 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Mighty_Emperor Divine Wind
Joined: 18 Aug 2002 Total posts: 19943 Location: Mongo Age: 42 Gender: Male |
 Posted: 21-06-2004 03:11 Post subject: Current state of The War Against Terror |
 |
|
|
Not good:
| Quote: | Bush told he is playing into Bin Laden's hands
Al-Qaida may 'reward' American president with strike aimed at keeping him in office, senior intelligence man says
Julian Borger in Washington
Saturday June 19, 2004
The Guardian
A senior US intelligence official is about to publish a bitter condemnation of America's counter-terrorism policy, arguing that the west is losing the war against al-Qaida and that an "avaricious, premeditated, unprovoked" war in Iraq has played into Osama bin Laden's hands.
Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror, due out next month, dismisses two of the most frequent boasts of the Bush administration: that Bin Laden and al-Qaida are "on the run" and that the Iraq invasion has made America safer.
In an interview with the Guardian the official, who writes as "Anonymous", described al-Qaida as a much more proficient and focused organisation than it was in 2001, and predicted that it would "inevitably" acquire weapons of mass destruction and try to use them.
He said Bin Laden was probably "comfortable" commanding his organisation from the mountainous tribal lands along the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan.
The Pakistani army claimed a big success in the "war against terror" yesterday with the killing of a tribal leader, Nek Mohammed, who was one of al-Qaida's protectors in Waziristan.
But Anonymous, who has been centrally involved in the hunt for Bin Laden, said: "Nek Mohammed is one guy in one small area. We sometimes forget how big the tribal areas are." He believes President Pervez Musharraf cannot advance much further into the tribal areas without endangering his rule by provoking a Pashtun revolt. "He walks a very fine line," he said yesterday.
Imperial Hubris is the latest in a relentless stream of books attacking the administration in election year. Most of the earlier ones, however, were written by embittered former officials. This one is unprecedented in being the work of a serving official with nearly 20 years experience in counter-terrorism who is still part of the intelligence establishment.
The fact that he has been allowed to publish, albeit anonymously and without naming which agency he works for, may reflect the increasing frustration of senior intelligence officials at the course the administration has taken.
Peter Bergen, the author of two books on Bin Laden and al-Qaida, said: "His views represent an amped-up version of what is emerging as a consensus among intelligence counter-terrorist professionals."
Anonymous does not try to veil his contempt for the Bush White House and its policies. His book describes the Iraq invasion as "an avaricious, premeditated, unprovoked war against a foe who posed no immediate threat but whose defeat did offer economic advantage.
"Our choice of timing, moreover, shows an abject, even wilful failure to recognise the ideological power, lethality and growth potential of the threat personified by Bin Laden, as well as the impetus that threat has been given by the US-led invasion and occupation of Muslim Iraq."
In his view, the US missed its biggest chance to capture the al-Qaida leader at Tora Bora in the Afghan mountains in December 2001. Instead of sending large numbers of his own troops, General Tommy Franks relied on surrogates who proved to be unreliable.
Advertiser links
WWF - Animal Charity
WWF works to protect endangered species and their habitats,...
s0b.bluestreak.com
Find Animal Charities at Charity Choice
Charity Choice, the encyclopaedia of charities on the...
charitychoice.co.uk
"For my money, the game was over at Tora Bora," Anonymous said.
Yesterday President Bush repeated his assertion that Bin Laden was cornered and that there was "no hole or cave deep enough to hide from American justice".
Anonymous said: "I think we overestimate significantly the stress [Bin Laden's] under. Our media and sometimes our policymakers suggest he's hiding from rock to rock and hill to hill and cave to cave. My own hunch is that he's fairly comfortable where he is."
The death and arrest of experienced operatives might have set back Bin Laden's plans to some degree but when it came to his long-term capacity to threaten the US, he said, "I don't think we've laid a glove on him".
"What I think we're seeing in al-Qaida is a change of generation," he said."The people who are leading al-Qaida now seem a lot more professional group.
"They are more bureaucratic, more management competent, certainly more literate. Certainly, this generation is more computer literate, more comfortable with the tools of modernity. I also think they're much less prone to being the Errol Flynns of al-Qaida. They're just much more careful across the board in the way they operate."
As for weapons of mass destruction, he thinks that if al-Qaida does not have them already, it will inevitably acquire them.
The most likely source of a nuclear device would be the former Soviet Union, he believes. Dirty bombs, chemical and biological weapons, could be home-made by al-Qaida's own experts, many of them trained in the US and Britain.
Anonymous, who published an analysis of al-Qaida last year called Through Our Enemies' Eyes, thinks it quite possible that another devastating strike against the US could come during the election campaign, not with the intention of changing the administration, as was the case in the Madrid bombing, but of keeping the same one in place.
"I'm very sure they can't have a better administration for them than the one they have now," he said.
"One way to keep the Republicans in power is to mount an attack that would rally the country around the president."
The White House has yet to comment publicly on Imperial Hubris, which is due to be published on July 4, but intelligence experts say it may try to portray him as a professionally embittered maverick.
The tone of Imperial Hubris is certainly angry and urgent, and the stridency of his warnings about al-Qaida led him to be moved from a highly sensitive job in the late 90s.
But Vincent Cannistraro, a former chief of operations at the CIA counter-terrorism centre, said he had been vindicated by events. "He is very well respected, and looked on as a serious student of the subject."
Anonymous believes Mr Bush is taking the US in exactly the direction Bin Laden wants, towards all-out confrontation with Islam under the banner of spreading democracy.
He said: "It's going to take 10,000-15,000 dead Americans before we say to ourselves: 'What is going on'?" |
http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/story/0,12469,1242638,00.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| rynner Location: Still above sea level Gender: Male |
| Posted: 11-04-2006 08:00 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Looks like this thread will have to be renamed:
| Quote: | Planning the US 'Long War' on terror
By James Westhead
BBC News, Washington
It sounds eerily like the Cold War - and that is no mistake.
The "Long War" is the name Washington is using to rebrand the new world conflict, this time against terrorism.
Now the US military is revealing details of how it is planning to fight this very different type of war.
It is also preparing the public for a global conflict which it believes will dominate the next 20 years.
The nerve centre of this war against terror is the huge MacDill airbase in Tampa, Florida.
Surrounded by white sand beaches, palm trees and two golf courses it looks more like a holiday camp than a military camp.
But inside US Central Command (Centcom) generals are planning what they call "fourth-generational warfare".
Centcom is already responsible for military action in the Middle East, South Asia and Africa as well as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and now it is planning a campaign that will eventually span the globe.
Aiming at al-Qaeda
The man behind what the US military calls its "principles of the Long War" is Brig Gen Mark Kimmitt.
Gen Kimmitt, Centcom's deputy director of plans and strategy, told the BBC News website: "Even if Iraq stabilised tomorrow the Long War would continue."
So as Centcom tries to control events in Iraq, he is also planning a strategy for "nothing less than the defeat of al-Qaeda across the world and its associated movements strung together by extremist ideology."
To achieve victory the US military will have to change dramatically, he says.
Like the terrorists it will have to build international networks, Gen Kimmitt says, making better use of "soft power" - diplomacy, finance, trade and technology.
"I'm an artillery officer, and I can't fire cannons at the internet," he says, referring to what he sees as one of the key weapons of the modern age.
Instead, he argues that the US military must try to break down "old mind-sets and bureaucracies" and build new relationships with other agencies - like the FBI, the police and the State Department - through what in military jargon are called "joint inter-agency task forces."
Improved posture
The theory is that the military cannot fight alone against such a nimble and deadly foe as al-Qaeda, and must build a new kind of worldwide network as flexible and smart as its enemy.
As a result Gen Kimmitt predicts a much lower profile for traditional US forces.
Donald Rumsfeld has long pushed for transformation of the military
He believes that will help win hearts and minds, by ending the impression that the US is occupying the Middle East.
"Our future posture is still being worked out," he says.
"But I would like to see to the number of troops in the Middle East cut to a fraction of the current 300,000, by at least a half."
The US military is planning a big increase in the role of special forces, the smaller, specially-trained teams able to speak local languages - including Arabic - to deploy rapidly and to work with the other nations' military.
Trailer park diplomacy
Outside Centcom sits a symbol of the new approach and its complexity - a large trailer park with fluttering flags atop each trailer representing each of the 63 nations represented at Centcom, from Denmark to El Salvador.
Inside each trailer a small team of military liaison officers shares information with their American colleagues and co-ordinate action in Iraq, Afghanistan and throughout the region.
According to an American general working with the coalition, the aim is to maintain this loose-knit arrangement to fight the global war on terror.
"We want to make it a lasting organisation," he said.
"We don't want it to dissolve like it did after Desert Shield and Desert Storm."
The US hopes coalition-building can help win the "Long War"
However, America's difficult relationship with some allies after 11 September 2001 suggests that this will be a challenge.
France and Germany, for example, opposed the war in Iraq. Rear Adm Jacques Mazars, the French representative at Centcom, says French and American forces co-operate more successfully on the ground than their politicians.
But, he said, running a coalition for a sustained period will be hard.
"On the conceptual level we can agree," he said. "There will be a long war to be won. But on the practical level it will be harder."
One regular cause of tension among the allies is the sharing of sensitive intelligence.
"There are some things you wouldn't share with a neighbour and even an ally," one senior US officer said.
There are signs that despite the difficulties the new coalition against terror is here to stay.
The Pentagon admits its vision is not yet fully realised, but it has already started work on a new building in the MacDill complex, providing a bricks-and-mortar home for the international occupants of the trailer park.
"I can't see there ever being a completely homogenous coalition dealing with worldwide terror," said Col Mark Bibbey, the chief of staff of the British mission at Centcom. The 63 nations are not signed up to the same view on everything."
But he added: "You've got to start somewhere. You have to plan ahead. You have to be driving in a particular direction. If we don't start driving now or soon we'll be behind the curve."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4897786.stm
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| tonyblair11 Joined: 28 Jan 2002 Total posts: 2080 |
| Posted: 11-04-2006 08:11 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| I guess "anonymous" forgot about the democrats, independents,and all the other parties and the fact that laws would have to be changed. Even a lot of conservatives don't like bushes liberal moves in office. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pietro_Mercurios Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 14-01-2007 03:33 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Here's a recent example of what 'The Long War' really looks like.
| Quote: | http://news.independent.co.uk/world/africa/article2149716.ece
US strikes on al-Qa'ida chiefs kill nomads
Independent Online. 13 January 2007
By Anne Penketh and Steve Bloomfield
The herdsmen had gathered with their animals around large fires at night to ward off mosquitoes. But lit up by the flames, they became latest victims of America's war on terror.
It was their tragedy to be misidentified in a secret operation by special forces attempting to kill three top al-Qa'ida leaders in south-ern Somalia.
Oxfam yesterday confirmed at least 70 nomads in the Afmadow district near the border with Kenya had been killed. The nomads were bombed at night and during the day while searching for water sources. Meanwhile, the US ambassador to Kenya has acknowledged that the onslaught on Islamist fighters failed to kill any of the three prime targets wanted for their alleged role in the 1998 US embassy bombings in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam.
The wanted men are Fazul Abdullah Moham-med, Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan and Abu Taha al-Sudani, who were all supposedly sheltered by the Union of Islamic Courts during its short reign in Mogadishu.
The operation, which opened a new front in Washington's anti-terror campaign, seems to have backfired spectacularly in the five days since it was launched. In addition to the scores of Somali civilians killed, the simmering civil war in the failed state has been rekindled.
Yesterday concern was mounting at the high number of civilian casualties, despite a claim by the US ambassador, Michael Ranneberger, that no civilians had been killed or injured and that only one attack had taken place. The UN's refugee agency, UNHCR, reported that an estimated 100 people were wounded in Monday's air strikes on the small fishing village of Ras Kamboni launched from the US military base in Djibouti after a mobile phone intercept.
The operation was only confirmed by the Pentagon a day after it was launched and it continued despite international protests and warnings that it risked being counterproductive.
Yesterday the Americans had boots on the ground for the first time since a 1993 mission backfired and led to a humiliating withdrawal from Somalia. According to The Washington Post, a small number of US military personnel are in southern Somalia trying to determine exactly who was killed in the raids by an AC-130 gunship.
Oxfam - which had received reports from its Somali partner organisations about the herdsmen's deaths - and Amnesty International have asked whether the the air strikes violated international law.
"Under international law, there is a duty to distinguish between military and civilian targets," said Paul Smith-Lomas, Oxfam's regional director. "We are deeply concerned that this principle is not being adhered to, and that innocent people in Somalia are paying the price."
... |
Oops...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rjmrjmrjm Professional Surrealist
Constipated-Philosopher Joined: 25 Feb 2004 Total posts: 1465 Location: Behind your eyes... Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 14-01-2007 04:22 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Is it just me or does this 'long war' sound exactly like a strategy for global domination? Orwell style. Centcom - read MiniPax. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| BlackRiverFalls I wear a fez now.
Joined: 03 Aug 2003 Total posts: 8716 Location: The Attic of Blinky Lights Age: 44 Gender: Female |
| Posted: 14-01-2007 11:07 Post subject: |
|
|
|
so is that technically an act of war against somalia?
this is getting ridiculous... and uber grim... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ted_bloody_maul Great Old One Joined: 23 May 2003 Total posts: 4877 Location: Quester's Psykick Dancehall Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 14-01-2007 18:58 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| rjmrjmrjm wrote: | | Is it just me or does this 'long war' sound exactly like a strategy for global domination? Orwell style. Centcom - read MiniPax. |
"This is an existential conflict," Cheney said. "It is the kind of conflict that's going to drive our policy and our government for the next 20 or 30 or 40 years. We have to prevail and we have to have the stomach for the fight long term."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,243629,00.html
well they're not doing much to discourage the perception. add that to blair's "anyone want some" speech the other day and the timing of the two...doesn't look good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ghostdog19 |
| Posted: 14-01-2007 19:41 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| This isn't the new 'cold war' as one of those articles makes reference to. The new 'cold war' is called 'global warming'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rjmrjmrjm Professional Surrealist
Constipated-Philosopher Joined: 25 Feb 2004 Total posts: 1465 Location: Behind your eyes... Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 14-01-2007 20:54 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Just read that Fox article. Got me all confused.
How does the President have the power in himself to decide if the US go to war or not, I thought the US was a democratic country? That sounds awfully like a monarchs power to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ghostdog19 |
| Posted: 15-01-2007 02:12 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| rjmrjmrjm wrote: | Just read that Fox article. Got me all confused.
How does the President have the power in himself to decide if the US go to war or not, I thought the US was a democratic country? That sounds awfully like a monarchs power to me. |
He doesn't... and the Constitution stipulates as much. Only Congress can do that. So the big picture is this; Bush = Republican Congress = Democrats. It's just Bush saying he defies the U.S. Constitution (no change there then). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Iggore Customize This !!!
Great Old One Joined: 01 Aug 2005 Total posts: 530 Location: Shmocation Age: 28 Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 15-01-2007 02:14 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| BlackRiverFalls wrote: | so is that technically an act of war against somalia?
this is getting ridiculous... and uber grim... |
Well, since that Somalia is the closest thing that we've got to an Hobbesian state of nature, I think that you can hardly declare war against it. The U.N backed transitional government is the closest thing that Somalia has to a legitimate government, and it invited the U.S.A to come in and do their dirty work anyway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ted_bloody_maul Great Old One Joined: 23 May 2003 Total posts: 4877 Location: Quester's Psykick Dancehall Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 27-04-2007 22:47 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Saudis foil 'air attack plotters'
Saudi Arabia says it has foiled a plot by militants to carry out suicide air attacks on oil installations and military bases.
Foreign nationals were among 172 terror suspects held in a series of raids, the interior ministry said on state TV.
Large amounts of weapons and $32.4m (£16.21m) in cash were also seized.
continues
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6599963.stm
US holds 'senior al-Qaeda figure'
Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi has been taken to Guantanamo Bay
The US says it has arrested one of al-Qaeda's highest-ranking operatives, as he was on his way home to Iraq to plan future attacks.
A Pentagon spokesman said Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi was now in Guantanamo Bay.
He was heading to Iraq to take over al-Qaeda operations and possibly plot attacks on Western interests, he said.
continues
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6600751.stm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ramonmercado Psycho Punk
Joined: 19 Aug 2003 Total posts: 17933 Location: Dublin Gender: Male |
| Posted: 12-05-2007 12:13 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Quote: | New Research Into Causes Of Terrorism Reveals People Turn To Suicide Bombing To Preserve Identity
12 May 2007
The University of Southampton is researching why people turn to terrorism and investigating the motivations that persuade ordinary people to carry out extreme acts of violence, which could help tackle the growing problem suicide attacks.
Using terror management theory, which provides important clues to researchers and government agencies about extreme behavior such as suicide bombing, Dr Clay Routledge is examining the emotional reactions of people confronted with the psychological terror of knowing they will die.
Recent research is the first to reveal that heightened awareness of death increases willingness to self-sacrifice in an effort to seek symbolic immortality. When people are faced with mortality they are more likely to want to commit themselves to some form of meaning, or worldview, that will enable them to live on in some way.
A study of 105 UK students, with a non religious cultural identity, reveals that when asked to think about their own mortality they reacted with increased willingness to self-sacrifice for England. However, when alternative ways of transcending death were provided, this moderated the impact of responsiveness to death awareness.
The research studied the attitudes of the participants when encouraged to think about their own death or another unpleasant experience that did not involve death (e.g. dental pain).
The participants were then either asked to imagine being a member of a group that was transient, and would cease to exist beyond their death, or one that was immortal, and would continue beyond their death. When no alternative outlet of symbolic immortality (or on-going group) was provided, personal safety was perceived to be less important than the continuation of the British way of life. The research suggests that heightened awareness of mortality increases the willingness of the British to make self-sacrifices, in some form, for their nation.
Cultural or religious worldviews enable people to feel that they are part of something larger, more meaningful, and, ultimately, longer lasting than themselves. Suicide bombing offers not only an identity, but also a place in community history - life is exchanged for identity. Self-sacrificial behaviour is present in many cultures, and is not exclusively linked with Islam. It is an assertion that you will survive as an identity even if you cannot survive in physical form.
Many ordinary people, given the right conditions, can be influenced into violence. Connecting with comrades provides an emotional haven and a clear focus for turbulent energies. What is most important is to be integrated into a society or group as people who do not feel they are may be more likely to seek violent ways of achieving immortality.
Individuals can attain symbolic immortality deciding to die for their country. But if offered other ways of achieving symbolic life, they may be encouraged to leave a legacy in a pro-social way, rather than through violence. Pro-social methods of extending identity beyond death include raising children, starting a company and the preservation of peaceful cultural or religious practices.
Dr Clay Routledge said: "The 7 July bombers may have been driven, in part, by a desire for a larger sense of meaning or purpose and for symbolic permanence. When faced with the reality of their mortality people are more likely to want to commit themselves to some form of meaning that will enable them to live on in some way - the continuity of life after death. A method to attain that existence, even if violent, can be reassuring if it is considered to be an important part of affirming a meaning and immortality-providing cultural identity."
"Individuals feel less transient if they can live on in some way. It is possible that suicide bombings could be overcome by helping people assert themselves and selfhood in a more meaningful and pro-social way.
"The most extreme ways that people can invest in their world view is to sacrifice their own life for it. Physical risks help to secure their own immortality this is self sacrifice as self-defense."
COMMUNICATIONS MANAGEMENT
Calverton House
2 Harpenden Road
http://www.communicationsmanagement.co.uk
Article URL:
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=70717
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ted_bloody_maul Great Old One Joined: 23 May 2003 Total posts: 4877 Location: Quester's Psykick Dancehall Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 12-05-2007 16:59 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Well, if Tony Blair's looking for a legacy...
Interesting find, Ramon. Obviously it's difficult to get the empirical data on this one because the post-match interview, as it were, is not available and nor can the particpants be identified and surveyed in advance of their actions but there does seem to be a ring of truth to this.
It's a staple of action movie narratives that there will be a willing sacrifice, prepared to give his/her life for a loved one/country/the human race and I wonder how much that's a reflection of these findings or if it influences people's thinking in this kind of survey. Either way I suspect it's something that can be manipulated by a more shrewdly political and self-assured operator to turn a young man into a lethal weapon. There is some data available regarding the background of suicide bombers that might be worth studying in this respect.
The wider aspects of this topic might also be worth its own thread in the Human Condition forum? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ramonmercado Psycho Punk
Joined: 19 Aug 2003 Total posts: 17933 Location: Dublin Gender: Male |
| Posted: 12-05-2007 17:43 Post subject: |
|
|
|
I was wondering if I should have put it in The Human Condition Forum, but I think its more in context here. Equally I guess the broader aspects could spark a debate in THCF.
Heres a book review, the volume sounds interesting.
| Quote: |
PRINT CLOSE
Dangerous minds
Yahya Birt
Published 14 May 2007
The Islamist: why I joined radical Islam in Britain, what I saw inside and why I left
Ed Husain Penguin, 304pp, £8.99
ISBN 0141030437
On 30 April, five British-born Muslims were convicted of plotting to blow up targets including a shopping centre and a nightclub using 600kg of ammonium nitrate. The question remains: how did we get to a position where MI5 is monitoring 1,600 suspects in 160 cells? Who are these would-be terrorists? Even if Ruth Kelly and John Reid now belatedly acknowledge the aggravating effect of Iraq, foreign policy does not provide the whole answer. Radical ideas have mattered, too.
Among British Muslims, there are two main views of radicalisation. The first pins the blame squarely upon extreme Salafi Muslims, who developed a doctrine of attacking the west in the wake of the 1980s Afghan-Soviet war. Throughout the 1990s, their propagandists were allowed to spread their ideas in Britain unimpeded by the police and intelligence services. Most ordinary Salafis, committed, like the Amish, to austere apolitical piety, either ignored this trend or argued against it.
The second position takes a wider view. British Islamists, those who emphasise faith-based political activism, helped to create a receptivity to more radical groups with whom they shared a similar vision of Islamic resurgence in the Muslim world. Their relationship is like that between the Mensheviks, the Bolsheviks and the Trotskyists - more a difference over means than ends, ranging from gradual reform to national or even international revolution.
Ed Husain, brought up in Tower Hamlets in east London, takes the second view. He describes in detail his time with various student Islamist groups between 1990 and 1996. Husain, in an escalating youthful rebellion, defies his parents, then his traditional upbringing, his college authorities and, later, society at large. Having been an eyewitness to this scene, I can vouch that he accurately describes a period of intense competition and one-upmanship between Islamist factions for the attention of young minds. Riding on the back of anti-Saudi sentiment during the first Gulf war, the Hizb ut-Tahrir organisation began to have a serious impact.
Hizb ut-Tahrir's confrontational tabloid style excited Muslim students looking for easy answers to western double standards. Control of Islamic student societies oscillated between Islamists and apolitical Salafis, leaving few alternatives to a crude, despiritualised, angry and self-righteous take on Islam. Husain is essentially correct in his judgement that Hizb ut-Tahrir, then under Omar Bakri Mohammed (who later founded the splinter group Al-Muhajiroun), did more to inculcate the spirit of jihad, anti-west sentiment and passionate support for the cause of the umma, the Muslim super-nation, than anyone else.
This personal memoir offers an insider's view of the context that shaped the period, but it is not a definitive analysis. While Hizb ut-Tahrir is subversive, and should be challenged, its members have not directly recruited for jihad abroad or terrorism at home. However, a few have left Hizb ut-Tahrir's talk of jihad for the real thing - though the leadership has always denied the violence of the young men it has influenced. Hizb ut-Tahrir's stoking of intercommunal tensions at Newham College in 1994 led indirectly to the murder of a Nigerian Christian by a Muslim. The leadership denied any involvement, but the tragedy set Husain on the path out of Islamism.
Husain's intelligence and sensitivity lead him full circle, back from Islamist alienation to his family and the tolerant mystical Islam - Sufism - that they espouse. He becomes part of the counter-extremist movement, led by Hamza Yusuf and Tariq Ramadan, that gained ground in Britain from the mid-1990s, defined by a convergence between a more relevant traditional Islam and post-Islamism, emphasising core Islamic values and active citizenship. Husain, scarred by the cultish manipulations of Islamist groups, underestimates the positive impact this had on both British Islamists and Salafis, and - in my view, mistakenly - judges this transition as more tactical than genuine.
This shift towards a relevant British Islam, having acquired official encouragement since 7/7, has become politically contested among British Muslims.
Naysayers now play the "sell-out" card more assiduously, and the government has been none-too-subtle at times in its public interventions, stoking fears of re-engineering a churchless religious tradition proud of its independence and diversity.
Husain ends on an ambiguous note: the future direction of British Islam remains uncertain. His own trajectory shows, however, that mainstream Islam can renew itself in the context of 21st-century multicultural Britain - despite the challenge of an extremist fringe.
http://www.newstatesman.com/200705140044 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
