web counter Media Lies: Common sense — good sense

Monday, February 21, 2005

PLEASE NOTE: Media Lies has moved.
The new address is http://www.antimedia.us/.
Please adjust your bookmarks.

Common sense — good sense

I have a friend who used to regularly correct me whenever I said "common sense" in the context of something most people should know. He would say, "You should say, 'Good sense', because whatever it is is not that common."

By my friend's definition, Alaa has good sense. His problem is, he can't figure out why good sense isn't more common.
So, the “Arab and Moslem World” is furious with U.S. for the actions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet, the peoples most directly concerned, i.e. the Afghans and the Iraqis are behaving in a very strange manner. The majorities in both these two victim countries of “American aggression” just do not seem to be sufficiently outraged. Of course, they said, what do you expect of “puppets” installed by the “occupiers”? But, Lo & behold, these very same puppets get elected by majorities in fair and honest elections, which probably, were the first of their kind in the history of the region. In Iraq, not even the bitterest enemies can deny the fact; and the worst accusation they can level against these elections is that of being of “incomplete legitimacy”, due to the non-participation of many of the Sunni minority. People brave death, bombs, suicide bombers and hardship to line up to vote despite the privations and sufferings of their daily life in one of the most impressive demonstrations of courage and defiance in history. Thousands of Iraqi security forces protect the voters and behind there are the American boys of the “occupation” forces sharply vigilant to protect the Iraqis. 60% of the eligible voters did vote, this figure would have risen at least to 80% had the conditions permitted. Thus, the majority of Iraqis chose to vote for these same “puppets” and “stooges” who “came with the American tanks”. This is peculiar behavior of a people who are supposed to be absolutely fed up and angry at the “occupation”, according to all the knowledgeable pundits and commentators all over the world. Wouldn’t this occasion have been very appropriate to demonstrate apathy and disapproval in a very easy, passive and quite risk-free manner simply by abstaining from the vote and staying home; especially when the opposite course was so full of danger? Indeed, as the rejectionists had demanded, it would have been appropriate to refuse to have anything to do with an event under the auspices of a hated "occupier".

We have an Iraqi saying: “When the Judge is satisfied, the Mufti has no business to object”. In other words, it is the positions of those directly concerned that matter, not that of others. But could the wise guys and passionate anti-this and anti-that people understand. It seems to me as simple and as evident as 1+1=2 ....
Alaa, my friend, you are not alone. Many of us are asking the same question these days.