Replies

Blog:

http://www.terraplexic.org/current-intelligence/2009/10/3/reconsidering-revisions.html
—Filed On: Oct 3, 2009 at 15:06

RECONSIDERING REVISIONS
Politics & Society | —Author: Marisa Urgo

SNIPPET: “I finally got around to reading Brown and Brachman’s insights into Libyan Islamic Fighting Group’s (LIFG) recent publication of “revisions” to their takfir-centered Salafist-Jihadism (SJ). For the few bloggers and analysts who have reported on LIFG’s revisions, it appears that they are substantial, and have the potential for challenging AQ’s own theology. (For more information on LIFG’s long history with AQ, check out Brachman’s post above) That said, I’m growing far less sanguine about the potential in this current revisionist movement.

If you’re new to this phenomenon, revisions are Salafist-Jihadists’ attempts to revise the most violent aspects of their movement.”

SNIPPET: “Revisions work to blunt the edge, but the edge remains, and all the movement needs is another “Blind Sheikh” or Abu Yahya al-Libi to sharpen it again. This time armed with the rhetoric needed to counter past revisionist arguments. The really big problem for the West comes in the possibility of that “Blind Sheikh” originating in a Western country, armed with a Western demeanor, reshaping SJ with western idioms. That possibility is seen in the radicalized communities in the UK, and is at work in the U.S. efforts of Samir Khan and his followers.

I’m not arguing against revisions. If a senior member of the movement realizes the error of his ways and (more or less) repents then far be from me to complain. After all, souls are at stake. But I think we have to approach it with more analytical caution. SJ is religious doctrine, not political ideology, and as long as there are believers, the movement (and the threat) will persist.”