RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20561/defining-jihadism

There is no need, therefore, to abandon the terms jihadism and jihadist out of political correctness or fear of offending Muslims. When appropriately defined, those terms are helpful in grasping the terrorist and insurgent threats and challenges posed by al-Qa’ida, the Islamic State and similar groups — far more so than khawarij, a term that does not have immediately clear meaning for wider audiences, is historically inaccurate, and sounds like a sneaky effort to cloud a very real threat.

Recently, the Daily Wire revealed that an internal newsletter from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence featured an article arguing for “changing terminology related to counterterrorism,” because “certain phrases to identify international terrorism… are hurtful to Muslim-Americans.” One of the supposedly “problematic phrases” is the term “jihadist.” An alternative suggestion given in the newsletter to denote jihadists is the word khawarij.[1]

If one wanted to find stereotypical “woke” discourse and political correctness, one would be hard pressed to find a better example than this. Unfortunately, the suggested change in terminology only creates more obstacles to an accurate understanding of contemporary terrorism and insurgent activity associated with the Islamic State (ISIS) and al-Qa’ida.

For a start, the term khawarij (which can be translated in the broadest sense as “outsiders”) is not immediately understandable to broader audiences or those without knowledge of historical and present-day usage of the term in Arabic-language and Islamic discourse. In this regard, the use of the term recalls the British government’s official adoption of the derisive Arabic acronym “Da’esh'”(standing for “the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham”) to refer to the Islamic State — an acronym that is by now familiar to Arabic-speakers but is meaningless to most English-speakers.

Within Islamic discourse today, the term khawarij is often thrown at those who are deemed too extreme in their beliefs. It may be as an insult, for example, against the Islamic State by al-Qa’ida, or from other Sunni Muslims against the Islamic State and al-Qa’ida. Even the Islamic State uses the term khawarij to describe groups it deems too extreme: most notably, the faction dubbed Jama’at Ahl al-Sunna lil-Da’wa wa al-Jihad, which broke off from the Islamic State in the West Africa region and continues to fight against the Islamic State.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20551/jordan-hamas-muslim-brotherhood

The Jordanian authorities have accused the Muslim Brotherhood and its offshoot, Hamas, of seeking to destabilize security inside the kingdom.

Behind both Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, of course, is the terrorist-sponsoring emirate, Qatar, and its propagandizing television bullhorn, Al-Jazeera.

Jordan’s leaders are doing exactly what many other Arab regimes and heads of state have long been doing: radicalizing their people and inciting them to violence against Israel as a means of distracting them from problems at home.

The Arab leaders want their people to be busy hating Israel. Otherwise, the people might demand democracy, transparency and accountability from the corrupt Arab rulers.

Their Jordanian majesties apparently seem to have forgotten that if Israel were not protecting them, their own Palestinian population would have overthrown them or assassinated them long ago, as they did to the king’s grandfather, King Abdullah I.

[Queen Rania] has also apparently forgotten is that it is Hamas that is using its own citizens as human shields and stealing and hoarding the humanitarian aid in the hope that the blame will be assigned to Israel – as it all too often unfortunately is.

“It is no longer a secret that there are two parties that have interests in creating tension in the region and moving to a new front: the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran. They share the same agenda: destabilizing the Arab states. Since the beginning of the Gaza war, we have seen that the Hamas leadership is trying to mobilize the Jordanian street and is trying to drag the Jordanians into the war by any means.” — Munif Al-Harbi, Saudi political analyst, aawsat.com, April 1, 2024.

If Jordan’s King Abdullah and his wife want to avoid chaos in their kingdom, and a rather unpleasant outcome for themselves, they would do well to stop playing into the hands of the radical Islamists by inciting the Jordanian people to violence against Israel.

However, behind the incitement to violence that is empowering the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas — and destabilizing the area — lies the silky hand of Qatar.

Jordan’s leaders are doing exactly what many other Arab regimes and heads of state have long been doing: radicalizing their people and inciting them to violence against Israel as a means of distracting them from problems at home.

The Jordanian authorities have accused the Muslim Brotherhood and its offshoot, Hamas, of seeking to destabilize security inside the kingdom. The accusation came in the aftermath of recent demonstrations in the capital Amman and other parts of Jordan in support of Hamas and in condemnation of Israel. The demonstrators are demanding that Jordan shut down the Israeli embassy and cut all ties with Israel.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20549/rwanda-30-years-after-genocide

Many of them had taken refuge in the local church, and others in a plot of land opposite the communal house, where there were several thousand frightened people, thinking that the authorities were going to protect them. Instead, the authorities conveniently decided to kill them on the spot. The soldiers and police, armed with rifles and grenades, and the militiamen with machetes and spiked clubs, surrounded the refugees and began firing into the crowd, throwing grenades and machetes.

What is certain is that he killed every day for a month… and that he never ran out of ammunition. How did he feel? “At first it was fear,” he tells us, “but then the fear disappeared, there was no joy either, it became a habit to kill. It was a job ordered by the authorities and we did our duty.” He took orders and obeyed, like Adolf Eichmann and the other Nazi executioners of the Final Solution.

Brainwashing

In 1994, Jean-Claude, a Hutu policeman later turned “Tutsi hunter,” was 26 years old and one of 14 police officers in the commune of Nyamata, an hour outside Kigali, one of the areas worst affected by the genocide.

Four years earlier, the Rwandan Patriotic Front had attacked Rwanda from Uganda. The movement was made up of mainly Tutsis, living in exile since 1959, whom the Rwandan regime had not wanted to let return to the country.

In 1990, after that attack, Jean-Claude and his colleagues, on the orders of the authorities, began harassing the Tutsis in the commune, arresting them for no reason and beating them up. In 1992, dozens were killed and their homes burnt down…. Until 1994, during meetings, the authorities had kept repeating that the Tutsis were “snakes” and “cockroaches,” and that the Rwandan Patriotic Front would, according to their truncated vision of history, “bring back serfdom” (of the Hutus by the Tutsis), a powerful theme in the imagination of the regime.

The Rwandans were fed the message that the Tutsis, all the Tutsis, who had been second-class citizens since 1959, were allies of the exiled group that had attacked them. When Rwandan President Juvénal Habyarimana’s plane was shot down on the evening of April 6, the authorities were quick to spread an accusatory discourse: “Here is the proof that what we told you was true, they killed our President.”

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20548/iran-israel-denial-game

Soleimani would do everything to avoid a direct clash with either Israel or the US forces in the region.

If he [“Supreme Guide” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei] does nothing, he could anger his core supporters. If he orders attacks on Israeli and/or Jewish targets, he won’t be able to cite plausible deniability. And that, as the Iranian state TV analyst suggests, could give Israel an excuse for attacks on big targets in Tehran itself.

“Will this time be different?” This is the question that haunts Tehran political circles as more body bags are flown in from Damascus.

The body bags contain the mortal remains of 13 Iranian diplomatic and military officers, including two senior commanders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), General Muhammad-Reza Zahedi (alias Abu Mahdi) and Gen. Muhammad-Hadi Haj-Rahimi, killed in an Israeli airstrike on what was presented as an Iranian consular building in the Syrian capital.

To be sure, this is not the first time that Israelis have taken out IRGC officers, and Lebanese, Iraqi, Syrian, Pakistani, and Afghan mercenaries in Syria.

The take-out operation started in 2015 and reached a peak in 2020. The last time an Iranian official organ provided figures was in 2018, when the Foundation for Martyrs and Self-Sacrificers put Iran’s losses at around 5,000. The figures didn’t show how many were Iranian officers or foreign mercenaries.

In the first three years of this deadly cycle, Tehran used the transfer of body bags from Damascus as a propaganda ploy and organized mass rallies on the burial day of its “heroes of Islam.” Later, when Tehran’s losses grew the propaganda aspect was forgotten, the “heroes of Islam” were quietly buried in their native hometowns and villages.

Over time, partly thanks to the influence of late Gen. Qassem Soleimani, Tehran decided to swallow the bitter pill and brag about “taking revenge,” but not retaliate.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20529/qatar-role-gaza-hamas

In one of the more high profile cases involving Qatar’s financing of terrorism, the family of murdered American journalist Steven Sotloff claimed in a federal lawsuit in 2022 that prominent Qatari institutions wired $800,000 to an Islamic State “judge” who ordered the murder of Sotloff and another American journalist, James Foley. The two were beheaded in Syria in 2014, their killings filmed and published in grisly propaganda videos.

The US moved its forces to Qatar’s Al Udeid Air Base from Saudi Arabia in 2003, after the 9/11 attacks on the US in 2001. There seems no reason why it could not be moved once again to a country in the region that does not support terror groups.

Of even greater concern [than Qatar contributing $5.1 billion to US campuses since 1986], though, is the Biden administration’s willingness to allow Qatar to play a prominent role in negotiations for a ceasefire in Gaza and manage humanitarian aid delivered to a new pier being built in Gaza, even though Doha’s negotiating status and that of a potential caretaker have been thoroughly compromised through its involvement in creating Hamas’s terrorist infrastructure.

Given Qatar’s well-documented support for Hamas, it is clear that no meaningful resolution of the Gaza conflict is possible so long as Doha is continuing with its efforts to negotiate a settlement that is favourable to Hamas, one that would enable the terrorist movement to remain in control of Gaza, or that Qatar should operate, or indeed have anything to do with, the delivery of “humanitarian aid” to what seems planned as Hamas’s new beachhead.

Rather than allowing Qatar to continue playing its double game, where Doha pretends to be a close ally of the West while at the same time sponsoring terrorist groups such as Hamas and the Taliban, the Biden administration needs to wake up to the real threat Qatar poses to the security of the Middle East, and concentrate its efforts on negotiating a ceasefire deal and finding a custodian for Gaza and its new pier that do not require Qatar’s malign involvement.

After the success the Gulf state of Qatar achieved in helping restore the Taliban to power in Afghanistan, Doha is now investing all its energy in seeking to keep Hamas in power in Gaza.

For more than a decade, the tiny Gulf emirate has been using the massive profits it derives from its vast energy resources to sponsor radical Islamist ideology that underpins terrorist organisations such as Hamas.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20489/south-africa-hamas

“The South African government is the same thing as Hamas. It’s an Iranian proxy, and its role in the war is to fight the ideological and ideas war to stigmatize Jews around the world. ” — Frans Cronje, CEO Race Relations Institute, interview on Chai FM Radio, January 26, 2024.

The ANC’s lax monitoring and prosecution of the terrorist presence in South Africa may have been the result of an understanding between the government and terrorist groups not to execute terror operations in the country while permitting fundraising to continue without interference from South African law enforcement agencies.

Adding to South Africa’s concerns is the possibility that its citizens waging jihad in Mozambique may eventually return and apply their combat experience at home to target the ANC regime.

South Africa’s ruling African National Congress (ANC) has close and long-standing ties to the terrorist organization Hamas. As early as 2015, Hamas had developed personal ties with South Africa’s then-President Jacob Zuma. In October 2015, the ANC hosted a Hamas delegation led by terrorist mastermind Khaled Mashaal, who met with Zuma in Pretoria.

South Africa might appear to have scored another diplomatic victory propaganda victory by getting the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to accept onto its judicial docket the African state’s charge that Israel’s presence in the West Bank is an illegal occupation. This recent initiative follows South Africa’s December 29, 2023 presentation to the ICJ that Israel’s military operations in Gaza were supposedly acts of genocide against the territory’s civilian population.

While South Africa’s latest grandstand maneuver will most likely fail on its lack of merit, the effort did succeed in exposing yet another unsavory dimension of the relationship between South Africa and the terrorist organization Hamas, which initiated the war against Israel on October 7, 2023.