I'm not sure what the Times said, but my experience of New Yorkers is actually quite nuanced- far less bloody-minded than many outside the city reacting more to the symbolism of the attack than the reality of suffering.
That's pretty much what the piece stated.
I was at the mass meeting on Wednesday of various left folks - a large group wanted a firm statement of principle that those who committed the crime should be brought to justice only based on international law. This was rejected by the left faction who said that since international tribunals would be dominated by the US, promoting such an option should be rejected. So any demand for justice was taken off the table as undermining "unity."
Typical. I understand the "left" faction's concern, but it seems that nothing less than the fall of Western capitalism will appease them and prod them into positive action. By taking this stand, however, you allow a lot of criminals off the hook (like Kissinger who, until last week, was starting to feel some international heat) and make someone like Bin Laden into a "resister" rather than the theocratic thug he is.
If the Left says that justice is not possible, then those who are angry will choose vengeance. It's second best, but if the left refuses to fight for a positive alternative, then they make war all the more likely.
Agreed.
DP -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20010921/246cc80a/attachment.htm>