Innocence of Provocateurs: unjustifiable loss of lives amidst 'justifiable' umbrage
Innocence of Provocateurs: unjustifiable loss of lives
Following another provocative anti-Islam movie and probably the most preposterous movie trailer I have ever seen, there have been predictable acts of lawlessness and sad loss of lives, in particular the attack on the US Embassy in Libya with the death of the US ambassador and three embassy staff, my condolences to all those affected by these dastardly acts. On the other hand, I have questioned the moral, motive and motivation of those behind such an inciting movie, are they ‘innocent’ or are they just a pawn in a wider diabolic plan of instability?
I have been following various media fora and find it ludicrous some people have chosen to defend the makers of the movie without actually watching any part of it. I also consider it odious, the imprudent generalisations by so called intellectuals. Some people decide it appropriate to label the entire religion of Islam based on the actions of an infinitesimal amount, as compared to it’s over a billion adherents. My summation is they are as parochial as those ravaging the streets, the only difference is the former decide to cower behind media gadget screens; both parties are obviously uninformed and don’t know their history.
The similitude of the idiocy is a Muslim or non-Christian labelling the entire Christian faith because of the actions of a few, e.g. the actions of the unrepentant terrorist Anders Breivik who following his manifesto for a free Christian Europe, injured and murdered innocent civilians. Another good example that’s contextually relative to the current kerfuffle, is the attack by a French Christian fundamentalist who launched Molotov cocktails inside the Saint Michel theatre in Paris as it showed The Last Temptation of Christ on October 22, 1988; ending in casualties. Wouldn’t it be changeling like to crucify the Christian faith because of these extremist few? Please let’s endeavour to use our God given senses with acquired gumption in these matters and not fuel the embers of hate.
What is unjustifiable are the violence and killing of innocent people based on a senseless movie made by a coxcomb and convicted fraudster who happens to be Egyptian Coptic. Some of those rioting are ignorant, unenlightened, and uneducated, they might not even have seen the disgusting movie. I have seen the movie trailer and its repugnance can't be over emphasised, apart from the atrocious innuendos too ineffable to elucidate here, it also contained a porn type scene that’s repulsive to any sane person talk less a bunch of pugnacious extremists waiting to capitalise on anything anti-US, anti-western, and anti-imperialist. One then begins to wonder why; what’s the rationale behind these perceived acts of insanity? Have they not read about Prophet Muhammad and his gentle mien, his patience in times of adversity? Did they not read about the incident of the Bedouin who urinated in the mosque and the Prophet forgave him? Can they even read? Imagine such a thing happened now, with these extremists, your guess is as good as mine.
What some perceive as ‘justifiable’ to a certain degree, are the years of resentment and anger felt by some citizens from certain regions, precipitated by US Invasions and involvements in Middle Eastern or Muslim dominated lands, for the rightful or wrongful reasons. The mindset of some the people in these regions are in contrast to the mindset of those in the Western world. The incongruity is so apparent its simply like comparing tranquillity to turmoil. Juxtapose; walks in the park, children's funfair, museum outings, carnivals, cinema, circus and attending special football matches, with; bomb shelling, mortar explosion, RPG launch and impact sounds, suicide bombing incidents, friendly fire, aerial bombardment; coupled with dead family and friends probably killed with severed limbs, disfigured heads or brains blown off and relatives dealing with the trauma of sexual assault by soldiers. A ‘normal’ family outing in such regions might be another funeral of a beloved one; get the gory picture?!
Analysing these regions further and genesis of contemporary upheavals; tyrannical puppets were planted to suppress the masses and control valuable resources. So when the tyrants stopped doing the bidding of their puppet masters, they were usurped with the aid of armed and funded terrorists (though they like to refer to them as ‘rebels’ or ‘freedom fighters’ during this exercise). One of the benefits of ousting these dictators is the masses having a voice, but the downside is, among these voices are those of belligerence and extremist agendas.
Some have argued this is what happens when you arm terrorists under the guise of liberation, that they obviously haven't learnt vital lessons from arming Mujahideen/Al Qaeda/Osama Bin Laden during the USSR vs. Afghanistan war. In this regard, the arming of known and unknown terrorists to achieve war objectives, could ricochet and at times with disastrous consequences. The war and the usurpation might have been planned but the later consequences are usually unpredictable. Following such alliances with strange bed fellows and disarmament challenges, there are usually untraceable amounts of training camps, plethora of ammunitions and coterie of terrorists waiting for an opportunity to strike or wreak havoc based on their ideologies. Sadly, by a strange twist of fate, the US ambassador that got killed supported these armed groups against Ghadaffi and has probably been killed by the weapons they supplied to these terrorists: Karma? What is poignantly ironic is even under Ghadaffi, it wasn't possible a US ambassador got killed in Libya. Love or loathe Ghadaffi he was the stabilising factor in Libya.
One doesn't have to be a soothsayer to presage the current manifestation of events; you simply can’t go around sticking your 'cock' in other peoples 'cockpits', and expect everything to be dandy; sooner or later there’s bound to be repercussions. Let's not be hoodwinked or get swayed by well orchestrated PR mechanisms on the Western media we are so used to; portraying widespread support for the Western ‘liberators’, the reality on ground in these regions is quite different, there is the purest hatred towards US and its co-invaders. As far as these people are concerned, the invaders are responsible for all the woes in their respective lands, even though they are partly to blame. There exists a smorgasbord of intricate issues underpinning the complexity of the matter and fuelling the anger; from the conspiracy theories of 9/11, invasion of Iraq with no WMD and execution of Saddam on Eid to the Afghanistan war genesis and metamorphosis. Not forgetting the collective deaths of millions of people in these invaded territories, Guantanamo illegality, Abu Ghraib imbroglio, various cases of the indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians by US soldiers, bias support of Israel and the deliberate ignorance of the plight and sufferings of Palestinians, the Gaddafi usurpation exercise and no fly zone fiasco, just to mention a few. Ironically Bahrain government supported by Saudi forces repeatedly quelled protesters with force, the same offence Ghadaffi was accused of hence the invasion, maybe it’s because these particular Arab royals are still doing the masters bidding, i.e. lucrative defence contracts worth billions of dollars.
The West must accept even if in regrettable hindsight, that you simply can’t shove the West's version of 'Democracy' down the throats of an entire region. They have a different ethos and sacred beliefs that must be acknowledged and respected accordingly.
For example in many parts of the West, women can sun bathe topless with their bosom exposed. In contrast, if such is tried in some of these regions, expect tumult with possible loss of lives.
On a lighter note, the Duchess of Cambridge (wife to future King of England) was recently photographed topless by ambitious paparazzi while sunbathing on holiday with her husband; this has obviously generated some furore at the Buckingham Palace and hullabaloo in UK especially. The French magazine that published the photos have defended their actions under 'freedom of speech', but the public are livid, as the establishment are still outraged and have initiated legal proceedings. The same 'freedom of speech' card was used by some to justify the actions of the ‘innocent’ provocateurs behind the anti-Islamic film. I posit, some consider a 'royal boob' as more sacred than sacrilege to the religion of over 1.6 billion people. It is a ‘Crazy’ world we live in. Peace!
-M.B.O
2012©
Following another provocative anti-Islam movie and probably the most preposterous movie trailer I have ever seen, there have been predictable acts of lawlessness and sad loss of lives, in particular the attack on the US Embassy in Libya with the death of the US ambassador and three embassy staff, my condolences to all those affected by these dastardly acts. On the other hand, I have questioned the moral, motive and motivation of those behind such an inciting movie, are they ‘innocent’ or are they just a pawn in a wider diabolic plan of instability?
I have been following various media fora and find it ludicrous some people have chosen to defend the makers of the movie without actually watching any part of it. I also consider it odious, the imprudent generalisations by so called intellectuals. Some people decide it appropriate to label the entire religion of Islam based on the actions of an infinitesimal amount, as compared to it’s over a billion adherents. My summation is they are as parochial as those ravaging the streets, the only difference is the former decide to cower behind media gadget screens; both parties are obviously uninformed and don’t know their history.
The similitude of the idiocy is a Muslim or non-Christian labelling the entire Christian faith because of the actions of a few, e.g. the actions of the unrepentant terrorist Anders Breivik who following his manifesto for a free Christian Europe, injured and murdered innocent civilians. Another good example that’s contextually relative to the current kerfuffle, is the attack by a French Christian fundamentalist who launched Molotov cocktails inside the Saint Michel theatre in Paris as it showed The Last Temptation of Christ on October 22, 1988; ending in casualties. Wouldn’t it be changeling like to crucify the Christian faith because of these extremist few? Please let’s endeavour to use our God given senses with acquired gumption in these matters and not fuel the embers of hate.
What is unjustifiable are the violence and killing of innocent people based on a senseless movie made by a coxcomb and convicted fraudster who happens to be Egyptian Coptic. Some of those rioting are ignorant, unenlightened, and uneducated, they might not even have seen the disgusting movie. I have seen the movie trailer and its repugnance can't be over emphasised, apart from the atrocious innuendos too ineffable to elucidate here, it also contained a porn type scene that’s repulsive to any sane person talk less a bunch of pugnacious extremists waiting to capitalise on anything anti-US, anti-western, and anti-imperialist. One then begins to wonder why; what’s the rationale behind these perceived acts of insanity? Have they not read about Prophet Muhammad and his gentle mien, his patience in times of adversity? Did they not read about the incident of the Bedouin who urinated in the mosque and the Prophet forgave him? Can they even read? Imagine such a thing happened now, with these extremists, your guess is as good as mine.
What some perceive as ‘justifiable’ to a certain degree, are the years of resentment and anger felt by some citizens from certain regions, precipitated by US Invasions and involvements in Middle Eastern or Muslim dominated lands, for the rightful or wrongful reasons. The mindset of some the people in these regions are in contrast to the mindset of those in the Western world. The incongruity is so apparent its simply like comparing tranquillity to turmoil. Juxtapose; walks in the park, children's funfair, museum outings, carnivals, cinema, circus and attending special football matches, with; bomb shelling, mortar explosion, RPG launch and impact sounds, suicide bombing incidents, friendly fire, aerial bombardment; coupled with dead family and friends probably killed with severed limbs, disfigured heads or brains blown off and relatives dealing with the trauma of sexual assault by soldiers. A ‘normal’ family outing in such regions might be another funeral of a beloved one; get the gory picture?!
Analysing these regions further and genesis of contemporary upheavals; tyrannical puppets were planted to suppress the masses and control valuable resources. So when the tyrants stopped doing the bidding of their puppet masters, they were usurped with the aid of armed and funded terrorists (though they like to refer to them as ‘rebels’ or ‘freedom fighters’ during this exercise). One of the benefits of ousting these dictators is the masses having a voice, but the downside is, among these voices are those of belligerence and extremist agendas.
Some have argued this is what happens when you arm terrorists under the guise of liberation, that they obviously haven't learnt vital lessons from arming Mujahideen/Al Qaeda/Osama Bin Laden during the USSR vs. Afghanistan war. In this regard, the arming of known and unknown terrorists to achieve war objectives, could ricochet and at times with disastrous consequences. The war and the usurpation might have been planned but the later consequences are usually unpredictable. Following such alliances with strange bed fellows and disarmament challenges, there are usually untraceable amounts of training camps, plethora of ammunitions and coterie of terrorists waiting for an opportunity to strike or wreak havoc based on their ideologies. Sadly, by a strange twist of fate, the US ambassador that got killed supported these armed groups against Ghadaffi and has probably been killed by the weapons they supplied to these terrorists: Karma? What is poignantly ironic is even under Ghadaffi, it wasn't possible a US ambassador got killed in Libya. Love or loathe Ghadaffi he was the stabilising factor in Libya.
One doesn't have to be a soothsayer to presage the current manifestation of events; you simply can’t go around sticking your 'cock' in other peoples 'cockpits', and expect everything to be dandy; sooner or later there’s bound to be repercussions. Let's not be hoodwinked or get swayed by well orchestrated PR mechanisms on the Western media we are so used to; portraying widespread support for the Western ‘liberators’, the reality on ground in these regions is quite different, there is the purest hatred towards US and its co-invaders. As far as these people are concerned, the invaders are responsible for all the woes in their respective lands, even though they are partly to blame. There exists a smorgasbord of intricate issues underpinning the complexity of the matter and fuelling the anger; from the conspiracy theories of 9/11, invasion of Iraq with no WMD and execution of Saddam on Eid to the Afghanistan war genesis and metamorphosis. Not forgetting the collective deaths of millions of people in these invaded territories, Guantanamo illegality, Abu Ghraib imbroglio, various cases of the indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians by US soldiers, bias support of Israel and the deliberate ignorance of the plight and sufferings of Palestinians, the Gaddafi usurpation exercise and no fly zone fiasco, just to mention a few. Ironically Bahrain government supported by Saudi forces repeatedly quelled protesters with force, the same offence Ghadaffi was accused of hence the invasion, maybe it’s because these particular Arab royals are still doing the masters bidding, i.e. lucrative defence contracts worth billions of dollars.
The West must accept even if in regrettable hindsight, that you simply can’t shove the West's version of 'Democracy' down the throats of an entire region. They have a different ethos and sacred beliefs that must be acknowledged and respected accordingly.
For example in many parts of the West, women can sun bathe topless with their bosom exposed. In contrast, if such is tried in some of these regions, expect tumult with possible loss of lives.
On a lighter note, the Duchess of Cambridge (wife to future King of England) was recently photographed topless by ambitious paparazzi while sunbathing on holiday with her husband; this has obviously generated some furore at the Buckingham Palace and hullabaloo in UK especially. The French magazine that published the photos have defended their actions under 'freedom of speech', but the public are livid, as the establishment are still outraged and have initiated legal proceedings. The same 'freedom of speech' card was used by some to justify the actions of the ‘innocent’ provocateurs behind the anti-Islamic film. I posit, some consider a 'royal boob' as more sacred than sacrilege to the religion of over 1.6 billion people. It is a ‘Crazy’ world we live in. Peace!
-M.B.O
2012©
Comments
Post a Comment