11
   

Studying Europe's Muslim terrorists

 
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jul, 2007 03:46 am
McTag wrote:
Protestants think Catholics are wrong
Catholics think Jews are wrong
Jews think Muslims are wrong
Muslims think the rest are wrong

I agree with them all. Rolling Eyes

(Please indulge me in my unhelpful post)
Not unhelpful at all. I sometimes think God must have a strange sense of humour...to tell various tribes at various times that they alone are the chosen ones...then retiring from the scene to let them fight it all out.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jul, 2007 06:25 am
The Pentacle Queen wrote:
Please can someone speak very slowly and explain to an art student who knows absolutely nothing of politics/world affairs these few questions:

Why do Muslims extremists hate British/american peoples?
What do they hope to achieve by bombing us?


PQ

The article in the Observer by Hassan Butt which McT linked explains things quite well.

I've come back to the beginning of this. It was going to be a slow and brief summation...sorry. Thanks in advance for getting to the end if you do, at least you will know where I'm coming from.


Islam has been at war with Christianity since the beginning. There have been battles/invasions/crusades and long periods of stalemate for over 1000 years. But there has never been reconciliation and peace between the two religions because they are fundamantally incompatible. Although it may appear that each side is fighting for their version of (the same) God (how ironic is that?) in fact it has always been a struggle for power and dominance and control over people and resources.

Over the centuries religions evolved. But much more radically in the West/Europe. Here religion gradually became divorced from the state. Much more than in the Muslim world, religion became a private matter. Despite there still being an established Church of England, no one forces religion upon you. We are free to adopt any religion, or none, compatible with the laws of the land.

I believe that freedom of thought and action (which was hard won) which came through the reformation, the enlightenment and renaissance provided the platform for the fantastic developments we have seen in Europe and America. People may have their doubts about free market captitalism (I'm one) but you cant deny the astonishing progress we have made in the West over the last 250 years.

For whatever reason, and I believe religion has a lot to do with it, that didnt happen in the middle east. Europe and then America became dominant, and the Islamic world went into a long period of relative decline.

About 100 years ago we found new ways of exploiting the vast energy reserves stored in oil - specifically the internal combustion engine and later the jet engine. Very rapidly we became hooked on fossil fuels to provide us not only with cheap and easy transport but for all sorts of stuff including artifical fertilisers giving us cheap food, and plastics for new materials.

At the end of the first world war, the Ottoman Empire collapsed. The victors of that war, notably Britain and France raked over the pickings in the middle east and drew various lines in the sand to create a whole series of sheikdoms, emirates and "countries" where the European powers would be dominant. Knowing just how important oil was, Britain took a particular interest in the new country of Iraq.

The Muslims however saw things rather differently. They had once been a huge empire, and because of their "superior" religion regarded the west with a certain amount of disdain. But the facts on the ground spoke differently. They were reduced to being bit players in their own lands, peasants trying to survive whilst their rulers (installed by Western governments) did deals with western businesses to exploit the region's natural resources. A huge amount of resentment of the West built up, based on the Arab/muslim sense of humiliation.

Right so to sum up so far. We have western economic and technological dominance. ME lagging behind still locked into religion. Western economies dependent on ME oil. Muslim resentment and humiliation.

Now we get to the tricky bit, because governments dont tell us the truth, they only tell us what they think is good for us to know.

America used to have a lot of oil. (It powered the allied side during WW2). But no longer. Britain and Europe have oil, but its past peak production. The remaining sources of conventional oil, on which we unfortunately are still dependent are increasingly concentrated in the middle east. (In particular Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, United Arab Emirates and Kuwait). This is why American and Western military forces are spread throughout the region. The aim is to prevent any one country becoming dominant such that it becomes a regional super power and threatens the worlds oil supply.

To the north of the Gulf is the Caspian and there is a lot of oil and gas there, but relatively unexploited. The problem is getting it out without going through Russia or Iran. The obvious route is through Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Arabian sea. But Afghanistan is still home for the Islamic militants that we trained and supported when they were fighting the Russians. Part of the problem is blow back. Having defeated the atheistic communists these religious fanatics take that as proof that Allah really is with them and that another push this time against the West will finally defeat the decadent Great Satan and Little Satan (Britain), thus restoring the dominance of Islam in the world and gaining revenge for past humiliations.

To quote from the article by Hassan Butt

Quote:
Many Muslims may or may not agree with secularism but at the moment, formal Islamic theology, unlike Christian theology, does not allow for the separation of state and religion. There is no 'rendering unto Caesar' in Islamic theology because state and religion are considered to be one and the same. The centuries-old reasoning of Islamic jurists also extends to the world stage where the rules of interaction between Dar ul-Islam (the Land of Islam) and Dar ul-Kufr (the Land of Unbelief) have been set down to cover almost every matter of trade, peace and war.

What radicals and extremists do is to take these premises two steps further. Their first step has been to reason that since there is no Islamic state in existence, the whole world must be Dar ul-Kufr. Step two: since Islam must declare war on unbelief, they have declared war upon the whole world. Many of my former peers, myself included, were taught by Pakistani and British radical preachers that this reclassification of the globe as a Land of War (Dar ul-Harb) allows any Muslim to destroy the sanctity of the five rights that every human is granted under Islam: life, wealth, land, mind and belief. In Dar ul-Harb, anything goes, including the treachery and cowardice of attacking civilians.


So now to the crunch. Why do muslims want to kill us? I have thought about all the above quite a bit in recent times. I used to think it was all to do with oil, and western interference in muslim lands. Then I thought it was because we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. I'm sure our actions in doing these things have not helped, but we did them because we had to do them because we are dependent on oil. We didnt do them because we are Christians who want to kill Muslims. We the west are going to get our oil fix by fair means or foul. But it doesnt have to be violent. Its the worlds oil and the militants could co operate and help develop it.

But they dont want anything to do with us. They want to restore the glory of Islam. They want to build a new global caliphate, and they think they are pleasuring Allah through martyrdom. The crunch is that for us the struggle is over resources, where we are prepared to co operate. But for the jihadists resources are only of interest in furthering Islam. It is Islam that turns ordinary people into human bombs. And its the absurdities of Islam that we should expose and attack. IMHO
0 Replies
 
HokieBird
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jul, 2007 08:06 am
Don't forget those poor, disenfranchised doctors.
0 Replies
 
HokieBird
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jul, 2007 09:37 am
Not in our name

Asim Siddiqui
July 3, 2007 12:00 PM

The events of the last few days have been sobering for us all. The response from some UK Muslim groups (influenced by Islamist thinking) is still largely to blame foreign policy (undoubtedly an exacerbating influence but not the cause), rather than marching "not in my name" in revulsion against terrorist acts committed in Islam's name. By blaming foreign policy they try to divert pressure off themselves from the real need to tackle extremism being peddled within. Diverting attention away from the problems within Muslim communities and blaming others - especially the west - is always more popular than the difficult task of self-scrutiny. And what part of foreign policy do the Islamists want us to change to tackle terrorism? Withdrawal from Iraq?

The UK presence on the ground in Iraq is minuscule compared to the US. We currently have 5,500 troops from 40,000 at the start of the invasion. We will reduce them further to 5,000 by the end of the summer. The bulk of which will be located near Basra airport in a supporting role. Next year will likely see the numbers dwindle even further. Our troop presence is far more symbolic than military. It provides the Americans with their "coalition of the willing". The US, by contrast, is the only serious occupier in the country with over 160,000 troops. The government will not (and cannot) admit it, but we have been in withdrawal mode since the end of the war.

And once we've left Iraq, will they be satisfied? Of course not. Their list of grievances is endless: Afghanistan, Chechnya, Kashmir, Palestine, Burma ... so long as the world is presented as one where the west is forever at war with Islam and Muslims there is nothing we can do to appease the terrorists and those who share their world view. Instead it is this extremist world view that must change.

Take for example the idea that radical Islamists are concerned about Muslim life (let's ignore human life in general for a moment). Where is their outrage at the 400,000 Muslims slaughtered in Darfur? Where are the marches and calls for action against this ongoing genocide? Where is the "Muslim anger" boiling up amongst British Islamists? It is nowhere to be seen because the Darfurians have been massacred by fellow Muslims, not by the west. Hence it does not appear on the Islamist radar screen as a "grievance". Such is the moral bankruptcy of this ideology.

No, it's not foreign policy that's the main driver in combating the terrorists; it is their mindset. The radical Islamist ideology needs to be exposed to young Muslims for what it really is. A tool for the introduction of a medieval form of governance that describes itself as an "Islamic state" that is violent, retrogressive, discriminatory, a perversion of the sacred texts and a totalitarian dictatorship.

When the IRA was busy blowing up London, there would have been little point in Irish "community leaders" urging "all" citizens to cooperate with the police equally when it was obvious the problem lay specifically within Irish communities. Likewise for Muslim "community leaders" to condemn terrorism is a no-brainer. What is required is for those that claim to represent and have influence among young British Muslims to proactively counter the extremist Islamist narrative. That is the biggest challenge for British Muslim leadership over the next five to 10 years. It is because they are failing to rise to this challenge that the government feels it needs to act by further eroding our civil liberties with anti-terror legislation to get the state to do what Muslims should be doing themselves. If British Muslim groups focus on grassroots de-radicalisation then this will provide civil liberty groups the space they need to argue against any further anti-terror legislation.

Of course I would like to see changes in our foreign policy and have marched on the streets (with thousands of non-Muslims) in protest on many occasions. But blaming foreign policy in the face of suicide attacks is not only tactless but a cop-out that fails to tackle extremism, fails to promote an ethical foreign policy and fails to protect our civil liberties.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jul, 2007 09:38 am
My doctor recently retired.

I dont mind if his replacement is male or female, African Asian European N or S American Australian or Chinese. But if it turns out he prays 5 times a day towards Mecca, I think I might have a problem with that.

I'll be ill somewhere else.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jul, 2007 11:23 am
Steve 41oo wrote:
My doctor recently retired.

I dont mind if his replacement is male or female, African Asian European N or S American Australian or Chinese. But if it turns out he prays 5 times a day towards Mecca, I think I might have a problem with that.

I'll be ill somewhere else.


The Nazis offered here - some time ago - small cards "I don't want to be looked after by a Muslim medical personal".

I'm sure, the BNP offers that in English as well.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jul, 2007 12:35 pm
Emancipation by self-destruction
2007-05-25 ยท Radio Netherlands
http://www.radionetherlands.nl/currentaffairs/ter070525mc

Summary:

None of the terrorists committing recent major attacks were women. But they are certainly involved, explains Jolande Withuis, who conducted a survey into radicalisation, that covered Dutch Muslim women too. In fact, "they have to prove themselves to the men in the movement and that means going one better." Paradoxically, by giving lectures, acquiring knowledge of the Koran and even committing terrorist acts, those women go through "a kind of pseudo emancipation"; but at their own expense and that of others.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jul, 2007 02:18 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
The Nazis offered here - some time ago - small cards "I don't want to be looked after by a Muslim medical personal"
Well thats news to me, I thought it was the Jews they didnt like.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jul, 2007 02:23 pm
Seems, you need an update about that: at least in continental Europe (nearly, since I'm not 100% sure) all crimes against Muslims were committed by (neo-) Nazis or at least extreme right-wings.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jul, 2007 02:33 pm
but in the middle east there was some sympathy

Quote:
According to documentation from the Nuremberg and Eichmann trials, the Nazi Germany SS helped finance al-Husseini's efforts in the 1936-39 revolt in Palestine. Adolf Eichmann actually visited Palestine and met with al-Husseini at that time and subsequently maintained regular contact with him later in Berlin.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jul, 2007 02:37 pm
I'd thought, you were speaking of the actual situation and not referring to times 70 years ago.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jul, 2007 02:41 pm
ok Walter. just been advised that you are talking about neo-nazis

I thought as you said "some time ago" you were talking about Hitlers nazis.

Well it may be that the neo nazis are committing crimes against the muslims. I wish the muslims no harm what so ever. I just wish they would leave islam behind.

That does not make me a BNP member or sympathiser.

ok bye see you
0 Replies
 
HokieBird
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jul, 2007 05:41 pm
Gordon Brown: Don't say the terrorists are Muslim

And there's no "war on terror". FYI
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jul, 2007 03:11 am
HokieBird wrote:
Gordon Brown: Don't say the terrorists are Muslim

And there's no "war on terror". FYI
Well if I was in govt. I would take exactly the same line as Gordon Brown. They are terrified of civil strife on our streets. But its best not to show it. I bet round the cabinet table they talk of little else sometimes but Muslim this Islamic that etc etc. But not in public.

The Islamists may bomb the public because they cant get at govt. but its the govt. not the public who are terrified.
0 Replies
 
HokieBird
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jul, 2007 12:17 pm
Steve 41oo wrote:
HokieBird wrote:
Gordon Brown: Don't say the terrorists are Muslim

And there's no "war on terror". FYI
Well if I was in govt. I would take exactly the same line as Gordon Brown. They are terrified of civil strife on our streets. But its best not to show it. I bet round the cabinet table they talk of little else sometimes but Muslim this Islamic that etc etc. But not in public.

The Islamists may bomb the public because they cant get at govt. but its the govt. not the public who are terrified.


Islamist terrorist might work.

I agree with you on the discussions round the cabinet table.

"Well, what was that bloke who caught himself on fire in Glascow yelling? Allan Akbar, Allan Akbar. Who the hell is Allan Akbar?"
0 Replies
 
HokieBird
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jul, 2007 01:08 pm
Experts: Terror suspects not brainwashed, poor or uneducated
0 Replies
 
The Pentacle Queen
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jul, 2007 03:38 pm
Hey, steve thank you very much for your post. I haven't got much time atm, but I shall be back!
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jul, 2007 10:41 am
The Pentacle Queen wrote:
Hey, steve thank you very much for your post. I haven't got much time atm, but I shall be back!
well thank you. Thats cheered me up. You might think its bollocks but my little oeuvre (that French...for egg) did at least catch your royal 5 pointed eye.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 2 Oct, 2007 10:14 am
Quote:

Summary:

Quote:
For four years, Maajid Nawaz, a British Pakistani student who went to study Arabic in Egypt, was imprisoned, enduring months of solitary confinement and the screams of those being tortured. He was sentenced for spreading the beliefs of Hizb ut-Tahrir, a radical Islamic group that is legal in Britain but banned in Arabic countries.

Now, more than a year after his return, Nawaz has defected from Hizb ut-Tahrir, saying that he learned from scholars he met in jail that the ideology he so fervently espoused ran counter to the true meaning of his religion. His defection, which he announced on his blog and in a BBC interview, is considered significant because he was one of a handful of men on its executive committee in Britain.

Before being imprisoned in Egypt, Nawaz played a central role in recruiting new members for Hizb ut-Tahrir at home and abroad, spreading the belief that the dictatorships of the Muslim world must be replaced by a caliphate similar to that which held sway after the death of the Prophet Muhammad. "I gave talks in Pakistan, Britain and Denmark," he says now. "Wherever I've been I've left people who joined Hizb ut-Tahrir. I have to make amends. What I did was damaging to British society and the world at large."

But though he would like to help diminish its influence, he does not think the group should be banned.

Nawaz is the product of a third-generation British Pakistani family. His father is a retired oil engineer, his mother works in a bank. They live in Essex. When he was growing up, Islam seemed like an irrelevant, "backward village religion," he said. But that attitude changed on a rare visit to a mosque when he was 16. He met a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, who he said preyed on his confusion about his British Pakistani identity.

One of the basic texts by the group's founder said it was obligatory for Muslims to militarily overthrow "every single Muslim government, then forcibly unite them into one military state even if it means killing millions of people," Nawaz said. But so far, the group has refrained from attacking him.

"I say I haven't lost my religion," Nawaz said. "I've lost my ideology."
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 2 Oct, 2007 10:17 am
Quote:
Converts To Islam Move Up In Cells

Washington Post
September 15, 2007


Short version (well, shorter version):

Quote:
Religious converts are playing an increasingly influential role in Islamic militant networks, having transformed themselves in recent years from curiosities to key players in terrorist cells in Europe, according to counterterrorism officials and analysts.

The arrests this month of two German converts to Islam -- Fritz Gelowicz and Daniel Schneider -- on suspicions that they were plotting to bomb American targets are just one example of terrorism cases in Europe in which converts to Islam have figured prominently.

In Copenhagen, a convert is among four defendants who went on trial this month for plotting to blow up political targets. In Sweden, a webmaster who changed his name from Ralf Wadman to Abu Usama el-Swede was arrested last year on suspicion of recruiting fighters on the Internet. In Britain, three converts -- including the son of a British politician -- are awaiting trial on charges of participating in last year's transatlantic airline plot.

The trend is not limited to Europe. In Florida, U.S. citizen and convert Jose Padilla was convicted last month on conspiracy charges for participating in an al-Qaeda support cell. In March, David M. Hicks, an Australian convert, became the first prisoner at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to be convicted on terrorism charges.

Religious converts are sometimes more prone to radicalization because of their zeal to prove their newfound faith, analysts said. They are also less likely to attract police scrutiny in Europe, where investigators often rely on outdated demographic profiles in terrorism cases.

Counterterrorist analysts said that militant groups, which used to eye converts suspiciously as potential infiltrators, are now encouraging them to join. In May, al-Qaeda deputy chief Ayman al-Zawahiri released a videotape in which he repeatedly praised Muslim leader Malcolm X and urged African American soldiers to stop fighting in Iraq and embrace Islam.

Converts are a tiny subset of the Muslim population in Europe, but their numbers are growing in some countries. In Germany, government officials estimated that 4,000 people converted to Islam last year, compared with an annual average of 300 in the late 1990s. Less than 1 percent of Germany's 3.3 million Muslims are converts.

Analysts said European converts sometimes are drawn to mosques or organizations at home that have a radical bent but profess nonviolence. After spending time in those circles, however, some seek to deepen their involvement by attending religious schools, or madrassas, in Islamic countries such as Pakistan, Egypt or Saudi Arabia.

Once there, it is easy for spotters from al-Qaeda and other militant groups to recruit potential followers, said Ashraf Ali, a researcher at the University of Peshawar.

One fundamentalist network that has attracted hundreds of converts in Europe is Tablighi Jamaat, a missionary sect based in Pakistan that characterizes itself as peaceful but is criticized by some authorities as a training ground for extremists. Another is al-Muhajiroun, a movement founded by a radical cleric in London that officially disbanded in 2004 but reorganized into an assortment of splinter groups.

In Germany, investigators are still trying to determine how the three men arrested Sept. 4 became radicalized and how they came into contact with the Islamic Jihad Union, a South Asian network that has asserted responsibility for the plot to attack American targets in Germany.

Gelowicz, whom investigators have identified as the ringleader of the cell, struggled academically in high school and converted to Islam when he was 18. He was active in radical circles in the southern city of Ulm, home to an Islamic cultural center and other institutions that have long been under police surveillance.

Religious leaders meanwhile said they were trying to counter what they described as a public backlash against converts. Gerhard Isa Moldenhauer, a board member at the Central Institute of the Islam Archive, blamed panicky lawmakers for stirring up distrust. "The German politicians tell us almost daily that all converts are terrorists," said Moldenhauer, himself a convert.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 1.91 seconds on 11/24/2024 at 06:28:16