TigerHawk has a must read post on a lecture he attended by Michael Doran, Princeton’s embattled Assistant Professor of Near Eastern Studies. Subject: Al Qaeda’s grand strategy.
Al Qaeda’s thinkers have reinterpreted Islam all the way back to the time of the Crusades (or even the time of the Prophet). They argue, for example, that Muslim victories in the Crusades were not attributable to Saladin, but to small bands of Muslim insurgents that laid the foundation for Saladin’s victories. Their argument is that, in effect, al Qaeda-like organizations were at the source of Muslim triumphs a thousand years ago. These victories did not derive from the state, but from little bands of determined men. This reinterpretation of history shapes how they think about the war al Qaeda fights today.
Interesting comparison to the current “U.S. warts and all” crowd who focus only on the warts.
The Management of Barbarism
HT- Internet-Haganah
If there is any doubt left on Islamofascism’s perverted view of the world, see this new manifesto from the theologians of ideology of evil and hate.
Link Here
Their revisionist history seems to omit the fact that they had their “butts” whooped any number of times since.
It’s time they quit blaming the rest of the world including the Great Satan (US) and the Little Satan (Israel) for all the wrongs they have suffered.
It’s time they look inward to the source of why their culture has stagnated and not evolved beyond the 12th Century. Where are the Martin Luthers of the World of Islam?
In the terms of Dr. Phil, “How’s this working out for you?”
So this guy can’t get tenure but Ward Churchill can. Go figure.
A couple of critical leadership challenges in any insurgency are the commander’s task to imbue each individual in the movement with the perception that he (the rifle toter, phone cut-out, safe house host, etc) stands in a critical slot in the table of organization, and that the goals of the movement transcend anything else.
Rewriting history to factor out Saladin’s inspired leadership, both politically and militarily, seems kind of silly to me, but then again I can see the necessity for Al Q since they don’t have anything remotely resembling an empire from which to field armies.
They have their objectives. We have ours. We will both use what strengths we have until one side or the other wins.
An additional factor in this may be that Saladin was a Kurd, and many of his soldiers were Turks rather than Arabs. They may be Arabs who want to rewrite Saladin to a peripheral position in the history books in order to “reclaim” the victory for their own ancestors.
Not to mention the Arab world hasn’t thrown up a war leader like Saladin since.