Radical Islamist Ideologies and The Long War

[Tempest1]

Hello Dr,

You have brought up a very good point. The reason I use the term Fundamentalist is to get away from the western perceptions. To look at UBL and this class of people I would not consider them Jihadists (something they want to be called or seen as) but more of a Hirabist. Through their Persuasive Influence they are molding hearts and minds with the way Islam should be and that is associated with the time of Muhammad during the era of Revelation and Enlightenment when Muslims were the bosses and non-Muslims were subjugated to the concept of Dhimmitude and Tolerance.

To me this is what they want to get back to the Fundamentals=Fundamentalists. I consider UBL and al Qaeda a "Global Insurgency" using Asymmetrical Warfare as its means that has evolved from the traditional models of Terrorism of the 20th century. Their desire is to first rid themselves of the Apostate regimes (reference the Neglected Duty, the Assasination of Anwar Sadat) Secular and Moderate Muslims then establish an Islamic Caliphate (all lands previously conquered at one time or another during the Rashidun, Umayyad, Abbisad Caliphates) then the next step would be Global domination.

I believe Mawdudi stated this best "Being Muslim IMPLIES PERPETUAL JIHAD until the whole natural universe is under control and rule of Islam." In 1973 during the The World Assembly of Muslim Youth its founder Sayyid Abdulla al Mawdudi stated, “Jews, the source of the conflict, and Christians, enemies of Islam should be rendered into submission, Islam not only seeks the World, it demands the Universe”.

[marct]

Hi Tempest1,

You have brought up a very good point. The reason I use the term Fundamentalist is to get away from the western perceptions. To look at UBL and this class of people I would not consider them Jihadists (something they want to be called or seen as) but more of a Hirabist.

I would certainly agree with them being irhabi or hirabist.

To me this is what they want to get back to the Fundamentals=Fundamentalists.

I don't disagree with this, either. I would, however, point out that this is not the only form of "fundamentals" contained within Islam. Consider, by way of example, the works of abu-Hamid al-Ghazali for an alternate set of "fundamentals". I certainly agree with your use of the term fundamentalist as far as strength of belief is concerned for UBL and his little coterie of sociopaths. I was only disagreeing with you when you equated strength of belief with content of belief and, by inference, assuming that no "fundamentalist" could work with "us".

I consider UBL and al Qaeda a "Global Insurgency" using Asymmetrical Warfare as its means that has evolved from the traditional models of Terrorism of the 20th century. Their desire is to first rid themselves of the Apostate regimes (reference the Neglected Duty, the Assasination of Anwar Sadat) Secular and Moderate Muslims then establish an Islamic Caliphate (all lands previously conquered at one time or another during the Rashidun, Umayyad, Abbisad Caliphates) then the next step would be Global domination.

Again, I don't disagree with your interpretation (or presentation) of their content. Whether they actually believe it may be another matter.

I believe Mawdudi stated this best "Being Muslim IMPLIES PERPETUAL JIHAD until the whole natural universe is under control and rule of Islam." In 1973 during the The World Assembly of Muslim Youth its founder Sayyid Abdulla al Mawdudi stated, “Jews, the source of the conflict, and Christians, enemies of Islam should be rendered into submission, Islam not only seeks the World, it demands the Universe”.

Again, I think that this is a fairly accurate, from my reading, portrayal of the radical wahabist content and position. But, respectfully, let me point out that this is not he only position within Islam. To assume that it is would be as insane as to assume that Christianity has only a single position; one that was best summed up in the words of the Papal Legate at the siege of Carcassone: "Kill them all, God will know his own".

Marc

[Tempest1]

Hello again Dr,

Thank you for your words. When i get on my soap box I might not be as specific as needed. The Fundamentalists you refer to could they be a hybrid a Moderate Fundamentalist so to speak? As far as Wahhabism vs Salafism I might be wrong in interpretations but I feel the Wahhabists are those who desire to stay within the Middle East particularly Saudi Arabia and enforce their strict interpretation of the Shari'a via the Hudud and living a pious life like that of Prophet. (With an emphasis of change in the leadership of Saudi Arabia) The Salafists have similarities but are the exporters of Mayhem and will bend and break the laws of the Shari'a because they see this as justified means to a righteous End. The selected Salafists/Fundamentalists promote Suicide Bombing and the killing of innocents because it is justified in their Jihad against agressors (Kuffars). The Salafists have repealed the process of Ijma (Consensus) and Qiyas (Reasoning by Analogy and Precedence) and allowed only a strict interpretation of the Quran (might I add only the verses that support their Mayhem).
The Modern day Salafist/Jihadists (Fundamentalists) Basic Operating Guidelines are: The only source of Authority exists with Allah
Rejects the prerequisites for making and issuance of Fetwas (Religious rulings)
Everything Permitted in the name of Allah
NO LIMITS to JIHAD

[marct]

Hi Tempest1,

Thank you for your words. When i get on my soap box I might not be as specific as needed. The Fundamentalists you refer to could they be a hybrid a Moderate Fundamentalist so to speak?

I think we all get goin' on our own soap boxes .

A "Moderate Fundamentalist"? Certainly, as far as the social contract is concerned. I know a fair number of people who would fall into this category: politically moderate in social contract terms and fundamentalist in their own beliefs. On the whole, they would rather convert people as a result of a genuine desire to convert stemming fro their own actions in the world.

One of the hallmarks of people who seem to take this position is that they have struggled with their faith and, having done so, realize how important that struggle is. BTW, I know people in many religions who would fit in this category: Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Wiccans, Ba'Hai, etc. Another hallmark of people in this category is that they appear to be able to recognize that "struggle with God" across religious lines in much the same way that mystics across all traditions recognize each other.

This is really the crowd that we need to mobilize - the true believers who disagree with the content of the irhabi position; who find that content both heretical and repellent.

As far as Wahhabism vs Salafism I might be wrong in interpretations but I feel the Wahhabists are those who desire to stay within the Middle East particularly Saudi Arabia and enforce their strict interpretation of the Shari'a via the Hudud and living a pious life like that of Prophet. (With an emphasis of change in the leadership of Saudi Arabia)

I think that that used to be the position, but it has changed over the past 20years or so. In particular, you may want to look at the influence of the Wahhabi sect on mosques in the US - a lot of money and radical literature has been sent by them to both North America and Europe.

Marc

[Tempest1]

What group represents the present day attackers in Saudi Arabia who desire the overthrow of the current Monarchy because of their corruptions by the west? If I had to choose one i would say Wahhabism based on the founding principles of Wahab Wahhab preached rejection of the west, their science and technology, and a return to the Islam of Muhammad’s time. His basic tenets included emphasis on the unity of Allah; opposition to Sufism and any other form of bida (innovation); opposition to gravestones and honoring the dead; advocated the use of Religious Police, Mutawwa, to enforce morality in public places; he used a strict, conservative interpretation of Islamic Dogma; emphasized the “protected” status of women; and emphasized the Hudud. These are the most severe crimes, such as murder, which is punished by beheading; theft calls for amputation of the right hand; Blasphemy is punished by stoning; and for drunkenness a severe whipping.
He advocated a return of the domination of Islam to the Sunnis and more specifically the Arabs. He believed that Islam would dominate the world and called for establishment of the “pure” Islamic State. This state would consist of all lands that had ever been dominated by Muslims and by pure he meant only Wahhabis would be permitted to live there, all others would be purged. Reinstitution of the Caliphate under Wahhabi Arabs; and the rest of the world would have to be submissive to Shari’a law. He was the first Global Jihadist.

Am I about 20 years to late? Another reason for this is because Wahhabis are eccentric (Members Only) they only include those from Saudi Arabia outsiders (Muslims included) are looked down upon. I believe they are attempting to influence Wahhabism in other locations but this could be seen as maybe a rift with other Muslim Fundamentalists.

The Salafists seem to have a Global perspective and are willing to include Muslim Converts into their clique.

I am signing off for now but look forward to round 2. Have a good evening.