Pipes still can't get away from the idea that Islamists and Muslims are
different.  They aren't.

Bruce

[London Terrorism:] 
British "Covenant of Security" with Islamists Ends
by Daniel Pipes
New York Sun
July 8, 2005
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/2742

Terrorism usually comes like a bolt from the blue, but not so the four
explosions yesterday in London, killing at least 37. Some British
Islamist leaders have been warning for months that such violence was
imminent.

An Islamist British group called Al-Muhajiroun - "the immigrants" in
Arabic - for some time publicly stated that Britain was immune from
Islamist violence because of its acceptable behavior toward Muslims
within the country's borders. In an April 2004 conversation, the
24-year-old Sayful Islam, who heads Al-Muhajiroun's Luton branch,
announced that he supported Osama Bin Laden "100%" in the quest to
achieve "the worldwide domination of Islam," but went on to voice an
aversion to himself performing terrorist acts in Britain.

Yet, Mr. Islam endorsed terrorism in Britain in a broader sense "When
a bomb attack happens here, I won't be against it, even if it kills my
own children. . But it is against Islam for me to engage personally in
acts of terrorism in the UK because I live here. According to Islam, I
have a covenant of security with the UK, as long as they allow us
Muslims to live here in peace." He further explained. "If we want to
engage in terrorism, we would have to leave the country. It is against
Islam to do otherwise."

Covenant of security? What is that? In an August 2004 story in the New
Statesman, "Why terrorists love Britain," Jamie Campbell cited the
author of Inside Al Qaeda, Mohamed Sifaoui, as saying, "it has long
been recognized by the British Islamists, by the British government
and by UK intelligence agencies, that as long as Britain guarantees a
degree of freedom to the likes of Hassan Butt [an overtly
pro-terrorist Islamist], the terrorist strikes will continue to be
planned within the borders of the UK but will not occur here."

The New Statesman story drew from this the perversely ironic
conclusion that "the presence of vocal and active Islamist terrorist
sympathizers in the U.K. actually makes British people safer, while
the full brunt of British-based terrorist plotting is suffered by
people in other countries."

A Syrian immigrant to Britain who headed Al-Muhajiroun, Omar Bakri
Mohammed, confirmed the covenant of security, describing companions of
the Prophet Muhammad who were given protection by the king of
Ethiopia. That experience, he told the magazine, led to the Koranic
notion of covenant of security: Muslims may not attack the inhabitants
of a country where they live in safety. This "makes it unlikely that
British-based Muslims will carry out operations in the U.K. itself,"
Mr. Mohammed said.

But in January 2005, Mr. Mohammed determined that the covenant of
security had ended for British Muslims because of post-September 11,
2001, anti-terrorist legislation that meant "the whole of Britain has
become Dar ul-Harb," or territory open for Muslim conquest. Therefore,
in a reference to unbelievers, "the kuffar has no sanctity for their
own life or property."

The country had gone from safe haven to enemy camp. To renew the
covenant of security would require British authorities to undo that
legislation and release those detained without trial. If they fail to
do so, British Muslims must "join the global Islamic camp against the
global crusade camp."

Mr. Mohammed went on overtly to threaten the British people: "The
response from the Muslims will be horrendous if the British government
continues in the way it treats Muslims," explicitly raising the
possibility of suicide bombings under the leadership of Al-Qaeda.
Western governments must know that if they do not change course,
Muslims will "give them a 9/11 day after day after day!"

When Sean O'Neil and Yaakov Lappin of the London Times asked Mr.
Mohammed about his statements on the covenant, he said his definition
of Britain as Dar ul-Harb was "theoretical" and he provided a
non-bellicose re-interpretation:

It means that Muslims can no longer be considered to have sanctity and
security here, therefore they should consider leaving this country and
going back to their homelands. Otherwise they are under siege and
obviously we do not want to see that we are living under siege.

In a less guarded moment, however, Mr. Mohammed acknowledged that for
him, "the life of an unbeliever has no value."

Yesterday's explosions mark the end of the "covenant of security."
Let's hope they also mark the end of an era of innocence, and that
British authorities now begin to preempt terrorism rather than wait to
become its victims.




--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: [email protected]
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to