> Kirsch takes that sentence about bin Laden's implicit
> request for "legitimation" as the ultra-violence Robin
> Hood of the "global south", rejects it based upon our
> typical interpretation of AlQ's motivations, (we tend
> to emphasize the religious zealotry and forget the
> calls for zero American manipulation of political and
> cultural events in the Arab world) then leaps with
> quantum abandon to the assertion that Hardt and Negri
> see every violent group in the world as "ipso facto a
> liberation movement."
Whoops. I should've snipped the last sentence from Kirsch's paragraph. What I agreed with was the following:
"Hardt and Negri say that Osama bin Laden 'asks for legitimation by presenting himself as the moral hero of the poor and oppressed of the global South.' In fact, bin Laden presents himself as no such thing; he is and declares himself to be a religious zealot dedicated to the imposition of Islamic law and the chastisement of the secular West."
-- Luke