The Middle East Conflict and Terrorism

The Middle East Conflict: Historical, Religious and Cultural Perspectives on Terrorist Act as Unacceptable Behavior Abstract The purpose of this research paper is to examine the Middle East, its occupations and resulting conflicts in order to understand Terrorism, its origins and implications to innocent bystanders.  This paper utilized existing literature to construct a brief history of the region while examining the cultural differences between East and West in order to understand the mind of a Terrorist.  This meant looking to theories found in anthropology, religion, science and psychology while remaining within the framework and assumption that Terrorism is wrong and an unacceptable behavior.

To understand this assumption as true meant comparing and contrasting Eastern and Western ways of life using examples from literature, religion and politics.   The Middle East Conflict: Historical, Religious and Cultural Perspectives on Terrorist Act as Unacceptable Behavior  Chapter One: Introduction BackgroundThe Middle East has been in turmoil since the beginning of time.  Due to its location geographically and proximity to immensely valuable resource, not just oil but transportation routes, it has always been an area worth conquering to governments in power.  Add differences in religion that has defined the Muslim culture from Western values and the area remains a hot zone of conflict.

It should be said at this time, this paper would not explore how there are conflicts at work within subsets of populations in the area.  This is paper will look at how conflicts have persisted due to outside occupations by Western cultures.  It will look to cultural and religious differences as a means to define the motivations behind terrorist behaviours.  It will not discuss internal factions at work to feed the conflict such as Hezbollah in Lebanon.

It will not discuss the numerous differing Islamic beliefs found within the religion as a means of fuelling the fire for terror.  It should also be said at this time that extreme behavior does not only exist for the Middle East, it can be found in any religion, culture or society on Earth.  History tells the truth of such extremist movements throughout time.  Most recently, we’ve seen extreme, mad behavior on the part of such rulers as Hitler in Germany, Pinchot in Chile and the Branch Davidian in Texas.

Such behavior is just a fact of life.  Those of us brought up with a sense of Judeo Christian right and wrong understand these behaviours to be unacceptable to society.  One thing about humanity, there is always a rationale explanation.  This paper aims to address the complexity the Middle East rationale behind terrorism.

What makes a person a terrorist?  What drives them to sacrifice his or her life?  God or his or her idea of God, of Allah?  And as Westerners, how we are so blind to seeing this kind of passion, this kind of commitment?  Because it is not ours to bear?  If driven by the same primal, cultural and religious reasons, to fight for American soil for instance, would we not make the same choices?  Is the Gulf War not based on this premise?  To find for everything we believe in?  Our value system?  Our safety and morals?  Our way of life?  Still because of laws, ethics and society, we believe the terrorist to be behaving unacceptably?  What if the tables were turned?ProblemThe problem can be seen as there being many misconceptions about the Middle East.  From the Western point of view, this culture doe not fit the Western value system.  It seems foreign and mistrusting.  Part of what fuels this misconception are differences found between the East and West, found in religion, culture and politics.

This conflict is millennia old; how do we as humanity begin to understand each other in a modern world.  Another reason for such misconceptions is built around negative press as a result of extremist behavior.  Much of what the West sees is a threat to the West’s way of life.  Much of what the West knows about the East is negative because of Terrorist behavior.

This paper works to establish the Middle East as a place rich in history, culture, art and passion.  This view of the Middle East will be juxtaposed with that of the West’s point of view to offer insight on how extremist behavior hurts so many people worldwide.  This paper also works to explain the reasons behind this behavior.  How repeated occupations of the area and disrespect of the Islamic religion and culture has lead to a rise in Jihad.

Much of this paper is based on the fight between good and evil, but this paper will look to humanity as a basis of foundation.  The problem is preconceived notions and each person’s value system.  If we could only respect each other and stop the breeding of madmen and women?  Because of the conflicts that exist, much of the problem exists because of technology and lack of communication, understanding each other.  Are all these ideas just borne of a need for an explanation, reasoning behind why we are here at the moment? This issue of time brings up many questions and concerns many that cannot be explored during this study.

PurposeThe overall purpose of this paper and study is to examine the history of Middle East occupations and how differences in culture based on religion have given terrorist the reasoning for his or her unacceptable behaviours. This paper will examine both historical and cultural views of the Middle East in order to construct a working definition for modern times. It is ironic that by looking to the past and present, one can discover much about the status quo. This paper hopes to determine that unfortunately there is no clear path for the Middle East despite analysis of historical, religious, and cultural and modernist constructs.

Time is what one makes of it but at evolving creatures looking for reasoning, it is also simple to see why people want a definition and to establish differing viewpoints. How else could we survive the unknown? Some accounts have been able to establish motivation for terror scientifically while others have looked to religion, culture and experiences for proof.Literature from many experts in this field has been were studied to get a better picture. It has been researched and also explored the implications of the Middle East conflict as a construct.

Such research brought to light not just how the Middle East can vary depending upon the frame of reference. A scientist will see terror differently from a farmer, for example.  It is interesting to see the differing philosophies on the subject and look at how this has led to the modernist view of the present conflict.DelimitationsA few limitations were encountered during the implementation of this study; the following are the preliminary main issues:ResourcesResources were lacking to conduct a complete interview of scientists, theologians, historians, cultural anthropologists, and a huge percentage of the human population about his or her known opinion of Middle East culture.

Data collection was contingent on careful study of related literature in specific areas.  As a result, much “data” was not data at all but literature of different views on the Middle East, its history and culture.  To understand extremist behavior, the research also looked to experts in differing fields of science, anthropology, sociology and religion in order to grasp the mind of a terrorist.TimeTime is always of the essence when doing a project of this scope.

Because of the nature of the topic, constraints had to be applied, otherwise, one could spend forever in pursue of understanding the Middle East conflict, its history and terrorism.Research ExpectationsThere were many expectations when doing this research.  First, I wanted to gather enough evidence that varied on the view of the Middle East, its history and culture in order to understand terrorist behavior that have stood the test of time throughout history and culture. I wanted to be able to get a perspective on where the definition for conflict and hate came from and how it affects the present modern time for the human race.

This can be a difficult task. I wanted to be able to make sense of the conflict and look to that as a frame of reference from which I could explore modern implications. I believe there is too much focus on the conflict as a construct even with all the technology that influences the world; we are not able to move on. Many do not see how technology is leading the human race to being a multicultural humanity.

No longer are areas of the world closed off from the West.  We are being exposed as a result of technology like the Internet and satellite.  This changes the whole perspective for the modern society.  Still why can’t we work past the past and toward a future of multicultural acceptance?  I wanted to research how the Western view of the Middle East could change because of different influences like culture, religion and modern times.

Of course, there are also implications of living in the modern world that I also wanted to explore. I believe many people are hopeful that due to modern times, we can accept each other and be a world for all cultures.  Still this means incorporating flexibility many extremists; both left and right are not ready to embrace.  Part of the problem is not just the Middle East and extremist’s hate of the West but a reverse of that statement.

The Bush Administration feels it best to impose our way of life upon a Middle Eastern nation, whether it be for Bush’s own personal profit or world dominance, remains to be seen as his popularity wanes.  Still this is part of the issue.  What right does the West have to occupy any of the Middle East because of a need for oil or power?  No wonder so many on the Muslim political right are fighting so hard. I believe that by looking at religion, culture and science has created a construct to offer a foundation for understanding such behavior.

Possible Questions Pertaining to the Middle East(1) What is considered the Middle East?(2) Is there more than one definition of the Middle East?(3) How has it changed, throughout time? Does it change from culture to culture?(4) Is the modern view of the Middle East?(5) Where is terror?(6) What are violent methods?(6) What are the reasons behind terrorism?(7) Why is terrorism seen as an unacceptable behavior by the West?  By some Muslims?DispositionThe Introduction chapter provides a short background for the research. Here the reader will also be introduced to the problem and the purpose of the study. In addition, the chapter clarifies the delimitations and gives an explanation of the disposition of the thesis.  The Methodology chapter describes the methods that the research is based on, gives grounds for the chosen methods and reviews how the literature was chosen during the research.

After a brief description of the more general character of themethodology used, the literature is discussed.  The chapter is concluded with a research evaluation.  The purpose of this chapter is to present how the research has been conducted, which is important for the understanding of the following chapters.The Theoretical Framework or review of related literature chapter presents theories on the Middle East history exploring both religious and cultural views of terror as unacceptable behaviors.

The chapter starts with a short presentation of the history of the region as a construct.  This theoretical framework will be used when analyzing the empirical material.In the Empirical Research chapter or the fourth chapter, the findings and implications of the literature review will be presented.  In order to carry out the review, first the history had to be explored and then deconstructed.

It was deconstructed through the literature review as this review offered different views on Middle East and Terror.  A subject of this size in need of exploration meant that as the research progressed, it was important to categorize elements within the conflict to compare and contrast them.  Therefore, different categories were established in order to create a systematic framework.  I chose to focus on both religious and cultural views.

The results of the empirical research are combined with the theoretical framework presented in chapter three.  The data or information found the literature review is then analyzed in order to discover the answers to the Middle East conflict.  The Concluding Discussion or chapter five presents the conclusions drawn from the analysis.  The conclusions will provide an answer to the research problem and reflect upon issues discussed.

This also chapter provides suggestions for further research in the subject.

Chapter Two: Methodology

Scientific Approach

As part of any scientific approach, it is important to focus on the correct sources of information to prove the problem. For this purpose, it was important to focus on historical, cultural and modern perspectives of the Middle East conflict and terrorist behavior.  It was not the purpose of this study to conduct a survey or interview the population about his or her personal view of the Middle East or the right or wrong of extremist behaviours found in terrorist acts but rather to establish concrete views of the history and modern situation of the region from established academic sources.

Problem Significance:Timely: The Middle East has been in conflict since the beginning of time.  Recent events like 9/11 and the continued war in Iraq bring to the forefront issues of Terror to American eyes.  No one can know when the next terrorist attack will happen.  The American public, I believe, is unaware the extend of the reasons behind acts of terror brought about by Muslim extremist.

Many Americans and Westerns like are not aware that such behaviours exist in any culture and society.  History is plagued with mad men and women.  Because of this, political leadership comes under fire and public perception of the situation becomes important.  Legislation like the Freedom of Information Act and Patriot Act bring to light the strengths and weaknesses within our own society and how it lends itself to preconceived notions about the Middle East as a society and culture not living by Western standards or value systems.

This can be reflected in public perception of terrorist acts as unacceptable. Wide Population: It is very difficult to know every detail of Middle Eastern history or cultural experience.  It is very difficult to understand the reasoning behind violent acts with so many different sub-cultures and factions involved.  This makes the unknown difficult to grapple with from the Western point of view.

Research Gap: With consideration to Middle Eastern modern life, it is important to realize every human has individual mindsets and reasoning toward behavior.  There is neither the manpower nor the funds to provide adequate coverage occupied areas of the Middle East.  What does not help the situation is public perception of the Middle East and the War on Terror.  Problems still exist despite increased peace talks of years past and government cooperation to find terrorists; still there is not much research to suggest that that such actions has been effective.

There is however, much literature suggesting that there are factors influencing the terrorist and public perception terrorism and Western government need for control of the conflict.Resulting Policy Change: Public perception of terror’s role in the Middle East crisis has changed rapidly in the last ten years because there are factors at work within society that influence people.  Events such as September 11, 2001 are forever imprinted on the Western collective brain.  Increased public dissatisfaction with the War and increased immigration especially to metropolitan areas like New York and Los Angeles public perception of the government’s opinion on terror and the War on Terror as negative.

This in turn has resulted in the Bush administration to continue meddling in Middle Eastern policy.  It has changes how many Americans view the Middle Eastern culture.  It has promoted changes in identification processes at the border.  Starting in January 2007, everyone will need a passport to cross the border into areas and territories where you once only needed a driver’s license or birth certificate.

It has creates a feeling of paranoia that only reinforces the negative behavior terrorists stand for. Ethical FrameworkWhen embarking upon facilitating a study and disseminating findings, ethical issues should be at the forefront of any researcher’s mind.[1]  When performing a study to the extent of one warranted for Middle Eastern history, one must take into account the frameworks already established by the Nuremberg Code of 1964 and the Helsinki Declaration of 1989.[2]   These international documents outline three ethical principles that must be followed by all research studies.

The three ethical principles are: (1) Informed consent in full knowledge of the risks, (2) Autonomy and (3) Confidentiality and anonymity.  These principles aim to establish a means of respect and justice to underpin the conduct of the research.  Once a framework for the research is established, then the conduct cannot be called into question, unless one of these principles is violated.Everyday researchers face a myriad of common ethical questions.

Researchers have a responsibility to “recognize and meet the ethical standards at every stage of his or her work.”[3]  However rules established by society can be seen in very general terms, can be difficult to define because of context changing with each situation.  Part of the issue with a generalized framework is the notion that rules can be interpreted to suit one’s needs.  It is part of the researcher’s job to remain within the parameters in order to produce ethical research outcomes.

Ethical ConsiderationsWhen conducting a literature review, it is important for the researcher to see all sides of the subject and remain objective throughout the process of literature collection. This can be difficult as one can become excited by the prospect of discovering something new and original. When it came to researching a topic of this size, it was important to establish a frame reference from which to start the collection.  I started with understanding my own preconceived notions of the Middle East and the Terrorist mindset.

I looked to my own notions of hate, commitment and loyalty to a belief system. I then started working outward to understanding more creative and flexible views found in culture, religion and science.Variables:There are limitations or variables to any study and these variables below may alter the results of the study.Independent Variables:Anything that may categorize the subject as unique and immense within the parameters of study.

Issues of that may skew the view like culture, religion and science.Dependant Variables:Historical views and modern concept of Middle East conflicts including the notion of Islam as a foreign religion and therefore foreign way of life. Many are stuck within this frame of reference.The Sample:The topic applies to Middle East history and motivations of terrorist activity and when conducting the literature, I looked to professionals within the fields of historians of philosophy, cultural experts, religious figures and scientists, all who are academics and specialists in his or her fields of study pertaining to the framework of the Middle East.

Inclusion/Exclusion:As a result all specialists not published in these fields of expertise mentioned above were excluded.  Much of the literature sources, especially modern views, were published within the last 50 years and available at any library or via the World Wide Web.Because in order to better understand the concept of the Middle East, its conflicts and Western views today, one must look to the past, the philosophers and historians reviewed for this study who are long deceased but still revered were included.Literature as FrameworkIn this review of previous studies and related literature, information is presented in support of and in anticipation of the methodology.

In order to constrain the literature review to a manageable yet representative account of the development of the concepts and constructs employed here, the focus was on studies within the framework of historical, cultural, religious and scientific sources.With this in mind, what do we know about the Middle East, its occupations, conflicts, cultural differences and the role of terror there? Are there many views? How does the modern view distort reality? Has the human experience focused too much on the past as a means to continue fuelling the conflict? Can a modern notion of multiculturalism change this?Methods of Research: Review of Related LiteratureMany methods apply to the gathering of information during a study. For the purpose of this study, the main method focuses on a review of related literature. This review will provide a foundation from which one can review Middle East history but also analyze different views of the region for a more modern definition.

This research was conducted to study the Middle East and specifically what rationale makes a terrorist mind. This research focused on different areas of society in order to gain a perspective on this behavior and motivation toward it.This review did not offer data to act as a basis of analysis but more for a basis from which an understanding of these concepts can be built. This literature review was used for research purposes only.

The findings and implications are presented in Chapter 4 of this dissertation.Selection of LiteratureThe research process can be a long and arduous one. It can be a daunting process to undertake especially with such a broad topic. First it was important to look at the Middle East from an historical perspective rich in literature and religious beliefs.

Even with many sources from which to draw, there is a certain aura surrounding the Middle East as mysterious and very foreign from what the West is used to finding within the Western value system.  It is still mystery even thousands of years later.  It was important to gather information on how the Middle East is defined and viewed throughout the world.  The research needed to begin with looking at history, literature and religion and then looking to modern experts for different views.

Then in order to gain a more flexible and creative view of time, it was important to look at religion, culture and science as a means of defining the terrorist behavior as unacceptable. These are elements within society that influence the modern mindset and needed exploration. Because as these relationships were found in literature, it started to build a modern view of the Middle East where the conflict is somewhat understood to the Western mind. In this respect, these areas were researched in order to see if these relationships exist or if that is the wrong view to have about the continued modern conflict found today in the region.

This allowed the study to go from being very broad to something more specific. By doing this, I believe the review of literature to have validity.    Chapter Three: Review of Related Literature Part One: The History of the Middle EastAnd Its Occupation In order to understand the current day feeling of hatred between Palestinians and the West and Israel, one must first look back at history of not only the people but of the land that is the central piece of the violence.  The area which in today is known as Israel, the West Bank, Lebanon and most of Syria and Jordan was at one point inhabited by an entire population of Canaanites.

This area became was a potpourri of farmers and vineyard growers, pagans and also new converts to Christianity.  It became difficult to see a division between the Canaanites and the Arabs as a result of the intermarrying that occurred after the settlers came into Canaan.  The settlers who came to this land, did not try to establish their own rules and religions, instead they actually dissolved into the current culture and adopted the ways of the Canaan’s.  By the end of the seventh century the area became known as Palestine, or in Arabic, Filastin.

It was made up of mostly Arab and Islamic people.  In 1516, Palestine became a province of the Ottoman Empire.[4] After the collapse of Ottoman Empire that ruled the region from 1517 to 1917, the Mandate for Palestine was established in 1922.  During this mandate, large Jewish immigration from Europe took place.

During this period of time, the Ottoman Land Code was developed in 1858.  This code meant that every landowner must register their land and it was only then that the land was seen as formally theirs.  Whereas beforehand, the land was cultivated and saw in a communal sense, it was now being sold to members of the upper-class who understood how to circumvent the laws.  The land that had been used by the Arab settlers were now being sold to foreigners, and the Arabs saw the land being taken “right from under their feet”, quite literally speaking.

As a result of realizing Muslim weakness and technological backwardness and being in direct contact with the control of European thought and power, the apologetic trend appealed to liberalism and over-emphasized peace, freedom and tolerance.  This trend was a weapon to reform Muslim nations.  This reform was considered the main way to get rid of European occupation that threatened not only the land but all the values of Islam.  This was typical of the ruling Ottoman elite and its movements of the nineteenth century and of the reformers who came in contact with the West even since the era of Rifa`ah at-Tahtawi.

The other response to the European domination was military. Aimed at the liberation of the Muslim land, it was organized by people and their traditional leadership, such as Al- Mahdi in Sudan, Al-Mokhtar in Libya, Al-Jaza’iri in Algeria, Isma`il Al-Shahid in India, Osman Dan Foudia in Africa, and so on.  All these liberation movements emphasized jihad more or less in terms of classical conceptions. But such a jihad war was bound to fail because the conditions essential for success were not present.

The liberal approach to internal reform of government and society also failed.During the First World War, jihad was proclaimed by both the Ottoman Sultan against the allied powers and by the Sharif Hussein against the Turkish rulers. They also failed. So, the rest of the Arab world failed to gain the promised independence.

At the same time, the Balfour Declaration was issued and the aggressive Zionist project established its bases in Palestine.  These experiences brought disenchantment with Western liberalism, Western institutions and cooperation with the West.In the inter-war period, the liberation movements were waged under various ideological discourses. Other ideological movements stemming from nationalism or Marxism accompanied the Islamic jihad.

The Muslim Brotherhood was the main Islamic movement that adopted a comprehensive strategy for change. It proclaimed jihad both as military resistance against occupation and as social and spiritual reform.  The use of jihad terminology, as well as jihad doctrine, was restricted and narrowed. The indicators were various and extended, causing confusion and renewed the debate of jihad versus terrorism.

These term stems from non-Islamic frames of reference. But on the other hand, some leaders used the term jihad in critical situations, mainly during wars with Israel.  Otherwise, some wars between Muslims were also called jihad.After the end of the Cold War and the beginning of a comprehensive peace process between Arabs and Israel, national governments in the Muslim world adopted another discourse: the “adaptation to globalization” and to peace.

So, jihad’s reputation worsened as long as it was considered to be a catalyst force against the negative consequences of globalization, and the catastrophic situations prevailing since the peace process with Israel was begun.  The doctrine of jihad was also used by the US and its allies to wage war against Communism in the Islamic world, especially in Afghanistan. After the end of the Cold War, the acts called jihad against the USA and Israel were escalated towards the end of the 20th century, when the unjust and offensive policies against Muslim peoples reached its peak on various levels. The foreign cultural and civilizational aspects that threaten Muslim people have added more critical challenges to the traditional ones, at the military and economic level.

Then in 1947, the Jewish ownership of the land in Palestine was only 1,850 sq kilometers which is 7.04% of the total land Palestine.  In 1947 the United Nations proposed a division of the territory between an Arab and a Jewish state.  The regions proposed the Arab state included what would become the Gaza Strip and almost all of what would become the West Bank.

Jewish groups supported the partition plan and the Arab groups voted against it.  As a result of this discontent for the new partition, Arab groups invaded the newly formed State of Israeli and this was the start of the War of Independence.  Israel controlled many of the areas that were designated for Arab states after the war and then agreements were established with the Armistice Demarcation Lines in 1949 although these did not have recognized international borders.After this the area that was held by Jordan and Iraqi forces became known as the West Bank.

The area held by Egyptian forces remained under their control and became known as the Gaza Strip.  For nineteen years, the area was held by Jordanian forces to the West and the Egyptians to the East until the Six Day War.  Since the end of the Six Day War in 1967, Israeli forces have held the territories under its control. The land remained under Israeli control until the 1990s when the Oslo Accords established a new authority known as the Palestinian Authority.

This authority was initially developed to only be a short term resolution in where the Palestinian Authority would hold security as well as civil responsibility in the major cities of the West Bank Area and the Gaza Strip.  However, the five year interim period ended in 1999 and there has been no status agreement provided.  In 2005, the world saw Israeli forces pulling out of the Gaza Strip, ceding internal control over to the Palestinian Authority.[5] Representations of Palestine in Religious Doctrine and Literary Works ReligionAbraham is widely regarded as the Patriarch of monotheism and the common father of the Jews, Christians and Muslims.

Through His second son, Isaac, came all Israelite prophets including such towering figures as Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, Solomon and Jesus, may peace and blessings be upon them all. The advent of these great prophets was in partial fulfillment of God’s promises to bless the nations of earth through the descendants of Abraham.[6]  Such a fulfillment is wholeheartedly accepted by Muslims whose faith considers the belief of these prophets, an article of faith.Was the first born son of Abraham (Ishmael) and his descendants included in God’s covenant and promise?  A few verses from the Bible may help shed some light on this question:  Genesis 12:2-3 speaks of God’s promise to Abraham and his descendants before any child was born to him.

God’s promises the birth of Ishmael and before the birth of Isaac.   In Genesis, Isaac is specifically blessed but Ishmael was also specifically blessed and promised by God to become “a great nation”.  According to Deuteronomy 21:15-17[7] the traditional rights and privileges of the first-born son are not to be affected by the social status of his mother (being a “free” woman such as Sarah, Isaac’s mother, or a “Bondwoman” such as Hagar, Ishmael’s mother). This is only consistent with the moral and humanitarian principles of all revealed faiths.

The full legitimacy of Ishmael as Abraham’s son and “seed” and the full legitimacy of his mother, Hagar, as Abraham’s wife are clearly stated in Genesis.After Jesus, the last Israelite messenger and prophet, it was time that God’s promise to bless Ishmael and his descendants be fulfilled.  Less than 600 years after Jesus, came the last messenger of God, Muhammad (peace be upon him), from the progeny of Abraham through Ishmael. God’s blessing of both of the main branches of Abraham’s family tree was now fulfilled.

But are there additional corroborating evidence that the Bible did in fact foretell the advent of prophet Muhammad?  Long time after Abraham, God’s promise to send the long-awaited Messenger was repeated this time in Moses’ words. In Deuteronomy 18:18 , Moses spoke of the prophet to be sent by God who is meant to be seen as a brother among all men.  Analogies between Moses and Jesus overlooks not only the above similarities but other crucial ones as well (e.g.the natural birth, family life and death of Moses and Muhammad but not of Jesus, who was regarded by His followers as the Son of God and not exclusively a messenger of God, as Moses and Muhammad were, and as Muslims believe Jesus was).Deuteronomy 33:1-2 combines references to Moses, Jesus and Muhammad.  It speaks of God (i.e.God’s revelation) coming from Sinai, rising from Seir (probably the village of Sa’ir near Jerusalem) and shining forth from Paran. In  Genesis, the wilderness of Paran was the place where Ishmael settled (i.e. Arabia, specifically Mecca).

Indeed the King James version of the Bible mentions the pilgrims passing through the valley of Ba’ca (another name of Mecca.The Quron Eluded to in the BibleFor twenty-three years, God’s words (the Qur’an) were truly put into Muhammad’s (pbuh) mouth. He was not the “11th author” of the Qur’an, the Qur’an was dictated to Muhammad (pbuh) by Angel Gabriel, who asked him to simply repeat the words of the Qur’an as he heard them. These words were then committed to memory and to writing by those who hear them during Muhammad’s lifetime and under his supervision.

?Was it a coincidence that the prophet “like unto Moses” from the “brethren” of the Israelites (i.e. from the Ishmaelites) was also described as one in whose mouth God will put his words and that he will speak in the name of God.  (Deuteronomy 18:18-20 ).

Was it also a coincidence the “Paraclete” that Jesus foretold to come after Him was described as one who “shall not speak of himself, but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak (John 16:13)?Was it another coincidence that Isaiah ties between the messenger connected with Ke’dar and a new song (a scripture in a new language) to be sang unto the Lord (Isaiah 42:10-11). More explicitly, prophesies Isaiah “For with stammering lips, and another tongue, will he speak to this people” (Isaiah 28:11 ). This latter ‘verse correctly describes the “stammering lips” of Prophet Muhammad reflecting the state of tension and concentration he went through at the time of revelation. Another related point is that the Qur’an was revealed in piece-meals over a span of twenty-three years.

It is interesting to compare this with Isaiah 28:10 which speaks of the same thing. Arabs and JewsIf Ishmael and Isaac are the sons of the same father Abraham, then they are brothers. And so the children of the one are the Brethen of the children of the other.  The children of Isaac are the Jews and the Children of Ishmael are the Arabs, so they are Brethren to one another.

The children of Isaac are the brethren of the Ishmaelites.  In like manner Muhummed is from among the brethren of the Israelites because he was a descendant of Ishamel the son of Abraham. There the prophecy distinctly mentions that the coming prophet who would be like Moses, must arise not from the ‘children of Israel’ or from ‘among themselves’, but from among their brethren.Approximately fourteen hundred years ago, prophet Muhammad, the last in the line of the prophets of Islam (Submission), delivered the Quran, the Final Testament.

Islam (Submission in English) was founded by Abraham.   Ever since the Renaissance, its believers have been subjected to difficulties. From the Inquisition in Spain and Andalucia to the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Chechnya, the Muslim people have endured colonial regime and economic and military oppression. By the means of media, Islam  (Submission) has been given a sinister image in the eye of the public opinion; this notorious image is mainly due to the ignorance and misunderstanding of the media and public.

A word which is often heard and associated with the acts of certain individuals, claiming to act in the name of Islam, is the Arabic word: Jihad. Its significance plays an extremely crucial role in the image of Islam. But what does this so widely known word mean?Jihad has a great significance in the lives of Muslims (Submitters in English). Like any language, Arabic has unique words, which have a particular meaning, which cannot be translated precisely.

The best translation known for such a word is the following: a sincere and noticeable effort (for good); an all true and unselfish striving for spiritual good.Jihad as presented in the Quran and any of the other scriptures implies the striving of spiritual good.  This Jihad particularly involves change in one’s self and mentality. It may concern the sacrifice of material property, social class and even emotional comfort solely for the salvation and worship of God ALONE.

As a result, one who practices Jihad will gain tremendously in the Hereafter.” The Hereafter is far better for you than this first (life.)”(93:4)[8]”Say, “O my people, do your best, and so will I. You will surely find out who the ultimate victors are.

” Certainly, the wicked will never succeed.”(6:135).[9] The Jihad involves noticeable effort for righteousness. This means that the effort concentrated in the Jihad is a step in the true and ultimate path of Islam (submission); the effort imposed on one’s self.

Thus Jihad is solely individual, self-centered and self-interested. This effort is only the doing of good for salvation and pardon of God. The Quran points this out in the following verse: “The day will come when every soul will serve as its own advocate, and every soul will be paid fully for whatever it had done, without the least injustice.” (16:111).

[10]In respect to the above Quranic verses, God tells the believers that all acts will reflect the soul of their authors.  Examples of this Jihad would be to exceed in the sincere act of good deeds (to frequent the mosques that worship God alone more often; to study the scripture in detail, to help the poor and the orphans, to stand for people’s right for freedom, be equitable, never bear witness false testimony, frequent and stay in good terms with friends and neighbors, etc.) and the restraining of the doing of sins (to commit adultery, to steel, to lie, to cheat, to insult people, to gossip, etc.);”As for those who lead a righteous life, male or female, while believing, they enter Paradise; without the slightest injustice.

” (4:124).[11]The previous Quranic verse highlights the meaning of Jihad and its role. It has also mentioned the importance of the sincerity when it is practiced.  Jihad emphasizes on the individual.

Say, “O my people, do your best, and so will I. You will surely find out who the ultimate victors are.”  Certainly, the wicked will never succeed.”(6:135).

[12]Jihad also includes the striving and establishing of justice. Before one can strive for justice in his/her community, justice must be one of his/her main religious and moral principles.; The Koran–or, the Qur’an (the recitation) as the Arabs call it is believed by Muslims and diehard sheeple/believers to be the literal word of God as recited through Gabriel to Mohammed. However, the Koran–as demonstrated no better than in this post-September 11, 2001 world of incremented Muslim terrorism has many, irreparable faults within, the chief one being that it’s susceptible for the use of encouraging violence, brutality and terrorism.

There’s a reason Osama is, sacrilegiously, a very popular name these days in the Muslim community and why the Muslim world in general scarcely protests against terrorism, or the extremists they claim only make up a “fraction” of their worshippers.  The ordeal with Islam is that a larger-than-tolerable number of their practitioners believe that violence is essentially Islamic and Islamic terrorism is only religious terrorism and therefore true Islam.  Aside from these already inexcusable sins of the Koran, there are also irrecoverable problems relating to misuse of science, inconsistency, historical inaccuracy and a failure of providing context for verses.Because of all these flaws within the Koran, it is hazardously susceptible to misinterpretation by Islamic fascists and terrorists, something the Christian Bible, as an example, obviously is not.

That is why Christianity has not produced any extremists or fanatics, who use the name of their God to kill, murder, dictate, terrorize, or otherwise harm other human beings.  Still movements exist.The most infernal predicament with the Koran, not just extremist Islam, is that some of its own verses glorify and preach violence (leading to terrorism).  One of the most infamous verses in the Koran appears to shamelessly endorse brutality, (2:194):”The Sacred month for the sacred month and all sacred things are (under the law of) retaliation; whoever then acts aggressively against you, inflict injury on him according to the injury he has inflicted on you and be careful (of your duty) to Allah and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).

“[13]This provocative verse glaringly endorses a revenge culture, which, of course, dominates the minds of the Islamic terrorists who hate the West. The same sura where the above verse is featured also endorses that fighting for Allah is not optional. Followers do not have a choice if they strictly believe this interpretation.  Other verses implicating Islam as the opposite of the “religion of peace” include verse 4:95, which says that those who fight please Allah more than those who do not and verse 9:19-20, which says that those who take up arms for Islam rank highest among believers.

What are we to believe as Westerners?  Maybe we should understand that even our own Bible could have many meanings. Other irremediably terminal dilemmas with Islam concern the intractable punishment of death for apostasy, the rejection of Islam by a believer; the stoning-to-death of adulterers, particularly women; the advocation of cutting off the hands of thieves; the death penalty for homosexuals; and permitting/advocating slavery. Islam has no defense against the charge it condones slavery since the “best” Islamo-apologists like Yusuf Ali do is admit Islam permits slavery, but also the “good treatment” of slaves!!!!Aside from these morally distasteful encroachments by the Koran, it is also infected with historical irregularities versus what the Bible contains, but the arrogant Muslim believers justify this by denouncing the Bible as being blurred by human interference, which presumes the perfection of the Quran.  The science misused in the Koran is also unpardonable confirming its primitive sickness as some verses literally bait the reader into thinking the Earth is flat and that the moon gives off light instead of reflecting sunlight.

With all these irretrievably baneful ordeals in the Koran, it is no wonder that not only are Westerners confused but also many within the Islamic community have renounced his or her faith. On the other hand to compare and contrast with Christian ideals:For the Word of God is quick and powerful, and sharper than any two-edge sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and the marrow, and is the discerner of the thoughts and the intents of the heart” Hebrews 4:12[14] If people that conduct themselves in the name Christianity and who operate as a church were to see Muslims in the same light, maybe the conflict can be solved.  To see different factions in the Middle East also within Western society, to be able to see extremes as more than just an occasional occurrence and to know extremists are present in any religion, not just Islam.  This may help the situation.

After all, some much weight is put on the Bible.  Civil Law in most countries swear on this book in this particular translation under oath.  This book when explored keeps one accountable to a perfect creator; concept humanism has swept under the rug due to the continued conflict and focus on past transgressions.It is the reality that Christians and Muslims can indeed be cut of the same cloth.

Do they not feel the same passion for their faith as we do?  Do they want to understand what causes your guilt and the conscience inside them? Find out that is not emotion, rather a conviction demanding righteousness of themselves. Find out it is the will of God (and deep within them) for them to do Good. The righteousness we all fall short of, as detailed for the generations of those in Bible. We have created our own images to worship and seek, we are unlawful, greedy and selfish and worthy of harsh judgment.

The beauty in reading through the Bible, seeing the warnings God gives to sinful generations of men.  The only redemption for Christ to pay our fine for us to escape this judgment. In complete surrender to him you are stripped of death and born into a salvation so amazing.It is important to remember, “God resists the proud, and gives grace to the humble”.

There is so much meat in this Book so much that causes conviction in any audience member of it.  This conviction which when yielded to is not an emotional experience, but divine and not of this earth or of the mind. Literary WorksAs a basis for framework within the literature review of important studies on the subjects and in order to offer some notion of where preconceived notions of the Middle East come from; it was important to look to literary works.  To explore the notion that the Middle East continues to reflect a mysterious quality that is not only romantic but also foreign to the Westerner but completely not based on the region’s cultural beliefs and values but based in mystique and stereotypes.

The Tales of One Thousand and One Nights was examined for these qualities as well as play by William Shakespeare called Othello.  Both works of fiction use these notions to paint different pictures of the Arabian culture.  It is my belief this compounded with misconceptions and misinterpretations of the Quran have lead Westerners to misunderstand the region.  The acts of terror have only made this pre-existing perception worse especially in recent years with September 11, 2001.

The setting for the Tales is medieval Islamic world. The tales offer an interesting window into the psyche of the tellers and the listeners.  Two features stand out in these stories. One is the continuing theme of ‘betrayal’ by women and unbridled lust by men.

The … prowess of ‘negroes’ (who go around servicing their masters’ wives) appears to be a major concern for the storytellers.

The language is quite explicit for stories that could be told to any member of the family.The second feature is how the storytellers appear to be obsessed with wealth and riches.  There is very little mention of how these riches are to be produced, mostly they appear as if by magic or are endowed by kings.  No one has to work for them.

This gives the reader an unclear of the culture’s work ethic.  There are few, if any, moral principles, except for a continuing emphasis on faith in Allah and His prophet.  It is interesting to speculate what effect these stories would have had on the region’s culture over a thousand years of telling. If popular stories affect a culture’s world-view then you have here a very dangerous set of tales, as they seem to represent Western stereotypes of the Arab world.

There are some poignant moments.  At times, some of the characters display rare courage and honesty. You also learn how curiosity can kill the cat in a thousand and one ways. The Khalifa and the kings try to be just most of the time.

Some of the wazirs are heroic, though others are very crooked.  The description of beauty (male or female) is generally quite exquisite and meant to maintain a romantic quality. Does this really depict the people accurately, however?  The narrative also spends a lot of time and effort on describing places, chambers and palaces in detail, so reader can see them. This is perhaps the key to the magic of these tales and the enchantment found in them.

The Tales reflect a rich texture and maybe even idealism but some images do not reflect an Arab world of peaceful, Allah fearing people.  Maybe on many levels, the Tales explore what the people cannot voice or in other words, taboo subjects like romance and sex. Certainly In Shakespeare’s Othello, he introduces an unlikely dynamic in the main character of Othello and the evil Iago.  Othello is in many ways an unlikely hero and romantic character because of his race as a Moor.

This was very taboo for the time and only exaggerates the West’s preconceived stereotypes about Middle Eastern men.[16]  Here innocence and trust is contrasted with pure manipulation and evil in what is one of Shakespeare’s most revealing tragedies.  The characters act exactly as they would be expected to base on the overriding quality that they represent. The Framework of Cultural Anthropology When approaching the subject of Anthropology, one must look within one’s self for an open mind for the subject’s study is challenging.

One must be prepared to understand how human culture and its systems of value such as religion have evolved over time.  This means one must keep in mind there will be many opinions and arguments long the way to seeking a true picture of man’s early beginnings and how this picture reflects modern culture today.  Exploring such concepts and keeping such ideas straight in one’s mind can be a challenge as it is easy to become overwhelmed by numerous points of views.  One must learn how to chose which views carry more weight and value for today’s people.

First of all, what can one learn by studying other cultures and more specifically cultures of a primitive nature?  Does this better the Western world’s view of these cultures?  Why do we as humans continue to look to the past?  Why do we look at cultures less advanced than ours?  Does this study result in a new respect for their practices and traditions or does it just remind us how much Western culture has achieved with regard to modernization and technology?  By looking at how primitive cultures think and view the world, does that influence Western culture?  Does this study shed light on how we value our own cultural elements?  What is the purpose of such examination?  Is it by understanding primitive rationale, we can gain insight into our own?

Or is it that such study of man does nothing to promote progress or multicultural harmony?  Can it be true that such methods of studying primitive culture and the resulting opinions only generate more questions and confusion? The field of cultural performance that has emerged over the last half century includes a wide variety of activities situated around the world.  These include traditional and experimental theater; rituals and ceremonies; popular entertainments, such as parades and festivals; popular, classical, and experimental dance; avant-garde performance art; oral interpretations of literature, such as public speeches and readings; traditions of folklore and storytelling; aesthetic practices found in everyday life, such as play and social interactions; political demonstrations and social movements.  This list is open to additions, subtractions, and debate, but from it one can see that cultural performance is cultural in the widest sense of the term, stretching from “high” to “low” culture, though its most ardent proponents stress its counter cultural aspects.  M. F. Ashley Montagu defines culture “from the Latin cultura and cultus which means care, cultivation or allowing to grow something”.  Originally the connotation attributive reflected “agriculture or cultivation of the soil.”[17]  Only later did the word describe attributes of man and elements of personality within a group of men.

From the beginning, the concept of culture was difficult to disseminate. Even today in a world without borders or limits due to telecommunications technology, it is still difficult to grasp the notion of multi-culture.  Due to its melting pot, we are a culture defined equally by many cultures.  Hence, the concept of multiculturalism was born to accept everyone’s culture.

Lawrence Auster writes for instance, “America is an assemblage of racially or ethnically defined subcultures, all of which have equal value and none of which can claim a privileged position.”[18]  This definition includes all aspects of culture including that of religion and creed, gender and sexuality.  It really gives culture too many factors to be defined by accurately.  Given the great diversity of activities, how can we call them all “performance?”  Identifying different practices and discourses as “performance” first requires gathering them together and conceptualizing them as a field of study, a field of objects, a field of performance.

It simultaneously requires a gathering of subjects, a community of practitioners and researchers constituting itself around and indeed through performance.This section of the paper will examine the topic of rationality and how it differs from culture to culture.  First, it is important to have a better understanding of rationality and relativism as these concepts have a direct relationship to each other.  It is also important to define these terms in a simplistic manner, as it will provide one with a foundation for which opinions and arguments can be processed.

In other words, by keeping these definitions in mind, one can open their mind to numerous ideas and expand creatively on these notions.  One can even take on the role of critic and ponder the relevance of such ideas.  This part of the paper will define the concepts of relationally and relativism, first on a general level and then builds upon these definitions with relevance to primitive thinking.  This will allow one to expand upon these ideas by including different elements of primitive culture such as: religious practices, magic, science and technology.

These are elements that are valued in some way in Western culture and by looking at these one can grasp better the importance of these elements to culture.  It is interesting how certain items take on different value or how over time, the value changes due to technological influence.  To better aid this process, the paragraphs below will look at various opinions from prominent academic figures within the Anthropological world.  The academic figures and their works this section will focus on are as follows: Lucien Levy-Bruhl, Edward E. Evans-Pritchard, Clifford Geertz, Brian Wilson and Stanley J. Tambiah.  To further discussion and to carry the thought process to the next level of understanding not only have works from these Anthropologists been analyzed but also other scholarly critiques as well.  It is only upon examining multiple layers of arguments that one can get a better understanding of how people think differently depending on cultural influences.

It is only with such study that one can begin to appreciate the differences our world has to offer but only is one allows him or herself to do so. DefinitionsIt is not easy to define the concept of rationality and relativism without outside influence as Western culture has taught one to think too much.  Today, there are no simple answer, just long drawn out explanations of the why, how, what, when, where and who of a situation.  When did life become so convoluted?  It is a fact people are defined by their surroundings.

Most of how one perceives him or her self and their surroundings has much to do with the perspective they were given upon birth.  From there, much of what is learned from people and surroundings is learned through stories or conversations.  Communication plays a great role in how one develops into a thinking being.  Communication creates a sense of connection.

This happens not only with speech but also visually.  In essence every form of communication can be broken down to a story.  Even a symbol can be seen as having meaning.This connection begins at a fundamental level of human sociology where the use of story is central.

Howard Gardner reflects, “the ultimate impact of the leader depends most significantly on the particular story that he or she relates or embodies, and the receptions to that story on the part of the audiences”.[19]  By telling stories, allows for a certain level of openness or vulnerability on the part of people and makes them human.  By opening the line of communication, gives the participant knowledge of their environment and develops trust.  This results in the beginnings of culture as the stories create more foundations for people to communicate.

Believing these stories creates a system for religion to grow and for thoughts to arise.  Still Mish defines rationality as “the quality or state of being rational” or when rationalizing of going through a thought process one “substitutes a natural for a supernatural explanation or myth.”[20]  It makes perfect sense that the mind processes unknowns as getting to greater state of understanding on an individual basis.  Relativity, on the other hand can be defined as “having a relation or connection” which further builds on that stories are the root of thought.

Relativity discusses “the state of being dependent for existence.”[21]  This sets into motion how much one’s surroundings, stories and connection really play defining roles in character.  These elements also have direct relationships on how the surroundings are influenced as a person develops so does it as well. Primitive CultureCulture is truly significant as one defines it that is an inverse relationship as it defines one.

Confusing, sometimes, yes but culture is mean things to different people.  Culture can include beliefs, behavior and knowledge defined by one’s race, religion, gender, social status and age.  It can also be a shared existence defined by time, place and people who share the same values attitudes and goals.  Valetin Turchin describes culture being divided into material and spiritual.

It is thought physical things one can see define the material culture, feel and taste.  It is thought in contrast that spiritual culture is based on emotion or the act of imaging events.  It can be further deconstructed that out of this division, culture can be seen in “the savage state or primitive culture and civilization.”[22] Civilization is formed around the construct that culture created the phenomena in which we live with.

Everything single item which we value such as language, art and religion is born out of culture.  On the other hand, Turchin writes, “to a primitive person the observed phenomena of the world appear to be cause by invisible, supernatural beings.  The primitives resort to incantation, ritual dances, sacrifices taboos and so on to appease or dive off such beings.”[23]  But could this not be true of civilization, only that Western culture’s devices are more modern?  Are we not living to appease or run off the modern concept of God?  This may be just the way we have rationalized it all.

It is the anthropologist’s job to study people in their surroundings with the hopes of better understanding culture.  It is thought that a certain amount of objectivity should be practiced while fieldwork is in process.  After reading many different accounts, I believe it is extremely difficult to come away from fieldwork without imposing one’s own beliefs upon the analysis.  Does this mean one is biased because of his or her own culture and rationality?  I believe, not entirely all the time.

Otherwise there would not be such varying views or opinions on primitive cultures.    Lucien Levy-BruhlLucien Levy-Bruhl saw “the people of simpler cultures reason in a primitive, prelogical fashion”[24] and this view has been attacked and defended by many.  He formulates that there is no real difference with how each mind works.  He believes that human beings everywhere are capable of rational thought and that the logical processes are essentially the same the world over.

It is okay to question the premises on which primitives make their decisions.  Levy-Bruhl argues that it is wrong to think Western culture is better.  Illogical and irrational thought is not only evident with primitive culture but also civilization despite enormous progress and achievement.  He points out that even the classical Greek and Roman people had elements of mystery in their religions.

There is no basis in which to judge this only as a lapse in prelogical mode but by looking at history one can conclude even civilization can think with prelogic.  Levy-Bruhl surmises, “the participatory, or prelogical mode has lurked at the edges of Western culture since its inception, and at various times has all but displaced the rational thought-mode.  One such time was the late Hellenistic and Roman period (ca100 BC to 400 AD), which was characterized by an obsession with mysticism and magic.”[25]  The concept of God being a trinity is evidence of this radical idea.

The trinity joins three parts of God as one in the forms of Father, Son and the Holy Ghost.  This concept is built on people’s ability to suspend their disbelief and instead believe in something they cannot see.Levy-Bruhl also introduced the concept there is something more that differentiates the pre-modern from the modern mode of thought.  He shifted the debate from the individualized comparison of how a primitive and a modern man thinks, to the comparison and contrast of the differences and similarities in collective representations.

From this construct, he was able to conclude that despite a difference, there are primitive men that are capable of thinking in a modern way just as there are modern men capable of thinking primitively.  He focused on the group experience to find primitive people have careful forethought concerning ritual, communication, activities of great social importance that involve ideas and feelings.  Still the difference he found when compared with civilization is that primitive people could not differentiate between affective and cognitive aspects of these ideas and feelings.  What this really means is that primitives are functioning on one level of reality.

Their worlds are not separated and in fact both the physical and spiritual exist together.  Modern man in Western culture on the other had can identify many planes of existence or feelings.  Modern man functions in a society of multiple realities. Edward E. Evans-PritchardEdward E. Evans-Pritchard defended Levy-Bruhl’s premise however, his work followed a much different course.  He has trouble separating his work from his own pre-existing beliefs.  He is of the belief that the spiritual world affect interpretive frameworks, both his or her own and others.

Even though his fieldwork was lacking especially in later years as he became more deeply religious, he strived to prove primitive people could have logical thoughts and not just irrational ones.  He understood their logic made perfect sense to their within their culture.  Still his own personal experience with the Azande people clouded his analytical judgment.  He was fascinated by their nighttime rituals involving witchcraft and as a result of bearing witness fell under their spell.

It is this experience that allows him to begin questioning the theory of method and not the particular instance in that method is used.  This reflects his own personal theological view as he delves into trying to understand more metaphysical issues.  Even he realizes with the quote below, he should have kept his own thoughts simple:There is no possibility of the anthropologist knowing whether the spiritualbeings of primitive religions or of any others have any existence or not,and since that is the case he cannot take the questions into consideration.The beliefs are for him sociological facts, not theological facts, and his sole concern is with their relation to each other and to social facts.

This truly means two things.  First his is imposing his own beliefs upon theirs but also that he identifies with them upon realizing how profoundly they think.  However, it is because of his own religion that he limits his own thoughts within that context.  He could have delved deeper to find new results.

Still as much as he valued fieldwork, his data became skewed because of his beliefs.  He lost is objectivity the closer he became to the Zande people.  Still it is this closeness that provides the perspective.  It is a tough call seeing how one affects the other so closely.

Clifford GeertzIn contrast, Clifford Geertz looks closely at the definition of relativism or in his own words, the anti anti-relativism.  He believes it is broadly on the rise and represents misconceptions brought on by a trend to try to scare people away from a certain way of thinking.  He argues that we live in a society where people have too many views and opinions.  This has created an environment where relativism is given negative definitions.

He relents that this has contributed to people’s lack of clarity when it comes to relativity with this quote:The notion that someone who does not hold your views holds the reciprocal of them, or simply hasn’t got any, has, whatever its comforts for those afraid reality is going to go away unless we believe very hard in it, not conduced to much in the way of clarity in the anti-relativist discussion, merely to far too many people spending too much time describing at length what is that do not maintain than seem in any way profitable.[27] He thinks that people have a fear of too many different ideas but does not think relativity or anti-relativity is communist.  He sees the negative affects too much thinking has on people.  He believes that this can lead to a break down in out society as the relativists worry too much.

There is so much to loss in their opinion but as Geertz explains there is far too much about the Western culture that is overvalued.  He thinks the worries are un-needed and suggests a return to simpler times we failed to understand previously as he writes, “we were still squeezed into a narrow modern European point of view, and had no sympathy.”[28]  It is out of his view; he ponders what light primitives can shed.  As modern people, we are already predisposed to enlightenment and science.

Modern man has social structure but should that matter when discussing rationality?  He sees the danger of putting all “modes and systems of thought equally valid if viewed from within their own internally consistent frame of reference.”[29]  But is that not the vary definition of “relative” that everything seen or heard is from a unique standpoint?  He rejects anti-relativity not because of its approach to looking at thing (what you see is what you get) but because it imposes morality beyond culture and in his eyes, that is unfair.  He believes a return to the old stories will aid our perceptions into thinking differently. Brian WilsonFrom his observations, Brian Wilson surmises that people value religions with a certain amount of passion depending on cultural demands and expectations.

It is unfair to assume that primitive people will have a more emotional or irrational response to religion.  The same can happen in Western culture.  It is the concept of reason that aides people in being able to process their experiences as Wilson discusses, “At the emotional level, where this became an explicit concern, it was assumed that here, too, reason would itself come to master the passions, that in place of the techniques of socialization prompted by religious systems.”[30]  He believes is creates patterns of socialization defined by reason.

This creates the ideas that one can have a singular experience rather than collective.  It is his thoughts that modern man could no longer intellectually live with religion because knowledge has gotten in the way of deeper understanding.  This in turn creates thoughts and irrational behavior, which brings modern man back to the structure of religion.  Despite all of this, it must be clear that religion was a subject at the heart of classical sociological theory, and it remains true today that it continues to be at the core of the discipline.

Religion is not merely (and not necessarily primarily) an intellectual statement of the pre-requisites of social order.  It fulfils its functions for society by summoning evaluative and affective dispositions, and by diffusing appropriate motivations, so encompassing a very wide range of human experience.  For people across cultures, it is found in art and poetry and the whole imaginative, creative realm of man’s being.  Wilson elaborates that religion “stimulates, channels and regulates basic human emotions.

It elicits sympathy, altruism, and love, intimating minute and often subtle desiderata that have shaped human comportment.”[31]  All of these things have, in greater or lesser degree, been focused in religious activity, and religions have generally prescribed the evaluations that men should endorse towards various facets of the human experience.  In other words, Wilson believes people worldwide use religion for the same benefits and outlet.  It enables them to seek out answers to the ultimate questions of life.

They can explore these questions through different expressions as discussed earlier.  For some cultures, this may include dance, body art and nudity.  Wilson tries to get Western culture to see beyond the different results of expression and understand the thought process is the same.  He points out those cultures as only different from each other as they want to be.

People can find similarities between themselves if they seek it out.  For instance, American culture has many elements of mysticism, folklore and magic.  We chose not to see them as they are but only products of our culture like the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy.  We have superstitions about stepping on cracks or walking under a ladder that no one really understands but accepts as truth.

We have elements of magic in our culture that involves technologies for our entertainment such as movies and the Internet.  We also have access to machines to make our lives easier and therefore change the ritual.  The simple act of preparing meal would seem foreign to primitives but we have accepted it as reality.  As mentioned before, a person’s rationale has more to do with perception and perspective than anything else.

Stanley J. TambiahInspired by Lèvy-Bruhl, Stanley J. Tambiah, in his book, Magic, science, religion, and the scope of rationality, sets out to analytically separate two orientations of cosmos; two orderings of reality that people are capable of experiencing.  These two orientations he calls participation versus causality.

Ideally causality is quintessentially represented by the categories, rules and methods of positivistic science and discursive mathematic logical reasoning.  The discourse of participation, on the other hand, emphasizes ritual action, affective communication and emotions.  A way of exemplifying causality and participation, as contrasting orientations of the world, is the well known dichotomy between science and religion; the former being the quintessence of cognitive epistemology, the latter of affective. Such different kinds of discourses are engaged in different contexts of communication and praxis.

[32]Some of the concepts and characteristics, predominantly attachable to causality and participation respectively, are, according to Tambiah, as follows:Causality: Atomistic individualism; the language of distance and neutrality; the paradigm of evolution in space and time; instrumental action that changes matter, and the causal efficacy of technical acts; the fragmentation of phenomena, and their atomization in the construction of scientific knowledge; natural scientific experimentation, objectification and explanation of events. Participation: Sociocentrism; the language of solidarity, unity, holism, and continuity in space and time; expressive action that is manifest through conventional intersubjective understandings; the performative efficacy of communicative acts; the totalization of phenomena and their interconnectedness; the sense of encompassing, cosmic oneness.[33] It should be noted here, that elements of the one discourse are not necessarily absent in the other. This is just an analytical distinction.

It can be safe argue that the development context is generated by, and itself enacts, a causality discourse, which makes it impossible even for strategies of participation, supposedly and intentionally belonging to the participation category 5, and to escape it.  Development is born out of modern science and colonialist thought.  Tambiah shows how areas of knowledge are socially, politically and historically constructed, while represented as objective and value free. A discourse identifies appropriate and legitimate ways of practicing, as well as speaking.

It should be noted here that Tambiah’s participation category as opposed to causality and the participation of development discourse have different contents.  As already noted, I see participation of the development discourse as belonging to Tambiah’s category of causality.  Knowledge is thus inherently political, and the criteria for what is or is not regarded as knowledge and who is qualified to know is related to power. The production of Western knowledge is inseparable from the exercise of Western power.

And the development discourse, constructed in the West, is thus promoting and justifying certain interventions and practices as well as delegitimizing and excluding others.This section and part of the paper examined the topic of rationality and how it differs from culture to culture.  This section brought together the two concepts of rationality and relativism as these concepts have a direct relationship to each other.  It was important to define these terms in a simplistic manner, as it will provide one with a foundation for which opinions and arguments can be processed.

Therefore this section defined the concepts of relationality and relativism, first on a general level and then built upon these definitions with relevance to primitive thinking.  This allowed one to expand upon these ideas by including different elements of primitive culture such as: religious practices, magic, science and technology.  These are elements that are valued in some way in Western culture and by looking at these one can grasp better the importance of these elements to culture.  It is interesting how certain items take on different value or how over time, the value changes due to technological influence.

To better aid this process, the paragraphs above looked at various opinions from prominent academic figures within the Anthropological world.  The academic figures and their works this paper focused on were as follows: Lucien Levy-Bruhl, Edward E. Evans-Pritchard, Clifford Geertz, Robin Horton, Brian Wilson and Stanley J. Tambiah.

To further discussion and to carry the thought process to the next levels of understanding not only were works from these Anthropologists analyzed but also other scholarly critiques as well.  It was only upon examining multiple layers of arguments that one could get a better understanding of how people think differently depending on cultural influences.  Part Two: Terrorism: JihadInternal Factors of AcceptanceInternal factors influencing the acceptance activity were identified as being of an individual nature: information consciousness and individual exposure to information – and of an organizational nature – outwardness and information climate.  Information consciousness was assessed through the attitude of people and his or her leaders.

The literature agreed about the vital role of information in modern culture.Communication is key amongst political powers.  Communication is generally intense between the people facing conflict.  Communication among leaders is made up of a mix of oral information and written information; the nature of this mix and the reasons that determine the choice of either of the forms of communication was not entirely clarified.

However, some evidence associates the choice of oral communication with the generic scope of the information or its potential for starting action.The information climate was assessed through the information infrastructure implemented, i.e., the processes, technologies and people used in information acquisition and handling.

The pervasiveness of information was pointed out as one of the reasons why it is so difficult to account for misunderstandings amongst parties, as it is always associated with the performance of specific roles.    The outwardness of cultures was assessed on terms of acceptance theories and in depth study of motivational theories.The roots of acceptance theories can be found in the old personality theories such as Henry Murry’s need theory, Gordon Allport’s trait theory, Abraham Maslow’s humanistic theory, and Carl Rogers’ phenomenological theory.  All posited the importance of the human needs, values, and self-actualization in attitudes and behaviors.

In this view, the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA)[34] explains people’s actions by identifying the causal connections between various components:  beliefs, attitudes, intentions, and behavior.  Then, researchers adapted the TRA model to develop the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), which is specifically meant to explain behavior.  The TAM replaces the attitudinal determinants of TRA with two distinct variables-perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness of violence.  Like TRA, TAM theorizes that actual action is determined by behavioral intention, but differs in that the intention is jointly determined by the person’s attitude toward violence.

Specifically, three main motivations affecting method acceptance were examined: (a) intrinsic motivations (such as enjoyment and fun); (b) extrinsic motivations (such as usefulness); and (c) social pressure.Diffusion is defined as the process by which an innovation is adopted and gainsacceptance by members of a certain community.  A number of factors interact to influence the diffusion of an innovation.  The four major factors that influence the diffusion process are the innovation itself, how information about the innovation is communicated, time, and the nature of the social system into which the innovation is being introduced.

This theory states that diffusion is a process that occurs over time and can be seen as having five distinct stages.  The stages in the process are knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, and confirmation.  According to this theory, potential adopters of an innovation must learn about the innovation, be persuaded as to the merits of the innovation, decide to adopt, implement the innovation, and confirm (reaffirm or reject) the decision to adopt the innovation. Discovering the Mind of a Suicide BomberThe purpose of this research is to examine human motivation with relation to terrorism, a very negative human behavior.

It is one that cannot be seen as a goal to strive toward as a means of success by Western value systems.  However, discuss the concept with any terrorist or advocate and they will be the first to admit that any means necessary to bring about a success to the mission will be taken to reach that place.  It is thought that terrorism concerns a certain personality type because of the behavior exhibited.  It is just another rationale to absolve ourselves of any guilt regarding this behavior.

However, literature found in the research for this section has found many theories surrounding the reasoning or motives toward terrorism and that the behavior is an equal opportunist by nature.  Many turn to science as a foundation but research suggests that when it comes to the matter of terrorist acts; motivation toward the behavior is founded not just in genetics or scientific proof but also societal cornerstones of value systems like religion and ethics.  The purpose of this section of the paper is to examine these foundations for motivation. Motivation DefinedOne can look to history, society, religion, and even science to figure out what motivation means to humanity.

The best way to start such research is to look to language for a definition.  After all, it is through language that all messages are received, synthesized and then understood. WordReference.com offers the definition of motivation as:the psychological feature that arouses an organism to action toward a desired goal; the reason for the action; that which gives purpose and direction to behavior; we did not understand his motivation; he acted with the best of motives[35] With this in mind, how is that terrorism can be considered a goal?  With this definition in mind, one can consider that the terrorist act or devotion would give an organism the purpose and definitely the rationale for such behaviour but that being said, one can also take the opinion that a terrorist at the beginning of life wants to attain the goal of being a terrorist.

Are they born or made?  Aside from being under the influence and being devout to the cause, what does the terrorist serve to gain?  At a point of origin, what motivates the act?  Is it pure science or desire to rebel against society’s constructs and systems of value?  Is it for God? Motivation can be a complex issue for anyone to ponder when looking at groups of people as a myriad of personalities.  Many different things motivate people and influence their behaviors in everyday life.  Why do they do what they do?  What motivates one child to be a doctor or lawyer, while another is an artist or actor?  Are there factors woven into their DNA; pure genetics that make them who they are; drives them to be a certain personality, or is it clear cornerstones of value systems introduced early on in life that makes a person?  That motivates that person toward certain behavior?  A good person will work to understand what motivates each individual.  As discussed earlier, there is Maslow’s Theory of Needs, which applies not only to business practices but suggests that individuals have a range of needs and will be motivated to fulfill whichever is the greatest need at that moment in time.

In this construct, there are lower-order and higher-order needs (See Figure 1 below).  The lower-order needs are dominant until they are at least partially satisfied.Figure 1.  Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.

[36]Maslow predicts a normal person will turn their attention to higher-order needs once the lower ones are taken care of.[37]  Lower-order needs include items like making a living for food and shelter while higher-order needs are more in tune with personality such as esteem and worth.  How does Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs apply to society standards and behaviors outside of the business world?  I believe this theory acts as a springboard to understanding any behavior as it applies on a general level.  However, much the higher and lower needs concept does not compute with the average drug addict.

The need is like air or water for many and they are to disregard all other needs to attain that rush.  So in principal, looking to Maslow only offers as research a start into understanding the drug addict’s motivation.  We must take a long-range view of motive, motivation and what makes a certain personality tick.  We must look to theories found in religion, ethics, and science as contributing segments of society.

We can also look at more specific factors found in research literature such as gender and age for terrorist ideals. Theories Found in Religion and Ethics as Building Blocks of SocietyMuch of the notion of ethics begins with value systems inherent in people.  Part of the challenge any person faces is being able to bend his or her values with that of each individual’s value systems defined by culture, religion, race, gender and society.  It is almost an impossible task and complex as Nina Smith, et al suggest, “one of the aspects of good.governance is..diversity.

”Instilling any value system begins with representation.  The difference between right and wrong must be directly communicated as a clear and vital mechanism; a cornerstone of society.  Many see rules, laws and codes of ethics as something to be bent, to mould for his or her success.  Some cultures and societies are founded on this pursuit that anything is possible.

Still this type of behavior has a way of catching up to people.  Some people see this as creative thinking, liberal lifestyles and the fast pace of partying.  This is how they rationalize such behaviours.Much of ethics, codes of conduct, rules and laws come from the moral structure in which an individual is raised.

The structure of these ethics and laws come from a religious foundation or belief system.  In today’s age of anything goes, many people do not have this type of moral value system in place but we will explore it as a construct into how religion, specifically Christianity can be a double-edged sword with regard to addiction.So much is written about negative behavior in relation to Christianity.  Mostly God’s word in the footsteps of Jesus speaks to Sinners as a means of finding salvation and quitting the addiction.

After all, the Twelve Steps are loosely based on a Christian dynamic of the Higher Power.  From the Our Daily Bread Devotional, Anonymous writes:Today pull up the little weeds,The sinful thoughts subdue,Or they will take the reins themselvesAnd someday master you. (March 12, 2007)[39] This speaks directly to the mind of the terrorist or anyone battling an addictive element in his or her life.  The Bible discusses how as humans we cannot hide from God with our human behavior.

“God won’t be mocked is strategically centered in the context of reaping what we sow.  We can’t fool Him by hiding our inner motive.”[40]  Moore implores that God will hold us (humans) accountable to want we have done.  That it is indeed the fight between His goodness and Satan’s evilness where we fall to motive.

Satan invented sin in all forms to distract humans from our true goal of serving good.  Moore has interviewed many addicts mainly of alcohol and has persisted in asking why.  Why lose everything—job, family, love and other material possessions for the addiction.  The same can be asked of terrorists, especially suicide bombers.

What many have told in confidence is because they felt like it.  They liked how it made them feel or more importantly, what it didn’t make them feel.  What Moore thinks goes wrong and what motivates the individual are deformed desires.  The Bible writes that “Your Law is within my heart” meaning that knowing right from wrong begins and ends with God.

What happens with terrorists or addicts alike is that the desire overpowers the law.  The predisposition toward negative behavior blinds people.  Satan is relying on people’s weakness and this in itself motivates, gravitates toward bad behavior.  Moore discusses the amount work and falling from God’s word that must happen before “God reshaped.

.disfigured desires and somewhere along the way, God’s law transferred from the stone tablets to soft tissue of the heart.”[41]  Part of what motivates the individual past God’s Law is trust.  They do not trust in His love.

Much of this theory is bounded in humans as a culture needing to place blame or reasoning somewhere and therefore, blaming science or genetics.  It is not my fault, God’s fault, my failure to belief in the order the builds society; it’s my family or my make-up that motivates me.  Research suggests, as the following paragraphs will explore; this is somewhat true.  As humans, whether it is values or genes, we are all flawed.

Much of the scientific theories surrounding motivation and the motivation toward certain behaviors fell into the realm of studying the brain.  Even today, much of brain remains a mystery, constantly being re-mapped and seen as a marvel of not only human character but also evolution.  Orbitofrontal Cortex remains an area of interest when studying the organic nature of science of motivation toward addiction.  According to London et al. “the OFC is places in a position to code the motivational attributes of responses to stimuli.  It is the heterogeneous region that has connection with prefrontal, limbic, sensory and premotor areas.”[42]  In other words, it is the information center that responds to sensory perception and stimulus from the outside world.  By understanding what happens in this area of the brain, researchers can better understand why people behave in certain ways toward outside stimulus.

It is thought that all drive toward behavior begins here, in this center of control.  It is here where the idea is born based upon the relationship between compulsive drive and reward.  This relationship when studied specifically in terrorists has found a proven link to craving the reward.  London et al.

, discusses with respect to decision making is “based on the motivational attributes of the stimulus and the balance between expectation of immediate reward and long-term losses, is an important aspect of abuse behavior.”[43] In layman terms, when weighing the pros ands cons of the situation in relation to behavior, the terrorist only sees the short-term reward of the feeling of bliss.  Saah’s work also finds biological relationship between the behavior of addiction and environmental influences that creates a predisposition toward such behavior.  Saah’s work has found that this biological proof can be found in “both ancient origins probably evolving before the phylogenetic splits of vertebrates and invertebrates.

”[44] It is this deviation that makes human behavior so different from that of any other animal on Earth.  It is also Saah’s thoughts are that because of this slow evolution and split, that the human body has not evolved completely to remain competitive within the modern world.We are still looking for primitive ways to deal with physical issues like addiction because our bodies do not know better, have not been programmed for such stimulus.  We are weak to temptation.

Other studies done by Harvard Medical School have found a direct relationship between the senses and terrorist behavior.[45] It seems the more the modern world exposes people to earthly delights and make them more desirable in taste, smell and texture; the harder it is to resist response to the stimulus.  This falls again within the realm of the frontal cortex relationship with motivation.  With the early introduction of plant chemicals (smoking) into the evolutionary process at 40,000 years ago, Saah also believes that while the human body is not prepared for physical addictions today, that human emotional intelligence is higher than first thought.

While we are physically and mentally prepared with the biological reaction of ‘fight or flight’ and negative emotions associated with such elemental, primitive behaviors, there are also many positive emotions found within the human collective evolution.  The power of love, family and ritual; all born out of the need to celebrate life.  These actions can be directly attributed to personality and environment.  Of course, the need primitive need to protect the personality and one’s surroundings should outweigh one’s biological need for stimulus.

But this is exactly what happens in humans when it comes to addiction.  They are willing to lose all the positive emotions for the physical ‘fight or flight’.  This just goes to show how intricate the human being is and how fragile we really are.These findings only reiterate how complex the issue of addiction can become and as studies show in non-human subjects that “repeated drug use causes disruptions in the brain’s highly evolved frontal cortex, which regulates cognitive activities such as decision-making, response to inhibition, planning and memory.

”[46]  Despite this relationship, many recent studies have found that depending on the drug or agent of choice, every human reacts differently to the drug or agent and his or her addictive tendencies.  This in turn offers ways in which society can aide addicts in seeking the help they need.  Once one can pinpoint the reason for such behavior, treatment can be more effective and carry out its purpose.  The ability to see addiction is not only a physical problem but also an emotional one helps people understand the motivation better.

It should not stand as an excuse of such behavior and addicts in recovery should always be treated as someone constantly in he process of recovery. Origins of JihadThe word Jihad means striving.  In its primary sense it is an inner thing, within self, to rid it from debased actions or inclinations, and exercise constancy and perseverance in achieving a higher moral standard.  Since Islam is not confined to the boundaries of the individual but extends to the welfare of society and humanity in general, an individual cannot keep improving himself or herself in isolation from what happens in their community or in the world at large, hence the Quranic injunction to the Islamic nation to take as a duty “to enjoin good and forbid evil.

” (3:104).  It is a duty which is not exclusive to Muslims but applies to the human race who are, according to the Quran, God’s vicegerent on earth.Muslims, however, cannot shirk it even if others do.[47]  The means to fulfill it are varied, and in our modern world encompass all legal, diplomatic, arbitrative, economic, and political instruments.

But Islam does not exclude the use of force to curb evil, if there is no other workable alternative.  A forerunner of the collective security principle and collective intervention to stop aggression, at least in theory, as manifested in the United Nations Charter, is the Quranic reference ” make peace between them (the two fighting groups), but if one of the two persists in aggression against the other, fight the aggressors until they revert to God’s commandment.” (49:9) Military action is therefore a subgroup of the Jihad and not its totality.Jihad is not a declaration of war against other religions and certainly not against Christians and Jews as some media and political circles want it to be perceived.

Islam does not fight other religions.  Christians and Jews are considered as fellow inheritors of The Abrahamic traditions by Muslims, worshipping the same God and following the tradition of Abraham.The rigorous criteria for a “just war” in Islam have already been alluded to, as well as the moral and ethical constraints that should be abided by.  Modern warfare does not lend itself to those moral standards; and therefore, war should be replaced by some other alternative for conflict resolution.

An enlightened and resolute world public opinion can overcome and subdue war-oriented mentalities.The key is a change of heart.  Just as there is a constructive role for forgiveness in interpersonal relations, so might this be possible in international relations provided justice, and not force, is the final arbiter.We have to acknowledge again, for the sake of honesty, that historically all traditions, Muslim, Christian, Jew as well as others, had their lapses in honestly following the valued ideals of their religions or philosophies.

We all made mistakes, and we still do. Muslims are no exception, and time and again religion was exploited by ambitious tyrants or violated by ignorant mobs. This is no reflection on religion, but it shows how desperately humanity is in need of better education, more enduring concern for human dignity, rights and freedom, and vigilant pursuit of justice, even at the price of curbing political and economic greed. Different JihadsThe term “jihad” was used to specify different types of external Islamic relations.

The changing circumstances surrounding the Muslim world deeply affected the dominant interpretations, as well as the use of the term to justify political and military actions.  The international and regional context that has prevailed since the attacks of September 11, 2001 has shown the urgent need to revisit the term jihad. Linked to terrorism, the term has surfaced again in analyzing the logic of Islam and its nature as a value system.  The attack against the United States was labeled as an act of global terrorism.

For the United States, the involved parties are new transnational forces that threaten globalization and Americanization.On the other side, the Intifada in Palestine is continuing in the face of escalating Israeli aggression and the collapse of the peace process. The acts of legitimate resistance are clearly a sort of legitimate jihad, meaning self-defense against aggressors. Yet the United States, Israel, and their allies consider them acts of violence and terrorism.

The Israeli Zionist discourse badly conflates what they call Palestinian-Islamic terrorism with the acts of terrorism committed against the US. The dominant international media are portraying a distorted image of Islam and Muslims with jihad as terrorism at its core.Defining jihad in an apologetic way that stresses only the dimension of individual self-discipline as a meaning of the word rooted in Islamic moral teaching does not solve the problem, nor does it necessarily improve the image of Islam and Muslims. It simply disregards the realistic international affairs conflict management dynamics, ranging between peaceful means and legitimate self-defense up to the emerging Republican unilateral American model of pre-emptive wars.

It would be useful to illustrate how the concept of jihad has had different interpretations and different uses in the history of Muslim thought and politics. My object is to clarify that the dominant Western conception of jihad, though not very new – considering the history of confrontation between East and West – nevertheless reflects how the contemporary Islamic-Western encounter has come to an intensive climax. It is to be noted that during the dominance of the Islamic Civilization and Islamic power, the concept of jihad revealed positive meaning and was the motive for achieving noble ends and objectives. Unfortunately, during the contemporary period of Islamic decadence, jihad has gained a very bad reputation since it is intermingled in the Western minds with terrorism seen as coming from a backward Muslim World that is considered the main threat to Western Civilization.

In other words, if jihad is a historical concept and process, it could be comprehended in light of it historical memory and its significance and context.  This memory reveals the paradoxes of the difference between the doctrine and its application in real life.  It also helps explain how the image of Islam and Muslims has been distorted not only by Western misunderstanding but, also, mainly by Muslims themselves.Three theoriesLiterally, jihad means that Muslims should fulfill their duties to promote the cause of Islam.

It is not only an outward act, but also an inward one to strengthen one’s own self and correct one’s own mistakes. Clearly, the exertion of the self in all directions – in every effort and act, personal and collective, internal and external – is the essence of jihad in the Islamic sense. This rule illustrates that jihad does not necessarily involve waging a war.In other words, jihad is supposed to run through all aspects of a Muslim’s life, as it is his duty in the world to do well and prevent harm and evil in every possible way.

This can, of course, entail the use of force when peaceful means are not successful, but to equate jihad exclusively with waging war is based on the historical experience of the classical period of Islamic history.[48]It was understandable for classical Muslim jurists to think of Muslims as a powerful established society able to wage war against the sources of threat. This is the same way any empire built its image and saw its mission. It is not very much different from the current American foreign policy missionary statements that are all over the media.

But in our time the jurists and scholars are in a different situation, so they speak differently.  Seeking to narrow the Islamic position to a purely defensive and peaceful position, the modernists used a methodology of selectivity and a mild tone that represents the reality of dependency and underdevelopment of Muslims rather than the text and jurisprudence of Islam.  On the other hand, some Eastern, either classical or modern, only highlighted the interpretation of jihad that equated it with offensive destructive war.  So they were overly selective in their use of interpretations of some Muslim jurists while neglecting others; hence the Western prevailing use the term of jihad refers only to waging war.

This type of jihad was also described in various ways. Sometimes it is equated with holy war – Jihad, not… a “Holy” War! – and other times it is called the classical theory or modern theory of jihad.In Muslim thought and Muslim jurisprudence, interpretations of jihad are related to other terms such as Dar Al- Islam (domain of peace) and Dar Al-Harb (domain of war). These terms’ relationships pertain to the classical Islamic vision of the nature of international relations. So, the Islamic schools of thought and international law differed according to the divergence (between traditionalists and modernists) concerning the basis of Muslim external relations with non-Muslims, whether it is war or peace.

This divergence could be explained in terms of differences in methodology (applying abrogation rule or not) and in historical experiences (periods of Muslim strength or weakness).Jihad is the striving of Muslims to fulfill their every responsibility and to serve the Islamic cause and principles in a manner consistent with the framework of Islam. It is not to be taken to mean warfare alone. Jihad in this sense is the active expression of the Islamic commitment, responsibility, and sense of duty wherever it is required in practical life.

So, to interpret jihad only as an offensive or defensive war is to misunderstand the meaning of the word and the philosophy behind it. It is equally wrong to assume that jihad is a holy war in the Western sense.  To interpret the basis of Muslim external relations as war or peace is to misunderstand the meaning of Islam. It is based on da`wah (inviting people to Islam), which needs jihad.

Jihad as a basic Islamic principle neither excludes the possibility of armed conflict nor imposes peace as the sole alternative in all situations. So, it is necessary to pay attention to the variety of its meanings and applications in any specific situation. Only then will a better understanding of the motivations and consequences of any specific course of Muslim external relations be possible.Jihad may also reflect the war aspects in Islam (Submission).

The fighting of a war in the name of justice or Islam, to deter an aggressor, for self-defense, and/or to establish justice and freedom to practice religion, would also be considered a Jihad.”You shall strive for the cause of GOD as you should strive for His cause. ” (22:78). The ultra Muslim extremist believe that jihad is striving toward war with the West.

God is the ultimate say.  Whether the accused is rich or poor, GOD takes care of both. Therefore, do not be biased by your personal wishes.  If you deviate or disregard (this commandment), then GOD is fully Cognizant of everything you do.

” Since this verse shows that God accepts only justice, fighting in the name of God is fighting in the name of justice. But, contrary to many people’s interpretation, Jihad is anything but a holy war; the media and public misunderstand this.In the light and essence of Islam and the Quran, there is no war, which is Holy; this, under any circumstances whatsoever.

In fact the whole text of the Quran and the religion of Islam revolves around the concept of peace, not war.  To many people’s ignorance, Islam is also a word that shares the same root of the Arabic word Salaam meaning peace.  To Islam, war is unholy, Jihad must mean anything but holy war.However, there are times, in certain circumstances, when Islam tolerates, permits and sometimes even accepts the practice of war.

I slam strongly emphasizes the ideas of justice, freedom and opposition to oppression.  There is another condition: fighting for self-defense. War is tolerated in these conditions, but if there is a possibility to avoid war, then this alternative, as long as it is reasonable, must be taken.”You shall prepare for them all the power you can muster, and all the equipment you can mobilize, that you may frighten the enemies of GOD, your enemies, as well as others who are not known to you; GOD knows them.

Whatever you spend in the cause of GOD will be repaid to you generously, without the least injustice.  If they resort to peace, so shall you, and put your trust in GOD. He is the Hearer, the Omniscient.” (8:60-61)[50] Self-defense involves oppression, aggression and tyranny; Islam tolerates the use of war in these cases.

The Quran gives permission to fight in a war for those being persecuted and where injustice is witnessed.  Because Palestine has been occupied by one Western power or other dominant force at one time or another, no wonder many feel the right to call arms against the occupier. The other condition and perhaps the most important and often confused as a holy war, is the war in the name of God which actually means in the cause of God as God does not encourage war but rather encourages peace whenever possible. Fighting an oppressor or aggressor is fighting against oppression or aggression, thus it is fighting for justice and therefore in the name  (cause) of God.

Those who readily fight in the cause of GOD are those who forsake this world in favor of the Hereafter. Whoever fights in the cause of GOD, then gets killed, or attains victory, we will surely grant him a great recompense. Why should you not fight in the cause of GOD when weak men, women, and children are imploring: “Our Lord, deliver us from this community whose people are oppressive, and be You our Lord and Master. (4:74-75)[51] Even as an enemy, the Muslim (Submitter in English) must respect his adversaries.

Mere, brutal and barbaric fighting is condemned in Islam (Submission).  Islam condemns barbaric killing of any human being.  During military activities, the killing must not include civilians, provided they do not attack or provoke or share directly in the war. .

The enemies, even when at war, must be treated justly. If victory is achieved in any war for justice, then there is to be no oppression, enslavement or injustice to the enemy or people.  Nor must there be control over source of wealth of the nation or people or colonial regimes.  The division of people, putting them one against the other is also forbidden.

Justice and freedom must be established.  The cooperation and acceptance of other cultures and peoples is compulsory as well.  “GOD advocates justice, charity, and regarding the relatives. And He forbids evil, vice, and transgression.

He enlightens you, that you may take heed”(16:90)[52]In brief, the meaning the media gives to this word (Jihad) is false.  This word does not mean a holy war, for there is nothing holy about a war in Islam. There are times when war is tolerated, permitted and even, in some case, to a point accepted, but never considered holy. Islam is a religion of peace, no matter what certain media or deranged individuals say or claim.

Islam revolves around the concept of peace.Still Terrorists have attacked again, and this time at the center of our world, New York City and Washington D.C.  It is a deplorable and horrendous act that can never be condoned by any God fearing people.

Like many other attacks in the past, the terrorists are linked to groups that abuse the name and laws falsely attributed to Islam to commit crimes that are abhorred and strongly condemned by God in the Quran.  While all the known religions of the world call for love, peace, tolerance, freedom of belief and mutual respect, many of the terrorists’ acts are committed in this world by people who consider themselves religious.  Like all the other religions of God, Islam promotes peace, love and harmony among the people.  Actually the word “Islam” in addition to meaning submission (to God), is also derived from the Arabic word Salam (peace).

The Muslims (Submitters) greet other people by saying Salaam.  Regrettably, many terrorists groups have used the name Islam to promote their cause and this gave many non-Muslims a chance to asperse Islam and label the Muslims as terrorists. Deliberately ignored on the other hand, are terrorists who happen to be Christians or Jews.With all the great laws established on earth by God or man, the evil among the human being, will find a way to abuse, distort or misinterpret them.

This does not make these laws evil but rather proves the evil nature of these criminals.People have committed terrorism as an act of violence from all religious and political backgrounds.  Terrorists who happened to be Christians (e.g. in Bosnia, England, Ireland, Germany, Spain…etc. ) and those who happened to be Jewish (e.g. in Israel, Palestine and Lebanon) used their religious beliefs to claim legitimacy for the violence and terrorism they commit.  Thousands of women, children and men, young and old have been killed in attempts to achieve or hold on to special interests whether political, social or “religious”.

Those who do not comprehend Islam and those who have an interest in distorting the truth about the religion of Islam have been trying to make the word terrorists and terrorism synonymous to the religion.  This mistake has been common in the media in the West. Several groups who called themselves Jews, Christians or Muslims, have used terrorism to force their agenda, issues or beliefs. None of these groups represent the true religion of the Jews or the Christians as much as these terrorists represent Islam.

Attacks on the civilians and the least expecting people around the world by these groups is the kind of strife that cannot be justified by any religion or under any cause and is strongly condemned in all religions including Islam as clarified by the words of God in the Quran, the Final Testament.Some of the terrorist groups, which massacre innocent people consider, themselves martyrs.  Those who kill the innocent people in the name of their religion or the name of God, who think of themselves as martyrs should think twice.  Their act is actually strongly condemned by God in the verses of the Quran.

These people are disobeying God’s commandments and the Truth in the Quran. Instead they blindly follow the opinion of their corrupted leaders (and scholars).  It is not a surprise that God has not granted them victory. Quite the contrary they have been the most humiliated, defeated and oppressed people on earth.

Worse, their own rulers oppress them.The Quran is very clear that the believers must defend themselves but never to aggress.  It is true that Islam calls for the followers to be strong. This call however is to use the strength to secure peace, provide freedom for the society and the country but never to aggress unless aggressed upon?  Our Creator is one and the same.

The God of the Muslims is the same God of the Jews and the Christians and all the other religions. God does not permit one group the killing of innocent people of the other religions.  The blame lies with the terrorists and not the religion they claim to adhere to. Not everyone who calls himself a Muslim is a Muslim as much as not every one who thinks of himself as a Jew or a Christian is one.

The religion of Islam should not be confused by what these so called Muslims have done. They actually, by the definition of the Quran, are not Muslims or at least as much Muslims as the Ku Klux Klan are good Christians. We should not let our emotions overcome our logic and understanding. The Western View of Terrorism as Unacceptable BehaviorNow that one understands the history of the area, which has been so hotly, debated as to whom holds the rights to its boundaries, one can see how individuals could be brought to such hostility and violence in order to reclaim what is, in their mind, as rightfully theirs.

Throughout history, there have always been battles in which various torturous methods have been used in order to become victorious.  We must now look at these methods in order to examine what is in the minds and hearts of the men who use violence in order to win their cause.  In looking at these violent methods, a new term has come to light, which also must be defined and examined.  This term is terrorism.

The word is defined as:the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.[53]In examining the history of the occupied territories, one must then conclude that whichever group invaded the area and used force must be a terrorist.  However, no matter what source the reader uses the acts of invasions and taking control has never been described to the rest of the world as terrorism.  One reason for this is that there is no one accepted definition of the word and use of terrorism.

The United States has a completely different view of terrorism than say people of Sri Lanka for instance.  Another definition or description of terrorism can be seen below that upholds the view that everyone’s view of terrorism is vastly different: Terrorism – Term with no agreement amongst government or academic analysts, but almost invariably used in a pejorative sense, most frequently to describe life-threatening actions perpetrated by politically motivated self-appointed sub-state groups. But if such actions are carried out on behalf of a widely approved cause, say the Maquis seeking to destabilize the Government of Vichy France then the term ‘terrorism’ is avoided and something more friendly is substituted. In short, one person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter.

[54]      Now that the actual word has been described and defined we can look more closely at the methods that are used by various terrorist groups or factions.  According to MI5, an UK group called MI5, The Security Service, there are many different methods by which the groups obtain their objective.  The methods range from explosive devices, kidnappings, shootings, surface to air missiles, chemical, and biological, or radiological devices.  Other methods that have been documented are not physical but can also be as deadly because the groups use technological devices to sabotage and obtain information through thee computer systems.

The most popular method that is utilized by terrorist groups is that of explosive devices.  Most often this type of device requires a suicide bomber to initiate the attack.  This requires that a person who has either the devices strapped to his or her body or is in the car he or she is driving, put him or herself in direct line of fire.  That is to say, the device is detonated as they drive the vehicle directly into the target.

Other examples of terrorist explosive devices include the suicide attacks using vehicle-borne devices against the British Consulate and HSBC bank in Istanbul in November 2003 and Richard Reid’s thwarted attempt in December 2001 to bring down an airliner with a small improvised explosive device concealed in his shoes.  Al Qaida has also carried out two suicide attacks against ships using explosives packed into small boats (both off the coast of Yemen, in 2000 and 2002).[55]Another method that is used by terrorist groups is that of shootings.  We can look most recently to December 6, 2004 when gunmen assaulted the US consulate in Jeddah, in Saudi Arabia.

During this shooting, five consulate staff and four of the attackers were killed.[56]Kidnapping is a method is increasingly being used, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan.  In September 2004, Kenneth Bigley was kidnapped while in Iraq and ended up with his murder.[57]   A violent method that is utilized by terrorist groups is that of surface to air missiles.

These attacks have been used in an unsuccessful missile attack in November 2002 in Israeli charter plane was leaving from Mombasa, Kenya.  There have been similar attacks carried out in Iraq during the recent months again aircraft for the coalition.[58]The last method of violence that is used by terrorist groups is that of chemical, biological and radiological devices.  Although other methods are more reliable, safer and easier to acquire, terrorist groups such as Al Qaida will seek to use these methods as they forge their attack against the West.

Usama bin Laden has referred to the fact that his group has in their possession chemical and nuclear weapons.  An Al Qaida spokesman Sulaiman Abu Gaith was quoted in a June 2002 article saying, “it is our right to fight [the Americans] with chemical and biological weapons”.[59]In 2005, an Algerian by the name of Kamel Bourgass who was known to have links to Al Qaida was convicted of plotting to manufacture and spread poisons throughout the United Kingdom.In looking at the different methods that are used by various terrorist groups or factions, we must not only look at the method that they choose to utilize, but how did they come to that frame of mind that they feel obligated to use violence to deter their enemies, or whom they believe to be their enemies.

In order to examine this mindset, we must look further into the driving forces of an individual that determines whether they will become what we consider a terrorist and use one of the above described violent methods towards their enemies.  What is the motivation for those who choose to perform such attacks?  According to the Crime Library there are six influential factors that have been linked with homicide bombers.  The factors are social factors, financial factors, religious factors, and finally nationalistic/political factors, psychological factors, and finally strategic goals.Socially, it is believed that a Palestinian who chooses to end his life for nation and God, is worshiped.

According to the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, approximately 87% of Palestinians support armed attacks against soldiers and settlers in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.  As one can see, with the majority of culture supporting violent acts, it is no wonder that so many choose this way as an end of their life.  For these individuals, they are seen by family and friends as Martyrs and are to be worshiped and openly celebrated.  This belief that suicide bombers are Martyrs is not solely contained in Palestine however, this belief is widespread throughout the Middle East and even in the Western world in societies made up of Muslims.

Most recently an example of this can be seen when after the September 11, 2001 attacks, a Washington Post columnist visited an Islamic school in Maryland only to find pictures of the suicide bombers hung throughout the school even though these children were American citizens and children of diplomats.Another factor that drives individuals to become suicide bombers is financial.  Sociologists have claimed that the majority of suicide bombers come from the lower end of the social classes and therefore, money would  indeed be a motivational factor to the families of these individuals.  According to The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the Arab League leaders gave over $300 million to support the Palestinian Authority on March 28, 2002.

The PA has been linked to extreme militant groups such as the Al-Aska Martyr’s Brigade.  In April  of 2002 an invoice was discovered that was believed to authorize money from his faction to be given to families of suicide bombers.  This invoice was discovered by the Israeli military and was believed to have been signed by Yasser Arafat.Above the money that is donated to the families of suicide bombers by political organizations and private groups, the families also can receive other incentives such as free medical care and educational services.

It is clear to see that whether or not the family needs the monetary support, they certainly profit by having a martyr in their midst.[60]Another force that is tied to suicide bombers is that of religious beliefs.  The teaching of Islam forbids suicide and the harming of any innocent people.  However, extremists view suicide attacks against Israelis as sacred acts.

In trying to understand then how the individuals can move away from their teachings so that they are allowed to commit such violent acts, one can turn to Dr. Louis Rene Beres who writes in “understanding terror:  The “Suicide” Bases of Palestinian Bombers,” a “martyr” was quoted as saying that “every day on which the sun rises and no Jew is killed, nor any martyr has died, will be a day for which we will be punished by Allah.”[61]Another driving force for a suicide bomber is the Nationalistic and Political factors.[62]  These two factors together play a critical role in the motivation for a suicide terrorist.

The most obvious political issue for the Palestinians is the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.  Palestinian terrorist actually believe that when they are attacking the Israelis, they are defending their country.  In defending their country they believe that they are preserving their way of life. Psychological factors play a role in the mindset of suicide terrorists.

However, we are not sure exactly how or to what degree that it has.  There are some psychologists who believe that a suicide terrorist suffers from one of a series of personality disorders.  In actuality, we cannot accurately diagnosis any disorders as there are too few suicide bombers alive to actively study.The final factor that is evident in the creation of a terrorist who will be moved to the extreme of suicide to inflict terror and pain on their enemies is that of strategic goals.

In any and all suicide attacks, the main objective is to publicly relay their message.  It is easy to see why an extremist who is looking to pass on a message to its enemies will attempt suicide attacks, this method will always gain the attention of the press and the message will be carried throughout the world.  Any bombings in Palestine only seem to reinforce the Palestinian people as oppressed and impoverished people.  The media reflects the fact that these people will use any weapons that they have even if that means that they must use their own bodies as weapons.

The Israeli people have become outraged at this coverage because it is showing the Palestinians as victims rather than the murderers that they are.Interestingly to note, that in Robert A. Pape’s article, “The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism,” he claims that even though smaller attacks appear successful and seem to set into motion moderate concessions, more aggressive attacks do not.  The reason for this, according to Pape is that states such as Israel would not give into terrorist threats that would eventually, “weaken the economic prospects of the state or strengthen the rivals of the state.

” MartyrdomWe can thus see how the concept of martyrdom in Islam is linked with the entire religion of Islam. This whole process can be somehow understood if the term ‘Islam’ is appreciated. This is because being a derivate of the Arabic root salama, which means ‘surrender’ and ‘peace’; Islam is a wholesome and peaceful submission to the will of Allah.  This means being prepared to die (martyrdom) in the course of this submission.

Thus the concept of martyrdom, like all other Islamic concepts, can be fully and wholly appreciated only in the light of the Islamic doctrine of tawhid, or the absolute unity of Allah and full submission to His will and command.  It cannot be fully appreciated in isolation.  In this sense, the concept of shahada is no exception.  All Islamic concepts are interrelated, and should be appreciated within the framework of the doctrine of tawhid.

Both Muslims and non-Muslims have misunderstood the concept of shahada in Islam.  As stated above, shahada is closely associated with the concept of jihad. Most non-Muslim scholars, intentionally or unintentionally, have defined jihad as only the Holy War, and thus have understood neither jihad nor shahada.  The Muslims, mostly taking into consideration the martyrs of the early days of Islamic history, define martyrdom in terms of the fatalistic death of those dear to Allah, and do not see the close link between continuous struggle in the cause of Allah (jihad) and martyrdom.

Martyrdom is not the monopoly of Islam (though it is the monopoly of spiritual, religious, and divine systems, and cannot be claimed by followers of materialistic schools).  Islam introduces its own concept of martyrdom.  An Islamic concept should be explained within the framework of Islam, and not, by Muslims or by non-Muslims, in the light of non-Islamic concepts such as guilt and suffering.  Muslims are not allowed to explain Islamic principles without taking due consideration of the entire conceptual system of Islam.

Shahada thus cannot be explained purely in terms of intercession and mediation. That is to say, those early martyrs of Islam volunteered for death to be able to intercede and mediate for sinners on the Day of Judgment.[64]The Islamic concept of intercession and mediation (shafa’a) should be appreciated within the framework of the principle of causality, and not solely as spiritual mediation.  Islam rejects the Christian concept of mediation without the personal responsibility for the salvation of oneself.

The concepts of martyrdom and Holy Struggle in the cause of Allah are interrelated.  Both words have been frequently used in the Holy Qur’an.  In fact, there is no martyrdom without struggle in the cause of Allah and for the cause of the truth.  Both words have literal meanings different from their terminological meanings, although these terminological meanings were originally based on the literal meanings.

They developed their terminological meanings later on, though the term shahada was used in the Qur’an for those who were martyred too.  The Islamic concepts of both shahada and jihad have been misunderstood, particularly by non-Muslims, mainly by the East.The word shahada is derived from the Arabic verbal root shahada, which means to ‘see’, to ‘witness’, to ‘testify’, and to ‘become a model and paradigm’. Shahada therefore literally means to ‘see’, to ‘witness’, and to ‘become a model’.

A shahid is the person who sees and witnesses, and he is therefore the witness, as if the martyr witnesses and sees the truth physically and thus stands by it firmly, so much so that not only does he testify it verbally, but he is prepared to struggle and fight and give up his life for the truth, and thus to become a martyr. In this way, and by his struggle and sacrifice for the sake of the truth, he become a model, a paradigm, and an example for others, worthy of being copied, and worthy of being followed.[65]We may therefore conclude that there is neither jihad nor martyrdom outside the realm of truth, that martyrdom applies only when it is preceded by jihad, that jihad is an inclusive struggle for the cause of the truth, that a mujahid dies the death of a martyr even though he does not fall on the battlefield. He dies as a martyr even though he is not killed, on the condition that he stays loyal to the divine truth and stands ready to fight for the truth and to defend it at all costs, even at the cost of his own life.

He is a mujahid while he lives, and a martyr if he dies or is killed for it.We have explained that a martyr establishes himself as a paradigm and a model. Both shahid (martyr) and shahid (model) are derived from the same Arabic root. In this sense, the concept of shahada is closely related to the concept of prophethood in Islam.

Both the martyrs and the prophets are regarded as paradigms.In Islam as with all religion, man needs guidance to the truth.  The true guidance is from the whole truth, God, the Source of Truth and Guidance.  But since it is man who is to be guided, the guide should naturally be a man.

Islam is the message from the source of truth, given to the Messenger as the guideline for leading mankind to the truth. Guiding humanity requires leading humanity.  The true faith is united with righteous living in Islam, and there is unity of belief and practice in Islam. A comprehensive guidance therefore involves leading in thought, words, and behavior.

The guide should therefore practice what he preaches, and should he be the supreme incarnation and the perfect embodiment of the message he spreads. He should be a paradigm, a model, and a model-maker.  Muhammad was thus the Messenger who brought the comprehensive universal Message of Allah, and he was the incarnation of the divine message and the living example of his mission, the model (shahid), the paradigm (uswa). The key word in the concept of prophet hood in Islam is thus human guidance.

This involves the recognition of what humanity should be guided to, what guidance is, how it should be done, and the realization of the guidance by being the true model of the actual guidance.  This is why Muhammad was himself the first Muslim and the best model of Islam. And thus his practice is recognized as the guideline and standard pattern (sunna) for the Muslim community, the members of which are supposed to become models (shuhada) for the entire human community.  The prophets, including Muhammad, were thus models and model-makers, and their disciples and companions were models.

Thus those who carry on the struggle in the cause of the truth are mujahids and shahids at the same time. The Case of al-QaedaAl-Qaeda’s characteristics do not make it easy to explain its adherence to conventional terrorist attacks despite explicit threats to turn to non-conventional terrorism.  The strategic objective at which al-Qaeda is aiming renewal of the Islamic caliphate – places rapprochement and compromise out of the question. For this reason al-Qaeda does not restrain its activities out of a drive to create a positive image, which will prepare the ground for its participation in a political process.

Moreover, the geographic dispersion of its activists makes it difficult to conduct extensive countermeasures that would obliterate the conventional and non-conventional threat latent in this organization, its cells, and its imitators.Nevertheless and notwithstanding the continuous terrorist drives, it seems that cell leaders are doing their best to preserve organizational infrastructures. Without a doubt the defensive posture they have adopted is a result of the global attack being waged against the organization, but the ramifications of the countermeasures do not reduce the significance of self-preservation as a restraining influence, and even emphasize this motivation.  Support for the evaluation that even al-Qaeda is not exempt from operational considerations that take reprisals into account lies in the statement of one of the planners of the September 11, 2001 attack, who related that a plan to crash the plane into a nuclear reactor in the United States was rejected because of the fear of a reprisal that would undermine the organizational infrastructure.

Presumably the magnitude of the American response to the September 11, 2001 attack itself far exceeded that estimated in advance by its planners, since the response was as unprecedented as the scale of the attack.Al-Qaeda is not directly associated with a geographical community and is not based on a specific territory like the Lebanese Hezbollah or Hamas.  It is reasonable to assume, however, that the leaders of the organization are aware that a non-conventional terrorist attack, particularly if it involves numerous victims, is liable to be very costly in terms of support by the public in whose name they purport to act.  Such an attack would intensify the opposition that has been developing for several years, mainly in the United States and Western Europe, to the domestic cultural and social changes emanating from the growth of immigrant Muslim communities.

To be sure, reactions to terror attacks with measures such as blocking sources of employment, preventing access to educational institutions, or foiling the next terrorist attack with steps that infringe on civil rights heightens the militancy within Islamic communities.  However, at the same time it may be estimated that potential ostracism will likewise propel these communities to criticize inciting elements.  This will make the recruiting of activists and the preservation of a terrorist infrastructure increasingly difficult. Al-Qaeda does not belong to the category of state-sponsored organizations.

[66] Precisely for this reason it is easy to isolate among the factors influencing its range and nature of activity organizational motivations that do not involve considerations of a supporting government.  The limitations of control by the coalition forces in Iraq gave the organization an opportunity to establish an alternative stronghold to what it lost with the downfall of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.  This theater of operations is apparently free of political and operational inhibitions. Is it possible to infer from this that at the first opportunity al-Qaeda will carry out its declared intention to perpetrate a non-conventional terrorist attack?  It may be assumed that the reprisal for such an attack will set back the construction of the infrastructure in Iraq and its consolidation as a base for action on the international arena, and thus weaken the status of al-Qaeda as the flag-bearer of the Islamic revolution.

Presumably such a consideration explains the fact that the organization’s efforts to overcome the limitations of availability and operational expertise have not yet found practical expression in Iraq or on the international scene. The intermediate objectives guiding al-Qaeda – intensifying the tension between the Muslim world and Western states, and between Western states themselves against the background of the dilemmas involved in the fight against terrorism; and interference with the stabilization of the political system in Iraq and underscoring the problematic nature of the American occupation in the Iraqi and international consciousness – are advanced by conventional means. As far as al-Qaeda is concerned, conventional terrorism is neither a default option nor compensation for the difficulties of access to non-conventional weapons.  Apparently, in the case of this organization, and even more so in the case of less provocative organizations, the potential of conventional terrorism is still far from exhausted.

Chapter Four: Findings and Implications  Findings Therefore the question of when, why, and how to use force or a peaceful orientation should be carefully addressed and answered in light of the Islamic rules of warfare and with taking into consideration the realities of the contemporary world and the challenges that face Muslims.In other words, the trend of interpretation does not drop either war or peace for the absolute sake of the other.  It stands for the comprehensive meaning of Islam, i.e. , all principles, rules, and values of the message and experiences of Islam are valid whenever they are required in the light of changing circumstances in broad human life and experience.  The dynamic use of the different phases of Qur’anic outlook is always needed.Jihad is an intellectual instrument and a key value pertaining to da`wah as the main base of Muslim-non-Muslim relations. Hence, war or peace is considered not as a basis of external relations but as instruments for da`wah through a process of jihad.

According to this interpretation, the classical jurists’ thought was criticized as being influenced by the non-acceptance of Islam and adversarial stance towards Islam and the rising Muslim state by major non-Muslim powers.  It was also criticized as giving absolute weight to the abrogation methodology, regardless of the total meaning, basic objectives and value system of Islam.[67] In other words, this trend of thought gives more weight to the integrity of the Islamic value system and to the nature of its constructive message.  So, stressing the aggressive nature of jihad (i. e., fighting others just because they are not Muslims and forcing them to convert to Islam) could only be done by applying the rule, instead of being concerned with reviving human consciousness for establishing an egalitarian human society.  So, this aggressive attitude was seen as reducing the Islamic mission to a kind of spiritual totalitarianism.This middle trend has also criticized the modern jurists who interpreted jihad in a purely defensive way to the extent that they based Muslim external relations only on peace.

They were criticized of totally dropping the role of abrogation and underestimating the negative consequences of the unjust and aggressive Western policies towards the Muslim World.Finally, it is thought that the middle trend of thought presents a broad and realistic understanding.  It gives place to the different situations and contexts, weakness or strength that could surround the Ummah (nation), it makes the jihad movement a necessary one aimed at correcting unjust relationships (military or peaceful), and it does not allow room for accusations or exaggerated claims either against or for Islam.  The Muslim objection that adaptation to new circumstances might result in loss of identity is also out of place.

At last, according to this middle trend of thought, the spread of Islam and da`wah has taken several forms.  This da`wah is the basis of the Muslim external relations, while both peace and war present extreme states of relations that contradict the nature of the Islamic mission.  So, this trend differentiates between jihad and war; it refuses to equate jihad with holy war or to qualify jihad as legal or holy; it argues that the term “jihad” should not be used for a war until this war fulfills the legal conditions for launching it. As long as these conditions are not fulfilled, the launched war should not be called jihad.

Then what are these conditions? Who are responsible for launching jihad (defensive or offensive)?  What is the relevance of the different Islamic historical experiences?  What sort of these experiences illustrates the defensive or offensive jihad? Does the actual situation of Muslims in the world justify a defensive or offensive war? But what is the difference between a defensive and offensive one? And how can we understand the acts against the United States: do they represent a defensive war or an act of terrorism?Many prominent Eastern experts[68] have been selective in understanding jihad by equating it with offensive, destructive war and by qualifying Muslims as violent and non-tolerant.  Other scholars have realized the difference between the various interpretations of jihad.  On the other hand, to serve national interests and power politics, the concept of jihad has been manipulated differently by both Western and Muslim statesmen and politicians.The history of Muslim-Western relations provides us with various experiences that extend through two different periods in Islamic history.

Thus, they illustrate the nature of historical and psychological background that surrounded both the classic Muslim thought (offensive war) and the modern one (defensive war). Social, psychological and historical factors decide what attitude shapes the history of a nation and what school of thought responds to its state of strength or weakness.  Hence, these experiences illustrate that jihad was not pursued only by military means, even during the period of extended Muslim power. At the same time, during the periods of Muslim weakness, the military means of jihad still exist besides the peaceful ones.

Both instruments revealed new significance and gave different results.During a period when large Muslim powers were playing a central world role, we can shed light on the following experiences:a) The difference between the Umayyad and the first Abbassid caliphs. The Umayyads adopted and successfully executed a grand policy of faith (conquering). In contrast, the first Abbassid caliphs, although they were not less powerful, gave up the military fath orientation.

They depended mainly on peaceful instruments to run external relations, with force used mainly for retaliation and defensive purposes.b.) The similarity between the Mamluke and Ottoman use of peaceful means to run their power politics. Western historians, as well as Muslim ones who only equated jihad with offensive war, considered the flourishing peaceful relations between Mameluke sultanates and European kingdoms as a sort of relinquishing jihad.

The first Ottoman capitulation to François King of France in the 16th century was also seen as a turning point towards a new era of Muslim foreign relations. According to the third interpretation of jihad (as a means of Da`wah either through war or peacefully), the use of peaceful means in these two experiences should be considered as a sort of jihad. These large Islamic states (Mameluke and Ottoman) based their external relations on jihad and adopted an Islamic frame of reference.[69]In other words, while a trend of modern Muslim writings interpreted all acts of jihad during the period of power in Muslim history in terms of defense, and many non-Muslim writers explained them as aggression against non-Muslims, it must be noticed, in light of the broad interpretations of jihad, that a realistic analysis of the use the term of jihad should take into consideration the internal and external contexts of Muslim states, whether strong or weak.

Through the last two centuries, the period of Muslim decadence, acts of jihad narrowed gradually and took new shapes.  The Western attacks on and control of the Muslim world seriously challenged the classical approach of thought as well as the policies of Muslim states.  The attacks were fatal because of the condition of both Muslim thought and power.  Western attacks revealed and uncovered the decay of Muslims, rather than caused it.

It became moot to argue over defensive versus offensive jihad.  Total comprehension and understanding of the modern world could not be explained in terms of the classical thought.  The new exigencies demanded new Muslim thought and policies.These developments took the form either of apologetics or of protest and revolt against the Western adversary’s presence in the Muslim world.

Each of these two broad types of responses has taken various forms through the period of colonialism and after independence till now. Some of these forms have been proclaimed as jihad. The two types complement each other rather than being alternatives. Implications Influences Terrorism has on the Innocent The escalation of terrorism recorded in recent years does not necessarily indicate a linear progression toward a non-conventional era.

Terrorist organizations are walking on the brink and their attacks play a decisive role in heralding them as the bearers of a political message and the leaders of the struggle.  At the same time, violent provocations serve these aims up to a limit only.  If a red line is crossed, the chances increase of countermeasures that aim to destroy the capability of these organizations.  Caution not to cross this brink, which differentiates between maintaining the organizations in the public consciousness, for good or bad, and stimulation of a resounding response, explains the frequently observed disparity between ideological dictates and practice.

This gap, whether conventional or non-conventional terrorism is concerned, is not due solely to difficulties in access to weapons.  Often, profit and loss considerations prevent the use of conventional means.[70]  It may be assumed that these same considerations guide the caution displayed towards the use of non-conventional weapons.If the efforts fail to thwart the realization of the non-conventional threat, this will not necessarily inaugurate a new era regarding the tactics of terrorist organizations active throughout the world.

It is even likely that the response to a catastrophe of this sort would create an opposing drift, which would take the form of a lower profile by other organizations.  This effect of added caution impacted on the policy of the states involved in international terrorism following the overthrow of the Taliban regime and the invasion of Iraq.  However, the strategic significance of terrorism is not derived from the frequency of terrorist attacks but from the chain reaction triggered by spectacular attacks. As can be learned from the developments following the events of September 11, 2001 a single combined offensive, on an unprecedented scale regarding casualties and damage, is enough to revise concepts, intensify sensitivities, and produce a change in international relations and policy.

Consequently it is impossible to overstate the vital need for international supervision of the development, manufacture, and marketing of non-conventional weapons, and for coordinated steps to prevent access by unauthorized elements to these weapons.International organizations and representative offices, which have not yet asked for these permits, will be unable to carry out their duties as needed.  Health Organizations such as the International Red Cross requiring freedom of movement, under international law, for its staff, especially ambulance drivers and medical crews.  This new regime will forbid Palestinian ambulance drivers and medical crews from carrying out their duties without having the permit.

Any work or emergency medical assistance needed between the Districts past seven in the evening will be impossible for the Palestinian staff.[71] This will effectively paralyze Palestinian health organizations, particularly the Red Crescent and Medical Relief organizations. Consequently, thousands of daily medical emergencies will be unable to reach hospitals on time, if at all. Hundreds of deaths will also occur, as delays in arriving to hospitals for the injured or gravely ill will result in death.

Hospitals in the West Bank’s northern Districts (Tulkarem, Jenin, and others) are not equipped to receive medical cases in certain specialties and usually transfer the seriously injured or ill to hospitals in Nablus or Ramallah.At least one million Palestinian students travel on a daily basis from their villages to nearby cities in order to attend their school.  Tens of thousands of Palestinian teachers travel everyday from their place of residence to their place of work.  The Ministry of Education, keeping in line with the PNA’s rejection of having any direct dealings with the so-called Civil Administration, has instructed its teachers not to apply for these required permits.

School students will be unable to attend their schools, thus disrupting the entire educational system.  The current school year, which has been extended to the end of June as a result of the numerous Israeli invasions and reoccupation campaigns against West Bank cities and towns, is now nearing the High School Baccalaureate Exams. Graduating students must make it to examination centers in various locations, which will now become almost impossible to achieve, especially for the male students who constitute a target for Israeli occupation soldiers manning the roadblocks.Teachers, who now spend up to five hours to get to their places of work while risking their lives in the process, will be unable to reach the schools in which they teach.

These repercussions will not only disrupt the educational process, it also threatens the quality of education that students will be receiving in school.Tens of thousands of Palestinian university students attend universities in cities away from home.  Students from the Gaza Strip of Nablus city for example who are studying Ramallah’s Birzeit University will not have many choices. They could remain confined to the area of their university and unable to cross a roadblock, lest they be arrested or shipped of to their original place of residence.

This would include their denial of the right to visit their families, which has so far only been applicant to Gaza Strip university students studying in the West Bank for the past twenty months.[72]  Quit their university and move back to their original place of residence, thus compromising their higher educational experience and professional opportunities.  Students residing in Hebron city for example and traveling to Bethlehem University on a daily or weekly basis to attend classes will no longer be able to do so.  Professors teaching in one University and residing in another District will ultimately loose their position due to their inability to get to the lecture halls.

EconomyWest Bank cities, especially in the Center are almost entirely dependant on cities in the north for food products, specifically fresh produce.  International organizations and donor countries executing development or emergency assistance programs require freedom of movement between Palestinian towns, cities, and villages.  The new regime will deal a serious blow to these programs and most likely result in their suspension in some cases.The Bantustant regime that Israel intends to impose on the Palestinian Territory would translate into an economic catastrophe as well as possibly immeasurable devastation to the health status of Palestinian children and the elderly in particular.

The back-to-back system that will be imposed will immediately increase transportation costs, which will translate into the marketplace. Since at least 50% of Palestinian families now live below the poverty level, higher costs in essential food products will mean less food on the table.[73]  This reality will translate into an increase in preventable health problems due to the circumstances caused by the compounded tragedy caused by Israel’s policies of collective punishment.This plan will also directly impact the struggling Palestinian private businesses, which have barely been able to survive the deteriorating economic situation in the Palestinian Territory.

The Palestinian economy has shrunk by one third between October 2000 and December 2001 alone. Consequently, the horrific unemployment rate now plaguing the Palestinian society will inevitably rise as business owners will attempt to cut their costs in order to survive.   Modern Revolution?There are two distinct questions: When is it justified to make a revolution, and, once a conflict has begun, what rules should be followed in conducting it? These same two questions apply to the law governing international conflicts, where the Latin terms jus ad bellum (the right to go to war) and jus in bello (the laws of war) are used. There is some legal ambiguity about how much of this law applies to civil conflicts.

Civil wars have a great deal in common with international wars, however; and, on purely ethical grounds, it makes sense to use the same criteria in judging them insofar as this is possible. The laws of war are useful moral restraints in all kinds of conflicts. While the right to revolution clearly differs from the right to go to war in significant ways, there are also important similarities.Among all the rights to revolution, the right of racial and ethnic groups to defend themselves against genocidal attacks is the most universally accepted.

This right applies equally to groups, which do or do not have their own nation state. Of course, members of a persecuted group may question the wisdom of violent resistance on practical grounds, if they believe that it would be ineffective or would only exacerbate the situation. But no one except absolute pacifists questions the fundamental right to self-defense. What are needed are more effective mechanisms for enforcing the international laws against genocide.

The indifference of world opinion to the genocides, which have taken place in the last decades, is shocking.There is also a great deal of consensus about the right of racial and ethnic minorities to resort to armed struggle if they are denied equal participation in political and social life.  The argument for this right on utilitarian grounds is much more ambiguous than the argument for the right of defense against genocide, but international support for it has been much stronger, at least with regard to Palestine and South Africa. The right to equal participation does not mean a right to an independent national state, separate from other groups, which inhabit the same or contiguous territory.

Insofar as there is an international consensus on this issue, it is to respect existing national boundaries.[74]  Thus, existing states have a legal right to self-defense, but minority groups do not have a legal right to secede.  Ethically, this distinction could be questioned, but there is no clear criterion for deciding which groups have a right to secede and which do not. The principle of respect for persons requires, however, that minorities, which are not allowed to secede, be allowed equal political rights within the existing state.

The right to revolution on behalf of oppressed social or economic groups can be defended only in situations where an electoral option is not open to these groups. This is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition and one, which is difficult to apply in practice. In many situations, there are elections or promises of elections, but they are so corrupt or inadequate that oppressed groups question their usefulness. In these situations, a practical decision must be made as to whether an armed movement is likely to succeed, and whether, if successful, it will actually lead to a better political system.

Many revolutionary movements have overthrown repressive regimes, only to end up by replacing them with something even worse.  Stronger international pressures for democratic elections, and use of international observers in conducting them, have been helpful in avoiding this scenario in several countries in recent years. There is even a movement toward meaningful, multi-candidate elections in the Soviet-bloc countries.While both sides to a conflict may never recognize the right to revolution, there is hope that both sides can agree to ethical limitations on the violence itself.

The laws of war apply to the rules by which conflict is carried out, regardless of the origins of the disagreement. Ironically, the importance of the laws of war has been obscured partly by the influence of pacifist doctrines on Western social thought. In a provocative and thoughtful essay, Anscombe argued that by denouncing all killing, pacifism obscures the distinction between justifiable killing and murder.[75]  Very few people are willing to adopt absolute pacifist principles, but this does not mean that there are no ethical limits on killing.

The killing of unarmed civilians, or of prisoners of war, is not the same as killing in battle. This distinction is just as important in revolutionary conflicts as it is in traditional warfare. Regardless of the legitimacy of their cause, revolutionary movements should establish ethical codes governing the conduct of their struggle.  Insofar as possible, these standards should follow international laws governing warfare.

If a revolutionary movement is too weak to attack military targets but can only place bombs on airplanes or gun down civilian bus passengers, then it is not ready for armed struggle. It can be argued, however, that the code for a guerrilla struggle should differ from that governing conventional warfare. Should people who are leaders of a repressive government, or torturers and murderers in the employ of that government, be exempt from attack in their civilian habitats, while ordinary conscript soldiers who follow the rules of war are fair game? Is a general a legitimate target when in uniform but not at home or on the golf course? Certainly, government forces are not likely to extend the same courtesy to guerrilla leaders. International law does allow combatants to consider “military necessity” in applying the laws of war.

The military necessities of a revolutionary conflict may differ from those of conventional warfare. Farer has argued that in civil conflicts a legitimate distinction can be made between “active participants in the struggle for power and the more or less passive bulk of the citizenry. “[76]  Such distinctions are difficult to make in practice, however, and the temptation to extend the list of legitimate victims is great.  When revolutionary activists have been creative in their thinking, they have been able to conceive of many actions, such as destruction of torture centers, redistribution of hoarded wealth, freeing of prisoners, capture of weapons and supplies, or exposure of secret information which is embarrassing to the government, which are justifiable on the basis of their short-term benefits as well as making a contribution to the ultimate victory.

Assassination of members of death squads or government security agencies might even be justified as self-defense. When a group resorts to killing minor government officials, selected because of their vulnerability, almost everyone agrees that it has gone too far. Certainly, the killing of health workers, farmers, storekeepers, civilian managers, teachers, or social workers, to say nothing of pregnant women and school children, is beyond the bounds of any reasonable ethical code.Middle East Women UnveiledIt is important to take a moment to respond to a statement that has been made recently about a current situation in our world.

The current situation being addressed in my area is the war in Iraq but that is not the topic I wish to address today.  Unfortunately, the war in Iraq and the war or terrorism brings up other issues within daily discussion that can be sensitive in nature.  The part that bothers me greatly is that people so easily have an opinion without very little knowledge.  I am talking about the difference seen in American and Islamic cultures.

The two are vastly different in how they function.  American culture is based on religious freedom and the freedom to be unique.  Islamic culture is deeply defined by the religion and the moral codes set forth in the Quran.  Each, I believe require respect and understanding.

Still it is alarming the things I hear just walking down the street in my town.  I cannot help but over hear the opinions of some community members in my area concerning Islam and the treatment of women within that society.  Does one understand how uncomfortable it can be for any woman to be walking down the street and overhear without trying, the following statement: “I don’t have any problem with Islam, except for how they treat women.  Women in Muslim societies are oppressed and silenced.

I really feel for those women when I see them hidden behind their veils.”  I am here to attest to the fact that there are many problems with this statement and/or opinion.  The person saying this obviously has very little knowledge of what it means to wear the veil and the level of respect a veil symbolizes.  It is definitely a Western thought for one to carry the opinion that Muslim women are oppressed and silenced.

If anything, the veil protects women’s rights, especially her right to be seen.  It is a matter of perspective, each individual’s opinion but in my opinion it is important to get the facts straight.  This is a complex issue.  I say it is a matter of perspective because the Islamic view of women is vastly different from how Westerners see their own women.

One must always look to the flip side of the argument to see reason.  How odd it must be for Muslims to see women in Westernized dress, their faces bare along with their legs and arms?  This is where the differences begin but I must share with you some facts about Islamic culture and its treatment of women.  My job with this letter is to enlighten and educate the public.  It is my hope that this will lead to a better understanding of Islamic culture and reasoning behind the veil’s use.

The veil and the action veiling holds more context than first seen by the Western eye.  In Fadwa El Guindi’s book and field work, she discovered and uncovered the hidden meaning of the veil based in “analysis of Arab culture, about sacred privacy, sanctity and the rhythmic interweaving of patterns of worldly and sacred life, linking women as the guardians of family sanctuaries.”[77]  This is evidence that women in Islamic culture are powerful.  They are center to family life and therefore, center to life.

El Guindi also found in her research not only women veiling but also men.  Using the veil not only has social function to state placement and status within the society but also protects one from the harsh elements of the desert.  It is practical to wear by both genders.  Of course, this is within the context of the Arab world; many Westerners are unfamiliar to these details.

To further the evidence, El Guindi also found “seclusion occurs without veiling.” [78]  In fact the seclusion of women or separation by gender occurs more frequently in Mediterranean and Balkan cultures than Islamic culture.  There are also levels of separation in Orthodox Judaism and Christianity.  These standards of separation for these cultures are more directly defined by religion and religious concepts of purity, which are absent in Islam.

The choice to veil is more closely tied to social identity, a need for privacy of space and body as an expression of social standing, rank with relation to kinship status and behavior.  In this respect, veiling represents an element of power and autonomy as a means of resistance.  It is the dominant Western culture that has created the misconception the veil symbolizes the taboo fruit or unattainable female.  This leads to further misconception that a Muslim woman has not a choice but must remain docile and oppressed.

This misconception could not be further from the truth.It is thought by Westerners that in order for Muslim women to gain full rights, they must give up the veil or hijab.  It is the thought of Westerners, due to incorrect media coverage, that full veil represents “enforcing gender exclusion and inequality.”[79]  It is the Western perception the fuels the fire for misunderstanding.

It has been due to the Western reaction of discomfort to different dress that has caused much debate and misunderstanding.  The veil provides important private space even in the public sphere.  It is a common mistake to think that a veil prohibits a woman from expressing herself, her personality and her opinions.  The veil represents Islamic tenets of privacy, humility, piety and moderation.

The act of veiling today in the Middle East, especially Egypt carries the message of activism and carry on the tradition of one’s need to express cultural identity.  Essentially, by wearing the veil, a woman is taking a stand and making a powerful statement as a woman but mainly as a Muslim.  As with any statement, there is backlash.  Part of the problem with the Westerner’s concept of veiling is the fact much of this concept comes from negative images of the veiling.

For example in 1970s Iran, women were forced to veil as a means of political power for the Shah.  This led to many women being persecuted and killed but it also led to this opinion that Muslin women are oppressed and without rights.  This brings up the fact that veiling is defined by the context and culture in which it happens.In essence, the hijab means different things to different women.

Many find the veil a sacred right, an honor to wear, while others have rejected it completely.  Some women are under the impression that in order to embrace the modern feminist movement, one must remove the veil as it represents too much tradition or takes away from freedom.  I believe this to not be the case.  For the modern Islamic woman, there are many choices.

The hijab represents her religious choice to share that side of herself with the public.  In no way, does it underscore her ability to express herself.  In many ways, it exhibits her power.  By wearing a veil, the woman is telling the world what she values and this makes her more powerful than the Western women, naked and exposed to the world.

It is my opinion that each Muslim woman must make the choice for herself, how she will handle the veil.  For many, it depends on their relationship with Allah.  It is this personal choice that reflects one’s freedom of expression.  In this respect, Islam is not a culture to be afraid of but to be embraced and rejoiced.

Still it is only upon understanding this concept that a Westerner can see past the veil and into the heart of what makes Islam special as a culture.  It is with this notion that I leave your readers with much food for thought.  Social Mission of Islamists Many emigrants have sought to preserve in entirely their homeland culture, unlike previous generations, which did their best to adopt, or at least adapt, the cultures of their new environments.  This element has in turn facilitated the globalization of the Jihad.

Groups are made up of the school of Muslim brotherhood or Sufi groups who carry out the vast majority of political, social, cultural and educational work in the name of Islam.These groups give off attitudes and interpretations of Islam in which more extremist and violent Islamist groups thrive; they serve as a greenhouse of sorts for radical groups and for the growth of views hostile toward the West and Western culture.-          Historically the anti-western feeling in the Muslim Middle East has arisen from a failure to cope with the effects of western modernization.[80] Political Issues of LeadershipThe concept of flexibility within the construct of leadership is important as it means that the country has the ability to roll with the punches.

It means that the country can grow as a result of change and keep an open mind for its present and future status.  This also means that the organization is flexible to possibility and new ideas.  This creates an atmosphere of creativity and innovation for the people, which leads to success on many levels.Research stresses the importance of the leader’s flexibility and capability to adapt to his or her environment.

An effective leader will understand not only their environment and people but also understand the potential for impact upon that environment.  By understanding this key element, an effective leader will know how to define the environment.  This is important because employees look to management for guidance.  The leader defines the boundaries for the team and creates an atmosphere for building relationships and open communication.

This in turn creates stronger teams.  Research suggests leaders are more interested in mentoring and training their team rather than focusing on output of numbers or turn around time. A healthy culture inspires options and the innovations that grow out of creativity.Having change as a catalyst means average people become adaptable to the environment and get used the reality varying from day to day.

This means life is never boring as the unexpected can occur.  Such reaction to change opens doors for creativity and critical thinking, which leads to innovations and competitive edge.  This results in a national culture that encourages new ideas and processes.  Modern times embrace the unpredictable and uncertainty with gusto, as they believe this reflects the state of the world as it is always in flux.

Change agents like war, the economy, technology and globalization has made postmodernism possible.  It is recognizing change that opens up different views.The implications of living in such a reality means constantly being open-minded and remaining comfortable knowing that not every day is same.  Some people cannot live in such conditions.

We are so overly programmed in the modernist view; it is difficult to open their point of view.  It is realizing that the modernist view still exists that will aid the postmodernists in success.  As Stephen Robbins’ comments, “As humans, we are creatures of habit.  Changes substitute ambiguity and uncertainty for the known.

”[81].  People, by human nature, inherently resist change.  Leaders may find older people are more loyal but have a harder time embracing new ideas like the Internet because they remember the old days.  They remember when life was less complicated and doing business differently was not an issue for competition.

Older people remember that doing one thing and doing it well was all that mattered.  This resistance to change can result in conflict but it also creates opportunities for innovation.  The practice of innovation also begins with embracing or adopting the unexpected.  Peter Drucker describes, “unexpected successes and failures are such productive sources of innovation opportunities because most business dismiss them, disregard them, and even resent them”[82] and this type of behavior represents people’s resistance to change but at the same time creates recognition of new opportunities within the market.

Change in the global market, including multicultural demographics and new technologies, has required perceptions to change.  The attitude toward knowledge has evolved because more than one type is needed in order to implement a new idea.  This changes the needs of citizens and organizations as diffusion of innovation takes place as many different points of view are considered.  This adds value as it spawns creative thinking but it must also fall within economic reality.

It is important to carry out a detailed implementation but also to remain on budget and schedule.The concept of innovation brings up other implications, however.  It produces a whole new reality that employees may not be prepared to handle.  Product diversification could mean failure.

Technology, while it is wondrous and makes jobs easier, can also be dangerous.  With telecommunications, a new breed of crime has been created with identity theft and corporate brand protection becoming important.  Technology can be disastrous if put in the wrong hands.  Antibiotics used to cure infections have saved numerous lives while there is a continued threat of biological weapon of mass destruction.

With innovations come new inventions that make our lives easier but also have a higher risk when used.  This is the nature of the realm of possibility.  The postmodernist movement has given permission to anyone to create and discover.  This can backfire as it can also destroy and impose new rules of conduct upon communities.

As much as many like the idea of innovation, for those scared of change, it is difficult o embrace fully.  This leads to counter movements to conserve what is left of the modernist ideals.  This means as change rapidly flourishes out of control, those resistant aim to gain control of laws and rules to make change more difficult.  This leads to Big Brother watching every public move and return to conservative leadership.

Turbulent environmentThe term jihad is vanishing gradually, under the terrorism vogue.  The war against terrorism has become the nightmare of Muslim governments as well as Muslim people.  While the stability of the former has become at stake, the existence and identity of the latter has been dangerously threatened.  The distorted image of Islam and Muslims is used to an extreme to justify current international policies conducted against terrorism.

Islam and the Muslim world are considered the main source of evil that the United States should fight to protect humanity and civilization.This idea is not new.  Centuries ago when the Ottoman armies knocked at the gates of Vienna, the East drew a distorted picture of the Turks, the proclaimers of jihad. The motive was to mobilize European resistance against the great Ottoman sultans.

Three centuries ago, the image of Muslims as backward, fanatic, uncivilized people were used again to justify expansionists’ targets, called the mission of the white man to spread modernity and the message of civilization.Now at the beginning of the 21st century, while accusing Muslims of using religion to serve political aims, we can notice that the political discourse of the American administration reveals an alliance between the extreme religious right (Protestants) and the political conservatives.  This alliance presents a threat not only to the Muslim world but also to the entire world.  It adopts a strategy of absolute global American hegemony and is motivated by the theory of conflict of civilizations.

The politics emanating from this strategy are unjust, intolerant, violent, arrogant, deeply interfering and extremely oriented to power politics.These policies are meant to stimulate Arab and Muslim resistance.  The use of any kind of force against these hegemonic policies is always condemned and equated with terrorism.  From now on, since the Muslim people faced strong external and internal oppressions that blocked the capacity for opposition and the needed political and economic change, jihad will be pursued even in a way that will be considered as the hated terrorism.

The Bin Ladin phenomenon is a typical case.  He has acquired the admiration and approval of ordinary Muslim people because he took revenge for them. He found a new way to fight injustice where all ordinary ways had been closed.So, we have to wonder if the current policies against the so-called terrorism are going to cure the cause of the disease or just cure the symptoms.

Domestic and international scenes need to change dramatically in order to forge more justice and tolerance, for Westerners but also for Muslims everywhere, in Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya, Balkans, Philippines, Afghanistan, and in all Muslim countries where Islamists are persecuted and restricted.All the previous remarks lead one to conclude that in such international circumstances that do not favor Islam and Muslims, Islamic thought faces a big challenge because it is necessary to develop a new vision of jihad (especially regarding when and why to use force and by whom).  Any thought that does not respond to the personality and identity of the Islamic Ummah will result in more confusion and could be very harmful to the Muslim Ummah’s response to serious challenges that threaten not only its territory and wealth but the very essence of the Ummah, its soul and its identity, i.e. , jihad in its fullest and broadest meaning.

The Question of Motivation

Despite spates of terrorist attacks, it is possible to recognize in the activities of terrorist organizations certain constraints that define the extent of their struggle and their methods. These constraints point to a framework in which certain modes of action receive priority over others. The implied organizational rationale indicates tactical and strategic choices made over the course of time.

These choices are not a direct result of a balance between capabilities and intentions, since even efforts to achieve specific capabilities are a result of intentions.The constraints vary from one organization to another.  Certain organizations are more blunt and provocative than others regarding the selection of targets for attack, the frequency of attacks, the scale of the planned damage, and the style of action.  However, in the majority of cases, notwithstanding differences in ideological or strategic imperatives, the operational choices are testimony to self-imposed constraints.

These constraints, which change over time in accordance with situational conditions, are designed to protect the organization against a destructive counterattack on its infrastructure and erosion of popular and national support.The preservation of the organizational core is an aim in and of itself.  In recent years the terrorist threat has been linked to sophisticated use made by extremist Islamic elements of an unsophisticated mode of action; suicide attacks.  These spectacular attacks were taken by many to indicate that a non-conventional attack was not far off.

However, even the organizations that turned suicide bombings into the symbol of their struggle are not themselves inclined to organizational suicide, and as such are not immune to the reaction that these terrorist attacks are likely to incur.The fall of the Taliban regime does not necessarily dictate that any mass-casualty massive-damage terrorist attack will be followed by military reprisals on a similar scale against the organization responsible.  It will not always be possible to locate the headquarters and the bases of the organization, as in Afghanistan, nor will the state that has been attacked always find itself facing a backward state lacking the capability of resistance and isolated on the international scene, again such as Afghanistan before the invasion of the US-led coalition forces.  However, it may be estimated that the psychological effect of a spectacular attack using non-conventional weapons will sharpen sensitivities that perhaps became blunt during the period that has elapsed since September 11, 2001.

As such, it would award further international legitimization to determined acts of punishment against states in which there is an infrastructure of terrorist organizations, even when it is impossible to find solid evidence of their direct involvement in the planning or execution of the terrorist attack.  Concentrated military, diplomatic, and economic pressure on states that have not participated in a systematic determined fight against terror would generally evoke at least some efforts to join the struggle.  As a result, terrorist organizations are likely to be forced to seek alternative places of refuge in an already dwindling list of locations.It is possible that here lies part of the explanation why a terrorist attack using non-conventional weapons (including mass poisoning using chemicals, relatively simple to implement) has still not been perpetrated by extremist Islamic organizations.

Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad have for some years been subject to ongoing military pressure.  The possibility that in such circumstances these organizations will seek expression using non-conventional weapons is not viable, as this would free the Israeli decision-makers from limitations that still circumscribe retaliation.  In addition to efforts focusing on the perpetration of attacks, the Hamas leadership in the territories is deliberating participation in the official Palestinian leadership. Turning to non-conventional terror will remove this option from the agenda.

In other cases, military pressure is not direct but exists as a threat.  The Lebanese Hizbollah is already acting in the shadow of Israeli deterrence against the implementation of conventional capabilities both in its own country and on the international scene.  It is difficult to conceive of objectives whose chances of being advanced by non-conventional terror will, in the view of the leadership of the organization, override the danger of retaliation.The motivation of self-preservation and to save face is so inherent to the Muslim culture.

Worldwide one can find the need to save face in times of great stress.  It is not unique to organizations that fear for their status and operational capabilities (i.e., those that have something to lose), but is also applicable to organizations lying in a state of retreat and difficulty, perhaps even with their backs to the wall.

Significant erosion of status and even a state of siege do not necessarily lead to campaigns of revenge and indiscriminate attacks.  Extremist factions in the IRA or ETA, for example, did not escalate their struggle in order to thwart a process of compromise that rejected their participation in the emerging political system, but concentrated on preserving their remaining assets.  The fear of further damage to the already weakened organizational infrastructure deters the Muslim Brotherhood from showcase terrorist attacks in Egypt and Jordan, and instead encourages non-violent methods of persuasion in order to retain support from within and without and build the forces that will, when the time comes, proclaim the victory of the Islamic revolution.  This case also points to the importance of popular support for the entrenchment of the organizational core.

By their very nature, terrorist organizations act in a hostile environment where the balance of forces is decidedly not in their favor.  Consequently, popular support and a positive public image may well improve their capability of resisting pressure and heighten their chances of survival.  Organizations striving for national liberation have better chances of achieving broad popular support, and thus strengthening their resistance and enhancing the chances of the success of the struggle.  Conversely, the demise of organizations in the face of pressure on the part of security forces is frequently hastened because of the lack of popular support.

Typical examples of this are the collapse of the Red Brigades and the Baader-Meinhof group.In any case, a reduction in popular support is likely to encourage a change in the modes of action, and not always in the form of escalation intended to demonstrate capability of action under difficult conditions.  The erosion of the support in the Tamil diaspora for the Tigers, which in part took the form of reduced financial contributions, was one of the factors that in 2002 led to an end of the suicide bombing campaign in Sri Lanka.  The Lebanese Hezbollah acts within a framework of conditional popular legitimacy that dictates restraint, particularly since the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon.

True, the casualties and the extensive damage to infrastructures caused by Israeli reprisals following suicide bombings did not reduce the popular Palestinian support for the organizations responsible for them.  However, this does not guarantee that support for the perpetrating organizations would remain irrespective of developments on the ground, for example, after the adoption of non-conventional methods. The response to the crossing of the threshold is liable to strengthen doubts regarding the effectiveness of the struggle, erode the status of the militant organizations, and weaken the resistance to Israeli military pressure. It is hard to imagine that the leaders of the organizations will ignore this risk.

Popular support, however, is not the decisive prerequisite for organizations that enjoy state sponsorship.  Yet even state-sponsored organizations are not likely candidates for transition to non-conventional terrorism.  In general, states that sponsor terrorist organizations tend to shun activities that will involve them in an international scandal, liable to produce economic or even heavy military consequences.  The wariness of states regarding exposure of their direct involvement in terrorism implies that in matters related to the transfer of non-conventional technologies and materials to terrorists, they will be particularly cautious.

This estimate should reduce the non-conventional terrorism potential associated with state-supported organizations because of difficulties in access to means.Furthermore, it may be assumed that survival rationale is what prevents state-supported organizations from making the effort to acquire what the sponsoring state does not supply from other sources.  Deviation from the framework dictated by the sponsoring state, and especially a shift towards non-conventional terror, is liable to cost the organizations a heavy price in terms of operational assistance and a territorial foothold. The organizations close to Syria, for example, have acted in recent years against a backdrop of fear of a policy change in Damascus, because of a decrease in the international tolerance of support for terrorism.

This fear decreases the chances of non-conventional provocations being implemented, which would likely end the era of aid and hospitality.As a collective world community, we must change our thought processes.  We must approach change with an open heart knowing that personality may not always be set in stone.  It depends upon one’s flexibility and definition of identity within the context of one’s society.

With this in mind, it is the work of Vivian Burr and Kenneth Gergen that suggests the social constructionist modern view of personality be defined as “the concept that we use in our everyday lives in order to try to make sense of the things”[84] around us.  This allows one’s experiences into the equation but also allows for continued transformation of the personality.  Gergen relates that such transformative dialogues within the personality allows one to know one’s self directly instead of remaining confused and this in turn opens the mind to new experiences and less resistance to change.[85]  This allows the mind to be open to new ideas and constant evolution as a personality, self or identity.

It does not matter if ‘identity’ is flexible; people remain within the status quo.  This is why people find his or her comfort zone and usually do not venture out into the interview realm; there is too much stress.  Still the multicultural generation lends itself to constant change and movement from organization to new opportunities.  In much reflection, while Burr’s work is groundbreaking for the time, it is somewhat outdated for the present, modern community.

This resistance to change can result in conflict but it also creates opportunities for innovation.  Change in business, including multicultural demographics and new technologies, has required perceptions to change.  The attitude toward knowledge has evolved because more than one type is needed in order to implement a new idea.  This changes the needs of workers and organizations as diffusion of innovation takes place as many different points of view are considered.

This creates new identities for the personality to flourish creating a new atmosphere for the interview.  As Kenneth Gergen suggests these internal conservations within one’s personalities not only create war zones of conflict for the worker but also as a result create coping mechanisms for moving forward. The internal dialogue that Gergen presents acts a coping mechanism; somehow allowing times of stress to be ‘okay’ and allowing the personality to work under pressure of the unknown during the interview.  His work examines how the personality is constantly evolving to not only include past experiences but to also incorporate new ones happening in the present.

As a result terrorist may bring something unique challenging to a situation if different thinking touches them.  They may display creativity under pressure, therefore reflecting how they may thrive in the new workplace.  The dialogue offers comfort during uncertainty and new world leaders should look for people who exhibit these levels of emotional intelligence.  This allows the future to present itself in a way maybe not understood before hand.

This adds value as it spawns creative thinking but allows leaders to better understand the people in his or her communities.  This brings a whole new level to strategy that can start immediately and continue into the future.  This in a sense creates positioning of personalities so the work can get done efficiently.  This is one reason why many organizations have turned to personality testing during the recruiting process.

Knowing upfront how personalities fit into the organizational puzzle alleviates conflict and reduces resistance to change.With regards to modern society and living, Gergen is on the forefront of innovative thinking in the social constructionism field.  In Burr’s continued debate about identity, she delves into the absolute belief found in western society that one must have a personality.  Still she questions this concept; “there is no objective evidence that you can appeal to which would demonstrate the existence of your personality.

“[86]  This challenges everything we believe about conscious thought, the self, and Gergen’s dialogue.  She believes everything is ‘circular reasoning’ but yet she questions it all.  Her perspective comes from the need to label personality when one could have more than one facet to his or her personality.  We want to label a person as aggressive because of repeated behavior in the past but Burr makes the argument that personality is “stable across situations and over time.

“[87]  Does this mean it can change at all?  Burr suggests there is a difference between personality and behavior.  In other words, how we behave depends upon the situations we find ourselves in and not our characteristics.  Therefore by this definition, the situation predicts how we will behave, not necessarily how personality will react.Still it can be believed Burr was struggling with new modern influences that a multicultural world presents today.

She suggests that not all people have not realized the potential of personality and how much it can persuade behavior.   From a modern view, this displays discrimination as she explains people outside the west struggle in a ‘false view of reality’ due to the fact they are born into a society not as advanced as the west or with different cultural values.  These societies lack the structure and complexities of the west.  It seems judgmental.

This seems unfair.  She believes “how people think about and describe their experiences our language is constantly changing and we accept the meanings of words mutate over time.”[88]  This should apply to all language and culture worldwide. These ideas act as a foundation for Gergen’s work as the concept remains important to the new leadership in this post-September 11, 2001 world and being open to the internal dialogue within now that the west and non-west have fused into a multicultural society.

In other words, even when concepts are so carefully defined, the impact of change puts the modern world into a realm of endless possibility.  We can analyze these concepts into infinity but we must be aware of change as a continuous force within today’s society. It is one’s inability as a collective world culture that holds the multicultural effect of innovation from taking root as a catalyst of change and hope.  It is fear that distracts, paralyzes and as a result creates more fear.

When it comes to East and West harmony much of the problem begins and ends with differences.  Instead of being afraid, we should embrace our differences in celebration; not kill each other over what many see as a means to an end; a Holy War, Holy mission.  It is differences that set us apart, build fear and promote sinful acts but yet it could be differences that bring the world together.  Unfortunately it is the advent of technology that brings much of this conflict into the public sphere of debate as more and more actions are being taken to combat the enemy when it is lose-lose war regardless if Terrorists stop.

The fear will go on if not addressed in full. Chapter Five: Discussion and Conclusion The Middle East has been in turmoil since the beginning of time.  Due to its location geographically and proximity to immensely valuable resource, not just oil but transportation routes, it has always been an area worth conquering to governments in power.  Add differences in religion that has defined the Muslim culture from Western values and the area remains a hot zone of conflict.

It should be said at this time, this paper did not explore how there are conflicts at work within subsets of populations in the area.  This paper looked at how conflicts have persisted due to outside occupations by Western cultures.  It will look to cultural and religious differences as a means to define the motivations behind terrorist behaviours.  It will not discuss internal factions at work to feed the conflict such as Hezbollah in Lebanon.

It will not discuss the numerous differing Islamic beliefs found within the religion as a means of fuelling the fire for terror but it did look to the Quran for concrete reasons behind such a prevalence for hate of the West.  It should also be said at this time that extreme behavior does not only exist for the Middle East, it can be found in any religion, culture or society on Earth.  History tells the truth of such extremist movements throughout time.  Most recently, we’ve seen extreme, mad behavior on the part of such rulers as Hitler in Germany, Pinchot in Chile and the Branch Davidian in Texas.

Such behavior is just a fact of life.  Those of us brought up with a sense of Judeo Christian right and wrong understand these behaviours to be unacceptable to society.  One thing about humanity, there is always a rationale explanation.  This paper aimed to address the complexity the Middle East rationale behind terrorism.

What makes a person a terrorist?  What drives them to sacrifice his or her life?  God or his or her idea of God, of Allah?  And as Westerners, how we are so blind to seeing this kind of passion, this kind of commitment?  Because it is not ours to bear?  If driven by the same primal, cultural and religious reasons, to fight for American soil for instance, would we not make the same choices?  Is the Gulf War not based on this premise?  To find for everything we believe in?  Our value system?  Our safety and morals?  Our way of life?  Still because of laws, ethics and society, we believe the terrorist to be behaving unacceptably?  What if the tables were turned?The essence of the problem is based in stereotypes and misconceptions about the Middle East.  Westerners are ignorant.  From the Western point of view, this culture doe not fit the Western value system.  It seems foreign and mistrusting.

Part of what fuels this misconception are differences found between the East and West, found in religion, culture and politics.  This conflict is millennia old; how do we as humanity begin to understand each other in a modern world?  Much of what the West sees is a threat to the West’s way of life.  Much of what the West knows about the East is negative because of Terrorist behavior.  In the first half of the literature review, this paper worked to establish the Middle East as a place rich in history, culture, art and passion.

This view of the Middle East will be juxtaposed with that of the West’s point of view to offer insight on how extremist behavior hurts so many people worldwide.  This paper also worked to explain the reasons behind this behavior.  How repeated occupations of the area and disrespect of the Islamic religion and culture has lead to a rise in Jihad.  Much of this paper is based on the idea of the fight between good and evil, but this paper will look to humanity as a basis of foundation.

The problem is preconceived notions and each person’s value system.  If we could only respect each other and stop the breeding of madmen and women?  Because of the conflicts that exist, much of the problem exists because of technology and lack of communication, understanding each other.  Are all these ideas just borne of a need for an explanation, reasoning behind why we are here at the moment?  This issue of time brings up many questions and concerns many that cannot be explored during this study.As humans we are so set in our ways, our comfort zones found in culture, law, religion and society.

From a Western standpoint, a need to open one’s eyes to a new movement toward a global, multicultural community must be done in order for the conflicts to stop.  Still it is human nature to fear the unknown.  Is it possible the conflict is born out of fear and our most primal instinct?Purpose of this paper and study was to examine the history of Middle East occupations and how differences in culture based on religion have given terrorist the reasoning for his or her unacceptable behaviours. This paper examined both historical and cultural views of the Middle East in order to construct a working definition for modern times.

It was ironic that by looking to the past and present, one can discover much about the status quo. This paper hoped to determine that unfortunately there is no clear path for the Middle East despite analysis of historical, religious, and cultural and modernist constructs.  Time is what one makes of it but at evolving creatures looking for reasoning, it is also simple to see why people want a definition and to establish differing viewpoints.  How else could we survive the unknown? Some accounts were able to establish motivation for terror scientifically while others have looked to religion, culture and experiences for proof.

Literature from many experts in this field was studied to get a better picture. It has been researched and also explored the implications of the Middle East conflict as a construct.  Such research brought to light not just how the view of the Middle East can vary depending upon the frame of reference. It is interesting to see the differing philosophies on the subject and look at how this has led to the modernist view of the present conflict.

Still it is found and thought that no matter how much research is done, changes in human nature must be acted upon in order to see an end to the conflict and therefore, an end to terror.

Bibliography

1.  Adams, J. B.  “Relationships between personality and preferred substance and motivations for use among adolescent substance abusers.
2. ”  American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 2003: August. Allport, Gordon.  Personality: A psychological interpretation. New York: Holt and Company, 1937.
3. Anscombe, GEM.  War and Murder,” in Nuclear Weapons and Christian Conscience, ed. Walter Stein. London, 1963.
4. Auster, L.  “How Multiculturalism Took Over America”,  [Online]. Available from FrontPageMagazine.com 9 July: 1+.
5. http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=14164.
6. (Accessed: March 7, 2007. Burr, Vivien.  The Case for Social Constructionism. Psychology Press, 2003.
7. Carpenter, S. Cognition is central to addiction.  Monitor on Psychology, (2001, June).  No.
8. 32, 5. Coogan, Michael. The Old Testament: A History and Literary Introduction to the Hebrew Scriptures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
9. 2005. Dawood, N.J., trans.
10. , The Koran. New York: Penguin, 1993. Definition of Motivation.  http://www.
11. wordreference.com/definition/motivation. (Accessed: March 7, 2007) Demeterio, F.P.
12. A.  “The Primitivization of the Indio Mind and the Explosion of Rationalities”, Diwatao, vol. 1, no. 1, (2001), 1-17.
13. Drucker, Peter F.  “The Discipline of Innovation.”  Harvard Business Review, vol. 76 (1998), 149.
14. El Guindi, Fadwa.  “Veiled Men, Private Women in Arabo-Islamic Culture.”  18 Nov. 2005 <http://www.
15. ~bcf.usc.edu/~elguindi/VeiledMenPrivateWomen.htm>.
16. (Accessed: March 9, 2007). Endacott, R. Clinical research: legal and ethical issues in research, Victoria, Australia: LaTrobe University, 2004, page 1. Evans-Pritchard, E.
17. E. Theories of Primitive Religion. Oxford: Claredon Press,1965. Ezzati, A.
18. The Spread of Islam. 1976, p. 55. Franken, R.
19. E.  Human Motivation, 3rd ed. California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, 1994. Gardner, Howard.
20. Leading Minds: An Anatomy of Leadership. New York: BasicBooks Harper Collins, 1995. Gawrych, George.  “Jihad in the 20th Century.
21. ”  Military Review Sep/Oct (1995), 33-39. Geertz, C. “Distinguished Lecture: Anti Anti-Relativism.”  American Anthropologist, vol.
22. 86, no. 2. (1984), 263-278. Gergen, Kenneth, J.
23. Realities and relationships. Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London: Harvard University Press, 1995. Gorelick, Robert, “Wars of National Liberation: Jus Ad Bellum,” Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 11 (1979): 71-93; Gustafson, T. Anonymus Quote.
24. Our Daily Bread.  March 12, 2007 Devotional. http://www.tamilnation.
25. org/tamileelam/armedstruggle/terrorism/index.htm. (Accessed: on March 3, 2007). http://www.
26. mi5.gov.uk/output/Page25.html.
27. (Accessed: on March 3, 2007).  http://www.crimelibrary.com/terrorists_spies/terrorists/palestinians.
28. 6.html.  (Accessed: on March 3, 2007). http://meria.
29. idc.ac.il/journal/2002/isssue3/jv6n3a6.html.
30. (Accessed: March 3, 2007).  Khaula, Nakata.  “Veil: View From the Inside.”  Albalagh.
31. <http://www.albalagh.net/women/hijab.shtml>.
32. (Accessed: March 8, 2007). Kings James Version Bible. Chicago: Nelson Bibles, 1989. Levy-Bruhl, L.
33. How Natives Think.  Princeton: Princeton University Press,1985.. Lewis, B.
34. “The Roots of Muslim Rage.” Atlantic Monthly, Sept. (1990). London, E.
35. D., et al.  “Orbitofrontal Cortex and Human Drug Abuse: Functional Imaging.”  Cerebral Cortex, no.
36. 10, (2000, March), 334-342. Manthers. E.P.
37. The Book of the Thousand and One Nights (Vol. One). London: Routledge, 1990. Miles, M.
38. B. & Huberman, A. M. Qualitative data analysis, California, Sage Publications, 1994.
39. F. Mish, The Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. Springfield, Massachusetts: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2004.
40. Montagu, M. F., (ed).  Culture: Man’s Adaptive Dimension.
41. London: Oxford University Press    1968. Moore, Beth. Get Out of That Pit: Straight Talk about God’s Deliverance.  Nashville: Integrity Publishers, 2007.
42. Motivation. http://www.chnto.co. uk/management/ManagemenMaterials/HTML/motivation.html. (Accessed: on February 26, 2007). Nasr, Seyyed Hossein, “Islam,” Our Religions, ed. , Arvind Sharma, New York: HarperCollins, 1995.
43. “Research sheds light on eating disorders, compulsive gambling and drug abuse.” Medical Research News. (2006, April 23).
44. Robbins, Stephen.  Organizational Behavior.  Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2001. Roth, John, Douglas Greenburg and Serena Wille.
45. National Commision on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.  Monograph on Terrorist Financing: Staff Report to the Commission, by John Roth, Washington, DC: The Commission, 2004. Saah, T.  “The evolutionary origins and significance of drug addiction.
46. ”  Harm Reduction Journal, vol. 2, no.8, (2005, June 29). Shakespeare, William.
47. Othello.  Washington Square Press: Washington, D.C. 2004.
48. Sciolino, Elaine, “U.N. Adopts Resolution on Terror,” 10 December 1985. New York Times, A4.
49. Smith, N., et al.  Do women in top management affect firm performance?. Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus School of Business, 2005.
50. Talvi, Silija, J.A.  “The Veil: Resistance or Repression?” Lip Magazine<http://www.lipmagazine. org/articles/revitalvi_212_p.htm>. (Accessed: March 8, 2007).