PLEASE NOTE:
*
CCNet 105/2002 - 11 September 2002
---------------------------------
More asteroids are there to be explored.
Those heading towards our planet we can detonate, or better,
gently deflect.
They are not gods to be adored.
They are big rocks. On courses that we can correct.
Apocalypse is a paper tiger, there to be exposed,
the cranky mother of all war.
And O the majesty of it-- if humankind collectively deposed
apocalypse from its old throne. Gently but firmly showed it
the door.
Took hold at last of our own fate.
Let us deny apocalyptic rage
that final war it so devoutly wishes to precipitate.
-- William Mullen, The Circle in the Sand
"To some extent we feel after 9/11 like we have experienced
the
flood of Noah - as if a flood has inundated our civilization and
we
are the survivors. What do we do the morning after?"
--Rabbi Tzvi Marx, The New York Times, 11 September 2002
(1) THE CIRCLE IN THE SAND
William Mullen
(2) THE WORLD REMEMBERS SEPTEMBER 11
BBC News Online, 11 September 2002
(3) THE LESSONS OF 9/11: "LET IT BE CLEAR THAT SADDAM MUST
BE DISARMED"
Prime Minister Tony Blair
(4) NOAH AND 9/11
The New York Times, 11 September 2002
(5) AMERICA'S REVENGE: TO TURN TYRANNIES INTO DEMOCRACIES
The Daily Telegraph, 11 September 2002
(6) TERROR AS A STRATEGY OF PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE
International Policy Institute for
Counter-Terrorism
(7) MAJOR DISASTER TRIGGERS POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER ALSO
IN PEOPLE
NOT DIRECTLY AFFECTED
Julia Smith <jasmith@nsf.gov>
(8) LET'S ROLL: IT'S NOT JUST AMERICA'S WAR
The National Review, 10 September 2002
======================
THE CIRCLE IN THE SAND
William Mullen
Higher and higher our science takes us, as though we were
mounting to a sacred place,
to vision where complexity coheres
as though into a state of grace.
Our guides are lofting us to ever more hyperopic spheres--
new Dantes, new Mohamets-- their lectures never ceasing to
astound.
They soar, and dominate the age.
And what of the countertorsion on the ground?
What to make of the great rage, the ever more apocalyptic rage,
cascading from the minarets
and fanning out, and with ever more training, ever more cunning,
methodically gaining access to our jets?
Well, our retort has been just stunning.
Escorted by our war jets now, our science roars and soars.
Our laptop Special Forces are astounding.
Science, as ever, thrives on wars.
And listen, again, in the reprieve won, to the doctrines that our
science is expounding.
That life is everywhere, and will always be--
keeps burgeoning, diversifying.
That order is everywhere, local order but, still, "order for
free",
evolving and coevolving, ever more complex, godlike,
entropy-defying.
Entropy is not absolute.
Give any system, however simple, a simple set of rules,
it may soon become, on its own, too random or too complex to
compute.
And we can only watch, like fools,
watch it unfold, and stand around and tell its story.
We love that sort of system. We are its fools, but fools
for love.
For its unfolding is its glory,
and we are such a system, and what unfolds is what we are the
story of.
Yes, it has all proceeded even better than planned.
But hearken now to a dark fable,
I'll style it, "Of the Sandslide and the Sand".
Take a dune on a tableland, or just a sandpile on a table.
Keep adding sand, just grain by grain.
Note how, from time to time, a single grain will cause a tiny
sandslide.
And note how, much more rarely, adding yet another grain
precipitates a major landslide.
The greater the avalanche the rarer-- we are dealing here with an
instance of 'power laws'.
And the devil is, though you know the law, you can never predict,
in a single case,
whether the extra grain will cause
an avalanche, or leave the dune in place.
It is just the same if you take a hike on the mountainside,
wherever rock yields to the boot.
How many will be carried off by the avalanche you start when you
start to slide--
your friends, yourself, a marmot? These too are matters
that you can't compute.
The same with species going under,
be it by our hands, or by some sift of cosmic dust.
Extinction is not always, let us admit, accompanied by drums and
thunder.
Nor always fast. Nor ever just.
Extinction, yes, can be entrained by a tiny error,
so tiny you would never feel a shock.
What then to make of the new terror?
We cannot build on sand. We have no choice but to build on
rock.
To start another Dome of the Rock, on another holy hill,
its base an even greater square
that, doubled under squinches by the builder's skill,
becomes an octagon, then is doubled again, and on and up in the
air,
till we lose track of the angles' sum
that, doubling forever, up and on
aspires to draw the perfect circle a dome demands for its drum.
Circle never to be drawn.
Universe never to set the seal on its revelations,
in constitution, edifice, or tome.
O sweet to dictate to the nations--
to say, "Behold, our dome is the one and only, the final
dome!"
Sweet to abandon ourselves to the endgame of a global domination,
and claim the while it is all done
in the name of being the only just, the only chosen, the only
sacred nation.
In the name of the one God. In the name of staying Number
One.
"We are the righteous, we alone!"
Sweet to dream we were lifted by lightning up to the summit,
above the stars themselves, and privileged to gaze on the very
Throne.
Height from which we can only plummet,
down to a thousandfold humiliation.
First the peace that passes understanding, then the abandonment
to rage
that stupefies imagination--
from the hours of peace we are granted to the years of war we
wage.
Enough. Nothing we do can ever arrest the angles'
multiplications,
nothing can cancel multiplicity,
no deed can sate our lust for vengeance on the enemy's
abominations,
no code restore original simplicity.
The Day of Judgement will never come.
Is anything then worth fighting for, if you're stuck here on the
ground?
I recommend another text, encompassing another drum.
You can learn there, if you look around,
the finest of all reasons to wage war.
You read there, in the sweep of the circle supporting the dome's
span,
of the enmity another swore
to EVERY FORM OF TYRANNY OVER THE MIND OF MAN.
Tyranny always waiting in the wings,
not to be rooted from man's soul.
And what then is the stubborn source from which it springs?
From where does the great terror come-- that brother of the goal
of total control?
It dates, at least, back to the Flood.
It is still there, on the ground, to be read by satellite.
Saddam Hussein,
in 1993, at Al 'Amarah, drained the marshes and left them mud--
a tactic in his long campaign
on the Marsh Arabs there-- revealing, thus, the kind of crater
hypervelocity bolide impacts print on rock.
Geologists, a few year years later,
analyzing satellite reconnaissance from south Iraq,
made out a ring-like ridge, two miles across, apparently still
fresh--
"within the last 6,000 years".
Forebears of these Marsh Arabs gave us Gilgamesh--
that tells, some say, the story of the bolide as it nears:
"Hell's Seven Judges stood on high
and raised the radiance of their torches up.
Then thunder of the rage of the God of Storm, snuffing all
radiance from the sky,
smashed the land like a big cup.
And the Flood came on like war. And the gods, abandoning
men to their fate,
regretting their deed, and in terror of it, fled and ascended to
the highest heaven."
If it hit again, scientists state,
it would constitute "the asteroid equivalent of 9/11".
Could even trigger Armageddon well before it hit
if it should chance to be misread.
With "nerves strained to the nuking point", some
anxious nation, on misreading it,
could blow some other nation up instead.
All from a cosmic grain of sand.
When you stand back, the beauty of it is just this.
These are all things that humankind can come to understand,
they need not just be hit or miss.
More asteroids are there to be explored.
Those heading towards our planet we can detonate, or better,
gently deflect.
They are not gods to be adored.
They are big rocks. On courses that we can correct.
Apocalypse is a paper tiger, there to be exposed,
the cranky mother of all war.
And O the majesty of it-- if humankind collectively deposed
apocalypse from its old throne. Gently but firmly showed it
the door.
Took hold at last of our own fate.
Let us deny apocalyptic rage
that final war it so devoutly wishes to precipitate.
Let the Book lack for a last page.
Our science is a desert kingdom, whose vast border,
a wasteland dotted with oases, fluctuates forever with the sands.
It maps the patches of sweet order,
like rain that patters here and there, on cities or on empty
lands,
inscrutable, a kind of casual blessing from above.
It lectures us on Love and Strife
in their unending cycle. How Strife is everywhere,
prodigious. And how Love,
unstoppable, keeps burgeoning with life.
--William Mullen
[I would like to acknowledge certain scientists, several of whom
I
encountered on CCNet, for material I either quoted or paraphrased
in "The
Circle in the Sand":
-- Jim Pinkerton, CCNET 7/26/02, for the phrases "nerves
strained to the
nuking point" and "the asteroidal equivalent of
9/11".
--Sharad Master, CCNET 11/16/01, on the impact site at the Al
'Amarah
marshes.
-- Stuart Kauffman, At Home in the Universe (Oxford, 1995), p. 23
for the
phrase "order for free", and pp. 28-30 for the account
of sandslides and
"self-organized criticality" (for which he acknowledges
Per Bak and Kan
Chen, "Self-Organized Criticality", Scientific
American, January 1991, pp.
46-54.
-- Stephen Wolfram, A New Kind of Science (Wolfram Publications,
2002),
passim, for development of the notion, used frequently in chaos
and
complexity theory, that "Give any system, however simple, a
simple set of
rules/ it may soon become, on its own, too random or too complex
to
compute."]
---------
William Mullen is Professor of Classical Studies at Bard College
(New York).
He is the author of several papers on neo-catastrophism.
"Catastrophe/Apocalypse", a course Bill gives every
fall at Bard College,
explores the emergent paradigm of "cenocatastrophism"
which assembles
evidence that human civilizations have been shaped by recurrent
large-scale
catastrophes
http://inside.bard.edu/specialproj/clas214/.
=========
(2) THE WORLD REMEMBERS SEPTEMBER 11
>From BBC News Online, 11 September 2002
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2250319.stm
Britain is joining nations across the world in marking the
anniversary of
the 11 September attacks on the US.
In America, President Bush will lead the nation in a day of
prayers and
remembrance for the 3,000 people who lost their lives.
Meanwhile in the UK, the Prince of Wales and Prince Harry will
join
political leaders and families of some of the 67 British victims
at St
Paul's Cathedral.
Both Britain and America are on heightened security alert amid
fears there
may be an attempt by extremists to emulate the attack.
Live missiles have been deployed in air defence systems at the
Pentagon and
around Washington.
Scotland Yard anti-terror chiefs warned that lone terrorists
could seize
upon the opportunity of a "world stage" offered by the
memorial day.
Armed roadblocks have been set up around London and security at
airports has
been stepped up.
Millions of people across the UK are expected to observe a
minute's silence
at 1346 BST - the time when the first jet hit the World Trade
Center one
year ago.
A special service was held at St Thomas Church in New York on
Tuesday to
remember the 67 British victims.
It included a message of condolence sent by the Queen and read to
the
congregation by Foreign Secretary Jack Straw.
In London, a remembrance ceremony outside the American Embassy in
Grosvenor
Square Gardens takes place at 1000 BST on Wednesday and will be
attended by
the US Ambassador, William S Farish.
Rose petal tribute
Lieutenant Frank Dwyer of the New York Police Department is to
give Home
Secretary David Blunkett a Union Jack found at Ground Zero.
At 1315 BST, Prime Minister Tony Blair and other political
leaders are
expected to be among a 2,000-strong congregation at St Paul's
Cathedral.
In a statement, Mr Blair said: "We all witnessed scenes of
unimaginable
horror.
"This week we remember those that died. Our thoughts are
also with their
families and friends who live daily with the dreadful legacy of
these
attacks.
"September 11 was, and remains, above all an immense human
tragedy."
More than 3,000 white rose petals, representing the lives lost,
are to be
released from the cathedral dome.
The start of the first minute's silence is to be marked by Lt
Dwyer lighting
a candle.
And at 1403 BST - the time when the second jet hit the South
Tower - a
second candle will be lit by leaders of British Jews, Muslims,
Hindus and
Buddhists.
Muslim service
The London Stock exchange and most of the City will observe the
silence in a
tribute to their American counterparts.
And staff at the US Air Force bases at Lakenheath and Mildenhall,
both in
Suffolk, will also mark the event.
Shops and offices are expected to stop work, while many fire
brigades intend
to park their engines in front of stations at 1346 BST.
The Islamic Society of Britain is to hold a ceremony at 1100 BST
at the
London Central Mosque.
One of the speakers, Joe Ahmed-Dobson, said it was important to
distance the
Muslim faith from the perpetrators of the attacks in the US.
A 45-minute service of remembrance is to be held at St Giles's
Cathedral in
Edinburgh, followed by a debate in the Scottish Parliament on the
country's
links with the US.
A plaque is being unveiled in Hayle, Cornwall - the hometown of
Briton Rick
Rescorla, 62, who was head of security for Morgan Stanley Dean
Witter.
He helped 2,700 people to evacuate the South Tower before
perishing when it
collapsed.
Up to 350 British police officers are to attend a service at
Ground Zero
after spending Tuesday on the beat in New York to show solidarity
to their
US colleagues.
In Russia, hundreds attended a special concert in the Grand Hall
of the
Moscow Conservatory of Music.
Authorities closed US embassies in Indonesia, Malaysia, Cambodia
and New
Zealand after terror fears.
Copyright 2002, BBC
=============
(3) THE LESSONS OF 9/11: "LET IT BE CLEAR THAT SADDAM MUST
BE DISARMED"
Excerpts from Prime Minister Tony Blair's keynote address to the
Trades
Union Congress in Blackpool (10 September 2002)
BBC News Online, 10 September 2002
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2249312.stm
On September 11 last year, with the world still reeling from the
shock of
events, it came together to demand action. But suppose I had come
last year
on the same day as this year - September 10.
Suppose I had said to you there is a terrorist network called
al-Qaeda.
It operates out of Afghanistan. It has carried out several
attacks and we
believe it is planning more. It has been condemned by the UN in
the
strongest terms. Unless it is stopped, the threat will grow. And
so I want
to take action to prevent that.
Your response and probably that of most people would have been
very similar
to the response of some of you yesterday on Iraq. There would
have been few
takers for dealing with it and probably none for taking military
action of
any description.
So let me tell you why I say Saddam Hussein is a threat that has
to be dealt
with.
He has twice before started wars of aggression. Over one million
people died
in them.
When the weapons inspectors were evicted from Iraq in 1998 there
were still
enough chemical and biological weapons remaining to devastate the
entire
Gulf region.
I sometimes think that there is a kind of word fatigue about
chemical and
biological weapons. We're not talking about some mild variants of
everyday
chemicals, but anthrax, sarin and mustard gas - weapons that can
cause hurt
and agony on a mass scale beyond the comprehension of most decent
people.
Uniquely Saddam has used these weapons against his own people,
the Iraqi
Kurds. Scores of towns and villages were attacked. Iraqi military
officials
dressed in full protection gear were used to witness the attacks
and visited
later to assess the damage.
Wounded civilians were normally shot on the scene. In one attack
alone, on
the city of Halabja, it is estimated that 5,000 were murdered and
9,000
wounded in this way.
All in all in the north around 100,000 Kurds died, according to
Amnesty
International.
In the destruction of the marshlands in southern Iraq, around
200,000 people
were forcibly removed. Many died.
Saddam has a nuclear weapons programme too, denied for years,
that was only
disrupted after inspectors went in to disrupt it.
He is in breach of 23 outstanding UN obligations requiring him to
admit
inspectors and to disarm.
People say "but containment has worked". Only up to a
point. In truth,
sanctions are eroding. He now gets around $3 billion through
illicit trading
every year. It is unaccounted for, but almost certainly used for
his weapons
programmes.
Every day this year and for years, British and American pilots
risk their
lives to police the no fly zones. But it can't go on forever. For
years when
the weapons inspectors were in Iraq, Saddam lied, concealed,
obstructed and
harassed them.
For the last four years there have been no inspections, no
monitoring,
despite constant pleas and months of negotiating with the UN. In
July, Kofi
Annan ended his personal involvement in talks because of Iraqi
intransigence.
Meanwhile Iraq's people are oppressed and kept in poverty. With
the Taleban
gone, Saddam is unrivalled as the world's worst regime: brutal,
dictatorial,
with a wretched human rights record.
Given that history, I say to you: to allow him to use the weapons
he has or
get the weapons he wants, would be an act of gross
irresponsibility and we
should not countenance it.
Up to this point, I believe many here in this hall would agree.
The question
is: how to proceed?
I totally understand the concerns of people about precipitate
military
action. Military action should only ever be a last resort. On the
four major
occasions that I have authorised it as prime minister, it has
been when no
other option remained.
I believe it is right to deal with Saddam through the United
Nations. After
all, it is the will of the UN he is flouting. He, not me or
George Bush, is
in breach of UN Resolutions. If the challenge to us is to work
with the UN,
we will respond to it.
But if we do so, then the challenge to all in the UN is this: the
UN must be
the way to resolve the threat from Saddam not avoid it.
Let it be clear that he must be disarmed. Let it be clear that
there can be
no more conditions, no more games, no more prevaricating, no more
undermining of the UN's authority.
And let it be clear that should the will of the UN be ignored,
action will
follow.
Diplomacy is vital, but when dealing with dictators - and none in
the world
is worse than Saddam - diplomacy has to be backed by the certain
knowledge
in the dictator's mind that behind the diplomacy is the
possibility of force
being used.
Because I say to you in all earnestness, if we do not deal with
the threat
from this international outlaw and his barbaric regime, it may
not erupt and
engulf us this month or next; perhaps not even this year or the
next. But it
will at some point.
And I do not want it on my conscience that we knew the threat,
saw it coming
and did nothing.
I know this is not what some people want to hear. But I ask you
only this:
to listen to the case I will be developing over the coming weeks
and reflect
on it.
=============
(4) NOAH AND 9/11
>From The New York Times, 11 September 2002
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/11/opinion/11FRIE.html
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Over the past year several friends have remarked to me how much
they still
feel a pit in their stomachs from 9/11. One even said she felt as
if this
was the beginning of the end of the world. And no wonder. Those
suicide
hijackings were such an evil act that they shattered your faith
in human
beings and in the wall of civilization that was supposed to
constrain the
worst in human behavior. There is now a big jagged hole in that
wall.
What to do? For guidance, I turned to one of my mentors, Rabbi
Tzvi Marx,
who teaches in the Netherlands. He offered me a biblical analogy.
"To some
extent," said Tzvi, "we feel after 9/11 like we have
experienced the flood
of Noah - as if a flood has inundated our civilization and we are
the
survivors. What do we do the morning after?"
The story of Noah has a lot to offer. "What was the first
thing Noah did
when the flood waters receded and he got off the ark?" asked
Tzvi. "He
planted a vine, made wine and got drunk." Noah's first
response to the
flood's devastation of humanity, and the challenge he now faced,
was to numb
himself to the world.
"But what was God's reaction to the flood?" asked Tzvi.
"Just the opposite.
God's reaction was to offer Noah a more detailed set of rules for
mankind to
live by - rules which we now call the Noahite laws. His first
rule was that
life is precious, so man should not murder man." (These
Noahite laws were
later expanded to include prohibitions against idolatry,
adultery, blasphemy
and theft.)
It's interesting - you would have thought that after wiping out
humanity
with a devastating flood, God's first post-flood act wouldn't
have been to
teach that all life is precious. But it was. Said Tzvi: "It
is as though God
said, `Now I understand what I'm up against with these humans. I
need to set
for them some very clear boundaries of behavior, with some very
clear values
and norms, that they can internalize.' "
And that is where the analogy with today begins. After the deluge
of 9/11 we
have two choices: We can numb ourselves to the world, and plug
our ears, or
we can try to repair that jagged hole in the wall of civilization
by
insisting, more firmly and loudly than ever, on rules and norms -
both for
ourselves and for others.
"God, after the flood, refused to let Noah and his offspring
indulge
themselves in escapism," said Tzvi, "but he also
refused to give them
license to live without moral boundaries, just because humankind
up to that
point had failed."
The same applies to us. Yes, we must kill the murderers of 9/11,
but without
becoming murderers and without simply indulging ourselves. We
must defend
ourselves - without throwing out civil liberties at home, without
barring
every Muslim student from this country, without forgetting what a
huge
shadow a powerful America casts over the world and how it can
leave people
feeling powerless, and without telling the world we're going to
do whatever
we want because there has been a flood and now all bets are off.
Because imposing norms and rules on ourselves gives us the
credibility to
demand them from others. It gives us the credibility to demand
the rule of
law, religious tolerance, consensual government, self-criticism,
pluralism,
women's rights and respect for the notion that my grievance,
however deep,
does not entitle me to do anything to anyone anywhere.
It gives us the credibility to say to the Muslim world: Where
have you been
since 9/11? Where are your voices of reason? You humbly open all
your
prayers in the name of a God of mercy and compassion. But when
members of
your faith, acting in the name of Islam, murdered Americans or
committed
suicide against "infidels," your press extolled them as
martyrs and your
spiritual leaders were largely silent. Other than a few ritual
condemnations, they offered no outcry in their mosques; they drew
no new
moral red lines in their schools. That's a problem, because if
there isn't a
struggle within Islam - over norms and values - there is going to
be a
struggle between Islam and us.
In short, numbing ourselves to the post-9/11 realities will not
work.
Military operations, while necessary, are not sufficient.
Building higher
walls may feel comforting, but in today's interconnected world
they're an
illusion. Our only hope is that people will be restrained by
internal walls
- norms and values. Visibly imposing them on ourselves, and
loudly demanding
them from others, is the only viable survival strategy for our
shrinking
planet.
Otherwise, start building an ark.
Copyright 2002, The New York Times
==============
(5) AMERICA'S REVENGE: TO TURN TYRANNIES INTO DEMOCRACIES
>From The Daily Telegraph, 11 September 2002
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2002/09/11/do1101.xml&sSheet=/portal/2002/09/11/por_right.html
By Michael Ledeen
Those who said that America - and perhaps even the world at large
- would
never be the same after September 11 turn out to have been right
only in
part. American legislators have not found any anthrax in their
recent mail,
and so some of them, encouraged by recent remarks from officials
of previous
administrations, wonder openly whether further combat in the
Middle East is
even necessary.
They are insisting not only that President George W Bush provide
them with a
convincing bill of particulars regarding Saddam Hussein, but also
that they
approve any future action. This despite their full endorsement of
such
action on September 14 last.
In short, business as usual. Some other things have certainly
changed. The
pre-September 11 George W Bush was a relatively colourless
figure,
uncomfortable with international affairs and, despite his strong
religious
faith, largely bereft of what his father famously referred to as
"the vision
thing". The post-September 11 President is decisive, fully
engaged in his
mission, and quite eloquent on the war against terrorism, with an
economy of
language that we have not heard from a president since Truman.
Similarly, Donald Rumsfeld, the Defence Secretary, who had been
tagged as
the cabinet member least likely to succeed, has become a matinee
idol. Colin
Powell, the Secretary of State, may score higher in the polls,
but nobody
races to the television to watch his press conferences; they do
Rumsfeld's.
The transformation began immediately after the first aircraft hit
the World
Trade Centre, and Mr Rumsfeld told his staff: "I've been
around for a while,
and, believe me, this is not the last one we'll see today."
The greatest change has come among the American people
themselves. Americans
are the first people in history to believe that peace is the
normal
condition of mankind, but this reassuring conviction was
effectively
shattered, for this generation at least, on September 11.
Americans now
believe, with Machiavelli, that there are many people who are
more inclined
to do evil than to do good, and the only way to deal with them is
to
dominate them. They hope and believe that Saddam will not be the
last
terrorist tyrant to fall at their hands.
Americans are traditionally in a great hurry, but they have shown
great
patience with this president. They recognise that the war will be
long and
they trust that they have somehow struck lucky with their leader
at a moment
of peril. Recent drops in the President's popularity suggest that
the
people's patience may be wearing a bit thin, but now it seems
that action is
imminent and they will soon find out if Mr Bush is up to this
challenge.
The Americans may have been patient so far, but, as General
Patton once
reminded his troops, Americans can't stand a loser. Yet it is
hard to
imagine America will lose. So long as the people are convinced
they are well
led, and the war goes well, they will support it. One has a
tendency to
forget that, in the Second World War, it took nearly two years
after Pearl
Harbor before decisive victories were achieved, yet the American
people did
not waver.
Americans are not fond of realpolitik; they are a people of
crusades and
spasms. They almost never fight limited wars for limited
objectives (most
Americans now believe the 1991 Gulf war was excessively limited);
as Ronald
Reagan said, the country is too great to have small ambitions.
Few have
noticed that President Bush has in fact outlined a war of vast
dimensions.
Lurking behind the awkward phrase "regime change" is a
vision of a war to
destroy the Middle Eastern tyrannies and replace them with freer
societies,
as was done in Japan and Germany after the Second World War.
Early on after the September 11 attack, it was widely said that
America
would have to fight a new kind of war, conducted in large part in
the
shadows, with covert instruments and secret warriors. In the
event, it turns
out to be a very traditional sort of war, because they have found
that the
common denominator of their enemies is tyranny.
The states that undergird the terror network are Iran, Iraq,
Syria and Saudi
Arabia. They do not share ethnicity (Iranians are not Arabs) or
even
religious conviction (both Saddam and the Assad family in Syria
came to
power as secular socialists), but they are all petty tyrants. And
the most
lethal weapon against them is the people they oppress.
The Iranians demonstrate almost ceaselessly against the
mullahcracy in
Teheran; in recent days, there has been street fighting in
Isfahan,
political demonstrations in Teheran, and the petroleum pipeline
has been
shut down in Tabriz. Student leaders have called for a nationwide
demonstration today, a clear sign of the Iranian people's desire
for
freedom.
The Iraqis were willing to risk everything in the final weeks of
the Gulf
war, and the unreliability of Saddam's armies is well known. If
Iranians and
Iraqis are freed, the Syrian dictatorship cannot possibly
survive, and the
Saudi royal family would have to choose between shutting down its
worldwide
network of radical Wahhabi mosques or facing the same destiny as
the others.
A war on such a scale has hardly been mentioned by commentators
and
politicians, yet it is implicit in everything President Bush has
said and
done. He has directed the creation of an Iraqi
government-in-exile that is
committed to democracy, and he has promised the Iranian people
that America
will support them in their desire for freedom. He has recognised
that
democracy is essential for peace between Palestinians and
Israelis, and that
requirement surely extends throughout the entire region.
In one of those delightful paradoxes in which history so
delights, America's
enemies sought to destroy it on September 11, only to find their
own
survival at mortal risk. And all those who said the world would
never be the
same, thinking that America had been fundamentally shaken and
demoralised,
will soon find that, instead, America's enemies will be the
subject of
revolutionary change at its hands.
The author is a Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise
Institute and
the author of The War Against the Terror Masters (St Martin's
Press)
© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2002
===============
(6) TERROR AS A STRATEGY OF PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE
>From the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism
http://www.ict.org.il
by Boaz Ganor
ICT Executive Director
The modern terrorist differs from the common criminal in that he
is
motivated by a political agenda. The actions of the
terrorist-murder,
sabotage, blackmail-may be identical to those of the common
criminal.
However, for the terrorist, these are all means to achieve wider
goals,
whether ideological, religious, social or economic. The way to
the
terrorist's ultimate political goal runs through a vital interim
objective-the creation of an unremitting paralyzing sensation of
fear in the
target community. Thus, modern terrorism is a means of instilling
in every
individual the feeling that the next terror attack may have his
name on it.
Terrorism works to undermine the sense of security and to disrupt
everyday
life so as to harm the target country's ability to function. The
goal of
this strategy is, in turn, to drive public opinion to pressure
decision-makers to surrender to the terrorists' demands. Thus the
target
population becomes a tool in the hands of the terrorist in
advancing the
political agenda in the name of which the terrorism is
perpetrated.
Terrorists are not necessarily interested in the deaths of three,
or
thirty-or even of three thousand-people. Rather, they allow the
imagination
of the target population to do their work for them. In fact, it
is
conceivable that the terrorists could attain their aims without
carrying out
a single attack; the desired panic could be produced by the
continuous
broadcast of threats and declarations-by radio and TV interviews,
videos and
all the familiar methods of psychological warfare.
Modern terrorism, in defiance of the norms and laws of combat,
focuses its
attacks on civilians, thus turning the home front into the
frontline. The
civilian population is not only an easy target for the terrorist,
but also
an effective one; the randomness of the attack contributes to the
general
anxiety. The message is: anyone, anywhere, at any time, may be
the target of
the next attack. This threat undermines the ability of the
civilian
population to live a normal life. When every action must involve
planning
for how to survive a potential terror attack at a random time and
place, the
daily routine becomes fraught with anxiety.
A "conventional" terror attack usually has a fairly
limited physical effect.
Its effectiveness lies in its ability to get the terrorists'
message across.
These messages are intended for three different audiences. To the
terrorist
organization's supporters, and the population which it purports
to serve,
the message is: "We have succeeded. We have neutralized the
power of the
enemy and hit them at their most sensitive point." The
attack thus serves to
strengthen this public's support of the terror organization, to
encourage
enlistment to their ranks and, in general, to raise the morale of
this
community.
To the community targeted by the terror attack, the opposite
message is
sent: Despite all your defenses-your army, your policy force,
your military
hardware-you are never safe from us. Once civilians feel unsafe
in their own
homes and workplaces, daily life is disrupted, causing
considerable harm to personal and national morale. The message
is: until you
accede to our demands, you will not be safe.
At the same time, the terror attacks sends still a third message
to
international public opinion. To the rest of the world, the
terrorists
present the attack as an example of their determination to
achieve their
political aims by any means and at any cost. The terror attack is
intended
to draw the attention of international public opinion to the
conflict and
the terrorists' demands. A more sinister message is concealed in
this show
of determination: "You, the countries uninvolved
in the conflict, must put pressure on our enemies to give us what
we want.
Otherwise you might be next."
Classifying fear
The terrorists' primary aim is to create fear within the target
population,
with the intention that this fear is translated into pressure on
the
government to accede to the terrorists' demands in order to stave
off
further terror attacks. The success of this strategy is dependent
on the
degree to which the fear of attack can be magnified out of all
proportion to
the actual danger. The fear engendered in a population living in
the shadow
of terrorism has two components-a rational component and an
irrational component.
The rational fear is simply a product of the possibility of
meeting a violent death as a
result of a terror attack, with the degree of anxiety being
proportional to the actual
likelihood of the event occurring. In a society experiencing a
large number
of attacks, such anxiety is natural. However, there is also a
more insidious
element-an "irrational" anxiety-a fear that bears no
relation to the actual
statistical probability of ones being killed or injured in a
terror attack,
or even of a terror attack taking place at all.
It is this irrational anxiety that is the interim goal of the
terrorist
organization, and the means by which it exerts pressure on the
target
population. By magnifying the threat-making it seem that violent
death lies
around every corner-the terrorists hope to amplify the victim's
anxiety to the point where he looses a sense of proportion.
Terrorism is
psychological warfare pure and simple. It aims to isolate the
individual
from the group, to break up a society into so many frightened
individuals,
hiding in their homes and unable to go about their daily
lives as citizens, employees, and family members. Further the
terrorist aims
to undermine the individual's belief in the collective values of
his
society, by amplifying the potential threat to the extent that
security
appears to outweigh all other political concerns. Terrorism uses
the
victim's own imagination against him.
Terrorist use of psychological manipulation
Modern terror organizations invest much time and effort, as well
as
extensive resources into methods of psychological warfare. They
carefully
observer their target population to find weaknesses and cracks in
the
society which can be widened or exploited. The terrorists study
the target
country's media to learn how best to get their threats across and
how to
magnify the fears of the population and stimulate or amplify
criticism of
the government and its policies. Dissenting views in the society
are
carefully collected and used to undermine the population's
beliefs in the rightness of its own ways. The terror organization
knows from
the outset that it will not achieve its goals purely by means of
terror
attacks. It must enlist the help of its victims themselves in
gaining its
objectives. A victory that would be impossible by military
means is thus brought within reach through a protracted, gnawing
campaign of
psychological warfare-a war of attrition that gradually erodes
the target
population's will to fight and turns the tables against the
stronger power.
Personalizing the attack
One of the most telling examples of such a policy in action is
the effect
that a terror attack has on members of the target population not
directly
hit by the attack. This influence- the "personalization of
the attack"-can
be seen immediately after a terror attack on a busy street
or crowded shopping center. The immediate reaction of most people
upon
hearing of the attack is: "I was there only last week!"
or "my wife works on
the next block," or "my aunt lives just down the
street." People have a
natural tendency to seek a personal connection to events - a
tendency of
which the terrorist organization is well aware. By such
"personalizing" of
terror attacks, the effect on the target population is made to
extend beyond
the immediate victims to include people who weren't even in the
area at the
time of the attack. The message conveyed-even though totally
unfounded-is
nevertheless highly dangerous. Members of the target population
come to
believe that only by a coincidence were they or someone dear to
them, saved
from harm, and that such a coincidence cannot be counted upon
next time.
Of course, statistically these fears have no connection to
reality. The
likelihood of being harmed in a terror attack is fless than the
likelihood
of being harmed in a traffic accident or even an accident in the
home or
workplace. In fact, the chances of dying of serious illness are
much greater
than the chances of being even lightly injured in a terror
attack.
Nonetheless, by using psychological manipulation, the terrorists
succeed in
creating disproportionate anxiety in relation to the actual
threat-a kind of
irrational panic. While the physical damage caused by terrorism
may be
statistically less than that of traffic accidents or other
mishaps, the
atmosphere created by a terrorist act casts a greatly magnified
shadow over
society, far in excess of its statistical risk to the individual.
Terrorists' use of the media
Governments and policies have foundered under the influence of
terrorism.
The ability of a small group of individuals to manipulate public
opinion,
and thus the highest policies of the land, is what makes
terrorism a
strategic threat to Israel and other democratic societies.
An example of terrorist organizations' understanding of the
psychological
ramifications of its deeds can be seen in the way in which the
Hamas
organization uses the media in Israel. After any Israeli military
operation
against the organization, Hamas spokesman can be counted on to
declare via
the news media that, because of this operation, Hamas will now
carry out a
series of attacks in retaliation. "Our organization has ten
suicide bombers
standing by to retaliate," the spokesman declares in ominous
tones. But what is the
real significance of such threats? Does he mean that had the
military not acted against the
organization, all Hamas terrorism would cease? And when he speaks
of ten
suicide bombings, does this mean ten attacks in the next few
hours, or the
next week, or the next three years? And after these ten attacks,
will the
organization suddenly cease attacks, or will it merely use a
different
excuse for the eleventh attack.
Despite the threat's lack of significance, it serves to arouse
anxiety
during the calm periods between attacks. What's more, it plays on
the fears
of the target population, which, after the first attack will be
inclined to
think to itself, "Oh no! There are still nine more attacks
like this to
come!"
Sometimes the terror organizations will exploit fears raised by a
successful
attack, upon learning that the attack had some special, and
unintended,
significance to the target population. Most of the victims of the
June 2001
bombing at Tel-Aviv's Dolphinarium discotheque were teenaged new
immigrants
from Russia. Upon learning of this, Hamas attempted to exploit
the fears of
new immigrants by claiming that the attack was intended from the
start to
target this particular group and that henceforth, they would
focus their
attacks on new immigrants. Their aim was clear: to create panic
within the
new immigrant population, and thereby harm immigration to Israel
and to
encourage emigration out of Israel.
Toward a comprehensive counter-terrorism policy
Decision-makers and security personnel in countries affected by
terrorism,
not to mention as members of the media, often appear to be
woefully ignorant
of the psychological manipulations used by terrorist
organizations. These
people all too often play into the hands of the
terrorists, helping to increase the effectiveness of the
terrorists'
psychological campaign. The media often grants the terrorists a
platform to
publicize their views and psychological manipulations, not on by
the
coverage of the attack itself, but also in airing interviews with
terrorists themselves and videotapes made by them.
Decision-makers publicly
make reference to baseless threats made by the terrorists, thus
granting
them a credibility that they would not otherwise have. All of
this naturally
increases the public's anxiety. In addition, security personnel
sometimes
choose to publish vague intelligence warnings of impending
attacks, even
where such publicity does not add to public security. This
increases the
level of anxiety and contributes to a feeling of insecurity and
confusion
amongst the public, who have no idea how to act in the light of
these
warnings.
Those tasked with dealing with terrorism must examine their
methods of
coping from the point of view of terrorism's psychological
effect, and not
just with a view to countering the physical threat. Otherwise
they risk
winning the battle-succeeding in detecting and foiling a specific
attack-while losing the war. When terrorism succeeds in creating
such
anxiety within a society that daily life becomes impossible, then
that
society has lost the war against terrorism.
The population that must live under the threat of terrorism can,
and is
entitled to, receive aid and instruction to enable it to reduce
the
"irrational" anxiety caused by terrorism. It is the
responsibility of the
State to provide its citizens with the tools and information
necessary to
counter the terrorist's manipulation. And this can only be done
through
education, arming the population with knowledge in order to
prevent the
strategic damage of modern terrorism. This must be based on
comprehensive
research on the goals of the terrorists and the psychological
manipulations
used by them to achieve these goals. On the basis of this
information, tools
can be developed to neutralize these manipulations.
The target community must be taught to view media coverage of
terrorist
attacks with a critical eye, to avoid falling for terrorist
manipulation.
Individuals must be taught to recognize the moment when the
manner in which
they relate to terrorism changed-the instant when
"rational" fear became
"irrational" anxiety. At this stage, the instruction
should give the
individual psychological tools to enable him to lower the level
of his
personal "irrational" anxiety on his own. As a rule,
members of a targeted
population mush constantly ask themselves:
how do the terrorists expect me to behave in the light of their
attacks? Am
I willing to play the part that they have assigned to me in their
terrorism
strategy?
The role of the media
The media need not be a tool in the hands of the terrorist
organization. On
the contrary, it can play a crucial role in neutralizing the
psychological
damage of terrorism. In a democratic society, the media's role is
to provide
reliable information in real time. However, they must be wary of
their
natural tendency to amplify the horror of a terror attack, and
thus serve as
a platform for the terrorists. The media should avoid taking
close-ups
whilst a terror attack is taking place and they should downplay
expressions
of extreme fear and panic in the heat of the moment. Above all,
they should
avoid broadcasting tapes made by terror organizations and
interviews with
individual terrorists.
In a democratic society there is no place for censorship, even on
such a
problematic and sensitive issue. However, even though the
journalist must
remain professional, he must also be aware of his responsibility
as a member
of his society, and avoid being used as a tool by the
terrorists to attain their political aims.
The role of the government
Psychological victory and the ensuing changes in public policy
are the
primary strategic goals of terrorist groups. This manipulation of
governments through public opinion is especially dangerous to
democracies.
Thus, the decision-makers and politicians have a responsibility
to their
constituencies to help neutralize the effects of terrorist
manipulation.
Among other things, decision-makers can help by allocating the
necessary
funds for educational and instructional activities within the
target
community. In addition, they must be careful not to intensify the
fear of
terror attacks, by using the attacks as a tool in inter-party
political
struggles.
Above all, decision-makers must recognize the strategic
psychological damage
which could be caused by a policy of counter terrorism that does
not take
into account the physiological influence of terror attacks-on the
morale of
the nation's citizens, as well as on the terrorist groups
supporters and
activists.
A terror attack is not an end in itself, but only a means to an
end. Those
faced with countering terrorism have at least as thorough an
understanding
of the terrorists and their methods as the terrorist has of his
target
society. Often, the knowledge that one is being manipulated-and
how this is
being done-is itself a powerful weapon for countering such
manipulation.
Copyright 2002, Institute for Counter-Terrorism
=============
(7) MAJOR DISASTER TRIGGERS POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER ALSO
IN PEOPLE
NOT DIRECTLY AFFECTED
>From Julia Smith <jasmith@nsf.gov>
September 10, 2002
NSF PR 02-71
Media contact:
Bill Noxon
(703) 292-8070
wnoxon@nsf.gov
Program contact:
Steven Breckler
(703) 292-8728
sbreckle@nsf.gov
PEOPLE WHO "GAVE UP" AFTER 9/11 MORE LIKELY TO REMAIN
DISTRESSED
The Sept. 11 attacks of 2001 left a lingering psychological
impact on the
nation according to new research published in the Sept. 11 issue
of the
Journal of the American Medical Association
(JAMA). While 17 percent of the U.S. population living outside
New York City
reported symptoms of posttraumatic stress two months following
the attacks,
6 percent continued to report symptoms six months afterward.
A National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded study led by Roxane
Cohen Silver,
professor of psychology and social behavior at the University of
California,
Irvine, was unusual because it followed people who were already
taking part in an
Internet survey panel when the Sept. 11 attacks occurred.
Therefore, their
mental and physical health histories were known prior to
the tragedy. The study, Silver explains, provides new insights
into how
mental health workers can help people who have experienced
trauma, and
dispels a number of myths about who might be most affected
by such an
event.
"This investigation demonstrates that the effects of a major
national trauma
are not limited to those directly affected by it, and the degree
of response
cannot be predicted simply by objective measures of exposure to,
or loss
from, the trauma," Silver said. "It shows that early
disengagement from
coping efforts (such as 'giving up,' distracting oneself, or
refusing to
believe what happened) predicts poor psychological outcomes over
time." Her
paper for JAMA, "A Nationwide Longitudinal Study of
Psychological Responses
to September 11," was co-authored by researchers in her
department, E. Alison
Holman, Michael Poulin, and Virginia Gil-Rivas, as well as Daniel
McIntosh, a
psychology professor at the University of Denver.
"Overall, our data show that six months after the events of
9/11, the
effects continued throughout the country among individuals who
were, for the
most part, not directly affected by
the attacks," Silver said.
The paper was based on a national random sample of Americans
participating
in an Internet-based survey. Respondents were questioned about
distress and
posttraumatic stress symptoms during the first two weeks, two
months and six
months after the attacks. A total of 933 people participated in
the first
and second rounds of the survey, and 787 of those participated in
the third
round.
"Posttraumatic stress symptoms, while declining over the six
months, still
remained elevated. Moreover, individuals continued to have
substantial
anxiety about future terrorist attacks personally affecting
themselves or those
close to them," the authors write. Those individuals who had
preexisting mental
or physical health difficulties or had greater exposure to the
attacks (including watching them on "live" TV) were
more likely to show
continued stress symptoms over time.
"We believe it is important for health care professionals to
recognize that
potentially disturbing levels of trauma-related symptoms can be
present in a
substantial portion of individuals who are not directly exposed
to a trauma,
particularly when the trauma is a massive national tragedy such
as the 9/11
attacks," Silver added. "However, rather than
considering these symptoms as
evidence of psychiatric 'disorders' per se, their presence is
likely to
represent a normal response to an abnormal event."
-NSF-
=============
(8) LET'S ROLL: IT'S NOT JUST AMERICA'S WAR
>From The National Review, 10 September 2002
http://www.nationalreview.com/cohen/cohen091002.asp
The first anniversary of the 9/11 attack is a fitting time to
take stock of
where America is and where we want to go. We are going to defeat
those who
hate our freedom, our tolerance, our way of life, our faith in
equality and
opportunity. This vision is shared by hundreds of millions of
people across
the planet. This is not just America's war. We are not alone.
In this war, Western ideology, not just America, is our enemy's
target.
Regardless of what appeasers, isolationists, and anti-globalists
may say,
America is going to accomplish this together with others who are
under
attack - regardless of what fanatics, haters, and their fellow
travelers may
do.
We went through battles like this twice during the 20th century.
Both the
Nazis and the Communists were enemies of freedom. Our struggle
was lengthy,
but we prevailed because we knew that the safety of the U.S. and
its allies
rested on our ability to stand up to our enemies.
The militant ideology of radical Islam does not distinguish
between
Washington and Paris, or between London and Rome. Failing to
recognize our
commonality and act in concert will only strengthen our enemy.
The cost will
be high, for our enemy is ruthless, as the families of those who
perished in
the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, as well as the families
of those
who were murdered in Pakistan, Caspiisk, and Tel-Aviv can tell
you.
This battle too will require the destruction of our enemy - their
manpower,
their infrastructure, their sources of funding, and their refuges
in states
or regimes that harbor them. It will also require neutralizing
the
ideological infrastructure that supports them - the religious
schools
(madrassas), the radical mullahs, the venom-spewing,
government-controlled
mosques and the media.
Our resolve is as strong today as it was one year ago: We will
protect
ourselves - and the world - from future attacks, and ultimately
defeat the
attackers. America cannot and will not sit still. And those who
value
freedom - freedom for men and women, freedom of religion, freedom
of
political expression, freedom of movement, and freedom of
economic activity,
will join us.
Yet, senior experts and high-level politicians in Europe have
repeatedly
said that this is "not our war. It is America's War. We were
not attacked."
These Europeans criticize the U.S. response, objecting to
America's
unilateralism, America's Texan bravado.
What these Europeans forget is that al Qaeda planned to crash
planes into
the Eiffel Tower, the houses of the British parliament, and other
targets in
Europe. They plotted the assassination of the Pope. And they used
the
infrastructure in London and Hamburg, as well as safe houses in
Spain and
elsewhere in Europe to pursue their goals. Clearly, it is not
just America
under attack. This vicious strain of radical Islam does not
discriminate in
its hatred. We are all at risk.
Russian analysts also levy similar complaints, and go on to
accuse the U.S.
of nefarious motives. They claim that "our" war is
about oil, about a new
sphere of influence for the U.S. in the Middle East and Central
Asia, about
deterring China.
The U.S. already can buy all of the oil it needs: from the Middle
East, from
Latin America, from Africa, from Russia, and from the Caspian.
Critics
forget that U.S. imports most of its foreign oil from Canada,
Venezuela,
Mexico, and other non-Arab OPEC states. Less than one-third of
U.S.
petroleum imports are coming from the Persian Gulf. If anything,
al Qaeda,
in its attempt to sweep through the Arab world and change the
regimes in
Saudi Arabia and elsewhere, is the true party in pursuit of oil.
And with
that oil cash flow, bin Laden could inflict damage on the U.S.
and our
allies on a previously unimaginable scale.
As for those who claim that the U.S. desires to form a sphere of
influence
in Central Asia I ask, "What is there to influence?"
There is no oil in
Kyrgyzstan - the oil is thousands of kilometers to the East - in
the
Caspian. If the U.S. wanted military bases to protect potential
oil flows,
it should have put one on the Absheron peninsula in the Caspian,
not in
Manas, Kyrgyzstan, and not in Tajikistan. And as for China, it is
just too
far away. The Chinese military is concentrated in the
southeastern regions
facing Taiwan and the South China Sea - not exactly a stone's
throw away
from Kyrgyzstan.
The fact is, that the U.S., Russia, and Europe are cooperating in
fighting
terrorism. Achievements have been made in resupplying the
Northern Alliance,
bringing peace to Afghanistan, tracking terrorist infrastructure.
Much more
needs to be done, however: A recent U.N. report found that
efforts to stop
al Qaeda funding have stalled and the organization is still armed
and
dangerous.
But more needs to be done. The United States should expect
European and
Russian support in the United Nations to take weapons of mass
destruction
out of Saddam's hands. And greater efforts are needed to stop the
venomous
preaching of jihad, of wanton violence against innocent
civilians.
Terrorism is violence against non-combatants to achieve political
goals. It
is as barbaric as cannibalism and human sacrifice used to be. It
must not be
tolerated. Together, we can stop it.
- Ariel Cohen is research fellow at the Heritage Foundation in
Washington,
D.C.
Copyright 2002, The New Republic
--------------------------------------------------------------------
CCNet is a scholarly electronic network. To
subscribe/unsubscribe, please
contact the moderator Benny J Peiser < b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk
>. Information
circulated on this network is for scholarly and educational use
only. The
attached information may not be copied or reproduced
for any other purposes without prior permission of the copyright
holders.
The fully indexed archive of the CCNet, from February 1997 on,
can be found
at http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/cccmenu.html.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions,
beliefs and viewpoints expressed in the articles and texts and in
other
CCNet contributions do not necessarily reflect the opinions,
beliefs and
viewpoints of the moderator of this network.
*
HOPE OUT OF DESPAIR: NEW YORK AND LIVERPOOL TO BE TWINNED
---------------------------------------------------------
"It is estimated that, in the 100 years from 1840, more than
9m
people left Liverpool for New York, making homes in the five
boroughs
of Manhattan, the Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens and Staten Island. They
were
bonded as one in their desire to cast off the old ways and to
reach
together in faith for a new beginning, free from fear and hunger
and
persecution. Yes, it was a dream, the biggest the world had ever
known.
And it has given the great Atlantic cities of Liverpool and New
York a
common heritage, which matured into a culture of history, humour
and song
that can never be broken.
Both were havens for the dispossessed. Both gave those
dispossessed
people a place in the world and a sense of belonging. And the
people from
the two ports, who had seen so much, became tough, proud,
quick-tongued,
at once cynical and sentimental. This set them aside from the
mainstream
of their countries, making them entertaining, a little arrogant
maybe,
defiant, wary of authority; and always conscious of what went
before, those
memories left in the lands of their ancestors. To be a New Yorker
or to be
a Liverpudlian is to be different. Perhaps their citizens have
more
in common with each other than they do with their fellow
countrymen."
-- David Charters, Daily Post, 11 September 2002
ATLANTIC OVERTURE
>From Daily Post, 11 September 2002
http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0100regionalnews/page.cfm?objectid=12189439&method=full&siteid=50061
On the first anniversary of the September 11 attacks, David
Charters pays
tribute to the two great cities of the Atlantic, New York and
Liverpool,
linked forever by history, music, fine buildings and the promise
of tomorrow
By David Charters, Daily Post
THE dream came first, scattering its seeds across the cobbled
quays of the
growing port. And the seeds were the people from many lands,
separated by
their gods, their costumes and their languages.
But they were bonded as one in their desire to cast off the old
ways and to
reach together in faith for a new beginning, free from fear and
hunger and
persecution.
Yes, it was a dream, the biggest the world had ever known.
And it has given the great Atlantic cities of Liverpool and New
York a
common heritage, which matured into a culture of history, humour
and song
that can never be broken.
Both were havens for the dispossessed. Both gave those
dispossessed people a
place in the world and a sense of belonging. And the people from
the two
ports, who had seen so much, became tough, proud, quick-tongued,
at once
cynical and sentimental. This set them aside from the mainstream
of their
countries, making them entertaining, a little arrogant maybe,
defiant, wary
of authority; and always conscious of what went before, those
memories left
in the lands of their ancestors.
To be a New Yorker or to be a Liverpudlian is to be different.
Perhaps their
citizens have more in common with each other than they do with
their fellow
countrymen.
So today, when the world remembers those who died in the attacks
on the
World Trade Center, emotions distilled in an ancestral
understanding, as
well as natural affection and sympathy, will cross 3,500 miles of
turbulent
ocean from Liverpool to New York.
Since that deed of evil, the links have been even stronger.
Our firefighters have joined their brothers in New York at the
site of
Ground Zero, linking arms over the place where it happened and
where nothing
is left, except the spirit of the people.
The mood of our tourists, going to see the Statue of Liberty, the
Empire
State Buildings, Carnegie Hall and the Lincoln Center, is a
little more
sombre these days, respecting the feelings of a people who have
demonstrated
an almost British resilience in the face of adversity.
And when they come here, contemplating their past, to see the
cathedrals,
the haunts of the Beatles and the grand old buildings, they know
they are
being greeted by friends.
These are the people whose ancestors knew the smell of the fruit
in crates
on the waterfront, whose hands were burned by the same ropes
secured to the
stages at either end of the great voyage.
Now these ties established in friendship are to be made official.
Mike
Storey, leader of Liverpool City Council, said yesterday that
arrangements
are being made for the cities to be formally twinned. All 8m New
Yorkers are
also to be given the freedom of Liverpool. A date for the
ceremony is to be
announced.
In the telephone directory, the names of people from distant
lands are
listed in alphabetical order - Isaacs, Jones, Karpinski, McNair,
Mohamed,
Offerman, O'Reilly, Rodriguez, Rossi, Weinberg, Woo.
Their forebears came to Liverpool and New York with hope in an
ideal. Many
settled in our city, moving from the cellars and lodging houses
on the
Mersey waterfront.
Others awaited a Yankee clipper, or in later years a steam ship,
to carry
them to the promised land. It is estimated that, in the 100 years
from 1840,
more than 9m people left Liverpool for New York, making homes in
the five
boroughs of Manhattan, the Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens and Staten
Island.
Manhattan Island had been bought in 1626 from the native
Americans by the
Dutch West India Company, which founded New Amsterdam. Thirty
eight years
later, the British took the colony, renaming it New York. So
began the
modern history of a city, inextricably linked to Liverpool.
It took about six weeks for a sailing craft to cross the ocean,
if the
weather permitted. The advent of steam changed that.
Cunard's first ship, the paddle steamer Britannia, made her
maiden voyage on
July 4, 1840. With a service speed of nine knots, she carried 115
passengers
to Halifax, Nova Scotia, in 12 days. She took another 46 hours to
reach
Boston. By the end of the decade, Cunard was making regular trips
to New
York.
Many on board were fleeing disasters and persecution - the Irish
potato
famine of the 1840s, the pogroms which swept Russia and Poland in
the 1880s,
crop failures and war.
To mark the USA's centenary in 1876, France gave them the Statue
of Liberty.
To the Jewish poet Emma Lazarus, this great copper woman with the
torch,
standing 300 ft over New York harbour, was the Mother of Exiles.
In 1883, she wrote The New Colossus, which was inscribed on the
statue:
Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send those, the homeless, the tempest-tossed to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.
Ellis Island acted as the main US immigration centre from 1892 to
1943, at
its height processing 1m people annually.
During the last century, sailors returned to Liverpool with
stories of New
York's irrepressible drive, its invention, its charm, its crazy
cosmopolitan
nature. This was the city of Scott Fitzgerald and his Jazz Age
flappers,
Lorenz Hart, George and Ira Gershwin and Damon Runyon, whose
characters
brought glamour and humour to the underworld.
Among those growing up in this atmosphere were Ida and Israel
Bernstein, who
had left Lukshivka, a village near Kiev.
They adopted Sid Bernstein. Now he is the revered impresario and
writer from
East 72nd Street and one of Liverpool's cultural ambassadors.
As the man who introduced the Beatles to New York in 1964, he
crosses the
ocean regularly, loving both cities in equal measure. To him,
both are home.
Sid had been brought up with the sounds from the big shows and
then the
Brill Building in Broadway, home of Tin Pan Alley. There, in tiny
cubicles,
Carole King, Neil Sedaka, ..TEXT: Leiber and Stoller, Doc Pomus
and others,
composed the songs sung by a generation.
But New York's golden age of pop, epitomised by the extraordinary
har-monies
of the Four Seasons, quailed before the British invasion led by
the Beatles.
In February, 1964, thousands of girls greeted them at the John F.
Kennedy
International Airport.
The cities were joined in celebration of a common culture. Today,
they are
united in sorrow. The people of Liverpool, who suffered terrible
losses in
the bombing of war, reach to the New Yorkers, who suffered their
grievous
loss in a time of peace.
Mike Storey said: "There is a blood link, a link of life
between the two
cities. And September 11 has brought us closer. The thoughts of
our people
go to those of New York."
Chris Leahey, an accountant, his wife, Margaret, and their three
young
children, are friends of the Storeys. They moved to New York from
Liverpool
two years ago.
Their new city was selected by the terrorists as a symbol of
Western
capitalism and greed. But, to the Leaheys, it has become a warm
and friendly
home, quite different from its popular image on TV.
As in the history of all things, there is joy and there is
tragedy.
On December 8, 1980, John Lennon was shot dead by Mark Chapman
outside the
Dakota Building, where he lived with Yoko and their son, Sean.
To his memory, the Strawberry Fields garden was opened in Central
Park, New
York. Visitors from both cities, and the rest of the world, lay
flowers by
the oak tree planted there.
But Sid Bernstein, 84, always pronounced Bernsteen in Liverpool
and New
York, has happier memories of the former Beatle.
"You see he lived on West 72nd Street, where the Dakota is,
and I live on
East 72nd Street, just across the park," said Sid. "So
we would meet once in
a while just by accident on Columbus Avenue. We would always say
a very warm
hello. In fact, there was one occasion when he introduced me to
Yoko. She
said, 'John, how many times are you going to introduce me to
Sid?'.
"Sometimes we would meet when he was with his little boy. He
liked New York,
John Lennon. But I like Liverpool. There is a spirit and love
there which I
am very attached to."
To some, the defiance of the New Yorkers has been an inspiring
example.
David Balmer and John Cash, both Wallasey firefighters, policemen
Andrew
Davies and Alan Landrun, security guard Graham Farrell and the
former New
York firefighter Ron Schancke, were treated like heroes when they
went to
the USA to raise money for relatives of the 343 brothers in the
New York
Fire Department who lost their lives.
They walked the 286 miles from the Pentagon in Washington DC to
Ground Zero,
raising £26,000 for the fund. Ron, who left the USA nine years
ago, is now a
Merseyside ambulance technician.
A cross fashioned from the final girder removed from Ground Zero
is being
collected by Frank Proctor, the 52-year-old boss of the Many
Happy Returns
Travel agency in Ainsdale.
The 12-inch stretch of iron belonged to Stephen Vendola, an
employee of the
New York Port Authority which owned the World Trade Center. He
rented a
holiday villa in Orlando, Florida, owned by Frank's brother,
Kevin.
Kevin, 38, a BT manager in Liverpool, said: "I would have
conversations with
Stephen and his family after September 11, telling them that the
people over
here were thinking about the people of New York."
As a result, Stephen, a father of four, had the cross delivered
to the
villa, where it is being collected by Frank. "The final
girder was like an
icon in America, symbolising September 11," said Kevin.
"Stephen and some of
his colleagues were given parts of the girder. He had his welded
into the
cross. "
The brothers' cousin, Father Gerry Proctor, of St Margaret Mary's
church, is
going to bless it.
Today our cities, for centuries washed by the same waters, will
be as one in
a spirit of remembrance.
Copyright © Trinity Mirror Plc 2002