A newly published book affirms Muslims have an obligation to engage in jihad on Westerners, instructing the faithful living in the West to “amass and demonstrate military capability.”
The book, “Jihad Without Borders – Attacks In The West From An Islamic Perspective,” provides “a list of possible targets for such attacks, instructing Muslims to focus on military, law enforcement, political, and economic targets, or on ‘those who are openly and well known for their enmity towards Islam and the Muslims,'” according to the Middle East Media Research Institute’s Jihad and Terrorism Threat Monitor.
It suggests “using targeted assassinations, but also indiscriminate methods, especially ‘in situations or places in which there are not likely to be innocents, such as in military barracks or installations, political conferences, far-right anti-Islam demos and gatherings, and at offices similar to that of [French satirical weekly] Charlie Hebdo.'”
The book explains that Islamic jihad is not innocuous and harmless, as some Westerners believe it to be.
“Much has been said about ‘Islamic terrorism’ in light of recent attacks in the West, targeting the U.S., Britain, France, and a number of other European countries. Western politicians and commentators appear to have reached a consensus that such ‘barbaric’ attacks have nothing to do with Islam and are the sole actions of a small group of extremists, bent on distorting the religion of Islam to justify their actions. Indeed, many Muslims also echo these sentiments, stating unequivocally that these ‘actions, and individuals have nothing to do with Islam,’ effectively reinforcing the Western narrative.
“However, this discourse seems to ignore one important voice – Islam’s. Western governments and media has (sic) for a number of years attempted to dictate to Muslims what Islam is, or should be – A version of Islam compatible with Western ideals, principles, and (global) interests. Unfortunately, many Muslims, especially in the West, have become confused with these conflicting narratives – that of the West’s, and that of Islam’s. Consequently, many are now in doubt as to what the ‘Islamic perspective’ is on a range of contemporary (and some old) issues faced by Muslims in the twenty-first century, with one such issue being that of jihad.”
MEMRI reports the PDF-format book appears to have been written originally in English, and the author is listed as Abdullah Ash-Shaybani.
“The book includes several chapters including an introduction and definition of ‘key terms,’ as well as a review of the concept of jihad in Quran and during the times of Muhammad and his companions,” MEMRI said. “Much of the book deals with jihad in modern times, discussing terrorism as a global jihad ‘without borders’; jihad as a ‘just and equal retaliation’; and providing a list of targets for carrying out attacks in the West.
The book states: “There should be no remaining doubt in the minds of the readers regarding the misconception that seeks to restrict jihad to being merely a tool of self-defense, after reviewing the preceding evidence from the Quran, and the actions of the prophet. And even when it is used in a defensive capacity, its nature is still extremely aggressive and intimidating. … Nor is jihad restricted to particular lands (i.e. the lands of the Muslims) or particular times.
“Likewise, evidence points towards the obligatory nature of jihad, and that the Muslims are permitted, nay, even obliged at times, to pursue the disbelievers in their lands; because of the latter’s disbelief and aggression against Islam and the Muslims… Therefore, in order for the Muslims to fulfill this obligation of terrorizing the disbelievers, they are required to amass and demonstrate military capability, comparable to today’s concept of the military deterrent.”
It encourages violent Muslims to attack “pre-emptively” and calls for “special operations units which neutralized key figures and incendiary elements from amongst the disbelievers.”
The book asserts the right to attack – even when “people that should not have been, and could have been avoided, are harmed,” because what the West is doing “is even worse.”
“Muslim men, women, children, and elderly are massacred indiscriminately without respite, such as is currently the case in more than a dozen Muslim countries. However, perhaps even more detrimental than this, many Western countries have adopted deliberate and systematic policies designed, such as the U.K.’s Prevent, to strip away the religion of their Muslim inhabitants. Consequently, many of the ‘basic liberties and freedoms’ the West prides itself on, are withheld from the Muslims. Freedoms such as, the freedom to practice their religion in the way Allah intended, freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of dress, and more are all curtailed, ironically enough, in the name of freedom, tolerance, and western values,” it warns.
It compares Muslims to the “Japanese of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the Jews of Nazi Germany.”
“Allah commands the believers to respond to the assaults of the disbelievers in, at least, a like-fashioned manner except if this would involve sin and disobedience to Allah… As such, Muslims are indisputably justified to treat countries such as the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, Israel, Iran, and China, in exactly the same way as they are currently treating Muslims in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Mali, the Central African Republic (CAR), Chechnya, East Turkistan, Burma, and others. These Muslim countries are subject to regular assaults consisting of drone strikes, bombing campaigns, and ground incursions, by one or more of these (primarily Western) nations. The vast majority of those targeted and affected by this aggression and oppression are non-combatants, mostly consisting of women, children, elderly, and weak Muslims.”
It calls for action.
“Another sentiment the Muslims would do well to adopt, in conjunction with the prophet’s attitude, is the well-known maxim; ‘the best form of defense is a good offense.’
“Consequently, if the disbelievers continue to attack and plunder the wealth and resources of Muslims in their lands, then the Muslims should be expected to respond in, at least, a similar fashion, if not more, as a just and equal recompense to the formers aggression. What is more, even if the disbelievers were not busy assaulting the Muslims and their lands, fighting them would still be justified because of their disbelief in Allah, and as a preventative measure curtailing their ability to spread corruption, transgression, and oppression globally.”
And it calls on every Muslim to attack.
“The only question as to the obligatory nature regarding attacking the disbelievers in their countries, as part of an offensive jihadi strategy, rests on the Muslims ability to prepare and conduct such operations. However, when jihad becomes defensive in nature, it evolves into an individual obligation as agreed upon by all Islamic scholars. … Therefore … jihad in this era is, without a doubt, an individual obligation on all able-bodied Muslims.”