DBQ: ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES
Is extremism ever justified to spread religious belief and/or exercise retribution for the past?
Individuals who have taken part in religious extremism think that their actions were acceptable and that it is okay. However, I believe that their severe actions, although they thought it was right, is not justifiable. Extremists thought their actions were holy and done in the purpose of God, but I think what they did was inhumane and immoral.
How might the wars of today, post-9/11, be Holy Wars that mirror the struggles of the middle ages?
Back in the middle ages, Holy Wars meant taking up the “crux”, and fighting for the influence and glory of a religion. Modern wars all have a religious influence, even though it wasn’t what started all the conflict. Most wars of today involve some conflict over property (land), religious power (influence), and what holy land belongs to who. A war that is getting progressively worse is in Israel, between the Israeli and Palestinians over who the holy land belongs to. Both sides believe that their religion is superior and deserves the holy land that is rightfully theirs. They believe that it is so obvious and the opposite party should not even attempt to seize the land. This war has a similar duration as those occurring in the middle ages, as it started after WWII and has continued to the present day.
~From 632 onward through the middle ages, Islam continued to spread as a religion around the Mediterranean, taking instruction from their prophet Muhammed under newly established “caliphates” (ruling groups). The Islamic Seljuk Turks, in the 11th century, began to move into the holiest sites for Jews and Christians (like Jerusalem, the birthplace of Christ) and claim them for their own. This prompted Pope Urban II, in 1095, to call for the the first crusade to repel the Turks from the Christian Holy Lands.~
Document 1- They Bore the Sign of the Cross
Ekkehard of Aura, a German monk and historian, wrote about the reaction of Christians across Western Europe to the speech given by Pope Urban II:
“After Urban had aroused the spirits of all by the promise of forgiveness to those who undertook the expedition with single-hearted devotion, toward one hundred thousand men were appointed to the immediate service of God from Aquitaine and Normandy, England, Scotland, Ireland, Brittany, Galicia, Gascony, France, Flanders, Lorraine, and from other Christian peoples, whose names I no longer retain. It was truly an army of “crusaders,” for they bore the sign of the cross on their garments as a reminder that they should mortify {severely discipline} the flesh, and in the hope that they would in this way triumph over the enemies of the cross of Christ, as it had once come to pass in the case of the great Constantine. Thus, through the marvelous and unexampled working of divine dispensation {release}, all these members of Christ, so different in speech, origin, and nationality, were suddenly brought together as one body through their love of Christ.”
SOURCE: Ekkehard’s Hierosolymita, a history, 1099
According to Ekkehard, what was the response all over Europe to the speech by Pope Urban II?
The Europeans reacted to Pope Urban II’s speech “with single-hearted devotion” to God. They were drawn by the promise of forgiveness and the certainty of getting into heaven, to those who underwent the pilgrimage. One hundred thousand men from Aquitaine and Normandy, England, Scotland, Ireland, Brittany, Galicia, Gascony, France, Flanders, Lorraine joined the First Crusaders army.
What was surprising or amazing about this event?
What was astounding was the large amounts of determined and religiously devout men who willingly fought for the expedition knowing the high risk of death. It is surprising how their love for God made them sure to follow the proclamation of the Pope, that they didn’t hesitate to go on the First Crusade. I was amazed by the immense faith these Christian had that they were willing to hand over their lives.
~After the first Crusade, Jerusalem was restored to Christian and Jewish control; however, Saladin and his faithful Islamist followers vowed to retake control of the city for Muhammed. All three religions saw Jerusalem as the city given them by God.~
Document 2 - The Muslim Response
“If God blesses us by enabling us to drive His enemies out of Jerusalem, how fortunate and happy we would be! For Jerusalem has been controlled by the enemy for ninety-one years, during which time God has received nothing from us here in the way of adoration. At the same time, the zeal {devotion} of the Muslim rulers to deliver it languished {weakened}. Time passed, and so did many indifferent generations, while the Franks succeeded in rooting themselves strongly there. Now God has reserved the merit of its recovery for one house, the house of the sons of Ayyub [Saladin’s family], in order to unite all hearts in
appreciation of its members.”
SOURCE: The Islamic leader Saladin’s speech urging his people to retake Jerusalem, 1187.
What reasons did Saladin give for retaking Jerusalem?
Saladin preached to his followers that God had allowed them to conquer the Holy Land, to drive out their enemies (Christians and Jews). God enabled them to take back the Holy Land because the it had been ruled over their enemies for 91 years, and in the process they drove their enemies out. The land was now to be set apart for the house of the sons of Ayyub (Saladin’s family) in order to unite all hearts in appreciation of its members.
What arguments does he use to inspire his listeners (the Muslim people)?
Saladin states, “If God blesses us by enabling us to drive His enemies out of Jerusalem, how fortunate and happy we would be! For Jerusalem has been controlled by the enemy for ninety-one years, during which time God has received nothing from us here in the way of adoration.” (The Islamic leader Saladin’s speech urging his people to retake Jerusalem) I think this evoked the Muslims because God had given them an opportunity to take back what is rightfully theirs. Saladin reinforced their permission from God to finally seize the Holy Land. Saladin convinces his followers by saying “how fortunate and happy would we be!” saying that all those who follow will be appreciated in God’s eyes. The muslims have been waiting for this moment and they now had the opportunity to do so.
~As you can see from the map above, there were three more crusades emanating from Europe and attempting to drive out the Turks and Muslims from the Middle East. Many regard the Crusades as largely a failure, as the Muslim and Turkish rule was not vanquished in the region. Some scholars point to the Crusades as being part of what thrust Europe out of Medieval Times and into the Renaissance.
But, now, moving forward to today, we will see that this religious struggle has been reexamined and perhaps rekindled…~
...September 16th, 2001: following the attacks on New York and Washington, George W. Bush mentions launching a “crusade” on the Muslim attackers...
Document 3 - Fast-forward to Today
In recent months, the radical fringes within Christianity and Islam seem to have launched a modern-day crusade, a slander-to-vanquish battle where the mass media appears to have taken over from the sword as a weapon of choice. In an interview with CBS' 60 Minutes last year, the Rev. Jerry Falwell called the prophet Muhammad a "terrorist" and "a man of war." Falwell's comments capped a TV season that saw televangelist Pat Robertson call the prophet a "robber and a brigand" and the Rev. Franklin Graham (son of the Rev. Billy Graham) denounce Islam as a "very evil and wicked religion."
On the other side, underground cassette tapes of vitriolic Friday sermons delivered by mullahs across the Muslim world are available from Cairo to Quetta. And from post-9/11 hideouts, al Qaeda continues to release taped messages promising a fight against the "infidels." "They have taken their rabbis and their monks for gods beside Allah, and also the Messiah son of Mary," said bin Laden in a audiotape released last November. He was expanding on an earlier warning issued before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that the West had "divided the world into two regions — one of faith and another of infidelity, from which we hope God will protect us."
Certainly the choruses of commentaries emerging from several Christian evangelists over the past few months have been vitriolic and personally targeted at Mohammed, while Muslim extremists have steered clear of attacking Jesus, since he is also considered a prophet in the Koran.
By all accounts, jihad, or struggle, has been a particularly contentious term, with many Muslims interpreting it to mean a struggle to defend one's faith and ideals. Some experts say the fundamentalist interpretation of jihad as the duty of Muslims to fight to rid the Islamic world of a corrupting Western influence or of autocratic Muslim leaders received a modern shot in the arm when the Egyptian founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al-Banna, used the concept of jihad as a holy war to try ending the foreign occupation of Muslim lands. The Muslim Brotherhood is widely believed to have spawned the al Qaeda network. But while the Koran is open to interpretation, el Fadl admits that the intellectual climate in the Islamic world tends to be inhospitable to dissent. "I do agree that in the contemporary age, dissent in Islam has become difficult, to say the least," says the UCLA professor, who says he has received threats over his writings and seen the cancellation of planned publications of Arabic translations of several of his books.
SOURCE: Leela Jacinto, ABC News, Jan 2014
What are some accusations that Christians and Muslims make toward each other?
“In an interview with CBS' 60 Minutes last year”, Christians specifically called Islam religion “‘very evil and wicked religion’”. Many people have described Muhammad as a “‘terrorist’” and “‘man of war’”. The Islamic religion has reacted with equally harsh statements also found in this article. Al Qaeda has promised a war against “infidels”, in which is their reference for Christians. “‘Bin Laden has said They have taken their rabbis and their monks for gods beside Allah, and also the Messiah son of Mary’”.
What are the differences in interpretation of jihad that the author points out?
Jihad is commonly interpreted as holy war, or struggle. While some say, “fundamentalist interpretation of jihad as the duty of Muslims to fight to rid the Islamic world of a corrupting Western influence or of autocratic Muslim leaders received a modern shot in the arm when the Egyptian founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al-Banna, used the concept of jihad as a holy war to try ending the foreign occupation of Muslim lands.” The Muslim Brotherhood is often accused of supporting and forming the Al Qaeda organization, but the Koran is open to interpretation, and it just so happened that Al Qaeda became an extremist group due to their interpretations.
Document 4 - ISIS/ISIL reading of the Quran and Jihad
The leader [of ISIS] specifically called for lone-wolf attacks in the United States and France -- two countries that have been conducting airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq.
The U.S. State Department had no comment to CNN when asked about the message Sunday night.
"Hinder those who want to harm your brothers," the ISIS spokesman said. "The best thing you can do is to strive to your best and kill any disbeliever, whether he be French, American or from any of their allies."
Civilians should not be exempt from brutality, he said. "Do not ask for anyone's advice and do not seek anyone's verdict. Kill the disbeliever whether he is civilian or military, for they have the same ruling. Both of them are disbelievers. Both of them are considered to be waging war."
"Oh Americans, and oh Europeans, the Islamic State did not initiate a war against you, as your governments and media try to make you believe," the ISIS spokesman added. "It is you who started the transgression against us, and thus you deserve blame and you will pay a great price."
He gave specifics on how to attack Westerners: "Rig the roads with explosives for them. Attack their bases. Raid their homes. Cut off their heads. Do not let them feel secure. Hunt them wherever they may be. Turn their worldly life into fear and fire. Remove their families from their homes and thereafter blow up their homes."
Al Qaeda has called for similar attacks in the past. But given ISIS' radical support base, which believes ISIS leaders are the rightful sovereign leaders of all Muslims worldwide, the ISIS pronouncement carries more weight.
SOURCE: Josh Levs and Holly Yan, CNN http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/22/world/meast/isis-threatens-west/
What is ISIS’s directive to its believers regarding their fight?
ISIS instructs their followers not to prevent the deaths of those who want to harm them. They also tell them to kill any disbeliever, military or civilian at all costs. “‘Do not ask for anyone's advice and do not seek anyone's verdict.’” They believe that it is our fault (Americans), and that we have “waged this war” against each other. They strive to not let disbelievers feel secure, to hunt them down, cut off their heads, raid their homes, and bomb their cities. To paralyze the non-disbelievers in fear of their life.
How does the ISIS spokesman relate the current war to past struggles between the west and Islam?
He claims that it is not our governments that have brought this crisis upon us, but ourselves. That Westerners are to blame. ISIS is taking similar action alike the terrorist group Al Qaeda. The spokesperson specifies how to attack Westerners by saying, "’Rig the roads with explosives for them. Attack their bases. Raid their homes. Cut off their heads. Do not let them feel secure. Hunt them wherever they may be. Turn their worldly life into fear and fire. Remove their families from their homes and thereafter blow up their homes,’” suggesting how America and France attacked them.
Document 5 - President Obama’s view of Muslims as peaceable
“I have made it clear that America will not base our entire foreign policy on reacting to terrorism. Instead, we’ve waged a focused campaign against al Qaeda and its associated forces -- taking out their leaders, denying them the safe havens they rely on. At the same time, we have reaffirmed again and again that the United States is not and never will be at war with Islam. Islam teaches peace. Muslims the world over aspire to live with dignity and a sense of justice. And when it comes to America and Islam, there is no us and them, there is only us -- because millions of Muslim Americans are part of the fabric of our country.
So we reject any suggestion of a clash of civilizations. Belief in permanent religious war is the misguided refuge of extremists who cannot build or create anything, and therefore peddle only fanaticism and hate. And it is no exaggeration to say that humanity’s future depends on us uniting against those who would divide us along the fault lines of tribe or sect, race or religion.
But this is not simply a matter of words. Collectively, we must take concrete steps to address the danger posed by religiously motivated fanatics, and the trends that fuel their recruitment. Moreover, this campaign against extremism goes beyond a narrow security challenge. For while we’ve degraded methodically core al Qaeda and supported a transition to a sovereign Afghan government, extremist ideology has shifted to other places -- particularly in the Middle East and North Africa, where a quarter of young people have no job, where food and water could grow scarce, where corruption is rampant and sectarian conflicts have become increasingly hard to contain.
No God condones this terror. No grievance justifies these actions. There can be no reasoning -- no negotiation -- with this brand of evil. The only language understood by killers like this is the language of force. So the United States of America will work with a broad coalition to dismantle this network of death.”
SOURCE: www.whitehouse.gov
What is Obama’s sense of Islam as a religion, in the United States and worldwide?
Obama speaks for the US saying that the Muslim culture and Americans are not separate things, because a good amount of America is Islamic, living peaceful lives of dignity and justice. He states that the US and Islam will not be at war, however we will be shutting down terrorist groups’ resources. Obama wants to eliminate this evil, “‘this network of death’”, but not necessarily go against Muslims but rather the extremist terrorist groups.
What is Obama’s view of these modern day extremists, and how does he say the west must respond?
Obama plans to cut off terrorist groups’ resources and eliminate their leaders. He says the only way to fixing this is to “‘dismantle this network of death’”. “Belief in permanent religious war is the misguided refuge of extremists who cannot build or create anything, and therefore create only fanaticism and hate.” He thinks that humanity’s future relies on us uniting against forces that would divide us, like different, race or religion.
So, what are your views on the conflict today? What is your CLAIM?
Is the battle that Muslim extremists like ISIL/ISIS wage today a direct result of the teachings of Muhammad and the early Muslims? Is it justified?
I do not think it is a direct teaching of Muhammad. I believe that they may be interpreting what he proclaimed in a way that suits them. The basic principles of what they are doing may have some correlation as to what Muhammad taught, but I do not believe it is a direct teaching of his. There is no religion that states you should go out and kill people and battle people just for your religion. I know that it is stated in some religions that you should if there is a large need to do so but I do not think Muhammad in his first teachings said that. I think that they are interpreting what Muhammad taught, but mostly the Koran in a way they think should be justified, but I do not think their actions should justified at all. Even if they truly believe they are doing exactly what Muhammad wanted them to do, it is no excuse for all of the horrible things they have done. Just because you think you are doing the correct and justified thing for your religion, it should and is not okay for them to go to the extent in which they have gone.
Are the wars of today (Afghanistan, Iraq, and now ISIS in Syria and Iraq) another “crusade” against Islam? Do you think it will work?
I don’t think that the wars of today are another crusade because the people these groups are opposing aren’t fighting as one united religion they are fighting as a group trying to prevent the extremists from attacking their citizens. The wests goal also isn’t to regain any Holy Land, which is what the crusades goals typically are, but to hold on to all land the west has and to keep the people on it safe. I am hopeful that the extremists networks of death are dismantled, but I’m not entirely sure as to what the outcome will be.
What should the response be to the Islamic State’s extremist attacks?
I believe that humanity’s future relies on us, all of us, uniting against those who would break us up, the extremists, along the fault lines of tribe or sect, race or religion. All together, we must take actual steps towards addressing the chaos created by religiously motivated fanatics, and the trends that fuel their recruitment. If we do not do something to stand up for ourselves, how are we supposed to survive? I believe the steps we should take should consists of actions that help break apart the networks the extremists have created. I envision the first response always being to peacefully dismantle the network and the second to react with force, if necessary.
Claim:
We need to progressively dismantle the extremist groups so that we can confront this problem. If we sit and wait things will only get worse. I do not think we should act with force or war first though. If we could resolve this in a peaceful manner it would be amazing. However that seems very unlikely and I think we need to resolve this issue now. If we don't start now than we will never be able to pick ourselves back up, but if we do it will be a tough ride. I do not think we should react with some crazy action right now, but I do believe that we should act now. If we start with something small and progressively make our actions bigger than I think we can stop these extremist groups once and for all. We do need to start now though because if we do not, there is going to be a long, scary, and tough road ahead of us.
Individuals who have taken part in religious extremism think that their actions were acceptable and that it is okay. However, I believe that their severe actions, although they thought it was right, is not justifiable. Extremists thought their actions were holy and done in the purpose of God, but I think what they did was inhumane and immoral.
How might the wars of today, post-9/11, be Holy Wars that mirror the struggles of the middle ages?
Back in the middle ages, Holy Wars meant taking up the “crux”, and fighting for the influence and glory of a religion. Modern wars all have a religious influence, even though it wasn’t what started all the conflict. Most wars of today involve some conflict over property (land), religious power (influence), and what holy land belongs to who. A war that is getting progressively worse is in Israel, between the Israeli and Palestinians over who the holy land belongs to. Both sides believe that their religion is superior and deserves the holy land that is rightfully theirs. They believe that it is so obvious and the opposite party should not even attempt to seize the land. This war has a similar duration as those occurring in the middle ages, as it started after WWII and has continued to the present day.
~From 632 onward through the middle ages, Islam continued to spread as a religion around the Mediterranean, taking instruction from their prophet Muhammed under newly established “caliphates” (ruling groups). The Islamic Seljuk Turks, in the 11th century, began to move into the holiest sites for Jews and Christians (like Jerusalem, the birthplace of Christ) and claim them for their own. This prompted Pope Urban II, in 1095, to call for the the first crusade to repel the Turks from the Christian Holy Lands.~
Document 1- They Bore the Sign of the Cross
Ekkehard of Aura, a German monk and historian, wrote about the reaction of Christians across Western Europe to the speech given by Pope Urban II:
“After Urban had aroused the spirits of all by the promise of forgiveness to those who undertook the expedition with single-hearted devotion, toward one hundred thousand men were appointed to the immediate service of God from Aquitaine and Normandy, England, Scotland, Ireland, Brittany, Galicia, Gascony, France, Flanders, Lorraine, and from other Christian peoples, whose names I no longer retain. It was truly an army of “crusaders,” for they bore the sign of the cross on their garments as a reminder that they should mortify {severely discipline} the flesh, and in the hope that they would in this way triumph over the enemies of the cross of Christ, as it had once come to pass in the case of the great Constantine. Thus, through the marvelous and unexampled working of divine dispensation {release}, all these members of Christ, so different in speech, origin, and nationality, were suddenly brought together as one body through their love of Christ.”
SOURCE: Ekkehard’s Hierosolymita, a history, 1099
According to Ekkehard, what was the response all over Europe to the speech by Pope Urban II?
The Europeans reacted to Pope Urban II’s speech “with single-hearted devotion” to God. They were drawn by the promise of forgiveness and the certainty of getting into heaven, to those who underwent the pilgrimage. One hundred thousand men from Aquitaine and Normandy, England, Scotland, Ireland, Brittany, Galicia, Gascony, France, Flanders, Lorraine joined the First Crusaders army.
What was surprising or amazing about this event?
What was astounding was the large amounts of determined and religiously devout men who willingly fought for the expedition knowing the high risk of death. It is surprising how their love for God made them sure to follow the proclamation of the Pope, that they didn’t hesitate to go on the First Crusade. I was amazed by the immense faith these Christian had that they were willing to hand over their lives.
~After the first Crusade, Jerusalem was restored to Christian and Jewish control; however, Saladin and his faithful Islamist followers vowed to retake control of the city for Muhammed. All three religions saw Jerusalem as the city given them by God.~
Document 2 - The Muslim Response
“If God blesses us by enabling us to drive His enemies out of Jerusalem, how fortunate and happy we would be! For Jerusalem has been controlled by the enemy for ninety-one years, during which time God has received nothing from us here in the way of adoration. At the same time, the zeal {devotion} of the Muslim rulers to deliver it languished {weakened}. Time passed, and so did many indifferent generations, while the Franks succeeded in rooting themselves strongly there. Now God has reserved the merit of its recovery for one house, the house of the sons of Ayyub [Saladin’s family], in order to unite all hearts in
appreciation of its members.”
SOURCE: The Islamic leader Saladin’s speech urging his people to retake Jerusalem, 1187.
What reasons did Saladin give for retaking Jerusalem?
Saladin preached to his followers that God had allowed them to conquer the Holy Land, to drive out their enemies (Christians and Jews). God enabled them to take back the Holy Land because the it had been ruled over their enemies for 91 years, and in the process they drove their enemies out. The land was now to be set apart for the house of the sons of Ayyub (Saladin’s family) in order to unite all hearts in appreciation of its members.
What arguments does he use to inspire his listeners (the Muslim people)?
Saladin states, “If God blesses us by enabling us to drive His enemies out of Jerusalem, how fortunate and happy we would be! For Jerusalem has been controlled by the enemy for ninety-one years, during which time God has received nothing from us here in the way of adoration.” (The Islamic leader Saladin’s speech urging his people to retake Jerusalem) I think this evoked the Muslims because God had given them an opportunity to take back what is rightfully theirs. Saladin reinforced their permission from God to finally seize the Holy Land. Saladin convinces his followers by saying “how fortunate and happy would we be!” saying that all those who follow will be appreciated in God’s eyes. The muslims have been waiting for this moment and they now had the opportunity to do so.
~As you can see from the map above, there were three more crusades emanating from Europe and attempting to drive out the Turks and Muslims from the Middle East. Many regard the Crusades as largely a failure, as the Muslim and Turkish rule was not vanquished in the region. Some scholars point to the Crusades as being part of what thrust Europe out of Medieval Times and into the Renaissance.
But, now, moving forward to today, we will see that this religious struggle has been reexamined and perhaps rekindled…~
...September 16th, 2001: following the attacks on New York and Washington, George W. Bush mentions launching a “crusade” on the Muslim attackers...
Document 3 - Fast-forward to Today
In recent months, the radical fringes within Christianity and Islam seem to have launched a modern-day crusade, a slander-to-vanquish battle where the mass media appears to have taken over from the sword as a weapon of choice. In an interview with CBS' 60 Minutes last year, the Rev. Jerry Falwell called the prophet Muhammad a "terrorist" and "a man of war." Falwell's comments capped a TV season that saw televangelist Pat Robertson call the prophet a "robber and a brigand" and the Rev. Franklin Graham (son of the Rev. Billy Graham) denounce Islam as a "very evil and wicked religion."
On the other side, underground cassette tapes of vitriolic Friday sermons delivered by mullahs across the Muslim world are available from Cairo to Quetta. And from post-9/11 hideouts, al Qaeda continues to release taped messages promising a fight against the "infidels." "They have taken their rabbis and their monks for gods beside Allah, and also the Messiah son of Mary," said bin Laden in a audiotape released last November. He was expanding on an earlier warning issued before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that the West had "divided the world into two regions — one of faith and another of infidelity, from which we hope God will protect us."
Certainly the choruses of commentaries emerging from several Christian evangelists over the past few months have been vitriolic and personally targeted at Mohammed, while Muslim extremists have steered clear of attacking Jesus, since he is also considered a prophet in the Koran.
By all accounts, jihad, or struggle, has been a particularly contentious term, with many Muslims interpreting it to mean a struggle to defend one's faith and ideals. Some experts say the fundamentalist interpretation of jihad as the duty of Muslims to fight to rid the Islamic world of a corrupting Western influence or of autocratic Muslim leaders received a modern shot in the arm when the Egyptian founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al-Banna, used the concept of jihad as a holy war to try ending the foreign occupation of Muslim lands. The Muslim Brotherhood is widely believed to have spawned the al Qaeda network. But while the Koran is open to interpretation, el Fadl admits that the intellectual climate in the Islamic world tends to be inhospitable to dissent. "I do agree that in the contemporary age, dissent in Islam has become difficult, to say the least," says the UCLA professor, who says he has received threats over his writings and seen the cancellation of planned publications of Arabic translations of several of his books.
SOURCE: Leela Jacinto, ABC News, Jan 2014
What are some accusations that Christians and Muslims make toward each other?
“In an interview with CBS' 60 Minutes last year”, Christians specifically called Islam religion “‘very evil and wicked religion’”. Many people have described Muhammad as a “‘terrorist’” and “‘man of war’”. The Islamic religion has reacted with equally harsh statements also found in this article. Al Qaeda has promised a war against “infidels”, in which is their reference for Christians. “‘Bin Laden has said They have taken their rabbis and their monks for gods beside Allah, and also the Messiah son of Mary’”.
What are the differences in interpretation of jihad that the author points out?
Jihad is commonly interpreted as holy war, or struggle. While some say, “fundamentalist interpretation of jihad as the duty of Muslims to fight to rid the Islamic world of a corrupting Western influence or of autocratic Muslim leaders received a modern shot in the arm when the Egyptian founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al-Banna, used the concept of jihad as a holy war to try ending the foreign occupation of Muslim lands.” The Muslim Brotherhood is often accused of supporting and forming the Al Qaeda organization, but the Koran is open to interpretation, and it just so happened that Al Qaeda became an extremist group due to their interpretations.
Document 4 - ISIS/ISIL reading of the Quran and Jihad
The leader [of ISIS] specifically called for lone-wolf attacks in the United States and France -- two countries that have been conducting airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq.
The U.S. State Department had no comment to CNN when asked about the message Sunday night.
"Hinder those who want to harm your brothers," the ISIS spokesman said. "The best thing you can do is to strive to your best and kill any disbeliever, whether he be French, American or from any of their allies."
Civilians should not be exempt from brutality, he said. "Do not ask for anyone's advice and do not seek anyone's verdict. Kill the disbeliever whether he is civilian or military, for they have the same ruling. Both of them are disbelievers. Both of them are considered to be waging war."
"Oh Americans, and oh Europeans, the Islamic State did not initiate a war against you, as your governments and media try to make you believe," the ISIS spokesman added. "It is you who started the transgression against us, and thus you deserve blame and you will pay a great price."
He gave specifics on how to attack Westerners: "Rig the roads with explosives for them. Attack their bases. Raid their homes. Cut off their heads. Do not let them feel secure. Hunt them wherever they may be. Turn their worldly life into fear and fire. Remove their families from their homes and thereafter blow up their homes."
Al Qaeda has called for similar attacks in the past. But given ISIS' radical support base, which believes ISIS leaders are the rightful sovereign leaders of all Muslims worldwide, the ISIS pronouncement carries more weight.
SOURCE: Josh Levs and Holly Yan, CNN http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/22/world/meast/isis-threatens-west/
What is ISIS’s directive to its believers regarding their fight?
ISIS instructs their followers not to prevent the deaths of those who want to harm them. They also tell them to kill any disbeliever, military or civilian at all costs. “‘Do not ask for anyone's advice and do not seek anyone's verdict.’” They believe that it is our fault (Americans), and that we have “waged this war” against each other. They strive to not let disbelievers feel secure, to hunt them down, cut off their heads, raid their homes, and bomb their cities. To paralyze the non-disbelievers in fear of their life.
How does the ISIS spokesman relate the current war to past struggles between the west and Islam?
He claims that it is not our governments that have brought this crisis upon us, but ourselves. That Westerners are to blame. ISIS is taking similar action alike the terrorist group Al Qaeda. The spokesperson specifies how to attack Westerners by saying, "’Rig the roads with explosives for them. Attack their bases. Raid their homes. Cut off their heads. Do not let them feel secure. Hunt them wherever they may be. Turn their worldly life into fear and fire. Remove their families from their homes and thereafter blow up their homes,’” suggesting how America and France attacked them.
Document 5 - President Obama’s view of Muslims as peaceable
“I have made it clear that America will not base our entire foreign policy on reacting to terrorism. Instead, we’ve waged a focused campaign against al Qaeda and its associated forces -- taking out their leaders, denying them the safe havens they rely on. At the same time, we have reaffirmed again and again that the United States is not and never will be at war with Islam. Islam teaches peace. Muslims the world over aspire to live with dignity and a sense of justice. And when it comes to America and Islam, there is no us and them, there is only us -- because millions of Muslim Americans are part of the fabric of our country.
So we reject any suggestion of a clash of civilizations. Belief in permanent religious war is the misguided refuge of extremists who cannot build or create anything, and therefore peddle only fanaticism and hate. And it is no exaggeration to say that humanity’s future depends on us uniting against those who would divide us along the fault lines of tribe or sect, race or religion.
But this is not simply a matter of words. Collectively, we must take concrete steps to address the danger posed by religiously motivated fanatics, and the trends that fuel their recruitment. Moreover, this campaign against extremism goes beyond a narrow security challenge. For while we’ve degraded methodically core al Qaeda and supported a transition to a sovereign Afghan government, extremist ideology has shifted to other places -- particularly in the Middle East and North Africa, where a quarter of young people have no job, where food and water could grow scarce, where corruption is rampant and sectarian conflicts have become increasingly hard to contain.
No God condones this terror. No grievance justifies these actions. There can be no reasoning -- no negotiation -- with this brand of evil. The only language understood by killers like this is the language of force. So the United States of America will work with a broad coalition to dismantle this network of death.”
SOURCE: www.whitehouse.gov
What is Obama’s sense of Islam as a religion, in the United States and worldwide?
Obama speaks for the US saying that the Muslim culture and Americans are not separate things, because a good amount of America is Islamic, living peaceful lives of dignity and justice. He states that the US and Islam will not be at war, however we will be shutting down terrorist groups’ resources. Obama wants to eliminate this evil, “‘this network of death’”, but not necessarily go against Muslims but rather the extremist terrorist groups.
What is Obama’s view of these modern day extremists, and how does he say the west must respond?
Obama plans to cut off terrorist groups’ resources and eliminate their leaders. He says the only way to fixing this is to “‘dismantle this network of death’”. “Belief in permanent religious war is the misguided refuge of extremists who cannot build or create anything, and therefore create only fanaticism and hate.” He thinks that humanity’s future relies on us uniting against forces that would divide us, like different, race or religion.
So, what are your views on the conflict today? What is your CLAIM?
Is the battle that Muslim extremists like ISIL/ISIS wage today a direct result of the teachings of Muhammad and the early Muslims? Is it justified?
I do not think it is a direct teaching of Muhammad. I believe that they may be interpreting what he proclaimed in a way that suits them. The basic principles of what they are doing may have some correlation as to what Muhammad taught, but I do not believe it is a direct teaching of his. There is no religion that states you should go out and kill people and battle people just for your religion. I know that it is stated in some religions that you should if there is a large need to do so but I do not think Muhammad in his first teachings said that. I think that they are interpreting what Muhammad taught, but mostly the Koran in a way they think should be justified, but I do not think their actions should justified at all. Even if they truly believe they are doing exactly what Muhammad wanted them to do, it is no excuse for all of the horrible things they have done. Just because you think you are doing the correct and justified thing for your religion, it should and is not okay for them to go to the extent in which they have gone.
Are the wars of today (Afghanistan, Iraq, and now ISIS in Syria and Iraq) another “crusade” against Islam? Do you think it will work?
I don’t think that the wars of today are another crusade because the people these groups are opposing aren’t fighting as one united religion they are fighting as a group trying to prevent the extremists from attacking their citizens. The wests goal also isn’t to regain any Holy Land, which is what the crusades goals typically are, but to hold on to all land the west has and to keep the people on it safe. I am hopeful that the extremists networks of death are dismantled, but I’m not entirely sure as to what the outcome will be.
What should the response be to the Islamic State’s extremist attacks?
I believe that humanity’s future relies on us, all of us, uniting against those who would break us up, the extremists, along the fault lines of tribe or sect, race or religion. All together, we must take actual steps towards addressing the chaos created by religiously motivated fanatics, and the trends that fuel their recruitment. If we do not do something to stand up for ourselves, how are we supposed to survive? I believe the steps we should take should consists of actions that help break apart the networks the extremists have created. I envision the first response always being to peacefully dismantle the network and the second to react with force, if necessary.
Claim:
We need to progressively dismantle the extremist groups so that we can confront this problem. If we sit and wait things will only get worse. I do not think we should act with force or war first though. If we could resolve this in a peaceful manner it would be amazing. However that seems very unlikely and I think we need to resolve this issue now. If we don't start now than we will never be able to pick ourselves back up, but if we do it will be a tough ride. I do not think we should react with some crazy action right now, but I do believe that we should act now. If we start with something small and progressively make our actions bigger than I think we can stop these extremist groups once and for all. We do need to start now though because if we do not, there is going to be a long, scary, and tough road ahead of us.