Osama Bin Laden: Chicken or Egg?
To posit the significance of Osama bin Laden’s demise, we must first decide which came first — the chicken or the egg? Quaint as it is, this question is fundamentally an inquiry into the nature of cause and effect. In our context, did Osama bin Laden “create” the idea of jihad, or did the centuries-old doctrine of jihad — supplemented by Koranic verses to “strike terror into the heart of infidels” (8:12) — create him?
It is clear what the mainstream media would have us think. Take CNN alone; its national security analyst Peter Bergen maintains: “Killing bin Laden is the end of the war on terror. We can just sort of announce that right now.” Insisting that the “iconic nature of bin Laden’s persona” cannot be replaced, Bergen suggests: “It’s time to move on.”
Another CNN analyst, Fareed Zakaria, assures us that even if politicians including President Obama aren’t saying it yet (you know, “to be cautious”), “the truth is this is a huge, devastating blow to al-Qaeda, which had already been crippled by the Arab Spring. It is not an exaggeration to say that this is the end of al-Qaeda in any meaningful sense of the word.”
Rather than limit his analysis to pithy, sensationalist phrases and buzz words — the tools of the trade of op-ed writing — the ambitious Zakaria undermines his own position by actually trying to argue in historical and existential terms:
Al-Qaeda was an idea and an ideology, symbolized by an extremely charismatic figure in Osama bin Laden. … History teaches us that the loss of the charismatic leader — of the symbol — is extraordinarily damaging for the organization. … With the death of bin Laden, the central organizing ideology that presented an existential seduction to the Muslim world and an existential threat to the Western world is damaged beyond repair. … That existential threat is gone.
Indeed, nothing could be further from the truth. How many Muslim “charismatic leaders” and ideologues have come and gone only for the jihad to rage on?
Consider the Islamist leaders of this century alone: Hassan Bana and Sayyid Qutb, founder and chief ideologue of the Muslim Brotherhood, respectively; both were killed, yet over fifty years later, the Brotherhood — the parent organization of many jihadist organizations, including al-Qaeda — is today more dominant than ever, and may well take over Egypt.
Good work. Keep up the good fight!
Those jjournOlists or multicultural “experts” who maintain that the assassination of Bin Laden will mark the beginning of a decline in jihadist terror are either simpletons or complicit defenders of the “one true Faith”. Funded by the fabulous wealth brought to them by Western technology, after centuries of living in the poverty and subservience inflicted by their primitive beliefs, Islam sees this as an omen for the achievement of their Allah-proclaimed destiny of ruling the world. In this regard there is no such thing as a “moderate”, multi-culturalist muslim.
In my perception, there are only two divisions within Islam: those who believe in jihad now, and those who believe that in less than a century, through emmigration and taking advantage of the infidels’ tolerance and lack of any sense of self-defense, they can take over Western governments through simple demographics. Each side sees the other as defeating their strategy. Yhat is the sole extent of their difference.
In either case, their determination is unrelenting, implacable and udetered by the death of any martyr, but energized. The Taliban lives on. The Wahabists flourish. The Salafists outdo the Muslim Brotherhood in their fervor. The NYT and its followers may insist that we are not at war with Islam, in spite of the fact that the Jihadists shout it from the minarets and their pulpits, in their press, and in their broadcasts. Those who fail to understand the Peace of Allah is the subjugation to the to the rule of the Caliphate would willfully commit our Nation to servitude.
An excellent article by Mr. Ibrahim followed by an excellent first comment by Mr Williamson. Muslims are using both hot jihad and soft jihad to advance Islam. Hot jihad in fact undermines soft jihad as it alerts even the brain dead to the threat posed by Islam. Soft jihad, with its mendacious message that Islam is a religion of peace, is much more effective. The death of OBL will enhance the effectiveness of soft jihad as it will increase the number of idiot leftists (and uninformed moderates) who believe the threat to our way of life comes only from hot jihad and not from Islam itself. Bergen and Zakaria talk as though they know nothing about the the core values and goals of Islam.
No mention of Obama. A little addendum:
When will we vet this president?
The Internet is replete with information about the continuing wars and bloodletting in the Middle East between the two major Muslim sects, Sunni and Shiite, for GLOBAL caliphate status. We are being duped by our current unvetted President, Barack Hussein Obama who is using an old Shiite custom of Taqiyya (deceive your enemies to further your cause) . It is, well-documented that President Obama and his family are Shiite Muslims which make up 15% of the Middle Eastern Muslim population. Sunni Muslims make up 85%. Iranian President Amedinejad is a Shiite Muslim, and we see these two presidents friendship as portrayed by Obama’s silence and leniency with Amedinejad as he slaughtered Iranian students and now protestors in Pakistan (Sunnis). We find Obama leading the charge with our blood and money in the overthrow of all moderate Sunni Arab governments. One only needs to do the research.
Obama is supporting the “Rebels”, better known as the Shiite-dominated Muslim Brotherhood. Look at how he ushers in quick elections where only the Muslim Brotherhood can win using U. S. dollars. His escalation of our involvement in Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, Tunisia and now Pakistan, which are all Sunni led governments, is in direct contrast to Obama pulling out of Iraq and ignoring Iran (both Shiite). Now the Israelis will be fully exposed to barbarian elements as never before, and Barack Hussein Obama will, with our help, destroy Israel. The execution-style killing of Osama Bin Laden (a radicalized Sunni) and family began the very clever Shiite dismantling of Pakistan. It was not about the U.S. murder of 3,000 civilians. The Obama administration has placed the Muslim Brotherhood on the payroll as advisors to the United States. Aren’t they the ones in the streets of Egypt who denounced the United States and Israel with statements such as, “Death to America. and death to Israel”? Obama is obviously a radicalized Shiite terrorist in the White House, as he meets and consults with Muslim Brotherhood radical Imam Shiites but will not meet with U.S. allies.
Obama further supports his Muslim brethren by keeping U.S. energy dependent on Muslim oil by shutting down our coal production, refusing to allow Gulf drilling by US companies, yet twice has financed Brazil’s Petrobras with our tax dollars (George Soros, Obama’s benefactor and owner of 14% of Petrobras, hates Israel ) for deeper water drilling than the Gulf and contracting Petrobras to drill in our own Gulf when disallowing the same of U.S companies. He is systematically destroying the U.S. through unnecessary spending while he lays the groundwork for a global Shiite caliphate . Obama makes Shiites appear less hostile calling them “Rebels” as the United States is forced fight on their side. The truth is that the Sunnis have been Israel’s protectors. Obama hates Israel as do all Shiites. His goal is to annihilate Israel and use United States’ money and blood to bring a global Shiite caliphate into being. Are we using our best and bravest resources along with all of our money to rendered us destitute (powerless) to build Obama’s Shiite Caliphate throughout the United States and the world? This may be the most clever terror plot devised to date? An inside job (in our pockets.)
“Another CNN analyst, Fareed Zakaria, assures us that even if politicians including President Obama aren’t saying it yet (you know, “to be cautious”), “the truth is this is a huge, devastating blow to al-Qaeda, which had already been crippled by the Arab Spring. It is not an exaggeration to say that this is the end of al-Qaeda in any meaningful sense of the word.”
Fareed Zakaria is another one of those useless talking heads that is usually wrong about most of what he says on TV. Left-leaning organizations like CNN probably think that because he’s from India he knows everything there is to know about the Middle East, especially Islamic fundamentalists. In fact, he’s nothing but a shill for anti-American Islamists out there. For a guy who actually wrote, “Learning to Live with Radical Islam” in Newsweek magazine, I don’t think he’s too sympathetic to people fighting radical Islam. You can read the article here: http://www.newsweek.com/2009/02/27/learning-to-live-with-radical-islam.html
To Zakaria and other apologists for Isalamic terror, Islamic jihadists are simply “misunderstood” and really don’t pose that much of a threat to the world. And, if they are a threat, it’s only because Americans are such meanies. So I’m sure Zakaria would see bin Laden’s death as the end of the terror threat. In his myopic view of the world, there probably only was bin Laden, a Muslim anomaly, and now that he’s gone everything is fine with the Muslim world.
Fat chance. These are the same people who always assured us that Radical Islamists only account for a very small percentage of the Muslim population. Most of the Muslim population may not be day-to-day soldiers in the jihad against the west, but MOST of the Muslims certainly do sympathize with them. Just look at the outpouring of sympathy there was in Pakistan after bin Laden’s death. Just look at how much money the Saudis still give the radical Islamic madrassas in Pakistan. Just look at how many Taliban and al Qaeda fighters find sanctuary in Pakistan. Note the fact that bin Laden was hiding in a Pakistani town that was known for its military academy and army base, not to mention how many ISI (Pakistani Intelligence members) were probably living there, and yet nobody knew bin Laden was living in that town.
You don’t have to actually be a soldier in the war against the west, but there are lots of things the average Muslim CAN do to support that war. These are all concepts useful idiots like Fareed Zakaria ignore and claim not to exist. Then why doesn’t all radical Islamic terrorist attacks end with bin Laden’s death? Because they won’t. Radical Islam has been around for centuries and the death of one man certainly will not stop it. We ignore this lesson at our own peril.
I don’t understand Zakaria. A few years ago, he wrote “The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad”, which I still think is an excellent treatise on the state of Western democracy.
But he has really fallen apart. I suppose that, like most elites, eventually he succumbed to the desire to be invited to the right parties and “fit in”.
An analogy closer to home.
When our charismatic president John F. Kennedy was assassinated, did the American dreams and way of life go away? Of course not. And our way of life did not go away when Lincoln and other presidents were assassinated. To destroy the United States of America, would require damaging our many institutions. Unfortunately that assault is now happening.
to take it even further
the united states are her people and the ideals they cherish and defend
The Western media and government talking heads try to convince themselves that the Terrorism is carried out by “militant Islam”. There is no such thing. Islam is Islam. Islam is a cultural/governmental/societal/militarism philsophy that intends to dominate the world. It uses both hard (Jihad) and soft (CAIR, ISNA) power to advance Islam.
The oil money gives them the funds to spread Islam. Hence, you see terrorism world wide. You see a vast amount of immigration around the world. They don’t seek freedom and Western ideals; they want to overtake and overpower Western civilization. Like the end times battles as described in the Book of Revelation. Its all playing out before our eyes.
Right you are!
I believe Obama’s refusal to grant any oil drilling permits for the United States is his way of paying jizya, and being deferential to the Arabs for their oil.
Obama’s actually preaching like any mullah; Only the God he’s preaching about is himself.
This is the only thing you need to keep in mind.
Their entire belief system revolves around this dictum.
Muslims believe they are put on this earth to be the messengers of God, and that their death impregnates the world with this belief.
Repeat anything 3 times a day from your early childhood, and you’ll believe it’s true regardless of how insane it is.
The definition of “insanity” is repeating the same, failed obsession, and expecting a different result.
The problem is that it’s very hard to make your average Joe Six-Pack – who primarily sees local Muslims as hard working Americans – that those Muslims are, in fact, the ones not practicing orthodox Islam.
Please forgive me, my fellow commenters and Raymond.
But, I have witnessed this very same media and these very same leftists build arguments for forging documents, photoshopping pictures, “hide the decline”, dummied up poll results, intentionally withhold material evidence against brutal dictators, provide cover for our enemies, give away state secrets, be caught as spies for enemies…
At what point am I allowed to believe that they are not “wrong-headed” about the intention of our enemies, when to cease the war on terror and whether Al-Qaeda ceases to exist?
They have been in bed with communists, they have been in bed with radical Islam, they have been in bed with EVERY enemy of state for nearly 40 years.
Why is the argument that this is an intentional distortion…out of bounds? This is not a rhetorical question (except to the trolls).
The BEST way to cut and run from what we need to do to keep this country safer from radical Islam…was to wipe out a neutered bin Laden. It provided the perfect cover. “How can you say we are weak and cowardly on the war on terror…we ENDED IT…with the dumping of bin Laden in the ocean.
It’s a head fake. The body wasn’t cold yet and Barney Frank was floating this trial balloon. The bootlicking, lapdog, propaganda media were sent out to fuel this propaganda.
There is no longer a war on terror. From now on, it’s a police matter.
America’s defenses are being broken down as we speak. At our borders. Overseas. Our protections are being dismantled. And, the media is softening us up for this very thing.
Then again, maybe not. Maybe they are just “wrong” ….again.
exactly
Bingo! The MSM is in love with the Democrats/leftists/progressives, especially Barack Obama, and they think this is the perfect argument to justify ending the war on terror. If Bin Laden’s death made Al Qaida irrelevant and meant the end of terrorism, then there is no longer any need to have soldiers in Afghanistan, Iraq or Libya nor any need to concern ourselves with events in Egypt, Syria, and other areas with Muslim populations. That means that we can bring the troops home and Obama can be eagerly re-elected as a reward for having won the War on Terror. And if the War on Terror is over, then surely it makes sense to downsize the military dramatically to help pay for the new social programs the Democrats want to lavish on voters to seduce them into voting for Obama in 2012.
At least that appears to be the way these media analysts are thinking. I can’t help but wonder if the terrorists will actually lay low for a while to help that narrative flourish. After all, if the terrorism continues undiminished, it’s a lot harder to sell the notion that Bin Laden’s death has ended terrorism. Then again, it’s not impossible. If the MSM merely de-emphasize their coverage of terror by simply ignoring it for the next 18 months – or attributing it to non-Islamic causes when they can’t ignore it – many Westerners will get the idea that terrorism has diminished! If they can keep it up long enough, they may sucker people in to re-electing Obama for another term.
The death of Bin Laden won’t change a thing within the Islamic jihadism. We in the West who declare that it will, are thinking within our own mindset, which is focused around the individual, as hero, as inventor, as self-sufficient, as leader.
The Islamic mindset rejects the individual. Totally. They focus on the group, in its material form as a collection of finite beings..but actually existing only as a homogeneous force operating within a metaphysical abstract essentialist Will (of god). This homogeneous force must carry out the Will of god – in this case, to overwhelm the entire earth with its dictums. It’s the Will of Allah that is the causal force in jihadism. Not any particular man.
The killing of any so-called leader is irrelevant. The real problem is that the Islamic peoples have nothing, yet, to replace this metaphysical dogma. They have nothing that functions to promote them, in their individual nature, in their material lifespan, as having any role. Any value. Any function other than to disappear within the group dogma. That’s why no scientific inventions emerge in the Islamic world; they reject the individual, reject his reasoning capacity.
It’s always weird to see the Islamic jihadists yelling and waving their machine guns around and threatening the obliteration of the West. Heh – those gunds, those computers, those cars and trucks, those cellphones..everything they use, came from The West. They use the fruits of the minds of the West. Incredible.
The political scenario of the ME is based around tribalism. This means that ONE tribe/clan rules over all others – and the ruled must be without individual freedom. Islamic ideology suits this political tribalism perfectly. This ‘groupism’ is dysfunctional in our modern world but oil (hey, developed by western technology) has enabled these tribal rulers to remain in control far longer than they should.
This tribalism, this group braindead ideology, is what must change and is, hopefully – this is what is going on in the ME now. It must come from within; it must come from the people living there, who must reject the restraints of a two-class (ruler/ruled) system and insist that they, the people, have rights and needs as individuals. They can set up businesses, they can engage in private enterprise…rather than all being dependents of the Oil-State.
It will come; it’s a rocky road but when a population reaches a certain size, as it has in the ME, you can’t live in a constrained two-class system anymore..and expect the people to put up with merely passively watching the rest of the world (India, China as well) all busily engaged in the global economy.
There’s a lot of truth in what you say, but you may underestimate the hold that the medieval mental framework has on muslims. I agree the current flash points result from the ease with which telecommunications shows them that the rest of the world lives much better lives, which incites them to even new levels of anger…but it isn’t like they havent’t been in a rage for a millenium. Their looney religious directive is at least as responsible for the mania.
Something is preventing them from understanding the lessons that should be obvious from the last 200 years, and still being painted in bright colors by China and India.
Predicting the future seems nearly impossible, but I would like to know if there has ever been a culture that bootstraped itself into a new paradigm without cataclysmic violence. I suspect not. Moreover, I suspect that Islam will not be widespread religion 50 years from now. The rest of the world, despite the seemingly self-destructive tendancies of the moment, will come to the conclusion that the cancer simply has to be cut out of the body.
I agree with the concept that moving out of one structural societal paradigm into another is NOT a smooth path but requires violence. That’s because the paradigm of beliefs and behavior is not simply words but is a deep operational structure that, like the structure of a building, of a skeleton, is the basic form…for the superficial walls and rooms and windows..and flesh/muscles.
The old structure has to be destroyed and a new one allowed to emerge. A comparison is the infrastructural change that Europe went through in the 12th to 16th c. Same change from a two-class to a three-class system, from groupism to individualism, from a rejection of reason to a focus on individual reasoning capacities. And it was violent, really violent, with the church which had become a political entity fighting to retain its power, with the sovereign rulers fighting to retain their power…against the emergence of an exploding population, a market economy, a need for new technology.
In the ME, they’ve been cocooned; the oil (developed by the West not by them) has enabled the old power tribes to remain in control, and the new technology – cars, electricity, phones, radios..etc etc..has all been developed by the West. So they could remain braindead.
But that phase is over. It’s not simply the new electronic communication systems that is causing this phase to end. It’s the population explosion of the last 40 years in the ME, which has doubled the population..and this size of a population exceeds the carrying capacity of the State Economies of Oil or Suez Tolls. This state income can’t support this size of a population. That’s the basic cause of the implosion.
Not the communication devices which have a different role: these new electronic devices DO serve to inform and expand the power of the non-govt individual and enable the common man to form their own dissenting groups which are outside of the control of the state. The state rulers now can’t control the people the way they used to…Remember the printing press in Europe and how it empowered the people..
I agree – Islam, as it is now, won’t be widespread. It operates only within a two-class infrastructure..and once you enable a middle class to become dominant, as it must in a capitalist economy, then Islamism and its groupism, will reform.
The point about the ME’s exploding population is a good one too.
Isn’t it ironic that there seem to be checks and balances in almost every aspect of life. Here we have a situation where sitting on the West’s oil has gifted so much wealth to the former goat-herder autocrats and psychopaths that they were able to let enough trickle down to double the population in a few decades, but they weren’t willing to let enough trickle down to stave off abject poverty. And the other factor in the population growth is the medieval philosophy for bearing children, a philosophy that the goat-herders enthusiasticlly exploit to stir up the masses, against the western devils who made the goat-herders corrupt anti-islamic lifestyles possible, but which also stirs up the masses, in time, against the goat herders themselves.
What a brew.
Of course the CNN talking heads are always wrong. Why they are invited to return to be wrong again is a mystery for future sociologists. It is more likely that killing bin Laden merely disposed of an ageing has-been mass murderer, and the most important result is the increase in the likelihood of Obama’s reelection and the continuing decline of the Untied States.
True of all religioms and causes! Christian Conquistatores, Community Organizers (active in USA today), etc
Forcing others (public control) vs persuading buyers (private control) is our dilemma.
Howard Long, family doctor and patient power advocate
Did American greatness collapse with the death of Lincoln, Grant, either Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Kennedy, or Reagan? Of course, not.
Television pundits live in the moment. On a longer time scale, baby boomers divide world history between pre-Beatles and post-Beatles. Anything pre-Beatles just doesn’t matter. In the meantime, the long march of history continues on, grinding up Bin Laden—and for that matter, all of us—into little bits of dust, whose significance is hardly noted.
It is also a sign of the times that Peter Bergen and Fareed Zakaria have a voice on CNN and are therefore more widely recognized, imbued with the imprimatur of the latter organization while the name of Raymond Ibrahim, an eminent, knowledgeable and respected scholar in the anti-Jihad community, if mentioned in idle conversation among most Americans would likely elicit a response of, “Who?”
Bigotry, brutality and the hegemonic ambitions of a “Religion” is antithetical to the modern, Western, Judeo/Christian experience. How is it possible for a religion to be inherently evil? It is inconceivable until it becomes apparent that Islam is not a religion but a militaristic, political, social, judicial system that commands it’s adherents to behave in inhuman, sadistic, murderous, barbaric and suicidal ways in order to prove allegiance to and gain the approval of, their “god” and guarantee entry into “paradise.” Devout Muslims, strict adherents to the tenets of Islam, suffer no feelings of guilt as they abuse, torture and murder non Muslims regardless of age or gender. On the contrary.
Obama was not an enigma, a fanatical radical who “hijacked a religion.” He, like his followers, was a devout Muslim and while not all Muslims are so predisposed, tens of millions are and labeling the strife that’s erupted in the Middle East the “Arab Spring” is like calling Hitler’s quest for power a “European Reawakening.”
Mr. Bergen and Mr. Zakaria’s response to the death of Bin Laden represents a very dangerous assumption grounded in what might be simplistically described as “wishful thinking” and will most assuredly be greeted with great satisfaction if not glee among Jihadists around the world.
It’s truly appalling to think that a political analyst could have any credibility whatsoever in suggesting that the death of one prominent individual in an organization would surely end the relevance of that organization and render it harmless. By this line of reasoning, Marxism would have died with Marx but, of course, it didn’t. In fact, even the deaths of Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and various other scoundrels have not ended Marxism. The Castros, Hugo Chavez, Kim Jung Il and others are all eager practitioners of Marx’s ideas.
By the same token, the death of Jesus Christ, Buddha, Mohammed and countless other major religious figures didn’t end those movements either. In fact, they experienced staggering growth after the death of their founders.
How does any so-called analyst expect to be taken seriously when they advance a proposition as blatantly silly as the one advanced by Bergen and Zakaria? Anyone with even a basic knowledge of history should know better….
Then again, given the pathetic nature of history education in the last few decades, maybe these analysts can’t really be blamed for not picking up on the countless counter-examples to their thesis.
OBL was following Muhammad. The Muslim Brotherhood is also, but has taken a Hunda until they are strong enough to follow Muhammad like OBL.
Why don’t you call him what he really is…… a CIA INVENTION. I am amazed by the level of brainwashing that my fellow citizens have allowed to happen to them…… this OBL was declared dead before we ever went into Iraq, and your government knew it. But Bush used him to instill fear in you, it was admitted that most of the videos we saw of OBL WERE FAKE, and that the rest were made before hand.
If America does not wake up and see that they are being used as puppets, then we are doomed to failure.
Ummm…
you already DID, kay?
But Bush used him to instill fear in you….
“Bush”? Don’t you mean, “Booosh”?