Eloise's Diary Entries Diary Navigation: Choose A Diary Entry -------------------- Latest Entry: 4/29/02 -------------------- 3/19/02 2/28/02 1/28/02 1/11/02 12/17/01 12/5/01 11/26/01 11/23/01 11/15/01 11/7/01 10/26/01 10/7/01 9/20/01 8/25/01 8/2/01 7/25/01 6/29/01 6/28/01 6/27/01 6/25/01 6/4/01 5/23/01 5/8/01 4/30/01 4/10/01 4/4/01 3/22/01 3/10/01 2/22/01 2/14/01 2/3/01 1/15/01 12/20/00 12/17/00 -------------------- Eloise's Introduction

November 7, 2001

Clarification, An Apology, A Retraction, and all that juicy stuff you've been waiting for…

It will come as no surprise to many of you, that my last entry (outlining my pacifist stance on war) has upset and offended a number of readers who follow these diaries. Those of you that know me well, will understand that I have always taken my diary writing pretty seriously, I have always tried my best to respect and connect with readers, and so I take it very seriously when I'm told my writing is offensive. I do sincerely apologise for that, it wasn't my intention to upset people, but you will understand that I cannot retract my opinion, nor do I regret having published it. But I would like the opportunity to try and smooth the waters my last entry seems to have lashed into a frenzy. I think that, at least, I can do.


Opening My Heart And My Mind….

I really want to open up a little more, allow you to peep into the recesses of my heart and mind and see the turmoil within. It might surprise you to realise I have vacillated wildly in my response to the 'War on Terrorism,' and my last entry didn't do justice to just how difficult I find it to take the pacifist path. I'm an emotional person, like many of you I have suffered through my fair share of personal grief and tragedies in this life, and as I watched the terrorist attacks of 9/11 unfold on my television screen I cried…and cried…for days. What happened that day was simply horrendous. Perhaps I didn't make that clear enough in my last entry. What happened on September the 11th was horrifying. I was shocked, appalled, and sickened to my very core as I watched my TV screen in utter disbelief.

I guess when I was writing my last entry, I took that as a given.

The reason I decided I HAD to try to take the pacifist stance, (and only after weeks and weeks of tremendous soul-searching), was because I didn't want to see or hear about ONE SINGLE OTHER innocent civilian dying. It was too heart-breaking, too terrifying, to unspeakable to imagine that the distress we were all feeling for those who lost their lives on 9/11, was about to escalate as more innocent people were endangered. I am devastated that we live in a world where innocent people can die so bloody-chillingly violently while we all stand around our television screens gaping, crying, and unable to stop it.

I have read a lot of impassioned messages, and talked to a lot of people who argue America HAS TO stand up and fight back, that to 'do nothing' would mean the terrorists will win, that they will continue to attack until nothing is left standing. Please realise that I understand that viewpoint. Of course something MUST be done, action MUST be taken. Yes. Of course. I don't disagree with that, but I do disagree with the WHAT that action should be.


Big Mouth Strikes Again…

In my last entry I wrote: "Fighting back is wrong."

I think a lot of people were probably upset and offended by that statement. So now, here, allow me to RETRACT IT. I am only human, and I guess I got carried away with the flow of my own rhetoric when I wrote that. I don't necessarily think fighting back is wrong. If we consider that 'fighting back' can be done in many varied ways, then what I am against is SOME of those ways. If passive resistance is considered a legitimate way of 'fighting back', than I am all for it. What I should've said, and what I will clarify now, is that it is my opinion that bombing Afghanistan is wrong. Well, maybe I won't even use the word 'wrong', after all, who the hell am I to dictate on moral grounds??!! So let me just say this: I don't see that the bombing of Afghanistan is NECESSARY in the coalition's 'war on terrorism'.

There. Now if only I were smart enough to clarify my opinions as clearly and carefully as that all the bloody time.

The 'fighting back is wrong' statement doesn't do justice to how complicated my position is with regard to the 'war on terrorism', and it incorrectly gave the impression that I expected the USA to sit on her bruised and battered hands and do nothing. That is not what I meant. Accept my apologies for being a sloppy editor and an impassioned writer who allows the flow of rhetoric to sometimes swamp her real meaning. If you knew me in person, you would know that I am infamous for shooting off at the mouth and firing myself in the leg. Just one of my many foolish traits I'm afraid.


What does it mean to 'Turn The Other Cheek'?

It may disappoint some of you when I say that even though I retract the 'fighting back is wrong' sentence, I wouldn't change or retract any other opinions I voiced. I would like the chance to CLARIFY some of them, as I think they were sometimes misunderstood by some readers, perhaps because they were poorly defined, but I found nothing else in my text that glaringly misrepresented me. Now forgive me, I wouldn't normally bore you with all this crap, but I do think it's important - for the sake of my reputation as a writer and thinker - and in an effort for us all to reach mutual respect and understanding - that I go into these points and clarify my position a little better. I promise, a Pixie-packed entry will follow hot on the heels of this one, to bring us all back to the day-to-day living of life in Toddlerland, so bare with me or desert me as you see fit. (I certainly wouldn't blame anyone for fiddling with their mouse buttons about now!)

In my last entry I made reference to Christ's vision that we "turn the other cheek."
This, I was surprised to discover, deeply offended a number of readers, many of whom thought it was "insulting". I was actually quite shocked by this reaction, and it gave me cause to search deep in my heart and mind to try and understand it better. I guess I was shocked because it was Christ's vision I was referring to, and I guess I assumed everyone, whether Christian or not, agreed that Christ's teachings were a valid point of reference in troubled times. Personally I would far rather turn to spiritual teachings to try and guide my judgement through these troubled waters, than to turn to the rhetoric of politicians.

From a Christian perspective I understand that "turn the other cheek" means this: to have faith in God's infinite power, so much so, that you don't need to take justice into your own hands. God has the final say over right and wrong, and God is the ultimate (and perhaps the only legitimate) hand of justice.

I am not a Christian, but I guess I am realising that I am taking a very spiritual perspective on the state of world events, and from that perspective I found I was unable to move past Christ's vision of "turning the other cheek." What wisdom lies behind those words, is what I found myself constantly wondering?

To me, 'turning the other cheek' means to take the path of humility. In my heart I feel that is a much safer path than one lead by pride. What does it mean to be humble? I think we have lost touch with this virtue in modern times, and much to our detriment. Christ talks about humility a lot, and I think humility is a fundamental spiritual teaching. To be humble means you don't see yourself and your own needs as paramount….a position that could, quite frankly, revolutionise the world.

"Turning the other cheek' also implies you can rise above instinctual responses to life, responses usually dictated by the negative emotions of anger, jealousy and fear. It is my belief that these three emotions cause ALL the trouble in the world. If we could rid ourselves of these emotions we might just be able to attain peace on earth. No decision, no path of action that is EVER motivated by either anger, jealousy, or fear, will ever be right and just; it will never be a solution that leads to peace and harmony and the greater good of all people. If you were to 'turn the other cheek' you would have to rise above your anger and the desire to retaliate. It would also require us to rise above the fear that the attacker will continue to strike if you don't retaliate. That position is generated by fear, not necessarily reality.

"Turn the other cheek" means you refuse to 'buy into' the attacker's agenda. If you refuse to play by his rules he can never win.

For me, 'turning the other cheek' means you choose the path of passive resistance over the path of brute force. Brute force can never achieve real justice, because it simply means the stronger person wins.

These are just a few of my thoughts on "turning the other cheek".


War, What Is It Good For?

A lot of people think that the USA must fight back against the terrorist attack. If we accept that yes, indeed, fighting back is necessary, then the next step is to ask yourself: what WAY of fighting back is going to achieve your aims?

I don't think people realise there are a lot of different options when it comes to fighting back. Bombing Afghanistan is simply one of the numerous options, and one I believe we should seriously question. If one of your aim's is to seek justice, then I ask you: why are you bombing Afghanistan? The people who perpetrated the crime against your country are DEAD! The 'real' criminal's died in those planes. Apart from them, it is purported that Osama Bin Laden was the 'mastermind' behind the attacks (and some experts still question the validity of this claim, instead pointing the finger at Saddam Hussien). Whether or not this is true, it needs to be verified, and to do that Bin Laden needs to be caught and questioned. Fair enough. So why then, is the coalition now involved in a bloody and protracted war against the Taliban??????

Can't you see how sidetracked this is getting? For all we know the Taliban had no direct connection with the terrorist attacks of 9/11, except that the so-called 'mastermind' of the attacks has trained a number of terrorist's in that country. Meanwhile nobody really has any idea WHERE Osama Bin Laden is. And furthermore, I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that anyone is seriously considering the real possibility that Saddam Hussien is the real 'mastermind' behind this attack? I read recently that the hijackers put on scarlet headscarves, as Shiites do when about to die in a jihad. Bin Laden is not a shiite, he's a Sunni, their mortal enemy. How do we reconcile this information?

And so the usual injustice of war is taking place…again. The innocent civilian's of Afghanistan, people who have had NOTHING to do with the terrorist attack of 9/11, people who have been suffering through the repression imposed by the Taliban regime, not to mention severe drought and poverty, are now being BOMBED by coalition forces. If the irony and agony of this fact is lost on you then you must have a heart of steel. The irony of this position hurts me profoundly. It hurts me JUST as much as the injustice of 9/11. Perhaps more so, because this time it is 'my' government, 'my' troops, who are perpetrating these crimes. And to my mind it is a CRIME to hurt or kill innocent Afghani civilians. It is murder. What else can it be when the people dying had NOTHING to do with the 9/11 attacks? I mean let's face it, they didn't even ELECT the Taliban regime who allowed the terrorist's to train in their country. The Afghani's are as innocent as you can get. They are lambs to the slaughter. We now have blood on our hands.

War doesn't win. It has never been the 'solution' it is purported to be. The first world war lead DIRECTLY to the second world war. During the second world war Hilter was defeated, but the real 'evil' behind Hilter's actions was not. 'Ethnic cleansing' continued to breed on the planet, because we never dug out the real ROOTS of the second world war: racism. Hilter is gone, but look what happened in the former Yugoslavia in the 1990's: the same shit all over again, just a different ethnicity is being slaughtered this time round. And it will recur again, and again, and again, until we come up with REAL SOLUTIONS. War is not a real solution. It might get rid of one problem, one person, suppress one country, but the same ugly forces will rear up somewhere else, all over again. The 20th century was just one long series of wars…it was ugly, horrific, insane at times. And now look at where we are at the start of the 21st century: surprise, surprise, we're at war again! But this time the rules have changed: this time the perpetrator's have no borders, have no country, they hide among us, they have nothing to lose. And do you know what it will take to win this war? It will require that every single potential terrorist on the face of the planet must be unearthed and suppressed. How bombing Afghanistan is achieving this end defies my slow brain. On the contrary, logic tells me that bombing Afghanistan is more likely to breed more terrorism, not uproot it.


So, I hear you asking, How Do We Fight Back?

1. We need to pull our head out of the clouds. Terrorist threats are real. We need to protect ourselves. Improving internal security is far more likely to prevent a future terrorist attack than bombing the Afghani's.

2. The united nations coalition against terrorism needs to be strengthened. All countries involved must beef up their intelligence agencies, and track and freeze any financial transactions connected to terrorist organisations.

3. Undertake covert operations to infiltrate world wide terrorist networks. They need to be disbanded from the inside out.

4. Special forces operations could be considered to dismantle known terrorist camps, and to try and bring Osama Bin Laden to justice.

5. A long-term strategy needs to be developed to improve relations within and between countries of the middle east. Close attention needs to be paid to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. A lasting solution to this conflict MUST BE FOUND: the entire peace of the planet depends upon it.

6. America has a major PR job on it's hands. If it can't improve it's reputation within Arab countries then it remains in danger.

7. We need to take global responsibility for the poor, downtrodden and neglected nations of the world. Between 1992-1998 world aid to developing countries dropped by $88 billion US. We cannot allow this neglect to continue. Desperate people will be pushed to desperate measures to draw attention to their plight. The breeding ground of terrorism will always be poverty, exploitation, and ignorance. We must feed the starving, educate the many, and demand ethical and environmentally sustainable trade.



Yes, I want to change the world. I have a vision of what the world 'could' be, and the more events in the world conspire to compromise peace, the stronger I will hold to my ideals. Someone has to believe we can be better, greater, more peaceful and prosperous; if the torch is not held high how else will we find our way out of the quagmire?


Best wishes to everyone,
Eloise.