Articles

Table of Contents

Speakout: Muslims must both denounce, renounce their violent hadiths
By Dr. Tawfik Hamid
Rocky Mountain News
October 7, 2006

Ayman al-Zawahri, al-Qaida's No. 2 man, last month announced that Americans must choose: Convert to Islam or continue to receive acts of terror.

Al-Zawahri was reiterating a fundamental concept of Salafi Islamic teaching, the fountainhead of extremist thinking. Yet the authors of the American government's recent intelligence report on terrorism's spread seem not to have been listening.

Zawahri's threat is based on a saying of the Prophet Muhammad as written in Sahih Al-Buchary, a central book of Salafi Islamic teaching. This hadith, or fundamental concept, states: "I have been ordered by Allah to fight and kill all mankind until they say, 'No God except Allah and Muhammad is the prophet of Allah' (Hadith Sahih)."

Based on this hadith, early Muslims used the sword to spread Islam throughout the world. The same hadith inspires contemporary Islamic terror including this summer's thwarted London airplane explosions. Other rationales that terrorists use to justify terrorism - the Arab-Israeli conflict, America's involvement in Iraq - are simply useful propaganda cover stories, not the actual causes or goals of terrorists' actions.

Americans must be wary of political leaders who accept the propaganda explanations. To win the war on terror, America's leaders must recognize the powerful role of the Islamic religious principle of jihad, Islam's belief that it must conquer the world, which derives from the above hadith. Belief in jihad is what causes so many Muslims worldwide to cheer terrorist acts such as 9/11, European subway bombings, and Hezbollah and Hamas attacks against Israel.

Allowing jihadist teaching to continue is like allowing cancer cells to survive in a human body.

The human immune system demonstrates that nurturing normal cells and respecting their variance sustains life. A healthy body nourishes cell diversity. A healthy body politic, similarly, must value respect for different beliefs. At the same time, if an immune system shows any tolerance whatsoever for cancer cells, the latter will terminate that body's life. The immune system of a body politic must have a similar zero tolerance for beliefs that incite violence against its citizens.

Cancer can be overcome if an individual has a strong immune system that acts to triumph over the killer cells. Similarly, the cancerous teachings of Salafi Islam could become insignificant if the majority of Muslims were to vocally oppose them.

Unfortunately, however, the vast majority of Muslims, Islamic organizations and Islamic scholars have not publicly objected to these teachings. There have been no powerful Muslim demonstrations to denounce Osama bin Laden and not a single fatwa by top Islamic scholars or organizations to consider bin Laden an apostate - as was done to Salman Rushdie just for writing a novel.

Because the teachings continue, a significant proportion of the world's Muslims have become passive terrorists, peaceful citizens whose sympathy in their hearts and support with their purses enable terrorism's spread.

If Islamic scholars and organizations in America disapprove of jihadist teachings, they must speak out against them. Americans should consider Muslims to be moderates, and Islam a peaceful faith, only if, in English and in Arabic, Muslims clearly denounce their violent hadiths and strike them from the books that educate their next generation.

In addition to internal immune reactions, externally applied interventions also can destroy cancer cells. Like cancer-fighting chemotherapy, strongly applied military might can reduce large tumors. America eliminated al-Qaida training camps in Afghanistan, but the verdict is not yet in on whether Israel this past summer similarly decimated Hezbollah.

To conquer the metastases of extremist Islam, however, words may be the most potent weapons. Outspoken condemnation of the theological sources of terrorism by American intellectuals and politicians, reinforcing the self-examination of Muslims themselves, could make a vital difference.

Addressing the theological wellsprings of Islamic terrorist motivation is essential if America is to succeed in its war against terrorism. Pope Benedict XVI has begun leading the way. Neither political correctness nor Muslim outrage must be allowed to prevent further realistic talk about the religious underpinnings of Islamic violence. Otherwise Islamic teaching will continue to spread jihad's cancerous beliefs.


Contents

What drives jihad?
By Andrea Jacobs, staff writer
October 20, 2006

Dr. Tawfik Hamid holds a boxed lunch in one hand and offers me his book, *The Roots of Jihad*, with the other. A Muslim, he wears Western clothing. Still, I refrain from extending my hand. We walk back to the conference room.

No photographs of Dr. Hamid are allowed.

"For security reasons," says the doctor, who looks younger than his 45 years.

Dr. Hamid fled his native Egypt because he espouses a peaceful interpretation of Islam based on the Koran.

Today he is one of the leading authorities on the Islamic texts (*Sulafi*) which are responsible for the wildfire spread of *jihad* in the Arab world.

As I listen to his articulate scholarship, his bitter condemnation of his own people, Icatch myself staring.

Before he embraced this new way of seeing, Dr. Hamid was an ideological extremist on the fast track to becoming a real live terrorist.

"I was eight when I first heard the teaching that says, 'When you die a martyr, you are not dead -- you are alive,'" says Dr. Hamid, who was raised in a secular Muslim family. "Dying for Allah was the only guarantee that we would not go to the grave.

"For us, the grave was frightening. *Sulafi* Islam teaches that only punishment awaits us in the grave. So to me, and many kids around me, the idea of dying for Allah and going to Paradise was wonderful. For me, a child, that meant eating lollipops and candy and chocolate. Believe me. This was my dream!"

Later, the dream changed.

During medical school, Dr. Hamid joined JI (*Jaamma Islameia*), an outlaw fundamentalist group calling for *jihad* against Muslims who have abandoned their faith (apostates) and non-Muslims.

He met Dr. Aiman Al-Zawaheri -- now Al Qaida's second in command under Osama bin Laden -- in JI.

Asked what Al-Zawaheri was like, Dr. Hamid does not hesitate. (And any Muslim who hesitates "even for one second" when answering a question is being deceptive, he later stresses.)

"Al-Zawaheri was a very nice man on the personal level," he says. "He was very dedicated to the concept of *jihad* against the US. He often came to the mosque I went to. We prayed together. We talked."

I need to know why Dr. Hamid is no longer an extremist. What happened?

"At first I followed the teachings of *Sulafi* Islam. Ichanged into a person that justified the killings of innocents. I thought in a totally distorted manner. I became like a beast.

"When it came time to go forward and commit certain acts -- I was invited to go Afghanistan, to train for *jihad*, to die for Allah -- I felt this struggle between my conscience and the religious teachings. I started to think.

"And this word, thinking, probably is what saved me. I began to question. You see, at the theoretical level things seemed OK. But at the practical level, when I was about to act . . .

"A friend introduced me to another form of Islamic thinking that was relatively peaceful. I say relatively peaceful, compared to the other kind.

"This sect was primarily based on the Koran. I began studying Koranic verses in a totally different manner. There are many verses in the Koran that praise B'nai Yisrael; that grant the Israelis the land. Soon I started to preach this new understanding."

One day, he was called to preach at the mosque. "I gave a lecture, and people listened peacefully. It was good. But afterward, some fundamentalists surrounded me. They said, if you come here again we will kill you. Then they attacked me, and my friend. We ran. But soon they began stoning me."

Dr. Hamid looks at me with pained and furious eyes.

"Unfortunately, this resistance to peaceful teaching is not limited to fundamentalists. It is now at the level of the people."

The three dominant beliefs encouraged in the prevailing, and popular, Sulafi Islamic teachings are killing the apostate, beating women, and declaring war on non-Muslims.

"Clearly,"Dr. Hamid adds, "most adherents believe Jews are apes and pigs."

I write his last sentence with tight fingers.

Although he won't allow his face to be photographed and refuses to divulge where he lives, Dr. Hamid speaks throughout the US on understanding -- and challenging -- radical Islamic ideology.

I'm reminded of Jews trying to dialogue with Jews for Jesus and other Christian proselytizers. Either you know your Torah, or drown in their specious arguments.

The same applies to discussions with Muslims, says Dr. Hamid.

"It is vitally important to confront Islamic organizations in the US on these points. They should clarify their positions in an unambiguous manner. Of course, they will say what they say. But you must put your questions to them in a clear manner. Do not give them a chance to blame the world for their own actions. They know how to play with the words. I know, because Iwas one of them.

"For example, a Nazi can say Nazism is peaceful. But if they don't denounce the Holocaust or the killing of Jews, what they say means nothing." Dr. Hamid proceeds to offer his method for cracking the fundamentalist Islamic code.

"I am happy to give you the right answers to ask now,"he says, the flicker of a smile forming on his dark features.

"Ask them, 'What do you think of killing apostates? Is it correct, or absolutely wrong?' If they say it is absolutely wrong, take them to the next question. 'Clarify what Saudi Arabia says about killing apostates.' (The punishment for apostasy in Saudi Arabia is death.) Tell me whether this is wrong. If they say it is wrong, ask them to please put this up on their Website, or post it in their mosque, or have them sign a document stating that this is what they believe.

"The same is true of beating women: 'Is is correct or absolutely unacceptable to beat women?' Ask me. I could say to you, 'Islam generally recommends dealing in a good manner with women.' Or you may hear, 'Oh, it's only in rare instances.' I know how they trick the world. Iwas one of them.

"Don't let them betray you. Don't . . ."

He struggles for an accurate English translation, his fingers jabbing the

air.

Don't leave the question open-ended, I suggest.

"Ah, never!"

He leans forward on the table.

"Ask Muslim kids what they think about Jews. Kids do not lie. They will tell you what they are being taught. If they say, 'Jews are nice people and we can live with them in harmony,' I will be the first person to congratulate their parents. But I assure you, if you ask Muslim kids living in the US what they think of Jews, you will be shocked."

In the US?

"Yes. In the US. You will be shocked."

"Dr. Hamid, do you hate your own people?"

For the first time, he hesitates -- briefly.

"Iam against them," he says. "When you preach peace, and the whole community boycotts you and your wife and your children, it is painful. Just because you preach that killing apostates is absolutely wrong and is not mentioned in the Koran, and that Jews are not 'pigs' and 'monkeys,' and the community threatens you, it is painful. But forget my passion, my emotions. Follow the logic."

Dr. Hamid says the Islamic world did not condemn bin Laden for masterminding 9/11.

"Not one single *fatwah* (religious ruling) was issued against bin Laden. Ihave never heard of one. Have you? Yet 24 hours after the publication of Salman Rushdie's book *The Satanic Verses*, there was a *fatwah* to kill Rushdie."

In the wake of 9/11, many Muslims expressed their sorrow on American TV.

Some were genuine, Dr. Hamid says.

However, the majority were sending their approval to the terrorists via the media by not mentioning bin Laden's name.

His narrowing brow warns me I'm not going to like what I hear.

"Listen closely. Let's imagine that I, Dr. Tawfik Hamid, commit a terrorist act. The media invites another Muslim to appear on TV and talk about what Idid. This person says, 'Islam is against terrorism. Islam is against violence.' But he does not say my name. Iget the message. By not mentioning my name, he is telling me to do it again. It's like a hidden language in our culture. I know Iam being given the justification to act."

He notices a disbelieving shadow creep across my face.

"You are very naive," he tells me.

Dr. Hamid, who will speak at a lecture hosted by DU's Institute for the Study of Israel in the Middle East later that day, covers fascinating, and disturbing, territory during the hour-long interview.

- A few years before 9/11, Dr. Hamid predicted tall buildings in New York would be "brought down to ground" by Islamic terrorists.

- Mohamed is "just a human being in the Koran. Nothing more than this. But the Muslims have elevated Mohamed because he can intercede on their behalf when they come before Allah for judgement."

- While portions of the Koran can be interpreted as anti-Semitic, the vast majority of anti-Semitism arises from the Sulafi teachings. He points to several Koranic verses, first reciting in Arabic, then translating: "Children of Israel, remember the gifts I have given you and that Ihave prepared for you above all mankind"; "I have chosen the Jews above all mankind"; "I have made you guiding lights to the world"; "The land I have given you is written as a permanent contract, a permanent inheritance."

Near the conclusion of our talk, Iraise two more questions.

If I walk past two Muslims and they notice my Star of David, should I assume they hate me because I am Jewish?

"Certainly," he responds without the slightest pause. "I'm sorry to say this, but certainly."

He quickly reconsiders.

"No. That was an unscientific answer. I would say, 'Most likely.' Ask the Muslim children here what they think of Jews. You will see, Andrea."

With the publication of *The Roots of Jihad *and subsequent speaking engagements to large audiences throughout the US, does he fear for his life?

"Yes. But I feel obligated to expose the truth. Iam morally obligated to help Muslims understand the Koran in a peaceful manner. Enabling Muslims to live in harmony with the rest of the world is far more important to me than my life. I always say that in certain times in history, there are people who stand against evil. Iam honored to be among them."

Contents

Predicted British Attacks
Sunday Express (p4-5)
17th July 2005

Britain will be hit by a chemical attack next time. London was nothing. By Julia Hartley-Brewer Political Editor

The majority of Muslims are "passive terrorists" who secretly condone terror attacks on the West, an Islamic scholar has warned.

Muslim born Tawfiq Hamid - who has had close links with Al Qaeda's top brass and predicted the attacks on New York, Madrid and London - warned of worse to come in Britain. And he called on the Government to act against the "cancer" of extremists hiding within the Muslim community.

The scholar, who has been forced to conceal his real identity after death threats from Islamic fundamentalists, says he was schooled in radicalism and indoctrinated into terrorism as a young man before escaping to the West.

Born in Egypt, he once prayed alongside Al Qaeda's leaders, including Osama Bin Laden's deputy Ayman Al Zawahari.

He has warned: "There will be future terror attacks on Britain and they will make Thursday's bombings in London look like nothing. I expect a major crisis in the next few years. I expect a major chemical attack on the water supply or on food in Britain.

He said the failure of Western governments to act against the growing radicalism had allowed it to flourish. "This is like someone with cancer pretending they don't have it" he said. "They ignore it but it will just grow and grow and eventually it will kill them."

Hamid, author of "The Real Roots of Islamic Violence, has founded an Islamic movement promoting peace, but said tackling fundamentalism will fail unless the teachings of Islam change. He said "I believe that the majority of the Muslim population are passive terrorists. The Western world classifies people into religious fanatics and moderates. In Islam the distinction is non-religious and religious.

"Among the religious, very few are active terrorists committing terrorist acts, but unfortunately the vast majority are passive terrorists. In their hearts and minds they support terrorist acts against the West and they have a symbiotic relationship with the active terrorists

The imams condemn terrorism and behave well in public to protect themselves from revenge attacks but they continue to preach what they really think in their mosques. The people who come in front of the media cameras and the Government are the same people who are praying for Bin Laden in their mosques.

He added: "There will be no more than one per cent of Muslims who are active terrorists, but that is still a huge number of people. Western governments will not be able to solve this on their own. They will fail because they cannot understand the mentality behind the extremism.

"There is no use in giving concessions. The more you concede, the more generous you are, the more it is seen a weakness and they will attack you again to get more concessions. The UK has been harbouring barbarians and allowing them to speak out in public. The problem needs to be solved from within by reformists as well as from without."

Hamid has first-hand experience of Al Qaedas's fundamentalist teachings, having prayed alongside Bin Laden's right hand man for a year after he joined Jamaha Islameia, the Islamic group run by Al zawahari in Cairo. He has also met with Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who faced protests when he visited London at the invitation of Mayor Ken Livingstone after supporting Palestinian suicide bombers in Israel.

He said "Violence is a fundamental part of Islamic teaching. In Islam, the books themselves preach violence against non-Muslims. It is an ideological war against the West to force you into subjugation before Islam. We love in the dark ages.

"They brainwash you the moment you enter the mosque as a child. Every Muslim child is brought up with the idea that followers of Islam are superior; of Islam conquering the world. "It is easy to say Islam is the religion of peace, but the reality is actually the opposite. For the majority of Muslims, every terrorist act is a small victory against the West. They dream about being victorious against the infidels. So they become silent and that silence means approval. Unfortunately, such hatred of non-Muslims is generated by the Islamic religion itself against those who do not follow it, irrespective of their deeds."

And he added: "The only way to make Muslims satisfied with the West is for Westerners to submit to an Islamic or Taliban-like system, stop their freedom, and suppress women.

Contents

What Makes A Terrorist
Sunday Express (p4-5)
17th July 2005

What makes a terrorist? Exploring extremist thought
By Amy Ellis Nutt, staff writer for The Star-Ledger of Newark, N.J.

Religion News Service

Tawfik Hamid stood with 200 other students for afternoon prayers inside a mosque at the University of Cairo.

It was important for them to stand with their feet touching, as the Qur'an teaches, so that even in prayer they were prepared for war: "Truly Allah loves those who fight in his cause . . . as if they were a solid cemented structure."

The mosque was the religious home of a burgeoning radical Islamic movement, Al-Gama Al-Islamiyya.

After prayers that day in 1978, Mr. Hamid stepped into the courtyard and saw a slightly older, bearded man who was deep in thought. It was Ayman al-Zawahiri, future confidant of Osama bin Laden and an architect of the attacks on the USS Cole, the Pentagon and the World Trade Center.

"Tawfik is a new member of Al-Gama Al-Islamiyya," a friend of Mr. Hamid's said, by way of introduction.

Zawahiri looked at Mr. Hamid and spoke: "The future of Islam is dependent on you young Muslims." Mr. Hamid, who believed in the Salafi, or literal, reading of the Islamic texts, surged with pride. He felt he had been chosen for a special task, just as it states in the Qur'an: "Slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them."

What turns an otherwise ordinary human into a terrorist? It is a question that has puzzled the world with a special urgency since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Now the scientific community is close to providing some answers. Social-cognitive neuroscientists are using technologies that normally detect illnesses to better understand the behavior and motivation of terrorists. Mathematicians and computer scientists are looking at models like game theory and network analysis to understand the formation of terrorist cells.

While the government received failing grades in December from the Sept. 11 commission for not adequately responding to security concerns, academic institutions are providing a road map to a safer world.

Consider these advances: high-tech cognitive detection sensors that literally can look into the brain to uncover malevolence, computer modeling of terrorist behavior and the development of mathematical indexes to disrupt terrorist networks.

At the core of this scientific inquiry, however, is the terrorist himself.

Mr. Hamid was a member of Al-Gama Al-Islamiyya for less than a year. Yet the emotional power of group identification and the quick slide into thoughts of violence and martyrdom are a testament to what most social scientists now believe -- that it is easy for an ordinary, educated man to be swayed by extreme ideology.

Today, Mr. Hamid is a 44-year-old psychologist, married, with children, and he no longer lives in the Mideast. Because he has renounced the Islamism of his former mentor, he prefers not to reveal where he lives. Several years ago, he changed his name to protect his family.

He says it is difficult to explain how he broke away from the radical group he joined in college.

Mr. Hamid said his intellectual curiosity and his abiding belief in the sanctity of life eventually led him to reject extremism, but how he could have contemplated murder, even suicide, in the name of jihad still haunts him.

Defining the unthinkable -- removing the veil from the militant mind -- is what cognitive researchers now are doing. Success lies in their ability to manipulate medical technologies in locating the neural roots of emotion, behavior and belief.

Using sophisticated brain scanners, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography that measure blood flow in the brain, scientists can watch the mind in motion.

Functional neuroimaging has identified the involvement of the amygdala (pronounced ah-MIG-duh-lah), a walnut-sized bulge in the brain's medial temporal lobe, in the processing of emotions about groups. Because the amygdala also is the center of emotional learning, scientists believe it plays an important role in the creation of bias.

Anger creates bias

Last year, researchers at Northeastern University in Boston and the University of Massachusetts-Amherst published a paper in the journal Psychological Science titled "Prejudice From Thin Air." In their experiments, subjects randomly were assigned to "in-groups" and "out-groups" ("us" versus "them") and tested for automatic attitudes by measuring the speed with which they classified a picture as being part of one group or the other.

Participants also were asked to recall specific emotional memories, times when something made them angry, sad or neutral. Subjects did not express bias when they were in sad or neutral states, but did register prejudice against the out-group when their responses were coupled with anger memories.

Anger, in other words, created an automatic bias where previously there was none.

The amygdala is linked to the more recently evolved part of the brain called the prefrontal cortex, located just behind the forehead. It is here that habits of mind -- along with sense of self and sense of others -- originate.

Jordan Grafman, chief of the cognitive neuroscience section at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke in Bethesda, Md., has shown how easy it is to turn off the "socialized" part of the brain in normal subjects.

Four years ago, Dr. Grafman asked volunteers, after they were placed in the doughnut-shaped PET scanner, to imagine three scenes, all involving their mothers being attacked in an elevator. In the first, the subject imagines doing nothing. In the second, the subject fights the attackers, but loses and is physically restrained. In the third, the subject attempts to either injure or kill the men.

The PET scans revealed that when the subjects imagined the two aggressive scenarios, there was a significant decrease in blood flow to their orbitofrontal cortex, the center of a person's beliefs and motivations. The empathic part of their brains had been deactivated.

"There's no doubt that even if you just fantasize a lot about violent activity, your brain gets better at shutting down the part that holds onto social rules and empathy," said Dr. Grafman.

This was what energized and eventually frightened Mr. Hamid, and it still puzzles him.

"I felt evil -- thinking of killing non-Muslims, of raping their wives -- because all of it was justified in the books I was reading. Hatred developed gradually. I became very extremist. I became fanatical."

Katherine Taylor, a physiologist at Oxford University, has studied how repetition and reinforcement of extreme ideas shape the brain. She calls the neural pathways or cognitive networks created by thoughts "cogwebs."

"The idea behind the cogweb," said Ms. Taylor, also the author of a book on brainwashing, "is the more something is repeated, and the stronger the emotions associated with it, the stronger that cogweb becomes. And as those connections get stronger, the more likely it is that there will be a quick step through to the action phase. . . . And that, of course, is what an ideologue is aiming for."

With scientists now able to locate and study prejudice and aggression in action, the technology of detection -- being able to pick people out of a crowd who have malevolence on their minds -- has become an experimental, if controversial, idea.

The Department of Homeland Security and other agencies are funding development of "noninvasive neurologic sensors" and airline-passenger screening technologies.

Other programs are focused on automated detection of deceptive intent. In August, Rutgers University's Center for Computational Biomedicine, Imaging and Modeling, along with scientists at Lockheed Martin, received $3.5 million from the Department of Homeland Security to develop a new kind of lie detector.

Dimitris Metaxas, director of the Rutgers center, aims to develop a camera-assisted computer program that can analyze a person's subtle nonverbal cues and correlate them with an intention to deceive.

'Pre-lie' detection

Peter Rosenfeld, principal member of the engineering staff at Lockheed Martin's Advanced Technology Laboratories in Cherry Hill, N.J., is working on the visual component.

"What we want is a kind of scanner that can take a 3-D image of the head -- and by applying a virtual mask to the person's face, we can read his eyebrow positions, the lines in his face, his eye movements," Mr. Rosenfeld said. "They can be correlated to a person's psychological state. Basically, it's a simple portable device to quickly see if a person is lying."

Britton Chance has taken deception screening one step further. He believes his remote brain sensor has the potential to identify people planning acts of violence.

The 92-year-old University of Pennsylvania bioengineer is developing a kind of high-tech "pre-lie" detector that he said could one day screen for terrorists at airports.

Dr. Chance's "cognosensor" also is being tested as a remote device, with the machine emitting a concentrated light beam targeted at the orbitofrontal cortex. With funding in part from the federal government, Dr. Chance said he has been able to detect lying in volunteer subjects.

"It's not the emotional stress of having made a decision (what a conventional lie detector measures), but about what goes on in the decision making," he said. "We detect signals in the forebrain right before a decision is made. Because we are not fully in control of our own brain, it would tell me this person is having trouble deciding to tell the truth."

The potential application to homeland security and airport screening is obvious to Dr. Chance, who acknowledges the considerable ethical and legal hurdles. "If it was commercially available," he said, "we could decide if a person waiting for a plane is contemplating violence or malevolence."

While social-cognitive neuroscientists are peering into the militant mind, other researchers have moved further up the terrorist evolutionary scale to understand what happens after recruits join terrorist cells. Before Sept. 11, 2001, this was something Valdis Krebs could not have dreamed he'd be doing.

An expert in social network analysis, Mr. Krebs, who works from his home in Westlake, Ohio, usually spends his days consulting with Fortune 500 companies about how they can improve the flow of information among their personnel.

That all changed on the morning of 9/11 when Mr. Krebs and his wife heard the grinding roar of a westbound jet banking hard and turning back to the east. They both sprinted into the backyard but never saw the plane that eventually went down in a field in Pennsylvania. That day, Mr. Krebs heard the words "terrorist network" for the first time.

Soon he was using his expertise to try to understand exactly what the term meant. He began by combing through newspapers and reading the Web. Every time he stumbled on a new piece of information about the 19 suicide terrorists, he entered it into his computer, processing it through network-analyzing software called InFlow, which he had invented a decade earlier.

Six weeks after the attacks, Mr. Krebs knew that if the federal government had been using InFlow in 2000 and 2001 to track just a few of the 19 hijackers, it might have prevented the attacks.

His insights draw on social-network analysis -- a combination of mathematics, computer science and anthropology used mainly to examine business efficiency. The study of complex systems has become an important tool in the war on terrorism only in the past two years because of major advances in computing power.

Government investigators primarily work top-down, seeking terrorists by obtaining personal details about a vast pool of people to pick out those who might pose a threat.

Mr. Krebs believes this approach to data analysis produces too many false positives. Instead, he uses a bottom-up approach, building knowledge by "snowballing" the data -- starting with the most likely members of a terrorist cell and letting each new bit of information lead to a clearer view of the network.

Just days after the Sept. 11 attacks, Mr. Krebs typed three names into his database: Mustafa Ahmed al-Hawsawi, the mission's paymaster; Mohamed Atta, its ringleader; and Nabil al-Marabh, another financier.

Using InFlow, Mr. Krebs connected the dots. The program weighed the importance and frequency of the links between the terrorists. Strong ties, such as living in the same apartment and communicating frequently, were assigned more importance.

Social networks

Mr. Krebs eventually made a startling conclusion: "Back in the year 2000, we knew two of those guys, Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhamzi. . . . In 2001, when someone said we have to find these guys, they couldn't. If someone had had this map, they could have found them in a day."

Kathleen Carley looks at social networks as dynamic relationships that change over time. When two people interact, the network changes, and sometimes small-scale events result in large-scale effects.

The promise of dynamic network analysis lies in its ability to identify emerging threats, which is why Dr. Carley, director of the Center for Computational Analysis of Social and Organizational Systems at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, constantly runs network scenarios through her computer.

Like Mr. Krebs, Dr. Carley begins each analysis by collecting data from publicly available sources. She uses a text-mining tool called "Auto Map," which looks through newspapers, documents and Web pages (100,000 a day) to identify relationships.

Last year, Dr. Carley ran such a scenario to see what her software would predict if Sheik Ahmed Yassin, the spiritual leader of the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, were assassinated. Its answer: Abdel Aziz Rantisi would rise to power and temporarily strengthen Hamas.

Two weeks later, when Israeli missiles killed the sheik, Rantisi took over, briefly revitalizing the militant group.

Mr. Hamid, who now practices a nonviolent form of Islam and believes the Qur'an has been distorted by the jihadis, decided to begin with a simple act.

Before leaving college, he carried two boxes of books -- all espousing jihad -- into his yard. He poured gasoline over the pile and set it on fire.

A healed mind, he felt, could rise only from the ashes of hate. While he watched the blaze, he remembered reading the Bible on his own in high school, and the words that had so moved him.

"Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.
"Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God."

Contents

Reformation of Islam; the challenges and the future
By Dr. Tawfik Hamid

Does Islam need reformation? Why didn’t it take place in the past as happened in other religions?

This article will focus on the following issues:

1- Various Styles of Islamic thinking process
2- Why violent understanding of Islam succeeded to dominate in the last few decades.
3- The challenges of Reformation in Islam
4- The concept of “Relative Fundamentalism”.
5- How could Islam be reformed and the “Relativity of the Quran”
6- Recommendations to Western governments

Different styles of Islamic teaching

Traditionally, there are 3 main groups in Islamic accepted view; The Salafi, the Sufi, and what the west considers secular Islam.

Salafi Islam

Salafi Islam is a fundamentalist view that follows the traditional Islamic books literally. The word Salafi is derived from the word “Salaf” meaning “predecessors”. Those predecessors are, in the view of the currant Salafists, the Muslims who dominated the world in the past because they applied Islam correctly and strictly.

Salafists believe in applying the Shariia law strictly, gaining control over the world (Islamic Chelapha), and subjugating non-Muslims to Islam. This view is based on traditional interpretation of certain religious texts (see below) that order Muslims to declare war on non-Muslims until they become subjugated to Islam.

“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger (Mohammed), nor acknowledge the religion of Truth (Islam), [even if they are] of the People of the Book (Christians and Jews), until they pay the Jizia (Humiliation Tax) with submission, and feel themselves subdued.” Quran {9: 29}

“Prophet Mohammed had said, “I have been ordered by Allah to fight and kill all people (non-Muslims) until they say, “No God except Allah”.” ( Hadith: Bukhari: Volume 4 Book 52 Number 196 Narrated by Ibn Omar, Hadith Sahih by AlBuckary and Muslim).

The Islamic Shariia is a system that allows some of the following: killing the apostates, beating women, calling Jews pigs and monkeys, declaring wars to subjugate others to Islam, enslaving female war prisoners and raping them, fighting Jews and killing all of them before the end days, and killing gays.

Anyone that does not implement these rules is considered Infidel. That view is based on the following verse:

Those who do not judge with Allah’s law are Infidels. “( Quran 5:44) Accordingly, some Salafists developed a concept called “Al Takfeer wal Istihlal”; if a person does not apply strictly Salafi Islamic principles he could be considered an “Infidel” and thus it is allowed to kill and confiscate his possessions. This concept is based on a Hadith prescribing that even Muslims who do not pray the traditional Muslims prayers regularly deserve the same punishments as infidels.

According to Ibn Abbas, Prophet Mohammed had said: “The most essential fundamentals of Islam are three. If someone did not do any of them he should be considered an Infidel and his blood is Halal (This means any Muslim is encouraged to kill him; shedding such a person’s blood is considered a great deed in Islam.) These three foundations are: Saying no God except Allah and Mohammed is the prophet of Allah, praying the five prayers (every day), and fasting of Ramadan”: (The holy month for Muslims). [By Abu Yaali with Good narration - Fikh allsunna: Prayer chapter).

Salafi system is the ideology behind the Wahabbi movement in Saudi Arabia. This philosophy is exemplified in the Saudi flag, which illustrates the sword and the phrase implying conversion to Islam. It proofs one of the basic principles of Salafism which is to use the sword to subjugate others to Islam. Salafi teaching is the principal teaching currently taught in most mosques, Islamic schools and Universities. It can manifest in different forms and can contribute to the development of certain violent behaviours such as:

● Lack of women rights; accepting polygamy, beating women

● Intolerance to other belief systems, e.g., preventing building of churches, temples or other houses of worshipping in Saudi Arabia, destruction of the Buddha Temples by the Taliban, insulting Jews in Mosques; calling them Pigs and Monkeys

● Violent acts: Violent demonstrations and killing Christians in Nigeria as a protest against an implicit comment - against Islam by beauty queens (Year 2002).

Murdering reformers of Islam such as Dr. Farag Fouda in Egypt in June 8 1992 after issuing a fatwa of apostasy on him, murdering Dr. Rashad Khalifa in the US in On January 31, 1990 (Khalifa was stabbed to death at his Tucson, Arizona mosque), and killing Mohamed Taha in 1985 in Sudan. Terrorist attacks: Sep the 11th, 7/7/ attack in London, Madrid attack in Spain, and other Islamist terror attacks in various parts of the world.

● Inability to tolerate criticism: such as the violent reaction following the Cartoons of Mohamed publication by a Danish Magazine or the fierce reaction following the comments on Islam by Pope Benedict the 16th.

Salafi belief can remain dormant until Muslims become powerful enough to implement Sharia Law. This is typically called “Tikkia” in traditional Islamic teaching. Most of the current Islamic organizations such as Al-Queda, Al-Jihad, Islamic Brotherhood and Hamas follow the Salafi ideology. The difference between these groups is mainly in the tactic rather than the strategic goal; to implement Sharia law and subjugate Non-Muslims to Islam as second class citizens. Al-Qaeda developed a system of attacking the West or Christians and Jews, while Al-Jihad used political assassinations against their opponents such as Anwar Al-Sadat in Egypt. Salafi Islamic groups in Algeria adopted a system of murdering innocent families and children. Islamic brotherhood group in Egypt uses planning and political tactics (the latter may involve political assassinations such as murder of the Prime Minster of Egypt in 1948).

The Muslim Brotherhood group flag illustrates the philosophy as well. It illustrates two swords and Arabic word beneath them; Wa-Aiidu; to “prepare” for them. It is linked to the following verse: “prepare for them (The Infidels) whatever military power you have so that you insert fear in the hearts of the enemies of Allah. Quran 8:60

Salafism can occasionally manifest through unexpected fatal- religious based violence by an individual. It is exemplified by the murder of an innocent Jew in Seattle US by a Muslim who surprisingly developed what Dr. Daniel Pipes call; “Sudden Jihad Syndrome”.

The unembellished Salafists thinking can create hard-hearted individuals who accept ruthless ideology that suppresses their human conscience while feeling that they are fine Muslims since they apply the will of Allah. This acute way of thinking can arise also in other religions. However, unlike other religions, the problem Islam currently faces is that the Salafi teaching which accepts violence is the predominant one in most Islamic institutions. Moreover, Islamic related violence can develop at a much greater scale; on a national level, such as the case of the Iranian nuclear threat.

Some argue that calls for violence appear in the Bible as well. Yet, there is a vast difference. The biblical text orders to fight or destroy specific groups of people in a particular territory at a precise time in history, often in response to misdeeds or unprovoked military attacks. Traditional Salafi Islamic text, on the other hand, promotes fighting and murdering people solely based on their belief at all times everywhere. The former took place in the past history for particular reasons, yet the latter embrace an ideology that continuously pose a threat to our world unless the texts can be re-interpret. There is a difference between fighting with the Amaleek in Biblical times because of their violent acts and following of Salafi Islamic teaching that is implied to be practiced today and in the future: Prophet Mohammed had said, “I have been ordered by Allah to fight and kill all people (non-Muslims) until they say, “No God except Allah”. (Hadith: Bukhari: Volume 4 Book 52 Number 196 Narrated by Ibn Omar,Hadith Sahih by AlBuckary and Muslim).This Hadith explains why Dr. Aiman AL-Zawaheri, second in command of Al-Qaeda, stated that only when the US subjugate to Islam the Jihadists will stop launching their attacks against it.

The proliferation of Salafi teaching among Muslim societies has resulted in uncivilized acts throughout the world and has been initiating a serious friction between societies.

Sufi Islam

Sufi teaching holds relatively peaceful approach to Islam. It typically considers Jihad as an internal struggle against the individual’s evil inclinations. This is quite the opposite from the traditional Salafi understanding of Jihad; declaring wars on the Infidels to spread or subjugate them to Islam. There is no clear statistical number of Sufists but they are certainly in the millions. Also, many Muslims share elements of Sufism and Salafism simultaneously which makes it difficult to estimate the correct number of Sufi Muslims.

Generally, Sufi Muslims visit shrines and ask for blessing from the deceased righteous people whom they call “Awleiiaa Allah Al-Saleheen” or the Righteous People of Allah.

The following Sufi poem can illustrate the tolerance concept within Sufism.

O Marvel! A garden amidst the flames.
My heart has become capable of every form:
It is a pasture for gazelles and a convent for Christian monks,
and a temple for idols and the pilgrim's Kaa'ba,
and the tables of the Torah and the book of the Quran.
I follow the religion of Love: whatever way Love's camels take, that is my religion and my faith. (Ibn al-`Arabi, Tarjuman al-Ashwaq, in The Mystics of Islam, translated by Reynold A Nicholson)

This poem was written by Muhammed Ibn 'Ali Ibn 'Arabi (1165 - 1240 AD) known as Muhyiddin (the Reviver of Religion) and the Shaykh al-Akbar (the Greatest Master), who was born into the Moorish culture of Andalusian Spain and traveled widely throughout the Islamic countries. When Sufi philosophy had been relatively dominant in several parts of the Islamic world in the early to mid of the 20th centaury, tolerance of Non-Muslims was widespread; however it changed when Saudi Arabia which applies strict Salafi ideology, became wealthy in the 1970s and, in turn, has given a strong support to Salafism which spread throughout the Muslim world. That brought with it religious intolerance, hatred, and violence toward followers of others faiths

The main setback of Sufi Islam is that it does not have as a strong traditional theological based Islamic text as Salafi Islam has. Sufi belief system relies on the individual’s spiritual condition rather than the literal understanding of the text. Consequently the major concern is that Salafi teaching is the one practiced currently in the Islamic education system in nearly all-if not all- recognized Islamic schools, mosques, and Universities.

Secular Islam

Secular Islam is an expression predominantly used in the West to describe what is perceived as liberal Muslims.

Generally, Secular Muslims apply various elements of the Muslim culture rather than following a text based belief system. Seculars may apply the moral codes of the religion rather than following literal text. They have also been influenced by their surrounding cultures such as the Judeo Christian traditions in the Middle East or the Hindu and Buddhist cultures in parts of Asia. In areas such as Egypt, polygamy had not been accepted or practiced compared to Saudi Arabia where the strict literal Salafi Islam is applied. This is partially because the Egyptian Muslims had been living side by side with Jews and Christians who do not practice polygamy.

Finally, there are also Muslims who do not fit typically in any of the previously mentioned Muslim categories, since they represent a variable mix of all combined groups. Some may put-on a moderate façade, while the Salafi elements influencing their mind could be predominantly effective.

Relative Fundamentalism

Another central issue is what I call ‘ Relative Fundamentalism’.

Currently, what people perceive a Jewish fundamentalist is an observant Jew who follows strictly Jewish religious laws. A Christian fundamentalist is one who understands the Bible literally and might express anger or demonstrate against people who violate biblical commands such as gay marriage, but normally would not apply violence, specifically murder to implement his belief. Furthermore, although Christians have occasionally exhibited religion linked violence, characteristically the New Testament does not advocate violent behaviour.

In contrast, a Muslim fundamentalist can take pleasure in burning a church or killing Non-Muslims, or applaud such acts, to feel the glory and power of Islam. A statistical study to compare between the number of violent acts conducted by fundamentalist Jews, Christians, or followers of other faiths and those linked to Muslims in the last few decades, can show that while Muslims are only 20 percent of the world population the number of violent acts conducted by them exceeds by far the number of such acts conducted by people of other faiths. Therefore the word Fundamentalism must be redefined.

Difficulties facing reformation in the Islamic world

The Salafists have established a system that suppresses any attempt for proper reformation. They use the concept of Hell Fire for warning people against defying change of the well known fundamental Islamic teachings. Those who try to alter those teachings are declared Infidels (Kafereen) who will be tortured in hell forever. This unmitigated intimidation has paralysed the thinking process in the Islamic religion where Muslims are afraid to challenge the violent aspect of Salafi teachings.

The following verses illustrate the hell fire description in Islamic texts which terrifies Muslims: (note: those verses are taught in Salafi tradition in a literal rather than figurative fashion):

“…how unhappy those of the left hand. They will be in the scorching hot wind and boiling water, under the shadow of thick black smoke, neither cool nor agreeable. …They will be gathered together on a certain day which is predetermined. Then you, the erring and the deniers will eat Zaqqoom [a thorn tree]. Fill your bellies with it, and drink scalding water, lapping it up like female camels raging of thirst and diseased. Such will be their entertainment, their welcome on the Day of Doom…the welcome of boiling water and the entertainment of roasting in Hell. This is the ultimate truth." (Qur'an 56:41)

"We have prepared the doom of Hell and the penalty of torment in the most intense Blazing Fire. For those who reject their Lord is the punishment of Hell: Evil, it is such a wretched destination. When they are flung therein, they will hear the terrible drawing in of their breath and loud moaning even as the flame blazes forth, roaring with rage as it boils up, bursting with fury. Every time a fresh crowd is cast in, Hell's wardens will ask, ‘did no Warner come to you?'" (Qur'an 67:7)

“These two contrary kinds of man have become engrossed in contention about their G-d! But as for those who are bent on denying the truth garments of fire shall be cut out for them [in the life to come]; burning despair will be poured over their heads causing all that is within their bodies, as well as the skins, to melt away and every time they try in their anguish to come out of it, they shall be returned there to and [be told]: “Taste suffering through fire [to the full]!’’ {Quran 22:19-22}

The second mechanism Salafists use to suppress reformation is threatening reformers by Redda Law; a component of Islamic Shariia law which justifies killing a Muslim who converted or one who changes any of its well known and accepted schooling; “Maaloom Mina Al-deen Bildarura”.

Salafists also teach that the violent Islamic texts are fundamental to the religion which makes many Muslims feel that the religion might disintegrate by reformation; viewing the religion as a house of cards that can collapse by transforming it, guarantees to Salafists that resistance for reformation will be an autonomous process. Therefore, reformers and their families can be boycotted by the local Muslim community who might view them as enemies of Islam and their life can be endangered as happened to me when my local Muslim community in the west boycotted and threatened me.

Another tactic the Salafists use is deterring people from following the viewpoints of Sufi or Secular Muslims.

While Sufi Muslims visit shrines and ask the dead for blessings or help, Salafists consider them Infidels or Idolaters based on the verse: “ … - whereas those whom you invoke instead of Him do not own so much as the husk of a date-stone! If you invoke them, they do not hear your call; and even if they could hear, they would not [be able to] respond to you. And [withal,] on the Day of Resurrection they will utterly disown your having associated them with God. And none can make thee understand [the truth] like the One who is all-aware. “(Qur’an 35:13- 14)

Salafists are also hostile to secular Muslims whom they consider infidels based on the verse: “….those who do not judge with Allah’s law are Infidels (or Idolatries).” (Qur’an5:44)

The use of the above two verses by Salafists has deterred many young Muslims from following Sufi or Secular path. Accordingly, for many Muslims the Salafi teachings have become the only accepted version of Islam.

Challenges that face Reformation of Islam

The challenges that currently face Reformation of Islam can be classified into three levels.

1- Information level
2- Transmission level
3- Perception level

At the Information Level, the main problem is lack of a theologically based peaceful Islam. Unlike Salafi, both Sufi and Secular Islam are weak in their theological foundation. Example; if a young Muslim came across the following Quranic verse “…slay the Idolatries (Infidels) wherever you may come upon them…” (Qur’an 9:5) and asked three different Muslims; Salafi- Sufi- and Secular to interpret it; the Salafi may use ample amount of authorized Islamic textbooks that justify fighting Non-Muslims because they are “Infidels”.

The Sufi can state “just love everybody and be kind to all mankind”….if the person persists; “But the verse is commanding me to fight Non-Muslims wherever I find them…” the Sufi clergy might reply “You will understand the significance of the verse in the day of Judgment…. Allah wants you to love everyone”.

The secular Muslim may respond: “I do not understand much about the Religion. My understanding of Islam is that it is a religion of Peace."

Since the Sufi and the secular lack powerful theological base, the young Muslim would most likely be attracted to the Salafi clergy given that Salafi would be the only one that can support his view with theologically based text.

Personally, I went through those experiences. I joined a Salafi Islamic group, used to pray in a nearby Mosque where the Mullah; Sheck Shaaban was a Sufi. Yet, my father was secular.

Additionally, Salafi clergy would defend the current violent practices by claiming that the Quranic verses that call for tolerance had been abrogated by later violent ones, which is based on the concept of “Al-Nashech Wa Al-Mansuch”.

Second challenge for reformation is at the “Transmission Level”. Even if a reformer has a peaceful theological bases interpretation, which is a possibility, the reformer would be accused by the religious authority of being ‘apostate’. Hence, the reformer’s transmission of the information could be impeded by physical threats.

The third obstacle is at the “Perception Level”. Many Muslim communities consider new approach which contradicts the traditional theologically based ones, as a cause for the religion to disintegrate. Consequently, they would resist the change for fear of going to hell. This challenge was apparent when the US government funded programs to win the heart and minds of Muslims. Those programs were not successful. They provided the information through the media, but it hasn’t been sufficient since there has been perceptual resistance at the receiver end of the information. One can use the finest technological tools to advance the information, but it will fail to produce an effect if the receiver’s radio is not working.

Without addressing the perception issue in the Muslims’ mind, attempts to make a change in the Islamic world can not succeed.

Is Islam reformable?

I believe that Islam is reformable and could be understood in a theologically based- peaceful demeanour.

The following examples can illustrate the point.

1- The use of definite prefix “Al” or “the” in the Qu’ran.
2- Treatment of the Jews in the Qur’an
3- Could Human Rights be accepted by Islam

Applying two Arabic letters [ ﺃ (A) & ﻝ (L) ) in understanding the Qur’an need to be used properly.

This definite particle “The” (two letters AL) can create significant distinction in the interpretation of many –if not all- violent texts. Example; “Kill Mn Kafar” means that one has to fight and kill every infidel (Non-Muslims). On the other hand, “Al-Kafreen” means allowing fighting a particular group of Infidels (only those who declare war on you) and not any Infidel.

Generally, the Qur’an never used the prefix “Mn” in the concept of wars against Infidels but used the definite particle “The” instead. This can limit the understanding of violent verses in the context of their historical period and not to the present times.

The following verse: “…slay the Infidels wherever you may come upon them…” (Qur’an 9:5) A young Muslim who interprets the verse without considering the definite suffix ‘the’ may join a Jihadists organization. Nevertheless if he understood the same verse while considering the use of the particle “the” he may then read it only in its historical context.

As an ex Jihadist and extremist I was indoctrinated to fight all Infidels based on these sorts of verses. If I would have been taught to consider the prefix “the”, it most probably could change my understanding of the text. This vital adjustment which could literally either end or save human life is not available in any approved Tafseer (explanation) of the Qur’an. I believe that if Islamic terrorist leaders like Dr. Al-Zawaheri or Bin Laden would have been taught Islam, using the above option, they may not have declared war on Non-Muslims and perhaps the phenomenon of Islamic terrorism would not exist.

Two letters can make a considerable difference.

Another important example is the issue of Jews and Israel.

Many Muslim scholars / clergy promote that Jews are pigs and monkeys and that Muslims have to kill every Jew before the end days. This form of guidance has become a genuine obstacle to true peace between Arabs and Israel. It is unlikely that an Arab child who had been brain washed with this type of hatred be able to live in harmony with Jews in the future.

The above anti-Semitic teaching is based on the following religious text: "Shall I point out to you something much worse than this by the treatment it received from Allah (The Jews), those who incurred the curse of Allah and His wrath, those of whom some He transformed into monkeys and pigs, those who worshipped evil - these are (many times) worse in rank, and far more astray from the even path!" Qur’an 5:60.

Hadith Sahih (accurate) in Al-Buchary: "The Hour will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews (and the Muslims will kill them), until the Jews hide behind the trees and rocks and the trees and rocks will say, "O Muslim, 0 Servant of God, Here are the Jews, Come and kill them!"; relying exclusively on the Quran rather than books like Al-Buchary; a fundamental book used in Salafi teaching, the concept to kill every Jew can be eliminated since it has not been mentioned in the Quran.

In addition, Muslim scholars added the word ‘Jews’ in brackets to the Quranic verse (above) or to their Tafseer (explanations) to promote disrespect and hatred of Jews. The original Quranic verse in Arabic does not contain the word Jews. Careful analysis of this verse without adding the word ‘Jews’ to it, can yield an entirely different understanding that would not insult the Jewish nation. In fact, Islamic scholars further intensify the hatred by adding words in brackets to limit the “Praising of the children of Israel” to the past. (It is available in the Quran in several verses)

“Children of Israel! Call to mind the favour which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all other nations.” (Qur’an 2:47)

In recent translations of the Qur’an such as the version distributed by Saudi Arabia freely through scores of Mosques all over the world, they added in brackets “of your time period, in the past” so the verse is written in their translation as follows; “Children of Israel! Call to mind the favour which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all other nations (of your time period, in the past)”

Those changes to distort positive expressions about Jews in the Quran have now become the common rule in most of the approved translations or Tafseers (explanations). Muslim scholars added the word (“Jews”) to the verse related to “pigs and Monkeys” to refer to all Jews, while they added the phrase “of your time period, in the past” to remove the praising of the Children of Israel as mentioned in several verses in the Qur’an. This typical Salafi approach has fuelled in modern history strong anti Semitism in the Islamic world to an unprecedented level.

The third example that further illustrates how Islam could be reformed is the issue of Human-Rights.

Salafi Scholars teach that Religious Rights, Women Rights, and Gay Rights are Non Islamic since Islam promotes killing those who convert from Islam, allows beating women and Polygamy, and supports killing gays. When I was a member of Jammaa Islameia (JI) with Dr. Al-Zawaheri, we hated the west mainly because of its civil liberties which we felt are un-Islamic and contradict the fundamental tenets of Shariia law.

Looking at the Quran from a different angle can reveal a new understanding that can make the Qur’an compatible with human rights and provide the Quranic validation for Muslims to follow them.

The Qur’an stated clearly: “Hold to forgiveness; and command Muslims to follow the “Urf” - which is commonly accepted among mankind.” (Qur’an 2:47) According to this verse Muslims are instructed to follow what is commonly acceptable among enlightened people. This could be applied to accommodating to civil rights as the official law, commonly accepted. Using this interpretation means that Muslims accept freedom to convert from Islam, women rights, gay rights and discount violence.

Some Muslims feel uncomfortable with the concept of applying a verse while ignoring other religious text. The religious justification for that could be based on another concept which I call The Relativity of the Qur’an. It is based on the following Qur’anic verse: "And follow the ‘better’ of what is revealed to you from your Lord…” (Qur’an 2:47)

Accordingly, Muslims are permitted by Allah himself to follow the verses that suit better their point in History and disregard others verses. For example, if Muslims considered contradiction between severe physical punishments in Islam, such as cutting the hands of thieves and the civil rights laws, the Qur’anic concept of following the better verses “The Relativity of the Quran” can allow applying only the laws that adhere to the values of human rights rather than using severe physical punishments since the former is more suitable in the present. The existence of Qur’anic validation for human rights is crucial for most Muslims to accept and practice in Muslim countries. The concept of the ”relativity of the Quran” provides an element of flexibility for interpreting Qur’anic texts with the prospect of offering a peaceful understanding for Islam to live in harmony with other faiths.

In brief, Islam could be taught in a conduct that justifies extreme violence and contradicts the basic tenets of humanity, as in Salafi teaching. Nevertheless, it can be taught in a manner that promotes peace, love, and harmony as seen in the previous few examples.

The type of Islam that has been dominating the Islamic world at present, promotes the violent understanding of Islam. Proper reformation can resolve this predicament which threatens both the world’s security and our values of freedom and liberty. Fundamental treatment is needed for this complexity if we are serious about solving it.

Recommendations for western governments and other decision makers:

1- Support the formation of theologically based peaceful understanding of Islam (Information level)
2- Help remove the obstacles that impede the violent teachings (Transmission level). This may include political and economic pressures on secular Muslim countries to end the Redda Law (Law to punish apostates)
3- Use correct tactics that allow the new teaching to be accepted in the mind of Muslims (Perception level).
4- Encourage introducing critical thinking in the Muslim educational system. This can protect many Muslims from the brain washing effect of Salafi Islam.
5- Supervise the curricula of Islamic schools and Mosques; make sure that the curriculum is compatible with the basic values of human rights.
6- Encourage T.V. debates between Muslims, who endorse different styles of thinking. It will allow young Muslims to recognize that there are diverse ways to understand the religion. This can start a constructive debate and initiate an endogenous reformation process.
7- Encourage criticism of the violent aspects of Salafi teaching. It is vital to make Muslims feel the need to adopt other forms of teaching. Without criticising Muslims, they will not recognize the profundity of the crisis.
8- Recognize that reformation of Islam has to take place by Muslims but the current situation does not allow it to transpire without the full support from the free world.

Contents

Hejab; The Islamic head-scarf and its contribution to the development of the terrorist mind.
By Dr. Tawfik Hamid

In the last few decades the phenomenon of Islamist terrorism has spread through many parts of the world. As a Muslim who contemplates about this growing trend, I recognize that current Islamic teachings have contributed to its development. This violence has not emerged out of a vacuum, but is deeply rooted in the developmental stages of the mind of many Muslims in Islamic societies. Sadly, the current teaching of Islam in many far-flung areas of the world creates a personality profile in young Muslims that contributes to their becoming involved in terror acts later on in life.

The shaping of the mind of a terrorist is familiar to me: Within few months of coming under the influence of fundamentalist Islamic teachings as an impressionable young student, I changed from a peaceful, tolerant individual to an Islamic extremist who was prepared to kill others and die for Allah. Passing through the stages of innocent to extremist, I became a beast – ready to kill non-Muslims, infidels, or those who didn’t practise Islam as I understood it.

That happened in three traceable stages:

Stage I (or Stage of hate): The creation of hatred towards non-Muslims or those who do not practice Islam.

Stage II (or Stage of killing one’s consciences): The murder of empathy or sympathy toward the pain and suffering of others.

Stage III (or Stage of violence): Accepting or even using violence against others.

Once a young Muslim has reached stage 3, as was the case with me like with thousands of others in my Muslim community, he is ready to convert this level of aggression into different forms – abuse at an interpersonal level, in public such as violent street riots, or acts of terrorism.

The violent attitude of Stage 3 personality, may or may not manifest itself in action, depending on the circumstances which either allow it to be externalized (active terrorism) or not (i.e. suppress violence and thus stop at the conceptual level). The latter condition (passive terrorism) contributes to the silence of many Muslims; tacitly praising, justifying or accepting terror attacks or denouncing those acts in a weak manner. In their minds they support the violent acts, but circumstances do not encourage them to translate their violent thoughts (Stage III) into active levels of terrorism.

I have observed a link between the position of women in current Islamic teachings and the development of the above 3 stages that lead to pro-terrorism violent personalities among many young Muslims. The proliferation of the Islamic head scarf (Hejab) in the last few decades has created insular Muslim societies in which observant Muslims consider women who do not put on the Hejab as sinful or evil, irrespective of how they lead their lives in all other ways. This stereotyping of women breeds hatred towards them, their partner, and towards societies that offer women free choice. That type of religious indignation gave license to Algerian Muslims to throw acid on the faces of women who refused to wear the Islamic head scarf.

I admit that I and my wife who used to wear the Hejab in the past and other Muslims in our circle of friends and acquaintances took pleasure when tragedy befell women who didn’t wear the Hejab as we considered them “the people of Hell.” When I belonged to Jammaa Islameia, the Salafi teaching made me believe that I could declare Jihad or war on Non Muslims. At that time, I thought that it was permissible for me to declare war on women who did not wear the Hejab and justify raping them based on the Salafi law relating to war. I used to consider those women as “the enemies of Allah”. These sentiments were the origin of many violent thoughts against women. Fortunately, my thoughts did not evolve into acts as I started to reform before reaching this level of hatred toward others.

Encouraging hatred against individuals or societies that allow women to wear “non-Islamic” clothes is one first step toward terrorism, as the element of ‘Hate’ has been created.

The acceptance of polygamy in current Islamic teachings is an important contributing factor to desensitizing our conscience. Many Muslims feel sympathy towards a woman in the community who may be suffering because her husband married another woman. Yet, the teaching that allows polygamy cultivates killing such human feelings. We were able to squelch our initial empathy towards these women by telling ourselves “Allah Almighty himself accepts polygamy and our role model prophet Mohammed practiced it.”

This process of suppressing the natural feelings of empathy/sympathy toward others in their suffering fulfils the Islamist’s second step toward terrorism, ‘killing one’s conscience.’

The third step toward terrorism, which is engaging in and condoning ‘violence,’ is a natural outcome to accepting the teaching that recommends beating women to discipline them. A person who justifies the use of violence against women can handily justify the use of violence also against other human beings. Furthermore, there is an actual teaching that encourages and supports domestic violence, thereby providing the preparation for later practice of violence on a larger scale.

The sequential relationship between the proliferation of the Islamic headscarf or Hejab and Islamists’ terrorist attacks is striking. This sequential correlation between Islamist terrorism and the proliferation of the Hejab is obvious; not only in the Islamic world, but even in Western countries that suffer from home-grown terrorism such as the UK – where Hejab has appeared increasingly among Muslim women within few decades. Before the relatively recent rise of Islamic head scarves among Muslim women, terrorism aimed at civilians was virtually unknown among Muslims. The Hejab is the spark of religiously based hatred toward others which ignites the fire of terrorism.

In Iraq the Northern parts, mainly Kurdish are the least to suffer from religious based violence compared to other areas of Iraq. Even though the Kurds are mainly Sunni Muslims, they do not contribute to terrorism and sectarian violence like the other Sunni Muslims in areas like Al-Anbar do. By a simple observation of women dress in Iraq in the last 10-15 years one can clearly examine the fact that the majority of women in Kurdish areas do not wear the Hejab while the majority of women in areas like Al-Anbar, one of the most violent areas, wear it. This observation is undeniable.

While the Islamic teaching in the educational systems of Iraq and in the traditional Islamic books have been nearly the same in Kurdish areas and in Al-Anbar, the presence of Hejab have-in my view- had a strong influential effect on proliferating a violent style of Islam. Other factors could have contributed to such a difference in the development of sectarian violence, but the Hejab among women in Iraq have been much more prevalent in the violent areas and is minimal in the non-violent areas. This fact should not be overlooked.

The importance of Hejab in controlling the mind of Muslims is apparent when we recognize that nearly all Salafi Islamic organizations focus on it as the first step toward Islamizing Muslim societies. These organizations know very well that once the women wear the Hejab, it will work as a catalyst to promote Islamism in its entirety. Women who wear the Hejab are not necessarily violent, but by wearing it, they transmit the Salafi Islamic teachings and initiate Islamizing the rest of their families and their environment.

In typical Salafi Islamic culture, the purpose of the Hejab is to cover free women as they are sexually attractive and since they are free or “superior,” their “flesh” has to be covered to prevent sexual attraction for men. Some Muslim women who wear the Hejab are trying to defend it, claiming that the Hejab is aimed at making men focus on their brain/thinking rather than their bodies. This does neither explain the phenomenon of forcing Muslim children on wearing it, nor does it fit with the approved Islamist teachings. The Hadith that justified Hejab (allowing only face and hands to be exposed) relates it to the set up of menstruation or beginning of sexual maturity. It does not discuss the mind of the female but her body.

It is important to distinguish between the traditional dress of head scarf that allows the neck and part of the hair of a woman to be exposed, which exists in some Muslim societies. On the other hand, the recent phenomenon of Hejab allows only the face and hands to be exposed. The former is mainly a cultural dress code, especially of the elders, as a matter of modesty, while the latter is the key symbol of current Islamism phenomenon and the “revival of Islamic victory”. The latter is an setup that transmits superiority and is based on fanatical religious teaching.

Since the proliferation of Hejab in moderate countries like Egypt in the late seventies, women have been classified by many Muslims as Muhajabat (wearing the Hejab) or Non Muhajabat (Not wearing the Hejab). This has lead to lack of respect to the latter and encouraged sexual harassment by many youth in the Arab society.

Wearing the Hejab was the first step my wife took in the path of Islamism. When she was wearing it, she used to advice male members of our family and friends to beat their women who refused to wear the Hejab. The change in her personality was the direct result of being brainwashed by Islamist teachings. While she wore it, she felt “above” all other women who rejected it. She viewed them as inferior and evil, describing them as “Cheap meat” (as the Mufti of Australia recently described women who do not wear the Hejab).

The Australian example, demonstrates the lack of respect to women who do not wear the Hejab which had been the first step to encourage young Australian Muslims to rape young girls and women. The sense of superiority can be the first step toward violence. The young Muslims who committed such heinous crime stood with pride in the court claiming that it is permissible according to their religion. Their view is based on deep Islamist thought that women who do not wear the Hejab are Infidels and it is thus permitted to take them as concubines “Ma Malakat Aimanikum” to rape them. This distorted way of thinking had been supported even by the grand Mufti of Australia when he blamed the women victims instead of blaming the person committing the crime.

While many Muslims claim that Islamic Hejab is a sign of Modesty, the reality of Salafi teaching is quite the opposite. According to the Salafi teaching, (Tafseer Ibn Katheir for the Quran) Hejab is only allowed for free women, however, not for slaves; it’s a sign of superiority above slave women. Another approved Salafi teaching, is related to the second Caliphate Umar Ibn Alkhatab, which used to beat slave women if they imitated the free Muslim women by wearing the Hejab. Through this form of teaching, slave girls are only allowed to cover the area between umbilicus (belly button) and knees (i.e. topless)!

My recommendations are the following:

1- Conduct research a study on the percentage of women who wear the Islamic Hejab (Head scarf or dress that allows ONLY the face and hands to be exposed) in Muslim societies between 1940 till now. This could be done by comparing the photos of graduation or passport photos of Muslim women during these periods of time.

2- Conduct a parallel research of the Islamist violence in the same societies during the same period of time. This should include both terrorist plots plus attacks. Find the statistical correlation between both 1 & 2

3- If the statistical correlation is significantly positive; i.e. the number of terror attacks and plots is directly correlated with the prevalence of Hejab in the Muslim societies, then every effort has to be taken to deal with this phenomenon (Hejab).

4- Another supportive research would be to compare the prevalence of wearing the Hejab among the mothers of the Islamist terrorists; both who plot and those who succeeded in conducting the attacks and the mothers of liberal Muslims. (The latter have to be carefully selected via certain parameters). If the percentage of mothers who wear the Hejab among the formers (Islamic Extremists) is significantly higher than the percentage of mothers who wear the Hejab among the latter (Liberal Muslims) then the relationship between the Hejab and violent Islamism could be further supported.

The Hejab has become a most powerful symbol of arrogance in the Muslim society that keeps the phenomenon of Islamism surviving. It is both a manifestation and a potentiating catalyst for the phenomenon of Islamism itself. Without ending it, Islamism will continue to grow. It will affect the future of our civilization and will drag it to a destructive clash of civilizations.

In my personal view ending the phenomenon of Hejab is one factor that would have a dramatic impact on ending violent Islamism. However, it will need the integration of legislative, political, media, intelligence, and few other essential components.

References:

Sahih Muslim (a well known book for accurate Hadith): narrated by Abu Huraira that Prophet Mohammed stated: two types of people in hell… women who are covered and naked at the same time “Kasiat Areat” (i.e. do not cover their bodies completely). They walked in a sexy manner and men followed them, their heads show their hair exposed like the Camels humps... these women will never go to paradise or even smell it… [Allfiqh Allwadeh by Mohammed Bakr Ismail Part 2 page 447 Dar AlManar]

Abu Dawood Book 2, Hadith # 0641: Narrated Aisha, Prophet Mohammed stated "Allah does not accept the prayer of a woman who has reached puberty unless she wears a veil."

Reference 1: Quran {33:59}: O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters (not the concubines), and the believing (Free) women, that they should cast their outer garments over their bodies, that they should be known (as free women) and thus not molested. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

[According to Tfseer Ibn Kathir (one of the most reputable authorities in explaining the Quran) the reason this verse is quoted is that (Asbab Alnuzul): Some people from Medina, (a city), looked at Muslim women, and if they saw a complete veil or cover they recognized they are free, so they did not sexually harass them, but if a woman was without a veil they recognized that she is a slave girl, so they “jumped on her to have sex”. The verse was stated to differentiate between the free women and the concubines so that the free Muslim women are not molested (Ibn Katheer 855/3)]. Most Islamic authorities and scholars have been supporting this explanation for the Hejab which is to differentiate between the free women and female slaves (see: Tafseer Altabary for Sura Ahzab 45/22, Tafseer Al-Baidawy 386/4, and many others).

Reference 2: Sahih Al-Buchary Volume 7, Book 62, Number 22: Narrated Anas: The Prophet stayed for three days between Khaibar (place) and Medina (a city), and there he consummated his marriage to Safiyya bint Huyai (after taking her as a prisoner of war). I invited the Muslims to the wedding banquet in which neither meat nor bread was offered. He ordered for leather dining-sheets to be spread, and dates, dried yoghurt and butter were laid on it, and that was the Prophet's wedding banquet. The Muslims wondered, "Is she (Saffiyya) considered as his wife or his slave girl?" Then they said, "If he orders her to veil herself, she will be one of the mothers of the Believers (the wives of Prophet Mohammed are called mothers of the believers); but if he does not order her to veil herself, she will be a slave girl. So when the Prophet proceeded from there, he spared her a space behind him (on his she-camel) and put a screening veil between her and the people (accordingly they understood she became his wife not just his slave girl).

Reference 3: The Truth about the Hejab and The Evidence of the Hadith (a book by Mohammed Saiid Al-ashmawi): “… Umar Ibn Al-khatab (one of the disciples of Mohammed and the second Khalifa (Ruler) for the Islamic Khelafa) used to beat any slave girl if she dared to cover her body as the free Muslim women did, so that free Muslim women became distinctive from the slave girls (Ibn Taimeia – Woman, Hejab and her dress during prayer - analysis by Naser Al-deen Al-Albany)”.

Reference 4: When Umar Ibn Alkhatab traveled in Medina (a city)... If he saw “Ama” or a slave girl, he would beat her with his Durra (a special type of stick) until the Hejab would fall off and he would say: “How come the slave girls are trying to emulate the free women by wearing the Hejab)!” (Tabakat Ibn Saad 127/7).

Sahih Muslim (a well known book for accurate Hadith): narrated by Abu Huraira that Prophet Mohammed said: two types of people in hell… women who are covered and naked at the same time “Kasiat Areat” (i.e. do not cover their bodies completely). They walked in a sexy manner and men followed them, their heads show their hair exposed like the Camels humps... these women will NEVER go to paradise or even smell it… [Allfiqh Allwadeh by Mohammed Bakr Ismail Part 2 page 447 Dar AlManar]

Quran {23:6}: Those (males) who protect their sex organs except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (in their case) they are free from blame

Quran {4:3}: “…marry women of your choice who seem beautiful to you, two or three or four” Tabari IX:126 “The Messenger of Allah married fifteen women. He combined eleven at a time and left behind nine.”

Quran {4:34}: Men are superior to women because Allah has given them more preference than to women, and because they financially support them. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part you fear that they do not obey you, admonish them, avoid making sex with them (as a form of punishment), and beat them; but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).

Contents

Nolan Finley

Ex-jihadist seeks Islam's Martin Luther

A former jihadist stopped by my office last week with a solution to the threat from radical Islam: more baseball and more sex.

Dr. Tawfik Hamid is not being flip. The physician and author believes the repressed passions of young Muslims, particularly Sunnis, make them susceptible to the promise of a heaven filled with pleasures of the flesh, and eager to blow up themselves and others to get there.

"I was 8 years old when I first entered this powerful brainwashing system," says Hamid, who grew up in affluence as the son of a Cairo doctor. "At first, my head was filled with images of a paradise of chocolates and lollypops. Later, it was of women."

Though his father was an atheist, Hamid lusted for the nirvana he was taught to envision in a secular Egyptian school.

"We used to pray and imagine these beautiful women in tents," he says. "At the same time, our sexual repression was overwhelming. We were taught that even masturbation would deny us our reward."

Eventually, Hamid joined the Jamaha Islameia, a jihadist organization, where he fell under the tutelage of Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden's No. 2, and was schooled in the art of terror.

He left when he was asked to go to Afghanistan. "I could not kill," Hamid says. "I could not put the theory into practice."

So he became a jihad dropout, fled to the West for safety and began examining the roots of a movement that aims to subjugate the entire non-Muslim world.

Islamic Reformation needed

Hamid passionately refutes theories that Islamist terror is rooted in politics, oppression, ignorance or poverty. He grew up wealthy, educated and free, and yet he fell under the jihadist spell.

This is about religion, he says, and even though the West is squeamish about categorizing the war on terror as a religious struggle, it has to be fought that way.

Hamid scoffs at the Bush administration's strategy of combating Islamism with democracy.

"The only solution is a reformation of Islam," he says. "We should be encouraging and supporting religious reformers."

Hamid believes a reformation will lead to the more enlightened practice of Islam, as it did with the Christian and Jewish reformations. The essential ingredients of reform, he says, are rejection of the principles that apostates must be killed; women can be subjugated and enslaved; Jews are subhuman, and Islam can be spread through violence.

The challenge, he says, is that no Islamic Martin Luther has emerged. "Show me where Muslims are speaking out against these beliefs," he says.

"Only a small number of Muslims are jihadists, but many, many more sympathize with their goals. They are passive terrorists."

Hamid's book is "The Roots of Jihad." He remains a practicing Muslim, but wants his religion to become more free, more tolerant, more open to secular pleasures -- like baseball -- and more accepting of criticism.

The West, he says, could help with the latter.

"You are so willing to criticize your own religions," he says. "You must do the same for Islam."

In other words, instead of walking on eggshells for fear of roiling the wasps' nest, both East and West would be better served by a vigorous critique of Islam.

Nolan Finley is editorial page editor of The Detroit News. Reach him at nfinley@detnews.com or (313) 222-2064. Watch Nolan Finley at 8:30 p.m. Fridays on "Am I Right?" on Detroit Public TV, Channel 56.

Contents

Fundamental Islam linked to terrorism

The Buffalo News

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

By Jay Tokasz - NEWS STAFF REPORTER

Dr. Tawfik Hamid nearly boarded a plane decades ago on an eventual path to holy war with the United States.

Instead, he took an opposite route and now travels throughout Europe and North America warning about what he experienced firsthand as a member of a jihadist group run by Ayman al-Zawahiri, the current second in command of al-Qaida.

"One single mistake, and I would've been sitting with al-Zawahiri instead of sitting with you now," he said in a recent interview with The Buffalo News.Hamid, an Egyptian-born medical doctor, psychologist and author of "The Roots of Jihad," travels throughout the world discussing Islam on college campuses, at churches and synagogues and in nonprofit organizations.

Hamid was in Western New York in October for a series of private talks and will return for a presentation at 7 p.m. Wednesday in Love Joy Gospel Church, Lancaster.

The former member of Gama'a al-Islamiyya, which is identified as a terrorist group by the U.S. State Department, has plenty to say about Islam and terrorism -- and some of it doesn't sit well with American Muslims.

Hamid worries that Westerners have become too politically correct, refusing to accept that current Islamic teaching -- not poverty, not Israel and not the war in Iraq -- is the root cause of Muslim terror. "I believe Islam can be taught in a peaceful manner," he said. "But it's unfair to say the current dominant form of Islamic teaching, which is salafi Islam, taught in mosques and universities, is peaceful."

Quite the contrary, said Hamid, who traces the spread of this virulent form of Islam to the rise of Saudi Arabia as an economic and political powerhouse.

Salafi Islam originated in Saudi Arabia decades ago, and as that country's oil profits grew, the fundamentalist strand began spreading throughout the Middle East.

Among other teachings, salafi Islam calls for the killing of apostates, considers Jews subhuman, encourages the beating and enslavement of women and urges war to convert nonbelievers, said Hamid.

"These are fundamentals of Sharia law. This is what they teach in the mosques and the universities," he said.

Hamid was attending medical school in Cairo when he joined Gama'a al-Islamiyya, intent on becoming a more observant Muslim. "I was not thinking of doing evil to anyone, absolutely not," he said. Within a few months, though, he became a self-described "vicious monster, like a beast," due to the group's teachings on Islam.

Encouraged by al-Zawahiri, Hamid considered fighting the Soviets as part of the resistance movement in Afghanistan -- a move that likely would have put him in line to become a key cog in Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida, the terrorist group responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Those terrorists, too, were encouraged by warped Islamic teachings, particularly among Sunni Muslims, Hamid said.

Sunnis forbid sex outside of marriage, creating a sexual suppression in young Muslim males who haven't accumulated enough wealth to marry, said Hamid. At the same time, they believe beautiful virgins await in heaven for men who abide by Islamic tenets. Sunni men stuck in this situation would die for a cause "just to make sex in paradise," Hamid said. "It is embarrassing, but it is what I used to think."

As much as he thought of violent acts, though, Hamid couldn't bring himself to do them. He left Gama'a al-Islamiyya in search of a different understanding of Islam.

Hamid's preaching, however, soon got him run out of a mosque by a rock-throwing group of men who threatened his life, he said.

Hamid changed his name and fled Cairo in 1992. He moved to the West three years later but refuses to identify the country where he lives for fear that it would put him and his family at risk.

Even in the United States and Europe, Hamid believes moderate Muslims are in the minority.

Hamid accused Muslims in the West of feeding into the radicalization of Islam by not forcefully confronting fundamentalist Islamic teachings.

"Because of them, reformation is not happening," he said.

But Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said Muslims here have condemned terrorism for years, even issuing a fatwa against it.

Contents

Copyright © 2008 RootsofJihad.com