Militant Activity Quotes

Hamas had, in a bloody armed coup, seized control of the Gaza Strip from the Palestinian Authority, and refusing to negotiate with the Israelis undermined the Palestinian hopes of peace talks with Israel. The PA could no longer speak for the Palestinians. Hamas a particularly aggressive terrorist organization whose charter called for the death of all Jews in the world, wanted to force the Palestinian Authority to join them in terrorist attacks on Israel. The Palestinians had renounced terrorism and violence. The Hamas fighters were planning to fire rockets at Israel from the West Bank and launching other terrorist attacks against Israel, hoping that Israel would retaliate against the Palestinian Authority by attacking the West Bank which had not been destroyed at all while Gaza had lost much of its infrastructure and 2,000 lives. The Palestinian Authority was not about to let themselves get sucked into a war that they could not possible win and was contrary to the policies of Prime Minister Abbas and his elected government.

This part of the war was particularly bloody as Marion and his opponent Colonel Tarleton both committed atrocities and war crimes against the civilians who supported the other side or tried to remain neutral. Marion was promoted to General.

This is diplomatic language for a very stern warning. Pakistan supported terrorist organizations because 1) they used the terrorists as their proxies in their continuing conflict with India. The terrorists were a de facto asset of the Pakistani Intelligence Service. 2) Many Pakistani citizens were ultra-orthodox Muslims and believed in the religious objectives of the terrorists and even shared a religious belief in the propriety of the terrorist methods as long as they were being applied to non-Muslims or Muslim heretics. 3) Much of the militant infrastructure was in the tribal, frontier areas of the country where the government was relatively weak. 4) The militants had taken the position that if the Pakistan government tried to curtail their jihad efforts, then the government and its supports were heretical Muslims and were, under Sharia—Islamic Law—proper targets for their terrorism activities. The number of Pakistani Muslims that the terrorists murdered was far greater ironically than the American or European Christians and Indian Hindus that had been killed. A decade later, the Pakistani authorities were split over those who realized that the terrorists were most dangerous to the Pakistanis themselves—and especially the government officials—and those who believed that the terrorists should have continued support because of the 4 reasons above.

Azad Kashmir is that part of the disputed territory of Kashmir that was under Pakistan’s control, as opposed to the part of Kashmir that was under Indian Control.

UNRWA is the acronym for United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees. This organization to do its work with Palestinian Refugees hires many Palestinians but does not vet them as to whether or not they have terrorist sympathies or have been or have been associated with terrorists. As a result, some of the UNRWA staff assist HAMAS and other Palestinian terrorist groups in many ways. Their staff and vehicles have not only been used to transport terrorists and weapons, but also helped them to escape after having been surrounded by Israeli police and IDF. Even some officials at the UN HQ itself support terrorists. One has posters decorating his office extolling particular suicide bombers as martyrs. The UN is so weak and vapid that they will not even prohibit their employees from decorating office walls with material praising multiple murderers.

This quotation provides a succinct view of most non-Western Muslims on the issue of the definition of “terrorist.” A “mujahid” can be translated from Arabic as “freedom fighter.” To the rest of the world, terrorism is defined by the techniques and behavior of the doer. To many Muslims, it is defined only by the motive. If one is defending land or a cause, he cannot be a terrorist. The only terrorist to a Muslim holding this point of view is a person who engages in these violent methods for no reason. The essential difference is that to most of the world a cause—even a worthy one—does not justify any methodology or cost. To the Islamicist who accepts Al-Jozo’s point of view, there is NO methodology that is immoral, especially if one is fighting for a cause, and no cause is more worthy than the spread and dominance of Islam and the world of God. Therefore, for that cause, there can be no terrorism as there can be no ethical or moral limits.