Hi All,

        The article is offensive and highly political as evidenced by its tone and language.  If you want to read some rational and sensible writings about the attack, see the series of articles in "The Fractured Landscape" in the Chronicle of Higher Education.  One is particularly pertinent to this issue:

        "Americans are advised by many abroad (and by some at home): "Ask yourselves why you are so hated."  It might be worth remembering that similar questions were put to Jews in the 1930s.  And to recall that, as Victor Klemperer recorded in his diaries of the war years in Dresden, some Jews internalized the worldview of their enemies and persuaded themselves that such violent hatred must, indeed, have had a rational source in their own behavior."

        Bernard Wasserstein, Prof., U of Glasgow, president of Jewish Historical Society of England.

        If you want some further idea of the thinking of those who support the attack (and some who don't) check out the material blocked in below which is a translation of Arabic press forwarded to me by a colleague at Wharton who handles investments in the Middle East and who has been a subscriber for sometime.



Thomas W. Dunfee
Vice Dean and Director
Wharton Undergraduate Division
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104
215-898-7691



Special Dispatch
September 21, 2001
No. 273

Terror in America (7)
Dr. Ma'moun Fendi: We should condemn terror, with no 'buts'

Dr. Ma'moun Fendi, a columnist for the London daily,
Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, criticized intellectuals in the Arab
world who he believes displayed hypocrisy by condemning the
September 11th attacks, while at the same time offering
justification for them:(1)

"The acts of terror that shocked New York and Washington...
gave rise to a dichotomy of the world before the explosions
and the world afterwards: a dichotomy of the forces of
destruction and oppression in the world and the victims who
died as they worked diligently at their jobs, leaving
behind children who dream of their future, and families
waiting at the dinner table; a dichotomy of the world of
crime, and the world of strict observance [of the law]; [a
dichotomy] of the world that tries to build, and the forces
of destruction."

"A few, mainly those who claim to know the reason [for the
attacks], [claimed] that the tragedy had its roots in
American policy... This is a kind of ambiguity, a kind of
evasion. Statements such as 'We condemn the terror, but,'
or 'We are sorry about what happened, but,' are
unacceptable. Either we clearly condemn the terror, or we
do not; either we are sorry, or we are not."

"When such human tragedies [occur], one cannot hold the
stick at both ends. There is a clear boundary between
humane forces and the forces of terror; between human
beings and inhuman beings; between criminals and those who
observe [the law]; between those who destroy and those who
build. Each of us must state his position clearly, with no
'buts.'"

"The deaths of thousands... under the ruins is an
unforgivable crime. What happened in New York can happen in
Cairo, in Amman, in Riyadh. The hearts of the powers of
oppression and destruction have no mercy; these hearts do
not acknowledge blood ties or human fellowship; these are
the forces that work solely for their own interests."

"According to all reports, Al-Sayyed Atta and his cousin,
two of those accused of carrying out the suicide
operations, spent their nights in Florida pubs! I do not
know what kind of Islamic fundamentalism this is [supposed
to be], nor what [kind of] Islam they belonged to?! It is
obvious that they are criminals, not Muslims. No matter how
[tightly] they envelop themselves in the robe of Islam, the
[real] Islam is innocent of their crime."

"The test is now clear: Do you belong to those who want
people to be able to live their lives in safety, and work
anywhere? Or do you belong to the forces of oppression,
destruction, and terror? There is no place to answer 'yes,
we're with you, but,' or 'we're against you, but.'"

"White is distinct from black; on one side [stand]
righteousness and its forces, and on the other side [stand]
injustice, madness, and those who support them. Where do
you stand? No 'buts'! This destruction is no longer an
American matter. A person's a person, regardless of
citizenship, gender, race, religion, or language. Is this
not what the Arabs demand of the world? Is this not what we
demand from the US when we seek to defend Arab-Americans or
Muslim-Americans? We demand always justice; are we not
required to act justly towards others also?... We must be
just so that when we demand justice someone will listen to
us."

"There is oppression, and there are the oppressed; there
are murderers and there are the murdered; there is crime
and there is punishment. True, these are black and white
concepts, but in such cases there is no other color. There
is no room for 'justice, but.' In this instance, we must
choose whether we support injustice, encourage it to
continue its tyranny, and place our fate in its hands, or
whether we subject our societies to the forces of justice
and righteousness. This is our choice at the beginning of
the new century."

"Whatever reservations Arabs have about US policy, this is
not the time for grievances. There is an appropriate time
for everything. Please, hold the 'but' for another time.
Please, join in to form an alliance against the forces of
oppression and destruction; do not allow arrogance to lead
you to deny your humanity. This does not mean that I
repudiate the conspicuous difference between terror aimed
at sowing destruction for the sake of destruction, and
peoples' rights to resist the oppressor anytime, anywhere."

"In spite of all the sorrow and anger in American society,
President Bush, his secretary of state, his
attorney-general, and senators have acted in an exemplary
manner by defending Arab-Americans and Muslim-Americans at
the height of passion. The American media also have been
careful not to make generalizations, and they have hosted
many Muslims and Arabs, [allowing them] to express their
apprehensions. All this is testimony to the humanity of
this society, whatever criticism we may level at it. At the
height of the anger and pain, the Americans - both
leadership and people - managed to differentiate between
the criminal and his religion, between him and his people.
This is to [American] society's credit... If only we, in
our moments of anger, could reach such a level, and not
harm people because of the deeds of others... American
society's position towards its Muslims and Arabs was a
sublime act of the human spirit..."

"We must demand such sublime acts from ourselves as well...
We must confront these forces with determination. Terror
and terrorists have a television channel that presents
itself as the only channel [in the Arab world] defending
freedom of expression; this is the only channel that
encourages terrorist leaders to be interviewed (referring
to Qatar's Al-Jezeera television, which has interviewed bin
Laden and many other fundamentalist leaders)... The
terrorists choose this particular channel... because its
crew carried weapons in Afghanistan and today wear
three-piece suits and host programs promoting those same
ideas (evidently a reference to the Egyptian Ahmed Mansour,
known for his connections to fundamentalist elements, who
has a talk show on Al-Jezeera)..."

"The vast majority of the Arab peoples were very sorry
about the killing of innocent people in New York, in
Washington, and in Pennsylvania. These are the [real]
Arabs; those who qualify their verbal expressions of sorrow
with 'but' are, deep in their hearts, praising the
terror..."

Endnotes:

(1) Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), September 17, 2001.

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

Special Dispatch
September 21, 2001
No. 274

Terror in America (8)
Egypt's opposition press: Rejoicing is a national and
religious obligation; these were the best moments of our
lives; Bush is a mouse leading a gang of mice

In general, the Egyptian government-sponsored press has
condemned the terrorist attacks committed against the US
and in most cases called for change in America's Middle
East policy and warned against an ill-considered offensive
on terror. These newspapers also criticized the scenes of
Arabs rejoicing that were broadcast across the world. One
exception in the government press was Al-Akhbar columnist
Ahmad Ragab, who has in the past expressed admiration of
Hitler. Ragab found it difficult to conceal his
satisfaction at the American tragedy: "I know a man of
great wealth and terrifying influence, a tyrant who forces
everyone to obey him... Suddenly, from out of the darkness,
he is thrashed soundly on the backside. He turns around -
but sees only ghosts."(1)

Many of Egypt's government papers referred to the "fall" of
"the superpower," and to "American and Israeli terror"
across the world, but maintained a tone less cheerful than
the tone evident in Ragab's column. The opposition papers,
however, reflected an entirely different view: Ahmad Murad,
a columnist for the Nasserist weekly Al-Arabi, wrote, "In
all honesty, and without beating around the bush: I am
happy about [what happened to] America; I am happy about
the great number of American dead. Let them accuse me of
whatever they want. It doesn't matter and it does not
lessen the happiness and excitement that overwhelm me. No
one can make me take back what I say, no matter what their
claims and explanations. All the innocent citizens who were
killed are victims of America's barbarism and terror,
ranging over half a century... Count up the number killed
by American weapons in the world and compare it to the
number of those killed in the US; you will find that the
number of  [American dead] is much less than one percent
[of the latter]. I have a right to rejoice; I have a right
to be filled with happiness; the Americans are finally
tasting the bitterness of death."(2)

Acting Al-Arabi editor, Abd Al-Halim Qandil also insisted
on his "rights," saying: "Yes, we have the right to
rejoice. This was the first step in a thousand-mile journey
towards defeating America by a knockout."(3) Al-Arabi
columnist Nur Al-Huda Zaki wrote: "I cannot hide my
feelings; I cannot restrain my joy. For the first time in
my life, I witness with my own eyes the defeat of American
arrogance, tyranny, conceit, and evil. For the first time,
I ask myself: has Allah finally answered the prayers of
mothers, the pleading of victims in Palestine, Iraq, and
Libya?..."

"Should I lie and be hypocritical like the others,
condemning the killing of civilians, expressing my sorrow
over the American and other victims, or praying and
donating blood?! Why do we try to present the arrogant
master in the White House with proof of our innocence?
Never, throughout history, have we been caught with the
blood of innocents dripping from our hands - the blood of
the Indians, the slaves, the Vietnamese, the Palestinians,
and the Iraqis. I do not want to form an alliance with
America, the shame of [what happened in] Iraq is enough for
me. I do not want to pray for the Americans or to donate my
blood; I do not want to condemn what happened. America is
the one who killed them, as it killed us in Iraq, and as it
continues to slaughter us in Palestine."(4)

Other Al-Arabi columnists took the same line. "The
Americans must now withdraw from the entire world," wrote
Muhammad Badr Al-Din, "Oh Americans, you must withdraw...
Either you treat the nations and the peoples with respect,
or you will die."(5)

Badr Al-Din's colleague Said Sh'eib added, "I rejoiced
greatly at what happened to the American government, and I
was very sorry about the civilian dead. Is this a
contradiction? Of course it is a contradiction, but that's
the way it was."(6) Maher Zuhdi concluded: "I cannot
describe how joyful I felt. Of course, I didn't rejoice
over the victims, because we must not gloat over the dead,
but I rejoiced because the honor of the US has become a
floor rag."(7)

Open expressions of joy were also evident in the Egyptian
Liberal Party daily Al-Ahrar. Columnist Salim 'Azzouz
wrote: "Oh, yeah, guys, Her Royal Highness America has
taken this defeat; she has turned out to be a paper tiger,
and the Americans [have turned out to be] no more than a
gang of delinquent children. It transpires that Bush...-
who treated us like servants in his court - is no head of
state, but a mouse leading a gang of mice. At the moment
[this] occurred in New York and Washington, he left for
parts unknown ..."

"Oh yeah, guys, they told us that he who stings America
ends up in the grave. They told us that [America] protects
the Arab royal families. They told us that [America] can
find a black ant on a dark night in the parched desert;
that it has the most powerful intelligence apparatus in the
world that can detect what happens in our bedrooms - an
apparatus that knows what kind of underwear the president
of Iraq [wears]... It has been proven that it was all an
illusion..."(8)

In another article, Azzouz complained about the social and
perhaps even governmental pressure applied on all those who
gloated over the US's anguish: "We have been prohibited
from showing the happiness and joy that we feel, so as not
to hurt the Americans' feelings - although in this case,
rejoicing is a national and religious obligation. The US is
Israel's protector. When it collapses in the blink of an
eye, and we see the heroes as they flee in horror - a
prohibition on rejoicing is a decree that the public cannot
observe..."(9)

Al-Ahrar editor Sallah Kabdhaya made fun of the incident.
"As far as I know," he wrote, "no organization in the world
is capable of carrying out what happened. Therefore, we
must assume that it [came from] outside the planet Earth...
It is known that President Bush Sr. promised, in his
election propaganda, to reveal the American government's
secret contacts with organizations from outer space if he
won the election. He said that the White House safe
contained recordings of conversations between US president
Eisenhower and spacemen. But Bush did not win, Clinton did;
since then the matter has not been mentioned. Perhaps Bush
Jr.... angered the spacemen in some way, and they tinkered
with his airplanes, sending them to convey this terrible
message..."(10)

'Adel Al-Gouhari, a Nasserist writing in Al-Ahrar,
differentiated between the American people and the American
government: "There is no reason to rejoice at the
misfortune of the American people, who have not yet
understood that five million Jews are not worth the
sacrifice of all these victims... The US's position in the
Arab-Zionist conflict causes Arabs to rejoice over every
disaster visited upon the American government, though not
on its people, because that government has gone too far in
its oppression."(11)

All columnists in the pan-Arab opposition weekly Al-Usbu',
which strongly criticizes the US under normal
circumstances, focused on the attacks. Deputy editor Magdi
Shandi wrote: "I considered hiring a professional mourner,
so as to adjust myself to the international atmosphere [of]
hypocrisy and weeping over the victims of the explosions in
America. But I knew that even those [professional mourners]
who charge by the hour would refuse, even if I promised
$100 for every tear."

"God, what will I do now? How can I write an article
without cursing those terrorists who launched a war not
only against the US, but against Western culture? How can I
refrain from calling them wild, barbaric, Tatars, people
who want to turn back [the clock of] civilization and
progress to the days when we struck two flints together to
make a fire? How can a columnist who thinks America got its
just desserts - a punishment that suits [its crime of]
sucking the blood of peoples - [how can he] be saved from
the guillotine of the hypocrites... The lies inundate you
from television screens, as [the hypocrites] express
sorrow, donate blood, and place their intelligence systems
at the disposal of the cardboard master... America weeps.
Let it seek professional mourners by itself. I beseech you,
do not participate in this demonstration of sorrow. If you
are murdered by a bully, it is a humiliation; if they force
you to march in his funeral procession, it is the zenith of
humiliation. Pardon us, America; we have no tears left to
share in your sorrow."(12)

Al Usbu' columnist Muhammad Mustagab related what he felt
as he watched the airliners crash into the World Trade
Center: "[Those moments of] exquisite, incandescent hell
were the most beautiful and precious moments of my life.
The towers, the walls, [symbols] of the [American] regime,
were a modern, terrifying monster infiltrated by a brave
and stinging hornet... This mythological monster was
terrible in its pain, in its screams, and in its fall, that
resembled Hell. All the media... broadcast these images for
us over and over. The generations of the past, and, with
Allah's help, the generations to come, will envy us for
having witnessed them."(13)

Another Al-Usbu' columnist, Farouq Abaza, displayed
relative restraint in regards to the victims: "No man with
human feeling can derive pleasure from the sight of the
victims' bodies being torn apart, burned, and crushed under
the ruins. Allah has created all human beings to live on
this land under an umbrella of peace, love, and beauty. But
some fools and idiots distort these lofty values and try to
impose their behavior, their sick ideology, and their
malignant idiocy... One of these was little Bush, whom
cursed fate placed on the throne of the government of the
superpower that rules the entire world. He is a tyrant;
playing golf at his ranch, he smiles and is filled with joy
when news reaches him of the number of Arab victims in
Palestine, among them women, children, and the elderly. But
Bush was woken from... his dream of false power by this
blow, from which, I think, he will never recover."

"What happened in America has never happened before in the
history of the human race. Nevertheless, the devil hastened
to weep over the ruins, and to call on the world to stand
beside the superpower, the symbol of civilization and
democracy... Oh Bush, drink from the bitter cup of the
blood of your people, so that you will [come to] know that
Allah is just!"(14)

Al-Wafd, the daily of Egypt's largest opposition party, was
vehement about Arafat, who was filmed donating blood for
the attack victims. Al-Wafd editor Magdi Muhanna wrote:
"Arafat may, perhaps, impress American public opinion with
his theatrics, but I do not think he can convince the Arab
viewer. Arafat also lacks credibility when he wraps his
face in a veil of sorrow for the American victims... Arafat
must stand with his people, and stop making a show of
himself."(15)

The Muslim Brotherhood mouthpiece Afaq Arabiya joined in as
well, publishing a poem written after the attacks by
columnist Wahid Gahshan: "...'Allah Akhbar,' shouted the
hero... The arrogance sunk in the filth... In the East,
none shed a tear for you, Allah decreed the vengeance
against you. If Allah had not wanted it, it would not have
happened. Return to the path of righteousness, for the eye
of Allah follows you..."(16)

Columnist Ammar Shammakh added, "In the eyes of Muslims,
the US is a force of oppression, thus the Muslims see what
happened as divine retribution, carried out under the
supervision of Allah by unknown soldiers. America
practically said to the world: Only I will teach you who is
Allah. Allah wanted to teach it a lesson... If not for what
happened, if the lion had not been wounded in his den, we
would think that our prayers were in vain and we would
despair... The Americans thought they could not be
defeated... They preferred the apes (i.e. the Jews) to
human beings, treating human beings from outside the US
cheaply, supporting homosexuals and usury. They have
forgotten that in this universe there is a God whose
punishment no one escapes... Allah came because they did
not expect him, bombing their hearts with horror..."(17)

Endnotes:

(1) Al-Akhbar (Egypt), September 17, 2001. Some quotes are
taken from daily reports from the Egyptian press in the
London daily Al-Quds Al-Arabi.
(2) Al-Arabi (Egypt), September 16, 2001.
(3) Al-Arabi (Egypt), September 16, 2001.
(4) Al-Arabi (Egypt), September 16, 2001.
(5) Al-Arabi (Egypt), September 16, 2001.
(6) Al-Arabi (Egypt), September 16, 2001.
(7) Al-Arabi (Egypt), September 16, 2001.
(8) Al-Ahrar (Egypt), September 14, 2001.
(9) Al-Ahrar (Egypt), September 17, 2001.
(10) Al-Ahrar (Egypt), September 13, 2001.
(11) Al-Ahrar (Egypt), September 17, 2001.
(12) Al-Usbu' (Egypt), September 17, 2001.
(13) Al-Usbu' (Egypt), September 17, 2001.
(14) Al-Usbu' (Egypt), September 17, 2001.
(15) Al-Wafd  (Egypt), September 14, 2001.
(16) Afaq Arabiye (Egypt), September 19, 2001.
(17) Afaq Arabiye (Egypt), September 19, 2001.

************************
The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) is an
independent, non-profit organization that translates and
analyzes the media of the Middle East.  Copies of articles
and documents cited, as well as background information, are
available on request.

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI)
P.O. Box 27837, Washington, DC 20038-7837
Phone: (202) 955-9070
Fax: (202) 955-9077
E-Mail: [log in to unmask]
www.memri.org


If you no longer wish to receive this publication via
e-mail, please reply and enter only the word "UNSUBSCRIBE"
in the subject line.