After Sep. 11, many American reporters view their role as a combination of cheer-leading for US wars, and providing advice for US policy makers. What is Michale Slackman's point here: "That such ideas persist represents the first failure in the fight against terrorism — the inability to convince people here that the United States is, indeed, waging a campaign against terrorism, not a crusade against Muslims." So he is frustrated that US policy makers have not succeeded in convincing Arabs/Muslims that US intentions are always beneveloent and altruistic? He is angry because Arabs and Muslims don't view the US role as purely innocent and police in nature. Do some grotesque rumors prevail in the Middle East? Yes, and it is unfortunate but he does not explain that some of these views also prevail among Christian Arabs: I have mentioned before my argument with Maronite politician in Lebanon, Michel Iddi, with whom I had a fight becuase he insisted that no Jewish Americans died on Sep. 11. So Slackman made it look like some religious thing. And why didn't Slackman mention that there are some grogesque rumors about Muslims that previals in both U.S. and Israel? But I like this quotation: "“Mubarak says whatever the Americans want him to say, and he’s lying for them, of course,” Mr. Ibrahim said of Hosni Mubarak, Egypt’s president."