NP? re Manifesto

[Doug Millison]

This article responds to the "manifesto" and provides a link to it:

http://www.counterpunch.org/delkhasteh1.html

"The most shocking oversight of this letter is that its signatories fail to
question the sincerity of the American government's mission to 'fight
terrorism,' even though it is obvious that the goals and means of this
so-called war on terrorism are completely incompatible. This is naive, at
best. One does not need to be an expert in politics, terrorism, or
revolution (as many of the people are) to realize that the war against
terrorism does not require a a staggering annual budget of $380 billion, or
to know that spending $10 billion to inseminate lies into the media is not
aimed at fighting terrorism, but at manipulating public opinion into
supporting the idea. It does not take an expert analyst to realize that the
US government, devoid of real solutions to the chronic and worsening
socio-economical problems of American society, has used the war to
legitimize and detract attention away from itself. It has every interest in
continuing to do so. No wonder there is so little public debate that
addresses the actual context and causes of terrorism within and against the
US today.

We cannot defend freedoms by suppressing them, nor can we defend human
rights by violating them. The American government has aggressively violated
many rights of many humans in its war against terrorism.  [...] Perhaps the
most disturbing aspect of this letter is that its signatories consciously
legitimize the murder of innocents, so long as it is accompanied by the
murder of combatants. They argue that 'within strict limits, it can be
morally justifiable to undertake military actions that may result in the
unintended but foreseeable death or injury of some non-combatants.' In
practice, this translates into a green light for the murder of innocent
people. Here again we observe that despite their claim to struggle for
justice, the signatories do not believe in the universality of human
rights. Such a statement indicates that they are far more faithful to the
principle that the "goal justifies the means". This principle, however, is
in total violation of the spirit and principle of the sanctity of human
life. It also reveals that power, and not freedom, form the core of their
guiding principles. [...] It is misleading for these intellectuals to
explain the contemporary anger among non- western people against the
American government by resorting to theories such as the 'clash of
civilizations.' Civilizations do not clash but interact, exchanging
knowledge and information. [...]"