When President Bush called the Sept. 11 attacks “cowardly,” a question arose among some Americans. Surely murdering unarmed civilians is cowardly, but does the term apply to the hijacker knowingly facing his own demise? Osama bin Laden taunts us that his adherents will follow him to their deaths; we hear of Palestinian parents proudly hailing the days their sons will become human bombs. And we may wonder if the terrorist possesses a commitment we Americans lack.
First, we should note that young men dedicated to murdering through suicidal acts is nothing new. Beginning in the late 11th century, a Shiite splinter group devoted to just that developed under the command of Hasan al-Sabbah. Hasan trained youths in the art of assassination, promising them Paradise if they died executing his orders.
Hasan’s sect became known as the “Assassins,” from which we derive the modern term. His headquarters was an impregnable Iranian mountain called Alamut, with sheer sides 600 feet high and scalable only by steps that allowed one man at a time – a target even Indiana Jones would find daunting.
In his 1968 book “History of the Order of the Assassins,” Enno Franzius gave an account that looks torn from today’s Middle East headlines: “Hasan’s contribution to the art of assassination was that by careful selection, training and inspiration, he developed the practice into a sacred ritual and the prime weapon of a small state waging war against a great power. Thus, Alamut became the greatest training center of fanatical politico-religious assassins that the world has known.
“It is recounted that when a fidai’s [assassin’s] mother heard that her son had been killed on a murder mission, she rejoiced and bedecked herself in gay raiment; when he returned alive, she enrobed mourning attire.”
So dedicated were Hasan’s youths that when a Sultan’s emissary visited Alamut, Hasan – to display his power – ordered one follower to slit his own throat, and another to hurl himself from a cliff. Both obeyed without hesitation, to the emissary’s horror.
The Assassins were feared by both Christian Crusaders and peaceful Muslims. How is it that “The Old Man of the Mountain” – as the sect’s successive leaders were eventually known – instilled such devotion in followers? We condense Marco Polo’s account (perhaps partly apocryphal):
In a beautiful valley, he formed a luxurious garden, stored with every delicious fruit and fragrant shrub. Palaces were erected in different parts of the grounds, ornamented with gold, paintings and furniture of rich silks. The inhabitants of these palaces were elegant and beautiful damsels, accomplished in the arts, especially those of dalliance and amorous allurement.
The object which the chief had in forming a garden of this fascinating kind was this: that Mohammed having promised to those who should obey his will the enjoyments of Paradise, where every species of sensual gratification should be found, in the society of beautiful nymphs, he was desirous of its being understood by his followers that he was also a prophet and the compeer of Mohammed, and had the power of admitting to Paradise such as he should choose to favor.
At his court, this chief entertained a number of youths, from the age of 12 to 20 years, selected from the inhabitants of the surrounding mountains, who showed a disposition for martial exercises and daring courage and at certain times he caused opium to be administered to 10 or a dozen of the youths; and when half dead with sleep he had them conveyed to the palaces in the garden. Upon awakening, their senses were struck with all the delightful objects that have been described and each believed himself assuredly in Paradise.
When four or five days had thus been passed, they were thrown once more into a state of somnolency, and carried out of the garden. The chief thereupon addressing them, said: “We have the assurances of our prophet that he who defends his lord shall inherit Paradise, and if you show yourselves devoted to the obedience of my orders, that happy lot awaits you.”
The consequence of this system was, that when any of the neighboring princes, or others, gave umbrage to this chief, they were put to death by these his disciplined assassins; none of whom felt terror at the risk of losing their own lives.
Thus, these killers were inspired less by religious devotion than by acts of deception. In fact, some leaders of the Assassins viewed themselves as above the Koran and eventually abandoned many Muslim practices.
Bin Laden does not employ duplicitous gardens, and we would not simply equate him to old Hasan, whose Islamic theology he would dispute, but important similarities are evident. Like Hasan, bin Laden is wealthy, had to move from various unwelcome places before settling in a final stronghold, and trains youths in the art of murder.
Throughout history, men have been willing to die for causes, but it does not prove rightness nor signal success. Japanese Kamikaze pilots crashed into American ships believing their emperor was divine – but he wasn’t, and Japan was defeated.
For that matter, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris were suicide killers. Jim Jones took 900 members of his Peoples Temple to the other side with cyanide-laced Kool-Aid, and 39 members of the Heaven’s Gate cult thought suicide would earn them a ride on Hale-Bopp.
Good Americans, from GIs to the New York Fire and Police, have shown themselves willing to die, too, but for causes manifestly just: the preservation of life or freedom for others – not indiscriminate slaughter.
Like the Kamikazes, the ancient Assassins were denied ultimate victory – in the 1200s, invading Mongols demolished them as a major power, and even mighty Alamut fell (though a few Assassins fled, and scattered remnants of the cult still exist).
Another lesson, admittedly subjective, might be drawn from “The Old Man of the Mountain.” Islam was once a great world power. And while it continues to spread as a religion, it has lost the cultural, economic and military dominance it once knew. While many historic factors could be cited for this, one must ask if the turning to bloodshed, epitomized by the Assassins, did not play a role in Islam’s decline. Does God honor systematic shedding of innocent blood?
Therefore, bin Laden’s terrorist acts and call for war between Islam and the West may not herald another golden age for Islam – but threaten to darken its future. Any rational person can see:
- that even if terrorists acts continue, Muslim states lack the resources to win a military struggle against the West, as the Gulf War swiftly demonstrated;
- that random acts of mass terror threaten not only “infidels,” but devout Muslims as well, millions of whom reside in the U.S.;
- that if all “infidels” must die, then Jack the Ripper was a saint, but Mother Teresa an enemy of God for nursing sick Hindus;
- that although George Bush is labeled a “Hitler” in the radical Islamic press, he has only been president for a few months, and the planning for the World Trade Center bombings obviously began long before he took office;
- that U.S. military strikes in Afghanistan are undeniably a response to the Trade Center and Pentagon bombings – not an effort to “destroy Islam” – and in dropping hundreds of thousands of food rations for Afghans, the United States is implementing humanitarianism unparalleled in warfare’s history;
- that if America was “at war with Islam,” as claimed by bin Laden, it would not allow millions of Muslims to practice their religion on its soil – a freedom Muslim states rarely reciprocate;
- that if the United States were “at war with Islam,” it would never have given bin Laden the weapons he used to fight the USSR – weapons he now turns against the very nation that provided them.
According to reports, bin Laden believes he can prevail against America partly because of little North Vietnam’s success in the Vietnam War. But he has forgotten that America was also instrumental in crushing the military empires of Japan and Nazi Germany. What bin Laden does not understand is that the United States failed in Vietnam, not because it lacked the power to win, but because, for political reasons, certain Washington officials placed restrictions on our generals that rendered victory impossible, and the entire nation divided over the issue.
Not so with the World Trade Center bombings. Bin Laden’s acts have made Americans more unified and patriotic than at any time since Pearl Harbor. Had North Vietnam directly attacked American soil, as bin Laden did, that conflict would have ended much differently. As Humphrey Bogart informed a boastful Nazi officer in “Casablanca”: “There are certain sections of New York, major, that I wouldn’t advise you to try to invade.”
Perloff’s book, “Tornado in a Junkyard,” has been widely praised as one of the most reader-friendly – yet scientifically accurate – books available on the fallacies of evolution. You can get it now in WND’s online store.
