| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Walid Phares at the Counterterrorism Blog (thanks to JS) has compiled a useful summary of the main points in the Osama tape -- including "twenty 'marching orders." Here they are, with some brief comments interspersed:
Twenty "marching orders"* One a long attack on the Cartoons crisis: Blood is needed to cleanse the matter.
Why is this a capital offense? Not because Muhammad was depicted; otherwise the Egyptian paper that ran the cartoons would be in the same hot water. The real offense here is that infidels lampooned the Prophet -- a capital offense according to the traditional dhimmi laws.
* Two, there is a Western war on Muslims and Islam.
This is laughable to any Jihad Watch reader who knows the lengths to which Western governments have gone to avoid this perception -- even to the point of compromising their own security -- but Osama needs to propagate this idea because there is no caliph. In traditional Islamic theology, offensive jihad can only be called by the caliph. But if a Muslim land is attacked by infidels, jihad becomes fard ayn -- the individual responsibility of every Muslim. So Osama has to couch all his activity in defensive terms, both to justify it and to try to compel Muslims to join his ranks.
*Three, Western policy towards Hamas proves this aggression.
What has the West done to Hamas? Cut off the jizya. This is aggression? Yes -- if your core assumption is that all the world's bounty belongs to the Muslims, and the Infidels only hold it illegitimately. Bruce Bawer discusses another manifestation of this assumption in While Europe Slept: an Oslo imam who told his flock that since the Infidels weren't paying the jizya, it was perfectly permissible to steal from them.
* Four, the United Nations is an infidel and criminal institution.
Osama, meet Kofi. You should find him very useful.
* Five, there is a Western-infidel aggression against Muslim Sudan. The Black southerners are bandits and the Darfur Blacks are agents of the infidels
Why aren't Jesse Jackson and Louis Farrakhan and Al Sharpton out there protesting against Osama's jihadist racism? The Darfur Blacks are Muslims. They just aren't Muslim enough for Osama. The Black southerners are Christians -- this is an out-and-out jihad war against Infidels.
* Six, Iraq’s Jihad is to stop future US military bases* Seven, a cultural invasion is underway: Arab TVs are to be stopped, Muslim liberals to be killed
For years now I have documented the threats and violence to which liberal Muslims are subjected by the mujahedin. This tends to dampen prospects for large-scale Islamic reform.
* Eight, France is to be punished for the female Hijab affair
Here again, absolute accommodation to Islam is required of the West. This is a manifestation of the assumption of Islamic supremacy. Osama wouldn't dream of calling on Islamic states to grant equality of rights to non-Muslims. The accommodation is all one way, because non-Muslims are inferior to Muslims and don't deserve equality.
* Nine, Bosnia’s Muslims were not salvaged by the West
Here again, Osama doesn't know who his friends -- and his useful idiots -- really are.
* Ten, The independence of East Timor is a defeat to the Muslims
And it is -- from the standpoint of the assumption that Islamic law must ultimately be imposed everywhere.
* Eleven, India and the Hindus are the enemies in Kashmir* Twelve, Pakistan’s Musharraf is to be killed
* Thirteen, Russia must be punished
* Fourteen: Salman Rushdie is not to be forgotten
All justifications for more violence.
* Fifteen: The masses in the infidel lands think like their leaders. Their public (enemies) is responsible
This is a justification for attacks on civilians, a la 9/11.
* Sixteen: Calls for Dialogue with the West are to be rejected
Calls for dialogue with the West would only be acceptable to Osama if the Muslims were in his estimation losing the jihad. A hudna, or truce, is only permissible for a temporary period, to allow the Muslims to gather strength to fight again more effectively.
I know he called for a hudna some time ago. If this tape is really new, he has a better opinion of the Muslims' prospects now.
* Seventeen: Do not trust the “traitors” including Muftis and moderate clerics* Eighteen: King Abdallah of Saudi Arabia ignores world realities
* Nineteen: (Western) civilization is attacking ours
* Twenty: It is of the duty of all members of the Umma to offer everything for Jihad, including their lives.
Nothing much new in these. Just more justifications of violence and calls for Muslims to join the struggle.
Posted by Robert at April 24, 2006 11:32 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Robert Spencer wrote:
I know he called for a hudna some time ago. If this tape is really new, he has a better opinion of the Muslims' prospects now.
He knows that if things continue as they have been, Islam will indeed swallow up the world into the New Caliphate. I don't blame him for being bold. Frankly, I do not see nearly enough clear action by the world to really come to grips with the reality of this enemy.
That was an excellent breakdown of Osama's talking points. But do any of our "leaders" even read JW?
Eventually the shouting from the rooftops here will either be heard or we become extinct.
And Jesse Jackson will convert to Islam before risking his neck.
Posted by: Foehammer![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at April 24, 2006 12:46 PM
the United Nations is [a] ... criminal institution.
Well, he's right there. LOL
Posted by: Yojimbo at April 24, 2006 1:13 PM
Archbishop Desmond Tutu?
I just googled and found this:
God weeps over God's world, aching because of conflict in Darfur, in Beslan, in Harare, in Colombia, in Jerusalem, in Belfast.
It's interesting that he includes Beslan.
I haven't paid enough attention to him or to his comments over the years to say anything definite. But if this is anything to go by, like many churchmen, he is aware of such "conflicts" but avoids any very direct statement as to their nature.
Posted by: Yojimbo at April 24, 2006 1:21 PM
RS, there has been a trend in the recent messages attributed to UBL and Zawahiri. IIRC, they all speak of the truce that was offered and rejected. They have thus met the minimal requirements to offer us a chance to repent before striking our necks. The question to me is, dumping the rest of his spiel, where does he think he has the ability to strike, and how? I'm not certain he can, not in the least, but the last several messages have repeated this theme.
Posted by: longtime lurker at April 24, 2006 1:27 PM
so the tall man in the cave issues out his orders to the brain dead followers of islam. notice he orders others to take their own lives, its never his life or his childrens'life.. cannot those dimwit islammofacists see the double standards. their lives are offered to allah, but not bin laden's life and those of his childrens? how long will it take for them to realize they are fighting an empthy war that in the long run will offer them nothing.
Posted by: Lulu at April 24, 2006 1:41 PM
Hi everyone,
I don't get to post on that many other blogs much, but, if anyone's interested, here's an article worth reading about the Sudan with more:
http://www.think-israel.org/green.sudan.html
I wonder if it's possible that Osama is hiding in any of the middle eastern countries where Allied forces haven't penetrated yet, such as Iran, or even Saudi Arabia itself? I think that's a good reason to run them over with a fine tooth comb to see if Osama is anywhere in there.
Posted by: Avi Green at April 24, 2006 2:11 PM
Thanks for summarizing and posting the 20 points.
Posted by: MikeMontana at April 24, 2006 2:22 PM
Lulu, I've also wondered why obl doesn't send his kids to indiscriminately mass murder. Lord knows he's got enough and he'd still have little breeders left.
Posted by: freewoman at April 24, 2006 2:23 PM
Foe Hammer;
Jesse "Jackass" Jackson has already rejected Jesus. He did so when he joined "Calypso" Louis FarraConman at the first "Million Man March" in 1995. The numerous ministers that were given the podium at this event refused to envoke the name of "Jesus" in their prayers. They didn't want to offend "their" Muslim brothers. COWARDS!!!
"We the People" and our other Western neighbors are always bending over backwards and for these Islamofeces. Enough is enough. This guy needs to hang with Adoph and Muhammad in the pages of history and in the dark bowels. Osama is off the map with this tape. He claims,
"Bosnia's Muslims were not salvaged by the West."
I'm sorry but in 1995, I work along side of quite a few Bosnian Muslims. I was working at the Zenith Rauland Division plant in Melrose Park, Illinois. They were likable fellows and very hard workers. They all assimulated into the life of freedom very well. they even picked up weight over time. A few even fought during the Bosnian war. They've soften up after being hardened by combat. Life as a soon to be free citizen of the United States tends to do that for you.
Osama, in my opinion, is shooting blanks.
Denver;
I've studied the koran. There is no peaceful koran. Unless you've some information that is totally unknown to the West. Post a sura that assures that non-Muslims don't have to worry about losing their head for not accepting Islam. I'll save you the homework. You won't find one. The only way that the koran is peaceful is when it's collecting dust in some remote corner of the basement. With blank pages.
at April 24, 2006 2:26 PM
If we kill or capture OBL, someone else will just take his place. Wouldn't it be better to just leave him in place, and with our monitoring technology, just pick off his top dogs one-by-one? It seems like this is the policy we've been pursuing since the fall of Afganistan. His organizational chart has a lot of 'X's on it.
Anyway, why make him a martyr?
Posted by: ShortBoard Surfer at April 24, 2006 2:30 PM
And no sooner do I write than BOOM, the blasts come in Egypt. Not that I'm prescient or anything like that...
Posted by: longtime lurker at April 24, 2006 2:38 PM
Yup, looks like the Religion of Peace™ is at it again:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4940506.stm
Posted by: Yojimbo at April 24, 2006 2:42 PM
MAYBE OSAMA WASN'T KIDDING !!!!!!!!!
Egypt resort town hit by blasts
Three explosions have been reported in Egypt's resort town of Dahab, on the eastern side of the Sinai peninsula.
According to some reports, up to 100 people may have been killed or injured in the blasts.
Police said more than 20 ambulances and police cars were rushing to the el-Masbat area of the city, the Associated Press news agency said.
"There is smoke coming from the area and there are people running everywhere," a witness told Reuters.
The blasts were heard around 1915 local time (1715 GMT), the witness said.
An interior ministry spokesman confirmed the blasts. "There were explosions, but the picture is still not clear," he told Reuters.
In July 2005, more than 60 people died in a bomb attack in the tourist area of the Egyptian resort town of Sharm al-Sheik.
at April 24, 2006 2:46 PM
"Calls for dialogue with the West would only be acceptable to Osama if the Muslims were in his estimation losing the jihad. A hudna, or truce, is only permissible for a temporary period, to allow the Muslims to gather strength to fight again more effectively."
Help me out here those of you who know more than I do on this subject. I recently read somewhere, I think it was Ibn Warq, that a hudna could last no more than 10 years then agression had to be employed or the nature of the hudna had to change just enough to buy more time. The example used was the Oslo Peace accord and Arafat's speech to the Palestinians shortly afterwards. Can anybody explain?
Posted by: ARAKIS at April 24, 2006 2:48 PM
Walid Phares
It is thoughtful of you to have posted the pertinent bits of the tape !
* Thirteen, Russia must be punished
OBL, This seems a bit harsh,
(THEY are actively helping Iran to become a modern missile monotheist entity, give them some praise !!).
* Seven, a cultural invasion is underway: Arab TVs are to be stopped, Muslim liberals to be killed
OBL, Does this mean that if they are not an Apostate but watch TV, Death is still advocated ?
Allah be mericful !
* Eight, France is to be punished for the female Hijab affair
OBL, In this case, I think the woman are being attacked by their own Arab men, another case of mistaken finger pointing perhaps.
* Eighteen: King Abdallah of Saudi Arabia ignores world realities
OBL, Geez, he can !!
have you seen the price of oil lately !!!
* Four, the United Nations is an infidel and criminal institution.
OBL, yes, well they do have their faults !
* Nine, Bosnia’s Muslims were not salvaged by the West
OBL, you're right there !, unfortunately we made the same mistake with the Armenians too.
* Fifteen: The masses in the infidel lands think like their leaders. Their public (enemies) is responsible
NO ! WE DO NOT, that is the problem
* Twelve, Pakistan’s Musharraf is to be killed
* Fourteen: Salman Rushdie is not to be forgotten
"Killed but not forgotten", sorry OBL but you are starting to use song titles from the Corrs. shameful
* One a long attack on the Cartoons crisis: Blood is needed to cleanse the matter.
OBL, you know that the PIG copy was created by your very own clerics. Naughty ! Naughty !
at April 24, 2006 3:24 PM
Have you seen the tape of the protest of the "Islamic Thinkers Society of NYC" (huh?) with their chants denying the holocaust and calling for a "real holocaust" "with mushroom clouds over Israel." Definitely scholarly material! Video at The Dumb Ox if you haven't already seen it (be sure to pause the Reuter's News Player at the very bottom of the page before you load the Islamic scholars...
D. Ox
http://thomistic.blogspot.com
at April 24, 2006 3:32 PM
Some day, decades from now, Osama will be recognized as the Dr. Kevorkian of Islam.
Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at April 24, 2006 3:41 PM
"I recently read somewhere, I think it was Ibn Warq, that a hudna could last no more than 10 years then agression had to be employed or the nature of the hudna had to change just enough to buy more time. The example used was the Oslo Peace accord and Arafat's speech to the Palestinians shortly afterwards."
-- from a posting above, wondering why this should be
In the Western world, the basis for treaty-making has become enshrined in the Latin phrase "Pacta sunt servanda." Meaning: Treaties are to be obeyed, to be respected, to be upheld. Sounds obvious, doesn't it? But it was a moral development over the more primitive idea that treaties were merely a means to an end, and the belief, in the Western world, that treaties should be kept, because without such an international regime, there would be no point in making treaties, and we need them.
The world of Islam does NOT believe that the basis of any treaty, signed by any Muslim power or state (a group, an "Authority," a state, a caliphate), with Infidels can possibly be permanently binding. How could a "Peace Treaty" concluded with any Infidels conceivably be permanent when it is the duty of Muslims to conduct Jihad in order to ensure that Islam dominates all over the globe, and no barriers to such dominance, of any kind, by any Infidels, are to be permitted to stand, whatever "treaties" have been signed?
The model for all Muslim treaty-making with Infidels is the agreement concluced by Muhammad with the Meccans, at the town, just outside Mecca, of Hudaibiyyah in 628 A.D. According to that agreement, if the Meccans allowed Muhammad and his followers into Mecca to perform the Lesser Pilgrimage (not the later hajj) once a year, Muhammad and his followers would not attack them. That treaty, known as the Treaty of al-Hudaibiyya, was to last for ten years.
During the first year, the Meccans scrupulously fulfilled their part of the bargain: Muhammad and his followers were allowed in, and performed the Lesser Pilgrimage. Six months into the second year, however, Muhammad used a pretext, involving other tribes, to break the treaty and attack the Meccans. It should be noted that although some Muslms describe that "pretext" as a real reason, most Muslim commentators gloat over Muhammad's deliberate cunning, and indicate that by his own sayings and deeds it was clear what he was going to do all along -- especially in replying to those who initially seemed to reproach him for entering into the agreement in the first place.
And he did know what he was doing. And ever since, Musilms have taken that treaty to be the model -- in duration, and in every other way -- for those "truce" treaties (not "Peace" treaties, for such are impossible) with Infidels.
For more on this, read Majid Khadduri's "War and Peace in Islam." When he wrote the book, Khadduri was more of a truth-teller, and less a sly apologist, for Islam -- he was writing at a time when the forces of Islam were very weak, and it seemed impossible to dream of a revival of Muslim power, so he saw no harm in setting out the truth. In this respect, he can be likened to Fatima Mernissia and Leila Ahmad, two soi-disant "feminists" who, when they realized that Islam itself might be seen as responsible for the mistreatment of women by Muslims, quickly retreated to the "it's-just-a-cultural-thing-and-has-nothing-to-do-with-Islam" mode, a mode they are both now stuck in.
Is that enough of an answer? Google "Hudaibiyyah" and see what Muslims write about it. That will clear things up.
Too badd no one in the American, British, or any other Infidel government has bothered to ask itself the following obvious question: "Jeez, guys, is there any reason to think that when Muslims make treaties, they have a different underlying theory about it than we do? Anyone got anything on that? Anyone, say, in the Counsel's office? Dontcha think we should find out?"
That's the level.
And that's the problem.
Posted by: Hugh at April 24, 2006 3:42 PM
Osama's apparently open-ended condemnation of all Arabic TV stations - which, if taken at his word, seems to include Al-Jazira, Al-Arabiya and the Hezbollah fartcasters - could possibly be the most hopeful thing he has yet said. It sounds as if he now feels that any kind of news media, any kind of dissemination of ideas and debate, never mind how partial, never mind how controlled by Believers, would ultimately be bad news for the True Faith. Think about it.
Posted by: Paolo at April 24, 2006 3:53 PM
Hugh:
Thanks for the answer. So the 10 year limit was specific to Hudaibiyyah and not generally applied to all hudna even in modern times.
at April 24, 2006 3:56 PM
most Muslim commentators gloat over Muhammad's deliberate cunning
Rather cuts the ground out from under that Muslim convert's talk of "warrior values of honour, loyalty and duty" quoted in the Times. The words "honour" and "dishonour" appear in that short piece no less than five times.
Now honour, important as it was for the Ancients, does have a somewhat problematic status in the modern West, since Christianity has moved compassion to the centre of our moral view of things. However, Mohammed clearly did not move in the same moral universe as the best of the "Noble Grecians and Romans", in which gentlemen if they gave their word kept it.
Posted by: Yojimbo at April 24, 2006 4:19 PM
Does anyone here think that the FBI or CIA or MI5 should assign all agents to read this site as it is the most educational resource i have ever encountered about the nature of the threat we face?
This website should be required reading in all schools in the west and we have to advertise it to our youth as they are the next vanguard in this generational war.
Lets spread the message. I did my bit a few weeks ago on the radio where i named this website as the best resource to find out what's going on.
Posted by: Churchill1938 at April 24, 2006 4:21 PM
* Fourteen: Salman Rushdie is not to be forgotten
I haven't forgotten him. In fact, I hope to join him in the ranks of published critics of Islam and Mohammed.
I'm trying.
Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at April 24, 2006 4:24 PM
When they hear this, they will know that the West has REALLY declared war on Islam.
Posted by: Kristopher at April 24, 2006 4:39 PM
Lots of praise for the maniac in the forums at UMMAH.COM.
And his gloating minions are working at waffle stands in Belgium, selling bootlegged CD's in Rotterdam, teaching school in Nuremberg, hawking cellphones in Madrid ,and putting out fresh piles of fish in Paris.
And loving the blindness of the West.
To death.
Posted by: profitsbeard at April 24, 2006 4:39 PM
Yojimbo - I would say that Christianity does hold honour in high esteem. You might even say that Jesus's words about not swearing, but letting your word mean yes when it says yes and no when it means yes could be seen as the background of the famous commonplace that a (Christian) gentleman's word is his bond. Dante placed traitors in the lowest rung of Hell, frozen hard in ice - as their word was not able to hold them, ice now would.
OT: I was delighted and somewhat embarrassed to find that I share a birthday with my countrywoman Oriana Fallaci. I cannot claim to be anything like as beautiful, but I hope that a little of her integrity and fearlessness may have rubbed off.
Posted by: Paolo at April 24, 2006 5:18 PM
Osama thinks that only blood can can reclaim the honour of Muslims:
By Anadolu News Agency (aa), Dubai
Published: Monday, April 24, 2006
zaman.com
'People Ridiculing Prophet Mohammed Should be Killed'
The leader of the al-Qaeda terror network, Osama bin Laden, has said that people who ridicule the Prophet Mohammed should be killed.
In his audiotape broadcast on al-Jazeera television yesterday, bin Laden said the enmity of atheists will not end unless they are killed.
He defended that freedom of expression has no base when the subject matter is Muslims, and that no apology from the Danish government, no trial for the guilty party responsible for the profane cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed and no preventive measure is proof of that.
"Freedom of expression has no base when the subject matter is Muslims" -- Did Osama really say this with a straight face? -- Did Islamist Zaman really publish this without wincing a little? The irony of these words apparently escaped them.
Posted by: Jen at April 24, 2006 5:55 PM
IMHO, muslims have no honor. They kill anyone indiscriminately. They kill each other. They throw woman and children in front of bullets. They have children walk through fields to check for land mines. They beat women. They whine over cartoons. They are happy living on welfare. They lie. They cheat. They get their kicks abusing women and children. They worship a pedophile. They worship a black meteorite. They are scared of women. They think satan lives in their noses. They can't face the black meteorite when going to the bathroom. They cry over women drivers. ETC....ETC...ETC.
How in the world can people believe they have OR deserve honor?
Posted by: freewoman at April 24, 2006 6:09 PM
* Seven, a cultural invasion is underway: Arab TVs are to be stopped, Muslim liberals to be killed
I see. So after years of living in caves he's worked up about Arab transvestites? Oh, those young guys in burkas!
Somewhat OT but interesting is that al-Zarqawi seems to be having e-mail problems. See Iowahawk for the details.
at April 24, 2006 6:19 PM
Blood, blood, blood.
That's all they think about
is blood to feed the molech,
a monster screaming, demanding submission.
So primitive, so twisted with false ideas
of honor and pride, the brain stymied
by the box of islam, the heart hardened
by hate, the only love, death. How sad.
at April 24, 2006 9:21 PM
"Does anyone here think that the FBI or CIA or MI5 should assign all agents to read this site as it is the most valuable educational resource I have ever encountered about the nature of the threat we face?"
-- from a posting above
Yes.
Posted by: Hugh at April 25, 2006 1:36 AM
There's culture. The Fur, Zaghawa and Massalit tribes are farmers, and their culture is more traditional African, they speak their own languages as well. The janjaweed, on the other hand, are pastoral nomads and speak Arabic only. They have completely identified with the Arab cultural imperialism of Islam. Also, the pastoralists and farmers seem to be in major competition for resources.
It's an eye-opener for a Sudanese 'Arab' to travel to one of the Gulf countries (and many of them do in search of work). They're likely to be called 'Abeed' or 'Abd', which means slave.
I also wanted to comment on the main post:
"I know he called for a hudna some time ago. If this tape is really new, he has a better opinion of the Muslims' prospects now."
I think OBL (if it really is OBL) figures that we ignored his offer of a hudna, so now he's going to lay down the law... by redirecting his exploding idiot friends from blowing up Baghdad markets to blowing up desolate portions of Western Sudan? We were probably supposed to fall all over ourselves in a rush to accept his oh-so-generous terms for a hudna.
Posted by: doolz at April 25, 2006 12:24 PM
What has the West done to Hamas? Cut off the jizya. This is aggression?
Instead of sounding like a Caliph in waiting, OBL sounds like a welfare queen. Instead of warning about warfare, he is whining about welfare. Couldn't he write out a check for $50Million himself???
at April 25, 2006 9:02 PM
Two, there is a Western war on Muslims and Islam.
+++++++++++++
Not yet.
Posted by: Texican at April 26, 2006 9:37 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)