Jihad, Islamism, and the American Free Press

Jihad, Islamism, and the American Free Press

By Jeffrey Imm

In the war with global Jihad, words and definitions matter, and in fighting anti-freedom ideologies, the free press and media should be America's greatest ally. Yet the confused and inconsistent reporting on Islamism and Islamist terrorism is another key fault line in America's struggles with global Jihad.

Without a precise definition of the enemy by American political leadership, major segments of the American free press have made their own foreign policy decisions as to who is and is not an enemy, made their own decisions on what terms like "Islamism" and "Jihad" mean (if they use such terms at all), and provided mostly "isolated incident"-style reporting on such subjects, with the exception of the largely anti-war colored reporting on Iraq.

So instead of much of the American free press being used to largely address and confront enemy anti-freedom ideologies and their adherents, such media has been manipulated by editorial managers, publishers, and Islamist groups to focus their investigative reporting on the American government's reaction to Islamist terrorism. As much of American government actions are based on a reaction without a defined enemy, there has been plenty of source material for press critiques and for press managers to gain political points against an unpopular administration.

But as made clear last week in speeches by leaders of the Washington Post and the Associated Press, the larger issue of "Islamism" itself, its role as the root of "Islamist terrorism" (as defined in the 9/11 Commission Report), and coherent news reporting on the continuing global links between political Islamism and such Islamist terrorism is not even an objective of much of the American free press. The reactive political sniping agenda by much of the American press' reporting not only misses the larger issue, but also fails to understand that anti-freedom ideologies like Islamism are a threat to a free press itself.

Therefore, even when the threat of Islamism to a free press is unquestionable -- such as imprisoned Afghan journalist Sayed Pervez Kambakhsh on death row for "blasphemy" per Islamists in the Afghanistan government -- Islamism is not a concern to such media leaders as Washington Post's Philip Bennett or AP's Tom Curley. These American free press/media leaders' apparent obliviousness to Islamism is symptomatic of the larger problem with much of the American free press when facing Jihad -- as shown in such media shaping of terms, providing a platform for Jihadists, confusing the public on the identity of the enemy, providing opportunities for enemy infiltration, and allowing news reporting tainted by gullibility about Islamism.

Islamism and Jihad - Not Acceptable Terms for American Media?

On March 3, Philip Bennett, the Washington Post's managing editor, gave a speech at the University of California Irvine (UCI) on Journalism and Islam, where it was reported that he believes the media is responsible for confusion about Islam, which is due to the lack of Muslims in American newsrooms (in his opinion). The Daily Pilot, a local newspaper, also reported that Washington Post's Philip Bennett stated that the term "Islamist" is something that the Washington Post editors still have not decided whether to add it to their style book. In Mr. Bennett's speech, he didn't even consider to qualify the need to have greater numbers of anti-Islamist Muslims represented in American newsrooms, because he and his Washington Post editors have not even decided whether to recognize political Islamism as a term they can use, let alone an anti-freedom ideology to be confronted.

Apparently, the Washington Post editors have not yet read the 2004-released 9/11 Commission Report where "Islamist Terrorism" is defined as a component of "Islamism". In 2008, nearly four years later, the Washington Post is still considering whether the very term "Islamist" is acceptable. Even Al Jazeera uses the term "Islamism", but over six years after the 9/11 attacks, the Washington Post is still thinking about it. Rather than being embarrassed by such mental paralysis in news reporting, the Washington Post's managing editor is proud of this failure and discusses this failure in speeches to universities. Moreover, when real investigative groups such as The Investigative Project challenge Islamist individuals and groups, the Washington Post's response is exemplified by its reporting on Esam Omeish, reporting the accusations of known Stalinists accusing IPT reports on Omeish as those of "right-wing anti-Muslim bigots".

Such deliberate unwillingness among American media to address the ideology of Islamism and its links to Islamist terrorism or Jihad is not limited to the Washington Post. As early as October 2001, the Society of Professional Journalists provided guidelines to the American free press that jihad was to be defined as "to exert oneself for the good of Islam and to better oneself".

This desire by "mainstream media" managers to "filter" and "shape" the news by deliberate ignorance of ideologies, language, and connections between events continues to be an ongoing threat to our free press - one that has largely necessitated the explosion of Internet blogs to simply provide a vehicle to report the news.

American Free Press - Why Provide a Platform for Jihadists and Islamists?

The logic of the American free press should be that it would investigate and reveal anti-freedom ideologies and their adherents. It would be logical that the American free press would certainly identify an anti-freedom ideological group like Hamas that uses antisemitic propaganda referenced in Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf as part of their Hamas charter (Article 32).

Unfortunately, in much of today's American media, this is not the case. So it is, as previously reported, that the Washington Post and the New York Times has provided an editorial platform for organizations such as the Hamas Islamist terror group to spread propaganda. Similarly, the Washington Post and Newsweek have done the same for the Hezbollah Islamist terrorist group.
Washington Post managing editor Philip Bennett's recent speech points out that Hamas and Hezbollah are not even considered "Islamist" by the Washington Post. Mr. Bennett is reported by the Daily Pilot as telling UCI students that"[s]ome argue the word is a useful distinction for movements like Hamas and Hezbollah, but others at the Post argue that it is too vague and should be omitted in favor of a more specific description."

Since "Islamist", "Jihadist", and "terrorist" are not the Washington Post's definition of the Hamas and Hezbollah groups, perhaps Mr. Bennett could explain an appropriate definition of such groups. Moreover, perhaps Mr. Bennett could explain why the Post editorial policy allows propaganda statements by terrorist groups as Hamas - the same Hamas terrorist group that lauds the "heroic" attack on innocent Israeli schoolchildren.

American Free Press - Who is the enemy?

Ultimately the fundamental disconnect within the American free press comes back to the American political leadership's failure to clearly and unequivocally define the enemy in the September 18, 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), or in subsequent documents. The singular exception is buried in the 9/11 Commission Report (Notes, Part 12, Note 3, page 562) in the definition of "Islamist Terrorism", that states "Islamist terrorism is an immediate derivative of Islamism." Of course, when portions of the American news media refuse to acknowledge the very existence of "Islamism", they can hardly report on such an ideology, let alone report in a way that provides coherent context between Islamist terrorism and Islamism.
In a speech on March 6, Associated Press President and CEO Tom Curley made it clear that he was focused on a different enemy: the actions of the American government (effective or not) in attempting to protect the American public. This is the enemy that AP's Tom Curley is truly concerned about: "[w]hat has become clear in the aftermath of 9/11 is how much expediency trumps safeguards. Congress steps back from its constitutional role of executive oversight. Civilian oversight of the military wanes. A Justice Department interprets laws in ways that extend police powers. More drastically, prisons are established in places where government or military operatives circumvent due process or control trials."

AP's Tom Curley seems to believe that the only important lesson in the aftermath of 9/11 is how much the American media needs to be a watchdog to monitor the actions of the American government in attempting to protect Americans from terrorists. But what about the actual enemy, Mr. Curley? How about the use of the free press to identify and coherently report on Islamist terrorism (as defined by the 9/11 Commission Report) and its links to Islamism? When will the AP and much of the rest of the American media address such Islamist terror group actions as more than merely a series of isolated incidents in the U.S. and around the world? When will AP coherently and consistently report on the larger anti-freedom ideology that Islamist terrorism represents?

Surely, as Mr. Curley states: "It's at moments like these when a free press matters most."
American Free Press Infiltration?

AP's Tom Curley could have used his recent speech to address a much more worrisome threat to the American free press - the infiltration of Jihadist sympathizers within their ranks. Such war-time infiltration is the singular gravest threat to American freedom of the press. This includes the reports by the U.S. military that AP photographer Bilal Hussein "had been named by 'sources' as having 'possessed foreknowledge of an improvised explosive device (IED) attack' on American and Iraqi forces, 'that he was standing next to the IED triggerman at the time of the attempted attack, and that he conspired with the IED triggerman to synchronize his photograph with the explosion.' " Surely Mr. Curley should be explaining how the AP prevents such infiltration of Jihadist sympathizers within their ranks of news media in Iraq and other battlefield combat areas, as a fundamental defense of the free press from being hijacked and manipulated.

As in the case of the Photoshop manipulated images by Reuters photographer Adnan Hajj, there is a known problem with Jihadist sympathizer infiltration within the media. Surely, while railing at the U.S. government actions to protect Americans, the free press could find some time for introspection at the dangerous threats of infiltration of enemies within its ranks, and how to protect the integrity of American journalism.

Such media integrity, as shown by the Washington Post, New York Times, and other media publication of terrorist editorials, is hardly above reproach - and is a key issue that the American free press and media must come to terms with as the war against Islamist terrorism continues.
Last August, the New York Times demonstrated such lack of integrity in publishing an article "If You Were a Terrorist, How Would You Attack?" by Dr. Steven Levitt soliciting suggestions for Jihadists on how to attack the United States. Can anyone imagine the American free press during any wartime era, actively soliciting ideas on how the enemy could attack the United States? Surely the issues on media integrity and infiltration must be addressed by the free press as part of effective reporting on Islamist terrorism.

American Free Press Gullibility?

Then there is the issue of the American media gullibility in reporting on Islamic figures. An example of this is the March 6, 2008 report by U.S. News and World Report "Egypt's Grand Mufti Counters the Tide of Islamic Extremism" written by U.S. News' religion writer Jay Tolson. As the topic of "Islamism" is untouchable by some journalists, we are left with meaningless phrases such as "Islamic extremism" to debate in Mr. Tolson's article.

In U.S. News's article about alleged "moderate" Egyptian Grand Mufti Sheik Ali Gomaa (also spelled "Ali Gum'a"), Mr. Tolson does not challenge Sheik Ali Gum'a on any of his previous comments (translated by MEMRI) in articles such as: "The New Egyptian Mufti - Dr. Sheikh 'Ali Gum'a: Opinions About Jihad, Supporting Suicide Bombings, and Forbidding Muslims in the U.S. Military From Fighting Other Muslims", "In Interview, Egyptian Mufti Ali Gum'a Questioned On Treatment of Women in Islam, Blames ‘Secularists' For Terrorism Worldwide", or "The Mufti of Egypt: The True Face of the Blood-Sucking Hebrew Entity has Been Exposed". This is hardly due to lack of information. U.S. News' reporter Jay Tolson (like anyone) could have found this information easily with a quick web browser search. But there is no challenge to Sheikh Ali Gum'a on such views, no challenge to the Sheikh Ali Gum'a's beliefs that his version of Sharia can somehow fight "Islamic extremism", simply a nodding gullibility that is found too often in American journalism today when it comes to interviewing any so-called "Islamic leader".

Mr. Tolson reports without challenge that Sheikh Ali Gum'a states how misunderstood his views on Islam are and quotes Sheikh Ali Gum'a as stating that "Maybe we just need to buy CNN" - an idea that is not even questioned as troubling. Mr. Tolson also reports "[a]fter taking more than an hour to explain to yet another western journalist why a traditional conception of sharia law—along with knowledge of Islamic jurisprudence—is the best antidote to Islamic extremism'." The role of Sharia within political Islamism is not even addressed once.

But as long as the American free press and media is not challenged to address the ideology of Islamism itself, and its use of Sharia, there is the ongoing media gullibility to accept whomever sounds "reasonable" at that moment as representing something other than "Islamic extremism" (whatever "extremism" means).

The root of this gullibility remains the failure of the American political leadership to define the enemy, to define the role of Islamism within Islamist terrorism, and develop a coherent global strategy for these. That failure remains the fundamental fault line that keeps our ability to fight Jihad from succeeding in the long term.

However, in the short term, surely it is not too much to ask the American free press and media - in the course of their news reporting - to ask the hard questions as to who the enemy is, what the role of Islamism is within Islamist terrorism, and how Islamism is reflected throughout the world.

After all, "It's at moments like these when a free press matters most."

Sources and Related Documents:

Authorization for Use of Military Force (Enrolled Bill), September 18, 2001
September 18, 2001 - U.S. Authorization for Use of Military Force
February 26, 2008 - Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty: Afghanistan: Journalist On Death Row Gives First Interview
March 3, 2008 - The Daily Pilot: Media to blame for Islamic misconceptions University of California - Chancellor's Distinguished Fellows Series
September 29, 2007 - Washington Post - Va. Muslim Activist Denies Urging Violence
September 29, 2007 - Fault Line on Jihad: Why the Omeish Reaction is Important - The Counterterrorism Blog - Jeffrey Imm
Society of Professional Journalist Guidelines on Terms Such as "Jihad" March 6, 2008 - AP: 9/11 attacks response harm First Amendment -- Associated Press President and CEO Tom Curley
December 17, 2007 - International Herald Tribune: Case Lays Bare the Media's Reliance on Iraqi Journalists
August 7, 2006 - Associated Press: Altered images prompt photographer's firing
March 6, 2008 - U.S. News and World Report: Egypt's Grand Mufti Counters the Tide of Islamic Extremism -- by Jay Tolson
February 19, 2008 - U.S. News and World Report: Faith Matters: Meeting Egypt's Grand Mufti
October 31, 2007 - MEMRI: In Interview, Egyptian Mufti Ali Gum'a Questioned On Treatment of Women in Islam, Blames 'Secularists' For Terrorism Worldwide
September 13, 2007 - MEMRI Video: Mufti of Egypt Ali Gum'a Confronted with Questions about the Treatment of Women in Islam and Blames "Secularists" for Terrorism Worldwide
August 18, 2006 - MEMRI: The Mufti of Egypt: The True Face of the Blood-Sucking Hebrew Entity has Been Exposed
October 1, 2003 - MEMRI: The New Egyptian Mufti - Dr. Sheikh 'Ali Gum'a: Opinions About Jihad, Supporting Suicide Bombings, and Forbidding Muslims in the U.S. Military From Fighting Other Muslims
August 10, 2007 - Why The New York Times Can Legally Help The Enemy in The War on Terror - The Counterterrorism Blog - Jeffrey Imm
July 24, 2007 - U.S. News Media and Terror Group Figure Editorials - The Counterterrorism Blog - Jeffrey Imm
August 8, 2007 - The New York Times: "If You Were a Terrorist, How Would You Attack?", by Steven D. Levitt
August 9, 2007 - The New York Times: "Terrorism, Part II", by Steven D. Levitt
July 24, 2007: Washington Post: Lebanese Cleric Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah - Jihad is Self-Defense Against Aggression
June 20, 2007 - Washington Post: Engage With Hamas - We Earned Our Support - Ahmed Yousef
June 20, 2007 - New York Times: What Hamas Wants - Ahmed Yousef November 1, 2006 - New York Times Editorial: "Pause for Peace" - by Ahmed Yousef
March 7, 2008 - The Australian: Hamas hails 'heroic' attack
May 12, 2004 - Newsweek: "From Mistake to Mistake" A leading Shiite cleric discusses Iraq, suicide bombers, U.S. elections -- and why he thinks George W. Bush should see a psychiatrist - interview with Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah
April 7, 2003 - Newsweek: War in Iraq - "'We Don't Trust America" - interview with Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah
September 9, 2006 - 9/11 and News Reporting on Jihadist Terrorism - The Counterterrorism Blog - Jeffrey Imm
August 1, 2006 - CNN Promotion of Islamic Relief Worldwide Group Linked to Jihadist Organizations - The Counterterrorism Blog - Jeffrey Imm
July 18, 2007 - Family Security Matters: "Preventing the West from Understanding Jihad" - Dr. Walid Phares
Islamism - Definition - Wikipedia
U.S. Final Report of the 9/11 Commission - Notes, Part 12, Note 3: "Islamism" (page 562) -- Adobe Acrobat PDF format
U.S. Department of State Foreign Terrorist Organization Listing - April 30, 2007
October 15, 2007 - The Dangerous Denial of Jihad's Threat - The Counterterrorism Blog - Jeffrey Imm
October 26, 2007 - Jihad, Islamism, and the Challenge of Anti-Freedom Ideologies - The Counterterrorism Blog - Jeffrey Imm
September 11, 2007 - 9/11 and the Inconvenient Truths about Jihad and Islamism - Jeffrey Imm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACT for America P.O. Box 6884 Virginia Beach, VA 23456 www.actforamerica.org
ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.

Terrorists Train to Manufacture Anthrax

Jihadi Website Supplies

Instructions for Anthrax Production

By Abdul Hameed Bakier

Much has been said about al-Qaeda’s quest to acquire weapons of mass destruction (WMD) as a means of striking at the heart of their number one enemy, the United States. The latest example of these ongoing efforts to acquire WMD capabilities is a recent posting in a jihadi internet forum entitled: “Good News – Anthrax Production Technique” (al-ekhlaas.net, March 3).

A forum participant, nicknamed al-Faz, posted a detailed description of anthrax production techniques dedicated to jihadis everywhere: “Long awaited good news for you, God’s soldiers. It’s time to use biological weapons against God’s enemies.” Al-Faz commences his posting with an introduction to anthrax and the pathology of the disease, including symptoms, parts of human body infected when exposed to anthrax and fatality percentages. Al-Faz notes that anthrax bacteria can be found in Africa, Asia and in some parts of Europe where the soil contains 10 anthrax bacteria per gram.

According to the jihadi forum, the following factors make anthrax the weapon of choice:

• Anthrax is powerful, lethal, cheap and easy to prepare.
• 50 grams of anthrax, when dispersed in a 2-kilometer line, forms a deadly cloud that can cover 20 kilometers.
• One kilogram of anthrax can be produced in a small laboratory in 96 hours.
• Anthrax bacteria spores are available worldwide and can be easily extracted.
• Production costs are low; one kilogram of anthrax bacteria costs about $50 even though a lethal dose can be as little as one millionth of a gram. • Colorless and odorless anthrax is easily concealed.
• Anthrax is a stable and dry substance that can be easily transported and used.

Before proceeding to anthrax production, al-Faz includes in his posting a picture of one of the anthrax-contaminated letters used in the 2001 U.S. anthrax attacks that killed five and infected 17 others. Undoubtedly included in an effort to encourage jihadis to try anthrax as a weapon, the letter reads: “You cannot stop us. We have this anthrax. You die now. Are you afraid? Death to America. Death to Israel. Allah is great.” The photo of the letter in no way establishes a jihadi connection to the still unsolved anthrax attacks—it is one of several released by the FBI and is easily available on the internet. Nevertheless, anthrax continues to be a feared weapon—only last week an Albany, Oregon courthouse was closed and the National Guard called in to deal with threats of anthrax contamination, which later proved to be a hoax (Albany Democrat Herald, March 4).

The second part of al-Faz’s posting elaborates on two methods of anthrax production. Photos are included of the microscopic phases of the process, including the extraction of anthrax bacteria from a sample of dirt that contains the infected remains of dead goats or other grazing animals’ remnants. A sample of a dead animal’s blood or tissue can also be used by cultivating it in a blood agar substance containing 0.7% sodium bicarbonate.

The attached pictures illustrate bacilli bacteria, spirochetes and bacteria clusters. The posting further includes precautionary instructions for the different phases of production. “Agar is a nutrient environment for cultivation that can be bought without drawing any suspicions from research centers for 70 Riyals or $20 per one kilogram,” says al-Faz.

The second method of producing anthrax involves cultivating the anthrax in horse blood and bentonite clay for five hours. Bentonite clay, an absorbent form of clay with multiple industrial uses, can be found in Iraq and two other countries in the region.

In conclusion, al-Faz says, “I wanted to contribute in the preparations against enemies of God. Consider me the servant of the mujahideen. I closely follow your news. May God reward you for your sacrifices. It would make me very happy to see you use biological weapons against God’s enemies. Wait for my next detailed posting on how to build a Cessna 128 aircraft,” which is an easily maintained agricultural aircraft designed to carry and spread a chemical load of 200 to 280 gallons.

Although there is no tangible evidence to confirm that jihadis have produced or procured mass quantities of biological weapons, the use of anthrax spores in bioterrorism has been discussed by jihadis for some time now. In theory, at least, cultivating anthrax spores can be achieved with minimum know-how and equipment, suggesting it is only a matter of time until jihadis succeed in producing some kind of biological weapon. There are, however, many dangers involved in the process and the development of a weaponized aerosol version of the bacterium requires scientific skills and equipment unavailable to most jihadis.

U.S. pressure against Israel Increases...

U.S. pressure against Israel Increases...

by Bill Maniaci
Chief, Intellingenc
B'nai Elim

Pentagon Blocks Sale of F-22 Fighters to Israel

The U.S. Congress in consort with the Pentagon has blocked the purchase of the F-22 Fighter to Israel. The F-22 is the newest and best stealth combat fighter aircraft in the United States arsnel. It will ultimately replace the ageing F-15s in service with the U.S. Military.

Legislation was passed by the House Appropriations Committee specifically prohibiting the sale of the Fighter outside the United States. Israel had been negotiating with the Pentagon to purchase the Jet Fighter in order to maintain air superiority over hostile Arab countries. The Pentagon officially rejected the Israeli request to procure the F-22 (this preceded Congressional action to prohibit the sale to any foreign power). Japan had also been in discussions regarding its desire to purchase the F-22.

This is another blatant example of how the United States is keeping its heel on Israel. One must note that as a precondition of the sale to Israel of the now outdated F-15 Fighters and other U.S. combat aircraft, Israel is specifically prohibited from make any modifications to the aircraft that would upgrade or otherwise increase or improve their combat capabilities. This restriction remains in place while the Arabs have no such restrictions placed upon them regarding their purchase of American weaponry and technology. With the completion of the recently announced twenty billion dollar arms sale to "moderate" or "friendly" Arab countries, the balance of military power in the region is tilting dramatically against the Israel Defense Forces.

Little, if any, backlash or opposition to this decision is expected in the U.S. by the American Jewish Community which is largely comprised of liberal leftist Democrats, many of whom openly oppose Israel and support the Palestinian cause.

Each stumbling block placed before Israel's ability to defend herself only strengthens her enemies. Israel has become the sacrificial lamb to, in the greatest tradition of Neville Chamberlain, appease the Arabs and continue the flow of Crude to the West. What more must we suffer at the hands of the Islamo Nazis before the West realizes that promises, agreements, treaties, and the like made by the Arab/Islamic world are worthless prevarications, designed only to weaken the West and strengthen their world-wide Jihadist ambitions?

ISLAMO-NAZIS RECRUITING ON-LINE WITH GREAT SUCCESS

The Blogosphere for Killers

Tech-savvy terrorists use the Web for propaganda and incitement.

BY DANIEL HENNINGER

Living as we do now afloat the incoming and outgoing tides of media, perhaps the aborted London and Glasgow car bombings of a fortnight ago are worth another thought before these attempted mass murders drift away on the sea of bad memories. What about those doctors? The apparent complicity of U.K.-resident Muslim physicians in the attempted murder of innocent British civilians had many in the West asking why. The short answer is that these trained M.D.s somehow convinced themselves that these British people didn't deserve to live--that it would be morally good to kill them. That's insane. Why would they think that?
The best answer I have seen in a long time is found in a new study of Islamic media propaganda by a research team from Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. "Iraqi Insurgent Media: The War of Images and Ideas" by Daniel Kimmage and Kathleen Ridolfo (with Radio Free Iraq correspondents, two of whom were abducted and murdered this year) is an astounding compilation of the high-tech methods being used by the insurgency in Iraq to propagate the ideology of the Islamic jihadist movement. This is the blogosphere for killers.
There is no more unchallenged verity in our times than that the World Wide Web, the Internet, is a boon to mankind. But as with nuclear or biological warfare, the Web is a dual-use technology. Technically adept Muslims, using out-of-the-box PC software and hardware, are outputting an electronic torrent of slick Web sites, discussion forums, videos, e-magazines and long-form movies, all with one purpose--to incite Muslims to join the jihad against the enemies of Islam in Baghdad, London, Glasgow or New York. Forget those Iraqi attack videos on YouTube; this is a sophisticated, globally distributed propaganda operation.
As always with the Web, anything done in the analog past--the propaganda of World War II or the Cold War--can be ramped up exponentially by Islamic jihadists on the Internet. In March, at least 11 self-identified insurgency groups posted 966 "statements" on the Web about battles and engagements, looking much like those put out by the U.S. Army. Their casualty claims often have no basis in reality, but that's not the point. The point is to convince credulous minds in their world that they are a potent, thriving force.
Example: Over March 26-27 this year, a Baghdad suicide bomber killed two people, a roadside bomb killed an Iraqi policeman, and a bombing killed four U.S. soldiers in Diyala. Press releases, or "statements," about events were sent over the Web by Al-Fajr Media Center, the Just Vengeance Brigades, the Mujahidin Army and Ansar al-Sunnah. The Al-Fajr Media Center's March 27 statement claimed that "our brother . . . detonated the car . . . killing more than 11 soldiers of the idolatrous Guard."
The language is invariably religious. There's no effort here to appeal to nationalistic sentiment; thus, for a global audience, the Islamic argument becomes wholly religious. Those produced for Islamic State of Iraq/Al-Qaeda (primarily by the Al-Furqan Institute for Media Production) refer to "martyrdom-seeking operations."
Many of the sites offer graphically attractive texts explaining "Who We Are" or "Our Creed." The texts can be shared on the Internet via free upload and download services such as sendspace.com or archive.org, using Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat. There are downloadable, full-color e-magazines with opinion pieces and jihadist articles ("The Courage of a Boy"). The Mujahidin Shura Council regularly produces elaborately formatted, full-color "biographies of martyrs."
According to the RFE study's authors, the utility of the written word is well understood by the jihadists: "The written word everywhere remains the preferred medium of record and authority. . . . Texts are also the traditional medium of ideological discourse." Nearly all this material, incidentally is "branded" with the group's unique logo floating in the corner of the screen.
They often embed audio clips from jihadist leadership in the texts. Audio polemics and hate speech are commonplace across the Islamic Web. Or they'll include links to attack videos, as noted in the "Top 20" graphic nearby. "Top 20's" seven-minute compilation of 20 attacks on U.S. forces comes with a rousing jihadist song, "Arise from Slumber." Its final lyric: "We have returned with the machine gun and now we are leaders."
A 28-minute film by Ansar al-Sunnah, "Just Vengeance," records the kidnapping, interrogation and execution of Shiite policemen. Another video of a suicide bomber's truck exploding reveals the centrality of distributable media: It was filmed from three different camera angles. Jihadist video comes in several file sizes: high resolution (up to 500 megabytes), medium (8 megabytes) or in highly compressed files for downloading to mobile phones, popular in PC-deficient Iraq. They enable free uploads of the videos via Windows Media Player, RealPlayer and DivX.
The reach of insurgent and jihadist propaganda increases exponentially when it is picked up by Arab TV--Al-Jazeera, of course, or the Al-Rafidayn satellite channel in Cairo or even the Iraqi Al-Zawra, which claims to be operating from a satellite truck in Iraq.
In an interview this week, RFE's Mr. Kimmage said they have presented the media study to both the House and Senate intelligence committees and to government national security agencies. Reactions range from "wow" to "we already know all that." In any event, what would they do? This is propaganda on an unprecedented scale.
If you are a young Muslim male, even a doctor, with a PC in Egypt, the Gulf states, Somalia, Morocco or Glasgow, as always with the Web you are marinating your mind in its content, and the content here is homicide on a mass scale. The answer--technical or political--is not obvious to me. But the one unacceptable answer is doing nothing.
Mr. Henninger is deputy editor of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page. His column appears Thursdays in the Journal and on OpinionJournal.com.