Letters to the Editor, August 31, 2003

Amidst lies, misrepresentations and fear mongering, young Americans have been sent to Iraq to fight and die for Israel, Halliburton and the oil business. And in a mad attempt to provide an extreme example of a sycophant, Tony Blair has sent British youth to join in the fight for Israel, Halliburton and the oil business.

But so much has been revealed and we now know that there were no WMDs, no links between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda, and no attempt to purchase depleted uranium in Niger. Now, according to latest polls, two thirds of the British electorate distrust Blair and over half of Americans believe Bush led them into a quagmire.

Now the US is bullying Thailand to send troops to Iraq. Although it is only 443 engineers that are being sent, it is an attempt on the part of the Bush regime to lend legitimacy to the illegal occupation. Let us hope that the Thai Prime Minister will abandon his decision to trust the US regime. It would be a shame if young Thais now also go to Iraq to fight for Israel, Halliburton and the Bush family oil business.

I saw this morning that a new reward poster is being distributed in Iraq in an attempt to bribe people into coming forward with information (if Saddam was the monster Bush says he was, why would people have to be bribed to come forward?). My purpose in writing this, however, is to note that the new poster does not promise 25 million, it offers "up to" that amount, which could mean anything or nothing. In addition, it states that the rewards for Hussein's have been "claimed" not paid.

I am an American and I care deeply about my country, but I also disapprove of what the Bush government is doing in the Middle East.

In sub-Saharan Africa, madmen with machetes are frantically dismembering anyone they can get their hands on. In the Middle East, people (Arabs, Israelis, Americans) entertain themselves by blowing things -- and people -- up. Across the world, various dictators and torturers maim, mutilate and murder in places we've never even heard of. Several nuclear wars are on the horizon. The annual slaughter of women and children has reached a whole new level. And in nearby Oakland, 75 murders have been committed so far this year.

Billions of people both at home and abroad are totally convinced that if they just kill enough people their problems will be solved.

Our world is crying out for honest, wise and BRAVE statesmen to come forth and pour oil on these troubled waters, to lead us away from carnage and violence, to sing to us and to tell us that there IS a better way; that the human race is teachable; that someday we will finally learn that violence ALWAYS leads to more violence.

The American government today began a campaign of criticism against the Arab press claiming it was inciting Iraqis to fight the Americans who are occupying their country.

As an American living in Washington, D.C., in the United States, and having traveled to the Arab world (including Iraq) frequently over the past several months and years, I can unequivocally agree with Columbia University Professor Edward Said who says that nowhere in the world is there more media bias than in the United States. This is also a criticism I frequently hear from journalists throughout Europe, Africa and Asia, about the American media. Their American colleagues have lost a substantial degree of respect because of their bias and ignorance or ignoring of the facts, the law, and the views of the majority of the world's population.

Just listening to almost any American radio news station in the morning (I listen to National Public Radio sometimes) or any television new cast (I have listened to many before writing this) on any given day proves the point. While the American media claims to be among the most objective in the world they clearly disprove this claim through their practice. Instead of functioning as investigative or even merely professional journalists they act as propagandists for the American government. For example, they have almost without exception failed to even mention that the United States attack against the Iraqi people has been condemned by the overwhelming majority of the people in the world as illegal and a flagrant violation of the most basic principles of international law. They also fail to report--as the Arab media accurately does--that the Iraqis who are resisting the United States occupation of their country by all necessary means and despite all odds are acting well within their rights as provided by international law. I have never even heard an American media source indicate that people who are subject to a foreign and oppressive occupation have the right under international law to resist such an occupation with all necessary means. This is exactly, however, what international law decrees. For obvious political reasons the American media instead villainizes the brave Iraqis who are fighting for their freedom from a foreign and oppressive occupation.

As an American, I salute the Arab media for their more truthful reporting and for their encouraging Iraqis to exercise the rights that they are granted by international law. Maybe the American media should learn how to function as professional journalists from their Arab counterparts. I certainly hope that the reverse will not be true whereby Arab journalists become uncritical propagandists for their government.

The underlying assumptions of the group of US litigants who suing prominent members of the Saud community for their alleged role in financing international terrorism are these:

· That the heads of organisations knew that money collected for charitable purposes was financing these activities.

· That they made deals with Al Qaeda and the Taliban to protected the Kingdom from attack by Al-Qaeda extremists.

The former assumption is hopelessly flawed. The latter even if true – and there is little or no evidence that would stand up in court to support it – is well within the Machiavellian workings of any sovereign government to safeguard national interests. As an example, the 5 billion dollars a year in cash and arms programmes to

Israel

is but one. The carefully calculated returns on the investment involved in the invasion of

Iraq

are another. The pitiful history of the finance of terrorist groups in South America and

Cuba

by the

provide others.

Part of the “evidence” offered for the former allegation is

Saudi Arabia

’s support of the families of suicide bombers in Palestine . It is presented is such a way that suicide has become a Palestinian cottage industry. That is a reflection on how cynical and fiscal the

approach to a deeply human problem – the invasion of Palestinians heritage and homeland by an artificially created state – has become.

The argument also displays an almost criminal negligence of the facts. Pointing to charitable organisations – World Association for Muslim Youth (WAMY), International Islamic Relief Organisation (IRO) and the Sultan bin Abdulaziz Foundation as ‘knowingly financing terrorism’ is to betray a total lack of understanding as to why these organisations exist.

WAMY – apparently much to US discomfiture, is set up to promote Islam and to resist what it sees as the corruptive influence of western culture; for west,” read “US.” With autistic clarity, President Bush announced before bombing much of

Afghanistan

to rubble, that “those who are not with us are against us.” Apart from a sadly exposed messianic complex, it showed that there really is no room for understanding in the mind of the leader of a sound-byte nation.

IRO donates to Islamic charities and individual cases of hardship all round the world. The families of suicide bombers are a fraction of one percent of its work – but it makes a hook to hang more accusations on. No consideration is given at all to the anguish and religious commitment that drove the bomber to the final deed – the only ones left to help are the survivors.

The involvement of the Sultan bin Abdulaziz Foundation in terrorism - even indirectly - is stretching credibility transparently thin, even by US media-spin standards. One look at the disbursements from the foundation – which is mainly a medical oriented institution with huge hospital complexes and aftercare facilities – dissociates it in essence and fact from random killing or acts of violence.

The conclusive piece of evidence the

offers is that “the

United States

has identified these organisations as supporting terrorism.” Not too long ago, the

also “identified

Iraq

as having weapons of mass destruction” and committed billions of dollars and thousands of troops on a similarly weak understanding.

The terrifying and geopolitically destabilising assumption is that if the

USA

says it is so, well then, it must be so: It’s the messianic complex again: But where are the weapons? It seems that they existed only as figments of a spin-doctors febrile imagination, useful as a rallying call for investment in a military adventure and economic return.

The same feeble quality of accusation – at best guilt by association – is being offered as evidence in the law suits against prominent Saudis.

The hoped for return on the investment in the law suit is dollars: the investment in

Iraq

however, is being paid entirely in body bags.