From our Wall of quotes:"The enemy is anybody who is going to get you killed, no matter which side he's on. "

Joseph Heller, Catch 22.

The School for violence A Conversation with Riane Eisler by Helen Knode in LA Weekly. "Riane Eisler is a macro-historian;systems and cultural-transformation theorist; international activist for peace, human rights and the environment and president of the Center for Partnership Studies. In "The Chalice and the Blade (1987), an international best-seller, she reviewed Western history in a radical new way and introduced the models of domination and partnership as two underlying possibilities for human organization...."

Check out ZMagazine for many relevant articles by Chomsky, Fisk, others.

Toward the Brink by Robert Perry at Consortium News

"History, like a person’s life, is defined by choices, some reasoned, some thoughtless, some made in anger, some based on false premises. For the past two decades or more, the United States has marked the course of its history through choices made in a fog of propaganda. At this publication, we have referred to this gap in the nation's understanding of the relevant facts as “lost history,” a tapestry of events established in scattered documents or from the testimony of participants, but largely excluded from the national debates that inform the next series of decisions and actions. This blindness to the recent past often is justified by the notion that ignoring unpleasant facts is “good for the country.” But the blind spots also prevent Americans from fully recognizing the dangers from abroad and comprehending the motives of potential enemies, a situation of sudden relevance as the U.S. prepares for war in retaliation for last Tuesday's terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. ....."

Mark Juergensmeyer, Author, "Terror and the Mind of God"

by Nick Welsh, Santa Barbara Independent.

UCSB's Religious Studies Professor Mark Juergensmeyer spent years nagivating the thought processes of international terrorists. As part of Juergensmeyer's research for his recently published book. Terror and the Mind of God, Juergensmeyer has spent hours, for example, interviewing Mahmud Aboulalima, who was convicted for his part in the 1993 conspiracy to bomb the World Trade Center. "The target is not accidental. The World Trade Center is a symbol of American economic power and from the Middle Eastern perspective, it's what supports Israel and controls politics in the region," he said, "And they're right. Even the planes -- American airplanes-- are symbols of American power."

"This isn't Pearl Harbor. This isn't some government. It's a small group of independent terrorists. Are we going to respond with our own terrorism? Certainly, it won't restore peace. It will lead to more terrorist attacks, and we'll be playing the game by their rules. If we retaliate, we certainly increase their support among the Middle Eastern and South Asian Muslim base. The best way to memorialize the thousands of people killed is to find out who, specifically, is responsible and bring them to justice."

Has Everything Changed by Michael Kinsley

..."The notion that there are days when history swings on a pivot is irresistible and, to some extent, valid. The shooting of the archduke that started World War I … the bombing of Pearl Harbor … the Kennedy assassination … Before: innocence and sun-dappled lawns. Afterward: knowledge, modernity, and darkness. Will Sept. 11, 2001, really turn out to have been one of those days? A horrible day, certainly, and—yes—a day that will live in infamy. But a day when life changed dramatically and permanently for everyone, at least in America? Maybe so, but there are adequate reasons to doubt, and excellent reasons to avoid leaping to that conclusion if it can be avoided."

Bush is Walking into a Trap by Robert Fisk. This entire article is worth the read.

"Retaliation is a trap. In a world that was supposed to have learnt that the rule of law comes above revenge, President Bush appears to be heading for the very disaster that Osama bin Laden has laid down for him. Let us have no doubts about what happened in New York and Washington last week. It was a crime against humanity. We cannot understand America's need to retaliate unless we accept this bleak, awesome fact. But this crime was perpetrated – it becomes ever clearer – to provoke the United States into just the blind, arrogant punch that the US military is preparing.

Mr bin Laden – every day his culpability becomes more apparent – has described to me how he wishes to overthrow the pro-American regime of the Middle East, starting with Saudi Arabia and moving on to Egypt, Jordan and the other Gulf states. In an Arab world sunk in corruption and dictatorships – most of them supported by the West – the only act that might bring Muslims to strike at their own leaders would be a brutal, indiscriminate assault by the United States. Mr bin Laden is unsophisticated in foreign affairs, but a close student of the art and horror of war. He knew how to fight the Russians who stayed on in Afghanistan, a Russian monster that revenged itself upon its ill-educated, courageous antagonists until, faced with war without end,the entire Soviet Union began to fall apart......"

Statement from Noam Chomsky

The terrorist attacks were major atrocities. In scale they may not reach the level of many others, for example, Clinton's bombing of the Sudan with no credible pretext, destroying half its pharmaceutical supplies and killing unknown numbers of people (no one knows, because the US blocked an inquiry at the UN and no one cares to pursue it). Not to speak of much worse cases, which easily come to mind. But that this was a horrendous crime is not in doubt. The primary victims, as usual, were working people: janitors, secretaries, firemen, etc. It is likely to prove to be a crushing blow to Palestinians and other poor and oppressed people. It is also likely to lead to harsh security controls, with many possible ramifications for undermining civil liberties and internal freedom.

The events reveal, dramatically, the foolishness of the project of "missile defense." As has been obvious all along, and pointed out repeatedly by strategic analysts, if anyone wants to cause immense damage in the US, including weapons of mass destruction, they are highly unlikely to launch a missile attack, thus guaranteeing their immediate destruction. There are innumerable easier ways that are basically unstoppable. But today's events will, very likely, be exploited to increase the pressure to develop these systems and put them into place. "Defense" is a thin cover for plans for militarization of space, and with good PR, even the flimsiest arguments will carry some weight among a frightened public.

In short, the crime is a gift to the hard jingoist right, those who hope to use force to control their domains. That is even putting aside the likely US actions, and what they will trigger -- possibly more attacks like this one, or worse. The prospects ahead are even more ominous than they appeared to be before the latest atrocities.

As to how to react, we have a choice. We can express justified horror; we can seek to understand what may have led to the crimes, which means making an effort to enter the minds of the likely perpetrators. If we choose the latter course, we can do no better, I think, than to listen to the words of Robert Fisk, whose direct knowledge and insight into affairs of the region is unmatched after many years of distinguished reporting. Describing "The wickedness and awesome cruelty of a crushed and humiliated people," he writes that "this is not the war of democracy versus terror that the world will be asked to believe in the coming days. It is also about American missiles smashing into Palestinian homes and US helicopters firing missiles into a Lebanese ambulance in 1996 and American shells crashing into a village called Qana and about a Lebanese militia - paid and uniformed by America's Israeli ally - hacking and raping and murdering their way through refugee camps." And much more. Again, we have a choice: we may try to understand, or refuse to do so, contributing to the likelihood that much worse lies ahead. "

Composite interview with Noam Chomsky compiled from various phone and other interviews, including with the Greek,Spanish and French Press, concerning the events of September 11, 2001.

"....12) Is the nation's so-called war on terrorism winnable? If yes, how? If no, then what should the Bush administration do to prevent attacks like the ones that struck New York and Washington?

I will not elaborate here, but if we want to consider this question seriously, we should recognize that in much of the world the US is regarded as a leading terrorist state, and with good reason. We might bear in mind, for example, that the US was condemned by the World Court for "unlawful use of force" (international terrorism) and then vetoed a Security Council resolution calling on all states (meaning the US) to adhere to international law. Only one of countless examples. But to keep to the narrow question -- the terrorism of others directed against us -- we know quite well how the problem should be addressed, if we want to reduce the threat rather than escalate it. When IRA bombs were set off in London,there was no call to bomb the US, the source of most of the financial support for the IRA. Rather, efforts were made to deal with what lay behind the resort to terror. When a federal building was blown up in Oklahoma City, there were calls for bombing the Middle East, and it probably would have happened if the source turned out to be there. When it was found to be a militia-based bombing, there was no call to obliterate Montana and Idaho. Rather, there was a search for the perpetrator, who was found, brought to court and sentenced, and there were efforts to understand the grievances that lie behind such crimes and to address the problems. Just about every crime -- whether a robbery in the streets or colossal atrocities -- has reasons, and commonly we find that some of them are serious and should be addressed.

That is the course one follows if the intention is to reduce the probability of further atrocities. There is another course:react with extreme violence, and expect to escalate the cycle of violence, leading to still further atrocities such as the one that is inciting the call for revenge. The dynamic is very familiar...."