government does wrong and that they could never, in any way, be justified the slightest bit.

But if you want to tell me that I of all people were supporting terrorists, only because I think the Russian people should have freedom and democracy as much as we have, then I'm sorry to have to say that this makes me sick. I just won't have you calling me a supporter of terrorism, only because I don't accept everything that President Putin does. End of discussion.

@ Niko

I don't get it. We've discussed those same things on this blog. Almost all of us have agreed at the time that, yes, the Russian government does things that are problematic. May I remind of you this:
Putin Gets a Free Pass
Human Rights Take a Back Seat to “Realpolitik” at German-Russian Summit
"What was missing in all of this was the outrage, the condemnation and the indignation at Russia’s lawless trampling of detainees rights and at the war in Chechnya. There will be no Spiegel covers depicting Russian soldiers as drooling Rambos, there will be no covers belittling Putin as a power mad tyrant asking: “Will Russia be democratic?" There will be no impassioned speeches on German talk shows by Green politicians complaining of the Russian government’s illegal detention (or assassination) of anyone standing in its way. After all, being in bed with corrupt, brutal Russian officials is simply “Realpolitik.”"

Those are not my words, they are Ray's. I absolutely agreed with them. I still do. How that makes me a supporter of terrorism whereas it was completely ok when this article was first posted, I fail to see.

Am I now supposed to agree with Mr. Putin in his decision to undermine US efforts against Saddam Hussein, as the Russian government now seems to be beyond criticism for you? Am I supposed to nod off that Mr. Khodorkowski is in jail? Am I supposed to applaud because there is no inpedendent TV channel any more? Am I a supporter of terrorism for finding these things wrong?

@ Niko

The last time I wrote about this was August 31, one day before all of this began:

So don't claim things that are lies. I have spoken out against some of Mr. Putin's policies ever since he has been in power. And I won't let me be called a supporter of terrorism for that.

thomas reminds me of someone who attends a funeral and suddenly shouts "he still owes me 20 bucks!"

@ Niko

Damn it, you don't even read what I say!

I didn't even claim one of those things you accuse me of. I never said that I see a connection between Mr. Putin's policies and this crime. I did in fact say the opposite, though, because I myself did mention that several of those terrorist were Arabs (just look some posts above for that) and shouldn't have had any quarrel with the Russians.

How dare you call me a supporter of terrorism without having even read what I said? I've mostly said the same as you did, the only slight difference being that I warned not to idealize Mr. Putin because of our sympathy for the Russian people.

So, the next time before you drop rhetorical bombs like that, do me a favor and READ.

(PS: myblog.de seems to be down at the moment, please try the link again in some minutes. It is the right one, but myblog.de isn't perfectly stable.)


"Now you are really making me angry. I won't have somebody saying something like this to me. I'm living in a free country and I have the right to free speech."

You know what, Thomas, you're making me angry, too. You and everyone like you, people who think they can strike their usual virtuous poses at a time like this, uttering pompous, "even-handed" platitudes. It astounds me that you could have been reading this blog for so long, and you still don't have a clue. Do you really think you can have the luxury of straddling the fence at a time like this? There's no way, Thomas, wake up! I repeat, although I despair that you'll ever get it Thomas, that your bleating about the sins of Putin and Russia at a time like this amounts to a justification and collaboration with terrorism. That's how every intelligent human being on the planet interprets your remarks except that little hard core of the professionally virtuous who thing they can float piously above the fray, tut-tutting about the irrationality of it all. This is not the time, Thomas, we don't need your diversions and pious bromides now. You are either against the vile, human scum that committed this vicious, genocidal act against children, or you are with them. All your injured dignity and protests of innocence don't impress me in the least. Look in the mirror, Thomas. Try to see yourself for what you really are.

Look, Niko, I can write whatever I want, you won't believe me anyway. You believe I'm a supporter of terrorism because I dare to mention that we shouldn't let our sympathy for the Russian people and our disgust for those terrorists lead us in the wrong direction of idealizing Mr. Putin, who, I think, isn't that good for the Russian people and their future. It's your right to believe that I am a supporter of terrorism because of that. I dare to disagree, because fighting terrorism for me does not imply idealizing authoritarianism and demonizing those who call it by its name. Anyway, feel free to call me whatever you want. I hope others will see me differently.


"I hope others will see me differently."

I don't see you any differently, Thomas, because, like Niko, I see you for what you are.

You forgot another unbreakable rule of pro-appeasement journalists when reporting on islamic separatist terrorists - never mention that they reneged on a peace deal.

Guys, I read the exchange with Thomas and I really can't see on his side any hint of trying to relativate the terrorism in Russia. The problem is that he makes those claims now, after this shocking events, and most people are not in the mood of hearing about Putin's bad record.

Many idiots say that Pali terrorism is somewhat justified because of the Israeli "occupation". I don't have at all the feeling that Thomas is trying to do that here.

fogg said it best earlier: thomas reminds me of someone who attends a funeral and suddenly shouts "he still owes me 20 bucks!" The timing of what he says is just bad, that's all (in my opinion). As far as I can tell from what I read there isn't any understanding or sympathy for the terrorists on his side. It is also possible that I have missed something in his posts.

TIME OUT everyone!

JoeN is right: TIME OUT everyone!

One more thing though before the time out...

Niko, I guess you know me (if only by name) well enough to figure out what my position on the Russian terrorism situation is. I hate terrorism, not with the attitude of - oh, how I hated that dinner - but with pure, raw, calm, patient hate. I have no problem with bending some of the "civilized" world rules in order to fight terror.

I think Thomas wrongly implied that people here don't care about Putin's bad human rights record. On ther other hand, there was implied that Thomas thus tries to relativate the terror.

a) The terror in the school has nothing to do with Putin's good or bad record, and b)Thomas was wrong to bring it up here. I have no clue what's in Thomas head, but my feeling is that he wasn't pulling the "root cause" trick.

Der Artikel in der "New York Post" beschreibt es recht gut:

When the Killers Come for the Kids

The New York Post
Ralph Peters

September 4, 2004 -- The mass murder of children revolts the human psyche. Herod sending his henchmen to massacre the infants of Bethlehem haunts the Gospels. Nothing in our time was crueler than what the Germans did to children during the Holocaust. Slaughtering the innocents violates a universal human taboo. Or a nearly universal one. Those Muslims who preach Jihad against the West decided years ago that killing Jewish or Christian children is not only acceptable, but pleasing to their god when done by "martyrs."


The comments to this entry are closed.

Our Mission

The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

May 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31