, entitled The School Siege – Survivors’
Stories, was a film about the tragic events at Beslan in the week
before last, with contributions from survivors and participants. I
recorded the programme to observe the BBC’s language – particularly
their apparent trouble in recognising that those who murder and
terrorise unarmed civilians in the name of politics/religion/ideology
are terrorists rather than merely militants. The following are
chronological excerpts:
00’00” Presenter: In Beslan’s School Number One there were no
limits, no rules of war, children were the terrorists’ new weapons.01’00” Salimat Suleymanova (mother with five month old girl, both
released, and a seven year old boy who was killed): I personally
told him, “let at least the babies be released”, this is what I told
him, what else could I tell him, and the militant said “Pray to Allah,
pray to Allah”.02’00” Presenter: Now everyone knows about Beslan, it is
the place where terrorists put children on the front line.04’09” Presenter: As the children had prepared for school
about thirty members of a pro-Chechen terrorist group assembled in some
woods nearby, then they set off for Beslan10’10” Presenter: What was happening inside the school
gymnasium was worse than anybody could have imagined, not only were the
children hostages, but the terrorists who had captured them were
deliberately filming a video of their actions11’40” Salimat Suleymanova: There was an explosion, I’m
not sure what happened, but probably the two women suicide bombers blew
themselves up, I didn’t see what blew up, but we were told that the two
young women had blown themselves up. The militants themselves told us.
Maybe they lied12’28” Presenter: There are reports that two women
hostage-takers were unhappy that they were targetting children, they
protested, and their own leader then blew them up.13’40” Presenter: The hostage-takers began to make their
demands, the withdrawal of Russian troops from Chechnya and the release
of fighters seized in June in the neighbouring Russian republic of
Ingushetia15’00” Presenter: As parents waited for news, and
terrorists fired on the surrounding security forces19’00” Salimat Suleymanova: I got down on my knees and
begged them, please let me take my son with me. They said “don’t be
afraid, come on, nothing will happen, babies only”. I said, may I come
back after I pass my baby to somebody, he said “No, come on, get out,
thank Allah for being released with your baby20’15” Khazbek Dzarasov: One of the terrorists brought
some water over for a little girl, she took a sip, but another
terrorist started yelling at him, “Why did you give her that?”, so he
had to take the water away from her.39’05” Khazbek Dzarasov: All those militants must be shot,
we must get rid of them, if you put them in jail they will escape
somehow and continue to commit acts of terror. They must be caught and
shot. They are brainwashed to kill, and that’s all they’re good
for.42’00” Presenter: So this was Beslan. Terrorism in the
21st century. Its weapons the emotions and the lives of children and
their parents.
The presenter uses the term terrorist extensively, although often
uses ‘hostage takers’ (which is debatable – desperadoes who deny
children water, food, etc. are hardly mere hostage-takers), but,
nonetheless, this is a big improvement over the deception of calling
terrorists ‘militants’.
However, what is surprising are the voiced-over translations of the
Russian participants – are we really to believe that Salimat
Suleymanova (whose 7 year old son was killed) referred to one of the
terrorists as a ‘militant’ and to the group of terrorists as
‘militants’? Or that Khazbek Dzarasov said “All those militants must
be shot”? I doubt it – and if indeed they didn’t use the term
‘militant’ I’d like to know who translated their words thus and why
they did so.
It’s about time. I’m sick of all of the MSM tiptoeing around that word. Now if the trend continues it will be a good thing.
We’re not asking for the world here. When terrorism leaves no doubt as to what it is it needs to be named as such.
0 likes
Yes – I wondered about that dubbing. I was trying to listen out for the word the children were actually suing but couldn;t make it out. I think quite a lot of Russians refer to them as “bandits” – since I have often heard that translation. Bandits is OK by me – there are various moral grades of bandit.
David
0 likes
There were a couple of references to bandits – I edited out the following references to the terrorists, simply for reasons of space:
04’45” Boy: Then we saw a terrorist running and firing in the air
Vika Tsarakhova (an 8yr old girl): Some people hid in the boiler room – then one of the bandits went in there and brought all of them out
Oleg Nazriev (a young boy): I realised that they were bandits because they wore masks and had machine-guns
cont/.
0 likes
cont/.
Sado Nazriev (Oleg’s older brother): We got scared and ran through the gates, we ran to the police station and started shouting “Attack, School Number One, Terrorists!”. They didn’t believe us, they thought it was a hoax, then they heard the gunshots too and saw children running and then they went off and got ready to fight the terrorists.
Khazbek Dzarasov (16yr old boy): Because of my sister, my sister was standing over on other side, the line-up was organised by year groups, with the older pupils on one side and the first year students on the other side, furthest from the gate, and that’s where the terrorists came from.
0 likes
I am told that under Islamic belief , all babies are born Muslims.
Not until they have been corrupted by their non muslims parents do they become Infidels.
Is it therefore just a coincidence that only babies abd infants were released by the islamic Jihadists ?
0 likes
See my other posts – http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/109571524548845669#143272
I think a large portion of this controversy depends on your definitions, namely “terrorist” or “terrorism”.
Also, what makes so contentious is that acts of violence commited by
1. yourself / your own government
2. friendly governments
are not considered terrorism even though they are meant to achieve political, religious, or social goals, but are labelled “self-defence” or “counter-terrorism”.
Interestingly, why aren’t anybody crying “moral equivalence” for that?
0 likes