The main address for this site is http://expat.silvert.org. All other sites are mirrors and may be out-of-date.

In light of the terrorist actions of 11 September 2001, I have added some material relating to the event, as well as several documents reflecting my own views on how we should respond. (Click on this image, from the AP, to see it enlarged.)

Official Statements from the US State Department and other sources:

A release from the State Department (July 2002) contained this observation:

"Terrorist groups do not distinguish between official and civilian targets. Recent attacks on worshippers at a church and synagogue underline the growing possibility that as security is increased at official U.S. facilities, terrorists and their sympathizers will seek softer targets. These may include facilities where Americans are generally known to congregate or visit, such as clubs, restaurants, places of worship, schools or outdoor recreation events.  Americans should increase their security awareness when they are at such locations, avoid them, or switch to other locations where Americans in large numbers generally do not congregate. American citizens may be targeted for kidnapping."

Editorials and Columns:

I do not claim that this is a balanced selection, these are articles that friends and fellow expats highly recommended or that found particular resonance with me. I am particularly concerned about the choices that the US and its allies are facing: whether to confront the monster of terrorism and cut off its head - those who know Greek mythology will know why I call this "the Medusa Strategy" - or to starve it by attacking the poverty and despair that it feeds upon.

My personal views:

My own thinking is based on the concept that war on terrorism means fighting terror as well as fighting terrorists.

I have noted that several columnists have echoed my own viewpoint, that if we are overly afraid then our fear itself is a victory for terrorists - after all, that is what they are after. The fact that at a recent meeting of Americans in Porto, the organisers proudly asserted that they had the foresight to advise the hotel not to fly the American flag contrasts dramatically with the excessive flag waving that we see at home. It seemed particularly strange that whenever I ventured outside there were always fellow Americans ready to remind me to take off my name tag, which displayed a small US flag. The Portuguese, of course, frequently wear clothing with a US flag motif!

Remember that famous speech by an earlier US President - "We have nothing to fear but fear itself"? The full quote is:

"So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself - nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance."

So do I think that we can win the War on Terrorism? Truly we are dealing with a many-headed monster. While the US has identified a large number of terrorist organisations, it is common to hear of atrocities committed by "a previously unknown group", and even when terrorist groups are disbanded or reform, often there are break-away cells that continue with extremist policies. It is not clear that the authorities in the US are prepared to take account of this. For example, after the recent attack on the El Al counter in Los Angeles, the FBI and local police insisted that there was no evidence that it was an act of terrorism. Israel of course takes the view that any suicide attack on Israelis is an act of terrorism, and it is hard to see any other motive for the "incident" - but clearly what is at issue is whether this was organised terrorism or indivdual initiative. Put in these terms, the muddiness of defining terrorism becomes clear. Of course if Osama Bin Laden himself had set the whole thing up with Yasser Arafat's blessing, that would be TERRORISM. But what if the attacker was a member of a small extremist group whose members picked straws to see who would go down with guns blazing? How big would the group have to be to qualify as a terrorist organisation?

And finally, suppose that the LAX attack is followed by a series of copycat killings, all by independent deranged individuals who are inspired by the idea that the way to heaven is to kill, kill, kill? Will the authorities continue to classify all of these as "isolated incidents" and continue to focus their efforts on wiping out Al Qaeda, or will they admit that terrorism, like other manifestations of pathological fanaticism, is a human affliction against which we must practice eternal vigilance, but which we cannot ever eradicate?

This site is maintained by William Silvert, to whom all questions, comments and complaints should be addressed. You are also welcome to record your visit on the guestmap.