Jihad Joe_ Americans Who Go to War in the Name of Islam - J. M. Berger [47]
It is no longer a secret to Muslims on earth that they are struck repeatedly everywhere: their scholars are crushed and dispersed, their morals are trampled. Wherever the Muslims show military force or action, the infidels move and antagonistic camps are set up against Muslims warning and threatening, promising and pledging, foaming and frothing, then striking and destroying.6
The newsletter was sometimes frighteningly reductive in its view of the primacy of jihad over any other imaginable activity. One article, citing accounts of the Prophet’s companions, argued,
[Y]ou find that the first thing mentioned is “He took part in all of the attacks.” It does not say “He gave a hundred speeches” or that “he wrote such and such a book,” or “he had a lot of money.” It says “He took part in all of the attacks.” This is the greatest virtue, excellence, or merit of the friends of the Messenger. The value of someone in Islam is measured by the “number of battles he took part in.”
Today when they write about our dead, what do they say? Do they mention how many attacks they took part in? No. If they are truthful they will write “This famous scientist, this matchless preacher did not shoot one bullet for Allah’s cause in all of his life.”7
The authors of Al Hussam fired back at Muslim critics in the United States who were under increasing pressure to renounce jihad, which in the minds of most Americans had now become inextricably linked to terrorism. During the mid-1990s, a movement began among more mainstream American Muslim leaders to redefine jihad, at least for non-Muslim audiences.
The greatest jihad, they argued, was resisting temptation within oneself. These gestures toward moderation were a growing problem for Al Hussam; mosques were starting to ban the newsletter because of its extremist views.8 One of Al Hussam’s leading voices, a writer using the pen name Abu Zubair, had little use for such semantics.
Some are amazed when they hear that self-jihad is less than other jihads, or that jihad for the sake of Allah is less than other jihads or obedience. Yet, if we look at those people’s lives, inquire about their history, and ask about the secret of the discrepancy we will find that the explanation of their stand is easy.
When you follow the lives of those who belittle jihad and instead of fighting and martyrdom they give university lectures, write in magazines or give speeches about fighting and martyrdom in conferences; you will find a common denominator which combines them by reason and unites them in sickness. The common denominator among the discouraging and the refusing—those who have those opinions and theories—is that they did not take part in jihad. There were no opportunities for them, and they were not as lucky to join the military camps of the mujahideen. At those camps luxuries are not available, necessities are few, and they feel the difference between a day in the camp and the day in the university, with air-conditioned classes, restaurants, and playfields.
They did not enter the battle fronts nor did they join the war arenas. One battle which the person takes part in would correct all notions. In few hours, a soldier could see what would turn him gray in bombs and shrapnel, snatching the souls of his best friends, those who traveled with him, trained with him, and went to jihad with him. Those with missiles and explosives detonate over them and they see with their own eyes from down below: hands, feet, and stomachs flying. Then those members with sound, symmetrical bodies end up one-eyed, one legged, one armed or paralyzed. This is the secret of doubt and the abode of sickness. In just few hours or days the Mujahid sees what others will not see in decades: hardship, difficulty, and pain. Those who see these hardships of jihad find it impossible to compare personal jihad to other