Sep 30 2006

A Peak Into The Jihadist Mind

Published by at 7:56 am under All General Discussions

I ran across an extremely interesting article by a Muslim, Saud journalist who is obviously well steeped in the forces and thinking behind our Islamo Fascist enemies. And in reading this compelling insight into the Muslim political forces, it is clear we are fighting Islame Fascists. It is interesting because the author is clearly not pro West, he connects to the Jihadists forces in the sense he understands their arguments. But he sees the battle inside Islam and is not siding with the Islamo-Fascists – and is in fact warning against their siren call, because what they want may be deadly.

The article begins with incorrect statements from the NIE (naturally garnered from the incorrect reporting of the now completely fallible NY Times):

What caught my attention recently was the leaked National Intelligence Estimate attributed to American Intelligence. In a nutshell, it said that American intervention in Iraq has caused fundamentalist terrorism to double and has not curtailed this phenomenon. It stated that there is a ‘cancerous spread’ of radical terrorist thought, which surpasses what is managed by Bin Laden himself.

This report, published by The New York Times last Saturday, stated that some of the estimated results confirm the outcome that had been predicated by the National Intelligence Council last January, 2003, which is: any war in Iraq will increase and strengthen political Islam worldwide.

Suffice it to say we all now know the NIE never said the Islamo-Fascist movement ‘doubled’ and there was no mention of a ‘cancer’. But the point is still a reasonable launching pad for what the author wants to say. We can only thank the NY Times for helping to swell the ranks of our enemies with their incorrect reporting and its subsequent use as a propaganda tool to recruit more enemies. Something this article clearly demonstrates as well. But back to the point at hand:

Regardless, the intention is not to come up with a comprehensive evaluation of American interference in Iraq, both internally and externally, rather the emphasis lies on the relationship between the strengths and weaknesses of radical terrorism, and the extent of it, in light of the Iraq War.

…after neighboring Syria and Iran realized the intrinsic danger that is heading towards them, add to that the notion of the ‘holy war’ that the group has adopted of late, Iraq became appealing ground. With the intensification of militant fundamentalist zeal and its willingness to fight and since the fall of the Taliban regime, the Iraqi stage has been attracting all kinds of fundamentalists that multiply and hinder the path of solution.

The writer is focusing the fact there is an attraction to fight us in Iraq, but he goes on to point out that this desire is from a long running movement in Islam, not just from America’s presence.:

The question is: is the presence of ‘infidel’ American powers the sole reason for Al Qaeda’s existence? In my opinion, the answer is complex and comprises of various aspects.


Thus, the situation is perfect to invest in as the first attraction is that Al Qaeda’s enemy in Iraq is the Great Satan itself.

The second attraction comes from the expression the ‘Land of the Greats’, the land of Al Rasheed, Al Mamoun, Al Mutasim, Ahmed Ibn Hanbal and Abu Hanifa … Will it become a possession of American agents or ‘disbelievers’ or even secular Sunnis?

The third attraction is the emphasis on Iraq’s contiguity with the countries of the Levant, that is, its affiliation to pillaged Palestine, Jerusalem, and Al Aqsa Mosque, this time just a stone’s throw away. We complete the mission in Iraq then descend onto Palestine, stealthily regaining the example of Noureddine Zenki and his student Salahaddin (Zenki whom Al Zarqawi greatly admired and revered).

These are the reasons given to motivate the recruits. And now the writer looks deeper, and into history:

Yet all of these attracting elements of the Iraqi model that make this ‘land of the greats’ an enticing stage for zealous youngsters … do not constitute the catalyst for radical currents. The factor of utmost importance, the cause of all causes for any fundamentalist current, even the Shia amongst them, is the realization of fundamentalism by applying it to government, politics and the management of everyday life in general – that is the intention that is neither concealed nor kept secret.

The root driver is not our presence, but fascism. The removal of individualism, of diversity of freedom, and of nations.

Whenever debate arises between Islamists on fighting for the cause, and the need to focus on other missions such as preaching, education and the purifying and rearing of a new generation of believers, in such cases of discord, the heart of the matter is never reached.

Al Hawali rejected this concept deeming it a fervent exaggeration, claiming that the most important duty for leaders is to spread [Islamic] monotheism and its concepts. He said, “The matter is not about defending lands or nations but rather spreading the notion of monotheism.”

Those aware of the reactionary, revivalist and missionary scene in Saudi know that Al Hawali’s criticism of the youth’s flock to Afghanistan was for fear of ‘emptying’ the missionary paradigm through which the Islamic currents operated in Saudi. It is known that this reactionary scene was split between various currents of which the weakest and least prevalent was the Jihadist stream.

Apparently there was, at one time, the idea of spreading Islam through missionary work, with Jihadists in the minority. The goals were the same: Conform the world to Islam. But the Afghan war allowed those who did not want to learn the religion and preach it to go and simply fight those who they were told were the non-believers.

Al Hawali’s stance was met with criticism; the most important of which, in my opinion, came from the prominent theoretical symbol of radical militant groups, Abdel Qadir Abdulaziz, whose real name is Sayyed Imam Abdul Aziz. He is an Egyptian fundamentalist who specialized in theoretical scholarly observation for Jihadist groups, who became renowned after the publishing of his famous book, ‘Al Omda Fi Adaad al Ida’. He responded to al Hawali saying, “It is our duty, as Muslims, to control the land … and that cannot be achieved unless we banish the nations and rulers of infidels and raise Islamic rulers to establish their states on earth.” Here we see how he asserts his aim as he defends the legitimacy of defending the land, which is: to control the land by banishing disbelievers and their states. By ‘disbelievers’, he means those who follow the laws of positivism or modern state laws, as he writes in his last journal.

We all know that Islamo-Fascists grasped onto well held beliefs and tenants in Islam to rationalize their bloodlust. But we can see where and how this began to happen in the mind of this journalist. And how the internal struggle rages. How does one separate the goal from the methodology without attacking the goal itself? The problem seems to be that the Jihadist propaganda has focused this epic global struggle into one of Islam against the religion of democracy – the new face of Christiandom.

The laws of positivism are a new religion and whosoever legitimizes or acts upon them is a disbeliever”, in addition to, “Democracy is a new religion, whosoever legitimizes or applies it is a disbeliever.” This is the final aim of a fundamentalist state that rejects the concepts of nation and citizenship.

For those liberals and lefties who think they are not the enemy, they are sadly mistaken. The Murtha’s and Kennedy’s who think a retreat will end this struggle are naive and ignorant. To be for democracy is to be “A Crusader” now. The author is bothered by the loss of nationality. He should be concerned with the loss of individualism and free thought and expression more. The attempt to tear down the nation states and replace them with a Caliphate finalizes the comparison between Islamo Fascism and the 3rd Reich – which wanted Germanic world control.

If we review this perspective we see possible ways to destroy the Jihadists. One is to make sure Iraq becomes a free, democratic society that can marry the religious dictates to fair governence. If control of land is a prime driver, then Iraqi control satisifies that for the broader Muslim population. The right to free expression will allow debate on what it means to be a good Muslim, how to treat others, open those passages of the Koran that preach peace and honor to fight back the passages used by the Islamo-fascists. The Achille’s Heel of the Jihadists is they are not fighting the non-believers right now. They are fighting fellow Muslims. It is not clear that the propaganda that says Democracy=Infidel will win the day, since it is not a religion in actuality. But it is clear from this how the Islamo-Fascists are selling this war. And we cannot kid ourselves into pretending these people don’t mean what they preach. This is a war of against civilization. It is a war against Democracy. It is a war against the West. And Iraq is the center of this war. Don’t take my word for it. That is what the terrorists and experts in the ME are saying openly now.

12 responses so far

12 Responses to “A Peak Into The Jihadist Mind”

  1. rocketsbrain says:

    Right On AJ!

    As VDH and others say to win a war you must know your enemy, the ideology that drives it, continually engage and adapt to changes on the battlefied, and exploit the enemies mistakes.

    Unfortunately the MSM has failed to educate the American people on this.

    Here’s a further post on what drives Islamofascist suicide bombers:
    Islamofascist Suicide Bombers are Rational Actors
    HT Michelle Malkin

    ****Scroll for Updates*****

    Nothing new here.

    To win this war, we must first know the enemy. RBT has long argued such acts are not crazed acts of desparation by oppressed people. These are rational acts by intelligent people from their own sense of reality based on fanatical cultlike religious teachings.

    Unfortunately these teachings do not allow for alternative sources of information, interpretations and reason that would otherwise moderate this behavior. Again its David Koresch and the Branch Davidians (Waco, TX) and Jim Jones and the Kool Aid Bunch all over again except funded by petro dollars e.g. Iran the Shiia extremists and the House of Saud the Suni extremists.

    The Pope was actually onto something with his recent theological comments re the Religion of Islam. The Pope’s words just went over the heads of the followers of Islam and the MSM.

    How come we don’t have Baptist suicidal bombers?

    Read More

  2. Islamofascist Suicide Bombers are Rational Actors…

    HT Michelle Malkin

    ****Scroll for Updates*****

    Nothing new here.

    To win this war, we must first know the enemy. RBT has long argued such acts are not crazed acts of desparation by oppressed people. Thes……

  3. Ken says:

    Gee, Strata, the fact the jihadists might be saying Iraq is the center of their struggle doesn’t quite have the power you believe it does, considering there is no miitary analyst who believes they can take Iraq over if we leave.

    In fact most say the native Iraqis can do a better job of squashing it without our help, as our presence causes its growth there and here.
    Of course imperalists like you wish to hide this basic fact,along with a few others, so you can excuse the US power grab.

    And you seem to go along with “democracy” as signifying
    Christianity, a giveaway to the true Christian. Without delving
    into deep moralizing, the US is a post-Christian country with
    a slew of lukewarm religionists , a dangerous cult of “Left Behind” Armageddon-lusters,and a runaway materialist
    culture purveying some of the worst un-spiritual phenomenae to
    the world possible. Madonna,–hip/hop subculture, — cities
    some of the most violent in the world which you should be
    ashamed of in tacitly representing as exemplary of a lifestyle the world and Islam should consider worth emulating.

    Among the other facts: the NIE report nowhere calls for staying in Iraq and when it states the jihad would greatly love to
    conquer Iraq, it nowhere comments on that likelihood, with or without US occupation.

    Of course the jihad wants us to stay and slowly drain our military and demoralize and polarize our citizenry in a long battle of attrition which will continue to fuel their growth. Get it? Yeah, you get it, but
    you want to place your chips on American Empire, a losing bet.

    It shows in your “reherring-ing” Murtha and Kennedy who nowhere say leaving Iraq will end the battle, only that Iraq is unwinnable.

    The American “democracy” you extol as “Christian” is not Christian and purveys the world with hip/hop subculture, tawdry, least-common-denominator values,runaway materialism—and a crime rate in its once-treasured metropoli which the world should not wish to emulate.

    Thanfully, Islam is Europe’s , Russia’s and China’s problem
    and not ours, unless the oiligarchs and the Israeli Lobby and the
    “America is the exceptional indispensable nation” pagans
    continue to get their way.

  4. Barbara says:

    Everyone who says Ken is far right is wrong. Ken is lefty to his toes. Ken evidently does not live in the real world, but in some alternate universe where things are as he wants them to be not as they are. A few lukewarm Christians? Are you nuts? Middle America is chock full of very, very and not so very Christians, but luke warm? No. To equate the whole of this country with Madonna and her ilk is ridiculous. They are the bane of this country and nothing like the rest of us. Since you quote Murtha and Kennedy (the most far left of congress) is why I say you are a leftist. And where do you get this empire you keep nattering on about We have helped many, many nations get on their feet again and have not taken over any of them. And don’t want to. You keep on and on about being in Iraq. Where is the outrage about being in Kosovo? We have been their longer and don’t want that country either. Isolation no longer works. Travel time is too fast to opt out of the world conflicts. You want us to let Europe, Asia, and Africa shift for themselves with no help from us. After the Islamofascists have conquered these lands, they will then come after us. That was the German plan and it is the Islamofascists’ plan also. You need to get a good history book (not a leftist one) and read up on history. As the saying goes, those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

  5. The Macker says:

    Another good post. Yes, Iraq is winnable and being won.

    The Iraqi government (not formed in our image, mind you), elected by a huge voter turnout, wants us there through 2007, and to have bases there afterwards. They know they aren’t yet self sufficient.

    The “fascist lobby,”here, is hurting us as much as our direct enemies. They divide us then blame Bush and the War for the division.

    True, we are using our power and influence,but for good, not for self aggrandizement. Perhaps this is “our finest hour.”

  6. rocketsbrain says:


    I sorry Ken but they are driven by a failed ideology from Medievil Times that has no place in the modern world and is without moral equivalence.

    When they come knocking on your door and drag your daughter or wife out and stone her or hang her for petty “religious” transgressions that some mortal sole has deemed/interpreted appropriate, then you may change your tune.

    In short the issue is they want to kill or convert us and destroy what we cherish most dear, the free will of men and women. Without free will a society will not grow and flourish. The Arabic culture gave us many advances in knowledge and science but when they no longer accepted criticism and rational questioning the Golden Age of Islam went into decline from which it has never recovered.


  7. Ken says:


    You are ill-educated, politically, and confused because of it.

    Murtha is having trouble with much of his party because of
    his CONSERVATIVE stands on social and other issues. Yet you
    call him “left.”

    I, along with Buchanan and Perot OPPOSED Clinton’s intervention
    in Kosovo, but after, in Pavlovian Clinton-hating fashion citing it,
    you immediately returned to your anti-“isolationist” robotics, so
    you must have supported it, dear.

    Then you infer America must fight Islam FOR Europe, assuming it
    will conquer Europe, which, true or false, is Europe’s problem.
    Europe is not asking us to help, dearest, have you noticed?
    Europeans overwhelmingly OPPOSE our war in Iraq and our
    inflammatory pro-Israel foreign policy.

    Finally, the premise that China and Russia for example depends on America to fight Islam, is belied by their protection of Iran.
    They wish us to do exactly what the Bush/Strata policy calls for:
    draining our military and economic might in a no-win Iraq War.

  8. Barbara says:

    Dear Ken

    All these sweet endearments will turn my head.

    I called Murtha left because he is left. He supports the dem mantra to get out of Iraq and send our troops to Okinawa for gods sake. How stupid can you get? But all his caterwauling was to turn attention from his lawbreaking with the Navy department quartermastering.

    I never said I didn’t support our aid in Kosovo. Actually, I was for it. I am also for intervention in Darfur. As I was for intervention in Rwanda. I am, unlike some people, not willing to look upon genocide of thousands with a hard heart. You, evidently, come from the me generation. It’s all about you and your comfort.

    I have never liked Buchanan and Perot is solely responsible for the eight years we endured of Clinton. The repercussions of which we still feel to this day. So I don’t care what either are for or against.

    What makes you think the Europeans don’t expect us to carry the can? They certainly do and have for decades. But it doesn’t make any difference. We will help them in order to save ourselves. They, like the democrats, cannot see the forest for the trees.

    I have never said China and Russia expect us to fight Islamofascistism for them. I have said that these countries will thwart us at every opportunity. They will always be there to obstruct us in every possible way. This has been their plan all along.

    And for a lefty to talk about draining our military resources is laughable. When Bush took office the military had to cannabalize their equipment in order to have any. The only way America can afford all the grandiose plans of the democrats is to have no military. Just as Europe has no military. NATO cannot come up with 20,000 soldiers in the whole of Europe. This just shows how dependent they are on us for their safety. They are the ones with national health, etc. and are going bankrupt. But, I forgot, these countries are the shining beacon of the democrat party. The dems can’t wait to emulate them.

    Your problem is that you cannot argue rationally. I couldn’t either if all my sources were Kos and DU and former Clinton tag-alongs and the MSM (pseudo democrat party). It is very aggravating when you quote people who have been discredited long ago as experts in their field and who when in their field failed miserably.

  9. Snapple says:


    Ken is VERY far left. He doesn’t like Democrats, either.
    Ken doesn’t like Albright, Clinton, Powell, Kissinger, George H. Bush, or the people in power now.

    I think he likes Stalin and Mao. And Saddam Chavez warm the cockles of his heart.

    Tell us how you feel about Stalin and Mao, Ken, honey.

  10. Ken says:

    Barabara is politically moronic yet because she has not yet proven politically imbecilic I will attempt to educate her again.

    If Murtha is “left” based on wanting to get out of Iraq then Hagel is “left”, Walter Jones (NC) is “left” Buckley is “left” George Will is “left” and David Duke is “left.” All are current or former Republican Party officeholders or long term GOP commentators and I could name sundry others.

    Your naeive belief America can solve Darfur and Rwanda, Barbie-doll, shows you are a Wilsonian pie-in-the-sky Liberal. American cannot even solve its own metropoli crime rate, out of control in
    many large cities.

    As for Russia and China thwarting us, why you earlier predicted an Islamic takeover of both if we did not fight it. That means Barbie-doll
    must be more expert on saving China and Russia from their inevitable doom than their foremost strategicians. Talk about

  11. Barbara says:


    I don’t need to be educated by anyone who is reduced to name calling when losing an argument. As for the rest of your post, I wish you would read what I said and not what you think I said. The people you named in your first paragraph are either so far right they are extreme left or are conservatives who have contracted BDS. You will not change my mind about Darfur and Rwanda (which is moot anyway). I don’t recall saying the islamofascists would conquer China. I don’t think they will because China is too hard on dissidents. And Russia could fall because they are a smaller country than in the past and are having trouble with their muslim population. So, as you can see you will not change my mind about anything and I can see I will not change yours either.

  12. Ken says:

    Barabara’s quote…

    “You want us to let….Asia…fend for itself….”

    “After the Islamofascists conquer these lands…”

    Clearly the “logic” of Barbie-girl is the US should help China,
    among others, fight Islam and that if we don’t it will,
    among others, be conquered.