‘Jihad Jane’: not the usual suspect

Terrorism comes in all shapes and colours, but it is apparently easier to label it as such when it’s wrapped in a Muslim package

Jihad JaneColleen LaRose, the American woman known as ‘Jihad Jane’. Photograph: Anonymous/AP

The assumption that terrorism and radicalisation is specific to a certain racial profile,religion and ethnic name is undermined by the arrest of two, white American women allegedly conspiring to assassinate a Swedish cartoonist and the recent attack on the IRS building by a disgruntled Texan American.

Alleged ring leader Colleen Larose, popularly known as “Jihad Jane” and Jamie Paulin Ramirez (“Jihad Jamie”), recently exonerated of all charges, are as American as Apple pie and The Liberty Bell due to their blonde hair, blue eyes, and white skin. However, the women’s conversion to Islam and embrace of radicalised politics represent to many an unfathomable juxtaposition. The US department of justice proclaimed: “This case also demonstrates that terrorists are looking for Americans to join them in their cause, and it shatters any lingering thought that we can spot a terrorist based on appearance.”

This revelation immediately creates an exaggerated and fictitious paranoia in some that the average white American neighbour could secretly be a stealth, Islamist jihadist willingly ready to explode at the drop of a satirist’s paint brush. It also rationalises “western” Europe’s hysterical fear about its impending transformation into “Eurabia”, and condones its prejudicial and reactionary behaviour that has lead to the banning of minarets and hijabs.

In America, the sensationalised curiosity surrounding Jihad Jane’s revelation can be ascertained from her Google search, which has yielded 1,760,000 hits, and by her front page appearance on nearly every major media outlet. Whereas a search on Joseph Stack, the disgruntled and suicidal Texan who flew a plane into an IRS building killing one and injuring 13, has only netted 430,000 hits.

The existence of such white, radicalised identities reveals several important realities.

First, the necessity to racially profile Middle Easterners and Arabs, and the subsequent erosion of civil liberties to protect our “safety,” becomes moot in light of Jihad Jane’s Whiteness. Her seven co-conspirators arrested in Ireland, five of them recently released without charge, all come from varying ethnic backgrounds. If we are to racially profile all suspicious individuals based on this revelation, TSA might as well show the “special security” love to nearly every airline passenger. Will Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin, who have advocated unfettered profiling against Middle Easterners, call for similar treatment against middle aged, White women and men? Perhaps President Obama should amend his recent security measures, created after the arrest of the Nigerian underwear bomber, and extend special pat downs and heightened profiling to individuals returning from European countries, not just the 14 mostly Muslim countries currently targeted.

Second, terrorism comes in all shapes and colours, but it is easier and more comfortable to label it as such when it’s wrapped in a Muslim package. Even though the “war on terror” has made the word almost meaningless, “terrorism” is specifically defined by the United States as a “violent act … intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population … [or] influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion”. In comparison to Jihad Jane’s alleged assassination attempt, Joseph Stack’s kamikaze into the IRS building seems more apt to fit the definition.

Specifically, Stack outlined his intentions and grievances in a detailed 3,200 word manifesto proclaiming his hatred of the government and the IRS in particular. However, Representatives, such as Republicans Steven King of Iowa and Massachusetts centrefold Scott Brown, have been slow to label him a terrorist and even empathised with him. “It’s sad the incident in Texas happened, but by the same token, [the IRS is] an agency that is unnecessary. And when the day comes when that is over and we abolish the IRS, it’s going to be a happy day for America,” said King.

One wonders if Joseph Stack was named Yusuf ibn Stack and a practising Muslim if he’d be afforded such sensitive understanding. Considering America’s violent history with rightwing, anti-government extremists, most notably Timothy McVeigh, one hopes the government is actively concerned about Joseph Stack’s sympathisers and supporters, “who are looking for Americans to join them in their cause.”

It seems radicalisation and extremist ideology is a non-discriminatory disease that increasingly preys on isolated, lonely and angry individuals, regardless of colour or religious belief, who perversely justify the use of violence as means of furthering their agenda.

Ultimately, the US government must finally heed its own advice and seek colour blind security procedures and policies that effectively isolate radicalised elements within its society instead of marginalizing its own citizens based purely on race or religion.


7 thoughts on “‘Jihad Jane’: not the usual suspect

  1. “It seems radicalisation and extremist ideology is a non-discriminatory disease that increasingly preys on isolated, lonely and angry individuals, regardless of colour or religious belief…”

    If that was the case there would be just as much terrorism in the name of Christianity, Hinduism and Buddhism. In reality practically all of the terror attacks resulting in massive causalties are perpetrated by Muslims. So it’s a very discriminatory disease.

    • Well, when Christians, Hindus and Buddhists commit acts of terrorism it is rarely ever linked back to their religious edicts, is it?

  2. Practically all major terror attacks are carried out by Muslims, but the other religions I mentioned above have about 3.5 times as many followers as Islam. So even if you linked every single attack to a religion the Muslims would still be extremely overrepresentated.

    It’s hard to draw any other conclusion than that it is something wrong with Islam.

    • All major terror attacks, eh? And what are those, poorly executed road side bombs? You seem to be doing exactly what the media does so expertly, somehow redefine or reposition terrorism in a such a way that only ‘Muslims’ commit acts of terrorism.

      • Nan:
        How does “poorly executed road side bombs” falsify my claim that almost all terror attacks resulting in several casualties are carried out by Muslims?

        My definition is the same the UN:s, which says that terrorism is “any act ‘intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act’.

        What is your definition of terrorism? If you can come up with one that falsifies my statement, I’d sure like to hear it.

        And in case you didn’t already know it, there are Muslims who acknowledges this problem: http://www.reformislam.org/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s