Article

2007-09-30 Terror Networks

It's not 'jihad' and 'mujihadeen' - it's 'hiraba' and 'mufsidun'

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by lotp 2007-09-30 10:11|| || Front Page|| [11139 views ] Top

#1 This idea of trying to impose the word "hirabah" over the word "jihad" has been criticized by Robert Spencer here, here and here.

Posted by Mike Sylwester 2007-09-30 10:50|| 2007-09-30 10:50|| Front Page Top

#2 This idea of trying to impose the word "hirabah" over the word "jihad" has been criticized by Robert Spencer here, here and here.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester|| 2007-09-30 10:50 ||Comments Top||

Troll.

Posted by Jack Rubenstein 2007-09-30 11:06|| 2007-09-30 11:06|| Front Page Top

#3 Sorry, Jack, but citing Robert Spencer (and Hugh Fitzgerald) is not trolling.

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2007-09-30 11:30|| 2007-09-30 11:30|| Front Page Top

#4 Hmm... maybe if they told Osama this, he would die... of laughter...

Posted by john frum 2007-09-30 11:36|| 2007-09-30 11:36|| Front Page Top

#5 So ... there's a reason this was posted in Opinion. ;-)

I don't think the author is (pace Spencer) aligned with the Sauds etc. And I'm also not sure Spencer's word is the only one to be had on the subject.

Spencer wants us to focus on the existential threat posed by aggressive Islam practicing taqqiya. He's concerned that the West understand what we're facing. That's an important message.

Hospedales is thinking tactically. His aim is to find ways to create and exploit cracks in the Muslim world to our advantage and his argument is that one way to accomplish that is by challenging the noble-sounding call to jihad.

Under the right conditions, creating and exploiting cracks can be very powerful - witness the skill with which Petraeus and his subordinate commanders have exploited the cracks in Anbar caused by Al-Q's heavyhanded treatment of locals. As those cracks widen, others are approaching the coalition to form alliances. Possibly temporary ones, but in any case we'll use them to as much advantage as we can.

Do I think a change in vocabulary will cause the jihad set to take a weekend retreat, search their souls and change their aspirations to managing McDonalds franchises instead? uh uh.

Does Hospedales have some insights into the way in which Islamicists are recruiting online through preaching that shapes the thinking of impressionable young men seeking an identity?

I think he might. He's looking at this the way a really good cop considers how to counter gangs who are moving into his territory and recruiting the local kids.

Posted by lotp 2007-09-30 11:48|| 2007-09-30 11:48|| Front Page Top

#6 Of course the concept of jihad would have no legitimacy in the islamic world were it not for the speech patterns of the kafir. What a great idea! Wish I had thought of it.

Every bit helps. And I think it would no harm to use derogatory terms for jihadis becausqed there are Mulims in western societies.

Americans positively suck in the propaganda field: the fact is you sucked so much it was you not the Soviet Union who was considered the evil empire by most of mankind. It is sadiostic torturer Guevara who is in most teeenagerrs' T-shirts not Kennedy or Reagan. And Chirak (spoit) not Bush who passed
for a hero in 2004.

And winning the propganda war goes with small steps like this one. Having jihadis named hiraba is not a propaganda Midway but it is at least a Wake island battle.

Posted by JFM">JFM 2007-09-30 14:13|| 2007-09-30 14:13|| Front Page Top

#7 It also sets the stage to either have true moderate Muslims speak out against terrorism in Muslim terms -- or refuse to do so, in which case it becomes easier to inform the Western public just what's going on.

Create/find/exploit cracks.

Posted by lotp 2007-09-30 14:24|| 2007-09-30 14:24|| Front Page Top

#8 Sapir-Whorf riding again?

Posted by gromgoru 2007-09-30 14:31|| 2007-09-30 14:31|| Front Page Top

#9 Not necessarily.

You don't have to create an internalized concept space shaped by language in order for public language to influence group behavior.

Posted by lotp 2007-09-30 14:56|| 2007-09-30 14:56|| Front Page Top

#10 I'm game. Only which should we use instead of jihadis: hirabis or mufsidis?

Posted by trailing wife 2007-09-30 20:07|| 2007-09-30 20:07|| Front Page Top

#11 I vote for "screaming assholes," tw.

But that't just me.... :-D

Posted by Barbara Skolaut">Barbara Skolaut 2007-09-30 20:17|| http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/]">[http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/] 2007-09-30 20:17|| Front Page Top

#12 Permit me to suggest that hair-splitting over Islamic terms will prove a tremendous disservice to fighting terrorism. The term "jihad" is thoroughly embedded in the public's consciousness and identifies a central tenet of Islam that is absolutely inimical to the West.

Even if slightly incorrect in useage, it is far better to militate the general public against hostile core elements of Islam so that pressure is created against its theocratic dictates. Both shari'a and jihad are so toxic to basic liberty and individual freedom that it is far better to keep opposition focused upon these two poisons than to worry about catering to Muslim perceptions of themselves or their violent co-religionists.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-09-30 20:50|| 2007-09-30 20:50|| Front Page Top

#13 PS: It ain't just you, Barbara. You've got plenty of company, gal.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-09-30 20:51|| 2007-09-30 20:51|| Front Page Top

#14 I'm guessing Hospedales isn't primarily concerned with what the American public thinks. He's concerned with framing the responses of Muslims to Muslim-initiated violence.

Labeling the violence 'hiraba' rather than 'jihad' induces cognitive dissonance. Not always and for all Muslim listeners - but in the places where there are small cracks, where a mother grieves for her son caught in crossfire or enticed to a suicide bomb, this can broaden those cracks.

Posted by lotp 2007-09-30 21:05|| 2007-09-30 21:05|| Front Page Top

#15 it is far better to keep opposition focused upon these two poisons than to worry about catering to Muslim perceptions of themselves or their violent co-religionists.

Catering. Interesting word.

In Anbar our commanders might label it psyops. And later, building relationships that lead to IED factory tips. And then to sheiks of some of the largest tribes openly aligning themselves with the coaltion and the government.

Funny kind of catering business, that.

Posted by lotp 2007-09-30 21:11|| 2007-09-30 21:11|| Front Page Top

#16 "Screaming asshole" is the alternate English translation of the Arabic word, Barbara. But to help clarify thinking it's critical to use the correct terminology for the target audience. You could footnote the translation for those not familiar with the concepts, though -- that would help drive the point home to our little post-Friday sermon visitors. ;-) I'm really looking forward to the little idiots trying to explain to the kufrs why it's jihad instead of hirabah -- that's not the kind of knowledge we're supposed to have.

Posted by trailing wife 2007-09-30 21:24|| 2007-09-30 21:24|| Front Page Top

#17 In Anbar our commanders might label it psyops.

Yes, and it's all well and fine to make such distinctions over there. To consume lots of ink and dissipate any momentum of the American public's already lagging perception of Islam by detailing such minutae seems a lot more counterproductive than anything else.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-09-30 22:15|| 2007-09-30 22:15|| Front Page Top

23:52 Eric Jablow
23:38 twobyfour
23:34 OldSpook
23:33 gromgoru
23:32 OldSpook
23:31 OldSpook
23:30 OldSpook
23:27 twobyfour
23:21 JosephMendiola
23:14 Zenster
23:13 JosephMendiola
23:06 JosephMendiola
23:05 Jan
23:02 JosephMendiola
22:59 Zenster
22:59 JosephMendiola
22:53 JosephMendiola
22:52 Old Patriot
22:50 JosephMendiola
22:46 Red Dawg
22:29 Seafarious
22:19 McZoid
22:15 Zenster
22:07 Zenster