What is the feeling in the so called third world about the bombing?
As in all matters, all depends on the glass you see the reality thru.
As in all matters, all depends on the glass you see the reality thru.
What is the feeling in the so called third world about the bombing?
As in all matters, all depends on the glass you see the reality thru.
That is. The point of view of the victim and his or her family is an absolute one. The pont of view of all english people is also a clear one, they have now 2 choices: 1) To stop the war, and help the world by changing their own country from what it is now and not by conquering other cultures arround the world. Or 2) They could follow Blair who says things like this:
"It is through terrorism that the people that have committed this terrible act express their values, and it is right at this moment that we demonstrate ours. I think we all know what they are trying to do -- they are trying to use the slaughter of innocent people to cower us, to frighten us out of doing the things that we want to do, of trying to stop us going about our business as normal, as we are entitled to do, and they should not, and they must not, succeed."
When Blair talks about "they", "those people" and "their values" any third world man or woman would think: "I could be 'that' people, I could have 'those' values". From here we see no diference betwen the "terrorist attack" and the "Blair-Bush attack". England has bombed more than 50 countries in las 100 years, some of them for years and years and some various times trough history. Almost the half of the third world people has memory of an english invasion to their country. India, many countries of America, most of africa and oceanía. Millions of people in asia.
Who started the war? For third world countries is clear.
The end doesent justify the means but war polarizes people, like in WWII the world now has 2 sides util the war is over. Elglish people have a key role in this farse. The end of one group of terrorist or the end of all terrorism, of all wars.
As in all matters, all depends on the glass you see the reality thru.
That is. The point of view of the victim and his or her family is an absolute one. The pont of view of all english people is also a clear one, they have now 2 choices: 1) To stop the war, and help the world by changing their own country from what it is now and not by conquering other cultures arround the world. Or 2) They could follow Blair who says things like this:
"It is through terrorism that the people that have committed this terrible act express their values, and it is right at this moment that we demonstrate ours. I think we all know what they are trying to do -- they are trying to use the slaughter of innocent people to cower us, to frighten us out of doing the things that we want to do, of trying to stop us going about our business as normal, as we are entitled to do, and they should not, and they must not, succeed."
When Blair talks about "they", "those people" and "their values" any third world man or woman would think: "I could be 'that' people, I could have 'those' values". From here we see no diference betwen the "terrorist attack" and the "Blair-Bush attack". England has bombed more than 50 countries in las 100 years, some of them for years and years and some various times trough history. Almost the half of the third world people has memory of an english invasion to their country. India, many countries of America, most of africa and oceanía. Millions of people in asia.
Who started the war? For third world countries is clear.
The end doesent justify the means but war polarizes people, like in WWII the world now has 2 sides util the war is over. Elglish people have a key role in this farse. The end of one group of terrorist or the end of all terrorism, of all wars.
e-mail:
Comments
Display the following 11 comments