Rabbi Moshe Reiss
21.
Suicide Bombing – A Revisit
On October 22, 2004 I wrote a commentary on suicide bombing primarily
as an act committed by Palestinians against Israelis. In the past year
things have changed; now the majority of Islamic suicide bombers kill
other Muslims. They operate primarily in Iraq with Sunni’s killing
Shi’ites. It is only a matter of time until the Shi’ites
retaliate. In mixed Sunni-Shi’ite towns ethnic cleansing is already
taking place (N.Y.Times Nov. 20). These Islamic killing machines also
operate in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Afghanistan and Indonesia.
Their occasional forays into Europe are annoying and a media event
(more on that later) rather than a significant problem. Even in Israel
many more citizens die on the roads that by terrorists. Perhaps 3,000
westerners (including soldiers) have been killed in the last eighteen
months and perhaps 100,000 Muslims – some killed by Americans but most
by Islamic insurgents.
The Sunni’s are primarily creating a form of Islamic genocide. As a Jew
seeing their anti-Semitism I should not care. But because I am a human
being, first a descendant of Adam and secondly a descendant of Abraham
I do care; all human life (even President Ahmadinejad) are made in the
image of God.
People who choose as their life work terrorism are a different breed
than most of us; they take risks unacceptable to us but do not assume
they will die. Suicide bombers are a special breed of terrorist,
different by degrees so profound that they can only be called -
compared to the norm - pathological. These people who claim to use
suicide as a religious commandment are not pious students at a clerical
institution; they are in fact secularized western alienated young men
full of rage. They are primarily ‘born agains’ and as in all religions
including my own are ignorant of their own religion. (A surprising
number are converted from Christianity in prison from prison
gurus.) They did not seek a Rabbi or Sheik or Father to learn but
a guru who will brainwash them. A ‘guru’ will make life simple for them
by making all of life’s decisions. Gurus do not understand or perhaps
accept the grey complexities of life; the rage full never need to think
again.
My religion and Islam have many similarities (more so than
Christianity), they include what are called the five ‘pillars’ in Islam
and ‘mitzvot’ or commandments in Judaism. One could claim that by
observing these pillars or mitzvot one gets credit when one faces God
on ones personal Day of Judgment. These particular ‘born agains’ skip
these procedures and often drink and whore, but expect one great
service – killing and committing suicide another sin - to bring them
into Paradise. This is a distortion of Judaism and Islam.
A perfect example occurred in Jordan; we now have had the first married
couple attempted suicide bombing; she unfortunately failed to detonate
herself. She had married the man who accompanied her on her suicide
mission only shortly before the attack. As religious people, the man
could not accompany her unless they were married. They were concerned
about propriety of an unmarried couple being together. Apparently
killing innocent Muslims at a wedding ceremony was perfectly kosher in
their system of ethics. This is a perfect example of people ignorant of
religion and following some guru.
Dr. Theodore Dalrymple, a psychiatrist who volunteers to assist
criminals in a prison with mental problems many of whom are Muslims (as
in America a disproportionate number of prisoners are black). He
referred to one prisoner who he states was more hate-filled than any
man he had ever met. The offspring of a broken marriage between a
Muslim man and a female convert, he had followed the trajectory of many
young men in his area: sex and drugs and rock and roll, untainted by
anything resembling religion. Violent and aggressive by nature,
intolerant of the slightest frustration to his will and frequently
suicidal, he had experienced taunting during his childhood because of
his mixed parentage. After a vicious rape for which he went to prison,
he found a guru, another prisoner and converted to a Salafist (a
version of Saudi Arabian Wahhabism) form of Islam and became convinced
that any system of justice that could take the word of a mere woman –
referring to his rape - over his own was irredeemably corrupt. ‘I
noticed one day that his mood had greatly improved; he was
communicative and almost jovial, which he had never been before. I
asked him what had changed in his life for the better. He had made his
decision, he said. Everything was resolved. He was not going to kill
himself in an isolated way, as he had previously intended. Suicide was
a mortal sin, according to the tenets of the Islamic faith. No, when he
got out of prison he would not kill himself; he would make himself a
martyr, and be rewarded eternally, by making himself into a bomb and
taking as many enemies with him as he could’. (City Journal - Autumn
2005)
These suicide bombers are almost all misogynists. Who else would wish
72 eternal doe eyed virgins in Paradise. One wonders what the Jordanian
woman who failed would have received in her Paradise. Can Muhammad
Atta, the leader of the 9/11 terrorists really have wanted virgins in
heaven; he had a pathological loathing and fear of women. He tells us
this in his will (which he left in his hotel room for us all to read –
you can find it on the web) that he forbad women to visit his grave for
fear that they would contaminate his disintegrating body.
Andre Glucksmann, the French philosopher claims that hatred has its own
value; it is reassuring, makes one feel strong, is thrilling and may
require no other purpose. The three most popular hatreds he claims are
women, Jews and Americans (Le discours de la haine).
It does not take a theologian to read the Bible’s sixth commandment
‘you shall not kill’; it does not take a theologian to read Sura 17:31
in the Koran ‘kill not your children . . . the killing of them is a
great sin’. Since numerous supposed clerics have justified suicide
bombing and the killing of civilians, a clear misreading of those
simple words, where are the supposedly moderate Islamic clerics who are
not writing fatwas against killing as the Koran clearly states.
One might ask why Islam uses suicide bombing extensively; neither the
IRA, ETA or the Red Army Faction and others considered dying for their
cause. It began with the Ayatollah Khomeini overcoming the American
based Shah of Iran and creating the first Islamic Republic. As a result
he was considered by some as the reincarnation of the Hidden Imam – the
Shi’ite Mahdi (messiah) - who had returned. During the Iran-Iraq war he
sent tens of thousands of children and teenagers with a key –
originally iron then plastic - to Paradise around their neck into mined
fields with Iraqi machine gunners behind those who managed to survive
the mine fields. Some had large shirts stating ‘Imam Khomeini has given
me special permission to enter Heaven’ (C. Reuter, My Life is a
Weapon). It took a mother whose thirteen year old son was thrown away
by Khomeini many years to be able to visit her son’s grave and say ‘I
don’t believe it’s God’s will for someone to just throw his life away’
(Reuter).
This suicide disease then migrated into the Sunni Islamic world. The
only comparison a westerner can relate to is if Jesus returned would
some believe the Apocalypse had arrived and look to find ways to die?
Where are the Islamic clerics we hear are moderate. Muhammad Sa'id
Tantawi, sheikh and mufti of Egypt's famous al-Azhar Mosque and
University, is the highest ranking Sunni cleric in the world. In
2003 he seemed unequivocal about the issue of suicide bombers. He
declared that the Sharia (Islamic law) "rejects all attempts on human
life, and in the name of the Sharia, we condemn all attacks on
civilians" (Middle East Quarterly, Spring 2003).
However some of the fundamentalist clerics objected. The harshest
rebuttal came from Egyptian-born Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, known as the
theologian of the Muslim Brotherhood and currently head of the Sunni
studies faculty at Qatar University: "I am astonished that some sheikhs
deliver fatwas that betray the mujahideen, instead of supporting them
and urging them to sacrifice and martyrdom." He argued that "Israeli
society was completely military in its make-up and did not include any
civilians ... How can the head of al-Azhar incriminate mujahideen who
fight against aggressors? How can he consider these aggressors as
innocent civilians?"
Tantawi caved in declaring and effectively abrogating his earlier
fatwa: "My words were clear ... a man who blows himself [up] in the
middle of enemy militants is a martyr, repeat, a martyr. What we do not
condone is for someone to blow himself up in the middle of children or
women. If he blows himself up in the middle of Israeli women enlisted
in the army, then he is a martyr, since these women are fighters".
(Middle East Quarterly, Spring 2003). (Tantawi although refusing to
circumcise his daughter also refused to make a religious ruling on the
subject – O. Roy, Globalized Islam, Pg. 159).
While both Qaradawi and Tantawi are referring to Israeli civilians
Al-Qaeda does not make such distinctions. It is worth noting that
Palestinian suicide bombers tend to be family men integrated into their
society; Al-Qaeda’s are cultural outcasts who almost never return to
their homeland (Roy, pg. 307). To Al-Qaeda recovering Andalusia is the
same as recovering Israel. Perhaps the clerics could be reminded of
what Pastor Martin Neimoller said against another group of fascists.
“First they came for the Communists but I was not a Communist - so I
said nothing. Then they came for the Social Democrats, but I was not a
Social Democrat - so I did nothing. Then came the trade unionists, but
I was not a trade unionist. And then they came for the Jews, but I was
not a Jew - so I did little. Then when they came for me, there was no
one left who could stand up for me."
Millions of people demonstrated against America’s invading Iraq
rightfully and ethically. Why do not a million Muslims demonstrate in
Cairo, Amman, Karachi and Jakarta against Islamists killing Muslims?
The leaders of this group are Osama bin Laden a Saudi Arabian
businessman who calls himself a Sheik, but is not trained as such,
Ayman al Zawahiri an Egyptian medical doctor and Abu Zarqawi a
Jordanian high school dropout jailed in his home country as a gangster.
Despite continual discussion of God and the Koran there is not a single
cleric in the group. It is not clear whether these people believe ‘God
is great’ or like Nietzsche that God is dead (Reuter, Weapon). They
clearly do not believe in the traditional monotheistic believe that
life is sacred. There Jihadic killing is no more justified that the
Christian Crusades killing more Jews that Muslims or the
Catholic-Protestant wars in the Middle Ages. Everyone justifies killing
in God’s name. God can only be weeping!
Bin Laden castigated those in the Arab world who are "calling for a
peaceful democratic solution in dealing with apostate governments of
with Jewish and crusader invaders instead of fighting in the name of
God." He referred to democracy as "this deviant and misleading
practice" and "the faith of the ignorant."
Al-Zarqawi, reacted to the January 2005 Iraqi election directly: "The
legislator who must be obeyed in a democracy is man, and not God. ...
That is the very essence of heresy and polytheism and error, as it
contradicts the bases of the faith and monotheism, and because it makes
the weak, ignorant man God's partner in His most central divine
prerogative -- namely, ruling and legislating." Of course democracy
also does not favor Islamists. According to Oliver Roy, with few
paroxysmal events, ’nowhere in the world did Islamic parties attract
more than around 20 per cent of the electoral vote’ (pg. 78). Who made
this pathological killer Zarqawi, this high school drop out jailed as a
thief in his own country who acts against the Koran, God’s partner.
There is a problem with those of us who wish to live and not die.
General James Gavin (of WWII fame), whose airborne division was among
the finest units in any army, filled his diary with harsh comments
about the average soldier's military quality. ''If our infantry would
fight,'' he wrote in January 1945, ''this war would be over by now. . .
. Everybody wants to live to a ripe old age.'' When Winston Churchill
complained to Montgomery about the British Army's lack of initiative,
Montgomery replied by recalling the carnage on the Western Front during
World War I: ''It was you, Prime Minister, who told me that we must not
suffer casualties on the scale of the Somme'' (Armegeddon by Max
Hastngs).
Some have claimed this is ‘Clash of Civilizations’ and Europe will be
Muslim by the end of the century; but despite Bernard Lewis and Bat
Yeor (Eurabia:The Euro-Arab Axis) this seems unlikely to this author.
These views seem similar to Samuel Huntington the popularizer of the
term the ‘Clash of Civilizations” concern that America will become an
Hispanic country. It will not. In my younger days my favorite American
philosopher was Lawrence ‘Yogi” Berra who said ‘prophecy is hard
especially about the future”. The Jihadists led by Bin Laden,
Zawahiri and Zarqawi have no civilization to offer, at least not in
this world. They are using humiliated, marginalized, suffering,
discriminated and oppressed people not dissimilar to the Radical
leftists of the 1960’s. Those have all joined the middle class
bourgeoisie now.
When the French underclass who happen to be almost all Muslims lit
thousands cars on fire is not the death wish of Osama and his cohorts.
They are no longer Moroccans and not yet French. They are not, I
believe Radical Islamist; they want to be French and have what
the rest of the French have. Those who do not choose to be French
should and probably will be deported. Most however are exactly like the
American blacks who lit up Los Angeles, Detroit and N.Y. in the 1960’s,
they were also not radicals, they wanted what I already had. They have
achieved most of that and every year get more. This French underclass
is closer to American blacks in using Black music, halal McDonald’s and
other accoutrements of western culture than to their Moroccan families.
They probably speak a hip hop French which their father’s cannot
understand just as I cannot understand hip hop English. They might
achieve their wish to join the western culture if they stop burning
schools and find a Martin Luther King to lead them in using schools to
get ahead. What we are seeing in France is not an Islamic intifada but
underclass rebellion. But we must be aware that these men are possible
Al-Qaeda recruits.
There is only one civilization conquering the world – it is global
modernity – in different versions – Eastern, Western and Oriental - and
in fact no one can stop it. It has nothing to do with values; a modern
person and I personally know many who believe in pre-marital chastity,
family values, are against abortion and homosexuality.
Osama, Ayaman and Abu are what Oliver Roy called in his brilliant book
(Globalized Islam) simply ‘security problems’. My adopted country has
largely figured out how to handle these merchants of death. The
Palestinians actually want exactly what the French and Black Americans
want, part of the good life. If they get decent leaders which at some
point in the future one hopes they will, they will get the good life.
Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Jordan have more serious problems being
Muslim, largely autocratic and allowing their problems to fester for a
longtime. They have their own versions of Radical Islamists who wish to
overthrow their governments.
Al-Qaeda has organized a negative ideology on a global basis heard
mainly by these humiliated underclass people. But Al-Qaeda mistakes
what these rage full people really want. Al-Qaeda being a non-state
actor, is not sensitive to the usual deterrence and can be reckless and
create catastrophic attacks as 9/11 in N.Y., 3/11 in Madrid, 7/7 in
London even operated by local actors. Al-Qaeda aim is to overthrow the
existing political order in the Muslim countries and replace it with a
Caliphate regime. They have not succeeded in any one country. Ayman
al-Zawahiri, has argued that the militant Islamic movement cannot win
without a base at the heart of the Arab Middle East preferable Saudi
Arabia, Abu Zarqawi prefers Jordan. Does anyone believe that the U.S.
and Israel would allow that to happen? If America attacked Iraq it is
obvious what it would do if serious danger occurred in Saudi Arabia.
When Iran gets its nuclear bomb (and it will) does anyone believe it
will bomb Jerusalem or Mecca? Maybe, that would kill a lot of Jews as
well as Palestinians and Sunnies; that might even appeal to the latest
Shia Ayatollah and his Jew hating President. There will be terrorist
attacks in Saudi Arabia, but Al-Qaeda is still not as Roy noted a
strategic threat; they are a security problems that is solvable.
The result unfortunately will be racial profiling, human and civil
rights abuses and even torture – none of which I approve of – but those
are the reactions to people seeking safety when others kill
civilians. Less liberty but more safety appears to be acceptable to
most westerners.
Unless the Arabs acknowledge their own problems as three U.N. Arab
based reports have documented they will continue their own self imposed
genocide. As long as the Arab world admires Osama, Ayman and Abu who
are simply gangsters they will not progress from their own poverty. As
Tariq Ramadan has said ‘The Middle East is not the cause of our
problem; it’s the consequence.’ (Foreign Policy, Nov-Dec 2004).
The media are the biggest help to these terrorists; the terrorists have
managed to co-opt the media. CNN spend three days on the Jordan
terrorist attack on three hotels killing 58 people. I do not deny the
importance of that event but during the same three days 5,000 men,
women and children died of AID’s and in next month perhaps 10,000 or
more persons from Kashmir will freeze or starve to death. Why not spend
some of the three days on those problems? The media seem to
create reality or at least virtual reality which may be the new world.
PART II:
Three men founded Islamism: Qutb, an Egyptian (1906-1966), Mawdudi, a
Pakistani (1903-1979 and Ayatollah Khomeini (1902-1989). The first
two created Sunni Islamism with funding by Saudi Wahabeeism, and
Khomeini Shi’ite Islamism. The only one successful was Khomeini who
created an Islamic Republic. They all opposed secularism and modernity
and traditional Islam in favor of fascist Islamism. Only Khomeini
succeeded, due to his ability to create a coalition of the
underclasses, the middle class who had rejected the Shahs autocracy,
intellectuals and clerics. Despite his success and despite the apparent
victory of the Hard line President Ahmadinejad it is obvious at
least to author that in twenty years this Islamic Republic will be
gone.
21A. Jewish Fundamentalism or Fundamentally Jewish?
by Ze'ev Orenstein, September 22, 2005, Arutz 7
Of late, there have been several articles published, in particular
Wielding Ideology by Sam Ser and Fundamental Flaws by Rabbi Moshe
Reiss, that have taken a critical look at the perceived threat of
Jewish fundamentalism in Israel. I hope to dispel the myth surrounding
what it means to be a Jewish fundamentalist, and to show that, in
reality, what today is defined as Jewish fundamentalism is consistent
with traditional Jewish thought and teachings.
Rabbi Moshe Reiss and Sam Ser both make reference to the following
theme, as it appears in Rabbi Reiss' article:
Three themes that Judaic and Islamic fundamentalists both share are:
(1) the belief in the absolute supremacy of religious law; (2) the
contention that secular regimes, though they may pay lip service to
religious law, have rejected this law and rely instead on outside, and
particularly Western, influences to guide the state; and (3) the
insistence that the only way to restore the people to their rightful
status is to wrest control and implement a "return" to the divinely
inspired code.
Here is the definition of a fundamentalist:
"A usually religious movement or point of view characterized by a
return to fundamental principles, by rigid adherence to those
principles, and often by intolerance of other views and opposition to
secularism."
Based on this definition, one must draw the logical conclusion that
every observant Jew in Israel (and possibly the world) must be
considered a Jewish fundamentalist.
Let us take a look at the three characteristics that both Ser and Reiss
make reference to:
The belief in the absolute supremacy of religious law.
How could any religious, G-d-fearing Jew disagree with this statement?
That is not to say that a Jew is not obligated to follow the laws of
the land in which they live (the concept of dina d'malchuta dina). This
would obligate the Jew to pay taxes, follow traffic laws, etc.;
however, this obligation to follow the law of the land only applies
where the law in question does not conflict with Jewish law.
The contention that secular regimes, though they may pay lip service to
religious law, have rejected this law and rely instead on outside, and
particularly Western, influences to guide the state.
While the State of Israel does base many of its laws on Jewish law, by
no means are all its laws based on Jewish Law (all one has to do is
look at Israel's Supreme Court and the values that it promotes).
Additionally, Jewish law is rarely the main factor in determining the
State of Israel's foreign and domestic policies. Culture (movies,
books, TV, radio, clothing) in Israel is primarily based on Western
culture and values (or the lack there of).
The State of Israel, from its inception, has been pulled in two
conflicting directions. Her founding fathers desired to create a
"New-Jew" in Israel. A Jew that would no longer be bound by Jewish Law,
which was associated with the Judaism of the exile. Israel was to be a
nation like all others, with a Jewish majority, which would allow for
the normalization of the Jew. On the other hand, Orthodox Jewry (and of
late, Religious Zionist adherents) wanted Israel to be a Jewish State
in more than just demography, but also in character, spirit, identity
and culture.
This conflict, to this day, has not been resolved, and as such, the
State of Israel more often than not seems to be leading a double life
similar to that of Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Hyde.
The insistence that the only way to restore the people to their
rightful status is to wrest control and implement a "return" to the
divinely inspired code.
Three times a day a Jew is obligated to pray. Let us take a look at
some of the prayers that a Jew says each time he prays:
From the 11th blessing of the Amidah prayer: "Restore our judges as in
earliest times... and reign over us, You, HaShem, alone with kindness
and compassion...."
From the 14th blessing: "And to Jerusalem, Your city... may You rest
within it as You have spoken. May You rebuild it soon in our days as an
eternal structure, and may you speedily establish the throne of David
within it."
From the 17th blessing: "Be favorable, HaShem... and restore the
service to the Holy of Holies of Your Temple. The fire offerings of
Israel...."
From the Aleinu prayer:
For he has not made us like the nations of the lands, and has not
emplaced us like the families of the earth; for he has not assigned our
portion like theirs, nor our lot like all their multitudes. For they
bow to vanity and emptiness and pray to a god which helps not. But we
bend our knees, bow, and acknowledge our thanks before the King who
reigns over kings, the Holy One, Blessed is He....
Therefore we put our hope in you, Hashem our G-d... to remove
detestable idolatry from the earth, and false gods will be utterly cut
off, to perfect the universe through the Almighty's sovereignty.... All
the world's inhabitants will recognize and know that to You every knee
should bend, every tongue should swear... and they will all accept upon
themselves the yoke of Your kingship that you may reign over them soon
and eternally. And it is said: HaShem will be King over all the world -
on that day HaShem will be One and His Name will be One.
Can anyone honestly argue that in these prayers the Jewish people are
not asking HaShem to restore to them sovereignty in the Land of Israel,
in order to create a Jewish State where the judges will rule according
to Jewish Law, where the leaders, from the House of David, will be,
first and foremost, faithful servants of HaShem and of His laws and
teachings, where the Holy Temple in Jerusalem will be rebuilt and serve
not only as the spiritual center of the Jewish People, but for all of
mankind?
I do not know if Sam Ser or Rabbi Moshe Reiss are familiar with these
prayers, and if so, how they are able to reconcile the internal
conflict that reciting these prayers would undoubtedly create within
them. I can only imagine that, for Jews like Reiss and Ser who do
recite these prayers, they can take comfort in the words of the Kuzari
by Rabbi Yehudah HaLevi. When speaking of the Jews who, in spite of all
their prayers expressing a desire to return to Israel, chose to stay in
exile, Rabbi Yehudah referred to their prayers in the following way:
"But rather as the speech of a parrot or the twittering of a starling,
as without the correct intention of the heart we say these things and
others."
For 2,000 years, the Jewish people hoped, yearned and prayed to return
to the Land of Israel and to reestablish Jewish sovereignty. Why? Not
so that we could be the only democracy in the Middle East, but to
create an authentically Jewish State, true to Jewish teachings and
heritage. This would be refelcted not only in the laws and policies of
the state, but through its culture and educational system, as well. To
have a Jewish State one needs more than a simple Jewish majority.
Let me be clear in saying that I do not advocate bringing this about
through religious coercion. This is what the Jewish people, as a
nation, should be striving to achieve. It may be some time before this
vision becomes the reality in the State of Israel, and this will only
come to pass through love of our fellow Jew, intensive Jewish
education, true Jewish leadership, and more than a little help from
Above).
I do not doubt that the concept of Jewish fundamentalism makes Jews
like Ser and Reiss uncomfortable, because it directly conflicts with
their ideal of being a modern Jew accepted by the world, in which the
State of Israel exists as a nation like all others. It must be painful
for Ser, Reiss and others when they are confronted with the truth that
Judaism is not concerned with winning any popularity contests, but
about the Jewish people being true to their G-d, to His law and to
themselves. Only through that will the world come to respect the G-d of
Israel, along with his chosen nation, the Jewish people.
This concept is one of the fundamental principles of Judaism, and as
such, according to the likes of Ser and Reiss, those Jews who adhere to
it must be considered Jewish fundamentalists. It is ironic, that the
very ones whom Ser and Reiss view as posing the greatest threat to the
State of Israel are specifically those who have remained true to the
teachings and heritage of our forefathers.
I am confident that, just as Abraham merited being the father of the
Jewish people in spite of the fact that he was considered a Jewish
fundamentalist for his uncompromising belief in the G-d of Israel,
similarly, the Jewish fundamentalists of today, of whom Ser and Reiss
are so fearful, will ultimately lead the Jewish People to their
redemption, and to the birth of a true Jewish State in the Land of
Israel.