Sep 30 2006
I ran across an extremely interesting article by a Muslim, Saud journalist who is obviously well steeped in the forces and thinking behind our Islamo Fascist enemies. And in reading this compelling insight into the Muslim political forces, it is clear we are fighting Islame Fascists. It is interesting because the author is clearly not pro West, he connects to the Jihadists forces in the sense he understands their arguments. But he sees the battle inside Islam and is not siding with the Islamo-Fascists – and is in fact warning against their siren call, because what they want may be deadly.
The article begins with incorrect statements from the NIE (naturally garnered from the incorrect reporting of the now completely fallible NY Times):
What caught my attention recently was the leaked National Intelligence Estimate attributed to American Intelligence. In a nutshell, it said that American intervention in Iraq has caused fundamentalist terrorism to double and has not curtailed this phenomenon. It stated that there is a â€˜cancerous spreadâ€™ of radical terrorist thought, which surpasses what is managed by Bin Laden himself.
This report, published by The New York Times last Saturday, stated that some of the estimated results confirm the outcome that had been predicated by the National Intelligence Council last January, 2003, which is: any war in Iraq will increase and strengthen political Islam worldwide.
Suffice it to say we all now know the NIE never said the Islamo-Fascist movement ‘doubled’ and there was no mention of a ‘cancer’. But the point is still a reasonable launching pad for what the author wants to say. We can only thank the NY Times for helping to swell the ranks of our enemies with their incorrect reporting and its subsequent use as a propaganda tool to recruit more enemies. Something this article clearly demonstrates as well. But back to the point at hand:
Regardless, the intention is not to come up with a comprehensive evaluation of American interference in Iraq, both internally and externally, rather the emphasis lies on the relationship between the strengths and weaknesses of radical terrorism, and the extent of it, in light of the Iraq War.
…after neighboring Syria and Iran realized the intrinsic danger that is heading towards them, add to that the notion of the â€˜holy warâ€™ that the group has adopted of late, Iraq became appealing ground. With the intensification of militant fundamentalist zeal and its willingness to fight and since the fall of the Taliban regime, the Iraqi stage has been attracting all kinds of fundamentalists that multiply and hinder the path of solution.
The writer is focusing the fact there is an attraction to fight us in Iraq, but he goes on to point out that this desire is from a long running movement in Islam, not just from America’s presence.:
The question is: is the presence of â€˜infidelâ€™ American powers the sole reason for Al Qaedaâ€™s existence? In my opinion, the answer is complex and comprises of various aspects.
Thus, the situation is perfect to invest in as the first attraction is that Al Qaedaâ€™s enemy in Iraq is the Great Satan itself.
The second attraction comes from the expression the â€˜Land of the Greatsâ€™, the land of Al Rasheed, Al Mamoun, Al Mutasim, Ahmed Ibn Hanbal and Abu Hanifa â€¦ Will it become a possession of American agents or â€˜disbelieversâ€™ or even secular Sunnis?
The third attraction is the emphasis on Iraqâ€™s contiguity with the countries of the Levant, that is, its affiliation to pillaged Palestine, Jerusalem, and Al Aqsa Mosque, this time just a stoneâ€™s throw away. We complete the mission in Iraq then descend onto Palestine, stealthily regaining the example of Noureddine Zenki and his student Salahaddin (Zenki whom Al Zarqawi greatly admired and revered).
These are the reasons given to motivate the recruits. And now the writer looks deeper, and into history:
Yet all of these attracting elements of the Iraqi model that make this â€˜land of the greatsâ€™ an enticing stage for zealous youngsters … do not constitute the catalyst for radical currents. The factor of utmost importance, the cause of all causes for any fundamentalist current, even the Shia amongst them, is the realization of fundamentalism by applying it to government, politics and the management of everyday life in general â€“ that is the intention that is neither concealed nor kept secret.
The root driver is not our presence, but fascism. The removal of individualism, of diversity of freedom, and of nations.
Whenever debate arises between Islamists on fighting for the cause, and the need to focus on other missions such as preaching, education and the purifying and rearing of a new generation of believers, in such cases of discord, the heart of the matter is never reached.
Al Hawali rejected this concept deeming it a fervent exaggeration, claiming that the most important duty for leaders is to spread [Islamic] monotheism and its concepts. He said, â€œThe matter is not about defending lands or nations but rather spreading the notion of monotheism.â€
Those aware of the reactionary, revivalist and missionary scene in Saudi know that Al Hawaliâ€™s criticism of the youthâ€™s flock to Afghanistan was for fear of â€˜emptyingâ€™ the missionary paradigm through which the Islamic currents operated in Saudi. It is known that this reactionary scene was split between various currents of which the weakest and least prevalent was the Jihadist stream.
Apparently there was, at one time, the idea of spreading Islam through missionary work, with Jihadists in the minority. The goals were the same: Conform the world to Islam. But the Afghan war allowed those who did not want to learn the religion and preach it to go and simply fight those who they were told were the non-believers.
Al Hawaliâ€™s stance was met with criticism; the most important of which, in my opinion, came from the prominent theoretical symbol of radical militant groups, Abdel Qadir Abdulaziz, whose real name is Sayyed Imam Abdul Aziz. He is an Egyptian fundamentalist who specialized in theoretical scholarly observation for Jihadist groups, who became renowned after the publishing of his famous book, â€˜Al Omda Fi Adaad al Idaâ€™. He responded to al Hawali saying, â€œIt is our duty, as Muslims, to control the land â€¦ and that cannot be achieved unless we banish the nations and rulers of infidels and raise Islamic rulers to establish their states on earth.â€ Here we see how he asserts his aim as he defends the legitimacy of defending the land, which is: to control the land by banishing disbelievers and their states. By â€˜disbelieversâ€™, he means those who follow the laws of positivism or modern state laws, as he writes in his last journal.
We all know that Islamo-Fascists grasped onto well held beliefs and tenants in Islam to rationalize their bloodlust. But we can see where and how this began to happen in the mind of this journalist. And how the internal struggle rages. How does one separate the goal from the methodology without attacking the goal itself? The problem seems to be that the Jihadist propaganda has focused this epic global struggle into one of Islam against the religion of democracy – the new face of Christiandom.
The laws of positivism are a new religion and whosoever legitimizes or acts upon them is a disbelieverâ€, in addition to, â€œDemocracy is a new religion, whosoever legitimizes or applies it is a disbeliever.â€ This is the final aim of a fundamentalist state that rejects the concepts of nation and citizenship.
For those liberals and lefties who think they are not the enemy, they are sadly mistaken. The Murtha’s and Kennedy’s who think a retreat will end this struggle are naive and ignorant. To be for democracy is to be “A Crusader” now. The author is bothered by the loss of nationality. He should be concerned with the loss of individualism and free thought and expression more. The attempt to tear down the nation states and replace them with a Caliphate finalizes the comparison between Islamo Fascism and the 3rd Reich – which wanted Germanic world control.
If we review this perspective we see possible ways to destroy the Jihadists. One is to make sure Iraq becomes a free, democratic society that can marry the religious dictates to fair governence. If control of land is a prime driver, then Iraqi control satisifies that for the broader Muslim population. The right to free expression will allow debate on what it means to be a good Muslim, how to treat others, open those passages of the Koran that preach peace and honor to fight back the passages used by the Islamo-fascists. The Achille’s Heel of the Jihadists is they are not fighting the non-believers right now. They are fighting fellow Muslims. It is not clear that the propaganda that says Democracy=Infidel will win the day, since it is not a religion in actuality. But it is clear from this how the Islamo-Fascists are selling this war. And we cannot kid ourselves into pretending these people don’t mean what they preach. This is a war of against civilization. It is a war against Democracy. It is a war against the West. And Iraq is the center of this war. Don’t take my word for it. That is what the terrorists and experts in the ME are saying openly now.