July 27, 2009
7 NC men charged with plotting 'violent jihad'
By MIKE BAKER
Associated Press Writer
A father, his two sons and four other North Carolina men are accused of military-style training at home and plotting "violent jihad" through a series of terror attacks abroad, federal authorities said Monday.
Officials said the group was led by Daniel Patrick Boyd, a married 39-year-old who lived in an unassuming lakeside home in a rural area south of Raleigh, where he and his family walked their dog and operated a drywall business. But two decades ago, Boyd, who is a U.S. citizen, trained in terrorist camps in Pakistan and Afghanistan and fought against the Soviets for three years before returning to the United States.
An indictment released Monday does not detail any specific terrorist plans or targets overseas, although it claims some of the defendants traveled to Israel in 2007 with the intent of waging "violent jihad" and returned home without success.
"These charges hammer home the point that terrorists and their supporters are not confined to the remote regions of some far away land but can grow and fester right here at home," U.S. Attorney George E.B. Holding said. He would not give details of the alleged plots beyond what was in a news release and indictment.
The seven men made their first court appearances in Raleigh on Monday, charged with providing material support to terrorism. If convicted, they could face life in prison. Court documents charged that Boyd, also known as 'Saifullah,' encouraged others to engage in jihad.
Boyd stopped attending worship services at a moderate mosque in the Raleigh area and instead began meeting for Friday prayers in his home, Holding said.
"These people had broken away because their local mosque did not follow their vision of being a good Muslim," Holding said.
In 1991, Boyd and his brother were convicted of bank robbery in Pakistan — accused of carrying identification showing they belonged to the radical Afghan guerrilla group, Hezb-e-Islami, or Party of Islam. Each was sentenced to have a foot and a hand cut off for the robbery, but the decision was later overturned.
Their wives told The Associated Press in an interview at the time that the couples had U.S. roots but the United States was a country of "kafirs" — Arabic for heathens.
Jim Stephenson, a neighbor of Daniel Boyd in Willow Spring, said he saw the family walking their dog in the neighborhood and that the indictment shocked the residents.
"We never saw anything to give any clues that something like that could be going on in their family," Stephenson said.
Two of the suspects are Boyd's sons: Zakariya Boyd, 20 and Dylan Boyd, 22. The others are Anes Subasic, 33; Mohammad Omar Aly Hassan, 22; and Ziyad Yaghi, 21. Hysen Sherifi, 24, a native of Kosovo and a U.S. legal permanent was also charged in the case. He was the only person arrested who was not a U.S. citizen.
No attorneys for the men were listed in court records.
Reached at her home in Silver Spring, Md., Boyd's mother said she had not heard of their arrests and knew nothing about the current case.
"It certainly sounds weird to me," Pat Saddler said. "That's news to me."
Hassan's father declined to comment Monday night while others did not have listed numbers or did not return calls.
It's unclear how authorities learned of the activities, although court documents indicate that prosecutors will introduce evidence gathered under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
After the unsuccessful attempt at jihad in Israel, the men returned home, officials said. Court papers also say Yaghi went to Jordan to engage in jihad in 2006.
Boyd was also accused of trying to raise money last year to fund others' travel overseas to fight. One of the men, Sherifi, went to Kosovo to engage in violent jihad, according to the indictment, but it's unclear if he did any actual fighting.
___
Associated Press Writers Devlin Barrett contributed to this report from Washington; Meg Kinnard contributed from Columbia, S.C.; Alysia Patterson and Tom Foreman Jr. contributed from Raleigh.
This undated photo provided by the City County Bureau of Identification in Wake County shows Mohammad Omar Aly Hassan. Hassan is being charged with conspiring to support terrorism and traveling overseas to participate in "violent jihad," according to an indictment unsealed Monday, July 27, 2009. (AP Photo/City County Bureau of Identification)
This undated photo provided by the City County Bureau of Identification in Wake County shows Hysen Sherifi. Sherifi, a native of Kosovo and a U.S. legal permanent, is being charged with conspiring to support terrorism and traveling overseas to participate in "violent jihad," according to an indictment unsealed Monday, July 27, 2009. (AP Photo/City County Bureau of Identification)
This undated photo provided by the City County Bureau of Identification in Wake County shows Daniel Patrick Boyd. Boyd and the six other men were arrested, Monday, July 27, 2009, and made their first appearances in Raleigh, charged with providing material support to terrorism. (AP Photo/City County Bureau of Identification)
This undated photo provided by the City County Bureau of Identification in Wake County shows Ziyad Yaghi. Yaghi is being charged with conspiring to support terrorism and traveling overseas to participate in "violent jihad," according to an indictment unsealed Monday, July 27, 2009. (AP Photo/City County Bureau of Identification)
Monday, July 27, 2009
Friday, July 17, 2009
Hizb ut-Tahrir set for coup in Pakistan
Hizb ut-Tahrir set for coup in Pakistan
Published: July 6, 2009 at 2:51 PM
Loyalists of the Hizb ut-Tahrir political movement are calling for a coup in Islamabad to establish an Islamic caliphate, by force if necessary.
Imran Yousafzai, a spokesman for the group, claims to have organized mass demonstrations insisting the people in the tribal regions of Pakistan favor Islamic law.
Though the group claims to favor peaceful opposition over militancy, members of its ranks say jihad is justified to oppose foreign occupation, noting only an Islamic army can wage a necessary holy war.
Members of the group based in Lahore told The Times of London newspaper that Hizb ut-Tahrir was preparing for a "bloodless military coup" in order to indoctrinate the region by "military means" if necessary.
Tayyib Muqeem, who the Times reports is a Hizb ut-Tahrir leader in Lahore, said the group was prepared to bring the Islamic caliphate to power by "waging war."
He said the group sought to influence Pakistani military officials to push the movement forward, adding it was the Pakistani armed forces who held power in Islamabad, not the Western-backed government.
Hizb ut-Tahrir emerged in 1952 as a political movement bent on establishing an Islamic caliphate in Pakistan. It is one of the few political movements in Pakistan that expressed open opposition to attacks on the Taliban.
Published: July 6, 2009 at 2:51 PM
Loyalists of the Hizb ut-Tahrir political movement are calling for a coup in Islamabad to establish an Islamic caliphate, by force if necessary.
Imran Yousafzai, a spokesman for the group, claims to have organized mass demonstrations insisting the people in the tribal regions of Pakistan favor Islamic law.
Though the group claims to favor peaceful opposition over militancy, members of its ranks say jihad is justified to oppose foreign occupation, noting only an Islamic army can wage a necessary holy war.
Members of the group based in Lahore told The Times of London newspaper that Hizb ut-Tahrir was preparing for a "bloodless military coup" in order to indoctrinate the region by "military means" if necessary.
Tayyib Muqeem, who the Times reports is a Hizb ut-Tahrir leader in Lahore, said the group was prepared to bring the Islamic caliphate to power by "waging war."
He said the group sought to influence Pakistani military officials to push the movement forward, adding it was the Pakistani armed forces who held power in Islamabad, not the Western-backed government.
Hizb ut-Tahrir emerged in 1952 as a political movement bent on establishing an Islamic caliphate in Pakistan. It is one of the few political movements in Pakistan that expressed open opposition to attacks on the Taliban.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Toronto 18 member's jihad texts don't call for violence in Canada: expert
Toronto 18 member's jihad texts don't call for violence in Canada: expert
By Trevor Pritchard – Jun 25, 2009
BRAMPTON, Ont. — A leading expert in Islam testified Thursday that texts glorifying jihad seized from the home of one of the so-called Toronto 18 do not advocate violence against Canadians.
Mohammad Fadel, a University of Toronto law professor, took the stand as the final defence witness at the sentencing hearing for 22-year-old Saad Khalid.
Khalid pleaded guilty last month to taking part in a domestic terror plot that involved plans to detonate bombs at a number of high-profile locations, including the Toronto Stock Exchange and CSIS headquarters, over three days.
An agreed statement of facts entered into evidence earlier in the week show that on June 2, 2006, the day after Khalid was arrested, police carried out a search warrant at his home and seized a number of his personal belongings, including Khalid's laptop and a memory card.
The laptop and the memory card each contained five documents extolling the virtues of jihad.
Fadel told Khalid's lawyer, Russell Silverstein, that the documents were simply "moral arguments" in favour of jihad, not legal decrees that Khalid was bound to follow.
One text, "The Book of a Mujahideen," was written during the conflicts between Russia and Chechnya. It contained nothing that would incite a "reasonable reader" to commit violence in Canada, Fadel said.
A second document, "The Virtues of Jihad," was also geographically limited in scope, intended to recruit Muslims in Kashmir to fight against India. Even the most "incendiary" text found in Khalid's bedroom, one that singled out and criticized the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, did not urge Muslims to "blow up (non-Muslims') property and kill them in their own territories," said Fadel.
That text, "The Exposition Regarding the Disbelief of the one that assists the Americans," called upon Muslims to resist the invasion by fighting in Afghanistan, donating money, and praying for victory, he said.
"I think there are a whole host of targets that can be found in these texts," Fadel testified.
"I don't think Canada is one of those targets."
Khalid was arrested along with 17 others in the summer of 2006 as he was unloading a truck filled with what he believed was ammonium nitrate, court has heard.
The names of Khalid's alleged conspirators are protected by a publication ban. One member of the group, a youth at the time of his arrest, has already been convicted.
In that case, the judge said it was clear a terrorist group that adhered to al-Qaida principles existed.
Fadel tried to give the court a deeper appreciation of the meaning of jihad, pointing out its literal translation as a struggle that could be personal, political, or militaristic.
He said a Muslim with a knowledge of what jihad entails would better understand the texts found in Khalid's possession.
During cross-examination, Crown attorney Jason Wakely suggested that someone without Fadel's scholarly background might instead take the texts at "face value.""It's hard to understand what their face value is," Fadel replied.
Final arguments in the sentencing hearing were expected to begin Friday.
Copyright © 2009 The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.
By Trevor Pritchard – Jun 25, 2009
BRAMPTON, Ont. — A leading expert in Islam testified Thursday that texts glorifying jihad seized from the home of one of the so-called Toronto 18 do not advocate violence against Canadians.
Mohammad Fadel, a University of Toronto law professor, took the stand as the final defence witness at the sentencing hearing for 22-year-old Saad Khalid.
Khalid pleaded guilty last month to taking part in a domestic terror plot that involved plans to detonate bombs at a number of high-profile locations, including the Toronto Stock Exchange and CSIS headquarters, over three days.
An agreed statement of facts entered into evidence earlier in the week show that on June 2, 2006, the day after Khalid was arrested, police carried out a search warrant at his home and seized a number of his personal belongings, including Khalid's laptop and a memory card.
The laptop and the memory card each contained five documents extolling the virtues of jihad.
Fadel told Khalid's lawyer, Russell Silverstein, that the documents were simply "moral arguments" in favour of jihad, not legal decrees that Khalid was bound to follow.
One text, "The Book of a Mujahideen," was written during the conflicts between Russia and Chechnya. It contained nothing that would incite a "reasonable reader" to commit violence in Canada, Fadel said.
A second document, "The Virtues of Jihad," was also geographically limited in scope, intended to recruit Muslims in Kashmir to fight against India. Even the most "incendiary" text found in Khalid's bedroom, one that singled out and criticized the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, did not urge Muslims to "blow up (non-Muslims') property and kill them in their own territories," said Fadel.
That text, "The Exposition Regarding the Disbelief of the one that assists the Americans," called upon Muslims to resist the invasion by fighting in Afghanistan, donating money, and praying for victory, he said.
"I think there are a whole host of targets that can be found in these texts," Fadel testified.
"I don't think Canada is one of those targets."
Khalid was arrested along with 17 others in the summer of 2006 as he was unloading a truck filled with what he believed was ammonium nitrate, court has heard.
The names of Khalid's alleged conspirators are protected by a publication ban. One member of the group, a youth at the time of his arrest, has already been convicted.
In that case, the judge said it was clear a terrorist group that adhered to al-Qaida principles existed.
Fadel tried to give the court a deeper appreciation of the meaning of jihad, pointing out its literal translation as a struggle that could be personal, political, or militaristic.
He said a Muslim with a knowledge of what jihad entails would better understand the texts found in Khalid's possession.
During cross-examination, Crown attorney Jason Wakely suggested that someone without Fadel's scholarly background might instead take the texts at "face value.""It's hard to understand what their face value is," Fadel replied.
Final arguments in the sentencing hearing were expected to begin Friday.
Copyright © 2009 The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.
Are Judaism and Christianity as Violent as Islam?
Are Judaism and Christianity as Violent as Islam?
by Raymond Ibrahim
Middle East Quarterly
http://www.meforum.org/2159/are-judaism-and-christianity-as-violent-as-islam
Summer 2009, pp. 3-12
"There is far more violence in the Bible than in the Qur'an; the idea that Islam imposed itself by the sword is a Western fiction, fabricated during the time of the Crusades when, in fact, it was Western Christians who were fighting brutal holy wars against Islam."[1] So announces former nun and self-professed "freelance monotheist," Karen Armstrong.
This quote sums up the single most influential argument currently serving to deflect the accusation that Islam is inherently violent and intolerant: All monotheistic religions, proponents of such an argument say, and not just Islam, have their fair share of violent and intolerant scriptures, as well as bloody histories. Thus, whenever Islam's sacred scriptures-the Qur'an first, followed by the reports on the words and deeds of Muhammad (the Hadith)-are highlighted as demonstrative of the religion's innate bellicosity, the immediate rejoinder is that other scriptures, specifically those of Judeo-Christianity, are as riddled with violent passages.
Medieval times: The Crusades were violent and led to atrocities by the modern world's standards under the banner of the cross and in the name of Christianity. But the Crusades were a counterattack on Islam. Muslim invasions and atrocities against Christians were on the rise in the decades before the launch of the Crusades in 1096. More often than not, this argument puts an end to any discussion regarding whether violence and intolerance are unique to Islam. Instead, the default answer becomes that it is not Islam per se but rather Muslim grievance and frustration-ever exacerbated by economic, political, and social factors-that lead to violence. That this view comports perfectly with the secular West's "materialistic" epistemology makes it all the more unquestioned.
Therefore, before condemning the Qur'an and the historical words and deeds of Islam's prophet Muhammad for inciting violence and intolerance, Jews are counseled to consider the historical atrocities committed by their Hebrew forefathers as recorded in their own scriptures; Christians are advised to consider the brutal cycle of violence their forbears have committed in the name of their faith against both non-Christians and fellow Christians. In other words, Jews and Christians are reminded that those who live in glass houses should not be hurling stones.
But is that really the case? Is the analogy with other scriptures legitimate? Does Hebrew violence in the ancient era, and Christian violence in the medieval era, compare to or explain away the tenacity of Muslim violence in the modern era? Violence in Jewish and Christian History
Along with Armstrong, any number of prominent writers, historians, and theologians have championed this "relativist" view. For instance, John Esposito, director of the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University, wonders,
How come we keep on asking the same question, [about violence in Islam,] and don't ask the same question about Christianity and Judaism? Jews and Christians have engaged in acts of violence. All of us have the transcendent and the dark side. ... We have our own theology of hate. In mainstream Christianity and Judaism, we tend to be intolerant; we adhere to an exclusivist theology, of us versus them.[2]
An article by Pennsylvania State University humanities professor Philip Jenkins, "Dark Passages," delineates this position most fully. It aspires to show that the Bible is more violent than the Qur'an:
[I]n terms of ordering violence and bloodshed, any simplistic claim about the superiority of the Bible to the Koran would be wildly wrong. In fact, the Bible overflows with "texts of terror," to borrow a phrase coined by the American theologian Phyllis Trible. The Bible contains far more verses praising or urging bloodshed than does the Koran, and biblical violence is often far more extreme, and marked by more indiscriminate savagery. ... If the founding text shapes the whole religion, then Judaism and Christianity deserve the utmost condemnation as religions of savagery.[3]
Several anecdotes from the Bible as well as from Judeo-Christian history illustrate Jenkins' point, but two in particular-one supposedly representative of Judaism, the other of Christianity-are regularly mentioned and therefore deserve closer examination.
The military conquest of the land of Canaan by the Hebrews in about 1200 B.C.E. is often characterized as "genocide" and has all but become emblematic of biblical violence and intolerance. God told Moses:
But of the cities of these peoples which the Lord your God gives you as an inheritance, you shall let nothing that breathes remain alive, but you shall utterly destroy them-the Hittite, Amorite, Canaanite, Perizzite, Hivite, and Jebusite-just as the Lord your God has commanded you, lest they teach you to do according to all their abominations which they have done for their gods, and you sin against the Lord your God.[4]
So Joshua [Moses' successor] conquered all the land: the mountain country and the South and the lowland and the wilderness slopes, and all their kings; he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord, God of Israel had commanded.[5]
As for Christianity, since it is impossible to find New Testament verses inciting violence, those who espouse the view that Christianity is as violent as Islam rely on historical events such as the Crusader wars waged by European Christians between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries. The Crusades were in fact violent and led to atrocities by the modern world's standards under the banner of the cross and in the name of Christianity. After breaching the walls of Jerusalem in 1099, for example, the Crusaders reportedly slaughtered almost every inhabitant of the Holy City. According to the medieval chronicle, the Gesta Danorum, "the slaughter was so great that our men waded in blood up to their ankles."[6]
In light of the above, as Armstrong, Esposito, Jenkins, and others argue, why should Jews and Christians point to the Qur'an as evidence of Islam's violence while ignoring their own scriptures and history? Bible versus Qur'an
The answer lies in the fact that such observations confuse history and theology by conflating the temporal actions of men with what are understood to be the immutable words of God. The fundamental error is that Judeo-Christian history-which is violent-is being conflated with Islamic theology-which commands violence. Of course, the three major monotheistic religions have all had their share of violence and intolerance towards the "other." Whether this violence is ordained by God or whether warlike men merely wished it thus is the key question.
Old Testament violence is an interesting case in point. God clearly ordered the Hebrews to annihilate the Canaanites and surrounding peoples. Such violence is therefore an expression of God's will, for good or ill. Regardless, all the historic violence committed by the Hebrews and recorded in the Old Testament is just that-history. It happened; God commanded it. But it revolved around a specific time and place and was directed against a specific people. At no time did such violence go on to become standardized or codified into Jewish law. In short, biblical accounts of violence are descriptive, not prescriptive.
This is where Islamic violence is unique. Though similar to the violence of the Old Testament-commanded by God and manifested in history-certain aspects of Islamic violence and intolerance have become standardized in Islamic law and apply at all times. Thus, while the violence found in the Qur'an has a historical context, its ultimate significance is theological. Consider the following Qur'anic verses, better known as the "sword-verses":
Then, when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayer, and pay the alms, then let them go their way.[7]
Fight those who believe not in God and the Last Day, and do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden - such men as practise not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book - until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled.[8]
As with Old Testament verses where God commanded the Hebrews to attack and slay their neighbors, the sword-verses also have a historical context. God first issued these commandments after the Muslims under Muhammad's leadership had grown sufficiently strong to invade their Christian and pagan neighbors. But unlike the bellicose verses and anecdotes of the Old Testament, the sword-verses became fundamental to Islam's subsequent relationship to both the "people of the book" (i.e., Jews and Christians) and the "idolators" (i.e., Hindus, Buddhists, animists, etc.) and, in fact, set off the Islamic conquests, which changed the face of the world forever. Based on Qur'an 9:5, for instance, Islamic law mandates that idolators and polytheists must either convert to Islam or be killed; simultaneously, Qur'an 9:29 is the primary source of Islam's well-known discriminatory practices against conquered Christians and Jews living under Islamic suzerainty.
In fact, based on the sword-verses as well as countless other Qur'anic verses and oral traditions attributed to Muhammad, Islam's learned officials, sheikhs, muftis, and imams throughout the ages have all reached consensus-binding on the entire Muslim community-that Islam is to be at perpetual war with the non-Muslim world until the former subsumes the latter. Indeed, it is widely held by Muslim scholars that since the sword-verses are among the final revelations on the topic of Islam's relationship to non-Muslims, that they alone have abrogated some 200 of the Qur'an's earlier and more tolerant verses, such as "no compulsion is there in religion."[9] Famous Muslim scholar Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406) admired in the West for his "progressive" insights, also puts to rest the notion that jihad is defensive warfare:
In the Muslim community, the holy war [jihad] is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force ... The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense ... They are merely required to establish their religion among their own people. That is why the Israelites after Moses and Joshua remained unconcerned with royal authority [e.g., a caliphate]. Their only concern was to establish their religion [not spread it to the nations] ... But Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.[10]
Modern authorities agree. The Encyclopaedia of Islam's entry for "jihad" by Emile Tyan states that the "spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty upon Muslims in general ... Jihad must continue to be done until the whole world is under the rule of Islam ... Islam must completely be made over before the doctrine of jihad [warfare to spread Islam] can be eliminated." Iraqi jurist Majid Khaduri (1909-2007), after defining jihad as warfare, writes that "jihad ... is regarded by all jurists, with almost no exception, as a collective obligation of the whole Muslim community."[11] And, of course, Muslim legal manuals written in Arabic are even more explicit.[12] Qur'anic Language
When the Qur'an's violent verses are juxtaposed with their Old Testament counterparts, they are especially distinct for using language that transcends time and space, inciting believers to attack and slay nonbelievers today no less than yesterday. God commanded the Hebrews to kill Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites-all specific peoples rooted to a specific time and place. At no time did God give an open-ended command for the Hebrews, and by extension their Jewish descendants, to fight and kill gentiles. On the other hand, though Islam's original enemies were, like Judaism's, historical (e.g., Christian Byzantines and Zoroastrian Persians), the Qur'an rarely singles them out by their proper names. Instead, Muslims were (and are) commanded to fight the people of the book-"until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled"[13] and to "slay the idolaters wherever you find them."[14]
The two Arabic conjunctions "until" (hata) and "wherever" (haythu) demonstrate the perpetual and ubiquitous nature of these commandments: There are still "people of the book" who have yet to be "utterly humbled" (especially in the Americas, Europe, and Israel) and "idolators" to be slain "wherever" one looks (especially Asia and sub-Saharan Africa). In fact, the salient feature of almost all of the violent commandments in Islamic scriptures is their open-ended and generic nature: "Fight them [non-Muslims] until there is no persecution and the religion is God's entirely. [Emphasis added.]"[15] Also, in a well-attested tradition that appears in the hadith collections, Muhammad proclaims:
I have been commanded to wage war against mankind until they testify that there is no god but God and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God; and that they establish prostration prayer, and pay the alms-tax [i.e., convert to Islam]. If they do so, their blood and property are protected. [Emphasis added.][16]
This linguistic aspect is crucial to understanding scriptural exegeses regarding violence. Again, it bears repeating that neither Jewish nor Christian scriptures-the Old and New Testaments, respectively-employ such perpetual, open-ended commandments. Despite all this, Jenkins laments that
Commands to kill, to commit ethnic cleansing, to institutionalize segregation, to hate and fear other races and religions ... all are in the Bible, and occur with a far greater frequency than in the Qur'an. At every stage, we can argue what the passages in question mean, and certainly whether they should have any relevance for later ages. But the fact remains that the words are there, and their inclusion in the scripture means that they are, literally, canonized, no less than in the Muslim scripture.[17]
One wonders what Jenkins has in mind by the word "canonized." If by canonized he means that such verses are considered part of the canon of Judeo-Christian scripture, he is absolutely correct; conversely, if by canonized he means or is trying to connote that these verses have been implemented in the Judeo-Christian Weltanschauung, he is absolutely wrong.
Yet one need not rely on purely exegetical and philological arguments; both history and current events give the lie to Jenkins's relativism. Whereas first-century Christianity spread via the blood of martyrs, first-century Islam spread through violent conquest and bloodshed. Indeed, from day one to the present-whenever it could-Islam spread through conquest, as evinced by the fact that the majority of what is now known as the Islamic world, or dar al-Islam, was conquered by the sword of Islam. This is a historic fact, attested to by the most authoritative Islamic historians. Even the Arabian peninsula, the "home" of Islam, was subdued by great force and bloodshed, as evidenced by the Ridda wars following Muhammad's death when tens of thousands of Arabs were put to the sword by the first caliph Abu Bakr for abandoning Islam. Muhammad's Role
Moreover, concerning the current default position which purports to explain away Islamic violence-that the latter is a product of Muslim frustration vis-à-vis political or economic oppression-one must ask: What about all the oppressed Christians and Jews, not to mention Hindus and Buddhists, of the world today? Where is their religiously-garbed violence? The fact remains: Even though the Islamic world has the lion's share of dramatic headlines-of violence, terrorism, suicide-attacks, decapitations-it is certainly not the only region in the world suffering under both internal and external pressures.
For instance, even though practically all of sub-Saharan Africa is currently riddled with political corruption, oppression and poverty, when it comes to violence, terrorism, and sheer chaos, Somalia-which also happens to be the only sub-Saharan country that is entirely Muslim-leads the pack. Moreover, those most responsible for Somali violence and the enforcement of intolerant, draconian, legal measures-the members of the jihadi group Al-Shabab (the youth)-articulate and justify all their actions through an Islamist paradigm.
In Sudan, too, a jihadi-genocide against the Christian and polytheistic peoples is currently being waged by Khartoum's Islamist government and has left nearly a million "infidels" and "apostates" dead. That the Organization of Islamic Conference has come to the defense of Sudanese president Hassan Ahmad al-Bashir, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court, is further telling of the Islamic body's approval of violence toward both non-Muslims and those deemed not Muslim enough.
Latin American and non-Muslim Asian countries also have their fair share of oppressive, authoritarian regimes, poverty, and all the rest that the Muslim world suffers. Yet, unlike the near daily headlines emanating from the Islamic world, there are no records of practicing Christians, Buddhists, or Hindus crashing explosives-laden vehicles into the buildings of oppressive (e.g., Cuban or Chinese communist) regimes, all the while waving their scriptures in hand and screaming, "Jesus [or Buddha or Vishnu] is great." Why?
There is one final aspect that is often overlooked-either from ignorance or disingenuousness-by those who insist that violence and intolerance is equivalent across the board for all religions. Aside from the divine words of the Qur'an, Muhammad's pattern of behavior-his sunna or "example"-is an extremely important source of legislation in Islam. Muslims are exhorted to emulate Muhammad in all walks of life: "You have had a good example in God's Messenger."[18] And Muhammad's pattern of conduct toward non-Muslims is quite explicit.
Sarcastically arguing against the concept of moderate Islam, for example, terrorist Osama bin Laden, who enjoys half the Arab-Islamic world's support per an Al-Jazeera poll,[19] portrays the Prophet's sunna thusly:
"Moderation" is demonstrated by our prophet who did not remain more than three months in Medina without raiding or sending a raiding party into the lands of the infidels to beat down their strongholds and seize their possessions, their lives, and their women.[20]
In fact, based on both the Qur'an and Muhammad's sunna, pillaging and plundering infidels, enslaving their children, and placing their women in concubinage is well founded.[21] And the concept of sunna-which is what 90 percent of the billion-plus Muslims, the Sunnis, are named after-essentially asserts that anything performed or approved by Muhammad, humanity's most perfect example, is applicable for Muslims today no less than yesterday. This, of course, does not mean that Muslims in mass live only to plunder and rape.
But it does mean that persons naturally inclined to such activities, and who also happen to be Muslim, can-and do-quite easily justify their actions by referring to the "Sunna of the Prophet"-the way Al-Qaeda, for example, justified its attacks on 9/11 where innocents including women and children were killed: Muhammad authorized his followers to use catapults during their siege of the town of Ta'if in 630 C.E.-townspeople had refused to submit-though he was aware that women and children were sheltered there. Also, when asked if it was permissible to launch night raids or set fire to the fortifications of the infidels if women and children were among them, the Prophet is said to have responded, "They [women and children] are from among them [infidels]."[22] Jewish and Christian Ways
Though law-centric and possibly legalistic, Judaism has no such equivalent to the Sunna; the words and deeds of the patriarchs, though described in the Old Testament, never went on to prescribe Jewish law. Neither Abraham's "white-lies," nor Jacob's perfidy, nor Moses' short-fuse, nor David's adultery, nor Solomon's philandering ever went on to instruct Jews or Christians. They were understood as historical acts perpetrated by fallible men who were more often than not punished by God for their less than ideal behavior.
As for Christianity, much of the Old Testament law was abrogated or fulfilled-depending on one's perspective-by Jesus. "Eye for an eye" gave way to "turn the other cheek." Totally loving God and one's neighbor became supreme law.[23] Furthermore, Jesus' sunna-as in "What would Jesus do?"-is characterized by passivity and altruism. The New Testament contains absolutely no exhortations to violence.
Still, there are those who attempt to portray Jesus as having a similarly militant ethos as Muhammad by quoting the verse where the former-who "spoke to the multitudes in parables and without a parable spoke not"[24]-said, "I come not to bring peace but a sword."[25] But based on the context of this statement, it is clear that Jesus was not commanding violence against non-Christians but rather predicting that strife will exist between Christians and their environment-a prediction that was only too true as early Christians, far from taking up the sword, passively perished by the sword in martyrdom as too often they still do in the Muslim world. [26]
Others point to the violence predicted in the Book of Revelation while, again, failing to discern that the entire account is descriptive-not to mention clearly symbolic-and thus hardly prescriptive for Christians. At any rate, how can one conscionably compare this handful of New Testament verses that metaphorically mention the word "sword" to the literally hundreds of Qur'anic injunctions and statements by Muhammad that clearly command Muslims to take up a very real sword against non-Muslims?
Undeterred, Jenkins bemoans the fact that, in the New Testament, Jews "plan to stone Jesus, they plot to kill him; in turn, Jesus calls them liars, children of the Devil."[27] It still remains to be seen if being called "children of the Devil" is more offensive than being referred to as the descendents of apes and pigs-the Qur'an's appellation for Jews.[28] Name calling aside, however, what matters here is that, whereas the New Testament does not command Christians to treat Jews as "children of the Devil," based on the Qur'an, primarily 9:29, Islamic law obligates Muslims to subjugate Jews, indeed, all non-Muslims.
Does this mean that no self-professed Christian can be anti-Semitic? Of course not. But it does mean that Christian anti-Semites are living oxymorons-for the simple reason that textually and theologically, Christianity, far from teaching hatred or animosity, unambiguously stresses love and forgiveness. Whether or not all Christians follow such mandates is hardly the point; just as whether or not all Muslims uphold the obligation of jihad is hardly the point. The only question is, what do the religions command?
John Esposito is therefore right to assert that "Jews and Christians have engaged in acts of violence." He is wrong, however, to add, "We [Christians] have our own theology of hate." Nothing in the New Testament teaches hate-certainly nothing to compare with Qur'anic injunctions such as: "We [Muslims] disbelieve in you [non-Muslims], and between us and you enmity has shown itself, and hatred for ever until you believe in God alone."[29] Reassessing the Crusades
And it is from here that one can best appreciate the historic Crusades-events that have been thoroughly distorted by Islam's many influential apologists. Karen Armstrong, for instance, has practically made a career for herself by misrepresenting the Crusades, writing, for example, that "the idea that Islam imposed itself by the sword is a Western fiction, fabricated during the time of the Crusades when, in fact, it was Western Christians who were fighting brutal holy wars against Islam."[30] That a former nun rabidly condemns the Crusades vis-à-vis anything Islam has done makes her critique all the more marketable. Statements such as this ignore the fact that from the beginnings of Islam, more than 400 years before the Crusades, Christians have noted that Islam was spread by the sword.[31] Indeed, authoritative Muslim historians writing centuries before the Crusades, such as Ahmad Ibn Yahya al-Baladhuri (d. 892) and Muhammad ibn Jarir at-Tabari (838-923), make it clear that Islam was spread by the sword.
The fact remains: The Crusades were a counterattack on Islam-not an unprovoked assault as Armstrong and other revisionist historians portray. Eminent historian Bernard Lewis puts it well,
Even the Christian crusade, often compared with the Muslim jihad, was itself a delayed and limited response to the jihad and in part also an imitation. But unlike the jihad, it was concerned primarily with the defense or reconquest of threatened or lost Christian territory. It was, with few exceptions, limited to the successful wars for the recovery of southwest Europe, and the unsuccessful wars to recover the Holy Land and to halt the Ottoman advance in the Balkans. The Muslim jihad, in contrast, was perceived as unlimited, as a religious obligation that would continue until all the world had either adopted the Muslim faith or submitted to Muslim rule. ... The object of jihad is to bring the whole world under Islamic law.[32]
Moreover, Muslim invasions and atrocities against Christians were on the rise in the decades before the launch of the Crusades in 1096. The Fatimid caliph Abu 'Ali Mansur Tariqu'l-Hakim (r. 996-1021) desecrated and destroyed a number of important churches-such as the Church of St. Mark in Egypt and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem-and decreed even more oppressive than usual decrees against Christians and Jews. Then, in 1071, the Seljuk Turks crushed the Byzantines in the pivotal battle of Manzikert and, in effect, conquered a major chunk of Byzantine Anatolia presaging the way for the eventual capture of Constantinople centuries later.
It was against this backdrop that Pope Urban II (r. 1088-1099) called for the Crusades:
From the confines of Jerusalem and the city of Constantinople a horrible tale has gone forth and very frequently has been brought to our ears, namely, that a race from the kingdom of the Persians [i.e., Muslim Turks] ... has invaded the lands of those Christians and has depopulated them by the sword, pillage and fire; it has led away a part of the captives into its own country, and a part it has destroyed by cruel tortures; it has either entirely destroyed the churches of God or appropriated them for the rites of its own religion.[33]
Even though Urban II's description is historically accurate, the fact remains: However one interprets these wars-as offensive or defensive, just or unjust-it is evident that they were not based on the example of Jesus, who exhorted his followers to "love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you."[34] Indeed, it took centuries of theological debate, from Augustine to Aquinas, to rationalize defensive war-articulated as "just war." Thus, it would seem that if anyone, it is the Crusaders-not the jihadists-who have been less than faithful to their scriptures (from a literal standpoint); or put conversely, it is the jihadists-not the Crusaders-who have faithfully fulfilled their scriptures (also from a literal stand point). Moreover, like the violent accounts of the Old Testament, the Crusades are historic in nature and not manifestations of any deeper scriptural truths.
In fact, far from suggesting anything intrinsic to Christianity, the Crusades ironically better help explain Islam. For what the Crusades demonstrated once and for all is that irrespective of religious teachings-indeed, in the case of these so-called Christian Crusades, despite them-man is often predisposed to violence. But this begs the question: If this is how Christians behaved-who are commanded to love, bless, and do good to their enemies who hate, curse, and persecute them-how much more can be expected of Muslims who, while sharing the same violent tendencies, are further commanded by the Deity to attack, kill, and plunder nonbelievers?
----Raymond Ibrahim is associate director of the Middle East Forum and author of The Al Qaeda Reader (New York: Doubleday, 2007).
[1] Andrea Bistrich, "Discovering the common grounds of world religions," interview with Karen Armstrong, Share International, Sept. 2007, pp. 19-22.
[2] C-SPAN2, June 5, 2004.
[3] Philip Jenkins, "Dark Passages," The Boston Globe, Mar. 8, 2009.
[4] Deut. 20:16-18.
[5] Josh. 10:40.
[6] "The Fall of Jerusalem," Gesta Danorum, accessed Apr. 2, 2009.
[7] Qur. 9:5. All translations of Qur'anic verses are drawn from A.J. Arberry, ed. The Koran Interpreted: A Translation (New York: Touchstone, 1996).
[8] Qur. 9:29.
[9] Qur. 2:256.
[10] Ibn Khaldun, The Muqudimmah: An Introduction to History, Franz Rosenthal, trans. (New York: Pantheon, 1958,) vol. 1, p. 473.
[11] Majid Khadduri, War and Peace in the Law of Islam (London: Oxford University Press, 1955), p. 60.
[12] See, for instance, Ahmed Mahmud Karima, Al-Jihad fi'l-Islam: Dirasa Fiqhiya Muqarina (Cairo: Al-Azhar University, 2003).
[13] Qur. 9:29.
[14] Qur. 9:5.
[15] Qur. 8:39.
[16] Ibn al-Hajjaj Muslim, Sahih Muslim, C9B1N31; Muhammad Ibn Isma'il al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari (Lahore: Kazi, 1979), B2N24.
[17] Jenkins, "Dark_Passages."
[18] Qur. 33:21.
[19] "Al-Jazeera-Poll: 49% of Muslims Support Osama bin Laden," Sept. 7-10, 2006, accessed Apr. 2, 2009.
[20] 'Abd al-Rahim 'Ali, Hilf al Irhab (Cairo: Markaz al-Mahrusa li 'n-Nashr wa 'l-Khidamat as-Sahafiya wa 'l-Ma'lumat, 2004).
[21] For example, Qur. 4:24, 4:92, 8:69, 24:33, 33:50.
[22] Sahih Muslim, B19N4321; for English translation, see Raymond Ibrahim, The Al Qaeda Reader (New York: Doubleday, 2007), p. 140. [23] Matt. 22:38-40.
[24] Matt. 13:34.
[25] Matt. 10:34.
[26] See, for instance, "Christian Persecution Info," Christian Persecution Magazine, accessed Apr. 2, 2009.
[27] Jenkins, "Dark_Passages."
[28] Qur. 2:62-65, 5:59-60, 7:166.
[29] Qur. 60:4.
[30] Bistrich, "Discovering the common grounds of world religions," pp. 19-22; For a critique of Karen Armstrong's work, see "Karen Armstrong," in Andrew Holt, ed. Crusades-Encyclopedia, Apr. 2005, accessed Apr. 6, 2009.
[31] See, for example, the writings of Sophrinius, Jerusalem's patriarch during the Muslim conquest of the Holy City, just years after the death of Muhammad, or the chronicles of Theophane the Confessor.
[32] Bernard Lewis, The Middle East: A Brief History of the Last 2000 Years (New York: Scribner, 1995), p. 233-4.
[33] "Speech of Urban-Robert of Rheims," in Edward Peters, ed., The First Crusade: The Chronicle of Fulcher of Chartres and Other Source Materials (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998), p. 27. [34] Matt. 5:44.
by Raymond Ibrahim
Middle East Quarterly
http://www.meforum.org/2159/are-judaism-and-christianity-as-violent-as-islam
Summer 2009, pp. 3-12
"There is far more violence in the Bible than in the Qur'an; the idea that Islam imposed itself by the sword is a Western fiction, fabricated during the time of the Crusades when, in fact, it was Western Christians who were fighting brutal holy wars against Islam."[1] So announces former nun and self-professed "freelance monotheist," Karen Armstrong.
This quote sums up the single most influential argument currently serving to deflect the accusation that Islam is inherently violent and intolerant: All monotheistic religions, proponents of such an argument say, and not just Islam, have their fair share of violent and intolerant scriptures, as well as bloody histories. Thus, whenever Islam's sacred scriptures-the Qur'an first, followed by the reports on the words and deeds of Muhammad (the Hadith)-are highlighted as demonstrative of the religion's innate bellicosity, the immediate rejoinder is that other scriptures, specifically those of Judeo-Christianity, are as riddled with violent passages.
Medieval times: The Crusades were violent and led to atrocities by the modern world's standards under the banner of the cross and in the name of Christianity. But the Crusades were a counterattack on Islam. Muslim invasions and atrocities against Christians were on the rise in the decades before the launch of the Crusades in 1096. More often than not, this argument puts an end to any discussion regarding whether violence and intolerance are unique to Islam. Instead, the default answer becomes that it is not Islam per se but rather Muslim grievance and frustration-ever exacerbated by economic, political, and social factors-that lead to violence. That this view comports perfectly with the secular West's "materialistic" epistemology makes it all the more unquestioned.
Therefore, before condemning the Qur'an and the historical words and deeds of Islam's prophet Muhammad for inciting violence and intolerance, Jews are counseled to consider the historical atrocities committed by their Hebrew forefathers as recorded in their own scriptures; Christians are advised to consider the brutal cycle of violence their forbears have committed in the name of their faith against both non-Christians and fellow Christians. In other words, Jews and Christians are reminded that those who live in glass houses should not be hurling stones.
But is that really the case? Is the analogy with other scriptures legitimate? Does Hebrew violence in the ancient era, and Christian violence in the medieval era, compare to or explain away the tenacity of Muslim violence in the modern era? Violence in Jewish and Christian History
Along with Armstrong, any number of prominent writers, historians, and theologians have championed this "relativist" view. For instance, John Esposito, director of the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University, wonders,
How come we keep on asking the same question, [about violence in Islam,] and don't ask the same question about Christianity and Judaism? Jews and Christians have engaged in acts of violence. All of us have the transcendent and the dark side. ... We have our own theology of hate. In mainstream Christianity and Judaism, we tend to be intolerant; we adhere to an exclusivist theology, of us versus them.[2]
An article by Pennsylvania State University humanities professor Philip Jenkins, "Dark Passages," delineates this position most fully. It aspires to show that the Bible is more violent than the Qur'an:
[I]n terms of ordering violence and bloodshed, any simplistic claim about the superiority of the Bible to the Koran would be wildly wrong. In fact, the Bible overflows with "texts of terror," to borrow a phrase coined by the American theologian Phyllis Trible. The Bible contains far more verses praising or urging bloodshed than does the Koran, and biblical violence is often far more extreme, and marked by more indiscriminate savagery. ... If the founding text shapes the whole religion, then Judaism and Christianity deserve the utmost condemnation as religions of savagery.[3]
Several anecdotes from the Bible as well as from Judeo-Christian history illustrate Jenkins' point, but two in particular-one supposedly representative of Judaism, the other of Christianity-are regularly mentioned and therefore deserve closer examination.
The military conquest of the land of Canaan by the Hebrews in about 1200 B.C.E. is often characterized as "genocide" and has all but become emblematic of biblical violence and intolerance. God told Moses:
But of the cities of these peoples which the Lord your God gives you as an inheritance, you shall let nothing that breathes remain alive, but you shall utterly destroy them-the Hittite, Amorite, Canaanite, Perizzite, Hivite, and Jebusite-just as the Lord your God has commanded you, lest they teach you to do according to all their abominations which they have done for their gods, and you sin against the Lord your God.[4]
So Joshua [Moses' successor] conquered all the land: the mountain country and the South and the lowland and the wilderness slopes, and all their kings; he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord, God of Israel had commanded.[5]
As for Christianity, since it is impossible to find New Testament verses inciting violence, those who espouse the view that Christianity is as violent as Islam rely on historical events such as the Crusader wars waged by European Christians between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries. The Crusades were in fact violent and led to atrocities by the modern world's standards under the banner of the cross and in the name of Christianity. After breaching the walls of Jerusalem in 1099, for example, the Crusaders reportedly slaughtered almost every inhabitant of the Holy City. According to the medieval chronicle, the Gesta Danorum, "the slaughter was so great that our men waded in blood up to their ankles."[6]
In light of the above, as Armstrong, Esposito, Jenkins, and others argue, why should Jews and Christians point to the Qur'an as evidence of Islam's violence while ignoring their own scriptures and history? Bible versus Qur'an
The answer lies in the fact that such observations confuse history and theology by conflating the temporal actions of men with what are understood to be the immutable words of God. The fundamental error is that Judeo-Christian history-which is violent-is being conflated with Islamic theology-which commands violence. Of course, the three major monotheistic religions have all had their share of violence and intolerance towards the "other." Whether this violence is ordained by God or whether warlike men merely wished it thus is the key question.
Old Testament violence is an interesting case in point. God clearly ordered the Hebrews to annihilate the Canaanites and surrounding peoples. Such violence is therefore an expression of God's will, for good or ill. Regardless, all the historic violence committed by the Hebrews and recorded in the Old Testament is just that-history. It happened; God commanded it. But it revolved around a specific time and place and was directed against a specific people. At no time did such violence go on to become standardized or codified into Jewish law. In short, biblical accounts of violence are descriptive, not prescriptive.
This is where Islamic violence is unique. Though similar to the violence of the Old Testament-commanded by God and manifested in history-certain aspects of Islamic violence and intolerance have become standardized in Islamic law and apply at all times. Thus, while the violence found in the Qur'an has a historical context, its ultimate significance is theological. Consider the following Qur'anic verses, better known as the "sword-verses":
Then, when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayer, and pay the alms, then let them go their way.[7]
Fight those who believe not in God and the Last Day, and do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden - such men as practise not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book - until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled.[8]
As with Old Testament verses where God commanded the Hebrews to attack and slay their neighbors, the sword-verses also have a historical context. God first issued these commandments after the Muslims under Muhammad's leadership had grown sufficiently strong to invade their Christian and pagan neighbors. But unlike the bellicose verses and anecdotes of the Old Testament, the sword-verses became fundamental to Islam's subsequent relationship to both the "people of the book" (i.e., Jews and Christians) and the "idolators" (i.e., Hindus, Buddhists, animists, etc.) and, in fact, set off the Islamic conquests, which changed the face of the world forever. Based on Qur'an 9:5, for instance, Islamic law mandates that idolators and polytheists must either convert to Islam or be killed; simultaneously, Qur'an 9:29 is the primary source of Islam's well-known discriminatory practices against conquered Christians and Jews living under Islamic suzerainty.
In fact, based on the sword-verses as well as countless other Qur'anic verses and oral traditions attributed to Muhammad, Islam's learned officials, sheikhs, muftis, and imams throughout the ages have all reached consensus-binding on the entire Muslim community-that Islam is to be at perpetual war with the non-Muslim world until the former subsumes the latter. Indeed, it is widely held by Muslim scholars that since the sword-verses are among the final revelations on the topic of Islam's relationship to non-Muslims, that they alone have abrogated some 200 of the Qur'an's earlier and more tolerant verses, such as "no compulsion is there in religion."[9] Famous Muslim scholar Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406) admired in the West for his "progressive" insights, also puts to rest the notion that jihad is defensive warfare:
In the Muslim community, the holy war [jihad] is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force ... The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense ... They are merely required to establish their religion among their own people. That is why the Israelites after Moses and Joshua remained unconcerned with royal authority [e.g., a caliphate]. Their only concern was to establish their religion [not spread it to the nations] ... But Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.[10]
Modern authorities agree. The Encyclopaedia of Islam's entry for "jihad" by Emile Tyan states that the "spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty upon Muslims in general ... Jihad must continue to be done until the whole world is under the rule of Islam ... Islam must completely be made over before the doctrine of jihad [warfare to spread Islam] can be eliminated." Iraqi jurist Majid Khaduri (1909-2007), after defining jihad as warfare, writes that "jihad ... is regarded by all jurists, with almost no exception, as a collective obligation of the whole Muslim community."[11] And, of course, Muslim legal manuals written in Arabic are even more explicit.[12] Qur'anic Language
When the Qur'an's violent verses are juxtaposed with their Old Testament counterparts, they are especially distinct for using language that transcends time and space, inciting believers to attack and slay nonbelievers today no less than yesterday. God commanded the Hebrews to kill Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites-all specific peoples rooted to a specific time and place. At no time did God give an open-ended command for the Hebrews, and by extension their Jewish descendants, to fight and kill gentiles. On the other hand, though Islam's original enemies were, like Judaism's, historical (e.g., Christian Byzantines and Zoroastrian Persians), the Qur'an rarely singles them out by their proper names. Instead, Muslims were (and are) commanded to fight the people of the book-"until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled"[13] and to "slay the idolaters wherever you find them."[14]
The two Arabic conjunctions "until" (hata) and "wherever" (haythu) demonstrate the perpetual and ubiquitous nature of these commandments: There are still "people of the book" who have yet to be "utterly humbled" (especially in the Americas, Europe, and Israel) and "idolators" to be slain "wherever" one looks (especially Asia and sub-Saharan Africa). In fact, the salient feature of almost all of the violent commandments in Islamic scriptures is their open-ended and generic nature: "Fight them [non-Muslims] until there is no persecution and the religion is God's entirely. [Emphasis added.]"[15] Also, in a well-attested tradition that appears in the hadith collections, Muhammad proclaims:
I have been commanded to wage war against mankind until they testify that there is no god but God and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God; and that they establish prostration prayer, and pay the alms-tax [i.e., convert to Islam]. If they do so, their blood and property are protected. [Emphasis added.][16]
This linguistic aspect is crucial to understanding scriptural exegeses regarding violence. Again, it bears repeating that neither Jewish nor Christian scriptures-the Old and New Testaments, respectively-employ such perpetual, open-ended commandments. Despite all this, Jenkins laments that
Commands to kill, to commit ethnic cleansing, to institutionalize segregation, to hate and fear other races and religions ... all are in the Bible, and occur with a far greater frequency than in the Qur'an. At every stage, we can argue what the passages in question mean, and certainly whether they should have any relevance for later ages. But the fact remains that the words are there, and their inclusion in the scripture means that they are, literally, canonized, no less than in the Muslim scripture.[17]
One wonders what Jenkins has in mind by the word "canonized." If by canonized he means that such verses are considered part of the canon of Judeo-Christian scripture, he is absolutely correct; conversely, if by canonized he means or is trying to connote that these verses have been implemented in the Judeo-Christian Weltanschauung, he is absolutely wrong.
Yet one need not rely on purely exegetical and philological arguments; both history and current events give the lie to Jenkins's relativism. Whereas first-century Christianity spread via the blood of martyrs, first-century Islam spread through violent conquest and bloodshed. Indeed, from day one to the present-whenever it could-Islam spread through conquest, as evinced by the fact that the majority of what is now known as the Islamic world, or dar al-Islam, was conquered by the sword of Islam. This is a historic fact, attested to by the most authoritative Islamic historians. Even the Arabian peninsula, the "home" of Islam, was subdued by great force and bloodshed, as evidenced by the Ridda wars following Muhammad's death when tens of thousands of Arabs were put to the sword by the first caliph Abu Bakr for abandoning Islam. Muhammad's Role
Moreover, concerning the current default position which purports to explain away Islamic violence-that the latter is a product of Muslim frustration vis-à-vis political or economic oppression-one must ask: What about all the oppressed Christians and Jews, not to mention Hindus and Buddhists, of the world today? Where is their religiously-garbed violence? The fact remains: Even though the Islamic world has the lion's share of dramatic headlines-of violence, terrorism, suicide-attacks, decapitations-it is certainly not the only region in the world suffering under both internal and external pressures.
For instance, even though practically all of sub-Saharan Africa is currently riddled with political corruption, oppression and poverty, when it comes to violence, terrorism, and sheer chaos, Somalia-which also happens to be the only sub-Saharan country that is entirely Muslim-leads the pack. Moreover, those most responsible for Somali violence and the enforcement of intolerant, draconian, legal measures-the members of the jihadi group Al-Shabab (the youth)-articulate and justify all their actions through an Islamist paradigm.
In Sudan, too, a jihadi-genocide against the Christian and polytheistic peoples is currently being waged by Khartoum's Islamist government and has left nearly a million "infidels" and "apostates" dead. That the Organization of Islamic Conference has come to the defense of Sudanese president Hassan Ahmad al-Bashir, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court, is further telling of the Islamic body's approval of violence toward both non-Muslims and those deemed not Muslim enough.
Latin American and non-Muslim Asian countries also have their fair share of oppressive, authoritarian regimes, poverty, and all the rest that the Muslim world suffers. Yet, unlike the near daily headlines emanating from the Islamic world, there are no records of practicing Christians, Buddhists, or Hindus crashing explosives-laden vehicles into the buildings of oppressive (e.g., Cuban or Chinese communist) regimes, all the while waving their scriptures in hand and screaming, "Jesus [or Buddha or Vishnu] is great." Why?
There is one final aspect that is often overlooked-either from ignorance or disingenuousness-by those who insist that violence and intolerance is equivalent across the board for all religions. Aside from the divine words of the Qur'an, Muhammad's pattern of behavior-his sunna or "example"-is an extremely important source of legislation in Islam. Muslims are exhorted to emulate Muhammad in all walks of life: "You have had a good example in God's Messenger."[18] And Muhammad's pattern of conduct toward non-Muslims is quite explicit.
Sarcastically arguing against the concept of moderate Islam, for example, terrorist Osama bin Laden, who enjoys half the Arab-Islamic world's support per an Al-Jazeera poll,[19] portrays the Prophet's sunna thusly:
"Moderation" is demonstrated by our prophet who did not remain more than three months in Medina without raiding or sending a raiding party into the lands of the infidels to beat down their strongholds and seize their possessions, their lives, and their women.[20]
In fact, based on both the Qur'an and Muhammad's sunna, pillaging and plundering infidels, enslaving their children, and placing their women in concubinage is well founded.[21] And the concept of sunna-which is what 90 percent of the billion-plus Muslims, the Sunnis, are named after-essentially asserts that anything performed or approved by Muhammad, humanity's most perfect example, is applicable for Muslims today no less than yesterday. This, of course, does not mean that Muslims in mass live only to plunder and rape.
But it does mean that persons naturally inclined to such activities, and who also happen to be Muslim, can-and do-quite easily justify their actions by referring to the "Sunna of the Prophet"-the way Al-Qaeda, for example, justified its attacks on 9/11 where innocents including women and children were killed: Muhammad authorized his followers to use catapults during their siege of the town of Ta'if in 630 C.E.-townspeople had refused to submit-though he was aware that women and children were sheltered there. Also, when asked if it was permissible to launch night raids or set fire to the fortifications of the infidels if women and children were among them, the Prophet is said to have responded, "They [women and children] are from among them [infidels]."[22] Jewish and Christian Ways
Though law-centric and possibly legalistic, Judaism has no such equivalent to the Sunna; the words and deeds of the patriarchs, though described in the Old Testament, never went on to prescribe Jewish law. Neither Abraham's "white-lies," nor Jacob's perfidy, nor Moses' short-fuse, nor David's adultery, nor Solomon's philandering ever went on to instruct Jews or Christians. They were understood as historical acts perpetrated by fallible men who were more often than not punished by God for their less than ideal behavior.
As for Christianity, much of the Old Testament law was abrogated or fulfilled-depending on one's perspective-by Jesus. "Eye for an eye" gave way to "turn the other cheek." Totally loving God and one's neighbor became supreme law.[23] Furthermore, Jesus' sunna-as in "What would Jesus do?"-is characterized by passivity and altruism. The New Testament contains absolutely no exhortations to violence.
Still, there are those who attempt to portray Jesus as having a similarly militant ethos as Muhammad by quoting the verse where the former-who "spoke to the multitudes in parables and without a parable spoke not"[24]-said, "I come not to bring peace but a sword."[25] But based on the context of this statement, it is clear that Jesus was not commanding violence against non-Christians but rather predicting that strife will exist between Christians and their environment-a prediction that was only too true as early Christians, far from taking up the sword, passively perished by the sword in martyrdom as too often they still do in the Muslim world. [26]
Others point to the violence predicted in the Book of Revelation while, again, failing to discern that the entire account is descriptive-not to mention clearly symbolic-and thus hardly prescriptive for Christians. At any rate, how can one conscionably compare this handful of New Testament verses that metaphorically mention the word "sword" to the literally hundreds of Qur'anic injunctions and statements by Muhammad that clearly command Muslims to take up a very real sword against non-Muslims?
Undeterred, Jenkins bemoans the fact that, in the New Testament, Jews "plan to stone Jesus, they plot to kill him; in turn, Jesus calls them liars, children of the Devil."[27] It still remains to be seen if being called "children of the Devil" is more offensive than being referred to as the descendents of apes and pigs-the Qur'an's appellation for Jews.[28] Name calling aside, however, what matters here is that, whereas the New Testament does not command Christians to treat Jews as "children of the Devil," based on the Qur'an, primarily 9:29, Islamic law obligates Muslims to subjugate Jews, indeed, all non-Muslims.
Does this mean that no self-professed Christian can be anti-Semitic? Of course not. But it does mean that Christian anti-Semites are living oxymorons-for the simple reason that textually and theologically, Christianity, far from teaching hatred or animosity, unambiguously stresses love and forgiveness. Whether or not all Christians follow such mandates is hardly the point; just as whether or not all Muslims uphold the obligation of jihad is hardly the point. The only question is, what do the religions command?
John Esposito is therefore right to assert that "Jews and Christians have engaged in acts of violence." He is wrong, however, to add, "We [Christians] have our own theology of hate." Nothing in the New Testament teaches hate-certainly nothing to compare with Qur'anic injunctions such as: "We [Muslims] disbelieve in you [non-Muslims], and between us and you enmity has shown itself, and hatred for ever until you believe in God alone."[29] Reassessing the Crusades
And it is from here that one can best appreciate the historic Crusades-events that have been thoroughly distorted by Islam's many influential apologists. Karen Armstrong, for instance, has practically made a career for herself by misrepresenting the Crusades, writing, for example, that "the idea that Islam imposed itself by the sword is a Western fiction, fabricated during the time of the Crusades when, in fact, it was Western Christians who were fighting brutal holy wars against Islam."[30] That a former nun rabidly condemns the Crusades vis-à-vis anything Islam has done makes her critique all the more marketable. Statements such as this ignore the fact that from the beginnings of Islam, more than 400 years before the Crusades, Christians have noted that Islam was spread by the sword.[31] Indeed, authoritative Muslim historians writing centuries before the Crusades, such as Ahmad Ibn Yahya al-Baladhuri (d. 892) and Muhammad ibn Jarir at-Tabari (838-923), make it clear that Islam was spread by the sword.
The fact remains: The Crusades were a counterattack on Islam-not an unprovoked assault as Armstrong and other revisionist historians portray. Eminent historian Bernard Lewis puts it well,
Even the Christian crusade, often compared with the Muslim jihad, was itself a delayed and limited response to the jihad and in part also an imitation. But unlike the jihad, it was concerned primarily with the defense or reconquest of threatened or lost Christian territory. It was, with few exceptions, limited to the successful wars for the recovery of southwest Europe, and the unsuccessful wars to recover the Holy Land and to halt the Ottoman advance in the Balkans. The Muslim jihad, in contrast, was perceived as unlimited, as a religious obligation that would continue until all the world had either adopted the Muslim faith or submitted to Muslim rule. ... The object of jihad is to bring the whole world under Islamic law.[32]
Moreover, Muslim invasions and atrocities against Christians were on the rise in the decades before the launch of the Crusades in 1096. The Fatimid caliph Abu 'Ali Mansur Tariqu'l-Hakim (r. 996-1021) desecrated and destroyed a number of important churches-such as the Church of St. Mark in Egypt and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem-and decreed even more oppressive than usual decrees against Christians and Jews. Then, in 1071, the Seljuk Turks crushed the Byzantines in the pivotal battle of Manzikert and, in effect, conquered a major chunk of Byzantine Anatolia presaging the way for the eventual capture of Constantinople centuries later.
It was against this backdrop that Pope Urban II (r. 1088-1099) called for the Crusades:
From the confines of Jerusalem and the city of Constantinople a horrible tale has gone forth and very frequently has been brought to our ears, namely, that a race from the kingdom of the Persians [i.e., Muslim Turks] ... has invaded the lands of those Christians and has depopulated them by the sword, pillage and fire; it has led away a part of the captives into its own country, and a part it has destroyed by cruel tortures; it has either entirely destroyed the churches of God or appropriated them for the rites of its own religion.[33]
Even though Urban II's description is historically accurate, the fact remains: However one interprets these wars-as offensive or defensive, just or unjust-it is evident that they were not based on the example of Jesus, who exhorted his followers to "love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you."[34] Indeed, it took centuries of theological debate, from Augustine to Aquinas, to rationalize defensive war-articulated as "just war." Thus, it would seem that if anyone, it is the Crusaders-not the jihadists-who have been less than faithful to their scriptures (from a literal standpoint); or put conversely, it is the jihadists-not the Crusaders-who have faithfully fulfilled their scriptures (also from a literal stand point). Moreover, like the violent accounts of the Old Testament, the Crusades are historic in nature and not manifestations of any deeper scriptural truths.
In fact, far from suggesting anything intrinsic to Christianity, the Crusades ironically better help explain Islam. For what the Crusades demonstrated once and for all is that irrespective of religious teachings-indeed, in the case of these so-called Christian Crusades, despite them-man is often predisposed to violence. But this begs the question: If this is how Christians behaved-who are commanded to love, bless, and do good to their enemies who hate, curse, and persecute them-how much more can be expected of Muslims who, while sharing the same violent tendencies, are further commanded by the Deity to attack, kill, and plunder nonbelievers?
----Raymond Ibrahim is associate director of the Middle East Forum and author of The Al Qaeda Reader (New York: Doubleday, 2007).
[1] Andrea Bistrich, "Discovering the common grounds of world religions," interview with Karen Armstrong, Share International, Sept. 2007, pp. 19-22.
[2] C-SPAN2, June 5, 2004.
[3] Philip Jenkins, "Dark Passages," The Boston Globe, Mar. 8, 2009.
[4] Deut. 20:16-18.
[5] Josh. 10:40.
[6] "The Fall of Jerusalem," Gesta Danorum, accessed Apr. 2, 2009.
[7] Qur. 9:5. All translations of Qur'anic verses are drawn from A.J. Arberry, ed. The Koran Interpreted: A Translation (New York: Touchstone, 1996).
[8] Qur. 9:29.
[9] Qur. 2:256.
[10] Ibn Khaldun, The Muqudimmah: An Introduction to History, Franz Rosenthal, trans. (New York: Pantheon, 1958,) vol. 1, p. 473.
[11] Majid Khadduri, War and Peace in the Law of Islam (London: Oxford University Press, 1955), p. 60.
[12] See, for instance, Ahmed Mahmud Karima, Al-Jihad fi'l-Islam: Dirasa Fiqhiya Muqarina (Cairo: Al-Azhar University, 2003).
[13] Qur. 9:29.
[14] Qur. 9:5.
[15] Qur. 8:39.
[16] Ibn al-Hajjaj Muslim, Sahih Muslim, C9B1N31; Muhammad Ibn Isma'il al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari (Lahore: Kazi, 1979), B2N24.
[17] Jenkins, "Dark_Passages."
[18] Qur. 33:21.
[19] "Al-Jazeera-Poll: 49% of Muslims Support Osama bin Laden," Sept. 7-10, 2006, accessed Apr. 2, 2009.
[20] 'Abd al-Rahim 'Ali, Hilf al Irhab (Cairo: Markaz al-Mahrusa li 'n-Nashr wa 'l-Khidamat as-Sahafiya wa 'l-Ma'lumat, 2004).
[21] For example, Qur. 4:24, 4:92, 8:69, 24:33, 33:50.
[22] Sahih Muslim, B19N4321; for English translation, see Raymond Ibrahim, The Al Qaeda Reader (New York: Doubleday, 2007), p. 140. [23] Matt. 22:38-40.
[24] Matt. 13:34.
[25] Matt. 10:34.
[26] See, for instance, "Christian Persecution Info," Christian Persecution Magazine, accessed Apr. 2, 2009.
[27] Jenkins, "Dark_Passages."
[28] Qur. 2:62-65, 5:59-60, 7:166.
[29] Qur. 60:4.
[30] Bistrich, "Discovering the common grounds of world religions," pp. 19-22; For a critique of Karen Armstrong's work, see "Karen Armstrong," in Andrew Holt, ed. Crusades-Encyclopedia, Apr. 2005, accessed Apr. 6, 2009.
[31] See, for example, the writings of Sophrinius, Jerusalem's patriarch during the Muslim conquest of the Holy City, just years after the death of Muhammad, or the chronicles of Theophane the Confessor.
[32] Bernard Lewis, The Middle East: A Brief History of the Last 2000 Years (New York: Scribner, 1995), p. 233-4.
[33] "Speech of Urban-Robert of Rheims," in Edward Peters, ed., The First Crusade: The Chronicle of Fulcher of Chartres and Other Source Materials (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998), p. 27. [34] Matt. 5:44.
Seven-year sentence for Canadian al-Qaeda recruit
Seven-year sentence for Canadian al-Qaeda recruit
'Islamic paradise that he sought was usurped by men who wrapped their piety in bandoliers and announced their faith with explosives'
Stewart Bell, National Post Published: Thursday, July 09, 2009
A Canadian who left Toronto in 2000 to join Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda was sentenced to 7½ years imprisonment yesterday after admitting he had trained with and helped finance the terrorist group.
Although his lawyers described Mohamed Abdullah Warsame as simply "a naive, near-sighted and overweight idealist" who became deeply religious while living in Toronto and travelled to Afghanistan in search of an "Islamic utopia," prosecutors in Minneapolis argued the 35-year-old Somali, who came to Canada as a refugee in 1989, was devoted to the al-Qaeda cause.
Warsame could be released in less than a year and deported to Canada; he has been in custody since his 2003 arrest and the judge gave him credit for the time he has already served.
Warsame pleaded guilty in May to a single count of providing material support to al-Qaeda. In exchange, federal prosecutors dropped three counts of making false statements to the FBI.
"Mr. Warsame's actions demonstrate that he was a member of the organization, that he believed in its cause, and that he was willing to violate United States law in support of al-Qaeda," said U. S. Attorney Frank Magill.
Warsame's lawyers maintained that his trek to Afghanistan was not driven by violent ideals, but rather religious devotion. "There came a time, however, where it became so apparent that his vision of the new Islamic world was different than that embraced by the other men who had travelled to Afghanistan," defence lawyer Andrea George wrote in a sentencing memorandum.
"There came a time when Mohamed Warsame had to acknowledge that the utopia that he had envisioned, that the Islamic paradise that he sought was usurped by men who wrapped their piety in bandoliers and announced their faith with explosives."
Warsame was born in Mogadishu and schooled in India. At age 17, he fled Somalia for Rome. From there, he went to New York and then Canada, where he was accepted as a refugee.
He married a Minneapolis woman in an arranged marriage but had to return to Toronto without her because he did not have immigration status in the United States.
"He could not find spiritual fulfillment in Canada or the United States," his lawyer wrote, and "like many religious Muslims, became aware of the Taliban in the mid-1990s and believed a pure Islam would rise from there."
In March 2001, he left Toronto for Pakistan, and crossed the mountains into Afghanistan. He trained for five months at an al-Qaeda camp near Kabul, and then trained at bin Laden's infamous Al Farooq camp near Kandahar, where he saw the al-Qaeda leader there "frequently."
He left Afghanistan in the fall of 2000, and stayed briefly in Pakistan. While he was there, he sent an e-mail to a friend in Canada describing his time in Afghanistan as "one of the greatest experiences of my life. I will be going back there very soon."
He wrote other e-mails encouraging friends to join him because he considered it un-
Islamic to live in non-Muslim countries, and "I don't want you to be late for the action, you know what I mean. I hear there may be an attack soon."
He returned to Afghanistan and, beginning in January 2001, lived at an al-Qaeda guesthouse, where he worked as a guard. At a nearby Islamic institute, he "taught radical Islam and preached jihad to students," the U. S. Department of Justice said in a statement yesterday.
"While in Afghanistan, Warsame was asked to conduct operations in Western countries, but Warsame claims he denied this request," federal prosecutors wrote in their sentencing memorandum.
Al-Qaeda sent Warsame back to Canada in April 2001 because his Canadian passport was about to expire and they did not want him to get "stuck" in Afghanistan, the prosecutors wrote. But Warsame remained in contact with his al-Qaeda associates and sent $2,000 to one of his former training camp commanders.
During sentencing proceedings, prosecutors said some of Warsame's associates in Afghanistan -- also apparently Canadians -- were nervous "about returning to Canada." But once he reached Toronto, via the United Kingdom, Warsame wrote to one of them with advice.
"Thanks to Allah I have reached safely in Canada. There is no stamp on the passport from London. In Canada I was asked lots of question like how come you went for a year and all that. And also they are afraid of mad cow disease and they check the bags and spray something on your shoes so be careful."
He later moved to Minneapolis and lived there until his arrest.
'Islamic paradise that he sought was usurped by men who wrapped their piety in bandoliers and announced their faith with explosives'
Stewart Bell, National Post Published: Thursday, July 09, 2009
A Canadian who left Toronto in 2000 to join Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda was sentenced to 7½ years imprisonment yesterday after admitting he had trained with and helped finance the terrorist group.
Although his lawyers described Mohamed Abdullah Warsame as simply "a naive, near-sighted and overweight idealist" who became deeply religious while living in Toronto and travelled to Afghanistan in search of an "Islamic utopia," prosecutors in Minneapolis argued the 35-year-old Somali, who came to Canada as a refugee in 1989, was devoted to the al-Qaeda cause.
Warsame could be released in less than a year and deported to Canada; he has been in custody since his 2003 arrest and the judge gave him credit for the time he has already served.
Warsame pleaded guilty in May to a single count of providing material support to al-Qaeda. In exchange, federal prosecutors dropped three counts of making false statements to the FBI.
"Mr. Warsame's actions demonstrate that he was a member of the organization, that he believed in its cause, and that he was willing to violate United States law in support of al-Qaeda," said U. S. Attorney Frank Magill.
Warsame's lawyers maintained that his trek to Afghanistan was not driven by violent ideals, but rather religious devotion. "There came a time, however, where it became so apparent that his vision of the new Islamic world was different than that embraced by the other men who had travelled to Afghanistan," defence lawyer Andrea George wrote in a sentencing memorandum.
"There came a time when Mohamed Warsame had to acknowledge that the utopia that he had envisioned, that the Islamic paradise that he sought was usurped by men who wrapped their piety in bandoliers and announced their faith with explosives."
Warsame was born in Mogadishu and schooled in India. At age 17, he fled Somalia for Rome. From there, he went to New York and then Canada, where he was accepted as a refugee.
He married a Minneapolis woman in an arranged marriage but had to return to Toronto without her because he did not have immigration status in the United States.
"He could not find spiritual fulfillment in Canada or the United States," his lawyer wrote, and "like many religious Muslims, became aware of the Taliban in the mid-1990s and believed a pure Islam would rise from there."
In March 2001, he left Toronto for Pakistan, and crossed the mountains into Afghanistan. He trained for five months at an al-Qaeda camp near Kabul, and then trained at bin Laden's infamous Al Farooq camp near Kandahar, where he saw the al-Qaeda leader there "frequently."
He left Afghanistan in the fall of 2000, and stayed briefly in Pakistan. While he was there, he sent an e-mail to a friend in Canada describing his time in Afghanistan as "one of the greatest experiences of my life. I will be going back there very soon."
He wrote other e-mails encouraging friends to join him because he considered it un-
Islamic to live in non-Muslim countries, and "I don't want you to be late for the action, you know what I mean. I hear there may be an attack soon."
He returned to Afghanistan and, beginning in January 2001, lived at an al-Qaeda guesthouse, where he worked as a guard. At a nearby Islamic institute, he "taught radical Islam and preached jihad to students," the U. S. Department of Justice said in a statement yesterday.
"While in Afghanistan, Warsame was asked to conduct operations in Western countries, but Warsame claims he denied this request," federal prosecutors wrote in their sentencing memorandum.
Al-Qaeda sent Warsame back to Canada in April 2001 because his Canadian passport was about to expire and they did not want him to get "stuck" in Afghanistan, the prosecutors wrote. But Warsame remained in contact with his al-Qaeda associates and sent $2,000 to one of his former training camp commanders.
During sentencing proceedings, prosecutors said some of Warsame's associates in Afghanistan -- also apparently Canadians -- were nervous "about returning to Canada." But once he reached Toronto, via the United Kingdom, Warsame wrote to one of them with advice.
"Thanks to Allah I have reached safely in Canada. There is no stamp on the passport from London. In Canada I was asked lots of question like how come you went for a year and all that. And also they are afraid of mad cow disease and they check the bags and spray something on your shoes so be careful."
He later moved to Minneapolis and lived there until his arrest.
Friday, July 3, 2009
Lashkar-e-Taiba’s Financial Network Targets India from the Gulf States
Lashkar-e-Taiba’s Financial Network Targets India from the Gulf States
Publication: Terrorism Monitor Volume: 7 Issue: 19
July 2, 2009 04:12 PM Age: 1 days
Category: Terrorism Monitor, Global Terrorism Analysis, Home Page, Terrorism, South Asia
By: Animesh Roul
Hafeez Muhammad Saeed, Founder of Lashkar-e-Taiba
An impending threat from the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) terrorist group has prompted security establishments to raise an alert along India’s western sea-coast. According to intelligence sources, the LeT’s marine wing is planning a Mumbai-type incursion to target vital installations in the three coastal states of Gujarat, Maharashtra and Goa. The group is also reported to have funneled huge amounts of money from its Gulf-based networks to fund jihad activities in India (Times of India, June 30). This is not an isolated intelligence alert. The threat emanating from the LeT was partially revealed following the recent arrest of Muhammad Omar Madni, a close associate of LeT/Jamaat-ud- Dawa chief Hafeez Muhammad Saeed. The arrest and interrogation of Madni revealed several startling details, including new routes used by terrorists, the location of bases inside and outside India, terrorist finances, and the recruitment strategy of Lashkar-e-Taiba.
Muhammad Omar Madni, who also oversees LeT’s Nepal operations, was on a mission to recruit youths and send them to Pakistan for training. Madni travelled widely through Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and the Gulf nations, including Saudi Arabia, seeking funding and logistical support. His task was to recruit educated and computer-savvy youths from the major metropolises of India (Press Trust of India, June 7). Indian agencies believe he is not the only LeT recruiter in the sprawling hinterland of India (Statesman, [Kolkata], June 5). Madni’s brother Hafiz Muhammad Zubair, another Lashkar operative who worked closely with him, is presently based in Qatar (Telegraph [Kolkata], June 6).
Besides the usual routes of intrusion in Jammu and Kashmir, LeT has managed to build alternate routes through the porous borders of Nepal and Bangladesh while establishing bases in the Gulf countries. Investigating agencies have now confirmed that LeT is working on a new strategy which involves using Dubai as the center of planning for future strikes against India (India Today, June 22). Past and ongoing terror investigations suggest the Gulf countries have been the major hubs for LeT terrorists and many terrorist plots against India are now hatched outside Pakistan’s territory.
After groping in the dark for some time, India’s intelligence agencies have now confirmed that the Gulf link to terror in India is thriving and there are LeT cells operating in the Gulf that have financed and facilitated terrorist operations in India.
Mumbai’s crime branch probe revealed that the November 2008 Mumbai terror events were financed by LeT’s Gulf cells and Gulf-based operatives masterminded and executed a series of blasts in Indian urban centers ( Bangalore, Ahmadabad, Delhi and Surat) in 2008. These operations were carried out in collusion with militants of the Indian Mujahedeen (IM) and the proscribed Student Islamic Movement of India (SIMI).
While investigating the August 2003 twin blasts in Mumbai (car bombs at the Gateway of India and the Zaveri Bazaar), Mumbai Police unearthed a strong Dubai link. The plot was hatched by LeT’s Dubai operatives, who colluded with sleeper cells in Hyderabad, Ernakulum and Chennai. The blasts were claimed by an unknown group—the “Gujarat Muslim Revenge Force” (GMRF)—one of the many groups set up by SIMI and LeT following the 2002 Gujarat communal riots to avenge atrocities perpetrated against the Muslim community (Press Trust of India, October 10, 2003). Hanif, one of the Lashkar militants arrested in connection with the blasts, reportedly told police about the planning, logistics and targets of the LeT’s GMRF wing. Since 1993, Hanif worked in Dubai as an electrician and was sent to Mumbai in September 2002 to organize and execute the attacks. Police also interrogated Hanif about his ties to Basheer, a fugitive SIMI figure who fled to Sharjah in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and one Abu Hamza, affiliated to Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) (Frontline [Chennai], September 13-26, 2003).
Another major example of Lashkar’s Gulf connections arose in mid-2006, following the serial commuter train blasts in Mumbai. Mumbai’s Anti-Terrorist Squad seized approximately 37,000 Saudi Riyals from the residences of the LeT’s Mumbai cell chief, Faizal Ataur Rehman Sheikh (Indian Express, August 2, 2006). The money reportedly came in two installments from Saudi Arabia via the hawala network operated by Faizal’s London-based brother Rahil Sheikh and another Lashkar operative identified as Rizwan Ahmed Davre, an IT professional based in Riyadh. [1] Rizwan acted as a conduit between the unidentified Saudi funder, Pakistan based LeT commander Azam Cheema and Faizal Sheikh. Cheema reportedly designated Davre the ‘amir-e-baitulmaal’ (chief exchequer) for his able handling of monetary transactions (Indian Express, October 1, 2006)
Investigations by India’s intelligence agencies into the 2008 urban terrorist attacks uncovered ties to many Gulf hotspots, especially the financial networks in Muscat (Oman). At least four LeT operatives handled India operations from Gulf cities like Muscat and Sharjah. They are identified as Wali (a.k.a Shameem), Muslim Basheer, Sarfaraz Nawaz (a.k.a Hakeem Sarfoor) and Abu Haroon. These four are believed to be of Pakistani origin and to have been deputed in the Gulf to raise funds and monitor operations planned for India. While Wali was involved in fundraising activities and responsible for coordinating with SIMI and IM militants in India, Muslim Basheer, based in Muscat, was the chief coordinator for the LeT in the Gulf. Funds for the terrorist operations were raised by Wali, who provided the money for the blasts and who sent youths from the southwestern state of Kerala to Pakistan Administered Kashmir (PAK) for terrorist training (New Indian Express [Chennai], March 27). Investigating agencies identified Abu Haroon, a travel agent in Muscat, as the operative who facilitated the movement of money to India from the Gulf region through hawala channels. Abu Haroon also coordinated between the Lashkar leadership in Pakistan and India (Rediff.com, May 27). The fourth terrorist, Sarfaraz Nawaz, another LeT man from Muscat and a former SIMI leader who likely fled to Oman following the countrywide crackdown on SIMI establishments, was brought from Muscat to India in a dramatic secret operation earlier this year by India’s external intelligence agency, Research & Analysis Wing (RAW). The swift operation surprised many Indian officials, especially in the absence of any extradition pact between India and Oman (Rediff.com, March 04, 2009).
Three other terrorists involved in the July 2008 Bangalore serial blasts and other incidents have been identified as Saleem and Jaheed from Bangladesh (hawala operators) and Ali Abdul Azeez Hooti of Oman, the chief terrorist financier.
The Gulf’s increasing ties to terrorism resurfaced when investigations into the November 2008 Mumbai carnage tracked a similar pattern involving Gulf-based financiers and Lashkar coordinators. The role of Aziz Hooti as one of the financers in this connection is currently under probe. Hooti, the Oman based businessman and key Lashkar operative there, was in touch with Lashkar terrorist Fahim Ansari just before late November’s carnage in Mumbai. At present, Fahim Ansari is on trial and Aziz Hooti is in the custody of the Oman police for plotting against Western establishments in Oman. According to the information shared between Oman and Indian police, Aziz Hooti could have had direct ties to the Mumbai attackers. It is now believed in investigating circles that both Aziz Hooti and Nawaz played vital roles in financing terrorist activities in India, especially in providing funds for Indians taking jihadi training in the PAK region (The Hindu, May 28; Rediff.com, May 28).
Nawaz’s interrogation has revealed many facts about Lashkar’s plans in southern India. According to his statement, he and Ummer Haji, an IM cadre and key figure in the terror network in south India, had hatched a plan to carry out serial bomb blasts in Chennai and Bangalore (New Indian Express, June 29). However, Lashkar’s Chennai plot was dropped by Wali due to funding issues. Haji is the man who sent Kerala youths to Muzaffarabad in Kashmir for training. Aziz Hooti was also involved in the Bangalore plan while the terrorist triumvirate (Wali, Nawaz and Hooti) met in Sharjah in early 2008. Nawaz’s statement also sheds some light on Lashkar’s operational strategy in southern India. Bangalore police revealed that Nawaz was in close touch with Abdul Nazar Madhani, leader of the People's Democratic Party (PDP - a left wing Kerala political party) (New Indian Express [Chennai], March 28)
SIMI has operational ties with many militant student groups, including the Saudi Arabian Jamayyatul Ansar (JA), whose membership is comprised of former SIMI activists and expatriate Indian Muslims. It should be emphasized that the LeT and its Jamaat ud-Dawah (JuD) subsidiary were born out of the Ahl-e-Hadith (AH) movement with roots in the Middle East and in the Indian subcontinent. LeT largely draws its ideological inspirations from this transnational Islamic puritanical movement that openly propagates the doctrine of jihad in India. AH has been influential in the subcontinent with active ties to Saudi Wahhabis and strong diaspora links. One of the reasons for this could be the AH inspired student movements (e.g. the Mujahid Students Movement) active in Kerala with branches in Gulf countries, along with Indian Islahi centers in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Oman, Bahrain and Kuwait. [2]
The beginning of this year was marked by Islamabad's crackdown on the LeT and other Pakistan based terror groups in which LeT came under severe pressure from the Pakistan administration to de-escalate its jihadi agenda against India. Despite the crackdown and the detention and subsequent release of LeT leaders in Pakistan, the LeT is reportedly once again looking to strike India by plotting against its vital installations and infrastructure.
The recent spurt of terror activities by the LeT in India has a direct connection to contributions from the Gulf-based cells that have planned and financed most of the group’s operations. The LeT’s Gulf based networks are becoming the lifeline for LeT/JuD operations in Pakistan and India. With this threat in view, India is now seeking a comprehensive anti-terrorism treaty with the Gulf nations. For now, Madani and Nawaz’s confessions have provided investigating agencies an outline of the shape of things to come regarding the LeT’s plans for terrorist operations in India.
Notes:
1. Hawala is an informal and alternative remittance system which operates outside of 'traditional' banking or financial channels.
2. Indian Islahi centers are Islamic organizations working among Indians (especially Keralites) in the Gulf countries to spread of the true message of Islam and guide Muslims away from the clutches of superstitious traditions, blind faiths, polytheism, etc. Indian Islahi Centers operate in almost all Gulf countries as a subsidiary of the Kerala Nadvathul Mujahedeen. In some Gulf countries and the northern states of India, this organization is known as Salafi Center. All these associations are working for the propagation of Quran and Sunnah among Muslims and non-Muslims.
Publication: Terrorism Monitor Volume: 7 Issue: 19
July 2, 2009 04:12 PM Age: 1 days
Category: Terrorism Monitor, Global Terrorism Analysis, Home Page, Terrorism, South Asia
By: Animesh Roul
Hafeez Muhammad Saeed, Founder of Lashkar-e-Taiba
An impending threat from the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) terrorist group has prompted security establishments to raise an alert along India’s western sea-coast. According to intelligence sources, the LeT’s marine wing is planning a Mumbai-type incursion to target vital installations in the three coastal states of Gujarat, Maharashtra and Goa. The group is also reported to have funneled huge amounts of money from its Gulf-based networks to fund jihad activities in India (Times of India, June 30). This is not an isolated intelligence alert. The threat emanating from the LeT was partially revealed following the recent arrest of Muhammad Omar Madni, a close associate of LeT/Jamaat-ud- Dawa chief Hafeez Muhammad Saeed. The arrest and interrogation of Madni revealed several startling details, including new routes used by terrorists, the location of bases inside and outside India, terrorist finances, and the recruitment strategy of Lashkar-e-Taiba.
Muhammad Omar Madni, who also oversees LeT’s Nepal operations, was on a mission to recruit youths and send them to Pakistan for training. Madni travelled widely through Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and the Gulf nations, including Saudi Arabia, seeking funding and logistical support. His task was to recruit educated and computer-savvy youths from the major metropolises of India (Press Trust of India, June 7). Indian agencies believe he is not the only LeT recruiter in the sprawling hinterland of India (Statesman, [Kolkata], June 5). Madni’s brother Hafiz Muhammad Zubair, another Lashkar operative who worked closely with him, is presently based in Qatar (Telegraph [Kolkata], June 6).
Besides the usual routes of intrusion in Jammu and Kashmir, LeT has managed to build alternate routes through the porous borders of Nepal and Bangladesh while establishing bases in the Gulf countries. Investigating agencies have now confirmed that LeT is working on a new strategy which involves using Dubai as the center of planning for future strikes against India (India Today, June 22). Past and ongoing terror investigations suggest the Gulf countries have been the major hubs for LeT terrorists and many terrorist plots against India are now hatched outside Pakistan’s territory.
After groping in the dark for some time, India’s intelligence agencies have now confirmed that the Gulf link to terror in India is thriving and there are LeT cells operating in the Gulf that have financed and facilitated terrorist operations in India.
Mumbai’s crime branch probe revealed that the November 2008 Mumbai terror events were financed by LeT’s Gulf cells and Gulf-based operatives masterminded and executed a series of blasts in Indian urban centers ( Bangalore, Ahmadabad, Delhi and Surat) in 2008. These operations were carried out in collusion with militants of the Indian Mujahedeen (IM) and the proscribed Student Islamic Movement of India (SIMI).
While investigating the August 2003 twin blasts in Mumbai (car bombs at the Gateway of India and the Zaveri Bazaar), Mumbai Police unearthed a strong Dubai link. The plot was hatched by LeT’s Dubai operatives, who colluded with sleeper cells in Hyderabad, Ernakulum and Chennai. The blasts were claimed by an unknown group—the “Gujarat Muslim Revenge Force” (GMRF)—one of the many groups set up by SIMI and LeT following the 2002 Gujarat communal riots to avenge atrocities perpetrated against the Muslim community (Press Trust of India, October 10, 2003). Hanif, one of the Lashkar militants arrested in connection with the blasts, reportedly told police about the planning, logistics and targets of the LeT’s GMRF wing. Since 1993, Hanif worked in Dubai as an electrician and was sent to Mumbai in September 2002 to organize and execute the attacks. Police also interrogated Hanif about his ties to Basheer, a fugitive SIMI figure who fled to Sharjah in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and one Abu Hamza, affiliated to Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) (Frontline [Chennai], September 13-26, 2003).
Another major example of Lashkar’s Gulf connections arose in mid-2006, following the serial commuter train blasts in Mumbai. Mumbai’s Anti-Terrorist Squad seized approximately 37,000 Saudi Riyals from the residences of the LeT’s Mumbai cell chief, Faizal Ataur Rehman Sheikh (Indian Express, August 2, 2006). The money reportedly came in two installments from Saudi Arabia via the hawala network operated by Faizal’s London-based brother Rahil Sheikh and another Lashkar operative identified as Rizwan Ahmed Davre, an IT professional based in Riyadh. [1] Rizwan acted as a conduit between the unidentified Saudi funder, Pakistan based LeT commander Azam Cheema and Faizal Sheikh. Cheema reportedly designated Davre the ‘amir-e-baitulmaal’ (chief exchequer) for his able handling of monetary transactions (Indian Express, October 1, 2006)
Investigations by India’s intelligence agencies into the 2008 urban terrorist attacks uncovered ties to many Gulf hotspots, especially the financial networks in Muscat (Oman). At least four LeT operatives handled India operations from Gulf cities like Muscat and Sharjah. They are identified as Wali (a.k.a Shameem), Muslim Basheer, Sarfaraz Nawaz (a.k.a Hakeem Sarfoor) and Abu Haroon. These four are believed to be of Pakistani origin and to have been deputed in the Gulf to raise funds and monitor operations planned for India. While Wali was involved in fundraising activities and responsible for coordinating with SIMI and IM militants in India, Muslim Basheer, based in Muscat, was the chief coordinator for the LeT in the Gulf. Funds for the terrorist operations were raised by Wali, who provided the money for the blasts and who sent youths from the southwestern state of Kerala to Pakistan Administered Kashmir (PAK) for terrorist training (New Indian Express [Chennai], March 27). Investigating agencies identified Abu Haroon, a travel agent in Muscat, as the operative who facilitated the movement of money to India from the Gulf region through hawala channels. Abu Haroon also coordinated between the Lashkar leadership in Pakistan and India (Rediff.com, May 27). The fourth terrorist, Sarfaraz Nawaz, another LeT man from Muscat and a former SIMI leader who likely fled to Oman following the countrywide crackdown on SIMI establishments, was brought from Muscat to India in a dramatic secret operation earlier this year by India’s external intelligence agency, Research & Analysis Wing (RAW). The swift operation surprised many Indian officials, especially in the absence of any extradition pact between India and Oman (Rediff.com, March 04, 2009).
Three other terrorists involved in the July 2008 Bangalore serial blasts and other incidents have been identified as Saleem and Jaheed from Bangladesh (hawala operators) and Ali Abdul Azeez Hooti of Oman, the chief terrorist financier.
The Gulf’s increasing ties to terrorism resurfaced when investigations into the November 2008 Mumbai carnage tracked a similar pattern involving Gulf-based financiers and Lashkar coordinators. The role of Aziz Hooti as one of the financers in this connection is currently under probe. Hooti, the Oman based businessman and key Lashkar operative there, was in touch with Lashkar terrorist Fahim Ansari just before late November’s carnage in Mumbai. At present, Fahim Ansari is on trial and Aziz Hooti is in the custody of the Oman police for plotting against Western establishments in Oman. According to the information shared between Oman and Indian police, Aziz Hooti could have had direct ties to the Mumbai attackers. It is now believed in investigating circles that both Aziz Hooti and Nawaz played vital roles in financing terrorist activities in India, especially in providing funds for Indians taking jihadi training in the PAK region (The Hindu, May 28; Rediff.com, May 28).
Nawaz’s interrogation has revealed many facts about Lashkar’s plans in southern India. According to his statement, he and Ummer Haji, an IM cadre and key figure in the terror network in south India, had hatched a plan to carry out serial bomb blasts in Chennai and Bangalore (New Indian Express, June 29). However, Lashkar’s Chennai plot was dropped by Wali due to funding issues. Haji is the man who sent Kerala youths to Muzaffarabad in Kashmir for training. Aziz Hooti was also involved in the Bangalore plan while the terrorist triumvirate (Wali, Nawaz and Hooti) met in Sharjah in early 2008. Nawaz’s statement also sheds some light on Lashkar’s operational strategy in southern India. Bangalore police revealed that Nawaz was in close touch with Abdul Nazar Madhani, leader of the People's Democratic Party (PDP - a left wing Kerala political party) (New Indian Express [Chennai], March 28)
SIMI has operational ties with many militant student groups, including the Saudi Arabian Jamayyatul Ansar (JA), whose membership is comprised of former SIMI activists and expatriate Indian Muslims. It should be emphasized that the LeT and its Jamaat ud-Dawah (JuD) subsidiary were born out of the Ahl-e-Hadith (AH) movement with roots in the Middle East and in the Indian subcontinent. LeT largely draws its ideological inspirations from this transnational Islamic puritanical movement that openly propagates the doctrine of jihad in India. AH has been influential in the subcontinent with active ties to Saudi Wahhabis and strong diaspora links. One of the reasons for this could be the AH inspired student movements (e.g. the Mujahid Students Movement) active in Kerala with branches in Gulf countries, along with Indian Islahi centers in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Oman, Bahrain and Kuwait. [2]
The beginning of this year was marked by Islamabad's crackdown on the LeT and other Pakistan based terror groups in which LeT came under severe pressure from the Pakistan administration to de-escalate its jihadi agenda against India. Despite the crackdown and the detention and subsequent release of LeT leaders in Pakistan, the LeT is reportedly once again looking to strike India by plotting against its vital installations and infrastructure.
The recent spurt of terror activities by the LeT in India has a direct connection to contributions from the Gulf-based cells that have planned and financed most of the group’s operations. The LeT’s Gulf based networks are becoming the lifeline for LeT/JuD operations in Pakistan and India. With this threat in view, India is now seeking a comprehensive anti-terrorism treaty with the Gulf nations. For now, Madani and Nawaz’s confessions have provided investigating agencies an outline of the shape of things to come regarding the LeT’s plans for terrorist operations in India.
Notes:
1. Hawala is an informal and alternative remittance system which operates outside of 'traditional' banking or financial channels.
2. Indian Islahi centers are Islamic organizations working among Indians (especially Keralites) in the Gulf countries to spread of the true message of Islam and guide Muslims away from the clutches of superstitious traditions, blind faiths, polytheism, etc. Indian Islahi Centers operate in almost all Gulf countries as a subsidiary of the Kerala Nadvathul Mujahedeen. In some Gulf countries and the northern states of India, this organization is known as Salafi Center. All these associations are working for the propagation of Quran and Sunnah among Muslims and non-Muslims.
Bangladeshi militants spreading fangs internationally
Bangladeshi militants spreading fangs internationally
Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury
Notorious Islamist militancy group in Bangladesh named ‘Jamaatul Mujahedin Bangladesh’ [JMB] has started getting re-organized under a new umbrella named “Islam-O-Muslim” [Islam and Muslim] and has so far established its wings inside India in Murshidabad, Nodia and Maldah districts. This was disclosed by a number of recently captured activists of JMB. It has taken secret plans of suicide bombing and attacks on secularist forces as well as Western establishments in several countries, including Bangladesh. This group has even established secret factories to produce small weapons.
Talking to Bangladeshi reporters on July 2, 2009, in presence of Bangladeshi intelligence officials, JMB terrorist Abdur Rahim alias Shahadat said, their main ambition is to become ‘martyr’ through jihad. They believe jihad is the best path for Muslims.
According to information, Shahadat is also in charge of establishing overseas wings of JMB in a number of countries in the world. He also heads the secret killing squad of this notorious Islamist group in Bangladesh. Authorities in Dhaka are yet to ban the activities of this ferocious group, including several more extremist Islamist terror outfits as well as political parties, which are continuing to promote culture of Jihad and spreading hate speech through various ways.
For years, Islamist extremist groups are spreading network throughout Bangladesh mostly through various mosques and Madrassas. Hate speech and Jihadist instigations are given to innocent people through mosques especially during Friday prayers. Members of notorious Islamist groups are already working in hundreds of mosques and Madrassas in Bangladesh as well as many of the Muslim nations.
Most of the clergies in the mosques come from the Qawmi [Koranic] Madrassas. As it was already documented that, Madrassas are breeding ground of Jihadists, clergies from these Islamic schools, entering various mosques as clergies play important role in brain-washing people with well orchestrated hate speech against Jews and Christians. Taking the advantage of people’s faith on Islam, Muslim clergies very cleverly give provocative sermons and narrate imaginary stories with the mission of poisoning their minds against any other religion except Islam.
Some extremist groups as well as so-called religious political parties continue the mission of spreading Jihadist sentiment amongst the people, thus alluring them in becoming martyr through suicide bombing. Killing Jews and Christians are projected as a part of ‘Holy War’, which promises 72-virgins and heaven to the Muslims becoming martyr.
Although for years, Jihadist activities in Bangladesh as well as other Muslim nations are funded by Afro-Arab sources, it is also learnt that one of the espionage agencies of a South Asian nation is spending significant amount of money each year in spreading religious extremism and militancy in the name of solidarity towards ‘Kashmiri mujahidins’ or solidarity to ‘Palestinian mujahidins’. With such funding, seminars and symposiums are even organized in various parts of Bangladesh with the ulterior motive of increasing anti-Israel and anti-Indian sentiments.
Many secularists and leftists have even gathered under the umbrella of Islamist extremist groups in the name of according support for Palestinian and Kashmiri “Freedom Fighters”. They consider Israel and India as close allies of United States and the Western world.
Pakistani intelligence agency ISI [Inter Service Intelligence] continues to patronize and support anti-Indian notions by funding any group extending support for Kashmiri separatists while Iran continues massive propaganda against Israel through its own missions in a number of nations. In Bangladesh, Iranians are spending huge amount of money in promoting anti-Israel and anti-US sentiments. Most of the street demonstrations burning Israeli and American flags are secretly funded by Iran to give instigations to people in adopting anti Semitic and anti US notions.
According to various news-sites, beside JMB at least two other Islamist terror group has established branches in foreign countries with the aim of exporting jihad.
Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury
Notorious Islamist militancy group in Bangladesh named ‘Jamaatul Mujahedin Bangladesh’ [JMB] has started getting re-organized under a new umbrella named “Islam-O-Muslim” [Islam and Muslim] and has so far established its wings inside India in Murshidabad, Nodia and Maldah districts. This was disclosed by a number of recently captured activists of JMB. It has taken secret plans of suicide bombing and attacks on secularist forces as well as Western establishments in several countries, including Bangladesh. This group has even established secret factories to produce small weapons.
Talking to Bangladeshi reporters on July 2, 2009, in presence of Bangladeshi intelligence officials, JMB terrorist Abdur Rahim alias Shahadat said, their main ambition is to become ‘martyr’ through jihad. They believe jihad is the best path for Muslims.
According to information, Shahadat is also in charge of establishing overseas wings of JMB in a number of countries in the world. He also heads the secret killing squad of this notorious Islamist group in Bangladesh. Authorities in Dhaka are yet to ban the activities of this ferocious group, including several more extremist Islamist terror outfits as well as political parties, which are continuing to promote culture of Jihad and spreading hate speech through various ways.
For years, Islamist extremist groups are spreading network throughout Bangladesh mostly through various mosques and Madrassas. Hate speech and Jihadist instigations are given to innocent people through mosques especially during Friday prayers. Members of notorious Islamist groups are already working in hundreds of mosques and Madrassas in Bangladesh as well as many of the Muslim nations.
Most of the clergies in the mosques come from the Qawmi [Koranic] Madrassas. As it was already documented that, Madrassas are breeding ground of Jihadists, clergies from these Islamic schools, entering various mosques as clergies play important role in brain-washing people with well orchestrated hate speech against Jews and Christians. Taking the advantage of people’s faith on Islam, Muslim clergies very cleverly give provocative sermons and narrate imaginary stories with the mission of poisoning their minds against any other religion except Islam.
Some extremist groups as well as so-called religious political parties continue the mission of spreading Jihadist sentiment amongst the people, thus alluring them in becoming martyr through suicide bombing. Killing Jews and Christians are projected as a part of ‘Holy War’, which promises 72-virgins and heaven to the Muslims becoming martyr.
Although for years, Jihadist activities in Bangladesh as well as other Muslim nations are funded by Afro-Arab sources, it is also learnt that one of the espionage agencies of a South Asian nation is spending significant amount of money each year in spreading religious extremism and militancy in the name of solidarity towards ‘Kashmiri mujahidins’ or solidarity to ‘Palestinian mujahidins’. With such funding, seminars and symposiums are even organized in various parts of Bangladesh with the ulterior motive of increasing anti-Israel and anti-Indian sentiments.
Many secularists and leftists have even gathered under the umbrella of Islamist extremist groups in the name of according support for Palestinian and Kashmiri “Freedom Fighters”. They consider Israel and India as close allies of United States and the Western world.
Pakistani intelligence agency ISI [Inter Service Intelligence] continues to patronize and support anti-Indian notions by funding any group extending support for Kashmiri separatists while Iran continues massive propaganda against Israel through its own missions in a number of nations. In Bangladesh, Iranians are spending huge amount of money in promoting anti-Israel and anti-US sentiments. Most of the street demonstrations burning Israeli and American flags are secretly funded by Iran to give instigations to people in adopting anti Semitic and anti US notions.
According to various news-sites, beside JMB at least two other Islamist terror group has established branches in foreign countries with the aim of exporting jihad.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
