Journalism is a dog-eat-dog business these days. Lack of talent is no longer enough. No, you have to do something truly original and spectacular in order to get noticed.
Take, for example, Osama Bin Laden. After years of fruitless struggle (and the customary mound of polite rejection letters) he has finally been rewarded with his own column in the Guardian:
The west’s occupation of our countries is old, but takes new forms. The struggle between us and them began centuries ago, and will continue. There can be no dialogue with occupiers except through arms. Throughout the past century, Islamic countries have not been liberated from occupation except through jihad. But, under the pretext of fighting terrorism, the west today is doing its utmost to besmirch this jihad, supported by hypocrites.
Employing him was clearly the right decision. Who else can boast such an enticing combination of political commentary, history and anti-Western rhetoric? This is sizzling stuff. Looks like the Guardian has landed itself a new champion of social justice and the environment.
This is low. I mean Al Jazeera low. Yasser Arafat is looking _down_ at you, that’s how low you are.
The man who murdered 3000 Americans has a column with the Guardian.
Americans won’t forget Sept. 11, and this American won’t forget this either.
Terribly disturbing. The fact that the piece is given a title by the Guardian staff, and that it is given a striking amount of respect, is disheartening.
An act of High Treason…..
They really are on a different planet to the one I am on. I spent ten minutes thinking it was probably a joke site from someone parodying the Guardian.
I’ll give them this much – they are as good at winding up their non target audience as we are at winding up the frothing graudianista’s. Very nicely played, although despicable – I wouldn’t expect anything more from the Guardian.
Regards
But why not? (presuming it is for real). The more freedom extremists are given to expound their views, the more able people are to see them for what they are and draw their own conclusions accordingly. Far more dangerous is suppression.
I trust he negotiated suitable fee 😉
Column? Hardly – they’ve just printed the transcript, perhaps edited, of what was on the BBC following the original Al Jazeera report. Before every wacko in backwoods USA starts gunning for The Guardian, let’s remind ourselves that OBL has not just become that organ’s latest foreign correspondent, filing copy by satellite from his cave beneath the Hindu Kush or wherever… I think it is in our interest to read exactly what OBL purportedly says – ? That is, to make it easier to track him down and kill the bastard, together with his followers.
What really struck me when I read it was that the tone didn’t seem all that far out for the Guardian. I’ll bet a good few Guardian readers agreed with the jist of the piece. Scary.
Tony H wrote:
Column? Hardly – they’ve just printed the transcript, perhaps edited, of what was on the BBC following the original Al Jazeera report.
Except that the top line reads “Comment”, and they’ve given it a headline the way one would expect with any other op-ed piece.
If they had simply wanted to include a transcript of the tape, they could have written a paragraph at the beginning of the piece that said something to the effect of, “The following is a transcript of the tape of Osama bin Laden aired by Al-Jazeera TV on XYZ date”.
That’s the Guardian – edgy as ever. Must be a shame for Alan Rusbridger that Hitler isn’t still knocking around. He’d be a dead cert for their Israel comment op-ed.
Mark Ellot is right – the more this vile, nihilist philosophy is given the “oxygen of publicity”, the sooner it will wither and die as people recognise it for the foulness it is.
That may not have been the Guardian’s idea, but it’s the way to see it.
I hope the French and the Germans will be berating “Bin Laden” for his crude, unstatesmanlike use of the term “chain of evil”.