Appearing on MSNBC's Morning Joe on Thursday, David Rothkopf, CEO and editor of The FP Group, which publishes Foreign Policy magazine, warned against European authorities being too aggressive in fighting Islamic terrorism following the brutal attack in Paris: "I think we have to be just as worried about the reaction to the attack from nationalists, from right-wingers, from people who have sought to drive this wedge...between the Islamic communities and the mainstream communities in Europe....it's very important that we recognize the value of restraint in response to these things."
Moments later, he cited the Abu Ghraib prison scandal as a cause for the massacre: "You know, one of the reports has it that one of these guys who led this attack was radicalized by reading about Abu Ghraib, that prior to that he was not an extremist, and after that he moved into this vein of thought."
Rothkopf also decried calls for French police to be better armed to combat terrorists: "And we have to really keep away from the kind of reactions that lead to, 'You know, should this society be more armed?' You know, it's ironic to listen to a conversation that says, 'You know, perhaps these police need be more militarized,' just a few weeks after we've had the debate in Ferguson about how over-militarized our police is."
Even liberal co-host Mika Brzezinski balked at that: "I'm at a loss as to how a police officer could respond to that scene of that massacre, which was clearly underway, with no weapon. I mean, because the fact that he had no weapon is why he has died. If he a weapon – he had two – I mean, I'm sorry, that just doesn't make any sense."
Rothkopf replied: "...perhaps, you know, that police officer should have been armed. But we don't need to go from there to an American society where you've got 200 million weapons. You don't need go from there to a militarized society. And you don't want to do things that inflame the divides within European society."
Minutes later, co-host Thomas Roberts repeated Rothkopf's claim: "...one of these radicalized murderers feels that Abu Ghraib and seeing those images on the internet is the reason why he was flipped and feels that he has to go out and vindicate such atrocities that have been performed against his own society."
On Wednesday, Daily Beast foreign editor Christopher Dickey appeared on MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell Reports and fretted that anti-Muslim sentiment from the "extreme right" in Europe increased tensions.
Here is a transcript of Rothkopf's January 8 comments:
7:09 AM ET
(...)
JOE SCARBOROUGH: David Rothkopf, let's bring you in. We had read earlier Jeffrey Goldberg's "Europe is under siege." "The European Parliament complex in Brussels, where I happen to be sitting at the moment, is meant to be a monument to post-World War II continental ideals of tolerance, free speech, and openness. All of these notions seem to be under attack at once, and what is striking to me...is that not many people – until a few hours ago, at least – seem to believe that their union, and their basic freedoms, are under threat." Now Jeffrey Goldberg says Europe is under siege. Talk about that, talk about yesterday, and talk about the challenge across all of Europe.
DAVID ROTHKOPF [CEO AND EDITOR, THE FP GROUP]: Well, look, you know, the issue has been brewing for a long time, long before this particular attack, and I think we have to be just as worried about the reaction to the attack from nationalists, from right-wingers, from people who have sought to drive this wedge, as it was described earlier, between the Islamic communities and the mainstream communities in Europe because that's the tinder that could spark a fire that could go far, far beyond anything in these attacks.
In fact, I think, even listening to the conversation here, it's very important that we recognize the value of restraint in response to these things. These are terrifying, horrifying attacks but they're conducted by just a few people. They are conducted by people who are radicalized by overreaction.
You know, one of the reports has it that one of these guys who led this attack was radicalized by reading about Abu Ghraib, that prior to that he was not an extremist, and after that he moved into this vein of thought. And we have to really keep away from the kind of reactions that lead to, "You know, should this society be more armed?" You know, it's ironic to listen to a conversation that says, "You know, perhaps these police need be more militarized," just a few weeks after we've had the debate in Ferguson about how over-militarized our police is.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Right, no, absolutely. I thought about that. But I'm still – I'm at a loss as to how a police officer could respond to that scene of that massacre, which was clearly underway, with no weapon. I mean, because the fact that he had no weapon is why he has died. If he a weapon – he had two – I mean, I'm sorry, that just doesn't make any sense. But that's a different question, that's a policy issue within the French police at this point, probably, and a much smaller issue. Ayman, I just want to-
SCARBOROUGH: Wait, wait. Let David – David wanted to respond. David.
BRZEZINSKI: Go ahead, David.
ROTHKOPF: No, I'm just saying you're absolutely right and perhaps, you know, that police officer should have been armed. But we don't need to go from there to an American society where you've got 200 million weapons. You don't need go from there to a militarized society. And you don't want to do things that inflame the divides within European society.
BRZEZINSKI: Exactly.
ROTHKOPF: It's a very fragile situation. New immigration is driving it further. And the foreign fighter situation, which may be related to this, will inflame it even further still, and we've got to be very careful that we do as much to keep a lid on internal tensions within these societies as we do to hunt down and track down the few who are causing problems.
(...)
7:17 AM ET
THOMAS ROBERTS: But these radical murderers have used the fact that this satirical magazine would go after a wide swath of religions and not discriminate against anybody in the satire that it was using to make statements. But they've used that now to make a larger statement. And as David had just made a statement about, that one of these radicalized murderers feels that Abu Ghraib and seeing those images on the internet is the reason why he was flipped and feels that he has to go out and vindicate such atrocities that have been performed against his own society.
(...)
