Rescued Mother Tells of Hostages' Three Days of Hell in Russian School Gym

[hang a left]

Rescued Mother Tells of Hostages' Three Days of Hell in Russian School Gymnasium

Injured children are carried on a stretcher to a temporary hospital in Beslan, North Ossetia, Friday, Sept. 3, 2004. Commandos stormed a school Friday in southern Russia where hundreds of hostages had been held for three days, sending hostage-takers and their captives fleeing in a scene of chaos amid explosions and gunfire. (AP Photo/Musa Sadulayev)
09-03-2004 2:15 PM
By MIKE ECKEL, Associated Press Writer

BESLAN, Russia -- Holding up the corpse of a man just shot dead in front of hundreds of hostages at a Russian school, the rebel _ his pockets stuffed with ammunition and grenades _ warned: "If a child utters even a sound, we'll kill another one."

When children fainted from lack of sleep, food and water, their masked and camouflaged captors simply sneered. In the intolerable heat of the gym, adults implored children to drink their own urine.

Hours after escaping alive, a woman who had been taken hostage with her 7-year-old son and her mother spoke of three days of unspeakable horror _ of children so wired with fear they couldn't sleep, of captors coolly threatening to kill hostages one by one, of a gymnasium so cramped there was hardly room to move.

"We were in complete fear," said Alla Gadieyeva, 24, who spoke to an Associated Press reporter Friday as she lay collapsed in exhaustion on a stretcher outside a hospital. "People were praying all the time and those that didn't know how to pray _ we taught them."


http://sandiego.cox.net/cci/newsnational/national?_mode=view&_state=maximized&view=article&id=D84SDTRO0

[samtob]

1. Sick

For the love of anything decent, this is reprehensible.

Now this is a woman that went through it, describing what happened at the hands of the terrorists, not someone on the outside making presumptions.

I will say it again, my first gut response as a mother of children this age, I wish for a painful demise for the terrorists.

Even the children who survive will live with this for many many years to come. Just breeding more hatred....what good did it do these heartless %@$#$#s??

Nauseating.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

2. Let me ask you a question...

...is that any different from what we've done by bombing Afghan and Iraqi civilians, including women and children?

How much hate do you think that will generate toward Americans over the next several generations?

Do you hope for the same demise to overtake those that ordered the attacks on the Afghan and Iraqi civilians, and continue to do so to this very day?

By the way, I hold the very same people responsible for the dead and mangled American troops who were ordered into the Middle East under false pretenses.

And yes, I also have children...one of whom may be drafted when Congress passes pending legislation authorizing the draft early next year.

Just curious, but what do you suppose made those terrorists in Russia do what they did? Do you think it just happened out of thin air? What do you think the Russians have been doing to the families and friends of the terrorists?

IMHO, none of this crap is justified.

[nodehopper]

3. does not make it any less sick.

I hate these terrorist apologist arguments. We are monsters, and so are they. But it's also an individual choice. No matter what would be done to me, I would never kill someone's child. That does not free me from my complicity in the narrative of the Empire whose privilege I enjoy, but ascribing everything to historical conditions takes away human agency and individual choice.

[LondonAmerican]

4. Hear, hear!

I get really sick of terrorist apologist arguments too.

As if these monsters were mere machines who had no control over their actions, as if they did not KNOW the pain and suffering they are causing to people they KNOW are innocent.

[HuckleB]

5. Where's the apologist argument?

Some of us just wonder why we don't see such vehemence when atrocities are committed by the US or by Russia, for that matter.

The condemnations should be the same. Why are they not?

[eric_schafer]

6. it seems like you are trying to hijack this thread

if the original poster wanted to make a statement on comparative terrorism, i'm sure they would have.

out of respect for the person who started this topic, could you please start a different thread on the topic you wish to discuss?

[HuckleB]

8. Hijack the thread?

Thanks for the laugh. If you have something to say about what I posted, please do. If not, please ignore my posts.

[eric_schafer]

19. glad I brought some sunshine to your day :)

No need to be antagonistic. I was addressing the point that you weren't talking about the same subject as the original poster. That's what I meant by "hijacking the thread".

I'm not interested in ignoring anybody's posts here, that's why I visit the board.

[Sterling]

20. You seem new so I am sure everyone understands

Why you don't seem to understand how DU works. I don't think we need you telling us what is ok to discuss either. The mods don't even do that much. Just chill out and take part in what you like and stay out of what you don't.

[arcos]

7. I think there has been ample condemnation of such things here on DU...

even when the USA has done it. True, this probably doesn't hold true for a lot of people, but here at DU it does.

[HuckleB]

10. Sorry, I haven't seen it in regard to Chechnya.

Meanwhile I have seen tons of Islamophobia and out-of-context statements ranting about Muslims and Chechens in general, whenever something like this happens. Sorry, but where are all the long threads and discussions and condemnations about Russian atrocities in Chechnya? Please refer me to them. I haven't seen them.


FYI --

http://www.ccharm.org/news/article30.htm

AND


http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1213034,00.html

AND

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1296220,00.html

AND

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,859806,00.html

AND

http://www.mosnews.com/feature/2004/09/01/terror.shtml

AND

http://www.hrvc.net/articles/kuhner.htm

AND

http://www.hrvc.net/articles/zbrzezinski.html

AND

http://www.hrvc.net/west/12-10-03.htm

AND

http://www.hrvc.net/articles/koshmel.html

AND

http://www.hrvc.net/articles/osgood.html

AND

http://www.hrvc.net/articles/putley.html

AND

http://www.hrvc.net/articles/boston.html

AND

http://www.theoathbook.com/op-ed.php

and on and on and on...

[arcos]

16. I have to admit I've seen little at all about Chechnya here...

I was mostly talking about US atrocities and war crimes

[HuckleB]

55. Stories about Russian atrocities have been posted, by myself and others.

And the threads die like rocks falling to the ground, as if no one could give a rip. This is why I see such a disconnect, when something like this occurs. Yes, this deserves the most vehement condemnation possible, by all of humanity. But so does what Russia has done to Chechnya, though that doesn't happen, even here at DU.

I guess I'm just left to wonder why.

[vincent_vega_lives]

29. So I guess those children got what they deserved

huh?

[HuckleB]

54. Please grow up.

No one is saying that. Please get off your high horse.

[nodehopper]

25. Well, I express equal vehemence towards both. My condemnations are

equivalent. But anyone who fails to condemn ANY act like this by ANY nation or guerilla coalition is a terrorist apologist. if you do not condemn this, you are no better than Bill O'Reilly or Michael Savage. Understanding and combatting historical conditions that produce and create terrorism isn't the same as asking "well, what would YOU do if this was done to you" as if it was any excuse for murdering 200 children. What would I do? Like I said, no matter what was done to me or my family, I would never harm an innocent child.

[HuckleB]

57. No one is failing to condemn this act.

However, many on these boards now condemning this have chosen to ignore the stories about Russian atrocities posted here, as those threads drop like rocks.

There is definitely a disconnect about terror in the Caucasus here at DU. Why do you think that is?

[AP]

11. What's the difference if you do it with an army or like this?

If the Chechens had an army, they'd go to war with Russia. They don't, so they do it this way. (And I'm presuming it was done by chechens.)

[nodehopper]

26. I don't CARE what kind of military formation it is. They killed children.

I understand how terrorism is produced, but it also takes a certain kind of character to be able to murder children. And I don't want to hear anything about how these un-people are not monsters. They knew what they were doing. And while traditionally armies care little for civilian casualties, they don't actively target them. This is a whole other level of amorality.

[AP]

41. They're the same kind of monsters the US is and France and every other...

...country that has dropped bombs on civilians and killed children.

This point is made very clear in the movie, The Battle of Algiers.

[nodehopper]

43. it's not like I was rooting for anyone in Battle of Algiers

I watching it with interest and deep sadness.

I just want to point out that these people, individually are monsters. Not just the policies of the countries and the leaders, but these people. They CHOSE to be monsters.

[AP]

56. The Battle of Algiers actually does want you to take sides, but that's not

really the point here (and, by the way, remember the last scene...when they blow up the house...and one of the four people in the attic is a litte boy?).

I'm not sure what your distincition is, by the way, between individuals making a choice to be monsters, and political leaders or the police or soldiers making that same choice.

[Demonaut]

32. you don't fuck with children, you never fuck with children

anyone who does deserves the worst that can possibly be given.....never make apologies for this kind of brutality, never condone the attacks or make comparisons to what these evil fucks did to children to what we do in error.

[mike_c]

35. you might be interested in the truth....

Let's start with "Revealed: coalition forces imprison Iraqi children (1 Aug 04)"

http://radiofreeusa.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=3493

Here's another favorite:

Unmasked: The War Against Iraqi Children

http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=2422

Nothing "in error" there.

Here's compassion in action:

Burned Iraqi children turned away

http://www.refusingtokill.net/USGulfWar2/burnediraqichildrenturnedaway.htm

And let's not forget a few pictures:

[Demonaut]

36. I've seen this before, I know it exists but it still does not mean we can

justify these actions EVER! mike you've posted great threads in the past but opologies for kid killers is never justified.

[AP]

42. I'm not clear what your argument is. Nobody is "opologizing" for them.

I think the point is that this is no different than when children are killed from 15,000 feet or by an army. It's not more or less legitimate. It's the same thing. All war is bad. But you're a hypocrite if you are more outraged by this than if it were done by an army, or if you think it's "tactical" when it's done by people in uniforms and barbaric when it's not.

[Demonaut]

49. call me a hypocrite for being more outraged when children are the intended

targets.

[geek tragedy]

84. Some people don't think that intent matters.

For them, a dead body means somebody is a murderer. No differentiation is allowed--that's too difficult.

[geek tragedy]

83. Do you have solid evidence that the US military consciously chooses

to target children? Are there memos talking about the best way to murder as many children as possible? Of course, there are the Abu Ghraib/My Lai incidents, and anyone who intended to target women and children for murder or rape or torture belong in the same category as the beasts who carried out what happened in Beslan.

It's called intent/motive, and it does play a role in most people's ethical criteria. This is why manslaughter is considered less reprehensible than premeditated murder. It's why bombing German cities that had actual military value (unlike Dresden) during WWII is distinguishable on a moral level from gassing people in Auschwitz.

It's not hypocricy. It's called having something other than an utterly simplistic and reductive moral theory.

[mike_c]

52. I was responding to your implication that our military's actions...

...in Iraq were somehow not comparable to the Chechnyan support action in North Ossetia. WE have killed more innocent children since the invasion of Irag than the hostage takers killed (or put into harms way and caused to be killed), and that doesn't even begin to address the prior deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children under the economic sanction.

Demonaut, I'm as sickened and outraged about this as you are, but unfortunately there ARE parallels between what was done in North Ossetia in the Chechnyans' names and what has been done in Iraq in our names.

[AP]

38. I agree -- whether it's an army or otherwise

[Cronus Protagonist]

81. FYI - the US funded the IRA who also blew up busloads of children

Don't think the US doesn't pay for and condone this type of operation when it's pervieved in the US as "freedom fighting".

The IRA specifically targeted children for years and killed them with money from donation jars in Irish pubs in the US, just to cite one example.

[Aidoneus]

44. on these points..

a) by the best reports, it was not Chechens in this. Kitaeb ash-Shuhadah Riyadh as-Salahin may have had a hand (I will wait to see if there is anything said, and will not believe it until there is), but strictly speaking there is no evidence of actual Chechens in there (despite the claim, which is opposed by more signifigant others).
b) the Chechen resistance indeed has an army, a good army, and has taken on one of the most powerful armies of the world for well over a decade and continues to inflict losses on the enemy occupation forces. Just a day or two back, 9 Russian soldiers were killed as 2 military convoys in the western outskirts of Grozny were attacked. That is a regular feature across the whole length of the land at any point.

[AP]

60. I agree. I'm not ready to conclude that it was Chechens. I would not be

surprised if had something to do with trying to get Putin out of office as punishment for nationalizing Lukoil.

[sistersofmercy]

71. Hi AP! Here's the difference.

Doing it with an army has a distance from the horrid outcome, the unspeakable process is generally not viewed by the attacker until it is finished. On the other hand, the terrorists who inflict such atrocities in this manner imo are a special breed of cold, heartless killers, to look on with apathy as children are famished and drinking their urine is unfathomable in my book and there is no cure for those who would commit such cruelty to children. These terrorists will never have an ounce of sympathy from me.

[BrendaStarr]

46. Russia has been bombing and killing in Chechnya

Violence breeds violence.

[samtob]

14. Horrid

Media,

Where in my post did I indicate I think the killing of ANY child is forgivable??? It just is not there!

Clearly this is a dangerous cycle only to worsen by this event.

"Just curious, but what do you suppose made those terrorists in Russia do what they did?"

Nothing MADE them do it they chose to take that action. Using the excuse of man that beats his wife because she MADE him do it does not fly.

If your question was, what do I suppose made them angry enough to do what they did? Well it is well known what they have been through, and I am in no way discounting the deaths of their children and innocent civilians. BUT, it DOES NOT justify this action...just as the Russians would NOT be justified by dropping bombs on more cities in Chechnya in retribution.

"Do you hope for the same demise to overtake those that ordered the attacks on the Afghan and Iraqi civilians, and continue to do so to this very day?

Let me state my position more clearly, anyone who intentionally kills children, and laughs at their misery is evil, I do not care what the motivation is. Maybe it is just a mom thing or maybe it is just me, but as I have been watching this unfold, I could not help but imagine if I was in the same position. Be it inside the school with my kids, or outside waiting to recover their body, I, PERSONALLY would want to rip the heart out of the one responsible for killing my innocent child. Would I actually do it? I don't know, I have never been put in that position thank god.

I think war blows!! I hate it. I have always felt if government officials fail to come to a resolution, they are the ones that should fight, I mean put them in a room with the weapon of their choice. You see, it would never happen, they would actually resolve the problem!

"IMHO, none of this crap is justified."

I am not sure where you came to the conclusion that I do!


Correct me if I am wrong, but I assume you are not indicating this action by the terrorists was in any way warranted.

[MudBug]

22. Yes

Yes it is.

[Dover]

9. Of course no mention of all the children the U.S. and Coalition troops

have killed in Iraq and Afghanistan! Where IS the outrage for those murders?

[MacCovern]

12. comparing apples and oranges

The public knows that the takeover of a school by terrorists,
and the sad unintentional deaths of children due to military
action is vastly different and should not be compared.

[Dover]

15. A very thin and weak distinction imo

Many in Iraq consider US the terrorists and invaders. Civilian deaths AREN'T unintentional if you know they are there and proceed with indiscriminate bombing and shooting anyway. Several children have been shot point blank in Israel too.

[vincent_vega_lives]

31. indicriminate?

US soldiers and Marines endanger themselves and their brethan to avoid civilian casulties. But then why am I wasting my breath on telling someone who has her mind made up regarding the US baby killers?

[Yupster]

37. Indiscriminite bombing?

We're bombing individual buildings.

You sound like we're fire bombing cities like Tokyo 1945. That's what we could do. We're not.

[mike_c]

53. individual buildings with women and children in them...

...and do Kufa and Najaf look like they were subjected to "precision" bombardment? Recent reports from Fallujah are of "neighborhoods" being targeted. By definition, neighborhoods tend to be populated by families and children.

[LanternWaste]

27. I have reason to doubt...

I have reason to doubt that the mothers and daughters, fathers and sons of innocent, killed Iraqi civilians make the same distinction... unless you were implying that only Americans make the comparison-- which would be odd.

[BrendaStarr]

47. Nope

Only those who tend to believe every little word that comes out of the mouth of Bush.

Sorry, but it's true.

I thought people were smarter than that here.

The news media has been taught to be dispassionate partly because the right wingers count any caring and sensitivity to be liberal (and they are right!), but probably more importantly because for your news people to hint something might be truly wrong with Bush's glorious war would make people feel depressed and/or worried about what is happening in the world.

And depressed and worried people don't go out and spend their last buck on some new fangled gadget or clothes. Therefore you have the advertisers putting a break on any kind of compassion from news people.

So you just have to develop your own.

And I understand. I almost felt the same way during Reagan's and Bush 41's terms when they sent the bombs out to kill women and children. It wasn't so much an acceptance of the rightness of war deaths as such a helplessness! The media does not listen to us because we don't pay their paychecks like business does. And in '91 even, well I didn't have INTERNET access for sure, what ever anyone else had.

Since I have had it and discovered the mixed message boards, I've been able to fight back against that horrible idea that civilian war deaths are okay. Especially for a war that is not absolutely necessary!

[Disturbed]

13. Outrage!!!

I condem these tactics and those of the US Neo Fascists in Iraq and Afghanistan. It seems that some people become so desperate and hardened that even children are the enemy and are granted no mercy. It also seems that children were being used to strike terror in the hearts and minds of the citizens of a country that is oppressing another country. I try to understand the people that are so committed to their struggle of independence but cannot remotely condone this type of tactic. Seems it only brings about aghorance to the "freedom fighters", as I am sure they view themselves as.

[vincent_vega_lives]

30. Murder?

Murder involves intent.

In Iraq and Afghanistan the fanatics endanger children by deliberately using them as sheilds because they know the US will not delibertely target them.

[Demonaut]

33. they were never intentional , these fucks targeted KIDS

if we actively targeted children we would rightly be condemned, every child that dies due to our bombs is a tragedy but those pilots dont drop bombs on schools full of children.

[HuckleB]

59. The Russians target Chechnyan children all the time.

I've never seen you post on any of the threads about those atrocities. Why is that?

[SOS]

61. Allawi's CIA funded exile group

bombed a school bus full of children to demonstrate the CIA "capability" against Hussein.
He also bombed a full movie theater.
Here's a Sunday Herald link to child torture in Abu Ghraib:
http://www.sundayherald.com/43796

[mike_c]

62. yes they do....

Iraq Says Western Planes Bomb School, 8 Hurt

http://www.geocities.com/iraqinfo/index.html?page=/iraqinfo/sanctions/sarticles2/bombschool.html


Here's a UNICEF report that include attrocities against Iraqi children and a reference to bombed schools in Falluja:

"The security situation is exacerbating the already difficult situation for children in Iraq. Since the conflict began, hundreds of children have been killed and thousands injured. Schools are sometimes closed and many parents keep their children at home out of fear that their children would be hurt or kidnapped on their way to school.

Yet despite fears of violence and kidnappings, many children still make the journey to school, with parents or other family members escorting them to try to ensure their safety. In Fallujah, when schools were bombed, arrangements were quickly made so that children could take their exams at other schools.

But violence in Iraq is a daily reality – throughout the country. Last April, more than one hundred children were reported killed in Fallujah and Basra as a result of fighting – some on their way to school. Children are often killed or maimed by landmines and unexploded ordnance as they are “attracted” by the sometimes colourful and curious designs.

“The children of Iraq have suffered enough,” said Bellamy. “They have gone through three wars, twelve years of sanctions and live in extraordinarily difficult circumstances – often living in fear of violence.”

http://www.unicef.org/media/media_23085.html



Secondary School under Siege by US Forces

http://electroniciraq.net/news/1271.shtml

[Don Claybrook]

17. There are some reprehensible attitudes expressed in this thread

I will never be an apologist for the atrocities committed by the United States. I've been quite vocal about them since I've been an aware adult.

But that will never excuse this awful targeting of children. This Russian school seige was a truly disgusting event. Yes, the US has bombed lots of Iraqi and Afghan villages (along with Vietnam, Greneda, Panama, complicity in East Timor, complicity in Central and South America, etc, etc). And in those bombings, lots of innocent children have died, and this will always remain inexcusable.

But I think that we were indifferent to the children that we killed. That's bad enough in its own right, but this intentional targeting of children is at a whole new level, so far as I know. It most certainly fits into the category of pure terrorism, as I'm sure it has struck terror in the hearts of all of the citizens in Russia, and it's given the rest of us pause.

I'm anti-death penalty, but I did note with some grim satisfaction that some Russian citizens got hold of one of the attackers who was hiding under a vehicle in an attempt to escape. It didn't sound like there was much left of this animal, certainly not enough to prosecute.

A final thought: I'm supportive of independence for Chechnya. If these attackers were in fact Chechen, I'll never understand what they hoped to gain for their people by committing this atrocity. One would imagine that much of the Russian public is of a mind to throw lots more military hardware in the direction of Grozny.

And yes, I can see the parallels between what my own country has done and what has gone on in this situation. But this heinous atrocity deserves its own attention, without all of the "why don't you protest when we do it" stuff. Using every terrible situation as a political lever to point out just how bad the Bush Administration is becomes a little dehumanizing. If we can't stop for a moment just to consider how terrible a thing this act was, without trying to compare it to how bad Bush is, then we're giving away little bits of our humanity. And I won't be a party to that. I'll get back to excoriating the Bush Administration, as they so richly deserve, and you may even find me making an argument that the Chechnyan situation only got so bad in the first place because Putin knew he could get by with his own little atrocities because we were busy with ours under the auspices of fighting terrorism.

But...this horrible event stands on its own, and I'm taking a minute to call these subhuman filth attackers by their true names and hoping for a literal hell that I don't believe in just so that they can be housed there for an eternity.

Thank you

[MacCovern]

18. Well said Don!

Yes, it is bewildering to me how so many posters in this thread
dismiss this atrocity by comparing it to wrongs by other nations.
Although I cannot recall any other incident like this happening
ever!

Psychologically, the people who are so quick to ignore school
kids gunned down in the back by terrorists are using a coping
mechanism because it doesn't fit in with their slant on the
current situation in the world.

[yellerpup]

24. Timothy McVeigh deliberately targeted children in OKC

It has happened in this country, for no reason whatsoever.

[barb162]

66. I think his one and only target

was the federal government and the innocent little kids in that day care were "collateral damage" in his mind.

In this case these people (separatists or whatever they are) really did target kids to make their point.

What we don't know is if most of the people in Chechnya want to stay with Russia or not, do we?

[LanternWaste]

28. Tim McVeigh, David Koresh, Jim Jones...

Tim McVeigh, David Koresh, Jim Jones...

There's a litany of these same types of atrocities we can recount that happen here in this country. The only difference is we package it differently.

I kinda think that the people who are so quick to ignore the terrorism here in our own country are using a coping mechanism...

[samtob]

21. Well said

Thank you for it.

[antigone382]

23. Bravo!

Well stated, Don.

Has America been complicit, and even active, in the murder of innocent people, including children, at many points throughout its history? Yes; no one here is going to deny that--not to mention that most of us on DU *do* express our outrage about this "collateral damage" (a term which I despise), quite frequently.

However, specifically targeting children for an attack, and mercilessly denying them food, water, and other basic needs, while mocking their suffering, is a very different and far more perverse thing, and it deserves every ounce of outrage it gets. I'd say this IS definitely a unique and disgusting event, and I see absolutely nothing wrong with DUers who express their horror, without qualifying it or comparing it to the many horrors in which this nation has played a part. This is an event that transcends the political situation of the United States, IMHO.

DUers are very conscious of the bloodstains on our nation's hands, as a quick scroll through just about any of our discussion forums will show. There is no need to chastise anu of us just because we recognize incomprehensible evil in others as well.

[Demonaut]

34. Right On! Thanks for the post, Never excuse this Evil for our mistakes

it takes a heartless individual to justify this brutality.

[minkyboodle]

39. well said

Really Don, I can't tell you how much you have stated my exact feelings on this matter. Thanks for this post.

[Piperay]

40. TOTALLY agree

glad you said it.

[lostnfound]

48. Well put. nt

[philosophie_en_rose]

50. Well said.

I'm disgusted with the ease in which some can dismiss the pain and violence in this situation. We should never give up the responsibility of US actions in Iraq and elsewhere. However, the victims in Russia deserve more than "so what? it happens everywhere."

This is not about blame; it's about choice. No one deserves to be ten year old bombed by a country that doesn't know who you are. No one deserves to go to be a parent that is forced to decide which child to save. No one deserves to be stripped naked and photographed by US military perverts.

The terrorizing behaviors of US and foreign monsters are influenced by politics and personal history. And, there are situations when there is no choice or awareness about harmful actions. However, the Russian school is not one of those situations. Just as the atrocities committed in Abu Ghraib and other places were not unavoidable. At some point, it is one human being looking at another one and choosing to kill.

We are not the only monstrous people in the world.

[Don Claybrook]

51. even better-said

Thanks for your comments. I think you restated the case more articulately than I did. I guess it's easy to fall into the "yes, but..." camp as a progressive. I think it has something to do with those of us who are aware that the de facto internal image of the US as being the "guys in the white hats" is just wrong. When one becomes aware that we in the US can commit atrocities with the worst of them, one wants to evangelize, to spread the word about the way things really are. So when something like this school tragedy in Russia occurs, there's a natural tendency to say "yes, but what about the United States...".

I especially appreciated how you pared this whole thing back to its basic essence with "At some point, it is one human being looking at another and choosing to kill". I think that's the crux of the thing.

Thank you.

[HuckleB]

58. Wrong.

No one is excusing this event. Everyone here has condemned it.

Many of us who pay attention to the Caucasus and bring stories of the atrocities done by Russians there, including against thousands of children, are very much wondering why so many who ignore those stories are suddenly so up in arms about this one.

That is a legitimate question. You can't bypass it with a long post. Sorry.

[SOS]

63. Well said

The Russians have been crushing the Chechens since the late 19th Century.
In 1944 Stalin deported hundreds of thousands to Siberia under the false pretense of Nazi collaboration. Thousands of men, women and children died under horrific conditions.
Since 1994 the Russians have been astoundingly brutal towards the Chechens.
See Human Rights Watch for some details.
Nothing excuses what has happened in Belsan, but it is puzzling that when Russians massacre Chechens by the thousands there are no threads of outrage. It's not even mentioned on our junta media.
Imagine if Yeltsin, in 1991, had apologized for a century of mass murder, deportation and crimes against humanity and had given the region a measure of autonomy.
Most likely, none of this would be happening today.

[Don Claybrook]

64. Would you mind pointing out the wrong part for me?

I'll answer your question from a personal point of view. I don't ignore news of atrocities done by Russians. There, does that make you feel better?

I don't understand how you think I'm bypassing the question of ignoring Russia's atrocities. And I'm struggling to understand how you think that creating a "long post" is somehow a device by which to avoid an inferred question (one that I did address in said "long post".

I believe that the very nature of your question is also something I addressed in my post. While comparisons and contrasts with other events, other atrocities, may be valid on some level, I find it personally wrong-headed to, by definition, tie this horrific event to other horrific events. When you do that, it's clear that you have good intentions, that you want to magnify and bring attention to other atrocities that don't get as much reportage. But in so doing, you are unintentionally (I hope) trying to marginalize the sheer magnitude of this evil that has been committed. That's what happens when you draw comparisons--for comparisons are an attempt to leverage one thing above another. I suggest that a good and appropriate alternative would be to have a separate conversation about the atrocities that the Russians have foisted on the citizens of Chechnya. Then we can make some comparisons in the abstract. Meantime, I plan to keep my humanity intact by letting this one stand on its own. If you'd like, sometime later we can analytically diagram how violence begets violence, in the Caucuses, in Iraq, in other places.

Finally, I want you to know that there's no need to be sorry; I don't want for you to have to feel guilty and apologetic on my behalf.

Thanks.

[HuckleB]

65. I already pointed it out.

Why have I not seen your condemnations on any of the theads posted at DU about Russian atrocities?

These events are tied together with other events. You can't put history in a vacuum, no matter how horrific. Without ten years of constant Russian terror in Chechnya, do you think that these events would have occurred? Now, again, I'm not excusing them, but you can't put things in a vacuum, as you are attempting to do. That distorts the story, and distorts perception and history. I won't go down that road. I want to actually learn and see what can be done about this long and complex history, which now includes this horrible event. However, we won't learn jack if we try to sit back and put this event on a pedestal as separate from everything else. That would be a mistake, as it would be a mistake to ask why people who condemn this have failed to condemn what Russia has done in Chechnya here at DU.

[Don Claybrook]

68. I think I see where we're going

First, I rarely comment on DU anymore. I've been here since late 2001 and as far as I can recall, I may have commented on Putin's steamrolling of Chechnya once or twice, but that's about all. So I suppose that the answer to your question is that it's a numbers game: there are lots of bad things to comment on. Over the course of some 3000-odd posts, I've only managed to comment on Chechnya a couple of times. You are, of course, gifted enough to perceive that this does not mean I am in favor of, or indifferent to, the plight of the Chechnyans.

And now for the main response to your reply. You appear to be looking at this event from an analytical point of view. Right now, I'm focused on the emotion, on the horror of it all. As I've mentioned a few times now, this analytical dissection of current events in the region is appropriate, but for me, not right now. I didn't discuss Bush's incompetence in the period of September 11th through about September 18th, 2001. I was more concerned with the human side of that story. So maybe one day soon, I'll come knocking at your Caucuses think tank door to discuss how we should be giving more coverage to slain Chechens. But not now.

Do you not see how we're on the same side? You seem to have a great deal of anger about the marginalization of the Chechen atrocities. I can't blame you for that, but I would question why you want to lessen the magnitude of this latest story just to make a point.

Thanks.

[HuckleB]

70. Uhm, I'm focused on the emotion, too.

And it's connected, as is everything.

I have done nothing to lessen the magnitude of this story. That is what is incredibly wrong about your first post. Some of the things that have been said about the Chechen people as a whole as a result of this act cannot be ignored. Emotion is not an excuse for condemnations of a people as a whole, especially when the people in question have faced ongoing terror for ten years and those now condemning them have sat by in silence.

Simply, you made assumptions that you cannot make based on too little evidence. You used the term "reprehensible" for pete's sake. Sorry, but that was more than out of line and out of context of what I and others have posted.

Further, it's not my point that any one poster did or didn't comment about Russian atrocities, but the magnitude of the large threads about this atrocity in comparison to the threads about Russian atrocities that drop like rocks. I worry that this says a lot about what we pay attention to and buy into. And there is emotion in that, and it's emotion that I am entitled to, just as you and I are entitled to grieve and moan and wail about this atrocity. I am looking at this question from both an analytical and an emotional standpoint. My emotions do feel despair when I note that kidnapped, murderd and raped Chechen children don't get the same sympathy as kidnapped and murdered Russian children at DU. Should I hide this? Is that a reprehensible emotion?

Nevermind the apparent reality that -- since most people at DU ignore ongoing stories about Chechnya -- this is probably one of the few times that they might actually tune in to the whole tragedy, rather than simply one sick part of it. Now, that wasn't ever my intention in posting here. In fact, I just had that thought as I typed this. But nonetheless...

Enjoy your day.

[Don Claybrook]

73. one glaring fallacy, at least where I'm concerned

I never have, never will, condemn the Chechens as a whole. I condemn the filth that planned and carried out this attack. If that's the core of why my post was so wrong, then we'd have to start all over again, but with valid assumptions this time around.

Completely off-topic, but am I spelling "Chechens" correctly? Or is the usage wrong? Should I be using "Chechnyan"? I've been inconsistent with my usage, but it looks wrong any way I type it.

You enjoy your day also.

[HuckleB]

76. Interesting.

That wasn't what was necessarily wrong with your post, that's merely your stance. However, your post condemned those who posted about other atrocities occurring in Chechnya. And those people posted about those atrocities partially because others were condemning Chechens as a whole, and even when they weren't doing that they were making comments about how the Chechens, as a whole, had lost any right to world sympathy and advocacy because of this act.

I repeat that I have noted no poster at DU who does not condemn this act from the bottom of their being. Unfortunately, I have noted more than a few posters who have posted without condemnation of Russian atrocities, some even encouraging further acts in retaliation. I find that reprehensible and incredibly scary for too many reasons to go into here.

I have to go now, and I won't be back online for 12 days, so...

It's been nice discussing with you.

Cheers.

[Don Claybrook]

78. good day n/t

[LanternWaste]

79. I don't think that contrasting two events marginalizes either one

I don't think that contrasting two events marginalizes either one, I think that it, in fact, makes one or both easier to understand. However, if it does, could you explain to me precisely and specifically how it does? Is it an absolute or simply inference on the part of listener?

As far as I know, "Compare" means an examination of two or more items to establish similarities and dissimilarities-- implying an aim of showing relative values by bringing out characteristic qualities whether similar or divergent. That, in and of itself appears to me a fundamental method of more effective comprehension of an event or a thing.

:)

[Don Claybrook]

80. Many posts already covering this. Good day n/t

[LanternWaste]

82. But not the specific ways and means

But not the specific ways and means in which contrasting two events marginalizes either one-- that's the answer I'm looking for :)

[sistersofmercy]

74. Very well said, an excellent post, Don!

I wrote my reply to AP before reading your post, I think your's is better.

[4MoreYearsOfHell]

45. violence begets violence

that is one lesson to be learned here..

Even a repuke fiend of mine said "What drives whese people to do things like this?"

Address the underlying reasons...sit and talk - for as long as it takes...

Of Irish-American heritage, I watched as George Mitchell painfully sat through seemingly meaningless sessions to help overcome 800 years of hatred...

His patience won out, we have the Good Friday accords and a 10 year cease-fire by the IRA (not to mention partial disarmement) as a result.

BUT - There is never a reason to endanger children, for Christ's sake...

Thank whatever God you pray to that first and foremost on their mind was trading hostages for prisoners, and not the wanton slaughter that could have occured had they been in a truly suicidal mode, not unlike the assholes who attacked us on 9/11.

By the way, f*** the BFEE, and those of it's ilk...

PNAC/Diebold - 2004

[HuckleB]

67. Death toll rises to 340 at Beslan:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,2763,1297436,00.html


Botched operation was a disaster waiting to happen:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,2763,1297146,00.html

[HuckleB]

69. Now work begins to help child survivors overcome ordeal

http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,2763,1297167,00.html

[HuckleB]

72. Message by Chechen President Aslan Maskhadov to the people of Ossetia

Message by Chechen President Aslan Maskhadov to the people and the President of Ossetia-Alania
http://www.chechentimes.org/en/news/?id=21131

"Fathers, mothers, brothers and sisters of the children and adults, who were killed and injured during these tragic days. On behalf of the Chechen people and myself, I pesonally express to you our deep condolences and sympathy.

For understandable reasons, neither I nor my official representatives are able, to our great regret, to come to fraternal Ossetia in order to participate in the mourning ceremonies and to visit the injured. I have no doubts that you feel our solidarity and support. May the Most High give you patience and courage in this sorrowful hour!

..."

[TheLastMohican]

75. The wolf is feeling sorry for the sheep before eating it

[HuckleB]

77. If only the same could be said of Putin.

The only thing he feels sorry for is the possible loss of power.

[eridani]

85. Where these sick pukes come from

Can you say 'blowback,' boys and girls? I knew you could.

http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/0000000CA6CA.htm

This goes some way to explaining why today's terrorism seems so much more unrestrained and brutal than earlier political violence. Freed from responsibility to a distinct community, with little ties to national territory or political principles, today's roving terrorist has fewer constraints on his actions - as we witnessed so devastatingly in Beslan. It is because these groups are free-floating agents rather than rooted political actors, reflecting the kind of Western intervention that rejuvenated their fortunes in the 1990s, that they can execute what appear to be unthinkable acts. In the absence of conventional political structures that might define and direct a violent campaign, the new terrorists have little compunction about killing or injuring. As Jonathan Tucker of the Monterey Institute of International Affairs has argued, because these terrorists 'are not motivated by political ideology on the far left or right', they are more likely to be 'extremists...with an apocalyptic mindset' (14).

The Mujihadeen was created and financed by the right in the 1980s, by the Reagan administration and the Thatcher government, to take on the Soviets in the Afghan war of 1979 to 1992 - that last gasp of the Cold War. In the 1990s, the baton was passed to the left; Mujihadeen forces effectively became the armed wing of Western liberal opinion, moving across borders to fight what politicians and liberal commentators in the West considered to be 'good wars', from Bosnia to Kosovo and also in Chechnya. It was the internationalisation of local conflicts by Western governments that encouraged the internationalisation of the Mujihadeen, transforming what had been a specific Afghan-based phenomenon into an effectively global force.

The same politicians and commentators who applauded the interventions of the 1990s - some of whom wrote glowing accounts of the 'brave' and 'cool' Mujihadeen in Western newspapers during the Yugoslav and Kosovo wars (15) - are as shocked as everyone else by the Beslan school siege. But perhaps, as well as condemning those who attacked innocent children and their parents, they should also interrogate their earlier support for 'humanitarian intervention' and continuing support for Western interference abroad.