August 04, 2005
NYC Letter: Broadcasting A Root Cause Of Terrorism
It used to be received wisdom that a root cause of terrorism was poverty and by implication the West was self-condemned by its own prosperity. Yet the burakumin have managed redress without terror. The dalits have steadily improved their miserable lot without beheadings. The hapless and destitute boat people bootstrapped their fortunes without car bombs. But don't take our word for it, there's a Harvard study that makes the same point with footnotes.
In the past, we heard people refer to the strong link between terrorism and poverty, but in fact when you look at the data, it's not there.
We think a root cause of terrorism is, well, inciting people to acts of terror. Person A convinces Person B to blow up Person(s) C, which Person B hurries off to do or is intent on doing before some self-immolating embarrassment. The causality is just so damn palpable.
So the challenge for Person A becomes acquiring Person B's attention, which brings us to Al-Manar (the "The Beacon") TV.
Al-Manar TV is Hezbollah TV, or as Ariel Cohen at TCS puts it, "All Intifada, All the Time":
Al Manar, however, makes al Jazeera look like PBS. ... Al Manar constantly calls upon the "Arab masses" to "mobilize" and "resist" the U.S. presence in Iraq and elsewhere, while it glorifies murder-suicide bombings against civilians in Israel. ... In fact, according to Hizballah, it is the U.S. and Israel which are "terrorist states" whereas"jihad, resistance, martyrdom... is actually removing terrorism. Humanity will not be blessed without removing America's type of terrorism...We have to continue our jihad in all different types in order to save humanity from the (American) terrorist thinking."
Here's a Hezbollah program guide.
The Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center at the Center for Special Studies gives a detailed report on Hezbollah's puzzle-box arrangements for Al-Manar TV "broadcasts preaching to terrorism and anti-American, anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic incitement" beamed to the great big world, which brings us to France.
Last November Al-Manar applied to the Conseil Supérieur Audiovisuel (i.e., French Higher Audiovisual Council , "CSA"), France's broadcasting regulator, for a broadcast license and promised to play nice:
"We are ready to respect French law and will submit to it," [station chief] Mohammed Haidar told Thursday's edition of the conservative Paris daily Le Figaro. "We have agreed to be bound by the agreement required of us" by the CSA.
Now granted, the EU would not come around to pronouncing Hezbollah a terrorist organization till March 10 of 2005. This non-binding resolution (the weakest of weak teas) had been long delayed by a successful French campaign of dithering over a distinction between Hezbollah's political and military wings. A distinction that, outside of the French mind, does not exist.
Muhammad Fannish, a member of the Political Bureau of Hezbollah, told al-Manar Television in January 2002 that "no differentiation is to be made between the military wing and the political wing of Hezbollah."
It has never been a mystery what Hezbollah is up to, yet thoughtful Jack concluded that "the time was not right" to properly recognize Hezbollah for what it is and does.
Against cautions and alarms and all the expectations of the established evidence, CSA granted Al-Manar a broadcast license. Shortly after Al-Manar broadcast this:
Less than ten days after Hezbollah’s “al-Manar” television station was permitted to broadcast in France, one of its commentators has stirred uproar after he accused Israel of “repeated attempts in the past several years to spread AIDS throughout the Arab world”.The commentator, who was defined as an expert on the “Zionist entity”, described at length how Israel has been trying to spread dangerous diseases, including AIDS, in the Arab world.
Then-PM Raffarin politely bleated that Al-Manar be banned:
"Al-Manar's programmes are incompatible with our values. It is clear they will lead to the termination of the contract between the CSA and Al-Manar."
What follows is a predictable cascade of headlines:
FRENCH REGULATORS WANT AL-MANAR TV OFF AIR
PARIS, November 30, 2004 (AFP) - Communication Minister Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres told parliament he hoped the station, Al-Manar, would be taken off the [Eutelsat S.A.] satellite "very soon" ... The move to cancel the licence - which the CSA gave to the Al-Manar station less than two weeks ago - came after several "serious defaults regarding the contractual agreements" to which the channel is subject, the CSA said in a statement.
AL-MANAR TV BLASTS 'ZIONIST' PLOT TO TAKE IT OFF AIR
December 2, 2004 (AFP)
FRENCH MEDIA BODY MOVES AGAINST AL-MANAR TV
PARIS, December 7, 2005 (AFP) - French media authorities Tuesday launched a procedure against Lebanese television channel Al-Manar... The CSA addressed a letter to the president of the Lebanese Communication Group, which controls Al-Manar, quoting remarks broadcast by the station last Thursday which it described as "liable to constitute incitement to hatred or violence."
FRENCH COURT TO RULE ON AL-MANAR TV BAN
December 11, 2004 (AFP)
FRENCH COURT ORDERS END TO AL-MANAR BROADCASTS
PARIS December 14, 2005 (AFP) - French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier told television station France 2 that "we must respect" the court's ban... Al-Manar late Monday issued a statement claiming the ban was the result of Israeli pressure "following a political campaign by the Zionist lobby in France."It said "the ban constitutes an attack on freedom of expression, a denial of the principles espoused by France and a dangerous precedent in France's attitude towards Arab media."
The head of Lebanon's broadcast regulator, Abdel Hadi Mahfouz, last Friday warned he would look at imposing reciprocal bans on French media transmitting into Lebanon if Al-Manar was taken off Eutelsat.
Sure enough.
BEIRUT CABLE COMPANIES DUMP FRENCH CHANNEL
BEIRUT December 20, 2004 (AFP) - About 50 private cable operators in Beirut have stopped the distribution of French channel TV5 in solidarity with Al-Manar, the mouthpiece of the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah banned by France.
And that was where we left France's weak-wristed response to her willing assent as a tool of Hezbollah. Until we read this:
FRANCE TELECOM ACCUSED OF HELPING HEZBOLLAH
PARIS, July 20, 2005 (AFP) - The Simon Wiesenthal Center, a leading Jewish lobby group, on Wednesday accused France Telecom of helping Al-Manar television, the mouthpiece of the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah, to broadcast in Asia and Latin America.The centre...said in a statement that France Telecom subsidiary Globecast was providing Al-Manar to Latin America through Spanish satellite provider Hispasat.
In Asia, the Wiesenthal Center said that Globecast was at fault for using Asiasat to offer Al-Manar programming.
Now a world that hasn't defined terrorism, or rather is dead set against such a definition, or consigns terrorism to a matter of semantical tastes, is a world full of shocks -- SHOCKS! -- where everyone can safely pretend they had no idea that terrorists were about. We do not ask for France to love Israel. We do not ask that France love the Jews, though we do expect her to protect those in her care. No. We only ask that France stop pretending she is shocked.
We only ask that France and her like-minded chums stop pretending.
Posted by Damian at August 4, 2005 01:00 PMWe think a root cause of terrorism is, well, inciting people to acts of terror.
By itself, I just can't buy this. You can go just about anywhere you like - a Catholic church in New York, a synogogue in Idaho, a Baptist church in Georgia - and try to incite people to violence. Try for years, and I'd be amazed if you met with a single success. I think it takes a cocktail.
You need, at minimum, two components to be present. The first is an atmosphere where such acts are not only not shunned, but tacitly approved or even expressly encouraged. One person's incitement can't create this environment - it needs to be a more pervasive message. This on its own is probably enough to get people throwing rocks at Israeli soldiers, or possibly shooting at American troops (if they think they can do so safely), but it isn't enough to get them making beheading videos or turning themselves into meat confetti.
Second, the life of the person in question should not be such a thing that it would be missed by them. Someone who loves their life does not wear a bomb into a subway. Someone who subscribes to a religion that requires their immiseration and lives under the bootheel of a tyrant is quite another story - they're ready for paradise right now, thank you.
Combine these two elements, and I think you've got people you can incite to terror.
Posted by: Doug at August 5, 2005 09:31 PMDoug,
The post does not claim incitement as the root cause. It is characterized as a root cause. The post begins with the difference between a gauzy but widely believed cause, poverty, and a concrete but widely ignored cause, incitement. Incitement begins with person A's access to person B's attention. How person B responds depends on a mix of things.
As you suggest, if person B has had two cocktails he is more prone to do something crazy.
Regards,
DGB
I would rather say that it's incitement and poverty, let me take an exemple :
When there was the war between Iran and Irak, the Iranian army, selected young mens (under 18) in the poorest suburbs of Teheran, they gave them a small key that they wore around their neck, it was the key that will open the doors of paradise when they would die on the battlefield (a paradise full of everything they wanted).
And it worked, thousand and thousands of young men died with their small keys. They thought that they had nothing to loose (they belonged to the poorest) but everything to win in an other life.
Q: Why isn't Bangladesh swarming with homicidal maniacs?
A: Because their poverty may be pervasive, but misery is not religiously or culturally required of them, nor does their society lionize as "glorious" the slaughtering of infidels.
Yes, some cultures ARE inferior to others.
Posted by: Doug at August 6, 2005 07:40 AMThe post does not claim incitement as the root cause.
My bad, I see that now.
Posted by: Doug at August 6, 2005 07:41 AM




