Psycho killers
Sir-- I agree wholeheartedly with what Ibrahim Nafie has to say in 'The madness of Baghdad' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 30 January - 5 February). I know we are not going to bomb Iraqi mothers and children into the dark ages because that's where Saddam's got them anyway, but do we have to slavishly follow that nice, good, Christian nonsense as espoused by psycho killers? I want to know a lot more before I give up my right to freedom and the American Way, especially posing the question: "What did you know and when did you know it," with particular emphasis on 11 September. I really hope my thoughts are wrong, but every time Bush doesn't answer, you have to wonder; and if I wonder I'm not the only one. He invents an inquiry and asks it not to ask him or his people those questions.
Bush isn't president material, and continuously bases his speeches on either false advice, limited information or downright propaganda. If we allow this man and henchmen to wag our tail we will be the worst for it. I know it can be a depressing feeling to think that your future is held in the hands of psychos, but together with the truth -- or a good version of it -- we will beat these scoundrels.
Frank McCormack
Brisbane
Australia
Accurate description
Sir-- 'The madness of Baghdad' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 30 January - 5 February) is an excellent article. It describes the situation with great accuracy. I'll look for more of your editorials.
Charles Hendrix
Charleston, WV
USA
Words of wisdom
Sir-- Mr Nafie is completely right in 'The madness of Baghdad' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 30 January - 5 February). The old Arabic proverb "If words were of silver, then silence is of gold" should apply now and until the Bush/Blair shadow has gone.
For the world as a whole and its leaders in particular, the right words about the present world situation are those uttered by Mr Mandela and broadcast by CBS and partially ABC -- ignored by all others -- on the imminent threat to world peace from the actions of fools, liars and profiteers.
Khalil Semaan
New York, NY
USA
The Feurher made proud
Sir-- Once again Mr Nafie wastes not a word in a totally accurate and cogent assessment of the situation in Iraq in his article 'The madness of Baghdad' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 30 January - 5 February). If the daily and weekly publications in the US (Time, Newsweek, Washington Post, etc.) were to carry his articles, it is likely they could influence the arena for the better.
The United States has always prided itself in leading by example. For over 200 years we have forsworn first strike aggression. Our policy has been that the US will always suffer the first blow before crossing a border to attack other countries. It is ironic that our Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld has done what Hitler failed to do, and that is to unite Germany, France and Russia politically. Der Feurher would be proud.
"Win without war" is more than the cry of peaceniks; it could be made to happen except for the warmongering right-wing regime now in power in the US. Instead, they are squandering the high moral imprimatur we have always enjoyed, and as Mr Nafie points out, are doing so not at the expense of the high-living Iraqi leadership, but by degrading and endangering a disenfranchised and long suffering population of political innocents.
Jennis Strickland
Sterling, VA
USA
Immoral war
Sir-- All the world is becoming aware of US motives for this upcoming invasion. I find the whole thing so disgusting that it makes me feel ashamed to be white. I sincerely hope that US leaders will have a change of heart, but at this point, my personal opinion is that it would take a miracle. All our manifestations and protest may just be delaying the operations.
We all live on the same planet, and I don't understand why the world cannot be one country under God. All we can do at this point is pray.
And remember, the rest of the world is opening its eyes. Maybe Bush and Blair will have to go to war all alone because what they plan to do is grossly immoral.
Marie Major
British Colombia
Canada
Platform for the rich
Sir-- The current situation between the US and Iraq is not being guided by "Americans" or "America" -- it is being guided by a man who has based his credibility on "protecting Americans from evil foreigners". Although at least half of America thinks Bush is very wrong, he has chosen this platform to keep some sort of support while he pushes through new tax laws that benefit the richest Americans. These tax changes would never have a chance of becoming law in America, but as long as Bush can claim that he should be supported because "America is at war with evil foreigners", they might actually pass.
I think that Bush is surprised at the resistance he is receiving, not just internationally, but domestically. What can he do now? He has based his claim to power on his aggressive foreign policy, and if he backs down, he looks foolish, and loses the next election (and his rich supporters lose their ability to rewrite the tax laws). So all Bush can do is keep this same anti-Iraq position, and hope that something sufficiently evil is discovered by the inspectors.
To your readers, I say: I, and my fellow Americans are not imperialists. We are much like you. We'd just like to live and let live. Please do not judge me by what you hear Bush saying. He might have been elected by Americans, but he is using the anger over 9/11 to take positions that are not supported in America.
Bill Smith
California
USA
To the point
Sir-- 'Weapons of mass distraction' is really a clever line to describe what's happening, and not only in Palestine and Israel, but also in how the United States is showing its lust for Iraqi oil.
Al-Ahram Weekly is a really good medium to find out some truth about the mess in the world.
Federico Antin
Buenos Aires
Argentina
A belief in freedom
Sir-- 'Johnson and Bush' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 30 January - 5 February) is well enunciated. Hopefully, we Americans will again re-focus any imperialistic aspirations to the economic realm, where, as stated, all cultures, religions and ideologies are welcome to participate and define their own roles.
Unfortunately, both Johnson and Bush act as true believers in what they see as their responsibility to a higher purpose; just as does Sharon, Bin Laden or any of the 11 September hijackers. To survive, the US will eventually have to return to a belief in individual freedom as the only higher power. It is what our constitution is based upon, and what originally made a unique, and hesitant, nation.
Chris Watts
California
USA
The correct shade
Sir-- I read 'Johnson and Bush' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 30 January - 5 February) and was fascinated by Abdel-Moneim Said's knowledge and ability to see the larger scheme of things, as they play out on the world's stage. Nothing is all black or all white and Mr Said has an excellent grasp of this fact.
I know little of your paper and less of Mr Said, but I am very impressed with both. I look forward to other articles by Mr Said.
Jay Mather
San Luis Obispo
USA
Rooted in faith
Sir-- Thank you for another brilliant article 'Johnson and Bush' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 30 January - 5 February) by Abdel-Moneim Said. His insight into how the US operates excels that of most American academics. I have one minor criticism: Arab writers exhibit no qualms about crediting Islam for their Golden Age, so why doesn't Mr Said, and others, give the religion of the founders of the US credit for its role in creating the Golden Age of America?
Mr Said seems to think that the US constitution, government and economy sprang into existence like the universe, an accidental big bang out of nothing. But the truth is that the founders, and most citizens for over a century, were Protestants who shared a faith that was very different from the Catholicism of Europe. This new form of Christianity led to a new form of government, democracy, and a new form of economic organisation -- capitalism.
In Old Europe, Catholicism continued to support tyranny through absolute rulers and stifling control of markets. Popes encouraged the powerful to accumulate wealth through warfare and through monopolies obtained as service to the king. Meanwhile, Protestants freed citizens from tyrannical rulers, at the cost of thousands of lives and established democracies. At the same time, they freed the markets and encouraged people to gather wealth through honest work and trade. That is the primary reason that throughout their history Americans have focussed on economics rather than war, as Mr Said points out.
Roger McKinney
Broken Arrow, OK
USA
Wider perspective
Sir-- I would just like to convey thanks and support for the article 'Thought in a time of war' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 16-22 January) by Anouar Abdel-Malik.
It is essential reading that well captures the crises in its wider implications, and offers a vision of hope with concrete choices possible by the Arab world. Such a vision can be supported by many with progressive leanings in the Western world.
Michael Springate
Montreal
Canada
False claims
Sir-- Hassan Nafaa's comments about the United States in 'A year of living dangerously' (Al- Ahram Weekly, 16-22 January) were dreadfully wrong and misguided. Most profoundly, he mis- characterises America's fight against terrorism. It is the terrorists who chose to come to the US and killed 3,000 innocent civilians on our soil. Terrorists may pretend this is a fight between Christian West and Islam East, but it is not. It is a fight between civilised freedom and terrorist opponents of our freedom and power. You need not ask me; ask the millions of Muslims who are also loyal Americans and who enjoy our countries' freedom. This is a "global clash" only because terrorism threatens many countries, not just the US. Those who suffer share many backgrounds, religions and nationalities.
The author falsely claims that America wishes to change Islam; we do not. Indeed, what America wishes for Arabs and for all humanity is to have democracy and self-rule not dictatorship; political development through peaceful means not terrorism; and a society built on freedom not built on fear. America tries to be free, peaceful and democratic, and if we fail to always meet our ideals it is because we are human and fallible like anyone else. Also, it is hard to defeat violent enemies with non-violent means.
Patrick McGuinness
Austin, TX
USA
Who's culprit?
Sir-- Ayman El-Amir's article 'Barbarians at the gate' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 16-22 January) is written within the scopes of biased telescopic vision and pre-mediaeval historical awareness. The major problem today is the exploitation of Muslims by Muslims and turning them into martyrs in the name of Islam. It's the Shi'ites versus the Sunnis; or Wahabbis exercising their newly earned wealth and muscle creating this army of anti-West doctrines and generating the new war of terrorism to preserve their own control in Saudi Arabia.
Times have changed; old philosophies and rules do not apply in this age, and the days are not far when there will be one world, one rule and it will be from a laptop in space.
Wasim Akhtar
Texas
USA
Vicious cycle
Sir-- Let me commend Nancy Gee for at least saying what's really on the mind of bigots like herself in 'Domino destruction' (Readers' Corner, Al-Ahram Weekly, 2-8 January) and not letting simple human decency cloud her judgment. Instead of justifying the war on Iraq as a war to protect the United States from terrorism, she merely states that the whole point is to kill more Arabs. Rest assured Ms Gee, even without the upcoming blitz a slow genocide against the "uncivilised" children of Iraq has been happening for some time now.
Besides, she gives a model method for dealing with the world's problems; since so-called Muslims killed Americans, Americans must kill Muslims where ever they are. And by that tortured logic, who will stop the future victims in Iraq from seeking redress against those who kill them? With such redneck thinking pervasive in the world today, it's no wonder no one is at peace. It's a shame we can't develop a way to send all the warmongers to another planet where they can rumble all they like, whether they be Bin Laden, Sharon, or Bush and Co. (and their senile cheerleaders like Ms Gee).
Susan Hansen
California
USA
Beg to differ
Sir-- I found the article 'The root of all evil' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 9-15 January) by Bashir M Nafi a very interesting narrative on the historical relations between the West and the Arab world -- as seen from the Arab perspective. There are, however, a few points that he made that I find questionable.
I don't think Americans really have any interest in the Arab world, except for the fact that there is a mutual need to see an uninterrupted flow of oil towards America, and an uninterrupted flow of dollars towards the oil producing Arab nations. America, whether the Arabs like it or not, is a realist when it comes to relationships with its friends and enemies in the age of globalisation. America and her allies have a mutual understanding that when their interests are threatened, they support each other in order to deal with these "problems".
My next point is I don't think America is taking aim at extremist Islam from a sense of self- righteousness as much as America (and the Western powers) sees radical Islamic groups threatening the stability of the world. Sure, there is talk about democracy and human progress, but is only a valid premise to demonstrate the good intentions the West has to deal with the aftermath of the inevitable clash of civilisations. I don't think anyone in the USA really cares if the Arab world wants to enslave them to a future where they are destined to be beggars and hopelessly lost.
Finally, Mr Nafi states "This conflict is rooted in a dominant set of international relations, known simply, in university textbooks, as the imperialist system." This simplistic conclusion denies the violent, expansionist ideals of extremist Islam that has brought the West to the Arab front door.
Shep Fargotstein
Memphis, TN
USA
A painful fix
Sir-- I am a keen follower of the developments in Egypt's economic situation, both as an Egyptian citizen and as a professional in the financial community with 22 years of experience with major global financial institutions in fairly senior positions.
I feel that "conventional wisdom" is always governing in our country; we have not seen any visionaries, and if we have, such visions have never been pursued with conviction. The visionary who comes to my mind on both the political and economic fronts is the late President Sadat, who had the vision, courage and determination to pursue peace and open door economic policy alone.
In managing our economy we are still adopting very conservative and classical policies, we don't see progressive strategies, well-studied and well-executed. I believe that interest rate reduction and using the government budget to stimulate growth would propel the economy into full employment mode.
The market will pay the price of some currency devaluation, which may result in some inflation which may be healthy for us at this deflationary situation. Meanwhile, devaluation will help at another front, reducing reliance on imports and enhancing exports by rendering our products more price competitive.
Sometimes doing nothing is much worse than trying a different solution, but our traditional approach in managing our affairs has proven unfruitful.
Tarek Hassan Amer
Cairo
Egypt
Trodden path
Sir-- I enjoyed reading Sherif Milad's story in 'Mood Swings: I am ready to go' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 30 January - 5 February). It seems that you are a romantic going through some identity crisis. Don't worry you will eventually get over it. I have gone through similar stages after I left Egypt in 1969. We look forward to hear the rest of your story. Good luck.
Saad Alexan
Vancouver
Canada
Useless Oslo
Sir-- What was the Oslo peace process going to bring for Palestinians, but legitimised settlements, legitimised apartheid and eternal servitude? I wish Graham Usher and everybody else would stop talking about Oslo as if it was something that was good for the Palestinian people.
Rita Hansberry
New York, NY
USA
Enough murder
Sir-- I feel a great sorrow when looking at pictures or read articles like those in 'Sharon's Israel' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 30 January - 5 February). I ask all the civilised world, isn't there a solution for that fatal problem? Can't the politicians stop the violence of the Israeli soldiers against the unarmed Palestinians?
Ibrahim Moustafa
Cairo
Egypt
Sharon's peace
Sir-- The Palestinians are indeed in a grim situation. The peace offered by Hitler was the peace of the concentration camps; the peace offered by Stalin was the peace of the gulags; and the peace offered by Sharon is occupied Palestine.
John Carpenter
Malvern East
Australia
The war within
Sir-- I support the Palestinian people in many ways, and I am not religious or an anti-Semite; I just want justice. Bush is co-responsible for the collapse of Israel, thus enhancing the danger of a larger war.
An implosion or meltdown of the unstable state of Israel is almost inevitable, that's why Israel (the only nuclear power in the region) is a danger to the region and world peace, more so than Iraq. Bush makes it worse by supporting the proven war criminal Sharon, using Israel as a foothold for his greasy aims to control Middle East oil.
Israel is alienating itself from the civilised world, the economy is terrible, and only the US donates a lot of money. As long as Israel refuses to behave as a civilised and democratic country and stop the war crimes and crimes against humanity, it's doomed to collapse. The civilised world (including the US after the 2004 elections, and hence without Bush) will no longer accept the destruction of Palestine or the humiliation, oppression, suppression and murder of innocent people.
I sincerely hope that Palestine and Israel will live as two neighbouring states in peace and prosperity, and I also hope that Bush and Sharon will soon disappear from the international political scene.
Frederik van Leeuwen
Almere
The Netherlands
No substance
Sir-- I have been watching Egyptians discuss Israeli elections as if they have ever held them. Please don't discuss what you don't know. My advise is for you to just do what you usually do: go and shout death to America. I'm waiting to see the demonstration when the Yankees are in Baghdad.
Matthew Eridad
Nairobi
Kenya
Great job
Sir-- Thank you for the great Al-Ahram Weekly newspaper; the collection of articles published every week is very informative. It helps me read between the lines of the lies of our George W Bush's war-mongering administration. You bring to light a true picture of world events and a thorough and objective analysis of global trends.
Through your publication I learn about the true motives of the Zionist imperial American administration, and their dirty desire to divide and control the Middle East for the benefits of the Zionist State. Keep up the good work, and know that you are doing a great job.
Li Tan
New York, NY
USA
A fair view
Sir-- As a student of political science and international relations, I am extremely interested in the outcome of the UN inspectors report and George Bush's actions. I am almost certain that no matter what the outcome of the reports, the US will attack Iraq, whether they have the support of the UN or not. The US and (their baby) Israel are the only countries that have acted outside the realm of international law without suffering any real penalty. Most people in the West do not want a war but who dares to speak against the great super eagle?
I would like to say thank you for presenting articles in your paper which allow people like myself to read stories that contain facts not propaganda, like what is commonly portrayed by the media in the West.
Kim Powell
St Catherine
Jamaica
