Britain | |
Irish Muslim radical says Americans should be grateful more people didn't die in Boston | |
2013-04-29 | |
An Irish Muslim who once threatened to kill Barack Obama has refused to condemn the Boston bombers and claimed they gave Americans 'a taste of their own medicine'. Khalid Kelly, a 46-year-old from Dublin, made the controversial remarks in an exclusive interview with the Irish Sun newspaper. In the course of the interview, he refused to condemn Chechen terror brothers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev for the attack which killed three people including an eight-year-old boy. Nicknamed Taliban Terry, Kelly told the paper that he was not surprised by the attack, the first on US soil since 9/11. And he told Americans to be glad nobody else had died in the marathon bomb. Kelly said: "Thousands of Muslims are being killed every day from Syria to Afghanistan. A lot of them are being murdered at the hands of the Americans, and they never have a minute's silence. "Where are the tears for these people? Three people get killed and they have a big day of remembrance. They should remember the people they are killing. "This is a war and they should be thankful that it wasn't more."
| |
Link |
India-Pakistan |
Un-teaching extremism |
2012-01-08 |
![]() The one of its kind three-person unit, whose aim is to support grassroots groups and moderate religious leaders to counter beturbanned goon ideology, started operating in Pakistain last July. Sultan Mehmood Gujar, 46, a property dealer by profession, is reported to be one of the many staunch supporters of the "holy war." But his views changed after listening to a 40-day lecture series offering a counter narrative to jihad. Hopefully, this measure will prevent the youth from joining radical groups and deradicalise gunnies -- if the message seeps in! For over a decade, Pakistain has endured the wrath of beturbanned goon ideology that has successfully bred terrorism and convinced many to blow themselves up to "fight theInfidels" in foreign soil and even perish those Mohammedans who do not subscribe to the cause on home ground. But have the leaders done anything besides giving lip service to its people on combating violent extremism? "Pakistain has done absolutely nothing to deradicalise the krazed killers," said Tariq Pervez, ex-chairman National Counter-Terrorism Authority (NACTA). "World over, one dimension for deradicalisation is to rehabilitate those people who are in jails on terrorism charges." If the al Qaeda poster boy, Dr. Fadl, can take a U-turn in the jail and write a book titled "Rationalising Jihad in Egypt and the World" that shattered the beturbanned goon ideology, it gives cause to believe that rehabilitation is possible no matter how brainwashed the person is. Soddy Arabia has been running terrorist rehabilitation programs for ex-Guantanamo detainees. And the kingdom officials claim to have 80 per cent success rate. However, a woman is only as old as she admits... they have enormous resources and are seemingly committed to make a change as well. But in Pakistain, initiatives to counter-violent extremism pose a difficulty when the subject starts to question the legitimacy of the program. "The problem is that conspicuous support from Western governments for 'moderate Islam' is usually counterproductive, in that it contaminates the moderates with the stain of association with Western policies, notably support for unpopular despotic regimes, unjust financial systems, and hard-line backing for Israeli policies," wrote Tim Winter, lecturer of Islamic Science at Cambridge University. "To accept such support is usually a kiss of death, and strengthens the hand of the radicals." Perhaps this is why the US is leveraging local groups and moderate religious leaders.Knowing how keen the Pak government is to fight terrorism, one can only rely on grassroots initiatives. "The problem with the groups working on ground is that their efforts are not coordinated," said Mr. Pervez. "People were systematically radicalised in GeneralMuhammad Zia-ul-Haq's regime and a greater effort is required to deradicalise the krazed killer psyche and to neutralise the breeding grounds." Akbar Ahmed, author of "Journey into Islam," rightly noted: "unless these [initiatives] are conducted on a national scale, they will only create the smallest of dents in Pak society." And that's not it. Militant material is readily available on social media that adds another tier to the problem. "US policy makers have focused on YouTube because videos are one of the most effective tools for radical recruiters," wrote J.M. Berger, author of "Jihad Joe" said in an email. "Facebook has a constantly growing body of radical material available, and there hasn't been much focus on policing it...Over the last year, we've seen a surge of violence-oriented gun-hung tough guys using Twitter." With the growing difficulty to prevent radicalisation and rehabilitate krazed killers, there is a lot more that needs to be done by parents, imams, scholars, teachers, and the entire society to promote the message of mercy and compassion. "With the growth of new media, it is important for prominent and trusted voices to get on television, Facebook, YouTube and Twitter to help counter narratives which might promote extremism," wrote Arsalan Iftikhar, author of "Islamic Pacifism: Global Mohammedans in the Post-Osama Era" He added: "Since many youth are quite impressionable, it is important to get to them an early age." Imams and religious scholars, across the globe, tweet and update their Facebook statuses and fan pages regularly, often with a thought-provoking line or a religious quote, there is a dire need to counter beturbanned goon ideology on networking sites, regardless of how unpalatable it may be to the followers. A national security analyst, speaking off the record, said that counter narratives would work when one person hears from 10,000 voices that krazed killer ideology is unfounded and unjust. I wish we could rely on Jon Stewart to spread the counter-extremist message, like we're depending on him to counter Islamophobia ...the irrational fear that Moslems will act the way they usually do... on The Daily Show, but we really need to mobilise the entire Mohammedan community if we really want to counter the beturbanned goon ideology. |
Link |
India-Pakistan | |||
Dupe URL: The great debate: is violent jihad against Islam? | |||
2011-04-17 | |||
Egypt passed through a violent phase in the 1990s when the government made all-out efforts to dismantle jihadist groups in the country. The Mubarak regime had filled up the prisons with thousands of suspects. Although rejection of violence by the Muslim Brotherhood had shrunk the space for violent actors in Egyptian society, the discourse facilitated among captive members of the Islamic Group (Gamaa Islamiyah) and Al Jihad, the two main jihadist groups in Egypt, on the issue of the legitimacy of pursuing a violent path, contributed much towards countering violent ideological tendencies. The debate was initiated among thousands of imprisoned members of the Islamic Group and questioned the justification of violence for achieving their stated goals. After the discourse, reading and furtive conversations, the detainees came to feel that they had been manipulated into pursuing a violent path. Although it was difficult to start the debate as initially it had faced strong opposition both inside and outside the prisons, at some point the imprisoned members of Al Jihad, the most violent group in Egypt and led by Ayman Al-Zawahiri, also began to express an interest in joining the non-violent initiative. But Dr Fadl, the architect of Al Qaedas ideological paradigm, was the man who turned the initiative into a great debate. Fadl, an Egyptian physician and scholar, was one of the first members of Al Qaedas top council and proponent of the literature that Al Qaeda used for indoctrination. His book Compendium gave Al Qaeda the licence to murder all those who stood in its way. Al-Zawahiri had declared the book a victory from God. Later, Fadl accused Al-Zawahiri of adding new chapters to his book and rephrasing it in parts, which caused a rift between the two. Al-Zawahiris amendments to Fadls work provoked a debate among the imprisoned leaders of the Islamic Group in the late 1990s. They started to examine the evidence and felt that they had been manipulated into pursuing a violent path. In 2001, Fadl was arrested in Yemen and handed over to Egypt. Fadl joined his former colleagues in prison and started revising his previous work and came up with a title Rationalising Jihad in Egypt and the World. This new book attempted to reconcile Fadls well-known views with sweeping modifications from Compendium. Apart from covering many critical issues including the conditions for jihad in foreign lands and the killing of innocent civilians, Fadl critically examined the question of takfir and observed that there were various kinds of takfir, and that the matter was so complex that it must be left to competent Islamic jurists, and that members of the public were not qualified to enforce the law. He cautioned that it was not permissible for a Muslim to condemn another Muslim. The debate provided an opportunity to Islamic Group and Al Jihad members to review their strategies and give up violence. At the same time, on a societal level, it helped to strengthen non-violent narratives. One has not even heard echoes of such a discourse in Pakistan, although the dire need for that cannot be emphasised enough. Religious scholars in Pakistan have issued more than a dozen conditional religious decrees against suicide attacks, stating that there is no justification for such attacks on Pakistani soil. However, in the decrees they have not failed to mention that terrorist attacks are a reaction to the governments policies. There has been intentional evasion of talking about extremism mainly on the ideological front. This attitude of putting the entire burden on the state and shirking ones own responsibility has almost become the norm in Pakistan. Fear for personal security, as much as any other factor, has hindered the initiation of a debate on such sensitive issues. A number of religious scholars from all schools of thoughts hold contrary views on the militant discourse but these views either do not have support within their sectarian domains or the scholars do not want to expound their thoughts vociferously for fear of risking their lives. Very few scholars have been willing to speak out in the face of personal threats. Allama Javed Ghamdi is one such scholar who has been the voice of reason in the ideological proliferation in Pakistan. But the clergy in Pakistan does not accept his narrative because of his modern credentials. There is an urgent need to find the voice of reason among the clergy, which has an influence in the militant circles and can courageously initiate debate on critical issues. In this context, one example is a young Deobandi scholar, Muhammad Ammar Khan Nasir, son of Maulana Zahidul Rashidi, who wields influence in the Deobandi school of thought and is well respected even among militant groups in Pakistan. Nasir, in his newsletter, Al Sharia, has declared that it is not permissible on religious grounds for non-Afghan Muslims to fight against international forces in Afghanistan. He has argued that Pakistan is in agreement with the international community in Afghanistan and if the government supported the Taliban it would be going against the principles of Islam.
The debate initiated by Ammar Nasir has formed the basis for an intellectual discussion among Deobandi scholars. This is a ray of hope that the intellectual discourse is still intact in the religious community in Pakistan. But the crucial question is: can these discussions be transformed into something close to the great debate in Egypt? The writer, Muhammad Amir Rana, is editor of the quarterly research journal Conflict and Peace Studies. | |||
Link |
India-Pakistan | |||
Pakistan joins the great debate: is violent jihad against Islam? | |||
2011-04-17 | |||
Egypt passed through a violent phase in the 1990s when the government made all-out efforts to dismantle jihadist groups in the country. The Mubarak regime had filled up the prisons with thousands of suspects. Although rejection of violence by the Muslim Brotherhood had shrunk the space for violent actors in Egyptian society, the discourse facilitated among captive members of the Islamic Group (Gamaa Islamiyah) and Al Jihad, the two main jihadist groups in Egypt, on the issue of the legitimacy of pursuing a violent path, contributed much towards countering violent ideological tendencies. The debate was initiated among thousands of imprisoned members of the Islamic Group and questioned the justification of violence for achieving their stated goals. After the discourse, reading and furtive conversations, the detainees came to feel that they had been manipulated into pursuing a violent path. Although it was difficult to start the debate as initially it had faced strong opposition both inside and outside the prisons, at some point the imprisoned members of Al Jihad, the most violent group in Egypt and led by Ayman Al-Zawahiri, also began to express an interest in joining the non-violent initiative. But Dr Fadl, the architect of Al Qaeda's ideological paradigm, was the man who turned the initiative into a great debate. Fadl, an Egyptian physician and scholar, was one of the first members of Al Qaeda's top council and proponent of the literature that Al Qaeda used for indoctrination. His book Compendium gave Al Qaeda the licence to murder all those who stood in its way. Al-Zawahiri had declared the book a victory from God. Later, Fadl accused Al-Zawahiri of adding new chapters to his book and rephrasing it in parts, which caused a rift between the two. Al-Zawahiri's amendments to Fadl's work provoked a debate among the imprisoned leaders of the Islamic Group in the late 1990s. They started to examine the evidence and felt that they had been manipulated into pursuing a violent path. In 2001, Fadl was arrested in Yemen and handed over to Egypt. Fadl joined his former colleagues in prison and started revising his previous work and came up with a title Rationalising Jihad in Egypt and the World. This new book attempted to reconcile Fadl's well-known views with sweeping modifications from Compendium. Apart from covering many critical issues including the conditions for jihad in foreign lands and the killing of innocent civilians, Fadl critically examined the question of takfir and observed that there were various kinds of takfir, and that the matter was so complex that it must be left to competent Islamic jurists, and that members of the public were not qualified to enforce the law. He cautioned that it was not permissible for a Muslim to condemn another Muslim. The debate provided an opportunity to Islamic Group and Al Jihad members to review their strategies and give up violence. At the same time, on a societal level, it helped to strengthen non-violent narratives. One has not even heard echoes of such a discourse in Pakistan, although the dire need for that cannot be emphasised enough. Religious scholars in Pakistan have issued more than a dozen conditional religious decrees against suicide attacks, stating that there is no justification for such attacks on Pakistani soil. However, in the decrees they have not failed to mention that terrorist attacks are a reaction to the government's policies. There has been intentional evasion of talking about extremism mainly on the ideological front. This attitude of putting the entire burden on the state and shirking one's own responsibility has almost become the norm in Pakistan. Fear for personal security, as much as any other factor, has hindered the initiation of a debate on such sensitive issues. A number of religious scholars from all schools of thoughts hold contrary views on the militant discourse but these views either do not have support within their sectarian domains or the scholars do not want to expound their thoughts vociferously for fear of risking their lives. Very few scholars have been willing to speak out in the face of personal threats. Allama Javed Ghamdi is one such scholar who has been the voice of reason in the ideological proliferation in Pakistan. But the clergy in Pakistan does not accept his narrative because of his modern credentials. There is an urgent need to find the voice of reason among the clergy, which has an influence in the militant circles and can courageously initiate debate on critical issues. In this context, one example is a young Deobandi scholar, Muhammad Ammar Khan Nasir, son of Maulana Zahidul Rashidi, who wields influence in the Deobandi school of thought and is well respected even among militant groups in Pakistan. Nasir, in his newsletter, Al Sharia, has declared that it is not permissible on religious grounds for non-Afghan Muslims to fight against international forces in Afghanistan. He has argued that Pakistan is in agreement with the international community in Afghanistan and if the government supported the Taliban it would be going against the principles of Islam.
The debate initiated by Ammar Nasir has formed the basis for an intellectual discussion among Deobandi scholars. This is a ray of hope that the intellectual discourse is still intact in the religious community in Pakistan. But the crucial question is: can these discussions be transformed into something close to the great debate in Egypt? The writer, Muhammad Amir Rana, is editor of the quarterly research journal Conflict and Peace Studies. | |||
Link |
Afghanistan | |
Some 25 likely killed in Afghanistan airstrike: official | |
2010-10-26 | |
[Dawn] About 25 people may have been killed in a Nato
The coalition was continuing to look into the operation, the officials said. The head of Helmand's provincial council, Fazal Bari, said local officials had told him that 25 people had been killed but that the casualty figures could rise because many bodies were still buried in the rubble. He said the dead were inside a mosque in Baghran district but Nato said it had no reports of a mosque being struck. Baghran is the northernmost district in Helmand, about 100 miles north of the quiet provincial capital of Lashkar Gah. In an unrelated incident, an jihad boy attack in eastern Afghanistan killed a Nato service member, the coalition said in a statement on Monday, bringing to 50 the number of coalition soldiers killed this month. The statement did not provide further details on Sunday's death. The Afghan insurgency has traditionally been fiercest in the country's south and east, along the border with Pakistain. Most of the insurgency's top commanders are believed to be hiding in the mountainous Pakistain border area. Nato and Afghan troops have been trying to wrest back control of the southern provinces from the Taliban since July, but attacks and roadside kabooms are still daily occurrences. Nato has also been trying to kill or capture Taliban leaders in Residents said the push has resulted in patches of security in the south, but the insurgency has stepped up attacks in other parts of the country, including the north, which has traditionally been more stable. In northern Afghanistan Monday, a suicide kaboomer blew up his explosives-laden car in Pul-i-Khumri, the capital of Baghlan province, said Mahmood Akmal, a front man for the provincial governor. The attacker died, but no one else was injured in the blast, which appeared to be targeting a coalition convoy, he said. On Saturday, four suicide kaboomers used a car bomb, explosives vests and guns to attack a UN compound in the western province of Herat. The four attackers were the only fatalities. | |
Link |
Terror Networks |
Dr. Fadl: Bin Laden and Al-Zawahiri should face an Islamic trial |
2010-02-25 |
[Maghrebia] The newspaper Asharq Alawsat published a series of articles between January 25th and February 2nd, which were a condensed version of a new book by Dr. Sayyid Imam Abdul Aziz Al-Sharif, better known as Dr. Fadl, a prominent Jihadi theoretician. His books were used by al-Qaeda to train and educate its members in matters of Islamic jurisprudence and religious principles. In his book, titled "The Future of the Conflict between the Taliban and America in Afghanistan", Dr. Fadl pursued his attack against the leader of al-Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden and his second-in-command, Ayman Al-Zawahiri. He accused both of them of being fully responsible for the "catastrophes" that have befallen the Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq. The new book by Dr. Fadl, imprisoned in Egypt since 2002 after being handed over to Egyptian authorities by Yemen, is consistent with his previous series of books which he published in the last few years, starting with "A Guidance for Jihad Activity in Egypt and the World" (2007), in which he provided Islamic legal arguments which, in his view, strip the actions of al-Qaeda of its "jihadi" aspect. |
Link |
Africa North |
Egypt: Son of jailed Al-Qaeda leader speaks ahead of Obama visit |
2009-05-31 |
[ADN Kronos] He was once considered the intellectual chief of Al-Qaeda, a valued colleague of global leader Osama Bin Laden and his second-in-command, Ayman al Zawahiri. But now Sayyed Imam Al-Sharif, known as Dr. Fadl, who is in an Egyptian prison, has renounced his role in the movement and called for an end to violent jihad in western and Muslim countries. In an interview published in the magazine of Italian daily, La Repubblica on Friday, his 24-year-old son Ismaiel spoke about his father's life in prison and his revisionism on the eve of US president Barack Obama's visit to Egypt. "He has a single cell, bathroom and kitchenette," he told the daily. "They bring him the newspaper but he has refused satellite TV. If we want he can telephone every day. I saw him yesterday." What do they talk about? "I tell him what I am doing, I have become the head of the family, I have to take care of our interests." |
Link |
Terror Networks |
Ideological clash of two jihadi titans shakes Al Qaeda |
2008-12-15 |
![]() Mr. Zawahiri "is only good at fleeing, inciting, collecting donations, and talking to the media," wrote Sayyed Imam al-Sharif in his latest attack on Al Qaeda's No. 2. Sayyed Imam, serving a life sentence in Egypt, is an esteemed theoretician of jihad whose ideas helped shape Al Qaeda's ideology. But now he's decrying its stock in trade -- mass murder -- in a clash that is an example of how some once-fierce zealots of violent jihad are having second thoughts. "It is really an argument about ... what means are militarily effective and Islamically legitimate," says William McCants, a Washington area-based analyst of militant Islamism. Imam, he adds, is saying that only "a guerrilla war conducted against enemy soldiers" is permitted. Imam's prison writings were preceded by a series of books and commentaries from imprisoned members of Islamic Group, a group that waged a guerrilla war against the Egyptian government in the 1990s. Their so-called "revisions" renounced violence and some put forward ideas on how to peacefully create an Islamic society. Terrorism experts disagree on the impact that Imam's scathing critiques of Zawahiri and Al Qaeda will have on the global jihadi movement, particularly since he writes from prison where he is believed subject to influence from Egyptian and US intelligence agencies. But his writings have put Zawahiri on the defensive. And they come amid other pressures, including the disabling of several Al Qaeda-linked online forums -- presumably by Western and Middle Eastern intelligence agencies -- and an intensification of US military activity in Pakistan's tribal areas, where Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden are believed to be hiding. "One shouldn't overestimate the impact of this [ideological feud] in the overall war on terror, but it is definitely going to divert some of Zawahiri's creative energy away from operations," says Thomas Hegghammer, a fellow in Harvard Kennedy School's international security program. "Zawahiri's support among jihadis is still strong, but he is losing the media battle to convince the public that Al Qaeda is winning," adds Mr. McCants, who monitors Al Qaeda Web activity at jihadica.com. "That, coupled with the US Predators attacks in Pakistan, put him under tremendous pressure." Bruce Hoffman, a professor of security studies at Georgetown University and author of "Inside Terrorism," says he does not believe that Imam's writings are going to have a huge adverse impact on Al Qaeda's hard-core followers. If you are a hard-line militant, "are you going to listen to an elderly, geriatric guy in an Egyptian prison?" Mr. Hoffman asks. "It's not as if Zawahiri himself changed his mind." Far more problematic for Al Qaeda, Hoffman says, is the sabotage of its online forums, some of which have not been working since September. As the principle means of communicating with followers and potential recruits, their loss "has been a serious blow," Hoffman says. Imam, also known as Dr. Fadl, was a close ally of Zawahiri when Imam led Egypt's Islamic Jihad in the 1980s. His reputation as a top jihadi ideologue rested on his books, particularly his 1994 "A Compendium for the Pursuit of Divine Knowledge." But Imam and Zawahiri disagreed about many things and grew estranged. When Imam stepped down as Islamic Jihad leader in 1993, Zawahiri took his place. Though Al Qaeda cited Imam's writings, he never joined the group. In Nov. 2007, Imam released "Rationalizing Jihad in Egypt and the World," a book that refuted Al Qaeda's terrorist tactics and ideology and was especially critical of Zawahiri. |
Link |
Terror Networks |
Special report: Is Al Qa'ida in pieces? |
2008-06-22 |
Long, but worth going to the link to read. It seems Al Qaeda is no longer popular with many of their former jihadis. They've murdered too many Muslims they labelled takfiri, and the jihadis are getting older and more sensible than they were back in the go-go '90s, before 9/11 and 7/7. The article is based on interviews with a number of former jihadis who are now speaking out against the whole thing. This article gives depth and background to discussions here and elsewhere about the anti-Al Qaeda book released by the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood theorist Sayyid Imam al-Sharif, aka Dr. Fadl. Within a few minutes of Noman Benotman's arrival at the Kandahar guest house, Osama bin Laden came to welcome him. The journey from Kabul had been hard 17 hours in a Toyota pick-up truck, bumping along what passed as the main highway to southern Afghanistan. It was the summer of 2000, and Benotman, then a leader of a group trying to overthrow the Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi, had been invited by Bin Laden to a conference of jihadists from around the Arab world, the first of its kind since al-Qa'ida had moved to Afghanistan in 1996. Benotman, the scion of an aristocratic family marginalised by Qaddafi, had known Bin Laden from their days fighting the communist Afghan government in the early 1990s, a period when Benotman established himself as a leader of the militant Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. Bin Laden was trying to win over other militant groups to the global jihad he had announced against the West in 1998. Over the next five days, Bin Laden and his top aides, including Ayman al-Zawahiri, met with a dozen or so jihadist leaders. "This was a big strategy meeting," Benotman told one of us late last year, in his first account of the meeting to a reporter. "We talked about everything, where are we going, what are the lessons of the past 20 years." Despite the warm welcome, Benotman surprised his hosts with a bleak assessment of their prospects. "I told them that the jihadist movement had failed. That we had gone from one disaster to another, like in Algeria, because we had not mobilised the people," recalls Benotman, referring to the Algerian civil war launched by jihadists in the 1990s that left more than 100,000 dead and destroyed whatever local support the militants had once enjoyed. Benotman also told Bin Laden that the al-Qa'ida leader's decision to target the West would only sabotage attempts by groups such as Benotman's to overthrow the secular dictatorships in the Arab world. "We made a clear-cut request for him to stop his campaign against the United States because it was going to lead to nowhere," Benotman recalls, "but they laughed when I told them that America would attack the whole region if they launched another attack against it." After the [9/11] attacks, Benotman, now living in London, resigned from the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, realising that the United States, in its war on terrorism, would differentiate little between al-Qa'ida and his organisation. Benotman, however, did more than just retire. In January 2007, under a veil of secrecy, he flew to Tripoli in a private jet chartered by the Libyan government to try to persuade the imprisoned senior leadership of his former group to enter into peace negotiations with the regime. He was successful. This May, Benotman told us that the two parties could be as little as three months away from an agreement that would see the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group formally end its operations in Libya and denounce al-Qa'ida's global jihad. At that point, the group would also publicly refute recent claims by al-Qa'ida that the two organisations had joined forces. This past November, Benotman went public with his own criticism of al-Qa'ida in an open letter to al-Zawahiri. In the letter, Benotman recalled his Kandahar warnings and called on al-Qa'ida to end all operations in Arab countries and in the West. The citizens of Western countries were blameless and should not be the target of terrorist attacks, argued Benotman. Although Benotman's public rebuke of al-Qa'ida went unnoticed in the United States, it received wide attention in the Arabic press. In repudiating al-Qa'ida, Benotman was adding his voice to a rising tide of anger in the Islamic world toward al-Qa'ida and its affiliates, whose victims since 11 September have mostly been fellow Muslims. Significantly, he was also joining a larger group of religious scholars, former fighters, and militants who had once had great influence over al-Qa'ida's leaders, and who alarmed by the targeting of civilians in the West, senseless killings in Muslim countries, and barbaric tactics in Iraq have turned against the organisation, many just in the past year. Why have clerics and militants once considered allies by al-Qa'ida's leaders turned against them? To a large extent, it is because al-Qa'ida and its affiliates have increasingly adopted the doctrine of takfir, by which they claim the right to decide who is a "true" Muslim. Al-Qa'ida's Muslim critics know what results from this takfiri view: first, the radicals deem some Muslims apostates; after that, the radicals start killing them. This fatal progression happened in both Algeria and Egypt in the 1990s. It is now taking place even more dramatically in Iraq, where al-Qa'ida's suicide bombers have killed more than 10,000 Iraqis, most of them targeted simply for being Shia. Recently, al-Qa'ida in Iraq has turned its fire on Sunnis who oppose its diktats, a fact not lost on the Islamic world's Sunni majority. Additionally, al-Qa'ida and its affiliates have killed thousands of Muslim civilians elsewhere since 11 September: hundreds of Afghans killed every year by the Taliban, dozens of Saudis killed by terrorists since 2003, scores of Jordanians massacred at a wedding at a US hotel in Amman in November 2005. Even those sympathetic to al-Qa'ida have started to notice. "Excuse me Mr Zawahiri but who is it who is killing, with Your Excellency's blessing, the innocents in Baghdad, Morocco and Algeria?" one supporter asked in an online Q&A with al-Qa'ida's deputy leader in April that was posted widely on jihadist websites. All this has created a dawning recognition among Muslims that the ideological virus that unleashed 11 September and the terrorist attacks in London and Madrid is the same virus now wreaking havoc in the Muslim world. Ultimately, the ideological battle against al-Qa'ida in the West may be won here in Britain. It is in this country that many leaders of the jihadist movement have settled as political refugees, and the capital has long been a key barometer of future Islamist trends. There are probably more supporters of al-Qa'ida in Britain than any other Western country. Over the last half-year, we have been interviewing London-based militants who have defected from al-Qa'ida, retired mujahideen, Muslim community leaders, and members of the security services. Most say that, when al-Qa'ida's bombs went off in London in 2005, sympathy for the terrorists evaporated. In Leyton, the local mosque is on the main road, a street of terraced houses, halal food joints, and South Asian hairdressers. Around 1,000 people attend Friday prayers there each week. Usama Hassan, an imam at the mosque, has a PhD in artificial intelligence from Imperial College in London, read theoretical physics at Cambridge, and now teaches at Middlesex University. But he also trained in a jihadist camp in Afghanistan in the 1990s and, until a few years ago, was openly sympathetic to Bin Laden. And, in another unusual twist, he is now one of the most prominent critics of al-Qa'ida. Raised in London by Pakistani parents, Hassan arrived in Cambridge in 1989 and, feeling culturally isolated, fell in with Jam'iat Ihyaa Minhaaj Al-Sunnah (Jimas), a student organisation then supportive of jihads in Palestine, Kashmir and Afghanistan. In December 1990, Hassan travelled to Afghanistan, where he briefly attended an Arab jihadist camp. Later, as a postgraduate student in London, Hassan played a lead role in the student Islamic Society, then a hotbed of radical activism. "At the time I was very anti-American... It was all black and white for us. I used to be impressed with Bin Laden. There was no other leadership in the Muslim world standing up for Muslims." When 11 September happened, Hassan says the view in his circle was that "al-Qa'ida had given one back to George Bush". As al-Qa'ida continued to target civilians for attacks, Hassan began to rethink. His employment by an artificial intelligence consulting firm also integrated him back toward mainstream British life. "It was a slow process and involved a lot of soul-searching... Over time, I became convinced Bin Laden was dangerous and an extremist." The July 2005 bombings in London were the clincher. "I was devastated by the attack," he says. "My feeling was, how dare they attack my city." Three days after the London bombings, the Leyton mosque held an emergency meeting; about 300 people attended. "We explained that these acts were evil, that they were haram [unlawful]," recalls Hassan. It was not the easiest of crowds; one youngster stormed out, shouting, 'As far as I'm concerned, 50 dead kuffar is not a problem.'" In Friday sermons since then, Hassan has hammered home the difference between legitimate jihad and terrorism, despite a death threat from pro-al-Qa'ida militants: "I think I'm listened to by the young because I have street cred from having spent time in a [jihadist] training camp." This spring, Hassan helped launch the Quilliam Foundation, an organisation set up by former Islamist extremists to counter radicalism by making speeches to young British Muslims about how they had been duped into embracing hatred of the West. In December, al-Qa'ida's campaign of violence reached new depths in the eyes of many Muslims, with a plot to launch attacks in Saudi Arabia while millions were gathered for the Hajj. Saudi security services arrested 28 al-Qa'ida militants in Mecca, Medina and Riyadh, whose targets allegedly included religious leaders critical of al-Qa'ida, among them the Saudi Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul Aziz al-Sheikh, who responded to the plot by ruling that al-Qa'ida operatives should be punished by execution, crucifixion or exile. Is al-Qa'ida going to dissipate as a result of the criticism from its former mentors and allies? Despite the recent internal criticism, probably not in the short term. Al-Qa'ida, on the verge of defeat in 2002, has regrouped and is now able to launch significant terrorist operations in Europe. And, last summer, US intelligence agencies judged that it had "regenerated its [US] Homeland attack capability" in Pakistan's tribal areas. Since then, al-Qa'ida and the Taliban have only entrenched their position further, launching a record number of suicide attacks in Pakistan in the past year. Afghanistan, Algeria and Iraq also saw record numbers of suicide attacks in 2007 (though the group's capabilities have deteriorated in Iraq of late). Meanwhile, al-Qa'ida is still able to find recruits in the West. In November, Jonathan Evans, the head of MI5, said that record numbers of UK residents are now supportive of the group, with around 2,000 posing a "direct threat to national security and public safety". However, encoded in the DNA of apocalyptic jihadist groups such as al-Qa'ida are the seeds of their own long-term destruction: their victims are often Muslim civilians; they don't offer a positive vision of the future (but rather the prospect of Taliban-style regimes from Morocco to Indonesia); they keep expanding their list of enemies, including any Muslim who doesn't share their precise world view; and they seem incapable of becoming politically successful because their ideology prevents them from making the real-world compromises that would allow them to engage in genuine politics. The scholars and fighters now criticising al-Qa'ida, in concert with mainstream Muslim leaders, have created a powerful coalition countering the organisation's ideology. According to Pew polls, support for al-Qa'ida has been dropping around the Muslim world in recent years. The numbers supporting suicide bombings in Indonesia, Lebanon and Bangladesh, for instance, have dropped by half or more in the past five years. In Saudi Arabia, only 10 per cent now have a favourable view of al-Qa'ida, according to a December poll by Terror Free Tomorrow, a Washington-based think tank. Following a wave of suicide attacks in Pakistan in the past year, support for suicide operations among Pakistanis has dropped to 9 per cent (it was 33 per cent five years ago), while favourable views of Bin Laden in the North-West Frontier Province of Pakistan, around where he is believed to be hiding, have plummeted to four per cent from 70 per cent in August 2007. |
Link |
Terror Networks |
An Al Qaeda mastermind questions terrorism. |
2008-05-27 |
by Lawrence Wright Last May, a fax arrived at the London office of the Arabic newspaper Asharq Al Awsat from a shadowy figure in the radical Islamist movement who went by many names. Born Sayyid Imam al-Sharif, he was the former leader of the Egyptian terrorist group Al Jihad, and known to those in the underground mainly as Dr. Fadl. Members of Al Jihad became part of the original core of Al Qaeda; among them was Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Ladens chief lieutenant. Fadl was one of the first members of Al Qaedas top council. Twenty years ago, he wrote two of the most important books in modern Islamist discourse; Al Qaeda used them to indoctrinate recruits and justify killing. Now Fadl was announcing a new book, rejecting Al Qaedas violence. We are prohibited from committing aggression, even if the enemies of Islam do that, Fadl wrote in his fax, which was sent from Tora Prison, in Egypt. Fadls fax confirmed rumors that imprisoned leaders of Al Jihad were part of a trend in which former terrorists renounced violence. His defection posed a terrible threat to the radical Islamists, because he directly challenged their authority. There is a form of obedience that is greater than the obedience accorded to any leader, namely, obedience to God and His Messenger, Fadl wrote, claiming that hundreds of Egyptian jihadists from various factions had endorsed his position. Two months after Fadls fax appeared, Zawahiri issued a handsomely produced video on behalf of Al Qaeda. Do they now have fax machines in Egyptian jail cells? he asked. I wonder if theyre connected to the same line as the electric-shock machines. This sarcastic dismissal was perhaps intended to dampen anxiety about Fadls manifestowhich was to be published serially, in newspapers in Egypt and Kuwaitamong Al Qaeda insiders. Fadls previous work, after all, had laid the intellectual foundation for Al Qaedas murderous acts. On a recent trip to Cairo, I met with Gamal Sultan, an Islamist writer and a publisher there. He said of Fadl, Nobody can challenge the legitimacy of this person. His writings could have far-reaching effects not only in Egypt but on leaders outside it. Usama Ayub, a former member of Egypts Islamist community, who is now the director of the Islamic Center in Münster, Germany, told me, A lot of people base their work on Fadls writings, so hes very important. When Dr. Fadl speaks, everyone should listen. Although the debate between Fadl and Zawahiri was esoteric and bitterly personal, its ramifications for the West were potentially enormous. Other Islamist organizations had gone through violent phases before deciding that such actions led to a dead end. Was this happening to Al Jihad? Could it happen even to Al Qaeda? |
Link |