All Terrorists are Muslim... Except the 94% that aren't

[Drybone]

And here is one I personally like

http://qctimes.com/news/opinion/mailbag/article_3161824a-ab37-11df-9034-001cc4c002e0.html

Yes, they are at it, again — having to defend themselves, their faith, and even their civil liberties. The recent controversy over the building of a mosque near the site of the 9/11 attacks has put the spotlight on both the latent and overt fears and hate many in this country have toward Muslims.

The fact is that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are peaceful people who practice a faith that does not condone violence. The responses to the building of the Muslim community center are shameful. They have been filled with hate and ignorance. The Muslim group behind the project not only has the right to build the community center, they should be applauded for this act as it grants us all — Muslim and non-Muslim alike — an opportunity to put the spotlight on Muslims who are radically different than those rogue men who committed those deplorable and unspeakable acts on Sept. 11, 2001.

[VICanucksfan5551]

How is this post helping the topic get back on track?

[Drybone]

Maybe it'll help some of the people who aren't familiar with your posts realize that you're trolling and they'll stop responding to your nonsense about how horrible atheists are and how Heretic is not really a Christian.

[Drybone]

Sorry to disappoint you, but I am a Christian.

Whether you think I am one or not does not affect me.

BTW, a church isn't a bunch of bricks.

[Heretic]

Thats a long long story if you want to hear it.

Its not about 'working hard' its about dedicating oneself to it. Its a faith that rejects ceremony . Rejects dogma. Rejects judgement . Rejects things that end up meaning nothing. Like money or fame .

Its quite awesome , but it has been corrupted by many over the last 2000 years. I reject that .

That does not make you an Atheist. It means you are Agnostic. Agnostics are normal folks like you and I who have no proof there is a God and could care less either way.

Atheists state there is no God for a FACT . In my experience its a negative and its a dig at people who do believe. That requires a totally different mindset. That requires you point the finger at people who do believe which isnt fair to do.

[Drybone]

. Lets get back to the topic at hand.

http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/terrorism-in-europe/

There are a lot of charts here. Too many to list . Its a good read

I think 'terrorists' are folks who hide behind a cause to cloak their real intent. They dont have to be religious or non religious.

[Drybone]

I just realized what you said here...

Jesus never said He was "normal" nor that His followers would be...

So what is "normal" to you?

Back to your comment - it sounds like you just said that you're agnostic - "Agnostics are normal folks like you and I".

[VICanucksfan5551]

How about adding something to the conversation

[Drybone]

Lets get back on topic. Stop following my posts around Heretic.

[Heretic]

Callling yourself a christian does not make it so. Any practicing Christian will tell you that.

No practicing christian hangs out with atheists on a hockey blogg for years. You cant deny that.

And no it doesnt bother me at all. Its just finally time I said it.

[Drybone]

I'm more than happy to once the conversation switches back to the prevalence of Islamic terrorism.

[Drybone]

You saying I'm not a Christian doesn't mean I'm not neither.

To be honest, I'm not seeing any good fruit from you.

Matthew 7:15-23

New International Version (NIV)

True and False Prophets

15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

True and False Disciples

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

[Drybone]

Back to the thead. Here is a good read here.

http://www.citizenwa...terrorists.html

THIS IS another in our series called Answers to Objections. When you talk about Islamic supremacism, people often respond as if you've made some sort of mistake, as if you are equating a few crazy terrorists with all 1.3 billion Muslims in the world, when "everybody knows" most of them are peace-loving people.

This is an easy objection to answer, but it is also an opportunity to give your listener a deeper education on the subject. Here are a few ideas of how to answer this objection:

1. Terrorism is only one of many ways to wage jihad. There are at least ten types of jihad (I recommend you memorize this list). In Islamic teachings, there are five pillars of Islam, five things every Muslim should do. But according to Mohammad, jihad is more important than any of them. It is a religious duty for each Muslim to struggle for the establishment of Sharia laweverywhere in the world. Some do it with bombs. Some do it with immigration and fecundity. Some do it with relentless political actions (waging jihad by gaining concessions). Some do it with "mainstream, moderate" Muslim organizations that try to undermine Western governments. So in other words, I agree with you completely that not all Muslims are terrorists, but I disagree with you that this somehow implies Islamic supremacism is something we can safely ignore. We need to know about it or we will have no ability to protect ourselves from it.

2. That's true: Not all Muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslims, and they kill in the name of Islam. Do you know why? Do you know what they're after? (When they say something like, "Yes, they want the West to stop interfering with Islamic affairs," you can answer with a lesson on Islam 101.) Since the beginning, Muslims have waged a war of expansion, and they have tried to justify their violence as a response to a grievance (read more about that here). That's the way Mohammad did it, and he's the example all Muslims forever after are supposed to follow. They want only one thing: For everybody on earth to submit to Islamic law. Fighting toward this goal is a religious duty for Muslims. And terrorism is only one of many ways to wage jihad.

3. That's true, but most Muslims believe Mohammad is a good example to follow. They believe this because it says over seventy times in the Qur'an that every Muslim must follow Mohammad's example. Do you know anything about Mohammad? Knowing about Mohammad explains a lot of what otherwise is incomprehensible about what is going on in the world. (Here you can tell the story of Mohammad's rise to power and the change in the Qur'anic revelations. Talk them into reading the Qur'an. Recommend a readable version like this one: An Abridged Koran.)

4. The Muslims who are terrorists are able to do what they do because of a tremendous amount of support from their community, and that support is motivated by Islamic teachings. It is also motivated by the hope that the supporters will gain entry to Paradise. The martyr can plea to Allah (once he arrives in Paradise) on behalf of up to seventy of his relatives to getthem a ticket to Paradise. For those who believe this, it is a tremendous incentive to help any of their relatives who plan on killing non-Muslims. In other words, that "small percentage" of Muslims who are active terrorists are only the tip of the iceberg of a tremendous amount of popular support for the killing of non-Muslims. Remember the jubilation throughout the Muslim world when thousands of non-Muslims were killed on 9/11? Only 19 hijackers did it, but clearly millions supported it. Millions. Maybe hundredsof millions. Why? Because that's the kind of thing Muslims aresupposed to do according to the Qur'an and the "perfect" example of Mohammad (read more about that here).

Make your arguments as cleanly and as calmly as you can. Try to be almost casual about it. Never be intense if you can help it.Understate rather than overstate your case. Speak accurately.Never exaggerate.

We must successfully persuade people. We cannot afford to fail. Make your conversations count.

[Drybone]

finally back on topic here is the generic version from Wiki

http://en.wikipedia....lamic_terrorism

[Bertuzzi Babe]

finally back on topic here is the generic version from Wiki

http://en.wikipedia....lamic_terrorism

Some scholars, such as Mark Burgess of the Center for Defense Information, trace the roots of Islamic terrorism back to the 11th-century Assassins, an order of Isma'ili Shi'ism that targeted political and religious opponents who stood in the way of the Assassins' sectarian ideology. In positing a continuity between Islamic terrorism's medieval and modern manifestations, Burgess identifies both a common underlying motive, namely loyalty to a divine imperative, and similar tactics, such as actively seeking out martyrdom.

The emergence of modern Islamic terrorism has its roots in the 19th century.[2] The Wahhabi movement, an Arabian fundamentalist movement that formed in the 18th century, began to establish a broad following during the 1800s and gradually inspired other fundamentalist movements during the 20th century. Waves of politically motivated terrorist movements in Europe during the 1800s (e.g. the Narodnaya Volya, the Irish Republican Brotherhood, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation) and early 1900s (e.g. the IRA, the Irgun) served as inspirations and models which would inspire the Islamists over the course of the 20th century and beyond.[3] During the Cold War, the United States and the United Kingdom supported the rise of fundamentalist groups in the Middle East and South Asia as a hedge against Soviet expansion and as a means to weaken anti-Western nationalist movements in some countries.[4]

According to Burgess, the escalation of terrorism during the later 20th century has its roots in three pivotal events circa 1979: the Iranian Revolution, the post-Cold War global religious revival, and the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan. These events, Burgess goes on to argue, were factors that fueled a recourse to religious terrorism.[5][6] American historian Walter Laqueur described the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan as the "global trigger" of Islamic terrorism.[7]

[edit]Motivations and Islamic terrorism

Various arguments have been to explain the root cause of Islamic terrorism.

[edit]The view that Western foreign policy is a motivation for terrorism

Robert Pape, has argued that at least terrorists utilizing suicide attacks — a particularly effective[8] form of terrorist attack—are driven not by Islamism but by "a clear strategic objective: to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from the territory that the terrorists view as their homeland."[9] However, Martin Kramer, who debated Pape on origins of suicide bombing, countered Pape's position that the motivation for suicide attacks is not just strategic logic but also an interpretation of Islam to provide a moral logic. For example, Hezbollah initiated suicide bombings after a complex reworking of the concept of martyrdom. Kramer explains that the Israeli occupation of Lebanon raised the temperature necessary for this reinterpretation of Islam, but occupation alone would not have been sufficient for suicide terrorism.[10] "The only way to apply a brake to suicide terrorism," Kramer argues, "is to undermine its moral logic, by encouraging Muslims to see its incompatibility with their own values."

Former CIA analyst Michael Scheuer argues that terrorist attacks (specifically al-Qaeda attacks on America) are not motivated by a religiously inspired hatred of American culture or religion, but by the belief that U.S. foreign policy has oppressed, killed, or otherwise harmed Muslims in the Middle East,[11] condensed in the phrase "They hate us for what we do, not who we are." U.S. foreign policy actions Scheuer believes are fueling Islamic terror include: the U.S.-led intervention in Afghanistan and invasion of Iraq; Israel–United States relations, namely, financial, military, and political support for Israel.;[12][13][14][15][16] U.S. support for "apostate" police states in Muslim nations such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, Algeria, Morocco, and Kuwait;[17] U.S. support for the creation of an independent East Timor from territory previously held by Muslim Indonesia; perceived U.S. approval or support of actions against Muslim insurgents in India, the Philippines, Chechnya, and Palestine;[18] U.S. troops on Muslim 'holy ground' in Saudi Arabia; the Western world's religious discrimination against Muslim immigrants'; historical justification, such as the Crusades.

Some academics argue that this form of terrorism should be seen as a strategic reaction to American power: that America is an empire, and empires provoked resistance in the form of terrorism. The Russian, Ottoman, and Habsburg Empires, for example, all suffered from terrorist attacks and had terrorist organizations – the Black Hand, Young Bosnia, Narodnaya Volya – spawned from their multiple ethnic groups, religions and national identities.[19] On the other hand, American intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq led to free elections in those nations. The United States therefore does not meet the definition of an empire as it lacks politico-military dominion over Muslim or other populations in those countries. Moreover, as discussed in the section below, the first instances of anti-American Islamic terrorism occurred long before the United States was a global power.

[edit]The view that Islamic terrorism predates U.S. action and is justified by Quranic teachings

March 18, 1786 letter written by Thomas Jefferson and John Adams describing their diplomatic initiative with Tripoli.

An alternative argument is that anti-American terrorism predated the rise of the United States as a global power and is justified by the Quran. This is exemplified by the events leading to the First Barbary War. Muslim pirates of Algiers, Morocco, Tunis, and Tripoli Barbary Coast had attacked, enslaved and held American merchant sailors for ransom, soon after the establishment of the United States of America in 1776 (see First Barbary War). These terrorist-type attacks predated any U.S. involvement in the Islamic world and occurred before the US had been involved in any overseas military action. In 1786, future U.S. Presidents Thomas Jefferson and John Adams met with Tripoli’s envoy to London, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman in an attempt to negotiate an end to the piracy. Adams and Jefferson summarized their meeting in a letter dated March 28, 1786 to John Jay, the United States Secretary of Foreign Affairs:

"We took the liberty to make some enquiries concerning the ground of their pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation. The Ambassador [of Tripoli] answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman (muslims) who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise."[20]

These diplomatic engagements suggest that a modern Jihad-like ideology existed prior to any U.S. involvement in the Islamic world, and that the Koran was used to justify this ideology.

Thus, according to critics of Islam, Islamic terrorism is linked to the practice of divinely sanctioned warfare against apostates.[21][22] Many Muslim groups including the Council on American-Islamic Relations argue that references to violence in Muslim sources have been taken out of context.[23][24][25] They argue that these Koranic ayahs are only for self-defense when non-believers endanger Muslim life. While a debate may exist on the proper interpretation of Koranic verses, the terrorist actions leading to the First Barbary War and the justification provided by Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman, provide an early example where the Koran was used to justify anti-American terrorism. These events occurred at a time where the U.S. had yet to intervene in the Muslim world and argue against U.S. policy as a fundamental cause of Islamic terrorism. On the contrary, the historical timeline demonstrates that the very first U.S. engagement with the Muslim world was an American response to Islamic terrorism.[citation needed]

[edit]Societal and economic motivations

Scholar Scott Atran, research director and involved in NATO group studying suicide terrorism, points out that there is no single root cause of terrorism. Greatest predictors of suicide bombings, Atran concludes, is not religion but group dynamics: "small-group dynamics involving friends and family that form the diaspora cell of brotherhood and camaraderie on which the rising tide of martyrdom actions is based".[26]

The Muslim world has been afflicted with economic stagnation for many centuries. In 2011, U.S. President Barack Obama himself stated that apart from crude oil, the exports of the entire Greater Middle East with its 400 million population roughly equals that of Switzerland.[27] It has also been estimated that the exports of Finland, a European country of only five million, exceeded those of the entire 260 million-strong Arab world, excluding oil revenue.[citation needed] This economic stagnation is argued[who?] to have commenced with the demise of the Ottoman Caliphate in 1924, with trade networks being disrupted and societies torn apart with the creation of new nation states; prior to this, the Middle East had a diverse and growing economy and more general prosperity[citation needed].

Obama gave a major public speech in the United States in response to the 2011 Arab Spring. In a message to Muslim leaders around the world, Obama urged reform and stated "that in a global economy based on knowledge, based on innovation, no development strategy can be based solely upon what comes out of the ground (oil). He also stated that people can not reach their potential when they cannot start a business without paying a bribe. Throughout the region, many young people have a solid education, but closed economies leave them unable to find a job. Muslim entrepreneurs are brimming with excellent ideas, but corruption, lack of funding, lack of support or inadequate infastructure leaves them unable to develop and profit from those ideas."

Strong population growth combined with economic stagnation has created urban conglomerations in Cairo, Istanbul, Tehran, Karachi, Dhaka, and Jakarta each with well over 12 million citizens, millions of them young and unemployed or underemployed. Such a demographic, alienated from the westernized ways of the urban elite,[citation needed] but uprooted from the comforts and more passive traditions of the villages they came from, is understandably favourably disposed to an Islamic system promising a better world – an ideology providing an "emotionally familiar basis for group identity, solidarity, and exclusion]; an acceptable basis for legitimacy and authority; an immediately intelligible formulation of principles for both a critique of the present and a program for the future."[citation needed]

[edit]Profiles

Forensic psychiatrist and former foreign service officer Marc Sageman made an "intensive study of biographical data on 172 participants in the jihad," in his book Understanding Terror Networks.[28] He concluded social networks, the "tight bonds of family and friendship", rather than emotional and behavioral disorders of "poverty, trauma, madness, [or] ignorance", inspired alienated young Muslims to join the jihad and kill.[29]

Author Lawrence Wright described the characteristic of "displacement" of members of the most famous Islamic terrorist group, al-Qaeda:

What the recruits tended to have in common – besides their urbanity, their cosmopolitan backgrounds, their education, their facility with languages, and their computer skills – was displacement. Most who joined the jihad did so in a country other than the one in which they were reared. They were Algerians living in expatriate enclaves in France, Moroccans in Spain, or Yemenis in Saudi Arabia. Despite their accomplishments, they had little standing in the host societies where they lived."[30]

Scholar Olivier Roy describes the background of the hundreds of global (as opposed to local) terrorists who were incarcerated or killed and for whom authorities have records, as being surprising for their Westernized background; for the lack of Palestinians, Iraqis, Afghans "coming to avenge what is going on in their country"; their lack of religiosity before being "born again" in a foreign country; the high percentage of converts to Islam among them; their "de-territorialized backgrounds" – "For instance, they may be born in a country, then educated in another country, then go to fight in a third country and take refuge in a fourth country"; their nontraditional belief that jihad is permanent, global, and "not linked with a specific territory."[31]

This profile differs from that found among recent local Islamist suicide bombers in Afghanistan, according to a 2007 study of 110 suicide bombers by Afghan pathologist Dr. Yusef Yadgari. Yadgari found that 80% of the attackers studied had some kind of physical or mental disability. The bombers were also "not celebrated like their counterparts in other Arab nations. Afghan bombers are not featured on posters or in videos as martyrs."[32] Daniel Byman, a Middle East expert at the Brookings Institute, and Christine Fair, an assistant professor in peace and security studies at Georgetown University say that many of the Islamic terrorists are foolish and untrained, perhaps even untrainable.[33]

[edit]Ideology

See also: Islamism and Political aspects of Islam

Part of the Politics series on

Islamism

Basic topics[show]

Movements[show]

Manifestations[show]

Concepts[show]

Key texts[show]

Islam Portal

Politics portal

v t e

One ideology that plays a role in Islamic terrorism is the principle of Jihad, which broadly means struggle. Militants generally use jihad to mean defensive or retaliatory warfare against actors that have allegedly harmed Muslims.

Transnational Islamist ideology, specifically of the militant Islamists, assert that Western policies and society are actively anti-Islamic, or as it is sometimes described, waging a "war against Islam". Islamists often identify what they see as a historical struggle between Christianity and Islam, dating back as far as the Crusades, among other historical conflicts between practitioners of the two respective religions. Osama bin Laden, for example, almost invariably describes his enemy as aggressive and his call for action against them as defensive. Defensive jihad differs from offensive jihad in being "fard al-ayn," or a personal obligation of all Muslim, rather than "fard al-kifaya", a communal obligation, which if some Muslims perform it is not required from others. Hence, framing a fight as defensive has the advantage both of appearing to be a victim rather than aggressor, and of giving your struggle the very highest religious priority for all good Muslims.

Many of the violent terrorist groups use the name of jihad to fight against certain Western nations and Israel. An example is bin Laden's al-Qaeda, which is also known as "International Islamic Front for Jihad Against the Jews and Crusaders". Most militant Islamists oppose Israel's policies, and often its existence.

According to the U.S. Army Colonel Dale C. Eikmeier, “ideology”, rather than any individual or group, is the "center of gravity" of al-Qaeda and related groups, and the ideology is a "collection of violent Islamic thought called Qutbism."[34] He summarizes the tenets of Qutbism as being:

A belief that Muslims have deviated from true Islam and must return to “pure Islam” as originally practiced during the time of the Prophet.

The path to “pure Islam” is only through a literal and strict interpretation of the Qur'an and Hadith, along with implementation of the Prophet’s commands.

Muslims should interpret the original sources individually without being bound to follow the interpretations of Islamic scholars.

That any interpretation of the Quran from a historical, contextual perspective is a corruption, and that the majority of Islamic history and the classical jurisprudential tradition is mere sophistry.[34]

The historic rivalry between Hindus and Muslims in the Indian subcontinent has also often been the primary motive behind some of the most deadly terrorist attacks in India. According to a U.S. State Department report, India topped the list of countries worst affected by Islamic terrorism.

In addition, Islamist militants, scholars, and leaders opposed Western society for what they see as immoral secularism. Islamists have claimed that such unrestricted free speech has led to the proliferation of pornography, immorality, secularism, homosexuality, feminism, and many other ideas that Islamists often oppose. Although bin Laden almost always emphasized the alleged oppression of Muslims by America and Jews when talking about them in his messages, in his "Letter to America" he answered the question, "What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?," with

We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest (...) You separate religion from your policies, (...) You are the nation that permits Usury, which has been forbidden by all the religions (...) You are a nation that permits the production, trading and usage of intoxicants (...) You are a nation that permits acts of immorality (...) You are a nation that permits gambling in its all forms. (...) You use women to serve passengers, visitors, and strangers to increase your profit margins. You then rant that you support the liberation of women.[35]

Given their perceived piety, The Times noted the irony when a major[36] investigation by their reporters uncovered a link between Islamic Jihadis and child pornography; a discovery that, according to the London paper, "is expected to improve understanding of the mindsets of both types of criminals and has been hailed as a potentially vital intelligence tool to undermine future terrorist plots.".[37] Similarly, Reuters reported that pornography was found among the materials seized from Osama bin Laden's Abbottabad compound that was raided by U.S. Navy SEALs.[38]

In 2006 Britain's then head of MI5 Eliza Manningham-Buller said of Al-Qaeda that it "has developed an ideology which claims that Islam is under attack, and needs to be defended". "This" she said "is a powerful narrative that weaves together conflicts from across the globe, presenting the West’s response to varied and complex issues, from long-standing disputes such as Israel/Palestine and Kashmir to more recent events as evidence of an across-the-board determination to undermine and humiliate Islam worldwide."[39] She said that the video wills of British suicide bombers made it clear that they were motivated by perceived worldwide and long-standing injustices against Muslims; an extreme and minority interpretation of Islam promoted by some preachers and people of influence; their interpretation as anti-Muslim of UK foreign policy, in particular the UK’s involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan."[39] She also cautioned how difficult it was to gain a proper perspective, saying that although there are more important dangers we face daily without feeling so threatened by them such as climate change and road deaths and though terrorist deaths were few the intelligence services had prevented some potentially large threats and that vigilance was needed.[39]

[edit]Interpretations of the Qur'an and Hadith

The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (July 2011)

The role played by the Qur'an, Islam's sacred text, in opposing or in encouraging attacks on civilians is disputed.

The Princeton University Middle Eastern scholar Bernard Lewis, states that Islamic jurisprudence does not allow terrorism.[40] In 2001, Professor Lewis noted:[41]

At no time did the (Muslim) jurist approve of terrorism. Nor indeed is there any evidence of the use of terrorism (in Islamic tradition). Muslims are commanded not to kill women, children, or the aged, not to torture or otherwise ill-treat prisoners, to give fair warning of the opening of hostilities, and to honor agreements. Similarly, the laws of Jihad categorically preclude wanton and indiscriminate slaughter. The warriors in the holy war are urged not to harm non-combatants, women and children, "unless they attack you first." A point on which they insist is the need for a clear declaration of war before beginning hostilities, and for proper warning before resuming hostilities after a truce. What the classical jurists of Islam never remotely considered is the kind of unprovoked, unannounced mass slaughter of uninvolved civil populations that we saw in New York two weeks ago. For this there is no precedent and no authority in Islam.

But Bernard Lewis says Jihad is an unlimited offensive to bring the whole world under Islamic law; Christian crusades a defensive, limited response to, and imitation of, jihad.[42]

Even the Christian crusade, often compared with the Muslim jihad, was itself a delayed and limited response to the jihad and in part also an imitation. But unlike the jihad it was concerned primarily with the defense or reconquest of threatened or lost Christian territory...The Muslim jihad, in contrast, was perceived [by Muslims] as unlimited, as a religious obligation that would continue until all the world had either adopted the Muslim faith or submitted to Muslim rule.… The object of jihad is to bring the whole world under Islamic law.

Bernard Lewis says Islam imposes, without limit of time or space, the duty to subjugate non-Muslims.[43]

"...it is the duty of those who have accepted them [Allah's word and message] to strive unceasingly to convert or at least to subjugate those who have not. This obligation is without limit of time or space. It must continue until the whole world has either accepted the Islamic faith or submitted to the power of the Islamic state.”

Michael Sells and Jane I. Smith (a Professor of Islamic Studies) write that barring some extremists like al-Qaeda, most Muslims do not interpret Qura’nic verses as promoting warfare; and that the phenomenon of radical interpretation of scripture by extremist groups is not unique to Islam.[44][45] According to Sells, "[Most Muslims] no more expect to apply [the verses at issue] to their contemporary non-Muslim friends and neighbors than most Christians and Jews consider themselves commanded by God, like the Biblical Joshua, to exterminate the infidels."[44]

According to Robert Spencer, Muhammad said in one Hadith:[46] "Allah's Apostle said, "I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand." Abu Huraira added: Allah's Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them). Narrated in Abu Huraira, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220" Furthermore Muhammad said in another Hadith:[47] The Prophet said, "Who is ready to kill Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf who has really hurt Allah and His Apostle?" Muhammad bin Maslama said, "O Allah's Apostle! Do you like me to kill him?" He replied in the affirmative. So, Muhammad bin Maslama went to him (i.e. Ka' and said, "This person (i.e. the Prophet) has put us to task and asked us for charity." Ka'b replied, "By Allah, you will get tired of him." Muhammad said to him, "We have followed him, so we dislike to leave him till we see the end of his affair." Muhammad bin Maslama went on talking to him in this way till he got the chance to kill him. Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah Volume 4, Book 52, Number 270 And another Hadith:[48] The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle. Narrated As-Sab bin Jaththama Volume 4, Book 52, Number 256

[edit]Criticism of Islamic terrorist ideology

Although "Islamic" terrorism is commonly associated with the Salafis (or "Wahhabis"), the scholars of the group have constantly attributed this association to ignorance, misunderstanding and sometimes insincere research and deliberate misleading by rival groups.[49] Following the September 11 attacks, Abdul-Azeez ibn Abdullaah Aal ash-Shaikh, the Grand Mufti of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, made an official statement that "the Islamic Sharee'ah (legislation) does not sanction" such actions.[50] A Salafi Committee of Major Scholars"in Saudi Arabia has declared that "Islamic" terrorism, such as the May 2003 bombing in Riyadh, are in violation of Sharia law and aiding the enemies of Islam.[51]

Criticism of Islamic terrorism on Islamic grounds has also been made by Abdal-Hakim Murad (Timothy Winter):

Certainly, neither bin Laden nor his principal associate, Ayman al-Zawahiri, are graduates of Islamic universities. And so their proclamations ignore 14 centuries of Muslim scholarship, and instead take the form of lists of anti-American grievances and of Koranic quotations referring to early Muslim wars against Arab idolaters. These are followed by the conclusion that all Americans, civilian and military, are to be wiped off the face of the Earth. All this amounts to an odd and extreme violation of the normal methods of Islamic scholarship. Had the authors of such fatwās followed the norms of their religion, they would have had to acknowledge that no school of mainstream Islam allows the targeting of civilians. An insurrectionist who kills non-combatants is guilty of baghy, “armed aggression,” a capital offense in Islamic law.[52]

Colonel Eikmeier points out the "questionable religious credentials" of many Islamist theorists, or "Qutbists," which can be a "means to discredit them and their message":

With the exception of Abul Ala Maududi and Abdullah Yusuf Azzam, none of Qutbism’s main theoreticians trained at Islam’s recognized centers of learning. Although a devout Muslim, Hassan al-Banna was a teacher and community activist. Sayyid Qutb was a literary critic. Muhammad Abd al-Salam Faraj was an electrician. Ayman al-Zawahiri is a physician. Osama bin Laden trained to be a businessman.[53]

Fethullah Gülen, a prominent Turkish Islamic scholar, has claimed that "a real Muslim," who understood Islam in every aspect, could not be a terrorist.[54][55][56] There are many other people with similar points of view[57] such as Karen Armstrong,[58] Prof. Ahmet Akgunduz,[59] Harun Yahya[60] and Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri.[61] Huston Smith, an author on comparative religion, noted that extremists have hijacked Islam, just as has occurred periodically in Christianity, Hinduism and other religions throughout history. He added that the real problem is that extremists do not know their own faith.[62]

[edit]Identity-based frameworks for analyzing Islamist-based terrorism

Islamist-based fundamentalist terrorism against Western nations and the U.S. in particular, has numerous motivations and takes place the larger context of a complex and tense relationship between the ‘West' and the Arab and Muslim 'world,'[63] which is highlighted in the previous section on motivations and Islamic terrorism. Identity-based theoretical frameworks including theories of social identity, social categorization theory, and psychodynamics are used to explain the reasons terrorism occurs.[64]

Social identity is explained by Karina Korostelina as a “feeling of belonging to a social group, as a strong connection with social category, and as an important part of our mind that affects our social perceptions and behavior”[65] This definition can be applied to the case of Osama bin Laden, who, according to this theory, has a highly salient perception of his social identity as a Muslim, a strong connection to the social category of the Muslim Ummah or 'community,' which affect his social perceptions and behaviors.[66] Bin Laden's ideology and interpretation of Islam led to the creation of al-Qaeda in response to perceived threats against the Muslim community by the Soviet Union, the U.S. in particular due to its troop presence in Saudi Arabia, and American support for Israel.[67] The Islamist terrorist group al-Qaeda has a group identity, which includes “shared experiences, attitudes, beliefs, and interests of ingroup members,” and is “described through the achievement of a collective aim for which this group has been created,”[68] which in this case is to achieve "a complete break from the foreign influences in Muslim countries, and the creation of a new Islamic caliphate."

Social categorization theory has been discussed as a three-stage process of identification, where “individuals define themselves as members of a social group, learn the stereotypes and norms of the group, and group categories influence the perception and understanding of all situations in a particular context”[65] This definition can be applied to the U.S.-led war on terror, in which conflict features such as the phenomenon of Anti-Americanism[69] and the phenomenon of non-Arab countries like Iran and Afghanistan lending support to Islamist-based terrorism by funding or harboring terrorist groups such as Hezbollah[70] and al-Qaeda[71] against Western nations, particularly Israel[72] and the United States[73] are, according to social categorization theory, influenced by a three-stage process of identification. In this three-stage process of identification, the Arab and Muslim world(s) are the social group(s), in which their members learn stereotypes and norms which categorize their social group vis-à-vis the West.[74] This social categorization process creates feelings of high-level in-group support and allegiance among Arabs and Muslims and the particular context within which members of the Arab and Muslim world(s) social group(s) understand all situations that involve the West. Social categorization theory as a framework for analysis indicates causal relationships between group identification processes and features of conflict situations.[75]

[edit]Muslim attitudes toward terrorism

Main article: Muslim attitudes towards terrorism

Muslim popular opinion on the subject of attacks on civilians by Islamist groups varies. Fred Halliday, a British academic specialist on the Middle East, argues that most Muslims consider these acts to be egregious violations of Islam's laws.[76] Muslims living in the West denounce the September 11th attacks against United States, while Hezbollah contends that their rocket attacks against Israeli civilian targets are defensive Jihad by a legitimate resistance movement rather than terrorism.[77][78] Subsequently, however, on Osama Bin Laden's death, many Muslims in UK came out on streets in support of Osama, announcing him as an Islamic hero and condemned the role of US and west in killing him. The protest against Bin Laden’s death was organised by controversial preacher Anjem Choudary – who praised both 7/7 and the September 11 attacks.[79] Statistics compiled by the United States government's Counterterrorism Center present a complicated picture: of known and specified terrorist incidents from the beginning of 2004 through the first quarter of 2005, slightly more than half of the fatalities were attributed to Islamic extremists but a majority of over-all incidents were considered of either "unknown/unspecified" or a secular political nature. The vast majority of the "unknown/unspecified" terrorism fatalities did however happen in Islamic regions such as Iraq and Afghanistan, or in regions where Islam is otherwise involved in conflicts such as the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, southern Thailand and Kashmir.

[edit]View of Muslim clerics

Many Muslim scholars have presented proofs against the religious justification of terrorism, a notable example being that of Muhammad ibn al Uthaymeen who states regarding killing a non-Muslim:[80] "As for a non-Muslim living under Muslim rule and a Mu’āhid (a Non-Muslim ally with whom Muslims have a treaty, trust, peace, or agreement), it’s been authentically established that the prophet (blessings and peace upon him) said: “Whoever kills a Mu’āhid will not even smell the fragrance of paradise and its fragrance can be smelled from the distance of forty years away.” and he also said: “Certainly, one of the most difficult situations for which there is no turning back for whomever casts himself into it - shedding sacred blood without right.”

Another example is that of late scholar Abd al-Aziz Ibn Baz who stated: "It is well-known to anyone with the slightest amount of common sense that hijacking planes and kidnapping embassy officials and similar acts are some of the greatest universal crimes that result in nothing but widespread corruption and destruction. They place such extreme hardships and injuries upon innocent people, the extent of which only Allāh knows."[81]

Numerous fatwās (rulings) condemning terrorism and suicide bombing as haram have been published by Islamic scholars worldwide, one of the most extensive being the 600-page[clarification needed] ruling by Sheikh Tahir-ul-Qadri, whose fatwa condemned them as kufr.[82] On 2 March 2010, Qadri's fatwa was an "absolute" condemnation of terrorism without "any excuses or pretexts." He said that "Terrorism is terrorism, violence is violence and it has no place in Islamic teaching and no justification can be provided for it, or any kind of excuses or ifs or buts." Qadri said his fatwa, which declares terrorists and suicide bombers to be unbelievers, goes further than any previous denunciation.[83] Iranian Ayatollah Ozma Seyyed Yousef Sanei issued a fatwa (ruling) that suicide attacks against civilians are legitimate only in the context of war.[84] The ruling did not say whether other types of attacks against civilians are justified outside of the context of war, nor whether jihad is included in Sanei's definition of war.

An influential group of Pakistani scholars and religious leaders declared suicide attacks and beheadings as un-Islamic. 'Ulema' (clerics) and 'mushaikh' (spiritual leaders) of the Jamaat Ahl-e-Sunnah, who gathered for a convention, declared suicide attacks and beheadings as un-Islamic in a unanimous resolution. Chairman of the Pakistani Ruet-e-Hilal Committee, Mufti Muneeb-ur-Rehman, said in his address that those who were fighting in the name of implementing Shariah or Islamic law must first abide by these same laws and killing minors is contrary to the teachings of Islam.[85]

Some contemporary scholars who have followed a textual based approach to the study of the Qur'an with an emphasis over the coherence in the Book and the context of situation offered a radical interpretation on the verses and prophetic narratives that are usually quoted by the militants to promote militancy. According to Javed Ahmad Ghamidi (his booklet on Jihad is considered one of his most important contribution towards understanding the religion according to the principles of interpreting the Qur'an introduced by Farahi and Islahi) the Qur'an does not allow waging war except for against oppression under a sovereign state. He holds that jihad without a state is nothing but creating nuisance in the land when hijacked by the individuals and groups independent of the state authority defeats the purpose. The principle behind this study of the issue in the basic sources is the principle that there are divine injunctions in the Qur'an which are specific to the age of the Messenger. He says that nobody can be punished for apostasy or being non-Muslim after the Prophet who acted as the divine agent when he punished the disbelievers by sword who had rejected the message of God and his messenger even after the truth was made manifest to them. Ghamidi and his associates have written extensively on the topics related to these issues. In his book Meezan Ghamidi has concluded that:

Jihad can only waged against persecution Islamic jihad has only two purposes: putting an end to persecution even that of the non-Muslims and making the religion of Islam reign supreme in the Arabian peninsula. The latter type was specific for the messenger of God and is no more operative.

Under a sovereign state.

There are strict ethical limits for jihad which do not again allow fighting for example non-combatants.

Seen in this perspective acts of terrorism including suicide bombing becomes prohibited.

[edit]Opinion surveys

Gallup conducted tens of thousands of hour-long, face-to-face interviews with residents of more than 35 predominantly Muslim countries between 2001 and 2007. It found that – contrary to the prevailing perception in the west that the actions of al-Qaeda enjoy wide support in the Muslim world – more than 90% of respondents condemned the killing of non-combatants on religious and humanitarian grounds.[86]

A 2004, a year after the invasion of Iraq, Pew Research Center survey found that suicide bombings against Americans and other Westerners in Iraq were seen as "justifiable" by many Jordanians (70%), Pakistanis (46%), and Turks (31%). At the same time, the survey found that support for the U.S.-led War on Terror had increased.[87][88]

A 2005 Pew Research study that involved 17,000 people in 17 countries showed support for terrorism was declining in the Muslim world along with a growing belief that Islamic extremism represents a threat to those countries.[89] A Daily Telegraph survey[90] showed that 88% of Muslims said the July 2005 bombings in the London Underground were unjustified, while 6% disagreed.

In Pakistan, despite the recent rise in the Taliban's influence, a poll conducted by Terror Free Tomorrow in Pakistan in January 2008 tested support for al-Qaeda, the Taliban, other militant Islamist groups and Osama bin Laden himself, and found a recent drop by half. In August 2007, 33% of Pakistanis expressed support for al-Qaeda; 38% supported the Taliban. By January 2008, al-Qaeda's support had dropped to 18%, the Taliban's to 19%. When asked if they would vote for al-Qaeda, just 1% of Pakistanis polled answered in the affirmative. The Taliban had the support of 3% of those polled.[86]

Pew Research surveys in 2008 show that in a range of countries – Jordan, Pakistan, Indonesia, Lebanon, and Bangladesh – there have been substantial declines in the percentages saying suicide-bombings and other forms of violence against civilian targets can be justified to defend Islam against its enemies. Wide majorities say such attacks are, at most, rarely acceptable. The shift of attitudes against terror has been especially dramatic in Jordan, where 29% of Jordanians were recorded as viewing suicide-attacks as often or sometimes justified (down from 57% in May 2005). In the largest majority-Muslim nation, Indonesia, 74% of respondents agree that terrorist attacks are "never justified" (a substantial increase from the 41% level to which support had risen in March 2004); in Pakistan, that figure is 86%; in Bangladesh, 81%; and in Iran, 80%.[86]

A poll conducted in Osama bin Laden's home country of Saudi Arabia in December 2008 shows that his compatriots have dramatically turned against him, his organisation, Saudi volunteers in Iraq, and terrorism in general. Indeed, confidence in bin Laden has fallen in most Muslim countries in recent years.[86]

In Iraq, people of all persuasions unanimously reject the terror tactics against Iraqi civilians by the local al-Qaida. An ABC News/BBC/NHK poll revealed that all of those surveyed – Sunni and Shi'a alike – found al-Qaida attacks on Iraqi civilians "unacceptable"; 98% rejected the militants' attempts to gain control over areas in which they operated; and 97% opposed their attempts to recruit foreign fighters and bring them to Iraq.[86]

[edit]Examples of organizations and acts

Further information: List of designated terrorist organizations and History of terrorism

Countries in which Islamist terrorist attacks have occurred between September 11, 2001, and May 2008

Some prominent Islamic terror groups and incidents include the following:

[edit]Transnational

Main article: Al-Qaeda

This section requires expansion. (July 2011)

Al-Qaeda's stated aim is the use of jihad to defend and protect Islam against Zionism, Christianity, Hinduism, the secular West, and Muslim governments such as Saudi Arabia, which it sees as insufficiently Islamic and too closely tied to the United States.[91][92][93][94] Formed by Osama bin Laden and Muhammad Atef in the aftermath of the Soviet war in Afghanistan in the late 1980s, al-Qaeda called for the use of violence against civilians and military of the United States and any countries that are allied with it.[95]

[edit]North America

[edit]Canada

See also: Terrorism in Canada

According to recent government statements Islamic terrorism is biggest threat to Canada.[96] The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) reported that terrorist radicalization at home is now the chief preoccupation of Canada's spy agency.[97] The most notorious arrest in Canada's fight on terrorism, was the 2006 Ontario terrorism plot in which 18 Al-Qaeda cell members were arrested for planning a mass bombing, shooting, and hostage taking terror plot throughout Southern Ontario. There have also been other arrests mostly in Ontario involving terror plots.[98]

[edit]United States

See also: Terrorism in the United States

Between 1993 and 2001, the major attacks or attempts against US interests stemmed from militant Islamic jihad except for the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.[99] In 2001 nearly 3,000 people were killed in the massive September 11 attacks organised by al-Qaeda and largely perpetrated by Saudi nationals, sparking the War on Terror. Former CIA Director Michael Hayden considers homegrown terrorism to be the most dangerous threat and concern faced by American citizens today.[100] As of July 2011, there have been 51 homegrown jihadist plots or attacks in the United States since the September 11 attacks.[101]

[edit]Europe

See also: Al-Qaeda involvement in Europe

Major lethal attacks on civilians in Europe credited to Islamist terrorism include the 1985 El Descanso bombing in Madrid, the 1995 Paris Metro bombings, 11 March 2004 bombings of commuter trains in Madrid, where 191 people were killed, and the 7 July 2005 London bombings, also of public transport, which killed 52 commuters. According to EU Terrorism Report, however, there were almost 500 acts of terrorism across the European Union in 2006, but only one, the foiled suitcase bomb plot in Germany, was related to Islamist terror.[102] In 2009, a Europol report also showed that more than 99% of terrorist attacks in Europe over the last three years were, in fact, carried out by non-Muslims.[103][104][105] In terms of arrests, out of a total of 1,009 arrested terror suspects in 2008, 187 of them were arrested in relation to Islamist terrorism. The report also showed that the majority of Islamist terror suspects were not first generation immigrants, but were rather children of immigrants who no longer identified with the culture of their parents and at the same time felt excluded from Western society, "which still perceives them as foreigners," thus they became "more attracted to the idea of becoming ‘citizens’ of the virtual worldwide Islamic community, removed from territory and national culture."[106]

[edit]Eurasia

[edit]Russia

See also: Terrorism in Russia

Politically and religiously motivated attacks on civilians in Russia have been traced to separatist sentiment among the largely Muslim population of its North Caucasus region, particularly in Chechnya, where the central government of the Russian Federation has waged two bloody wars against the local secular separatist government since 1994. In the Moscow theater hostage crisis in October 2002, three Chechen separatist groups took an estimated 850 people hostage in the Russian capital; at least 129 hostages died during the storming by Russian special forces, all but one killed by the chemicals used to subdue the attackers (whether this attack would more properly be called a nationalist rather than an Islamist attack is in question). In the September 2004 Beslan school hostage crisis more than 1,000 people were taken hostage after a school in the Russian republic of North Ossetia–Alania was seized by a pro-Chechen multiethnic group aligned to Riyad-us Saliheen Brigade of Martyrs; hundreds of people died during the storming by Russian forces.[107]

Since 2000, Russia has also experienced a string of suicide bombings that killed hundreds of people in the Caucasian republics of Chechnya, Dagestan and Ingushetia, as well as in Russia proper including Moscow. Responsibility for most of these attacks were claimed by either Shamil Basayev's Islamic-nationalist rebel faction or, later, by Dokka Umarov's pan-Islamist movement Caucasus Emirate which is aiming to unite most of Russia's North Caucasus as an emirate since its creation in 2007.[108] In 2011, the U.S. Department of State included the Caucasus Emirate on its list of terrorist organisations.[109]

[edit]Turkey

Turkish Hezbollah (unrelated to the Shia Hezbollah in Lebanon) is a Sunni terrorist group[110] accused of a series of attacks, including the November 2003 bombings of two synagogues, the British consulate in Istanbul and HSBC bank headquarters that killed 58.[111]

[edit]Middle East / Southwest Asia

[edit]Iraq

The area that has seen some of the worst terror attacks in modern history has been Iraq as part of the Iraq War. In 2005, there were 400 incidents of one type of attack (suicide bombing), killing more than 2,000 people – many if not most of them civilians.[112] In 2006, almost half of all reported terrorist attacks in the world (6,600), and more than half of all terrorist fatalities (13,000), occurred in Iraq, according to the National Counterterrorism Center of the United States.[113] Along with nationalist groups and criminal, non-political attacks, the Iraqi insurgency includes Islamist insurgent groups, such as Al-Qaeda in Iraq, who favor suicide attacks far more than non-Islamist groups. At least some of the terrorism has a transnational character in that some foreign Islamic jihadists have joined the insurgency.[114]

[edit]Israel and the Palestinian territories

Main article: Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Hamas ("zeal" in Arabic and an acronym for Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya) began support for attacks on military and civilian targets in Israel at the beginning of the First Intifada in 1987.[115] The 1988 charter of Hamas calls for the destruction of Israel,[116] and remains in effect today. Its "military wing" has claimed responsibility for numerous attacks in Israel, principally suicide bombings and rocket attacks. Hamas has also been accused of sabotaging the Israeli-Palestine peace process by launching attacks on civilians during Israeli elections to anger Israeli voters and facilitate the election of harder-line Israeli candidates.[117] Hamas has been designated as a terrorist group by the European Union, Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Israel, Australia, Japan, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights and Human Rights Watch. It is banned in Jordan. Russia does not consider Hamas a terrorist group as it was "democratically elected".[118] During the second intifada (September 2000 through August 2005) 39.9 percent of the suicide attacks were carried out by Hamas.[119] The first Hamas suicide attack was the Mehola Junction bombing in 1993.[120] Although Hamas justifies these attacks as necessary in fighting the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory, the attacks continue despite the 2005 Israeli withdrawal from Hamas controlled territory and Hamas still states its goal to be the elimination of Israel.[121] The wider Hamas movement also serves as a charity organization and provides services to Palestinians.[122]

Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine is a Palestinian Islamist group based in the Syrian capital, Damascus, and dedicated to waging jihad to eliminate the state of Israel. It was formed by Egyptian Fathi Shaqaqi in the Gaza Strip following the Iranian Revolution which inspired its members. From 1983 onward, it engaged in "a succession of violent, high-profile attacks" on Israeli targets. The intifada which "it eventually sparked" was quickly taken over by the much larger Palestine Liberation Organization and Hamas.[123] Beginning in September 2000, it started a campaign of suicide bombing attacks against Israeli civilians. The PIJ's armed wing, the Al-Quds brigades, has claimed responsibility for numerous militant attacks in Israel, including suicide bombings. The group has been designated as a terrorist organization by several Western countries.

[edit]Lebanon

This section may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. No cleanup reason has been specified. Please help improve this section if you can. (July 2011)

Hezbollah first emerged in 1982 as a militia during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, also known as Operation Peace for Galilee.[124][125] Its leaders were inspired by the ayatollah Khomeini, and its forces were trained and organized by a contingent of Iranian Revolutionary Guards.[126] Hezbollah's 1985 manifesto listed its three main goals as "putting an end to any colonialist entity" in Lebanon, bringing the Phalangists to justice for "the crimes they [had] perpetrated," and the establishment of an Islamic regime in Lebanon.[127][128] Hezbollah leaders have also made numerous statements calling for the destruction of Israel, which they refer to as a "Zionist entity... built on lands wrested from their owners."[127][128] Hezbollah, which started with only a small militia, has grown to an organization with seats in the Lebanese government, a radio and a satellite television-station, and programs for social development.[129] Hezbollah maintains strong support among Lebanon's Shi'a population, and gained a surge of support from Lebanon's broader population (Sunni, Christian, Druze) immediately following the 2006 Lebanon War,[130] and is able to mobilize demonstrations of hundreds of thousands.[131] Hezbollah alongside with some other groups began the 2006–2008 Lebanese political protests in opposition to the government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora.[132] A later dispute over Hezbollah preservation of its telecoms network led to clashes and Hezbollah-led opposition fighters seized control of several West Beirut neighborhoods from Future Movement militiamen loyal to Fouad Siniora. These areas were then handed over to the Lebanese Army.[133] A national unity government was formed in 2008, giving Hezbollah and its opposition allies control of 11 of 30 cabinets seats; effectively veto power.[134] Hezbollah receives its financial support from the governments of Iran and Syria, as well as donations from Lebanese people and foreign Shi'as.[135][136] It has also gained significantly in military strength in the 2000s.[137] Despite a June 2008 certification by the United Nations that Israel had withdrawn from all Lebanese territory,[138] in August, Lebanon's new Cabinet unanimously approved a draft policy statement which secures Hezbollah's existence as an armed organization and guarantees its right to "liberate or recover occupied lands." Since 1992, the organization has been headed by Hassan Nasrallah, its Secretary-General. The United States, Canada, Israel and the Netherlands regard Hezbollah as a "terrorist" organization, while the United Kingdom and Australia consider only Hezbollah's external security organization to be a terrorist organization. Many consider it, or a part of it, to be a terrorist group[139][140] responsible for blowing up the American embassy[141] and later its annex, as well as the barracks of American and French peacekeeping troops and a dozens of kidnappings of foreigners in Beirut.[142][143] It is also accused of being the recipient of massive aid from Iran,[144] and of serving "Iranian foreign policy calculations and interests,"[142] or serving as a "subcontractor of Iranian initiatives"[143] Hezbollah denies any involvement or dependence on Iran.[145] In the Arab and Muslim worlds, on the other hand, Hezbollah is regarded as a legitimate and successful resistance movement that drove both Western powers and Israel out of Lebanon.[146] In 2005, the Lebanese Prime Minister said of Hezbollah, it "is not a militia. It's a resistance."[147]

Fatah al-Islam is an Islamist group operating out of the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp in northern Lebanon. It was formed in November 2006 by fighters who broke off from the pro-Syrian Fatah al-Intifada, itself a splinter group of the Palestinian Fatah movement, and is led by a Palestinian fugitive militant named Shaker al-Abssi.[148] The group's members have been described as militant jihadists,[149] and the group itself has been described as a terrorist movement that draws inspiration from al-Qaeda.[148][149][150] Its stated goal is to reform the Palestinian refugee camps under Islamic sharia law,[151] and its primary targets are Israel and the United States.[148]

[edit]Saudi Arabia

Main article: Terrorism in Saudi Arabia

[edit]Yemen

Main article: Terrorism in Yemen

[edit]North Africa

[edit]Egypt

Main article: Terrorism in Egypt

[edit]Algeria

The Armed Islamic Group, active in Algeria between 1992 and 1998, was one of the most violent Islamic terrorist groups, and is thought to have takfired the Muslim population of Algeria. Its campaign to overthrow the Algerian government included civilian massacres, sometimes wiping out entire villages in its area of operation. It also targeted foreigners living in Algeria, killing more than 100 expatriates in the country. In recent years it has been eclipsed by a splinter group, the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC), now called Al-Qaeda Organization in the Islamic Maghreb.[152][153]

[edit]South Asia

[edit]Afghanistan

According to Human Rights Watch, Taliban and Hezb-e-Islami Gulbuddin forces have "sharply escalated bombing and other attacks" against civilians since 2006. In 2006, "at least 669 Afghan civilians were killed in at least 350 armed attacks, most of which appear to have been intentionally launched at civilians or civilian objects."[154]

[edit]Bangladesh

In Bangladesh the group Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh was formed sometime in 1998 and gained prominence in 2001.[155] The organization was officially banned in February 2005 after attacks on NGOs, but struck back in August when 300 bombs were detonated almost simultaneously throughout Bangladesh, targeting Shahjalal International Airport, government buildings and major hotels.[156][157]

[edit]India

See also: Terrorism in India

Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed are militant groups seeking accession of Kashmir to Pakistan.[158] Comments made by several Pakistani religious clerics in public gatherings about ISI included 'ISI's role towards India is to continuously bleed India through a thousand cuts'. The Lashkar leadership describes Indian and Israeli regimes as the main enemies of Islam and Pakistan.[159] Lashkar-e-Toiba, along with Jaish-e-Mohammed, another militant group active in Kashmir are on the United States’ foreign terrorist organizations list, and are also designated as terrorist groups by the United Kingdom,[160] India, Australia[161] and Pakistan.[162] Jaish-e-Mohammed was formed in 1994 and has carried out a series of attacks all over India.[163][164] The group was formed after the supporters of Maulana Masood Azhar split from another Islamic militant organization, Harkat-ul-Mujahideen. Jaish-e-Mohammed is viewed by some as the "deadliest" and "the principal terrorist organization in Jammu and Kashmir".[165] The group was also implicated in the kidnapping and murder of American journalist Daniel Pearl.[165]

[edit]Pakistan

Main article: Terrorism in Pakistan

[edit]Southeast Asia

[edit]Indonesia

Main article: Terrorism in Indonesia

[edit]The Philippines

See also: Terrorism in the Philippines

The Abu Sayyaf Group, also known as al-Harakat al-Islamiyya, is one of several militant Islamic-separatist groups based in and around the southern islands of the Philippines, in Bangsamoro (Jolo, Basilan, and Mindanao) where for almost 30 years various Muslim groups have been engaged in an insurgency for a state, independent of the predominantly Christian Philippines. The name of the group is derived from the Arabic ابو, abu ("father of") and sayyaf ("Swordsmith").[166] Since its inception in the early 1990s, the group has carried out bombings, assassinations, kidnappings and extortion in their fight for an independent Islamic state in western Mindanao and the Sulu Archipelago with the stated goal of creating a pan-Islamic superstate across southeast Asia, spanning from east to west; the island of Mindanao, the Sulu Archipelago, the island of Borneo (Malaysia, Indonesia), the South China Sea, and the Malay Peninsula (Peninsular Malaysia, Thailand and Myanmar).[167] The U.S. Department of State has branded the group a terrorist entity by adding it to the list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations.[167]

[edit]Tactics

[edit]Suicide attacks

See also: Suicide attack

An increasingly popular tactic used by terrorists is suicide bombing.[168] This tactic is used against civilians, soldiers, and government officials of the regimes the terrorists oppose. The use of suicide bombers is seen by many Muslims[weasel words] as contradictory to Islam's teachings;[169][170] however, groups who support its use often refer to such attacks as "martyrdom operations" and the suicide-bombers who commit them as "martyrs" (Arabic: shuhada, plural of "shahid"). The bombers, and their sympathizers often believe that suicide bombers, as martyrs (shaheed) to the cause of jihad against the enemy, will receive the rewards of paradise for their actions.

[edit]Hijackings

Islamic terrorism sometimes employs the hijacking of passenger vehicles. The most famous were the "9/11" attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people on a single day in 2001, effectively ending the era of aircraft hijacking.

[edit]Kidnappings and executions

Along with bombings and hijackings, Islamic terrorists have made extensive use of highly publicised kidnappings and executions, often circulating videos of the acts for use as propaganda. A frequent form of execution by these groups is decapitation, another is shooting. In the 1980s, a series of abductions of American citizens by Hezbollah during the Lebanese Civil War resulted in the 1986 Iran–Contra affair. During the chaos of the Iraq War, more than 200 kidnappings foreign hostages (for various reasons and by various groups, including purely criminal) gained great international notoriety, even as the great majority (thousands) of victims were Iraqis. In 2007, the kidnapping of Alan Johnston by Army of Islam resulted in the British government meeting a Hamas member for the first time.

[edit]Internet recruiting

In the beginning of the 21st century emerged a worldwide network of hundreds of web sites that inspire, train, educate and recruit young Muslims to engage in jihad against America and the West, taking less prominent roles in mosques and community centers that are under scrutiny. According to The Washington Post, "Online recruiting has exponentially increased, with Facebook, YouTube and the increasing sophistication of people online".[171]

[Drybone]

finally back on topic here is the generic version from Wiki

http://en.wikipedia....lamic_terrorism

[Bertuzzi Babe]

finally back on topic here is the generic version from Wiki

http://en.wikipedia....lamic_terrorism

Some scholars, such as Mark Burgess of the Center for Defense Information, trace the roots of Islamic terrorism back to the 11th-century Assassins, an order of Isma'ili Shi'ism that targeted political and religious opponents who stood in the way of the Assassins' sectarian ideology. In positing a continuity between Islamic terrorism's medieval and modern manifestations, Burgess identifies both a common underlying motive, namely loyalty to a divine imperative, and similar tactics, such as actively seeking out martyrdom.

The emergence of modern Islamic terrorism has its roots in the 19th century.[2] The Wahhabi movement, an Arabian fundamentalist movement that formed in the 18th century, began to establish a broad following during the 1800s and gradually inspired other fundamentalist movements during the 20th century. Waves of politically motivated terrorist movements in Europe during the 1800s (e.g. the Narodnaya Volya, the Irish Republican Brotherhood, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation) and early 1900s (e.g. the IRA, the Irgun) served as inspirations and models which would inspire the Islamists over the course of the 20th century and beyond.[3] During the Cold War, the United States and the United Kingdom supported the rise of fundamentalist groups in the Middle East and South Asia as a hedge against Soviet expansion and as a means to weaken anti-Western nationalist movements in some countries.[4]

According to Burgess, the escalation of terrorism during the later 20th century has its roots in three pivotal events circa 1979: the Iranian Revolution, the post-Cold War global religious revival, and the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan. These events, Burgess goes on to argue, were factors that fueled a recourse to religious terrorism.[5][6] American historian Walter Laqueur described the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan as the "global trigger" of Islamic terrorism.[7]

[edit]Motivations and Islamic terrorism

Various arguments have been to explain the root cause of Islamic terrorism.

[edit]The view that Western foreign policy is a motivation for terrorism

Robert Pape, has argued that at least terrorists utilizing suicide attacks — a particularly effective[8] form of terrorist attack—are driven not by Islamism but by "a clear strategic objective: to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from the territory that the terrorists view as their homeland."[9] However, Martin Kramer, who debated Pape on origins of suicide bombing, countered Pape's position that the motivation for suicide attacks is not just strategic logic but also an interpretation of Islam to provide a moral logic. For example, Hezbollah initiated suicide bombings after a complex reworking of the concept of martyrdom. Kramer explains that the Israeli occupation of Lebanon raised the temperature necessary for this reinterpretation of Islam, but occupation alone would not have been sufficient for suicide terrorism.[10] "The only way to apply a brake to suicide terrorism," Kramer argues, "is to undermine its moral logic, by encouraging Muslims to see its incompatibility with their own values."

Former CIA analyst Michael Scheuer argues that terrorist attacks (specifically al-Qaeda attacks on America) are not motivated by a religiously inspired hatred of American culture or religion, but by the belief that U.S. foreign policy has oppressed, killed, or otherwise harmed Muslims in the Middle East,[11] condensed in the phrase "They hate us for what we do, not who we are." U.S. foreign policy actions Scheuer believes are fueling Islamic terror include: the U.S.-led intervention in Afghanistan and invasion of Iraq; Israel–United States relations, namely, financial, military, and political support for Israel.;[12][13][14][15][16] U.S. support for "apostate" police states in Muslim nations such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, Algeria, Morocco, and Kuwait;[17] U.S. support for the creation of an independent East Timor from territory previously held by Muslim Indonesia; perceived U.S. approval or support of actions against Muslim insurgents in India, the Philippines, Chechnya, and Palestine;[18] U.S. troops on Muslim 'holy ground' in Saudi Arabia; the Western world's religious discrimination against Muslim immigrants'; historical justification, such as the Crusades.

Some academics argue that this form of terrorism should be seen as a strategic reaction to American power: that America is an empire, and empires provoked resistance in the form of terrorism. The Russian, Ottoman, and Habsburg Empires, for example, all suffered from terrorist attacks and had terrorist organizations – the Black Hand, Young Bosnia, Narodnaya Volya – spawned from their multiple ethnic groups, religions and national identities.[19] On the other hand, American intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq led to free elections in those nations. The United States therefore does not meet the definition of an empire as it lacks politico-military dominion over Muslim or other populations in those countries. Moreover, as discussed in the section below, the first instances of anti-American Islamic terrorism occurred long before the United States was a global power.

[edit]The view that Islamic terrorism predates U.S. action and is justified by Quranic teachings

March 18, 1786 letter written by Thomas Jefferson and John Adams describing their diplomatic initiative with Tripoli.

An alternative argument is that anti-American terrorism predated the rise of the United States as a global power and is justified by the Quran. This is exemplified by the events leading to the First Barbary War. Muslim pirates of Algiers, Morocco, Tunis, and Tripoli Barbary Coast had attacked, enslaved and held American merchant sailors for ransom, soon after the establishment of the United States of America in 1776 (see First Barbary War). These terrorist-type attacks predated any U.S. involvement in the Islamic world and occurred before the US had been involved in any overseas military action. In 1786, future U.S. Presidents Thomas Jefferson and John Adams met with Tripoli’s envoy to London, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman in an attempt to negotiate an end to the piracy. Adams and Jefferson summarized their meeting in a letter dated March 28, 1786 to John Jay, the United States Secretary of Foreign Affairs:

"We took the liberty to make some enquiries concerning the ground of their pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation. The Ambassador [of Tripoli] answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman (muslims) who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise."[20]

These diplomatic engagements suggest that a modern Jihad-like ideology existed prior to any U.S. involvement in the Islamic world, and that the Koran was used to justify this ideology.

Thus, according to critics of Islam, Islamic terrorism is linked to the practice of divinely sanctioned warfare against apostates.[21][22] Many Muslim groups including the Council on American-Islamic Relations argue that references to violence in Muslim sources have been taken out of context.[23][24][25] They argue that these Koranic ayahs are only for self-defense when non-believers endanger Muslim life. While a debate may exist on the proper interpretation of Koranic verses, the terrorist actions leading to the First Barbary War and the justification provided by Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman, provide an early example where the Koran was used to justify anti-American terrorism. These events occurred at a time where the U.S. had yet to intervene in the Muslim world and argue against U.S. policy as a fundamental cause of Islamic terrorism. On the contrary, the historical timeline demonstrates that the very first U.S. engagement with the Muslim world was an American response to Islamic terrorism.[citation needed]

[edit]Societal and economic motivations

Scholar Scott Atran, research director and involved in NATO group studying suicide terrorism, points out that there is no single root cause of terrorism. Greatest predictors of suicide bombings, Atran concludes, is not religion but group dynamics: "small-group dynamics involving friends and family that form the diaspora cell of brotherhood and camaraderie on which the rising tide of martyrdom actions is based".[26]

The Muslim world has been afflicted with economic stagnation for many centuries. In 2011, U.S. President Barack Obama himself stated that apart from crude oil, the exports of the entire Greater Middle East with its 400 million population roughly equals that of Switzerland.[27] It has also been estimated that the exports of Finland, a European country of only five million, exceeded those of the entire 260 million-strong Arab world, excluding oil revenue.[citation needed] This economic stagnation is argued[who?] to have commenced with the demise of the Ottoman Caliphate in 1924, with trade networks being disrupted and societies torn apart with the creation of new nation states; prior to this, the Middle East had a diverse and growing economy and more general prosperity[citation needed].

Obama gave a major public speech in the United States in response to the 2011 Arab Spring. In a message to Muslim leaders around the world, Obama urged reform and stated "that in a global economy based on knowledge, based on innovation, no development strategy can be based solely upon what comes out of the ground (oil). He also stated that people can not reach their potential when they cannot start a business without paying a bribe. Throughout the region, many young people have a solid education, but closed economies leave them unable to find a job. Muslim entrepreneurs are brimming with excellent ideas, but corruption, lack of funding, lack of support or inadequate infastructure leaves them unable to develop and profit from those ideas."

Strong population growth combined with economic stagnation has created urban conglomerations in Cairo, Istanbul, Tehran, Karachi, Dhaka, and Jakarta each with well over 12 million citizens, millions of them young and unemployed or underemployed. Such a demographic, alienated from the westernized ways of the urban elite,[citation needed] but uprooted from the comforts and more passive traditions of the villages they came from, is understandably favourably disposed to an Islamic system promising a better world – an ideology providing an "emotionally familiar basis for group identity, solidarity, and exclusion]; an acceptable basis for legitimacy and authority; an immediately intelligible formulation of principles for both a critique of the present and a program for the future."[citation needed]

[edit]Profiles

Forensic psychiatrist and former foreign service officer Marc Sageman made an "intensive study of biographical data on 172 participants in the jihad," in his book Understanding Terror Networks.[28] He concluded social networks, the "tight bonds of family and friendship", rather than emotional and behavioral disorders of "poverty, trauma, madness, [or] ignorance", inspired alienated young Muslims to join the jihad and kill.[29]

Author Lawrence Wright described the characteristic of "displacement" of members of the most famous Islamic terrorist group, al-Qaeda:

What the recruits tended to have in common – besides their urbanity, their cosmopolitan backgrounds, their education, their facility with languages, and their computer skills – was displacement. Most who joined the jihad did so in a country other than the one in which they were reared. They were Algerians living in expatriate enclaves in France, Moroccans in Spain, or Yemenis in Saudi Arabia. Despite their accomplishments, they had little standing in the host societies where they lived."[30]

Scholar Olivier Roy describes the background of the hundreds of global (as opposed to local) terrorists who were incarcerated or killed and for whom authorities have records, as being surprising for their Westernized background; for the lack of Palestinians, Iraqis, Afghans "coming to avenge what is going on in their country"; their lack of religiosity before being "born again" in a foreign country; the high percentage of converts to Islam among them; their "de-territorialized backgrounds" – "For instance, they may be born in a country, then educated in another country, then go to fight in a third country and take refuge in a fourth country"; their nontraditional belief that jihad is permanent, global, and "not linked with a specific territory."[31]

This profile differs from that found among recent local Islamist suicide bombers in Afghanistan, according to a 2007 study of 110 suicide bombers by Afghan pathologist Dr. Yusef Yadgari. Yadgari found that 80% of the attackers studied had some kind of physical or mental disability. The bombers were also "not celebrated like their counterparts in other Arab nations. Afghan bombers are not featured on posters or in videos as martyrs."[32] Daniel Byman, a Middle East expert at the Brookings Institute, and Christine Fair, an assistant professor in peace and security studies at Georgetown University say that many of the Islamic terrorists are foolish and untrained, perhaps even untrainable.[33]

[edit]Ideology

See also: Islamism and Political aspects of Islam

Part of the Politics series on

Islamism

Basic topics[show]

Movements[show]

Manifestations[show]

Concepts[show]

Key texts[show]

Islam Portal

Politics portal

v t e

One ideology that plays a role in Islamic terrorism is the principle of Jihad, which broadly means struggle. Militants generally use jihad to mean defensive or retaliatory warfare against actors that have allegedly harmed Muslims.

Transnational Islamist ideology, specifically of the militant Islamists, assert that Western policies and society are actively anti-Islamic, or as it is sometimes described, waging a "war against Islam". Islamists often identify what they see as a historical struggle between Christianity and Islam, dating back as far as the Crusades, among other historical conflicts between practitioners of the two respective religions. Osama bin Laden, for example, almost invariably describes his enemy as aggressive and his call for action against them as defensive. Defensive jihad differs from offensive jihad in being "fard al-ayn," or a personal obligation of all Muslim, rather than "fard al-kifaya", a communal obligation, which if some Muslims perform it is not required from others. Hence, framing a fight as defensive has the advantage both of appearing to be a victim rather than aggressor, and of giving your struggle the very highest religious priority for all good Muslims.

Many of the violent terrorist groups use the name of jihad to fight against certain Western nations and Israel. An example is bin Laden's al-Qaeda, which is also known as "International Islamic Front for Jihad Against the Jews and Crusaders". Most militant Islamists oppose Israel's policies, and often its existence.

According to the U.S. Army Colonel Dale C. Eikmeier, “ideology”, rather than any individual or group, is the "center of gravity" of al-Qaeda and related groups, and the ideology is a "collection of violent Islamic thought called Qutbism."[34] He summarizes the tenets of Qutbism as being:

A belief that Muslims have deviated from true Islam and must return to “pure Islam” as originally practiced during the time of the Prophet.

The path to “pure Islam” is only through a literal and strict interpretation of the Qur'an and Hadith, along with implementation of the Prophet’s commands.

Muslims should interpret the original sources individually without being bound to follow the interpretations of Islamic scholars.

That any interpretation of the Quran from a historical, contextual perspective is a corruption, and that the majority of Islamic history and the classical jurisprudential tradition is mere sophistry.[34]

The historic rivalry between Hindus and Muslims in the Indian subcontinent has also often been the primary motive behind some of the most deadly terrorist attacks in India. According to a U.S. State Department report, India topped the list of countries worst affected by Islamic terrorism.

In addition, Islamist militants, scholars, and leaders opposed Western society for what they see as immoral secularism. Islamists have claimed that such unrestricted free speech has led to the proliferation of pornography, immorality, secularism, homosexuality, feminism, and many other ideas that Islamists often oppose. Although bin Laden almost always emphasized the alleged oppression of Muslims by America and Jews when talking about them in his messages, in his "Letter to America" he answered the question, "What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?," with

We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest (...) You separate religion from your policies, (...) You are the nation that permits Usury, which has been forbidden by all the religions (...) You are a nation that permits the production, trading and usage of intoxicants (...) You are a nation that permits acts of immorality (...) You are a nation that permits gambling in its all forms. (...) You use women to serve passengers, visitors, and strangers to increase your profit margins. You then rant that you support the liberation of women.[35]

Given their perceived piety, The Times noted the irony when a major[36] investigation by their reporters uncovered a link between Islamic Jihadis and child pornography; a discovery that, according to the London paper, "is expected to improve understanding of the mindsets of both types of criminals and has been hailed as a potentially vital intelligence tool to undermine future terrorist plots.".[37] Similarly, Reuters reported that pornography was found among the materials seized from Osama bin Laden's Abbottabad compound that was raided by U.S. Navy SEALs.[38]

In 2006 Britain's then head of MI5 Eliza Manningham-Buller said of Al-Qaeda that it "has developed an ideology which claims that Islam is under attack, and needs to be defended". "This" she said "is a powerful narrative that weaves together conflicts from across the globe, presenting the West’s response to varied and complex issues, from long-standing disputes such as Israel/Palestine and Kashmir to more recent events as evidence of an across-the-board determination to undermine and humiliate Islam worldwide."[39] She said that the video wills of British suicide bombers made it clear that they were motivated by perceived worldwide and long-standing injustices against Muslims; an extreme and minority interpretation of Islam promoted by some preachers and people of influence; their interpretation as anti-Muslim of UK foreign policy, in particular the UK’s involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan."[39] She also cautioned how difficult it was to gain a proper perspective, saying that although there are more important dangers we face daily without feeling so threatened by them such as climate change and road deaths and though terrorist deaths were few the intelligence services had prevented some potentially large threats and that vigilance was needed.[39]

[edit]Interpretations of the Qur'an and Hadith

The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (July 2011)

The role played by the Qur'an, Islam's sacred text, in opposing or in encouraging attacks on civilians is disputed.

The Princeton University Middle Eastern scholar Bernard Lewis, states that Islamic jurisprudence does not allow terrorism.[40] In 2001, Professor Lewis noted:[41]

At no time did the (Muslim) jurist approve of terrorism. Nor indeed is there any evidence of the use of terrorism (in Islamic tradition). Muslims are commanded not to kill women, children, or the aged, not to torture or otherwise ill-treat prisoners, to give fair warning of the opening of hostilities, and to honor agreements. Similarly, the laws of Jihad categorically preclude wanton and indiscriminate slaughter. The warriors in the holy war are urged not to harm non-combatants, women and children, "unless they attack you first." A point on which they insist is the need for a clear declaration of war before beginning hostilities, and for proper warning before resuming hostilities after a truce. What the classical jurists of Islam never remotely considered is the kind of unprovoked, unannounced mass slaughter of uninvolved civil populations that we saw in New York two weeks ago. For this there is no precedent and no authority in Islam.

But Bernard Lewis says Jihad is an unlimited offensive to bring the whole world under Islamic law; Christian crusades a defensive, limited response to, and imitation of, jihad.[42]

Even the Christian crusade, often compared with the Muslim jihad, was itself a delayed and limited response to the jihad and in part also an imitation. But unlike the jihad it was concerned primarily with the defense or reconquest of threatened or lost Christian territory...The Muslim jihad, in contrast, was perceived [by Muslims] as unlimited, as a religious obligation that would continue until all the world had either adopted the Muslim faith or submitted to Muslim rule.… The object of jihad is to bring the whole world under Islamic law.

Bernard Lewis says Islam imposes, without limit of time or space, the duty to subjugate non-Muslims.[43]

"...it is the duty of those who have accepted them [Allah's word and message] to strive unceasingly to convert or at least to subjugate those who have not. This obligation is without limit of time or space. It must continue until the whole world has either accepted the Islamic faith or submitted to the power of the Islamic state.”

Michael Sells and Jane I. Smith (a Professor of Islamic Studies) write that barring some extremists like al-Qaeda, most Muslims do not interpret Qura’nic verses as promoting warfare; and that the phenomenon of radical interpretation of scripture by extremist groups is not unique to Islam.[44][45] According to Sells, "[Most Muslims] no more expect to apply [the verses at issue] to their contemporary non-Muslim friends and neighbors than most Christians and Jews consider themselves commanded by God, like the Biblical Joshua, to exterminate the infidels."[44]

According to Robert Spencer, Muhammad said in one Hadith:[46] "Allah's Apostle said, "I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand." Abu Huraira added: Allah's Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them). Narrated in Abu Huraira, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220" Furthermore Muhammad said in another Hadith:[47] The Prophet said, "Who is ready to kill Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf who has really hurt Allah and His Apostle?" Muhammad bin Maslama said, "O Allah's Apostle! Do you like me to kill him?" He replied in the affirmative. So, Muhammad bin Maslama went to him (i.e. Ka' and said, "This person (i.e. the Prophet) has put us to task and asked us for charity." Ka'b replied, "By Allah, you will get tired of him." Muhammad said to him, "We have followed him, so we dislike to leave him till we see the end of his affair." Muhammad bin Maslama went on talking to him in this way till he got the chance to kill him. Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah Volume 4, Book 52, Number 270 And another Hadith:[48] The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle. Narrated As-Sab bin Jaththama Volume 4, Book 52, Number 256

[edit]Criticism of Islamic terrorist ideology

Although "Islamic" terrorism is commonly associated with the Salafis (or "Wahhabis"), the scholars of the group have constantly attributed this association to ignorance, misunderstanding and sometimes insincere research and deliberate misleading by rival groups.[49] Following the September 11 attacks, Abdul-Azeez ibn Abdullaah Aal ash-Shaikh, the Grand Mufti of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, made an official statement that "the Islamic Sharee'ah (legislation) does not sanction" such actions.[50] A Salafi Committee of Major Scholars"in Saudi Arabia has declared that "Islamic" terrorism, such as the May 2003 bombing in Riyadh, are in violation of Sharia law and aiding the enemies of Islam.[51]

Criticism of Islamic terrorism on Islamic grounds has also been made by Abdal-Hakim Murad (Timothy Winter):

Certainly, neither bin Laden nor his principal associate, Ayman al-Zawahiri, are graduates of Islamic universities. And so their proclamations ignore 14 centuries of Muslim scholarship, and instead take the form of lists of anti-American grievances and of Koranic quotations referring to early Muslim wars against Arab idolaters. These are followed by the conclusion that all Americans, civilian and military, are to be wiped off the face of the Earth. All this amounts to an odd and extreme violation of the normal methods of Islamic scholarship. Had the authors of such fatwās followed the norms of their religion, they would have had to acknowledge that no school of mainstream Islam allows the targeting of civilians. An insurrectionist who kills non-combatants is guilty of baghy, “armed aggression,” a capital offense in Islamic law.[52]

Colonel Eikmeier points out the "questionable religious credentials" of many Islamist theorists, or "Qutbists," which can be a "means to discredit them and their message":

With the exception of Abul Ala Maududi and Abdullah Yusuf Azzam, none of Qutbism’s main theoreticians trained at Islam’s recognized centers of learning. Although a devout Muslim, Hassan al-Banna was a teacher and community activist. Sayyid Qutb was a literary critic. Muhammad Abd al-Salam Faraj was an electrician. Ayman al-Zawahiri is a physician. Osama bin Laden trained to be a businessman.[53]

Fethullah Gülen, a prominent Turkish Islamic scholar, has claimed that "a real Muslim," who understood Islam in every aspect, could not be a terrorist.[54][55][56] There are many other people with similar points of view[57] such as Karen Armstrong,[58] Prof. Ahmet Akgunduz,[59] Harun Yahya[60] and Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri.[61] Huston Smith, an author on comparative religion, noted that extremists have hijacked Islam, just as has occurred periodically in Christianity, Hinduism and other religions throughout history. He added that the real problem is that extremists do not know their own faith.[62]

[edit]Identity-based frameworks for analyzing Islamist-based terrorism

Islamist-based fundamentalist terrorism against Western nations and the U.S. in particular, has numerous motivations and takes place the larger context of a complex and tense relationship between the ‘West' and the Arab and Muslim 'world,'[63] which is highlighted in the previous section on motivations and Islamic terrorism. Identity-based theoretical frameworks including theories of social identity, social categorization theory, and psychodynamics are used to explain the reasons terrorism occurs.[64]

Social identity is explained by Karina Korostelina as a “feeling of belonging to a social group, as a strong connection with social category, and as an important part of our mind that affects our social perceptions and behavior”[65] This definition can be applied to the case of Osama bin Laden, who, according to this theory, has a highly salient perception of his social identity as a Muslim, a strong connection to the social category of the Muslim Ummah or 'community,' which affect his social perceptions and behaviors.[66] Bin Laden's ideology and interpretation of Islam led to the creation of al-Qaeda in response to perceived threats against the Muslim community by the Soviet Union, the U.S. in particular due to its troop presence in Saudi Arabia, and American support for Israel.[67] The Islamist terrorist group al-Qaeda has a group identity, which includes “shared experiences, attitudes, beliefs, and interests of ingroup members,” and is “described through the achievement of a collective aim for which this group has been created,”[68] which in this case is to achieve "a complete break from the foreign influences in Muslim countries, and the creation of a new Islamic caliphate."

Social categorization theory has been discussed as a three-stage process of identification, where “individuals define themselves as members of a social group, learn the stereotypes and norms of the group, and group categories influence the perception and understanding of all situations in a particular context”[65] This definition can be applied to the U.S.-led war on terror, in which conflict features such as the phenomenon of Anti-Americanism[69] and the phenomenon of non-Arab countries like Iran and Afghanistan lending support to Islamist-based terrorism by funding or harboring terrorist groups such as Hezbollah[70] and al-Qaeda[71] against Western nations, particularly Israel[72] and the United States[73] are, according to social categorization theory, influenced by a three-stage process of identification. In this three-stage process of identification, the Arab and Muslim world(s) are the social group(s), in which their members learn stereotypes and norms which categorize their social group vis-à-vis the West.[74] This social categorization process creates feelings of high-level in-group support and allegiance among Arabs and Muslims and the particular context within which members of the Arab and Muslim world(s) social group(s) understand all situations that involve the West. Social categorization theory as a framework for analysis indicates causal relationships between group identification processes and features of conflict situations.[75]

[edit]Muslim attitudes toward terrorism

Main article: Muslim attitudes towards terrorism

Muslim popular opinion on the subject of attacks on civilians by Islamist groups varies. Fred Halliday, a British academic specialist on the Middle East, argues that most Muslims consider these acts to be egregious violations of Islam's laws.[76] Muslims living in the West denounce the September 11th attacks against United States, while Hezbollah contends that their rocket attacks against Israeli civilian targets are defensive Jihad by a legitimate resistance movement rather than terrorism.[77][78] Subsequently, however, on Osama Bin Laden's death, many Muslims in UK came out on streets in support of Osama, announcing him as an Islamic hero and condemned the role of US and west in killing him. The protest against Bin Laden’s death was organised by controversial preacher Anjem Choudary – who praised both 7/7 and the September 11 attacks.[79] Statistics compiled by the United States government's Counterterrorism Center present a complicated picture: of known and specified terrorist incidents from the beginning of 2004 through the first quarter of 2005, slightly more than half of the fatalities were attributed to Islamic extremists but a majority of over-all incidents were considered of either "unknown/unspecified" or a secular political nature. The vast majority of the "unknown/unspecified" terrorism fatalities did however happen in Islamic regions such as Iraq and Afghanistan, or in regions where Islam is otherwise involved in conflicts such as the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, southern Thailand and Kashmir.

[edit]View of Muslim clerics

Many Muslim scholars have presented proofs against the religious justification of terrorism, a notable example being that of Muhammad ibn al Uthaymeen who states regarding killing a non-Muslim:[80] "As for a non-Muslim living under Muslim rule and a Mu’āhid (a Non-Muslim ally with whom Muslims have a treaty, trust, peace, or agreement), it’s been authentically established that the prophet (blessings and peace upon him) said: “Whoever kills a Mu’āhid will not even smell the fragrance of paradise and its fragrance can be smelled from the distance of forty years away.” and he also said: “Certainly, one of the most difficult situations for which there is no turning back for whomever casts himself into it - shedding sacred blood without right.”

Another example is that of late scholar Abd al-Aziz Ibn Baz who stated: "It is well-known to anyone with the slightest amount of common sense that hijacking planes and kidnapping embassy officials and similar acts are some of the greatest universal crimes that result in nothing but widespread corruption and destruction. They place such extreme hardships and injuries upon innocent people, the extent of which only Allāh knows."[81]

Numerous fatwās (rulings) condemning terrorism and suicide bombing as haram have been published by Islamic scholars worldwide, one of the most extensive being the 600-page[clarification needed] ruling by Sheikh Tahir-ul-Qadri, whose fatwa condemned them as kufr.[82] On 2 March 2010, Qadri's fatwa was an "absolute" condemnation of terrorism without "any excuses or pretexts." He said that "Terrorism is terrorism, violence is violence and it has no place in Islamic teaching and no justification can be provided for it, or any kind of excuses or ifs or buts." Qadri said his fatwa, which declares terrorists and suicide bombers to be unbelievers, goes further than any previous denunciation.[83] Iranian Ayatollah Ozma Seyyed Yousef Sanei issued a fatwa (ruling) that suicide attacks against civilians are legitimate only in the context of war.[84] The ruling did not say whether other types of attacks against civilians are justified outside of the context of war, nor whether jihad is included in Sanei's definition of war.

An influential group of Pakistani scholars and religious leaders declared suicide attacks and beheadings as un-Islamic. 'Ulema' (clerics) and 'mushaikh' (spiritual leaders) of the Jamaat Ahl-e-Sunnah, who gathered for a convention, declared suicide attacks and beheadings as un-Islamic in a unanimous resolution. Chairman of the Pakistani Ruet-e-Hilal Committee, Mufti Muneeb-ur-Rehman, said in his address that those who were fighting in the name of implementing Shariah or Islamic law must first abide by these same laws and killing minors is contrary to the teachings of Islam.[85]

Some contemporary scholars who have followed a textual based approach to the study of the Qur'an with an emphasis over the coherence in the Book and the context of situation offered a radical interpretation on the verses and prophetic narratives that are usually quoted by the militants to promote militancy. According to Javed Ahmad Ghamidi (his booklet on Jihad is considered one of his most important contribution towards understanding the religion according to the principles of interpreting the Qur'an introduced by Farahi and Islahi) the Qur'an does not allow waging war except for against oppression under a sovereign state. He holds that jihad without a state is nothing but creating nuisance in the land when hijacked by the individuals and groups independent of the state authority defeats the purpose. The principle behind this study of the issue in the basic sources is the principle that there are divine injunctions in the Qur'an which are specific to the age of the Messenger. He says that nobody can be punished for apostasy or being non-Muslim after the Prophet who acted as the divine agent when he punished the disbelievers by sword who had rejected the message of God and his messenger even after the truth was made manifest to them. Ghamidi and his associates have written extensively on the topics related to these issues. In his book Meezan Ghamidi has concluded that:

Jihad can only waged against persecution Islamic jihad has only two purposes: putting an end to persecution even that of the non-Muslims and making the religion of Islam reign supreme in the Arabian peninsula. The latter type was specific for the messenger of God and is no more operative.

Under a sovereign state.

There are strict ethical limits for jihad which do not again allow fighting for example non-combatants.

Seen in this perspective acts of terrorism including suicide bombing becomes prohibited.

[edit]Opinion surveys

Gallup conducted tens of thousands of hour-long, face-to-face interviews with residents of more than 35 predominantly Muslim countries between 2001 and 2007. It found that – contrary to the prevailing perception in the west that the actions of al-Qaeda enjoy wide support in the Muslim world – more than 90% of respondents condemned the killing of non-combatants on religious and humanitarian grounds.[86]

A 2004, a year after the invasion of Iraq, Pew Research Center survey found that suicide bombings against Americans and other Westerners in Iraq were seen as "justifiable" by many Jordanians (70%), Pakistanis (46%), and Turks (31%). At the same time, the survey found that support for the U.S.-led War on Terror had increased.[87][88]

A 2005 Pew Research study that involved 17,000 people in 17 countries showed support for terrorism was declining in the Muslim world along with a growing belief that Islamic extremism represents a threat to those countries.[89] A Daily Telegraph survey[90] showed that 88% of Muslims said the July 2005 bombings in the London Underground were unjustified, while 6% disagreed.

In Pakistan, despite the recent rise in the Taliban's influence, a poll conducted by Terror Free Tomorrow in Pakistan in January 2008 tested support for al-Qaeda, the Taliban, other militant Islamist groups and Osama bin Laden himself, and found a recent drop by half. In August 2007, 33% of Pakistanis expressed support for al-Qaeda; 38% supported the Taliban. By January 2008, al-Qaeda's support had dropped to 18%, the Taliban's to 19%. When asked if they would vote for al-Qaeda, just 1% of Pakistanis polled answered in the affirmative. The Taliban had the support of 3% of those polled.[86]

Pew Research surveys in 2008 show that in a range of countries – Jordan, Pakistan, Indonesia, Lebanon, and Bangladesh – there have been substantial declines in the percentages saying suicide-bombings and other forms of violence against civilian targets can be justified to defend Islam against its enemies. Wide majorities say such attacks are, at most, rarely acceptable. The shift of attitudes against terror has been especially dramatic in Jordan, where 29% of Jordanians were recorded as viewing suicide-attacks as often or sometimes justified (down from 57% in May 2005). In the largest majority-Muslim nation, Indonesia, 74% of respondents agree that terrorist attacks are "never justified" (a substantial increase from the 41% level to which support had risen in March 2004); in Pakistan, that figure is 86%; in Bangladesh, 81%; and in Iran, 80%.[86]

A poll conducted in Osama bin Laden's home country of Saudi Arabia in December 2008 shows that his compatriots have dramatically turned against him, his organisation, Saudi volunteers in Iraq, and terrorism in general. Indeed, confidence in bin Laden has fallen in most Muslim countries in recent years.[86]

In Iraq, people of all persuasions unanimously reject the terror tactics against Iraqi civilians by the local al-Qaida. An ABC News/BBC/NHK poll revealed that all of those surveyed – Sunni and Shi'a alike – found al-Qaida attacks on Iraqi civilians "unacceptable"; 98% rejected the militants' attempts to gain control over areas in which they operated; and 97% opposed their attempts to recruit foreign fighters and bring them to Iraq.[86]

[edit]Examples of organizations and acts

Further information: List of designated terrorist organizations and History of terrorism

Countries in which Islamist terrorist attacks have occurred between September 11, 2001, and May 2008

Some prominent Islamic terror groups and incidents include the following:

[edit]Transnational

Main article: Al-Qaeda

This section requires expansion. (July 2011)

Al-Qaeda's stated aim is the use of jihad to defend and protect Islam against Zionism, Christianity, Hinduism, the secular West, and Muslim governments such as Saudi Arabia, which it sees as insufficiently Islamic and too closely tied to the United States.[91][92][93][94] Formed by Osama bin Laden and Muhammad Atef in the aftermath of the Soviet war in Afghanistan in the late 1980s, al-Qaeda called for the use of violence against civilians and military of the United States and any countries that are allied with it.[95]

[edit]North America

[edit]Canada

See also: Terrorism in Canada

According to recent government statements Islamic terrorism is biggest threat to Canada.[96] The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) reported that terrorist radicalization at home is now the chief preoccupation of Canada's spy agency.[97] The most notorious arrest in Canada's fight on terrorism, was the 2006 Ontario terrorism plot in which 18 Al-Qaeda cell members were arrested for planning a mass bombing, shooting, and hostage taking terror plot throughout Southern Ontario. There have also been other arrests mostly in Ontario involving terror plots.[98]

[edit]United States

See also: Terrorism in the United States

Between 1993 and 2001, the major attacks or attempts against US interests stemmed from militant Islamic jihad except for the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.[99] In 2001 nearly 3,000 people were killed in the massive September 11 attacks organised by al-Qaeda and largely perpetrated by Saudi nationals, sparking the War on Terror. Former CIA Director Michael Hayden considers homegrown terrorism to be the most dangerous threat and concern faced by American citizens today.[100] As of July 2011, there have been 51 homegrown jihadist plots or attacks in the United States since the September 11 attacks.[101]

[edit]Europe

See also: Al-Qaeda involvement in Europe

Major lethal attacks on civilians in Europe credited to Islamist terrorism include the 1985 El Descanso bombing in Madrid, the 1995 Paris Metro bombings, 11 March 2004 bombings of commuter trains in Madrid, where 191 people were killed, and the 7 July 2005 London bombings, also of public transport, which killed 52 commuters. According to EU Terrorism Report, however, there were almost 500 acts of terrorism across the European Union in 2006, but only one, the foiled suitcase bomb plot in Germany, was related to Islamist terror.[102] In 2009, a Europol report also showed that more than 99% of terrorist attacks in Europe over the last three years were, in fact, carried out by non-Muslims.[103][104][105] In terms of arrests, out of a total of 1,009 arrested terror suspects in 2008, 187 of them were arrested in relation to Islamist terrorism. The report also showed that the majority of Islamist terror suspects were not first generation immigrants, but were rather children of immigrants who no longer identified with the culture of their parents and at the same time felt excluded from Western society, "which still perceives them as foreigners," thus they became "more attracted to the idea of becoming ‘citizens’ of the virtual worldwide Islamic community, removed from territory and national culture."[106]

[edit]Eurasia

[edit]Russia

See also: Terrorism in Russia

Politically and religiously motivated attacks on civilians in Russia have been traced to separatist sentiment among the largely Muslim population of its North Caucasus region, particularly in Chechnya, where the central government of the Russian Federation has waged two bloody wars against the local secular separatist government since 1994. In the Moscow theater hostage crisis in October 2002, three Chechen separatist groups took an estimated 850 people hostage in the Russian capital; at least 129 hostages died during the storming by Russian special forces, all but one killed by the chemicals used to subdue the attackers (whether this attack would more properly be called a nationalist rather than an Islamist attack is in question). In the September 2004 Beslan school hostage crisis more than 1,000 people were taken hostage after a school in the Russian republic of North Ossetia–Alania was seized by a pro-Chechen multiethnic group aligned to Riyad-us Saliheen Brigade of Martyrs; hundreds of people died during the storming by Russian forces.[107]

Since 2000, Russia has also experienced a string of suicide bombings that killed hundreds of people in the Caucasian republics of Chechnya, Dagestan and Ingushetia, as well as in Russia proper including Moscow. Responsibility for most of these attacks were claimed by either Shamil Basayev's Islamic-nationalist rebel faction or, later, by Dokka Umarov's pan-Islamist movement Caucasus Emirate which is aiming to unite most of Russia's North Caucasus as an emirate since its creation in 2007.[108] In 2011, the U.S. Department of State included the Caucasus Emirate on its list of terrorist organisations.[109]

[edit]Turkey

Turkish Hezbollah (unrelated to the Shia Hezbollah in Lebanon) is a Sunni terrorist group[110] accused of a series of attacks, including the November 2003 bombings of two synagogues, the British consulate in Istanbul and HSBC bank headquarters that killed 58.[111]

[edit]Middle East / Southwest Asia

[edit]Iraq

The area that has seen some of the worst terror attacks in modern history has been Iraq as part of the Iraq War. In 2005, there were 400 incidents of one type of attack (suicide bombing), killing more than 2,000 people – many if not most of them civilians.[112] In 2006, almost half of all reported terrorist attacks in the world (6,600), and more than half of all terrorist fatalities (13,000), occurred in Iraq, according to the National Counterterrorism Center of the United States.[113] Along with nationalist groups and criminal, non-political attacks, the Iraqi insurgency includes Islamist insurgent groups, such as Al-Qaeda in Iraq, who favor suicide attacks far more than non-Islamist groups. At least some of the terrorism has a transnational character in that some foreign Islamic jihadists have joined the insurgency.[114]

[edit]Israel and the Palestinian territories

Main article: Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Hamas ("zeal" in Arabic and an acronym for Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya) began support for attacks on military and civilian targets in Israel at the beginning of the First Intifada in 1987.[115] The 1988 charter of Hamas calls for the destruction of Israel,[116] and remains in effect today. Its "military wing" has claimed responsibility for numerous attacks in Israel, principally suicide bombings and rocket attacks. Hamas has also been accused of sabotaging the Israeli-Palestine peace process by launching attacks on civilians during Israeli elections to anger Israeli voters and facilitate the election of harder-line Israeli candidates.[117] Hamas has been designated as a terrorist group by the European Union, Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Israel, Australia, Japan, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights and Human Rights Watch. It is banned in Jordan. Russia does not consider Hamas a terrorist group as it was "democratically elected".[118] During the second intifada (September 2000 through August 2005) 39.9 percent of the suicide attacks were carried out by Hamas.[119] The first Hamas suicide attack was the Mehola Junction bombing in 1993.[120] Although Hamas justifies these attacks as necessary in fighting the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory, the attacks continue despite the 2005 Israeli withdrawal from Hamas controlled territory and Hamas still states its goal to be the elimination of Israel.[121] The wider Hamas movement also serves as a charity organization and provides services to Palestinians.[122]

Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine is a Palestinian Islamist group based in the Syrian capital, Damascus, and dedicated to waging jihad to eliminate the state of Israel. It was formed by Egyptian Fathi Shaqaqi in the Gaza Strip following the Iranian Revolution which inspired its members. From 1983 onward, it engaged in "a succession of violent, high-profile attacks" on Israeli targets. The intifada which "it eventually sparked" was quickly taken over by the much larger Palestine Liberation Organization and Hamas.[123] Beginning in September 2000, it started a campaign of suicide bombing attacks against Israeli civilians. The PIJ's armed wing, the Al-Quds brigades, has claimed responsibility for numerous militant attacks in Israel, including suicide bombings. The group has been designated as a terrorist organization by several Western countries.

[edit]Lebanon

This section may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. No cleanup reason has been specified. Please help improve this section if you can. (July 2011)

Hezbollah first emerged in 1982 as a militia during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, also known as Operation Peace for Galilee.[124][125] Its leaders were inspired by the ayatollah Khomeini, and its forces were trained and organized by a contingent of Iranian Revolutionary Guards.[126] Hezbollah's 1985 manifesto listed its three main goals as "putting an end to any colonialist entity" in Lebanon, bringing the Phalangists to justice for "the crimes they [had] perpetrated," and the establishment of an Islamic regime in Lebanon.[127][128] Hezbollah leaders have also made numerous statements calling for the destruction of Israel, which they refer to as a "Zionist entity... built on lands wrested from their owners."[127][128] Hezbollah, which started with only a small militia, has grown to an organization with seats in the Lebanese government, a radio and a satellite television-station, and programs for social development.[129] Hezbollah maintains strong support among Lebanon's Shi'a population, and gained a surge of support from Lebanon's broader population (Sunni, Christian, Druze) immediately following the 2006 Lebanon War,[130] and is able to mobilize demonstrations of hundreds of thousands.[131] Hezbollah alongside with some other groups began the 2006–2008 Lebanese political protests in opposition to the government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora.[132] A later dispute over Hezbollah preservation of its telecoms network led to clashes and Hezbollah-led opposition fighters seized control of several West Beirut neighborhoods from Future Movement militiamen loyal to Fouad Siniora. These areas were then handed over to the Lebanese Army.[133] A national unity government was formed in 2008, giving Hezbollah and its opposition allies control of 11 of 30 cabinets seats; effectively veto power.[134] Hezbollah receives its financial support from the governments of Iran and Syria, as well as donations from Lebanese people and foreign Shi'as.[135][136] It has also gained significantly in military strength in the 2000s.[137] Despite a June 2008 certification by the United Nations that Israel had withdrawn from all Lebanese territory,[138] in August, Lebanon's new Cabinet unanimously approved a draft policy statement which secures Hezbollah's existence as an armed organization and guarantees its right to "liberate or recover occupied lands." Since 1992, the organization has been headed by Hassan Nasrallah, its Secretary-General. The United States, Canada, Israel and the Netherlands regard Hezbollah as a "terrorist" organization, while the United Kingdom and Australia consider only Hezbollah's external security organization to be a terrorist organization. Many consider it, or a part of it, to be a terrorist group[139][140] responsible for blowing up the American embassy[141] and later its annex, as well as the barracks of American and French peacekeeping troops and a dozens of kidnappings of foreigners in Beirut.[142][143] It is also accused of being the recipient of massive aid from Iran,[144] and of serving "Iranian foreign policy calculations and interests,"[142] or serving as a "subcontractor of Iranian initiatives"[143] Hezbollah denies any involvement or dependence on Iran.[145] In the Arab and Muslim worlds, on the other hand, Hezbollah is regarded as a legitimate and successful resistance movement that drove both Western powers and Israel out of Lebanon.[146] In 2005, the Lebanese Prime Minister said of Hezbollah, it "is not a militia. It's a resistance."[147]

Fatah al-Islam is an Islamist group operating out of the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp in northern Lebanon. It was formed in November 2006 by fighters who broke off from the pro-Syrian Fatah al-Intifada, itself a splinter group of the Palestinian Fatah movement, and is led by a Palestinian fugitive militant named Shaker al-Abssi.[148] The group's members have been described as militant jihadists,[149] and the group itself has been described as a terrorist movement that draws inspiration from al-Qaeda.[148][149][150] Its stated goal is to reform the Palestinian refugee camps under Islamic sharia law,[151] and its primary targets are Israel and the United States.[148]

[edit]Saudi Arabia

Main article: Terrorism in Saudi Arabia

[edit]Yemen

Main article: Terrorism in Yemen

[edit]North Africa

[edit]Egypt

Main article: Terrorism in Egypt

[edit]Algeria

The Armed Islamic Group, active in Algeria between 1992 and 1998, was one of the most violent Islamic terrorist groups, and is thought to have takfired the Muslim population of Algeria. Its campaign to overthrow the Algerian government included civilian massacres, sometimes wiping out entire villages in its area of operation. It also targeted foreigners living in Algeria, killing more than 100 expatriates in the country. In recent years it has been eclipsed by a splinter group, the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC), now called Al-Qaeda Organization in the Islamic Maghreb.[152][153]

[edit]South Asia

[edit]Afghanistan

According to Human Rights Watch, Taliban and Hezb-e-Islami Gulbuddin forces have "sharply escalated bombing and other attacks" against civilians since 2006. In 2006, "at least 669 Afghan civilians were killed in at least 350 armed attacks, most of which appear to have been intentionally launched at civilians or civilian objects."[154]

[edit]Bangladesh

In Bangladesh the group Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh was formed sometime in 1998 and gained prominence in 2001.[155] The organization was officially banned in February 2005 after attacks on NGOs, but struck back in August when 300 bombs were detonated almost simultaneously throughout Bangladesh, targeting Shahjalal International Airport, government buildings and major hotels.[156][157]

[edit]India

See also: Terrorism in India

Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed are militant groups seeking accession of Kashmir to Pakistan.[158] Comments made by several Pakistani religious clerics in public gatherings about ISI included 'ISI's role towards India is to continuously bleed India through a thousand cuts'. The Lashkar leadership describes Indian and Israeli regimes as the main enemies of Islam and Pakistan.[159] Lashkar-e-Toiba, along with Jaish-e-Mohammed, another militant group active in Kashmir are on the United States’ foreign terrorist organizations list, and are also designated as terrorist groups by the United Kingdom,[160] India, Australia[161] and Pakistan.[162] Jaish-e-Mohammed was formed in 1994 and has carried out a series of attacks all over India.[163][164] The group was formed after the supporters of Maulana Masood Azhar split from another Islamic militant organization, Harkat-ul-Mujahideen. Jaish-e-Mohammed is viewed by some as the "deadliest" and "the principal terrorist organization in Jammu and Kashmir".[165] The group was also implicated in the kidnapping and murder of American journalist Daniel Pearl.[165]

[edit]Pakistan

Main article: Terrorism in Pakistan

[edit]Southeast Asia

[edit]Indonesia

Main article: Terrorism in Indonesia

[edit]The Philippines

See also: Terrorism in the Philippines

The Abu Sayyaf Group, also known as al-Harakat al-Islamiyya, is one of several militant Islamic-separatist groups based in and around the southern islands of the Philippines, in Bangsamoro (Jolo, Basilan, and Mindanao) where for almost 30 years various Muslim groups have been engaged in an insurgency for a state, independent of the predominantly Christian Philippines. The name of the group is derived from the Arabic ابو, abu ("father of") and sayyaf ("Swordsmith").[166] Since its inception in the early 1990s, the group has carried out bombings, assassinations, kidnappings and extortion in their fight for an independent Islamic state in western Mindanao and the Sulu Archipelago with the stated goal of creating a pan-Islamic superstate across southeast Asia, spanning from east to west; the island of Mindanao, the Sulu Archipelago, the island of Borneo (Malaysia, Indonesia), the South China Sea, and the Malay Peninsula (Peninsular Malaysia, Thailand and Myanmar).[167] The U.S. Department of State has branded the group a terrorist entity by adding it to the list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations.[167]

[edit]Tactics

[edit]Suicide attacks

See also: Suicide attack

An increasingly popular tactic used by terrorists is suicide bombing.[168] This tactic is used against civilians, soldiers, and government officials of the regimes the terrorists oppose. The use of suicide bombers is seen by many Muslims[weasel words] as contradictory to Islam's teachings;[169][170] however, groups who support its use often refer to such attacks as "martyrdom operations" and the suicide-bombers who commit them as "martyrs" (Arabic: shuhada, plural of "shahid"). The bombers, and their sympathizers often believe that suicide bombers, as martyrs (shaheed) to the cause of jihad against the enemy, will receive the rewards of paradise for their actions.

[edit]Hijackings

Islamic terrorism sometimes employs the hijacking of passenger vehicles. The most famous were the "9/11" attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people on a single day in 2001, effectively ending the era of aircraft hijacking.

[edit]Kidnappings and executions

Along with bombings and hijackings, Islamic terrorists have made extensive use of highly publicised kidnappings and executions, often circulating videos of the acts for use as propaganda. A frequent form of execution by these groups is decapitation, another is shooting. In the 1980s, a series of abductions of American citizens by Hezbollah during the Lebanese Civil War resulted in the 1986 Iran–Contra affair. During the chaos of the Iraq War, more than 200 kidnappings foreign hostages (for various reasons and by various groups, including purely criminal) gained great international notoriety, even as the great majority (thousands) of victims were Iraqis. In 2007, the kidnapping of Alan Johnston by Army of Islam resulted in the British government meeting a Hamas member for the first time.

[edit]Internet recruiting

In the beginning of the 21st century emerged a worldwide network of hundreds of web sites that inspire, train, educate and recruit young Muslims to engage in jihad against America and the West, taking less prominent roles in mosques and community centers that are under scrutiny. According to The Washington Post, "Online recruiting has exponentially increased, with Facebook, YouTube and the increasing sophistication of people online".[171]

[Drybone]

finally back on topic here is the generic version from Wiki

http://en.wikipedia....lamic_terrorism

Some scholars, such as Mark Burgess of the Center for Defense Information, trace the roots of Islamic terrorism back to the 11th-century Assassins, an order of Isma'ili Shi'ism that targeted political and religious opponents who stood in the way of the Assassins' sectarian ideology. In positing a continuity between Islamic terrorism's medieval and modern manifestations, Burgess identifies both a common underlying motive, namely loyalty to a divine imperative, and similar tactics, such as actively seeking out martyrdom.

The emergence of modern Islamic terrorism has its roots in the 19th century.[2] The Wahhabi movement, an Arabian fundamentalist movement that formed in the 18th century, began to establish a broad following during the 1800s and gradually inspired other fundamentalist movements during the 20th century. Waves of politically motivated terrorist movements in Europe during the 1800s (e.g. the Narodnaya Volya, the Irish Republican Brotherhood, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation) and early 1900s (e.g. the IRA, the Irgun) served as inspirations and models which would inspire the Islamists over the course of the 20th century and beyond.[3] During the Cold War, the United States and the United Kingdom supported the rise of fundamentalist groups in the Middle East and South Asia as a hedge against Soviet expansion and as a means to weaken anti-Western nationalist movements in some countries.[4]

According to Burgess, the escalation of terrorism during the later 20th century has its roots in three pivotal events circa 1979: the Iranian Revolution, the post-Cold War global religious revival, and the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan. These events, Burgess goes on to argue, were factors that fueled a recourse to religious terrorism.[5][6] American historian Walter Laqueur described the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan as the "global trigger" of Islamic terrorism.[7]

[edit]Motivations and Islamic terrorism

Various arguments have been to explain the root cause of Islamic terrorism.

[edit]The view that Western foreign policy is a motivation for terrorism

Robert Pape, has argued that at least terrorists utilizing suicide attacks — a particularly effective[8] form of terrorist attack—are driven not by Islamism but by "a clear strategic objective: to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from the territory that the terrorists view as their homeland."[9] However, Martin Kramer, who debated Pape on origins of suicide bombing, countered Pape's position that the motivation for suicide attacks is not just strategic logic but also an interpretation of Islam to provide a moral logic. For example, Hezbollah initiated suicide bombings after a complex reworking of the concept of martyrdom. Kramer explains that the Israeli occupation of Lebanon raised the temperature necessary for this reinterpretation of Islam, but occupation alone would not have been sufficient for suicide terrorism.[10] "The only way to apply a brake to suicide terrorism," Kramer argues, "is to undermine its moral logic, by encouraging Muslims to see its incompatibility with their own values."

Former CIA analyst Michael Scheuer argues that terrorist attacks (specifically al-Qaeda attacks on America) are not motivated by a religiously inspired hatred of American culture or religion, but by the belief that U.S. foreign policy has oppressed, killed, or otherwise harmed Muslims in the Middle East,[11] condensed in the phrase "They hate us for what we do, not who we are." U.S. foreign policy actions Scheuer believes are fueling Islamic terror include: the U.S.-led intervention in Afghanistan and invasion of Iraq; Israel–United States relations, namely, financial, military, and political support for Israel.;[12][13][14][15][16] U.S. support for "apostate" police states in Muslim nations such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, Algeria, Morocco, and Kuwait;[17] U.S. support for the creation of an independent East Timor from territory previously held by Muslim Indonesia; perceived U.S. approval or support of actions against Muslim insurgents in India, the Philippines, Chechnya, and Palestine;[18] U.S. troops on Muslim 'holy ground' in Saudi Arabia; the Western world's religious discrimination against Muslim immigrants'; historical justification, such as the Crusades.

Some academics argue that this form of terrorism should be seen as a strategic reaction to American power: that America is an empire, and empires provoked resistance in the form of terrorism. The Russian, Ottoman, and Habsburg Empires, for example, all suffered from terrorist attacks and had terrorist organizations – the Black Hand, Young Bosnia, Narodnaya Volya – spawned from their multiple ethnic groups, religions and national identities.[19] On the other hand, American intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq led to free elections in those nations. The United States therefore does not meet the definition of an empire as it lacks politico-military dominion over Muslim or other populations in those countries. Moreover, as discussed in the section below, the first instances of anti-American Islamic terrorism occurred long before the United States was a global power.

[edit]The view that Islamic terrorism predates U.S. action and is justified by Quranic teachings

March 18, 1786 letter written by Thomas Jefferson and John Adams describing their diplomatic initiative with Tripoli.

An alternative argument is that anti-American terrorism predated the rise of the United States as a global power and is justified by the Quran. This is exemplified by the events leading to the First Barbary War. Muslim pirates of Algiers, Morocco, Tunis, and Tripoli Barbary Coast had attacked, enslaved and held American merchant sailors for ransom, soon after the establishment of the United States of America in 1776 (see First Barbary War). These terrorist-type attacks predated any U.S. involvement in the Islamic world and occurred before the US had been involved in any overseas military action. In 1786, future U.S. Presidents Thomas Jefferson and John Adams met with Tripoli’s envoy to London, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman in an attempt to negotiate an end to the piracy. Adams and Jefferson summarized their meeting in a letter dated March 28, 1786 to John Jay, the United States Secretary of Foreign Affairs:

"We took the liberty to make some enquiries concerning the ground of their pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation. The Ambassador [of Tripoli] answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman (muslims) who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise."[20]

These diplomatic engagements suggest that a modern Jihad-like ideology existed prior to any U.S. involvement in the Islamic world, and that the Koran was used to justify this ideology.

Thus, according to critics of Islam, Islamic terrorism is linked to the practice of divinely sanctioned warfare against apostates.[21][22] Many Muslim groups including the Council on American-Islamic Relations argue that references to violence in Muslim sources have been taken out of context.[23][24][25] They argue that these Koranic ayahs are only for self-defense when non-believers endanger Muslim life. While a debate may exist on the proper interpretation of Koranic verses, the terrorist actions leading to the First Barbary War and the justification provided by Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman, provide an early example where the Koran was used to justify anti-American terrorism. These events occurred at a time where the U.S. had yet to intervene in the Muslim world and argue against U.S. policy as a fundamental cause of Islamic terrorism. On the contrary, the historical timeline demonstrates that the very first U.S. engagement with the Muslim world was an American response to Islamic terrorism.[citation needed]

[edit]Societal and economic motivations

Scholar Scott Atran, research director and involved in NATO group studying suicide terrorism, points out that there is no single root cause of terrorism. Greatest predictors of suicide bombings, Atran concludes, is not religion but group dynamics: "small-group dynamics involving friends and family that form the diaspora cell of brotherhood and camaraderie on which the rising tide of martyrdom actions is based".[26]

The Muslim world has been afflicted with economic stagnation for many centuries. In 2011, U.S. President Barack Obama himself stated that apart from crude oil, the exports of the entire Greater Middle East with its 400 million population roughly equals that of Switzerland.[27] It has also been estimated that the exports of Finland, a European country of only five million, exceeded those of the entire 260 million-strong Arab world, excluding oil revenue.[citation needed] This economic stagnation is argued[who?] to have commenced with the demise of the Ottoman Caliphate in 1924, with trade networks being disrupted and societies torn apart with the creation of new nation states; prior to this, the Middle East had a diverse and growing economy and more general prosperity[citation needed].

Obama gave a major public speech in the United States in response to the 2011 Arab Spring. In a message to Muslim leaders around the world, Obama urged reform and stated "that in a global economy based on knowledge, based on innovation, no development strategy can be based solely upon what comes out of the ground (oil). He also stated that people can not reach their potential when they cannot start a business without paying a bribe. Throughout the region, many young people have a solid education, but closed economies leave them unable to find a job. Muslim entrepreneurs are brimming with excellent ideas, but corruption, lack of funding, lack of support or inadequate infastructure leaves them unable to develop and profit from those ideas."

Strong population growth combined with economic stagnation has created urban conglomerations in Cairo, Istanbul, Tehran, Karachi, Dhaka, and Jakarta each with well over 12 million citizens, millions of them young and unemployed or underemployed. Such a demographic, alienated from the westernized ways of the urban elite,[citation needed] but uprooted from the comforts and more passive traditions of the villages they came from, is understandably favourably disposed to an Islamic system promising a better world – an ideology providing an "emotionally familiar basis for group identity, solidarity, and exclusion]; an acceptable basis for legitimacy and authority; an immediately intelligible formulation of principles for both a critique of the present and a program for the future."[citation needed]

[edit]Profiles

Forensic psychiatrist and former foreign service officer Marc Sageman made an "intensive study of biographical data on 172 participants in the jihad," in his book Understanding Terror Networks.[28] He concluded social networks, the "tight bonds of family and friendship", rather than emotional and behavioral disorders of "poverty, trauma, madness, [or] ignorance", inspired alienated young Muslims to join the jihad and kill.[29]

Author Lawrence Wright described the characteristic of "displacement" of members of the most famous Islamic terrorist group, al-Qaeda:

What the recruits tended to have in common – besides their urbanity, their cosmopolitan backgrounds, their education, their facility with languages, and their computer skills – was displacement. Most who joined the jihad did so in a country other than the one in which they were reared. They were Algerians living in expatriate enclaves in France, Moroccans in Spain, or Yemenis in Saudi Arabia. Despite their accomplishments, they had little standing in the host societies where they lived."[30]

Scholar Olivier Roy describes the background of the hundreds of global (as opposed to local) terrorists who were incarcerated or killed and for whom authorities have records, as being surprising for their Westernized background; for the lack of Palestinians, Iraqis, Afghans "coming to avenge what is going on in their country"; their lack of religiosity before being "born again" in a foreign country; the high percentage of converts to Islam among them; their "de-territorialized backgrounds" – "For instance, they may be born in a country, then educated in another country, then go to fight in a third country and take refuge in a fourth country"; their nontraditional belief that jihad is permanent, global, and "not linked with a specific territory."[31]

This profile differs from that found among recent local Islamist suicide bombers in Afghanistan, according to a 2007 study of 110 suicide bombers by Afghan pathologist Dr. Yusef Yadgari. Yadgari found that 80% of the attackers studied had some kind of physical or mental disability. The bombers were also "not celebrated like their counterparts in other Arab nations. Afghan bombers are not featured on posters or in videos as martyrs."[32] Daniel Byman, a Middle East expert at the Brookings Institute, and Christine Fair, an assistant professor in peace and security studies at Georgetown University say that many of the Islamic terrorists are foolish and untrained, perhaps even untrainable.[33]

[edit]Ideology

See also: Islamism and Political aspects of Islam

Part of the Politics series on

Islamism

Basic topics[show]

Movements[show]

Manifestations[show]

Concepts[show]

Key texts[show]

Islam Portal

Politics portal

v t e

One ideology that plays a role in Islamic terrorism is the principle of Jihad, which broadly means struggle. Militants generally use jihad to mean defensive or retaliatory warfare against actors that have allegedly harmed Muslims.

Transnational Islamist ideology, specifically of the militant Islamists, assert that Western policies and society are actively anti-Islamic, or as it is sometimes described, waging a "war against Islam". Islamists often identify what they see as a historical struggle between Christianity and Islam, dating back as far as the Crusades, among other historical conflicts between practitioners of the two respective religions. Osama bin Laden, for example, almost invariably describes his enemy as aggressive and his call for action against them as defensive. Defensive jihad differs from offensive jihad in being "fard al-ayn," or a personal obligation of all Muslim, rather than "fard al-kifaya", a communal obligation, which if some Muslims perform it is not required from others. Hence, framing a fight as defensive has the advantage both of appearing to be a victim rather than aggressor, and of giving your struggle the very highest religious priority for all good Muslims.

Many of the violent terrorist groups use the name of jihad to fight against certain Western nations and Israel. An example is bin Laden's al-Qaeda, which is also known as "International Islamic Front for Jihad Against the Jews and Crusaders". Most militant Islamists oppose Israel's policies, and often its existence.

According to the U.S. Army Colonel Dale C. Eikmeier, “ideology”, rather than any individual or group, is the "center of gravity" of al-Qaeda and related groups, and the ideology is a "collection of violent Islamic thought called Qutbism."[34] He summarizes the tenets of Qutbism as being:

A belief that Muslims have deviated from true Islam and must return to “pure Islam” as originally practiced during the time of the Prophet.

The path to “pure Islam” is only through a literal and strict interpretation of the Qur'an and Hadith, along with implementation of the Prophet’s commands.

Muslims should interpret the original sources individually without being bound to follow the interpretations of Islamic scholars.

That any interpretation of the Quran from a historical, contextual perspective is a corruption, and that the majority of Islamic history and the classical jurisprudential tradition is mere sophistry.[34]

The historic rivalry between Hindus and Muslims in the Indian subcontinent has also often been the primary motive behind some of the most deadly terrorist attacks in India. According to a U.S. State Department report, India topped the list of countries worst affected by Islamic terrorism.

In addition, Islamist militants, scholars, and leaders opposed Western society for what they see as immoral secularism. Islamists have claimed that such unrestricted free speech has led to the proliferation of pornography, immorality, secularism, homosexuality, feminism, and many other ideas that Islamists often oppose. Although bin Laden almost always emphasized the alleged oppression of Muslims by America and Jews when talking about them in his messages, in his "Letter to America" he answered the question, "What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?," with

We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest (...) You separate religion from your policies, (...) You are the nation that permits Usury, which has been forbidden by all the religions (...) You are a nation that permits the production, trading and usage of intoxicants (...) You are a nation that permits acts of immorality (...) You are a nation that permits gambling in its all forms. (...) You use women to serve passengers, visitors, and strangers to increase your profit margins. You then rant that you support the liberation of women.[35]

Given their perceived piety, The Times noted the irony when a major[36] investigation by their reporters uncovered a link between Islamic Jihadis and child pornography; a discovery that, according to the London paper, "is expected to improve understanding of the mindsets of both types of criminals and has been hailed as a potentially vital intelligence tool to undermine future terrorist plots.".[37] Similarly, Reuters reported that pornography was found among the materials seized from Osama bin Laden's Abbottabad compound that was raided by U.S. Navy SEALs.[38]

In 2006 Britain's then head of MI5 Eliza Manningham-Buller said of Al-Qaeda that it "has developed an ideology which claims that Islam is under attack, and needs to be defended". "This" she said "is a powerful narrative that weaves together conflicts from across the globe, presenting the West’s response to varied and complex issues, from long-standing disputes such as Israel/Palestine and Kashmir to more recent events as evidence of an across-the-board determination to undermine and humiliate Islam worldwide."[39] She said that the video wills of British suicide bombers made it clear that they were motivated by perceived worldwide and long-standing injustices against Muslims; an extreme and minority interpretation of Islam promoted by some preachers and people of influence; their interpretation as anti-Muslim of UK foreign policy, in particular the UK’s involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan."[39] She also cautioned how difficult it was to gain a proper perspective, saying that although there are more important dangers we face daily without feeling so threatened by them such as climate change and road deaths and though terrorist deaths were few the intelligence services had prevented some potentially large threats and that vigilance was needed.[39]

[edit]Interpretations of the Qur'an and Hadith

The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (July 2011)

The role played by the Qur'an, Islam's sacred text, in opposing or in encouraging attacks on civilians is disputed.

The Princeton University Middle Eastern scholar Bernard Lewis, states that Islamic jurisprudence does not allow terrorism.[40] In 2001, Professor Lewis noted:[41]

At no time did the (Muslim) jurist approve of terrorism. Nor indeed is there any evidence of the use of terrorism (in Islamic tradition). Muslims are commanded not to kill women, children, or the aged, not to torture or otherwise ill-treat prisoners, to give fair warning of the opening of hostilities, and to honor agreements. Similarly, the laws of Jihad categorically preclude wanton and indiscriminate slaughter. The warriors in the holy war are urged not to harm non-combatants, women and children, "unless they attack you first." A point on which they insist is the need for a clear declaration of war before beginning hostilities, and for proper warning before resuming hostilities after a truce. What the classical jurists of Islam never remotely considered is the kind of unprovoked, unannounced mass slaughter of uninvolved civil populations that we saw in New York two weeks ago. For this there is no precedent and no authority in Islam.

But Bernard Lewis says Jihad is an unlimited offensive to bring the whole world under Islamic law; Christian crusades a defensive, limited response to, and imitation of, jihad.[42]

Even the Christian crusade, often compared with the Muslim jihad, was itself a delayed and limited response to the jihad and in part also an imitation. But unlike the jihad it was concerned primarily with the defense or reconquest of threatened or lost Christian territory...The Muslim jihad, in contrast, was perceived [by Muslims] as unlimited, as a religious obligation that would continue until all the world had either adopted the Muslim faith or submitted to Muslim rule.… The object of jihad is to bring the whole world under Islamic law.

Bernard Lewis says Islam imposes, without limit of time or space, the duty to subjugate non-Muslims.[43]

"...it is the duty of those who have accepted them [Allah's word and message] to strive unceasingly to convert or at least to subjugate those who have not. This obligation is without limit of time or space. It must continue until the whole world has either accepted the Islamic faith or submitted to the power of the Islamic state.”

Michael Sells and Jane I. Smith (a Professor of Islamic Studies) write that barring some extremists like al-Qaeda, most Muslims do not interpret Qura’nic verses as promoting warfare; and that the phenomenon of radical interpretation of scripture by extremist groups is not unique to Islam.[44][45] According to Sells, "[Most Muslims] no more expect to apply [the verses at issue] to their contemporary non-Muslim friends and neighbors than most Christians and Jews consider themselves commanded by God, like the Biblical Joshua, to exterminate the infidels."[44]

According to Robert Spencer, Muhammad said in one Hadith:[46] "Allah's Apostle said, "I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand." Abu Huraira added: Allah's Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them). Narrated in Abu Huraira, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220" Furthermore Muhammad said in another Hadith:[47] The Prophet said, "Who is ready to kill Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf who has really hurt Allah and His Apostle?" Muhammad bin Maslama said, "O Allah's Apostle! Do you like me to kill him?" He replied in the affirmative. So, Muhammad bin Maslama went to him (i.e. Ka' and said, "This person (i.e. the Prophet) has put us to task and asked us for charity." Ka'b replied, "By Allah, you will get tired of him." Muhammad said to him, "We have followed him, so we dislike to leave him till we see the end of his affair." Muhammad bin Maslama went on talking to him in this way till he got the chance to kill him. Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah Volume 4, Book 52, Number 270 And another Hadith:[48] The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle. Narrated As-Sab bin Jaththama Volume 4, Book 52, Number 256

[edit]Criticism of Islamic terrorist ideology

Although "Islamic" terrorism is commonly associated with the Salafis (or "Wahhabis"), the scholars of the group have constantly attributed this association to ignorance, misunderstanding and sometimes insincere research and deliberate misleading by rival groups.[49] Following the September 11 attacks, Abdul-Azeez ibn Abdullaah Aal ash-Shaikh, the Grand Mufti of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, made an official statement that "the Islamic Sharee'ah (legislation) does not sanction" such actions.[50] A Salafi Committee of Major Scholars"in Saudi Arabia has declared that "Islamic" terrorism, such as the May 2003 bombing in Riyadh, are in violation of Sharia law and aiding the enemies of Islam.[51]

Criticism of Islamic terrorism on Islamic grounds has also been made by Abdal-Hakim Murad (Timothy Winter):

Certainly, neither bin Laden nor his principal associate, Ayman al-Zawahiri, are graduates of Islamic universities. And so their proclamations ignore 14 centuries of Muslim scholarship, and instead take the form of lists of anti-American grievances and of Koranic quotations referring to early Muslim wars against Arab idolaters. These are followed by the conclusion that all Americans, civilian and military, are to be wiped off the face of the Earth. All this amounts to an odd and extreme violation of the normal methods of Islamic scholarship. Had the authors of such fatwās followed the norms of their religion, they would have had to acknowledge that no school of mainstream Islam allows the targeting of civilians. An insurrectionist who kills non-combatants is guilty of baghy, “armed aggression,” a capital offense in Islamic law.[52]

Colonel Eikmeier points out the "questionable religious credentials" of many Islamist theorists, or "Qutbists," which can be a "means to discredit them and their message":

With the exception of Abul Ala Maududi and Abdullah Yusuf Azzam, none of Qutbism’s main theoreticians trained at Islam’s recognized centers of learning. Although a devout Muslim, Hassan al-Banna was a teacher and community activist. Sayyid Qutb was a literary critic. Muhammad Abd al-Salam Faraj was an electrician. Ayman al-Zawahiri is a physician. Osama bin Laden trained to be a businessman.[53]

Fethullah Gülen, a prominent Turkish Islamic scholar, has claimed that "a real Muslim," who understood Islam in every aspect, could not be a terrorist.[54][55][56] There are many other people with similar points of view[57] such as Karen Armstrong,[58] Prof. Ahmet Akgunduz,[59] Harun Yahya[60] and Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri.[61] Huston Smith, an author on comparative religion, noted that extremists have hijacked Islam, just as has occurred periodically in Christianity, Hinduism and other religions throughout history. He added that the real problem is that extremists do not know their own faith.[62]

[edit]Identity-based frameworks for analyzing Islamist-based terrorism

Islamist-based fundamentalist terrorism against Western nations and the U.S. in particular, has numerous motivations and takes place the larger context of a complex and tense relationship between the ‘West' and the Arab and Muslim 'world,'[63] which is highlighted in the previous section on motivations and Islamic terrorism. Identity-based theoretical frameworks including theories of social identity, social categorization theory, and psychodynamics are used to explain the reasons terrorism occurs.[64]

Social identity is explained by Karina Korostelina as a “feeling of belonging to a social group, as a strong connection with social category, and as an important part of our mind that affects our social perceptions and behavior”[65] This definition can be applied to the case of Osama bin Laden, who, according to this theory, has a highly salient perception of his social identity as a Muslim, a strong connection to the social category of the Muslim Ummah or 'community,' which affect his social perceptions and behaviors.[66] Bin Laden's ideology and interpretation of Islam led to the creation of al-Qaeda in response to perceived threats against the Muslim community by the Soviet Union, the U.S. in particular due to its troop presence in Saudi Arabia, and American support for Israel.[67] The Islamist terrorist group al-Qaeda has a group identity, which includes “shared experiences, attitudes, beliefs, and interests of ingroup members,” and is “described through the achievement of a collective aim for which this group has been created,”[68] which in this case is to achieve "a complete break from the foreign influences in Muslim countries, and the creation of a new Islamic caliphate."

Social categorization theory has been discussed as a three-stage process of identification, where “individuals define themselves as members of a social group, learn the stereotypes and norms of the group, and group categories influence the perception and understanding of all situations in a particular context”[65] This definition can be applied to the U.S.-led war on terror, in which conflict features such as the phenomenon of Anti-Americanism[69] and the phenomenon of non-Arab countries like Iran and Afghanistan lending support to Islamist-based terrorism by funding or harboring terrorist groups such as Hezbollah[70] and al-Qaeda[71] against Western nations, particularly Israel[72] and the United States[73] are, according to social categorization theory, influenced by a three-stage process of identification. In this three-stage process of identification, the Arab and Muslim world(s) are the social group(s), in which their members learn stereotypes and norms which categorize their social group vis-à-vis the West.[74] This social categorization process creates feelings of high-level in-group support and allegiance among Arabs and Muslims and the particular context within which members of the Arab and Muslim world(s) social group(s) understand all situations that involve the West. Social categorization theory as a framework for analysis indicates causal relationships between group identification processes and features of conflict situations.[75]

[edit]Muslim attitudes toward terrorism

Main article: Muslim attitudes towards terrorism

Muslim popular opinion on the subject of attacks on civilians by Islamist groups varies. Fred Halliday, a British academic specialist on the Middle East, argues that most Muslims consider these acts to be egregious violations of Islam's laws.[76] Muslims living in the West denounce the September 11th attacks against United States, while Hezbollah contends that their rocket attacks against Israeli civilian targets are defensive Jihad by a legitimate resistance movement rather than terrorism.[77][78] Subsequently, however, on Osama Bin Laden's death, many Muslims in UK came out on streets in support of Osama, announcing him as an Islamic hero and condemned the role of US and west in killing him. The protest against Bin Laden’s death was organised by controversial preacher Anjem Choudary – who praised both 7/7 and the September 11 attacks.[79] Statistics compiled by the United States government's Counterterrorism Center present a complicated picture: of known and specified terrorist incidents from the beginning of 2004 through the first quarter of 2005, slightly more than half of the fatalities were attributed to Islamic extremists but a majority of over-all incidents were considered of either "unknown/unspecified" or a secular political nature. The vast majority of the "unknown/unspecified" terrorism fatalities did however happen in Islamic regions such as Iraq and Afghanistan, or in regions where Islam is otherwise involved in conflicts such as the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, southern Thailand and Kashmir.

[edit]View of Muslim clerics

Many Muslim scholars have presented proofs against the religious justification of terrorism, a notable example being that of Muhammad ibn al Uthaymeen who states regarding killing a non-Muslim:[80] "As for a non-Muslim living under Muslim rule and a Mu’āhid (a Non-Muslim ally with whom Muslims have a treaty, trust, peace, or agreement), it’s been authentically established that the prophet (blessings and peace upon him) said: “Whoever kills a Mu’āhid will not even smell the fragrance of paradise and its fragrance can be smelled from the distance of forty years away.” and he also said: “Certainly, one of the most difficult situations for which there is no turning back for whomever casts himself into it - shedding sacred blood without right.”

Another example is that of late scholar Abd al-Aziz Ibn Baz who stated: "It is well-known to anyone with the slightest amount of common sense that hijacking planes and kidnapping embassy officials and similar acts are some of the greatest universal crimes that result in nothing but widespread corruption and destruction. They place such extreme hardships and injuries upon innocent people, the extent of which only Allāh knows."[81]

Numerous fatwās (rulings) condemning terrorism and suicide bombing as haram have been published by Islamic scholars worldwide, one of the most extensive being the 600-page[clarification needed] ruling by Sheikh Tahir-ul-Qadri, whose fatwa condemned them as kufr.[82] On 2 March 2010, Qadri's fatwa was an "absolute" condemnation of terrorism without "any excuses or pretexts." He said that "Terrorism is terrorism, violence is violence and it has no place in Islamic teaching and no justification can be provided for it, or any kind of excuses or ifs or buts." Qadri said his fatwa, which declares terrorists and suicide bombers to be unbelievers, goes further than any previous denunciation.[83] Iranian Ayatollah Ozma Seyyed Yousef Sanei issued a fatwa (ruling) that suicide attacks against civilians are legitimate only in the context of war.[84] The ruling did not say whether other types of attacks against civilians are justified outside of the context of war, nor whether jihad is included in Sanei's definition of war.

An influential group of Pakistani scholars and religious leaders declared suicide attacks and beheadings as un-Islamic. 'Ulema' (clerics) and 'mushaikh' (spiritual leaders) of the Jamaat Ahl-e-Sunnah, who gathered for a convention, declared suicide attacks and beheadings as un-Islamic in a unanimous resolution. Chairman of the Pakistani Ruet-e-Hilal Committee, Mufti Muneeb-ur-Rehman, said in his address that those who were fighting in the name of implementing Shariah or Islamic law must first abide by these same laws and killing minors is contrary to the teachings of Islam.[85]

Some contemporary scholars who have followed a textual based approach to the study of the Qur'an with an emphasis over the coherence in the Book and the context of situation offered a radical interpretation on the verses and prophetic narratives that are usually quoted by the militants to promote militancy. According to Javed Ahmad Ghamidi (his booklet on Jihad is considered one of his most important contribution towards understanding the religion according to the principles of interpreting the Qur'an introduced by Farahi and Islahi) the Qur'an does not allow waging war except for against oppression under a sovereign state. He holds that jihad without a state is nothing but creating nuisance in the land when hijacked by the individuals and groups independent of the state authority defeats the purpose. The principle behind this study of the issue in the basic sources is the principle that there are divine injunctions in the Qur'an which are specific to the age of the Messenger. He says that nobody can be punished for apostasy or being non-Muslim after the Prophet who acted as the divine agent when he punished the disbelievers by sword who had rejected the message of God and his messenger even after the truth was made manifest to them. Ghamidi and his associates have written extensively on the topics related to these issues. In his book Meezan Ghamidi has concluded that:

Jihad can only waged against persecution Islamic jihad has only two purposes: putting an end to persecution even that of the non-Muslims and making the religion of Islam reign supreme in the Arabian peninsula. The latter type was specific for the messenger of God and is no more operative.

Under a sovereign state.

There are strict ethical limits for jihad which do not again allow fighting for example non-combatants.

Seen in this perspective acts of terrorism including suicide bombing becomes prohibited.

[edit]Opinion surveys

Gallup conducted tens of thousands of hour-long, face-to-face interviews with residents of more than 35 predominantly Muslim countries between 2001 and 2007. It found that – contrary to the prevailing perception in the west that the actions of al-Qaeda enjoy wide support in the Muslim world – more than 90% of respondents condemned the killing of non-combatants on religious and humanitarian grounds.[86]

A 2004, a year after the invasion of Iraq, Pew Research Center survey found that suicide bombings against Americans and other Westerners in Iraq were seen as "justifiable" by many Jordanians (70%), Pakistanis (46%), and Turks (31%). At the same time, the survey found that support for the U.S.-led War on Terror had increased.[87][88]

A 2005 Pew Research study that involved 17,000 people in 17 countries showed support for terrorism was declining in the Muslim world along with a growing belief that Islamic extremism represents a threat to those countries.[89] A Daily Telegraph survey[90] showed that 88% of Muslims said the July 2005 bombings in the London Underground were unjustified, while 6% disagreed.

In Pakistan, despite the recent rise in the Taliban's influence, a poll conducted by Terror Free Tomorrow in Pakistan in January 2008 tested support for al-Qaeda, the Taliban, other militant Islamist groups and Osama bin Laden himself, and found a recent drop by half. In August 2007, 33% of Pakistanis expressed support for al-Qaeda; 38% supported the Taliban. By January 2008, al-Qaeda's support had dropped to 18%, the Taliban's to 19%. When asked if they would vote for al-Qaeda, just 1% of Pakistanis polled answered in the affirmative. The Taliban had the support of 3% of those polled.[86]

Pew Research surveys in 2008 show that in a range of countries – Jordan, Pakistan, Indonesia, Lebanon, and Bangladesh – there have been substantial declines in the percentages saying suicide-bombings and other forms of violence against civilian targets can be justified to defend Islam against its enemies. Wide majorities say such attacks are, at most, rarely acceptable. The shift of attitudes against terror has been especially dramatic in Jordan, where 29% of Jordanians were recorded as viewing suicide-attacks as often or sometimes justified (down from 57% in May 2005). In the largest majority-Muslim nation, Indonesia, 74% of respondents agree that terrorist attacks are "never justified" (a substantial increase from the 41% level to which support had risen in March 2004); in Pakistan, that figure is 86%; in Bangladesh, 81%; and in Iran, 80%.[86]

A poll conducted in Osama bin Laden's home country of Saudi Arabia in December 2008 shows that his compatriots have dramatically turned against him, his organisation, Saudi volunteers in Iraq, and terrorism in general. Indeed, confidence in bin Laden has fallen in most Muslim countries in recent years.[86]

In Iraq, people of all persuasions unanimously reject the terror tactics against Iraqi civilians by the local al-Qaida. An ABC News/BBC/NHK poll revealed that all of those surveyed – Sunni and Shi'a alike – found al-Qaida attacks on Iraqi civilians "unacceptable"; 98% rejected the militants' attempts to gain control over areas in which they operated; and 97% opposed their attempts to recruit foreign fighters and bring them to Iraq.[86]

[edit]Examples of organizations and acts

Further information: List of designated terrorist organizations and History of terrorism

Countries in which Islamist terrorist attacks have occurred between September 11, 2001, and May 2008

Some prominent Islamic terror groups and incidents include the following:

[edit]Transnational

Main article: Al-Qaeda

This section requires expansion. (July 2011)

Al-Qaeda's stated aim is the use of jihad to defend and protect Islam against Zionism, Christianity, Hinduism, the secular West, and Muslim governments such as Saudi Arabia, which it sees as insufficiently Islamic and too closely tied to the United States.[91][92][93][94] Formed by Osama bin Laden and Muhammad Atef in the aftermath of the Soviet war in Afghanistan in the late 1980s, al-Qaeda called for the use of violence against civilians and military of the United States and any countries that are allied with it.[95]

[edit]North America

[edit]Canada

See also: Terrorism in Canada

According to recent government statements Islamic terrorism is biggest threat to Canada.[96] The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) reported that terrorist radicalization at home is now the chief preoccupation of Canada's spy agency.[97] The most notorious arrest in Canada's fight on terrorism, was the 2006 Ontario terrorism plot in which 18 Al-Qaeda cell members were arrested for planning a mass bombing, shooting, and hostage taking terror plot throughout Southern Ontario. There have also been other arrests mostly in Ontario involving terror plots.[98]

[edit]United States

See also: Terrorism in the United States

Between 1993 and 2001, the major attacks or attempts against US interests stemmed from militant Islamic jihad except for the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.[99] In 2001 nearly 3,000 people were killed in the massive September 11 attacks organised by al-Qaeda and largely perpetrated by Saudi nationals, sparking the War on Terror. Former CIA Director Michael Hayden considers homegrown terrorism to be the most dangerous threat and concern faced by American citizens today.[100] As of July 2011, there have been 51 homegrown jihadist plots or attacks in the United States since the September 11 attacks.[101]

[edit]Europe

See also: Al-Qaeda involvement in Europe

Major lethal attacks on civilians in Europe credited to Islamist terrorism include the 1985 El Descanso bombing in Madrid, the 1995 Paris Metro bombings, 11 March 2004 bombings of commuter trains in Madrid, where 191 people were killed, and the 7 July 2005 London bombings, also of public transport, which killed 52 commuters. According to EU Terrorism Report, however, there were almost 500 acts of terrorism across the European Union in 2006, but only one, the foiled suitcase bomb plot in Germany, was related to Islamist terror.[102] In 2009, a Europol report also showed that more than 99% of terrorist attacks in Europe over the last three years were, in fact, carried out by non-Muslims.[103][104][105] In terms of arrests, out of a total of 1,009 arrested terror suspects in 2008, 187 of them were arrested in relation to Islamist terrorism. The report also showed that the majority of Islamist terror suspects were not first generation immigrants, but were rather children of immigrants who no longer identified with the culture of their parents and at the same time felt excluded from Western society, "which still perceives them as foreigners," thus they became "more attracted to the idea of becoming ‘citizens’ of the virtual worldwide Islamic community, removed from territory and national culture."[106]

[edit]Eurasia

[edit]Russia

See also: Terrorism in Russia

Politically and religiously motivated attacks on civilians in Russia have been traced to separatist sentiment among the largely Muslim population of its North Caucasus region, particularly in Chechnya, where the central government of the Russian Federation has waged two bloody wars against the local secular separatist government since 1994. In the Moscow theater hostage crisis in October 2002, three Chechen separatist groups took an estimated 850 people hostage in the Russian capital; at least 129 hostages died during the storming by Russian special forces, all but one killed by the chemicals used to subdue the attackers (whether this attack would more properly be called a nationalist rather than an Islamist attack is in question). In the September 2004 Beslan school hostage crisis more than 1,000 people were taken hostage after a school in the Russian republic of North Ossetia–Alania was seized by a pro-Chechen multiethnic group aligned to Riyad-us Saliheen Brigade of Martyrs; hundreds of people died during the storming by Russian forces.[107]

Since 2000, Russia has also experienced a string of suicide bombings that killed hundreds of people in the Caucasian republics of Chechnya, Dagestan and Ingushetia, as well as in Russia proper including Moscow. Responsibility for most of these attacks were claimed by either Shamil Basayev's Islamic-nationalist rebel faction or, later, by Dokka Umarov's pan-Islamist movement Caucasus Emirate which is aiming to unite most of Russia's North Caucasus as an emirate since its creation in 2007.[108] In 2011, the U.S. Department of State included the Caucasus Emirate on its list of terrorist organisations.[109]

[edit]Turkey

Turkish Hezbollah (unrelated to the Shia Hezbollah in Lebanon) is a Sunni terrorist group[110] accused of a series of attacks, including the November 2003 bombings of two synagogues, the British consulate in Istanbul and HSBC bank headquarters that killed 58.[111]

[edit]Middle East / Southwest Asia

[edit]Iraq

The area that has seen some of the worst terror attacks in modern history has been Iraq as part of the Iraq War. In 2005, there were 400 incidents of one type of attack (suicide bombing), killing more than 2,000 people – many if not most of them civilians.[112] In 2006, almost half of all reported terrorist attacks in the world (6,600), and more than half of all terrorist fatalities (13,000), occurred in Iraq, according to the National Counterterrorism Center of the United States.[113] Along with nationalist groups and criminal, non-political attacks, the Iraqi insurgency includes Islamist insurgent groups, such as Al-Qaeda in Iraq, who favor suicide attacks far more than non-Islamist groups. At least some of the terrorism has a transnational character in that some foreign Islamic jihadists have joined the insurgency.[114]

[edit]Israel and the Palestinian territories

Main article: Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Hamas ("zeal" in Arabic and an acronym for Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya) began support for attacks on military and civilian targets in Israel at the beginning of the First Intifada in 1987.[115] The 1988 charter of Hamas calls for the destruction of Israel,[116] and remains in effect today. Its "military wing" has claimed responsibility for numerous attacks in Israel, principally suicide bombings and rocket attacks. Hamas has also been accused of sabotaging the Israeli-Palestine peace process by launching attacks on civilians during Israeli elections to anger Israeli voters and facilitate the election of harder-line Israeli candidates.[117] Hamas has been designated as a terrorist group by the European Union, Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Israel, Australia, Japan, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights and Human Rights Watch. It is banned in Jordan. Russia does not consider Hamas a terrorist group as it was "democratically elected".[118] During the second intifada (September 2000 through August 2005) 39.9 percent of the suicide attacks were carried out by Hamas.[119] The first Hamas suicide attack was the Mehola Junction bombing in 1993.[120] Although Hamas justifies these attacks as necessary in fighting the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory, the attacks continue despite the 2005 Israeli withdrawal from Hamas controlled territory and Hamas still states its goal to be the elimination of Israel.[121] The wider Hamas movement also serves as a charity organization and provides services to Palestinians.[122]

Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine is a Palestinian Islamist group based in the Syrian capital, Damascus, and dedicated to waging jihad to eliminate the state of Israel. It was formed by Egyptian Fathi Shaqaqi in the Gaza Strip following the Iranian Revolution which inspired its members. From 1983 onward, it engaged in "a succession of violent, high-profile attacks" on Israeli targets. The intifada which "it eventually sparked" was quickly taken over by the much larger Palestine Liberation Organization and Hamas.[123] Beginning in September 2000, it started a campaign of suicide bombing attacks against Israeli civilians. The PIJ's armed wing, the Al-Quds brigades, has claimed responsibility for numerous militant attacks in Israel, including suicide bombings. The group has been designated as a terrorist organization by several Western countries.

[edit]Lebanon

This section may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. No cleanup reason has been specified. Please help improve this section if you can. (July 2011)

Hezbollah first emerged in 1982 as a militia during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, also known as Operation Peace for Galilee.[124][125] Its leaders were inspired by the ayatollah Khomeini, and its forces were trained and organized by a contingent of Iranian Revolutionary Guards.[126] Hezbollah's 1985 manifesto listed its three main goals as "putting an end to any colonialist entity" in Lebanon, bringing the Phalangists to justice for "the crimes they [had] perpetrated," and the establishment of an Islamic regime in Lebanon.[127][128] Hezbollah leaders have also made numerous statements calling for the destruction of Israel, which they refer to as a "Zionist entity... built on lands wrested from their owners."[127][128] Hezbollah, which started with only a small militia, has grown to an organization with seats in the Lebanese government, a radio and a satellite television-station, and programs for social development.[129] Hezbollah maintains strong support among Lebanon's Shi'a population, and gained a surge of support from Lebanon's broader population (Sunni, Christian, Druze) immediately following the 2006 Lebanon War,[130] and is able to mobilize demonstrations of hundreds of thousands.[131] Hezbollah alongside with some other groups began the 2006–2008 Lebanese political protests in opposition to the government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora.[132] A later dispute over Hezbollah preservation of its telecoms network led to clashes and Hezbollah-led opposition fighters seized control of several West Beirut neighborhoods from Future Movement militiamen loyal to Fouad Siniora. These areas were then handed over to the Lebanese Army.[133] A national unity government was formed in 2008, giving Hezbollah and its opposition allies control of 11 of 30 cabinets seats; effectively veto power.[134] Hezbollah receives its financial support from the governments of Iran and Syria, as well as donations from Lebanese people and foreign Shi'as.[135][136] It has also gained significantly in military strength in the 2000s.[137] Despite a June 2008 certification by the United Nations that Israel had withdrawn from all Lebanese territory,[138] in August, Lebanon's new Cabinet unanimously approved a draft policy statement which secures Hezbollah's existence as an armed organization and guarantees its right to "liberate or recover occupied lands." Since 1992, the organization has been headed by Hassan Nasrallah, its Secretary-General. The United States, Canada, Israel and the Netherlands regard Hezbollah as a "terrorist" organization, while the United Kingdom and Australia consider only Hezbollah's external security organization to be a terrorist organization. Many consider it, or a part of it, to be a terrorist group[139][140] responsible for blowing up the American embassy[141] and later its annex, as well as the barracks of American and French peacekeeping troops and a dozens of kidnappings of foreigners in Beirut.[142][143] It is also accused of being the recipient of massive aid from Iran,[144] and of serving "Iranian foreign policy calculations and interests,"[142] or serving as a "subcontractor of Iranian initiatives"[143] Hezbollah denies any involvement or dependence on Iran.[145] In the Arab and Muslim worlds, on the other hand, Hezbollah is regarded as a legitimate and successful resistance movement that drove both Western powers and Israel out of Lebanon.[146] In 2005, the Lebanese Prime Minister said of Hezbollah, it "is not a militia. It's a resistance."[147]

Fatah al-Islam is an Islamist group operating out of the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp in northern Lebanon. It was formed in November 2006 by fighters who broke off from the pro-Syrian Fatah al-Intifada, itself a splinter group of the Palestinian Fatah movement, and is led by a Palestinian fugitive militant named Shaker al-Abssi.[148] The group's members have been described as militant jihadists,[149] and the group itself has been described as a terrorist movement that draws inspiration from al-Qaeda.[148][149][150] Its stated goal is to reform the Palestinian refugee camps under Islamic sharia law,[151] and its primary targets are Israel and the United States.[148]

[edit]Saudi Arabia

Main article: Terrorism in Saudi Arabia

[edit]Yemen

Main article: Terrorism in Yemen

[edit]North Africa

[edit]Egypt

Main article: Terrorism in Egypt

[edit]Algeria

The Armed Islamic Group, active in Algeria between 1992 and 1998, was one of the most violent Islamic terrorist groups, and is thought to have takfired the Muslim population of Algeria. Its campaign to overthrow the Algerian government included civilian massacres, sometimes wiping out entire villages in its area of operation. It also targeted foreigners living in Algeria, killing more than 100 expatriates in the country. In recent years it has been eclipsed by a splinter group, the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC), now called Al-Qaeda Organization in the Islamic Maghreb.[152][153]

[edit]South Asia

[edit]Afghanistan

According to Human Rights Watch, Taliban and Hezb-e-Islami Gulbuddin forces have "sharply escalated bombing and other attacks" against civilians since 2006. In 2006, "at least 669 Afghan civilians were killed in at least 350 armed attacks, most of which appear to have been intentionally launched at civilians or civilian objects."[154]

[edit]Bangladesh

In Bangladesh the group Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh was formed sometime in 1998 and gained prominence in 2001.[155] The organization was officially banned in February 2005 after attacks on NGOs, but struck back in August when 300 bombs were detonated almost simultaneously throughout Bangladesh, targeting Shahjalal International Airport, government buildings and major hotels.[156][157]

[edit]India

See also: Terrorism in India

Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed are militant groups seeking accession of Kashmir to Pakistan.[158] Comments made by several Pakistani religious clerics in public gatherings about ISI included 'ISI's role towards India is to continuously bleed India through a thousand cuts'. The Lashkar leadership describes Indian and Israeli regimes as the main enemies of Islam and Pakistan.[159] Lashkar-e-Toiba, along with Jaish-e-Mohammed, another militant group active in Kashmir are on the United States’ foreign terrorist organizations list, and are also designated as terrorist groups by the United Kingdom,[160] India, Australia[161] and Pakistan.[162] Jaish-e-Mohammed was formed in 1994 and has carried out a series of attacks all over India.[163][164] The group was formed after the supporters of Maulana Masood Azhar split from another Islamic militant organization, Harkat-ul-Mujahideen. Jaish-e-Mohammed is viewed by some as the "deadliest" and "the principal terrorist organization in Jammu and Kashmir".[165] The group was also implicated in the kidnapping and murder of American journalist Daniel Pearl.[165]

[edit]Pakistan

Main article: Terrorism in Pakistan

[edit]Southeast Asia

[edit]Indonesia

Main article: Terrorism in Indonesia

[edit]The Philippines

See also: Terrorism in the Philippines

The Abu Sayyaf Group, also known as al-Harakat al-Islamiyya, is one of several militant Islamic-separatist groups based in and around the southern islands of the Philippines, in Bangsamoro (Jolo, Basilan, and Mindanao) where for almost 30 years various Muslim groups have been engaged in an insurgency for a state, independent of the predominantly Christian Philippines. The name of the group is derived from the Arabic ابو, abu ("father of") and sayyaf ("Swordsmith").[166] Since its inception in the early 1990s, the group has carried out bombings, assassinations, kidnappings and extortion in their fight for an independent Islamic state in western Mindanao and the Sulu Archipelago with the stated goal of creating a pan-Islamic superstate across southeast Asia, spanning from east to west; the island of Mindanao, the Sulu Archipelago, the island of Borneo (Malaysia, Indonesia), the South China Sea, and the Malay Peninsula (Peninsular Malaysia, Thailand and Myanmar).[167] The U.S. Department of State has branded the group a terrorist entity by adding it to the list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations.[167]

[edit]Tactics

[edit]Suicide attacks

See also: Suicide attack

An increasingly popular tactic used by terrorists is suicide bombing.[168] This tactic is used against civilians, soldiers, and government officials of the regimes the terrorists oppose. The use of suicide bombers is seen by many Muslims[weasel words] as contradictory to Islam's teachings;[169][170] however, groups who support its use often refer to such attacks as "martyrdom operations" and the suicide-bombers who commit them as "martyrs" (Arabic: shuhada, plural of "shahid"). The bombers, and their sympathizers often believe that suicide bombers, as martyrs (shaheed) to the cause of jihad against the enemy, will receive the rewards of paradise for their actions.

[edit]Hijackings

Islamic terrorism sometimes employs the hijacking of passenger vehicles. The most famous were the "9/11" attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people on a single day in 2001, effectively ending the era of aircraft hijacking.

[edit]Kidnappings and executions

Along with bombings and hijackings, Islamic terrorists have made extensive use of highly publicised kidnappings and executions, often circulating videos of the acts for use as propaganda. A frequent form of execution by these groups is decapitation, another is shooting. In the 1980s, a series of abductions of American citizens by Hezbollah during the Lebanese Civil War resulted in the 1986 Iran–Contra affair. During the chaos of the Iraq War, more than 200 kidnappings foreign hostages (for various reasons and by various groups, including purely criminal) gained great international notoriety, even as the great majority (thousands) of victims were Iraqis. In 2007, the kidnapping of Alan Johnston by Army of Islam resulted in the British government meeting a Hamas member for the first time.

[edit]Internet recruiting

In the beginning of the 21st century emerged a worldwide network of hundreds of web sites that inspire, train, educate and recruit young Muslims to engage in jihad against America and the West, taking less prominent roles in mosques and community centers that are under scrutiny. According to The Washington Post, "Online recruiting has exponentially increased, with Facebook, YouTube and the increasing sophistication of people online".[171]

[Drybone]

Super troll is super troll.

[Drybone]