Honest analysis
Sir-- I write to thank and congratulate Mr Abdel-Moneim Said for his lucid and courageous articles in your publication. Rather than relying on the culture of blame and complaint to justify the failings of the Arab world, he presents Arab leaders, decision-makers and intellectuals with the obvious -- if less palatable -- alternative: an honest analysis of their culture, history, and institutions.
I will remain an avid reader of Mr Abdel-Moneim Said's writings.
John de Castro
Hamilton South
Australia
Truth deluge
Sir-- I must be honest. I had to look three times while reading the article by Abdel-Moneim Said entitled 'Iraq, Sudan and others' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November). I could not believe that what I was reading was appearing in an Arab newspaper.
It was insightful and most unbelievably, it was truthful. For the first time that I can remember, an Arab intellectual appeared to be attempting honesty in assessing the state of the Arab world.
Let the flood gates of truth open and the salvation of the Arab people can be at hand. It is just that simple, and you must demand nothing less. It's not Israel, its not the West, it's you and the liars and the deceitful in your midst. As we say in the West: "The truth will set you free."
Michael Brown
California
USA
Rare view
Sir-- I just read with great interest Mr Abdel- Moneim Said's article 'Iraq, Sudan and others' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November).
In my opinion, this type of view is much too rare in the Arab press and media. Was this article ever published in Arabic, and if yes, what was the general reaction to it? My assumption would be a large outcry against such a view.
Yves Denamur
Paris
France
No relevance at all
Sir-- While I agree with Soheir Morsy's assessment of Spencer Abraham in 'American voices of dissent' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November), I disagree with her biased slant on anti-war sentiment in the US. These anti-war voices are of a free country where anyone can voice their opinions without any fear of retribution from their government.
Iraq is a rogue nation which refuses to act in a internationally responsible manner. There is no freedom or choice there. They should be held accountable for war crimes against their own people and their neighbours. I do feel for the suffering of the Iraqi people who are unfortunate pawns of the policies of their egotistical leader. Let's not paint their government as a victim of US bullying, and please let's not bring the Palestinian issue into this. Saddam Hussein could care less about his Palestinian brothers.
S Barragat
Los Angeles
USA
We are many
Sir-- I am writing in response to Ms Soheir Morsy's article 'American voices of dissent' (Al- Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November). Thank you for covering this story. The American media, (controlled by a wealthy, corporate minority) have been greatly under-reporting the Anti-war/anti-Bush resistance movement in this country.
I am a 26-year-old woman living in Seattle, WA and I do not know a single person who supports George W Bush's agenda of terror and imperialism. It is my great hope that our friends throughout the world know that we are working in solidarity with them to prevent this monster from committing more atrocities than he already has. The people of Iraq, Palestine, Pakistan -- all the people living in what our "president" calls "the axis of evil" are not my enemies. My enemy sits in a White House in Washington, DC. My enemy targets the poor, people of colour, intellectuals, humanitarians, environmentalists, women and children in his own country and abroad for his own profit.
On 30 November, 2002 the people of Seattle will take to the streets in remembrance of our WTO protests in 1999. We will be protesting corporate greed and destruction, we will decry any further violent action taken against the citizens of Iraq and will demand an end to the brutal US embargo of that country. We will be calling out to the rest of the world in solidarity.
I pray for a time when we know peace and are all allowed to grow and prosper as is our right. I pray the people who read your newspaper know that there are many Americans who refuse to be complicit in the Bush administration's imperialist reign of terror. And finally I pray that we all move beyond the idea that murdering innocents (no matter what their nationality) is not an acceptable means to any end.
In peace, love and gratitude for your story.
Frances Varian
Seattle, WA
USA
Sickening dissent
Sir-- I read your article 'American voices of dissent' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November) and it sickens me. I am not pro-Israeli or pro-Arab; if it was up to me I would take all the Israelis and Palestinians and move them to another planet.
Why don't you go and talk with the families whose loved ones perished in the New York terrorist attack, and explain to them about loss of civil liberties, about the "peace" movement, about your "good" Democrats.
George Abrams
Dallas
USA
The right questions
Sir-- In 'American voices of dissent' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November) Soheir Morsy entirely ignores the question "what do we do if Saddam gets a nuke?"
Until "dissenting" voices tackle that question head on, their rhetoric will easily be dismissed as pap. Citing the usual list of American misdeeds (Vietnam, corporate greed, etc.) has little relevance in deciding whether this particular war should be fought at this particular time.
Ken Hodge
Los Angeles
USA
American apartheid
Sir-- Thank you for restoring a little sanity into the debate about Iraq in 'American voices of dissent' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November). I have just finished reading an article in the New York Daily News entitled "Build Wall Against Islamic Fanatics", clearly written by bloodthirsty fanatics, and another in the New York Times entitled "US Taking Steps To Lay Foundation For Action In Iraq", which is so clinical and sanitised that it sounds like plans for a scientific experiment, not plans to mass murder hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis (then whoever is next on the hit list).
Unfortunately, believing that the US mass media would ever give reasonable coverage to the anti-war movement is like believing in the tooth fairy. The US corporate media is the propaganda arm of US imperialism. I like the phrase made by Thabo Mbeki of "global apartheid". Global apartheid is the logical outcome of unrestrained US imperialism which holds the entire world in contempt.
There was an article in the Washington Post recently which said US military officials were censoring what they released to the media based on protecting their military strategies. The Washington Post accepted this without reservation. Such servile compliance must bring a beaming smile to all at the White House.
Paul Mansfield
Melbourne
Australia
Remove resentment
Sir-- I wish to commend Soheir Morsy for her thoughtful and provocative article 'American voices of dissent' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November). The truth she implies -- that we are all truly brothers and sisters in our humanity, that violence begets violence and that violence is never successful ultimately -- I believe, is a truth most Americans believe in. Most Americans, like most Arabs, however have also been disenfranchised by our own corrupt out-of-control political leadership and heads of government.
I wish to add to Ms Morsy's suggestion that the Arab world ought to refuse blind anti- Americanism, that blind anti-Israel is every bit as horrendous as blind anti-Americanism. The Arab world needs to acknowledge that Israel also has a right to exist as does Palestine.
No one should support the injury, let alone murder, of innocent civilians. And the recent demonic logic of Al-Qa'eda that because American citizens pay taxes (which we all do or go to jail) it justifies murdering them, should be forcefully contradicted by all Arab interests.
Raymond Fredell
Cedar City, Utah
USA
Deconstructing "we"
Sir-- When Papa Bush declares "What we say goes" and Junior Bush warns "You are either with us or against us," the phrases strike us as both menacing and vaguely incomplete. Just whom do their imperious pronouns "we" and "us" refer to? Hardly to the ordinary North Americans with whom the Bushes have virtually nothing in common. Yet this immensely important absence of common interests must be concealed at all costs if the charade is to go on. Bush Senior will never declare: "What we -- the wealthy and the powerful -- say, goes." Nor will Junior ever chime in with: "You are either with us -- your masters and owners -- or against us."
Never mind, there is no need for you to spell it out. We, the people of all nations, are awakening to your true script and can give you our answer. Of course we are against you. Anyone who cares about humanity and about a livable future is bound to be against you. You and those whose interests you serve are the promoters of lies, poverty, war, illiteracy, pollution, disease, slavery, and death -- what person of conscience could ever be with you? Millions upon millions of people are forming links of grassroots solidarity, organising worldwide to overthrow the hideous system of global injustice and tyranny whose champions you are, and to replace it with a humane and egalitarian way of life for all.
What you say goes? Not for much longer, arrogant plutocrats, not for much longer. We shall overcome and life -- at long last -- shall prevail.
Zeljko Cipris
Stockton, CA
USA
American enforcement
Sir-- It is interesting to read your review of the decisions of the United Nations in 'Life after 1441' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 21-27 November). I especially found humorous your comment that the US draft was rejected. It was amended in a minor way, but certainly not rejected.
It is clear that the resolution that was passed not only allows the United States to enforce the terms of the inspection team, it seems that the UN clearly supports our plan to enforce the decision.
Larry Steller
New Jersey
USA
Compelling reasons
Sir-- Regarding 'Life after 1441' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 21-27 November). There is good reason that the "resolution starts off by treating Iraq as a country guilty, not just suspected, of violations". No country in the UN has ever doubted that Iraq is in violation of the 1992 UN resolution and cease- fire agreement. There are many violations, but the most obvious one is refusing to allow weapon inspectors to re-enter Iraq for four years.
While your article raised interesting points, you leave out the possibility that there could be valid reasons for the Arab League not to support Iraq.
Mark Decker
Orlando
USA
Simple choice
Sir-- Mr Hans Blix and Mr Kofi Anan were forced to meet with Mr Bush. They had two options: either do what the US wants and get financial rewards, or do what the UN wants and have a short-term career.
Magnus Kles
Stockholm
Sweden
Superpox wars
Sir-- The US should invade Iraq with our eyes wide open. Iraq is generally believed to have the smallpox virus and probably has the technology to turn smallpox into superpox, which makes the standard vaccine ineffective.
The CIA says it is over 75 per cent likely that Saddam, about to be toppled, will authorise biological attacks on the US homeland. When the US invades Iraq to depose Saddam, we lose the deterrent card. We will cause what we are invading to prevent.
A strategic biological attack on the US using a highly contagious virus is as easy as infecting one person and having them ride airplanes and hang around the airport.
A epidemic in America would ruin our economy, kill millions of Americans (especially those with lowered immune systems), and probably kill over a billion people world wide. Those who survived the superpox would have terrible pox scars all over their face.
Let's roll (the dice).
Brad Arnold
St Louis Prk, MN
USA
Screening letters
Sir-- I have read the letters to the editor in Al- Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November and was astonished at the amount of misinformation and blatant stereotypical insults to Egyptians, Arabs and Muslims in many of these letters. A good example is the letter from Keyvan Rafii 'Bad behaviour' (Al- Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November). Where ever this man is really writing from and whoever he really is, such letters should be filtered out, based on their content of subjective ignorant insults to a whole race and religion and the misinformation they propagate.
This person described Arab Muslims as killers, and claimed that all wars between Israel and its Arab neighbours where initiated by the Arabs in an attempt to destroy Israel. If someone wrote a letter to an American newspaper accusing the Americans or the Israelis of such unfounded, subjective, collective accusations, there is no chance that this letter would be printed.
Please filter and select the letters to save us the time wasted on reading such rubbish. In addition to saving the dignity of our newspapers and readers.
Hisham Shaalan
Cairo
Egypt
Enough racism
Sir-- I am appalled by the amount of bigotry displayed by Keyvan Rafii in his letter 'Bad behaviour' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November). Mr Rafii's generalisations about Arabs based on 9/11 terrorist attacks are outright racist. It is this type of prejudice and bigotry that has led to hundreds of hate crimes against Arabs and Muslims in America, as reported last week by Human Rights Watch.
The perpetrators of 9/11 terrorist attacks do not represent Arabs and Islam any more than Baruch Goldstein's terrorist attack represents America and Judaism or Timothy McVeigh represents America and Christianity. Mr Rafii cannot continue to live in denial and claim that Hollywood has not been vilifying Arabs for more than 50 years. Those facts are documented in Jack Shaheen's book Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies a People.
Mr Raffi's claims about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are dishonest. I advice him to read Noam Chomsky's book Fateful Triangle before attempting to spread miss-information.
Ann Barton
New York, NY
USA
Hands bound
Sir-- While 'Back to the future' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November) is a well thought-out projection -- one which I also see as the best for the long term interests of both camps -- you assume that Palestinians actually have some control over their fate.
John Haag
Brisbane
Australia
Bright idea
Sir-- As a non-Zionist Jewish American supporter of Eretz Yisrael, I think your idea of a one-state solution as stated in 'Back to the future' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November), should be thoroughly studied by all interested parties to the conflict.
Realistically, this may be just the solution that could satisfy most of the dreams of both parties. Has this idea ever been proposed to the leaders of either side? Can this one state solution be protected from the problems that Lebanon's one state solution suffers?
Isaac Lieberman
New York, NY
USA
Getting it backwards
Sir-- In 'A necessary pragmatism' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November), you state: "Closing the door to any military action on Iraq can only serve the interests of the Iraqi people." Indeed. Saddam Hussein serves the interests of the Iraqi people? With such confused reasoning it is no wonder your part of the world is so backward.
Robert Lefevre
Beaverton
USA
Not so true
Sir-- Jonathan Cook's article 'Finishing the job' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November) contains a gross calumny against Benny Morris (author of the book The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1949). It stated baldly at the start that "Benny Morris has recently undergone a conversion to the racist ideology of transfer."
Anyone who reads Benny Morris's original article in The Guardian newspaper can see for themselves that Benny Morris is not a supporter of "transfer" at all. Benny's article is available on the world wide web -- together with the bits The Guardian cut out and then printed later as a "correction" after Benny Morris complained. Rather, Benny Morris's article was actually a critical examination of the history of the totally unacceptable idea of "transfer" among Zionist, British and, indeed, even Arab leaders over the past 100 years.
Please, Mr Cook, have a little more care with other people's good name.
Samuel Jonathan
London
UK
Nothing's perfect
Sir-- The article 'Finishing the job' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November) by Jonathan Cook is an important, nuanced and impressive analysis of Zionist history from 1948 until now. Amazingly (for I am an American Jew, a Zionist and supporter of the Israeli peace camp), I found myself in agreement with 90 per cent or more of what the writer said about Israel and Zionism until I came toward the end of the piece, where he says there is essentially no difference between Sharon and Peres, and that any form of Zionism, even the most dovish, will have to oppress or eliminate the remaining Israeli Arabs in order to realise its goal of being a Jewish homeland. This point I reject completely.
After there is peace between the Palestinians and Israelis, will there still be inherent contradictions within Israeli society and great inequalities between Israeli Arabs and Jews? Certainly. Have there not been the same racial contradictions within US society for decades if not centuries (among whites, African Americans and Native Americans)? But with peace, Israel will eventually become more equipped politically, socially and financially to address and rectify those inequalities -- just as with peace, the Palestinian people will be able to build new, democratic processes for their own society.
Certainly, there will be right wing Israeli prime ministers and leaders who will work their hardest to limit or roll back attempts to redress the wrongs done to Israeli Arabs. But over time, just as in our own society, the lot of Israeli Arabs will be a better one. Their opportunities will be greater and they will play a more integrated role in Israeli society. Will there ever be perfect harmony, tolerance and acceptance between Jews and Arabs in Israel? No. But it is unrealistic to expect perfection.
Mr Cook rejects any optimistic reading of Israel's prospects for harmony and consigns Israel to what he calls "the depths of the abyss". I hope history proves this wrong.
Richard Silverstein
Seattle
USA
The un-citizen
Sir-- On reflecting on Edward Said's article 'Europe versus America' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 14-20 November), I felt compelled to inform Mr Said and the rest of the readers of the phenomenon of the "un-[nationality]". In Australia, one of the favourite methods of condemnation utilised by politicians is the denouncement of a supposedly fellow citizen as being un-Australian. Or the condemnation of an opposing viewpoint as un- Australian.
This begs the question: What is a citizen in democracy? We are being held hostage, as citizens of these self-proclaimed democracies like America and Australia. We are quickly being drawn into a war of the powerful few against the disenfranchised many.
So rest assured Mr Said, Americans are not alone in having the proverbial knife of ultra- nationalism held to the collective throat of a population fearful of its own government.
The witch hunts are alive and well.
Sari Kassis
Sydney
Australia
Alien thought
Sir-- Neither the basic tenets of Islam nor the nature of Arab society were ever anti-Semitic. Throughout its history, the Arab world never produced a body of anti-Semitic literature of its own, as Europe had done, and when those lost souls in it saw fit to wax anti-Semitic, they borrowed that from outside. Nothing along the fantastical lines of The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion was ever composed by Arabs. That is because the racial theory is not only alien to the Arab and Islamic sensibility, but it is diametrically opposed to it.
Arab philosophy -- consider Ibn Khaldun's seminal work Muqaddimah -- and Islamic theology enshrined in the Qur'an, propound the thesis that it is not race but faith, productive skills and cultural values that are key to understanding human worth, and the advancement of peoples, countries and civilisations. Beyond that, we are told to tell others, "You have your religion, and I have mine."
Mohamed Seed
Alexandria
Egypt
