The Verdict is out. Tahawwur Rana is NOT guilty of the Mumbai attack of 26/11. He had only provided material support.
A nice knockdown argument. One may sell, even give away an AK 47 and be perfectly innocent of an assault with the weapon. The intention was to sell or give away the weapon, and had nothing to do with the use to which it was put.
One who sold the weapon, or the one who gave “material support” is only following his calling; perversity is the domain solely of the end-user!
Interesting!… how logic is a subtle slave.
My logic says Osama was not guilty of 9/11 or any of the other acts imputed to him. He only provided material support; besides intellectual, strategic and ideological support. He had nothing to do with the end-use of these inputs. After all, he did not personally supervise , or carry out any of these acts, did he? Pakistan and Islamic Jihadi groups are quite right in questioning and condemning the US Drone attacks in the interiors of sovereign foreign lands, leading ultimately to the planned execution of Operation Osama. How Barak Obama’s logic enabled him to justify the out-of-court verdict that Osama was guilty, is slightly mysterious. Perhaps unquestionable power confers superiority on questionable logic. The uncertain status of India’s power allows it only to express its disappointment, not question the logic of a US Jury.This is the ambiguous fate of India being neither Pakistan nor America in a world full of Jihadi Powers with considerable abilities to shape suitable logics.
India will not get access to Rana or Headley. A PM whose tremulous voice betrays India’s logical (and logistical) weakness, an extra-constitutional power-center whose ground-strength lies outside of India, and a people who expend all their energies in petty, mutually recriminative quibbling will ensure this.
Osama was guilty because a powerful US was attacked.Rana is not guilty because the attacked India is not powerful. Q.E.D.
No comments:
Post a Comment