Deceptive road
Sir-- I don't agree with the commonly accepted European and American political views that the so-called ''Roadmap for Peace'' can lead to a real peace solution in the Middle East, and with it an economically and politically independent Palestinian state. First, total disarmament is demanded of militant Palestinian organisations [whose resistance to Israeli occupation is legally justified according to international law, unlike suicide attacks on Israeli civilians] in exchange for Israel dismantling the so-called illegal settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.
This distinction between "legal" and "illegal" settlements made by the Israeli government is a flagrant violation of international law, which prohibits the transfer of the civilians of the occupying lands to the occupied areas and also prohibits the disowning of land and properties of so-called "protected persons" [people who live under an occupation]. Therefore, all settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories are illegal according to international law. But apart from the injustice done against the former Palestinian owners of the land, the maintenance of the so-called "legal" settlements, which are being heavily protected by the Israeli army, de facto means the continuation of the control of the Palestinian areas by the Israeli army. This excludes the development of a politically independent Palestinian state.
Only the dismantling of all settlements in the Palestinian territories, the total and unconditional withdrawal of the Israeli army and the recognition of the right on return of Palestinian refugees can lay the foundation for real peace in the Middle East.
Astrid Essed
Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Envious anger
Sir-- Peace in the Middle East is not possible since the Arab nations cannot abandon their lust for violence and intolerance. Underlying the pan-Arab hatred of Israel and the United States surely is not the purported sympathy for the Palestinians; no Arab country wants even a token number within its borders.
Instead, Arab anger is clearly a result of jealousy towards Western prosperity and freedom. Why don't Arab nations first bring democracy to their people, then when ordinary citizens are free to express a range of opinions -- as they can in the civilised world -- you'll see less intolerance for the West.
Robert Dominianni
New Jersey
USA
Taking a stand
Sir-- I have read several of your articles regarding America. It is plain to see that the Middle East and the citizens of the USA do not understand each other. The USA has been under terrorist attack since the 1970s. Up until 9/11/2001 we worked through the UN, diplomatic channels, the various court systems of the countries involved, and the World Court. Nothing changed. The attacks grew bolder. It is also important to point out that all of the attacks were from militant Muslim Middle Eastern men; many times their countries chose to look the other way.
UN Resolution 1441 was approved unanimously. It had 10 predecessors dealing with Iraq and it's weapons. Not once during the 10 years which these resolutions covered, nor during the debate on 1441 did any country step forward with proof that Saddam did not possess weapons of mass destruction. In fact, France and Germany were selling Iraq antidotes and chemical suits.
I have not heard a major outcry from the leaders of Islam regarding how wrong terrorists attacks are; I have not heard the people of the Middle East condemning these acts. Now you all want to say how bad the USA is for invading Iraq, well, we had to take a stand. Iraq was the easiest target.
As to Uday and Qusay and displaying their bodies, they did not want to be taken alive because they knew what would happen to them. If their bodies had not been displayed, people would never have believed that they were dead.
Alice Lambert
Knoxville, TN
USA
Selective indignation
Sir-- As an American citizen who, like many, stayed glued to my television set from day one of this war, I find myself wondering what I missed now that I am completely befuddled at the uproar over the showing of the bodies of these two heinous murderers.
I am sure I heard no such outcry as found in 'Disgusting display' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 31 July - 6 August) when thousands of bodies of fellow Muslims were found in boxes stacked in a warehouse. There were no shouts of indignation when Iraqi families stood transfixed around mass graves of their loved ones who were all victims of Saddam and his murderous sons. Does any person in Iraq believe for one moment that Saddam and his family have been wrongly accused of committing thousands of murders, rapes, disfigurements, tortures, and only God knows what else, on his own countrymen and women?
I confess to being ignorant of many of the teachings of Islam, but from what I do know it is a religion of peace, respect and devotion. I saw none of these things in the actions of the former Iraqi leaders and am dismayed at the apparent epidemic of memory loss which seems to be sweeping the Middle East.
Kathi Sandoval
Texas
USA
Last stand
Sir-- Whatever one's opinion regarding the past deeds or misdeeds of the Hussein brothers, one can only hold in respect the unbelievable resistance they maintained to the heavily armed US troops sent to kill them.
There is no doubt that they fell as heroes and that their deaths will contribute to the birth of a new legend: no longer of their immortality, after failed assassination attempts in the past, but of their immense courage. Consider again that US troops suffered several casualties in a gunfight that lasted over six hours, and finally won their way after firing some dozen anti- tank missiles.
Contrary to wishful assertions from Defence Secretary Rumsfeld, their deaths will not quash the spirit of resistance of Iraqi fighters. Quite the opposite, it will stimulate their imagination and increase their combativeness as never before.
Actually, the ghastly and disgusting display of Uday and Qusay's corpses doesn't matter at all.
Pascal Nguyen
Tokyo
Japan
Inflammatory reporting
Sir-- 'Disgusting display' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 31 July - 6 August) neglects to mention that Uday and Qusay were given an opportunity to surrender and spurned it. It was they who would rather die than surrender and face trial.
No wonder "the Egyptian and Arab streets" are so upset if your inaccurate and inflammatory publication is representative of the type of journalism available to the Arab world.
Timothy Bowman
Oregon
USA
Violent images
Sir-- Why would people be shocked to find Arab newspapers spreading the photos of the bloodied corpses of Uday and Qusay on their front pages, when one can find photos of bloody corpses daily on the front pages of Arabic newspapers?
I'm referring to the Palestinian victims being displayed without a second thought that their body belongs to God. Where is the double standard on these occasions?
America is not perfect, but nor are the Arabs.
Levine Preskusenko
Sofia
Bulgaria
Burying the evidence
Sir-- In 'Disgusting display' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 31 July - 6 August), you're correct in your assessment that Saddam's sons were eliminated because it may have been embarrassing to the US government.
After all, who was it that induced Saddam to attack Iran? We as a nation are owed an explanation why we support despots and then use them for our own interests -- oil.
Bruce Macklin
Illinois
USA
The real reason
Sir-- The people of Iraq rejoiced when the US killed Saddam's sons. The people of Iraq will rejoice when the US finally hunts down Saddam and deals with him (one way or another). The only valid comment in 'Disgusting display' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 31 July - 6 August) was that it is humiliating to Arabs.
That is the key point: the resentment of the US has almost nothing to do with what the US does and everything to do with the Arab feeling of inadequacy at their inability to govern themselves well, stop fighting amongst themselves and be capable of dealing with their own problems.
It is amazing that Arabs outside Iraq condemned the US while Arabs in Iraq celebrated the good thing the US did by getting rid of those two monsters. The only conclusion is that this is all about Arab anger about being humiliated -- the people you interviewed don't seem to really give a hoot about the welfare of Iraqi Arabs. Otherwise they would have spoken up while Saddam and his sons were doing their butchering.
Jim Lynn
Massachusetts
USA
Smoke screen
Sir-- I agree with 'Disgusting display' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 31 July - 6 August).
This is the way juvenile Texas Rambos get their kicks. Bush and Co see billions of barrels of unprotected oil -- that is what it is all about.. The rest is smoke screen.
Ralph Orr
Manhattan Beach, CA
USA
Doing it differently
Sir-- Regarding 'Disgusting display' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 31 July - 6 August). Granted that the US went a little overboard with their pictures, but basically it was the Iraqi people who needed the proof. The US could have done it more humanely for the families involved and not broadcast their pictures.
As far as the US using what many conceive as excessive force, there was no proof as to what weapons they actually had; but admittedly, 200 marines with tanks and choppers was a little excessive. It is very likely the operation could have been done with a less than 10 men, and it would have been better justice if Saddam's sons could have been taken alive. It would have been more appropriate for the people of Iraq to try them for crimes against them.
But don't blame the US entirely for its actions in the fire fight; we are not really an inhumane people. If they would have surrendered we would have accepted that. Though I wonder if the US would have turned them over to the people of Iraq.
Bob Sergeant
Washington, DC
USA
The other dead
Sir-- Where were the protests when the mutilated bodies of American soldiers were put on display on Arab television? It seems there is a double standard in the Arab world.
Pam Boudreaux
Louisiana
USA
Non-starter
Sir-- I read 'Disgusting display' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 31 July - 6 August). Although I disagree with the US's decision to go to war, your "journalism" is equally biased and frightening.
Joseph Pertel
Santa Monica, CA
USA
Good angle
Sir-- The article 'Disgusting display' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 31 July - 6 August) was very good, well written, objective and had good content.
I had never visited Al-Ahram Weekly's site before; it looks like a good quality site to get a different view on world events.
Ron Leary
California
USA
No offence meant
Sir-- I firmly believe the US did not mean to offend anyone by displaying the bodies of Uday and Qusay. How else could we prove these vicious people had come to an end after years of torturing and murdering their own people.
This was the only way, and the Arab community should not be angered -- they took the brunt of what this regime had to offer.
Hernan Gonzalez
Bakersfield
USA
Shared outrage
Sir-- In the excellent article 'Disgusting display' (Al- Ahram Weekly, 31 July - 6 August) by Gihan Shahine, mention is made of the death, along with Uday and Qusay, of a child.
Was this not the l4-year-old son of one of the brothers? Many here share your outrage.
Delia Whittaker
California
USA
Glory lost
Sir-- I am disgusted that the American government would allow the broadcast of Qusay and Uday's corpses; yet I am disgusted about many things that have taken place in the name of peace and justice.
I understand that Saddam's teenage grandson was also killed in the attacks, and I am saddened by all this. I hope more Americans become outraged at the horrors that our government is committing.
I believe that Bush has changed the path of America's fate forever -- but maybe it was time. We have lost our glory and are shamed.
Angeline Rodriguez
Alabama
USA
No American money
Sir-- After reading 'Disgusting display' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 31 July - 6 August) by Gihan Shahine, it has me again thinking of American foreign policies. It appears that no matter which direction the US takes in its foreign policies it is a lose-lose situation for us.
So I am thinking we have two directions which we, as a world power, can take. First, we can continue spending my hard earned money to be the worlds bank, grocery store and police department while all the time we have our economy struggling. Alternatively, we can close our borders, keep our money, close all our military bases (which provide thousands of high-paying jobs in third world countries) and bring our troops home to secure our borders.
We can also stop trading and buying manufactured goods from overseas (which will help put our people to work) and stop buying foreign oil -- yes, we don't need foreign oil, we have 200 years' worth of reserves under Oklahoma alone.
So, you decide.. Call your appointed representative and tell him you don't want any of Americas money.
Jesse Cox
Ohio
USA
Back to basics
Sir-- Many Americans have strongly opposed the angry, righteous actions of the Bush administration. I started writing the week after 9/11 expressing relentlessly that the path of revenge and righteousness championed by Bush was no better than the holy violence of Al-Qa'eda. You don't solve problems by sinking down into the vicious mud of your attacker.
So, with that in mind, here are some thoughts on Egyptian reactions to the display of the bodies of Uday and Qusay: Was there equal disgust at the display of American bodies in the same fashion? If we are to begin to make some headway in the search for peace, this cannot be a partisan issue where to display the dead bodies of Iraqis is different than to display the dead bodies of Americans. Either one is simply a horrible, totally unnecessary portrait of dead human beings.
Second, we keep characterising everything as, "Arabs and Muslims feel this and say that," while you there say, "Americans are...," bloodthirsty, demonic, ruthless, barbaric etc. When more of us start to see clearly what we have in common, realise that life is tough and mindless prejudice only makes our sorrow worse than it has to be, then peace will come inexorably, and not before. Hide behind the walls of hate and all you will find is enemies to be destroyed outside of those walls.
So I ask you there to be better than us. See that many on both sides share great sorrow at the squandering of precious life. Teach our angry leaders a lesson as to what mature human behaviour is all about by espousing the ideals of tolerance, kindness and justice. It has to start somewhere, and what better place than your part of the world -- the cradle of civilisation?
David Jolly
Chico, CA
USA
Who benefits?
Sir-- I like the well documented article by Nyier Abdou 'What is good for the goose...' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 31 July - 6 August).
It points out how US arrogance in foreign policy leads to "double talk", contradictions, and self destruction. "Who in a real world can call the US to account? If the UK cannot get worthwhile concessions who can?" Neither can the United Nations call the US to account.
The Bush administration is making a mockery of the great ideals of democracy which made the US a beacon of freedom and justice. By preempting UN resolutions and world opinion, the US may bring about the breakdown of the UN. Is this good for the goose or for the gander?
Duane Hower
Philadelphia
USA
Lynching is the answer
Sir-- Regarding 'What is good for the goose...' (Al- Ahram Weekly, 31 July - 6 August), I say shoot them and be done with it. They are cowards who kill women, children and old men.
Just shoot them the world will be a safer place.
Charles Atlas
Oregon
USA
White supremacy
Sir-- I have been reading your on-line weekly with great interest. One point that you and your Arab readers are missing when discussing Israeli/Palestinian/ American events is the issue of worldwide "White Supremacy". "WS" is the engine that drives the supremacist agenda. American support for Israel is based on a "WS" plan for them to control the Middle East and its vast oil wealth. That is why they (European Jews) were installed there in 1948 by their fellow European and American "WS" and given nuclear weapons (the same WMD that supposedly Saddam was guilty of possessing). Their outrages against the Palestinian people should be no surprise when you consider their conduct in Lebanon and their total support for the "WS" South African apartheid regime, even when other governments were boycotting South Africa.
All non-white peoples of the world are potential rivals of and therefore targets of "WS". You in the Middle East are just "niggers" who happen to live on vast oil reserves that "WS" needs to maintain their "WS". This also explains historical actions taken in Africa, Central and South America, India etc. You must also understand this to understand recent events in Iraq.
Saddam was installed by "WS" (CIA) to "control" his people (by any means necessary) for the profit of American oil companies and other interests. When he got too big and then decided to accept only eurodollars as payment for his oil, that's when he had to go.
All of the undemocratic rulers in the Middle East are propped up and are proxies of "WS". "WS" will not install nor support democratic governments if they will challenge their agenda in any way. This is the key to looking at and understanding the dealings of Europeans on the world stage. Do not forget that Israel is governed by European Jews who are just as ruthless and murderous as their fellow White European "cousins" worldwide. Their actions against Palestinians are the same as the actions historically taken against Blacks and other non-whites in America and in all other parts of the world.
I doubt there will ever be real peace in the Middle East because it is impossible for "WS" to accept non- whites as equals. That is the nature of "the beast" -- supremacy, not equality.
Ben Wilson
Washington
USA
Flesh for freedom
Sir-- We are writing this on behalf of foreign prisoners serving 20-year sentences in Egyptian prisons for drug offences. We would like to inform you of the unacceptable and illegal practices taking place against inmates serving these sentences.
Until 1995, convicts who had served 20 years were set free without any obligations. This practice has since been abolished without any reason and the system has changed to uncertain and ambiguous procedures. Some convict's release dates have been delayed by six months to four years and most without any explanation. In other cases, those who have outside connections and financial support have been set free. (We have full details of those inmates).
Prior to 1986, all convicts who had 20-year sentences, only served 15 years but this practice has been completely abolished for all convicts. Until 1991, those who were sentenced to hard labour with a fine had the fine automatically cancelled. Since 1991, the convicts still have to pay the fine or serve a six-month sentence. The practice has changed yet again, and all convicts who complete 20-year sentences must also pay the fine or the sentence will be extended without a fixed date.
Those who were sentenced before 1989 were fined between LE3,000 and LE10,000 and those sentenced after 1989 were fined from LE50,000 to millions of pounds. After spending 20 years behind bars in a strange country, how and from where can such a huge amount of money be found to pay fines? Most inmates do not know the whereabouts of their families.
After long discussions, we, the foreign prisoners in Egypt came to the conclusion that we could sell one of our organs such as an eye, kidney or part of a liver or lungs to obtain the money to pay our fines, as we know that our freedom is more important to us than these organs.
Therefore we need your help to obtain permission from the Egyptian government for us to sell our organs. This is the only solution that we have. Please help us.
Mohamed Rasik, Sri Lanka
Khalid Askaf, Syria
Oscar Posada, Columbia
Thomas Wargis, India
Zubir Bozwetta, Tunisia
Ganiyu Sule, Nigeria
Good fit
Sir-- In reference to the article 'Anatomy of an exerciser' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 17-23 July), I must say it's spot on.
Ms El-Rashidi's account of all gym goers is highly entertaining yet informative. I tried to figure out in which category I would fall under and tried to place other "regulars" in her categories as well.
A lovely read.
Dalia Abdel-Moniem
Cairo
Egypt
Running scared
Sir-- 'Dead or alive' (Al-Ahram Weekly, 24-30 July) was very clever in comparing the fate of Osama Bin Laden to the fate of Ms Shehab's uninvited kitchen guest (the grey mouse).
Amira Khalifa
Cairo
Egypt
Hate mail
Sir-- I continue to wonder if publishing visibly propagandist letters accusing others of harbouring "hate" or judging a piece of writing in Al-Ahram Weekly as "motivated by hate" is, can be or should be required by the Weekly's honoured principle of "Freedom of Speech."
Khalil Semaan
Vestal, NY
USA
Arab perspective
Sir-- I stumbled upon your electronic weekly, purely by accident, and I have enjoyed reading it, especially because I get an Arab perspective on issues that are not usually in the mainstream media here in America.
Thank you, I look forward to continued news and opinions from the Arab world, so I can get a well rounded idea about my world at home and abroad.
Sherry Cochran
Bremen, GA
USA
Al-Ahram Weekly reserves the right to edit letters submitted to Readers' Corner for brevity and clarity. Readers are advised to limit their letters to a maximum of 300 words.
