Accusations of Ignorance When a New Version

Accusations of Ignorance When a new version of an old evil appears on the event horizon of mankinds slow march toward evolutionary progress, those who preach cultural diversity and tolerance are the first to stake out a position of acceptance. Modern man must be tolerant of new ideas, because through the new ideas, man evolves into a more progressive, and advances creature. This approach seems to be the popular mantra regardless of what lessons have been learned through similar events in the past.

Regardless of the lessons mankind has learned about the evil which man can perpetrate against himself, there are those who believe that with enough time, and modern advancements in knowledge, technology, and understanding, man can overcome our propensity toward depraved behavior, which we have shown over and over again that we are willing to perpetrate on others.

The surprising aspect of this cultural phenomenon is that those who call for tolerance and acceptance of others ideas are the first, and the loudest to rail against any who would contradict their own ideas. It seems that tolerance and acceptance is extended only as far as other members of their like minded peer group. The subject of cloning, as well as the world's response to 9-11 are the most recent examples of this approach to culturally seminal events.

The terrorist attacks of 9-11 left the world in horror as to the attitudes of those who would perpetrate these actions. Declaring war on a battlefield, against a similarly armed combatant is an unfortunate, but accepted method for conducting armed conflict. But declaring war on a nation by flying airliners of innocent civilians into buildings filled with other civilians is a cowardly act, of depraved minds. The events of 9-11 were also properly understood as a terrorist act of war against our nation.

The cowardly men, armed with 767 aircraft attacked buildings that housed the financial services and commerce communities of nations from around the world. By attacking them, the Al Quaida terrorists declared war on their opponents. These people demonstrated that they held no regard for life. They only desired to pursue their self-destructive, and ill conceived political agenda. As such, the U.S. response to this act of war by attacking terrorist cells through out the middle east is an accurate, and correct response.

When a nation is attacked, and declared war upon by another armed nation, the former must defend itself against the aggression, otherwise the aggressor will grow more bold, and continue its campaign. Bill Clinton, please take notice. While the U.S. suffered under the unjust death of over 3000 of it's citizens, European allies rallied under a banner of creating a 'measured response.' The European community wanted to take into consideration the feelings and motivation of those who attacked us.

In Arundhati Roy's article challenging the U.S.'s approach to responding to the trade center attack in kind, as an act of war, he accused the U.S. Of rushing to judgment. He says "America is at war against a people it doesn't know, because they do not appear on the television." (p. 429) In other words, Mr. Roy is accusing the Americans as being ignorant, and knowing nothing more than what appears on the telly. According to Mr.

Roy, our myopic view of the world is matched only by our bullying shortsightedness by which we think we can push the world around. "The trouble (with America) is, that once American goes off to war, it can't very well return without having fought one. If it doesn't find its enemy, for the sake of the enraged folks back home, it will have to manufacture one." (p., 429, parentheses added) I would invite Mr.

Roy to remember the video telecast of the Taliban leader sitting piously at his royal desk in Afghanistan, telling the world in a canned and pompous statement that he was sorry for the attack in the U.S. And he hoped that the Americans found full justice through their court system against whoever was responsible. The arrogance, and evil of this group's head cleric, who would take to a public stage and display his lack of concern for the thousands of lives his organization snuffed.