Posted on 02/21/2005 2:09:20 PM PST by Bob J
Taqiyya and kitman: The role of Deception in Islamic terrorism
Taqiyya and kitman or holy hypocrisy has been diffused throughout Arabic culture for over fourteen hundred years since it was developed by Shiites as a means of defence and concealment of beliefs against Sunni unbelievers. As the Prophet said: 'he who keeps secrets shall soon attain his objectives. The skilful use of taqiyya and kitman was often a matter of life and death against enemies; it is also a matter of life and death to many contemporary Islamic terrorists. As so often in the history of Islam, a theological doctrine became operational.
Taqiyya is common to both Shiite and Sunni Muslim discourse and has significant implications for understanding Islamic fundamentalism and terrorist operations. The theory and practice of counter terrorism would be counter productive, indeed pointless, and even harmful, without reference to taqiyya and kitman and the crucial role of deception ranging from Islamic jurisprudence to Al Qaeda training manuals, which carry detailed instructions on the use of deception by terrorists in Western target countries. According to Christian ethics lying is a sin; In Islamic jurisprudence and theology, the use of taqiyya against the unbelievers is regarded as a virtue and a religious duty.
Like many Islamic concepts taqiyya and kitman were formed within the context of the Arab-Islamic matrix of tribalism, expansionary warfare and conflict. Taqiyya has been used by Muslims since the 7th century to confuse and split 'the enemy. A favored tactic was deceptive triangulation; to persuade the enemy that jihad was not aimed at them but at another enemy. Another tactic was to deny that there was jihad at all. The fate for such faulty assessments by the target was death. Sydney NSW Australia: 2 November 2002
'Several times, when direct responses to questions about passages in the Koran begged a simple yes or no, both men preferred to avoid the issues by talking about the difficulties of translating passages from Arabic to English. Referring to the Sheikhs blithe dismissal of his virulent anti-Semitic remarks in 1998, the journalist reflected: 'I can only muse at the facility of my guest, who has also praised suicide bombers in more recent times, to dismiss his notorious and abominable remarks with such ease and without actual apology. It seems clear that he is considering the way his remarks will be construed by the Sunday Telegraphs huge and influential audience when they are translated into Arabic for Muslims to debate. Hes walking a tightrope.' The skilled journalist should not be puzzled as the Sheik's target audiences were Australians and not Arab readers. Taqiyya, or dissimulation, is a key feature in Islamic public discourse and confuses Western audiences. It is meant to, according to the Koran: 'Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers; if any do that; they shall have no relation left with Allah except by way of precaution .that ye may guard yourselves. 3:28 Al Taqiyya is with tongue only; not the heart. A believer can make any statement as long as the heart is comfortable'. The 9/11 terrorists lived and visited in the United States for two years before the 9/11 attacks. How did they acculturate? By the use of taqiyya. Meaning: I hate you but I smile at you-in public. Taqiyya and Outwitting in contemporary political discourse and debates Outwitting: Islamic spokesmen commonly use taqiyya as a form of outwitting. The matter under discussion is not to be debated or discussed; rather the opponent is to outwitted through taqiyya, by diversion of the subject and obfuscation aided at times with a mystical reference to God or Allah. The claim that difficulties in translating from Arabic to English make communication with non-Arab speakers difficult or impossible, is another form of outwitting. The tactical use of a translator offers considerable advantage.
Manipulating ambiguity: Sheik Hilaly of Sydney, Australia is on public record as (a) condemning the 9/11 attacks in ambiguous terms and (b) praising suicide and martyr operations However, Islamic spokesmen will rarely condemn a specific act of terrorism and direct questions will be skillfully evaded. Diversion: For example, questions relating to the 9/11 terrorists attacks will be diverted by a causally irrelevant counter reference to the plight of the Palestinians, the nefarious role of Israel and US foreign policy and support for Israel as causes of terrorism. Anti-Semitism, a core belief of Islamic fundamentalism is also skillfully diverted by misleading and exaggerated historical references to the alleged status enjoyed by Jews and non-believers under Islamic rule, thereby deflecting critical examination of the virulent contemporary Islamic anti-Semitism.
Tactical denial: Rather than admitting that a proposition concerning a state of affairs can be partly true, an Islamic spokesman will deny a claim or proposition in absolute terms. For example, It is impossible to be a Muslim and a terrorist , which is false and Islam forbids suicide, which is true, but irrelevant as suicide or martyrdom attacks are not forbidden in the Koran. Exploiting cognitive dissonance: Islamic spokesman tend to be baffle television interviewers and puzzle viewers as they resort to double talk clichés and platitudes concerning Islam. A state of cognitive dissonance-holding two contradictory beliefs and attempting to resolve them- is induced in viewers as they attempt to process the claim that Islam is a peaceful religion with the dissonant facts of Islamic terrorist acts and operations. The Islamic defence script: Islamic spokesmen repeat the same predictable platitudes concerning Islam in London as do Islamic spokesmen in Seattle and often appear to follow a prepared script from Islam is tolerant and peace loving to the claim by Islamic spokeswomen invariably claiming that wearing the veil offers them more freedom (women in Muslim countries are therefore freer than women in western countries), thereby precluding further examination into the real status of women under Islamic rule.
The Islam has been hijacked diversionary theme is now a conventional media and political reference deflecting attention from empirical and historical examination of the doctrinal, political and religious continuity of Islamic terrorism. A related theme that a small minority of Muslims are engaged in terrorism is utterly irrelevant as Islamic terrorism is always perpetrated by small minorities or more accurately small groups. Taqiyya as impressions and perceptions management
Taqiyya and the Deceptive use of Jihad: The contemporary political meaning of jihad is clear: it is Jihad of the sword. Egyptian-based Islamic fundamentalists, from whom Bin Laden recruited his key operatives, believe jihad is the fourth pillar of Islam and is a binding belief and integral to the faith. Claiming that Jihad is a subjective and psychological state of personal struggle is taqiyya. In contemporary terms, Jihad means - holy war - against unbelievers and it in this context that Al Qaeda training manuals refer to Jihad as Holy War. The study of taqiyya and kitman is crucial to an understanding of Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism ranging from the issuing of false terrorist threats, operational and strategic disinformation issued by Al Qaeda in the form of intelligence chatter to the use of taqiyya and kitman by terrorists during interrogation and the use of systematically misleading expressions concerning Islam and terrorism by Muslim spokesmen.
|
I'm Catholic...heheh.
Let the good ones in their cult worship a rock if they want and kill all the bad ones that are willing to act out evil.
So, are you an adherent to the "No Muslims, No Terrorism" argument?
"Rag-head talk is cheaper than any other variety, IMO. (snip)The silence of the rags is deafening".
Ahh, I see. Tell us, how do you feel about the Mexicans?
I'm not sure what you're trying to prove by all this...that Islamic terrorists use intelligence, counter intelligence and psy-ops to achieve their goals? That's hardly news.
Why are you so in the tank for the pagans, anyway?
You're so blinded by hate anyone who proposes anything short of Armegeddon with a billion people is "in the tank".
BTW - What's keeping you from starting a little "Helter Skelter"?
Your answer on Bush going into Iraq is completely disingenuous. You advocate killing 1000 Muslims to every American, yet "admire" Bush for "what he is doing" even though it has cost over 1,000 American lives to date (and 30k casualties).
By your logic, we now have to kill 1,000,000 Muslims and maim 30,000,000. How and where do think we should start?
You don't know the Koran, and you don't know the history of Islam, obviously.
You're sucked in by the sweet-sounding words of Muslims. That's your problem.
But as I said in my first post on this thread, I think it's sick that you put their propoganda on this forum.
Well, all I can say it's good people like you have no authority or power or we'd really be in a shitstorm.
ok.......I got ya.......so when Bush says that Islam is religion of peace he is either lying or coddling them. I got it. Instead of yelling at me for simply bringing up a point that is brought up in the media all the time, maybe we should be villifying our politicians who keep saying that Muslims can rule themselves. Tell me, since you are from Texas and know Bush much better than I, why does he keep doing this???????
Let me qualify that. Our soldiers would be in a shitstorm, you'd safely be in the dollar bleachers where you could cheer on the blood games and heckle the unit officers whenever they drop the ball.
Kind of a cross between John Madden, George S. Patton and Mr. Potatohead.
Sorry for that last, this thread has dropped into the twilight zone and it has me dizzy...
And Hitler said he only wanted to reunify old Germany and everyone was so relieved. You actually believe this?
You've got it, Islam the religion of peace, NOT! Read the Koran and learn.
I don't believe in trying to waltz around the truth:
I don't know.
I've said many times before that I have to assume he has a reason. I don't know WHY he doesn't insist that the Muslim community turn out in force to stop enabling terrorism!
I'm as baffled by this as I am about his border stance.
Except for that "brief" period during their formative years when they whent on a evangelistic killing rampage from India to Lisbon, and subjugated half the known world leaving only the Americas and Antarctica untouched by jihad.
You have seen the enemy and you are wise.
I believe at that time they were still operating under the assumption that the world was flat.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.