Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
A Refutation of the Recent

A Refutation of the Recent

Ratings: (0)|Views: 55 |Likes:
Published by jmorton1978
revolutionmuslim.com
revolutionmuslim.com

More info:

Published by: jmorton1978 on Feb 13, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/23/2012

pdf

text

original

 
A Refutation Of The RecentWest Point Study Claiming Al-Qa'ida Kills Mostly Muslims
“We haven’t killed the innocents; not in Baghdad, nor in Morocco, nor in Algeria, nor anywhereelse. And if there is any innocent who was killed in the Mujahideen’s operations, then it waseither an unintentional error, or out of necessity as in cases of al 
‐ 
Tatarrus (human shields).”
Ayman al
ZawahiriThe Power of Truth, 2007The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point recently released a study that attempts tocontribute to the ideological war against the mujahideen. The report has been touted by many press agencies and will certainly be floated as data utilized in the coming months and years. Theentire article is devoted to "disproving" the above statement by the Mujahideen, namely that theydo not kill civilians, and focuses on attacks carried out by any arm affiliated with al-Qa'ida. Thisstatement will insha'aAllah serve as an utter annihilation of this biased, unintelligent anduninformed piece of propaganda put out by West Point. This is not an exhaustive refutation butis meant to reveal the absurdity and malevolent intention of the report.The study, entitled
 Deadly Vanguards: A Study of Al-Qa'ida's Violence Against Muslims
wasconducted by Dr. Scott Helfstein, Nassir Abdullah, and Muhammad al-Obaid. You will noticethat Dr. Helfstein was aided by two apostates from the religion and that he will inevitably be theone roaming around and publicizing the report, but it serves in the U.S. military’s interests toattach two Arab names onto the report thus furthering the ultimate objective of the operation, torelegate Al-Qa’ida and their narrative to the fringe of the Islamic world thus preventing themfrom gaining ideological and sentimental backing and thereby subsequent physical aid. We haveselected some of the main points of the article and will proceed to demonstrate how suchstatements try to characterize legitimate, even if sometimes unfortunate, acts of war as terroristattacks targeting Muslims.The report is initiated with some nonsensical claims with regard to its methodology. On the first page we read,"This report used Arabic media sources to study the victim’s of al
Qa’ida’s violencethrough a non
Western prism. This allows researchers to avoid accusations of biasassociated with Western news outlets or U.S.
 based datasets. Almost all of the major terrorism incident databases utilize Western and English language reporting as primarysource material."and then,"Regarding the system for analysis: This work built upon already existent datasets such asITERATE, which tracks transnational attacks, and the RAND incident set which was not publicly available."This is more or less irrelevant, as the Arab rulers and the media arms that operate under them aremore firmly against the actions of the Muslims and the Mujahedeen than anyone else on the faceof the Earth. It also has nothing to do with actual science. Utilizing journalism and the estimationthat is usually associated amidst the competition of reporting attacks before other agencies do
 
certainly serves to manipulate the data set as hypothetical rather than actual. Furthermore thereport utilizes data provided by organizations that are explicitly against Islam. For example,RAND Corp. has said the following regarding the ideological struggle against Islam:A mixed approach composed of the following elements is likely to be the most effective:• Support the modernists first: — Publish and distribute their works at subsidized cost. — Introduce their views into thecurriculum of Islamic education. — Make their opinions and judgments on fundamentalquestions of religious interpretation available to a mass audience in competition with those of thefundamentalists and traditionalists, who have Web sites, publishing houses, schools, institutes,and many other vehicles for disseminating their views. — Position secularism and modernism asa “counterculture” option for disaffected Islamic youth. — Facilitate and encourage anawareness of their pre- and non-Islamic history and culture, in the media and the curricula of relevant countries.• Support the traditionalists against the fundamentalists: — Publicize traditionalist criticism of fundamentalist violence and extremism; encouragedisagreements between traditionalists and fundamentalists.— Discourage alliances betweentraditionalists and fundamentalists. — Encourage cooperation between modernists and thetraditionalists who are closer to the modernist end of the spectrum. — Where appropriate,educate the traditionalists to equip them better for debates against fundamentalists.Fundamentalists are often rhetorically superior, while traditionalists practice a politicallyinarticulate “folk Islam.” In such places as Central Asia, they may need to be educated andtrained in orthodox Islam to be able to stand their ground. — Increase the presence and profile of modernists in traditionalist institutions.— Discriminate between different sectors of traditionalism. Encourage those with a greater affinity to modernism, such as the Hanafi lawschool, versus others. Encourage them to issue religious opinions and popularize these to weakenthe authority of backward Wahhabi inspired religious rulings. This relates to funding: Wahhabimoney goes to the support of the conservative Hanbali school. It also relates to knowledge:More-backward parts of the Muslim world are not aware of advances in the application andinterpretation of Islamic law. — Encourage the popularity and acceptance of Sufism.• Confront and oppose the fundamentalists: — Challenge their interpretation of Islam and expose inaccuracies. — Publicize theconsequences of their violent acts.• Selectively support secularists: — Encourage recognition of fundamentalism as a shared enemy, discourage secularist alliancewith anti-U.S. forces on such grounds as nationalism and leftist ideology. — Support the ideathat religion and the state can be separate in Islam too and that this does not endanger the faith
 
 but, in fact, may strengthen it.(Civil Democratic Islam - Cheryl Bernard)Regarding Somalia and East Africa RAND Says:Reduce the influence of foreign Islamist organizations by identifying mainstream and SufiMuslim sectors and helping them propagate moderate interpretations of Islam and delegitimizeterrorism. Given that Islamist organizations use the provision of social services to advance their agenda, ways should be explored to help moderate Muslim nongovernmental organizations(NGOs) provide social services and therefore reduce the influence of Islamist NGOs. Of course,this assistance should be extended in ways that do not compromise the credibility of themoderate groups. (Radical Islam In East Africa - Angel Rabasa)So we see from these quotations that the article, while attempting to look like it is using unbiasedsources, it is actually using some of the most biased sources available. By pointing to thescientific references and the utilization of Arab press releases, the study adopts some perceivedlegitimacy at first glance. However, the very methodology employed is selective in that it doesnot consider the events in context and seeks to attain a particular outcome from the onset. Thus itis more an example of what has become typical Western “academia’s” black propagandacampaign against Islam. It is not science but is an effort to place a scientific face on a means of ideological war that follows many of the recommendations included in the agenda outlined bythe quotes from Rand Corp. Therefore, where the article puts a huge degree of attention on thefact that it uses "unbiased" sources, we see that it is completely untrueUtilizing this biased and purely unscientific methodology, the study is able to draw its intendedconclusions which allege that “evidence” suggests that,"The fact is that the vast majority of al
Qa’ida’s victims are Muslims: the analysis here showsthat only 15% of the fatalities resulting from al
Qa’ida attacks between 2004 and 2008 wereWesterners.""The results show that non
Westerners are much more likely to be killed in an al
Qa’ida attack.From 2004 to 2008, only 15% percent of the 3,010 victims were Western.""During the most recent period studied the numbers skew even further. From 2006 to 2008, only2% (12 of 661 victims) are from the West, and the remaining 98% are inhabitants of countrieswith Muslim majorities.""The coding scheme used for this project focused on nationality, relying on designation of victims as “Western” and “non
Western.” This scheme was used because media sources(irrespective of language) usually include victims’ nationalities as identifying religious affiliationis difficult. It is interesting to note that if major media outlets cannot distinguish victims’religions, it is difficult to believe that others (such published jihadi materials) could obtain an

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->