NOTE: This message is from the Afghan Ṭālibān and unedited below.

Sha’ban 16, 1431 A.H, Thursday, July 29, 2010

In the Name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.

There are speculations that the ousted Gen Mc Chrystal’s successor, Gen Perraeus, who has been chosen by the mutual consent of the White house and Pentagon, would hit the mark in six month’s time, that is, break the Mujahideen resistance across the country and enable the Kabul puppet administration to stand up for itself accelerating part of the troops’ withdrawal process from the country in a way that it may not affect the remaining troops on the ground in Afghanistan.

Gen Petraeus, in his first statement after a month his arrival in Afghanistan, pointed out to his commanders on the ground that his presence in Afghanistan was to ensure the final showdown and decisive operation, but for that, they were left no chances in Afghanistan to achieve their goal.

The sequence of the events, if observed, David Petraeus, after two months of his taking charge of the command in Afghanistan, does not seem to have come up with unique military tactics and extraordinary warfare so as to succeed in restoring the losing morale of the US soldiers in Afghanistan.

Furthermore, the attacks of every type on US invading forces in the country, gunfights, ambushes, IEDs, sniper fires, rocket propelled grenades and other weapons have reached the record levels since Gen Petraeus took the charge of battle in Afghanistan.

According to the Pentagon data, the deaths bring the US soldiers killed in Afghanistan to 150 in June, taking death toll of the US forces to 170 since the beginning of July. As things stand, Gen Petraeus’ appointment to the post did not only spiral down the progress of the invading forces in the country but also had the US and its allies military bases, barracks, outposts, airbases and military and logistical convoys attacked by Mujahideen several times more than ever.

As a matter of fact, the only accomplishment Gen Petraeus has made so far is civilian casualties (mass murder), which has to be considered his new war strategy and tactics.

Regrettably, some 90 non-combatant defenseless civilians have been martyred in the US invaders’ blind bombardments in Helmand’s Kajak, Paktis’s Zurmat districts and in other parts of the country over the past two weeks.

It appears that Gen Petsaeus will continue working out such war strategies and tactics (civilian casualties or mass murder) in the coming time as the way things are, the US invading forces are no match for Mujahideen in every war front and battle zone throughout the country; furthermore, the US forces have lost morale on the ground which leaves the Gen Petraeus no any alternatives but to resort to carrying out his vicious and wicked war pans and tactics which are only causing further civilian casualties (mass murder) over and over again.

Gen Petraeus has to realize the fact that the civilian casualties will make things worse for the US invading forces and their allies in Afghanistan, and create growing resentment among Afghan masses for the invading forces, turning the ordinary people against the US invaders which will definitely work out in favor of Mujahideen.

The capture and handover of the US soldiers in Logar’s Charkh district on July 24 by ordinary people is a case in point. This shows a clear evidence of the Afghan masses’ strong hatred towards US invaders.

Gen Petraeus is reminded if the civilian casualties continue to increase in such an alarming rate, it is not unlikely that the masses would give a full vent on the likes of Gen Petraes, balancing the accounts, therefore, it is advisable to manly admit the defeat as Mc Chrystal put it bluntly by admitting that Afghan war is unlikely to win over. To put it another way, further stay for the US and their allies in Afghanistan is the same as digging ones own grave.

There is a worldwide growing concern over the long-delayed Afghan war, the American nation and whole world read the Afghan war as a burden and defeatist signal, which is ,with each day passing, deteriorating rather than progressing, whereas the number of the anti Afghan war people is increasing in the West. Fearing the downfall, some of the Western countries have set deadlines for their troops’ removal from Afghanistan.

It is high time Gen Petraeus knew full well the ground reality that he has the command of the forces in Afghanistan whose morale has already been down and they have been mentally defeated seeing no power in them to stand the war against the Afghan Mujahideen. Under the circumstances, Gen Peraeus would reap the reward of his job in Afghanistan in the form of disgrace, blame and defeat. Insha Allah.

The Islamic Emirate Of Afghanistan

Earlier today, Newt Gingrich, Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and former Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, presented a speech titled: “America at Risk: Camus, National Security, and Afghanistan.” In it he discussed a variety of issues, but the one that stuck out for me dealt with the sharī’ah (Islamic law). Gingrich stated:

Sharī’ah in its natural form has principles and punishments totally abhorrent to the Western world, and the underlying basic belief is that law comes directly from God. It is therefore imposed upon humans, and no human can change the law without it being an act of apostasy [irtidād].

Any student of Islamic studies will realize this is a completely simplistic understanding of the sharī’ah. Before discussing the sharī’ah and the establishment of law in Islam it is crucial to understand a few things first.

Indeed, in Islam, God is considered the lone sovereign (ḥākimīyyah). For instance, in Qur’anic verse 2:107 it says: “Do you not know that to God belongs the sovereignty of the heavens and the Earth”? But there are some Muslim jihādīs, such as Sayyid Qutb that link God’s sovereignty to governance. According to Sayed Khatab, Qutb’s theory of ḥākimīyyah denotes the following ideas: (1) “the system of government in Islam is not similar to any other system”; (2) “it is distinct from all forms of government in secular democracies”; (3) “it is constitutional”; (4) “it is not inherently theocratic or autocratic”; and (5) “the form of Islamic government has no impact on the Islamic identity of the state.”

In addition, the concept of ḥākimīyyah is connected to the concept of tawīd (oneness of God). As Qutb states:

Tawīd is that Allah is the Lord and Sovereign of people not merely in their beliefs, concepts, consciences, and rituals of worship, but in their political affairs … There is no God but God. There is no one worthy of worship except God, there is no creator or sustainer except God … There is no one in charge of the universe or even one’s own affairs except God … Thus, Muslims worship him alone … Muslims believe that there is no true ruler above them except Allah, no legislator for them except God, no one except God to inform them concerning their relationships and connections with the universe, with other living creatures, and with their fellow human beings. This is why Muslims turn to God for guidance and legislation in every aspect of life, whether it be political governance, economic justice, personal behavior, or the norms and standards of social intercourse.

When discussing the idea of Islamic governance, it was also essential for Qutb to connect the above terminologies – ḥākimīyyah and tawīd – to the sharī’ah. Qutb contends that for one to institute the sharī’ah one needs to first accept the idea behind tawīd, which based on the above definition, lends credence to the notion of ḥākimīyyah and one’s willingness to submit to the will of God and its laws. In other words, before one can follow the sharī’ah, one needs to believe in the idea of tawīd and ḥākimīyyah, which is a quintessential part of joining the faith of Islam.

The major problem with this is that Qutb and other jihadists for that matter are conceptualizing an Islamic state under the institutional framework of a nation-state, in that laws are codified and for jihādīs it is a totalitarian system that does not have any checks on power or law. This differs from the classical understanding, which Noah Feldman brilliantly explains in his book The Fall and Rise of the Islamic State. In it, Feldman points out that in the classical Islamic state, the ‘ulamā (religious scholars) provided a check on the power of the ruler since law was not a monopoly of the state like it is in the framework of the nation-state. This legal system was ever evolving and changing since there was a separation between the state and the sharī’ah. Therefore, according to Feldman it created: “[a] crucially [important] balance between the authority of the ruler and the law itself.”

This returns us to the original point of this post, which dealt with the creation of the sharī’ah. One derives sharī’ah from two primary sources: the Qur’ān and the Sunnah (actions and sayings of Muhammad). Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) allows the ulamā’ to interpret aspects of the sharī’ah to issues not directly addressed by the Qur’ān or Sunnah. These tools include using ijmā (consensus of the scholars) and after that qīyās (analogy), while Shī’ah use ‘aql (reason) instead of qīyās.

The only individuals who are allowed to practice fiqh are qualified mujtahid’s (one who performs ijtihād or independent thought) who have gone through extensive training in classical Islamic and Qur’ānic sciences. One might answer by stating, well, I think I heard or have read something about the “gates of ijtihad being closed”. This is also a misnomer. Hakim Murad explains: “sophisticated mechanisms were available which not only permitted qualified individuals to derive the Sharī’ah from the Qur’ān and Sunnah on their own authority, but actually obliged them to do this.” Further, there are different levels of ijtihād that a mujtahid could perform. The highest level is mujtahid fī-l-shar, which is an individual who does not need to follow a particular madhhab (legal school, there are four in Sunnī Islam) because he is advanced in his knowledge of the Islamic sciences. These were the individuals whom Abū ‘Abdullah Muhammad Ibn Idrīs al-Shafi’ī (or al-Shafi’ī) explained the “gates of ijtihād” were closed for since a mujtahid of those heights could no longer exist. Therefore, the “gates of ijtihād” being closed was in reference to not being able to establish another madhhab outside of the established four. As such, the ‘ulamā’ were still allowed to perform ijtihād, just the lower levels. These included: (1) a mujtahid fī-l-madhhab who could perform ijtihād within a specific school on an array of legal issues; (2) a mujtahid muttabi (follower) “who follows his madhhab while being aware of the Qur’ānic and adīth (sayings of Muhammad) texts and the reasoning, underlying its positions”; and (3) a mujtahid muqallid (emulator) “who simply conforms to the madhhab because of his confidence in its scholars, and without necessarily knowing the detailed reasoning behind all its thousands of rulings.”

These processes still exist at traditional religious establishments such as Jāmi’at (university) al-Azhar in Egypt, Jāmi’at al-Qarawiyyin in Morocco, Jāmi’at al-Zaytuna in Tunisia, and others. For example, scholars at al-Azhar issued a fatwā that discusses the permissibility of celebrating Mothers Day, a non-Islamic holiday (for the record it is indeed permissible). One can see that the process of the sharī’ah is far more complicated and intellectually rigorous than how Gingrich described it in his speech and that Islamic scholars have the tools to evolve the law as time changes. This does not excuse the heinous acts in the name of trying to establish the sharī’ah by jihadists, but most of them are not qualified to truly derive Islamic law, but that is a whole other issue.


Abdal-Hakim Murad, “Understanding the Four Madhhabs: The Problem with Anti-Madhhabism.”

Noah Feldman, The Fall and Rise of the Islamic State (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008).

Sayed Khatab, The Power of Sovereignty: The Political and Ideological Philosophy of Sayyid Qutb (London: Routledge, 2006).

Sayyid Qutb, Khasa’is al-Tasawur al-Islāmī wa Muqawimatuh (Cairo: Dar al-Shuruq, 1995).

NOTE: For an English language story on this statement checkout Reuters‘ coverage. Also here is the key quote from the below passage translated by Evan Kohlmann’s outfit Flashpoint Partners: “we will not hesitate to target anyone or any media organization… as long as it persists in being a tool of war.” The full statement is unedited below in Arabic.
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

(( بيانٌ عن استهداف مقرّ قناة “العربيّة” الفضائيّة الخبيثة ))

يقول تعالى: {بَلْ نَقْذِفُ بِالْحَقِّ عَلَى الْبَاطِلِ فَيَدْمَغُهُ فَإِذَا هُوَ زَاهِقٌ وَلَكُمُ الْوَيْلُ مِمَّا تَصِفُونَ} [الأنبياء: 18].

الحمد لله ربّ العالمين، والصلاة والسلام على نبينا محمد، وعلى آله وصحبه أجمعين.. وبعد:
ففي عملية مباركة وفّق الله ليوث دولة الإسلام لتنفيذها، استمراراً لسلسلة غزوات الأسير المباركة في دكّ قواعد المشروع الصّفوي وأذنابه في بغداد، وبعد تخطيطٍ مُحكم واستطلاعٍ دقيق من قبل مفارز الإسناد للأهداف المنتخبة في قلب الخطّة الأمنية لحكومة المنطقة الخضراء، قام بطلٌ من أبطال الإسلام وليثٌ من ليوث دولته باستهداف وكرٍ خبيث من أوكار الشّر والعُهر، وبوقٍ للفساد والحِرابة والدّعاية الكاذبة الدّائرة في فلك الحملة الصّليبيّة على الإسلام وأهله.

ورغم زعم المرتدّين عِلمَهم بالتّخطيط لضرب الهدف وتبجّحهم بمعلوماتهم “الاستخبارية” وإجراءاتهم “الأمنيّة”، فقد تمكّن الأخ المنفّذ من الوصول لمبنى الفضائية الخبيثة بعد اختراق الأطواق الأمنيّة ونقاط التفتيش التي جَهِد المرتدّون والشركات الأمنيّة المتعاقدة معهم في بنائها حول المنطقة المستهدفة المُلحقة بـ”المنطقة الخضراء” المحصّنة، وأدّى انفجار المركبة المفخخة إلى تدمير الهيكل الداخلي للمقرّ بالكامل إضافة للمباني المحيطة والتي اتخذت ملجئاً آمنا لمسئولي حكومة الأقزام السّفهاء، وقادة الأحزاب المرتدّة، ومقرّات الشركات الأمنيّة المجرمة العاملة في العراق.

وإنّنا إذ نعلن مسئوليتنا عن ضرب هذه القناة المُفسدة الخبيثة، فإننا نُؤكّد أنّ هذه الرّسالة التي خُطّت بالدّم والنّار لم تكُن الأولى ولن تكون الأخيرة، وأننا لن نتردّد في استهداف أيّ جهة أو مؤسسة إعلاميّة وملاحقة عناصرها حيثما كانوا، ما دامت تُصرّ على أن تكون أداةً لحرب الله ورسوله وتشويه دينِ الإسلام والصّد عنه، أو بوقاً لإعانة الحملة الصليبيّة وحرب المجاهدين في هذه البلاد، أو منبراً إعلاميّا لتثبيت أركان المشروع الصّفوي فيه..

كما أنّنا لا ننسى أن نذكّر أهل التّوحيد في بلاد الإسلام القريبة منّا والبعيدة، أن يشمّروا عن ساعد الجدّ وينفضوا عن أنفسهم غبار القُعود، ويهبّوا لنُصرة دينهم ولا يتركوا لمثل هذه الفضائيات الخبيثة موطئ قدم آمنٍ في بلادهم، وليعلم إخوة الدّين أن استهداف هذه المؤسّساتِ المحارِبة وأعيانِ العاملين فيها ممّن اختار الوقوف في خندق الكفّار مظاهَرةً للحملة الصليبيّة وحرباً للمجاهدين، من أعظم القُرُبات إلى الله، ومن مراتب الجهاد المُتعيّن على كلّ مسلم نُصرة لدين الله وطاعةً لأمره في قتال أئمّة الكُفر الطّاعنين في الدّين، وحتى يعلم هؤلاء الأنجاس ومن يقف ورائهم أن حِمى الإسلام ليست مباحةً لكلّ ديّوثٍ وعاهرة، وأنّ لدين الإسلام رجالاً ترخصُ دمائهم في سبيله وإعلاءً لكلمته، {أَمْ حَسِبْتُمْ أَنْ تُتْرَكُوا وَلَمَّا يَعْلَمِ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ جَاهَدُوا مِنْكُمْ وَلَمْ يَتَّخِذُوا مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ وَلا رَسُولِهِ وَلا الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَلِيجَةً وَاللَّهُ خَبِيرٌ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ}[التوبة:16].

والله أكبر
{وَلِلَّهِ الْعِزَّةُ وَلِرَسُولِهِ وَلِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَلَكِنَّ الْمُنَافِقِينَ لا يَعْلَمُونَ}
وزارة الإعلام / دولة العراق الإسلامية

المصدر : ( مركز الفجر للإعلام )

NOTE: Flashpoint Partners released a transcript of  Dr. Ayman Al-Zawahiri’s most recent video message titled: “Al-Quds [Jerusalem] Will Not Be Judaized”. Here is a brief abstract of the transcript and below it is the entire transcript:

In an audiotape titled “Jerusalem Will Not Be Judaized”, produced by As-Sahab and released on July 19, 2010, Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri addressed President Obama: “O’ Obama, whether you admit or not, the Muslims have defeated you in Iraq and Afghanistan, and they will defeat you—and the powers that brought you—soon Inshallah in Palestine, Somalia, and the Islamic Maghreb. Not only will you be defeated militarily and economically, but also, most importantly, you were defeated morally and constituently.” He harshly criticized Muslims who applauded Obama’s speech in Cairo despite the fact that “His criminal, invasive forces were occupying Afghanistan, Iraq and the Gulf, and wide ranges in Pakistan, Egypt, Jordan, the Islamic Maghreb and Yemen…” He then argues that “we are the greatest reason in losing Palestine because some of us are requesting to unify with the Arab Zionists and call them with prefixes like brother and president…to the end of these falsehoods, in which they realize their own lies.” For Zawahiri, “Arab Zionists are more dangerous…than the Jewish Zionists. Who is sanctioning our people in Gaza and circulates them with a metal wall underground? Who? Isn’t it the head of the Arab Zionists Husni Mubarak?…And who is helping the Mossad in killing the mujahideen and imprisoning them? Isn’t he the Arab Zionist Mahmoud Abbas?” He counsels that “we first have to liberate ourselves in order to liberate what is outside of it; we will not liberate our homelands if we are weak slaves with our fear, incompetence, greed and delusions, with the incompetent rulers and the greedy leaders and the scheming cooperatives and the apostate sheikhs.”

Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri- “Jerusalem Will Not Be Judaized”

NOTE: I’m surprised this jihobbyist omitted al-Fajr Media. Also, by highlighting Somali languages below it shows how important the Somali theater has become in the Global Jihadist War.

In the name of Allah most Gracious most Merciful


As-Sahab – Al-Furqan – Al-Ansar

Al-Andalus – Al-Kataib – Al-Malahim

Al-Emara – Kavkaz

Salaam Alaykom Wa rahmatolahi wa barakatuh ya Ansar Al-Mujahideen,

We all know that the mujahideen are fighting two wars at the same time. The Mujahideen are fighting the crusaders/apostates on the battlefield and in the media.

The media of today, with their satellite channels and their writers, agents, and poets are carrying out the most horrible defamation campaign against Islam since he, peace be upon him, was chosen to be the Prophet. They are directing their spears and swords towards what they call the global Salafi-Jihadi movement, which is attacking the centre of their homes, and the axis of their power, and is the biggest threat to them and the state of the Zionists. It is against it: the Islamic caliphate.

Allah, the Almighty says, “Truly, Allah defends those who Believe. (22:38)

We can make it easier for our brothers if we help them with uploading videos from news agency’s.

Aljazeera Arabic
Aljazeera English

The brothers/sisters who understand URDU/Pushtu language, please upload videos that are related to jihad and breaking news stories…

The brothers/sisters who understand Arabic language, please upload videos
that are related to jihad and breaking news stories…

The brothers/sisters who understand Somali language, please upload videos that are related to jihad and breaking news stories…


There is no good in us, if we are too lazy to help our brothers in the jihad Media!

The Prophet, peace be upon him, has said: “There will be a time when nations will be on the verge of calling one another to attack you, as people call on one another to a plate of food.” A Companion asked, “O Messenger of Allah! Is it because we will be few then?” He replied, “No. You will rather be many and will be in multitude like the scum floating on flood waters. Fear of you will be removed from the hearts of your enemies, and fear of them will be put in your hearts.” Another Companion asked, “What is the cause of this?” He answered, “Love for this worldly life and the hatred of death

Was salaam Alaykom,

The poor servant of Allah

NOTE: This message is from the Afghan Ṭālibān and unedited below.

Sha’ban 14, 1431 A.H, Tuesday, July 27, 2010

In the Name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.

General David Petraeus, the chief of invading forces in Afghanistan, has taken on a task, by the order of White house and Pentagon rulers, to increase notorious militia under the name “Local Force” against Mujahideen.

The right-wingers’ setup and expansion of Militia is a terrible and failed plan carried out at the time of Najeeb’s rule during the Communist Regime which not only resulted in fueling the racial prejudice and civil war but also brought that infamous regime to an end.

Now that the US invaders, in pursuit of former USSR, intends to repeat that terrible blunder and failed experience imposing the tragedies and the civil war of later 1900’s, on Afghan masses which is, in facet, horrible plan to pave the ways for the disintegration of Afghanistan, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan thinks it necessary to issue it is stance as follows:

1. The Afghan brave and honor-loving nation, which has constantly crushed the invading forces at different times in history and has always retained its Islamic identity and independence, should realize the fact that the invading forces in Afghanistan are threatened with the disgraceful defeat and want to back off and leave the scene in a way that our country should continuously remain at war one way or another, drawing the Afghan masses into racial, linguistic, regional and mutual differences. In view of these facts, the Afghan nation is reminded not join hands with the right-wingers in such disgusting plans and conspiracies.

2. The attempt by the US invaders to se up Local Militia is an indirect plot to disintegrate Afghanistan, therefore every individual Afghan, by fulfilling their nation-state’s duty, is bound to preserve their Islamic and national solidarity so as to foil this conspiracy.

3. The influential tribesmen and the scholars, in their respective areas, are responsible to make the ordinary civilians aware of this hostile plan and not let them be losers in the world and the Hereafter by falling prey to the abhorring conspiracy of the colonialism.

4. Mujahideen of the Islamic Emirate, in collaboration with the nation, have to use every asset in their power to foil this plot and punish and keep a close eye on those support this program and join it.

5. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan is certain that the Petraeus’ plan of forming new Local Militia would end up a failure because, on the one hand, our Islam-loving nation and Mujahideen’s advanced tactical warfare and the heroic martyrdom operations get in the their way of success, on the other hand, Mc Chrystal, prior to Petraeus, did the same thing in Provinces such as Wardag, Khost, Kunduz and so on, with the result in vain, even the outcome in some areas was quite the opposite. As the enemy is weaker than ever being threatened by defeat across the country, the futile efforts to set up the new Local Militia would not do them any good; on the contrary, it would certainly be doomed to a failure Insha Allah.

The Islamic Emirate Of Afghanistan

NOTE: Ḥizb ut-Taḥrīr (The Party of Liberation) is a Sunni pan-Islamist movement whose goal is to unite the Muslim ummah (community) and reinstate the Caliphate (al-khilāfah). Once the Caliphate is reinstated, the government would be ruled by Islamic law (sharī’ah) with the Caliph (khalīfah) being the head of state elected by a shūrā (consultation) council. Ḥizb ut-Taḥrīr was founded in 1953 in Jerusalem by Taqī ad-Dīn al-Nabhānī who was an Islamic scholar (‘ālim). Currently, Ḥizb ut-Taḥrīr is located in more than forty countries and is especially active in the United Kingdom and maintains a branch in the United States. The essay is unedited below.

By ‘Ābid Muṣṭafā

“They talk about wanting to re-establish what you could refer to as the Seventh Century Caliphate. This was the world as it was organized 1,200, 1,300 years, in effect, when Islam or Islamic people controlled everything from Portugal and Spain in the West; all through the Mediterranean to North Africa; all of North Africa; the Middle East; up into the Balkans; the Central Asian republics; the southern tip of Russia; a good swath of India; and on around to modern day Indonesia. In one sense from Bali and Jakarta on one end, to Madrid on the other.”

— Former US Vice President Cheney

In December 2004, The National Intelligence Council of the CIA predicted that in the year 2020 a new Caliphate would emerge on the world stage. The findings were published in a 123-page report titled “Mapping the Global Future”. The aim of the report is to prepare the next Bush administration for challenges that lie ahead by projecting current trends that may pose a threat to US interest. The report is presented to the US president, members of Congress, cabinet members and key officials involved in policymaking.

What is striking about the report is that it is full of references about political Islam and the various challenges it poses to US interests in the foreseeable future. There is even a fictional scenario depicting the emergence of Caliphate state in 2020 and its impact on the international situation.

However, the report is predicated on assumptions which undermine the validity of the report in various parts, especially the section on the Caliphate. Below is a critique of some of the arguments postulated in the fictional scenario: –

The report asserts that the strength of the new Caliphate will be borne out of the efforts of a global Islamic movement taking power. While it may be true that a global Islamic movement may instigate civil disobedience or initiate a coup to bring about the Caliphate, its strength and longevity is dependent upon something entirely different.

Intellectual conviction in a common set of values amongst the citizens of a state is the measure of the state’s strength and not the movement, which founded the state. The Soviet Union collapsed not because it was deficient in technology, but because its people abandoned communism and the communist party was powerless to convince them otherwise.

An accurate appraisal of the convictions of the Muslim masses for the resumption of the Islamic way of life through the re-establishment of the Caliphate is the single most important factor in determining whether the Caliphate will succeed or fail in the 21st century. This is more important than technology and resources, both of which can be quickly gained as long as the Caliphate is able to defend itself and base its progress exclusively on the Islamic ideology. Whenever Islamic movements are taken as the sole gauge for estimating the extent of Islamic revival in Muslim countries, a skewed picture will always emerge. The CIA is not alone in employing this false standard. The practice is wide spread and has tainted the analysis of respected think tanks and the writings of some notable commentators such as Francis Fukuyama and Samuel P. Huntington.

This flaw is not the result of their malice towards Islam, but is due to their adherence to the philosophy of individualism, which has marred their understanding of society and reduced it to a collection of individuals.

A proper understanding of society reveals that it is composed of individuals, which are bonded together by common thoughts and emotions, and live under a specific system. The degree of support amongst people towards the existing system of governance or for an alternative system of ruling can only be ascertained through the evaluation of these common thoughts and emotions.

The attachment to individualism has led the West to grossly underestimate the penetration of Islamic thoughts and sentiments in the Muslim countries, and also to miscalculate the wide spread support for the re-establishment of the Caliphate.

Another point of contention in the report is the claim that the emergence of the Caliphate will not cause the regimes in Muslim countries to collapse one after the other – the domino effect.

Again this understanding is derived from an incorrect understanding of society. A cursory study of the Muslim world shows that there exists strong polarisation in viewpoints between the regimes and the people they govern. Before the collapse of the Baath regime, Saddam an atheist was delivering speeches laced with Islamic terms. He did this, because he realised that the people were no longer motivated by Baathism, secularism or Arabism and only responded to Islam. Similarly, when Musharraf sided with America’ s war against Afghanistan he had to quote lengthy passages from life of the Messenger (SAW) to justify his stance.
The conflict between maintaining the secular order and preventing political Islam from assuming power is a daily occurrence in much of the Muslim world. The regimes in the Muslim world are viewed as the custodians of western interests and antagonistic towards Islam. Muslims simply loathed these regimes and are eager to extinguish their existence. The only reason these regimes survive is because of the dogged support from western governments.

Today, the Islamic Ummah stands on the cusp of a monumental change, just as the Warsaw pact countries stood some 18 years ago. The iron curtain came down because people had changed their viewpoint from communism to capitalism. Likewise the Muslim Ummah has abandoned both communism and capitalism, and is waiting for the emergence of the Caliphate, which will cause these regimes to collapse in spectacular fashion, only to be absorbed by the Caliphate.

Finally the report claims that Muslims would find the temptations of western materialism too much to bear, causing them to flee the shores of the new Caliphate. This view is obviously founded on the prevalent western notion that the Caliphate is the antithesis to modernisation.

Another factor that enhances this perception amongst westerners is the current exodus of Muslims from the Islamic world to the west. Nothing could be further from the truth.

First, the Caliphate that Muslims want to establish is the rightly guided Caliphate, which was at the zenith of human civilisation. A historical fact widely recognised by several eminent experts on Islam- most notably Bernard Lewis.

Second, the mass migration of Muslims to the West is a consequence of western foreign policy ventures in the Muslim world and not because of Muslim infatuation with western values. Most migrants, if not all are either economic migrants or political asylum seekers escaping the tyranny of regimes often supported by western governments. Even those Muslims, who have settled in the west, have yet to embrace secular values for fear of corrupting their Islam.

The recent endeavour by Europe to coerce its Muslim population to adopt western values speaks volumes for Europe’ s obsession with secularising Muslims and runs counter to the stereotyped image projected by the western media that Muslim countries are pleading to be westernised.

The typecasting of Muslims is based on the erroneous understanding of anti-western feeling that pervades the Muslim world. Often in western circles, anti-western sentiments are equated with the total rejection of western civilisation and attributed to the fundamentalist camp.
To make matters worse, the desire amongst Muslims to own western goods are interpreted as a craving for the western way of life. Westerners often classify those who display admiration for western goods into the moderate camp.

To pigeonhole Muslims into the two camps based on such interpretations is wrong. This is because the anti-western rhetoric found amongst Muslims is a denunciation of western culture and not of western goods. Likewise, the expression for the admiration for western products is an acknowledgement of the superior quality of the goods and is not an affirmation for the wholesale acceptance of western culture.

For the first time in many years, the Muslim world has undergone a radical transformation in reconciling which aspects of the western way of life can be accepted or rejected with Islam. Muslims today accept western goods such as DVDs, Satellites Dishes, and TVs only because such items do not contradict their Islamic viewpoint. On the other hand western concepts such as freedom, democracy and individualism are discarded because are deemed to contradict Islam. Previously, the Muslim world was torn between two factions i.e. the modernists who wanted to adopt everything from the West and the traditionalists who were keen to rebuff all aspects of western civilisation. This mentality stifled progress and allowed the West to establish their hegemony over Muslim lands.

Today, it is not Muslims who are holding themselves back from human advancement and meeting the demands of the 21st century, but rather it is the West that chooses to suppress these developments and insists on imposing its values upon the Muslim masses in connivance with the regimes of the Muslim world.

This attitude has not only contributed to the West’ s misunderstanding of Islam, but has encouraged the West to define an inequitable relationship with the Muslim world.

Furthermore, the mindset has prompted the West to shun everything to do with Islam. West’ s occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan has already highlighted the abuse of the Muslim people, the pillage of their land and denigration of Islam.

If this attitude is not reversed then the West will find itself in a precarious position on two fronts.

First, the Caliphate will be a strong, progressive state charting a new destiny for the Muslim people after liberating them from the political, military and economic hegemony of the West. The West weakened by this abrupt loss of control will struggle to maintain its dominance in world affairs.

Secondly, the Caliphate will swiftly harness the synergy between Islam and science, thereby surpassing the West in terms of inventions, technologies and new scientific discoveries. Given the West’ s negative attitudes towards all things Islamic, it will find itself closing the doors to knowledge and shielding its people from progress and challenges of 21st century.

Sunday July 18:

“Jihad Recipe Book is Inevitable” – Marisa Urgo, Making Sense of Jihad

“Al-Wala ‘wa-l-Bara’ – Part 2 – Al-Maqdisi” – Ahmad al-Zaky, Ma’alim fi al-Tariq Blog

Monday July 19:

“A Portrait of the Terrorist as a Young Man” – Joas Wagemakers, Jihadica

Tuesday July 20:

“How Long Can Al Qaeda In Iraq Last?” – Musings on Iraq Blog

“Lashkar e Tayyiba, Al Qaeda, and Pakistan: Time to Clean House” – Bruce Riedel, Brookings Institution

Wednesday July 21:

ICT’s Jihadi Websites Monitoring Group releases its Periodical Review July 2010 – No. 1:

“The African Union’s beleaguered Somalia mission” – Daveed Gartenstein-Ross & Seungwon Chung – LWJ’s Threat Matrix Blog

“American Jihad, Part II” – Bruce Hoffman, The National Interest

“Following the al Qaeda thread from Norway to Denver” – Mary Habeck, Foreign Policy

Thursday July 22:

“Engaging Pakistan’s moderate majority” – Amil Khan, The AfPak Channel

“Abu Talhah Al-Amrikee: An Extensive Online Footprint” – Anti-Defamation League

“Why the Clash of Civilizations Won’t Go Away” – Marc Lynch, Foreign Policy

“Operation Roll Back Kuwaiti Freedom” – Priyanka Motaparthy, Foreign Policy

“A Federal Court at GTMO? Get Serious.” – Joshua L. Dratel, The CenterLine Blog

Friday July 23:

“The Legal War on Terror for the week of 7/17-7/22”  – Andrew Lebovich, Foreign Policy

“Tawhid al-Hakimiyah – A Jihadi Achilles Heel?” – Jack Barclay, Terrorism Monitor

Emir of the Caucasus Emirate Dokku Abu Usman has officially announced the appointment as his deputy (naib) and future successor, case of his death, the commander of the Eastern Front of the Armed Forces of the Caucasus Emirate Emir Aslambek (Aslambek Vadalov).

In a special message sent to commanders and governors of the provinces of the Caucasus Emirate, Dokku Abu Usman indicated that he took this decision after careful consideration, in connection with the importance of succession of power and the need to be ready for any situation.

Emir of the Caucasus Emirate urged Mujahideen to accept his choice and emphasized that in case of his death, commanders of the Mujahideen and governors of provinces of the Caucasus Emirate should pledge bayat (oath) to Emir Aslambek and obey him as long as long as Emir Aslambek obeys Sharia of Allah and adheres to Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

Emir of CE Dokku Abu Usman also appointed as Wali (governor) of Province Nokhchicho (AKA Chechnya) of the Caucasus Emirate the deputy commander of the Eastern Front of the Armed forces of the Caucasus Emirate Hussein Gakayev (Emir Mansur).

Kavkaz Center