The two faces of religion

Believe nothing just because a so-called wise person said it. Believe nothing just because a belief is generally held. Believe nothing just because it is said in ancient books. Believe nothing just because it is said to be of divine origin. Believe nothing just because someone else believes it. Believe only what you yourself test and judge to be true. [paraphrased] Buddha

Mr. Raymond Ibrahim writes that the motivation of Al Qaeda to attack the west is the ideology of Islam, hate infidels, as much as it is our foreign policy. Some excerpts are appended below.

I agree that radials in religion have an ideology. Most of these ideologies of religions have often been supported by realism. Religions have always needed something to hate. Early Christian leaders created the Devil to have something to hate. Good vs. evil. Al Qaeda's ideology would be weakened if there were no infidels.

The realism of our foreign policy does help Al Qaeda recruit young members who are already enthralled with the ideology of Islam. Mr. Ibrahim seems to imply that Al Qaeda attacks the U. S. because we are infidels. That logic does not explain why Al Qaeda does not attack other infidel countries that are easier targets, such as Mexico. It is much easier for angry young Muslims to direct their ideology at the infidels who invade and occupy their country, kill and maim their families, than to those who do not.

Charles Tolleson

http://chronicle.com/subscribe/login?url=/weekly/v54/i04/04b01301.htm

October 3, 2007
The Two Faces of Al Qaeda, by Raymond Ibrahim
Chronicle for Higher Education

From the start, the Internet - unregulated, uncensored, unfettered - has been Al Qaeda's primary mouthpiece. Then, as now, whenever Al Qaeda has wanted to communicate with the West, it has posted videotaped messages, some complete with English subtitles.After the events of 9/11, my increased interest in Arabic language and history led me to enroll in Georgetown University's Center for Contemporary Arab Studies. Before and during my studies at Georgetown, I avidly read any and all posted Al Qaeda messages. The group's motivation seemed clear enough: retaliation. According to its widely disseminated statements, the West in general and the United States in particular had been - overtly and covertly - oppressing and exploiting the Islamic world. The accusations included: unqualified U.S. support for Israel at the expense of Palestinians; deaths of Iraqi children due to U.N. sanctions; U.S. support for dictatorial regimes in the Muslim world; and, most recently, Western occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq. Every single message directed to the West by Al Qaeda includes most of these core grievances, culminating with the statement that it is the Islamic world's duty to defend itself.

As to the relationship between Muslims and infidels, this is summarized by the Most High's Word: "We renounce you. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us - till you believe in Allah alone."

So there is an enmity, evidenced by fierce hostility from the heart. And this fierce hostility - that is, battle - ceases only if the infidel submits to the authority of Islam, or if his blood is forbidden from being shed, or if Muslims are at that point in time weak and incapable. But if the hate at any time extinguishes from the heart, this is great apostasy! Allah Almighty's Word to his Prophet recounts in summation the true relationship: "O Prophet! Wage war against the infidels and hypocrites and be ruthless. Their abode is hell - an evil fate!" Such, then, is the basis and foundation of the relationship between the infidel and the Muslim. Battle, animosity, and hatred - directed from the Muslim to the infidel - is the foundation of our religion. And we consider this a justice and kindness to them. Bin Laden goes so far as to say that the West's purported hostility toward Islam is wholly predicated on Islam's innate hostility toward the rest of the world, contradicting his own propaganda: "The West is hostile to us on account of ... offensive jihad."

As Butt puts it: The main reason why radicals have managed to increase their following is because most Muslim institutions in Britain just don't want to talk about theology. They refuse to broach the difficult and often complex truth that Islam can be interpreted as condoning violence against the unbeliever - and instead repeat the mantra that Islam is peace and hope that all of this debate will go away. When news of The Al Qaeda Reader leaked to the press in 2005, some on the left questioned whether the book would be a pseudo-scholarly attempt to demonize Muslims. Others on the right worried that unfiltered exposure to the radical beliefs and propaganda of bin Laden and his cohorts might unintentionally lead to more converts or sympathizers.My reply is simply this: Whatever one's position in regard to the "war on terror," understanding the ideas of our enemy is both a practical necessity in wartime and a fundamental liberal value.

It is my hope that both sides in this bitter debate will profit from a deeper acquaintance with these works. In any case, it simply will not do to dismiss Al Qaeda as an irrational movement without ideas.

Raymond Ibrahim is the editor of the Al-Qaeda Reader, translations of religious texts and propaganda.