Attacking the al Qaeda "Narrative"
General James Mattis - Attacking the al Qaeda "Narrative" by Jim Guirard at the SWJ Blog...
Quote:
In his June 2007 State Department E-Journal article, New Paradigms For 21st Century Conflicts, Dr. Dave Kilcullen of General David Petraeus' senior staff in Baghdad called for, among other things, a "New Lexicon" for better defining and more effectively defeating enemies which subscribe to the faith-based mantra of "Death to America, the Great Satan".
In other public statements and in several Small Wars Journal postings, Kilcullen entered very slowly, very prudently into the virtually verboten realm of attacking al Qaeda-style Terrorism in Islamic religious context, rather than in Western secular terms only -- referring to the AQ terrorists as "munafiquun" (hypocrites to authentic, Qur'anic Islam) and pointing out that "they call themselves mujahideen" but are doing barbaric things which are anything but holy.
To which this word warrior says: Spot on! Two small steps for a good man, two giant steps for truth-in-language and truth-in-Islam in the War on al Qaeda-style Terrorism -- a.k.a., Irhabi Murderdom and the AQ Apostasy, as this essay recommends as its most appropriate new names.
But even these two measured Kilcullen attacks on the terrorists' religious legitimacy were in conflict with the State Department's basic rule in such matters. As stated on page 25 of the US National Strategy For Public Diplomacy and Strategic Communication, the official advisory is, in part, as follows: Use caution when dealing with faith issues. Government officials should be extremely cautious and, if possible, avoid using religious language, because it can mean different things and can be easily misunderstood...
Part of me is drawn to this but...
It also worries me. I think back to Dubya's frequent use of mufsiduun (well, really the English evildoers) way back when. I remember well the nearly universal postmodern sneering at this sort of talk that ensued around my university, at cocktail parties, in the Western media generally. And I'm sure the same thing would happen all over again if our government or military tried talking that way again as a deliberate matter of policy.
Maybe it doesn't matter, but maybe it does. I don't know exactly how attuned your average Mahmoud is to the discordant din of public discourse in the West, but I'll bet that whatever edge such an alternative lexicon might potentially have, it would be substantially dulled by our own cacophany over its use. It might even backfire. It would be one thing if Muslims themselves naturally developed this alternative lexicon, but I'm pretty nervous about us trying to adopt it as a deliberate tactic.
Satirist turns terrorists into Dad's Army
From today's Sunday Times.
http://entertainment.timesonline.co....cle3177654.ece
Quote:
CHRIS MORRIS, the satirist whose television act features jokes about paedophilia, drugs, incest and rape, is to make a movie intended to show the funny side of terrorism.
He says the film will seek to do for Islamic terrorism what Dad’s Army, the classic BBC comedy, did for the Nazis by showing them as “scary but also ridiculous”.
Morris said: “Most of us would dearly love to laugh in the face of our worst fears. Why aren’t we laughing at terrorists? Because we don’t know how to, until now.”
Though the film is a work of fiction, Morris has researched it over the past two years by visiting places in Britain associated with terrorist plots, including Leeds, Bradford and Luton.
“I don’t plan for this film to be offensive, but I do want it to be very funny,” Morris said. “I accept, though, that some may find poking fun at terrorists is offensive.
“There is this Dad’s Army side of terrorism and that’s what this film is exploring,” said Morris, who once, while hosting a Radio 1 show, made a hoax announcement about the death of Michael Heseltine, the former Conservative deputy prime minister.
For those not familiar with Mr Morris and his humour, here's an example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvyX-CwHpAQ
Should be interesting...
Dean Ing's "Soft Targets"
Y'all are discussing one of the major threads in Dean Ing's "Soft Targets". A great read by a brilliant fiction writer. Note that in the book the comedian who has the nerve to initiate the humor campaign against the irhabi becomes a target of violence, and also note that this book was written in the late '70s early '80s.
My favorite joke from the book was something like (forgive me as I don't have a copy on my desk);
Achmed: "We must kidnap everyone who thinks we are idiots!"
Abdul: "But Achmed, where are we going to keep five billion hostages?"
Also, Jeff Dunham and Achmed the Dead Terrrorist are an excellent example of anti-irhabi humor (though targeted at Western audiences). Gotta love the eyebrows.
I agree that one of the major unspoken objectives of the AQ criminals is to be taken seriously. They also want legitimacy. If we would try to deny them legitimacy, why not also deny them the serious tone that they crave?