“Declaration of the World Islamic Front for Jihad against the Jews and the Crusaders.”
Foreign Affairs, Nov 1998 p14(1)
License To Kill. Usama bin Ladin’s Declaration of Jihad
Bernard Lewis
On February 23, 1998, Al-Quds al-Arabi, an Arabic newspaper published in London, printed the full text of a “Declaration of the World Islamic Front for Jihad against the Jews and the Crusaders.”
by Osama bin Laden February 23, 1998 View the full document
http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/180.pdf
According to the paper, the statement was faxed to them under the signatures of Usama bin Ladin, the Saudi financier blamed by the United States for masterminding the August bombings of its embassies in East Africa, and the leaders of militant Islamist groups in Egypt, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. The statement–a magnificent piece of eloquent, at times even poetic Arabic prose–reveals a version of history that most Westerners will find unfamiliar. Bin Ladin’s grievances are not quite what many would expect.
The declaration begins with an exordium quoting the more militant passages in the Quran and the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, then continues:
Since God laid down the Arabian peninsula, created its desert, and
surrounded it with its seas, no calamity has ever befallen it like these
Crusader hosts that have spread in it like locusts, crowding its soil,
eating its fruits, and destroying its verdure; and this at a time when the
nations contend against the Muslims like diners jostling around a bowl of
food.
The statement goes on to talk of the need to understand the situation and act to rectify it. The facts, it says, are known to everyone and fall under three main headings:
First–For more than seven years the United States is occupying the
lands of Islam in the holiest of its territories, Arabia, plundering its
riches, overwhelming its rulers, humiliating its people, threatening its
neighbors, and using its bases in the peninsula as a spearhead to fight
against the neighboring Islamic peoples.
Though some in the past have disputed the true nature of this
occupation, the people of Arabia in their entirety have now recognized it.
There is no better proof of this; than the continuing American
aggression against the Iraqi people, launched from Arabia despite its
rulers, who all oppose the use of their territories for this purpose but
are subjugated.
Second–Despite the immense destruction inflicted on the Iraqi people at
the hands of the Crusader-Jewish alliance and in spite of the appalling
number of dead, exceeding a million, the Americans nevertheless, in spite
of all this, are trying once more to repeat this dreadful slaughter. It
seems that the long blockade following after a fierce war, the
dismemberment and the destruction are not enough for them. So they come
again today to destroy what remains of this people and to humiliate their
Muslim neighbors.
Third–While the purposes of the Americans in these wars are religious
and economic, they also serve the petty state of the Jews, to divert
attention from their occupation of Jerusalem and their killing of Muslims
in it.
There is no better proof of all this than their eagerness to destroy
Iraq, the strongest of the neighboring Arab states, and their attempt to
dismember all the states of the region, such as Iraq and Saudi Arabia and
Egypt and Sudan, into petty states, whose division and weakness would
ensure the survival of Israel and the continuation of the calamitous
Crusader occupation of the lands of Arabia.
These crimes, the statement declares, amount to “a clear declaration of war by the Americans against God, his Prophet, and the Muslims.” In such a situation, the declaration says, the ulema–authorities on theology and Islamic law, or sharia–throughout the centuries unanimously ruled that when enemies attack the Muslim lands, jihad becomes every Muslim’s personal duty.
In the technical language of the ulema, religious duties may be collective, to be discharged by the community as a whole, or personal, incumbent on every individual Muslim. In an offensive war, the religious duty of jihad is collective and may be discharged by volunteers and professionals. When the Muslim community is defending itself, however, jihad becomes an individual obligation.
After quoting various Muslim authorities, the signatories then proceed to the final and most important part of their declaration, the fatwa, or ruling. It holds that
To kill Americans and their allies, both civil and military, is an
individual duty of every Muslim who is able, in any country where this is
possible, until the Aqsa Mosque [in Jerusalem] and the Haram Mosque [in
Mecca] are freed from their grip and until their armies, shattered and
broken-winged, depart from all the lands of Islam, incapable of threatening
any Muslim.
After citing some further relevant Quranic verses, the document continues:
By God’s leave, we call on every Muslim who believes in God and hopes
for reward to obey God’s command to kill the Americans and plunder their
possessions wherever he finds them and whenever he can. Likewise we call on
the Muslim ulema and leaders and youth and soldiers to launch attacks
against the armies of the American devils and against those who are allied
with them from among the helpers of Satan.
The declaration and fatwa conclude with a series of further quotations from Muslim scripture.
INFIDELS
Bin Ladin’s view of the Gulf War as American aggression against Iraq may seem a little odd, but it is widely–though by no means universally–accepted in the Islamic world. For holy warriors of any faith, the faithful are always right and the infidels always wrong, whoever the protagonists and whatever the circumstances of their encounter.
The three areas of grievance listed in the declaration–Arabia, Iraq, and Jerusalem–will be familiar to observers of the Middle Eastern scene. What may be less familiar is the sequence and emphasis. For Muslims, as we in the West sometimes tend to forget but those familiar with Islamic history and literature know, the holy land par excellence is Arabia–Mecca, where the Prophet was born; Medina, where he established the first Muslim state; and the Hijaz, whose people were the first to rally to the new faith and become its standard-bearers. Muhammad lived and died in Arabia, as did the Rashidun caliphs, his immediate successors at the head of the Islamic community. Thereafter, except for a brief interlude in Syria, the center of the Islamic world and the scene of its major achievements was Iraq, the seat of the caliphate for half a millennium. For Muslims, no piece of land once added to the realm of Islam can ever be finally renounced, but none compares in significance with Arabia and Iraq.
Of these two, Arabia is by far the more important. The classical Arabic historians tell us that in the year 20 after the hijra (Muhammad’s move from Mecca to Medina), corresponding to 641 of the Christian calendar, the Caliph Umar decreed that Jews and Christians should be removed from Arabia to fulfill an injunction the Prophet uttered on his deathbed: “Let there not be two religions in Arabia.” The people in question were the Jews of the oasis of Khaybar in the north and the Christians of Najran in the south. Both were ancient and deep-rooted communities, Arab in their speech, culture, and way of life, differing from their neighbors only in their faith.
The saying attributed to the Prophet was impugned by some earlier Islamic authorities. But it was generally accepted as authentic, and Umar put it into effect. The expulsion of religious minorities is extremely rare in Islamic history–unlike medieval Christendom, where evictions Compared with European expulsions, Umar’s decree was both limited and compassionate. It did not include southern and southeastern Arabia, which were not seen as part of Islam’s holy land. And unlike the Jews and Muslims driven out of Spain and other European countries to find what refuge they could elsewhere, the Jews and Christians of Arabia were resettled on lands assigned to them–the Jews in Syria, the Christians in Iraq. The process was also gradual rather than sudden, and there are reports of Jews and Christians remaining in Khaybar and Najran for some time after Umar’s edict.
But the decree was final and irreversible, and from then until now the holy land of the Hijaz has been forbidden territory for non-Muslims. According to the Hanbali school of Islamic jurisprudence, accepted by both the Saudis and the declaration’s signatories, for a non-Muslim even to set foot on the sacred soil is a major offense. In the rest of the kingdom, non-Muslims, while admitted as temporary visitors, were not permitted to establish residence or practice their religion.
The history of the Crusades provides a vivid example of the relative importance of Arabia and other places in Islamic perceptions. The Crusaders’ capture of Jerusalem in 1099 was a triumph for Christendom and a disaster for the city’s Jews. But to judge by the Arabic historiography of the period, it aroused scant interest in the region. Appeals for help by local Muslims to Damascus and Baghdad went unanswered, and the newly established Crusader principalities from Antioch to Jerusalem soon fitted into the game of Levantine politics, with cross-religious alliances forming a pattern of rivalries between and among Muslim and Christian princes.
The great counter-Crusade that ultimately drove the Crusaders into the sea did not begin until almost a century later. Its immediate cause was the activities of a freebooting Crusader leader, Reynald of Chatillon, who held the fortress of Kerak, in southern Jordan, between 1176 and 1187 and used it to launch a series of raids against Muslim caravans and commerce in the adjoining regions, including the Hijaz. Historians of the Crusades are probably right in saying that Reynald’s motive was primarily economic–the desire for loot. But Muslims saw his campaigns as a provocation, a challenge directed against Islam’s holy places. In 1182, violating an agreement between the Crusader king of Jerusalem and the Muslim leader Saladin, Reynald attacked and looted Muslim caravans, including one of pilgrims bound for Mecca. Even more heinous, from a Muslim point of view, was his threat to Arabia and a memorable buccaneering expedition in the Red Sea, featuring attacks on Muslim shipping and the Hijaz ports that served Mecca and Medina. Outraged, Saladin proclaimed a jihad against the Crusaders.
Even in Christian Europe, Saladin was justly celebrated and admired for his chivalrous and generous treatment of his defeated enemies. His magnanimity did not extend to Reynald of Chatillon. The great Arab historian Ibn al-Athir wrote, “Twice, [Saladin said,] I had made a vow to kill him if I had him in my hands; once when he tried to march on Mecca and Medina, and again when he treacherously captured the caravan.” After Saladin’s triumph, when many of the Crusader princes and chieftains were taken captive, he separated Reynald of Chattillon from the rest and beheaded him with his own hands.
After the success of the jihad and the recapture of Jerusalem, Saladin and his successors seem to have lost interest in the city. In 1229, one of them even ceded Jerusalem to the Emperor Frederick II as part of a general compromise agreement between the Muslim ruler and the Crusaders. Jerusalem was retaken in 1244 after the Crusaders tried to make it a purely Christian city, then eventually became a minor provincial town. Widespread interest in Jerusalem was reawakened only in the nineteenth century, first by the European powers’ quarrels over custody of the Christian holy places and then by new waves of Jewish immigration after 1882.
In Arabia, however, the next perceived infidel threat came in the eighteenth century with the consolidation of European power in South Asia and the reappearance of Christian ships off the shores of Arabia. The resulting sense of outrage was at least one of the elements in the religious revival inspired in Arabia by the puritanical Wahhabi movement and led by the House of Saud, the founders of the modern Saudi state. During the period of Anglo-French domination of the Middle East, the imperial powers ruled Iraq, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, and Sudan. They nibbled at the fringes of Arabia, in Aden and the trucial sheikhdoms of the Gulf, but were wise enough to have no military and minimal political involvement in the affairs of the peninsula.
Oil made that level of involvement totally inadequate, and a growing Western presence, predominantly American, began to transform every aspect of Arabian life. The Red Sea port of Jiddah had long served as a kind of religious quarantine area in which foreign diplomatic, consular, and commercial representatives were allowed to five. The discovery and exploitation of oil–and the consequent growth of the Saudi capital, Riyadh, from small oasis town to major metropolis–brought a considerable influx of foreigners. Their presence, still seen by many as a desecration, planted the seeds for a growing mood of resentment.
As long as this foreign involvement was exclusively economic, and as long as the rewards were more than adequate to soothe every grievance, the alien presence could be borne. But in recent years both have changed. With the fall in oil prices and the rise in population and expenditure, the rewards are no longer adequate and the grievances have become more numerous and more vocal. Nor is the involvement limited to economic activities. The revolution in Iran and the wars of Saddam Hussein have added political and military dimensions to the foreign involvement and have lent some plausibility to the increasingly heard cries of “imperialism.” Where their holy land is involved, many Muslims tend to define the struggle–and sometimes also the enemy–in religious terms, seeing the American troops sent to free Kuwait and save Saudi Arabia from Saddam Hussein as infidel invaders and occupiers. This perception is heightened by America’s unquestioned primacy among the powers of the infidel world.
TRAVESTIES
To most Americans, the declaration is a travesty, a gross distortion of the nature and purpose of the American presence in Arabia. They should also know that for many–perhaps most–Muslims, the declaration is an equally grotesque travesty of the nature of Islam and even of its doctrine of jihad. The Quran speaks of peace as well as of war. The hundreds of thousands of traditions and sayings attributed with varying reliability to the Prophet, interpreted in various ways by the ulema, offer a wide range of guidance. The militant and violent interpretation is one among many. The standard juristic treatises on sharia normally contain a chapter on jihad, understood in the military sense as regular warfare against infidels and apostates. But these treatises prescribe correct behavior and respect for the rules of war in such matters as the opening and termination of hostilities and the treatment of noncombatants and prisoners, not to speak of diplomatic envoys. The jurists also discuss–and sometimes differ on–the actual conduct of war. Some permit, some restrict, and some disapprove of the use of mangonels, poisoned arrows, and the poisoning of enemy water supplies–the missile and chemical warfare of the Middle Ages–out of concern for the indiscriminate casualties that these weapons inflict. At no point do the basic texts of Islam enjoin terrorism and murder. At no point do they even consider the random slaughter of uninvolved bystanders.
Nevertheless, some Muslims are ready to approve, and a few of them to apply, the declaration’s extreme interpretation of their religion. Terrorism requires only a few. Obviously, the West must defend itself by whatever means will be effective. But in devising strategies to fight the terrorists, it would surely be useful to understand the forces that drive them.
BERNARD LEWIS is Cleveland E. Dodge Professor Emeritus of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University. His books include The Arabs in History, The Emergence of Modern Turkey, and, most recently, The Middle East: A Brief History of the Last 2,000 Years.
Global Jihad Coming to Get Us!
“Jihad against the Jews and the Crusaders”
Bin Laden declares jihad
February 23 1998: A fatwa against Jews and Crusaders
By Jennifer Lipman, February 22, 2011
Long before the September 11 attacks on the United States, Osama bin Laden had made himself known as a terror threat. In 1996 he declared that Muslims should raise jihad against the west, and two years later he outlined his belief that killing “Jews and crusaders” was an “individual duty for every Muslim”.
The fatwa stated: “All these crimes and sins committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on God, his messenger, and Muslims. And ulema have throughout Islamic history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty if the enemy destroys the Muslim countries.
“The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies – civilians and military – is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it.”
Published in London in the Arabic Newspaper al-Quds al-Arabi, this declaration of jihad – signed alongside his deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri under the auspices of the World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders – was no empty threat, as the world would learn that August.
Following the bombing of the US embassy bombings in East Africa in August 1998, which killed 224, the Saudi Arabian born al Qaeda leader was placed on the FBI’s “Ten Most Wanted” list with a $5 million bounty on his head. The reward became $25 million after some 3,000 people were killed on September 11.
What the JC said: September 11 was certainly perceived at the time by millions of Muslims as a euphoric moment, a taste of triumphal joy at the conflagration which had exposed the impotence of Western civilisation. Almost overnight, Osama bin Laden became a hero among the Arab masses, in the wider Muslim world and across the far-flung Muslim diaspora. This maverick Saudi millionaire had inflicted upon the Americans their first major defeat since Vietnam. He symbolised the restoration of wounded Arab and Muslim pride.
A Global Genocide against Christians Underway?
ADD : (understand Crusaders = Christians…not like you could had understood, Army Involvement. Yes but not all, We are talking about Civilians here and Civilisations) W.T.K.
Publiée le 13 avril 2012 par 0MadeInEngland1
13 April, 2012 – JERUSALEM, Israel — While Saudi Arabia is one of the worst persecutors of Christians in the Middle East, it is a problem that’s getting worse throughout the region.
Since 2003, Islamic radicals have bombed 70 churches in Iraq alone. And that’s only the beginning.
“We’re seeing a very vicious attack on Christians in a number of countries. In fact, in many places in Iraq we’re seeing a religious cleansing,” Nina Shea, director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom, told CBN News.
“That’s a euphemism. It means that Christians are being killed and driven out,” she said.
Shea said the phenomenon has affected the two largest Christian populations in the Middle East.
“About two thirds of the Christians in Iraq have already left,” Shea said. “In Egypt, we’re just beginning to see those with green cards, those with visas are fleeing. Those who can leave are leaving.”
“They’re very, very worried about their future because there’s an Islamist parliament now,” she said.
For years, Middle East Christians lived under the protection of long-time dictators. The so-called Arab Spring ended that with the overthrow of regimes like that of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.
“The old secular order — even though it was a dictatorship, military dictatorship at that, very oppressive for them — they nevertheless, were able to have churches and to pray as Christians,” Shea told CBN News. “Now they’re concerned that they can no longer do that.”
In Saudi Arabia, most Christians are foreign workers. No churches are allowed. And Shea revealed that, now, the government is even hunting down people who pray in their homes.
“There was an incident in December of 2011 against 35 Ethiopian Christians. These are Ethiopians who are working as domestics for the most part in Saudi Arabia, and 25 of them were women. They were abused in prison. They were simply holding their weekly service, prayer service,” she explained.
Shea noted that it’s not just the Middle East that’s seeing Muslim radicalization.
“There is a radicalization of Islam going on throughout the world and this is having an impact on the tolerance that there is for non-Muslims. So Christians are very much threatened throughout the world,” she said.
Those countries include Nigeria, North Korea, China, Vietnam, and Pakistan.
“Anyone who defends them who are Muslim — they’re being attacked and killed. And of course the blasphemy law in Pakistan carries a death penalty,” Shea said.
Yet this widespread persecution is largely ignored by the mainstream media. A rare exception is this Newsweek article by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who is described as a Somali-Dutch feminist, writer and politician.
Hirsi Ali wrote that the world often hears complaints about Muslims victimized by the West, “but, in fact, a wholly different kind of war is underway.”
“(It’s) an unrecognized battle costing thousands of lives,” Ali told CBN News. “Christians are being killed in the Islamic world because of their religion. It is a rising genocide that ought to provoke global alarm.”
Ali said the West needs to use financial and diplomatic pressure against offending countries.
Shea specifically points to the United States as not doing enough, especially in Egypt.
“We have to start speaking out and we can use quiet diplomacy,” Shea suggested. “We can use more public statements to signal that it matters to us, that we’re not indifferent, not a green light for them to continue killing Christians and disrespecting their worship.”
“So I think that we have a lot of levers to pull and we just need to start doing it,” she said.
swissdefenceleague 