Tag: Terrorism

Posted on Posted in Book Reviews No Comments

The controversy surrounding the detention of David Hicks at Guantanamo Bay by the United States government has waned.  In the aftermath of 9/11 and the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan – in that era when the War on Terror was a novelty, not a socio-political framework, when the soundbites were filled with Bush and Howard – it was another matter.   Do you remember the banners, the protests?  Do you recall how the Hicks factor played out in the political tumult of 2007, when he was plea bargained to freedom, but Rudd was elected anyway?

Yes, that David Hicks.

I wondered when he would speak out.  There was a control order and a gag order in place when he was released.  But the times, they have a-changed.  And Guantanamo – My Journey, Hicks’ own account of his life before and during his five-and-a-half year ordeal is well and truly published.  I have found it a fascinating read.  It is also the first ever official “ebook” that I have owned and read.

So what do I think?  He writes with a precise and articulate tone.  It is somewhat askance to the account of the lack of education of his early life – the school dropout jackeroo.  I suspect a ghost writer, but then again he has a clear motivation to form his words well and tell his side of the story – to have his day in the media courthouse.

The big question of course is – was he actually guilty of anything?  Is this his own form of propaganda to play himself in a good light?  He was self admittedly naive – some would say stupid – to imagine that joining militant organisations in Kosovo and Kashmir would not land him in some sort of trouble.

At times it feels like he is playing to a politically correct audience as he covers his adventures in a “I was just concerned for the oppressed” light.  For sure I do not suspect that he was a terrorist in any way – but his declaration that “I have never killed anyone or attempted to.  I have never hurt or injured anyone during my travels, nor did I try to” beggars a certain amount of belief; he joined a military organisation with no intention to use force?

He tells his story well, however, and I found myself caught up in the narrative – I was interested in his interest in Islam, and its later waning, his desire to travel, the way he described the internal struggles of his incarceration.  I found myself trying to imagine the various scenes, to get some sense of the experience.

The second part of the book – the account of his detention – is well footnoted.  It provides corroboration to his story and demonstrates clearly and convincingly the inhumanity of an American militarised bureaucracy.  Even tonight, on the eve of the tenth anniversary of 9/11, I was watching Dick Cheney on the news declaring that the use of torture was justified and justifiable.  I felt a surge of injustice.

The heroes I was looking for are there – Terry Hicks, the dogged father, Major Mori, the principled military lawyer.  I’m not sure if I put David Hicks in that category – while tenacious and amazingly robust, there is little heroism in his character – just much to be pitied and regretted and ultimately relieved about.

This is a sorry story.  But it is still a story of our times.  And it should be read.

Posted on Posted in Q&A 1 Comment

Anonymous asks: Coming up 9/11-“Terrorism takes life.Christian martyr gives life”. My question is how this can be better worded or used at that time?

First of all, I’ll take your quote as as a notion rather than a direct quote (a quick google didn’t find anything).  If it is a direct quote – let me know, for it’s provenance may set some context that I’m not aware of.

Some quick thoughts.

It is helpful because

  1. There is truth to it – a terrorist is the bringer of violence, a Christian martyr (in the ilk of Polycarp and many others across history and in recent times) reflect Christ by demonstrating the victory of God in with and through being the recipient of violence.
  2. The word “martyr” literally means “witness.”  A Christian martyr bore witness to Jesus by trusting in him even unto death.  This witness is a proclamation that brings life, encourages others to turn to God who redeems and empowers to stand against sin and oppression.  I think it was Tertullian who said “the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church” for the witness of faith in those who lost their life inspired faith in those who saw that witness.  So yes, the martyr – the witness, brings life.

It  is an unhelpful wording because

  1. The word “martyr” has become semantically impoverished and, with images of face-covered machine-gun wielding suicide bombers on TV, I would think it has become almost synonymous with “religious fanatic.”  And so the average person would not see the distinction in the quote between “terrorist” and “martyr” but between “muslim fanatic” and “christian fanatic” and would take the phrase to simply be a “my religion is better than yours” polemic.
  2. One persons terrorist is another persons martyr.  Those who have perpetrated acts of terrorism are often described by this term by their followers.  They would argue that it has furthered “life” – by some definition – in that it has furthered truth or justice as they see it.

Given all this I think a better phrasing would more clearly draw this contrast, and would emphasise Jesus – him which is being witnessed about, not the one doing the witness.

So perhaps:

“Terrorism: Death from violence.  Jesus Christ: Life from death”

I’m sure someone could come up with something better though.

Posted on Posted in Q&A

DaveO asks:

Osama gets Obama – idiots dancing in the streets, singing, chanting and waving flags, celebrating their victory.

Obama gets Osama – idiots dancing in the streets, singing, chanting and waving flags, celebrating their victory.

There is a very real difficulty in bringing Osama to a court and having a trial. However, the current approach is anything be edifying. Can you tease out a biblical understanding/response.

Thanks for the question.  It came in just as a facebook/twitter conversation led me to this quote by Martin Luther King:

“Are we seeking power for power’s sake? Or are we seeking to make the world and our nation better places to live. If we seek the latter, violence can never provide the answer. The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate. So it goes. Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that.” A Testament of Hope: The Essential Writings and Speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr.

I think I’ve said it before somewhere that the response of the US to 9/11 was typical and therefore far from ideal.  Pax Americana is not a wholesome aspiration.  I see very little distinction from militant Islam in it – “Yes, we are a religion of peace, when we’re in control.”

But, you asked for a biblical teasing out, so here goes:  Like all good theological questions there are two somewhat contrasting parts to the balanced truth.

The first is this:  Violence is not the path of the gospel.  This is Martin Luther King’s position of course.  Apparently even Bonhoeffer, who contributed to a (justifiable, it would seem) assassination attempt on Hitler, considered that act to be a taking of guilt upon himself.  Jesus of course, eschewed violence at the time of his arrest –

Matthew 26: 51 And behold, one of those who were with Jesus stretched out his hand and drew his sword and struck the servant of the high priest and cut off his ear. 52 Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword. 53 Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels? 54 But how then should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must be so?” 55 At that hour Jesus said to the crowds, “Have you come out as against a robber, with swords and clubs to capture me? Day after day I sat in the temple teaching, and you did not seize me. 56 But all this has taken place that the Scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled.” Then all the disciples left him and fled.  ESV

And then, of course, there is the familiar command for us to love our enemies – particularly in the light of the Kingdom of God in which, Christ asserts, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.”

Matthew 5:43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? 48 You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.  ESV

The second is this:  Justice is good, and that involves punishment.  Would it be right to ignore Osama bin Laden and not call him to account?  I think Romans 13 portrays the governing authorities as God’s agents for this purpose

Romans 13: 4b But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. ESV

I think the framework perhaps is to consider Romans 13 punishment is an act of judgement.  And to the extent that the human authority acts justly, it is an act of judgement that prefigures the judgement of all things at the end.  If you like – a judging ahead of time to prevent harm, pain and further sin.  Such an act is not done lightly for the judge presumes to represent and point to God, our judge.

The balance then is this:

Both things point to grace.   The non-violence of the gospel is the nature of the eternal kingdom that we are passing into, by grace.  Romans 13 points to the judgement that we are passing from/through, by grace.

In application, therefore:  The use of violence against Osama is not necessarily wrong – a violent, evil man needed to be stopped.  But it is a dreadful thing (as Bonhoeffer knew) and should be measured, and done with trembling and even regret – regret that it had to come to this, regret that this is a necessary act in a sinful world while we yet precede the day when all things are made right.  In the light of an eternal gospel of peace and non-violence (lions laying down with the lamb) we need grace in all things, including this, to cover the guilt and brokenness of us all.

Therefore, the jubilation in the streets must be considered as “idiotic” (your words).  It is simply presumptious – are they all without sin that they should rejoice at the stones being cast?  Triumph, gloating and celebration has no place here.

Some have compared the scenes with that of the end of World War 2.  I reject the comparison.  The jubilation at the end of World War 2 is not so much that Hitler was dead, but that the war was over.  It was relief, a lifting of a burden, not the celebration of a “justice done.”  As if war could bring justice!  I’m reminded of the scene in a later episode of Band of Brothers where an American soldier screams at captured Germans about the pointlessness of it all.

My response to all this is not “God bless America”, but “Maranatha, Come Lord Jesus”

Posted on Posted in Book Reviews No Comments

It’s not often that I read a book that makes me smile and wince for all the right reasons.

Cory Doctorow’s latest novel, Little Brother, has been available for some time now. I have had the Creative-Commons licensed on-line version for months but being handed a tree-ware copy gave me an excuse to read it.

Having read reviews, and having heard the cheers from the techno-geek rebel wannabes that clip on red-copycat-capes as they seed the blogosphere with attempts at profundity, I wasn’t surprised at the story or the plot. In fact it is a rather a linear plot with some clumsy sequences and character introductions – but right on the money for the apparent mid-teen audience. (Note to the discerning parent: my classification would be an Australian M-Rated, adult themes, mild violence, drug use, nudity, sex scenes)

But it’s not the literary weight of Little Brother that gives its value – it is it’s subject matter. Set in a very slightly futuristic San Francisco in the days and weeks following a significant terrorist bombing it explores the very topical and present issues of freedom and security. Questions are raised about the fundamentals of (American) political freedom – and the psychology behind giving up freedoms for the sake of security only to arrive at the reality of security theatre that masks an ever-growing bureaucratic control of society. As I was reading it I was constantly thinking about issues that Bruce Schneier often raises only to find that he had written an afterword in the book itself!

Doctorow teases open issues of how the so-called War on TerrorTM gets used for manipulation and places this within a generational and cultural milieu that draws from San Francisco hippiedom alway through to the technological ubiquity of the latest generation weaving the values of the hacker into the whole thing. Surveillance, privacy, civil rights, generational angst, and a little bit of Hollywood-esque action are thrown together in just the right way to make me smile and wince for all the right reasons.

This book is bit absolutist but deliberately so. I think that what it does best is point at the hypocrisies of Western societies and state clearly in the words of a seventeen year-old hacker “The Emperor has no clothes.” It takes current thin wedge-ends and plays them out to an extreme. It is an excellent summary of the values, the angst, and the serious philosophy of a generation and sub-culture that riles at a protectionist-by-increment cancer creeping into our civilisation.

Even Doctorow’s decision to release it through creative-commons – giving away his book in the face of old-style mercantile establishment who gasp at the audacity of such a business plan – is part of the message of this book. Although it does make me wonder if they’ll ever be a movie.

From a Christian point of view: Well it’s not exactly from the same crowd behind Veggie Tales and Guitar Praise Hero if you know what I mean. And it’s certainly wouldn’t be held up as wholesome by those who confuse American patriotism with Christian spirituality. But it does remind us that all government and nations rule only at God’s pleasure. It paints a picture of what humans do to each other. I agree with much of its critique, then rest with gladness on the truth that God is in control and in him is safety, security, and sometimes the energy for counter-cultural proclamation.

Anyway. Download it. Pick it up. Enjoy it. And ponder.

image_pdfimage_print