GOP Vixen

Muhammad cartoons, part deux

See this guy? He's an editorial cartoonist who will probably be on the run for the rest of his life. He can't return home and has been shuttled to a secret location by police. What did he do? Drew a caricature of Muhammad in a Swedish newspaper. Which drew a big bounty on his head:

"The leader of al-Qaida in Iraq, Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, offered $100,000 over the weekend for Vilks' murder. He said the bounty would be upped to $150,000 if Vilks was 'slaughtered like a lamb' and offered $50,000 for the killing of the editor of a local newspaper that reprinted the cartoon on Aug. 19.

'We are calling for the assassination of cartoonist Lars Vilks who dared insult our Prophet ... and we announce a reward during this generous month of Ramadan,' al-Baghdadi said, according to transcripts of Islamic Web sites."

An extra fiddy thou for slaughtering Lars Vilks like a lamb! Wow, al-Qaida is generous for Ramadan!

The reason the threat was issued by the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq? Because it just so happens that Sweden has taken in about 18,000 Iraqi refugees in just the past year alone, and the al-Qaida faction is clearly trying to incite them. Not a small matter after the 2004 slaying of director Theo van Gogh in broad daylight on an Amsterdam street. Al-Qaida has also called for boycotts of Volvo, Ikea, and probably Swedish Fish as well. Iran, Pakistan and Egypt has filed protests with the Swedish government.

Fortunately, media solidarity is happening in Sweden, with other publications reprinting the cartoon. Friends, it doesn't matter if it's controversial speech or offensive speech -- it's still free speech, and implementing self-censorship out of fear of reprisals only gives fundamentalists more ammunition.

First, you've got to get mad

    

It's been six years since the mass terrorist attack on the U.S. The days following Sept. 11, 2001, were characterized by patriotic fervor (remember the little flags on the cars?) mixed with the desire to hunt down Osama. People were mad. Some channeled that anger into enlisting, and many since have given their lives in Afghanistan or Iraq. But as the story of 9/11 faded away, and those little American car flags wound up in muddy gutters, so much of that passion to fight terrorism is gone -- along with any desire to learn the true nature of the threat.

I've spent the past few years writing about terrorism and studying the Islamic threat. I've met brave Muslims who have vociferously opposed radicalism, many risking jail time in their native countries to voice their opinions on blogs or YouTube; I've also met far too many passive enablers whose actions and rhetoric are music to the ears of al-Qaida. I've received threats from extremists and begun doing guest commentary for Al-Jazeera. I've spent the past several months learning Arabic, and years studying the finely woven net of terrorist organizations that has slipped into once-unlikely nations. I've witnessed Osama bin Laden become a political pawn, surely much to his delight. And yet, I've only scratched the surface in my research in learning.

I think the best way to spend 9-11 is watching the Golden Globe-winning movie "Osama," the first movie shot in Afghanistan after the fall of the Taliban and starring ordinary Afghans -- the extraordinary cast was literally found on the streets and in refugee camps, and even former Taliban members played the bad guys. It's a stark reminder of why we were attacked: The draconian living hell under Taliban rule is the caliphate envisioned for the world by al-Qaida and other jihadi groups. "Osama," incidentally, is the name assumed by the lead character, a girl who must disguise herself as a boy simply to work and feed her all-female family that is not allowed to leave the house (because no more male relatives existed to accompany them). But director Siddiq Barmak picked the common regional name for another reason: "I really wanted to tell that every horrible thing that happened in Afghanistan -- a terrible situation -- was because of Osama Bin Laden. In my film, nobody has their own personal name because they lost their own identity. In my opinion, Osama Bin Laden was behind all of this losing."

Politicking will go on and on, and terrorism will only become more politicized in Campaign 2008. But the reality remains: Negotiation goes against all that the jihadists fight for. We are "invited" to convert, and if we refuse we are marked for death. If these are unacceptable terms, we must be willing to fight for a long time on an unconventional battlefield. We have to fight. And we have to fight them, not each other.

But first, we've got to get mad...

    

It's been six years since the mass terrorist attack on the U.S. The days following Sept. 11, 2001, were characterized by patriotic fervor (remember the little flags on the cars?) mixed with the desire to hunt down Osama. People were mad. Some channeled that anger into enlisting, and many since have given their lives in Afghanistan or Iraq. But as the story of 9/11 faded away, and those little American car flags wound up in muddy gutters, so much of that passion to fight terrorism is gone -- along with any desire to learn the true nature of the threat.

I've spent the past few years writing about terrorism and studying the Islamic threat. I've met brave Muslims who have vociferously opposed radicalism, many risking jail time in their native countries to voice their opinions on blogs or YouTube; I've also met far too many passive enablers whose actions and rhetoric are music to the ears of al-Qaida. I've received threats from extremists and begun doing guest commentary for Al-Jazeera. I've spent the past several months learning Arabic, and years studying the finely woven net of terrorist organizations that has slipped into once-unlikely nations. I've witnessed Osama bin Laden become a political pawn, surely much to his delight. And yet, I've only scratched the surface in my research in learning.

I think the best way to spend 9-11 is watching the Golden Globe-winning movie "Osama," the first movie shot in Afghanistan after the fall of the Taliban and starring ordinary Afghans -- the extraordinary cast was literally found on the streets and in refugee camps, and even former Taliban members played the bad guys. It's a stark reminder of why we were attacked: The draconian living hell under Taliban rule is the caliphate envisioned for the world by al-Qaida and other jihadi groups. "Osama," incidentally, is the name assumed by the lead character, a girl who must disguise herself as a boy simply to work and feed her all-female family that is not allowed to leave the house (because no more male relatives existed to accompany them). But director Siddiq Barmak picked the common regional name for another reason: "I really wanted to tell that every horrible thing that happened in Afghanistan -- a terrible situation -- was because of Osama Bin Laden. In my film, nobody has their own personal name because they lost their own identity. In my opinion, Osama Bin Laden was behind all of this losing."

Politicking will go on and on, and terrorism will only become more politicized in Campaign 2008. But the reality remains: Negotiation goes against all that the jihadists fight for. We are "invited" to convert, and if we refuse we are marked for death. If these are unacceptable terms, we must be willing to fight for a long time on an unconventional battlefield. We have to fight. And we have to fight them, not each other.

But first, we've got to get mad...

South Korea should face punitive measures for funding a terrorist organization

South Korea: Ally or foe? You make the call after reading my Los Angeles Daily News column today:

"...South Korea's National Intelligence Service chief, Kim Man-bok, flew to Afghanistan late last month and returned with the remaining 19 hostages. Immediately, reports surfaced that South Korea had paid a large sum to the Taliban in exchange for the evangelicals' release. Al-Jazeera cited several sources that said a hefty sum had changed hands, and a Taliban figure - who later recanted under pressure from his superiors, who undoubtedly wanted to look like they were a powerful political bargaining force and not common criminals - told Reuters the amount was $20 million.

South Korea vehemently denied coughing up a ransom. But behind closed doors, the answer adopted shades of gray. 'It is inappropriate to discuss whether a ransom was paid,' Kim reportedly told a parliamentary committee Thursday. 'It will be known later. I will speak at an appropriate time.'

Because the Taliban doesn't just let valuable hostages go out of the goodness of their hearts - or for 'demands' that were a foregone conclusion - late last week I checked with U.S. government sources who unofficially confirmed that South Korea did, indeed, exchange cash for the hostages.

South Korea supplied the Taliban with funds that will be used to try to overthrow Afghanistan's fledgling democracy and restore an oppressive, draconian theocracy. The Taliban now would have more cash for munitions to attack U.S. soldiers and other members of the coalition, more money for roadside and suicide bombs to kill men, women and children.

And, of course, they'd have more reason to kidnap others..."

Read the whole thing!

The incredible shrinking coverage of 9/11 anniversaries

In the weeks leading up to Sept. 11, 2002, my desk at the San Bernardino Sun was a mess. I'd been sifting through several hundred photos to find the perfect shots for the special 9/11 anniversary issue, assigned and edited all of the stories coming in from reporters, created the text for a huge graphic on the history of terrorism and coordinated the look of the spread with the graphics department, wrote a couple of articles for the wrapper myself, and in the final days leading up to the anniversary went through edit after edit, correcting red-marked proofs that collected into their own pile. I even went down to the press for the special run of the section, catching the first issues coming off and taking a stack home for keepers. The editor directed the press to make me a special set of CMYK plates of the front page, which now hangs framed on my wall.

A year later, I was making the move from a brief stint as a magazine editor back to my beloved news biz. I told the hiring editor at my new paper that I wished I could be there to help out on the 9/11 anniversary, but she responded not to worry, that it would be no big deal and probably just a couple of stories.

What happened? More...

Al-Qaida's little messages

Osama invited all of us to convert to Islam in his tape last week. Pundits are in a tizzy about this because an invitation to embrace Islam is a prerequisite to wage war against those who reject the call. Now there's another al-Qaida tape criticizing Hamas for bad jihad, just before Gen. Petraeus is set to deliver his Iraq analysis today. But al-Qaida has always loved symbolism, and this will be the first 9-11 anniversary to fall on a Tuesday, the day of the original attacks in 2001. I hope that doesn't mean anything -- but then again, the foiled plot against airports and U.S. installations in Germany may have been intended to be the big 9-11 anniversary attack. And the part that's not reassuring -- all of the suspects of that Islamic Jihad cell in Germany have not been arrested yet.

Depressed about your subprime loan?

Osama feels your pain:

"And Iraq and Afghanistan and their tragedies; and the reeling of many of you under the burden of interest-related debts, insane taxes and real estate mortgages; global warming and its woes; and the abject poverty and tragic hunger in Africa: all of this is but one side of the grim face of this global system."

I'm really enjoying the many tangents in Osama's return to the small screen. It's like the end of "Team America: World Police," where a blustering Alec Baldwin, rapidly losing favor with his audience, stammers, "But... global warming... and ... and... the corporations..."

Not to mention, actually finding a transcript was an accomplishment in and of itself. I'm not sure how much the caution of U.S. media agencies has to do with not wanting to give Osama a platform and how much is fear that some sleepy cell will be awakened and driven to terror just by hearing Osama's voice on the CBS Evening News.

Which brings me to my final question -- is Noam Chomsky actually HAPPY to be praised by Osama??

Al-Qaida's carbon footprint

Who said the following statement -- Al Gore or Leo DiCaprio?

"In fact, the life of all of mankind is in danger because of the global warming resulting to a large degree from the emissions of the factories of the major corporations, yet despite that, the representative of these corporations in the White House insists on not observing the Kyoto accord, with the knowledge that the statistic speaks of the death and displacement of the millions of human beings because of that, especially in Africa.

This greatest of plagues and most dangerous of threats to the lives of humans is taking place in an accelerating fashion as the world is being dominated by the democratic system, which confirms its massive failure to protect humans and their interests from the greed and avarice of the major corporations and their representatives.''

Naw, it was Osama!

Osama runs for Miss Teen South Carolina

"I personally believe that it will also achieve U.S. Americans' desire to stop the war in the Iraq as a consequence, because as soon as the warmongering U.S. American owners of the major corporations realize that you have lost confidence in your democratic system and education like such as in South Africa and the Iraq, and have begun to look for an alternative because, uh, some people out there in the nation don't have maps, and this alternative is Islam, they will run after you to please you and achieve what you want to steer you away from Islam and help the Iraq and the Asian countries so we will be able to build up our future, for our children."

S. Korea pays up to $20 million to Taliban for hostages

Japan's Asahi Shimbun newspaper first reported that money changed hands to spring the 19 remaining South Korean evangelicals held by the Taliban. Now this follow-up:

"Taliban and Afghan officials have also denied that a ransom was involved.

But Alan Fisher, reporting for Al Jazeera from Kabul in Afghanistan, said that the 'Taliban left the table substantially richer' and that the ransom could have been as high as $20m.

'We've gone back to several sources and again they have told us that as far as they are aware there was certainly a ransom paid and a figure that is being bandied around in Kabul is about $20m ... All our sources tell us that money did change hands.'

He also reported that kidnappings by the Taliban were likely to continue.

'In a vow to continue with the kidnappings they [the Taliban] said that "we will do the same thing with other allies in Afghanistan because we found this way to be successful",' he said.

Seoul had earlier restated its decision to withdraw its small military presence in Afghanistan - about 200 people comprised mainly of medical workers and engineers - by the end of the year.

It also agreed with the Taliban that it would ban missionary groups from going to Afghanistan, prompting criticism from the Korea World Missions Association."

I wonder if South Korea is going to feel the slightest twinge of guilt as that $20 million is used on attacks against Afghan civilians, bombings against allied operations, more assassination attempts against the democratic government of Hamid Karzai, etc. Their $20 million ransom is going to turn into that many more kidnappings, deaths and suffering. Good going, Seoul.

What happens when you appease terrorists

In March, the Afghan government traded Taliban prisoners for an Italian journalist. Met with condemnation around the globe, Afghanistan was warned that this would only embolden the terrorists to snatch more foreigners. Last month the South Korean evangelical group was taken hostage as they were taking a charter bus from Kabul to Kandahar, basically sitting ducks on the highway. South Korea has tried to get the Afghan government to release more Taliban to get their people back, but the Afghan government has duly refused. Now an amazingly bold attack -- four gunman seizing a German aid worker in a Kabul fast-food joint (how do you say Big Mac in Pashtu?) in the middle of the day, strategically positioning themselves inside and outside the restaurant, the one inside even ordering a pizza (we're assuming not ham and sausage).

Now even though the Taliban currently hold a German man, the German government has not demanded the Afghan government bend over for terrorists and meet their demands. So the pizza parlor terrorists probably picked the wrong nationality to kidnap this time around. And there's a chance that the aid worker was snatched by criminals who just want money. But as the Taliban have also declared that negotiations regarding the 19 remaining South Korean hostages are over, my guess is that they will kill a few more to try to stir the international-furor pot, and try to freak out the German citizenry enough that they pressure the government to give in to terrorist demands as well.