wouldn't it be more accurate to say that in the sudan, a very problematic regime is in power?
and that this particular situation is but one--and not a terribly significant one--example of this?
i say not terribly significant because, well, there's darfur. there's been a civil war. who the hell knows how many people have been massacred in these contexts?
that a nice school teacher from england is in jail because she let her class name a teddy bear muhammed is surreal, but it doesnt demonstrate anything--AT ALL---about islam in general.
and why would you advocate military action over this?
i dont remember seeing anything from you (or anyone else here, really) arguing that darfur was a massive human rights disaster that required international intervention?
the "community" almost addressed this question a couple years ago, but dodged it by deciding that darfur was "genocide-like" or "genocide-ish" but not genocide because that would have required action.
nothing about that: outrage about this.
i really do not understand your priorities, where they lay, what they are.
and i'm in no way condoning what is happening to this poor woman.
i just dont understand why her situation is more important than that of hundreds of thousands of human beings in darfur. for example.
please dont make me speculate as to why that is.
i really dont want to go down that route.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
Last edited by roachboy; 11-30-2007 at 02:32 PM..
|