[Nettime-bold] Media Watch 4

["Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net>]

Reuters now puts civilian death toll in Afghanistan at 76 and injured 
at about 100. Mohamed Heikal, the former foreign minister of 
Egypt, and former editor and chariman of Egyptian dail Al Ahram, 
sees no logic in the attack on Afghanistan:
  "I have seen Afghanistan, and there is not one target deserving 
the $1m that a cruise missile costs, not even the royal palace. If I 
took it at face value, I would think this is madness, so I assume 
they have a plan and this is only the first stage."

He also questions whether Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida 
network were solely responsible for the September 11 attacks, 
arguing that the limited evidence so far presented is far from 
convincing. "Bin Laden does not have the capabilities for an 
operation of this magnitude. When I hear Bush talking about al-
Qaida as if it was Nazi Germany or the communist party of the 
Soviet Union, I laugh because I know what is there. Bin Laden has 
been under surveillance for years: every telephone call was 
monitored and al-Qaida has been penetrated by American 
intelligence, Pakistani intelligence, Saudi intelligence, 
Egyptian intelligence. They could not have kept secret an operation 
that required such a degree of organisation and sophistication."

Indeed, it does make sense to believe that the US was preparing to 
strike against Al Qaeda for some time - after all Al Qaeda has been 
striking against the US for about 8 years so far, if not longer. If we 
take into the account the $43 million bribe to Taliban this Spring 
and the larger police presence in New York that I observed this 
Summer, it is conceivable that both sides were preparing the strike 
at the same time. 

The U.S., however, for political considerations, could not strike 
without a pretext. So, they had to wait for Al Qaeda to strike first. 
Still, it is improbable that the US government would allow 
destruction of WTC to provide for the reason to strike against Al 
Qaeda and its host country (Afghanistan). This is highly 
uneconomical proposition: the costs highly outweigh the benefits. 
They probably expected a truck bomb type of attack - not 
something of this scale in human atrocities and economic damage. 
The fourth plane would not be allowed to hit anything (even if the 
passengers did not manage to wrestle down attackers), because F-
16s were already over DC waiting for it. Plus, there is no 
guarantees that September 11 attack would not happen even if the 
US stroke Afghanistan during the summer - and US would be 
without global support for its action in that case.

As Bush was speaking to the youth, looking like he is slowly 
waking up from a rather bad nightmare, and hoping that when he 
opens his eyes the "evil one" would be gone, yesterday, the 
anthrax scare came to New York city. It came, conveniently, after 
it was officially admited that the 3 cases of it in Florida *were* the 
enemy act. Just as in Florida, here in New York anthrax bacterium 
happened to be found among journalists - not among farm workers 
or wool sorters - where it is more commonly found under 
circumstances without terrorist intervention. Here, it happened at 
NBC. And suspicious, but later declared clean, packages were 
received by CBS and New York Times as well. Anthrax targets 
media. The objective is to hit the media with the anthrax scare, so 
journalists become scared of their own offices.

This is a pre-emptive strike. It is as if Al Qaeda anticipated the next 
move of the US government - that would at this point try everything 
to keep Al Qaeda's side of the story out of media. The US would 
like to paint Osama to look like a loser, hoping that this is how he 
shall lose. But, even if we never see or hear anything from him, with 
anthrax repeatedly being discovered in buildings of the U.S. news 
media, Osama will make sure to stay in the news as a winner - 
keeping his enemy on tippy-toes and guessing about his new move.

Here are some useful sites on anthrax baccilum:
http://www.hopkins-biodefense.org/pages/agents/agentanthrax.html
http://www.bt.cdc.gov/Agent/Anthrax/Anthrax.asp
http://www.bact.wisc.edu/microtextbook/disease/anthrax.html

The cure for anthrax - antibiotic Ciprofloxacin - has to be 
administered in early stages of the disease, practically before the 
symptoms occur - otherwise the fatality rate is about 90% - that's 
what makes it such a good bio-terrorist weapon. Unfortunately, for 
the terrorists, the disease is not highly contagious (nothing like 
smallpox or plague or ebola for example), and both the cure and 
the vaccine exist. However, there is not enough of vaccine available 
and Cipro has side-effects: insomnia, diarrhea and rashes.

The anthrax spores are actually a good analogy for Al Qaeda 
terrorist cells - they work on the same principles. The 'societal 
Cipro' of course also has nasty side effects - certain loss of 
freedoms, militarization of society, general insomnia of population 
and general logorrhea of political leaders. And it also works best 
only if administered before symptoms occur. For example, if Bush 
tried to create the office of Homeland Security before September 
11, i.e. at the time the government started to expect the onset of 
'the terrorist disease', the towers might still stand out there, but we 
would all passionately hate Bush by now, people on streets in New 
York would walk with his pictures in Nazi uniform and his approval 
rating would (at best) be a half of what it is now. 

Here is the recent Chinese Civil Aviation Association memo - a vivid 
example of advantages that a totalitarian state posses in fighting 
terrorism:
  "The Chinese memo said tickets should not be issued to holders
     of the following passports: Afghanistan, Israel, Egypt,
     Syria,Jordan, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, United Arab Emirates, Oman,
     Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Kuwait, Sudan,
     Libya,Algeria and Pakistan. Holders of Palestinian passports
     were also barred. "

Of course, none of us would want the US to do the same. My 
impression Osama is a rich, intelligent, spoiled kid. He is used to 
be able to control the situation. He plans well in advance and 
thinks about his opponent moves and about ways how to block 
them. This is fun for him. He, perhaps, may be defeated only by a 
move that he could not possibly envision the U.S. could make. 
Something that runs completely astray of the rules, guidelines and 
policy.

Fatwahs against Osama:
You are asking "How much it would cost to get Al Khamenei to 
issue a fatwah against Osama?  
May be an easy answer is to let Iranian pistachios come freely to 
the US market , without added taxes as is today the case.  I mean 
that offering opening for business, especially small enterprise, will 
'pull the rug" (if i may use the expression) under Bin Laden.

For existing anti-Osama fatwas, check out:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1591000/1
591024.stm
PULLQUOTE:
        A leading Muslim scholar, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, issued a
        fatwa - which is an opinion of an Islamic scholar, based
        on Islamic law - immediately after the attacks, saying
        Osama Bin Laden could not call himself a Muslim.

Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi is an Egyptian-born cleric living in Qatar 
and a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood.  He has a broad following 
throughout the Muslim world, particularly among the militant youth. 
 Qaradawi's fatwa condemning Bin Laden as "not a Muslim" and 
the WTC attacks as a violation of Islamic law, was broadcast on Al 
Jazeera TV.  Curious we didn't see it on the US networks ... US 
networks act even less inspiring than the US government. Very self-
absorbed.

See:
http://www.qaradawi.net/xml/topics/index.xml
http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2001-
09/12/article25.shtml

Prosecuting Osama:
VIENNA, Friday -- The Hague Tribunal Prosecutor said this 
morning that she has proof that the Taleban and Osama Bin 
Laden's terrorist organisation Al-Qaida are active in Bosnia-
Herzegovina. Carla Del Ponte told Austria daily Die Presse that 
proof of this had been established in the course of tribunal 
investigations.
The tribunal is at present attempting to establish whether Bin 
Laden's terrorists had been smuggled into Macedonia in order to 
destabilise the situation in the country.
Del Ponte added that the tribunal could indict Bin Laden if it could 
obtain a mandate for this from the United Nations.
(comment) --> We know that Del Ponte loves to prosecute. But 
doesn't she already have a backlog of cases? Besides, I don't think 
that THe Hague should broaden its mandate. I do think, though, 
that Osama should be tried in international court (if possible) and I 
would like to see UN establish such a tribunal for global terrorism 
at the most appropriate place - in NY city where the largest act of 
global terrorism was committed; besides, that's the only way we'll 
get rid off Giuliani as a mayor - to let him prosecute Bin Laden.

Ivo Skoric

_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold