Reply
Sat 30 Oct, 2004 06:07 am
The following is excerpts from an Atlantic Monthly article. It is premium content - ie I have to be a subscriber to get to it - and copyright laws do not allow me just to copy it to here - but I will try to give you a flavour of it (in case I am wrong, and you can access it without being a subscriber, here is the url:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200409/cullison ).
Inside Al-Qaeda's Hard Drive
Budget squabbles, baby pictures, office rivalries?and the path to 9/11
by Alan Cullison
In the autumn of 2001 I was one of scores of journalists who ventured into northern Afghanistan to write about the U.S.-assisted war against the Taliban............
.......When the Taliban's defenses crumbled, in November of 2001, I joined a handful of malnourished correspondents who rushed into Kabul and filed stories about the city's liberation. We pounced like so many famished crows on the first Western staples we had seen since leaving home: peanut butter, pasteurized milk, and canned vegetables, all of which we found on Chicken Street, Kabul's version of a shopping district. We raided the houses where Arab members of al-Qaeda had been holed up during their stay in Afghanistan, grabbing whatever documents were left in their file cabinets. But unlike most correspondents, I needed to spend some time getting to know Kabul's computer dealers, because I wanted to replace my laptop. It took about an hour to shake hands with all of them.......
........The second dealer told me that he had serviced computers belonging to the Taliban and to Arabs in al-Qaeda. I forgot about my own computer problems and hired him to search for these computers. Eventually he led me to a semiliterate jewelry salesman with wide-set eyes and a penchant for gold chains. This was the man who that December would take $1,100 from me in exchange for two of al-Qaeda's most valuable computers - a 40-gigabyte IBM desktop and a Compaq laptop. He had stolen them from al-Qaeda's central office in Kabul on November 12, the night before the city fell to the Northern Alliance. He wanted the money, he said, so that he could travel to the United States and meet some American girls.......
...........On the night before Kabul fell, Taliban officials were fleeing the city in trucks teetering with their personal effects. The looter who sold me the computers figured that al-Qaeda had fled as well, so he crawled over a brick wall surrounding the house that served as the group's office. Finding nobody inside, he took the two computers, which he had discovered in a room on the building's second floor. On the door of the room, he said, was the name of Muhammad Atef'al-Qaeda's military commander and a key planner of 9/11. Each day, he said, Atef would walk into the office carrying the laptop in its black case. The looter knew he had something good. ...........
......Thinking that the computers might hold information about future attacks, my editors called the U.S. Central Command, which sent three CIA agents to my hotel room in Kabul. They said they needed the computers immediately; I had time to copy only the desktop computer before handing them both over. Atef's laptop was returned to me two months later, by an agent named Bert, at a curbside in Washington, D.C. The CIA said that the drive had been almost empty, but I've always wondered if this was true.......
The desktop computer, it turned out, had been used mostly by Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden's top deputy. It contained nearly a thousand text documents, dating back to 1997........
.....What emerged was an astonishing inside look at the day-to-day world of al-Qaeda, as managed by its top strategic planners - among them bin Laden, al-Zawahiri, Atef, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, and Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, all of whom were intimately involved in the planning of 9/11, and some of whom (bin Laden and al-Zawahiri) are still at large. .....
...............Perhaps one of the most important insights to emerge from the computer is that 9/11 sprang not so much from al-Qaeda's strengths as from its weaknesses. The computer did not reveal any links to Iraq or any other deep-pocketed government; amid the group's penury the members fell to bitter infighting. The blow against the United States was meant to put an end to the internal rivalries, which are manifest in vitriolic memos between Kabul and cells abroad. Al-Qaeda's leaders worried about a military response from the United States, but in such a response they spied opportunity: they had fought the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, and they fondly remembered that war as a galvanizing experience, an event that roused the indifferent of the Arab world to fight and win against a technologically superior Western infidel. The jihadis expected the United States, like the Soviet Union, to be a clumsy opponent. Afghanistan would again become a slowly filling graveyard for the imperial ambitions of a superpower.
Like the early Russian anarchists who wrote some of the most persuasive tracts on the uses of terror, al-Qaeda understood that its attacks would not lead to a quick collapse of the great powers. Rather, its aim was to tempt the powers to strike back in a way that would create sympathy for the terrorists. Al-Qaeda has so far gained little from the ground war in Afghanistan; the conflict in Iraq, closer to the center of the Arab world, is potentially more fruitful. As Arab resentment against the United States spreads, al-Qaeda may look less like a tightly knit terror group and more like a mass movement. And as the group develops synergy in working with other groups branded by the United States as enemies (in Iraq, the Israeli-occupied territories, Kashmir, the Mindanao Peninsula, and Chechnya, to name a few places), one wonders if the United States is indeed playing the role written for it on the computer.........
(Some emails)
.....To: Al-Qaeda Members in Yemen
From: Tariq Anwar
Folder: Outgoing Mail?To Yemen
Date: April 1998
I send you my greetings from beyond the swamps to your country, where there is progress and civilization ? You should excuse us for not calling. There are many reasons, the most important of which is the difficulty of calling from this country. We have to go to the city, which involves a number of stages. The first stage involves arranging for a car (as we don't have a car). Of course, we are bound by the time the car is leaving, regardless of the time we want to leave. The second stage involves waiting for the car (we wait for the car, and it may be hours late or arrive before the agreed time). The next stage is the trip itself, when we sit like sardines in a can. Most of the time I have 1/8 of a chair, and the road is very bad. After all this suffering, the last stage is reaching a humble government communication office. Most of the time there is some kind of failure?- either the power is off, the lines out of order, or the neighboring country [through which the connection is made] does not reply. Only in rare cases can we make problem-free calls ?
The Arabs' general contempt for the backwardness of Afghanistan was not lost on the Taliban, whose leaders grew annoyed with Osama bin Laden's focus on public relations and the media. Letters found on the computer reveal that relations between the Arabs and the Taliban had grown so tense that many feared the Taliban leader, Mullah Muhammad Omar, would expel the Arabs from the country. A dialogue to resolve the two sides' differences was carried on at the highest levels, as the memo below, from two Syrian operatives, demonstrates. ("Abu Abdullah" is a code name for bin Laden; "Leader of the Faithful" refers to Mullah Omar, in his hoped-for capacity as the head of a new Islamic emirate, based in Afghanistan.)
To: Osama bin Laden
From: Abu Mosab al-Suri and Abu Khalid al-Suri
Via: Ayman al-Zawahiri
Folder: Incoming Mail?From Afghanistan
Date: July 19, 1999
Noble brother Abu Abdullah,
Peace upon you, and God's mercy and blessings.
This message [concerns] the problem between you
and the Leader of the Faithful ?
The results of this crisis can be felt even here in Kabul and other places. Talk about closing down the camps has spread. Discontent with the Arabs has become clear. Whispers between the Taliban with some of our non-Arab brothers has become customary. In short, our brother Abu Abdullah's latest troublemaking with the Taliban and the Leader of the Faithful jeopardizes the Arabs, and the Arab presence, today in all of Afghanistan, for no good reason. It provides a ripe opportunity for all adversaries, including America, the West, the Jews, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, the Mas'ud-Dostum alliance, etc., to serve the Arabs a blow that could end up causing their most faithful allies to kick them out ? Our brother [bin Laden] will help our enemies reach their goal free of charge! ?
The strangest thing I have heard so far is Abu Abdullah's saying that he wouldn't listen to the Leader of the Faithful when he asked him to stop giving interviews ? I think our brother [bin Laden] has caught the disease of screens, flashes, fans, and applause ?
The only solution out of this dilemma is what a number of knowledgeable and experienced people have agreed upon ?
Abu Abdullah should go to the Leader of the Faithful with some of his brothers and tell them that ? the Leader of the Faithful was right when he asked you to refrain from interviews, announcements, and media encounters, and that you will help the Taliban as much as you can in their battle, until they achieve control over Afghanistan. ? You should apologize for any inconvenience or pressure you have caused ? and commit to the wishes and orders of the Leader of the Faithful on matters that concern his circumstances here ?
The Leader of the Faithful, who should be obeyed where he reigns, is Muhammad Omar, not Osama bin Laden. Osama bin Laden and his companions are only guests seeking refuge and have to adhere to the terms laid out by the person who provided it for them. This is legitimate and logical........
..........From: Unknown
Folder: Outgoing Mail
Date: September 26, 1998
Dear highly respected _______
?I present this to you as your humble brother ? concerning the preparation of the lawful study that I am doing on the killing of civilians. This is a very sensitive case?as you know?especially these days ?
It is very important that you provide your opinion of this matter, which has been forced upon us as an essential issue in the course and ideology of the Muslim movement ?
[Our] questions are:
1- Since you are the representative of the Islamic Jihad group, what is your lawful stand on the killing of civilians, specifically when women and children are included? And please explain the legitimate law concerning those who are deliberately killed.
2- According to your law, how can you justify the killing of innocent victims because of a claim of oppression?
3- What is your stand concerning a group that supports the killing of civilians, including women and children?
With our prayers, wishing you success and stability............
.........To: Muhammad Atef
From: Ayman al-Zawahiri
Folder: Outgoing Mail? To Muhammad Atef
Date: April 15, 1999
I have read the majority of the book [an unnamed volume, probably on biological and chemical weapons] ? [It] is undoubtedly useful. It emphasizes a number of important facts, such as:
a) The enemy started thinking about these weapons before WWI. Despite their extreme danger, we only became aware of them when the enemy drew our attention to them by repeatedly expressing concerns that they can be produced simply with easily available materials ?
b) The destructive power of these weapons is no less than that of nuclear weapons.
c) A germ attack is often detected days after it occurs, which raises the number of victims.
d) Defense against such weapons is very difficult, particularly if large quantities are used ?
I would like to emphasize what we previously discussed?that looking for a specialist is the fastest, safest, and cheapest way [to embark on a biological- and chemical-weapons program]. Simultaneously, we should conduct a search on our own ? Along these lines, the book guided me to a number of references that I am attaching. Perhaps you can find someone to obtain them ?
The letter goes on to cite mid-twentieth-century articles from, among other sources, Science, The Journal of Immunology, and The New England Journal of Medicine, and lists the names of such books as Tomorrow's Weapons (1964), Peace or Pestilence (1949), and Chemical Warfare (1921).
Al-Zawahiri and Atef appear to have settled on the development of a chemical weapon as the most feasible option available to them. Their exchanges on the computer show that they hired Medhat Mursi al-Sayed, an expert to whom they refer as Abu Khabab, to assist them. They also drew up rudimentary architectural plans for their laboratory and devised a scheme to create a charitable foundation to serve as a front for the operation. According to other sources, Abu Khabab gassed some stray dogs at a testing field in eastern Afghanistan, but there is no indication that al-Qaeda ever developed a chemical weapon it could deploy..........
(Life in any office - even a global secret conspiracy, sucks)
......To: Ezzat (real name unknown)
From: Ayman al-Zawahiri
Folder: Outgoing Mail?To Yemen
Date: February 11, 1999
Noble brother Ezzat ?
Following are my comments on the summary accounting I received:
? With all due respect, this is not an accounting. It's a summary accounting. For example, you didn't write any dates, and many of the items are vague.
The analysis of the summary shows the following:
1- You received a total of $22,301. Of course, you didn't mention the period over which this sum was received. Our activities only benefited from a negligible portion of the money. This means that you received and distributed the money as you please ?
2- Salaries amounted to $10,085?45 percent of the money. I had told you in my fax ? that we've been receiving only half salaries for five months. What is your reaction or response to this?
3- Loans amounted to $2,190. Why did you give out loans? Didn't I give clear orders to Muhammad Saleh to ? refer any loan requests to me? We have already had long discussions on this topic ?
4- Why have guesthouse expenses amounted to $1,573 when only Yunis is there, and he can be accommodated without the need for a guesthouse?
5- Why did you buy a new fax for $470? Where are the two old faxes? Did you get permission before buying a new fax under such circumstances?
6- Please explain the cell-phone invoice amounting to $756 (2,800 riyals) when you have mentioned communication expenses of $300.
7- Why are you renovating the computer? Have I been informed of this?
8- General expenses you mentioned amounted to $235. Can you explain what you mean? ?
To: Ayman al-Zawahiri
From: Ezzat
Folder: Incoming Mail?From Yemen
Date: February 17, 1999
Kind brother Nur al-Din [al-Zawahiri]:
? We don't have any guesthouses. We have bachelor houses, and the offices are there too. We called it a guesthouse hypothetically, and we don't have any bachelors except Basil and Youssef. And Abd al-Kareem lives at his work place.
If I buy a fax and we have two old ones, that would be wanton or mad.
Communication expenses were $300 before we started using the mobile phone?and all these calls were to discuss the crises of Ashraf and Dawoud and Kareem and Ali and Ali Misarra and Abu Basel and others, in compliance with the orders.
Renovating our computer doesn't mean buying a new one but making sure that adjustments are made to suit Abdullah's [bin Laden's] work. There were many technical problems with the computer. These matters do not need approval.
There are articles for purchase that are difficult to keep track of, so we have put them under the title of general expenses ?
The first step for me to implement in taking your advice is to resign from ? any relationship whatsoever between me and your Emirate. Consider me a political refugee ? ............
(Company mergers are hard)
THE MERGER
l-Qaeda's relationship with the Taliban, though strained at times, grew cozier as the attacks on New York and Washington approached. Mullah Omar was enraged at the U.S. missile strikes on Khost, Afghanistan, in 1998?strikes that were made in retaliation for bin Laden's African-embassy bombings that year. Bin Laden, meanwhile, kept after the Taliban leader with a campaign of flattery. He hailed Mullah Omar as Islam's new caliph (a lofty title not used since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire) and talked of Afghanistan as the kernel of what would become a sprawling and pure Islamic state that would embrace Central Asia and beyond. By 2001, some said, bin Laden had become a confidant of Mullah Omar, helping him to understand the outside world. He encouraged the Taliban leader to destroy the ancient Bamiyan Buddhas and sent him a congratulatory note afterward.
To: Mullah Omar
From: Osama bin Laden
Folder: Publications
Date: April 11, 2001
? I pray to God?after having granted you success in destroying the dead, deaf, and mute false gods?that He will grant you success in destroying the living false gods, the ones that talk and listen. God knows that those [gods] pose more danger to Islam and monotheism than the dead false gods. Among the most important such false gods in our time is the United Nations, which has become a new religion that is worshipped to the exclusion of God. The prophets of this religion are present in the UN General Assembly ? The UN imposes all sorts of penalties on all those who contradict its religion. It issues documents and statements that openly contradict Islamic belief, such as the International Declaration for Human Rights, considering all religions are equal, and considering that the destruction of the statues constitutes a crime ?
Meanwhile, Ayman al-Zawahiri rallied the support of other jihadis, especially in his militant group Islamic Jihad, which eventually became the largest component of al-Qaeda. Those jihadis from Egypt had been suspicious of him because of his close ties to bin Laden, whom they considered a publicity hound. In the summer of 1999 they ousted al-Zawahiri as the leader of Islamic Jihad and replaced him with a veteran, Tharwat Shehata, who wanted to limit the relationship with bin Laden and concentrate the group's fight against Egypt, not America. But with money scarce and morale low, Shehata soon resigned, and by the spring of 2001 al-Zawahiri had assumed control again. He sent a note to his colleagues in Islamic Jihad proposing a formal merger with bin Laden and al-Qaeda as "a way out of the bottleneck." Borrowing terms from global commerce, he warned of increased market share for "international monopolies"?the CIA and probably also Egyptian intelligence. The merger, he said, could "increase profits"?the publicity and support that terrorism could produce.
To: Unknown
From: Ayman al-Zawahiri
Folder: Letters
Date: May 3, 2001
The following is a summary of our situation: We are trying to return to our previous main activity [probably the merger]. The most important step was starting the school [training camps], the programs of which have been started. We also provided the teachers with means of conducting profitable trade as much as we could. Matters are all promising, except for the unfriendliness of two teachers, despite what we have provided for them. We are patient.
As you know, the situation below in the village [probably Egypt] has become bad for traders [jihadis]. Our Upper Egyptian relatives have left the market, and we are suffering from international monopolies. Conflicts take place between us for trivial reasons, due to the scarcity of resources. We are also dispersed over various cities. However, God had mercy on us when the Omar Brothers Company [the Taliban] here opened the market for traders and provided them with an opportunity to reorganize, may God reward them. Among the benefits of residence here is that traders from all over gather in one place under one company, which increases familiarity and cooperation among them, particularly between us and the Abdullah Contracting Company [bin Laden and his associates]. The latest result of this cooperation is ? the offer they gave. Following is a summary of the offer:
Encourage commercial activities [jihad] in the village to face foreign investors; stimulate publicity; then agree on joint work to unify trade in our area. Close relations allowed for an open dialogue to solve our problems. Colleagues here believe that this is an excellent opportunity to encourage sales in general, and in the village in particular. They are keen on the success of the project. They are also hopeful that this may be a way out of the bottleneck to transfer our activities to the stage of multinationals and joint profit. We are negotiating the details with both sides ?...........
(stirring, chest thumping, "patriotic" videos" - set to emotive music - okok, it's a pet hate of mine!)
......AFTER 9/11
he first evidence of work on the computer following 9/11 comes just days after the attacks, in the form of a promotional video called "The Big Job"?a montage of television footage of the attacks and their chaotic aftermath, all set to rousing victory music. The office was surely busier than it had ever been before, and soon many members of al-Qaeda's inner circle were competing for time on the computer. Ramzi bin al-Shibh, the senior Yemeni operative who coordinated with Khalid Sheikh Muhammad in masterminding the attacks, used the computer to work on a hasty and unfinished ideological justification for the operation, which he titled "The Truth About the New Crusade: A Ruling on the Killing of Women and Children of the Non-Believers," excerpts of which follow:
Concerning the operations of the blessed Tuesday [9/11] ? they are legally legitimate, because they are committed against a country at war with us, and the people in that country are combatants. Someone might say that it is the innocent, the elderly, the women, and the children who are victims, so how can these operations be legitimate according to sharia? And we say that the sanctity of women, children, and the elderly is not absolute. There are special cases ? Muslims may respond in kind if infidels have targeted women and children and elderly Muslims, [or if] they are being invaded, [or if] the non-combatants are helping with the fight, whether in action, word, or any other type of assistance, [or if they] need to attack with heavy weapons, which do not differentiate between combatants and non-combatants ?Now that we know that the operations were permissible from the Islamic point of view, we must answer or respond to those who prohibit the operations from the point of view of benefits or harms ?
There are benefits ? The operations have brought about the largest economic crisis that America has ever known. Material losses amount to one trillion dollars. America has lost about two thousand economic brains as a result of the operations. The stock exchange dropped drastically, and American consumer spending deteriorated. The dollar has dropped, the airlines have been crippled, the American globalization system, which was going to spoil the world, is gone ?
Because of Saddam and the Baath Party, America punished a whole population. Thus its bombs and its embargo killed millions of Iraqi Muslims. And because of Osama bin Laden, America surrounded Afghans and bombed them, causing the death of tens of thousands of Muslims ? God said to assault whoever assaults you, in a like manner ? In killing Americans who are ordinarily off limits, Muslims should not exceed four million non-combatants, or render more than ten million of them homeless. We should avoid this, to make sure the penalty [that we are inflicting] is no more than reciprocal. God knows what is best.
Osama bin Laden himself was composing letters on the computer just weeks before the fall of Kabul. In them he defiantly addressed the American people with a statement of al-Qaeda's goals, which he then went on to spell out at much greater length for Mullah Omar, in the spirit of a powerful, high-level political adviser offering advice to a head of state.
To: The American People
From: Osama bin Laden
Folder: Publications
Date: October 3, 2001
What takes place in America today was caused by the flagrant interference on the part of successive American governments into others' business. These governments imposed regimes that contradict the faith, values, and lifestyles of the people. This is the truth that the American government is trying to conceal from the American people.
Our current battle is against the Jews. Our faith tells us we shall defeat them, God willing. However, Muslims find that the Americans stand as a protective shield and strong supporter, both financially and morally. The desert storm that blew over New York and Washington should, in our view, have blown over Tel Aviv. The American position obliged Muslims to force the Americans out of the arena first to enable them to focus on their Jewish enemy. Why are the Americans fighting a battle on behalf of the Jews? Why do they sacrifice their sons and interests for them?......
Anyhoo - just thought some of you might be as bleakly fascinated as I by this glimpse.
"Why are the Americans fighting a battle on behalf of the Jews? Why do they sacrifice their sons and interests for them?....."
Seems Bin Laden's understanding of modern history is a little bit lacking. Fascinating stuff d. You get the Jimmy Olsen award this week.
"What takes place in America today was caused by the flagrant interference on the part of successive American governments into others' business. These governments imposed regimes that contradict the faith, values, and lifestyles of the people. This is the truth that the American government is trying to conceal from the American people."
Yes, this is the standard belief of a great part of the Muslim world. And it isn't entirely inaccurate at all. Our support of Israel is a very small part of it. If that were the only complaint, it would amount to little. But we tend to forget -- or perhaps don't know -- that it was the CIA which installed the Shah in Iran, overthrowing an American-friendly regime which we deemed too leftish and too chummy with the USSR. We backed Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq conflict because he was, at least, secular and we have this primal fear of all things Muslim. I can't, for the life of me, understand why we expect that anyone in the Near East (outside of Israel) should like us.
Right now we have only two America-friendly -- more or less -- nations in the region, Egypt and Jordan. And Egypt barely tolerates us. And Jordan's friendship stems, in part at least, from the fact that Queen Noor was the American-born Lisa Hallaby. The Saudis, you may point out, are our alies. But that's only because they need Western know-how in exploiting their oil reserves. I have talked to a number of Americans who've spent time in Saudi Arabia. They all hate the Arabs (no exceptions) and don't understand why it is that all the Arabs in Saudi Arabia hate us.
In Aghanistan, I think, we have a chance of setting things right only because the Taliban regime was so crushingly oppressive. (But, don't forget, we had initially supported the Taliban, too, when it fought the Soviet invasion back in the '70s.) I just hope we don't screw it up as we are usually wont to do. Iraq is a hopeless mess now. Under Emperor Bush, we simply blew it. I can see no way out of this now short of a loooong-term occupation.
dlowan wrote:'Tis a sad, forlorn little thread.
I don't get it, you know - everyone here (hyperbole) trumpets about Al Quaeda and Iran and what the hostage thing did and all that - but li'l threads giving a bit of a glimpse into what they actually think and such are of almost no interest.
Sigh - I think I must be very weird.
I enjoyed reading it too, I just didn't have anything to add.
The point deb is that they're arguing out of their ass in the other threads when they should be rading facts on this thread.
Sigh. We coneys are a small and unread folk!!!!
Thanks guys!
Also, remember that right now most Americans (no hyperbole there) are concerned with nothing else political save tomorrow's election. It matters not which wing they prefer, which party they owe allegiance to, the election tomorrow is the be-all and end-all. I don't even glance at the threads that have anything to do with the candidates in the headline. Unless they happen to have been posted by some sympatico person, of course.
Lol!!! sad but true of most, I am sure.
Are you ready to back that up with quotes?
Merry Andrew,
I generally agree with your take on the Middle East, but I believe that the Israel/Palestine conflict is the crux of the problem between the Middle East and the West.
We, Westerners, have colonized and created an ethnocentric country there, Israel, at the expense of the indigenous populations there, and the US as the leader of the West has by and large favored the interests of Israel over the interests of the Palestinians, and it is a grievance of the Middle East against the West that has festered since the end of the 19th century.
That is some very interesting stuff, dlowan. Also very anger-inducing. Thanks for putting it out there.
dlowan - this guy and the info about the hard drives was on NPR(radio) a while back. Very interesting things. I am too tired to read all of the text, will come back to it.
VERY worth purchasing the full article - I must say.
I am very much enjoying my Atlantic Monthlies!
This stuff is pretty chilling - thing is, I don't really think it is so very different from the machinations of CIA and KGB and real politik in governments. Do you guys?
Infra-Blue -- the end of the 19th Century? I'm not sure what you're referring to since there was no Israel until it was created in 1948, following WW II and the Holocaust. The Western presence in the Levant was firmly established after 1918 and the breakup of the Ottoman Empire, following WW I. That's when the various 'protectorates' and 'mandates' were established and the Saud family gained control of the major part of the Arabian peninsula, through some pretty violent means, I might add. Until 1918, anyone visiting any part of that region came as a guest of the Turks.
Oh yeah, absolutely, Israel was created in 1948, however, the colonization of Palestine by Europeans began in the late 19th century. They didn't go as visitors and guests of the Ottoman Empire. They went to settle there. To colonize. Between 1870 and 1890 Hovevei Zion (Lovers of Zion) set up 30 Jewish farming colonies in Palestine, financially aided by Baron Edmond James de Rothschild. Around 1882 the first Aliyah commenced. Problems between these colonists and the native populations began since then.
Dlowan, I want to thank you for this excerpt and the one reflecting on the anniversary of the Iranian/Islamic Revolution in Iran. These articles are so timely and relevant to the strife between the Middle East and the West.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace