[OT] - Interview with a former Jihadist

Discuss music production with Ableton Live.
Post Reply
M. Bréqs
Posts: 1479
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 6:02 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

[OT] - Interview with a former Jihadist

Post by M. Bréqs » Fri Nov 03, 2006 7:01 pm

Reprinted from the National Post, 3 November 2006. Emphasis mine.

I've been saying this for years, but because I'm not a muslim, I have no credibility with the Jihadist apologists on this forum. Finally somebody has spoken up. Along with Ishrad Manji, Dr. Tawfik Hamid is a welcome voice of reason.
Dr. Tawfik Hamid doesn't tell people where he lives. Not the street, not the city, not even the country. It's safer that way. It's only the letters of testimony from some of the highest intelligence officers in the Western world that enable him to move freely. This medical doctor, author and activist once was a member of Egypt's Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya (Arabic for "the Islamic Group"), a banned terrorist organization. He was trained under Ayman al-Zawahiri, the bearded jihadi who appears in Bin Laden's videos, telling the world that Islamic violence will stop only once we all become Muslims.

He's a disarmingly gentle and courteous man. But he's determined to tell a complacent North America what he knows about fundamentalist Muslim imperialism.

"Yes, 'imperialism,' " he tells me. "The deliberate and determined expansion of militant Islam and its attempt to triumph not only in the Islamic world but in Europe and North America. Pure ideology. Muslim terrorists kill and slaughter not because of what they experience but because of what they believe."
Hamid drank in the message of Jihadism while at medical school in Cairo, and devoted himself to the cause. His group began meeting in a small room. Then a larger one. Then a Mosque reserved for followers of al-Zawahiri. By the time Hamid left the movement, its members were intimidating other students who were unsympathetic.

He is now 45 years old, and has had many years to reflect on why he was willing to die and kill for his religion. "The first thing you have to understand is that it has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with poverty or lack of education," he says. "I was from a middle-class family and my parents were not religious. Hardly anyone in the movement at university came from a background that was different from mine.

"I've heard this poverty nonsense time and time again from Western apologists for Islam, most of them not Muslim by the way. There are millions of passive supporters of terror who may be poor and needy but most of those who do the killing are wealthy, privileged, educated and free. If it were about poverty, ask yourself why it is middle-class Muslims -- and never poor Christians -- who become suicide bombers in Palestine."

His analysis is fascinating. Muslim fundamentalists believe, he insists, that Saudi Arabia's petroleum-based wealth is a divine gift, and that Saudi influence is sanctioned by Allah. Thus the extreme brand of Sunni Islam that spread from the Kingdom to the rest of the Islamic world is regarded not merely as one interpretation of the religion but the only genuine interpretation. The expansion of violent and regressive Islam, he continues, began in the late 1970s, and can be traced precisely to the growing financial clout of Saudi Arabia.

"We're not talking about a fringe cult here," he tells me. "Salafist [fundamentalist] Islam is the dominant version of the religion and is taught in almost every Islamic university in the world. It is puritanical, extreme and does, yes, mean that women can be beaten, apostates killed and Jews called pigs and monkeys."

He leans back, takes a deep breath and moves to another area, one that he says is far too seldom discussed: "North Americans are too squeamish about discussing the obvious sexual dynamic behind suicide bombings. If they understood contemporary Islamic society, they would understand the sheer sexual tension of Sunni Muslim men. Look at the figures for suicide bombings and see how few are from the Shiite world. Terrorism and violence yes, but not suicide. The overwhelming majority are from Sunnis. Now within the Shiite world there are what is known as temporary marriages, lasting anywhere from an hour to 95 years. It enables men to release their sexual frustrations.

"Islam condemns extra-marital sex as well as masturbation, which is also taught in the Christian tradition. But Islam also tells of unlimited sexual ecstasy in paradise with beautiful virgins for the martyr who gives his life for the faith. Don't for a moment underestimate this blinding passion or its influence on those who accept fundamentalism."

A pause. "I know. I was one who accepted it."

This partial explanation is shocking more for its banality than its horror. Mass murder provoked partly by simple lust. But it cannot be denied that letters written by suicide bombers frequently dwell on waiting virgins and sexual gratification.

"The sexual aspect is, of course, just one part of this. But I can tell you what it is not about. Not about Israel, not about Iraq, not about Afghanistan. They are mere excuses. Algerian Muslim fundamentalists murdered 150,000 other Algerian Muslims, sometimes slitting the throats of children in front of their parents. Are you seriously telling me that this was because of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians or American foreign policy?"

He's exasperated now, visibly angry at what he sees as a willful Western foolishness. "Stop asking what you have done wrong. Stop it! They're slaughtering you like sheep and you still look within. You criticize your history, your institutions, your churches. Why can't you realize that it has nothing to do with what you have done but with what they want."

Then he leaves -- for where, he cannot say. A voice that is silenced in its homeland and too often ignored by those who prefer convenient revision to disturbing truth. The tragedy is that Tawfik Hamid is almost used to it.
Other sources:
Dr. Tawfik Hamid wrote:"Only a small number of Muslims are jihadists, but many, many more sympathize with their goals. They are passive terrorists."
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar ... /OPINION01
Dr. Tawfik Hamid wrote:“Unfortunately, this resistance to peaceful teaching is not limited to fundamentalists. It is now at the level of the people.”
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Re ... p?ID=25069
Dr. Tawfik Hamid wrote:"...the cancerous teachings of Salafi Islam could become insignificant if the majority of Muslims were to vocally oppose them... In addition to internal immune reactions, externally applied interventions also can destroy cancer cells. Like cancer-fighting chemotherapy, strongly applied military might can reduce large tumors. America eliminated al-Qaida training camps in Afghanistan, but the verdict is not yet in on whether Israel this past summer similarly decimated Hezbollah."
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/o ... 66,00.html

b0unce
Posts: 5379
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 4:16 pm

Post by b0unce » Fri Nov 03, 2006 7:36 pm

The Post was founded in 1998 by Conrad Black to combat what he saw as an "over-liberalizing" of editorial policy in Canadian newspapers. Black built the new paper around the Financial Post, an established business-oriented newspaper in Toronto which he purchased from Sun Media in 1997. (Financial Post was retained as the name of the new paper's business section.)

From the beginning, the Post has had a strongly conservative editorial stance by Canadian standards, and has an editorial page featuring the writings of many prominent neo-conservatives and libertarians from the United States and Canada, including Diane Francis, Andrew Coyne, Colby Cosh and David Frum.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Post


surprise, surprise.
spreader of butter

kineticUk
Posts: 1531
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 2:37 am

Post by kineticUk » Fri Nov 03, 2006 7:45 pm

Well spotted b0unce.
Who gives a fuck though, learnin' about Jihadists? And no disrespect meant towards you M. Bréqs. I couldn't care a less ... its propaganda (Thats the word)
Don't believe everything you read or see on the tv. And shit we're all gonna die anyway...don't worry.
Have a nice day. :)
MacBook MacOS Live 9.7.1 Max for Live Push Logic

M. Bréqs
Posts: 1479
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 6:02 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Post by M. Bréqs » Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:17 pm

b0unce wrote: surprise, surprise.
Doesn't make it any less true.

Contra
Posts: 1263
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:59 am
Location: Miami,FL. USA
Contact:

Post by Contra » Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:28 pm

www.abrahamic-faith.org

www.yourarmstoisrael.org


search for world war 3 : unmasking the end time beast.

its in the text the use.
to kill us all,
and those "who dont" are actually the "radicals" in islam

M. Bréqs
Posts: 1479
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 6:02 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Post by M. Bréqs » Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:28 pm

By attacking the source, b0unce has made a reverse appeal to authority, a logical fallacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority

However, we see that in order to appeal to an authority legitimately, one must satisfy the following conditions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority wrote:1. The authority must have competence in an area, not just glamour, prestige, rank or popularity. Citation to statements made by a sports or entertainment figure about foreign policy would be an example of an improper appeal to authority.
Dr. Tawfik Hamid certainly qualifies on the first count, having been a former jihadist himself. He is not popular, nor is he reknowned for anything other than his experiences in life.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority wrote:2. The judgment must be within the authority's field of competence. Linus Pauling won a Nobel Prize for chemistry, then later made claims that massive quantities of vitamin C would prevent cancer in humans. This claim was in the field of medicine and thus outside his field of competence.
The authority must be interpreted correctly. This is particularly a problem in religion; where the Koran, Bible, Torah, etc., have been interpreted with varying and sometimes contradictory results.
Dr. Tawfik Hamid again qualifies based on his experiences as a member of Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority wrote:3. Direct evidence must be available, at least in principle.
Evidence supporting Dr. Dr. Tawfik Hamid's position is legion; Turn on Al-Manar, you'll see it for yourself. Check out MEMRI.org, you'll see even more.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority wrote:4. The expert should be reasonably unbiased (not unduly influenced by other factors, such as money, political considerations, or religious beliefs). For this reason, appealing to one's own authority is never legitimate. The trial of Galileo (for promoting his belief in a heliocentric solar system and not the geocentric model taught by the Church) is one famous example. The court did not arrive at its guilty verdict by applying the scientific method of hypothesis and empirical observation. Instead Galileo was found guilty on no other basis than the religious authority of the Roman Catholic Church itself, which was at the basis of the prevalent scientific theory of the time.
Again, Dr. Tawfik Hamid comes off as legitimate. In fact, he has disincentive to speak as he does, considering the death threats he faces for being so uncannily blunt. Thus I can see no bias on his part.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority wrote:5. The judgment must be representative of expert opinions on the issue (as opposed to an unrepresentative sample). Lawyers sometimes find a non-representative "expert" to offer a theory which is not generally accepted (such as a so-called Twinkie defense) in hopes of winning their case.
Dr. Tawfik Hamid unfortunately doesn't represent a majority of muslims... This is the whole crux of his arguement, thus it is difficult to meet this condition. However, Ishrad Manji and a few other courageous muslims echo his sentiments. If you wish I can try to find more.
Last edited by M. Bréqs on Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:36 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Contra
Posts: 1263
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:59 am
Location: Miami,FL. USA
Contact:

Post by Contra » Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:30 pm

kineticUk wrote:Well spotted b0unce.
Who gives a fuck though, learnin' about Jihadists? And no disrespect meant towards you M. Bréqs. I couldn't care a less ... its propaganda (Thats the word)
Don't believe everything you read or see on the tv. And shit we're all gonna die anyway...don't worry.
Have a nice day. :)

true true, but its good to know your enemies so that u may live that much longer. or at least warn others, savin lives is better than doinn nothing.

b0unce
Posts: 5379
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 4:16 pm

Post by b0unce » Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:36 pm

Anyone is free to do a little research on this guy, he's being paraded around all the conservative zionist rags. Whats more, he's not doing it for free either. He gets paid a handsome sum for each of his appearances.

Take a little bit of salt with the interview, know about the guy who's speaking, and know about the people publishing it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt

Thats all I'm saying.
spreader of butter

M. Bréqs
Posts: 1479
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 6:02 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Post by M. Bréqs » Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:40 pm

Well, I find it funny b0unce that you criticize the source (conservative, zionist rags) when you have on this same forum rejected criticism of many of your sources (leftist jihadist rags like the Guardian, etc).

Here's my proposal then;

How about we declare a truce on challenging the sources and actually debate the content of what this man says?
Last edited by M. Bréqs on Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:48 pm, edited 2 times in total.

b0unce
Posts: 5379
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 4:16 pm

Post by b0unce » Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:41 pm

Nope.

I'm not about to ignore the fact this guy is getting PAID to say what he's saying by CONSERVATIVE institutions.
spreader of butter

M. Bréqs
Posts: 1479
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 6:02 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Post by M. Bréqs » Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:42 pm

b0unce wrote:Nope.

I'm not about to ignore the fact this guy is getting PAID to say what he's saying by CONSERVATIVE institutions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_motive
Last edited by M. Bréqs on Fri Nov 03, 2006 9:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

noisetonepause
Posts: 4938
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2002 3:38 pm
Location: Sticks and stones

Re: [OT] - Interview with a former Jihadist

Post by noisetonepause » Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:43 pm

M. Bréqs wrote:I've been saying this for years
People have been saying what you're saying since Mohammed's time.
Suit #1: I mean, have you got any insight as to why a bright boy like this would jeopardize the lives of millions?
Suit #2: No, sir, he says he does this sort of thing for fun.

b0unce
Posts: 5379
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 4:16 pm

Post by b0unce » Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:43 pm

M. Bréqs wrote:Well, I find it funny b0unce that you criticize the source (conservative, zionist rags) when you have on this same forum rejected criticism of many of your sources (leftist jihadist rags like the Guardian, infowars, etc).

Here's my proposal then;

How about we declare a truce on challenging the sources and actually debate the content of what this man says?
I have -never- quoted infowars. EVER. infact I just checked the website out to see what you were talking about - and its really far-fetched to put THE GUARDIAN in the same category....my goodness you are far gone.

I have quoted the guardian, and thats it. cheapshot and an out-and-out LIE saying I reject criticism of infowars.
spreader of butter

M. Bréqs
Posts: 1479
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 6:02 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Post by M. Bréqs » Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:48 pm

b0unce wrote:
M. Bréqs wrote:Well, I find it funny b0unce that you criticize the source (conservative, zionist rags) when you have on this same forum rejected criticism of many of your sources (leftist jihadist rags like the Guardian, etc).

Here's my proposal then;

How about we declare a truce on challenging the sources and actually debate the content of what this man says?
I have -never- quoted infowars. EVER. infact I just checked the website out to see what you were talking about - and its really far-fetched to put THE GUARDIAN in the same category....my goodness you are far gone.

I have quoted the guardian, and thats it. cheapshot and an out-and-out LIE saying I reject criticism of infowars.
Very well then, my error. Please accept my apologies, I may have confused you with computo. My post has been edited. However my proposal to discuss the content of the message stands, if you're interested.
Last edited by M. Bréqs on Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Contra
Posts: 1263
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:59 am
Location: Miami,FL. USA
Contact:

Post by Contra » Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:49 pm

how bout this, read mohammed's Haditha(hadiths-or biographies) and see how he lived it, "radical islam" whether this doctor says it or not is true islam as taught and lived by mohammed and his followers, so to say sunni's beliefs are more peaceful or shiite, is absurd. you do have peaceful muslims, but to true islamists they are secular, because they do not follow mohammed's teachings to a t.

and the day will come where they willl either have to join the true islamists, or fight for life with the rest of us, thats up to them.

check the book WW3:unmasking the end time beast,
written by Simon Altaf an ex-sunni muslim.

www.abrahamic-faith.org

Post Reply