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



CCCMENU CCC for 2002

The content and opinions expressed on this Web page do not necessarily reflect the views of nor are they endorsed by the University of

The content and opinions expressed on this Web page do not necessarily reflect the views of nor are they endorsed by the University of Georgia or the University System of Georgia.