Posted November 23, 2002

Mongols as Crusaders?

Regarding Vijay Venkataraman's letter of November 18:

OBL's mention of a Mongol Khan who sacked Baghdad in 1258 is indeed noteworthy. But Hulagu Khan, heir to Ghenghis and Il Khan of the Mongol hordes, was hardly a "crusader."

First of all, while a wife of his may have been Nestorian, those who claim Hulagu's wife held influence over the Khan ought to read up on cultural practices of Mongol hordes, especially the role and position of women. Moreover, Crusaders were Catholics, not Nestorians. Nestorians were a persecuted Christian sect, whose relationship with the Crusaders mostly involved being slaughtered because they "looked like Saracens".

There is also no historical foundation to attribute the Mongol invasion of Muslim lands to some hidden agenda. As many Muslims will point out, the Dar-al-Islam of that time was far richer and more civilized than Europe. That made it a natural target for Hulagu's hordes.

Hulagu himself converted to Islam later in life. See the attached link for more information:

http://www.bartleby.com/65/hu/HulaguKh.html

The Crusades were a major event in medieval Middle East history, but let's face it: the Muslims won. Those same Mamelukes who defeated the Mongol invaders proceeded to destroy the Christian kingdoms by 1291. It wasn't Christians who broke the power of the Caliphate, but invaders from farther East, ones who did not care about Christianity or Islam one way or another.

~ Nebojsa Malic

Homeland Security Department

Regarding "The Homeland Security Monstrosity" by Rep. Ron Paul:

Thank you for saying what so desperately needs to be said about the "Homeland Security Department". I am amazed to see how little the press has to say about this almost unfathomingly large new department. It wouldn't be "liberal bias" to merely point out that this department gives unprecedented power to the President and the Federal government. That they have virtually nothing to say about that, even in an objective manner, is a sorry indictment of the press.

Another, equally large, question is where is the Democratic Party on this issue? Without the give and take of an adversarial relationship between the political parties, democracy is rendered somewhat laughable.

I don't think I've ever been so sad to witness what my country was doing as I am currently. I was taught that it was wrong for the Soviet Union to spy on its own citizens. I never dreamed that my own country would do the same thing, with the willing complicity of an uninformed citizenry, no less.

In opposing this disgusting piece of legislation, you may be a lone voice in the Congress, but history teaches us that lone voices have been right on many occasions. Please keep up the fight for democracy and freedom.

~ Bob P.

Still Monstrous

Regarding "The Homeland Security Monstrosity" by Rep. Ron Paul:

Rep. Paul's commentary warns that "organizational problems" from consolidating the armed services into a single Defense Department lasted for "more than 40 years." To make his point even more effectively, he might have mentioned that even now, a decade after the supposed resolution of those problems, the Pentagon is still monstrous enough to lose track of $2.3 trillion in taxpayer funding.

~ Dan K.

Already at War

Regarding "War Party Stalled" by Justin Raimondo:

We are already at war! For several months, US and Turkish troops have been fighting to capture the Kirkuk and Mosul regions, where the oil is and where the Kirkuk-Ceyhan pipeline flows to Turkey. Also, US planes have been bombing Iraq consistently for several weeks. Sooner or later Bush will have to break the news that he has got us into a war and decided to tell us after the fact.

~ Diane S.

Antiwar Conservatives

Regarding "Prospects For Conservatives" by Russell Kirk:

Although I am ... a progressive, I believe it is crucial to build a united front in the face of this proposed war and as such we must come together to welcome, embrace and allow all voices expressed, liberals and conservatives alike. Progressives and Libertarians, liberals and conservatives who oppose war should join in common unity. Though I may be on the Left, I strongly encourage and welcome my conservative friends into the antiwar movement.

Antiwar sentiment is expected from the Left and so the powers that be know how to deal with it, but antiwar sentiment from the Right is an old concept with new viewpoints and as such, presents a much greater problem for the neo-conservative pro-war people. Our collective strength will be greatly enhanced if we promote, encourage and bolster an antiwar, united front movement that spans ideological viewpoints.

To build that united front, we need not nor should we attempt to convince others of our ideological perspectives and opinions, rather we should accept their ideological opinions as valid and useful to the debate, allow them the flexibility of deciding on their own, allow them to retain their political opinions, and embrace them as welcome participants in the antiwar fold.

Antiwar.com is a wonderful site for both those on the right and those on the left to rally against the war, enjoy articles from a variety of perspectives and allow persons of different ideological viewpoints to learn about each other and their respective viewpoints. Balancing the diversity of our ideological viewpoints does bring stability to our nation and stability increases the likelihood for continued peace. We should cherish the knowledge earned from exploring and exchanging our ideological differences while standing together against a needless war.

~ Eric E. Johansson, Ex-US Army Paratrooper and Grunt, Veterans for Peace, Chapter 69, San Francisco, California

Debka

Tell me, why don't I find Debka File listed among your vast list of resources? ...

~ George B.

Managing Editor Eric Garris replies:

We do not consider Debka to be a credible news source. Although they sometimes have stories that turn out to be true, they are mostly a source of Israeli-government-fed disinformation.