Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/21/2005 12:47:01 PM EDT
Please don't hurt us AQ!!


These asshats really think they can negotiate successfully with Al Qaeda? What the FUck is going on!! Is this the new direction journalism is taking on the Left now? Pacifism will make this worse people. I'm so frustrated after reading this nonsense I'm having trouble formulating a response. Anyone care to take over?
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 3:39:30 PM EDT
harvard says we should consider that we might be the bad guys instead of alqaeda

Harvard, CAIR, and Kos.
From the September 26, 2005 issue: Meet Mohammad-Mahmoud Ould Mohamedou, Harvard's al Qaeda apologist.

by The Scrapbook
09/26/2005
www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/091rlsae.asp
Harvard's al Qaeda Apologist

After four long and bloody years of unresolved war, shouldn't America begin thinking about the possibility of an equitable diplomatic settlement with Osama bin Laden? Isn't it finally "Time to Talk to Al Qaeda?" So asks the headline on a Boston Globe op-ed piece published September 14. And so answers its author, Mohammad-Mahmoud Ould Mohamedou of Harvard University: Yes, he says. Let's make a deal.

Bid Laden and his confederates are widely "misunderstood" in the United States, according to Mohamedou, associate director of Harvard's "Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research." We like to flatter ourselves that the war on terrorism is "an open-and-shut matter of good versus evil," but the truth is very different, he suggests. Al Qaeda is not, in fact, a totalitarian and "apocalyptic" movement; it is an "industrious" and "committed" rational actor pursuing "political" and "limited" objectives. And September 11 "was not an unprovoked, gratuitous act." Rather, the murder of 3,000 office workers in New York is best understood as a "trained commando" operation "in the context of a war that had twice been declared officially and publicly."

And there being no realistic way for Americans to win such a war--against a "diffuse, ever-mutating, organized international militancy movement" enjoying "the rear-guard sympathy of large numbers of Muslims"--it becomes the better part of wisdom for us to seek a truce with al Qaeda in return for "some degree of satisfaction regarding its grievances."

The Scrapbook knows what you're thinking here: There's a numbskull on the Harvard payroll. Been

there, done that.

But wait. There's more. This is new. This is worse.

For it turns out that Dr. Mohamedou's Globe op-ed is merely the condensed version of "Non-Linearity of Engagement," a 30-page treatise he produced, on Harvard's dime, back in July. And "numbskull" doesn't begin to describe the thing. It seems that Harvard University's associate director of "humanitarian policy" and whatnot believes the United States should belatedly "acknowledg[e] the logic in which terrorism is used as a method of warfare, according to a principle of indiscrimination whose rationale is negation of the notion of innocence of the civilian population, and imputation of collective responsibility." As Osama bin Laden himself has observed, American foreign policy is effected by politicians whom Americans have freely elected. And in that respect, concludes our man in Cambridge, al Qaeda clearly claims "a valid jus ad bellum case" against any and every one of us--man, woman, or child.

In the end, Mohamedou says, "these 'terrorists' are de facto combatants, and justice . . . is what they are after." Which is the true source of bin Laden's strength. And the reason that "no leading Muslim intellectual or scholar has denounced him."

Not at Harvard, anyhow.

CAIR's Interfaith Photo-Retouching

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) often chooses curious means to further its self-proclaimed mission of "enhancing understanding of Islam" and "encouraging dialogue." But this may be the most curious of all.

An eagle-eyed reader of the website jihadwatch.org noticed last week on the CAIR website a photo taken at CAIR's "interfaith candlelight vigil" commemorating 9/11 on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol (see leftmost photo). Unfortunately, the group turned out to have been a little too interfaith for the tastes of CAIR's website.

As can be seen by close examination of the "improved" photo on the right (which at first accompanied the press release on the event but subsequently was removed from CAIR's website), a hijab was photoshopped onto the woman beside the CAIR lectern and onto two members of the audience: the brunette in the lower left foreground and the blonde in the lower right.

Women contemplating attendance at future CAIR outreach events should consider themselves forewarned--if you don't cover your heads beforehand, they may do it for you after the fact.

Kos Fires Blanks

The Scrapbook has been waiting with bated breath since August 22, when lefty blogger and Democratic-strategist-on-the-make Markos "Kos" Moulitsas of DailyKos.com announced an imminent campaign to make the centrist Democratic Leadership Council "radioactive." Moulitsas's hatred of the DLC was nothing new. Last May he wrote that it was "Time for the DLC to die," that it's "the most fundamentalist organization within the [Democratic] caucus," that it's "ideologically rigid," indeed "cancerous," and that it's past time to "euthanize" it. What was new about Moulitsas's August post, though, was that it promised all-out war between liberals and moderates by the beginning of September. "Two more weeks, folks, before we take them on, head on," he wrote. (This led to the mocking graphic by LittleGreenFootballs.com pictured at bottom.)

Well, over two weeks have passed, and plenty of people--Moulitsas's own readers included--have noticed that the DLC is still here. "Whatever happened," for example, "with the DLC thing from a few weeks ago," someone called "airwave" asked

on a DailyKos.com message board on September 13?

"I didn't think a time of national crisis was the right time to do this," Moulitsas answered. Because, you see, "timing is important for things like media attention, people's attention, outrage generation, etc. The window wasn't there. Bush and his mishandling of Katrina is clearly more important now. So is the future of the Supreme Court." The anti-DLC campaign "isn't forgotten," he concluded. "Just deferred."

But, as any evil mastermind will tell you, having a catastrophic hurricane mess up your plans for world domination is no fun at all. Thus it wasn't a surprise when Moulitsas felt it necessary the following day--in comments appended to a post in which he labeled St. Paul's Democratic mayor Randy Kelly a "turncoat" (Kelly having committed the crime of endorsing George W. Bush last year)--to reiterate that, yes, he really will turn the DLC into Chernobyl one of these days, just you wait and see:
Top Top