Posted on 02/24/2009 5:21:40 PM PST by nickcarraway
There has been an outpouring of sympathy for India from all over the world after the recent Mumbai carnage just like what the US received after 9/11. In recent years there have been such senseless killings in Bali, Indonesia (October 2002), Madrid train killings (March 2004), and the London bombings (July 2005). Between 9/11 in the US and 26/11 in India, there have been regular jihadi killings in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nigeria, Algeria, China and Russia. But jihadi terrorism involving the World Trade Center (New York), Madrid, Bali and London has been getting the world attention without any attempt to identify and solve the fundamental problem behind the carnage.
After the regular cyber jihadi terrorism talks and acts by Saudi millionaire terrorist Osama bin Laden, the world started to pay some attention to global jihadi ideology. While the world has realised the killing of millions by communism (according to Black Book of Communism it is more than 100 million), the world has still not taken jihadists seriously. In many respects they are more dangerous than the most deadly weapons of mass destruction. By this time it is well recognised that Bush’s attack against Sadam Hussein, instead of solving the basic problem of international jihadi terrorism (IJT), has only worsened it.
After the Mumbai carnage where one could see on TV the beastly behaviour of jihadi terrorists killing their hostages for just being non- Muslim there is an urgent need for the world community to face the long-term consequences of IJT. In his book on “Clash of Civilizations” Samuel Huntington was able to foresee the future wars based not on nationalities or ideologies like Communism but on religions. But he did not predict nor could he foresee the potent power of jihadi ideology which can hardwire Muslims into live bombs to kill people all over the world.
Douglas Feith, writing for the Wall Street Journal on how India will be a key ally in the fight against terror, has summarised IJT ideology: “The more we learned about jihadist ideology - that of Al Qaada, Lashker-e-Taiba and others - the less likely it appeared that India could free itself of terrorist attacks simply through territorial compromise with Pakistan over Kashmir. Jihadist leaders declare that the aim of their holy war is not to alter specific policies of their enemies, but rather to establish a universal Muslim state. Fighting and killing to implement this apocalyptic vision, they have a long list of grievances and hatreds, including against the rulers of most Muslim countries, who they deem apostates.
But the jihadists particularly despise democracy. They believe law-making and self-government by human beings is blasphemous, an affront to the sovereignty of God, who is the only proper source of legislation.”
It is that IJT ideology quite possibly supported by the Pakistan Army and intelligence which led to the killing of Benazir Bhutto, according to the Economist. It is the same IJT ideology which was behind the Mumbai carnage.
When the world first heard of Chechnya and the Russian inability to handle it peacefully, the reaction was to sympathise with Chechen separatists and we failed to see the role of jihadi ideology. Even after the heart-breaking killings in Moscow and in North Caucasus, the world interpreted the Chechen problem more from the point of view of human rights and age-old grievances of Chechnya rather than the role of international jihadists in exacerbating the situation. The same is true about the Uighur problems in Xinjiang in China. Irrespective of the problems of Muslims in Xinjiang which may be genuine, why should international jihadists interfere in the internal affairs of the country?
Sudan and Nigeria, both of which are suffering from the curse of oil, are also victims of international jihadi terrorism in a less subdued manner compared to Kashmir, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Sudan was the country which had hosted Osama just before his bombings of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
In Pakistan, the army and the intelligence wing, which is under the army, ensure the influence of jihadists. While the former military dictator Zia-ul Huq did not even try to control the army’s jihadi role, the recent dictator Pervez Musharraf did not have much luck. Currently the civilian President Asif Ali Zirdari has no control over his army which has been getting billions of dollars to fight al Qaeda in Afghanistan from the US. But it is diverted to support IJT against India as has been revealed in the latest US report.
According to the Economist, Pakistan is the most dangerous place in the world because of the combination of two weapons of mass destruction - atom bomb and the rule of jihadi ideology. Today it is Pakistan. Tomorrow it could be another country like Bangladesh where democracy has not been able to set its roots. If the world does not start dealing with the fast spreading virus of international jihadi terrorism, IJT will be considered by the future generation to be a more deadly WMD than atom bombs.
There is an urgent need for the UN to organise a meeting of world leaders to discuss the increasing problem of IJT and to develop strategies to overcome it. While the UN is planning such a meeting, the world community should call upon the moderate leaders of Islam to isolate their jihadi elements in more forceful ways. Just like Hindus have been struggling to get rid of untouchability, caste-based discrimination and Sati (practically eliminated), Islam should start a movement to get rid of Jihadism.
While the majority of Muslims is critical of jihadists, there is still a significant minority in various Muslim-dominated countries where jihadists are getting full support. How can one explain the martyr type of respect shown to the killers of Bali bombing in Indonesia after they were put to death recently?
When the complicity of India’s mafia leader Dawood Ibrahim is well known in various jihadi killings of Mumbai, how can one explain the indifference of the Pakistan government in extraditing him to India or being given lavish hospitality in the Middle Eastern countries? How can one explain millions of dollars being provided to promote international jihadi terrorism movement by the millionaires living in an oil rich country like Saudi Arabia?
Now is the time to take strong action because IJT will get more strength and support in the future as the world’s reliance on Middle East oil starts to increase even more. The recent IEA report has predicted $200 per barrel of oil by 2030 mostly because the supply of conventional oil will start peaking. By that time more than 85 percent of oil reserves will be from the Middle East and all the nations there have Muslim majority. Unless those states take active steps and join the rest of the world community to eliminate these jihadi elements, the situation will only get worse.
There is no use in some affected countries like the US, India or Spain going and bombing the jihadi terror camps. Killing a few jihadists physically will not help much. In Hindu mythology there was a demon whose each drop of blood falling to the ground created hundreds of his clones. Similarly as it happened in Iraq, killing of Al Qaeda or LET will give rise to more of them instead of eliminating them as predicted. What is needed is for the followers of moderate Islam to condemn jihadism in no uncertain terms. Only they can put the genie of jihadism back in the bottle.
(Dr. Bhamy V Shenoy, convener of Mysore Grahakara Parishat, an NGO, and an international oil expert. He can be reached at bhamysuman@hotmail.com)
They need to to a heck of a lot more than condemn them.
As a Moslem, I do not necessarily support terrorism and murder in the name of Allah but...
Stop Jihad Now!
I’ll give them the benefit of a doubt when they declare and conduct an outright war on terrorism. Until then their words are just air molecules rattling around.
Yah right. That's like asking a Christian to forget about Jesus.
Jihad is compulsory on ALL Muslims.
Qur'an:2:216 "Jihad (holy fighting in Allah's Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims), though you dislike it. But it is possible that you dislike a thing which is good for you, and like a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knows, and you know not." [Another translation reads:] "Warfare is ordained for you."
Bukhari:V1B2N25 "Allah's Apostle was asked, 'What is the best deed?' He replied, 'To believe in Allah and His Apostle Muhammad.' The questioner then asked, 'What is the next best in goodness?' He replied, 'To participate in Jihad, religious fighting in Allah's Cause.'
Qur'an:33:22 "Among the Believers are men who have been true to their covenant with Allah and have gone out for Jihad (holy fighting). Some have completed their vow to extreme and have been martyred fighting and dying in His Cause, and some are waiting, prepared for death in battle." [quotation marks are Korans, not mine]
Bukhari:V4B53N412 "Allah's Apostle said on the day of the conquest of Mecca, 'There is no migration now, only Jihad, holy battle. And when you are called for Jihad, you should come out at once.'"
Bukhari:V4B52N311 "Allah's Apostle said, 'There is no migration after the Conquest of Mecca, but only Jihad. When you are called by the Muslim ruler for Jihad fighting, you should go forth immediately, responding to the call.'"
Qur'an:47:4 "So, when you clash with the unbelieving Infidels in battle (fighting Jihad in Allah's Cause), smite their necks until you overpower them, killing and wounding many of them. At length, when you have thoroughly subdued them, bind them firmly, making (them) captives. Thereafter either generosity or ransom (them based upon what benefits Islam) until the war lays down its burdens. Thus are you commanded by Allah to continue carrying out Jihad against the unbelieving infidels until they submit to Islam."
Anyone who claims Jihad does not mean "holy fighting" for the advancement of Islam, and that "moderate" Muslims are somehow excempt or are not obligated to practice jihad, is a LIAR, and does not understand the cult, and what it's Koran and A hadith (Mohammads sayings) instruct.
I’ve met moderate muslims, but their is no such thing as moderate Islam
IF there is such a thing as ‘moderate Islam’ they are the cowewring redheaded stepchild for the mainstream blood-lusting Islam.
Did you forget your sarcasm tag?
They won’t ... they’re waiting to support the side that wins.
Not shown on Asmerican TV news stations. The traitorous media is afraid the sheeple will learn what Islam really is.
I’m waiting for Americans to condemn socialism unequivocally.
I would go so far as to say that there are moderate muslims but they aren’t really what I would call “practicing” muslims. They don’t go to mosque or try to practice the five pillars. Basically muslims who don’t live among other muslims and aren’t controlled by the muslim community.
But then they’d have nuthin. That’s like asking an eskimo to give up blubber.
Good d@mn luck!
Bloody savages, all of them!
):^(
That is impossible. It would require 90% of the Koran to be shredded and rewritten. Taking all violence, discrimination, hatred, slavery, woman beating, and pedophilia out of the Koran and hadith would basically leave a Koran with two covers and nothing in between, as well as most of the sayings of Mohammad destroyed.
Islam would cease to exist. (as it should)
Would they quit with this “moderate islam” crap already? There is nothing moderate about the thing.
> Moderate Islam Needs to Condemn Jihadism Unequivocally
There may be moderate Moslems, but there is no moderate Islam.
In order to condemn Jihadism, they will have to condemn Mohammed, who was the inventor of it.
The world has waited CENTURIES for ‘moderate’ Islam to prevail.
There is only one Islam, the one that has terrorized the planet for centuries, the one we’re seeing now.
Expecting any Muslim to condemn the basic tenets of their
‘religion’( hate, death, world domination) is like expecting a cannibal to say eating people is evil.
There ARE no vegetarian cannibals.
There ARE no ‘good’ Muslims.
One does not belong to an evil cult and call oneself good.
Ah- but this is the sick, cowardly culture that says ‘ He’s a mass murderer, but he’s nice to his mama and was always a good boy.’
Today, Hitler would be a ‘good, patriotic, guy with anger isses and a little problem with Semetic people and ovens.’
Not true. "Good" Muslims or "devout" Muslims obey and follow all the pillars of Islam, Jihad being the second in importance next to believing in Allah and His Apostle Muhammad.
This is a good article while he is analyzing the problem. In terms of describing the problem he is clear-headed.
His description of the delay on the part of many in recognizing jihadism for what it is, is correct. I like his choice of the term IJT, International Jihadi Terrorism. Its as good a handle as any. He sees why natural sympathies early on for the Chechen revolt was wrong-headed, and why similar sympathies for the Uighars is likewise wrong-headed whatever we think about the Chinese government. Its similar to revolutions during the Cold War. Feel free to sympathise with them right up to the moment the Communists get involved; at that point they are beyond the pale. In the current era once the jihadis get involved in any conflict you pick the other side however distasteful they are.
He’s fine right up to the moment he reaches for a solution. Moderate muslims have to speak up, he says. Sure, fine. Thats boilerplate that has proven itself meaningless. The moderate muslim can’t speak up. Where he exists, he has to fight and we have to help him fight as we are doing in Iraq, and Afghanstan. Where we don’t help him fight he faces death just for speaking.
Which is the problem with the writer’s plea for a peaceful approach. Killing jihadis just produces more, he says. It does, if you don’t replace it with something else, which is the only way forward. You have to offer civilization as the alternative, and then you have to be prepared to defend it, and defend those muslims who have risked their lives for it.
Civilization is the alternative to jihadism. And it requires defending. If you can’t do that you’re just blowing smoke. You’re just kidding yourself. And you’ll stand by and watch the jihadis slaughter everyone who ever trusted you.
November 9, 2008.Mukhlas, Samudra and Amrozi were executed on their prison island at midnight, local time. 
Imam Samudra's funeral. Muslim hero...allah will reward him...killing 202 people, 164 of whom were foreign nationals, and 38 Indonesian citizens. A further 209 people were injured.
Islam rises and falls on the character of its 'prophet' - a terrorist, whom muslims are taught to believe must be emulated as he was 'the most perfect, divine man who ever lived.'
You know very well what definition of ‘good’ we’re talking about here. Moderate, harmless, tolerant of others, non-jihadists.
The terrorists we’re seeing ARE ‘good’ Muslims. They are following their ‘religion’ exactly as it is written.
Islam is evil.
The Koran is evil.
What else can those who believe in evil be called?
jihadists arte like excrement. Their only benefit would be derived from their removal!
“According to the Economist, Pakistan is the most dangerous place in the world because of the combination of two weapons of mass destruction - atom bomb and the rule of jihadi ideology.”
And with Pakistan having just surrendered one of its regions to the Taliban, how long will it be before the Taliban takes over the whole country and the bomb? Especially with Obama asleep at the wheel!
Has anyone pointed out to Doctor Balmy that this would require Muslims to abandon the Koran?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.