Al-Qaeda’s Virtual Reality in the Media

Spiked-Online reviews a new book on al-Qaeda by Faisal Devji, Landscapes of the Jihad. Devji, like Olivier Roy, repudiates the notion that al-Qaeda is a territorial entity that seeks territorial aims (e.g., the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, or even the caliphate).

Instead, al-Qaeda must be understood as a fluid, non-national movement whose aims are to get recognition in the global theater created by the media:

In short, the disparate individuals who are part of al-Qaeda, or who claim to be part of al-Qaeda, are not bonded by any common experience of oppression (many of them are well-to-do and Western-educated) or by shared political visions, but rather by fleeting and fluid relationships, often forged in the planning and execution of a one-off spectacular event rather in the pursuit of a future-oriented programme of ideas and tactics.

So al-Qaeda’s fanciful war is not for something tangible; it is not about making a state or an Islamic territory. Where the Islamic radicals of the past - from the Iranian revolutionaries of 1979 to that last gasp of Islamic fundamentalism in the shape of the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan in 1996 - were motivated by the desire to create an ideological state, al-Qaeda’s actions are better understood as a pose, Devji tells me, as ‘ethical gestures’. ‘Their acts function as exclamation marks’, he says.

And so, they’re acts of “martyrdom” are for the recognition they get for seeing their own names and faces in the newspapers and on TV:

In these post-political circumstances, al-Qaeda fights its battles in the media: its attacks are aimed at making global headlines rather than winning incremental victories towards some definable end. In his book, Devji argues that al-Qaeda’s acts of martyrdom only achieve meaning ‘by being witnessed in the mass media’. He describes one video obtained by Time magazine, which showed martyrs reading their last testaments and bidding farewell to their families before blowing themselves up in various parts of Iraq, as ‘the closest the jihad has come to creating its own form of a reality television show’. The video is ‘replete with scenes straight from Hollywood’, he argues: for example, one martyr dramatically kisses goodbye his beloved through her veil, which is ‘hardly an acceptable public spectacle for any Muslim tradition’ (7). Just as the media has increasingly become the place where politics happens across the West - a new political arena that has superseded crisis-ridden or sluggish parliaments - so it is also the ‘landscape’ in which al-Qaeda fights its weird war, or at least imprints its exclamation marks.

In short, they’ve tapped into the new voyeurism created by globalized media.

Their thuggish desire for recognition by the media reminds me of a scene in the 2002 Brazilian movie, City of God, which is about the drug wars in Rio’s slums. Li’l Zé, the leader of the most powerful group, is jealous that his rival gets his picture in the paper, so he gets a photographer, Rocket, who’s also the star of the movie, to shoot a picture of him and his gang, which gains him instant notoriety and, of course, satisfaction. Happily, it gets Rocket an internship with the Rio newspaper. Happily, it eventully leads to Li’l Zé’s death. Unhappily, violence of the slums continues.

3/4 of Canadians Hate Alberta; or 3/4 Are Fools

The National Post reports 3/4 of Canadians think oil and gas should be used as a political weapon against the US over the softwood lumber issue.

No report on what proportion want to use the auto industry, hydro, Maritime fisheries, Hamilton steel, Saskatchewan wheat, BC pot, etc. as trade sanctions against the US.

Barry Cooper on Alberta Pride, Canadian Envy

This Winnipeg Free Press editorial dates back to Oct. 2, but lines like this keep it timely:

One thing is certain, however: The pride of all Albertans, even those who wish to become even more loving and generous taxpayers, will have been engaged. The shameful things that have transpired inside the garrison lately in no way diminish the pride and self-respect of Albertans. Nothing but further shame will attend actions taken against this province from motives of envy.

Until Canadians beyond the province can take pride in the prosperity of Alberta, no Canadian can take pride in their country. That is a lesson to be learned outside the province, and not by us.

Alberta-to-Texas Pipeline in the Works

A new $3-billion US Alberta to Texas oil pipeline is in the works as the team that proposed the Alliance natural gas pipeline a decade ago looks to capitalize on the growing output of the province’s oilsands.

Altex Energy Ltd. wants to build the line from Northern Alberta to the refining hub of the Texas Gulf coast.

The private company’s management includes some of the key personnel behind the $5-billion Northeast-B.C. to Chicago Alliance project, which was proposed in 1995 and began shipping gas five years later.

More here.

Crossposted from Civitatensis

Crown Will Appeal Coffin Sentence

The Crown has been granted leave to appeal Paul Coffin’s ultra light sentence of two years less a day for defrauding the federal government of more than $1.5 million. Coffin was also sentenced to give public speeches about his experience in the AdScam racket. He has already given his first talk to Management students at McGill University.

Crossposted from Civitatensis

Explaining the Barbarians to the Civilized

The Globe and Mail devotes two editorials to Alberta today (both behind the firewall).

Jeffrey Simpson chews over the “wacky” non-campaign campaign to replace Ralph Klein, where Ted Morton (whom he doesn’t mention - “too barbaric” to mention, I suppose), Mark Norris, and Jim Dinning travel across to rally support even though they’re not officially campaigning. Nothing new nor interesting here (surely a redundancy when it comes to Simpson).

Gordon Gibson explains to Glob readers that if and when Alberta separatism “becomes respectable,” then the rest of Canada needs to “watch out.” I take this to mean that, unlike Quebec’s flirtation with separatism, Alberta has the means to do it if it wants to. And he explains the political landscape of Alberta’s relationship with the rest of Canada to explain what factors would have to come into play for Alberta separatism to sky-rocket (i.e., NEP II, or some equivalent). None of this is original. But Gibson’s explanation of the relevance to the Clarity Act is worth highlighting:

In Canada, almost unique among nations, this independence sentiment has a legal outlet, namely, the Clarity Act, which says what a province must do to begin the separation process.

The act, much touted by the Chrétien government, was a ticking time bomb from the beginning. No special prescience was required. Testifying to a Commons committee on the Clarity Act and separatism in 2000, I said: “Like all controversial activities made legal, what is legal will in due course become respectable.” Sovereignty has long been respectable in Quebec but there’s an affordability problem. If it becomes respectable in rich Alberta, watch out.

So here’s some “civilized” advice on using the law provided to the barbarians.

On barbarism versus civilization in Canada, read Max West’s treatise on urban liberals. That’s a good primer on Globe and Mail hermeneutics.

Black Woman Visits Hobbits

For those of you still in awe of our good-for-whatever-ails-humanity Governor General, may I bring to your attention a story described by some as “fantastic”: here. Fantastic is quite a stretch, not how I would describe it—more “annoying” than anything.

Visiting with Indian students, the Governor General had this to say “at Children of the Earth [hmmm, Hobbits] high school in Winnipeg’s North End”:

“There are things that a black woman understands profoundly when we talk about prejudices, when we talk about feeling left out, feeling abandoned. There are things in my experience that are probably very similar to yours.”

What can one say? No details of her experience? In my estimation, there are many black women in the world, of various backgrounds and possessing various virtues. To hedge understanding prejudice, being “left out” and “abandoned”, solely in terms of her racial features rather than her virtues as a woman who made choices in life and took responsibility for them, Madame Jean furthers the prejudice that being a black woman means something other than what we give it. And in so doing, she encourages these children to grow up losers, to think they deserve everything without having to do anything solely because they are Indians. Another example of poor leadership emanating from this affirmative action appointee as The Queen’s representative.

Don’t get me wrong! Indians have pride of place and history in this country, and for good reason. In the face of government endorsed efforts to the contrary, their communities have survived; though just barely and in socially precarious condition. Having survived, these communities can carry forward cultural practices from the past, that, with honest leadership, will speak to younger generations of significant ways to live their lives. This is good.

But unfortunately, Madame Jean is a vice-regal “advocate”; not one forged in the choices she made to behave rightly or wrongly in life’s difficult situations, but one privileged because of historical disadvantage and good repoire with Montreal intellectuals. She demonstrates little appreciation for higher virtues beyond racial appearance and history. She is not concerned with matters of character: integrity, courage, devotion to duty, etc. She self-aggrandises with the baleful optimism of racial privilege and government welfare. Too bad!

In seeking to be a vice-regal advocate and lift people up, maybe she should look to the example of The Duke of Edinburgh’s Award; a case in point of royal offices advocating character through meeting adversity with responsibility. Ultimately, even royals are respected not because of their historical privilege but because of strength in character, in good choice and responsibility. And as with any echelon of leadership, they get respect when what they advocate is grounded in common sense.

As Frodo says to Sam, encouraging him to use Galadriel’s gift to regrow the Shire:

Use all the wits and knowledge you have of your own, Sam … and then use the gift to help your work and better it. And use it sparingly. There is not much here, and I expect every grain has a value.

Church and State Must Pay for Residential Schools

Canadian Press reports the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled the federal government must pay 75%, and the United Church of Canada must pay 25%, of compensation to aboriginals for residential school abuse. The gov’t had appealed the case from the lower court in BC, which had ruled that the feds had to pay 100%.

The article is short on details and on the Court’s reasoning. Nor has the decision been posted at the SC’s website.

Other cases are in the pipeline, in other provinces and involving the Roman Catholic and Anglican Church. However, I would think that the Supreme Court wanted to clarify the legal issues of this case in order to resolve the other cases in the lower courts.

Stay tuned.

UPDATE: CBC radio reports the SC ruled against the UCC’s argument that it can’t be held liable because it was acting as a charitable organization as an arm of the government. In other words, they argued they were simply taking orders.

UPPERDATE: The name of the case is Blackwater v. Plint. CBC has more details.

The Sayings of Our Philosopher-Queen

Small Dead Animals has featured the wise words of our Governor-General. I hope Kate posts more.

And you can check the GG’s website to learn all about her accomplishments.

Meanwhile, our G-G wrapped up her visit to Winnipeg with a speech to an aboriginal high school and by presiding over a citizenship ceremony. Of course these are part of her job, but I’m still confused what they have to do with the stated purpose of her visit, namely, addressing Western indignation.

Looks like her handlers, and the national media, forgot about that.

How Do You Say, “D-oh!” in Arabic?

The Independent reports on an Arab version of The Simpsons. Apparently, it’s not that funny.

More seriously, Paul Cantor made the argument a few years back that The Simpsons carries with it a serious political message. One of its messages is that Springfield the town harkens back to the ancient polis, where people govern themselves. Yet, Westerners don’t live in a polis, as evidence by the fact that there’s only one Hollywood, though Simpsons has its own film company.

In other words, its political message, and the absurdity of contrasting the dynamics of Springfield with contemporary life, is part of what makes it so funny.

Can the Arab world, not known for its practice of self-government (past or present), appreciate the humor of the Simpsons?

« Previous Page — Next Page »