I’m going into far more detail about this article than simply posting a blink because I think it’s urgently important to understanding the basis for current U.S. policy in the conflict. Blind Faith: Dubya’s official advisor on Islam, David Forte, is not Muslim, does not speak Arabic, and describes himself as a “student and not an expert”, but Dubya has adopted his line whole hog. He’s also a conservative Catholic who serves on a Vatican committee to strengthen the family and whose scholarship is in Catholic legal theory, although he has reportedly become passionate about Islamic persecution of Christians. His insistence that al Qaeda are theological heretics who take their inspiration from a “seventh-century sect of puritan thugs called the Kharijites” may be motivated by the ulterior desire to

“redeem religious orthodoxy… or, at least, cleanse it of the extremist stain. ‘Nothing this evil could be religious,’ he is fond of saying. It’s a bromide that jibes perfectly with Bush’s own unabashed fondness for religiosity of all stripes. Unfortunately, it may be wrong,”

writes political commentator Franklin Foer in The New Republic. Serious scholars of Islam scoff at his analysis as mistaken and oversimplified, and he ignores the influence of

“Wahhabism, one of modern Islam’s central movements. Emerging in eighteenth-century Arabia, Wahhabism called for a new asceticism, violently opposing decorations in Mosques and celebrations of the prophet’s birthday. And it has at times sanctioned violence against “infidels,” both outside the religion and within.

For decades the Saudi royal family has aggressively promoted Wahhabism by, among other things, financing Wahhabi religious schools throughout the Muslim world. Bin Laden was born Wahhabi, and the Taliban–who graduated from some of those Saudi-funded Wahhabi schools–have undergone a period of what Olivier Roy, an Islamologist at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, calls “Wahhabisation.” (Witness their destruction of the Bamiyan Buddha, in keeping with Wahhabi prohibitions against graven images.) You can even see traces of the sect’s influence in hijacker Mohammed Atta’s will, which requests Wahhabi burial rites. But you wouldn’t pick up any of this from Forte, who never mentions Wahhabism in his analyses. As Deeb told me, “He misses the real story.”

Perhaps that’s because, unlike the Kharijites, Wahhabis aren’t marginal. Within the United States, according to Hisham al-Kabbani, head of the Washington-based Islamic Supreme Counsel, almost 80 percent of mosques are presided over by Wahhabi Imams. The vast majority of them, of course, don’t support bin Laden. But understanding Al Qaeda’s Wahhabi roots exposes the simplicity of Forte’s distinctions between good and bad, or real and fake, fundamentalist Islam.

Understanding that bin Laden and al Qaeda are not as demonic and marginalized in the Muslim sphere as we would prefer to see them will help us understand what to expect from the Islamic world.

Contrast the trouble we’re getting ourselves into from the mistaken appeal — and influence — of a rigid failure of imagination unable to embrace relativism (if you believe the signs and symptoms and the diagnosis) with this important apologia for postmodernism by Stanley Fish, from this New York Times op-ed piece: Condemnation Without Absolutes:

During the interval between the terrorist attacks and the United States response, a reporter called to ask me if the events of Sept. 11 meant the end of postmodernist relativism. It seemed bizarre that events so serious would be linked causally with a rarefied form of academic talk. But in the days that followed, a growing number of commentators played serious variations on the same theme: that the ideas foisted upon us by postmodern intellectuals have weakened the country’s resolve. The problem, according to the critics, is that since postmodernists deny the possibility of describing matters of fact objectively, they leave us with no firm basis for either condemning the terrorist attacks or fighting back.

Not so. Postmodernism maintains only that there can be no independent standard for determining which of many rival interpretations of an event is the true one. The only thing postmodern thought argues against is the hope of justifying our response to the attacks in universal terms that would be persuasive to everyone, including our enemies. Invoking the abstract notions of justice and truth to support our cause wouldn’t be effective anyway because our adversaries lay claim to the same language. (No one declares himself to be an apostle of injustice.).

Later, he adds:

But of course it’s not really postmodernism that people are bothered by. It’s the idea that our adversaries have emerged not from some primordial darkness, but from a history that has equipped them with reasons and motives and even with a perverted version of some virtues. Bill Maher, Dinesh D’Souza and Susan Sontag have gotten into trouble by pointing out that “cowardly” is not the word to describe men who sacrifice themselves for a cause they believe in.

A BBC reporter who travelled with Taliban militia reports that they “secretly loathe their leaders and bin Laden.” ‘He’s mad, you know…’: “I spent two months in Afghanistan. I left with an overwhelming sense of humanity surviving in hardship beyond our imagination. The Taliban, although feared and loathed in equal measure, are in some ways a natural outcome of the chaos that existed in Afghanistan. But just as they have preyed on the plight of the Afghans to impose order they, too, have become easy prey for Bin Laden. He has used their homeland as a launching pad and now, like so many times before, Afghanistan is once again to become a battleground for other people’s war.” The Sunday Times of London

If war is not the answer, what is? Here’s what the Quakers (the Friends’ Committee on National Legislation, in particular) propose, with which I largely agree:

• mobilize law enforcement means of pursuing the perpetrators;
• empower the UN to intervene in states that harbor and encourage terrorists;
• preserve domestic civil liberties;
• enhance compassionate aid to the people even of offending states, and to refugees from war zones;
• resume efforts toward a just lasting peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict;
• lead a worldwide effort to reduce CBNW stockpiles and prevent their unauthorized dissemination and use;
• robust economic assistance to those who have lost jobs or income in the aftermath of the attacks.

Here’s their “grassroots toolkit” for encouraging non-military alternatives and supporting those in the US government who might take a similar stand. Here’s the FCNL’s official position paper on the U.S bombing of Afghanistan.

President Bush has said that the attacks of September 11 changed everything. Perhaps, but the thinking of our government officials and their response to violence remains unchanged. The U.S.-led military campaign is merely a high tech and more destructive version of a 19th century military strategy, and promotes the law of force over the force of law. By leading a military campaign in Afghanistan, the U.S. has fallen from its internationally recognized moral high ground to a much more morally ambiguous position in the eyes of many around the world. This response is inadequate to the demands of the 21st century and is unbecoming to America.

Noemie Emery: Look Who’s Waving the Flag Now: one of the more childish, name-calling tantrums about progressive dissent I’ve seen on an op-ed page; e.g. : “A healthy skepticism about the uses of power is always in order, but a smartass contempt for one’s country and one’s fellow citizens is something quite different. Most Democrats now get this; some students are learning. And one day, it may dawn on the chattering class.” Entitled to her opinion as she certainly is, is there any excuse for taking up column inches with such poor writing?? The Weekly Standard

“The photographs released by the Pentagon this week depicting pockmarked runways and shattered aircraft portray a successful U.S. bombing campaign in Afghanistan, but military experts warn that the carefully selected images reveal far less than meets the eye. Los Angeles Times

Private Ryan, Amnesiac: How apt are the analogies to World War II? Don’t they just act to shut off discussion and dissent? ‘The case for avoiding depth was made best, however, by Dan Rather, who was asked by David Letterman to comment on the sources of Islamic rage. The dean of American journalism dismissed the idea summarily. “Hate is hate,” he said, and then followed that up by saying, “George Bush is the president. He makes the decisions…Wherever he wants me to line up, just tell me where. And he’ll make the call.” There was no need, in other words, for journalism, for skepticism, or even for thought. The situation was that simple. Like World War II.’ Freezerbox

Thomas Friedman: Saudi Royals and Reality — ‘Attention, Prince Alwaleed: These young men came from your country, and while the Palestinian issue no doubt angers them, it does not compare to their hatred of what Mr. bin Laden called the corrupt, “hypocritical,” “hereditary” Arab regimes, starting with Saudi Arabia.’ NY Times [“FMHreader”, “FMHreader”]

Cyanide threat reportedly foiled in Europe: “Secretly recorded tapes have revealed plans by followers of Osama Bin Laden for a chemical weapon attack in Europe using a poisonous invisible gas that security sources say was cyanide.

A gang of terrorists active in Britain, Germany and Italy plotted to use tins of tomatoes to transport ‘a liquid that suffocates people’. The plan was foiled after a Libyan at the centre of the plot was arrested in Munich on Wednesday.” The Sunday Times of London

Burning question: Are Russian troops fighting in Afghanistan? “Moscow denies rumors that Russia has gone beyond intelligence, logistics support.” Christian Science Monitor

Oxfam emergencies – Crisis in Afghanistan

“They are just covering their ass…” The war on terrorism is being run by lawyers — “The United States has for some time been prepared for a war where achieving moral superiority is as important as military victory. The aim is to conduct an “ethical” war. But not quite up to programming a “smart” bomb with the appropriate theological dimension, they have settled for a very American solution: lawyers.

Every time a commander at headquarters selects a target there is a judge advocate general by his side to assess the ethical merits of the strike. This is a development in practice since the Gulf war.” Guardian UK

U.S. to Target Elite Taliban Assault Force In Next Phase: Running out of bombing targets, the U.S. will bring in helicopter gunships and special forces. Part of strategy is to “signal that the U.S. military is engaged on the ground in pursuing terrorists” Washington Post so that Dubya’s grandiose war pronouncements are not seen as the fatuous empty promises they are. Even our allies are cautious on what is being called the ‘Bush Doctrine’, whose essence is “that the United States will be the unilateral judge of whether a country is supporting terrorism, and will determine the appropriate methods, including the use of military force, to impose behavioral change.” Washington Post

“Once, I remember, we came upon a man-of-war anchored off the coast. There wasn’t even a shed there, and she was shelling the bush. . . . In the empty immensity of earth, sky, water, there she was, incomprehensible, firing into a continent.”

–Joseph Conrad, Heart of Darkness

The Puzzling Watts Towers, Restored but Not Revealed, “… like

the exclamation points at the end of an only half

articulated sentence.” NY Times [“FMHreader”, “FMHreader”]

Anthrax News:

• In Shift, Officials Look Into Possibility Anthrax Cases Have bin Laden Ties
  

  “Federal
  
  authorities say they are now investigating
  
  the possibility that followers of Osama bin Laden
  
  were behind the anthrax cases around the nation.

  This represents a significant shift in the thinking of
  
  investigators, who had earlier speculated that the
  
  initial case in Florida was an isolated criminal act
  
  unconnected with the Sept. 11 attacks.

  The shift of the investigation is based not on
  
  definitive proof but on circumstantial information drawn from cases diagnosed in recent days, like the
  
  postmarks on the letters known to contain anthrax. Each one was sent from places near where some of the
  
  terrorists involved in the Sept. 11 attacks lived or visited.” NY Times [“FMHreader”, “FMHreader”]

• On the other hand, Anthrax is reportedly easy to grow and distribute by mail.
  

  “Growing this organism is no problem,” said Norman Cheville, dean of Iowa State University’s School of Veterinary Medicine. “It grows readily. It grows overnight.”

  Until last week, the threat of anthrax had been couched largely in terms of its use as a weapon of mass destruction–and how difficult that would be…

  
  Bioterrorism experts said the use of the U.S. Postal Service to transmit lethal bacteria is significant and should trigger changes in how mail is handled. Los Angeles Times

• “The bacterium that causes anthrax is a hearty, fast-growing microbe that is relatively easy to isolate and identify from the blood and tissues of people who have fallen ill with the disease. But the bacterium can be difficult to detect at the earliest stages of exposure or infection. And some of the tests that have been drafted into use to offer speedy diagnoses during the current spate of apparent acts of bioterror were not designed for the purposes to which they are being put.” Washington Post
• 
  Here’s an official Centers for Disease Control (CDC) advisory on how to handle anthrax and other biological agent threats. And Experts Offer Advice on Handling Potentially Dangerous Mail NY Times [“FMHreader”, “FMHreader”]

• Here’s March, 2000 COngressional testimony by Dr. Stephen M. Ostroff, Associate Director for Epidemiologic Science, NCID-CDC, about the “plans for and management of the National Pharmaceutical Stockpile Program (NPSP), one component of CDC’s overall public health response to the threat of bioterrorism.” Although I’m under no illusions that the isolated psychiatric hospital south of Boston where I’m the medical director is a prime terrorist target, I’m currently investigating with my pharmacy staff what stockpiling of antibiotics we ought to do there.
• CNN reports (toward the bottom of this roundup of anthrax-related news) that “ninety offices of Planned Parenthood and at least 80 clinics of the National Abortion Federation across the United States have received envelopes containing unidentified powdery substances and letters with threatening language, according to spokesmen for the groups. Both groups support abortion rights and provide abortions in at least some of their offices.” Although it’s not exactly what I was looking for in asking the other day for links to anything about the reactions of the right wing paramilitary movement to 9-11, one would wonder if this is the response of another faction of the rabid right.
• I missed this one. A 46-year-old Ohio Aryan Nations member with a degree in microbiology who pleaded guilty last year to having fraudulently obtained cultures of bubonic plague via mail order (interestingly, from the same laboratory from which Saddam Hussein had reportedly ordered biological agents!) is one of two men detained by the FBI. Larry Wayne Harris has self-published a 131-page book that The Southern Poverty Law Center has called ‘a do-it-yourself manual for mass destruction through biological terrorism’. Although Harris says he is merely alerting the US to the Iraqi threat,
  

  in an interview with U.S. News & World Report last November, Harris said his associates in the white supremacist movement would strike at government officials with biochemical weapons, if provoked. ‘If they arrest a bunch of our guys, they get a test tube in the mail,’ he told the magazine.
  
  And he suggested that worse could come if the separatists? dreams are denied. ‘How many cities are you willing to lose before you back off? At what point do you say: “If these guys want to go off to the Northwest and have five states declared to be their own free and independent country, let them do it.” ‘ ABC

• And, not surprisingly, the Boston Globe‘s investigations reveal that lax security eases access to lethal strains. “Scores of low-security labs store the deadly bacteria with little oversight.

  For decades, anthrax lab samples moved freely among researchers and universities, from Georgia to California and around the world. Hundreds of samples were traded, copied, and mailed on. Authorities kept few tabs on the transactions, and remain unable to account for many.”

• The above is part of the answer to my curiosity about why investigators weren’t rushing to identify what strain of anthrax was used in the various attacks, whether the strains were identical, etc. Identifying the particular strain of an anthrax culture is difficult and unreliable, and doing so may not aid in a criminal investigation of the origins of an anthrax attack, as cultures of anthrax have been passed around the world freely from lab to lab.