Category: Articles

*Islam in Arabic means submitting to Allah the one and only god. *Muhammad is the prophet of Allah. *Mecca is the Holy City. *In the beginning Islam provided a suffering Arab community divided by intertribal wars with power, unity, and triumph. *Mosques are the “churches” of Muslims.*The Five Pillars (key duties) of Islam: …Shahada: A profession of faith recognizing that Allah is the only god and Muhammad is his prophet. Salat: Praying five times a day at dawn, midday, when the sun begins its descent, sunset, and when night falls. This is a quick exercise in intense meditation. Fasting: During the month of Ramadan from sunrise to sunset. Giving Alms A Pilgrimage to Mecca.

(The Five Pillars say nothing of terrorizing other people.)

Until the suicide bombing on September 11 I had never given very much thought to the Islamic religion because I come from the viewpoint that organized religion is an oppressive and controlling force that allies itself with government. As the Middle East continues to be demonized by our government I find it necessary to educate ourselves and our communities on the matter so that the demonstrations of ignorance through acts of violence, unnecessary sideways glances, threatening phone calls, ugly nationalism, and ironically enough, a rejuvenated love for the christian god can be thought of more logically and come to an end. Bush may have criticized intolerance but it still exists and needs to be addressed.

If David Koresh had been referred to as a “christian terrorist” the entire country would have been up in arms protesting the use of the two words together. It is just as ridiculous to use the term “islamic terrorist” that I continue to hear repeated not only by the media but also by individuals within earshot.

Bin Laden is not the representative for the entire Muslim community (which is 1/6 of the world’s population). In fact, he is a representative of one small fundamentalist group that was trained and funded by the United States (we gave them $43 million dollars just 4 months ago to destroy poppies-as part of the “war on drugs”).

Believing that all followers of Islam are terrorists is comparable to believing that all christians are devout followers of Jerry Fallwell. It is this ignorance that is allowing for people in this country to believe that a military retaliation is necessary, it is ignorance that is fueling the recent hate crimes in our communities, and it is ignorance that allows Bush to further an arms race that is ineffective and costly. The real danger is not individual spiritual beliefs or religions but fundamentalists of any religion who use their religion to justify actions that are not justifiable by any earthly circumstances.

Muhammad Atta who was the pilot for the first jet that crashed into the World Trade Center was from Egypt, a country that spends only 4% of the budget on health care. Poverty causes anger and rebellion and as we impose policies on the international community that pressure them to privatize their resources; their government in turn cuts further into public spending, which results in higher unemployment rates and increased poverty. There are very understandable motivations for attacks on the United States and we need to think critically about our foreign policy.

Aside from stealing bread off the tables of the poor consider Reagan’s 1983 bombing of a Lebanese village, Bush’s “smart bomb” of civilians seeking shelter in Baghdad, or Clinton’s 1999 “mistakenly” dropped missles on a pharmaceutical company in Sudan. Abbas Hamdani of the Mediterranean Quarterly, Fall 1995 articulates it well in the following paragraph:

“The Middle East grew more restive when the days of employment and comparative security under socialism gave way to infitah, or an opening of countries to the free market and Western capitalism; when poverty and inflation increased; when bread riots erupted; when national pride was hurt and humiliated; when Palestinians were thrown out of their lands and homes; and when the superpower; America, vetoed many United Nations resolutions granting Palestinians their legitimate right to return to their homes and achieve their self-determination, while doling out billions of dollars every year to Israel and strengthening its occupation of Palestinian lands.”

It should be no surprise that there are people in the world that despise us; and not because “we are the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity,” but because our freedom and opportunity come at the expense of the freedom and opportunity of the majority of the world’s population. Who is the real terrorist in this story?

If there is any doubt consider that America brought the Taliban to power, promoted Saddam Hussein for a war against Iran, allied itself with the most reactionary regimes in the mideast and sponsored the ongoing military occupation of Palestine by Israel. Not enough? How about Israel’s invasion on Lebanon in 1982 where 17,000 civilians died? Or maybe the half million children that have died because of our sanctions on Iraq. You think 5,000 is a big number? Consider the terrorists that we armed and paid in the 1980’s massacre of more than 30,000 Nicaraguan civilians. Vietnam?

With Bush’s “Operation Infinite Freedom” where he has threatened to “stop, eliminate, and destroy” terrorism where it grows (sort of like spraying your lawn for weeds, right?) we are embarking on a war that really will be infinite. How long will it take to “weed out” all of the terrorists? Will the impossible demands on the people from Afghanistan result in bombing? How many bombs will we drop before the people of this country protest against the ridiculous policy that has no attainable outcome? How many must die at our expense and what civil liberties will we lose in the meantime?

Until we change our brutal, militaristic, foreign policy and follow rules of international law there will be terrorists. The weapons of mass destruction the United States has in themselves are a form of terrorism on the rest of the globe; it is intimidation, and until we put down our arms we are inviting opposition. There will continue to be idealistic and fundamentalist attacks on capitalism and the West and it is up to progressive people in the west to use this opportunity to educate our own communities about capitalism and it’s effects on the rest of the wolrd.

Capitalism is the real terrorist in this world because it rewards greed and motivates the greedy to get what they want by any means necessary. When we get sick or go to war it benefits our economy. We need a new system based on humane principles, mutual aid, and strengthening of local infrastructures. The time is now, there are millions more lives at stake and things are only going to get worse as the nation becomes more hysterical and war hungry.

Call any of these Islamic organizations in San Francisco to show support and counteract all of the ignorant hateful messages they are receiving:

Islamic Bulletin/Masjid Al Noor 415-552-8831 Islamic Society of SF/Masjid Darussalam 415-863-7997 SF Muslim Community Center 415-563-9397 The Mosque and Islamic Center of SF 415-282-9039

Osama bin Laden is a multi-millionaire of Saudi origin who sponsored and led Arabs fighting in Afghanistan against the USSR in the 1980’s. Ronald Reagan who supported “the valiant freedom fighters”, recruited bin Laden and other Muslim rebels to overthrow the Soviet backed secular government in Kabul. The covert U.S. funding was funneled largely through Pakistan’s maverick Inter-Services Intelligence. Millions of dollars in money and arms were provided to the mujahideen rebels to fight the Soviet occupation. bin Laden made it clear that both the U.S. and Russia were considered enemies.

In the mid-1980’s Osama bin Ladin and the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood leader Abdallah Azzam co-founded the Maktab alKhidamat, an organization to help supply the Afghan resistance in Peshawar with fighters and money. The MAK enlisted, sheltered and transported thousands of people from over 50 countries to fight the Soviets. Over 10,000 Arabs received training in these paramilitary camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

In the late 80’s Bin Laden and Azzam formed a new organization, al-Qua’ida, to focus on extending his campaign world wide. After the car bombing death of Azzam in 1989, the MAK split, with the extremist faction joining al-Qa’ida.

After Afghanistan, bin Ladin returned to Saudi Arabia and continued to support opposition movements in that country and Yemen. He began to oppose the Saudi leadership when they rejected his advice to rely on native fighters and turned the country’s defenses over to the U.S. military. Bin Laden organized a local movement to force U.S. troops out of the country. He relocated to the Sudan in 1991 and was stripped of his Saudi citizenship in 1994 after Algeria, Saudi Arabia and Yemen accused him of supporting subversive groups. Eventually, in 1996, Sudan expelled bin Laden under pressure from the U.S. and Suadi Arabia threatening UN sanctions for Sudan’s alleged complicity in the attempted assassination of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in 1995.

After returning to Afghanistan, bin Laden found many willing Muslim recruits who were angered by the massive civilian “collateral damage” caused by the Gulf War. In 1996, bin Laden publicly issued his “Declaration of War” against the United States. Since then, his anti-U.S. rhetoric has escalated to the point of calling for worldwide attacks on Americans and allies, including civilians.

As the September 11 attacks so clearly illustrated, mass violence is ugly. Horrific. Every day the US press now carries page after page of photographs of those killed, with short biographies of the lives so brutally snuffed out. With over 6,000 killed, it will take years to eulogize all of those killed. If you stop to read these biographies, it’s hard not to cry. The newlywed couple, now separated forever. The fireman with four children at home. The environmental lawyer who loved to camp in the redwoods.

We’ve lived in the United States never expecting such slaughter on our own soil. That happens somewhere else, and we’re safe here at home. The emotional potency of our loss of innocence and security is hard to assimilate.

The reaction so far has been anger and rage – the impulse to fight back against those who robbed us of our safety. This has been encouraged by the government response and the media, both pushing a military response.

After being touched by the uglyness of violence, the urge to more violence is curious. The history of most every other country on Earth includes the type of violence seen on September 11. The ugliness, the brutality, the fear is no stranger in the rest of the world. The United States, generally spared such violence, is the exception.

Many other nations around the world have known such violence at the hands of the United States Government. While we mourn 6,000 people killed September 11, imagine how much greater must have been the sorrow at the 200,000 Iraqis killed during the Gulf War. Or the over 1,000,000 children who have died in Iraq since that war as a result of US sanctions which prevented repair of sanitation, water and health infrastructure. Those victims were generally as “innocent” as those killed at the World Trade Center – just people trying to live their lives who got in the way of violence.

The victims of US military or CIA adventures is a shameful pile a mile high: 3 million killed in Vietnam, thousands in Nicaragua and El Salvador, how many in Columbia, Panama, Chile, Granada, Sudan, where else? The CIA has funded and encouraged conflict around the globe. Osama bin Laden, now the chief suspect in the September 11 attacks, was amongst the CIA funded rebels encouraged to reduce Afghanistan to rubble in a decade of war against a Soviet invasion. That war alone killed tens of thousands, forcing millions to flee.

The United States government has acted for decades as if violence had no consequences. The violence has always been used against “other people” living “elsewhere” – US soil was safe. That the US government violence may have created millions of enemies across the globe could be conveniently ignored, because they couldn’t strike at US interests. At worst, US citizens traveling abroad might be in danger.

On September 11, the United States’ isolation from the rest of the world lifted. The new reality is that US violence employed abroad can and may come back to US soil.

The Bush administration’s proposed response to the September 11 outrage is a war against all terrorist and all states that “harbor” them. The proposed war is broad, perhaps against many governments and many people across the globe, and perhaps permanent. It almost appears Bush doesn’t care who the war is against, just so long as the military can punish someone for the September 11 disaster.

More violence, more suffering, more mourning and crying for loved ones butchered by the machines of war – this cannot bring back any of the September 11 victims. This won’t make the US safer or return us to the security we felt before September 11. Such violence makes us less safe by increasing violence and hate everywhere.

In the aftermath of the recent attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center, I think we all agree that there should be some sort of response to the situation. Exactly how we should respond, however, is the pivotal decision in need of further debate. The mainstream media and US military are narrowly focussing on a war reaction to the attacks, meanwhile leaving diplomatic options largely outside of the perimeter of discussion on the issue. It is therefore imperative that we take it upon ourselves to react thoughtfully and explore the alternatives. Doing so may not only encourage the wisest decision in responding to these attacks, but may also make us better for it in the long run.

Before we can address how best to respond to the attacks, we must first discuss how best not to respond and why. The role of the US media has been to provide one option: war. But that is not our only option, and, in fact, it’s a very bad one. This is not going to be an ordinary war; the consequences here are enormous. President Bush has declared our response not to be a series of quick air strikes, but a long, ongoing sustained attack; allowing himself an open-ended justification for universal massive military violence and funding (with slashed domestic social spending and increased domestic repression) for years to come. In a recent interview with Noam Chomksy, he fears ” we are considering the possibility of a war that may destroy much of human society,” causing mass destruction of inner civilian cities, and killing “unknown numbers of people who have not the remotest connection to terrorism,” resulting in the death of “possibly millions” (Radio B92, Belgrade). If history serves as a lesson, it should be clear that a US military retaliation will do harm mainly to innocent people. Seldom do the despots themselves face the consequences of US military attacks. Iraq illustrates a good example; Saddam Hussein remains healthy and in power, yet the women, men and children of the country suffer and die horribly due to US bombings and relentless sanctions. This time around we’re talking about a much more severe attack. The press has discussed employing the draft and, worse, using nuclear weapons.

There is nothing lending support to the credence that a US military retaliation will result in greater national safety or put an end to terrorism. On the contrary, we’ll be fueling the fire of hatred and war, worldwide, increasing popular opposition to the United States. Terrorism may rise larger than ever before, with a backlash of widespread support for militant fundamentalism, endangering not just the rest of the world, but our own country as well. Our current mode of military retaliation will only make things far worse. If we actually want to put an end to this sort of violence and terrorism we need to respond in a way that will not provoke further terrorism, by our own government or any others.

Ideally, we should respond to the attack on America by following the law and utilizing our pre-existing international judicial system. We have the World Court, the United Nations, the Security Council and international laws designed to solve these sorts of problems, diplomatically. Terrorists can be brought to justice, and violators of international law abated, without killing millions of other innocent people in the process. But the US ignores these laws, they always do. Diplomacy could be a possibility, it always can be, but it is never explored. And since the US will not abide by international laws or even acknowledge the possibility of an alternative to a worldwide military response, the ideal, diplomatic and legal method of responding to the attacks is unfortunately not presently an option.

Considering the horrible long term consequences of a US military retaliation, both at home & abroad, and the fact that the US is ignoring the appropriate legal and diplomatic options available, our response to the attack on America needs to be a fundamentally different one. I believe our primary concern at this point should be to stop the war. Congresswoman Barbara Lee of Oakland was the only congressperson to oppose the war before the House of Representatives. “Women, children and other non-combatants, ” she said, “will be caught in the crossfire” of our war (09.14.01). She is a brave example of the kind of stance the rest of us should be taking in response to our current situation. In fact the only sane approach to the US military response is to do everything we can to stop the war. No other options make sense at this point. If we ever want to explore diplomatic options, or encourage a future of relative peace instead of transnational violence, our first response needs to be to stop the war.

Fortunately, in what may be a record-breaking response, anti-war activists have already begun mobilizing against the war. Several protests have sprung up across the country and around the San Francisco Bay Area. Sunday, September 16, a rally with over 1,000 people opposing the war and racial hostility in San Francisco emerged. Other protests have followed, resulting in a nation-wide series of anti-war/anti-racism protests and rallies on University campuses across the country. On September 20, about 3,000 people marched through the streets of Berkeley alone. Other demonstrations have happened and are being planned. The Berkeley fire department has ordered all of their vehicles to remove any American flags because it’s encouraging pro-war hysteria, and the Dalai Lama has stepped forward against the war as well. The scheduled September 29 protests against the IMF/World Bank meeting in Washington DC have been transformed into an anti-war/anti-racism protest instead.

Our anti-war activity needs to increase. Everything possible should be done to halt the war, starting with the basics: articles, phone calls and petitions, as well as more overt protests and dissident anti-war resistance and non-violent action. The immense organization and momentum fueling the growing anti-globalization protests should continue being harnessed to rally against the new US war, and further build a movement based on solidarity, peace and democracy. Community, student, and labor organizing should increase. The anti-war protests we’ve already seen should serve as examples and inspiration for the immediate response we should be taking to the attack on America and the current US military retaliation.

Both the pro-war campaign of the US corporate press and military, and the quick anti-war response by concerned people and organizations, may effect the growing popular support for social justice and activist movements. The pro-war media have been working overtime, and everything is being done to craft public consent to support war retaliation. But their efforts may backfire; their propaganda is becoming absurd; President Bush is looking for unilateral unlimited military power. This whole affair has forced people to pay attention to the activities of the US corporate military and US foreign policy. In spite of the immense pro-war state propaganda campaign, people are questioning the role of the US military, their motives and actions. The result of all of this may well be a stronger, larger & more diverse movement of people working for social justice and change. The anti-war response is a first step toward ending international terrorism, both on our own soil as well as abroad, and the rest of the world depends on us.

(with intrusive Slingshot editing)

Well, it looks as if the good people of the rural U.S. should be breathing a sigh of relief right about now. What with the President and most Americans itching to bomb any place where terrorists might be hiding one can only imagine the kind of wrath that would have been brought down upon the heads of folks in Iowa or Nebraska had the guilty parties been white boys with crew-cuts, like Tim McVeigh. All this talk of “carpet bomb ’em back into the stone age,” would have to have been replaced with “bomb ’em back to the ‘Dust Bowl”.

But the fact is, we all know that such a scenario would never have transpired, and not because white boys aren’t capable of inflicting mass death. They certainly are. McVeigh proved that, if Hitler, Stalin, Andrew Jackson, Lyndon Johnson and Dick Nixon weren’t sufficient to make the case. But because the folks who are so quick to collectivize the responsibility and the payback when the perps are dark-skinned or “foreign,” are just as quick not to do so when white boys are the ones committing mass murder or engaging in terrorist activities.

Bottom line: people who look different, speak a different language or practice a different religion are a lot easier to view as the “other”, the enemy, somehow cutoff from the common humanity of which we consider ourselves a part. And so we speak now of killing Arabs indiscriminately, of not differentiating between the guilty and the innocent (ironically, the precise mentality of whomever carried out last week’s attacks). But we would have said none of these things had the perpetrators been internal extremists. We would never have heard columnists calling for profiling of white men, the way that reactionary crank Ann Coulter, called for the same against Arabs and Muslims this week. Actually, she also opined that it should be the role of the United States to invade “their” countries, kill “their” leaders, and “convert them to Christianity.” If these were the words of an Imam, calling for the forced conversion of Southern Baptists to Islam, we would call them the fanatical ramblings of a jihad-happy madman. But when Coulter says it she finds mass support for her nuttiness .

And so what does that leave us with? The fact is, I don’t know. And neither do you. And why can’t we just say that, admit our frailties and uncertainties and ignorance. That we demand quick and easy answers is indicative of our cultural attachment to instant gratification.

No wonder so much of the world looks at America with contempt and at Americans as spoiled children. First, we train terrorists the world over, including bin Laden, because we had to “get the commies” at all costs, even if it meant supporting dictators and murderers. Then we support corrupt and brutal regimes that trample the rights of their citizens.

This is not to say that any of these things, no matter how irresponsible or even criminal warrant an act the likes of what we saw September 11th. But there is something to be said for understanding why no one likes you. This is no game. There is no “winner” despite the blustery rhetoric of our frat-boy-in-chief. And unless we begin to fundamentally alter the way we as a nation operate around the world, we are in for many years of violence, empty platitudes and body bags. And if that happens, it won’t merely be the fault of those who attack us from outside, but also the fault of those who are the enemies of justice inside the American empire. There will be more than enough blame to go around.

The strangest thing about the days immediately following the September 11 attack was a strange sense of unity and community that I felt, even as the nationalism and war fever also began to rage.

I talked to my 80 year old neighbor and held her hand. I talked to another neighbor, a blue collar white tough guy, and he cried openly before me. I said hi to strangers on the street and had substantive conversations with people at the grocery store. A former political rival came up and spontaneously gave me a hug. And these weren’t isolated incidents. According to radio reports, normally tough New York City felt like a small town as strangers comforted and hugged strangers on the subway. This was a feeling of community, of solidarity, of society that most of us have never experienced before.

In many ways, recent events have brought out the worst in people (racist attacks, unquestioning support for Bush, etc.) but something about this crisis also brought out something good.

It seems to me that the essence of the anarchist society we seek to build would be a spirit of community and spontaneous solidarity and caring from strangers such as some of us experienced right after the attack. We need to remember what that felt like and realize how good it felt. In a future society, these feelings of caring – wanting to take care of other people just because they are other people – wouldn’t rise out of the nationalist impulse “we’re all Americans; we’re all in this together.

Such sentiment would arise out of the realization that we’re all human beings. We’re all in this together here on this planet, and life will be much better if we can love each other and take care of people when they need help.