Liars & Believers

Time Magazine’s interview with Marwan, an Iraqi insurgent who plans to blow himself up to further the cause of getting the American’s out of Iraq. The article was posted on Somalia Online, and one of the nomads has pointed out that the words fundamentalism, and radical was not used in the entire article. So here is a little response or rather an opinion why they’re not used as much, and how the language of the media is constantly shifting. The last two terms [fundamentalism and radical] are disappearing because they are occasionally used against the Bush administrations, terms such as Christian fundamentalism’ and ‘radical conservatism’ are somewhat redundant in liberal media critique against George Bush Jr. It’s even interesting when we evaluate the usage of language in the media – for example, we the see the dehumanization of suicide bombers by calling them ‘homicide bombers’ – it sidetracks their political cause - ultimately categorizing them into a criminal/and animalistic group. In addition to that, when Palestinians homes are destroyed, and demolished – the media often uses words such as ‘raze’ -the word sounds like ‘raise’ and people might think that it implies a non-destructive event, when in fact, raze means to destroy, flatten and etc. Even in the US political discourse – we clearly see the shift in language usage – for example compassionate conservatism is one concept that has been used a lot lately. Even this interview – we don’t get to empathize with Marwan – we see him as a person with conflicting beliefs. The writer examines him as a person, who is infatuated with the idea or theory of insurgency – he paints him as someone who is mesmerized by the pop-idolization of suicide bombing – the writer even emphasizes Marwans political ideas of global dominance post-liberation Iraq (don’t forget Marwan wants Americans out of Iraq first), showcasing that Marwan is too emotional, irrational, and his political beliefs to be entirely utopian. Western media has portrayed suicide bombers as irrelevant actors in Middle Eastern politics. Rather they have discredited them as political worriers and painted them as terrorists. They have often showed us that suicide bombing is a culture of worship –I remember on a report on TV showing posters of suicide bombers and the kind of respect, and celebrity status they get. By showing us this clip, or even the analytical overview or even presenting the concept into public discourse – it diminishes political apathy and discredits the overall cause. In fact when we see posters of bombers in local shops – there’s an element of desire – ultimately it’s not in the path to liberation, but the path to post-mortality superstardom. To live in misery is hell in it self – but to complete a horrible existence with a horrendous event – and after all be loved when your gone – who can resist that. In the lonely crowds of the willing as Beanie Sigel once suggested in a song ‘everybody wants to be a star.’ Muslim Westerners might think this, but than again, Sigel also suggests in another track that we often talk liberal, think Muslim and act like a Kufar. The US plans to occupy Iraq for the next decade, and please believe that Iraqi-Insurgent Idol will have truckloads of contestants. Perhaps they are true believers of the cause and the media should not display them in such manner, they should make serious of their paths – and showcase why they’re doing what they’re doing – and most of all they should not make them out to be human missiles that are ideologically handicapped. Instead they should emphasize their struggles, and at best acknowledge their tactics to be meaningful, effective, and politically feasible in the long run.