Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Where Terror Breeds

By John Thorne and James Brandon, Christian Science Monitor. Posted July 26, 2005.


A new breed of British radicals is inspiring impressionable urban Muslims to consider killing their fellow Britons.
Advertisement

Outside a small, red-brick mosque, a young Muslim in sneakers and a white robe is lecturing a cluster of young men gathered on the sidewalk.

"The London bombings ... were about striking terror into the heart of the enemy," he thunders, just one week after the 7/7 attacks that killed 56 people and wounded hundreds more.

Muslims around the world are being slaughtered, he tells them. "All we ask them is: 'Remove your troops from Muslim lands and we will stop all of this.' " The men nod in agreement. One glances into the baby stroller he's pushing. Car after car races past.

The preacher, who calls himself Abu Osama ("Father of Osama"), is one of a new breed of British radicals thriving at the margins of London's Muslim community.

Young, independent, and streetwise, they are preaching in urban slang outside the confines of Britain's mosques. They are helping teens and 20-somethings beat drugs and alcohol. And they are inspiring a new pool of impressionable young Muslims to consider killing their fellow Britons.

These radical bands constitute a small fraction of London's 1 million Muslims. But their freewheeling ideology - hardened in the jihadi echo chambers of cliques like Abu Osama's - is creating a new subculture within Britain's Islamic community. So far, the growing influence of these informal, maverick groups has gone largely undetected - and unchecked.

As older, camera-courting, foreign-born extremists like Omar Bakri and Abu Hamza al-Masri recede from relevance, their younger counterparts are striking out quietly and independently with a new brand of do-it-yourself radicalism.

"On the ground level, people like Bakri don't communicate with the youth," says Nadim Shehadi, an analyst at Chatham House, a think tank in London. The fragmentation of British radical groups and their dispersal underground, he adds, is the "worst of all possible options."

"When the Muslim Council of Britain [MCB] said 'We must be vigilant,' this pushed [radical groups] underground," says Abdul-Rehman Malik, contributing editor at the Muslim magazine Q-News, based London. As radicals fled to minor mosques and homes, Britain's security services, and even mainstream Muslims, lost track of them.

Did the 7/7 bombers come from Bakri's circle? "Probably not -- it's something far more insidious," says Mr. Malik. "It's beyond the Omar Bakris; it's a low rumble."

Yearning for jihad

Abu Osama, just 30, was born and raised here in East London, amid peeling paint and dingy kebab shops. "I know English. I know Britain. But if I live here, I must speak for Muslims elsewhere," he says, stressing that he belongs first to the ummah, or global Islamic community.

Abu Osama's faith deepened early. Watching his Pakistani immigrant father struggle to support his family of seven, he sought strength in Islam.

"I began praying and studying when I was 16, and since then I've been like this," he says, pointing to his long, curling beard.

Abu Osama first spoke publicly eight years ago; he has since won ardent followers.

Last fall, addressing a meeting of scores of British radicals, he sighed: "At the moment in Britain there is no jihad." Faces fell around the hall.

"Yet!" he exclaimed suddenly, to approving murmurs. The jihad would soon come, Abu Osama predicted, and he urged his listeners to embrace its arrival.

On 7/7, the jihad came. The suicide bombers were aged 18 to 30 - the same age as Abu Osama's cohorts. By portraying militancy as the ultimate expression of piety, Abu Osama and preachers like him are leading young Muslims down the path toward violence.

"Some of the people tell you Islam is a religion of peace because they think that then you'll want to convert," says Dublin-born convert Khalid Kelly, who soaks up Abu Osama's sidewalk sermon. "But you cannot possibly say Islam is a religion of peace; jihad is not an internal struggle."

Armed struggle was the last thing on Mr. Kelly's mind until his conversion several years ago. "I was your average Irish drunkard, partying and so on," he says. Arrested in Saudi Arabia, where he worked as a nurse, for brewing his own alcohol, Kelly found Islam in prison - an increasingly common arena for Muslim conversion and radicalization.


Digg!

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Watch what they do, not what they say.
Posted by: Sojourner on Jul 26, 2005 1:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I did not realize until I read it that Eric Hoffer's characterization of the true believer, in his book by that title (The True Believer : Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements) explained why conflict becomes violent.

Hoffer uses the label of 'true believer' as an ironic if not condemnatory phrase. That works because 'true belief' is used by the organizers of mass movements to defend their cause. As in the article above, the violence or threat of violence is more than a plea to rectify injuries done. It is service to a higher calling, paying a debt to a god, becoming a hero-martyr, fulfilling human destiny. In other words, it is being holier-than-thou.

The damage we, humans, have done to one another in the name of righteousness is vast. All mass violence has a good excuse for itself. While individuals may act sadistically for only the enjoyment of so acting, mass movements rely on a claim to moral superiority.

And that's why the terrorist can seem to look good. His act is, so he says, only 'in response' to a crime committed against him, so he has a justified grievance.

Differentiating the genuine victim from the self-defined victim can be confusing. Assassins believe in what they do, and their belief can seem persuasive.

It is only when we look at the consequences of their belief, the horrors they commit, that their words then can be seen to be an irrational rationalization. Except for war, the end does not ever justify the means, if the means causes the innocent to be injured or to die.

That is like the golden rule in that all the major religions of the world agree that taking an innocent life is treachery. A universal human command protects the innocent.

'By their fruits will you know them,' said one great teacher. The rest is all rhetoric.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Treason
Posted by: georgesdelatour on Jul 26, 2005 3:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A few rather rambling comments:
1. We need to reintroduce a rather old-fashoned sounding word into this: treason. If you're a UK citizen, and you urge people to kill other UK citizens for the sake of an external power such as al Queda, you are committing treason. You are in the same category of enemy as Lord Haw-Haw. It's that simple.
2. Some of the people quoted in the article make statements equivalent to formal renunciation of their citizenship. In every country the world over the fundamental basis of citizenship is allegiance. Renunciation of allegiance is effectively renunciation of citizenship. So many people from all over the world want to become UK citizens, and here we have men who are unwilling UK citizens. We should take these men at their word and relieve them of what they do not want.
3. I believe the US government paid a lot of money to Japanese Americans because, during World War Two, it had wrongly assumed that they might hold an allegiance to Japan overruling their allegiance to the USA; in fact they were loyal citizens of their adopted country. Even the dropping of Atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki - massively more violent acts than anything the US has so far done in Iraq - did not provoke them to commit revenge terrorist attacks in America.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Treason Posted by: bonapartist
» RE: Treason Posted by: HuckFinn
» RE: Treason Posted by: bonapartist
Britain is not the problem
Posted by: MarkH on Jul 26, 2005 6:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks George, you are dead right. We have a situation here where a number of people are quite unhappy about them being in a society that teaches and practices liberalism.

Well lads, here's news for you: Get lost to Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. Do not try to change our (the vast majority of English) way of life, just because you don't agree with it. The problem is not society (which, by the way, does not agree about Iraq either in its majority), the problem is YOU. So why don't you just leave? Oh yeah, of course you wouldn't have a job or get your benefits and live in a standard that is two huge steps away from everything in the middle-east. Hypocrits.

Why are we so nice to all these minorities anyway? Nobody in the middle-east would even dream about bringing in the level of liberalisation and freedom we have here in Britain. You want to practise your faith? Fine by me. But if your interpretation of your faith means to go out and kill anybody who has a different faith (or interpretation of your own faith), the fun stops.

Enough talk. Tony, get some laws into place to kick out these fanatics. Revoke citizenship where necessary and place them on a flight to Karachi. They can claim asylum there on religious grounds.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Britain is not the problem Posted by: andrewnowicki
» RE: Britain is not the problem Posted by: bonapartist
1 + 1
Posted by: nakis on Jul 26, 2005 9:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Consider this article and then consider this e-mail I received from a co-worker. I removed all names.


Something to think about. . .
The Jihad.......
Interesting this appears to sum up what we are faced with.
Muslim religion in the fastest growing religion per capita in Canada
and the United States especially in the minority race.
Allah or Jesus? by:xxxxxxxxxx
Last month I attended my annual training session that's required for
maintaining my state prison security clearance. During the training
session there was a presentation by three speakers representing the
Roman Catholic, Protestant and Muslim faiths, who explained each of
their belief systems.
I was particularly interested in what the Islamic Imam had to say.
The Imam gave a great presentation of the basics of Islam, complete
with a video.
After the presentations, time was provided for questions and
answers.
When it was my turn, I directed my question to the Imam and asked:
"Please, correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that most Imams and
clerics of Islam have declared a holy jihad [Holy war] against the
infidels of the world. And, that by killing an infidel, which is a
command to all Muslims, they are assured of a place in heaven. If
that's the case, can you give me the definition of an infidel?"
There was no disagreement with my statements and, without hesitation,
he replied, "Non-believers!"
I responded, "So, let me make sure I have this straight. All followers
of Allah have been commanded to kill everyone who is not of your faith
so they can go to Heaven. Is that correct?"
The expression on his face changed from one of authority and command
to that of a little boy who had just gotten caught with his hand in
the cookie jar. He sheepishly replied, "Yes."
I then stated, "Well, sir, I have a real problem trying to imagine
Pope John Paul commanding all Catholics to kill those of your faith or
Dr. Stanley ordering Protestants to do the same in order to go to
Heaven.
The Imam was speechless.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 1 + 1 Posted by: djisabella
1 + 1
Posted by: nakis on Jul 26, 2005 9:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I continued, "I also have a problem with being your friend when you
and your brother clerics are telling your followers to kill me. Let
me ask you a question. Would you rather have your Allah who tells you
to kill me in order to go to Heaven or my Jesus who tells me to love
you because I am going to Heaven and He wants you to be with me?"
You could have heard a pin drop as the Imam hung his head in shame.
Needless to say, the organizers and/or promoters of the
'Diversification' training seminar were not happy with Rick's way of
dealing with the Islamic Imam and exposing the truth about the
Muslim's beliefs.
I think everyone in the US and Canada should be required to read this,
but with the liberal justice system, liberal media, and the ACLU,
there is no way this will be widely publicized. Please pass this on to
all your e-mail contacts.
This is a true story and the author, Rick Mathes, is a well known
leader in prison ministry.
*Think about this, with all the Islamic people now in the Canada and
the USA , building their Temples.............Do we really feel safe
here in our own country ?......
Can we reclaim our world ? Or is it already too late


Besides the fact that past Popes have had whole peoples wiped out in the name of Christianity.
It is also a fact that mainstream Islam does not support violence. Many of the Nation are some of the most peace loving people on the planet.

Yet I received this e-mail that immediately reminded me of the things written in 1920, 30s Germany against Jews, Catholics, Gypsies, etc... .

The world is not black and white. No people, faith, race is all bad or all good. There are fundamentalists in every faith including, I am told, Buddhism.

This article explains some very dire facts. Facts about a violent minority. That can apply to Christains as well. As we know fundamentalist Christian ministers spout the same rhetoric.
Deportations based on faith is oppression. Laws based upon faith only create oppression, victims and motivate radical extremism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» To andrew Posted by: nakis
Qutb
Posted by: boxingfrogproductions on Jul 26, 2005 12:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The real problem with modern Islamism that this article nicely illustrates is the idea Sayyid Qutb took from Lenin, of a revolutionary vanguard to bring the population into a new society. Also, his idea of the violent struggle against an UnIslamic jahilliya state allows for violent, nay requires violent struggle against the unmoralist state. These ideas have irretrievably harmed the conservative Muslim political struggle, and lead to treasoneous ideas such as those articulated by the men in this article.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Time to Apply Ockham's Razor?
Posted by: m. singh on Jul 26, 2005 1:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dear sirs,
Why not simplify this entire tragic problem by first noting that practically everyone involved is advocating or defending some kind of religious viewpoint. And once you pull away the religious trappings you are left with nothing more than groups of human beings who are unable to act or think without instructions of some sort from "on high". Further simplification leads one to admit that religion (unless practiced in complete privacy) is as dangerous for the vast majority of human beings as pure heroin or suitcase nuclear bombs.
Why not simply declare that all forms of public religious discourse are dangerous forms of extremism, ie. terrorism? I am sure that the incalculable armies of corpses produced by this and every religious war of the last few millenia, would agree, if they could speak from the glorious hereafter which was promised them for their efforts.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Put up job
Posted by: pjrsullivan on Jul 26, 2005 10:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only Muslims that are a threat to us are the ones hired by the Sheenies to committ crimes against us. The real threat is, and always has been, the Zionists and their blood-suckers in crime, the Hanoverian Germans, represented by butcher queenie and her ghoul brigade.

Wake up folks, this band of nuclear war crime committing enemies of humanity have already pulled the nuclear pin on us, repeatedly they have tried to nuke us. The reason we are still here is because of some unknown higher level power has intervened against the nuclear war criminals, in behalf of humanity.

The reason that the Sheeny-cons are pushing to attack Iran is so that a nuclear exchange can be started that will draw the Russians and Chinese into unloading their nuclear weapons upon us.

As you read these articles about how naughty these Muslims are, remember, the Sheeny has a long history of huckstering on other peoples blood, and will use up all of Americas cannon fodder kids that are fed to them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Zionists, 9-11 and the will of God
Posted by: IanA on Jul 27, 2005 9:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The point of putting things in religious terms is to have a one fits all justification for anything, past present or future. We have a convenient God, his Word, and then we have all the people who interpret that and everything else which makes for their power. Where people disagree too much the power breaks down and they form a new sect and make a new doctrine, with their own view of God being the only true God and everyone else a non-believer, not of the chosen, a “them” as apposed to an “us”. As far as everybody in that religion or sect see God in the same way they agree to treat each other in a better way than those outside the sect. This complicates things because economic, social, and cultural circumstances now act upon them individually and as a group, and theyalso interact with society individually and on the basis of norms defined by their group.

So when individuals behave in a certain way do we find responsibility with them, their group, or their long dead teacher who made a left turn 2000 to 4000 years ago? It is not the question when you are stealing someone's land, bombing or bulldozing their home, killing their child, or putting them in jail without just cause. It’s just, them or us.

I mean quite frankly a Jew would be a Muslim without Abraham, and then the 47 varieties of Christians would be Muslims too, except for that Jew, Christ, Anglicans are Catholics without Henry VIII etc... And over history these differences have justified endless rape pillage and plunder between them and us.

So nothing much has changed but it is interesting to note that it is not the barbarous intolerant Muslims with allegedly crazed suicidal assassins among their numbers who have done the greater part of the killing. No, the big numbers in organized murder is being carried out as a "war on terror” by the non-believers who see the Muslim faith as a threat and any number of their individual faithful as potential terrorists and no, it is not a crusade.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]