Parihaka

Lovely anology, unfortunately the bombers ideological software isn't in competition with the state, it is supplied by the state. (read religion if you prefer) There is no competition or desire to prevent the promulgation of the software, infact as both Ray and Bluesman have pointed out, the 'software', oh hell lets call it what it really is, the indoctrination of people burn churches and to strap bombs to their bodies and go and kill as many men, women and children as they can, is actively encouraged by 'the state', oh hell lets call that what it is too, Islam.
It is indeed easy to rationalize:
Sure most people who are Islamic aren't terrorists, just like most Christians weren't crusaders, but that doesn't excuse the leaders of Islam it's current atrocities.

Parihaka

I was very much entertained today to read some old threads pointed out to me by OoE. Amongst many other interesting observations M21Sniper had some pithy comments. I'd like not to quote him here but to paraphrase what I think he meant, and I do hope he doesn't mind.
There is no need to understand the mind of your enemy, only how best to put a bullet through it.

Ray

Sword,

Agreed.

But who, in your opinion should provide the water and lead the horse to drink it, even if by some sort of an incentive attached?

The Moslem world or the non Moslem world?

And what should be this "water" and "incentive"?

My point is that while the non Moslem world cannot fathom Islam's nuances, the Islamic world fathom each aspect of Islam and can counter the incorrect interpretation of the terrorists and their sympathisers, especially the clerics who alone are deriving maximum benefit, since they are becoming omnipotent and a total menace to all.

Therefore, the Islamic scholars who realise the folly can counter point by point the mad mullahs who are goading the terrorists.

I am sure the Islamic world will see the fallacy that the terrorists have embarked on, interpreting Islamic verses that suit their purpose.

and

Do clarify how ummah which transcend man made demarcation such as borders and unites the Islamic world in thought can at the same time harbour nationalism.

Nationalism is the evolution of history of the region and culture and it need not have any similarity to the Arab culture on which Islam is based.

How is this mismatch, matched?

However, it is a wonderment to me when the majority of Moslems claim descent from the Arabs and recluctantly, from the Persians! In other words, there is no idigenous Moslem!

I am sure that is what all desire,

But there is no movement within the moderates and they seem to have been swamped into silence!

__________________


"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

HAKUNA MATATA

Swift Sword

Some radical Muslim groups who practice terror are indeed sponsored by states but I think it a bit of a stretch to assume that all Muslim states sponsor terror.

In any case, if a Muslim state secular or otherwise will not supply competing ideas, interested third parties can easily do so, even as part of a private initiative.

There are no rules saying that governments have a monopoly on fighting terroism (or sponsoring it, for that matter) individuals, NGOs and even multi national corporations are all free to join in the reindeer games.

Come to think of it, when I think of some of the effective propaganda campaigns waged by MNCs against states, here we might have part of the solution for Muslim and Western governments that are dragging their feet on combatting terror.

I have been studying the subject for fifteen years and have yet to determine exactly who "the leaders of Islam" are. But, then again, I never could find the Elders of Zion either.

Ray

Swift Sword

Ideally, secular Muslim actors would be reasonable candidates but they are not the only choices.

I am open to suggestions but with our agreed upon caveat: diffrent medicine for different patients. There is a lever out there which move the Islamic world, it just has to be found and employed wisely.

Agreed. However, the non Muslim world can study the subject to great profit just the same; I am absolutely amazed at how much there is to learn about it.

Ultimately, your proposition that Islamic jurisprudence is the biggest club in the bag is correct in my opinion.

This is essentially sound reasoning. The key here is to find people with enough credibility to not be denounced by terrorist counter propaganda as "Zio Crusader Imperialist Pig Dog Lackeys".

Someone who might invoke ijtihad would be a big plus but this leads us to Shi'ite and Sufi groups, a policy that might carry its own complications.

The moderate Pan Islamist promotes the idea that Muslims should live in individual states but with some sort of overarching Islamic harmony. There is no reason why those states could not be secular entities or a mix of entities including nationalist and Islamic governments. This is a bit of an oversimplified explanation of their goals but it is a Hell of a lot more palatable than what the radical Pan Isalmisists are pimping.

Which is exactly why an interested party should look to them: when there is enough perceived distance between the radicals and the rest of Islam, the target will be out in the open and subject to attack from both within and without.

What I am advocating, basically, to use Western political terminology is a construct best described as a center right coalition to fight the influence of the fundamentalist, radical ideologies in Islam

Swift Sword

Anybody can be a leader in Isalm. If your knowledge and interpretation of Koran and Hadith can sway enough to follow you, you are in the game.

Radical, political Islam has taken to the INTERNET and mass media like ducks to water and this is a key mechanism to how a relatively few can reach out to a very many. Handbills, doctrinal material in audio and video formats and all the rest are available for immediate download and distribution.

One literate man in a Paris flat can get all the radical Islamic propaganda materials he requires instantly and then distribute them far and wide in ghettos filled with immigrants of varying degrees of literacy and perceptions of disenfranchisement.

Essentially, one can study the problem through the lens of what terrorist organizations on the fringe of the right wing of US politics call "leaderless resistance": cells form independently around the germ of widely dissemenated propaganda.

Again check out Hizb ut Tahrir's INTERNET presence http://www.hizb-ut-tahrir.org/
This is just one tiny piece of a wide ranging phenomenon.

Ray

Anoop C

Swift Sword,

Can you provide examples for these cases? Do you count Egypt as an example of the successful case?

Swift Sword

You are correct that most Sunni sects have been out of the ijtihad business for a thousand years. However, Sunnis do not have a monopoly on Islam so there are some opportunities to shop around.

Quote:

You suggest since anything suggested by a non Moslem is haram. In India, there was a case where the court gave a judgement on a divorce issue which the Mullahs said would not be recognised since it was given by a non Moslem.

He who pens a message and he who delivers it do not have to be the same person.

Ray

Swift Sword

Anoop,

What I was getting at is the idea that terrorists/guerillas/insurgents have in the past proven susceptible to counter propaganda.

In the last few years, stories have surfaced from time to time of family members of suicide bombers turning in would be bombers as well as would be bombers turning themselves in. In these cases, products of PSYOPS campaigns were mentioned as entering into the decision making processes of the actors involved. Apologies for not having the relavent cites on hand.

Another historically valid example of the priniciple I am advocating would be the propaganda effort that generated recruits for the Kit Carson Scouts during the US Army's stay in Vietnam.

Some Islamic militants and those that support them can no doubt be convinced to defect or otherwise turned; given even a cursory cost benefit analysis, it is certainly worth the try.

Swift Sword

I saw that on a bumper sticker at the last gun show.

It is no doubt a sound tactical principle but has proven somewhat wanting at the strategic level.

Forget the widely dissemenated propaganda that calls "Iraq the central front in the Global War on Terror" where "we lure terrorists like moths to a flame so we can destroy them". The combat zone extends from Pole to Pole in every Time Zone and is populated by a variety of enemies, many of whom cannot be reached with bullets. PSYOPS and INFOWAR weapons have a tendancy of going through the mind of your enemy at times and places where other weapons will not reach him.

Swift Sword

And if that does not work, we will find someone else to wave the Green Flag. I have heard it said that "once you have people conditioned to follow the flag, they will not pay attention to who is carrying it".

Anoop C

Swift Sword,

The penetration of Israeli agents in the Palestinian populations of Gaza and West Bank would be proof of success at the individual or at least, small scale level. Jessica Stern's interviews with some Pakistani mid-ranking jihadis who were waiting for a way out of the mess, would also substantiate your views.

However, I think this is a different problem from the one the article was referring to. Your posts deal with how to identify and turn potentially violent jihadis before they wreak havoc. The larger problem is how to cap and roll-back the recruitment pool of jihadis from the large population of Muslims, given that many Muslims are unwilling to publicly distance themselves from the terrorists that take their name - the Morroccan and Jordanian counter-examples being rare.

It is true that political divisions between Muslim states are such that they make a mockery of the Ummah concept - the kind of horse-trading that goes on in the OIC is ample proof of that. However, that in itself does not translate to reduced tolerance of jihadis across borders, simply because the jihadis appeal not to political dispensations in Muslim countries for support, but to the populace's religious faith, that in their view, transcends political borders.

So my question is - what practical steps can a non-Muslim take to demonstrate that jihadis are doing Muslims a far greater dis-service than a Kafr does, without calling into question the piety of Muslims? Specifically, how does a non-Muslim compete with the legitimacy of Islamic scholars in the interpretation of their holy book, so that it aligns the book's teachings with the compulsions of living in a modern day society, governed by man-made laws?