"But the bombers of Manhattan represent fascism with an Islamic face, and there's no point in any euphemism about it. What they abominate about "the west", to put it in a phrase, is not what western liberals don't like and can't defend about their own system, but what they do like about it and must defend: its emancipated women, its scientific inquiry, its separation of religion from the state. Loose talk about chickens coming home to roost is the moral equivalent of the hateful garbage emitted by Falwell and Robertson, and exhibits about the same intellectual content. Indiscriminate murder is not a judgment, even obliquely, on the victims or their way of life, or ours. Any observant follower of the prophet Mohammed could have been on one of those planes, or in one of those buildings - yes, even in the Pentagon."

The Guardian Sept 21, 2001

Christopher Hitchens

Let's not get too liberal

It was in Peshawar, on the Pakistan-Afghanistan frontier, as the Red Army was falling apart, and falling back. I badly needed a guide to get me to the Khyber Pass, and I decided that what I required was the most farouche-looking guy with the best command of English and the toughest modern automobile. Such a combination was obtainable for a price. My new friend rather wolfishly offered me a tour of the nearby British military cemetery (a well-filled site from the Victorian era) before we began. Then he slammed a cassette into the dashboard. I braced myself for the ululations of some mullah, but received instead a dose of So Far Away From Me. From under the turban and behind the beard came the gruff observation: "I thought you might like Dire Straits."

This was my induction into the now-familiar symbiosis of tribal piety with hi-tech; a symbiosis consummated on September 11 with the conversion of the southern tip of the capital of the modern world into a charred and suppurating mass grave. Not that it necessarily has to be a symbol of modernism and innovation that is targeted for immolation. As recently as this year, the same ideology employed heavy artillery to destroy the Buddha statues at Bamiyan, and the co-thinkers of Bin Laden in Egypt have been heard to express the view that the Pyramids and the Sphinx should be turned into shards as punishment for their profanely un-Islamic character.

Since my moment in Peshawar I have met this faction again. In one form or another, the people who levelled the World Trade Centre are the same people who threw acid in the faces of unveiled women in Kabul and Karachi, who maimed and eviscerated two of the translators of The Satanic Verses, and who machine-gunned architectural tourists at Luxor. Even as we worry about what they may intend for our society, we can see very plainly what they have in mind for their own: a bleak and sterile theocracy enforced by advanced techniques. Just a few months ago, the government in Bosnia surrendered its only accused war criminals to the international court at the Hague. The butchers had almost all been unwanted "volunteers" from the Chechen and Afghan and Kashmiri fronts; it is as an unapologetic defender of the Muslims of Bosnia (whose cause was generally unstained by the sorts of atrocity committed by Catholic and Orthodox Christians) that one can and must say that Bin-Ladenism poisons every thing that it touches.

I was apprehensive from the first moment about the sort of masochistic email traffic that might start circulating from the Noam Chomsky-Howard Zinn-Norman Finkelstein quarter, and I was not to be disappointed. With all due thanks to these worthy comrades, I know already that the people of Palestine and Iraq are victims of a depraved or indifferent western statecraft. And I think I can claim to have been among the first to point out that Clinton's rocketing of Khartoum - supported by most liberals - was a gross war crime, which would certainly have entitled the Sudanese government to mount reprisals under international law. (Indeed, the spectacle of contented Clintonoids on TV, applauding the "bounce in the polls" achieved by their man that time, was even more repulsive than the sight of destitute refugee children making a wretched fiesta over the nightmare on Chambers Street.) But there is no sense at all in which the events of September 11 can be held to constitute such a reprisal, either legally or morally.

It is something worse than idle to propose the very trade-offs that may have been lodged somewhere in the closed-off minds of the mass-murderers. The people of Gaza live under curfew and humiliation and expropriation. This is notorious. Very well: does anyone suppose that an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza would have forestalled the slaughter in Manhattan? It would take a moral cretin to suggest anything of the sort; the cadres of the new jihad make it very apparent that their quarrel is with Judaism and secularism on principle, not with (or not just with) Zionism. They regard the Saudi regime not as the extreme authoritarian theocracy that it is, but as something too soft and lenient. The Taliban forces viciously persecute the Shi'a minority in Afghanistan. The Muslim fanatics in Indonesia try to extirpate the infidel minorities there; civil society in Algeria is barely breathing after the fundamentalist assault. Now is as good a time as ever to revisit the history of the Crusades, or the sorry history of partition and Kashmir, or the woes of the Chechens and Kosovars.

But the bombers of Manhattan represent fascism with an Islamic face, and there's no point in any euphemism about it. What they abominate about "the west", to put it in a phrase, is not what western liberals don't like and can't defend about their own system, but what they do like about it and must defend: its emancipated women, its scientific inquiry, its separation of religion from the state. Loose talk about chickens coming home to roost is the moral equivalent of the hateful garbage emitted by Falwell and Robertson, and exhibits about the same intellectual content. Indiscriminate murder is not a judgment, even obliquely, on the victims or their way of life, or ours. Any observant follower of the prophet Mohammed could have been on one of those planes, or in one of those buildings - yes, even in the Pentagon.

The new talk is all of "human intelligence": the very faculty in which our ruling elite is most deficient. A few months ago, the Bush administration handed the Taliban a subsidy of $43m, in abject gratitude for the assistance of fundamentalism in "the war on drugs". Next up is the renewed "missile defence" fantasy, recently endorsed by even more craven Democrats who seek to occupy the void "behind the President". Idiocy can contribute no more. There is sure to be further opportunity to emphasise the failings of our supposed leaders, whose costly mantra is "national security" and who could not protect us. And yes, indeed, my guide in Peshawar was a shadow thrown by William Casey's CIA, which first connected the unstoppable Stinger missile to the infallible and inerrant Koran. But that's only one way among many of stating the obvious, which is that Islamic fascism is an enemy for life, as well as an enemy of life.

---------------------

• This article also appears in this weekend's The Nation.

Christopher Hitchens is a columnist for Vanity Fair.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), September 21, 2001

Answers

Christofer Hitchens is a reactionary, phoney "Leftist" who sold-out years ago. Why the Guardian and the Nation publish his sophistries is a mystery. No matter, Comrade Molotov will deal with him in due time.

-- (Leon Trotsky@Wobblie's.World), September 21, 2001.

-- photoshop rulz (photo@shop.com), September 21, 2001.