What Ron Paul and the Anti-War Left Fail to Understand About Jihad and Its Motives

anti-war pacifism

In almost every exchange you get into with anti-war pacifists or Ron Paul supporters, the inevitable argument is that the reason Radical Islam exists and why Jihadists want to see America destroyed is because of America’s presence and involvement in the Mid-East.

This is demonstrably an ignorant and clueless understanding of the Jihadist mindset and radical Islamist estacheology that fuels the desire to wage jihad against infidels. The anti-war argumentation is typical of the sheltered Intellectuals sipping latte’s and projecting our own Western motivations in answering “why?” Islamists hate us and are willing to wage war on us. The truth is that the real motivation is so beyond the multicultural ideology that infects the West – and pacifist thinking, that it is dismissed outright as not even considerable. Their minds automatically revert to the presumption that jihad is simply a reaction to provocation. Unfortunately, that is a Western mindset built on a belief of tolerance that does not exist in the radical Muslim culture.

The push for pacifist politics in dealing with the Islamofascist beast that is rising in the world is the result of pure ignorance of this mindset – and a lack of conviction in the foundational bedrock of our own culture and civilization.

Tawfik Hamid is a doctor and former Jihadist militant that shares the development of the Jihadist mindset by the radicals and gives us proper insight into the REAL REASON WHY Muslims across the spectrum of Islam are motivated to go to war on America and the West.

It is NOT because of the yellow-belly washing Ron Paul and the Anti-war left have everyone believing is the motivation.

Read what a militant muslim himself reveals.

(Excerpts posted here – go to link for full essay)

The development of a jihadist’s mind—What occupies the mind of a jihad-driven Muslim?

“We viewed both the Soviets and the Americans as enemies. The Soviets were considered infidels because they did not believe in the existence of God, while the Americans did not follow Islam. Although we planned to fight the Soviets first, our ultimate objective is to destroy the United States – the greatest symbol of the infidel’s freedom”.


What occupies the mind of a jihad-driven Muslim? How is such fervor planted in young and impressionable believers? Where does it originate? How did I – once an innocent child who grew up in a liberal, moderate and educated household – find myself a member of a radical Islamic group? These questions go to the root of Islamic violence and must be addressed if free societies are to combat radical Islam. To further this aim, I will explore the psychological development of a jihadi’s mind through my own firsthand experience as a former member of a Muslim terrorist organization.

I was born in Cairo to a secular Muslim family. My father was an orthopedic surgeon and an agnostic at heart; my mother was a French teacher and a liberal. Both considered Islam to be, primarily, an integral part of our culture. With the exception of my father, we would fast on Ramadan. Even though my father was not religious, he understood our need to fit into the community and never forced his secular views on us. He espoused diverse philosophical ideas but encouraged us to follow our own convictions. Most importantly, he taught my brother and me to think critically rather than to learn by rote. I never had any doubt, however, that we were Muslim – that Allah was our creator, Muhammad his messenger and the Koran our book…

I felt sorry for the Christians, sensing that they must be hurt by being treated as an inferior minority in an Islamic society. In my short life it was the first time I perceived that my Christian friends were not my equals…

When I was nine, I learned the following Koranic verse during one of our Arabic lessons: “But do not think of those that have been slain in God’s cause as dead. Nay, they are alive! With their sustainer have they their sustenance. They are very happy with the reward they received from Allah [for dying as a shahid] and they rejoice for the sake of those who have not joined them [i.e., have not yet died for Allah]” (Koran 3:169-70). It was the first time I was exposed to the concept of shahid (martyr), and naturally, I began to dream of becoming one.

…Dying as a shahid, in fact, was the only deed that fully guaranteed paradise after death. In secondary school I watched films about the early Islamic conquest. These films promoted the notion that “true” Muslims were devoted to aggressive jihad.

…I was reading a book entitled Alshaykhan by Taha Hussein that cited the Prophet Muhammad’s words: “I have been ordered by Allah to fight and kill all people [non-Muslims] until they say, ‘No God except Allah.'” Following the reading of this Hadith, I decisively turned toward Nagi and said to him, “If we are to apply Islam correctly, we should apply this Hadith to you.” At that moment I suddenly started to view Nagi as an enemy rather than as a longtime friend.

What further hardened my attitude on this matter was the advice I received from many dedicated Muslim fellow students, who warned me against befriending Christians. They based their counsel on the following verse: “O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends: They are but friends to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them [for friendship] is of them [an infidel]. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust” (Koran 5:51). In view of this verse and the previous one, I felt obliged as a Muslim to limit my relationships with my Christian friends. The love and friendship I once felt for them had been transformed into disrespect, merely because I wished to obey the commandments of my religion. The seductive ideas of my religious studies had diluted the influence of my secular upbringing. By restricting my contact with Christians, I felt that I was doing a great deed to satisfy Allah.

…We enviously lamented, “Look how Allah has blessed the Saudis with money and oil because they apply Shari’a.” We believed that our economic problems would be solved if we did the same – just as Allah had blessed the Saudis, He would bless us.

…They warned us about the punishments awaiting us after death if we did not follow Islam strictly and were effective in advancing Islamism among many of the students, including me….This militaristic attitude during prayers was the first step in preparing me for the concept of jihad against “the enemies of Allah,” the non-Muslims.

…Salafi teachings expressly forbid acting on sexual desire. They prohibit a man from touching any woman or even looking at one. Speaking to a woman on a personal level is not permitted. To be alone with a woman without relatives present, it is believed, would “invite Satan to be the third person.” Women became for members of Jamaah, therefore, forbidden creatures. But while relations with women were strictly proscribed, the erotic passages in Salafi writings simultaneously aroused in us a powerful sexual desire. This dilemma led us to conclude that dying for Allah provided our only hope for satisfying our lust, because that lust could be satisfied only in paradise. It is not surprising that Osama bin Laden and other terrorist leaders sent letters to their suicide murderers that described to them the hur, or white ladies awaiting them in paradise. In addition to its severe prohibitions governing sexual conduct, Salafi Islam also strictly limits most artistic expression, which it considers to be satanic…

…My hatred toward non-Muslims increased dramatically, and jihadi doctrine became second nature to me. My goal of being a physician and healing the sick grew tainted, infected by my strong wish to subjugate non-Muslims and impose Shari’a.

At one afternoon prayer session, an imam I had never met before gave a sermon. He was one of the fiercest speakers I had ever heard. His passion for jihad was astonishing. He advocated complete Islamic dominance, urging us to pursue jihad against non-Muslims and subdue them to Shari’a – the duty of every true Muslim. His rhetoric inspired us to engage in war against the infidels, the enemies of Allah. He particularly condemned the West for the freedom of its women. He hated the fact that Western women were permitted to wear what they pleased, to work and to have the same opportunities as men. He dreamt of forcing the West to conform to a Taliban-style system in which women were obliged to wear the Islamic hijab, were legally beaten by men to discipline them and were stoned to death for extramarital sex. After the imam’s speech my friend, Tariq Abdul-Muhsin, asked me if I knew this speaker. When I said I did not, Tariq told me that he was Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri and, because I was a new member of Jamaah, offered to introduce us.

…With a serious expression he placed his hand on my shoulder and said, “Young Muslims like you are the hope for the future return of khilafa [caliphate or Islamic global dominance].” I felt a great sense of gratitude and honor. I wanted to please him by contributing to his “noble” cause. Throughout my membership in Jamaah, I would meet with Zawahiri on six more occasions. He did not have much time to spare, however, for he was deeply involved in several Islamist organizations. One of Zawahiri’s significant achievements was to personalize jihad – that is, to have transformed it from a responsibility of the umma, the Islamic collective, to a duty of Muslim individuals. His goal is to spread the empire of Islam through the actions of individual radical Muslims, each of whom is incited to wage a personal jihad. This allows young Muslims to carry out suicide bombings without the endorsement of the collective body. Zawahiri and his fellow jihadis base their philosophy on the verse that states, “Then fight in Allah’s cause – you are held responsible only for yourself – and rouse the believers [to fight]” (Koran 4:84).

We viewed both the Soviets and the Americans as enemies. The Soviets were considered infidels because they did not believe in the existence of God, while the Americans did not follow Islam. Although we planned to fight the Soviets first, our ultimate objective was to destroy the United States – the greatest symbol of the infidel’s freedom.

Notice that he does not list Israel as the ‘ultimate objective’ for destruction. Please understand, that in most of militant Islam’s literature – it is the United States that is Satan’s Nation, or “The Great Satan” as in Shiite estacheology. Israel is only the ‘little Satan’. At a conference denying the Holocaust in Tehran in 2006, the poster advertising the “End of Zionism” depicted glass globes of America and Israel falling and shattering from an hourglass. Israel is in the process of falling in the poster – America is already shattered. In many of the studies of Salafi and Jiahdist Islam – there is a belief that America must be destroyed first, in order that Israel will wither and then be weak for annihilation.

My personal dream was to be an Islamic warrior, to kill the enemies of Islam, to smite their necks in accordance with the Koranic verse that read, “When ye meet the unbelievers smite at their necks” (Koran 47:4). We considered the Prophet Muhammad to be our role model. The Koran commanded us to follow in his footsteps: “Ye have indeed in the messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern [of conduct] for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the final day, and who engages much in the praise of Allah” (Koran 33:21). Salafi Islamic texts demonstrate Muhammad’s uncompromising nature. They encourage devout Muslims to emulate the prophet’s deeds and to accept and defend his actions in even the harshest passages. When confronted by outsiders, however, these same Muslims insist that such stories are misinterpreted because they are taken out of context – though they rarely, if ever, provide the context. This self-protective denial effectively paralyzes further criticism by the West.

Jihad against non-Muslims seemed to me to be a win-win situation. The following verse, commonly cited by Jamaah members, validated my duty to die for Allah: “Allah has purchased the believers, their lives and their goods. For them [in return] is the garden [of paradise]. They fight in Allah’s cause, and they slay and are slain; they kill and are killed… it [paradise] is the promise of Allah to them” (Koran 9:111).

…Among the more appalling notions it supports are the enslavement and rape of female war prisoners and the beating of women to discipline them. It permits polygamy and pedophilia. It refers to Jews as “pigs and monkeys” and exhorts believers to kill them before the end of days: Say: “Shall I tell you who, in the sight of God, deserves a yet worse retribution than these? Those [the Jews] whom God has rejected and whom He has condemned, and whom He has turned into monkeys and pigs because they worshiped the powers of evil: these are yet worse in station, and farther astray from the right path [than the mockers]” (Koran 5:60).

…The civilized world ought to recognize the immense danger that Salafi Islam poses; it must become informed, courageous and united if it is to protect both a generation of young Muslims and the rest of humanity from the disastrous consequences of this militant ideology.

More at LINK



Filed under War On Jihadists

10 responses to “What Ron Paul and the Anti-War Left Fail to Understand About Jihad and Its Motives

  1. Very interesting, but anecdotes are not evidence.

    You still have yet to explain what special law or dispensation is in effect that renders decisions made in the arena of American foreign policy – unlike every other imperfect, human endeavor – immune to and innoculated from the law of unintended consequences.

    Here are some more examples to tickle your brain a bit, courtesy Wikipedia:

    * The Streisand Effect occurs when an attempt to censor or remove a certain piece of information (such as photograph, file or website) instead causes the information in question to become widely known and distributed in a very short time. The fact that a piece of information is being restricted assigns to it a previously nonexistent value in the eyes of the public.

    * The introduction of rabbits into Australia for sport led to an explosive growth in the rabbit population; rabbits have become a major feral pest in Australia.

    * Standard economic theory implies that minimum wage laws increase unemployment among low wage workers (the workers whose wages the minimum wage law will affect). A survey of American Economic Association economists found that 45.6% fully agreed with the statement “a minimum wage increases unemployment among young and unskilled workers”, 27.9% partially agreed, and 26.5% disagreed.[2]

    * The stiffening of penalties for driving while intoxicated in the United States in the 1980s led, at first, to an increase in hit and run accidents, most of which were believed to have been drunken drivers trying to escape the law (Later, legislators stiffened penalties for leaving the scene of an accident when driving while intoxicated as well).

    * In 1990, driven by concern for the increasing number of cyclists’ head injuries, the State of Victoria (Australia) made safety helmets mandatory for all bicycle riders. The expected significant reduction in the absolute number of head injuries occurred, but there was also a concomitant, entirely unexpected reduction in the number of juvenile cyclists. Research by Vulcan et al. found that the reduction in the number of juvenile cyclists was entirely because the youths considered wearing a bicycle helmet unfashionable.[citation needed]

    * “Prohibition”, in the 1920s U.S., originally enacted to suppress the alcohol trade, drove many small-time alcohol suppliers out of business and consolidated the hold of large-scale organized crime over the illegal alcohol industry. By the time the U.S. repealed Prohibition, the brewing industry had concentrated in a few major brewers, which had been able to ride it out. Sixty years later, the “War on Drugs,” intended to suppress the illegal drug trade, likewise drove many small-time drug dealers out of business and consolidated the hold of organized drug cartels over the illegal drug industry. Additionally, it has led to the existence of street drugs of unknown strength and contamination; at least some drug-related (and particularly opiate-related) deaths are the result of accidental overdosing on drugs that a dealer neglected to dilute to the usual extent.

    * In CIA jargon, “blowback” describes the unintended, even undesirable consequences of covert operations. Examples include:
    o Operation Ajax, which contributed to the 1979 Iranian Revolution & the Iran hostage crisis
    o Covert funding of the Contras in Nicaragua, which lead to the Iran-Contra Affair
    o Covert funding of the Mujahideen, which led to the rise of the Taliban

    * Government rent control has led to the unintended consequence of housing shortages and reduction in housing quality, increased difficulty for less desirable renters to obtain or retain housing and even to the creation of slums—areas where owners permit rental property to run down until it becomes uninhabitable, leading renters to leave.

  2. sictransitgloriamundi

    Very interesting, my dear “reverend”, but Wiki anecdotes are not evidence either.

    Before so casually dismissing this article, it’s incumbent upon to you to first demonstrate that the Jihadist movement is causally linked to America’s behavior via the so-called “law of unintended consequences”. Once you have done this, then you may credibly posit your hypothesis.

    This measly “anecdote” is yet another in a large body of evidence that stems directly from the mouths of current and former Jihadists. At some point it’s prudent to give the people who want you dead some credence, instead of casually blowing them off as ignoramuses who are so stupid that they don’t know their hatred comes from our foreign policy.

    Perhaps I’m just stupid, but maybe — just maybe — when they say it’s not our foreign policy that drives them, but the fact that we’re not dhimmi… they might be telling the truth.

  3. Before so casually dismissing this article, it’s incumbent upon to you to first demonstrate that the Jihadist movement is causally linked to America’s behavior via the so-called “law of unintended consequences”.


    The challenge, as I understand it, is to provide evidence that jihadism did not fulliy formed from the void, but is a response to some actual action or historical events in the real world, yes?

    Which is to say, that if I posit that jihadism is (at least in part) an effect, then I am also suggesting that American foreign policy is a partial cause – that invading countries, funding dictators and insurgencies, and toppling governments are not the sorts of activities which pass unnoticed, but which actually do inflame regiuonal tensions, up to and including terrorism.

    Well, OK then.

    I’ll provide a list of sources and Invar may then tell me which he accepts or rejects as authoritative.

    (I know from past experience that its better to do this first; that way I won’t have to waste a lot of time gathering material only to have it dismissed, e.g. “I don’t trust encyclopedias, everyone knows that encyclopedia editors are crazy/lazy/biased/whatever.”

    Anyway, here’s a list of possible sources for my assertion that the law of unintended consequences plays (or has played) a role in the history of Middle Eastern political and military interventions, Invar please let me know which ones meet with your a priori disapproval and I’ll trim the list accordingly:

    – 9/11 commission report
    – CIA analysis
    – American counter-insurgency manuals
    – American academics + historians
    – American + European journalists
    – Islamic jihadist manifestos

    thanks, I’ll check back later.

    P.S. Invar, I should add that if you veto some or all of the above fon purely specious grounds (for example, if you dismiss the 9/11 commission report on the grounds that the American government has an anti-American bias, or some such nonsense) then I will consider this a definitive concession of the point.

    thanks and nice chatting with you!

  4. invar

    How utterly sophmoric.

    You cite ‘sources’ all coming from a limited American and Multicultural Western perspective and analysis sans SOME of the Jihadist manifestos of justifying barbarism, at least as it is waged on Western infidels.

    You present nothing from Islamic history, the Quran, the Hadiths and the various estacheologies and sects that have used and are currently using violent Jihad to secure their goals.

    Glutimus here cites the most convenient sources the Anti-war pacifists use to argue their clueless belief that Jihad is simply a causal response to American presence and intervention.

    As sictransitgloriamundi duly noted: it’s prudent to give the people who want us dead some credence, and listen to what they study, what they hear and what they believe in outside of how the West looks at and views Jihadist Islam.

    Perhaps he might do a bit of research into the perspectives of former Jihadists and radical Muslims like Dr. Hamid, Walid Shoebat, Nonie Darwish and others before he goes and throws all his chips down on his Western government and media sources.

    I’m not holding my breath. I’ll take the lessons learned from Muslims and former Jihadists and half a lifetime with my friend Syed’s explantion about Islamofascism, than the cup of spit that is held up as gold from government and media sources.

    Hell, people can cite the New York Times as proof positive that Hitler was a great guy and that our intervention and assistance to Britain was angering the Nazis and setting the stage for unecessary war. Nevermind what Hitler himself had in mind and was saying boldly to his people about what he planned to do.

    About the same situation happening here.

    But I get the feeling arguing with a turnip would be more valuable than what’s coming next from the Glutimus Max.

  5. Check your title. The possessive is “its” not “it’s.”

  6. metaljaybird

    We should just pack it up and stop fighting a war that can’t be won. Iraq is a stupid shame of a war, and we aren’t there to fight them evil terrorists, but to gain oil and control the currency standard. Get a clue, stop drinking Hannity kook-aide.

  7. invar

    Spoken like a true yellow-bellied coward with no clue and a head full of Democrat Underground Conspiracy talking points.

  8. You cite ’sources’ all coming from a limited American and Multicultural Western perspective and analysis sans SOME of the Jihadist manifestos of justifying barbarism, at least as it is waged on Western infidels.

    You present nothing from Islamic history, the Quran, the Hadiths and the various estacheologies and sects that have used and are currently using violent Jihad to secure their goals.


    Actually, I’ve “cited” nothing at all – I’m asking you which sources you would be willing to accept, before I bother to cite anything.

    That said, it sounds from your response like you only trust Islamic sources, not Western ones; if you want perhaps we could compare sources, you can tell me about the Koran and I can tell you about the Bible and that way we can meet in the middle. Would that work for you?

  9. analysis sans SOME of the Jihadist


    Quick tip: “sans” actually means without, e.g., “sans peur” = “without fear”

  10. metaljaybird

    Wow, first time someone accused me of taking DU talking points.

    Actually, I was a huge supporter of this war, until I realized it was an unjustified pointless war. Seeing some of my buddies come back disenfranchised only affirms my point.

    If you seriously think we are bombing Iraq for America’s freedom, than you are in for a rude awakening.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s