Posted May 13, 2002

Democracy/Imperialism

Malic usually writes quite incisive and informative articles so I was rather surprised by his article "Democracy Triumphant in the Balkans".

Yugoslavia's main problem for quite some time now has been imperialist intervention not democracy. Tensions within Yugoslavia and the push towards secession were greatly exacerbated by "reforms" pushed by the IMF and World Bank, unaccountable and undemocratic institutions. The elections held in 1990 were held separately by republic not nationally and there was substantial interference from outside. There was never a nationwide referendum held on whether or not the people of Yugoslavia wanted to maintain the union. The secessions of Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia were conducted unilaterally and in violation of the Yugoslav constitution (It should also be noted that Alija Izetbegovic, who was talked into secession by outside powers, became president despite being outpolled in the 1990 elections by Fikret Abdic.) The referendums held by Serbs within these republics were ignored as was their right to self-determination.

As has been well-documented by Antiwar.com and many others, the Balkan wars of the 1990's were caused and continued by imperial intervention from outside and peace negotiations were continuously sabotaged by the U.S. Following Dayton, Bosnia has become a NATO protectorate/colony. As long as it remains this way any talk of actual "democracy" in Bosnia remains more or less meaningless.

Contrary to Malic's claims the 2000 elections held in the Federal Republic Of Yugoslavia did not bring to power a democratic government but rather an opposition coalition largely created and controlled by foreign interests. At the time of elections Yugoslavia faced continuing international sanctions and threats of invasion from the US and other NATO powers (not to mention the enormous sums of money given the democratic opposition by those same powers). Democracy requires a free, well-informed, and participatory citizenry able to elect its own leaders and hold them accountable. Such conditions are impossible under the rule of the Empire. The problem is not democracy, but imperialism which makes democracy impossible.

~ Dimitri O.

Nebojsa Malic replies:

I cannot disagree with any of the facts, only the conclusions. Yes, the Empire is the problem. But it can't be fought with its own most potent weapon. Unlike the idealistic definition used here, democracy in practice means that power comes from numbers, force and money – and was thus the ideal tool of Imperial conquest. Thanks to Imperial language acrobatics, many people have come to believe 'democracy' stands for self-determination and liberty, while it has never been anything of the sort.

Credibility and Perspective

I am very disappointed with the .... article "The Quest for Modernity in Islam" by Falsafay Ghaalib. Here are the reasons why:

1. The author is hiding behind a pseudonym. You will find articles much more hostile and critical of Islam published in Weekly Standard or almost any other publication. Their authors don't "hide" from all of those billions of "hostile, intolerant Muslims who will not rest until those who disagree with them are beheaded." I visit Antiwar.com and contribute financially to it since you all bring things into perspective and tell it like it is which brings me to my next point --
2. Why is Islam particularly in need of coming to terms with modernity? What about the Biblical/Old Testament command to stone adulterers to death? What about the Talmudic commandment of not allowing Jews to charge other Jews interest in financial dealings? What about the oral consumption of urine in various Hindu traditions? The list could go on forever. Focussing on Islam exclusively demonstrates a total lack of perspective which is contrary to the core nature of Antiwar. Which brings me to my next point --
3. The fact that there are many commandments/recommendations in Islam does not mean that they are obeyed by individual Muslims or their governments. After Iman (belief), the prayer to Allah (literally "the God") is the most important duty of the individual Muslim. Yet only about 5% of the world's 1.2 billion Muslims perform the 5 daily mandatory prayers. A very small percentage of any religion's followers even try to fully observe their religion. Muslims for the past few to several centuries have proven themselves to be much less observant of their own religion than those of others. In fact, many observant Muslims in the West including myself have the opinion that the United States, Canada, as well as other such countries are much more Islamic in a wide array of matters than the typical predominantly Muslim country.
4. The dismal state of the world's Muslim countries is not because of their observance of Islamic commandments and principles since only a few percent even try to be observant. This includes trying to be observant in regards to: honesty in business dealings, abhorring bribery/corruption, administering true justice between disputing parties regardless of their religions or ethnicity, being generous with material possessions regardless of how little it may be, striving to acquire knowledge, and many other values. These are explicitly Islamic values which also are found in other religions. These are values that are much more in practice in the financially successful Western world than in most Muslim countries. That is why so many Muslims want to emigrate to the Western world. Such values are not luxuries of wealthy, powerful countries. On the contrary, these values are the foundations upon which great nations are built.

In conclusion, "Credibility" and "Perspective" are the words that come to my mind when I recommend friends to visit Antiwar.com. I hope that Antiwar.com maintains its commitment to an accurate, informed perspective on any topic it wishes to tackle. Please maintain credibility by avoiding anonymously authored, poorly thought-out articles which ultimately provide biases readily available on news outlets that Antiwar.com more or less despises. Antiwar.com does not need to endorse or critique any religion.

~ Anjum Shariff, M.D., Missouri

Support

It surely must baffle Israelis that Sharon, The Likud Party and their lobby in Washington, AIPAC, have more support in the US Congress than they do in their own Knesset. This shown by their recent overwhelming vote supporting Sharon's policies at a time when most of the world is condemning them. In fact, if we transferred many members from the US Congress into the Knesset they would most likely be aligned with the party of the late immigrant from Brooklyn, Rabbi Meir Kahane, and his Kach Party.

~ Stephen Block Jr.

Chance for Peace

I applaud ... [Ron Paul's] courage and sense of conscience in opposing the pro-Israeli bill that was so overwhelmingly favored by representatives across the nation. You have given concerned Americans hope that there does exist some honesty, integrity and fairness in the congress concerning the crisis in the middle east. I urge you to continue speaking for justice and peace as bravely and honestly as you have done recently. Rare leaders such as yourself give a voice to the oppressed, a chance for peace for all.

~ Husna H., New York

If Israel Knew that the US Knew

Just speculating. From an intelligence perspective, certainly the highly trained Mossad, the Israeli art student projects sounds very unprofessional. But was it?

Possibility: they wanted to be seen. What if that was the entire point of the operation? What if Israel was communicating, also through the Florida address (Justin, your latest article mistakenly mentions Hollywood, California) a few blocks from the terrorist address? What if Israel, not through the all-too-obvious art students, but through real spying, such as their reported telephone wiretapping system, knew something was up, and wanted to leave tangible evidence of that fact?

Isn't is interesting to see what Israel is getting away with after 9/11? Absolutely stunning, if you ask me. If this were a poker game, who would you think had the better hand: Israel or the US? No sooner is the White House even slightly resisting Israel, or ABC reports of a book about the 1960's US military planning to attack US citizens in an effort to frame Cuba. Did I just hear a card drop?

If Israel merely had foreknowledge of 9/11, would they presently be in the driver seat? Unlikely. But if Israel knew that the US knew -- now there's a scenario that 'nobody' would want to investigate.

If the above is anything more than speculation, investigation will hardly be necessary. If the US needs to free its hands, we should soon be seeing a pattern of admission, albeit of the harmless kind, of 9/11 foreknowledge by US agencies. Indeed, today the FBI did precisely that.

~ Alex Nagel

Unfortunate

Justin's "Story of the Century" (May 10, 2002), as well as his many previous articles on the Israeli angle, is plausible, as far as it goes, but I think his dismissal of Cynthia McKinney's and others' "unfortunate conspiracy theories" is unfortunate in itself. After all, Antiwar.com itself has published stories about the Carlyle Group's defense portfolio and the prominent Reaganites (Carlucci, James Baker, Bush I) connected with it, as well as the previous bin-Laden family connection. The Independent and the Guardian, both in the UK and both of which are frequently linked as presumably reliable sources by antiwar, have reported on Bush II's move to stop investigations into Virginia-based Islamic groups with alleged connections to terrorism.

Then there was the one-day story of the leisure stocks short selling the week before the attack, not to mention the conveniently timed anthrax attack that apparently originated at Fort Detrick. None of these can convincingly be attributed to Mossad or the Israelis.

Emperor's Clothes (www.tenc.net), which did terrific yeomen's work on Kosovo, has posted a number of articles that raise at least two fundamental questions: with an active air force base ten miles from the Pentagon, how come no interceptors were scrambled in the hour or so between the time that the jets were known to be hijacked and the time that the third one crashed into the Pentagon -- keeping in mind that this jet supposedly was originally believed to be targeting the White House? No reasonable explanation has been offered, and Dick Cheney's two efforts to address the matter contradicted one another and both sounded like dismissals and cover-ups to boot.

The second question regards the behavior of Bush II himself, who, having been informed of a major terrorist attack on the most prominent symbol of capitalism in the US, and that two other jets had been hijacked and were headed toward Washington -- with the obvious corollary that his own safety might well be at issue in such a coordinated attack -- continued with his publicly announced schedule, and went into a kindergarten class to read to the children in a pointless photo-op, which had been displayed prominently in the newspapers, both time and place, the day before. Was he taunting the terrorists? It would seem unlikely from his subsequent darting about the country in order to preserve the Seat of Government from alleged and it turned out fabricated threats against Air Force One. Did he know he was safe, that the attacks were not targeting any important personnel?

Cheney was in the White House with Bush Senior, and Rumsfeld was at the Pentagon meeting with advisers. The plane that hit the Pentagon swung in an extremely tight bank after passing it by, veering 270 degrees to smash into it on the opposite side from Rummy's office. Of course, none of this proves conspiracy, but it certainly merits an investigation of the sort McKinney has called for -- after all, the Congressmen who are stonewalling both an inquiry into the art students and into the Bush administration are the same ones who voted $50 million to investigate Clinton's sex life.

One would think that the question, cui bono -- in addition to Israel -- would raise questions in Justin's mind as well. Richard Myers, who wants to build space platforms to incinerate rival countries with lasers, is now head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Ashcroft has gone Mitchell Palmer one better, and essentially, with the help of the USA PATRIOT Congress, simply abolished the Bill of Rights and Constitutional restrictions on the imperial executive. And Bush Jr., or his handlers, has donned the diadem that John Adams warned against.

And all this was made possible by an attack supposedly masterminded by a past asset of the CIA from his den in a cave in the remote mountains of one of the most backward countries in Asia, who moreover according to Murdoch's (of Fox News) paper Le Figaro was visited in his hospital suite in Dubai last July by the local CIA COS, a month or so after the Paki foreign minister was assured by "senior American officials" that the US would be bombing Afghanistan by October.

Come on, Justin, surely at least some of this reportage, which has surfaced in respected papers everywhere except in the US, piques your curiosity? Or is the Israeli angle so fundamentally earthshaking that it's impossible to conceive of anyone else being involved, or knowing about it?

As you yourself note, there's a certain implausibility to the idea that a conspiracy that took five years or so to hatch, involving groups that our intelligence and police state agencies keep close tabs on, could go entirely undetected. I expect more than airy dismissal from Antiwar.com; your brilliant exposure of the Israeli spy scandal ought to be followed up with a full investigation that doesn't close any doors before looking into them. Our dying republic demands no less.

~ Ron Reed, Arkansas

Modernity in Islam

I have the following comments to make regarding ... [the guest column of May 6, "The Quest for Modernity in Islam," by 'Falsafay Ghaalib']:

I believe that the author is confused, he does not even know that true Islamic economy can be compared to that of the Capitalist US economy more than any other system worldwide. There are differences of course, but the differences are rules that would better establish a fair opportunity to all members of society. True Islamic economy system calls for free trade, it fights monopoly, it promotes research and development, it has so much respect for copyrights, intellectual property, and many other things that were practiced centuries ago. The deterioration of such economic system should be blamed on the corruption of the members of society and rulers, not the teachings of Islam.

Kindly recommend for the Author to read "Iqtisaduna" by Sayyed Muhammad Baqer Al-Sader a Shi'at cleric assassinated by Saddam during the '70s. His book is the prime undisputed authority of it's time on Islam economics until other sects of Islam have plagiarize and republished their own versions of it. Another scholar the author should consider is Sayyed Muhammad Alhussaini Alshirazi who have published an encyclopedia on almost all modern related issues with regard to Islam. Sayyed Alshirazi passed away last year, so his work should be up to date as far as more recent history goes.

As far as science and politics in Islam. The author fails to understand that with suppression there would be no creativity. Maybe he forgot the fact that he is living in Canada, a democratic free nation, rather than under a suppressive Islamic government. There are great Muslim scientists who do reside in the western hemisphere, should he research that matter.

Great treason has been committed by some of the followers of Islam just so that they can be in power. Quran can not be changed, that is true. No one can add, take out, change the place of a single letter in Quran even. But the author fails to recognize that just like there are many interpretations for the Bible and Torah, there exists many interpretations for the Quran. Each sect interprets Quran differently. While some take the words as they are, those are mainly Wahabbis, and the author seems to be a follower of one of those kind of sects; other sects interpret the Quran while acknowledging the Quran eloquence.

Females in Islam are granted more rights than any other religions. Save the two situations which there are differences, namely heredity, and the right to decide the divorce. The latter has many roles that would grant a female to be divorced on her request if she provides sufficient evidence that would support her request. As for Heredity, she gets half of what the male gets as his sister.

All what you read and see around the Islamic world is because of closed minded people who interpret the Quran according to their wishes.

The author also fails to mention that Quran has one version because no single Arabic speaking individual has ever been successful to produce verses and sentences compared to the eloquence of those present in the Quran. It turned out to be the biggest challenge for the native speakers. I think your author is not an Arabic speaker, and thus he would not understand that aspect of Quran.

My last comment, is the fact that the author mentions that Islam is a "deen", a way of life, yet he fails to understand that it is a complete systematic way of life. It is a self sustained system that is built on solid building blocks. If the rulers and members of society try to improperly mix and match between these building blocks, add, refine, or take out one of those building blocks, the whole system will fail.

Honestly, I sense more confusion from the author about the Islamic system, rather than an expert certainty. Even if such certainty expressed by the author is a negative one, I would accept it; but there seems to be none.

~ Ismail T.