A Symbolic Gesture

January 7th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

Al Qaeda nerd Adam Gadahn has called on Muslim extremists in the Middle East to receive American President George W. Bush with bombs, booby-traps and so on when he visits the region and he tore up his American passport, saying that it was symbolic gesture and that every person who’s compassionate, honest, moral, etc. should feel ashamed to carry such a passport.

After he destroyed it he said that he doesn’t “need it to travel” anyway.

One wonders whether Gadahn joined Al Qaeda because he couldn’t get a girl. As an Al Qaeda operative, I’m sure that his buddies have hooked him up with one, two, three or four women.

What’s - to me at least - quite an interesting question is how did Gadahn get where he is? Where did he make the wrong decisions? Where did he become hateful and where did he lose his American identity (not the passport, the inner identity I mean)? At what point in time - and why - did he decide to turn against his country, his family, and his countrymen? How does he feel now that he’s a traitor?

Those are interesting questions indeed, but what’s perhaps even more interesting is: will he be tried as the traitor he is once he gets caught?

One certainly hopes so, doesn’t one?

You can watch the video at Memri; Hot Air and Atlas Shrugs also blogged about it.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  1. Xel
    January 7th, 2008 at 17:28
    Reply | Quote | #1

    "Where did he become hateful and where did he lose his American identity (not the passport, the inner identity I mean)?"

    Perhaps when its leader did.

    Wait, could one get tried for treason for saying "I’m Qaeda now. Fudge this passport right here."? What exactly has this guy done and why do we have to persecute him before we get to those criminals in the administration? Listen, it’s nice that we all have this obviously mentally and intellectually deficient moonbat to laugh at and make snark over but, really, he is a distraction from people who also have overstepped laws and endangered americans as well.

    Shorter me: If you’re going after Gadahn, get to some more difficult targets before, would you?

  2. Michael van der Galien
    January 7th, 2008 at 17:33
    Reply | Quote | #2

    Xel: that comment is so filled with BDS and moral relativism that I had to think 30 seconds about whether or not it should be deleted. I’ve decided not to do that, but I encourage you not to push me.

    If that isn’t the most ridiculous comment I’ve seen in approximately two months I don’t know what is.

  3. Xel
    January 7th, 2008 at 18:09
    Reply | Quote | #3

    "I’ve decided not to do that, but I encourage you not to push me."
     
    So I am pushing you if I defend my notion that there are crimes that will never be called out because it’s too much of a hassle? Clinton got indicted because one side mustered a riot of indignation - should justice really be carried out based on which group can muster enough pressure? I think simple legal and moral principles that have been applied in the past could tear through several prominent politicians on both sides, and I think acerbic, serious talk about indicting some pipsqueak should happen after the discussion about casting a serious eye at said people.

    I’m seeing a lot of people getting away with whatever because a) They would be difficult to take down b) There are pragmatic problems and there is not ime for ideals any longer and c) We are too busy being upset about some Jonesy who has spent too much time on democraticunderground.com.

    Oh and d) There are moral relativists with BDS about. They are all really extreme because they have this notion that US politicians have created systematic and logistical obstacles to scrutiny of and legal proceedings against them.

    I’m genuinely sorry if I am lowering the level of debate below the intended or resorting to some sort of partisan insanity, but I am seeing so many stones left unturned simply because there are so many of them. It bothers me. Delete away.

  4. ChrisWWW
    January 7th, 2008 at 18:43
    Reply | Quote | #4

    What are you talking about Xel?  Warrantless wiretapping and torture are perfectly legal :-)

  5. physco219
    January 9th, 2008 at 21:39
    Reply | Quote | #5

    Sort of funny to see him tear it up like that. I would like to point out a few things I noticed. He only ripped it in half, they could easily be put back together. The page that really counts he didnt tear at all. Typical. Another thing I noticed he says "This is the original passport…" I take that to mean he has a replacement and is just getting rid of the old one. I mean for all we know this US document if its not a faked one was expired any how. There are plenty of ways to get a replacement passport.  A word to Adam the "man" in the video you should take the Pizza Hut table cloth if you want anyone to take you somewhat seriously.

  6. physco219
    January 9th, 2008 at 21:41
    Reply | Quote | #6

    EDIT: A word to Adam the "man" in the video you should take the Pizza Hut table cloth off if you want anyone to take you somewhat seriously.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.


Warning: is_writable() [function.is-writable]: open_basedir restriction in effect. File(error_log) is not within the allowed path(s): (/home/p6525pol:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php:/tmp) in /home/p6525pol/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 500