What is a RAND Muslim?

Civil Democratic Islam

Partners, Resources, and Strategies


By: Cheryl Benard

Contemporary Islam is struggling within itself over its values, identity, and place in the world, with rivals contending for spiritual and political dominance--as well as with the "outside" world. In Western eyes, the ideal Islamic community would be democratic, economically viable, politically stable, and socially progressive and would follow the rules and norms of international conduct. But as the international community strives to understand all this and, possibly, influence the outcome, the best approaches--or even whom to approach--are not always easy to determine. As an aid to the process, this report compares and contrasts the subgroups within Islam. The author recommends careful deliberation in deciding how to proceed, taking into account the symbolic weight of certain issues, the meaning likely to be assigned to any positions U.S. policymakers might take on these issues, the consequences for other Islamic actors, and the opportunity costs and possible unintended consequences. With all that in mind, the author then makes her own series of recommendations.


RAND | Monograph/Reports | Civil Democratic Islam: Partners, Resources, and Strategies
Source: www.rand.org
Islam's own internal struggles make it difficult for outsiders to understand the actors and the issues. The author sheds light on these issues and suggests ways for the international community to cope.

Review: Civil Democratic Islam By Cheryl Benard

Since September 11, many authors, scholars, policymakers and researchers have contemplated the role of Islam in Muslim societies. At a time when the geostrategic, cultural, and sociological frontiers of the Muslim world are being redrawn in Washington and London , a strategy for the West to counter Muslim “fundamentalism” by supporting Muslim “moderates” has been drawn up in a report funded partially by a conservative American think-tank. The report, entitled Civil Democratic Islam: partners, resources, strategies, was drawn up by the US-based RAND corporation, with financial support from the conservative Smith Richardson Foundation, a trust fund that annually hands out in excess of $100 million to research organizations and universities.[1]
The report is the latest in a long series of policy papers dedicated to further the military, economic, and cultural onslaught of the West on the Muslim World. In a briefing given in summer 2002 to a top Pentagon advisory board, former RAND analyst Laurent Murawiec described Saudi Arabia as the “kernel of evil, the prime mover, the most dangerous opponent” to US interests in the Middle East . He argued that Washington should demand that Saudi Arabia stop supporting “terrorism” or face seizures of its oil fields and its financial assets in the US . Murawiec urged a multi-stage imperial campaign in the Middle East, beginning with Iraq (“the tactical pivot”), continuing to Saudi Arabia (“the strategic pivot”) and finally to Egypt (“the prize”).[2]

Civil Democratic Islam was written by Cheryl Benard, a sociologist who had previously published feminist-themed novels (including Moghul Buffet and Veiled Courage) that ridicule religious figures and portray Muslim women as oppressed individuals living under the rule of totalitarian megalomaniac male patriarchs.

Despite the objection of millions of Muslim women to the controversial French ban on the hijab, or Islamic headscarf, in French public schools, Benard insisted in a recent commentary for the Christian Science Monitor that the new law is a positive push for women’s rights: “Throughout the Islamic world the hijab is often something girls and women wear because they are forced to – a symbol of restriction and intimidation.” Although a sociologist, Benard positions herself as an authority on Islamic jurisprudence, citing among other things a claim made by an unknown Egyptian author who contends that “the head scarf is not an obligation, but derives from an erroneous reading of the Koran.”[3]



"Muslims are compartmentalized depending on their degree of affinity for Western values and concepts."



Interesting to note is that Cheryl Benard is married to Zalmay Khalilzad, who is currently a Special Assistant to President Bush and the chief National Security Council (NSC) official for the Persian Gulf and Southwest Asia . Khalilzad is known to be probably the first and only Afghan-American neoconservative, with clearly hawkish views.[4] During the 1980s he was able to secure himself a permanent position in the State Department’s Policy Planning Council, working under neoconservative mastermind Paul Wolfowitz. He then served as undersecretary of defense in the first Bush administration during its war on Iraq in 1991. After the 2000 election, Vice President Dick Cheney selected Khalilzad to head Bush Jr.’s transition team for defense issues.

Khalilzad is also known to have been involved in long-running US efforts to obtain direct access to oil and gas reserves in Central Asia, serving as an energy consultant to Chevron and as an advisor to US oil giant Unocal, which was interested in building a gas pipeline between Turkmenistan and Pakistan via Afghanistan. He is also known to have courted anti-Saddam and anti-Taliban groups both prior to and after the US invasion of both countries.



In Civil Democratic Islam, Cheryl Benard makes her intentions clear. The goal is the construction of a new, passive, Islamic discourse tailored to suit the West’s post-September 11 agenda. Elaborated in the most explicit of terms, the author leaves no doubts concerning the grandiose ambitions of her project: “It is no easy matter to transform a major world religion. If ‘nation-building’ is a daunting task, ‘religion-building’ is immeasurably more daunting and complex,” [emphasis added].[5]



Benard explains that Islam’s current crisis has two main components: “a failure to thrive and a loss of connection to the global mainstream.” From the author’s perspective, the Muslim world is civilization’s problem-child, “fallen out of step with contemporary global culture.” Again, the author utilizes convenient classical Orientalist discourse to stereotypically depict Muslims. Once more, Muslims are the “backward barbarians” whose lifestyle is antithetical to that of the West. If the modern West is dynamic, the world of Islam is stagnant. While the West honors human life and freedom, Islam is plagued by despots, terrorists, endless “hadith wars,”[6] and fanatic explosive-wearing youth who glorify death and encourage nihilistic concepts such as martyrdom. No reference is made to the West’s support for totalitarian secular regimes, Israel ’s endless pogroms against the Palestinians and ethnic cleansing perpetrated against Muslims in Eastern Europe and Chechnya , and of course, the US ’ carpet bombing of Afghanistan and Iraq is conveniently neglected.



The report suggests forging close ties with forces in the Islamic world that are more amicable to the West, identifying four essential ideological positions in Muslim societies vying for control over Muslim hearts and minds:

Fundamentalists who “reject democratic values and contemporary Western culture”
Traditionalists who “are suspicious of modernity, innovation and change”
Modernists who “want the Islamic world to become part of global modernity”
Secularists who “want the Islamic world to accept a separation of religion and state.”
The report says that the modernists and secularists are closest to the West, but are generally in a weaker position than the other groups, lacking money, infrastructure and a political platform. It suggests a strategy of supporting modernists and secularists by publishing their work at subsidized costs, encouraging them to write for mass audiences, getting their views into the Islamic school curriculum and helping them in the new media world that is dominated by fundamentalists and traditionalists.



It further recommends that traditionalists should be supported against fundamentalists, and that the US should pursue a policy of “encouraging disagreements” between the two. Another suggested strategy would be to confront and oppose fundamentalists by challenging their interpretation of Islam and exposing their links with illegal groups and activities. Furthermore, Benard urges the strengthening of Sufism, since it represents a more passive and tolerant interpretation of Islam.



What is striking to note is that in almost all areas of the report, Muslims are not dealt with as reasonable individuals with legitimate fears, but are conveniently compartmentalized into subgroups for analysis depending on their degree of affinity for Western values and concepts. Those subgroups are to be used as pawns to further the interests of US hegemony – a policy of “divide and rule.”



Rather than facing contemporary problems of marginalization and subordination imposed by despotic Western-supported regimes or by imperialist designs on their region, Muslims are portrayed as people who are out of touch with reality, as rigid ideologues who are endlessly engaged in age-old theological debates.

From the author’s perspective, Muslim violence and protest is not a reaction to injustice, but is simply an expression of illiterate, uneducated masses being led by well-funded, disciplined fundamentalists. The fundamentalists, we are told, are the real danger, because they advocate an “aggressive, expansionist version of Islam that does not shy away from violence… Their unit of reference is the not the nation-state or the ethnic group, but the Muslim community, the Ummah; gaining control of particular Islamic countries can be a step on this path but is not the main goal.”[7] Ironically, if using violence to achieve political goals and gain control of particular countries implies fundamentalism, then US foreign policy in the Muslim world is unbridled radicalism par excellence.



"Benard’s suggestions are Machiavellian, seeking to enforce Western hegemony."



Surprisingly, the author admits that even “many important secularists in the Islamic World are unfriendly or even extremely hostile to us [the West] on other grounds.”[8] Again, the main reason for their hatred is not the ugly reality of the US’ policies in the Middle East, but rather misguided ways of thinking manifested in “leftist ideologies, anti-Americanism and aggressive nationalism.”[9] Benard’s insinuations are clear: When Muslims hate or use violence, it is because they are inherently radical or misguided, but when the modern, enlightened, benevolent West uses the same tactics or espouses similar objectives, its behavior is either conveniently disregarded or immediately rationalized.

Ultimately, Benard’s suggestions are nothing more than a Machiavellian manifesto that seeks to enforce Western hegemony and cultural imperialism through an archaic policy of “divide and rule.” The type of Islam that Benard espouses is a passive and weak Islam that can be easily penetrated and hence reformulated to suit the West’s agenda.



The role model for Benard is Turkey , whom she regards as “one of the Islamic world’s most successful states” because of its policy of “aggressive secularism.”[10] The author seems to forget that despite decades of “aggressive secularism,” two Islamist governments were elected by the Turks in recent years, the last of which refused to grant the US access to Turkey ’s military facilities prior to the war on Iraq .



Not only does the author want to deform some of the basic aspects of Islam – issues such as jihad, shahada (martyrdom), and hijab – but she goes as far as to question the authenticity of the Qu’ran itself, when she contemptibly suggests that “it is widely accepted that at least two suras were lost” from the Muslim holy book.[11] To make nefarious suggestions about the Qu’ran, without any citation or evidence, is not only repugnant, but an exercise in poor scholarship. One suspects that if similar statements were made about Jewish scripture the author would have been prosecuted for anti-Semitism.



Benard’s policy recommendations, despite their virulent anti-Islamic undertones and their divisive implications for the Muslim world, are nothing new in the political lexicon of US foreign policymaking. Two decades ago, while Shi’ite fundamentalism emanating from Iran was considered the biggest threat to Western civilization, hundreds of Sunni Muslim “radicals” were being armed by the United States to wage jihad against the Soviet Union. The operating assumption at the time was that the Wahhabi brand of Sunni Islam was innately conservative and therefore a natural ally of the US against the communists and the radical Shi’ites.[12] Today, Sufis, modernists, secularists and some Shi’ites are being seen as a counterweight to Sunni fundamentalists. Indeed, history repeats itself in twisted ways.



Kareem M. Kamel is an Egyptian freelance writer based in Cairo, Egypt . He has an MA in International Relations and is specialized in security studies, decision- making, nuclear politics, Middle East politics and the politics of Islam. He is currently assistant to the Political Science Department at the American University in Cairo .

Footnotes:

Paul Reynolds, “Preventing a ‘Clash of Civilization’” BBC News March 29, 2004
Jack Shafer, “The Power Point that Rocked the Pentagon,” Slate MSN August 7, 2002
Cheryl Benard, “French Tussle Over Muslim Head Scarf is Positive Push for Women’s Rights,” RAND January 5, 2004
“ Iran Expert Khalilzadeh to Take Over US Policy in Near East ,” Iran Expert January 7, 2002
Cheryl Benard, “Civil Democratic Islam: Partners, Resources and Strategies,” RAND
See “Appendix A: Hadith Wars” where the author refers to the manipulation of prophetic sayings as “a tactical tool” to be used in winning debates against fundamentalists. Ibid., pp.49-55
Ibid., 5
Ibid., 25
Ibid., 25
Ibid., 26
Ibid., 24
Tony Karon, “The Shi’ites the U.S. Thinks it Knows,” Time.com March 11th, 2004
http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1716/

December 5, 2008

Washington Arrogance Has Fomented a Muslim Revolution

by Paul Craig Roberts

"In a government of law, the existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy." Justice Louis Brandeis Is Pakistan responsible for the Mumbai attack in India? No. Is India’s repression of its Muslim minority responsible? No. Is the United States government responsible? Yes. The attack on Mumbai required radicalized Muslims. Radicalized Muslims resulted from the US overthrowing the elected government in Iran and imposing the Shah; from the US stationing troops in Saudi Arabia; from the US invading and attempting to occupy Afghanistan and Iraq, bombing weddings, funerals, and children’s soccer games; from the US violating international and US law by torturing its Muslim victims; from the US enlisting Pakistan in its war against the Taliban; from the US violating Pakistan’s sovereignty by conducting military operations on Pakistani territory, killing Pakistani civilians; from the US government supporting a half century of Israeli ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their lands, towns and villages; from the assault of American culture on Muslim values; from the US purchasing the government of Egypt to act as its puppet; from US arrogance that America is the supreme arbiter of morality. As Justice Brandeis said, crime is contagious. Government teaches by example, and America’s example is lawlessness. America’s brutal crimes against the Muslim world have invited every Muslim to become a law unto himself – a revolutionary. It is not terror that Washington confronts but revolution. By illegal, uncivilized and undiplomatic behavior, the US has stirred Muslim peoples from their long slumber as serfs of Western colonial powers. Some Muslims have had all that they can take, and their fury drives them to rouse a billion of their fellows to throw off the yoke of foreign hegemony. The arrogant incompetence of American governments brought this conflict to the American people and inflicted it upon the world. By destabilizing Pakistan, the US lost a puppet and created an opportunity for Muslim revolutionaries to exploit. By enraging India against Pakistan, the Mumbai attack has created new problems for Pakistan that will focus that government’s attention away from combating Taliban sanctuaries on Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan. If the US picks up the slack, it will have invaded yet another country and become trapped in a larger quagmire. Having fomented terrorism, the American government now pretends to be the innocent victim, just as Israelis, having brought about terrorism by driving Palestinians from their homes and villages, pretend to be innocent victims. Today European members of NATO, an outdated organization formed to defend Western Europe against Soviet invasion, are sacrificing the lives of their soldiers fighting the American Empire’s war in Afghanistan. If America continues to have its way, Europeans will soon be dying in Ukraine, Georgia, and Iran. The American government, which preaches "freedom and democracy" has in the 21st century gone to great extremes to stamp out the US Constitution and the civil liberties that it guarantees. The US government has repudiated the Geneva Conventions and the prohibitions in US statutory law against torture. The US government has set aside habeas corpus, the ancient legal principle guaranteed by the US Constitution that prohibits governments from holding people in prisons without presenting charges. The US government has broken the laws of other nations by kidnapping foreign citizens and transporting them to other lands to be tortured. These massive crimes have been justified in the name of the "war on terror." In truth, America’s crimes foment revolution. It was the US government that created the "war on terror," which has been used to murder and dispossess millions of Iraqis and Afghans, to imprison US citizens as if they were medieval serfs, and to squander three trillion dollars for the sole purpose of enriching Halliburton and the military-security complex. Investigative journalist John Pilger has shown that the so-called "moral superiority of the West" is a hoax designed to shield from view the self-seeking West’s crimes against humanity. Obama promised change from this destructive behavior, but how does change arise when the most arrogant woman on earth is appointed Secretary of State and the rest of the new government is staffed with tried-and-true Likudniks and servants of the military-security complex? The change over which Obama will preside will have no American victories. The change will come from America as a failed state, from the dollar dethroned as reserve currency, from America repudiated by its allies and paid puppets, from massive unemployment for which there is no solution, from hyperinflation that produces anarchy. The day might arrive when Washington is faced with revolution at home as well as abroad.

Shaykh Husayn bin Mahmud: This is al-Qa’idah

Shaykh Husayn bin Mahmud: This is al-Qa’idah September 10, 2009

Posted by admin in : Jihad, Knowledge, True Shuyookh , trackback

I am posting this article here because we need more open minded articles that give more exposure to people, ideologues and groups that usually don’t have much exposure due to the media efforts to defame them.

In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate

” This is Al-Qaeda (1) “

Thanks be to God: the Determiner of fates, the Creator of tall and heavy mountains, He who restores life and ends it, the Living, the Permanent, with all His majesty. May perfection, prayers, and peace upon the teacher of people, the one who is satisfied with all of destiny with its good and bad.

” Before I begin discussing the title, I would like to remind the people about a certain pillar of Islam. He was a continuation of the predecessors, and an expert of the age. Perhaps these words will move a heart and excite a soul in such a way that the chest will open and pray for the mercy and forgiveness of the Shaykh of Muslims, Abdullah bin Abd-al-Rahman al-Jibrin (may God grant him mercy and rest his soul). Many youths do not know the extent of the nation`s loss in this great cleric. In the recent past, if something happened, Muslims would say: `Let us await the opinion of the two shaykhs, Ibn-Baz and Ibn-Uthaimayn.` When Ibn-Baz died, they would say: `Let us await what Ibn-Jibrin will say.` The massive calamity that has befallen the nation is that there are no clerics today to refer to in this way. He who has mingled with religious circles knows the dangers (and benefits) of gathering the words of the nation and uniting it. The loss of Shaykh Ibn-Jibrin (may God rest his soul) is a loss of a piece of the religious structure, not just an expert. I do not think that Al Sa`ud (the Saudi Royal Family) were comfortable after the death of this great cleric. Shaykh Ibn-Uthaimayn and Shaykh Ibn-Jibrin were feared the most. The rest of their peers did not carry the same weight in religious circles. Shaykh Ibn-Baz (may God rest his soul) was more lenient than his two brothers. They did not fear him like they feared the others. Sultan Bin Abd-al-Aziz used to deliberately insult Shaykh Bin-Baz and keep him waiting at his door for long periods of time. The shaykh (may God rest his soul) only went to him about the needs of Muslims. He was patient (may God rest his soul). If one said that the last cleric and shaykh in the (Arabian) Peninsula who told the truth and only feared God has died, he would be saying the truth. Today the ruler is happy on his throne. Today the hypocrites and apostates are happy and breathing a sigh of relief. Today Muslims are mourning. Muslims today must be honest in their prayers to God. They should ask the Almighty, using His great names and attributes, to compensate the nation with a divine cleric who speaks the truth, whatever it might be, to the face to anyone, and only fear God in this. O God, have mercy on Shaykh Ibn-Jibrin. Forgive him and reward him with the best reward for a cleric of the nation of your prophet (prayers and peace of God be upon him). “Back to the topic:

“This is a simple article (perhaps small) but correct in meaning. It shows the reality of the nation`s condition today, the truth about what the rulers are calling for, and the truth about what is wanted from the sons of this nation. These rulers have exhausted all efforts and abilities in order to kill what is left of religion in the hearts of the public. They have used the media and other means to remove all the pride, eliminate all the manhood, and mutate what is left of the brain to create a subservient generation that lives on the margins and is sustained by scraps. This is a generation that we cannot say knows virtue or rejects vice. It is a generation that denies virtue and pursues vice. The rulers today are preparing the nation for a scheme that was devised in the dark: the Christian occupation of Muslim countries, once again. It is an occupation in the full meaning of the word: of hearts, minds, desires, countries, subjects, chastity, and wealth. This is not possible as long as religion is still in the soul and people promote virtue and reject vice. It will not be possible while the sword of jihad is still raised and not sheathed. Those who see this rabid campaign against religion and morals in the media, the curricula in the schools, and the monitoring of the clerics of Shari`ah, know the goals of these rulers and those who are behind them quite clearly.

“It has been ten years since the eighth Crusade against Islam. It is the war that the people of jihad have fought, headed by the mujahidin of Afghanistan. Despite this, there are still questions regarding the truth about Al-Qaeda and its ideology. Is it an independent organization, or is it under some umbrella group? Many brothers have written me asking for an article about the creed of Al-Qaeda. After all this time, all that has been said, and all the actions and sacrifices, how can people still not know the truth about the people of jihad in Iraq, Afghanistan, the Arabian Peninsula, Somalia, the Arab Maghreb and Chechnya? There are many sensitive questions about this matter, and what is here is meant to be read by everyone so that they can now know the clear, hidden but announced, truth. May the reader forgive us if we do not do well in presenting the concepts, for the most difficult thing to do is to make clear what is already clear.

” The Truth About the Term `Al-Qaeda` “During the first Afghan jihad against the Christian Soviets, the mujahidin descended on Afghanistan from everywhere. The natural destination was the `Services Office` established by Shaykh Abdullah Azzam (may God rest his soul), or the `Bayt al-Ansar (House of the Supporters)` later established by Shaykh Usama (Bin Ladin). This House would receive the youths, take their personal information, monitor their phases of development in the training centers, and then record the names of the fronts they were fighting jihad in. Because of the high number of volunteers, a separate department was created to preserve and organize these records and oversee the `Bayt al-Ansar` and the training camps. The youths agreed to call this process (Bayt al-ansar, the training centers, and the record-keeping) Al-Qaeda because this agency was the first place the mujahidin went to. This naming was not an anythinf new, for it was similar to the military base of any regular army. It differed in that it was the base of a mujahid Islamic army in the age of hesitation and non-participation in jihad. In the Medina of the time of the messenger of God (prayers and peace of God be upon him) and that of the the two shaykhs, as well as during part of the rule of Uthman (may God bless them all), there was a base from which the Muslims would launch to conquer the earth. The Arab mujahidin in Afghanistan were called the `Al-Ansar,` the `mujahidin,` or the `muhajirun` (immigrants). The term `Al-Qaeda` did not exist until the conquest of Kabul. Perhaps the Americans found some Bayt al-Ansar records, or pehaps some spies told them about Al-Qaeda, whereupon they took this name and made it famous. This is the origin of the word `Al-Qaeda,` which was used by the US media to divert people away from the truth that these people are in fact mujahidin for the sake of God (and so separate them from the rest of the nation). The Arab and international media quickly followed suit.

” The Creed and Ideology of Al-Qaeda “Talking about the creed and ideology of Al-Qaeda is to talk about Islam itself. A lot of people are not able to understand this simple and easy truth. Some might reject this truth or find it strange, because it is so simple. For ten years the enemy media has portrayed a dark, mysterious Al-Qaeda. It has tried, with all its magic, to widen the gulf between Islam and the mu jahidin. The truth is, the media has succeeded in mutating Muslims` ideas of Islam. It has told the people: `Al-Qaeda goes against these mutated ideas.` The media has ruined the great pillars and foundations of religion (the notion of jihad, the creed of loyalty and disavowal, and the truth of belief and monotheism). Jihad has become a source for discord and has been made harmful to the nation and its interests. They marginalized jihad after they severed many of its proofs. There is no jihad today except in Palestine, and no jihad in Palestine except with the approval of the `legitimate Palestinian leadership` Fatah (and Fatah is under the command of the Jews). So in reality, there is no jihad in Palestine except with the approval of the Jews. Anyone who goes against this is a deviant, extremist terrorist who does not know the meaning of legitimate jihad.

“As for the creed of loyalty and disavowal, it has been transformed from a religious to nationalist creed. Loyalty and disavowal are now tied to nationality and ethnicity. Loyalty to God Almighty has become loyalty to rulers and governments. Armies only know their kings or presidents, and when the ruler or government changes, so does their loyalty. People are loyal to the country, whether the government is Muslim or infidel. What is even stranger is the loyalty of many Muslim youths, who should be guiding humanity. Instead they play on soccer teams, many of which are in the lands of infidels. They go sports tournaments where they love, hate, go fanatical. You find many youths proudly pinning up pictures of Christian soccer players in their rooms and on their chests. They wear shirts with the names of those infidels, and then go into houses of God to pray with these shirts on. Many of these shirts have the symbols of these European clubs, which include crosses. What calamity is greater than Muslim youths willingly carrying crosses on their chests? If we could see how much these governments in our countries spend to market these games in newspapers and magazines and broadcast them on the screens, we would realize the magnitude of their conspiracies against the future of Islam. This is at a time when many Muslims are dying of thirst and hunger in refugee camps across the world.

“As for belief and monotheism, it is embarrassing. True belief has been separated from the heart, and you only find wicked `Irja` (Muslim school of thought where punishment and reward are only in the afterlife and a proclamation of faith is sufficient, deeds notwithstanding). Deeds are no longer part of faith. No matter what a person does and how many acts of non-belief he commits, he is still a Muslim as long as he proclaims `There is no god but God.` I wish people would have been satisfied with just this, but they have gone even further and canceled the laws of God. They set up constitutions and laws that go against His commands, and followed the priests and turbaned rabbis who allow what is forbidden and forbid what is allowed. The forefathers used to say that he who withholds bread has become an apostate, and he who allows a drop of alcohol has become an apostate. They have allowed usury, promiscuity, alcohol, gambling, non-belief, polytheism, support of God`s enemies, enmity to the supporters of God, and rule by other than what God has sent. They have forbidden adherence to the commands of Islam, the call to God, support for the people of Islam, and fighting and inciting jihad for the sake of God. He who wants proof of this, let them grab a musical instrument in any Arab country and play, in public, whatever they want, day and night, and no one will stand in their way. However, if he holds a Koran or a book about the Hadith and reads in one of God`s homes, you will find intelligence agents gathering around him like flies and taking him for interrogation and questioning. He will be tortured, threatened, and violently warned against going back to such a dangerous thing.

“Recently, slogans have spread among Muslims that show the extent of the conspiracy against Islam. Among th ese slogans are: freedom of religion, the brotherhood of humanity, and equality in rights and responsibilities among the people. The call to these slogans is led by Arab rules, headed by the betrayer of the Two Holy Mosques (Saudi King) Abdullah bin Abd-al-Aziz. If we give him the benefit of the doubt, we might say that he is just an Arab who does not know the truth of these slogans. But what about those who know and do not reject? `Liberty, fraternity, and equality` are old Masonic slogans that infiltrated Europe in order to take Jews from their bitter condition to the very top of the Christian countries (who used to prefer the Devil to these brothers of monkeys). Overnight, Jews became the victims of historical and religious persecution. They won the friendship and sympathy of Christians and rode on their backs, the way donkeys are ridden, and then proceeded to control their economy, media, and governments.

“Al-Qaeda for some means `extremist Islam,` `fundamentalist Islam,` `violent Islam,` the `Islam of bombs and terrorism,` the `anti-democratic Islam,` the `personal freedom-taking Islam,` the `Islam that cannot coexist with the other,` and the `dark, shadowy, rigid Islam.` Why? Because it went against the notions of peace, brotherhood, justice, equality, peaceful coexistence, national interests, inter-religious dialogue and civilization. It wanted to return Muslims to their previous state of loyalty to religion and disavowal of infidels and polytheists. But then again, these wretched notions are not suitable for the twenty first century. If we look at the origins of these statements and know the goals behind them, we realize the magnitude of the trickery and wickedness that many Muslims have fallen victim to. Here is Barack Obama, the Christian, saying that he is willing to hold talks with the `non-extremist` elements of the Taliban. As for the extremists, those who sever hands and stone people, they cannot be talked to. Extremists to them are those who uphold religious punishments, do not allow prostitution, vice, promiscuity, or proselytizing. A look at the report by the Rand Corporation and other institutions makes clear the truth of these terms used by Western and Arab media. Any research into Al-Qaeda literature will yield nothing. There is no written creed for Al-Qaeda or any recorded ideology. There are only personal efforts in some theological issues (upon which the mujahidin rely) from Muslim clerics across the world. Not writing down an ideology or creed is not the result of inability or ignorance, it is wisdom, for the true ideology of every Muslim is written and protected by God. There is no need to write out a separate ideology. Many previous clerics have already written about correct Muslim ideology and the ideology of the mujahidin. Based on this, it is evident that Al-Qaeda is not a group in the normal sense of the word. It is part of the general Muslim nation. No one can separate it from the body of the nation. The media, governments, and wicked clerics have tried to call the mujahidin all kinds of names in order to separate them from the body of the nation. They have called them `terrorists,` `a deviant sect,` `zealots,` `the people of bombings and destruction,` `the people of violence`, `secessionists,` `the people of takfir,` and other names that have been shattered on the rigid rock of truth (with the grace and blessings of God). The ideology of Al-Qaeda is the Koran, and then Sunnah. It is built according to the understanding of the nation`s forefathers. This is the Islam we know. The creed of Al-Qaeda is what is in the Koran and the correct Sunnah according to the understanding of the forefathers of the nation. This is the creed that we believe in. Unlike other groups, Al-Qaeda does not have an ideologue. There is the Koran, Sunnah and certain clerics who strive to understand this wide spectrum of texts. Clerics and seekers of knowledge use the writings of the nation`s clerics (old and new) without regard to the cleric`s theological affiliations, country, or group allegiance s. As for the people of innovation, they are not considered at all. When something is proved by religious evidence, it becomes an ideology and creed of Al-Qaeda.

“Some people affiliate Al-Qaeda to Wahhabism, and this is a great mistake. Many mujahidin brothers do not know Muhammad bin Abd-al-Wahab. They follow Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Abd-al-Mutalib al-Hashimi al-Qurashi, the messenger of God (prayers and peace of God ber upon him). Some people link Al-Qaeda to Salafism. It is like the above if they mean Salafism in its narrow context. If they mean that they follow the forefathers of this nation (the prophet (prayers and peace of God be upon him), the companions, and the followers), then this is correct, and he who is not like this is has no part in Islam. Some ignorant people affiliate Al-Qaeda to Shaykh Sayyid Qutb or Abu al-A`la al-Mawdudi and claim that Al-Qaeda is a continuation of the Egyptian jihadist group. These are incorrect assumptions. They seek to link Al-Qaeda to this person or that group so they can try to base it on the thinking of that person or group. They cannot and will not be able to do this, for the men of Al-Qaeda are wiser than they think. Sayid Qutb and Al-Mawdudi are among the good clerics of the nation, but they are human. They can be right, but they also make mistakes. The errors of these two men are drenched in the sea of their good deeds. Al-Qaeda takes from them what conforms to the truth (and this is a lot) and leaves what goes against it (like the rest of the clerics of the nation). The proof of this is that Sayid Qutb (may God rest his soul) came mostly from the Al-Ash`ari ideolody, while Al-Qaeda leaders are Sunnis. Al-Mawdudi believes in defensive jihad only, and this is known by the mujahidin to be false.

“Perhaps the clear difference between Al-Qaeda and other Muslims is that Al-Qaeda has announced its rejection of political enforcement. This is heart of the difference between Al-Qaeda members and other Muslims. By political enforcement we mean surrender to reality. When someone says that the state of the Jews (which is incorrectly and falsely called Israel) is a reality and that we must recognize it, you will find Al-Qaeda rejecting this political enforcement and announcing a revolution against this decrepit reality. They do not recognize it and work, with all their strength, to change it. When someone says that the nation is destined to have these traitors (the rulers) stifle it, change God`s laws, support the infidels, spread vice, steal the abilities of Muslims, and violate the honor of Muslim women, then the elements of Al-Qaeda will announce their complete rejection of this and work to change it. When some people say that Muslims cannot stand up to the US, the West, Russia, and their soldiers, Al-Qaida will shout at the top of their voice: `How oft, by Allah`s will, hath a small force vanquished a big one? Allah is with those who steadfastly persevere` (Partial Koranic verse, Al-Baqarah, 2:249). They do not stop like other people do, with mere talk, they carry arms to announce to the world the truth of this religious fact. Al-Qaeda is a revolution against this upside down reality. It is a total rejection of political enforcement. Its is a real victory for religious truths. It is an incitement for jihad for the sake of God with words, life, wealth, and the heart. It is a renunciation of everything that contradicts religious truth and divine promises.

“A researcher will not see, anywhere in the Muslim world, the truth of the Islamic creed of brotherhood as it is with Al-Qaeda. Here they are in Khurasan (Afghanistan) with their diverse citizenships and nationalities and with their different looks and ethnicities: the Adnani, the Qurashi, Hashimi, Qahtani Yemeni, Shami, Egyptian, Iraqi, Maghribi, Mashriqi…the northerner, the southerner, the black, the white, and the yellow. They have all pledged obedience to a Khurasani man. This is the Islamic relationship and political realization about the nature of religious obedience. It puts the intere sts of Islam before personal interests. It re-ignites how the first generation was like in cancelling anything that is not Islamic. This is the truth that is manifested in them and that is not present anywhere else. There you will find those who have pledged allegiance to people not from his country only hesitantly and without total acceptance. This is human nature in the absence of religious emotions. This is like friend of Musaylamah, who said: `The liar of Rabi`a is better for us than a harmful honest man.` If the religious feeling is gone, deviant philosophies appear, and this is what is prevalent in the world today. The people have, however, chosen a man who is honest in his call, faithful in his deeds…a mujahid for the sake of God. He sells his soul and world for his afterlife (we consider him so, but we do not presume over God). They have given him their spirits and hearts, as if they are saying: `The honest man of the Afghans is better for us than the lies of the Arabs.`

“The greatest and most visible beliefs that characterize the members of Al-Qaeda is that they are certain, without a doubt, of God`s promise. This certainty is nearly absent from most people of Islam, even most clerics. The men of Al-Qaeda are certain of God`s victory, just like people are certain that there is a dawn after night. The reason for this is God Almighty`s saying in his book: `Allah will certainly aid those who aid his (cause), for verily Allah is full of strength, exalted in might, (able to enforce His will)` (Koranic verse, Al-Hajj, 22:40). God has mentioned the conditions for this victory in the verse that follows it. God Almighty said: `(They are) those who, if we establish them in the land, establish regular prayer and give regular charity, enjoin the right and forbid wrong. With Allah rests the end (and decision) of (all) affairs) (Koranic verse, Al-Hajj, 22:41). Al-Zajaj wrote: `Allah will certainly aid those who aid his (cause).` Al-Sa`di (may God rest his soul) wrote in interpreting the verse: `He then mentioned the signs to those who will be made victorious and how they are identified. He who claims to support God and support his religion and does not have these characteristics is a liar. He said: `(They are) those who, if we establish them in the land…` Meaning, we gave it to them and made them its undisputed authority. `Establish regular prayer…` In its set times, with its conditions on Friday and in groups. `Give regular charity…` That they must personally give it to those who deserve it. `Enjoin the right…` And this includes the definition of what is right religiously and logically `Forbid wrong…` Meaning every wrong that is known, religiously and logically.`

“We assume and swear by the one and only God that the people of Islam will be victorious because they have been promised victory on account of the conditions they met during the rule of the Islamic Emirate. If the majority of the people of the earth gathered against them (and most people on earth are gathered against them now) they will not be defeated (God willing) because God is with them. He has promised them victory on account of the conditions they met when they controlled the land. The entire world testifies that they established prayers and that the mosques were filled with worshippers. They gave charity to the people who deserved it. They enjoined the right, forced people to adhere to the teachings of Islam, and implemented God`s law. They forbade what is wrong: theft, the violation of honor, and the trafficking of drugs. They demolished the Buddhist idols which were guarded for centuries by the Rejectionist (Shiite) Isma`ilis (sect). They shouted to the entire world: `And say: Truth has (now) arrived, and falsehood perished, for falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish` (Koranic verse, Al-Isra, 17:81). He who is like this will be victorious. This promise is from God, and is one of the greatest reasons the mujahidin are steadfast at the time when some fall and others stand in the middle of the road. A brother told me that he and his brothers complained to a senior cleric at the beginning of the US invasion of Afghanistan about the defeat of the Islamic Emirate and the loss of its state. This great cleric replied to them and said: `By the one and only God, time will not end before you see the US fall because of these Afghans. God gave them the land and they established prayer, gave charity, promoted virtue, and forbade vice. God will make those who support him victorious. God will make those who support him victorious. God will make those who support him victorious. Be patient and steadfast and support them. You might hate something while God has a lot of good in it.` His words (may God protect him) ended this way. These are the blessings of god, which He gives to whomever He wishes.

“Written by Husayn Bin Mahmud
“14 Sha`ban 1430 hijri (5 August 2009)

Anything NICE about America?

Information Clearing House Newsletter NewsYou Won't Find On CNN August 31, 2009 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The United States appear to be destined by Providence to plague America with misery in the name of liberty" Simón Bolívar (South american liberator, soldier and statesman , 1783-1830) = "America's entire war on terror is an exercise in imperialism. This may come as a shock to Americans, who don't like to think of their country as an empire. But what else can you call America's legions of soldiers, spooks and special forces straddling the globe?" : Michael Ignatieff, New York Times, Jul. 28, 2002 = "The truth is that neither British nor American imperialism was or is idealistic. It has always been driven by economic or strategic interests". Charley Reese = "Imperialism is an institution under which one nation asserts the right to seize the land or at least to control the government or resources of another people". -John T. Flynn = "We could not leave them to themselves - they were unfit for self-government - and they would soon have anarchy and misrule over there worse than Spain's was ... there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them". -U.S. President William McKinley, 1899, on the Filipinos = "I do not hesitate one second to state clearly and unmistakably: I belong to the American resistance movement which fights against American imperialism". - Paul Robeson = Number Of Iraqis Slaughtered Since The U.S. Invaded Iraq "1,339,771" www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq/iraqdeaths.html

Muslim Reminds the World that Muslims have been Subjected for Years