I thought readers may be interested in this web site: www.ussliberty.org  It is the official site for the victims of the violent and criminal attack that took place by the Israelis during the six day war in 1967 (Israel v. Egypt) on the USS Liberty. I found not only the attack astonishing but also the suppression of information about the event by the US government. I feel like this could be a turning point (if this information continues to reach more people) in the perception that Americans have of Israel as the protectors of peace and democracy in the Middle East. We must educate people of this horrific event that took place and the US's role in the cover up.

There is a documentary by Tito Howard titled "The Loss of Liberty" that can be purchased for about $25. It could probably be found at various book/movie stores (ex. amazon.com). Peace.

From: Tax Man (8/22/02).

Subject: Al-Jazeerah bias.

Hi I've read an English version of Al Jazeera and I have to say that I've never read any news articles that were more biased in my whole life. Journalistic integrity means that when you are reporting a story that you do not put your personal opinions right in the story. Those opinions are supposed to be on the editorial page.

It is no wonder that Arabs have so much hate if this is the kind of information that they are fed on a daily basis. 

You are not going to win. You may blow up a few buildings but you are never going to win.

Editor: Why don't you use your real name Tax Man? Why don't you mention which news item was biased and in what way? The news stories published in Al-Jazeerah are from so many sources, from international news agencies and Arabic newspapers.

People anywhere in the world, including Arabs, cannot be fooled by inaccurate media stories. Nowadays, pictures and videos show it all. Arabs watch the Israeli war machine on daily basis killing Palestinian civilians, destroying their homes, uprooting their trees, arresting their children, and imposing long curfews on them. These Israeli occupation practices are what agitates people all over the world, Arabs included.

Finally, you mentioned integrity, where is your integrity in addressing Al-Jazeerah the way you did in your last line. Al-Jazeerah promotes peace and understanding between people all over the world, particularly between Arabs, Muslims, and Americans, and between Palestinians and Israelis. Did you send a letter to the New York Times telling them your last line. They are also against a US attack on Iraq, that is why they published the leaks they obtained from the Pentagon. Did you send another letter to MSNBC, particularly to Donahue? He is more outspoken in his criticism to the administration and to the Israeli policies? I doubt it. May God open your eyes and soften your heart, so you can address people who educate you properly.

Subject: Electronic Media

The geopolitical events taking place in Pakistan’s northern neighborhood have far reaching effects both in the region and on world affairs. It is here that the products of CBM—‘confidence building measures’---contribute in motivating the general public to play a crucial role in shaping their future. The foreign forces of America and Britain are foremost in engaging, what they describe as ‘fighting against terrorism’. In doing so they have let loose a reign of their own terror and devastation which has little semblance to human rights. 

We are of the view that instead of opposing and clashing with America and Britain, a positive approach to the region is adopted by getting in step with both foreign powers. Nobody would interfere if nation-building programs were beamed to the region laced with local music, songs and folklore telecasts. The era of colonial exploitation has gone forever. Two prominent regional economic power blocks are emerging in SAARC (south Asia) and ECO (central Asia). The importance of electronic media in both places doesn’t require overemphasizing.

Editor: What geopolitical events are you referring to, taking place in Pakistan's northern neighborhood?

From: Sara Empey, USA (8/21/02).

Subject: Cynthia McKinney

I read your side article regarding the defeat of Cynthia McKinney in her bid for the 4th district of Georgia. Is it possible that Republicans crossed over to defeat her? Yes, I supposed this could be possible. In my state there are basically two sections for a primary ballot, Democrat and Republican. When voting, you open up the little voting book and pick which party to vote for. You don't have to declare it publicly, you just pick it all by yourself in the little voting booth. But once you decide which party to vote for, you have to stick with that one when making your selections. If you cross back and forth, your ballot becomes invalid and is tossed out. When the statewide general election occurs, then you get to pick between the parties down the line. So if I feel like voting Republican in one primary election I can. And if in the next two years I decide to vote Democratic I can. In my state I don't have to declare a party affiliation. In some states you do though. You have to declare if you are a Democrat, Republican or Independent, you are given a ballot for that specific party and can only vote for that party. I do admit that I don't know which system Georgia follows, though from the article it sounds like Georgia follows the more open system that my state does.

Now the other statement in the article "Republicans crossed over to vote against her. Thus, two main parties were against her..." doesn't really reflect typical voting behavior either. First, if Republicans crossed over and were voting on the democratic side in the primary, then that might mean that they would be unable to vote for other candidates they like within their own party. This would be the case in my state anyway. Typically most people will not come together and sabotage their own party in an election year to "get" one specific person they don't like. And why wasn't her own party supporting her? The wording implies that with "two main parties against her" even the democrats weren't with her. Why? There is probably a whole range of issues there. Gun control, environment, education, women's health, employment, economics; all of these would be other major issues that would be a factor in anyone's election. I read her bio on-line and saw that she supported giving more money to firefighters and policeman. That she voted in favor of a bill that authorized the President to use force against those who gave aid to or perpetrated the September 11th attacks. In her website she also states that she supported the Financial Anti-Terrorism Act and the Public Health and Bioterrorism Preparedness Act. Like I stated, a whole range of issues. 

It must also be remembered that only people within the 4th district of Georgia are voting here. Not the entire state of Georgia and certainly not the United States as a whole. This is a little state election. The registered voters of the 4th district came together and the majority decided for whatever reason to not vote for Ms. Mckinney. This is democracy in action. If this were a totalitarian issue, there would have been no election in the first place. This was not a case of the government imposing its will on the people, but the people imposing their will on their government. By voting for some they liked and not voting for someone they didn't like. And I have a question that I would just like to throw out there. Where are the Arab lobbyists anyway? Do Jewish people have an organized lobby in Congress? Sure. But so do the People for Ethical Treatment of Animals, the Sierra Club, The National Rifle Association, The American Medical Association etc. Surely there must be several Arab focused lobbies groups too. Why is nothing ever mentioned about Arab lobbyists? They certainly would be able to have the same funding of any Jewish organization. More if wealthier nations like Saudi Arabia or Kuwait contributed to their funding. So where are they? If the Zionists are bent on fixing even the most minor of state run elections, why aren't there Arab groups out there trying to combat it? They could run television or radio ads. Or sponsor a candidate of their own. Just wondering.

Lastly I would like the editor to know that I did read the article on Barak as he suggested and shortly after that saw an interview with Barak in-which the interviewer specifically asked him about the doubling of Jewish settlers in the disputed areas of the West Bank and Gaza AFTER the Olso Accords were signed. The thing that struck me was that he had no clear answer for why the Jewish settlers were allowed to double in population in these disputed areas and he could not deny that this wasn't a provocative action. The only thing Barak would say is that if the Palestinians stopped bombing, the Jewish settlers would happily leave the areas. Personally, I found his statement to be unrealistic at best. So I do thank you for posting the article.

Editor: The first part of your letter was deleted because it is $1.3 million, that is 1.3 million dollars, not votes, as you thought. Concerning Republicans, apparently, they crossed over to defeat the stronger Democrat, which may help them defeat the weaker (the winner in this case) in November. For Democrats, the issue is Israel. She was critical of the Israeli occupation of Palestine and one of the few in Congress who did not vote for the "support-Israel" resolution, in April. This cost her support from the Party leadership and brought the Zionist revenge against her, as it did against Rep. Hilliard of Alabama. 

Zionist groups (staunch supporters of Israel, which is a more accurate term than "Jewish groups," used in the media, because many Jews are against the Israeli occupation) did not do anything illegal, as the American system allows for donations from out of state. However, because of their hegemonic position in the US and their intolerance for dissent, we may end up in a totalitarian system that follows Israeli policies. By the way, totalitarian systems also had elections. There were elections in Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia (the two known totalitarian systems in the 20th century). But these were one-party elections. If this Zionist campaign continues to defeat every Congressman and Congresswoman who does not support Israeli policies, there would be no difference between Democrats and Republicans in terms of foreign policy. Therefore, it is a serious issue that deserves readers' attention.

With regards to Arab lobbying and Arab funding, they have been weakened after September 11. So many Arab-American financial activities have stopped, even charities have been prevented to continue because of suspicion. I agree with you that Arab-Americans and Muslim-Americans should be more involved and and more active politically and in lobbying. However, your observation about Saudi and Kuwaiti money may be true in normal conditions. But these days, Saudi Arabia is under threats and continuous attacks by supporters of Israel in the US. Arab-Americans and Muslim-Americans are under great scrutiny these days, which may explain their low profile in politics and public activities. But this matter should concern every American, not just Arab and Muslim Americans. 

From: Marzia, Italy (8/21/02).

Subject: Why are some Muslims angry at a painting?

I live in Bologna (north Italy). Our ancient cathedral has a painting (XIV century) that portrays Mahomet burning in hell's fire. Yesterday some people from Morocco have been arrested cause they were filming in the church, moreover on the cassette are taped their harsh voices against catholic religion, and people who were there to pray, and other strange speeches on terrorism. Well, I am not a believer, but usually I'm respectful for every religion, especially when I'm abroad visiting mosques. Why for many Muslim people respect is something not due to other religion? Two years ago the same church was squattered by some Muslim immigrants to claim some houses to live. Why it shines so clear to me I couldn't do the same in any Islamic countries without having serious problems: are western countries too permissive? I'm clearly provocative...hoping to have a reply. Peace to everybody.

Editor: Any Muslim should be insulted by the painting. The Prophet Muhammed is mercy for all humankind. The teachings of Islam are genuinely the teachings of Judaism and Christianity. Muslims respect and glorify the great messengers of God and their messages. These include Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Ismael, Jacob, Joseph, David, Solomon, Jesus Christ, and Muhammed. All these, according to Islam, revealed the message of God to humanity in different times. 

The Holy Qur'an has a chapter called, Maryam (Mary), it is Chapter Number 19. There is another chapter, called Al-Imran, Number 3. In both chapters and throughout the Holy Qur'an, Jesus Christ and his mother Mary are glorified and praised. No other book besides the Bible gives more love and respect to them. Moreover, Muslims believe that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, and he will come back to Earth, and they will welcome him as the messenger of God. This is how Muslims feel towards Christianity.

You cannot generalize from the behavior of some individuals that everybody else is the same. This painting is well known and it is an insult to Muslims. It does not represent Christianity, and it does not depict a scene from the Bible. It represents the opinion of the artist who painted it. How would observing Catholics feel if somebody painted Mary the Virgin in an insulting way? Some of them may protest that just like the protests you describe by Muslims.

With regard to some Muslim immigrants taking the Cathedral as a shelter, this tells me that they are unable to find housing. Their behavior is not related to being Muslims. Rather, it is related to being homeless and poor. Good people like yourself should help them find jobs and decent housing instead of criticizing the Islamic religion, which has nothing to do with their plight.