|
|
|
|
The hottest places in hell
are reserved for those who,
in time of great moral crisis,
maintain their neutrality.
--Dante Alighieri
|
12.14.01
I heard Linda Wertheimer on NPR yesterday interviewing Mohammed Sid Ahmed (a columnist for Al Ahram in Egypt), Najam Sethi (editor of The Friday Times in Pakistan) and Khaled Al-Maeena (editor-in-chief of Arab News in Saudi Arabia) about the bin Laden video. Mohammed Sid Ahmed made me mad.
The kind of mad where the blood rushes to your face and your pulse races and your eyesight goes a bit dizzy from the force of it.
He was arrogant, couching his comments carefully so that in the off chance that the tape was doctored or faked, he remained in the most coveted of all media positions:
"I told you so."
Mohammed Sid Ahmed:
Well, I had never discarded the possibility that bin Laden was behind the whole thing, so I'm not the sort of person that needed to be convinced in one direction or another. But, my concern is, not so much people who agree to the fact that it might have been bin Laden, but, rather, what about the people who have no interest in being convinced that it is bin Laden? I'm not sure that the tape is conclusive when it comes to those who are interested in doubting. And those constitute quite an important establishment in the Arab and Islamic world.
[The videotape is] not the entire text, it's two tapes overlapped, it's translated, the Arabic is not clearly heard, things could have been omitted and things could have been added, so that is just to show that there will be much scrutinizing of the tape in the direction to dispprove it is a conclusive argument.
It has already been charged [that is was faked] to some extent, on television, and I see other Arab televisions doing the same thing. So what I'd say is, [the tape] has taken the argument one step forward. One element, one strong element in the tape, is that it can no longer be said after this tape that bin Laden was not in the know. But he could have been in the know without being the mastermind. He could have been a figurehead, and not the mastermind.
Ah! What do you need? Videotape of bin Laden in a cockpit, parachuting to safety seconds before it hits the WTC? And thank you, Mr. Sid Ahmed, for letting us into the thought processes of "quite an important establishment in the Arab and Islamic world", while making sure to disassociate yourself from "the sort of person that needed to be convinced." You wouldn't want to take a firm stand on the issue or anything, because that might make you unpopular with bin Laden enemies and supporters, both. Best always to sit firmly in the middle in regards to all random acts of violent terrorism.
Al-Maeena stated in his interview that bin Laden's base of support is not as extensive as supposed, although he still held onto the notion that more "proof" is needed before conviction.
Whoo, I've got to stop. Am getting all angry and dizzy again. Go here to hear the interviews for yourself.
Najam Sethi, seemingly well-spoken and rational, did make one (what I hope to be language-based) gaffe:
My impression is that people who are already convinced that Osama is a rascal and a terrorist will be reaffirmed in their beliefs . . .
That wascally wabbit bin Waden! Where's Elmer Fudd when you need him?
|
|
|
|
