Save Bigley’s Life

This refers to your front-page report about the British hostage Kenneth Bigley (Sept. 24).

I’m 56 years old and am of Afro-American descent. I am not a Christian but believe in a Creator and to this Creator, I’ve asked that He intervene and spare this person’s life.

I have always stated the Palestinians deserve a homeland and I want nothing more than for the world to join together to build houses, schools, and hospitals and to create jobs for the Palestinians. I want the same for the Iraqis and for all humans around the world. Just as I do not want Mr. Begley to die, I do not want to see Saddam Hussein die. Saddam has been captured and imprisoned. There is no need to take his life, so to the Iraqi people, I ask for his life to be spared also. A Chinese proverb comes to mind: “If you can’t help me, don’t hurt me.”

If only we humans would learn to build one another up instead of tearing one another down, it would be a better place.

Sharon Wilson • UK published 28 September 2004

Save Bigley’s Life [2]

Tell me, why should we comment? The British government is quite prepared to back George W. Bush’s regime to vindicate what Bush Senior’s regime failed to do and we just roll over and play dead. For God’s sake, please realize that while you are all considering what is good copy and what isn’t, there is a very scared, naive man who is crouched in an orange suit awaiting the first cut to his throat. Do something. For God’s sake do something. You are all very important... then do something important: Save this man’s life!

Ruth Levinsky • UK published 28 September 2004

Save Bigley’s Life [3]

I believe the stories you publish (Sept. 24) best contrasts the West with the Arab world.

Iraqi insurgents “demand” that the Muslim prisoners of the Christians be “returned” and given ice cream on their arrival.

The Christian civilian prisoners are beheaded and put on public display. Why do these people fail to understand that killing innocent people, children, and the common man, will not make them loved, or even tolerated throughout the world?

Charles Allen • UK published 28 September 2004

Tiring Customs

“Energetic Indians waiting with malicious smiles” was a gratuitously malicious comment that did not enhance the value of Mohammad T. Al-Rasheed’s article (“Tiring Customs,” Sept. 23). Would the cars have been checked any faster if the mechanics were non-energetic and non-smiling, that is lazy and scowling, and were of some other nationality? How about having these jobs Saudized as a priority?

Making daft comments about a community lowers Rasheed’s position as a writer.

Athar P. Shah • Toronto, Canada published 28 September 2004

Away From Home

Good Morning Rasheed Abou-Alsamh (Sept. 24). I wanted to take a few minutes to thank you for writing such a meaningful article. I honestly can’t agree with more, but unfortunately this is not the case.

Many foreign workers are given an orientation prior to heading to the Kingdom on the life in Saudi Arabia. All are warned not to socialize with the locals or even speak to them!

I’ve lived in many countries and have many friends all over the world, but living here is quite an experience for foreigners. People like us who are exposed to different cultures early in life and grown to respect people’s choices and religious beliefs have somewhat an easy way of adjusting to the life in the Kingdom.

I agree that our society in the Kingdom needs an overhaul in terms of education, understanding and tolerance of other cultures and religious beliefs. Foreign workers have the responsibility to at least live up to the minimum requirements of their contracts.

Fahad Al-Mulaik • Saudi Arabia published 28 September 2004

Away From Home [2]

That some Saudi nationals can feel up to this extent for the foreigners moved me beyond words. My husband has been serving in this country for the last 20 years and has faced different situations. Some locals have been very good and kind but some others have harassed him many times thinking him only as a foreigner who has come here to snatch the riyals from them. Well, after this long stay here we will find it difficult to adjust to a life in our home country. We want to stay back here for the rest of our lives but rumors are in the air that people who have completed 20 years here have to leave now.

Mrs. N.A. Khan • Saudi Arabia published 28 September 2004

Away From Home [3]

A very nice article.

I have been working in Saudi Arabia for the last three years and have very good memories. I have found good employers except one who made me mad by his threats and abuse. But he wasn’t Saudi, but Pakistani, a close friend of our Saudi employer’s . This expatriate abused the Saudi law, always kept the salaries of the employees in his pocket, and when they asked for salaries, he kicked them/or put them in jail, by using his sources in different government departments.

A. Thanvi • Saudi Arabia published 28 September 2004

Away From Home [4]

You told the bitter truth about this country. I am glad that there are Saudis like you who understand this. I am an Indian, born and brought up here. I studied in Saudi schools, so I talk and look like a Saudi. Though I see myself as part of this society, many times I had to hide my nationality to avoid the negative attitude of some locals. But I find the changes are there, and most Saudis now have better understanding with others.

Syed Taha Omar • Saudi Arabia published 28 September 2004

No Land for Chechens

Richard Curtiss (Sept. 23) asks why can’t Chechens have a land of their own. The answer: They can’t have because they have repeatedly crossed the line when they target innocent civilians, most seriously in Beslan. If you reward Chechens their own land, it sends an ominous signal out to all terrorists that targeting civilians as a matter of policy yields rewards. Free and innocent people should not be intimidated, nor bow to such heinous crimes. The way I see it, Chechnya is harboring terrorists. It’s too late for diplomacy. The Russians should invade the territory in a blitzkrieg fashion, just like they would’ve done in World War II. After they got a firm grip on the territory they could bring it back in line with the rest of the country through aggressive indoctrination and education. It has been successful before and it can be successful again.

David Holbrook • United States published 28 September 2004

No Land for Chechens [2]

Richard Curtiss only betrays his ignorance. Russians actually did grant sovereignty to the Chechens. But it was exactly their attempts to spread revolution/war to neighboring states and terrorist attacks in Moscow that provoked a military response and (reluctant) re-invasion. The Chechens only have themselves and their stupid leaders to blame.

Mark Jensen • United States published 28 September 2004

Don’t Cut and Run

Amir Taheri’s reasoning (Sept. 24) is precisely correct, in my opinion. One other difference between this war and Vietnam is that back then, we did not have a president (Johnson) who was willing to let our military do what was necessary to finish the job. Consequently, a war that should have been finished in 2-3 years went on and on and public opposition to it became untenable for our leaders here. Hence the eventual pullout (under Nixon). John Kerry did his part then in advancing opposition to that war, in order to advance his own career ambitions (my view). If president Bush is re-elected, we will continue to have a leader who will allow the military to do what is necessary to finish this job in Iraq, even though he will also face stiff public opposition to it (which Kerry, again in his campaign for president, is advancing).

Charles V. Paul • United States published 28 September 2004

Don’t Cut and Run [2]

Amir Taheri’s “Why US Shouldn’t Cut and Run” (Sept. 24) was one of the most clear and concise articles I have had the opportunity to read in a long time. I haven’t read anything in the US press that is as well thought out.

Thank You.

Ralph Spencer • Rossville, GA, USA published 28 September 2004

Don’t Cut and Run [3]

Good analysis. But I would like to know whether Bush would attack all nations with WMDs — whether actually possessing or assumed to possess as in the case of Iraq.

I am sure Israel has WMD. Can you please let Bush know about this? Can Bush act against Israel the way he did in Iraq? Then Amir Taheri’s “cut and run” story has great meaning.

I understand one kidnapped American’s life is worth more than the lives of over 2000 “terrorists” killed in Fallujah air strike. Needless to say, some of these terrorists are as young as two-month-old babies. Their arms and brains were spread all over the place. Of course I don’t expect Amir Taheri to write about such trivial things.

Sajid Shaikh • Pakistan published 28 September 2004

Don’t Cut and Run [4]

To Mr. Tahri: Who cares about Bush and Kerry’s views on Iraq? The Iraqi people are voting with their lives to expel the occupiers.

Tariq Andrea • Tunisia published 28 September 2004

Abaya and Little Girls

Raid Qusti in his article (Little Girls Wearing Abayas — Sept. 22) mentions the negative points of the beautiful black dress. It is true that little girls didn’t wear abayas 20 years ago. This was because at that time the abayas were stitched only for the ladies and even if a girl wanted one she wouldn’t get her size.

Speaking of little girls, I remember how I loved wearing abaya, headscarves and the veil when I was just 7 years old. My cousins and I used to wear our mother’s abayas. This fondness still exists among today’s little girls. I see them fighting for their mother’s veil. Aged 7 and 8, my cousins too wear abayas when visiting the Prophet’s Mosque while other times they put on colorful dresses. These little girls are not forced to wear abayas but they themselves wait so eagerly to put them on and insist their parents buy one for them. My father bought one for me only because I insisted on him to. Such is the case of many little girls.

You call a child in abaya as a “poor child” while this girl herself enjoys wearing abaya. She isn’t poor at all because wearing abaya doesn’t restrict any child from playing around and enjoying her time. In fact, they do and why shouldn’t they? Wearing abaya doesn’t mean a child cannot play or run and be like a child. It doesn’t restrict the child from doing any of these activities. It doesn’t mean they would be deprived of their childhood and the joy and happiness of childhood, as Mr. Qusti has said.

It may be true that some families force little children to wear abayas but it is absolutely incorrect to say that they deprive them of their childhood. We too, when we were 10 years old, wore abayas and played around. It never occurred to us that our parents wanted us not to play and enjoy. Wearing abaya isn’t a difficult task at all. It is like any other dress except that it is black in color.

As time has changed people, so has the abayas. It no longer remains a plain black dress. It is now decorated with beautiful patterns, designs and colors as well.

Fashion has emerged in abayas and women and girls wear this black dress with pride and fondness. Mr. Qusti should have at least asked one little girl. If he had, he would have been surprised to hear her reply.

Faiza Saeed Nangru • Madinah published 28 September 2004