Asia Times

<html> <head><script type="text/javascript" src="https://web-static.archive.org/_static/js/bundle-playback.js?v=7YQSqjSh" charset="utf-8"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://web-static.archive.org/_static/js/wombat.js?v=txqj7nKC" charset="utf-8"></script> <script>window.RufflePlayer=window.RufflePlayer||{};window.RufflePlayer.config={"autoplay":"on","unmuteOverlay":"hidden"};</script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://web-static.archive.org/_static/js/ruffle/ruffle.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> __wm.init("https://web.archive.org/web"); __wm.wombat("http://www.atimes.com:80/atimes/Letters.html","20031202024625","https://web.archive.org/","web","https://web-static.archive.org/_static/", "1070333185"); </script> <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="https://web-static.archive.org/_static/css/banner-styles.css?v=p7PEIJWi" /> <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="https://web-static.archive.org/_static/css/iconochive.css?v=3PDvdIFv" />  <title>Asia Times</title> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1250"> <meta name="keywords" content="Asia Times Asian news Online middle east southeast central china japan korea war terror economy business international daily national letters editor archives press regional coverage politics political"> <meta name="description" content="Asia Times Online. The Asia News Hub providing the latest news and analysis regarding economics, events and trends in business, economy and politics throughout Asia."> <meta name="AUTHOR" content="Asia Time Online"> <meta name="COPYRIGHT" content="Asia Times Online"> <meta name="EXPIRES" content="0"> <meta name="Distribution" content="Global"> <meta name="Resource-Type" content="Document"> <meta name="Revisit-after" content="1 days"> <meta name="Robots" content="index, follow"> <meta name="Language" content="en-us"> <meta name="Rating" content="general"> <meta http-equiv="Cache-Control" content="no-cache"> <meta http-equiv="Pragma" content="no-cache"> <link href="/web/20031202024625cs_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/atimes.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"> <script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="/web/20031202024625js_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/atimes.js"></script> </head> <body vlink="#003399" alink="#003399" link="#003399" bgcolor="#ffffff" leftmargin="0" topmargin="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0"> <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="782" border="0"> <tr> <td valign="top" align="left" width="775"> <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" border="0"> <tr> <td width="284" height="81"><img height="81" alt="Asia Time - Daily News" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/atime_logo1.gif" width="284"></td> <td valign="center" align="middle" height="81"> <noscript> <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://network.realmedia.com/RealMedia/ads/click_nx.ads/atimes/combo/ron/nwspfn/ss/a@Position1?x"> <img src="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625im_/http://network.realmedia.com/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.ads/atimes/combo/ron/nwspfn/ss/a@Position1" border="0"></a> </noscript> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="284"><img height="53" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/atime_logo2.gif" width="284"></td> <td><img height="53" alt="Asia Times Online" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/mid_top.jpg" width="492" usemap="#Map" border="0"></td> </tr> </table> <map name="Map"> <area shape="RECT" target="_blank" coords="347,3,488,47" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.asiatimes-chinese.com/"> </map> </td> <td width="7" background="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/sha.gif"><img height="7" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="7"></td> </tr> <tr> <td valign="top"> <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" border="0"> <tr> <td valign="top" align="middle" width="118" bgcolor="#003366"> <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" border="0"> <tr> <td valign="top" align="middle"> <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="118" border="0"> <tr> <td><img height="7" alt="" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/main_links_01.gif" width="118"></td> </tr> <tr> <td><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page.html"><img height="14" alt="" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/frintpage.gif" width="118" border="0"></a></td> </tr> <tr> <td><img height="14" alt="" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/main_links_03.gif" width="118"></td> </tr> <tr> <td><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China.html"><img height="13" alt="People&apos;s Republic of China, Taiwan, Hong Kong" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/china.gif" width="118" border="0"></a></td> </tr> <tr> <td><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia.html"><img height="14" alt="Southeast Asia - Thailand, Myanmar [Burma], Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/southeasta.gif" width="118" border="0"></a></td> </tr> <tr> <td><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia.html"><img height="14" alt="South Asia - India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, Bhutan" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/southa.gif" width="118" border="0"></a></td> </tr> <tr> <td><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Japan.html"><img height="15" alt="Japan" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/japan.gif" width="118" border="0"></a></td> </tr> <tr> <td><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea.html"><img height="13" alt="Korea" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/korea.gif" width="118" border="0"></a></td> </tr> <tr> <td><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia.html"><img height="14" alt="Central Asia" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/cen_a.gif" width="118" border="0"></a></td> </tr> <tr> <td><img height="15" alt="" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/main_links_10.gif" width="118"></td> </tr> <tr> <td><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East.html"><img height="13" alt="Middle East" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/mideast.gif" width="118" border="0"></a></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/War_and_Terror.html"><img height="14" alt="War on Terrorism" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/wandt.gif" width="118" border="0"></a></td></tr> <tr> <td><img height="15" alt="" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/main_links_13.gif" width="118"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Business_in_Brief.html"><img height="14" alt="Business in Brief" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/binb.gif" width="118" border="0"></a></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Asian_Economy.html"><img height="14" alt="Asian Economy" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/asiane.gif" width="118" border="0"></a></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy.html"><img height="14" alt="Global Economy" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/globale.gif" width="118" border="0"></a></td></tr> <tr> <td><img height="14" alt="" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/main_links_17.gif" width="118"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Letters.html"><img height="12" alt="Letters to the Editor" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/letters.gif" width="118" border="0"></a></td></tr> <tr> <td><img height="7" alt="" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/main_links_19.gif" width="118"></td></tr> </table> <table class="" id="Table14" height="130" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="3" width="65" align="center" border="1"> <tr> <td class="" valign="top" bordercolor="darkorange" align="left" bgcolor="#000000" height="0"> </form></form> <form id="Form2" action="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/cgi-bin/es/esearch.asp">Search Asia Times <input id="Hidden5" type="hidden" size="1" value="0" name="start"> <input id="Hidden6" type="hidden" size="1" value="10" name="perPage"> <input id="Hidden7" type="hidden" size="1" value="yes" name="summary"> <input id="Hidden8" type="hidden" size="1" value="rank" name="sort"> <center><input id="Text2" size="11" name="search"></center> <center><input id="Submit1" type="submit" value="Search" name="submit" d="Submit1"></center> <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/search.asp">Advanced Search</a></td></tr></table></form></td> </tr> <tr> <td valign="top" align="middle"><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/others/newsletter.htm"><img height="49" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/register_button.gif" width="111" border="0"></a></td></tr> <tr> <td valign="top" align="middle" height="10"><img height="10" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="1"></td></tr> <tr> <td valign="top" align="middle"><a href="javascript:Currency();"><img height="49" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/currency-logo.gif" width="111" border="0"></a></td></tr> <tr> <td valign="top" align="middle" height="10"><img height="10" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="1"></td></tr> <tr> <td valign="top" align="middle"><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/book_reviews.html"><img height="49" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/books_logo.gif" width="111" border="0"></a></td></tr> </table> <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" border="0"> <tr> <td> <div align="center">   </div></td></tr> <tr> <td> <div align="center"> </div></td></tr> <tr> <td> </td></tr></table> </td> <td valign="top"> <table height="31" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" border="0"> <tr> <td valign="top" align="middle" background="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/top_bg.gif"> <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" border="0"> <tr valign="top" align="middle"> <td width="25%"> <div align="center"><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/archive.asp"><img height="18" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/archive.gif" width="110" border="0"></a></div></td> <td width="25%"> <div align="center"><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/about.html"><img height="18" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/about.gif" width="110" border="0"></a></div></td> <td width="25%"> <div align="center"><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/contact.html"><img height="18" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/contact.gif" width="110" border="0"></a></div></td> <td width="25%"> <div align="center"><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/advertise.html"><img height="18" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/advertise.gif" width="110" border="0"></a></div></td></tr></table></td></tr></table> <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" border="0"> <tr> <td width="10"> </td> <td valign="top" align="left" width="510"> <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" border="0"> <tr> <td valign="top" width="64%">Letters</td> <td width="36%"> <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" border="0"> <tr> <td valign="center" align="middle" height="51"> <div align="right"> <script language="javascript"> function showDate(){ var monthArray=["Jan", "Feb", "Mar", "Apr", "May", "Jun", "Jul", "Aug", "Sep", "Oct", "Nov", "Dec"] var days=["Sunday", "Monday", "Tuesday", "Wednesday", "Thursday", "Friday", "Saturday"] var d=new Date(); var month=d.getMonth() var day=d.getDate() var year=d.getYear() // document.write("Today is " + days[d.getDay()] + " ") document.write(monthArray[month]) document.write(" ") document.write(day) document.write(", ") if(d.getYear()<2000){document.write(year+1900)} if(d.getYear()>2000){document.write(year)} } </script> <script language="javascript">showDate()</script> </div></td></tr></table></td></tr></table> <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" align="left" border="0"> <tr> <td valign="top" width="65%"> <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="406" border="0"> <tr> <td width="406"> Write to us at <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/mailto:letters@atimes.com">letters@atimes.com</a> Please provide your name or a pen name, and your country of residence. Lengthy letters run the risk of being cut. <hr> In reading Ramtanu Maitra's article, <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EK26Df04.html">India and Russia have much to lose</a> [Nov 26], it is clear that the Taliban are cleverly painted in his fanciful collage of blurred images as drug merchants by natural proclivity, and although no specific reference is made to it, it is tacitly asserted by Maitra, by virtue of omission, that the Taliban had made their living, before the American invasion forces arrived, dealing in the opium trade. This is pure propaganda. It was the Taliban who put a stop to opium-growing in Afghanistan, much to the chagrin of the Zionist Central European and American bankers and the drug-financed military industrial complex, operated by the former. When US Zionist forces invaded Afghanistan, the purpose was every bit as much to resume opium production as to effect the rape of natural resources in the region. George Soros must have been elated. Maitra should get his prerogatives a little straighter before undertaking to describe a nation's past year of history. It is poignant that the Afghans have nothing to do with the events of September 11, 2001, nor did they pose any threat whatever to US national security. Those are the sole facts of the issue, and everything else is propaganda. The invasion of Afghanistan was an illegal, unconstitutional war crime from the very start, instigated by the Bush administration on behalf of Zionist big oil interests and the state of Israel. This leads one to wonder just what the actual forces were behind the Russian invasion of Afghanistan, before the time of Vladimir Putin. In my humble opinion, I view the Taliban warriors as more noble and honest than those who would "reform" them. Mike Andrews (Dec 1, '03) I am writing about a very interesting article, <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK26Ak02.html">Iraqis wrestle with Jewish factor</a> [Nov 26]. I have two slightly critical comments on this otherwise illuminating article. The first concerns Nir Rosen's statement that all religions are in competition for the same market. We Jews are not. Not only do we not actively seek converts, we historically discourage them for a variety of reasons. We do indeed hold ourselves to the be the Chosen People - chosen to receive the Torah. I see where that is a controversial position, and it has certainly caused its share of misunderstandings, so let me be clear. Being the Chosen People is a position of obligation and service, not of privilege. Further, while we Jews are judged by 613 laws, non-Jews are held to be judged only by the seven Noahide (post-Flood) laws - prohibitions against idolatry, blasphemy, murder, robbery and theft, forbidden sexual relationships (eg incest, homosexuality, bestiality and adultery), eating flesh carved from a still-living animal and the establishment of a system of justice to maintain law and order. So, not only do we not actively seek converts and not only do we not believe that all people must become Jews to achieve "salvation" (and when we speak of "salvation", we mean something very different from what Christians and Muslims mean), but we also hold that it is easier for non-Jews to attain a share in the world to come than for Jews to do so. Kind of the opposite of Christian and Muslim teaching. My second criticism revolves around Rosen's statement: "With the creation of Israel, the Jewish state, and with its successful defeat and occupation of Arabs and Muslims, as well as its oppression of occupied populations, Jews became a threat rather than an anachronistic and vestigial relic." Rosen compresses many complex issues into this one sentence - and it is lacking. He neglects to mention that Israel has "only" fought in self-defense. Israel is also the "only" victorious nation in war to be punished internationally for its victory over aggressors. And the Arabs and Muslims that Israel "occupies" and "oppresses" (though Israeli "oppression" is pure liberty compared to life in any Arab nation) were previously "occupied" and "oppressed" by Jordan (the West Bank) and Egypt (the Gaza Strip) between 1948 and 1967 (when the Arabs lost another "war of extermination" - their words, not mine - that they started) - and there was not a peep of protest from anywhere. My complaint is that this one sentence could have been worded better - more accurately - and a bit less judgmentally and should probably have been more than just one sentence. In general though, this article was, while disturbing, very well written and very informative. James Myska Vienna, Virginia (Dec 1, '03) I'm not sure I see the point to the story [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK26Ak02.html">Iraqis wrestle with Jewish factor</a>, Nov 26]. In some of the worst writing I have ever seen, Nir Rosen rambles on and on about the prejudices of the common Iraqi towards the Jewish people. That's no surprise given that Iraqis, like most of their Middle East neighbors, live under dictatorships that control the flow of information and use hatred and anti-Semitism to maintain the myth of their own peaceful political and religious co-existence. Cooperation and brotherly love among Muslims (and most Arab countries) is far from actual reality. And what better to way to avoid the truth than blaming it all on the Americans and Jews? It would have been nice to see some signs that the environment of ignorance and hate so vividly described by Rosen was improving, but this was certainly not apparent in his article. Was this intended or just simply an example of poor journalism? Chris Baker London, United Kingdom (Dec 1, '03) Thank you for your informative article, <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK26Ak02.html">Iraqis wrestle with Jewish factor</a> [Nov 26], by Nir Rosen. It casts a much needed light on the Iraq situation. I will be forwarding the link to your article to The New York Times and The Washington Post, asking them why they have failed to report on these matters. Gary Robinson Gaithersburg, Maryland (Dec 1, '03) Thanks for publishing the article, <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EK27Df03.html">Pakistan-India: Same game, new rules</a> [Nov 27]. I appreciate its candor. It echoes the conviction of a significant number of Indians: that peace with Pakistan is a pipe dream and that Pakistan is solely responsible for the deterioration of its relationship with India. Pakistan is a sore loser. The ideology of its creation (two-nation theory) lies in the grave next to communism, and the world perceives it as a problem child while its most hated enemy (India) has earned its place as a progressive partner in the comity of nations. The grand finale for this drama is not going to be "pretty", unless significant and fundamental structural changes are made within Pakistan. India must work with the US to effect a happy ending. Krithivas Phoenix, Arizona (Dec 1, '03) I read the article by Syed Saleem Shahzad, <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EK27Df03.html">Pakistan-India: Same game, new rules</a> [Nov 27]. It is a real surprise to know how deeply the military in Pakistan is involved in jihad activities. I appreciate the author for providing such illuminating information. Usually a reader is always apprehensive about content provided by an author living outside the country in question. Does Shahzad mean that the government in Pakistan is not sincere, or that the government is ineffective in controlling militancy, even if they wish to establish peace? Does this mean that there is no way to establish peace for the type of governing system in Pakistan? Shekhar USA (Dec 1, '03) Judging by some recent letters, we seem to be in the midst of yet another cliched discussion between pro and anti-Israel groups, with each side accusing the other of anti-Semitism and Zionist conspiracy respectively. However, everyone seems to miss the point that the fundamental problem with Israel has nothing to do with it being Jewish - the country would have been more or less equally repressive of its minorities even if it had been created for settlers that were Christian, Muslim, Hindu or anything else. The fundamental problem is that religion is a matter of personal faith and is simply not a strong enough force to keep any country united. Just look at how many Christian countries there are in Europe and how they've been slaughtering each other for centuries. What is the need for so many different Muslim countries in the Middle East? The Jews are no different from any other people: they are incredibly divided, racially and culturally. The easiest way for Israeli politicians to avoid the chaos and anarchy of a multi-racial society and keep everyone in line, is to always remain in a state of national emergency. Thus, Israel, like all countries created in the name of religion, must perpetually remain in a state of holy war against some imagined foreign enemy or else risk falling apart under the weight of racial divisions. Hence, the settlements will always keep expanding, and Israel will keep rejecting all offers of peace, while portraying itself as a victim and blaming the Palestinians for being stubbornly, intrinsically violent. Of course, the support of the world's biggest (and now only) superpower has made matters worse. Until Israel removes the Star of David from its flag and truly becomes a multi-religious, multi-racial society in spirit, not just in name, very little is going to change. Amit Sharma Roorkee, India (Dec 1, '03) One would have to look long and hard to find a better example of hypocrisy than your article exposing the horrific anti-Semitism in Iraq [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK26Ak02.html" target="_blank">Iraqis wrestle with Jewish factor</a>, Nov 26]. Buried in your article is the following quote: "With the creation of Israel, the Jewish state, and with its successful defeat and occupation of Arabs and Muslims, as well as its oppression of occupied populations, Jews became a threat rather than an anachronistic and vestigial relic." The "oppression of occupied populations"? Do you realize that you are perpetuating the same absurd myths that you are trying to expose? The populations of most of Asia should be as "oppressed" as the Arab citizens of Israel. The Arabs of Israel have the highest standard of living in the region, making on average three times what the average Egyptian earns. They have more democratic rights and more opportunity for education than more than 90 percent of Asia. Religious minorities and women have full freedom without dhimmi [protected] status, and homosexuals are free from the fear of being locked up or executed. All nations have minorities with grievances and complaints; Arabs in Israel are no different. But to perpetuate stereotypes and anti-Semitism in an article supposedly dedicated to battling hate demonstrates that your own reporters need to take a good long look in the mirror. Jonathan D Reich Lakeland, Florida (Nov 26, '03) I just read Nir Rosen's article/editorial [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK26Ak02.html" target="_blank">Iraqis wrestle with Jewish factor</a>, Nov 26] regarding the Jewish question in Iraq. Throughout the article he lists multiple instances of obviously false and malicious viewpoints about Jews. I kept reading the article to see when he would make some comment as to how this needs to be stopped or changed in order to have some form of peace in the Middle East or for that matter in the world. However, the article continues on right to the end listing false beliefs about Jews without any statement by the author refuting those beliefs. I am not sure why this was done this way, but it seems to be a disservice to the readers to list these so-called Jewish issues and not at least make it clear how false they all are. Frankly, I wonder if Asia Times believes the same way that the misinformed Iraqis believe. Issie Rabinovitch Los Altos, California (Nov 26, '03) No doubt what [Nir Rosen] writes is true [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK26Ak02.html" target="_blank">Iraqis wrestle with Jewish factor</a>, Nov 26]. Maybe he could next inform us as to what the Talmud says about goy. Try to be honest so we can get a true picture on this topic as well. Brandt Amlie (Nov 26, '03) I generally liked Spengler's fine article <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK25Ak01.html" target="_blank">George W Bush, tragic character</a> [Nov 25], even though I disagree with the premise of the title. In particular, this paragraph annoyed me: "If a piano falls out of a 20th-floor window and lands on Daffy Duck, we laugh. If a piano falls out of a 20th-floor window and crushes a loved one, we do not laugh, but neither is it a tragedy. September 11, 2001, was a tragic event. So was America's invasion of Iraq. It is Bush's tragedy to be the protagonist in the tragedy, rather than the playwright." The attack of September 11 was an atrocity, not a dramatic inevitability. You have failed to demonstrate why al-Qaeda had to kill 3,000 innocents - indeed, I think that is impossible. On the other hand, the conquest of Afghanistan and Iraq and the resultant deaths are tragic - the inevitable result of the the terrorist actions and America's response in self-defense. America cannot tolerate terrorist attacks on its soil. If it cannot persuade, it will conquer. It kills those who kill its citizens. Many have said the war on terror is unwinnable. I fail to see how it is more difficult than the war on communism. That took 50 years and was against the largest country in the world with the largest military. The war on terror is not against Islam but against those who use terrorism as a political weapon within it. That is a small, conquerable percentage. Perhaps this is where we differ. I see the inevitable victory over terrorism in 10, 20 or 30 years from now. That is the happy ending that belies your tragic interpretation. You see the long battle ahead, with many tragic deaths. Enjoy your half-empty glass. I will enjoy my half-full one. Jeff Smith Peoria, Illinois (Nov 25, '03) Spengler in his first paragraph [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK25Ak01.html" target="_blank">George W Bush, tragic character</a>, Nov 25] says that Bush is a Christian. I would suggest that he say that Bush professes to be a Christian, but his actions betray his profession. Bush has refused to meet with the leaders of his professed church (Methodist) when they have wanted to talk with him about going to war with Iraq, etc. In no way can I recall any public action by Bush that exemplifies Christianity or Christian teachings. So please don't refer to Bush as a Christian. Clyde Everton Boise, Idaho (Nov 25, '03) Spengler [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK25Ak01.html" target="_blank">George W Bush, tragic character</a>, Nov 25] repeats what all first-year college students in humanities are - or at the very least, were - taught: "What distinguishes tragedy from comedy is the element of necessity, not a sad or happy ending." But is that really so? Does not the tragedy of Oedipus hinge upon chance events as well as necessary ones? In any case, today, indeed for some time now, a tragedy is considered to be that which makes you very sad, and a comedy that which makes you laugh. I am not certain what a resort to the older, now "technical" definitions add to our understanding of modern tragedies or comedies. For surely Spinal Tap is no tragedy, but given the premise of a metal band falling apart, its plot unfolds inevitably and hilariously. As for George W Bush being a tragic figure: Puh-leeze. Richard Einhorn New York, New York (Nov 25, '03) If the conclusion drawn by Sultan Shahin in <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EK25Df04.html" target="_blank">India gains new respect in Muslim world</a> [Nov 25] is correct, then it gives us more reason to court the Western world. Friends of India should not blindly sit and watch any bad deeds of India. A country should be criticized when it deserves criticism. I think that India deserves severe criticism in the Gujarat riots case because a mass murderer is not only walking freely with impunity, but also is not charged with murder or any other equivalent charge by the police. I applaud Western governments and human-rights organizations for not only rapping India during the Gujarat riots, but also for thoroughly studying the situation before issuing criticism. In the concluding paragraph, the author cites many studies exploding the mythical existence of a Muslim ummah. In the absence of ummah, how do you explain the muted response of the Muslim world to the massacres of Saddam Hussein? How do you explain the silence of the Muslim world to repressive practices of the Taliban? A Muslim ummah does exist, and instead of using it as a forum to improve the lives of Muslims, it is being used to hide the social evils of the Muslim world. Prasanna Lyengar USA (Nov 25, '03) First, at the risk of sounding sycophantic, I too would like to congratulate ATol for remarkable scholarship and excellence at a time when the center ground, that which represents the voice of reason and moderation, is being squeezed by cliche and trite rhetoric. Well done. With reference to K Gajendra Singh's piece about Turkey [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK22Ak02.html" target="_blank">Turkey: 'Sow war and reap terror'</a>, Nov 22], particularly [the statement], "If Western intervention in Afghanistan created the mujahideen, Western intervention in Bosnia appears to have globalized it", I think the popular term is blowback. However, I think we have to extend these two theaters and now place Iraq into a triumvirate of theaters. Furthermore, historians have to recognize that the illegal war in Iraq, far from draining the swamp, added highly toxic fertilizer. What were essentially nationalistic and localized arenas became forged in the extremist Islamist consciousness into a "crusader" attack on Islam. The careless (but probably truthful) rhetoric deployed by the Anglo-Saxon coalition have further fueled this impression. The architects of "shock and awe", the champions of the linguistic discourse of "you are with us or against us", mean that the center ground of mutual tolerance and coexistence is being squeezed by these two absolutes. Whilst I accept Singh's analysis of the origins of the jihadists, I would extrapolate and argue now that the clear and present danger is that we are alienating the moderate Islamic voice. Let's all recognize that where the Israelis (and the coalition) resort to incursions and the bulldozing of homes, there is an act of terrorism. The suicide bomber is ultimately entirely rational. They are calculating that they have nothing left to lose; no job, no future. Asymmetric warfare (the Istanbul bombing is but the latest example) has fought us to a standstill. This unidimensional military approach is a complete failure. Let's free Iraq and Palestine, let's empower their peoples (give them a one-man, one-vote democratic model and live with the consequences), let's inject aid to lift them from off the floor and we will undercut al-Qaeda, at the same time. The population, once free, will themselves root out the nihilists and extremists in their midst. We cannot afford our current approach any longer and it was Donald Rumsfeld, of all people, who pointed this out. He has also been fond of demanding that his subordinates think out of the box. Now is the time. Aly-Khan Satchu London, England (Nov 25, '03) In response to Macabe Keliher's [and Craig Meer's] <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/EK21Ad02.html" target="_blank">Two bulls, one China shop</a> [Nov 21], I find it odd at best and journalistically biased at worst that [the authors'] tone implies that whether there will be war in the Taiwan Strait is solely determined by Beijing. In fact, any astute observer of Chinese-Taiwanese politics will notice that, given the ongoing economic integration between the two sides, the determining factor is really Taiwanese politics, not Chinese saber-rattling. The Chinese have made it abundantly clear, in their rhetoric and in their economic policies, that they place economic development as their first priority. But the priority list of Chen Shui-bian's administration on Taiwan is far more vague. And given the recent push by his administration for the referendum issue, and the less-than-stellar performance of the government in revitalizing the economy, it is becoming clear that Taiwan's priority may not be "economy first". This then indicates that the option for war or peace rests in Taiwan, not China. Beijing will be quite happy to continue with the economic focus so long as Chen doesn't rock the boat and proceed further down the dead end of independence. But if he chooses to, then China will have no choice but to switch its priorities in response. Michael Lou Milton, Massachusetts (Nov 25, '03) I read with interest your article <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/EK21Ae01.html" target="_blank">US reorganizes its military might</a> [Nov 21]. While generally balanced, it was poor editing, deliberate distortion, or lack of geographic knowledge that allowed the statement "Okinawa - the base for the US 7th Fleet and the only carrier group outside the United States" to be included in the article. The 7th Fleet and USS Kitty Hawk carrier group are based in Yokosuka, which is on the main Japanese island of Honshu, nearly 1,000 miles to the northeast of Okinawa. I can state with certainty there is no US aircraft carrier based in Okinawa. This geographical oversight, if it is such, presents a distorted impression of the US Navy in Japan. If the statement was intended, it is blatantly erroneous and ought be rescinded. Considering the high quality of the majority of the articles I have read in your editorial pages, I can only feel this was an unfortunate lapse in research or editing. I bring this to your attention as I am certain you are interested in providing a reliable source of information for your readers. Jon N Nylander Yokosuka, Japan (Nov 25, '03) As you are evidently aware of ATol's standards, you must know that "deliberate distortions" are not tolerated on this website. To err, however, is human. The inaccurate phrase has been removed from the article. - ATol In his letter below, B Raman states that Osama bin Laden adopted his pan-Islamic ideology from Mufti Nizamuddin Shamzai, the head of the Binori madrassa [religious school] of Karachi. Shamzai is not the head of Binori madrassa or head of any madrassa. He is an ordinary teacher in Binori Town Seminary. The head of Binori madrassa is Dr Abdul Razzak Sikandar. Syed Saleem Shahzad (Nov 25, '03) I greatly enjoyed B Raman's editorial [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK22Ak01.html" target="_blank">Istanbul: The enemy within</a>, Nov 22]. International views are so refreshingly different from the biased and predictable network news anchors and mainstream media in America. However, I fail to see the value of your differentiation of the suicide bombers as not being from al-Qaeda but who you clearly indicate were connected to the IIF [International Islamic Front]. If they receive training, funding and other support from the "corporate" parent of al-Qaeda, is that not enough to say they are "from" al-Qaeda? I realize the subtle difference that the radicals may relish - they have different objectives as the perverted justification for committing their travesties. Does it not help us foil their objectives in a tactical sense by misidentifying them, if, in substantial fact, it is erroneous? In any event, please keep writing; you articulate a depth of insight and a differing opinion that is most educational and helpful. Personal request: I wish someone would write about what the aftermath will/could be when (not if) some of these demented people set off a true WMD [weapon of mass destruction] among us. Cogent speculation would be most welcome here, and perhaps it will mitigate some of the disaster by improved preparedness. Steve Garner USA B Raman responds: Thanks. I appreciated your comments. Many of the components of the IIF jealously guard their organizational independence even while accepting Osama bin Laden as a mentor and his pan-Islamic ideology, which, in turn, he got from Mufti Nizamuddin Shamzai, the head of the Binori madrassa of Karachi. It is important to keep this distinction in mind if one were to penetrate each and every one of the IIF components. If the Turkish authorities had kept this in mind after the synagogue blasts, they would have been looking inwards and rounded up all local jihadists who were still at large. This distinction also has a psywar value. We should not unwittingly make al-Qaeda seem to the impressionable youth in the Islamic world as another superpower. B Raman (Nov 24, '03) In response to <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK22Ak03.html" target="_blank">The hallmarks of an al-Qaeda attack</a> [Nov 22] by Syed Saleem Shahzad: I enjoyed your piece. A few comments. These attacks may well be directed by al-Qaeda or an affiliated group; however, other individuals may well be involved. The case against the Bali bombers was weak. The Indonesian military has a long history of inciting destabilizing activities. In my view, these bombings benefit the US, Britain and Israel and, indirectly, Saudi Arabia. They will allow these countries to introduce more repressive laws, and in the case of the US, may well serve as a justification to bomb other countries, such as Iran and North Korea. When I hear about things like this, I follow two lines of reasoning: always follow the money, and who benefits from this? Based on all of the stories circulating about September 11 [2001], and the fact that [George W] Bush does not want to hold a public hearing on this attack, we should be careful about rushing to conclusions about these latest bombings. It should also be recalled that the Bush family has had intimate ties with wealthy Saudis, including the bin Laden family, for years. Paul Billings Swarthmore, Pennsylvania (Nov 24, '03) The coordinated bombings on November 20 against British targets in Istanbul and occurring just days after the dual bombings of Istanbul synagogues make the Islamic terrorist message brutally clear - their targets are the Jewish people and Western democratic civilization. What most Americans recognized after September 11 [2001] Europeans are now also beginning to see: radical Islamists threaten every Western citizen, and Israel is merely a convenient front line for their battle. Given this, there occurs the same trend we witnessed after September 11 - the media's shift of focus away from this stark reality and on to Israeli policy as a scapegoat for Islamic terrorism. Recent examples include <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK18Ak03.html" target="_blank">Istanbul attacks and hidden agendas</a> [Nov 18] by K Gajendra Singh, who writes: "Many Turkish experts suspect that the twin bombings were a warning to Turkey, one of the few Muslim countries to have ties with Israel ... The blasts could be an act of revenge for the daily killings of Palestinians and the Israelis building a much-opposed wall that encroaches on Palestinian land." This media trend recasts the radical Islamic war against the Jewish people and the West as something else entirely - an Israeli-specific disaster that now everyone's suffering from. As we work on the details of peace, we must look to the heart of the matter, which is the need for a viable Palestinian democracy. Peace will not be achieved by Palestinian rulers who intimidate opposition, who tolerate and profit from corruption and maintain their ties to terrorist groups. The long-suffering Palestinian people deserve better. They deserve true leaders capable of creating and governing a Palestinian states. Leaders in Europe should withdraw all favor and support from any Palestinian ruler who fails his people and betrays their cause. And Europe's leaders - and all leaders - should strongly oppose anti-Semitism, which poisons public debate over the future of the Middle East. Rachel Waldman (Nov 24, '03) While clearly a Turkish scholar, K Gajendra Singh is not knowledgeable about Islamic terrorists [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK18Ak03.html" target="_blank">Istanbul attacks and hidden agendas</a>, Nov 18]. He assumes that the bombing in Turkey was aimed at Jews in response to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. If that is the case, why was Saudi Arabia also bombed? The answer, in both cases, is that the terrorists are Islamic fundamentalists who aim to kill all "infidels", meaning all non-Muslims and non-fundamentalist ... Muslims, who were the target of the bombing. Besides, they do not kill Jews because they deny Palestinians a state. In fact, they kill Jews despite the fact that Israel has had a land-for-peace offer on the table since 1967, an offer continuously refused by the Palestinians because it is all of Israel proper they want. What the terrorists want is this: a world governed by themselves according to Islam as they interpret it. Without understanding this - and they say so explicitly, if Singh cares to simply read their books, websites and essays - he will fail to understand the expansion their bombing campaign. Steve Blumer Chatham, Ontario (Nov 24, '03) How can you dare link the Istanbul bombing to the Israel-Palestinian conflict? There is an obvious lack of knowledge about Islamic fundamentalism here. Be aware: once they finish with the Jews, you are next. Esteban Kochmann Lausanne, Switzerland (Nov 24, '03)  As Henry C K Liu points out [Realpolitik of Democratic Revolution, Part 1: <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/EK19Ae03.html" target="_blank">The Philippines revisited</a>, Nov 19; Part 2: <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK20Ak05.html" target="_blank">The Bush vision</a>, Nov 20], just because a nation has some democratic institutions does not mean it will always agree with the US. In fact, a nation such as Japan, can "adopt" (during US occupation) a written constitution quite similar to that of the US, yet develop a form of government that differs in significant ways from that of the US because its courts interpret the constitution differently from the way US courts have. And historically, US courts have changed the way they have interpreted the constitution and subsequent amendments depending on the make up of the courts (the reason why the Bushies and various members of the GOP [Grand Old Party, ie Republicans] first blocked so many of [president Bill] Clinton's nominations and now rail against [President George W] Bush's not being able to have confirmed anyone he nominates - typical GOP sense of "fairness"), the culture and politics of the time and of course some legal interpretation. One aspect of the US occupation of Japan that Liu does not mention is that when [General Douglas] MacArthur tried to foster the development of unions in Japan, he was quickly and forcefully told by the US to back off and forget it. Even then it seems that the powers that were did not think it was a good idea for workers to get funny ideas about having more control over their own economic destiny. Of course, it's fine if corporations band together and in other ways do their best to influence or even control government in order to best control their own future. How successful in doing so they have become in the US can be judged by Bush's eagerness to slap tariffs on foreign goods, and impose import quotas on some, despite his alleged liking for "free trade" and his rush to make all of the US as polluted and unhealthy as Houston, Texas, all in an effort to assist large US corporations to maximize their short term profit. Given Bush's behavior (his rhetoric means little to nothing), it is difficult to believe that he has any idea of what "democracy" is. Unless democracy is restricted only to a very small elite and a few large corporations. Susan Hogg Newport, Oregon (Nov 24, '03) Henry C K Liu is intelligent, informed and a rather impressive communist propagandist. The constant gush of approval by readers seems to miss his basic premise: that all wealth is merely uncollected taxes. His long-winded, murky pieces remind me of an American aphorism: "Bedazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit." Ken McPherson USA (Nov 24, '03) I am a French citizen living in the city of Los Angeles. My wife and I do not own a television in order to keep clean air at home. We are extremely avid news readers, especially the ones from a free press that has almost completely disappeared from this country, which claims to champion freedom of speech. Your site is a gust of fresh air. Your journalists and essayists, like Henry C K Liu, reach brilliance. Your news is impeccably presented. And your topics are out of the ordinary. I want to offer you my congratulation for such good work. Sebastien Sainclair Los Angeles, California (Nov 24, '03) It is time the world woke up to the fact that the Israeli Palestinian conflict is not the cause of Islamic radicalism, but a symptom. Islamic radicalism is at war with Western freedoms, ideals and philosophy. That is why they have attacked the World Trade Center [and] the British [consulate] and HSBC bank [<a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK22Ak03.html" target="_blank">The hallmarks of an al-Qaeda attack</a>] as well as the two synagogues in Turkey [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK18Ak03.html " target="_blank">Istanbul attacks and hidden agendas</a>, Nov 18]. The Palestinians walked away from offers for everything they were allegedly fighting for at Camp David and Tabas. The lack of a counter-offer, and the ensuing terrorism which the Palestinian Authority encourages and supports, furthers their clearly stated goals of destroying the State of Israel. Why destroy Israel, which has provided Israeli Arabs with a higher standard of living than Arabs in any Arab country? Why destroy Israel when Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza need to come into Israel for jobs? The answer is the same as the reasons Islamic radicals are terrorizing countries all over the world: they do not want Western democracies as neighbors, they do not want to live in ... democracies. They want to destroy us infidels and establish Islamic rule throughout the world. Conrad (Nov 21, '03) In regard to <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK18Ak03.html " target="_blank">Istanbul attacks and hidden agendas</a> by K Gajendra Singh [Nov 18] in which he writes, "Many Turkish experts suspect that the twin bombings were a warning to Turkey, one of the few Muslim countries to have ties with Israel ...The blasts could be an act of revenge for the daily killings of Palestinians and the Israelis building a much-opposed wall that encroaches on Palestinian land." Using this perverted "logic" you can blame Jews for the Holocaust as well. After [Thursday's] bombing in Turkey [<a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK22Ak03.html" target="_blank">The hallmarks of an al-Qaeda attack</a>], who are you going to blame - the Jews again? Epshteyn USA (Nov 21, '03) Moving militarily on Iran, as Stephen Blank seems to advocate in <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK21Ak04.html" target="_blank">IAEA misses its chance on Iran</a> [Nov 21] as the only course of action capable of yielding substantive results, can only expedite the collapse of the [US] economy, which, by reasoned reports, we are precariously close to already in Iraq. Blank is a tough talker, but as happens when people "lose their cool," there is little reason and plenty of rationalizing. Non-proliferation treaties may not work, but mutually assured destruction does. Lessening the threat posed by the American stockpile of nuclear weapons would be a mature and reasoned course of action. Combined with an active international non-proliferation body and inspection teams inside potentially hostile countries, American disarmament would greatly reduce the global risk of a nuclear event. Hypocrisy can not be tolerated by reasoning human beings. If Blank desires a "simple and straightforward" answer to these problems, it lies in simple logic and straightforward values. The world need not be so complicated that preemptive war should be presented as the only way to keep the peace. Nate Perry Denver, Colorado (Nov 21, '03) Wonderful article, well-written and researched on <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/EK21Ad01.html" target="_blank">US dares a trade war</a> [Nov 21] by John Berthelsen. The United States and George W Bush both have many similarities to the Titanic in that they believe there own hype and propaganda. We all know what happened to the Titanic; it sank in its own glory. The United States and [its] labor pool are in the process of a rude awakening, which some call reality. They have priced themselves out of the global market in many sectors and wish to blame others for there "brainless surprise". Many in the United Sates can be thanked for this event. However, George W Bush is at the top of the list presently. Please keep up the outstanding job of presenting reality through Asia Times Online. I read it every day. Richard Boykin President, Pacific Capital Corp Pensacola, Florida (Nov 21, '03) I would like to congratulate Sultan Shahin on a very well-written, lucid article [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EK20Df03.html " target="_blank">India: Beyond Pakistan's army and mullahs</a>, Nov 20]. His article takes the Indian dilemma today and uses historical facts to show the way. As someone who has written before to criticize Sultan Shahin's other writings, I feel that it is incumbent upon me to offer fulsome praise when it is due. Parag Vohra Washington, DC (Nov 21, '03) Your article [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK18Ak03.html" target="_blank">Istanbul attacks and hidden agendas</a>, Nov 18] about the activates of the Muslim murderers in Turkey was a joke. Why did you not mention the killings of the Israeli children and mothers by these Palestinians? Try reporting the truth for a change. Louise (Nov 21, '03) My comment is in reference to the statement: "Many Turkish experts suspect that the twin bombings were a warning to Turkey, one of the few Muslim countries to have ties with Israel ...The blasts could be an act of revenge for the daily killings of Palestinians and the Israelis building a much-opposed wall that encroaches on Palestinian land" [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK18Ak03.html" target="_blank">Istanbul attacks and hidden agendas</a>, Nov 18]. In a civilized world, the actions of Israel in the West Bank and Gaza, just like the actions of Arabs, Muslims and others - such as the child abuse practiced when 10-year-olds are encouraged to become suicide bombers - the overt effort of leaders to keep the population living in misery for over 50 years and the joy demonstrated on September 11 [2001], and when US troops are killed in Iraq, are all open for analysis, discussion and condemnation or approval depending on your point of view. In an uncivilized world, when a group does not like you or what you stand for, innocent people are blown up while shopping, eating or working. Which world do you think you are condoning with comments like this? You should be ashamed. Jay Shaffer New City, New York (Nov 21, '03) K Gajendra Singh [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK18Ak03.html" target="_blank">Istanbul attacks and hidden agendas</a>, Nov 18] speculates on what Turks believe caused the attacks on their country and then says it could be revenge for "the daily killings of Palestinians" and a "wall that encroaches on their land". If Singh is really an expert on foreign affairs, he knows that there were attacks on Western interests when Israel was engaged in peace talks with the Palestinians. If he were really an expert on foreign affairs, he would know that there are not "daily killings" of Palestinians, but rather battles between those that wish to attack Israel and those that must defend it. Of course, the people killed, even the Jews who were killed, have no leverage on Israeli policy. To blame their deaths on the actions of a sovereign government is to justify their deaths on the basis of their religious affiliation. Here in the United States we consider that reprehensible. Jonathan D Reich Lakeland, Florida (Nov 21, '03) The article <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html " target="_blank">What is American culture?</a> [Nov 18] is a disappointing screed. The author, Spengler, shows an absence of familiarity with both America and culture. One can only be left to wonder what great psychological injury he must have suffered having to stand in queue to get his own "burnt" coffee. A culture that must point to its beverages, its restaurateurs (who obviously know better what the customers want than the customers), or the ability to drive 230 km/h (no matter the danger it poses to those around them), has a sorry claim to supposed superiority. American culture, if there can be only one in a melange of 300 million people or so from all over the world, is the democratization of thought, of tastes and ideas. Americans do not allow those like Spengler to dictate what they should or should not enjoy, what is or is not able to lift them up from the mundane. All of those claims of "culture" were and are enjoyed by so few Europeans that it cannot rightly be claimed as applying to the continent. It may be the culture of a few, in-bred, self-impressed elite, but one need not look further than each successive generation of "Euro-trash" gentry to see that it is not long for this world. America's true culture is one of openness and unlimited potential. Open to new ideas. No limit to the potential of people, and no limit to the potential of change. And we even enjoy some of the "old" ideas from Spengler's European culture. What Americans are not open to is a limited culture that must attack others to claim its legitimacy. Quentin Walker London, England (Nov 21, '03) Thanks for Dhruba Adhikary's article <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EK15Df05.html " target="_blank">A fight to the death in Nepal</a> [Nov 15]. For me, news about Nepal in Asia Times Online has been a very valuable way to know about my country when I am not there. We Nepalese who are away are really thankful to Asia Times for keeping us informed. Sanjeev Gautam Karachi, Pakistan (Nov 21, '03) I have to thank Asia Times Online for publishing articles by Henry C K Liu. I might not agree with his conclusions, but he is one of few writers I respect. Congratulations for a job well done. Alex USA (Nov 21, '03) As a new reader of Asia Times Online, I have been impressed by the quality of reporting overall. Not being, perhaps, as erudite as some of your readers, I find the articles consistently steer me into a further investigation of the players and entities involved, if not by direct links as much as the thoroughness of the reporting. Perhaps as time goes by and my awareness becomes more acute and, ergo, critical, the first blush of infatuation will wane, and the honeymoon will end. But for now I feel inclined to make this comment. As with most newspapers, some of the most intriguing accounts of current thoughts and trends are captured by the readers themselves in the forum known as Letters to the Editor. In reply to all the critics of Pipes, Spengler, et al (and otherwise contradictory opinions of the particular reader involved) who think such tripe shouldn't pass before their eyes, I say press on, Asia Times. I am perhaps under the mistaken impression that journalism should disseminate the popular, as well as unpopular, rhetoric of opposing views in an attempt to offer the reader the proper tools for informed and considered thought with whatever intellectual means are at their disposal. As I spend a good deal of my Internet time seeking out reliable as well as opposing news accounts, I find it useful to find them in a single media source. Again, the discernment of what is of value and what rings true is up to the individual reader. I however, find Asia Times a refreshing change from the pap, polemics and amen-corner reporting of the so-called free press offered in American media. Although Asia Times is not guilt-free of some of this on occasion, in this reader's humble, albeit opinionated, gleanings into the murky waters of media truth and misinformation, all I can say is Amen. Casey USA (Nov 20, '03) Once again, I am flabbergasted by the abilities of Henry C K Liu [Realpolitik of Bush's Revolution - <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/EK19Ae03.html" target="_blank">Part 1: The Philippines revisited</a>, Nov 19; <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK20Ak05.html" target="_blank">Part 2: The Bush vision</a>, Nov 20]. He writes so well and thinks so accurately that it is difficult to find enough words to praise him. Thanks very much for presenting his work in Asia Times Online, which is without doubt the best news publication available to the American public. M Sweet Oregon, USA (Nov 20, '03) At my age one shouldn't have heroes; well, not live ones anyway. But I have to add Henry C K Liu to the very short list of people whom I revere. His piece <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK20Ak05.html" target="_blank">The Bush vision</a> [Nov 20] is penetrating, to say the least. And his final observation that one cannot control terrorism "with fear generated by overwhelming force" should be inscribed on the portico of the White House. Brian Cloughley New Zealand (Nov 20, '03) Spengler's essays [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html" target="_blank">What is American culture?</a>, Nov 18; <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK11Ak01.html" target="_blank">Why America is losing the intelligence war</a>, Nov 11] posit an American character flaw - a willful disconnection with our cultural heritage - as the primary cause of America's intelligence failures, and the root of a supposedly failed response to the Muslim world. But the true reasons are messier, yet, one hopes, less intractable than Spengler believes. Spengler's image of immigrants arriving in America to shed their cultural heritage like worn-out pantaloons may have been true a hundred years ago when cultural presto-changeo was partly a defensive reaction to bigoted stereotypes and partly out of pride in becoming American and getting to roll the dice in a game that was maybe not as rigged as the one back home. Those were the realities of early-20th-century Manhattan Hell's Kitchen and Lower East Side, not of 21st-century Flushing, Queens and Washington Heights. While Haitians, Dominicans, Puerto Ricans and most other predominantly blue-collar immigrant groups tend to lose their mother tongues by the time they are second- or third-generation Americans, the loss has nothing to do with American character. It is because both parents work (often more than one job each) and have neither the time nor energy to shuttle their kids to and from weekend language classes. The wealthier immigrant groups have more mothers who are homemakers, able to do the inquiring, the driving, the registering, the helping with the homework, all necessary to get their kids into language and cultural classes and keep them there. Another factor is the role of education within each immigrant group. East and South Asians emphasize education more than other groups. Thus, large numbers of Sikhs conduct language classes in their American temples; easily over 90 percent of the immigrants from Korea, Taiwan and mainland China enroll their kids in classes where they are taught their mother tongues. A significant percentage of Muslim immigrants enroll their kids in Arabic classes run by local mosques or Muslim organizations (although there is a post-September 11 [2001] trend toward private classes and tutors out of fear of guilt by association in case the mosque or organization becomes tainted by suspicions of, or actual, links to terrorism). I doubt I could ever satisfactorily expound on the real reasons for America's intelligence failures. I'll just say that dialogue, synthesis and intelligence have been on life support ever since William F Buckley's Firing Line went off the air. We've let the ideologues and buffoons (but I repeat myself) take over. And if you think I mean Spengler, think again. He's one of the best reasons to read ATol, even if his aim is occasionally awry. I mean, the US as Jew-dominated hegemon I-can-tell-you-what-I'm-against-but-not-what-I'm-for anti-globalists vs the neo-con, Bushwhacked, overweight, undereducated, malcontented know-nothings. Out of this Stone Age swamp you want intelligence? Geoffrey Sherwood New Jersey, USA (Nov 20, '03) I have been reading your site for the past year and find it interesting and informative. However, the recent article <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html" target="_blank">What is American culture?</a> [Nov 18] written by Spengler is truly reaching to achieve what is considered in style these days, which is to bash the USA and forget all the good things that the USA has done for the world - the Internet, for example, which your company is using and seems to enjoy. Spengler ... just criticizes and insults people from all over the world or what he labels as "Americans". If this is the best he can do, I think he needs to get another job. I was also not very impressed with the article <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK04Aa03.html" target="_blank">What the Jews won't tell you</a> [Nov 4]. I am very interested to know the name of the author and his ethnicity. This kind of content on your site really puts a black mark on the rest of the articles and demonstrates ideas that are going a bit far just to join the group of anti-Americans in the world - the same group that enjoys many American inventions, concepts, products and ideas on a daily basis. Mark Mathison (Nov 20, '03) Spengler's <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html " target="_blank">What is American culture?</a> [Nov 18] is an example of the condescending attitude of European elitism. While it is fashionable to be anti-American, Spengler should try reading and understanding the history of the European continent before he begins dictating the most important cultural characteristics of ours [the US]. He might find out why half of Europe is living on a Roman Catholic land-lease. Why it was the very bastion of European culture that brought us the slave trade, the Crusades, the Inquisition and the two World Wars, among other things. Yet I am sure I could still find some redeeming characteristics in European culture were I to compile my own list . Hopefully, the characteristics might be a little more thoughtful than what Europeans "chew, eat or drive". American culture is based on freedom. Americans value freedom, family, faith, tolerance and leisure. They are optimistic, entrepreneurial, [and] creative and have a "can do" attitude. They are also naive [and] poorly educated and tend to believe and hope for the best in other people and other nations. American culture is the culture of the common man, not royals. So if that twinges your aristocratic nerve, it's probably because of your breeding. Or maybe your culture. Jonah Cal USA (Nov 20, '03) In response to Spengler's <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html" target="_blank">What is American culture?</a> [Nov 18]: You forgot to list envy. Envy of all things American. Just remember that when push comes to shove, the USA does not need the rest of the world. The brutal truth is that the world needs America. This does not mean we do not make many mistakes and tragic blunders. However, in our country, people are accountable for their actions. Perhaps you and your readers should take this to heart. We're not as stupid as you believe us to be. I will put my money on the goodness of America and its history of unselfish action instead of the cynicism and self-absorbed immaturity of Europe, the whining of the Middle Eastern states and the general bashing of America that seems to be all the rage here on planet Earth. As an avid reader of Asia Times Online, I have found your website timely, informative and well-written. Compared to the semi-literate journalists and television news personalities running amok here in America, I would say you have us beat in the quality and depth of your reporting too. I will continue to read your site due to the high-quality reporting of such timely subjects as the Middle East, the war on terror, Southeast Asia, South Asia and your business columns. Please keep up the good work. On a more serious note, you might want to remember that you are only capable of this quality reporting due to the sacrifices of the United States in past wars. Suppose you were still flying the Rising Sun and that America's Arsenal of Democracy had not vanquished the Japanese militarist in World War II. Who do you think is keeping those nice people in Beijing from marching in and performing another Tianamen Square on the good people of Hong Kong? Richard Connolly Gloucester, Massachusetts (Nov 20, '03) Your humor columnist, Spengler, often provides interesting points for contemplation in his columns. His view of American culture is not one of them [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html" target="_blank">What is American culture?</a>, Nov 18]. I do not know his background. I find it odd that he prefaces his column with T S Eliot's view of English culture, given that Eliot was an American. Perhaps he is an Englishman providing his view of American culture. His point of view seems to spring from the opinion that European culture is superior, and that nothing in American culture has provided anything of equal weight. His first point is well taken, but trivial. There are many poor aspects of European road manners, but road usage is not culture. Food is not America's strong point, although I have eaten many poor meals in Europe, Asia and the Middle East. There is certainly some excellent regional American cuisine, especially in the south, with which I am sure Spengler is unfamiliar, as it takes a thorough knowledge of place and circumstance in order to find such. I notice, however, that in areas of the arts and literature, which is only one of nine points, Spengler calls us a "hand me down" culture. It is here that I take exception. There is nothing in European culture that is not an accretion of 1,000 years of mediocre development, absent some bright spots. To compare most of the hackneyed tripe of European culture with the jazz solos of Charlie Parker and John Coltrane, the songs of Duke Ellington and Cole Porter, the crime novels of Dashiell Hammett, Raymond Chandler, James Ellroy and Andrew Vachss and the films of William Wellman and Raoul Walsh is compare dross to diamonds. The world sings and dances to the American beat, and none other. J Liebman Greensboro, North Carolina (Nov 20, '03) I would like to congratulate Henry C K Liu for another excellent article, <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/EK19Ae03.html" target="_blank">The Philippines revisited</a> [Nov 19]. One may not need to agree with Liu; however, as a writer, he stands taller, much taller, than most of the others. Will Johnson USA (Nov 19, '03) The concluding part of Liu's Realpolitik of Bush's Revolution commentary, <a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK20Ak05.html " target="_blank">The Bush vision</a> , is now online. - ATol What a lot of arrogant, cynical horseshit in the latest Daniel Pipes column [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK19Ak01.html" target="_blank">The case for 'Iraqification'</a>, Nov 19]. How splendid of his patron George W Bush to want the Iraqis to be more involved in the governance of their own country. How cavalier these neo-cons and their evil prince. Their sort of thinking, if allowed to prevail, will guarantee that thousands of poor whites, blacks and Hispanics come back home in body-bags from this doomed-to-fail occupation. But, then again, what do effete gutless wonders like Pipes or Bush care about such people - either dead or alive? These maggots care only about the interests of their own economic and political class here in the US and in Israel. The sad truth is that, in the end, Iraq will not be made democratic by force of arms, the USA will be far less safe from terrorist attacks and Israel's security, and indeed its very survival, will be dealt a possibly fatal blow. Jose R Pardinas Miami, Florida (Nov 19, '03) Daniel Pipes nails the fiction that the coalition is honestly interested in Iraqi democracy [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK19Ak01.html" target="_blank">The case for 'Iraqification'</a>, Nov 19]. There is an enormous gulf between the president's high-flown rhetoric and his real intentions. President George W Bush said that he wants "the Iraqis to be more involved in the governance of their country", the proviso being that it has to be a quisling government, made up of the likes of that arch-nationalist [Ahmed] Chalabi, and if not, the coalition (just over the horizon) will steamroller back in. Daniel Pipes' suggestion of a "politically moderate but operationally tough ... democratically minded Iraqi strongman" is not only a non sequitur but is also a recipe for the making of Saddam Hussein No 2 - one who will do his master's bidding. The colonialist mentality that "attempts to tutor them will surely fail" (quite outrageous) is the wrong starting point. The ultimate conundrum for the likes of Pipes is that true democracy in Iraq would translate into a Shi'a majority, deeply sympathetic to Iran and ultimately quite inimical to US interests. More problematic for the US is that its natural interlocutors would be the minority Sunni, but given what the new muscular posture is doing in the Sunni triangle, there is even less chance of that. The final irony is that asymmetric warfare and sabotage are going to mean the US will have to exit at some point, with an enormous bill, having been unable to get their grubby hands on the oil. Aly-Khan Satchu London, England (Nov 19, '03) Thank you for your great perspective on what we have now, and what we need to do in Iraq. We do not get this level of coverage in our "news" here. Richard Blake Merlin, Oregon (Nov 19, '03) I read Spengler's <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html" target="_blank">What is American culture?</a> [Nov 18] and found that the article was the worst I have ever read on Asia Times Online. Let's think of five touchstones [Spengler highlights] of US culture. Driving slow in the fast lane, bad coffee, bad tea, bad wine and chewing tobacco. The first five points are trivial criticisms rather than characterizations of US culture. What would US denizens think of those points? The author wishes we were more like Europe. That way we wouldn't have such a cultural-identity problem. As for shopping-mall architecture and mass-produced menus, the majority of people seem to love these. Hand-me-down high culture? You lost me. Should we have a transient high culture? I think a follow-up article with a little more gravitas is deserved. How does US culture conflict with Islam? What is your message to US individuals? How about a little compare and contrast? This one article was very disappointing, but Asia Times Online is great. Thank you for all the work you do, and thank you for writing. Ben (Nov 19, '03) While Spengler is sipping his coffee and enjoying his dying culture [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html " target="_blank">What is American culture?</a> Nov 18], we Americans are creating a new culture in the world. While many young Europeans are watching Hollywood movies (one part of American culture), Spengler-type old dudes whimper with half-opened eyes "oh these good old days". Tony Liu (Nov 19, '03) Spengler's <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html" target="_blank">What is American culture?</a> [Nov 18] reminds me of an evening spent years ago with a similarity arrogant (and ignorant) European, whose nationality need not be mentioned. Clad in a motorcycle jacket and Levi's jeans, enjoying the blues playing in the background while nursing his Jack Daniels and Coke, my companion took a long, thoughtful drag from his Marlboro cigarette and said, "You know, Americans have no culture." At least ignorance is sometimes funny. BT Shanghai, China (Nov 19, '03) Spengler's article <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html" target="_blank">What is American culture?</a> [Nov 18] is utterly ridiculous. One can do this with any culture, pick out some of the garbage and dub it as its crux. Give me a break. Tibor Machan (Nov 19, '03) Spengler's article on American culture [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html" target="_blank">What is American culture?</a>, Nov 18] is classist piffle masquerading as political critique. Having traveled all over Europe and eaten the bad food, observed whole cultures sunk in moribund worship of their own former glories (and disasters), I am happy to leave Spengler to his own bourgeois delights - whatever they be. In the end, he only demonstrates why the rest of the world can and should quickly leave both American and European "culture" - built first upon slavery and then upon exploitation of the rest of the planet, now exhausted intellectually and morally - behind and build a better world in its place. Good food can be had anywhere there is money, but who cares about that, and why is it germane to the atrocity the US is presently inflicting on Iraq? What is crass and unacceptable (nay, downright murderous) about American "culture" is its wholesale alignment with the most cancerous forms of capitalism, which feast on the world in the name of "freedom" and "justice". My hunch is that Spengler is simply flotsam on the former far verges of European empire, one of those aging expats with whom Asians sometimes amuse themselves. He doesn't seem to know that [T S] Eliot himself - wholly irrelevant to anyone now - was in fact an American. Matthew Kopka (Nov 18, '03) Thomas Stearns Eliot was born in St Louis, Missouri, in 1888 but established residence in London in 1914 and became a British subject in 1927. - ATol I think Spengler protests too much about America and its denizens [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html" target="_blank">What is American culture?</a>, Nov 18]. What happened to cause this bias against any and everything American? You don't like [American] culture, so why go on about it? Please consider that there is no true American culture. [Americans] are an amalgam of many cultures that have melded into one homogenous mixture. You are clearly in the minority if you count how many people in the world choose to attempt crossing rivers and oceans illegally to arrive on [US] shores. It surely can't be the terrible coffee, tasteless fast food or the wine selection, can it? We are a diverse nation with many problems but we are the first to attempt a new way of governing - not ever seen before on this planet. Give us a break. Mistakes will be made as we learn what works best. We have good people here who desire to live free of tyranny and who want that same opportunity for those who aren't so fortunate. J Dale Russell USA (Nov 18, '03) Speaking as an American, I would like to respond to Spengler's extraordinary screed <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html" target="_blank">What is American culture?</a> [Nov 18]. Yes, our food is lousy (like kidney pie is any better), our wines are second-rate and our most famous coffee is often dreadful. The shopping mall is a crime against humanity, and our government is a universal object of scorn, hatred and ridicule. Well listen up, no one said the United States was perfect! Well, actually, a lot of Americans have said that, but I have a question for you: Would you really like to live in a world without such transcendent American masterpieces as Spinal Tap, The Producers or Annie Hall? I certainly wouldn't. These are works of art so great they compare, and favorably, with the best of [French playwright Jean Baptiste Poquelin] Moliere and [French dramatist Pierre Augustin Caron de] Beaumarchais. And if you think I'm not being serious, then you know nothing about American culture or its Weltanschauung [philosophy of life]. Richard Einhorn New York, New York (Nov 18, '03) Regarding the Spengler article <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html" target="_blank">What is American culture?</a> [Nov 18]: I must say that if this is an example of how gullible Spengler is or the rest of your readers, you certainly should continue to allow trash like this to continue to appear on the front page of your paper. On the other hand, if you want to be considered a credible news source, you should rethink printing garbage like this. I found this article insulting as an American; let's face it, in any country we can find stupid things people do or say, but don't start acting as though all of us are fools. That's just insulting. Spengler has no idea what American culture is, and if by any chance he is an American, he clearly hates America. James A Steiner (Nov 18, '03) Spengler is a well-educated man; however, his rather sneery article on US culture [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html" target="_blank">What is American culture?</a> Nov 18] risks making him look plain silly. Christopher Columbus "discovered" America in 1492, while Italy was founded in 1861, and Germany finally came together in 1866. The US is not a young state, and it is hard to argue that it does not have a strong and deep culture of its own. Those of us who are opposed to the US government's foreign policies (and Spengler would appear to fall into that category) must always be careful to respect what is worth respecting in the US and offer carefully considered arguments in cases where the behavior of the US is out of order. Spengler's boorish attitude only apes that of the ugly American he portrays here, and his piece bears little relevance to his chronicling of America's encounter with Islam. Yes, the food is fatty, the tea terrible, the literature lowbrow, but one shouldn't make the mistake of assuming this makes Americans stupid. Noam Chomsky has observed that one only needs to observe a sports quiz in the US to see that the average American is no fool. Is it a sin that more people here are inclined to look at baseball statistics than study [German dramatist and poet Bertolt] Brecht - though some do? And if the wine is that bad, why does it sell so much in Europe? Will Hawkes New York, New York (Nov 18, '03) The US is too young to have created a culture [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html" target="_blank">What is American culture?</a> Nov 18]. We have a few seeds, jazz for one, but mostly we try on various passing trends and imitations of European culture. My guess is we'll need about another 300 years to flesh out one of our own. By then I expect it will have a distinctly Latin-Asian flare. Meanwhile, we lurch toward the lowest common denominator in terms of taste and intellect - just check out our television shows and our "news". Robert Laiks (Nov 18, '03) First Spengler attacks Muslims, then goes back to talk about American intelligence and discusses why Islam will defeat the West, then it's back to Mahathir Mohamad and attacks on Muslims and their views, and now he's making fun of American culture and food [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html " target="_blank">What is American culture?</a> Nov 18]. That has nothing to do with politics. Even if I don't agree with American policy and its government I think that you're running out of topics so you're putting your own philosophical mumbo-jumbo at work again to insult the Americans. I think you're pushing it a bit too far. You have no right to insult an entire nation by stereotyping it. Not agreeing is a right you have, but again, there is a limit to what a person can say. Who do you want to insult next, the Jews? Mike Sabbah Montreal, Quebec (Nov 18, '03) Regarding <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK18Aa01.html" target="_blank">What is American culture?</a>, Nov 18: Please inform Spengler to not throw rocks when you live in glass houses. Rear Admiral Thufur Hawat (Nov 18, '03) Who is Spengler? What is his academic background, journalism background and nationality? I enjoy reading him/her immensely, but it sure would help to know where he/she is coming from. Rogers Worthington (Nov 18, '03) I cannot believe that an organization like Asia Times Online, which has some excellent reporters, giving objective, informative and thought-provoking views, can employ someone who is clearly using this forum to pursue his own agenda. I am talking about B Raman. I have been reading the online edition for over a year and continue to do so. I have not written to you before, but feel compelled to do so because Raman is writing articles on issues around the world, but they have one thing in common. All the articles are in some way connected to Pakistan. It does not matter what is happening or where it is happening at, Raman will find or make a connection to Pakistan. It is quiet clear that his distorted and anti-Pakistani views are blinding him [to] the real facts. ATol should not allow someone with such biased views to use their organization for his own agenda. If the publication wants to expand its diverse readership, then people like Raman should be told to stop reporting lies and stick to real and factual journalism. Failure to do so will result in a bad reputation for the publication and Raman himself, who is already losing credibility. Naz London, England (Nov 18, '03) KEDAR DESHPANDE RESPONDS  I noticed a letter to the editor concerning my article <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK14Ak06.html" target="_blank">A general's plan to tackle terror</a> (Nov 14). The text of Wesley Clark's speech on his website (which I hadn't visited) was nearly that of what Clark actually said. In the actual speech, however, he highlighted the term "secularize", a word which was curiously absent from the speech text posted on the website. I don't think the website used a transcription of Clark's words as he spoke them; I think it used the supposed "final draft" of the speech, which doesn't take into account ad-libs that Clark might insert. When he used the word "secularize", I was a bit surprised, in fact. That is why I included the paragraph in my article (and also because it might be of interest to ATol readers for its reference to madrassas). Kedar Deshpande USA (Nov 17, '03) It doesn't matter that most Americans disapprove of [President George W] Bush [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK15Aa02.html" target="_blank">Skepticism grows among US voters</a>, Nov 15]. Most voters didn't vote for him in 2000 but he was installed in power anyway. His backers now control the vote-counting process, ensuring his continuance in power. On the national level, democracy is dead in the US. Richard Carter California, USA (Nov 17, '03) First, my appreciation goes to Piyush Mathur and ATol for saving me $26, as I was going to spend it to buy the book written by Peggy Noonan [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK15Aa01.html" target="_blank">Book Review: The crisis of American journalism</a>, Nov 15]. Piyush is outstanding to delineate the stagnation of intellectuality in American journalism today. An axiom readily adopted by the mainstream US media since the war in Afghanistan, that in times of war journalists require obedience [to the] Pentagon and the White House, is not only inherently dangerous to a democratic society, but also deduces my early assessment. Where are the journalistic ethics of altruism, at least to its own citizenry? A nation without a third eye [consisting of] honest, independent, conscientious journalists, constantly at war with others to finance its internal and external debt, and to keep its dollar hegemony afloat, will be a shell of democracy in our lifetime with its inner core filled with rotten, cruel, [despotic] neo-cons. Peggy is the vivid contemporary burning example. Nasim Islam California, USA (Nov 17, '03) [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK14Ak02.html" target="_blank">A palpable sense of panic</a>, Nov 14] was a good article, it hit the nail on the head. I liked the accompanying cartoon too. Just a small technical quibble. I think the word "satrap" is more appropriate for Mr Bremer's position than "proconsul". John Edstrom (Nov 17, '03) Historically, there is little difference in the two words, except the former was originally a Persian official and the latter Roman. In modern usage, "proconsul" is the more common term for the type of position L Paul Bremer holds in Iraq. - ATol This is regarding [B] Raman's continued rantings. His entire focus appears to be to somehow show a link between terrorism and Pakistan. Objectivity aside, calling names is not responsible journalism. Mr Raman appears to be stuck in a time when he was the Delhi government's propagandist. Continued indulgence of Mr Raman will eventually morph your paper from a vehicle of responsible and fact-based journalism to an instrument of misguided Indian policy. Teepu Siddique Chicago, Illinois (Nov 17, '03) Sorry Zak [Letters, Nov 14], but your arguments are pretty weak. After September 11 [2001] Pakistan was expected to be labeled an enemy [for], besides its ties with North Korea, the Taliban and Iran, its prolific arms trading and nuclear-tech swapping. It is also run by the military and secret police. Say what you will about India or even China but both are run by the political branch of government and are subject some control and diplomacy. On the other hand Pakistan is known for its increasing support of the former Taliban, religious murders and rampant corruption. I'm not saying that your neighbors are that much better, I'm just saying don't delude yourself as to your situation and the views of the world. The madrassas are only using these poor orphans to swell the ranks of their suicide squads, not even bothering to teach the majority of their students science or math. I know this because the Pakistan government just had to pass a law demanding that they do. Of course the preachers feel otherwise; to them religion is their life, they cannot think with out it, so neither should anyone else. Hope things get better, I always had wanted to go to Pakistan but I think I'll hold off on travel arrangements, say for 20 years or so. Tim USA (Nov 17, '03) I enjoy Spengler's articles [eg, <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK11Ak01.html" target="_blank">Why America is losing the intelligence war</a>, Nov 11] in the same way as I enjoy hard crossword puzzles. Both are elaborate explorations in futility. The key thing Mr Spengler doesn't admit regarding Muslims' present mistrust of Jews is that it is entirely driven by the Zionist project. His far-fetched explanations do not explain why for over 90 percent of the period that Islam has existed, it has not particularly targeted out Jews from amongst other non-believers. Zionism has a fanatical and paranoid grip over a significant part of the Jewish community (all of it, if you were to believe some of the self-appointed mouthpieces). This is something that Jews will have to overcome themselves. A decent compromise with the Palestinians will tremendously help. And as for US intelligence dilemmas, why has Mr Spengler not seized upon the idea of recruiting from within persecuted minorities in Islamic countries? Baha'i Iranians, Shi'a Afghans, Ahmadiyya Pakistanis, Christians from various Arab countries could all serve as translators. A lot more can be said about the pointed US shortage of competent analysts. Usman Qazi Palo Alto, California (Nov 17, '03) I enjoyed reading the [Nov 14] edition of Asia Times online. Your correspondents' analyses of the war in Iraq were trenchant, especially the very interesting analysis of American intelligence shortcomings by Spengler [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK11Ak01.html" target="_blank">Why America is losing it</a>, Nov 11]. That column was marred only by a gratuitously flippant remark about American literature. I'll let it go this time. Christopher Purcell Kansas City, Missouri (Nov 14, '03) This relates to the Nov 14 article <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK14Ak01.html" target="_blank">Jihadi anger: After Italy, Australia?</a> by B Raman. I would just like to add that it seems to me, as someone who has himself taught a little elementary mathematics at B Raman's hated Pakistani madrassas, that Mr Raman writes more out of his hatred of Pakistan than any logical or factual experience. My question to him is: Sir, have you ever even set foot into any of your much despised Pakistani madrassas? If your answer is no, please venture into one, and then comment on it. Madrassas have a history of well over 400 years in the Indian subcontinent. While then they were the bastions for higher learning for the scions of kings, they are now the only hope for the downtrodden. Madrassas offer Pakistan's thousands of orphaned and/or poor children a little opportunity to make sense of their shattered lives. There are around 7,800 madrassas in Pakistan, 6,972 of them were registered under the Education Regulation Act, as of 2002. From educating poor children on basic reading and writing, to teaching them how to cook a meal, these madrassas offer programs on social and civic issues as well. Mathematics and elementary sciences are taught in nearly 6,000 of these institutes, despite a shortage of teachers. Obviously the 7,000 students that are given some semblance of basic understanding in these madrassas weren't opportune enough to get Western-style education or the onus to learn English as you and I did. I advise you, Mr Raman, either get your facts straight, or better yet experience a day in a madrassas yourself, or abstain from putting out blatant and absurd statements, such as labeling something you have no clue about as "breeding grounds for extremism". A Mustafa Pakistan (Nov 14, '03) I am dumbfounded by the lack of objectivity and almost daily Pakistan bashing in your publication. It seems that you don't even want to give a glimmer of impartiality. Talk about cross-border terrorism when that movement is self-determination of the oppressed Kashmiri people. Why don't you ask the hard question such as why tens of thousands of Kashmiris have lost their lives at the hands of Hindu fanatics? Why are there thousands of Kashmiris abducted never to be seen again? Why don't you talk to Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International? They will be only too happy to point out Indian armed forces barbarism. About Afghanistan, again India [is] stirring up the stew. Is there a real need for four Indian offices in the cities adjacent to the Pakistan border? Pakistani forces crossed the Durand line only after Indian-paid lackeys shelled the Pakistani outposts. I won't even go into the Indian lobbying efforts in cooperation with the Jewish lobby. Its efforts are too incredible to believe. Please try to give at least the illusion of impartiality. For every negative article about Pakistan, try and put in a truthful one about this nation of 150 million peace-loving people. Zak (Nov 14, '03) This refers to the so-called analytical article <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EK14Df04.html" target="_blank">Sri Lanka a test of Delhi's resolve</a> by Sultan Shahin [Nov 14]. It looks as though Sultan Shahin is no better than the so-called experts in South Block or other LTTE [Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam] baiters like D N Dixit or Kuldip Nayar. The writer forgot one vital fact. The LTTE already is in control of most of the northeast. Another equally important factor: Shahin ought to know that the northeast belongs to the Tamils where they have lived for centuries. The Tamils had their own kingdom (Jaffna Kingdom) from the early 13th century till it was conquered by the Portuguese in AD 1619. So in effect, the Tamils are simply asking the restoration of status quo ante. India will be making a big mistake, a repeat mistake, if it decides to dictate terms once again to the Tamil people. We are not opposed to the geopolitical interests of India, because unlike the Sinhalese the Tamils have a common culture, religion and language affinity with Tamil Nadu, and by extension India. But at the same time the Tamils will not like to become citizens of India either. So the rights of the Eelam Tamils rest with them. It does not depend on the mercy of anyone else, including India. No one can dictate to the Tamils what they should or should not have. That is none of the business of others. As for the LTTE proposals, the alarm bells raised by Sultan Shahin are unfounded and unwarranted. The proposals are still within the parameters of a federal structure. In the USA a person in Michigan or any other state is primarily a citizen of his/her state and at the same he/she is also a citizen of USA. There is no contradiction in the status. The paranoia that if Tamil Eelam declares independence, Tamil Nadu across the Palk Strait will also follow suit is unfounded. If that is the argument, why did West Bengal [not] join Bangladesh? After all, both are Bengalis who speak the common language. The ISGA [Interim Self-Governing Authority] proposal still leaves currency, transport, communications, immigration, customs, etc, in the hands of the Sri Lankan central government. Every proposal contained in the LTTE's ISGA has precedents. For example the "ISGA shall have control of the adjacent seas and the power to regulate access thereto" is similar to the provision in the Bougainvillea agreement. Also "an international tribunal to settle disputes between the government of Sri Lanka and the interim government for the northeast" is based on the constitution of Bosnia. As for the [specific points] raised by Sultan Shahin, every single province in Canada enjoys [those specific] powers. In addition, Quebec, the French-majority province, enjoys rights over immigration ... Perhaps it may be useful to quote the status of Montenegro and Serbia. After the dissolution of Yugoslavia there is a loose federation between Montenegro and Serbia. Montenegro has its own central bank, currency, customs and army. The Montenegrins will decide in a referendum in three years' time whether to stay or opt out of the federation. So what is bothering Sultan Shahin? Why he is complaining? His diatribe cloaked under the guise of an analysis of the Sri Lankan situation is one-sided and biased. The LTTE proposals still leave currency, customs, immigration, transport and communication in the hands of the Sri Lankan government. So where is the independence you are speaking of? The Tamils are the natural allies of India because of common language, culture and religion. But if India decides to step [on] the toes of Tamils, we will fight back. The days superpowers held other nations under bondage through guns have gone. This can be seen at Kashmir, Iraq and Afghanistan. Sultan Shahin and others should display some maturity to realize this truth. Thangavelu (Nov 14, '03) One of the obvious solutions to the mess in Sri Lanka is generally not considered in mainstream journalism, viz, integration with the Indian Union. One can see why this won't be discussed in the regional press, but a bold international publication like ATol could be a good place to talk about it. One can only characterize the ethnic differences between the Sinhala and Tamil communities as relatively "soft", and the quarrels petty. That said, this factionalism easily fits the description of what were [the fourth US president] James Madison's worst fears about this perpetual hazard in all societies and, likewise, his proposed solution should also be considered, viz extending the boundaries of the political union to include greater diversity and reduce the probability of large pre-determined factions. In fact, this theory can be applied easily to most small nations of the subcontinent (but let's not go there!). The only nation where ethnic war is not the main issue is India, simply because of its diversity. On the other hand Pakistan has four ethnic-based states and five insurgent movements (Bangladesh has already seceded). Sri Lanka, of course, is the subject of discussion. Therefore, there is a strong case for gradual integration of the island of Sri Lanka with the Union of India, like any other language-based state. This will force a much wider and more inclusive national consciousness in the minds of the people there once they're out of the well. Carl Ohio, USA (Nov 14, '03) I don't plan to vote for General Wesley Clark in the New Hampshire primary election, but I don't think the text of the general's speech of Nov 12, as posted on his official campaign website, quite supports Kedar Deshpande's words: "Clark also stressed the necessity for the secularization of educational and political institutions in both Saudi Arabia and Pakistan" [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK14Ak06.html" target="_blank">A general's plan to tackle terror</a>, Nov 14]. The paragraph Deshpande seems to refer to reads: "Working together, we can get at some of the roots of terrorism: the extreme Wahhabist ideology and funding from Saudi Arabia; and the impoverished, class-ridden, corrupt society of Pakistan and its madrassas. Winning the war against terrorism also requires far-reaching reforms in the Middle East, including more pragmatic education, broader economic development, and wider political participation. It also means working toward a just and comprehensive settlement between Israel and the Palestinians." I don't think that even our religious right here in the United States would insist that "more pragmatic education" and "wider political participation" would necessarily mean "secularized" educational and political institutions - yet, anyway. Mark McWhiney Salisbury, New Hampshire (Nov 14, '03)   For someone who likes to posture as a critic of US foreign policy, Pepe Escobar often sounds like a Radio Free Europe hack in his series "The Silk Road" [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/EK08Ag01.html" target="_blank">Part 3: In pursuit of the snow leopard</a>, Nov 8]. Escobar seems a little too enthusiastic about the potential for "super chaos" in Western China due to ethnic tension involving the Islamic Uighurs. Chaos is precisely what the West would like, of course, in order to destabilize a resource-rich area of China and perhaps justify Western "liberation" of this territory a la Iraq. Its no coincidence that Western media (like the BBC and Voice of America) have recently increased their "interest" in Xinjiang, as the West's phony "war against terrorism" (ie war for oil) has increased apace. Though predictably couched as concern for human rights, this Western interest is completely cynical and is fundamentally motivated by economic and strategic interests. While there are egregious human-rights violations involving Uighurs which China must address, what Escobar touts as a "liberation" movement has more to do with the Balkanization of China into ethnic statelets easily dominated by Western Imperialism - similar to what the West did in Yugoslavia and is increasingly attempting do in Iraq. Indeed, it's curious that Escobar fails to mention that US, Turkish, and Taiwan intelligence outfits have historically sponsored these various Uighur exile groups - an issue that even Asia Times' own B Raman discusses in his article "Counter-terrorism: India-China-Russia co-operation", found on his South Asia Analysis Group website, [with] which you must be familiar. As they say, most disinformation is not based upon outright lies but the selective omission of the truth. While Escobar indulges in historical flights of fancy about Marco Polo or Genghis Khan, he fails to address more relevant history such as America's support of Islamist "freedom fighters" like Osama bin Laden dating back to the regime of [US president] Jimmy Carter. As people such as former Carter national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski have tacitly admitted, the US has long manipulated Muslim insurgency in the "arc of instability" as a geopolitical strategy for the balkanization of Eurasia. Indeed, what is most revealing about Escobar's series is his scrupulous attempt to downplay the role of Western imperialist intervention in this region in general. Escobar's cynical eye is primarily cast at Russia and China, whom he accuses of having expansionist ambitions in Central Asia - as opposed to the West and its allies like Turkey, which are all increasing their military presence in the area. In fact, Escobar glosses over the basic issue: What business do the Western powers have in militarily invading this region thousands of miles from their own nations? Does Escobar (or ATol) seriously believe that the pretext for this intervention - the invasion of Afghanistan - was really about getting those "evil-doers" responsible for the [September 11, 2001] attacks? Or is it merely a wild coincidence that this invasion has enabled the West to colonize a region that contains Caspian energy reserves? Perhaps Escobar and ATol should look to the Western "democracies" if you want to find out who the true dominators and colonizers are. After all, it is Western allies like Turkey which are busy oppressing and ethnic-cleansing Kurds fighting for liberation in Turkish-occupied Kurdistan, an issue that Escobar and ATol would do well to report on. DP USA (Nov 14, '03) In <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/EK13Ae04.html" target="_blank">Philippines: Between democracy and disaster</a> [Nov 13], Marco Garrido does good work in diagnosing the ills of the flesh that hangs upon the skeleton of Philippine democracy, and his prognosis for the same disease being inflicted now upon Iraq is right. But was it ironic for the imposition of United States political structures to lead to the "consolidation of a national oligarchy", or was this the intended and necessary result? And is this not also the clear intention of the Bush administration in Iraq? What would have been ironic would be the US going to what is now the Philippines sincerely interested in liberating the peoples on those islands from Spanish colonial rule (which these peoples were at the brink of doing themselves), and with the intention of creating instead a "democratic nation", only to witness the concept of a nation quickly dissolve into clusters of islands, each with the independence that was wanted by "the masses" living on them. And this would have happened had the US not fought an extended war to prevent it. Iraq is different but similar, and the maintenance of the state will require a hierarchical power to keep its disparate peoples under one authority. Complicating Iraq's prospects for meaningful democracy is the even greater insistence by the US to privatize the national economy, making oligarchy of the worst sort inevitable. Joe Nichols USA (Nov 13, '03) Indian politicians are notoriously famous for browbeating the media every now and then [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EK13Df05.html" target="_blank">In India, publish and be persecuted</a>, Nov 13]. In many instances, Indian media are themselves to blame for being treated like this. The author cites many instances where politicians suppressed the freedom of press. May I ask what did the media do in response to it (this Hindu episode being an exception)? Kanshi Ram slapped a TV cameraman in front of the national audience four to five years ago. The Indian media made few noises for a couple of days and then forgot about it. What is Indian media's plan of action to avoid such incidents in the future? A starting point in this direction may be to create a website and publish information about harassment faced by Indian journalists. Prasanna Iyengar USA (Nov 13, '03) In <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/EK13Dg05.html" target="_blank">The human face of North Korea</a> [Nov 13], filmmaker J T Takagi contends, "North Korea has been trying to change, to move to a market economy or at least to an economy that could interface with the world market, yet the US has been preventing that from happening. The existence of North Korea as a supposed threat is a good reason to maintain a military presence in the area." I wish Takagi would've taken a sip of reality along with his soju (or did the Dear Leader break out some XO?) while visiting the Hermit Kingdom. Kim Jong-il's dictatorship could take any steps toward a market economy it wants without interference from anyone. That's the beauty of dictatorship. As for North Korea's status as a "supposed threat", I wonder how Takagi would prefer to characterize a country that remains technically at war with its neighbor, engages in periodic acts of aggression on the seas, in the air and overseas against that neighbor and its government and allies, and claims to be developing a nuclear weapon; if previous behavior regarding weapons sales is a guide, it will peddle those nuclear weapons to all comers, regardless of international covenants. Somehow, I think Takagi might feel differently about this "supposed threat" if he found himself in Japan, within range of Kim Jong-il's missiles and kidnap squads, rather than in the warm embrace of Third World Newsreel in New York. Baat-Baak Buhn Hong Kong (Nov 13, '03) Tallat Nosheen's passionate account of the difficulties facing the Pakistani population despite the reforms undertaken by the country over the past 50 years gives much food for thought, especially to those who have been following the country in its attempts to improve its living standards and human development indicators [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EK12Df02.html" target="_blank">IMF and Pakistan</a>, Nov 12]. The analysis rightly depicts the weaknesses in the country's reform implementation which are difficult to rebut. However, blaming multilateral financial institutions for most of the reform failures in Pakistan is a definite stretch. While nobody, including the organizations themselves, argues that their advice is always flawless, it is just too shortsighted to accuse them of plain evil-doing. As a member of the executive board, a decision-making body at the IMF [International Monetary Fund], I have been reviewing the implementation of Fund's programs by Pakistan for the past five years. I recall the country having emerged from a status of pariah in 1999 to an emerging market economy ready to come back to international capital markets in 2003-04. This road has been difficult despite IMF's constant attempts to stabilize the country's macro-economy. But let's be honest here: if it were not for the US's change of heart towards Pakistan after the September 11 [2001] events, the country would be hardly doing as well macro-economically as at present, despite the IMF efforts or President [General Pervez] Musharraf's desire to being order to the country. Thus, large debt forgiveness by the US, Paris Club restructuring and the increased inflows of remittances are largely to thank for the recent macro-economic stability. The author argues that despite the current positive developments and lending institutions' prescriptions, 60 percent of the population lives in poverty. This is indeed discouraging. However, this should be hardly blamed on the institutions. Rather, the government's commitment to poverty reduction should be seriously examined. I can personally vouch that every IMF program review has highlighted the underspending on the already low level of development expenditures while the government increased military expenditure, and maintained distortive tax exemptions and poorly targeted subsidies. It is hardly the fault of the lending institutions that corruption continues to be rampant despite the institutions' efforts to improve governance, not least by requesting the establishment of the Anti-Corruption Agency. It is not in the institutions' control to be able to increase tax collection levels (from a very low 13 percent of GDP [gross domestic product]) and broaden (not increase) the tax base so that to have available resources for increasing pro-poor spending. And it is not because of the IMF-induced policies the government engages in poor debt-management practices by paying high interest rates on the National Savings Scheme that provides arbitrage opportunities to a few while depriving the poor of resources. On the contrary, all of these issues have been contentious points under all programs and only recently the authorities had seriously started addressing them. Throughout the years IMF provided the necessary financial resources upon the completion of conditionality that was aimed at strengthening macroeconomic stability, implementing structural reforms and decreasing poverty. It is true that the IMF program review reports are not simple reading, as they address very complex issues. Conditions present in the programs, while not easy to accomplish, are necessary for Pakistan's successful development. They have been streamlined and prioritized to better reflect the urgency of reforms in certain areas, and accounted for the country's implementation capacity. The compliance with the conditionality by Pakistan has been mediocre at best, and the IMF has made many concessions. But this is about all the IMF can do. The rest and, actually, the major part of the reform implementation lies in the hands of the Pakistani government and Pakistanis themselves. It is rather popular and easy to blame economic woes and slow progress in poverty reduction in Indonesia, Bolivia, Russia, etc on the bad prescriptions in the IMF programs. It is much more unpleasant to face the reality by looking inside oneself for answers. Pakistan, as a country and as a society, needs to take a deep look into why it is facing such severe problems. The expression that every country deserves its government seems appropriate in this context. As to the optimistic tone of the report, I have to agree with the author's sentiment. However, while it could have been more subdued, one must recognize that by far this has been one of the very few positive reports on Pakistan in recent years. But please be assured that there is hardly an economist at the IMF who is underestimating the challenges and the risks facing Pakistan in the future. Svetlana Vtyurina Washington, DC (Nov 13, '03) I would like to congratulate you on a quality publication with talents like Henry C K Liu and Pepe Escobar. However, lately, instead of reasoned analysis I am seeing an increasing number of articles by writers with overtly biased opinions like B Raman, Spengler and Stephen Blank. We don't need this from ATol as Fox News, CNN and Aljazeera already do a good job of peddling hate, misinformation and hysteria. ATol should stay in the realm of reasoned, informed and unbiased analysis. A case in point is B Raman's <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK12Ak02.html" target="_blank">Saudi blasts: More than meets the eye</a> [Nov 12]. Yes, there is probably more to the blasts than what the official line suggests but as usual, B Raman is struggling to insert a Pakistan connection into the picture. Most of his previous articles are along the same lines. Having lived in Saudi Arabia for a long time, knowing its culture and the nature of the security apparatus there, I can say the kingdom has enough of its own disaffected people who don't need help or dictation from outside. Raman's claims are concocted and deceitful. After all, as a former spymaster he has professional expertise in intrigue and deceit. Among those who watch International politics with interest it is common knowledge that B Raman is a spokesman at large for the "blame everything on Pakistan" brigade. If a comet hits the Earth tomorrow, Raman will be out claiming the disaster was engineered by Pakistan. India's RAW [Research and Analysis Wing], much like Pakistan's ISI [Inter-Services Intelligence], Israel's Mossad and the United States CIA [Central Intelligence Agency] is no benign entity. I am sure Mr Raman can take credit for as many atrocities in Pakistan as former General Hameed Gul of the ISI can in India. Raman needs to get over his obsession with blaming Pakistan and understand that there is a very thin line separating hyper-nationalism and fascism. If BJP [the Bharatiya Janata Party] and RSS [Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh] continue with their communal and divisive agenda in India, the results will be similar to what extremist groups like the LET [Lashkar-E-Taiba] have done to Pakistan. Only this time, the victims will be Indians. Most educated Indians and Pakistanis are well aware of the problems with their politicians and make no holier-than-thou claims against each other. Indeed, the only way forward is peace with mutual respect. FW Australia (Nov 13, '03) In reference to S Kumar's comments (from Sydney, Australia [letter, Nov 12]): I am not amazed by your inclination of being labeled as "China hater". True or not of such a label, hatred frequently results in mere sensation devoid of reasoning, as evident in your speculation of a subsequent rebuttal by Henry C K Liu to Li [Yong Yang]'s article <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/EK12Ad03.html" target="_blank">China's compitalists: Worst of both worlds</a> [Nov 12]. I might disagree with some specifics of what Mr Liu had to write on political, economic and monetary issues, but never in my mind have I doubted that he is the most knowledgeable with his subjects on ATol. I enjoy his fluent scholastic writing style, thoroughly researched and well presented. So I am afraid he is not capable of any stuff at your level - noisy rhetoric without facts. If you believe that Chinese can't or won't speak truth about ills of ever-evolving China on ATol, you probably underestimate the confidence the Chinese people have in themselves and you better think again whether ATol is the right place for you as well. Finally, about China's manned space flight, I suggest to you, find out rather than from "mainstream media" instead what space scientists and experts have said about its scientific usefulness or otherwise, and ecopolitical analysts about its social impact. One thing I am certain is that its success has further shown China has been moving forward at an amazing pace and thus far attracted great amount of attention, or anxiety may I say, in your case. Sean USA (Nov 13, '03) The alternative available to the United States forces in Iraq, against the increasing resistance from either the nationalists, the Ba'athists or Islamists, is to resort to the Israeli technique of massive retaliation against the civilian population through carpet-bombing of villages like Tikrit and Falluja. The human toll of any such massive strikes will further alienate not only the Iraqis, but the Muslim world as well as the rest of the world community. United States President George W Bush's war is a very unpopular war. The world has already made up its mind that whatever the different kinds of spin the think-tank of the neo-con cabal can come up [with] from time to time, ranging from the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to Saddam Hussein's brutalities, to introducing freedom and "human rights" to the despotic world of Middle East backlands, all such attempts will be a transparent failure and non-starter and will not clear Bush from the charge of committing a monumental war crime and a crime against humanity, when US forces had already carried out 37,000 aerial bombing sorties killing over 30,000 civilians and, according to a UNESCO [United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization] report, a total of 1,000 children have died after Bush declared victory, when they handled cluster bombs scattered over the land of Iraq by US forces. Now if Bush and [Deputy Defense Secretary Paul] Wolfowitz persist in carrying out further bombings, they run the risk of further widening the war. The warnings that Russia has given, about Iraq becoming a new center of an international terrorist playground, are not without firm basis. President Bush must put a humane face to an exit strategy by calling a grand [meeting] of all Middle East Arab states to thrash out a common strategy to bring peace and national government to Iraq. Involvement of Arabs in the settlement of the Iraqi imbroglio will be the most reassuring move the US can make to soothe the nerves of all concerned and bring some sanity to the process of handing over Iraq to Iraqis. Any deepening or widening of the war by wiping out villages in Iraq will be very counterproductive and could result in further condemnation of the US from the world community. Ghulam Muhammed Mumbai, India (Nov 13, '03) I would like to express my relief and gratitude towards ATol for remaining one of the few intelligent and cogent news sources in the world. Plagued with peers whose only link to the world outside of President George W Bush's reign is from Fox News, I find the solace I need in reading ATol religiously. My peers are incredibly ignorant, as well as many of my professors, who often ask Korean students if they understand a classroom example spoken in Japanese. Foreign affairs take a back seat to childish preoccupations with salons, sunglasses, and skateboards in Arizona. I feel as though I don't recognize my own country at this juncture, and face almost daily ostracization by the most stupid and rich people I have ever met. Thank you for being my bastion of intellectualism and level-mindedness. I appreciate it. Hunter Fisk University of Arizona (Nov 12, '03) If one accepts the claim that al-Qaeda was responsible for the Saudi blasts of November 9, he very likely also will agree with [B] Raman [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK12Ak02.html" target="_blank">Saudi blasts: More than meets the eye</a>, Nov 12] that the blast was not intended to kill Sunni Muslims, all foreign workers. It was most likely an accident in the course of a planned blast intended against foreigners from the West. In any case, there was a definite message to the Saudi kingdom too in the growing number of terrorist blasts in that country, to keep the Middle East free of the Western influence. Terrorism, especially when motivated by religious intolerance, will not be defeated by force alone. Force can lead to a temporary cessation of terrorist violence. But it will also exacerbate the underlying hatred and violence, which will spring up elsewhere and at a different time. If the world wants to see the end of world terrorism, it has to combine the use of force (short-term solution) with a genuine attempt to understand the real motivations and resolve the underlying issues (long-term solution). This is not being sympathetic to terrorism, but is an attempt at being realistic. Giri Girishankar (Nov 12, '03) I appreciated B Raman's article about the car bombing in Riyadh last week [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK12Ak02.html" target="_blank">Saudi blasts: More than meets the eye</a>, Nov 12]. He seems suspicious of the official explanations that al-Qaeda was behind it. He lists several reasons for this, and I must add that they are quite persuasive. He leaves the explanation to an accidental premature detonation of the bomb that was really intended for the Saudi royal family or Westerners. He writes: "It is similarly difficult to accept at present that the car bomb which killed the foreign Sunni workers at the Riyadh housing complex was designed to deliberately kill them. A more convincing explanation is that the real targets were - either the members of the Saudi ruling families or foreign diplomats and their families - elsewhere." I don't wish to argue with him in this matter. Clearly, it is difficult to accept the official explanation. I would like to suggest another explanation though. What if it was one of ours, the United States I mean? What if we wanted to have a terrible murderous act attributed to al-Qaeda in a country where it has much support from the people? Sort of a "here's what you get when al-Qaeda is around" message. Our intention would be to discredit al-Qaeda where it gets many of its jihadis. It would be an alternative way to "win hearts and minds", so to speak. Hmm ... makes me remember that car bomb outside the Hizbollah office in Beirut back in 1985. It turns out that was one of ours too. Mark Brooks Austin, Texas (Nov 12, '03) Being the supposed "China hater" that I have been labeled on this forum, I cannot wait for Henry C K Liu's 500-odd-page rebuttal and the associated flame mail from "Chinese" readers, all based in the United States, about the story by Li Yong Yan, <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/EK12Ad03.html" target="_blank">China's compitalists: Worst of both worlds</a> [Nov 12]. I am especially looking forward to how sending a man into space will address these issues. If you "search and replace" communism with socialism, and communism with bureaucracy, this would well define what's happening in India too. S Kumar Sydney, Australia (Nov 12, '03) Spengler [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK11Ak01.html" target="_blank">Why America is losing the intelligence war</a>, Nov 11] likes to couch his opinions in the appearance of deep learning, but in truth he gives neither history nor fact a great deal of weight against what he feels, and we can learn from him only his feelings. The essence of the American story, he points out, is in the movie Stagecoach, one among many of the John Wayne/John Ford tales of the good and evil, the strong and the weak; he could have as easily used My Darling Clementine, with its fact-deprived rendering of the gunfight at the OK Corral, which tells us about law and order; or the Quiet Man, where a real man can beat his wife and she respects him for it. I enjoyed all of these movies while I was growing up in America; but unlike Spengler I did grow up, enough to read Moby Dick twice, which is a great work of art, in part because it yields something to the real problem of moral ambiguity and was certainly more demanding to produce than anything Ford ever did. While Spengler's classic, Straussian, neo-conservative rant that post-colonial theory, deconstructionism, and post-modernism have undermined ideology surely has some truth to it, he completely misunderstands or misrepresents this as an attack against "all culture", when in fact genuine culture tends to become more important in the absence of ideology and withers in its presence, and this is a big reason why America has so little of the one and so much of the other. And when someone "learns" that a fundamental part of US history involves the slaughter of native populations, slavery, discrimination, and central government operating on the behalf of plutocratic interests, it is learned, and properly becomes part of your knowledge and requires no use of theory to make judgments about. When we add the story of US foreign adventures, some measure of the ambiguity that Spengler fears, and perhaps despises, might arise with the whole truth, but it has not been the truth that has led us to the crises we know face; and the whole truth does not deny us our courage or our fealty in defense of legitimate and important values; that task belongs more to ignorance. Spengler should lose no sleep, however, about America's intelligence failures and its paucity of good spies ready to betray our "enemies" - the US is just getting warmed up. When it jumps in for the big war to come, it will do as it has in the past: it will find its quislings and elevate them to power; it will make even greater chaos and weed out the greedy, the appalled, the ruined and the confused and put them to use; and it will even revisit the good old days when Americans knew how, and were willing, to make people talk by any means necessary. And the next generation of Spenglers will again fume about anyone who remembers. Joe Nichols USA (Nov 12, '03) Spengler's writings may win you more readers because of his polemics, but it may also turn Asia Times into a tabloid of cheap sorts, raising questions of credibility and validity. His latest analysis [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK11Ak01.html" target="_blank">Why America is losing the intelligence war</a>, Nov 11] of the reasons behind the intelligence failures of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is marred by sweeping generalizations and stereotyping. Consider how he characterizes deconstructionism, postmodernism, etc: "No qualitative difference separates Dante and Goethe from the meanest screed of the cheapest propagandist. What matters is the sub-text, the expression of power relations buried beneath the rhetoric." This is really the cheapest academic propaganda one could get, and often does, in the popular media - about interpretive theories within the humanities. Spengler demonstrates his shallowness above, but in many other places too. For example, students from outside America do not have to come to America and go the route of theory in order to learn about its many demerits (as Spengler would have us believe); in fact, the so-called postcolonial theory is crowded, in large part, by thinkers from around the world, especially from outside the US and Europe. The majority of readers of those thinkers also reside not in the US but outside it. Moreover, the thousands of people that demonstrate against Coca-Cola or Enron or the World Trade Organization around the world do not have to read about America's plutocratic financial interests in arcane theoretical texts: they live through them as part of their daily lives. In the same way, and especially in the age of the Internet, people from around the world can find all kinds of information about the US or other countries. I don't see how these theories could be held accountable for the knowledge about these simple realities. Also, consider that in the age of globalization, in which cultural realities and loyalties around the world are actually melting, the intelligence mechanisms of all countries, and not just the US, are more than likely to weaken. It is just that the US has chosen to intrude far too much into hostile territories, a feat unknown to most nations other than Israel. Therefore, Israel, in its super-successful intelligence, is actually far worse politically than the US in its intelligence failure. What the US and Israel need is wisdom, not intelligence - a crucial fact that escapes Spengler's brain. CN (Nov 11, '03) I don't know who Spengler is and I am not sure I would want to. His column [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK11Ak01.html" target="_blank">Why America is losing the intelligence war</a>, Nov 11] is puerile drivel and postulates high evidence of both envy and supreme idiocy. Without America, its citizen army, democratic ideals and social conscience, Spengler is but five years away from Wahhabism [Saudi Arabia's dominant faith] and a directed mantra. A poor and incompetent fool indeed. Neil Macdonald (Nov 11, '03) America does not have to defeat radical Islam. It just has to outlast it [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK11Ak01.html " target="_blank">Why America is losing the intelligence war</a>, Nov 11]. The intelligence failures do mean more attacks, but so far they are of limited consequence. Ask yourself this question: Are people from Islamic countries trying to get to America or are they trying to leave it? That determines the outcome if America can last. The asymmetry is extreme. The jihadis have to win. America only has to last. I'm betting on America. Despite intelligence failures. Despite superior Soviet intelligence, where are the Soviets today? What did them in? American economic power and American culture. Our advantages are still the same. M Simon (Nov 11, '03) A definition of "intelligence" states in part "the ability to use the faculty of reason in understanding and interest of what is being understood". In this age of "the matrix" syndrome only a modicum of intelligence seems to be needed. That along with societal acceptance that an Arab (actually anyone who is not a bona fide American as exemplified by Hollywood standards) is a barefooted, swarthy, camel-riding, womanizing (the word "cockroach", first used by Israel and lately appropriated by many Americans, comes to mind) wog, whose religious beliefs include idolatry and cannot be worthy of being an intelligent human being. The one thought that comes to mind as to <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK11Ak01.html" target="_blank">Why America is losing the intelligence war</a> [Nov 11] is best exemplified by the acceptance of absurdities proposed by the neo-cons and their coterie of fundamentalist supporters in promoting not only the atrocities that have been carried out against the Palestinians but also the ones presently being committed in Iraq. An intelligent society would have seen through the Blair/Bush statements that Saddam Hussein (hemmed in by two no-fly zones; bombarded on a daily basis by the Royal Air Force and US Air Force and having missiles whose range is 170 kilometers) could annihilate both the British Isles and the USA. What may possibly be a redeeming factor of the ongoing war of intelligence is the acceptance that the Arabs (and all non-Hollywood typecasts) are not as dumb as some of us might want them to be. So in a sense, Spengler is again correct. Armand DeLaurell USA (Nov 11, '03) I thank you for Hussain Khan's insightful piece on November 11, <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Japan/EK11Dh01.html" target="_blank">Japan ousts foreign overstayers</a>. The attitude of Japanese society to resident foreigners - either permanent or temporary - is cowardly, morally repugnant by any civilized standards and racist in the extreme. All of my Japanese friends would agree with this statement. It is therefore doubly ironic that refusing to accept foreigners merely adds to the country's endless economic malaise and increasing misery. Allowing foreigners to take jobs Japanese do not want would lower the country's obscenely high prices for basic goods and services. Not only would this benefit ordinary Japanese people, but it would also make the country a more competitive place to do business. Foreign workers could also help finance a solution to the demographic time bomb of Japan's aging society. Furthermore, imagine what legal acceptance of foreign workers would do for law enforcement. Rather than going after oh-so-dangerous illegal dish washers, police could spend their time pursuing yakuza gangsters, loan sharks and sex perverts. I suspect most Japanese would acknowledge this to be a more productive use of taxpayer resources. But to argue the obvious is pointless until ordinary Japanese are willing to accept people who are (horror of horrors) different to themselves. Judging by the state of things, this is a tall order. But until such time, Japan's suffering will be prolonged, self-inflicted and indeed deserved. BT Shanghai, China (Nov 11, '03) I commend Sultan Shahin on the article <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EK08Df04.html" target="_blank">A visiting word in the ear for India</a> [Nov 8]. Sherry Rehman's candor and frankness while commenting positively on the Indian government's 12-point confidence-building measures are remarkable. Her stress on the principle "that sustainable peace between India and Pakistan was not possible unless all issues were put on the negotiating table" is worth paying attention to. The current animosity between the two neighboring nations cannot and should not last forever. As mature societies, Indians and Pakistanis should find a way to resolve their problems and move on to serious nation-building activities. As long as there is an agreement in principle to do that, the methodology can be worked out in negotiations. The energies of these two nations are being wasted, and the people who gain by this standoff are neither Indians nor Pakistanis. The confidence-building measures have the potential to let people-to-people interactions grow without fear of the heavy hand of the stubborn governments. Growing interaction will lead to an expansion of areas of understanding and discarding negative passions. Negative passions are often due to ignorance and lack of desire to understand the other point of view. While the motivation behind Sherry Rehman's exhortations for increasing people-to-people contacts is to develop between the two societies [India and Pakistan] a genuine understanding on various topics, that of Maulana Fazlur Rehman, the Muslim fundamentalist, may be to keep the Americans away. People-to-people contacts have the chance to develop a genuine understanding of American intentions and can be used to the advantage of the two nations. The most important outcome of the mutual understanding between the two neighboring societies could be the realization not to give outsiders a chance to capitalize on the cleavages between the two countries. Giri Girishankar (Nov 10, '03) In response to Mark Engler [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK08Ak02.html" target="_blank">Mark his words, again</a>, Nov 8]: In the US, mass murderers get executed or receive multiple life sentences. They are not allowed to rule a Third World country. Outside the US, mass murderers are considered victims of American imperialism, and writers start writing campaigns to label those who try to stop them as imperialist, colonialist and oil barons. Outside the US, mass murderers are heroes and considered well-motivated soldiers who control foreign policy and represent "the people". Strangely, mass murdering of innocent bystanders on street corners and shooting elected officials is considered "God's will" by both sides and every citizen's duty. Have you lived in a murdering dictatorship? I already know you have not. Rule by greedy imperialist, colonialist, oil barons seems like a great alternative, a blessing, a god send - angels sent down from heaven compared to your alternative. James Retta Hsin-Chu, Taiwan (Nov 10, '03) <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK07Ak04.html" target="_blank">The answers to Rumsfeld's queries</a> by Dan Smith [Nov 7] reminds me of some old thoughts. It is too bad that many people seem to miss the main reason behind US militarism. I have watched this go on since Vietnam and have read about it since World War II. There are groups in the USA that strive to create reasons (causes) that will persuade the American people (Congress) to spend huge amounts of money on the military, solely to keep the military strong and the "defense" industries alive. These groups will do anything to accomplish their goals: they will lie, they will kill (millions if necessary), they will sleep with tyrants, they will undermine democracy, they will mislead their own people, they will pretend to care about anything in order to further their primary goals. They have adopted Israel because it creates so much conflict, they have cuddled up to the Christian right and Saddam [Hussein] and many other tyrants. They look for the greatest potential threat to US interests (either military or political) so that it will sell better to the masses back home. I remember [George W] Bush saying over and over in his campaign speeches that he was going to increase military budgets. Peace does not move the US Congress to spend more money on the military. Quite the contrary. So I suggest that you remind your readers and writers not to listen to what the US says but to watch its actions. Selling arms all over the world is not the action of a peace-loving country. Supporting Israel is not the action of a peace-loving country. Refusing to support the UN is not the action of a peace-loving country. Therefore, the US is not a peace-loving country. Victory would not make it any happier, especially if it brought peace. Think about it. John Sang USA (Nov 10, '03) In reference to Li Yong Yang's article [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/EK05Ad03.html" target="_blank">China puts all its eggs in one rocket</a>, Nov 5] on the foolishness of China's manned space program, I can only say that he is quite ignorant and shortsighted. First, China indeed has accomplished something that the Russians and the Americans did 40 some years ago. But so what? It is still a great feat, and China needs something like this instead of being so earth-bound. And we all know what that sort of inward, earth-bound attitude got China (need I repeat China's miserable history during the age of imperialism?). Second, the project is not the "same" as the one that was done by the Russians and Americans 40 years ago. The Shenzhou is far different and more advanced, and the purpose is far more multifaceted and useful. Need I remind Yang that the orbital module is still in space? Yang's article is nothing but a burst of useless lambasts from someone who is always looking for something negative to write about. Why doesn't he congratulate the thousands of men and women who endured terribly harsh conditions and with their dedication and efforts, accomplished something great for China? I would suggest that Yang do a bit more research on the subject (at the very least, go to spacedaily.com and get some technical facts), and stop repeating all the ills of China (which is quite familiar to anyone who is well read about the country) as the reason a la mode. Whether the manned space shot took place or not will not solve China's current problems, which are long-term and chronic due to its political and economic structures and reforms. What China really needs is a confidence boost for its people and government to tackle these problems - one or two billion dollars will not solve them overnight. But a united nation, a proud nation and a nation that will spawn a generation that can dream and reach new heights in the stars will be far more able to tackle the problems of Earth. Michael Lou Milton, Massachusetts (Nov 10, '03) Your front page article by Gary Webb, <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/EK07Ad03.html">The spy who was left out in the cold</a> [Nov 7] is sadly representative of the American propaganda that Asia Times Online is routinely publishing these days. Webb's entire article is essentially an apologia for Lok Lau, boasting at one point that Lau is "a genuine American hero" because he was "the first agent in FBI history to penetrate the top levels of the Chinese government". For anyone who understands the nature of the FBI [Federal Bureau of Investigation], CIA [Central Intelligence Agency], or imperialist America in general, Lau is not a hero of any kind. This is the same FBI after all that spied on and terrorized its own citizens in the form of the Cointelpro program [a program aimed at neutralizing political dissidents] during the 1960s and early 1970s, and today harasses Muslims and Arabs in the US with impunity. That said, the crimes committed by the CIA - another Lau employer - are even worse and too numerous to detail here. Even Webb's article is forced to admit that a possible reason why this case is being kept under wraps is because Lau was engaged in some (surprise, surprise) illegal or unauthorized activity. Then there is the question of why a supposedly "domestic" spy agency like the FBI was going international in its operations. The bottom line is that American intelligence and spying has nothing to do with "democracy and freedom" around the world - in China or anywhere else. These institutions are about advancing the predatory interests of American imperialism to the detriment of the vast majority of people on this planet. You could say that a "genuine American hero" like Lau is nothing more than a genuine imperialist goon to the rest of the world. The Anti-Lau United States (Nov 7, '03) America was taken to war with Iraq on pretexts of weapons of mass destruction, the imminent threat of al-Qaeda and more recently, "Iraqi freedom". It is obvious who is responsible. Not [George W Bush] the swaggering "cowboy", but the neo-conservative/Likuds who actually control the administration. Their real purpose (as you outline in the article<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK07Ak03.html">Loss of Feith in Douglas</a>, Nov 7) is the expansion of Israel. This requires the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian Arabs and the elimination, by America, of any Arab regime seriously opposing such ethnic cleansing. Please keep up your enlightened reporting. I pray we Americans can take back our beloved country before it is morally and financially bankrupt. RT Carpenter, Florida (Nov 7, '03) In a reply to letters he's received, Spengler writes the following: "I urge them to concentrate upon the simple and the obvious. Why is it that leaders of 1.3 billion Muslims attribute their problems to the machinations of 10 million Jews? Why do the great majority of Americans support Israel, while the great majority of Europeans view Israel as a security threat worse than North Korea or Iran? Why are Americans mainly religious, while Europeans are overwhelmingly secular?" Simple and obvious? Well to some of us perhaps, but not to Spengler who insists on following his deterministic logic of the "twilight of the West". On this and various other comments one could propose fruitful counter-arguments, but instead I would like to limit my response to Spengler's questions above. Why do some Muslims such as the former prime minister of Malaysia think "the Jews" are a threat? Perhaps because they fail to see much difference between the policies of Likud and that of the Reaganists in Washington, many of whom have done policy research and propaganda for both right-wing movements. Actually, the perceived threat is more the Israeli government, not just "the Jews", but Spengler seems to confuse them, as many Muslims do. Why do the majority of Americans support Israel? Perhaps because of religion, simple habit and the fact that the [George W] Bush administration has shamelessly sold "the terrorist threat" to include Palestinians who have little scope of action to resist [Ariel] Sharon's expansionist and violent policies? The presumption is that by "failing to reign in the terrorists" all Palestinians have forfeited any legitimacy to their cause. Why do a majority of Europeans view Israel (not "the Jews") as a security threat? Perhaps because they rightly see that the hardline policies of Sharon's government are only inflaming an already volatile situation, in an area right on Europe's doorstep. And finally, the religiosity of America? As a person brought up in the American South, in a traditional Christian family, I see little today that could objectively be referred to as "traditional Christianity". What seems to be most important today is that a person believes in "something" in order to show the outward pretense of "morality", while private actions/thoughts are pretty much open to whatever consumer society provides, which explains why marijuana is the nation's biggest cash crop and US pornography film rentals lead the world - not to mention the recent tribulations of Reaganist moralists like William Bennett and Rush Limbaugh. In other words, it is as if Jesus Christ had condemned the harlot and the adulteress and forgiven the millionaire and the pharisee instead of the other way around. In closing, I suggest that Spengler give Oswald Spengler a rest and instead consider what his far greater German contemporary Max Weber would say concerning this current confusion. Joseph M Guerra Portugal (Nov 7, '03) Just a brief note of thanks for your excellent editorials. I only became aware of Asia Times Online two years ago, and your paper is just outstanding, the top of my list. Henry C K Liu is a pleasure to read, as are many others on your staff.  Clyde Emery Los Angeles, California (Nov 7, '03) SPENGLER REPLIES Nasim Islam (letter, Nov 4) charges me with "ignorance" concerning his religion, but then reaffirms precisely what I wrote, namely, that "Islam does not believe in the Jewish or Christian theology of 'divine humility'". As a Muslim, Islam rejects "divine humility", which is his right. Jews and Christians accept it, which is their right. On what point of analysis do we disagree, Mr Islam? My purpose is not to defend or attack any religion, but dispassionately to consider the teachings of each, and to consider what consequences these teachings may have for public life in general, including political systems. Judeo-Christian "divine humility", I argued, is the heart of modern Western democracy. Can democracy flourish in its absence? Of course this oversimplifies. Separation of church and state, that is, the moral authority of religious leaders to limit the caprice of political rulers, goes back to the Church's battle for independence from the Holy Roman Empire, Catholic scholars claim. Some Jewish scholars trace the principle back to separation of kingship and priesthood in ancient Israel. However one interprets history, the emotion with which the peoples of the world think about democracy is more important than mere form. Contrary to what Joe Nichols (letter, Oct 24) and Jonathan (Nov 4) appear to believe, I reject Leo Strauss and his cult of reason. Massachusetts farmers did not form a battle line against British regulars in 1775 due to rational agreement with the Greco-Roman democratic tradition (as Nov 3 letter writers Deborah Harrell and Jose Pardinas seem to think), but because they believed that self-rule was a God-given right worth dying for. The Virginians liked the Greco-Roman version of the Republic, complete with slavery; but Virginia and Massachusetts later fought a civil war over this difference. Men do not ratiocinate their way through life but quake in terror at the prospect of death - their own death, and the death of their culture. Valid points too numerous to mention are made in readers' letters, but I urge them to concentrate upon the simple and the obvious. Why is it that leaders of 1.3 billion Muslims attribute their problems to the machinations of 10 million Jews? Why do the great majority of Americans support Israel, while the great majority of Europeans view Israel as a security threat worse than North Korea or Iran? Why are Americans mainly religious, while Europeans are overwhelmingly secular? These events should astonish us. One should marvel at them, not avert one's gaze from them. We delude ourselves that simple misunderstanding lies at the heart of the great conflict that now possesses the world. The naive, condescending, even racist presumption of the Bush administration that the Islamic world only needs to learn of the wonders of the American way of life in order to love it will, in my view, lead to disaster. Spengler (Nov 6, '03) Regarding Jim Lobe's article <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/EK06Ad01.html" target="_blank">US split on China, but realists hold the reins</a> [Nov 6]: I cannot help but feel that just as the neo-conservative cabal made catastrophic miscalculations about Iraq ([Vice President Richard] Cheney: It will be a cakewalk; [Defense Secretary Donald] Rumsfeld: Never have so many been so wrong about so much; [Iraq civil administrator L Paul] Bremer: Dead-enders fighting history; and so forth), the invasion of Iraq will be seen to mark the high-water mark of US power and hegemony. Asymmetric insurgency is so far holding the US behemoth at bay, and furthermore, by carefully selected acts of sabotage, the US has been unable to pump up the oil in order to pay for the occupation. China just needs to sit back and watch the US sink into its own morass. Clearly, the fashionable arguments about one unipolar hyperpower are set to be severely tested by China's super-fast emergence as an economic powerhouse. Today, China enjoys an extraordinary balance-of-payments surplus with the US, has an outsized reserves position in US dollars and could cause chaos and havoc in the international markets - if it ever chooses to aggressively dump its US assets. The decision not to heed George W Bush's call for a revaluation upwards in the value of the Chinese currency has to be seen in this light. The Chinese have never sought immediate gratification, and one suspects that they are patiently waiting for the tipping point. The quest to exercise global power is multidimensional, and one suspects that George W Bush should have paid better attention to [former] president Bill Clinton, who was fond of saying, "It's the economy, stupid." Aly-Khan Satchu London, England (Nov 6, '03) Rudranath Talukdar seems to have fallen off his chair in his haste to fire off his letter [Oct 29] to ATol. Had he taken a little time to do some research by clicking on the <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/about.html" target="_blank">About Us</a> link on the ATol site, he would have discovered that Sultan Shahin was "born in 1949 in a village in Bihar, graduated from Patna University in 1972, and [has] been a Delhi-based journalist since". Now as far as I remember, both Patna and Delhi are still a part of India. Rudranath Talukdar seems to suffer from the highly contagious malaise as afflicts many Indians: "the blame-Pakistan-for-everything syndrome". Wait, perhaps Shahin is an ISI [Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence] agent in disguise. That should explain it. Kamran Ali (Nov 6, '03) J Koo's letter on Nov 6 is typical of overseas Chinese who haven't a clue as to the harsh economic reality of their ancestors' country. Yes, if the Chinese were asked (they weren't), they would think the space program is a great. But if you asked any of the country's 150 million migrant workers, they would probably prefer those billions to be spent on job creation back home, rather than doing something the Americans and Soviets did 40 years ago. If you asked the countless hundreds of millions without health care, or the victims of corruption or environmental degradation, they might just prefer those billions to be spent on easing their woes, as opposed to a project that will generate no tangible economic gain for the country. China has been able to launch satellites for years - a program that creates income for the country and one the Chinese people can and should be proud of. In fact, China has much it can be proud of, and it doesn't need to orbit a man around the Earth to demonstrate its national worth. Frankly, with so many enormous problems and so much human misery in both the cities and the countryside, China has no business devoting so many resources to an independent manned space program. BT Shanghai, China (Nov 6, '03) I would like to respond to the article <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/EK05Ad03.html" target="_blank">China puts all its eggs in one rocket</a> [Nov 5] by Li Yong Yang. An overwhelming majority of the Chinese people, both in and outside of China, welcome and support China's space program. If Li truly supports the idea of democracy, he will have to accept that if a poll were to be conducted among the Chinese people worldwide, the vast majority would support China's space program. Therefore, Li belongs to the tiny, tiny minority who have not studied and understood recent Chinese history. J Koo Canada (Nov 5, '03) The chilling incident in Fukuoka prefecture was indeed "brutal" and all of my sympathies go out to relatives of the family. But your use of that incident [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Japan/EK04Dh01.html" target="_blank">A deadly lesson in education reform</a>, Nov 4] in order to draw a blanket generalization of the motivations of foreign students in Japan is disingenuous and insulting to the dead. Rather than use this anecdotal evidence, do you have any real facts to back up your claim that "a number of Chinese students now in Japan pursue activities not related to their studies"? Do you have any interviews or statistics that point to the conclusion you draw? If not, then your "news article" is really nothing more than fear-mongering, which ends up making the problem worse instead of helping. Matthew Downs Fukui, Japan (Nov 5, '03) Spengler is a case; part romantic, part missionary and part cynic. He seeks to pull a magic cloak over a complex world rich with contradiction, noble lies and partial truths; and upon this cloak are the icons of his imagination, symbols of what he needs in order to salvage the belief that no matter the consequence, the Judeo-Christian, Western enterprise is sublime. In <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EJ28Aa02.html " target="_blank">Mahathir is right: Jews do rule the world</a> [Oct 28], I think the kernel of what we are told is that the Jews introduced (even by the divine act of translation) to the Protestants and the world the idea of a sympathetic God in dialogue with man. This would be the God of Judgment. Fine. Then there is history, which makes a painfully poor and highly selective showing alongside the idea. We are not allowed entry into the endless, self-inflicted crises that has always attended any version - ancient or modern - of Jewish self-rule, and are pushed hastily through millennia, nodding dismissively at the Greco-Roman beginnings of the democratic idea, over the heaps of inter-European wars (inter-Christian wars included), and then, after a brief stay with the embryonic empire in England, landed in messianic America to plant the seed of self-rule. And in the US, the fact that democracy is, at the present time, widely considered a sham is best left unmentioned. Now comes Spengler's next fantasy [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK04Aa03.html" target="_blank">What the Jews won't tell you</a>, Nov 4]. What the Jews won't tell you is that they are envied, when the proper word is resented. From a Jewish scholar on Jewish history comes this point of view: "To us [Jews], European anti-Semitism appears to be a weapon of the strong against the weak, a kind of ideological sadism. To European right-wing nationalists of the post-1870 period, however, anti-Semitism appeared to be a weapon of the weak against the strong, an attempt (as they saw it) by a downtrodden nation to regain control over its resources from a separate, distinctive minority which appeared to dominate the economy - an aim not unlike that of anti-colonial movements in the Third World vis-a-vis the Europeans and foreign entrepreneurial minorities (like the Chinese throughout Southeast Asia) ... Moreover, research is most likely to demonstrate a very considerable actual Jewish over-representation in many other social and political areas which figured largely in the litany of continental anti-Semitism of the post-1870 period, especially Jewish participation in the radical left, the liberal professions, in journalism, and in the media" (W D Rubinstein, Jewish Journal of Sociology, 2000). Spengler needs to lift his nose from the books and go out to experience the real world, talk to real people and maybe even live by the power of his own physical labor for a while. And to the Jewish communities of the world, or the Chinese, the Lebanese in West Africa, or any dominant economic elite in any nation, I recommend that they view society and civilization in ecological terms, wherein the whole is just as important as any of its parts. Joe Nichols USA (Nov 5, '03) As a Swiss living for more than 15 years in the US, I cannot agree that there is no anti-Semitism in the US [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK04Aa03.html" target="_blank">What the Jews won't tell you</a>, Nov 4]. I actually think that there is more anti-Semitism in the United States than in Switzerland. One example: throughout World War II, the US did not let Jews immigrate, and on the deed for my house there is a restriction (60 years old) that says it cannot be sold to Jews and blacks. This was common at the time, but this restriction cannot be enforced because it is against the constitution, otherwise I would bet it would be still in place. Karl Brugger (Nov 5, '03) From a European's point of view, I think the article [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK04Aa03.html" target="_blank">What the Jews won't tell you</a>, Nov 4] misses the point about why so many people dislike the Israelis - notice I don't say "hate the Jews". As far as I know, Judaism is no race but a religion, and most of us here in Europe respect all [religions], Judaism included. But for some reason, some people like to acquaint Judaism with political Israel, even though these are two completely different things. Note that according to the opinion poll mentioned in the article, Europeans consider Israel, not the Jews, to be the threat. The reasons the article points out as the source of "anti-Semitism" are that Judaism is the oldest Abrahamic religion and the "eternal" characteristic imprinted on the Jewish people. These pseudo-reasons don't hold any credit, especially here in Europe. Most Europeans, though Christians, are becoming more secular, and religion is not the driving force behind their lives. They could care less that Judaism is the oldest Abrahamic religion and that Jews are an "eternal" people for that matter. Whoever believes this is completely off the mark. What I cannot accept and understand, and I'd think most Europeans would share this view, is the fact that after 60 years, Israel is still using the comfortable argument of playing the victim but uses similar methods of "elimination" that the Nazis used with them - the only difference is the numbers. So anybody that criticizes Israel's handling of the Palestinian problem becomes automatically anti-Semitic or, even worse, a Nazi. If this is not an "imbalance in the brain" I don't know what is. If Israel wants to be respected in the world, it needs to engage on a two-phased therapy: first, it needs to put behind it all the ghosts from the past and start afresh, instead of constantly feeling sorry for itself (the past belongs in the past and some of us, including the Germans, have learned from it). Second, [we need to] honestly seek a solution to the Palestinian problem. L Oliveira Portugal (Nov 4, '03) The article [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK04Aa03.html" target="_blank">What the Jews won't tell you</a>, Nov 4] is a very interesting one but does not seem to take into account the following: 1) There has been and is a fairly strong strain of anti-Semitism in the US - not so long ago there were Jewish "quotas" in quite a few US universities (there may still be, for all I know). 2) As recently as the late 1960s, I heard an adolescent from the Midwest say she had not met a Jew before and had heard (or learned) that they had "horns". 3) It's a poorly kept secret that well-placed anti-Semites in the US effectively sentenced a number of Jews (who had sponsors in the US) from getting out of Nazi-controlled areas by refusing to issue visas or processing paperwork so slowly the Jews were deported before visas were issued. Hardly the behavior of a nation that welcomed or had no problem with Jews. Also frequently heard or read are comments regarding "Christian" behavior, or the need for more people to attend church on Sunday because apparently being "Christian" or attending church regularly will solve/reduce crime, decrease homelessness, stop drug use, domestic abuse, etc - whether the people making these comments are aware that they are (intentionally or not) excluding Jews, Muslims, Hindus and followers of all other faiths from the category of good citizens I don't know. But their actual language does exclude everyone but "Christians". How does this behavior (plus the behavior of many Americans to the large influx of Irish before, during and shortly after the potato famine, and of course, to the black people brought here as slaves) figure into the hypothesis that the US has no difficulty accepting or dealing with a very old but still vibrant Jewish culture? Susan Hogg Oregon (Nov 4, '03) Regarding [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK04Aa03.html" target="_blank">What the Jews won't tell you</a>, Nov 4]: There is much anti-Semitism filling the air these days - much of [it] quite foolish. Much of it is easy to refute, but four essential points keep getting raised that are extremely difficult to answer and ensure that so-called anti-Semitism will be around for a very long time. They are as follows: 1) Jews lie. From an agony aunt like Ann Landers, who regularly coached her readers on the necessity of telling the diplomatic lie, to Leo Strauss, who spent his days at the University of Chicago teaching the greatness of the Noble Lie, to the Hollywood movie makers who cannot tell the most simple tale as it was written, Jews have a well-earned reputation as liars. 2) Jews will cheat you. It is very difficult to find any person on Earth who has had more than three commercial dealings with a Jew who hasn't been cheated. 3) Jews are incredibly bigoted. For all the howling about anti-Semitism, it would be very difficult to find anyone who believes with more vigor that his group is smarter, more blessed by God, or more capable of running things than a Jew. No matter what you have learned or accomplished in life, a Jew will require less than five minutes to inform you that your village is missing its idiot. 4) Jews are terrible economists. From David Ricardo to Karl Marx, Jews have offered a wide range of economic thinking. Yet all of it has led to widespread human misery. So Spengler, whoever you are, you may have some interesting philosophic points about the enduring nature of anti-Semitism, but I think you make it much too complicated. If you are so smart, think of a valid explanation for anti-Semitism that those right-wing extremists can believe is better than the ones they already subscribe to. Jonathan (Nov 4, '03) How could the remaining population of the world (excluding India and China) be so ignorant as not to see that we all suffer from Jewish envy [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK04Aa03.html" target="_blank">What the Jews won't tell you</a>, Nov 4]? I will not subject ATol readers to the countless examples of pride within the many cultures of this great world, without looking at the Jews as some sort of barometer to be measured by. The Jews' achievement of such feats in history is nothing to be ignored, but to suggest that the world should use this for comparative purposes is like children arguing in the playground about who has a better father. Oh and yes, the timeless philosophy of the Chinese is well taken. Where there is smoke, there is fire. Frank Bakes Canada (Nov 4, '03) Spengler [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EK04Aa03.html" target="_blank">What the Jews won't tell you</a>, Nov 4] ignores over 2,000 years of history when he claims that hatred against Jews is a deathbed curse of discredited cultures. Anti-Semitism is rooted in the long-standing Roman hatred of its upstart colony, Israel, which rebelled against Roman control from 170 BC, and the desire of the Christian church to distance itself and supplant its Jewish roots. In response to the rebellion, Emperor Hadrian banned worship on Saturday and the many of the martyrs sent to the Colosseum were not members of any recognizable Christian church but were bands of rebellious Jews, messianic or otherwise. A schism between messianic Jewish believers and Greek and Roman converts ended with the replacement theology of the 2nd century, which states that the Jews forfeited their favored position with God and now Christianity was the new "heir" to the promises and blessings of God. The Romans, upon adopting Christianity as the state religion, absolved themselves from any responsibility for the crucifixion and continued the anti-Semitic schism of the now-official church doctrine in an attempt to stamp out any taint of Judaism. In AD 313, Constantine, the first Christian Roman emperor, issued the Edict of Mila outlawing synagogues, and in 315 another edict allowed the burning of Jews if convicted of breaking the law. Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea, in the 4th century argued that the Church was the continuation of the Old Testament and thus superseded Judaism. Replacement theory became one of the main foundations on which Christian anti-Semitism was based and is still a pillar of all Christian faiths. That it was expedient for leaders or nobles to blame a country's problems on its ethnic and religious minorities is nothing new. To claim that anti-Semitism is caused by a jealous fear of mortality ignores the basic roots of anti-Semitism from Roman times to the present. CDL (Nov 4, '03) Spengler's view on Islam [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EJ28Aa02.html" target="_blank">Mahathir is right: Jews do rule the world</a>, Oct 28] is one of ignorance about this great religion. [Spengler's] finite vision of theology of "man's failings more powerfully awake God's love" is a contradiction at its height. Man's failings are directly related to the transgressions of God's and his suggestions that if we, men, transgress, then we will be imbibed by God's love surely has no merit. And, for this reason, Islam does not believe in the Jewish or Christian theology of "divine humility". Indeed, Spengler's heartfelt enmity, ignorance and thus the unfathomable gap between his ideology and a Muslim one, is unbridgeable. Nasim Islam California, USA (Nov 4, '03) I must commend ATol on its diverse - and often intensely enlightening - forums as well as the broad spectrum of novice and expert authorities that are regularly offered on its site. Recently, I read Lawrence Pintak's <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK04Ak03.html" target="_blank">Tragedy of Lebanon being repeated in Iraq</a> [Nov 4]. Although I respect his insight and historical experiences, I find some disturbing flaws within his article's deduced conclusions. Comparing Lebanon in 1982 to Iraq in 2003 undermines both the cause and effect of the US's present objectives in Iraq. In Iraq, the military objective falls under a political mandate, while in Lebanon there was a questionable semblance of "coalition spirit", either at home or abroad, in this regard. This attribute is critical when applied toward the impact of domestic morale on US foreign policies that directly involve the use of US military force regardless of the "war on terror". Secondly, I disagree that US and coalition forces will find themselves in the same crucible that brought them into the middle of a civil war between Muslim and Christian factions. Both the operational and tactical situation renders an overall successful blueprint in motion - and in most operations of such magnitude, the achievement of progresses is a painfully learned game. In [tune] to this is the sheer number of US forces. In 1982, there were 1,200 marines deployed to Lebanon. The flaw in this design is the lack of support forces - as in Somalia - and the incongruities between the number of forces and the mission at hand. One cannot compare the present force strength of US, Poles, British and other coalition forces to a handful of marines in the middle to an escalating civil war and contribute such an example to a conclusion that claims both involvements are quite similar and therefore may indeed share the same fate. In sum, Pintak's history is deep, but I do not clearly understand the analogy he appears to be making as it applies to the present tense. The devil is in the details and although such metaphors can be helpful in painting a topographical understanding, to draw similar conclusions based on evidence produced by such analogies rejects the often acute changes that have occurred on all sides during the interim and therefore undermines, dilutes and oversimplifies the accuracy of the final conclusion. Jonathan Fraizer USA (Nov 4, '03) By blatantly espousing the brutal acts committed by terrorists on the basis of "root causes", Sultan Shahin has indeed become the spokesman of these terrorists [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EK04Df05.html" target="_blank">India: Thinking out of the Cold War box</a>, Nov 4]. Shahin, by justifying these crimes, fares no better than the mindless killers. Do you think these unacceptable terrorist acts solve/highlight the "social side" of the problem? Even if they have genuine problems, the violence brings more harm and is bound to complicate the issues at stake. The "emerging world view" (I do not know which countries support this ridiculous view for it to be called a "world" view) will in the future encourage violence as the preferred means to "solve" social problems. Is this what Sultan's world view is about? Kannan (Nov 4, '03) It is with great interest that I follow the articles on your website. And although I have taken a critical view of Pepe Escobar's articles on Iraq (primarily because they somehow have seemed a little too virulent to appear unbiased, even to someone like me with an anti-US stance), I have to say that his reporting from around Asia is quite amazing [<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/EK01Ad01.html" target="_blank">The last frontier: China's far west</a>, Nov 1]. And quite surprisingly, I see other newspapers follow suit. Recently, there was an article on the BBC about the Uighurs and the issues plaguing the region. So Escobar's articles seem sort of pioneering in a way. vivek (Nov 4, '03) </td></tr></table> </td></tr> <tr> <td valign="top" width="65%"> </td></tr></table></td> <td valign="top" width="10" background="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/line.gif"><img height="1" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="9"></td> <td valign="top" align="left" width="130"> <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="117" align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-to-editor.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_1.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page1.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_2.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page2.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_3.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page3.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_4.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page4.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_5.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page5.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_6.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page6.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_7.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page7.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_8.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page8.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_9.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page9.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_10.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page10.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_11.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page11.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_12.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page12.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_13.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page13.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_14.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page14.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_15.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page15.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_16.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page16.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_17.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page17.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/letters_18.html"> <center><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/letters-page18.gif" border="0"> </a></center></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.wsicorporate.com/business.asp?id=5292" target="_blank"><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/Big-Button-new.gif" border="0"></a></td></tr> <tr> <td height="5"><img height="5" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/advertise.html"></a></td></tr> <tr> <td height="10"><img height="10" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="5"></td></tr> <tr> <td><a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/advertise.html"></a></td></tr> <tr> <td height="10"><img height="10" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="1"></td></tr></table> <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="6" width="117" align="center" border="0"> <tr> <td bgcolor="#000000">Affiliates <a href="/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/advertise.html#AF">Click here to be one</a>) </td></tr> <tr> <td valign="top" align="middle" bgcolor="#000000"> <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" border="0"> <tr> <td valign="center" align="middle"><div align="center"></div></td></tr> <tr> <td valign="center" align="middle"><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.asiaobserver.com/" target="_blank"><img hspace="0" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/atimes//images/asia_observer_logo1.gif" border="0"></a></td></tr> <tr> <td valign="center" align="middle" height="10"><img height="10" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="1"></td></tr> <tr> <td valign="center" align="middle" height="10"><img height="10" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="1"></td></tr></table></td></tr></table>  </td></tr></table></td></tr></table></td> <td background="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/sha.gif"><img height="7" src="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/1pix.gif" width="7"></td></tr> <tr> <td valign="center" align="middle" bgcolor="#003366" height="50"> <div align="center"> <table class="table-text" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" border="0"> <tr> <td height="17"> <div align="center"></div></td></tr> <tr> <td height="17"> <div align="center">No material from Asia Times Online may be republished in any form without written permission.</div></td></tr> <tr> <td height="13"> <div align="center">Copyright 2003, Asia Times Online, 4305 Far East Finance Centre, 16 Harcourt Rd, Central, Hong Kong</div> <div align="center"> </div> <div align="center"><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20031202024625/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/policies.html">Privacy and Legal Policies</a></div> <div align="center"> </div></td></tr></table> </div></td> <td background="/web/20031202024625im_/http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/sha.gif"> </td></tr></tbody></table> </body> </html>

CINXE.COM

Asia Times