Nine Years after 9/11, Conservatives Embolden Al-Qaeda with Rhetoric

Print More

Nine years after the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil, it is difficult to imagine Newt Gingrich wire transferring millions of dollars to Osama bin Laden. It is also hard to envision Rush Limbaugh sending a shipment of weapons to Al-Qaeda. However, many “well meaning” American figures are aiding bin-Laden and his cohorts with words almost as lethal as explosives or ammunition.
Unable to defeat the United States militarily, Al-Qaeda’s primary influence stems from its ideology. In a 1998 interview with Osama Bin Laden, ABC reporter John Miller uncovered the heart of Al-Qaeda’s philosophy through bin-Laden’s own words: “The terrorism we practice is of the commendable kind for it is directed at the tyrants and the aggressors and the enemies of Allah, the tyrants, the traitors who commit acts of treason against their own countries and their own faith and their own prophet and their own nation… Our religion is under attack. They kill and murder our brothers. They compromise our honor and our dignity and dare we utter a single word of protest against the injustice, we are called terrorists.” Under the banner of protecting his twisted interpretation of Islam, bin-Laden justifies his actions by saying Islam is “under attack” and that Muslims should protect their prophet and brothers from American aggression.
Philosophically, his objective is crystal clear. He needs to portray America as hating Islam, slandering the “honor” and “dignity” of Muslims, and as a real threat to Islamic culture. To combat this mentality, conservatives like Newt Gingrich have used the following logic: “There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia… America is experiencing an Islamist cultural-political offensive designed to undermine and destroy our civilization. Sadly, too many of our elites are the willing apologists for those who would destroy them if they could.”
If the former Speaker of the House meant that America was at war with the Taliban or Al-Qaeda, then he should have just said so instead of bolstering bin-Laden’s mission statement. His assertion that we are facing an “Islamist cultural-political offensive” can easily be used by Al-Qaeda to portray America as being at war with Islam. His reference to building a church in Saudi Arabia also reeks of demagoguery. Using the same logic, would Gingrich propose that the Bush tax cuts should be extended only if Egypt privatizes its health care?
After analyzing bin-Laden’s own words and hearing how Gingrich (who’s echoed the views of many in his party) has played into Al-Qaeda’s propaganda, one question comes to mind. How should we effectively combat the ideology behind Al-Qaeda – the same philosophy that recruits suicide bombers and bolsters bin-Laden’s deadly message?
Bruce Hoffman, a Professor at Georgetown University and a Senior Fellow at the Combating Terror Center explained to the Washington Post his view of how to attack bin-Laden’s philosophical objectives: “Point 1. a. more effectively pursue a “divide and conquer” strategy that seems to drive wedges between al Qaeda central and its affiliates elsewhere and also better seeks to counter al Qaeda’s ideology; b. better efforts to water down the al Qaeda brand and make al Qaeda and its ideology less attractive to the audiences its targets for support and new recruits; c. isolate al Qaeda intellectually and theologically to a greater extent than is currently being done.” Professor Hoffman’s detailed strategy to dismantle the “al Qaeda brand” and “ideology” might seem elitist to people like Newt Gingrich, but it directly relates to weakening the terrorist group.
Unfortunately, Al-Qaeda has many other high profile conservatives supporting its propaganda campaign by making its ideology attractive to potential recruits. On August 3, Rush Limbaugh made the following statements: “They’re planting the flag of victory with this mosque. That’s what they’re doing. Opening a mosque at Ground Zero? That says we won. That’s what’s going on here.” What’s most interesting about this quote is that Al-Qaeda can spin Limbaugh’s thoughts as either a “victory” for their side or as a proof that Americans hate Islam. What also makes his views frightening is the word “they” presumably refers to Muslim Americans, many of who also died in the 9/11 attacks and can’t rationally be associated with Al-Qaeda.
In a world where many Americans equate patriotism with wearing a flag pin, Gingrich, Limbaugh, and others have lost focus on what Al-Qaeda propaganda thrives upon. With their false bravado, they play right into bin-Laden’s hands. Pitting America against Islam is exactly what Al-Qaeda wants and it’s precisely what Gingrich and others have fostered with their words. Furthermore, conservatives have done nothing to make Al-Qaeda’s ideology “less attractive to the audiences it targets for support and new recruits.”
Finally we can always rely on the fundamentalist religious wing of the conservative base to embolden bin-Laden’s message even further. Pastor Terry Jones and the Koran burning fiasco has recently motivated a four star general of the U.S. Army, the Secretary of Defense, the President, and the State Department to warn of impending danger to troops if his proposed “Burn a Koran Day” takes place. This debacle has even been called a “recruitment bonanza” for Al-Qaeda, and rightfully so. With all the controversy surrounding Imam Rauf, organizer of the Ground Zero mosque, he’s never been accused of endangering the lives of America’s warriors. Rather, conservatives have given bin-Laden enough rhetorical ammunition to recruit the suicide bombers and fighters needed to attack our troops on a daily basis.
The more people talk about a “war on terror” while simultaneously making reference to Islam, bin-Laden scores a public relations victory. Gingrich, Limbaugh and others should remember that our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are the one’s backing up their talk and fighting the “war on terror” they so often evoke.
If toning down the rhetoric and attacking bin-Laden’s core philosophy can save lives and stifle Al-Qaeda’s propaganda strategy, then it’s time conservatives take notice.

0 thoughts on “Nine Years after 9/11, Conservatives Embolden Al-Qaeda with Rhetoric

  1. What was it that the National Review said when we were attacked on 9/11? We were attacked because we are “good” and our enemies “hate our democracy and our free markets” (or words to that effect). Get over it, National Review, Rush, Newt, & company. We were attacked because of our Middle East policies. I’m not justifying the mass murders of 9/11 but leave it to the neoconservatives to write their own history.

  2. How ironic that we on the Left were so often reminded in the days after 9-11-01 by these simpletons that “loose lips sink ships” –meaning they wanted the Left to shut up and be silent. The fantasy comes to mind yet again of locking the right wingnuts from all over the earth in a single room where they can all express their sadism and free us up from their drag on progress.

  3. I agree. The neocons keep feeding this war on terror. When, in the history of mankind has any nation been able to get rid of terror, every place on this planet? The whole purpose of a war on terror is to keep this country in war forever. The wingnuts are up in arms about Obamacare but are silent on perpetual war.

  4. Elaine,
    I am actually more afraid of ther infection winning out in Afrganistan and spreading into nuclear Pakistan. That is something to be deathly afraid of. Wouldn’t you agree?
    As a Liberal, i am sure you woudl support the the civial liberties of Afghans, whihc runs counter to the oppressive Taliban movement. Woman havubg access to school and progressing in Afghan society would lend itself to a more stable country. Woudn’t you agree.

  5. Even after 9/11 most Americans do not believe that they are vulnerable. Therefore It is important to remind them of terror organizations and rogue states that are constantly looking for opportunities to hit America and the free world whenever they can. Make sure 9/11 is not repeated while you fall asleep reading the naive interpretations of A.H.Goodman and his likes.

    • Hi Rita,
      I absolutely agree with you that Al-Qaeda is looking for ways to attack us on a daily basis. One of my concerns, however, is that the more we say that all of Islam is linked to the extremists, the more people like bin-Laden benefit.
      We are very vulnerable. We are vulnerable to shoe bombers, psychotic people who shoot up military bases, terrorists on planes, all these threats. But the danger doesn’t come from the guy in my neighborhood who owns the newstand (he’s Muslim), the danger comes from terrorist groups. Gingrich and others blur this reality to cause enough fear and panick for votes. The terrorist threat and the way they portray it are discordant and make us less safe. Our “civilization” will be fine no matter what Al-Qaeda does. In terms of protection, we need to focus on making sure information is processed more efficiently since many threats LIKE 9/11 – we are warned of and given prior notice but nobody doesn anything.

  6. David,
    IMO, we are in no position to continue fighting in Afghanistan over civil liberties. We are literally falling apart economically and can’t right all that we perceive as wrong on this planet. It’s time to worry about Americans first and put resources into our own country. In Afghanistan, the U.S. is spending $100 billion per year on military operations. That is borrowed money and with all those dollars the Chinese and the rest of the world are buying up our own factories. That money would be better spent on U.S. domestic issues, from debt reduction to infrastructure spending to building a green economy and freeing us from our dependence on foreign oil and all the dangers and pollution that go with it.
    The war in Afghanistan is the longest in our history and I don’t belive that U.S. interests, at stake in Afghanistan, warrant this level of sacrifice. Terrorist groups are now dispersing to Yemen and Somalia and Pakistan. Taking and holding Afghanistan is not essential to U.S. security. Further, we have no alliances there. We are working with a corrupt, ruthless government.
    If nuclear-armed Pakistan is a threat to us, isn’t it a threat to China, Iran, and Russia as well? Isn’t it a threat to NATO countries who have given token troops and, in some cases, are withdrawing completely? Pakistan is a concern but why can we not go back and blast al-Qaeda locations if we see terrorists regrouping there, just as we do in Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen? To keep us in Afghanistan because of Pakistan means, to me, that there is no end to this war.

  7. Elaine,
    I’m sorry if woman’s rights under the Taliban don’t warrant your concern. I thought the would as a Liberal cause.
    As for Pakistan, let me tell you their collapse in facvor of a Taliban style regime is a threat to us all. I met a German diplomat at a home stay while traveling in Armenia this past spring. She has a PHd in history and extensive diplomatic experience. We had a very long discussion, all night in fact. I was commenting on how well Germany faced up to the Holocasut and what a wonderful country it transformed itself into. She responded by saying it was ivery good, in fact too good. What was her point?. Germany and others are not paying enough attention to the next great threat. the section of the world that sits on the Afghan/Pakistani border. She see the taliban combined with AQ as an absolute threat. I see this war as a good fight hopefuly a winnable fight. Leaving Afghanistan in the cold woud be a horrific mistake.
    Now let’s get back to our regular programing, America’s ill policies the Middel East that drew a terrorist attack. Isnt; that code word for support for the most evil regime on the planet, the Zionists?

  8. David,
    There are human rights abuses all over this world. Do you want to go to war over all of them and quite frankly, we’ve lost some of our own rights here at home under the Patriot Act. Why not focus on the fact that we are the only major economy in the world that still doesn’t have universal health coverage. Not even to have access to medical care (except in an emergency situation) is a form of abuse, in my opinion. (Do you feel sick? Just die or pay up).
    Of course, women’s rights are a concern but the plight of Americans are a far greater concern to me. Poverty is rising. Americans can’t find work. Jobs continue to be sent overseas and it seems to be getting worse, not better. Homes are in foreclosure. Sorry, but I’m putting Americans first.
    What friend do we have in Pakistan? Elements of their own government and their own military support the Taliban. We have no allies in this fight. This war is not winnable. Your concern about Pakistan is warranted but we have to think of a different way to fight this fight instead of boots on the ground forever.
    How would you pay for perpetual war in Afghanistan/Pakistan while the rest of the world sits back and watches? Where do we get the money?
    Not sure what you meant by the last statement. It wasn’t code for anything. America’s lousy Middle East policies are America’s lousy Middle East policies:
    1. We preach democracy and human rights, yet prop up dictators and oligarchies who oppress Islamic people.
    2. By moving thousands of soldiers (U.S.) onto their sacred soil, we defile their land. This is how I believe they look upon our presence. How would you feel about foreign powers occupying the U.S.?
    3. And yes, if you want to talk about Zionists (though that wasn’t my intent), Americans have a hypocritical double standard in dealing with Arabs and Israelis.
    4. We attacked, invaded and continue to occupy a country that never harmed us, didn’t want war with us, and couldn’t defend itself against us–all on the pretext that Iraq had WMD and played a role in the 9/11 attacks. We destroyed an entire country. Thousands dead or maimed–we don’t have a figure. Millions who have fled and have yet to return. We’ve committed our own abuses.

  9. To David Stein
    Only a person who deliberately makes himself deaf and blind to what goes on in the world, and especially in the Middle East,would make such preposterous claims as yours about “the Zionists”. You cannot even call Israel by its name !. Why is Israel “the most evil regime in the world?” because it dares to protect itself after being attacked in 1948, in 1967, and in 1973 and hit by 8000 rockets from Gaza?? You must be one of those self hating Jews who internalized the gentiles’ concept that Jews have no right to defend themselves. By you Jews should let their enemies destroy them.
    What a disgrace.

    • Rita,
      I think you miss understood, I was implying that Israel bashing is a sport in this magazine and I have sent a personal e mail to David Beldan to that effect.
      Elaine,
      We cannot just up and leave Afghanistan. First of all, we have realy only just started a surge. Obama made it clear in his campaign that this was going to be his initiative. He won my vote in part for that reason. The Taliban represent about the worse we can see out of the Muslim world. Yes, we do close our eyes to other oppressive regimes and not just in the Arab world, but I see the fight in Afghanistan as something we have to win.
      As for Israel. Well it is not an angelic country, but it has to survive in the Middle East. It is by leaps and bound the most Democratic and least volatile regime in the region. The war they are fighting with the Palestinians is not one of oppressor vs. the oppressed and Israel faces a foe who use unconventional methods, They are 2 people struggling for the same land. With some hope and some prayer, perhaps an agreement can finally be eeked out. Hamas, though, will not sit by without trying to disrupt the process.

  10. David, this will be my last comment on this subject. My desire to leave Afghanistan has nothing to do with Israel. I am not alone in feeling that we need to leave. This view is shared by many Americans and now a recent report from the Afghanistan Study Group entitled “A New Way Forward: Rethinking U.S. Strategy in Afghanistan.”
    As for the article itself, I agree with the writer–pitting America against Islam is exactly what Al Qaeda wants. It is hateful rhetoric and can leave our soldiers exposed to more danger and goes against our own professed tolerance of other religions.

  11. Elaine
    I will have to disagree with you. The problems in Afghanistan will not remain in there if we leave.A German doplomat with far more experience than you and and I would agree. If 9/11 showed us ome thing it is that an ocean no longer protects us. No one except for right wingnuts would think that this is a war against Islam.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.