The Driving Ideology Behind Al Qaeda

Mr. Shahid.

Your article seems a perfect specimen of the official stand of the western stooges ruling the Muslim countries including Pakistan. The problem with this point of view is that it is based on wishful thinking and a way of life which is hugely dependent on the west, in both material as well as intellectual terms. The reality however is that the exiting confrontation on the world stage is a continuation of the perennial confrontation between Islam and the other civilizations particularly west. It is in this context that the things should be viewed.

Your article heavily borrows the ready made and popular concepts, perceptions and terms coined by the coercive western propaganda machines. You have talked about the innocent lives taken by alleged al-Qaeda outfits in the attacks of 9/11 and later incidents; however you have neglected the grind mill of western oppression, which has resulted in the death of more than 1 million Muslims, including about 0.5 million children, only Iraq. This figure when combined with the killings and deaths wrought by western forces and their alleys only in the period of one decade in Afghanistan, Palestine, Kashmir and Algeria shoots up to more than two million people. However as those victims were Muslims, the calculus of the western mind fails to give any weight to them. However the irony is that even our own so-called educated and enlightened people like you, are able to neglect this. For this successful diplomacy and cunningness, the west is worthy of appreciation as it is a great master in the art of appearing innocent even after doing the most heinous crimes. However if you are not so much concerned about your image in the eyes of the west, if you are not so much apologetic and. in short, if not so much enlighten and moderate, you will be able to see who is the real character in bringing the world to this verge of destruction and war.

In this perspective if we weigh the crimes of Al Qaeda against the crimes of the US led western forces before and after 9/11, we can easily judge who the bigger criminal is. Here it will not be out of place to remind you of the fact that what the US has so far presented as the evidences of Al Qaeda’s participation in the 9/11 can not convince any independent court of law. (So have its allegations against Saddam regime proved bogus). As for your calling Hezbolla a terrorist organization, I can not but protest as this ‘terrorist’ organization is now Lebanon’s most popular organization, which has defended her against a thousand times greater force and which is working now for the rehabilitation of the country and its people irrespective of their religion.

But this wasn`t concieved by Islam or it`s prophet, these military campaigns were initiated by oppurtunists.

..........so Umar was an opportunist?

a disgruntled, egotistic narcisst who having been rejected and disowned by his own family and country has struck out to establish an institution where he would hold an exalted and revered postion.

...........hell of a way to describe a person`s motivations who has been granted the same status as Hitler and Stalin by no less than Bush himself ...

LoL .... an Uncle Tom writing junk mired in ignorance as usual.....

Either of the sides of the balances for the Muslims do not favour them.

Mein.Tuwadda.Saath.Daina.Tey.Raangar.
Mein.Tuwadda.Saath.Nai.Dinda.Tey.Maraasee

Kitthay.Jaawaan.Mein.

{``My personal opinion on Osama Bin Laden is that he is a disgruntled, egotistic narcisst who having been rejected and disowned by his own family and country has struck out to establish an institution where he would hold an exalted and revered position``}

Shahid Sahib,
I wanted to refer to you by your first name, but such is the state of common sense nowadays, that I hesitate to even use this otherwise noble name. I agree with your personal opinion about OBL (some call him UBL, I just call him ``please be gone.``). I think that the whole matter of the jihadi silafi movement as represented by these right-wing fundo whacko Sunni Wahabbi terrorists is rather childish, stupid, personal, and selfish. They may have been initially motivated by the desire to combat the enemies of Islam during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Unfortunately, like most movements, born out of violent self-righteousness, this jihadi aberration has mutated into an irrational, suicidal, and cruel association of egotists, maniacs, and self-styled warriors of the faith. I suspect that something nasty occurred between the Arab jihadists and their benefactors in the CIA, ISI, and Saudi intelligence. Much like the uncontrollable Rambo, they have turned on their puppeteers for what is probably a very mundane and elementary purpose such as personal insult, lack of payments, or a feeling of having been used, abused, and discarded. At this point, rather than figure these idiots out, I hope, for the sake of Islam and Muslims, a quick and rapid end to their existence. Thanks.

Re: # 5, Salim:
I shall evaluate Shahid`s article later but would like to promptly rejoin Salim. I agree totally with Salim that it is absolutely imperative that the rabid Islamists be corrected, suppressed or eliminated as soon as possible. The fate of Islam depends on it.

Unless the military/civilian leaders of the moderate Muslims assert themselves forcefully against the rabids, there will be a Halaku (brother of Changez Khan) who would cause a major catastrophe in West Asia. All Muslims must know Halaku did thousand years ago to silafis.

This Halaku may very well come from America. I would hate to see lot of decent and well meaning Muslims who believe in Sufism, etc being wiped out with the rabids.

Al Qaeda, wahabism, Saudi petrodollars and state sponsored patronage are all parts of the same chain which defines Islamic ideology as preached by extremist. Eliminating one (Obl) will not solve th eproblem, cause the hand that feeds this extremism is getting richer and stronger with every passing day. Pakistan is a great example where wahabism/salafis have receieved state patronage, complete monoply over religious discourse and free flow of funds courtesy of their masters in Soodi land.

As long as the wahabi house controls Mecca/Medina Islam will never be able to breakout of its clutches and soothsayers will be proven right as another Halgu Khan from the west comes down and demolishes many artifical edifices based on hatred, narrowminded ideologies and rooted in age-old tribal customs.

Evaluation of the article:
I agree with the general thinking of the author. But what is critically needed is: development by moderate Muslims of a forceful line of action to neutralize the the rabids.

``Islam is simply being used as a smoke screen to push for revolutionary change not only in the middle east or the muslim world, but in the pathos of the religion itself.``
****Agreed. But htis needs to be demonstrated.****

``jihad is not about killing and murdering in the name of God. It does not involve the massacre of innocent civilians who happen to be non muslims.``
****This ideology has to be asserted at all costs by the rationalists in Islam, if they want to survive.****

``However, the true essence of jihad is conveniently excluded from the religious fatwas and teachings of hard line, fundamentalist clerics.``
****Why is this view not forcefully promulgated by the rationalist Mullahs?****

``during the Prophet Muhammeds lifetime, the muslim nation was found to be in a defensive position, due not to the lack of oppurtunities but as a reflection of the peaceful nature of Islam. A few years after his death, yes the muslim armies began to conquer territory and distant lands. But this wasn`t concieved by Islam or it`s prophet, these military campaigns were initiated by oppurtunists. It is the same breed of oppurtunists whom we see today in the form of Al Qaeda`s leadership.``
****The widespread conquests of Islamic armies was due to the distribution of loot among the soldiers. Thus the Muslim armies were the first mercenaries. All of the these thoughts need to be widely publicized and the necessary actions performed to make this view as the dominant view of the Muslims.****

``It is integral that the educated, enlightened moderates of Islam stand unified against this plauge. These are times of change and it is paramount that we muslims live up to perform our obligations dutifully. The future of our religion and the world hinges on how we react agaisnt the ideological and intellectual likes of Osama Bin Laden and his henchmen.``
****Totally agree. However, absence of action would only lend credence to the complicity - between the radicals and moderates - theory. In a clash of civilization, Muslims should think of the odds against them before they precipitate a crisis.****

Shahid Sahib,
These insidious fanatics have to use Islam as their excuse for committing violence, murder, and terror. Their selfish leaders have decided upon a pernicious road out of their own worldly and personal ambitions and then proceeded to find vague references in the Holy Koran or Hadith to justify their nefarious methods. The various passages in the Holy Koran and specific examples in the Sunnah, upon which they base their irrational violence, were all meant for specific circumstances for a particular time and place.

When the Muslims in Mecca were being tormented for their beliefs and driven from their homes, they were passive to the point of ``cowardice.`` The Holy Prophet (PBUH) shunned violence and as a result he and his followers were cruelly persecuted without any fear of retaliation on the part of the Meccans. Therefore, God ordered His Prophet (PBUH) to resist the oppression and fight back - which he did quite hesitatingly. The wars forced by the Meccans on his community in Medina were mostly for self-defense. To extrapolate these examples into an open-ended license for aggression, terror, and murder is to negate the very essence of Islamic beliefs.

The struggles of Nuruddin Zengi, Salahuddin Ayubi, and Sultan Baibars against the onslaught and colonization of Muslims by the Crusaders and Mongols were justified by the principle of self-defense. The conquests of Muhammad Bin Qasim, Mahmood Ghaznavi, Mohammed Ghori, Zahiruddin Babar, Jalaluddin Akbar, and Nadir Shah were all for personal gain, establishment of dynasties, and the ``well-accepted`` traditions of loot, pillage, and plunder. Umayyads, Abbasids, Fatimids, Seljuks, Almoravides, Almohades, Ottomans, and Mughals were all trying to enhance their empires just as the Persians, Greeks, and Romans had done before.

Invoking the name of God, or gods and goddesses, freedom, liberty, ``democracy,`` and honor have always been effective means of motivating the troops. Apparently, these still work - witness the lamentations of UBL, Dubya, and Blair.

What the Jihadists should keep in mind is that when non-Muslims start hating Islam for the violent excesses of a very small minority of its followers, they are causing the downfall of this otherwise wonderful, peaceful, and uniting faith. UBL and his cohorts are to Islam what Dubya, Blair, and Cheney are to democracy - a total mockery.

Re: # 9

Salim sahib,

{What the Jihadists should keep in mind is that when non-Muslims start hating Islam for the violent excesses of a very small minority of its followers, they are causing the downfall of this otherwise wonderful, peaceful, and uniting faith. UBL and his cohorts are to Islam what Dubya, Blair, and Cheney are to democracy - a total mockery}

well said, but u r being too kind to these arrogant fascists.....Dubya, Blair and Cheney are terrorizing muslims just as the Salafis/wahabis...one a external threat and the other internal...of the two its`the internal threat which is`eating islam like a parasite.....

rf786 {``well said, but u r being too kind to these arrogant fascists.....Dubya, Blair and Cheney are terrorizing muslims just as the Salafis/wahabis...one a external threat and the other internal...of the two its`the internal threat which is`eating islam like a parasite.....``}

Dear Brother Radio Frequency Bismallah Janaab Sahib, :)

Totally agree with you. I should be the last one to be guilty of ``being too kind to these arrogant fascists`` - unless, of course, you had Dubya, Blair, and Cheney in mind. :)

Of course the right-wing fundo whacko Sunni Wahabbi terrorist fanatics are the more serious threat to Islam - by being both internal and cancerous. :)

My point about Dubya and Cheney was directed more at the hypocrisy and mockery issue concerning democracy. Those who ask others to kill and die for ``democracy`` were themselves brought into office by a bypass of this sacred slogan - Florida 2000.

Re: # 11

thanku Salim sahib....muslim civilization is sitting on the edge of total destruction and our leaders are playing their selfish games aided and abetted by obscurantist clerics stuck in their past and wet dreams of glory.....as a muslim, a moderate muslim I feel like that famous urdu saying...dhobi ka kutha na ghar ka na ghat ka.....

Inquirer #6 {``Unless the military/civilian leaders of the moderate Muslims assert themselves forcefully against the rabids, there will be a Halaku (brother of Changez Khan) who would cause a major catastrophe in West Asia.``}

Inquirer Bhai,
Very good point. Halaku was actually, I think, a grandson of the Genghis Khan, but that`s not the issue. The so-called leaders of moderate Muslims (I shudder to think that Mushy, Mubarak, and the two Abadabaoolas are leaders or even moderates) have neither the conscience nor the fortitude to assert anything let alone themselves.

It is up to the overwhelmingly moderate Muslim Ummah to reach a consensus and eradicate this cancer of right-wing fundo whacko Sunni Wahabbi terrorist fanaticism among us.

Re: # 6
The problem with muslims is that they are caught between deep sea and the devil. If you really believe that it is time to change then you have to seek for the problem. Outdated concepts of any religion have to be criticaly evaluated and discarded if found necessary.However unfortunately Islam has no tradition of social reformers or thinkers

I agree with the premise of your article, however I do find your viewpoint on OBL subjective and uninformed to say the least. But your argument that Islam has been used as a smoke screen to push for revolutionary change certainly makes sense. I wouldn`t call it a smoke screen but more of an ideological basis for a social movement. If we glance at the political landscape of muslim countries, the absence of a out and out social party is notable in a majority of cases and therefore it is no surprise that religious parties are thriving by `selling` the socialist aspects of Islam to the masses.

Re: # 14, dhananjay:
I agree with you.

It is the misfortune of Islam and its followers that they have such a large amount of a strategic commodity - oil - and they have not/were not allowed to develop a truly national leadership. The development of a national leadership requires, among other things, effective national boundaries and some ethnic cohesion.

In case of Islam, the trans-ethnic message of Quran - as enunciated not by Mohammad but the political leaders after his death (By the way, this is the source of internecine and unbridgeable schism of the Shias and Sunnis as encapsulated in the Battle of Karbala.), a point often purposely hidden by Islamic rulers and Mullahs and forgotten by the Muslim population due to adoptation of the superstitions and coercion foisted by the ruling and religious cliques - itself is a hindrance. All this, however, has not completely prevented the social and religious reformist thinkers. The supreme tragedy is that the rigidity of Islamic interpretations, purposely designed by the religious and ruling cliques and buttressed insidiously by the Western Powers (so that they can continue to exploit the oil reserves till depletion) has led to to a blanket rejection and condemnation of all reformists (their acceptance will lead to national cohesion leading to control on the oil pipelines).

Non-religious education is not only not widespread, it is actively discouraged to keep the people superstitious and the one and most important resource that everywhere in the world has led to weakening of the stranglehold of bigoted religions, women, are hopelessly misled and brutally shackled by oppressive laws in Muslim Countries, Hudood of Pakistan is an example.

It seems that either there will have to be an armageddon (actuated by oil needs/demands) or total collapse of Islam before the SHACKLES of Foisted Islam in West Asia and North Africa can be broken and true Islam can emerge. There seems to be less-than-a-miracle`s chance for a pair of Nehru/Ambedkar can arise anywhere in Islamic world.