| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Sheikha Sajida explains it all for you at Al-Jazeera. She begins her answer by saying that the concept of jihad has been -- you guessed it -- "misinterpreted by the Western media," and it just goes downhill from there. But this is a good example of how in appearing to put a good face on things, or at least attempting to, an Islamic apologist actually confirms the legitimacy of jihad violence in the service of Sharia supremacism.
Hi Sheikha,What is Jihad? We keep hearing this word even in our media, however, regardless to the negative portrayal the main stream Western media provides, I’m sure many Europeans and Americans, as much as I, don’t know the exact meaning of the word.
Is it terrorism? Is it carrying weapons to attract more adherents to your religion?
Or is it carrying weapons to fight the infidels, like what the Muslims used to do some 1400 years ago?
Steve B. from the States
Dear Steve,
The concept of Jihad has been misinterpreted by the Western media as what some refer to as “religious militancy”, in ther words, using weapons to fight for the cause of one’s religion, regardless of whether fighting is against a true enemy or not, and regardless of weather it’s justified and being carried out against the right target or not.
Sure. The Western media made up the idea that jihad was religious militancy fought with weapons. Osama bin Laden works for the New York Times, after all, doesn't he? But as you'll see, the Sheikha herself doesn't object to jihad with weapons in every case. Read on.
But “religious militancy”, even if I’m opposed to it, doesn’t arise from vacuum. Human history has many examples of people becoming extremists and carrying weapons to fight dictator rule or bad social circumstances.
In other words, I may be opposed to it, but it may be justified.
“Religious militancy” in my view, is the outcome of extremism, which had been attributed to many factors including poverty, suppression, dictator rule, injustice, unemployment… etc.
In this the Sheikha sounds just like most Western analysts and government officials. Never mind the relative affluence of most jihadists, as has been amply documented by many studies we have noted here over the years. But the main object of her statement is to shift attention away from anything in Islam that might be giving rise to violence. And of course, nobody much is willing to consider the possibility that such elements of Islam might exist.
Despite continuous attempts to link Jihad to militancy, or so-called religious militancy, the concept of Jihad, carries a totally different meaning.The word Jihad means to fight or struggle in the way of God, and the verb “fight” here is not limited to "fight" using weapons, it can be fighting to become a respectable and successful Muslim, fighting one’s greed, fighting one’s evil intentions by praying and fasting regularly. It means fighting for the cause of Islam, which still doesn’t mean aggressive warfare. Jihad can be by tongue, by words and by knowledge.
It "still doesn't mean aggressive warfare," except when it does -- again, read on.
It can be carried out by being a successful and an effective member in the society.But Jihad using weapons, exemplified in the Palestinians’ fight against the Israeli occupiers (which is definitely justified) is the only meaning the West stress in their interpretation of Jihad, linking it to terrorism and militancy, and limiting its meaning to “killing the enemies of Islam” in an attempt to further shatter the image of Islam and its followers, whom they always portray as “evil souls”.
"Evil souls." I don't know who she is claiming to quote here, but in any case her position is completely ludicrous. The aggressive warfare carried out by the Palestinians against Israel, including evidently jihad martyrdom attacks on civilians, is "definitely justified," while it is "the West" that has "limited" the meaning of jihad to "killing the enemies of Islam," all in a dastardly attempt to ruin Islam's pristine image.
Well, I've got news for you, Sheikha. It isn't "the West" that has ruined Islam's image by focusing attention on jihad violence. It is Osama bin Laden, and the 7/7 bombers, and the 3/11 bombers, and the Bali bombers, and the perpetrators of the Beslan massacres, and jihadists from Nigeria to Thailand to Indonesia who have focused attention on the meaning of jihad that involves killing, and tarnished the enemies of Islam. "The West" doesn't give two hoots about the meaning of jihad as inner spiritual struggle, Sheikha, because your inner spiritual struggle doesn't explode all over a bus and kill innocent civilians.
Do you want to improve Islam's image, Sheikha? Then stop railing against "the West," and work to eradicate whatever you might consider as illegitimate "religious militancy" from the Islamic community -- if there is indeed any Islamic religious militancy that is not justified as far as you're concerned.
But it gets even worse:
Another point I need to stress here is that while Jihad is linked to Muslims and Islam- militancy, extremism and terrorism on the other hand are not limited to Muslims, we have Jewish and Christian militant groups, terror organisations and extremists.Theodore Hertzl, a Jew, was the founder of terrorism in occupied Palestine. And we have the American Christian terrorist Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma bomber. But those who wish to ruin the image and the world’s respect for Islam focus only on Muslim terrorists, as if the world’s followers of Islam are all terrorists.
Unfortunately, while religion should be a weapon to mobilize and unite people, it had always been misused throughout human history.
But of course Herzl was not a terrorist at all, or an observant religious Jew. McVeigh, as useful as he continues to be to those who issue sly justifications for jihad violence (like this one), never attempted to justify the OKC bombing according to Christian religious principles, and his actions were of course never endorsed by any Christian sect -- in stark contrast to Osama bin Laden's Qur'an-filled communiques, and the wide acceptance of jihad violence in the Islamic world.
One might expect this sort of thing from Al-Jazeera. But Sheikha Sajida's reply could just as easily be talking points for the mainstream media and a good number of prominent conservative news outlets as well.
Posted by Robert at December 29, 2006 3:41 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
a female Shake...? a female shakes..? i thought this was not allowed in islam..
Posted by: jihadlove![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at December 29, 2006 4:18 PM
"Theodore Hertzl, a Jew, was the founder of terrorism in occupied Palestine. And we have the American Christian terrorist Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma bomber. But those who wish to ruin the image and the world’s respect for Islam focus only on Muslim terrorists, as if the world’s followers of Islam are all terrorists."
this response is always pulled out of you know where..
at December 29, 2006 4:22 PM
Deception. It's in the DNA of Islam. It's a repulsive aspect of this "religion". This belief-system is the only major belief-system that gives any permission to deception.
Posted by: Frank at December 29, 2006 4:24 PM
Oh dear , i am ever so sorry...i thought that
9/11 was all about killing innocent people.
I stand corrected.
HeHeHe.
at December 29, 2006 4:25 PM
“Religious militancy” in my view, is the outcome of extremism, which had been attributed to many factors including poverty, suppression, dictator rule, injustice, unemployment… etc.""
BLAH BLAH BLAH. What a load. Same pathetic lefty excuse for evil. Oh...he/she must have had a bad childhood...or he/she must have been suppressed or treated unfairly.....or he/she gets involved in murder, etc., because they have no job. Spare me.
People do evil because THAT is what they CHOOSE. You obey and live for God or you live against Him..i.e. do what you desire, ignoring God. There is no grey area.
By the way....Lucifer (the devil) had it pretty wonderful by all accounts....so why did he rise up against God? Was it a bad childhood? Was he abused? Did he live in poverty?
She's an idiot.
at December 29, 2006 4:30 PM
But Timothy McVeigh suffered from PTSD, was alienated, humiliated, and had a root cause justification in the burning of the Waco compound. We should pity him and find ways to appease others who might be like him. Oh, and I blame UK foreign policy.
(Their arguments can only be revealed in their idiotic glory if you apply them to other people.)
Posted by: Beagle at December 29, 2006 4:31 PM
BEING MUSLIM MEANS "NEVER HAVING TO SAY YOU'RE SORRY."
Sorry to repost this, but it's very enlightening!
Yesterday, I came across the following exchange of comments at www.inshallahshaheed.wordpress.com:
A poster wrote in:
"None of us (kafireen, as you call them) are confused about the terrorists being true Muslims. Indeed, Islam is a religion of terror, as the posters above have pointed out. I guess this is why 3 Christian girls in Indonesia were beheaded by Muslims who were trying to do a service for Allah. Were these Muslims ‘resistance fighters’? I think not. We are accused of violating God’s law and therefore need to be terrorized. How do you reconcile terrorism with the sixth commandment (God’s Law)? Since the Qur’an affirms the Scriptures as divinely inspired?
And the Jihadi Creep wrote back:
So how do you know that those three girls weren’t part of the army or saying things against Islam or insulting the Religion of Islam? Islam is not just a Religion, mind you, it is a complete System and even much more than a mere government that we are ordered to live under and establish in a concrete manner.
Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 29, 2006 03:53 PM
at December 29, 2006 4:32 PM
Ynkedoodl2...that Jihadi Creep is a British muslim....I know this by the WAY he writes....the 'mind you' comment is very British.
He is a perfect example of why we moved from England to the States. Someone had better get busy here and squash this kind of thinking before it's too late......or we will be dealing (on a much larger scale) with the same barbaric idiots here.
Posted by: The Goobs at December 29, 2006 4:36 PM
Goobs,
I agree. There is something uniquely malevolent about British Muslims. I do believe that England will again become (as in Caesar's time) a "damp island full of warring tribes."
BTW, Glad to have you with us. As for that Jihadi Creep, I am not the only one to be forwarding his messages to the San Francisco F.B.I. There is no room in civilization for Islam, it's a plague.
Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at December 29, 2006 4:46 PM
She's an idiot only insofar as she thinks she can con all of us with her dissimulation, which I find detestable. Who believes this merde anyway, once one had read the Qur'an and translations of ahadith. Read Robert's latest book and you will find how the Prophet defined "jihad." "To fight in the way of Allah" means exactly the military struggle to dominate the unbelievers.
No, she is not an idiot. She knows the truth, but chooses to lie.
at December 29, 2006 4:47 PM
Why is it every that every event in Iraq is reported (often inaccurately or fictitiously) it is on the news. When ever there is an Amber Alert it is breaking news. When Islamist BEHEAD innocent children - not a word.
ISLAM is terrorism. Not because I say so, but because the violent barbarians who call themselves Muslims say so. They get the last word because they are the only ones talking. Whatever so called moderate Muslims have to say about it is like a whisper in a hurricane.
The outrage is not there (for a number of reasons) - result moderates do not get a vote.
The Crusaders were not Christianity. The Inquisitors were not Christianity. The KKK is not Christianity. This has been loudly proclaimed.
Time is running out for "Moderates". They may not get the chance to condemn the Islamist at this rate.
Posted by: Agrippa at December 29, 2006 4:51 PM
Exactly.....She's an idiot - she isn't clever enough to fool anyone.
Posted by: The Goobs at December 29, 2006 4:52 PM
Call it Jihad or call it something else. It dosen't matter. What matters is what is demonstrated by Islam, the vile being spewed, the murders, beheadings, "death to the west" "death to Israel" wishes of genocide and subjugation. There is little misinterpretation of all this. They can call it Islamic love if they wish, I don't care!
Posted by: sounder at December 29, 2006 4:54 PM
I think I could have explained it better, with far fewer words:
Jihad is the manifestation of religious and social retardation, resulting from the worshipping of a false god and repeated pediphelia assaults.
The result is the urge to kill yourself and everyone around you.
at December 29, 2006 4:55 PM
Black Dog.....excellent definition! lol
Posted by: The Goobs at December 29, 2006 5:09 PM
. . . . . .your inner spiritual struggle doesn't explode all over a bus and kill innocent civilians . . . Classic.
at December 29, 2006 5:10 PM
". . . . . .your inner spiritual struggle doesn't explode all over a bus and kill innocent civilians . . . Classic."
well...in the case of these murderous mohamedans, your innards explode all over the bus in your spiritual struggle...
at December 29, 2006 5:14 PM
Her answers would be hilarious were it not for the fact that we have so many fools and tools among us who actually believe it. I can deal with the enemy's deception. I won't lose any sleep over it. What I have a hard time with our our chattering classes and foreign policy wonks who by dint of their ambitions and positions have our lives in their hands. It is their obdurate refusal to read the Qur'an, Sunnah, and life of the Prophet that makes them take this woman's remarks and fit them into their pre-conceived templates of how to interpret the world. Our lives are literally in very poor hands and even worse minds, despite their degrees from elite institutions.
at December 29, 2006 5:22 PM
To which “mainstream western media” does Sheikha Sajida refer?
Does she mean the New Duranty Times, which purposely prints national security secrets that provide aid and comfort to the misunderstood jihadis.
Or is it in reference to the refusal of the WaPo to print the word “terrorist” in any “news” story that may be linked to the word “muslim” and instead labels these as “militants” or “freedom fighters”.
Perhaps she means the global media that reports continual rioting by “disaffected youth” in Paris or various locales in England and elsewhere in Europe.
Surely she does not include the “news” organization CNN, which signed its impartiality and credibility over to the devil to keep its Baghdad offices by never reporting on widespread mass torture and murder conducted regularly by Saddam and Sons (in fact what did commie news network report on during that time).
It couldn’t be the House of Saud’s very own US propaganda organ “Fox News”, which at this very moment subtly elicits pity for a murderous terror backing dictator – hours away from execution – while not once displaying even one victim of the mad man’s terror.
Could it be the AP – with numerous “firsts” e.g. “advance warning of 9/11 terror attacks by the Embassy of Israel to its citizens in NY City”.
Is it the media that eagerly accepted and broadcast or published immediately the fauxtography propaganda during the latest Israeli defense activities.
It must be the “entertainment wing” of western media she refers to – such as “Rosie O’Donnell” who understands that jihadis are actually “freedom fighters” or the need for major motion pictures resources to rewrite history so that audiences will now understand that if not for evil white European Christians –there would have been no need for enslavement and destruction of all peoples and territories not originally Islamic.
Maybe it’s the entire western “media” which refuses to report any of the thousands of acts of violence committed by jihadis the world over including the victims of September 11th, 2001.
I am confused – (but that’s what Sajida and her fellow jihadis and dhimmi supports wish).
at December 29, 2006 5:46 PM
"McVeigh, as useful as he continues to be to those who issue sly justifications for jihad violence (like this one), never attempted to justify the OKC bombing according to Christian religious principles, and his actions were of course never endorsed by any Christian sect -- in stark contrast to Osama bin Laden's Qur'an-filled communiques, and the wide acceptance of jihad violence in the Islamic world."
Not only were Timothy McVeigh's actions not based on religion, the killing of innocent people discredited his secular cause - citizen militias. Those who might have listened to, and sympathized with, his charges about Waco were turned against his cause by his own actions.
Who in the Muslim world has ever disowned those who commit acts of terror that kill innocents? The day such acts and their perpetrators are denounced rather than celebrated is a day we may never see.
at December 29, 2006 5:48 PM
Sheika I used to be more than tolerant of Muslims. In fact I quite liked my Psychology tutor at college. The local religious leader who bought cars from my parents was a star of a guy too.
But then some Muslims started detonating themselves abroad, and then here in Britain we too felt their wrath. The media came out with the usual BS about misguided souls and poverty. But those monsters that blew up innocent people in London were not poor and if they were misguided, then the video made by their ringleader citing the Koran proved how they were misguided.
In Iraq Saddam kept the lid on militant Islam by crushing it at every opportunity, just like Attaturk did in Turkey. Shame we only saw the brutality and like the fools our leaders are decided to depose him and give the Muslims democracy. The result as been murder and mayhem on an unprecedented scale as MUSLIMS from across the world flood into Iraq seeking power. We should have seen it coming. Look at Chechnya or Afghanistan, wherever there is weakness in a countries government there are Muslims trying to take control.
They attack and claim to be victims, it’s always somebody else’s fault. The dirty Jews or the ‘The West’ it makes no difference. They say they are being repressed in Britain but for all to see they have at least the same protection in the law as everybody else. Some say they are gaining preferred status because of their continual whining and I tend to agree.
So Sheika, when you are feeling particulary put upon by the evil west that as continually put your Arab friends down by buying oil and providing the Middle East with buckets of cash at every opportunity, you will have to forgive me for not shedding a tear. You see while once I saw Muslims as neighbours now I see them as a threat. Not particulary on the local level. I am sure my old psychology teacher isn’t running round Baghdad carrying an AK47. But on a global scale they are the biggest threat the West has faced since the Nazis.
Sorry Sheika but I have noticed that Muslim jihadists dislike overwhelming force and get really touchy about anybody who criticises the faith. If I had my way Sheika your precious religion would be the main topic at this year’s North West Comedy Awards and the next planes to fly to Iran would be making return trips without landing.
I don’t give a damn about your inner struggle. Without oil your region wouldn't register on the world radar and your regions masters would be riding camels, not Kawazakis.
at December 29, 2006 5:49 PM
McVeigh... never attempted to justify the OKC bombing according to Christian religious principles...
Also, it is significant that the last public expression he chose before his execution was a decidedly agnostic poem. Had McVeigh been comparable to Muslim jihadists, he would have chosen quotes from the Bible and/or quotes from the Christian Nicene Creed, or at the very least, mention of God or Jesus. It is amusing (not to mention aggravating and aggrieving) that proponents of the idea that McVeigh's OKC bombing was a "Christian" terrorist act have far less evidence for its religious motivation than there exists for the religious motivation of the Muslim jihadists; and yet such proponents seem to have no problem making the very same religious-motivation charge they otherwise -- when we do it with far more evidence -- dismiss.
But Timothy McVeigh suffered from PTSD, was alienated, humiliated, and had a root cause justification in the burning of the Waco compound.
Also, as McVeigh revealed in letters he wrote from prison to the Leftist millionaire writer, Gore Vidal, his (McVeigh's) personal experience in Iraq in the first Gulf War touched him deeply with a sympathy for those poor Muslims in Iraq who he thought had been so cruelly and callously abused by the evil American government (which, by the way, could have been one motivation for his willingness to be recruited by Iraqi Muslims to blow up the buildings in OKC, as reporter Jayna Davis alleges).
at December 29, 2006 6:34 PM
I'm surprised that invoking the McVeigh meme did not trigger the closely related "abortion doctors," "slavery," "Northern Ireland" and "crusades" memes as well. Bad burkha day at the office for our Sheika.
Posted by: anti-uffe at December 29, 2006 8:08 PM
And we have the American Christian terrorist Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma bomber.
McVeigh was an athiest who received funding, technical assistance, and direct assistance by a group of 10 - 15 Palestinian and Iraqui Moslems to blow up the Murrah Federal Building.
Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at December 29, 2006 8:46 PM
I think Sheikha Sajida's tortured explanation of what Jihad really means in the Islamic world, illustrates perfectly the difference between the Western world and the Islamic world. One values the rational, and the other wallows in delusion and self-deception.
Posted by: rational at December 30, 2006 12:17 AM
The Sheikha should be told that we are familiar with the "other jihads."
No, not the one where a Moslem tries to become a better human being, but the sneaky ones, those of "tongue*" and "pen*."
Read about 'em now. They are featured at
http://islamic-danger.blogspot.com/
-----------
*Those are the jihads that CAIR is using to try and make the US into an Islamic country.
NOTE: if the link above doesn't work, click on my name below. Thanks.
Posted by: unicorns62000 at December 30, 2006 1:24 AM
Sheikla sez:
'The word Jihad means to fight or struggle in the way of God, and the verb “fight” here is not limited to "fight" using weapons, it can be fighting to become a respectable and successful Muslim, fighting one’s greed, fighting one’s evil intentions by praying and fasting regularly. It means fighting for the cause of Islam, which still doesn’t mean aggressive warfare. Jihad can be by tongue, by words and by knowledge...'
"It means fighting for the cause of Islam.."
That's enough, Sheika. Anything and anyone 'fighting the cause of Islam' is my enemy...
Tale your cult and your BS and shove it...
at December 30, 2006 2:57 AM
Sheika,
Given the average Muslim's level of intelligence and intellectual curiosity, as displayed by yourself and others quoted here, it's not possible for you people to have an "inner spiritual struggle".
For crying out loud, who needs "inner spiritual struggle" when your holy book tells you how to wipe your a**? Sounds to me like the entire gist of Islam is to avoid spiritual struggle by inundating Muslims with a litany of rules in their daily lives. What do I know, I'm just an infidel, right? Well, I know spiritual struggle and I haven't seen hide nor hair of it anywhere near any Muslim I've ever met. In fact, your whole problem stems from being too confident in matters of the spirit. Of course, that confidence is based on an incorrect understanding of what "matters of the spirit" are, i.e. your interpretation of God as slave-master, so you are inevitably led to a false sense of confidence by your extremely narrow view of God's essence.
Now, it was observant of Muslim apologists to notice that in the West we do have people who authentically struggle in matters of the spirit and try to utilize this fact in your taqqiya, but, unfortunately for you, those same people are the ones who are against Islam the most, seeing correctly that Islam, with its pat answers to all of life's questions, imported straight from the 7th century, is the death of spiritual struggle.
An excellent example of real spiritual struggle is Saint Augustine's "Confessions". I doubt Islam has anything of the sort, at least in any of its mainstream theological schools.
Posted by: venividivici at December 30, 2006 12:04 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.)