Some telling points are made in this Christian Science Monitor piece, which characterizes those Al-Qaeda goals thusly:
1. Remove US forces from Saudi Arabia. (In 2001, there were about 4,500 US troops there. Today, about 500 remain.)2. Remove all foreign armies from all Muslim countries.
3. Destroy Israel and control Jerusalem.
4. Overthrow Arab regimes.
5. Establish a caliphate (a spiritual and secular ruler of the Islamic state.)
Hani Shukrallah, an "analyst for the Al Ahram Center for Political and Strategic studies in Cairo, and a newspaper columnist," plays the Blame-the-West game, claiming that by responding to jihad terrorism, the U.S. has created jihad terrorism:
"By framing it from the start as a clash of civilizations, starting with the 'Why do they hate us' speech by President Bush, [the US has] played into the radicals' hands. And then the US had the wars, and wars create anger. Instead of isolating what was a small, very fringe group, [the US] targeted a whole people and made them feel that there is a war against Islam and Muslims. This framing... strengthens all Islamist movements. It's redefining our identities. We're not Egyptians or Arabs, we're Muslims.
Sure, Hani, nobody had that idea before Bush's "Why do they hate us" speech. It isn't as if the supranational character of the Islamic identity hasn't been a core element of the idea of the caliphate from the beginning, and particularly a part of the movement for its restoration which began with the founding of the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928. No, it all began with a speech by Bush. Thanks for clearing that up.
"And then the US had the wars, and wars create anger." Oh heavens to betsy, we can't have that. Better we should have submitted to Nazism and Japanese imperial aggression rather than create anger by resisting them.
Brian M. Jenkins of the "RAND Corp. in Washington, a former US Army captain, and author of 'Unconquerable Nation: Knowing Our Enemy, Strengthening Ourselves,'" points out something we have noted here many times: that "everything is used to try to show an implacable, relentless crusade against Muslims," including any action by Israel or by Americans in Iraq. He doesn't go on to note, as we have here, that these pretexts and grievances always shift, but the jihad imperative remains constant -- and therefore that any belief that redressing any of the grievances du jour will make the jihad disappear is naive, and will meet only with disappointment.
Arab and Muslim anger over the conflict among the Israelis and Palestinians has grown. "Their narrative portrays us, the West, as the aggressors, and sometimes we give them the recruiting posters with incidents like Abu Ghraib. Now, they are using recent events in Lebanon. Everything is used to try to show an implacable, relentless crusade against Muslims. Acceptance of that view has spread."
M.J. Gohel, "CEO of the Asia-Pacific Foundation, a counterterrorism and intelligence think-tank in London," makes the most important observations:
"...there is unfortunately a very large pool of sympathizers. They may not be terrorists, but a large pool of people are being drawn into the Al Qaeda ideology of perceived grievances...."2. Osama bin Laden's "ideology was out there before the Afghanistan and Iraq wars took place, so it's nonsense to suggest these wars have created the problem. But, yes, it's true that the Iraq war has not progressed as hoped for... and it's true that any kind of failure in foreign policy will be used to their benefit...."
3. Mr. Gohel doubts that this conflict is important, "because their ultimate goal is the overthrow of the entire secular and Western world. This is not just a military battle, it's a battle of ideologies.... We need figures within the Islamic world, who are both respected within the Islamic world and outside. We need somebody like Gandhi or Martin Luther King, Jr. who can counter Al Qaeda."
[...]
5. "They're happy to wait 100 years. They see it as a war of attrition, to wear down our resistance. Too many people are buying into the fiction that the West is against Islam.... This is a battle of ideologies and the West can't win this battle on its own. The Islamic countries have to come on board wholeheartedly.... Until they do, it will be impossible for this message of global jihad and caliphates to be countered, because it isn't being attacked by moderates."
Muslims remain constant in their goals and are extremely focused in achieving them.
Meanwhile, the western world appears scatterbrained and inconsistent.
If the western world ever becomes focused and united, Islam is dead.
Islam is helping the western world become focused and united.
Al Qaeda has done very well in the last five years. But let's remember that Al Qaeda is merely a transient agent of Islam; it is Islam itself that has done very well the last half-decade.
* 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 *
* No public person in the West has dared call this the Islamic war; too fearful even to name our enemy, is is called the War on Terror.
* Islamic jihad states have been established in the Palestinian Authority, the Gaza, and most of Lebanon.
* No attempt has been made to apprehend bin Laden or Zawahiri or to stop Pakistan from funding the Taliban; Bush and Blair know that doing so would cause Musharaf to fall.
* The Taliban are on a comeback trail.
* The cause of Islam is doing well in the Sudan.
* Moslem Brotherhood candidates are quite popular in Egypt.
* The price of oil is up.
* In the last five years, thousands of new mosques have been built in the West.
* The jihad nights in Paris brought more jizya, and not any punishment.
* The cartoon controversy has successfully established the notion of self-censorship and even goverment censorship in the West.
* Many regions and even some nations will fall to Islam soon: Ossetia, Thailand, the Phillipines, and, most of all, Pakistan.
* Millions of new Moslems over the last five years have streamed into Western nation to take up permanent residence in Dar al Harb.
Well said, Alarmed Pig Farmer. May the curse of the oinkers be upon them.
The point of terrorism is to cause terror, sometimes to further a political goal and sometimes out of sheer hatred. The people terrorists kill are not the targets; they are collateral damage. And blowing up planes, trains, markets or buses is not the goal; those are just tactics. The real targets of terrorism are the rest of us: the billions of us who are not killed but are terrorized because of the killing. The real point of terrorism is not the act itself, but our reaction to the act.
exsgtbrown...
I agree that the point of it all is to cause the rest of us mental anguish and horror. But they made a serious mistake in targeting the people of the United States. We will not go quietly into the night. We don't 'fear this'. We sew things like 'Dont Tread on Me' to banners as we organize and drive hard against the tyrant.
They make the same grevious error that Hitler did when he declared war on the United States unnecessarily. They could have cowed the rest of the world but all these lot make the same mistake. Chalk it up to their bubble universe.
I sure hope you are right, Plague-on-Both-Houses. It must be those Americans in the "rest of the country", though.
I have to say that while standing across from Ground Zero this morning, Loose Screws (oops; that's Loose Change) people (wearing "Investigate 9/11" T-shirts to identify them) were everywhere. I mentioned them to more than one nearby stranger; all seemed to believe their theories. Same sentiments expressed by folks in Midtown.
And we think of the Islamic world being a hotbed of rumor and innuendo, irrational fears, etc.!
"Hani Shukrallah, an "analyst for the Al Ahram Center for Political and Strategic studies in Cairo, and a newspaper columnist," plays the Blame-the-West game, claiming that by responding to jihad terrorism, the U.S. has created jihad terrorism"
This of course explains the violence against Hindus in the early 1920'th. Like, say, in Moplah 1921.
No, I don't think so. My own theory is that when the Ottoman empire was defeated muslims realized that world domination was put on hold and something had to happen. India that had a significan muslim minority was first to feel the pain of Islam. The west is now to follow. Lets learn from India before it is too late and work towards either a Spanish solution or to outlaw Islam by putting the civil right above the rights to worship. Alternatively we can apply reciprocity and make muslims pay the jizya which is to be colleted as an entrance fee to the mosques.
Vee - it hurts my heart to hear what you've reported. But we will always have these people in our midst. They can be vocal and express their thoughts in this country as long as they don't harm others or incite harmful actions.
Not true of Islam. It incites violence as sacramental action.
We need to keep it up until the majority of people understand this. Those people with common sense. I'm doing what I can to get the word out. I'm not concerned with changing the hearts and minds of people in dar al-Islam. It's the people in the English Speaking countries who need to be instructed. That is my intended audience. When these people understand the naysayers and those marginal and on the fringe will be cast aside. They will no longer take seats at ecumenical dinners or on the panel of speakers or in the front of protest marches and demonstrations. They will not be listened to. Dismissed.
This will happen. It has happened in past situations very similar to this. Use Charles Lindbergh as an example...
This man has stated the facts point blank. They are not arabs, egyptians etc. Their all muslims in the end. There for any muslim is a potential terrorist, even when the live in my America. Wake up people.
If like me, you think we've given Muslims & Arabs enough chances and you're fed up and think it's time to call a murderous ideology a murderous ideology and remove the threat of terrorism from the free, peace-loving world, sign the petition:
http://timesup911.blogspot.com
I really am not clear on how often, if at all Bin Laden and his lackeys have offered conversion, but this article definitely has me wondering about it all. Was this a "last chance" before the next big strike?:
http://public.cq.com/public/20060908_homeland.html
""By framing it from the start as a clash of civilizations, starting with the 'Why do they hate us' speech by President Bush, [the US has] played into the radicals' hands. And then the US had the wars, and wars create anger. Instead of isolating what was a small, very fringe group, [the US] targeted a whole people and made them feel that there is a war against Islam and Muslims. This framing... strengthens all Islamist movements. It's redefining our identities. We're not Egyptians or Arabs, we're Muslims."
It is always all our fault. Everything is our fault to them. We are guilty of every murder, every theft, every misdeed on the planet -- according the fanatics... of the Left and Right... the ISlamists are foremost critics here.
For the Nazis... everything was the Jews fault.
For the Soviet Russians... they blamed everything on the Jews and Christians whom they massacred.
For the Hutus... it was the Tutsis... (speaking of the Rwandan genocide)...
The murderers claim that their potential victims are guilty of murder and deserve to die. They justify their hatred in this manner. This is their expression of HATE. I wish people could understand this. These lying accusations are of the same hate that makes them produce burning effigies of us.
These people lying against us in these things... we can count on it. They hate us.
Murderous hate, ultimately, regardless of how sophisticated they may be in hiding it.
Screw 'em. I would like to see 911 remembered by permanent silence imposed by droping nukes over Mecca, Medina, Damascus and Tehran, for starters. But that's just me....
Read this:
http://www.dansimmons.com/news/message/2006_05.htm
He is refering to this piece:
http://www.dansimmons.com/news/message/2006_04.htm
The EU strategy for what it is worth, is to show the Muslim population that we are not against them as Muslims, this is an attempt to break the cycle of hatred, those Europeans who started this as part of the European Arab Dialogue firmly believed that they would achieve this goal. However the other party has be be open minded and fair, which is something that you can never accuse a Muslim of being.
However I use the Egypt example to ram home that it failed, in the 70's when the EAD started there were mini-skirted Egyptian females in Cairo, how many mini-skited Egyptians do you see in Cairo now.
The question is will the EU elites ever have the courage to realise that they have screwed up big time, or will they stubbonly hold on to that doctrine at the expense of their population and ultimatley their freedom? My bet is that they will never have the courage to face up to their errors and change policy.
Sorry pressed the button earlier then I intended, I was going to sya that the Europeans policy is stamped all over Bush's speaches, in his last 9/11 speach he again referred to Islam as being hi-jacked by extremists, a EU double speak if ever I have saw one. Of course he needs allies but with allies like these who needs enemies?
The EU is an organization that is terrified of Islam. They continue to committ economic suicide.They fail to provide security and they fail in the goals established in their charter.
See if you can identify any action take by the EU on fighting terror--Their guidelines are as follows:
Fight against terrorism
Since the attacks of 11 September 2001, the European Union has been determined to step up the fight against terrorism. With this in mind, it has adopted a Framework Decision urging Member States to align their legislation and setting out minimum rules on terrorist offences. After defining such terrorist offences, the Framework Decision lays down the penalties that Member States must incorporate in their national legislation.
ACT
Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism
SUMMARY
The Framework Decision is applicable to any terrorist offence:
committed or prepared with intent in a Member State;
which may seriously damage a country or an international organisation.
These offences must be committed with the aim of intimidating people and seriously altering or destroying the political, economic or social structures of a country (murder, bodily injuries, hostage taking, extortion, fabrication of weapons, committing attacks, threatening to commit any of the above, etc.).
The above offences may be committed by one or more individuals against one or more countries.
The Framework Decision defines a terrorist group as a structured organisation consisting of more than two persons, established over a period of time and acting in concert. Moreover, instigating, aiding, abetting and attempting to commit terrorist offences will also be punishable.
To punish terrorist offences, Member States must make provision in their national legislation for:
effective, proportionate and dissuasive criminal penalties, which may entail extradition;
mitigating circumstances (collaborating with the police and judicial authorities, finding evidence or identifying the other offenders, etc.).
In addition, penalties will be imposed on legal persons where it is shown that the natural person has a power to represent the legal person or authority to exercise control within the legal person.
The Member States undertake to take the necessary action:
to establish their jurisdiction with regard to terrorist offences;
to establish their jurisdiction if they do not, under their own law, extradite their own nationals;
to coordinate their action and determine which of them is to prosecute the offenders with the aim of centralising proceedings in a single Member State where several Member States are involved.
They will also take all measures possible to ensure appropriate assistance for victims and their families (in addition to the measures already provided for in Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA).
Member States must take the necessary measures to comply with this Framework Decision. They must then notify the General Secretariat of the Council and the Commission of the above measures so that the Commission can prepare a report. By 31 December 2003 at the latest, the Council would assess whether the Member States had adopted all the necessary measures to comply with this Framework Decision.
I would say the EU has failed.