Another one bites the dust. While this adversely affects that temporal entity known as al-Qaeda (which is good), it does not influence the eternal notion of jihad (which is bad). "Senior al Qaeda leader killed in Pakistan," by Saad Khan for Reuters, August 12:
PESHAWAR, Pakistan (Reuters) - Senior Al Qaeda commander Abu Saeed al-Masri has been killed in recent clashes with Pakistani forces in a Pakistani region near the Afghan border, a security official said on Tuesday."He was believed to be among the top leadership of al Qaeda," the senior security official said on condition of anonymity.
Al-Masri, which means Egyptian, was the most senior al Qaeda operative to have been killed in Pakistan's tribal belt since the death of his compatriot, Abu Khabab al-Masri, an Qaeda chemical and biological weapons expert, last month.
Television channels identified the dead man as Mustafa Abu al-Yazid and said he was also known as Abu Saeed al-Masri.
He was killed in recent clashes in the Bajaur tribal region, a known sanctuary for al Qaeda operatives on the Afghan border, the security official said.
Yazid, commander of al Qaeda operations in Afghanistan, was an Egyptian who served time in jail with al Qaeda deputy leader Ayman al-Zawahri after the assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat in 1981.
He has been referred to as al Qaeda's third most senior figure, after the elimination or capture of five earlier occupants of the number three spot since 2001.
Earlier, the September 11 Commission described Yazid as the network's "chief financial manager".
Good news, and bad.
Good news, for all the obvious reasons. A leader important to the other side has been killed, and this may help demoralize Al Qaeda, and make those in Pakistan wanting to choose the "strong horse" perhaps do a bit more than they have to placate the Americans and to fight Al Qaeda (on the other hand, this is a report, and it is in the Pakistani interest to exaggerate, especially now, any achievements given that the Americans are at long last finally seeing Pakistan for what it is).
And if this were a war like other wars, mainly military in nature, where the death of such an enemy commander, where the enemy consists of an identifiable state or states, as in World War I (a war between Great Powers, of a kind immediately recognizable in European history), or as in World War II (an ideological war, where the other side had to be left desolate for the enemyies, in sufficient numbers, to finally give up and in giving up, and being left desolate (see German and Japanese cities, circa mid01945), bringing into disrepute, through that total ruination, the ideologies that had impelled them.
But it is not that kind of war. It is a war that the Infidel victims of that war have mistaken in its nature and identified with the wrong names. Endless attention, especially by the American government and the popular press, given to "Al Qaeda" and the "war on terror" and defeating "Al Qaeda." We see, and worry about to the exclusion of the more worrisome weapons, only the weapon of qitaal, combat (as in Afghanistan) or of terrorism, which its Infidel victims have no trouble identifying as such, but which a great many Muslims, even those not participating in terrorism, regard as a form of qitaal made necessary by the military superiority (in their eyes, so "unfair") of the Infidel enemy.
Thus the killing of al-Masri, if confirmed, will lead, whether satisfaction is quiet and sober, or gloating in the predictable talk-radio vein, will only contribute to the belief by some that "we are winning." But we are not "winning." There is not a war with a finite end, and calling that war a "long war" or "a war that will last decades" as some -- such as Secretary Gates -- think shows their deep seriousness, merely shows that they still have not understood what is going on. Islam, and the Jihad that is a duty central to Islam, is not to be "defeated" in a decade or three or five. The impulse, that explains a large part of history in the world, is as old as Islam. The ability to act on the duty, or the impulse, can be limtied, and Islam can be contained. Its members can be demoralized, its pre-existing fissures exploited, in Iraq and some other places by doing nothing to prevent them (the Americans are doing, in Iraq, exactly the opposite), and elsewhere, as with the non-Arab Muslims who constitute 80% of the world's Muslims, and who can be made mcuh more keenly aware of all the ways in which Islam has been, and always will be a vehicle for Arab supremacism, and then there are also those, in the part of the world described as "underdeveloped," who might be interested in the ways in which the inshallah-fatalism of Islam holds back such development. There are those, especially in Western Europe, who need to be alerted to how Islam, in its encouragement of Believers in the habit of mental submission (as "slaves of Allah" who are never to reason why, but simply accept the Whim of Allah, and to accept what is Commanded, shun what is Prohibited), makes free and skeptical inquiry, on which science depends, difficult or impossible. They need to be alerted as to the view, in Islam, of most forms of artistic expression -- sculpture, most painting, music. They need to understand that Islam is a collectivist faith; the individual Believer is to conform to the needs of the army of Islam which he must not betray (say, by leaving Islam, and by letting Infidels know the secrets of Islam -- that is, what Islam teaches, what it inculcates); apostasy is viewed as akin to treason.
It is hard to see how the killing of al-Masri in some border region of Pakistan does anything to limit the effectiveness of the most important instruments of Jihad: the Money Weapon, campaigns of Da'wa among the Infidels, and demographic conquest, especially, right now, proceeding inexorably, in Western Europe.
It is easy to see how the killing of al-Masri will lead to another round of busy discussions of how to "defeat" an enemy that some persist in limiting to "Al Qaeda" or if not to Al Qaeda then to "groups" that "copy Al Qaeda" (they don't - there are many Muslim terrorist groups, and they hardly rely on Al Qaeda to conduct their local Jihads, the sum of which is the world-wide Jihad, or that Jihad conducted through violent means).
A sober reaction from the American government, one that said something like that, that said the death of al-Masri, while welcome, is useful in "that part of the war we are fighting against those who conduct Jihad by violent means, which is an important part, but only a part, of the war we, the victims of Jihad, are fighting."
How likely is it that any such remark, uttered by anyone in the current Administration, or by either candidate, will be forthcoming?
They remind me of the rock group Kiss. The number one and two (Simmons and Stanley) remain but the other members are forever changing.
If Hitler, Himmler, Goebbels and Goering had been blown up at some nurembergish rally, or Stalin with much of his Politburo had had an accident while regaling each other with zany-laff-riot stories in one of those late-night dinners at a Kremlin table, things would or could have been different.
But if not only the leadership, but every single current member of Al Qaeda were to disappear, it would mean very little. Islam -- the texts, the tenets, the attitudes, the atmospherics -- remain. This is not understood. Few want to try to understand it.
They remind me of the rock group Kiss. The number one and two (Simmons and Stanley) remain but the other members are forever changing.
Or maybe the keyboard player of the Greatful Dead. Ron "Pigpen" McKernan, Keith Godchaux and Brent Myland all died young. Meanwhile, guitarists Jerry Garcia and Bob Weir lived on - until Garcia's drugs and weight problems caught up with him.
The #3 of Al Qaeda is also a bit like the #1 of Hamas. If I recall correctly, Israel shot one Hamas leader with a missile, and killed his successor a few months later.
"There are a number of possible explanations to the enigma of believing in Islam and even propagating it with zeal and violence. Some possible explanations are treated here.
For one, Islam is stamped on the impressionable mind of the child from birth. ... "Teaching the very young is like etching upon my youth is when your stones in the stone," says an Eastern proverb.
Another reason is the herd mentality--stay with the group, be one of them, and don't strike out on your own. ... There is security and power in numbers--in any numbers.
Islam is also appealing for giving purpose and order to the person's life--both the life on earth as well as an immortal life after death. Islam is an omnipresent and omniscient father figure who draws the boundaries, points out the path, dictates the terms, holds the carrots and the sticks. It absolves the person, for most parts, from the often demanding tasks of dealing with difficult questions and choosing what to do with oneself--a highly attractive trade off for many. Accept Islam as your guide, follow its path and you will never have to suffer the agony of not knowing and having to make decisions by yourself; you will be guided along the path of eternal happiness and salvation. Just follow the unerring guide given to mankind by the seal of the prophet, Muhammad."
-from a former Muslim
We are in a globalized world. People who once were restricted to their country of birth are now able to travel anywhere. The internet lets them spread their message to those they might not reach otherwise. Unless Islam is THOROUGHLY discredited and universally BANNED, "Islam -- the texts, the tenets, the attitudes, the atmospherics -- remain."
Containment is a temporary measure, at best. We did what we could to contain Communism, until it collapsed from within. Those who think this war will "take decades" are using the Cold War as their model. Containing Islam might be good for the short-term but not for the long term. Even if all non-Arabs eschewed Islam, would it be enough? Islam would still be here, waiting for the right time to spread.
But if not only the leadership, but every single current member of Al Qaeda were to disappear, it would mean very little. Islam -- the texts, the tenets, the attitudes, the atmospherics -- remain. This is not understood. Few want to try to understand it.
Posted by: Hugh
even if you a get dmihhi to admit Al Qaeda is bad, you can't him to admit muslim is bad too.
Islam -- the texts, the tenets, the attitudes, the atmospherics -- remain. This is not understood. Few want to try to understand it.
Posted by: Hugh at August 12, 2008 6:05 AM
Right. As long as there is the Koran, there will be Islamic Jihad.
I tell this to people all the time.
In Hemingway's brief memoir of his early years in Paris, "A Moveable Feast," the final chapter is titled "There is Never Any End to Paris." Well, in Islam, "There is Never Any End to Jihad."
And thus is the enormous difference between our two civilizations. Paris, on the one hand, us, Jihad on the other, them.
We couldn't be more diametrically opposed.
So many Al Qaeda #3s, so little time.
Killing Al-Qaeda or terrorists in general, is like swatting mosque-itos without ever considering the stagnant pond they are generating from.
In order to stop mosque-itos, you have to drain the swamp. Then cover it over with dirt. Better yet, asphalt and a mall.
Allah is the Lord of Matter. He reigns over the Kingdom of Dull. The Quran his 'Manual of Dullness', Mohammad his standard bearer, Islam his dark heart, and the mosque, temples dedicated to himself.
And from there mosque-itos, slaves to Allah, pour forth to do Allah's bidding, which includes violence, torture, murder, terror and hegemony, called 'jihad'.
Killing or capturing a few of them with a mosque-ito swatter wont get rid of the swamp.
To do that, you need to find the drain plug, and then make good use of a bulldozer.
The truth is the drain, and right actions are the bulldozer. What these right actions are, are discussed at length on this site. PMK's post above about sums it up.
One of the basic right actions we can take, is to stop electing dhimmi's, and other scary guys, to public office. Vacillating politicians help Allah and jihad, and hinder dar al-harb.
A vote for Obama is a vote for vacillations, at least McCain is stubborn...he wont vacillate as much...