Don Adams wrote---
> I apologize beforehand for using this forum for other than PD questions
>and answers, or for some comic relief... but it seems that there are
>statements and "sentiments" being posted as truth that cry out for a
>differing opinion or rebuttal.
Yes, Don, we have decided i think that right now it is important for
ALL opinions and perspectives on truth to be heard here. I will try
to respond to your version in that spirit, not as a personal attack,
which would resolve nothing. I understand that you, and many other
people, have strong beliefs which are different from mine, but may be
called "conscientious"--and I hope you will honor our right to our
conscientious leadings also. (BTW-- it was Jesus of Nazareth who
told us to love our enemies, not the bleeding heart liberals...)
>
> I too, do not believe that our President is going to play
>"cowboy" on this
>issue, probably the most important crisis affecting American citizens since
>W W II. He made, I believe. that very clear in his statements to a Muslim
audience in a mosque yesterday.
I understand (though I didn't hear him, that Pres. Bush did speak
against targeting Arab Americans, and I am relieved to hear that--I
hope he and others will repeat that warning, as such violence across
the country seems to be escalating.
>No matter how "surgical" our military
>response may be it is undoubtedly true that some innocent civilians may be
>injured or killed as happened last Tuesday. It also seems to be sure, and I
>hope that it is, that our response is going to be both overwhelming and
>drastic. There is no question in any minds other than "dyed in the wool"
>pacifists that the Muslim terrorist organizations have one primary
>goal---that is the utter destruction of not only the American way of life
>and people, but Western civilization in its entirety..
You may be right---but may I ask you to think about the things you
have read--by Middle Eastern scholars and respected journalists like
Tom Friedman's piece in the NYTimes--that urge us to avoid a
knee-jerk reaction and understand the *causes* of their wish to
destroy us? Unless we do that, just wiping out the current batch of
terrorists will accomplish nothing--except to add fuel to the hatred
of the next generation. Or do you propose that we kill all the
children too? Even administration officials and members of Congress
have stated as Rep.Lewis of Califionia said on the radio tonight,
that we "have no intention of carpet-bombing Afghanistan" , perhaps
because they realize how ineffective and difficult that would be.
Just ask the Russians, who tried with our help to conquer the
Afghans---as no one has succeeded in doing in 500 years !
> I mean no offense
>personally to any member of the "Friends" or Quakers
that is decent of you--may I explain,BTW, that the proper name of the
Quakers is the Religious Society of Friends, which is where the
"Friends" you quote comes from. We have had a testimony against all
wars since the 1600s, and suffered much as a result.
>but.....is there doubt
>in any reasonable person's mind that if their philosophy had been followed
>by our government in 1941 we would not be having these discussions openly,
>but clandestinely, and our children would be writing or speaking in public
>our primary language, either German or Russian. As viciously methodical as
>our enemies were before and during that war, if they had been victorious
>some distorted semblance of our Western civilization and society would have
>survived. If our present enemies are victorious, the only choices available
>for the vanquished will be death, slavery (believe it) or possibly
>conversion to Islam.
This is an argument frequently made--and I can only say that as usual
pacifists are asked "What would you do about this war we are in" when
things have already escalated out of control. We are not listened to
when we try to persuade governments to change the actions that
produce the causes of wars. (as is the task of the Friends Committee
on National Legislation) Just as now, many who in no way consider
themselves pacifists are urging caution, informed actions,and
long-range consideration of consequences.
>We should "remember", true enough. We should remember
>that many pacifists, during wartime called "conscientious objectors" were
>able to maintain their beliefs due to the blood shed by those who did not
>object. The exceptions, who are, and should be, admired today are those
>CO's who volunteered as medics (or corpsmen as they are called in the Navy
>and Marine Corps).
Pacifists in fact believe that they would sacrifice their own lives
rather than take the life of another human being, and for most this
is based on the Biblical command, "Thou Shalt Not Kill". Please
realize that our government determined what C.Os (like my husband)
would be ALLOWED to do--"work of national importance under civilian
direction"--recognizing the right of conscience, as most civilized
countries do today. Not all could volunteer for medical corps duty,
though many did. Others volunteered as guinea pigs for medical
experiments that would benefit humankind, or served in mental
hospitals, and started a movement to reform the terrible conditions
they found there. Enough of that--but I hope this adds a bit to your
knowledge of the situation.
>This is a very blunt statement, and I intend it to be.
>The USA, with all its problems, is undoubtedly one of the few places in
>this world to which people gladly risk death to emigrate. If an American is
>not prepared to defend in some way the freedoms which we enjoy, including
>religion, they should make a list of countries where they can enjoy more
>freedom and go about immigrating there.
Please, not the "Love it or leave it" bumper stickers again! <G>
Can we possibly agree that there is more than one way to love one's
country or to defend its freedoms? Some of the most restrictive acts
that threaten our freedom have been in wartime....and then we had to
apologize and pay reparations to the Japanese Americans who were
wrongfully interned due to WW2 hysteria .
> What I am trying to say is that
>this war is different from any that this country has experienced, even W W
>II It is concerned with the survival of our civilization,
>culture, institutions and yes, religions.
I think every war has been the war to save civilization---WW1 was
supposed to end all wars, and the Versailles treaty at its end sowed
the seeds of Hitler's Germany, as I think historians would agree.
We need to be sure that in saving these treasures, we don't destroy
them. In Vietnam we destroyed villages to in he heart and minds of
the people--even the military admit that didn't work.
> I heard today that "peace at any price" groups were being
>organized near
>the burial site of the body parts of over 5,000 people, and that the
>"Friends" were prime organizers. Just as I have said in a prior e-mail, I
>respect the right of any American to express their opinion--and I believe
>that these misled and naive people have the right to demonstrate. I can
>only hope, and those people should also, that there are enough people in
>this country and among our allies who are willing to defend against this
>challenge to our precious liberty that seem to be taken for granted.
I can only say that a "defense" which gives immediate satisfaction
and revenge for this atrocity against to many innocents may, sadly,
increase the risk of more atrocities in the future. Even some
government leaders are aware of this, and advising caution. I
respect your right to feel as you do, even though we will probably
continue to disagree. I also have appreciated the responses off and
on the lists who have thanked me for presenting an alternative
perspective---and asked that I continue to do so.
--
Shalom, Camilla [log in to unmask]
on the web at http://www.geocities.com/camillahf/index.html
"When the Spirit moves, the Light changes..."
from "The Light Changes".....CHF
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
