Fundamentalism, Wahhabism, and the sources of terrorism

I would assume there is some truth in what the writer has to say. However, I would take it with a grain of sand since the writer being a Muslim activist would be opposed to anything that puts Islam in a negative light.
There are two sides to every issue and each paints it with his own brush.

If you do some basic (i.e a five minute google search) in Pipes, you will find that the writer is right on the mark. Ther is a thread about him on this page.

From the 9/1 New Yorker "Briefly Noted" book reviews:

Terror in the Name of God, by Jessica Stern... This sophisticated examination of religiously motivated terrorism is a welcome antidote to the armchair analyses of Islamic extremism that surfaced in the wake of September 11th. Stern spent five years interviewing religious terrorists of all stripes, including anti-abortion crusaders, Hamas leaders, and militants in Pakistan and Indonesia. She found men and women who were driven not by nihilistic rage or lunacy but by a deep faith in the justice of their causes and in the possibility of transforming the world through violence. That faith, Stern suggests, is fuelled by poverty, repression, and a sense of humiliation, and then exploited by "inspirational leaders" who turn confused people into killers. The West cannot fight terror by intelligence and military means alone, she argues; a "smarter realpolitik approach" toward the developing world would use policy to deprive terrorists of not only funding and weapons but potential recruits.

An excellent work!

Have you read it, Hobit? I hear her now and then on NPR and she's always interesting, and though I don't always agree with her, I like her independence and the experience she brings to her analyses.

It is well worth the $26.00 (or whatever it cost, don't remember now).What is insteresting is she is ostensibly a conservative. Bet that sticks in the craw of Wolfy, et. al.

I don't like the direction, due mostly to the obfuscation, of this thread therefore I am bringing everyone up to date on how this thread originated and why. I had started to provide short condensations of passages from the book " Hatreds Kingdom" written by Dore Gold, former ambassador the UN. The purpose of the book was to identify Wahhabism as the root cause of suicidal terrorism and to further identify Saudi Arabia as the chief financial supporter as well as the homeland of Wahhabism.

I had placed two episodes of "Hatred's Kingdom" on theIran Iraq, III thread because I really wanted the participants of that thread to be exposed to the information contained in Ambassador Gold's expose. Even though several other participants supported my selection of the Iraq thread as the best site to spread the word, Tartarin and a couple of others did not want the calm tranquility of the "Support Group" shattered with some meaningful discussion on terrorism. Tartarin therefore took the initiative and with support of her wingperson Hobitbob started this new thread and are making every effort to change and disguise Wahhabism as a very minor sect of Islam that is being unfairly persecuted worldwide and in the process advocating the continuation of the leftist contention that terrorism is caused strictly by social, political and financial injustice inflicted by the imperialism of the West. I therefore am reposting the first two episodes for your review and then I will continue provided there is enough interest.

This is the first installment of passages from the book"Hatreds Kingdom" dealing with the formation and advancement of Wahhabism (which spawned bin Laden and most modern day terrorists) by the ruling family of Saudi Arabia. It is a particularly cruel and intollerant sect of Islam that seeks the conversion or destruction of all who don't subscribe to it's puritanical version of the word of the Prophet. You will see that it's hatred is aimed at not only Christians and Jews but also at Muslims who do not share the teachings of Wahhab. In the mid-1700s, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, a religious zealot, formed a branch of Islam that would be called Wahhabism. After quarreling with his father and the Emir of his tribe, Wahhab was expelled and he sought a new protector. In the end, Muhammad ibn Saud, the ruler of Diriyah, near Riyadh, gave him shelter. The two men struck an Alliance in 1744 and thus began the conquest of Islam by Wahhabism. At that time,what is now Saudi Arabia was merely a homeland for many Arab Tribes, one of which was the Sauds of Diriyah near what is now Riyadh. Muhammad ibn Saud and Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab thus formed a covenant, under which ibn Saud established the first Saudi state and ibn Abdul Wahhab determined its official creed. In the West the new puritanical doctrine was named Wahhabism and its adherants were called Wahhabis. With this political-religious alliance, tribal raiding could now be carried on as a religious cause. Ibn Abdul Wahhab legitimized jihad against fellow Muslims for the first time and thanks to his military Alliance with ibn Saud, he could duplicate the Muslim conquests of the seventh century. This allowed him to spread Wahhabism by the sword. Their enemies were offered a choice: embracing Wahhabism or death. This was a departure from mainstream Islam. In his Book of Tawbid, Wahhab advanced an extremely anti-Christian and anti-Jewish agenda, describing the followers of both religions as sorcerers who believed in devil worship and declared that the punishment for sorcerers is "that he be struck with the sword". This analysis and interpretation made Wahhabism far more INTOLLERANT of Christianity and Judaism and is a departure from mainstream Islam. During the next 50 or so years Wahhabism conquered all of what is now Saudi Arabia and even made forays into southern Iraq. ( Continued)

Wahhabism episode number 2 from the book "Hatred's Kingdom" by Dore Gold former UN ambassador. While Wahhabism represents a small percentage of the total Muslim Population( approx 1.2 BILLION) it remains the dominant religious creed in Saudi Arabia. Many regard Wahhabism as a radical and violient departure from the mainstream Islamic tradition. Former NYTimes Arab affairs commentator Youssef M. Ibrahim stated, "The money that brought Wahhabis power throughout the Arab world....financed networks of fundamentalist schools from Sudan to northern Pakistan." TALIBAN leaders, were in fact a product of these Saudi funded academies, which are known as Madrasas. Mohamed Charfi, a former minister of education in Tunisia, wrote in the New York Times: "Osama bin Ladan, like the 15 Saudis who participated in the criminal operations of Sept 11, seems to have been the pure product of his schooling. While Saudi Arabia is officially a moderate state allied with America, it also has been one of the main supporters of Islamic fundamentalism because of it's financing of schools which followed the the intransigent Wahhabi doctrine. Saudi-backed madrasas in Pakistan and Afghanistan have played a significant role in the strengthening of radical Islam in those countries". THE REAL PROBLEM Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Salih al-Jarbu asserted in a book written after Sept 11 that "Osama bin Laden is a natural continuation from Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab." This is a crucial point, for even when Americans have considered the source of the hatred that impelled the terrorists, many have not known where to look. In the days and weeks following Sept 11, many wondered whether Islam was the enemy. But Islam is not the problem. Rather, the problem is the exTremists in the Middle East who have manipulated Friday sermons in the mosques, textbooks in the schools, and state-controlled televisions to one end: TO SYSTEMATICALLY PERPARE YOUNG PEOPLE TO CONDONE THE COLD-BLOODED MURDER OF INNOCENT CIVILIANS. Continued (How Wahhabism fostered the ideology of hatred that spawned suicidal terrorism?)

I basically like Jessica Stern a whole bunch - she is my kind of conservative. She has down to earth, no nonsense reporting and is a very brave young lady! She reports the facts and is "fair and balanced", IMHO!

You now owe FOX $15.00 for the use of their trademark slogan. "News" will cost an additional $3.00.

Ah, but I have justice on my side. They said everyone knows satire when they hear it and can realize that Fox is a satirical organization, not real News

Gakkk!!! You are friends with Judge Moore???!!!???

Just the decision, not the man, ha

Aug. 31, 2003
The demonology of SE Asian Islamists, By Michael Danby


When people talk about the root causes of terrorism, I think about Sue Malony and Donna Croxford, two victims of a terrorist attack in Bali, Indonesia, on October 12, 2002 that killed 202 people including 88 Australians. Sue and Donna lived in Elwood and Port Melbourne respectively, suburbs in my constituency in Melbourne, where I serve as a federal member of parliament. Sue and Donna were killed whilst enjoying a holiday in Bali, and now Donna leaves behind a disabled four-year-old. As justification for their murderous acts in Bali, two of the known perpetrators, Amrozi bin Nurhasyim and Imam Samudra, have focused their rhetoric on revenge "against the Jews," despite the fact that, to the best of my knowledge, there are no Jews in Indonesia. Riduan Isamuddin ("Hambali") and Abu Bakr Bashir, the secular and spiritual masterminds of Jemaah Islamiah and that atrocity, also have a zealous hatred of Jews and the Jewish state. These Islamic terrorists live in Indonesia. Their own declarations show them to be in the grip of an anti-Semitic paranoia every bit as fanatical as that which gripped Russia in the 19th century or Germany in the 1930s. They are convinced that the Jews are plotting to take over Indonesia, and indeed the world the Jews already control the United States and Australia, they insist and subvert Islam and, indeed, all religion. Throughout the recent trials of the Bali bombers, the salience of Jew-hatred in the demonology of the Islamic terrorists has been clearly and widely exposed by the bombers through their burst into the media. Amrozi said the rationale for the Bali bombing was "because of the evil plan of the United States, the Jews and their allies to colonize [and] to destroy religions." He also said that the bombing was aimed at "the evil plans of the Jews' dirty hands and their friends who always try in every way to prevent congregation by religious groups, especially Muslims Then these Jewish people and their friends will easily conquer and make [Indonesia] their possession." Where European anti-Semites saw the Jews as the sworn enemies of Christianity, the Indonesian anti-Semites see the Jews and Christians as allies. Imam Samudra says the Bali bombing was designed "to carry out my responsibility to wage global jihad against Jews and Christians throughout the world." When Samudra was led from court on 26 June, he yelled: "Destroy Christians, destroy America, destroy Jews!" On August 6, following the bombing of the Marriott Hotel in Jakarta which killed 12 Indonesians, mostly humble taxi drivers and hotel workers, Samudra said: "If it's [the work of] Muslims, I'm happy. Especially if it was for Jews, hopefully [sic]." THE SOUTH East Asian focus on the Jews is a new phenomenon, not surprisingly since most Indonesians neither knew nor cared about Jews until very recently. Most of the Indonesian archipelago was converted to Islam between the 12th and 16th centuries, but Islam rapidly adapted itself to Indonesian culture, absorbing many elements of its Buddhist, Hindu and Animist past. Since Indonesians are not Arabs, Indonesian (Hanafi) Islam was unaffected by the waves of Islamic extremism which periodically flowed through the Arab Islamic world. Even today, nearly all Indonesian Muslims have an allegiance to moderate Islamic organizations such as Mummadiyah or Nahdlatul Ulama, whose leader, Abdurrahman Wahid, was briefly president of Indonesia following the downfall of the authoritarian Suharto regime. Over the past 20 years, however, Indonesian Islam has undergone far-reaching changes. As Indonesians have become wealthier, better educated and more travelled, they have become more aware of world events such as the Israel-Palestine conflict and the Islamic revolution in Iran. Poor Indonesian youth are attending religious schools (madrassas) and some of them are being indoctrinated by Wahabist preachers funded from Saudi Arabia. The result has been to reconnect Indonesian Islam with the Islamist strand of the Arab world, with its prevalent strains of anti-Western and anti-Semitic ideology. In recent years these elements of Islamist anti-Semitism have been deliberately spread in Indonesia by groups such as the Indonesian Committee for Solidarity with the Islamic World (KISDI) and extremist clerics like Abu Bakr Bashir. In the past these anti-Semitic slogans would have meant nothing in Indonesia, a country without Jews, but today they can be linked to Israel and thus to the United States, Australia and the West in general, and also to Christianity, to create a new blend of Indonesian Islamist extremism, embodied in al-Qaida's local franchise, Jemaah Islamiah. Unfortunately, Indonesia's welcome but uneasy transformation from authoritarianism to democracy has given militant Islam new opportunities. Older Indonesian Muslim leaders such as former president Wahid, have been challenged by figures such as the Council of Indonesian Islamic Scholars (MUI) and the Indonesian Mujahideen Council, led by Abu Bakr Bashir. Wahid's successor as president, Megawati Sukarnoputri, is politically too weak to offer much resistance, while Vice-President Hamza Haz has actively dallied with the Islamists. The shock of the October 2002 Bali bombing brought about a crisis for Indonesian Islam. Although ambitious politicians like Amien Rais are happy to exploit Islamist slogans, they have no desire to see the extremists come to power, nor to have their activities undermine Indonesia's fragile economic recovery. They also don't want to bring about a serious crisis in Indonesia's relations with the West. Moderate Indonesian Muslim leaders need to fight back against the militants and their imported ideologies, which will be immensely harmful to Indonesia. There must be a reform of the madrassa to reduce the influence of Saudi Arabian "charity." There must be continued economic and political reform. As the Bali bombing showed, Australia has a lot at stake in the future direction of Indonesian Islam. I might add that Australia's Jewish community also has a lot at stake, for if a significant number of young Indonesians agree with the paranoid rantings of Amrozi and Imam Samudra, their anti-Semitic phobias might lead them to look for real Jews rather than imaginary ones to target next time. The next bomb could easily be planted in Sydney or Melbourne. The writer, an MP for Melbourne Ports, is secretary of the Australia-Israel Parliamentary Friends of Israel.

In order to understand what's happening in today's world, it is necessary to understand human history. There aren't many countries with clean slates when it comes to colonization or imperailism. The only difference today is that only one country stands out as the superpower at a time when communication is instantaneous around the world. It doesn't take weeks or months for news to travel from one country to the next. It doesn't take too much imagination to understand why the US is being seen as imperialist by the world community. When the US tried to get UN Resolution for the war with Iraq, and 'we' didn't succeed, all the people around the world saw how the US disparaged the UN as "irrelevant." This administration used justifications to go to war that subsequently didn't pan out; WMD's, immediacy, and terrorists connections. What this administration has accomplished is increased terrorism in this world, because the very occupation of Iraq by the US and UK has increased recruitment for terrorist organizations around the world. Most Arabs do not want to see democracy in the center of the Middle East.

Back to "revitalizing the mainstream," which we were talking about, above, re Bernard Lewis. It's been in the back of my mind not only as I read daily news reports and remember conversations I've had with "mainstream" people from the Middle East -- most recently, some Palestinians visiting their professor-daughter in the US. These are people who think like small-d democrats and who would love to see democracy flourish.

They are also people who are educated, middle-class with experience in other countries. They know the US well, have American friends, etc. They love some aspects of the US (culture, art, freedom) and detest others (the ones many of us here worry about: capitalist imperialism, arrogance, etc.) So when we talk about encouraging the mainstream, we are talking about something I believe this administration would never do because it would mean encouraging those who are articulate in their dislike of this administration. We need to separate the desire for democracy (and many do desire it) from what they see as America sliding away from democracy, America forcing American capitalism on other nations and calling it "democracy." A conundrum. Anyone else wondering about this?

Probing the roots of terror

The attacks of 9/11 galvanized a phalanx of scholars to dissect terrorism from every angle. What they've learned so far may surprise you.


http://csmonitor.com/2003/0902/p18s01-lehl.html

Interesting, Au. Their ideas are based on information which I'm not sure we should rely on, so I'd call them theories still. But the end of Stern's quote is right on target: "We need to avoid giving in to spiritual dread, and to hold fast to the best of our principles, by emphasizing tolerance, empathy, and courage."

perception,

Thanks for the info on the Islamic sect of Wahhabism. The story of the religious zealot Muhammad ibn Abdul is, of course, an old one that continues to this day. If one is striving towards a power grab what better basis then an effort supposedly validated by none other than God?

One cannot ignore in your post the real cause of terrorism. The causative agent is not ecclesiastical but the never-ending anthropic struggle for power over others. This use of religion has always been vile in its attempt to seize power using the sincere beliefs of true followers by those on a selfish quest for personal gain. Such methods almost make the IRA look honest and forthright in their efforts. Additionally, the indoctrination of innocent young children in their formative years is simply insidious.



Extremism is involved but fundamentalist beliefs are not the evil at work here. Those who pursue terrorism do so only via Von Klauswitz as a means of "political change by other means". These individuals are either impatient or frustrated and feel that the political system in effect at the time works too slow or will not allow those changes sought. The Islamic world is still blaming the Mongols, Western Imperialism, and now the U.S. for its troubles and decline. We just have seem a Muslim, delivering a eulogy for a fallen UN colleague killed in the UN headquarters bombing, firmly place blame for that tragedy on the U.S. This misdirection of blame towards everyone except the obvious candidates of cause is a continuing theme in the Islamic world and speaks against solving the real problem that continues to plague the ME.

"Suicidal Terrorism" does not seem to describe a special "new type" of terrorism, any more than those members of the Muslim sect known as the Assassins (Arabic: Hashishiyy) were back in the middle of the 7th century C.E. It is merely the tactic de jour of frustrated individuals seeking power. It is instructive to view the actual individual suicide bomber juxtaposed with that individual or group arranging the terrorist act. Overwhelmingly we see the former as very young idealists in contrast to the latter being middle-aged/old experienced political warriors. The sad fact remains that according to the Koran (and current Islamic scholars), killing the enemies of Islam by committing suicide and thrusting oneself into combat against the enemy where the most possible outcome would result in one's death are two totally different concepts. The first puts the suicide bomber in Hell; the second places the Assassin in Paradise.

There is a lesson in this for us. First, we see our Attorney General on a "Publicity Tour" to promote the various Patriot Acts the present administration is pushing as necessary to protect the American people. This is just legislated McCarthyism and these acts are extremely malignant to our system of personal freedoms. We now collectively regret the acts of our country's leaders during WW II towards our Japanese citizens at that time. Why are we letting a select few lead us down this path again? No religion involved you say? Maybe not, but this administration is surely pursuing this curtailment of the people's rights religiously. Beware of those who assure us that we must give up some freedom in order to obtain more security. As Ben Franklin said, those that pursue such a path "deserve neither".

Verbal lee,

In your post of Thu Aug 28, 2003 9:52 am you state:



You are right, and yet we see such actions as when
Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore literally snuck into the Alabama Supreme Court building the granddaddy of religious icons and defiantly placed it where all could see in total disregard for all citizens and any different religions they may ascribe to. Hmmmm... Religious zealotry in action. Sad thing is the Judge would vehemently deny being anything like Osama Bin Laden. Seems Southern Reconstruction is a work in progress.

In my last two paragraphs we see examples of popular figures telling millions of Americans what they must do and in what they must believe. What's more, many simply acquiesce and say: "Yes we don't need that antiquated Bill of Rights nor must we obey the law of the land when expressing our religious beliefs." The very law that allows them to express those cherished beliefs they simply deny out of hand to others not sharing those beliefs. Seems simply Un-American.

hobitbob:

Would you recommend a couple of L. Carl Brown's works regarding Islam? It would be appreciated.

JM

Probably the two best are: Religion and State: The Muslim Approach to Politics New York, Columbia, 200, and Imperial Legacy: The Otoman Imprint on the Balkans and Middle East New York, Columbia, 1997.

James Morrison:

I mostly agreed with everything you said up to the point where you start blasting Ashcroft for his efforts campaigning NOT to lose the tools that have allowed him to foil thus far all the efforts of terrorists to hit us again.
You do agree that we have not had another attack for two years right?

What are you folks so frightened about? What you are witnessing by Ashcroft is democracy at work----he is frightened that the tools he needs to do his job are about to be taken away by the folks that gave him the tools in the first place. If he abuses those tools they will be taken away---it's just that simple. He is so frightened that he is out campaigning to convince the American people that he needs these tools-----what has he taken away from you? You may be alive because of his efforts, or your children, or some friends. You seem very concerned, and rightly so about Wahhabi terrorism or other suicidal terrorists--- would you want to go back to the days when the ACLU ruled and the FBI and the CIA refused to act because their leaders would not defend their actions against the overjealous politically correct lefties.

I fail to see you logic in condemning a man for just doing his job the best way he knows how.