| Submit your comments on this article |
| Terror Networks |
| The Rebellion Within |
| 2008-05-29 |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #8 Taquiya? |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2008-05-29 19:27 |
| #7 One of the things I admire about you, Ptah, is that when you realize you were wrong you admit it openly. Not enough of us are capable of that. I haven't read the article yet, but Dr. Fadl's masterwork has been out for a bit. It elicited a mocking response from, I think, Zawahiri, who wondered how an Egyptian prisoner had access to a fax machine. It's been reported that others have wondered whether Dr. Fadl was forced to write this, or whether he wrote it just to get out of jail. So this has been getting fairly wide distribution amongst those Arabs capable of reading. Friday sermons no doubt remain unchanged for the nonce. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2008-05-29 12:57 |
| #6 I hope enough people read this and take to heart the fact that we, the US, did NOTHING to deserve the 9/11 attacks and the fact that years and years of phoney posturing by the jihadists blaming the US as the motiviator of their violence is morally, ethically and factually bankrupt. Nah, they'll just become America hating Marxists and get full scholarships at our universities were their views will be reinforced and sanctioned. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2008-05-29 12:22 |
| #5 well not many jihadis read the New Yorker (maybe they are frustrated because they don't get some of the cartoons)or get direct faxes from Asharq Al Awsat. how widely the views of Sayyid Imam al-Sharif, aka Dr. Fadl are distributed in the Umma depends on the broadcasting policies of Al J, etc. how widely these views are accepted will be based on the former and on the Friday sermons, the statements of the school deans, and the Kings/princes/dictators of the Arab world, among others. |
| Posted by: mhw 2008-05-29 12:19 |
| #4 What is most significant is that this long well written article is very critical of AQ, criticizes radical islam and brings into focus questions of how the religion of peace could advocate violence. It is even more significant that this is in the New Yorker, a bastion of liberal thought, and a widely read and highly respected publication. I would agree that Imam has stuck a knife into the phoney jibberish that is radical islam and the silly false fatwas that make no sense...calling for death to all Americans and ignoring the millions of Moslems in America.... Perhaps, just perhaps, AQ is going to finally be exposed to both the liberals and the Islamic community as a criminal organization whose only function is violence and extortion populated by sociopaths and boderline personalities..if not full blown pediphiles (given their appetite for raping boys and girls)or rank serial killers full of murky demons who use jihad to legitimatize their abberent tastes for rape, torture, beheadings and mulitation. I hope enough people read this and take to heart the fact that we, the US, did NOTHING to deserve the 9/11 attacks and the fact that years and years of phoney posturing by the jihadists blaming the US as the motiviator of their violence is morally, ethically and factually bankrupt. |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet of Texas 2008-05-29 12:07 |
| #3 You were right, although not for the right reasons, so I reserve the right to use BBQ sauce to help the crow I have to eat go down easier. I should correct the bolded portions to: "although not for the ultimately correct reasons". Although the ROEs were killing good people, I objected to them because I didn't think their use was going to generate any good will. I did not believe that the Chief theoretician for the Islamists would be giving us an opening by saying "Muslim ingratitude for infidel hospitality and kindness is a sin". They're having real problems trying to process Israeli restraint, but I think we should give this time, while pushing back and insisting on consistency in the palestinian issue as well. |
| Posted by: Ptah 2008-05-29 08:30 |
| #2 Wow. The more I read, the more I'm impressed. This stuff is BIG. The argument, in summary, is that the fatwas authorizing collateral muslim damage and betrayal of non-musllim trust are false and unislamic. The members of the Umma are not expendable. I am familiar with the passage which was used to justify muslim collateral damage, and it has to do with Muslim hostages being held by infidels who are making demands of the Muslim armies to withdraw. Mohammed, very properly in my view, pointed out that Allah judges him who wields the sword that kills the Muslim, not the one who "forced" the wielder to kill the muslim. The choice of killing the hostages when negotiations fail still lies with the hostage taker, not the ones rescuing the hostages. Threatening to kill hostages, and being determined to do so, does not transfer responsibility. Consistent application of this would result in a rational enemy, after capturing a Muslim town, releasing the women and children, but keeping the men, based on the knolwedge that Muslims would still attack, so you may as well not waste manpower guarding non-combatants when they could be on the walls shooting at the enemy. Based on this, the argument can be made that the Americans won in Iraq because they worked very hard to Protect Muslims from Muslim fanatics, and so Allah blessed them for that. This is a win for those who argued for restrictive ROEs to ensure the winning of hearts and minds: According to Dr. Fadl, we doing so puts us on Allah's side. You were right, although not for the right reasons, so I reserve the right to use BBQ sauce to help the crow I have to eat go down easier. |
| Posted by: Ptah 2008-05-29 07:56 |
| #1 Both Zawahiri and Imam were pious and high-minded, prideful, and rigid in their views. They tended to look at matters of the spirit in the same way they regarded the laws of nature—as a series of immutable rules, handed down by God. This mind-set was typical of the engineers and technocrats who disproportionately made up the extremist branch of Salafism, a school of thought intent on returning Islam to the idealized early days of the religion. Ah. Garbage in, garbage out. Christianity? Ah, a different matter. A very different matter altogether. |
| Posted by: Ptah 2008-05-29 04:27 |