{"id":388,"date":"2008-09-10T17:56:20","date_gmt":"2008-09-10T21:56:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/mesh\/?p=388"},"modified":"2008-09-19T00:18:45","modified_gmt":"2008-09-19T04:18:45","slug":"osama_bin_laden_man_of_love","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/mesh\/2008\/09\/osama_bin_laden_man_of_love\/","title":{"rendered":"Osama Bin Laden: man of love?"},"content":{"rendered":"

From Raymond Ibrahim<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"In many ways, Michael Scheuer is the paradigmatic case of an otherwise knowledgeable and experienced Western adult who takes Al Qaeda\u2019s word at face value. According to his book, Imperial Hubris<\/em><\/a>, his credentials and thus authority to speak about Al Qaeda and its goals are impressive: \u201cFor the past seventeen years, my career has focused exclusively on terrorism, Islamic insurgencies, militant Islam\u2026 I have earned my keep and am able to speak with some authority and confidence about Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda, [and] the dangers they pose and symbolize for the Unites States\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

The remainder of his book makes several fine points, articulating well\u2014arguably even better<\/em> than bin Laden\u2014the grievances that Al Qaeda and the Muslim world have vis-\u00e0-vis specific U.S. policies. However, the book\u2019s fundamental thesis is bin Laden\u2019s own: Al Qaeda\u2019s terrorism is simply a reaction to U.S. foreign policy. Writes Scheuer emphatically: \u201cBin Laden has been precise in telling America the reasons he is waging war on us. None of the reasons have anything to do with our freedom, liberty, and democracy, but everything to do with U.S. policies and actions in the Muslim world.\u201d<\/p>\n

He then proceeds to quote and accept, rather naively, several of bin Laden\u2019s messages to the West, such as: \u201cTherefore, I am telling you [Americans], with Allah as my witness, whether America escalates or de-escalates the conflict, we will reply to it in kind….\u201d Bin Laden, of course, often begins every message directed at the West by saying \u201creciprocal treatment is part of justice\u201d\u2014i.e., \u201cleave us alone, we leave you alone.\u201d<\/p>\n

Scheuer takes it one step further by concluding that Al Qaeda\u2019s war revolves around \u201clove\u201d:<\/p>\n

Bin Laden and most militant Islamists, therefore, can be said to be motivated by their love for Allah and their hatred for a few, specific, U.S. policies and actions they believe are damaging\u2014and threatening to destroy\u2014the things they love. Theirs is a war against a specific target, and for specific, limited purposes. While they will use whatever weapon comes to hand\u2014including weapons of mass destruction\u2014their goal is not to wipe out our secular democracy, but to deter us by military means from attacking the things they love. Bin Laden et al are not eternal warriors.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Thereafter, bin Laden is likened to heroes like Robin Hood or (of all people) Saint Francis of Assisi\u2014a friar known for his benevolence towards animals. Surprisingly, Scheuer overlooks the theological underpinnings\u2014offensive jihad, enforcement of \u201cdhimmitude,\u201d and enmity for non-Muslims\u2014that dominate Al Qaeda\u2019s worldview (and which are delineated over and over in The Al Qaeda Reader<\/em><\/a>). These hostile doctrines, innate to Al-Qaeda\u2019s worldview, clearly demonstrate that, contrary to Scheuer\u2019s assessment, Al Qaeda and their kind do<\/em>\u2014indeed must<\/em>\u2014hate the United States for more than a \u201cfew, specific policies,\u201d and that their war transcends \u201cspecific, limited purposes,\u201d and thus that they are \u201ceternal warriors.\u201d<\/p>\n

Here is bin Laden himself explaining the \u201ctrue\u201d nature of the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims, such as Americans, AKA, \u201cinfidels\u201d:<\/p>\n

As to the relationship between Muslims and infidels, this is summarized by the Most High\u2019s Word: \u201cWe renounce you. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us\u2014till you believe in Allah alone\u201d [Qur\u2019an 60:4]. So there is an enmity, evidenced by fierce hostility from the heart. And this fierce hostility\u2014that is, battle\u2014ceases only if the infidel submits to the authority of Islam, or if his blood is forbidden from being shed [i.e., a dhimmi], or if Muslims are at that point in time weak and incapable [in which case, bin Laden later clarifies, they should dissemble (taqiyya)<\/em> before the infidels by, say, insisting the conflict is about \u201cforeign policy,\u201d nothing more]. But if the hate at any time extinguishes from the heart, this is great apostasy!… Such, then, is the basis and foundation of the relationship between the infidel and the Muslim. Battle, animosity, and hatred\u2014directed from the Muslim to the infidel\u2014is the foundation of our religion.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Note that, contrary to Scheuer\u2019s assurances, at no time does bin Laden indicate that U.S. foreign policy is behind such animus; it is entirely a theological<\/em> argument\u2014transcending time, space, and circumstance. In his attack against \u201cmoderate\u201d Muslims, bin Laden rhetorically asks and answers the pivotal question:<\/p>\n

Does Islam, or does it not, force people by the power of the sword to submit to its authority corporeally if not spiritually? Yes. There are only three choices in Islam: either willing submission; or payment of the jizya<\/em> [tribute], through physical though not spiritual submission to the authority of Islam; or the sword\u2014for it is not right to let him [an infidel] live.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

How do these quotes accord with Scheuer\u2019s statement that \u201cNone<\/em> of the reasons [for Al Qaeda\u2019s antipathy] have anything<\/em> to do with our freedom, liberty, and democracy\u201d? (My emphases.)<\/p>\n

Nor is this worldview \u201cpeculiar\u201d to bin Laden. Here\u2019s his \u201csecond,\u201d Ayman Zawahiri:<\/p>\n

Jihad in the path of Allah is greater than any individual or organization. It is a struggle between Truth and Falsehood, until Allah Almighty inherits the earth and those who live in it. Mullah Muhammad Omar and Sheikh Osama bin Laden\u2014may Allah protect them from all evil\u2014are merely two soldiers of Islam in the journey of Jihad, while the struggle between Truth and Falsehood transcends time.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

That Al Qaeda\u2019s messages to the West are being understood uncritically and taken at face value by the public is one thing; that a former CIA veteran whose expertise revolves around Islam buys into this calculated sophistry is quite another. Since, as Muhammad said, \u201cwar is deceit,\u201d Scheuer and other analysts of like mind would do well to consider that perhaps when Al Qaeda sends a communiqu\u00e9 to the West, it is not necessarily sincere but meant solely to elicit a particular response; such as, that Al Qaeda\u2019s war is predicated on a \u201cfew, specific, U.S. policies and actions.\u201d This is tailor-made to accord with the West\u2019s preconceived notions of \u201cjustice,\u201d \u201cequality,\u201d \u201cpoverty causes violence,\u201c and especially \u201cguilt,\u201d and is intended to demoralize Americans from, for instance, supporting \u201cthe war on terror\u201d which obviously directly affects Al Qaeda.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s Osama, one more time, relying on an anecdote from Muslim history indicating what all non-Muslims can expect\u2014even after they make concessions to Islam:<\/p>\n

When the king of the Copts of Egypt tried improving relations with the Prophet by dignifying his messenger and sending him back on a beast of burden laden with clothing, and a slave-girl, did such niceties prevent the Companions from raiding the Coptic realms, forcefully placing them under Islamic rule?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The answer is no. As both Islamic theology commands and history attests, \u201cconcessions\u201d or \u201cniceties\u201d are never enough: submission to Islam is the price for peace. Mr. Scheuer can be certain, then, that no matter how many political concessions the United States makes to the Islamic world, so-called \u201cSalafists\u201d like bin Laden\u2014that is, Muslims who follow the letter of the law (sharia)\u2014will continue the jihad \u201ctill all chaos ceases and religion is all for Allah\u201d (Qur\u2019an 8:38). Instead of thinking of them as Robin Hoods and Francis of Assisis, or simply idealistic, wayward children, it\u2019s best to start seeing them as they see themselves: mujahidin<\/em>\u2014warriors of Allah out to make Islam supreme, as there have been for some 1,400 years.<\/p>\n

Comments are limited to MESH members and invitees.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

From Raymond Ibrahim In many ways, Michael Scheuer is the paradigmatic case of an otherwise knowledgeable and experienced Western adult who takes Al Qaeda\u2019s word at face value. According to his book, Imperial Hubris, his credentials and thus authority to speak about Al Qaeda and its goals are impressive: \u201cFor the past seventeen years, my […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1620,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2218],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-388","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-qaeda"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/mesh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/388","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/mesh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/mesh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/mesh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1620"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/mesh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=388"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/mesh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/388\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/mesh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=388"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/mesh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=388"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/mesh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=388"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}