COMMENTS BY THE AUTHOR

Over the years I have put many of my thoughts on paper for my own satisfaction to ensure I would not lose a particular idea, feeling or thought. After the attacks of nine-eleven and the following events, I decided to compile into this book the many emails. letters and articles I received along with my own commentary. The comments of others are unedited and reflect the view of the particular writer. Its purpose is to share with others the pain, shock, disappointment, anger and, most of all, love that followed this tragic event.

I have the great pleasure to be a member of Science Fiction Novelists. This group of intelligent, articulate and very concerned people from all over the world keep in contact via the Internet. The main purpose of the group is to help writers with their work by critiquing and sharing helpful commentary, ideas and experience. SFNovelist members write primarily “hard” science fiction; that is fiction using the best and most accurate science available and extrapolating it into exciting novels and other tales of the future. Their thoughtful responses to the 9-11 attack inspired me to put this book together and are collected in the first part of the book. For that and their other help and encouragement I will be forever grateful.

Images of Pain

A Satanic burst of flame - Screaming, burning flesh - Bright tinkling shards of glass - Another monstrous flash of fire - Black smoke billowing - heart-rending phone calls - Humanity in the stair wells - Electronic pictures burned into brains - A rumbling, crushing, obliterating collapse - Terrible showers of stone, steel, glass, dust and flesh - Lives painfully obliterated as millions watch in horror and disbelief - Booming clouds of smoke and dust, then dooming silence.

Heroic thousands in vain efforts - Photos of lost loved ones - Withering hope - Veils of tears - Anguish a billion-fold, but some scream with satanic joy - Faces of horrible pain of loss - Electronic images of child faces of evil - I cry, you cry, millions cry, God cries. Satan laughs!
Ho - 9-11-01

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Source of this section: I am a member of an international writer’s group with members all over the world with ages ranging from twenty to seventy-four. After the World Trade Center attacks, there was quite a discussion within the group of the happenings and their ramifications. I thought you might be interested in some of what went on over the internet. The next fifty or so pages contain a selected group of comments from over several weeks. Please recognize that these are like conversations between friends, each comment a reflection of the thoughts of the writer. As such, they display the diverse views of concerned, caring and thoughtful individuals. In some instances I have grouped series of back-and-forth messages. All are used with the permission of their authors.
Howard Johnson

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-12-01 2:58am - Fellow Americans

I can barely type, because I can't stop crying. My American family is safe, although son-in-law is on combat alert. I feel violated, victimized, and overwhelmed with emotions. Please don't blame Muslims as a group. Most Muslims are decent God-fearing people, as most people are.

Malaysia, as a Muslim country, is not immune. There have been threats against our tallest building. These have been evacuated and downtown KL (Kuala Lumpur) is inaccessible.

A sad but very proud American.

eric (Eric Garrigue Vesely, Port Dickson, Maylasia)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-12-01 3:15am Eric:

What happened yesterday was not about religion. The perpetrator might think it was about religion, but that is only an excuse. The man who I think planned this is so filled with hatred and inadequacy that he probably doesn't even understand his own motives. In my opinion, the Muslim people are no more to blame for this act of war than Christian people are to blame for an individual who shoots an abortion doctor.

Thank you, Eric, for your tears. John (Bowers, US)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-12-01 5:35am

I hope everyone down in the US (and their families and friends) are safe. John is right, this isn't about religion, though cowardly monsters may use religion to justify their own hates and inadequacies. Pray for justice.


Pat Brown (London, Ontario)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-12-01 6:24am

Whatever the authors of this attack may be, they are not cowards. They were and are brave men willing to die for their cause, which makes the situation even worse. They are fanatics willing to die for a cause so long as they can take their perceived enemies with them. We've always reacted with horror to the idea of such fanaticism, as with Japanese kamikaze attacks. Civilization stands helpless before such fanaticism, and PM Blair is correct. This is an attack upon all of civilization, including other Muslim nations.

I have experienced this fanaticism first hand, having lost two friends in the rubble of the Murrah building in Oklahoma City. And now our nation has lost probably 10,000 killed. The time has come to exterminate the fanatics, for that is the only way to deal with them. They must be isolated and then destroyed along with those who have nurtured them. Possessing a rare blood type, I donated yesterday. It's all I could do. I had to do something.

Bob (Hurst, Oklahoma City)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Bob 9-12-01 7:14am

Yes, it was a horror leaving thousands with grieving, gaping holes in their families. My heart aches for them. I disagree about calling them “brave” men. I would not call a man who stalks, rapes and kills an innocent girl in an alley a brave man. Everything in our history says the same thing. These were back shooters, cowards, uncivilized dupes of mad fanatics who use perversions of religion to kill helpless people indiscriminately in a cowardly, sneak attack. Even the Japanese seemed to have tried to declare war on us before the attack on Pearl Harbor. The cowardly fanatics who guide these dupes and get them to kill themselves in carrying out their orders, these masters, hide safely in caves far away while their slaves did their dirty work. That’s what I call the ultimate in motivation. The Kamikazes were attacking military weapons while defending their homeland. That’s a whole different ball of wax.

The perversion of otherwise peaceful religions as a cause for death and agony has a long history. Over time, and including the present attack, Christianity has at least equaled and probably surpassed Islam as a basis for evil men to make war and create murder of innocents, as they strived for control and domination. Besides the crusades, countless thousands have been tortured and murdered by so-called Christians. The torture chambers of the Inquisition, the beheading of heretics, the burnings at the stake, all these horrors were ordered by the Christian? Church. How about Salem and the “Witches?”

Even now, many of the terrorist activities throughout the world are religious based. In Ireland, we even have Christian against Christian. On a smaller scale, there were Jim Jones and his cult, David Koresh and the Branch Dividians, and the Heaven’s Gate idiots? This is the same kind of perverted, but charismatic leadership which primarily leads to the death of cult members. The only difference between these and the bin Ladens is one of scale. They may wear different colors, but underneath they are the same satanic demagogs. These blind followers are not brave, but stupid, emotional slaves of their satanic masters.

Ho

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-12-01 9:30am Eric,

Thank you for posting that email. It was refreshing to hear a voice of sanity and compassion. I reside in Tennessee, but am currently in Connecticut, only two hours away from NY. Everyone here is aghast. I don't consider Muslims as a group responsible for this, but only those who are religious fanatics and brainwashed into believing they are involved in a jihad. I am strongly Christian in my beliefs, but intelligent enough to realize even we have our sects of nuts who are homicidal and suicidal. I am glad to hear your family is safe. I was supposed to fly home from Hartford to Nashville on Friday, but my wife wants me home now, and the airlines are gonna be impossible, so the company I work for is lending me a car and I am driving home, leaving this afternoon. It's about a 20-hour drive, 1250 miles. Thanks again. Our prayers join with your prayers for those intimately involved in this tragedy.

Dave the Junkie (David Harris, Connecticut

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-13-01 6:58am.

To all our American friends on SFN, your families, friends and colleagues.

Keep your chins up. May the perpetrator rot in hell. Warm wishes

Dave Skinner (Melbourne, Australia) (Aussie spelling)

In the lucky country down under... well, we may be perceived as a target just the same. One US expert on CNN said it could be Sydney tomorrow, or London next week. I was horrified in anticipation of a plane crashing into Buckingham Palace or the Houses of Parliament in London that awful night (our time 10.45 P.M. Monday)

So far so good that they don't see fit to escelate their acts of terror in other free countries. I'm just so sorry they see the US as the enemy. It's difficult to understand their thinking. Those whako fanatics put all us free democratic countries in the one basket. We will band together. Our Prime Minister has pledged Australia's full support. If America goes “to war,” then Australia goes “to war,” and I'm one Aussie citizen who agrees, and we all feel the same, take my word for it. You guys saved us from the Japanese in WW11. Our motives may (arguably) have been a little askew, but we fought side by side during the Vietnam war. We share the same beliefs of being free in our democratic society, and it's worth fighting for.

Some are comparing the events akin to Pearl Harbour. I think those who do are wrong. This is much much worse, no comparison. At least the Japanese attackers were a genuine military force, who attacked military targets. Not to say that they attacked first, declared war second, I understand that. The terrorists this week used civil aircraft, innocent civilians on board and one target at least, unfortunately with such horrible circumstances, was non military. You have every right to be triple angry than your parents and grandparents were over Pearl Harbour, not that that event as meaning something less in it's horror and how you see that event in your history.

No stone should be left unturned in our efforts to catch them. Our Prime Minister was in Washington that day ( he was at the Pentagon the day before) They whisked him to the Aussie Embassy. He's on his way home yesterday in a US military plane. Bill Clinton was here on vacation. He's gone home now. He was very sad on our TV news giving a speech.

I apologise for using this forum to air my thoughts, but I just had to put something down.

God bless you all (Dave Skinner)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-13-01 9:31am

Students at UNBC in Northern B.C. have been clumped around TV cameras in the lounge and pub and even classrooms since Tuesday's disaster. A huge card headed “Hope for World Peace” is posted in the Winter Garden (internal courtyard - lots of snow in PG in winter) and an interdenominational service was held yesterday. We've heard quite a bit about the commercial travelers routed to a city north of us and places where the number of incoming, dislocated travelers outnumbered the local population. All the faculty seem to know some colleague who lives or works in New York, and national news coverage confirms Canadians died in the towers. Who would have thought Prince George, in Northern B.C., would be affected by terror in New York. But it has, just like every city in the Western World. I take this as proof that we are one world, now, by means of bonds as intimate as personal connections. And as one world we can find the will to cooperate in a successful, zero tolerance stance toward terrorism and the use of any weapons destructive to all we've built and cherish as a civilized species.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Lynda J. Williams, Computer Science, University of Northern B.C.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-13-01 11:40am

In the U.S. we have done well so far in directing our anger at terrorists and not Muslims, to our credit. However, I strongly suspect the U.S. will declare war against terrorists and states that continue to harbor terrorists. I suspect the Taliban will react with great indignation and with a call to arms for all Muslims and all Muslim countries. That is the only reasonable purpose for this abhorrent act - forcing a war.

While peace-loving Muslims may find such a call abhorrent, I couldn't imagine Catholics standing aside if the Vatican declared war - or called Christians world wide to defend the Pope - and in the past the Pope has sanctioned terrible holy wars against Muslims (called crusades instead of jihad) for much the same reason that this conflict has come into being.

Israel, unfortunately, has demonstrated how not to respond (in my opinion). When Jewish settlers believe God gives them not only the right but the mandate to uproot and discard Palestinian lives it provides fodder to continue fueling religious and cultural conflict. Scenes of children being gunned down by the state military and civilians indiscriminately being killed and their lives torn asunder in the name of state security do not sit well with me. They sit much worse to anyone with Muslim sensibilities. Unfortunately, it is much easier to criticize efforts to combat terrorism than it is to offer up constructive suggestions on improvement. It is true that Israel is a tiny country subjected to a campaign of terrorism and very vulnerable. My heart goes out to Israelis and Palestinians wishing to live peacefully.

I do believe that any answer lies in avoiding the mind set of them vs. us, or at least new boundaries drawn. We who wish to live in peace with all of our neighbors must unite against those who wish to die in hatred and righteous indignation. That means Jew, Christian and Muslim who oppose hatred must work together. Where Muslims threaten the safety of westerners it would be best if Muslims stepped up and said no more. Where Americans strike blindly out in fear or anger at anyone arabic or Muslim, it should be other Americans who say no, loudly and forcefully.

For me the hallmark of good Science Fiction has always been the successful resolution to future problems, most imagined and far future, but many real and contemporary. My challenge to Science Fiction Novelists is to take the tradition of SF and address the question of combating terrorism, in all its forms. We have the literary format to address this issue and, thanks to the internet, a global perspective. This is a topic that could offend easily. (Whom do you portray as the antagonist? What act do you portray as oppressive?) I think it would provide more grist for the mill than perhaps we would wish to consider. I could portray factions in Palestine as protagonists, factions in Israel, factions engaged in jihads, factions within the U.S. Any realistic treatment of this subject will offend.

If viable answers are to be found, those offenses must be confronted no matter how unpleasant. For example, the U.S. is not without fault. That aspect of our government which too few of us ever see or even realize exists support governments that do not hold the favor of the citizens it governs and instigate insurrections to topple popular governments, all in the name of U.S. security. How dare we? One result is a faction of Muslims who feel religiously violated rather than a partner in a modern world, and terrorists who are willing to die, not for monetary or personal gain, but to defend their beliefs and their culture.

I am sure armed conflict is on our horizon and that such action is justified. Let us hope it doesn't serve to polarize otherwise reasonable people into opposing camps. No greater topic could be breached by this organization than the eradication of terrorism while simultaneously respecting the tensions that brought such behavior into being.

Any story addressing this issue is welcome in our current short story contest. I urge you to consider addressing this topic. Any story so submitted will not count toward the submission limits. Please limit their size. The one requirement - the story should offer resolutions or at least insights that help resolve the issue. Black pessimism will be rejected. Blind patriotic fervor from any perspective will be rejected. This is a harder topic but much more valuable.

John Koehler (Pacific Northwest)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-13-01 5:54pm

“When a person responds to the joys and sorrows of others as if they were his own, he has attained the highest state of spiritual union.” The Bhagavad Gita, 6:32

There is something holy in our country coming together in this time I think.
Regards, Don (Don Muchow, Dallas)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-14-01 2:31am Dear novelists.

This has been and continues to be a week of profound emotion for all of us, I think. Never before in the history of the world has anything like this happened, and for those of us in North America it is even more shocking because we have become complacent surrounded by our buffering oceans. Many of you are already aware, but new members may not know, that we have one who is no stranger to this sort of thing. We are a global workshop, with members on almost every continent. One member lives in Jerusalem, Israel. Her name is Geulia Stoliar, code name Tierry. Being the nosy sort that I am, I check in on Tierry from time to time to make sure she is still alive. And it might interest you to know that she has had her fair share of recent danger. Remember the building collapse when a wedding party fell three stories and two dozen people died? The night before that collapse, Tierry was at a wedding in the same building, on the same floor. Remember the pizza parlor that was bombed? That same day, Tierry walked past that pizza parlor twice, just three hours before the explosion. I'm sure she has other stories to tell, but those are two that I know about. For Tierry, danger is a daily routine. For the rest of us, it is new and terrifying. If you are the praying sort, pray for all of us. But pray twice for Tierry. And be sure to read her submissions: she is an excellent novelist.

With love and best wishes for all of you, John Bowers (US)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-14-01 6:19am

As a resident of an Islamic nation in that part of the world the US is currently pointing the finger at . . . I was as shocked and horrified as anyone by the events of 11 September. I deplore the loss of life and destruction. On the other hand, it comes as no surprise to me that the US is a target. The British mainland has for decades been a target of IRA terrorists because of the actions of the UK government. US foreign policy was almost certain to invoke the same response. Certainly US support of Israel has been an Arab bete noir for a number of years. And the anti-Israeli, anti-US rhetoric has only increased in this region since the election of Ariel Sharon. But, for all that, I don't like to see the US pointing fingers without solid proof, and I'm fearful of what action the US might take when they eventually learn who was responsible. I don't care how justified the US administration might feel it is, but going in guns blazing would be a mistake - e.g. the pharmaceutical factory in Khartoum. The US is not known for its considered approach to foreign affairs. Again, my condolences. But, please, think about what you're saying and what you plan to do. Terrorism requires a global, not an American, response.

- ian (Ian Sales, United Arab Emirates)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Commentary on Ian’s message: The attack on the Khartoum Pharmaceutical factory (and the cruise missiles launched at Iraq at the same time) was the diversionary tactic of the amoral lunatic in the white house at a time when his personal antics were drawing critical attention. It was a fruitless, pointless and stupid gesture with no long range goal. In spite of the condemnations and ridicule of the press, the current occupant of the oval office planned careful, long-range responses to the attack of 9-11 with the stated goal of fighting terrorism where it’s roots lie rather than on the streets of America. The attack was on America, on American soil, and was so declared by Osama bin Laden. It wasn’t the UN or any other nation being attacked both verbally and physically. A global response would have been bogged down by the Islamic terrorist nations in the UN. An American response was proper and well planned to serve notice on those who choose to be our active enemies that we will not lie down and let them go unpunished.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Recently, I was asked to look at the recent events through the lens of military history. I have joined the cast of thousands who have written an “open letter to Americans.”

14 September, 2001

Dear friends and fellow Americans:

Like everyone else in this great country, I am reeling from last week's attack on our sovereignty. But unlike some, I am not reeling from surprise. As a career soldier and a student and teacher of military history, I have a different perspective and I think you should hear it.

This war will be won or lost by the American citizens, not diplomats, politicians or soldiers. Let me briefly explain. In spite of what the media, and even our own government is telling us, this act was not committed by a group of mentally deranged fanatics. To dismiss them as such would be among the gravest of mistakes. This attack was committed by a ferocious, intelligent and dedicated adversary. Don't take this the wrong way. I don't admire these men and I deplore their tactics, but I respect their capabilities. The many parallels that have been made with the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor are apropos. Not only because it was a brilliant sneak attack against a complacent America, but also because we may well be pulling our new adversaries out of caves 30 years after we think this war is over, just like my father's generation had to do with the formidable Japanese in the years following WW II.

These men hate the United States with all of their being, and we must not underestimate the power of their moral commitment. Napoleon, perhaps the world's greatest combination of soldier and statesman, stated the moral is to the physical as three is to one. Patton thought the Frenchman underestimated its importance and said moral conviction was five times more important in battle than physical strength. Our enemies are willing -- better said, anxious -- to give their lives for their cause. How committed are we America? And for how long?

In addition to demonstrating great moral conviction, the recent attack demonstrated a mastery of some of the basic fundamentals of warfare taught to most military officers worldwide, namely simplicity, security and surprise. When I first heard rumors that some of these men may have been trained at our own Air War College, it made perfect sense to me. This was not a random act of violence, and we can expect the same sort of military competence to be displayed in the battle to come. This war will escalate, with a good portion of it happening right here in the good ol' U.S. of A. These men will not go easily into the night. They do not fear us. We must not fear them.

In spite of our overwhelming conventional strength as the world's only superpower (a truly silly term), we are the underdog in this fight. As you listen to the carefully scripted rhetoric designed to prepare us for the march for war, please realize that America is not equipped or seriously trained for the battle ahead. To be certain, our soldiers are much better than the enemy, and we have some excellent counter terrorist organizations, but they are mostly trained for hostage rescues, airfield seizures, or the occasional body snatch, (which may come in handy). We will be fighting a war of annihilation, because if their early efforts are any indication, our enemy is ready and willing to die to the last man. Eradicating the enemy will be costly and time consuming. They have already deployed their forces in as many as 20 countries, and are likely living the lives of everyday citizens.

Simply put, our soldiers will be tasked with a search and destroy mission on multiple foreign landscapes, and the public must be patient and supportive until the strategy and tactics can be worked out. For the most part, our military is still in the process of redefining itself and is presided over by men and women who grew up with - and were promoted because they excelled in - Cold War doctrine, strategy and tactics. This will not be linear warfare. There will be no clear centers of gravity to strike with high technology weapons. Our vast technological edge will certainly be helpful, but it will not be decisive. Perhaps the perfect metaphor for the coming battle was introduced by the terrorists themselves aboard the hijacked aircraft -- this will be a knife fight, and it will be won or lost by the ingenuity and will of citizens and soldiers, not by software or smart bombs. We must also be patient with our military leaders.

Unlike Americans who are eager to put this messy time behind us, our adversaries have time on their side, and they will use it. They plan to fight a battle of attrition, hoping to drag the battle out until the American public loses its will to fight. This might be difficult to believe in this euphoric time of flag waving and patriotism, but it is generally acknowledged that America lacks the stomach for a long fight. We need only look as far back as Vietnam, when North Vietnamese General Vo Nguyen Giap (also a military history teacher) defeated the United States of America without ever winning a major tactical battle. American soldiers who marched to war cheered on by flag-waving Americans in 1965 were reviled and spat upon less than three years later when they returned.

Although we hope that Osama bin Laden is no Giap, he is certain to understand and employ the concept. We can expect not only large doses of pain like the recent attacks, but also less audacious sand-in-the-gears tactics, ranging from livestock infestations to attacks at water supplies and power distribution facilities. These attacks are designed to hit us in our comfort zone forcing the average American to pay more and play less and eventually eroding our resolve. But it can only work if we let it. It is clear to me that the will of the American citizenry - you and I - is the center of gravity the enemy has targeted. It will be the fulcrum upon which victory or defeat will turn. He believes us to be soft, impatient, and self-centered. He may be right, but if so, we must change. The Prussian general Carl von Clausewitz, (the most often quoted and least read military theorist in history), says that there is a remarkable trinity of war that is composed of the (1) will of the people, (2) the political leadership of the government, and (3) the chance and probability that play out on the field of battle, in that order.

Every American citizen was in the crosshairs of last Tuesday's attack, not just those that were unfortunate enough to be in the World Trade Center or Pentagon. The will of the American people will decide this war. If we are to win, it will be because we have what it takes to persevere through a few more hits, learn from our mistakes, improvise, and adapt. If we can do that, we will eventually prevail.

Everyone I've talked to in the past few days has shared a common frustration, saying in one form or another, “I just wish I could do something!” You are already doing it. Just keep faith in America, and continue to support your President and military, and the outcome is certain. If we fail to do so, the outcome is equally certain. God Bless America

Dr. Tony Kern, Lt Col, USAF (Ret) - Former Director of Military History, USAF Academy

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-16-01 - All:

Methinks there is even a bit of small scale, class warfare rhetoric among our own members. Ratchetted up several orders of magnitude this can become racial, religious, ethnic, political or social hatred. As long as we can express our differences freely and remain relatively civilized about it, (and SFN members do that quite well) relative peace will prevail.

Sadly, it is inflamation of this kind of hatred that unscrupulous, power-hungry demagogs use so well to control their slaves. Osama bin Laden is certainly one of these. Why should we be surprised that he convinced so many of his followers to sacrifice their lives at his direction and while he sat safely in a bunker far away. We have our own brand right here in the good old USA. The Jim Jones cult, the Branch Davidians, even the Heaven’s Gate idiots, blindly followed their charismatic leader to their deaths. The only difference with the bin Laden cult is that they took a lot of Americans with them. History is full of examples: Hitler, Mussolini, Napoleon, Sulliman the Magnificent, Genghis Kahn, Attila the Hun, even Alexander the Great to name a few. Now, of course, they hide from combat unlike the last five named who led their men into battle and took mortal risks with their men.

When the cause is just in our eyes, we Americans, too, are willing to die. Just look at the wars we have fought since the revolution. Belief is a powerful force which can be used for good or evil. Whether our cause is good or evil is a very subjective opinion unfortunately. To most people, good is that which helps or pleases and bad or evil is that which harms or damages us and ours. Good and evil, right and wrong have very different meanings for a zebra than for a lion.

Winning is when my side triumphs. Losing is when the opposition triumphs. There is no denying a defeat. No argument annuls a victory. The end of this will come not when someone wins, but when and if all opposition is vanquished and accepts defeat. In war, the only battle that must be won is the final battle. Let’s hope that one is ours.

Ho

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-17-01 - John K,

Regarding your proposed new theme.

None of you probably know that when the NY bombing occurred, I was in Puebla Mexico performing an audit of a Software Development Center for Motorola. I ended up being trapped there for a week (well sitting in a nice hotel with nowhere to go) until the borders opened. It was particularly interesting listening to the news on CNN (US reactions) as contrasted with the viewpoint of the local, non-US citizens.

Their primary concern was worry. They don't know what the US will do (I reassured them . . . we don't know either . . . and that the fear and worry is a universal constant).

Upon coming home, I discovered I was correct . . . except the fear and worry is even greater here.

I like the topic of terrorism for a short story contest, but . . . not now. It's too soon. The theme is still too raw.

The theory of six-degrees-of-separation is proving agonizingly true. Everyone either:
1) knows someone who died, friend or relative (1st-degree-of-separation)
2) knows someone who had a friend or relative die (2nd-degree-of-separation) or
3) knows someone who knows someone who had someone close die (3rd-degree)

Near certainty is achieved by the 3rd degree here in the US.

Such stories right now would be too bittersweet to even review objectively. I would suggest postponing such themes until next year's competition. They might be cathartic, but they would probably be harmful and unintentionally offensive as well.
----

However, I do have a few thoughts.

The most interesting things about this topic are:

- the faceless enemy (you are fighting an emotion . . . and emotions cannot be dissuaded by logic since logic did not put those emotions there in the first place)

- the contradictions that we want to fight terrorism to protect our freedoms (The reason that terrorism is possible is because of the freedoms we have - the opportunities each of us has to act for good or ill. The only sure way to cut back on terrorism is to remove those opportunities and, indeed, reduce the very freedoms we wish to preserve . . . so are we willing to lose freedoms to preserve freedom?)
----

Anyone ever read David Gerrold's Alien series? His last book, A Season for Slaughter, discusses the nature of freedom. By his analysis, freedom consists of two elements . . . opportunity and responsibility.

If you don't have the opportunity (to express your opinions, to own weapons, to own property, etc.) then there is no freedom. However, if you do not act responsibly when such opportunities are offered (by shouting fire in a movie theater, by using your personal firearms to harm others, or by stealing property of others) then the freedoms of others are diminished by your acts and the freedom of all is thus diminished as well.

In our search for the solution to terrorism . . . do we wish to diminish opportunities of others to do ill? Because then we also diminish freedom of action to do good as well and everyone is less free . . . or do we wish to promote or ensure responsible action and behavior?

Two paths, but how the hell do you do the latter?
-----

Final thoughts . . . three quotes from history . . . with an odd thread, if you follow it;
1 - Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first drive mad with power.
2 - The millstone of the gods grinds slowly, but it grinds extremely fine.
3 - When it gets dark enough . . . you can see stars.
-------

Peace and best wishes to all and . . . it's nice to be home

jeffr (Jeff Robinson)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-17-01 - Jeff

I disagree, respectfully. Now, while the blood still flows, the pain is near overpowering and the flesh raw; now is the time to write. The discipline of putting words carefully in place should force a thoughtful writer (aren't we all?) to craft even more carefully than usual.

There is no solution to terrorism (evil). It has always been with us and always will. All we can do is reduce its damage to civilization. Terrorism comes in many forms: the inquisition, the crusades, the massacres of Native Americans and immigrant Americans as well as all wars, tribal, civil and international. Religion-based terrorism, like the latest attack, is among the most common.

Someone wrote that this recent attack was not about religion. Again, I respectfully disagree. Like so much terrorism associated with religious differences, it is a painful example of how ruthless men can subvert religion to their own satanic purpose. The only difference between the Osama bin Laden group and the Jim Jones cult here in America, is of scale and effect. Those people in Guiana could easily have been directed to kill themselves in taking the lives of others along with their own. Subversion of many religions to serve evil has a long and bloody history. Let us not blame the religions as they are merely the satanic tools of evil, charismatic leaders. One would not blame the aircraft that created the carnage, only those directing them.

Ho

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-14-01 8:49am Dear Ian,

I think the majority of the world shares the fears you express and view the prospect with abhorrence. Seems to me a truth as old as time that two blacks don't make a white. Justice and revenge are very different concepts. Revenge is far too likely to claim more innocent lives. Do police investigators solve murder cases by bombing the neighborhood where the murder suspects live? That's the difference between cracking down on criminals and war.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Lynda J. Williams

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-25-01 5:35am Linda:

You sound so much like my idealistic sister whom I love dearly, but whose views of methods differ from mine quite often. I wrote this reply to one of your emails to SFNchat, but didn't send it then.

Please hold on to your idealism; don't give up your wish for a better world. Saying that, I hope you will understand my comments.

You may be surprised at how our current administration proceeds. It is not being guided by a glib-tongued, self-serving egotist as was the administration that flattened the pharmaceutical(??) factory in Khartoum and at an opportune time for him. It is my firm belief that these men will plan carefully and thoughtfully before taking any action. I hope they will not be persuaded by those advisors and small-time politicos who demand immediate action.

Yes, this is a global problem, but I see nothing wrong with an American response aided by those civilized nations who want to join us. When it comes to conflict, there must be one leader. Divided leadership and alliances have never succeeded. Cooperation of sovereign nations, free to refrain from joining us in every aspect of our actions are the backbone of this battle. Cooperation, not subordination will, I hope, be our guiding principle. So being, all nations can hold their heads high and act according to their own decisions, but let there be one leader, and one leader only.

Linda, how naive can you be? There is a vast difference between a single, criminal act by a single or few criminals and an attack by a nation or organization of terrorists seeking to destroy a nation. Your example given is certainly without basis. It would be akin to mounting an investigation of the pilots of the individual planes that bombed Pearl Harbor. That could then be followed by endless trials of these pilots in courts where their warped childhood could be blamed for their actions or they could be declared innocent by reason of insanity. What language would we now be speaking if that had been our response? I take it you were not around when Pearl Harbor was attacked.

Like it or not, we are at war. We can mount all kinds of investigations, build up walls and processes of security, sacrifice our freedoms to protect ourselves, even isolate ourselves from those parts of the world where the terrorists operate, but that would not stop them. That is precisely what we have been doing for the last twenty years and look at the rewards for our efforts.

I think in spite of those who want to “bomb Afghanistan back to the stone age,” calmer and more knowledgeable heads will prevail. There are several other primitive countries where bin Laden has enslaved the government. I pray those in our country who would rush in headlong are held in check (and I think they will be).

The word is, we already have people on the ground in Pakistan. I truly believe the vast majority of the Muslim world do not want a catastrophic war with the west. If we can destroy the Hydra that is international terrorism with carefully planned surgical strikes, even ground attacks, states that foster the evil may change their direction. At least I hope so. The parallel between Hitler and bin Laden is painfully accurate. What did and didn't we do about that during the thirties? I was around then and remember. We talk a lot about what happened after Pearl Harbor, but very little about all the back peddling, coddling and appeasing of the Nazis before war broke out. It was a different world then as well. Near the end of WWII, Hitler had an atom bomb and an A9 missile under development. The missile was to be aimed at New York for the first atom bomb test. Had it not been for German scientists who, at great personal risk, delayed the development and deployment of this deadly combination, New York might be gone and who knows how history could have changed.

These terrorist organizations and the nations who harbor and supply them, could easily merge into a power with atom bombs, biological agents and deadly poisons at their disposal as well as the rockets to deliver them. When this happens, how long do think these monsters would hesitate before raining death and destruction on the US and the rest of Western Civilization? Their previous actions and direct words answer that question. Given the means, they would annihilate us all without hesitation even if it meant their own destruction.

This is a cancer now consuming the human race. We must eliminate the cancer now or face a new dark age that would easily eclipse the horrors of the last one.

Ho

- - - - - - - - - - - -

10-03-01

I can completely understand why emotions and anger and the need to act run high. Action must happen. But as far as naivety goes, I respectfully submit that power corrupts, and no one - not even the president of the United States - should amass too much power in the world with no questions asked and all license granted. Assuming that sort of power can function without straying into atrocity and loss of basic freedoms is, I greatly fear, the naive point of view.

Linda

- - - - - - - - - - - -

10-03-01 Linda:

You said, no one - not even the president of the United States - should amass too much power in the world with no questions asked and all license granted.

Right on the money. Methinks you misunderstood my message. Being a leader is not the same as being an all-powerful dictator. In the US our leaders govern with the consent of the governed. That's the basis of our Constitution. It is with a great deal of comfort that I watch my president relying heavily on the counsel of his cabinet for decision making. MBAs are trained in the skills of selecting and then relying on capable people in their first level of management. Been there. Done that. The good of the organization (the nation or the coalition) is frequently touted as the most desirable goal.

Kings, emperors and dictators with their absolute power are the exact opposite. You do know what happens when one of Saddam Hussein's advisors disagrees with him, right? The time to be wary is when a leader begins taking for himself the powers that should be given to his staff, the legislature and the courts. Thankfully, I see no evidence of that in the present situation. There are those in the US from all political persuasion that would frighten me if they were placed in positions of power. Some are quite obvious; some are more guarded in their pronouncements, but dangerous nonetheless. It is far easier to let such people obtain power than it is to take that power away once they have it. Fortunately, our constitution provides many safeguards against such actions by any person. Yet the public must remain vigilant.

A leader who leads by listening to those he leads, seeking wise counsel from his chosen staff, and is concerned for the welfare of the nation as a whole, is quite unlikely to abuse the power he does have. The divisions of power under our constitution remain a bulwark against any person or persons attempting to assume powers not granted by that constitution. If we, as a nation, lead the world in this new kind of war by consulting on an equal basis with other nations, leader to leader and government to government; and if we respect the wishes and the sovereignty of those nations; and if we move agonizingly slowly to be reasonably certain of the accuracy of our information and efficacy of our actions; then our course will be well charted. Our actions in Pakistan where we are not pressing for more than their government can safely grant, are an example of careful, deliberate decisions. I don't think there has been a time in my life when I have been more proud of the actions of our leaders than since September 11. Time alone will pass final judgement on those actions and I certainly cannot predict the future, but right now I feel good about what is going on. Of course, that could change.

Incidently, stay bright, independent-minded and questioning. I preached that to my four daughters and son. We continue to have spirited, no-holds-barred discussions whenever we get together. They, too, take me to task for whatever I say and with which they disagree. By the way, I probably have grandchildren older than you.

Ho

- - - - - - - - - - - -

10-11-01

Ho, you said,

government can safely grant, are an example of careful, deliberate decisions. I don't think there has been a time in my life when I have been more proud of the actions of our leaders than since September 11. Time alone will pass final judgement on those actions and I certainly cannot predict the future, but right now I feel good about what is going on. Of course, that could change.

I would agree. I remain concerned by the potential for the western world - lead by the US as you say - to get a bit addicted to the emotional relief of dropping bombs though. And so polarized by the experience that we are incapable of listening to some of the underlying problems that give terrorism a toe hold within more reasonable populations. As far as the Taliban themselves are concerned I would happily shoot one if given the opportunity. They're ugly but they're not new. The contras in Nicaragua were also vicious and others like the despots you cited. No civilized nation can any longer afford to support such horrors or breed them by supplying arms to states without regard to their human rights record. That's the bigger lesson here. And that I do not believe is at simple minded. It is common sense. During the cold war the threat was different and the things people did were different. We have to face a new world order from the point of view of how to work for peace as well as fight terrorism. That's all.

By the way, I probably have grandchildren older than you.

Really? I'm forty-three. Just young at heart.

Linda

- - - - - - - - - - - -

10-12-01 Linda:

You see what assumptions can do? Actually, I missed by just eighteen years. I assumed you were a grad student for some reason. You are the same age as my next-to-youngest daughter.

You said, I remain concerned by the potential for the western world - lead by the US as you say - to get a bit addicted to the emotional relief of dropping bombs though. And so polarized by the experience that we are incapable of listening to some of the underlying problems that give terrorism a toe hold within more reasonable populations.

A valid concern which I share, but about which I am presently encouraged. During the last thirty or so years, I have sensed, almost smelled, some gradual changes in our use of force. The Viet Nam War, Grenada, Panama, Somalia and the Gulf war, each taught us painful lessons. They also changed the way Americans see any conflict which increasingly came into their living rooms via TV. I feel really good about many of those changes.

Our military hardware and technology shifted from weapons of mass destruction to smart weapons designed to seek out and destroy military hardware and locations. I spent time as a civilian engineering consultant to several branches of the service and became acquainted with many career military men and women, some in high places. During that time I heard comments about a growing impetus to minimize civilian casualties and concentrate on military targets.

At the same time I have noticed growing concern for innocent lives among our leaders and the people in general. “Collateral damage” will always be with us in any kind of war if only as dislocations and the associated hardships. This is especially true when facing an enemy who uses this knowledge and deliberately places concentrations of innocent civilians near military targets as happened in Iraq. To place a school or hospital (I forget which one it was in Baghdad) atop a hardened military headquarters was a win-win situation for Saddam Hussein. If we didn't bomb it, his headquarters was secure; since we did, the innocent civilian lives destroyed provided him with an excellent propaganda tool. This or any other similar use of civilians as cover is not an option in the Western world.

No civilized nation can any longer afford to support such horrors or breed them by supplying arms to states without regard to their human rights record. That's the bigger lesson here. And that I do not believe is at simple minded. It is common sense. During the cold war the threat was different and the things people did were different. We have to face a new world order from the point of view of how to work for peace as well as fight terrorism. That's all.

Bravo! No one could have said it better. Again, I am encouraged by current events. If you will note one small fact that keeps popping up in news reports. We are not arming the so-called Northern Alliance in Afghanistan. We are using them, but, in fact, are trying to hold them in check. As I recall, they don't have a much better human rights record than the Taliban. They seem to be merely another group of war lords. Only time will tell the wisdom (or foolishness) of our efforts. It may be a stretch, but I see this insignificant action as aimed toward a real peace in Afghanistan when this is all over. Along with that I notice more concern among friends and relatives for just plain people all over the world and a little less of a tendency for self-righteous, knee-jerk responses within our government. We have a long way to go, but the direction we move is far more important than where we are. I am cautiously optimistic, but then, I have always been an optimist.

As you can tell, I can get wordy at times, particularly when writing to a thinking person like yourself about subjects in which I have a passionate interest. This is one of the luxuries provided by having the time to write and interesting people with whom to communicate. I thank you for your efforts and for your genuine concerns.

Ho

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Linda Williams - 11-09-01

I remain concerned by the potential for the western world - lead by the US as you say - to get a bit addicted to the emotional relief

A valid concern which I share, but about which I am presently encouraged. During the last thirty or so years, I have sensed, almost smelled, some gradual changes in our use of force. The Viet Nam War, Grenada, Panama, Somalia and the Gulf war, each taught us painful lessons. They also changed the way Americans see any conflict which increasingly came into their living rooms via TV. I feel really good about many of those changes.

Yes, I think it is harder to glamorize war. I remember my uncle telling me how world war II felt to him as a young man, in Britain. Sounded more like a team sports event.

This is especially true when facing an enemy who uses this knowledge and deliberately places concentrations of innocent civilians near military targets as happened in Iraq. To place a school or hospital (I forget which one it was in Baghdad) atop a hardened military headquarters was a win-win situation for Saddam Hussein. If we didn't bomb it, his headquarters was secure; since we did, the innocent civilian lives destroyed provided him with an excellent propaganda tool. This or any other similar use of civilians as cover is not an option in the Western world.

Always the problem for the “good guy” in any no holds barred situation. And one I acknowledge. My fear of habituation remains. I suppose - rather than being naive about threats from the outside being every bit as horrid as they seem - I am simultaneously skeptical of the ability of those who begin with the right motives to stick to them when circumstances hand over great power in combination with high stress and new social tolerances.

My father, who served in World War II, told me about nice Canadian farm boys who raped French girls under war conditions. I've spoken on the phone (crisis line stint) with Korean war vets who were brutalized by their experience. Accounts I have read of places like Nicaragua (and Rowanda, and the Taliban) leave me with the strong impression there are those in any population capable, willing and able to be monsters. I have a cousin who served in the military and know there are many decent people in it. But I get serious fear spikes when people start taking about suspending human rights in the name of hunting bad guys. Starting with freedom of speech. No one and nothing should ever be above criticism. Doesn't mean the criticism is necessarily right. But I meander.

No civilized nation can any longer afford to support such horrors or breed them by supplying arms to states without regard to their human rights record. That's the bigger lesson here. And that I do not believe is at all simple minded.

Bravo! No one could have said it better. Again, I am encouraged by current events. If you will note one small fact that keeps popping up in news reports. We are not arming the so-called Northern Alliance in Afghanistan. We are using them, but, in fact, are trying to hold them in check. As I recall, they don't have a much better human rights record than the Taliban.

Indeed. The enemy of my enemy may also be a major jerk. Amazes me that ANYONE is left alive in Afghanistan.

Along with that I notice more concern among friends and relatives for just plain people all over the world and a little less of a tendency for self-righteous, knee-jerk responses within our government. We have a long way to go, but the direction we move is far more important than where we are. I am cautiously optimistic, but then, I have always been an optimist.

Well, I sometimes feel anyone with children has to be. I am not a pacifist. If I ever was, I ceased to be the day I held my first child in my arms. I would kill to protect my own. I have even moved, as I learned more about the world through study, talking to people who have “been there” and doing things like crisis line counseling, away from my young adult position that all criminals were just sick and needed help. There are cases where I agree with one of my more hard line characters, Horth Nersal. “Some people just need killing.”

As you can tell, I can get wordy at times, particularly when writing to a thinking person like yourself about subjects in which I have a passionate interest. This is one of the luxuries provided by having the time to write and interesting people with whom to communicate. I thank you for your efforts and for your genuine concerns.

My thanks, in return, for reassuring me that all Americans haven't stopped thinking while they process the shock and grief the whole world felt, to some extent, on September 11. It is a bit unnerving to be “none of the above” (particularly re: the fervent Christian vs. fervent Islamic thing) and have powerful doses of “with us or against us” painted in stark blacks and whites pouring out of the TV screen.

I suppose I have always been suspicious of 'ism' starting with religion and including nationalism. They are so powerful. I was a card-carrying atheist in my youth. I read around the subject and concluded it was about everyone claiming to be “enlightened” and then killing each other over the details. I was also very interested in science and religion tended to feature as the heavy hand of censorship there. Seemed to me religion had been making a bolux of achieving peace and progress for the last few thousand years and it was time rationality had a go.

The older I get, the better able I am to see the positive side of religious belief, mostly as a result of getting to know very admirable people with earnest religious beliefs which don't expend the majority of their thrust trying to punish, dominate or control others; or sometimes just as a comfort that sustains people.

My faith in science, if one can call it that, is back sliding. The thing about science, which I didn't understand when I was 18, is that people fund it. And what do people fund? Better ways to make money. Or war.

Why can't we get excited about going to Mars or curing cancer?

It makes one despair, sometimes, when the world's problems keep persisting in looking like the sort that play out in the status struggles of Kindergarten.

Well, been a rough week. Got to work on the weekend but not tonight! Going to have a beer with a Mathematician friend who's reading my novel then go home, molest my husband, hug my kids and read something that helps me remember science used to sound more like the dawn of the “Star Trek” era of “Brave New Worlds”, than smack of “Cyberpunk” visions of post-holocaust disaster. I write about nasty stuff sometimes, but I still refuse to let the “cyberpunk” world view triumph. The world needs good guys and fiction owes it to the morale of the reading public to let them win more than their fair share.

Thanks for “listening.” I, too, like to talk a lot when I have an intelligent someone to bounce ideas off. It is a great disappointment - particularly working at a university! - how seldom the hubbub of 'real' life lets that happen.

The other person I burble to a lot is my coauthor, Dr. Alison Sinclair. Ever heard of a “blog?” You can see ours at http://ctl.unbc.ca/blog/blogger.html Not sure how I feel about it, yet. Maybe I am too old to adapt to the information age entirely. But she thought it was a great idea so I am going to give it a go. Very Reetion concept. Mind you, my Reetions (fictional people with a transparent, egalitarian political structure) have arbiters (AIs) to deal with the volume issue!

Give me some of your insights on religion? I'm not interested in conversion. I'm a hard core humanist agnostic. I figure any decent god will, by definition, forgive me that if I do a decent job of living right. :-) But I don't oppose my children attending church. Just checking their brain at the door.

More of that “nothing should be too sacred to question” attitude.

Every day since Sept 11 I do, FYI, wake up with a sense of gratitude that I still live in a world where I'm forgiven for holding such opinions.

Lynda J. Williams, M.Sc. Computation, M.L.S. Info Science
Project Leader CTL, University of Northern B.C. Instructor in Computing Literacy, Computer Science williaml@unbc.ca 960-5613 http://ctl.unbc.ca (work) http://www.okalrel.org (Sci Fi)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

This, from a Canadian newspaper, is worth sharing.

America: The Good Neighbor. (From before 9-11)

Widespread but only partial news coverage was given recently to a remarkable editorial broadcast from Toronto by Gordon Sinclair, a Canadian television commentator. What follows is the full text of his trenchant remarks as printed in the Congressional Record:

“This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth.

Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States.

When France was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it.

When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped.

The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans.

I'd like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why don't they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes?

Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles.

You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon - not once, but several times - and safely home again.

You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here.

When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke.

I can name you five-thousand times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake.

Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I'm one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those.”

Stand proud, America!

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Ho,

I don't have access to all the historical facts that Gordon Sinclair has, but in the most recent event that I can recall, those massive bush fires in California and other Western States, I can tell you that a contingent of Australian Fire fighters was there and helping.

Because America is so confident in its own abilities and resource rich, it often spurns the help of others, even when offered.

So while I find this comment a little one sided, I would not attack in the least this appreciation of a generous nation. YES, America does help other peoples -- but I think this help is appreciated and reciprocated more than was suggested.

Richard Womack (SFN) - 9-15-01

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Richard:

You are certainly correct. I should have noted that there was help sent from Japan and England, I believe, when a major earthquake struck the LA area in the 70s. I'm certain there were others I don't know of. And who could forget Lafayette and the French help in our revolution.
Ho - 9-17-01

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-18-01 Michael Horlak (California, not an SFN member)

From this Afghani's point of view, it's obvious there aren't any easy answers, only tough decisions to be made.

Peace, Michael

Written by an Afghani in the U.S.

I've been hearing a lot of talk about “bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age.” Ron Owens, on KGO Talk Radio today, allowed that this would mean killing innocent people, people who had nothing to do with this atrocity, but “we're at war, we have to accept collateral damage. What else can we do?” Minutes later I heard some TV pundit discussing whether we “have the belly to do what must be done.” And I thought about the issues being raised especially hard because I am from Afghanistan, and even though I've lived here for 35 years I've never lost track of what's going on there. So I want to tell anyone who will listen how it all looks from where I'm standing.

I speak as one who deeply hates the Taliban and Osama bin Laden. My hatred comes from first hand experience. There is no doubt in my mind that these people were responsible for the atrocity in New York. I agree that something must be done about those monsters. But the Taliban and bin Laden are not Afghanistan. They're not even the government of Afghanistan. The Taliban are a cult of ignorant psychotics who took over Afghanistan in 1997. Bin Laden is a political criminal with a plan. When you think Taliban, think Nazis. When you think bin Laden, think Hitler. And when you think “the people of Afghanistan” think “the Jews in the concentration camps.” It's not only that the Afghan people had nothing to do with this atrocity. They were the first victims of the perpetrators. They would exult if someone would come in there, take out the Taliban and clear out the rat’s nest of international thugs holed up in their country.

Some say, why don't the Afghans rise up and overthrow the Taliban? The answer is, they're starved, exhausted, hurt, incapacitated, suffering. A few years ago, the United Nations estimated that there are 500,000 disabled orphans in Afghanistan--a country with no economy, no food. There are millions of widows. And the Taliban has been burying these widows alive in mass graves. The soil is littered with land mines. The farms were all destroyed by the Soviets. These are a few of the reasons why the Afghan people have not overthrown the Taliban.

We come now to the question of “bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age.” Trouble is, that's been done. The Soviets took care of it already. Make the Afghans suffer? They're already suffering. Level their houses? Done. Turn their schools into piles of rubble? Done. Eradicate their hospitals? Done. Destroy their infrastructure? Cut them off from medicine and health care? Too late. Someone already did all that. New bombs would only stir the rubble of earlier bombs. Would they at least get the Taliban? Not likely. In today's Afghanistan, only the Taliban eat. Only they have the means to move around. They'd slip away and hide.

Maybe the bombs would get some of those disabled orphans, they don't move too fast, they don't even have wheelchairs. But flying over Kabul and dropping bombs would not really be a strike against the criminals who did this horrific thing. Actually it would only be making common cause with the Taliban--by raping once again the people they've been raping all this time.

So what else is there? What can be done, then? Let me now speak with true fear and trembling. The only way to get bin Laden is to go in there with ground troops. When people speak of “having the belly to do what needs to be done” they're thinking in terms of having the belly to kill as many as needed. Having the belly to overcome any moral qualms about killing innocent people. Let's pull our heads out of the sand. What's actually on the table is Americans dying. And not just because some Americans would die fighting their way through Afghanistan to bin Laden's hideout. It's much bigger than that, folks. Because to get any troops to Afghanistan, we'd have to go through Pakistan. Would they let us? Not likely. The conquest of Pakistan would have to be first. Will other Muslim nations just stand by? You see where I'm going. We're flirting with a world war between Islam and the West.

And guess what: that's bin Laden's program. That's exactly what he wants. That's why he did this. Read his speeches and statements. It's all right there. He really believes Islam would beat the west. It might seem ridiculous, but he figures if he can polarize the world into Islam and the West, he's got a billion soldiers. If the west wreaks a holocaust in those lands, that's a billion people with nothing left to lose, that's even better from bin Laden's point of view. He's probably wrong, in the end the West would win, whatever that would mean, but the war would last for years and millions would die, not just theirs but ours. Who has the belly for that? Unfortunately, bin Laden does. Anyone else?

In Peace,
Tamim Ansary

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-17-01 1:43pm Dan:

Go to the website www.debka.com and read. I think in spite of those who want to “bomb Afghanistan back to the stone age,” calmer and more knowledgeable heads will prevail. There are several other primitive countries where bin Laden has enslaved the government. If those in our country who would rush in headlong are held in check (and I think they will be) we might just do what the Afghan writer asks. The word is, we already have people on the ground in Pakistan. I truly believe the vast majority of the Moslem world does not want a catastrophic war with the west.

If we can destroy the Hydra that is international terrorism with carefully planned surgical strikes, even ground attacks, states that foster the evil may change their direction. At least I hope so. The parallel between Hitler and bin Laden is painfully accurate. What did and didn't we do about that during the thirties? I was around then and remember. We talk a lot about what happened after Pearl Harbor, but very little about all the back peddling, coddling and appeasing of the NAZIS before war broke out. It was a different world then as well.

Ho

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Thought you might be interested to learn what the Arabic-language press is saying about the events of 11 September. There's a couple of interesting items:

- four Saudi nationals identified as “hijackers” by the FBI (and even on CNN) have come forward, revealing that they are alive and well, and living in Saudi, Tunisia and the US. A fifth apparently died a year before the attack.

- 4,000 Israelis who worked in the World Trade Center were told by Israeli authorities not to go to work on 11 September.

- five Israelis in New York were arrested after they were reported for celebrating the destruction of the World Trade Center. One proved to be a Mossad agent. So what exactly is going on?

- ian (Sales)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Ian:

Not to worry! I have two friends, Frank Sinatra and John Wayne who are both alive and well right here in the US. Weren't they reported to have died? What about Elvis?

Somewhere in the confused reports about the WTC I remember hearing that among the many nationalities, there were approximately 200 Israelis who worked in the trade center and that about forty were not accounted for.

If our own media reports in error, sometimes fabricates, and frequently colors events to fit their own agenda, I would most certainly expect both accidental and deliberate misinformation from the Arabic-language press at this time.

I currently take all reports from all news sources with a great deal of salt, even when confirmed by several others. I'm sure I'm not alone. Sad, but true.

Ho

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Well, Ian, If you wish to postulate that Israel is attempting to influence U.S. public attitude about Muslims and Arabs - a highly risky business - you would have to believe that not only the hijackers would be sacrificed but also the Israeli nationals who work in the center, otherwise the whole plot would (as your rumors below) sound fishy.

As for identities, the terrorists swap identities constantly. This causes great confusion among the security community and most certainly outside the community. If others stepped forward with the claim, “No my name is Osama bin Laden” they may be either co-conspirators participating in the shell game or else innocent people who had their identity stolen by terrorists in order to hide behind legitimate identities. It is a week after the blast and identification of the terrorists aboard, and we still have little info out public. This indicates the U.S. is trying to be very careful about confirming associations before making public accusations. All we have so far is that we strongly suspect bin Laden is responsible.

I am sure Muslims will do anything to deflect criticism. Those who don't want to be associated with such horrible acts will say that surely good Muslims wouldn't do something like that and the terrorists will do everything in their power to rally general support by claiming they are scapegoats. Such claims should be expected.

John (Koehler)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Ian,

On a scale of 1 to 10 how exact or reliable is this information? I'm sure we may not be able to really know. The US news media would want us to believe they are 100% reliable, but from personal experience I know that on their very best days they rarely approach 90% accuracy. I would expect propaganda from the Arabic people to be slanted in some direction to draw attention away from them as the bad guys, just as it is slanted in the US to make them the only bad guys.

Dave, the Junkie (David Harris, Connecticut)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

All,

There is a great story (probably apocryphal) about Lyndon Johnson . . . he was running against Barry Goldwater in 1964 and Goldwater's campaign was doing well (maybe you remember the 10 . . . 9 . . . 8 . . . missile ad that ran). Anyway, someone on Johnson's campaign staff mentioned Goldwater and Johnson offhandedly told the aide that everybody knew that Goldwater was a “pig-f---er.” The staffer replied that it would not be appropriate to spread such rumors as no one could prove them.

“Just get him to deny it,” said Johnson. My point is that it's harder to deny a vicious rumor than it is to start it. Even checking reputable sources in moderate Arabic newspaper won't detract much from the damage one zealot can do in 24 hours. I urge anyone who has not checked the source carefully to consider where they are getting their news and ask themselves if they believe everything they hear . . . I hate terrorism also, but it seems we're a little quick off the gun here.

Don (Muchow)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

It's more than true that national IDs get swapped or stolen all the time. Canada has been a prime target for stolen passports and immigration ID. But it sounds like you are saying all Muslims ARE bad. Sorry, but just because the Koran has some passages that seem to promote violence doesn’t mean that. It also says things like: to kill one man is to kill humanity. The Christian Bible tells its devotees to kill witches, ungrateful sons and women who prove not to be virgins on their wedding night - and I suspect no one on this list thinks (most) practicing Christians go around killing such people. We have no right to label any other religion as such just because it's easier to point fingers at a broad group than it is to find evil individuals within a group.

Pat Brown

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Pat: NS

You said, The Christian Bible tells its devotees to kill witches, ungrateful sons and women who prove not to be virgins on their wedding night.

It wasn’t too many years back when that’s exactly what “Christians” did. Remember the Salem witch hunts? How about the burnings at the stake and other horrors committed by “the church” during the Middle Ages? Fundamentalist Islamics are doing the same things right now in nations they control. Maybe they took that part of the Bible and converted it into Islamic law.

Ho

- - - - - - - - - - - -

There is a well-known technique of propaganda called “The Big Lie”. It involves making a claim that is so monstrously large and mind-blowing that no one ever bothers to check the facts which would prove or disprove the claim. Hitler was a master of it and many politicians of our current era use the same technique, e.g. “I did not have sex with that girl!”

With regard to Mossad warning 4,000 Jews not to work in the World Trade Centre we would have to accept that:

1. 4,000 Jews DO normally work in the WTC. (maybe)
2. Mossad had some way to contact all of them. (possible)
3. All 4,000 of them kept the story to themselves in the time prior to the attack. (Yeah . . . right . . . )
4. The “evil” Mossad who could plan such an operation would actually give a damn about 4,000 Jews. (If they were so evil as to do such a thing it is more likely they would sacrifice their countrymen in order to claim world sympathy at the loss of 4,000 Jews).
5. The Arabic Press somehow found out about this. (But only after the event. Consider that if the Arabic Press was so efficient as to discover this plot within a week after the event, how come they didn't discover it beforehand? Also consider that the US media is the most efficient in the world . . . if it couldn't discover the plot after the event, then I suggest the evidence must be pretty thin.)
6. Speaking of evidence, where is it? I have heard the claim, but I have seen no evidence. Who wrote this story? Where did he get his facts? Who has checked his facts?

CONCLUSION: We have another example of “The Big Lie”. Toss it into the bin along with the oft repeated mantra that “Islam is a religion of Peace”. Sure they are a peaceful religion . . . as long as you do things their way and give up your right to your own beliefs.

Graham (Australia) (Aussie spelling and sentence structure)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Graham,

Prejudice is the act of deciding how one member of a group will act by observing behavior of another member of that group . . . or close enough. The question to ask is: what makes you (or anyone else, for that matter) think that ALL Muslims will,
do, or have behaved as you describe? What makes anyone conclude the same about Jews or Christians? That is my question.

As for rejecting faiths based on assumptions about them . . . just curious, and reply privately if you like . . . what do you BELIEVE, rather than disbelieve? It is a more healthy focus. You have, as I said before, hit the nail on the head regarding the making of laws by a social / government group claiming to be acting on behalf of all people when in fact they are acting unjustly and illegally on behalf of a twisted personal interpretation of religion, which has no place in government. That has nothing to do with Islam and everything to do with tribalism and terror tactics.

Don (Don Muchow,)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Don,

I summarized my argument by saying . . . I have no issue with Muslims practicing their faith, but I do have an issue with them not agreeing that followers of other faiths should have the same rights as they demand for Muslims. To which you replied . . . “I respect your arguments, but they appear tinged by prejudice.” Your response concerns me. How can I be accused of prejudice when all I am asking for is that Muslims give everyone else’s beliefs the same respect that Muslims demand for their own faith. Or, if you prefer, I reject any faiths spiritual claim to an authority which would deny equal civil rights to members of another faith.

I may be reading you wrong here, but your agreement seems to be that if I deny Muslims their claim for unique political and social privileges then I am prejudice. How can I be prejudice when I want equal privileges for all, and Muslims seek the imposition of an Islamic Law which grants them unique rights? For example, under Islamic law only Muslims can join the armed forces while non-Muslims must pay an additional tax to compensate for the fact that they are not allowed to serve in the armed forces. (That’s right . . . you pay an additional tax because you cannot join the army).

Muslims don't see that as discrimination . . . that's just Islamic Law which is, by definition, nondiscriminatory. (That's the “Big Lie” part of it.) Please clarify this point. Why do you say my arguments are “tinged by prejudice”?

Graham

PS There's no anger in this email. I just want to nail down where Don's coming from in this conversation.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Graham,

I agree with you . . . substantially. However, one must distinguish among the following:
1.
The Qu'ran. True, one can find passages in it that are largely intolerant of unbelievers, but one can also find great passion and poetry. I've read it . . . have you? About three quarters of it is Mosaic law, so if you reject it or its teachings out of hand you must also reject Christianity and Judaism. The three disagree only on who brought the true message of the anthropologically Semitic god. I prefer the position expressed today by Muhammad Ali: that all religions have at least *some* truth.

2.
Mainstream Islam and its traditions and teachings that, like Christianity, grew as a result of social and political pressures. As Islam is widely practiced, it is a peaceful religion . . . much like Christianity is now that its practitioners have gotten past the “God will smite thee” phase. Political and social pressure has interesting effects on a young religion over the centuries. Sometimes it results in ordinary folks like our neighbors. Sometimes it results in evil bastards like Torquemada and bin Laden. And sometimes it results in great gifts to humanity, such as Sufism.

In the crusades, knights-errant killed indiscriminately and let God sort out the believers and nonbelievers. This was just as much a crime as the attack on the WTC. Neither is excusable.

3.
Fundamentalism, whether Islamic, Christian or other. Generally, Fundamentalism relies on absolute authority and absolute dedication to a cause, usually led by a charismatic personality who keeps tight control over believers and nonbelievers. Bin Laden is a fundamentalist. Hamas are fundamentalists. Doubtless, there are settlers in the West Bank who hurt the cause of their own country by their fundamentalism. Hitler was a fundamentalist, though his only religion was fascism. Timothy McVeigh was a fundamentalist. All are/were a danger to peace and prosperity. I hope that it was the case that I misinterpreted the comments. You really nailed it by pointing out the rhetorical technique of the Big Lie and its identity as a logical fallacy.

With warm regards, Don (Muchow)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Don:

Amen on the evils of fundamentalists. Even on a small scale they can be quite evil. My wife was pastor of a small country church for about six years. It was a wonderful group of kind, loving and tolerant Christians - mostly. One male, very fundamentalist and very chauvinistic member, did everything in his power to hamper whatever my wife tried to do. He was quite nasty about it. My wife dealt with him quite effectively in a very Christian manner, but at great personal pain. At her request I kept my mouth shut at times when I didn't want to. Over the six years she was pastor the church grew dramatically in size and congregational participation.

I only repeat this story to emphasize your accounting of the evils of all kinds of fundamentalism. The difference between this man and the likes of bin Laden are only one of scale. There is no doubt in my mind that, given the power that bin Laden has, this one would behave in much the same way.

Lord, deliver us from the legions of self-serving, self-righteous, self-centered fundamentalists of the world.

Ho

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Richard:

I thank God that my Native American blood made peace with my European American blood a long time ago. I still get quite upset when I see how my European forbears treated my Native ancestors, particularly the repeatedly violated treaties. But all that is behind us, it's history and we move forward. Violent grudges held for centuries and passed down through generations are what make the hells in Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Israel, and so many other places. Use of these protracted hatreds and twisted religious beliefs by unscrupulous leaders to enslave followers is everywhere including the US. From small scale operations like Jim Jones and his cult to David Koresh and the Branch Dividians to bin Laden and the groups I listed before. They have a similar pattern. Only the scale of the death and destruction are different.

The only real hope is to rally the entire world to help eradicate all manner of hate mongers wherever they are. Those in the media and in political life in this country would do well to curb their own hate speech. Though they themselves are not so apt to do direct damage, there are many among us who may be so inflamed by such talk as to take actions that are terrorism on whatever scale.

I believe it was Thumper who said, “If you can't say somethin' nice, don't say nothin' at all!”

Ho

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-20-01 11:07pm - Don;

Prejudice: is the act of deciding how one member of a group will act by observing behavior of another member of that group . . . or close enough.

I disagree. The “act of deciding” which you describe is nothing more than observation and deduction. If I see a bunch of Muslims unrolling their prayer mats at sundown then I will probably presume that all Muslims will do the same. There's nothing wrong with me making that logical deduction. On the other hand, prejudice is the presumption of non-related attributes or the denial of civil rights based on the observed behavior.

E.g.,
* Muslims use prayer mats. Therefore, they are all perverts and thieves.

* Muslims use prayer mats therefore they should not be allowed to vote.

Such nonlogical statements are true prejudice. I am an active Christian, but I respect the right of every individual to make their own spiritual choices. I certainly do not suggest Muslims should be penalized for their beliefs, but neither do I agree that Muslims can penalize me simply because I am not a Muslim. I described Muslims as people seeking the imposition of Islamic law. That is my observation based on reading the Qu'ran (and other materials) and also based on conversations with Muslims. Since their Islamic law would rob my faith of its equal status with Islam, then I vigorously (but peacefully) oppose that part of their program. Yet somehow you describe my defense of my own civil rights as prejudice. Your approach is a perfect example of the “Big Lie” of Islam (and many other fundamentalist beliefs). I'm sure we all agree the attack on the WTC was an abomination in the sight of God and man. I suggest that we are all entitled to our beliefs... but we are not entitled to dictate our beliefs to others.

Graham

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-21-01 11:27am Graham,

I agree with everything you said except, “Islam is a religion of Peace. Sure they are a peaceful religion . . . as long as you do things their way and give up your right to your own beliefs.” That is utterly untrue. I live in a Muslim country. I have worked in four Muslim countries. No Muslim has ever asked me to give up my Christian beliefs or told my wife how to dress. Suggest you listen to the President's speech again. Our President and Commander-in-Chief has categorically stated that it is not Islam, or Muslims, or Arabs. Do you disagree with him?

eric (Eric Garrigue Vesely, Port Dickson, Maylasia)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Friends,

I been reading this debate, and have really intended to stay out of it, but I have to make one point that I believe is valid.

First, let me define an issue of this debate. Islam (the religion) is being judged based on the Koran (Islam's principal document), and this judgment used as a basis for making assumptions about Moslems.

Can we discuss the value of and teachings in the Bible and use that discussion to explain or understand what kind of Christians the Branch Davidians or the followers of Jim Jones were? Or predict their behavior? Can we discuss the merits of the US Constitution and expect Timothy McVeigh?

Let's discuss the merits of the Koran, or discuss Islam, but let us not underestimate the ability of mankind to totally corrupt what is pure good, or to totally redeem that which is pure evil. Maybe the absolutes in the previous sentence should be removed, but with or without, the point is still valid.

The Koran isn't the reason we have demonically evil people with no conscience any more than Playboy is responsible for all the rapes committed every day. There are evil people in the world from all religions who justify their behavior with religious zeal and others who must be really stupid because they condone and support them or are swayed by them. I can understand evil for the purpose of self promotion, protection, etc. But evil that only damages the believer yet creates some assets for corrupt leaders, I have to relegate to the intellectually impaired or the emotionally immature.

I am reaching the point of personally believing that the 'soldiers' of this terrorist war are as much the victims as their targets. I can believe that and at the same time argue that the only answer is to rid the planet of these people, be they the leaders or the soldiers.

And I hope none of us are so silly as to think we can ever win this war. We can make our planet a safe place to travel I hope. And make terrorism difficult, but even if we had a way to instantly know every person who is a threat and a terrorist or potential terrorist, and a way to just as instantly eliminate them, it wouldn't solve the problem. If we just wait a few years someone else will come up with a reason to hate a group or nation and begin to influence others. And there will always be a few impressionable clods around to agree and die for the idiot.

So what is the answer? It's simple really. Let me quote two Bible verses.

Matthew 27:5. And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.

John 13:17. If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them.

Just in case you were wondering, the cult I've been trying to found loses members almost as fast as it gets them.
Dave, the Junkie
9-22-01 12:09am John and SFNers

I believe there is emotional hysteria occurring in my homeland. I have just watched a report on CNN where Muslim women are afraid to leave home, a Sikh (who is not Muslim is killed), passengers refuse to fly with people who look Arab, and so on. I am emotional when friends and acquaintances are tarred by the mantra that if you are Muslim, you're evil. My response to Graham was based on personal experience or statistical fact. There are only a handful of whites in my coastal village. I can go weeks without seeing another white. Do I feel scared? Absolutely not. I also felt the same way during the Gulf War.

A historical fact to ponder. The British colony of Malaya consisted of eleven states on the peninsula and two states on Borneo. The British offered Sabah and
Sarawak their choice, join Malaysia under Muslim rule or become independent nation(s). Sabah and Sarawak are mostly Christian. They freely chose to live under a Muslim government. I have never heard any cry for independence.

A present fact. Has anybody asked NATO to drop Turkey because it is a Muslim nation?
eric (Vesely)

A proud American who is proud to be a Christian happily and safely living in Muslim Malaysia.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-25-01 8:26am

I don't have Web access at home (yet), so I only get to log on every other day or so. And now I check my emails and discover you've gone and killed the topic: (Typical. My timing, as ever, sucks.)

Oh, and the footage of Palestinians thing . . . check out www.snopes2.com, which busts a whole bunch of rumours concerning the 11 Sept attacks. I guess no newspaper or news station is immune to such stories.

- ian (Sales)

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-27-01 4:17pm Eric:

There are, unfortunately, many sick and evil people everywhere on this globe. Those who strike out blindly and in hate, sometimes over the very slightest incident. I pray that our nation’s leaders can avoid that emotional trap and hold the dogs of war in check until they know precisely who the enemy is and the best way to neutralize them. So far things look good for a carefully though out campaign. I only hope it stays that way. I know there are some among us who want swift reprisal. I recently heard a small time Chicago politician complaining loudly and vehemently because, “Bush hasn’t hit those bastards yet.” This kind of small minded, schoolboy anger we do not need.

Some recent news troubles me. First reports from Indonesia indicated support for our position. Now I hear reports of angry mobs of Muslims threatening Americans and siding with the Taliban. Already Americans and Europeans are being advised to leave the country. There is no indication that our diplomats will leave or our embassies close, but that is the next logical step. This comes after the huge demonstrations of support for the Pakistan government’s position siding with Americans. It’s hard to understand. Are the rabble being incited by individuals, or is the government behind them? The news is very confusing at the least.

Ho

- - - - - - - - - - - -

9-27-01 10:00pm Ho

Indonesia is not a homogenous nation. It consists of a few thousand islands with major islands of Sumatra, Java where Jakarta is, Most of Borneo, Sulawesi, Irian Jaya (other half is Papua New Guinea), Bali, Lombok, Sumba, and Koepang. Sumatra lies about 50 miles west of Port Dickson and I can take a ferry to one of its outer islands. Indonesia is the largest Muslim nation, but the common assumption that is virtually all Islam is incorrect. There are substantial Chinese Christian and other Christian populations, Indians (mostly on Bali), and other religious groups. Except for coverage of Timor during the Independence movement, media mostly concentrates on Jakarta. Jakarta is mostly Muslim including a large fundamentalist group that believes the US is evil because it supports Israel against Palestine. These are the riots you are seeing on CNN. Most Muslims in Indonesia, Singapore, and Malaysia are horrified at what bin Laden has perpetrated and what he might be prepared to do in the future. They will support the US and the coalition to wipe out terrorism, as long as it is battle against terrorism and not Islam. The US Embassy in Jakarta has stayed there during very bad times although it maybe closed to the general public with dependents sent home. I doubt that it will close during this crisis. After all, US wants Indonesia's help and the best way is to funnel whatever is through the Embassy.

eric

To contact the author for any reason, Click Here!