A Reprise on Sheikh al-Qaradawi
It is always interesting to me to see what the supposed “moderates” with whom so many want an “interfaith dialogue” really have to say, in their own words, to their preferred audiences.
Because we are largely unable to grasp the concept of taqiyya or spiritually-sanctioned deception of unbelievers, we always seem shocked when things and people are not what they appear on the Islamist side.
Yet it happens every day. The statements below have appeared, in varying forms, by Sheikh al Qaradawi and others, but I find it useful to remind myself of what we are really dealing with in the case of the Brotherhood and its attempt to straddle two worlds-the West through denial and deception campaigns, and its base of Islamists with a far different message than what we usually hear.
Thanks to the Middle East Media Research Institute’s TV Monitoring Project, we have the tape and translation of Youseff al Qaradawi,-the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and revered cleric in the Islamist movements-at his most comfortable, speaking on Qatar TV on Feb. 25, 2006.
This is not a marginal man on a speaking to the fringes. His books, sermons and interviews abound on the Brotherhood’s official sites. By his own admission, he turned down the Brotherhood’s top job , that of chairman. His TV call in shows and televised sermons are extremely popular in the Middle East, as are his online comments.
.
Let’s go to the tape, as it directly relates to the physical, earthly Caliphate and the conflict in the Middle East:
“They must not allow anyone to take a single piece of land away from Islam. That is what we are fighting the Jews for…Our religion commands us, we are fighting in the name of religion, in the name of Islam, which makes this jihad an individual duty in which the entire nation takes part, and whoever is killed in this (Jihad) is a martyr. That is why I ruled that martyrdom operations are permitted, because he commits martyrdom for the sake of Allah and sacrifices his soul for the sake of Allah.”
Perhaps those who have written and said it was not clear the Sheikh endorsed suicide bombing would reconsider. And those who seem to deliberately leave him out of their discussion of the Brotherhood do so, it is pretty clear why they do. But that is only the beginning.
Al Qaradawi gets to the heart of the matter in his sermon, Islam and war a little later. Again, to the tape:
“We do not disassociate Islam from war. On the contrary, disassociating Islam from war is the reason for our defeat. We are fighting in the name of Islam. Religion must lead to war. This is the only way we can win.”
No further comment necessary.
commenting closed for this article
Colombia's Mounting Troubles The Shifting Balance in the al Qaeda/Salafist Structure
Doug: you are absolutely correct of course, and may I add:
the below quote is from an “Ed Husain”; a Former British Islamist, who joined the radicals in Britain, before being one of the few to actually come back to the other side, EVERY American should be forced to read these words, and realize the dreaded import of what he is saying:
“We believed that the Muslim ummah was in a state of war with the West, particularly Britain, France, Russia, and the United States,” says Husain. “Our enemies were kafir, not deserving of our honesty or integrity.” Nor were these enemies (which is to say the rest of us: white, black, Asian, Christian, moderate Muslim) deserving of life. “As an Islamist, I believed that the taking of Jewish and non-Muslim lives was perfectly acceptable if it would facilitate Islamist domination,” he says. “Only Muslims were worthy of our attention; and then only those Muslims who would listen to us.”
BTW, I was the First person, to educate the IC, and the United States Government, on the practice of “Taqiyyah”; I’ve been doing it for 15 years!
Taqiyah
And a tremendous article on Qaradawi, from Pajamas Media, that butresses exactly what you say:
The Silencing
— Dale in Atlanta May 18, 13:49 #
The Silencing
Sorry, the link is above!
— Dale in Atlanta May 18, 13:52 #
Wow, my URL links aren’t coming thru:
The Silencing:
http://www.pajamasmedia.com/2007/05/the_silencing.php
Taqiyah:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqiyah
— Dale in Atlanta May 18, 13:53 #
PPS: Ed Husain joined a radical SUNNI group in Britain, notice this comment: “Our enemies were kafir, not deserving of our honesty or integrity.”
Remember that, when some Muslims will attempt to throw you off the track with “Taqiyah”, by saying it is a “Shia” practice!
I’ve disproved that, for 15 years!
— Dale in Atlanta May 18, 13:55 #
America is just as noncommittal to a global peacebuilding initiative as “moderate” Muslims are – war and its attendant sophistication is the conduct of choice on both sides. It is the choice of those who have the power and influence to act. I have heard nothing from the Bush Administration re: global peacebuilding initiative. I have heard nothing from moderate Muslims re:a global peacebuilding initiative…
— Philip Henika May 18, 16:39 #
Actually Philip, I beg to differ, and because of you, I’ve had my eyes open for this type of thing, please kindly read, then tell me what you think, and, if what you say above, jibes with this?
http://www.kuwaittimes.net/read_news.php?newsid=MTI1MDM1Mjk1Mw==
— Dale in Atlanta May 18, 16:54 #
As you know, I think the policy objectives in the Philippines as outlined from a recent ASEAN conference are the closest I have observed to ‘full’ package counterterrorism policy.
A ‘full’ package policy includes both military and peacebuilding roles. If America can manage both then perhaps anti-America sentiment will hopefully decline. Yes, America is coming around e.g.
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php?CID=2604
— Philip Henika May 18, 17:17 #
Philip: part of the reason why I’ve been so vociferously argumentative with your approach over the past couple of weeks, is that I grew up overseas, starting in 1966, while my father worked for an organization that does nothing BUT “peace building” initiatives, as you call them, and that is USAID!
My father (87 years old, and retired for 20years now); is a Horticulturalist by trade, and he spent 40 years in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia, spending BILLIONS of Taxpayer’s dollars, most of them in Muslim countries/populations, trainng people to raise Tilapia, Poultry, Pigs (non-Muslims obviously); Cattle, Rice, Rubber, Cocao, Oil Palms, etc.!
BILLIONS, over a 40 year career; and obviously, he is not the only one having done so!
Additoinally, I was in the Marine Corps for 12+ years, and I know the military very well, and during my time in the Corps, the Corps, and other services actually spent MORE TIME, building schools, cleaning up trash, building clean water supplies, etc., in places as diverse as Northern Iraq, Philippines, Somalia, West Afrian, South America, ad naseum!
The United States military, starting in the 1980’s, spent more money, and time, and deployments, and resources, on Hurricane and Typhoon Rescue, Peace Keeping missions, Sea Rescue, and any number of other what are called “LIC’s”; low-intensity confflict scenarios, or otherwise known as “Permissive” scenarios.
It was all we trained and planned for, for decades.
Heck, if you knew anything about the Green Berets for example, you’d know that is their PRIMARY focus, to tell the truth.
And in Iraq, and Afghanistan, we’re Spending HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS on the reconstruction, “peace initiatives”; schools, universities, newspapers, TV stations, ad naseum!
So to imply, the only thing we do, is destroy, attack, and kill people, even under President Bush, is just blatantly wrong!
In fact, the fighting in Iraq & Afghanistan is all that gets played in the MSM, because they hate President Bush; but that is the absolute MINORITY of their mission; and if the Jihadis, would quite attacking the infrastructure that we, YOU and I as taxpayers, are paying for, sabotaging schools to kill little girls, cutting people’s heads off, blowing up the electric and water infrastructure that we’re trying to reconstruct, attacking American contractors who leave their homes and families to help them rebuild, etc., then maybe we’d have made a lot MORE progress, over the past 5 years, than we have!
Just please take that in to account, the next time you imply that we are not trying any “peach initiatives”, and that all we do is try to kill people!
It is NOT an accurate reflection of our country, our military, our Corps, nor what we’ve done as a people, over the past 63 years actually, since we Reconstructed Europe with the Marshall Plan, actually!
— Dale in Atlanta May 18, 21:10 #
Dale from Atlanta:
Here is quote from the blog I linked above which proves my point that changes in counterterrorism policy are being advanced.
”...Evolution in U.S. Counterterrorism Strategy
The 2006 report indicates that the United States is adapting its approach to countering global terrorism. In the years following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States focused on taking aggressive action against terrorists and maintaining a hard line with foreign governments. This was reflected in the four counterterrorism policy principles outlined in the State Department’s 2004 report: (1) make no concessions to terrorists and strike no deals, (2) bring terrorists to justice, (3) isolate and pressure state sponsors of terrorism, and (4) improve the counterterrorism capabilities of allies.
This year’s report strikes a different tone. While the United States still must eliminate the leadership of terrorist organizations, the report notes that “incarcerating or killing terrorists will not achieve an end to terrorism.” According to the report, one of the most important and challenging aspects of combating terrorism is “addressing the underlying conditions that terrorists exploit,” which include “geo-political issues, lack of economic opportunity and political participation, ethnic conflict, ungoverned space, or political injustice.” In addition, a section of the report is devoted to “the struggle of ideas,” and how the United States is incorporating public diplomacy into its counterterrorism efforts in an effort to counter the “extremist rhetoric and disinformation coming from hostile groups…”
I am curious – do you accept that globalization has replaced the Cold War?
— Philip Henika May 18, 22:32 #
Philip: I saw the report you quoted above a couple of days ago.
I think it’s a bit overblown, in the sense that we never abandoned the war of ideas, peace inititives, etc., foreign aid, etc.; that’s a “spin” being put on this, to make it as usual, a criticism of President Bush, where none could exist before; that’s all!
“incarcerating or killing terrorists will not achieve an end to terrorism.”
This IS true, only in the sense that we cannot kill them all!
We however, are NOT killing enough of them, and we are killing a lot of the wrong ones; we should be targeting ALL Salafi/Jihadi Imams who preach hate, and violence, unabashed, every Friday morning, in their Mosques!
“addressing the underlying conditions that terrorists exploit,” which include “geo-political issues, lack of economic opportunity and political participation, ethnic conflict, ungoverned space, or political injustice.”
I’ve addressed this before, in another post between us, and it’s a wrongheaded, “PC” strawman!
These things do NOT cause “terrorism”; if it was true, then everyone in Moldova would be a terrorist due to lack of Political expression, so would One BILLION Chinese, and because of Poverty, millions of Haitians, etc.!
No, Jihadi/Salafiyyah and over Violent IDEOLOGIES, create terrorism, pure and simple!
I am curious – do you accept that globalization has replaced the Cold War?
Please explain further, I’m too thickheaded to understand what you are driving at here?
— Dale in Atlanta May 18, 22:53 #
Globalization is simply global reach – the means by which, for example, “global” terrorist groups are established; means that were not available during the Cold War such as, for example, the Internet.
I spent roughly two years engaged in the effort to get terrorist Internet Sites TOSSED – accounts cancelled due to violations of terms of service. It was bad business practice, I argued, to support Internet sites whose conduct, in a few cases, included videos of beheadings. In spite of the TOSSING efforts of private citizens and with no help whatsoever from the Bush Administration, terrorist and wannabe sites grew to ~4000 with ~20-30 hard core Al Qaeda sites. Al Qaeda was allowed carte’ blanche access to the Internet for recruitment and even on-line motivation in war zones.
I have other examples but I do not want to bog down this discussion.
Globalization also means ‘global’ reach for the peace process. It means that the success of military/peacebuilding efforts in the Philippines can obtain global reach as well.
What we really need is President Bush on-board with this innovation of the peace process.
Otherwise the Philippines model will become isolated.
Globalization calls for new semantics and precedent so my question for you is – how can this effort be conveyed without becoming “overblown”; without becoming “spin”?
I am sorry but I haven’t heard President Bush or the Democrats or moderate Muslims as well openly and specifically convey support for a “global peacebuilding initiative” i.e. a peace process with global reach and which deals with multiple factors such as climate change, Internet, violence, disease and energy efficiency.
Finally, peacebuilders such as the Carter Center have learned from past experience that helping people to help themselves is less invasive and a cheaper alternative to the Cold War “peacebuilding initiatives” that you described above.
— Philip Henika May 19, 11:04 #
Philipe, Check these guys out
http://www.businesswithoutborers.com
They have a thing called SEED Centers – Servant Entrepreneur Enterprise Development
— Shimron Issachar May 20, 00:49 #
Thanks Shimron,
You may also want to check out how the Carter Center works in foreign countries. In Sudan and Uganda, for example, they negociated to reunite families from civil war, to eradicate guinea worm disease and to help with farming practices. The Carter Center identifies factors that effect the health and prosperity of people. They help them to get started and then they leave. Yes, it is risky because the hope is that these healthy people will find peaceful resolution in combination with their chosen religious beliefs.
— Philip Henika May 20, 11:23 #
Philip, your ‘teach a man to fish’ program works beautifully until the subject turns to religion. Did you read the final quote in the post?
“We do not disassociate Islam from war. On the contrary, disassociating Islam from war is the reason for our defeat. We are fighting in the name of Islam. Religion must lead to war. This is the only way we can win.”
Does this allow for any teaching of agriculture? I’m afraid that Dale is closer to a peaceful world than you are, because of taqyyia and your desire to believe it.
— Mike H. (USMC)73-82 May 22, 03:25 #
Philip: you were doing okay, and I was ready to maybe start a serious dialog with you, THEN you had to bring up CARTER and the “Carter Center”!
There is no worse President of the past century, no worse FORMER President, no more deluded buffoon in dealing with the Jihadis, than Jimmy Carter!
The current mess in the Middle East, with Hezbollah in Lbbanon, and the Mullahs in Iran, go directly to his door; and the price we will pay in American blood, when we finally have to militarily take on Iran, will all be on his head!
He is a Pro-Jihadi, Anti-American clown, and Anti-Semitic as well!
Philip, my advice to you, if you want to be taken serioulsy, is to disassociate yourself from that clown, as quickly as possible!
— Dale in Atlanta May 22, 09:48 #
Dale from Atlanta:
I used the Carter Center model because of how they proceeded in a nonpartisan and nondemominational ‘peacebuilding’ mode in the Sudan and Uganda.
Dale, you persistantly attack the messenger rather then focus on the example. I am quilty of the same frustration with the Bush Administration and I am sure we could continue going toe-to-toe on every issue and every person
that is brought up at this blog.
Let me reiiterate – I am interested in global peacebuilding initiative as a counterterrorism measure i.e. countermotivation. Since examples of peacebuilding initiatives are few and far between, I point them out, discuss them and assess their success or failure.
Basically, when windows of opportunity open for a lasting and pragmatic peace, I want to see peacebuilding initiative on the scene.
Sorry, I am a Carter Center member.
— Philip Henika May 22, 15:06 #
Philip: you don’t have to be “sorry”; I figured that out, as soon as you brought it up the last time.
I have to think about this…..actually…
Jimmy Carter is epitome of everything I despise, and he earns that every day, including his most recent comments….
His history of Anti-Semitism….
His history of sucking up to facists, dictators, and thugs, because they’re Anti-American…
His history of Anti-Americanism, even when he was President of the United States…
His selling out of US allies in Tehran and Nicaragua…
His coddling and enabling of the North Korean dictatorship…
His enabling of the Palestinian militants and literally encouraging them against the Israelis…
I’ll go so far, as to seperate you, from him, but it’s a lot to ask me to forgive….
I’ll let you know; I have to think about this….
— Dale in Atlanta May 22, 15:49 #
Dale from Atlanta:
I have also discussed the methods of the Carter Center with my private email group of five years.
The discussions are all in the same vein i.e. counterterrorism is a global effort with contributions from a variety of disciplines i.e. military, technology, economics etc.
It is interesting to pose a checklist of what must happen before global peacebuilding initiative can take hold.
The Carter Center and the Philippine government have advanced such a ‘checklist’.
In the Philippines Abu Sayyaf and JI leaders were captured or killed
with advise and intel from the US.
In this regard, I totally agree with you.
And you know what I am going to say next i.e. once secure peacebuilding can commense.
This year we have seen many cases where the checklist cannot proceed i.e. Somalia (due to power struggle amongst warlords) and Iraq (due to genocide and refugees).
If you follow The Counterterrorism Blog, you will find the multidiscipline discussions re: counterterrorism that I allude to but only touch on here.
— Philip Henika May 22, 16:56 #