mumbai madness?

I watched with a mixture of fury, distress and helplessness the footage yesterday on BBC and CNN on the blasts in Mumbai, trying in a crazed desperation to reach a cousin of mine who commutes, like millions of mumbai-ites do, on the west bound city trains.

as the hot, molten fury flowed through my youthful veins, i could do nothing but cry at the heartlessness of people, who would willingly kill thousands for a semblance of what they perceive as religious liberation and justice. These people think naught of the justice and fairness a widowed bride would be crying for, nor the searing pain of a mother for the son she lost.

but then the lava eventually hardens, and becomes fertile with thought - what these people are fighting for.

you see, as a race, we humans can be very manipulative. we have created languages to express ourselves, and used words in those languages to confuse each other. we say things we dont quite mean, and we often have different meaning for these words anyway.

so when we label such attacks as terrorsts attacks, we forget to think about the essence of what were arguing about - these people fight fo freedom and liberation. they are fighting to be acknowldged for who they are and the vlaues they stand for. it is not impotant what those values are, as we are naught to judge the virtue of one value over another. is the fact that they think its worthy enought fight for. is this not the most basic and fundamental of human desires? is this not what we all aim to do? bylines in newspapers, the grammies, report card day at school - all this is an answer to a simple desire to be known and acknowledged. and in that knowledge, to be free.

we label these fighters as terrorists when they fight for liberation, but revere them as statesmen when they succeeed. perhaps it is oversimplifying things a little bit - i would never put Nelson Mandela, the MOST famous freedom fighter of our time, on the same page as the people who committed these massacres - but it is fine discerning line that separates the two that I am worried about. Nelson Mandela used the force of his presence and Gandhi used the force of the guilt he inspired. I have nothing but respect for these two leaders, but it is important we see that the essence of what they fought for is the same. it is only the manner in which they did it, and how specific their end goal was. Castro did what he did becasue he wanted Cuba - what did Osama really want? Do we really know, and do we really care?

and even then, all this can be turned into a matter of mistaken perception. we all know what the IRA did, and we all shudder in memory of their modus operandi. But some branches of the United States government refused to label members of the IRA terrorists, despite the violent methods used againt Britain.

I am not saying these terrorsts are correct in thier actions, nor am i in support of all this mayhem. its just that the value judgement we have made, the 'political expense' of dealing with the terrorists' laments, has resulted in a human cost we can never put a price tag on.

these people are figting in indignation of something they dont have - why are none of us finding out what that is?