US press: pick of the papers

The ten must-read opinion pieces from today's US papers.

1. Pain without gain (New York Times)

We could actually do a lot to help our economies simply by reversing the destructive austerity of the last two years, writes Paul Krugman.

2. Iran as continual regional menace (Politico)

Tehren is likely to increase these terrorist activities, based on the belief that nuclear weapons could provide an umbrella and that its regional enemies are weak and irresolute, says Stephen Blank.

3. Is this the end of market democracy? (New York Times)

Thomas Edsall asks: What if the legitimacy of free market capitalism in America is facing fundamental challenges that the candidates and their parties are not addressing?

4. The super PAC confusion (Washington Post)

What it has done is compromise basic First Amendment rights, clutter politics with baffling laws and regulations and actually deepen cynicism, writes Robert Samuelson.

5. Political double standard: GOP astounds in its hypocrisy (Oregonian)

This Republican presidential campaign is demonstrating conclusively that there is an unbridgeable divide between the philosophical commitments conservative candidates make before they are elected and what they will have to do when faced with the day-to-day demands of practical governance, writes E.J. Dionne Jr.

6. Liberals vs. conservatives (Los Angeles Times)

I equate Republicans' political views with thoughtlessness, intolerance and narcissism, says Diana Wagman.

7. Conservatives vs. liberals (Los Angeles Times)

There is no "how" in talking to a liberal. You can't talk to a liberal, period, writes Charlotte Allen.

8. Teacher's right -- kids need to know history of n-word (Chicago Sun Times)

As Joan Rivers likes to say, "Can we talk?" Apparently not. Not when it comes to the n-word, says this editorial.

9. The lush Life (New York Post)

Should public employees be treated substantially better than everyone else? Asks this editorial.

10. Why Romney can, and should, win evangelical vote (USA Today)

Think values, not stereotypes. Plus, we're picking a president, not a pastor, argues Nancy French.

 

Getty
Show Hide image

Munich shootings: The bloody drama where everyone knows their part

A teenage gunman murdered nine people in Munich on Friday night. 

At time of writing, we know only certain facts about the gunman who shot and killed nine people and wounded many more at a shopping centre in Munich.

He was 18 years old. He was German-Iranian. He was reported to have shouted: "I am German." After murdering his innocent victims he killed himself.

We don't know his motive. We may never truly understand his motive. And yet, over the last few years, we have all come to know the way this story goes.

There is a crowd, usually at ease - concertgoers, revellers or, in this case, shoppers. Then the man - it's usually a man - arrives with a gun or whatever other tool of murder he can get his hands on. 

As he unleashes terror on the crowd, he shouts something. This is the crucial part. He may be a loner, an outsider or a crook, but a few sentences is all it takes to elevate him into the top ranks of the Islamic State or the neo-Nazi elite.

Even before the bystanders have reported this, world leaders are already reacting. In the case of Munich, the French president Francois Hollande called Friday night's tragedy a "disgusting terrorist attack" aimed at stirring up fear. 

Boris Johnson, the UK's new foreign secretary, went further. At 9.30pm, while the attack was ongoing, he said

"If, as seems very likely, this is another terrorist incident, then I think it proves once again that we have a global phenomenon now and a global sickness that we have to tackle both at source - in the areas where the cancer is being incubated in the Middle East - and also of course around the world."

On Saturday morning, reports of multiple gunmen had boiled down to one, now dead, teenager. the chief of Munich police stated the teenage gunman's motive was "fully unknown". Iran, his second country of citizenship, condemned "the killing of innocent and defenceless people". 

And Europe's onlookers are left with sympathy for the victims, and a question. How much meaning should we ascribe to such an attack? Is it evidence of what we fear - that Western Europe is under sustained attack from terrorists? Or is this simply the work of a murderous, attention-seeking teenager?

In Munich, mourners lay flowers. Flags fly at half mast. The facts will come out, eventually. But by that time, the world may have drawn its own conclusions.