METGs in WDS

1
Western Democratic States
What is it that has made the concept of democracy such a lucrative system of
governance in which individuals throughout the world has come to support democracy?
Why has democracy been one of the superior institutions in which to rule from? Is there
something about this concept that mankind cannot simply live without? Or perhaps, is
this system a unique entity fabricated by man during a period of history in which
enlightened thinking was acceptable and anything that stemmed from it was deemed as a
particle of certainty and truth? Democracy can be understood in many different
limelights. One can graciously argue the benefits and drawbacks to a democratic system.
What we do know about democracy is that it is the best form of governance for
preserving certain innate rights that Western thought has agreed to consent to. Even
outside of Western thought, Eastern philosophy has agreed to some extent that life is a
right, and one’s entitlement to that right; matters greatly. What becomes different, and
ultimately divides the two competing theories, is the importance of the role of the
individual in life.
The Regime of Democracy
How did democracy come about? It is apparent when examining the different
discourses of history that democracy was not the only form of governance by which

2
people ruled from. Democracy is a by-product of the last few centuries. According to
Socrates, there are five kinds of regime1:
1. Kingdom or aristocracy, the rule of the best man or the best men, that is
directed toward goodness or virtue, the regime of the just city;
2. Timocracy, the rule of lovers of honor or of the ambitious men which is
directed toward superiority or victory;
3. Oligarchy or the rule of the rich in which wealth is most highly esteemed;
4. Democracy, the rule of free men in which freedom is most highly
esteemed;
5. Tyranny, the rule of the completely unjust man in which unqualified and
unashamed injustice holds sway.
Democracy is fourth on the list, making one think that democracy must not have weight
compared to the other forms. Perhaps, the different ideologies shape better for Socrates
which form is the best. However this may be, Socrates surely did not prefer democracy to
all other regimes for this reason2:
“The reason is that, being a just man, he thought of the well-being
not merely of the philosophers but of the non-philosophers as well,
and he held that democracy is not designed for inducing the non-
philosophers to attempt to become as good as they possibly can, for
the end of democracy is not virtue but freedom, i.e., the freedom to
live either nobly or basely according to one’s liking”.
Foreshadowing briefly, if we are to take Socrates quote as valid then it is the love of
freedom minus virtue that allows a Muslim Extremist Terror Group to exist without
scrutiny from its environmental surroundings. Moving back to the argument of the
different regime, “Socrates does not speak of ideologies belonging to them; he is
1
Strauss, Leo and Cropsey, Joseph. History of Political Philosophy. Pg. 61
2

3
concerned with the character of each kind of regime and with the end which it manifestly
and explicitly pursues, as well as with the political justification of the end in question in
contradiction to any transpolitical justification stemming from cosmology, theology,
metaphysics, philosophy of history, myth, and the like”3. Socrates ultimately puts
democracy lower on the regime order because democracy abhors every kind of restraint;
no one is compelled to rule or to be ruled if.
The Meaning of Democracy
Democracy is a structure of government in which all citizens exercise power and
civic responsibility, directly or through their freely elected representatives4. So what we
first come to understand is that democracy is a system that all citizens can participate
within, regardless of their race, or ethnic roots. This may seem far-fetched, but to
Western philosophers everyone is equal; at least in theory. “Democracy is a set of
principles and practices that protect human freedom; it is the institutionalization of
freedom”5. Democracy becomes more than just a theory because it requires the act of
implementation of the democratic theory into the daily practices of an individual and
their respected societies lives.
State of Nature
3
4
http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/principles/what.htm
5

4
The main emphasis that the system of democracy stresses within all different
contexts is the notion of the human to be free. The human is thus not tied down, or
obligated to not do anything, that he or she may not want to do. “Each individual
becomes the center of a tiny private universe consisting of himself and his immediate
circle of family and friends”6. However, with this approach we then become stuck within
a state of war as so eloquently written by the Scottish philosopher John Locke.
“For the Fundamental Law of Nature, Man being to be preserved
as much as possible, when all cannot be preserv’d, the safety of the
Innocent is to be preferred: And one may destroy a Man who makes
War upon him, or has discovered an Emmity to his being, for the same
Reason, that he may kill a Wolf or a Lyon; because such Men are not
Under the ties of the Common Law of Reason, have no other Rule, but
That of Force and Violence, and so may be treated as Beasts of Prey,
Thos dangerous and noxious Creatures, that will be sure to destroy him,
Whenever he falls into their power. . . . . And hence it is, that he who
Attempts to get another Man into his Absolute Power, does thereby put
Himself into a State of War with him”7.
John Locke insinuates in his writings that within the state of war the enemy is always then
preserved, or at least the potential for the enemy to be successful is constantly present.
However, what democracy aims to do is to allow mankind to get out of this rotten state of
nature. From what one can gather, the state of nature is an evil state whereas good
cannot pierce itself through evil. Democracy calls for the giving up of some of the
individual’s power that they have obtained. In making this move of giving up some form
of individual power, the individual allows a representative body to make key decisions for
them concerning numerous aspects of their livelihoods. Moving forward, “democracies
are diverse, reflecting each nation's unique political, social, and cultural life. Democracies
6
7
Locke, John. Two Treatise of Government: Ch.III; Of the State of War

5
rest upon fundamental principles, not uniform practices”8. A democracy is not
representative of one particular culture or society, it rather ad here’s to an ideology that
promotes the freedom of the individual to think for his/herself. “Democracy, then, must
satisfy the desire for well-being, not of a few men, but of all men, and do it in such a way
as to induce men to devote some part of their energies to other pursuits and to the needs
of the nation at large”9. Democratic system’s are recognizable for the fact that the
individual matters, whether a part of the minority or majority. Tocqueville celebrates in
his famous conclusion to the second part of the Democracy that, “Thus, although
democracy may be accompanied by the neglect of what is highest in man, at least it will
solve the problem of a modest well-being for the greatest number”10. The Democratic
system of thinking allows for a progressive society to ultimately evolve constantly and
flourish through time. When ideas and thoughts are at least respected, contemplation
begins to silhouette one’s mind. Once a mind fathoms and ponders about a particular
idea thought by another individual, then in theory, constructive dialogue takes course,
which allows for competing theories to test the truth within them. Engagement from
others outside the original thought allows for the thought to be published publicly and
circulated amongst a population. In this system, everyone at least has the chance to be
heard by others and to influence the decision making process with their own thoughts;
this is why democratic principles and ideals have dominated much of the world that we
know today.
Obligation of Democracy
8
9
10

6
The Democratic system has the obligation and duty to protect those that reside
within the system of governance. In so much as the individual in a WDS has the duty to
actively participate in the political process of democracy, so to does the government have
the duty to protect its citizens. In short11:
Democratic men will abandon their freedom to these
mighty authorities in exchange for a “soft” despotism, one
which “provides for their security, foresees and supplies
their necessities, facilitates their pleasures, manages their
principal concerns, directs their industry,” and ultimately,
“spare(s) them all the care of thinking and all the trouble of
living.”
This concept of protection not only presents itself in the form of physical protection from
other Nation-States that may seek to attack and damage the individuals in the WDS, it
also must safeguard the right to life of the individual. The WDS must make the means to
pursue the right to life available to its citizens. When it does this, it therefore protects the
individual’s innate human rights by allowing them to live freely and independently from
dictatorial oppression.
The Western Democratic State
A WDS is a Nation-State that adheres to the principles of the Western thought,
combined with some form of democratic system. Normally, one will find that a WDS
usually belongs to the category of developed countries, or 1st world countries. The reason
that we can categorize a WDS as a 1st world country is because a 1st world country
usually honors what are known as 1st generation rights in the generation of rights
11
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, the Henry Reeve text, rev. Francis Dowen, ed., with a
historical essay by Phillips Bradley. Pg. 336

7
classification system. In this system, 1st generation rights are those particular rights that
promote the individual rights of a person. 2nd and 3rd generation rights encompass more
economic and social rights, and even focuses on rights that deal with shelter and
protection. 1st world countries do not have to bother focusing upon 2nd and 3rd
generation rights for the mere fact that they are developed. These States have already
successfully mastered the 2nd and 3rd generation of rights. It is for these reasons
mentioned that we can generalize that a WDS is a developed country. One can therefore
decipher which Nation-State fits into the WDS make-up. Although there is not any
direct correlation between a WDS and a developed country, at least from a face-value
perspective, what make them share any correlation are the basic values in which they
exist upon. It is true that in theory a WDS does not have to be implemented
automatically into the category of a developed country, however, because both similar
categories share some resemblance to one another, a Nation-State that possess at least
one of the categories will more or less be prone to excepting the other category because of
the fact they both complement each other in a fashionable nature. Although both China
and the former area of the Soviet Union have seemed, at last at some point in time, to
resemble the make-up of a developed country, that does not grant them instantaneous
access to take privilege in dwelling upon the WDS label.
A WDS will possess numerous traits and personalities that differentiate it from
other ideal forms of governance. It would be adequate to state that a WDS has an
“allegiance to such values as equality, the common good, and cooperation”12. Within this
framework though one must not conceptualize as to the point of seemingly removing any
12
Tinder, Glenn. Political Thinking: The Perennial Questions. Pg. 153

8
negativity that stems from a WDS ideology. For if one were to not scrutinize and
question this political framework, would democracy truly be that of a “participatory”
institution of governance? Is democracy the truest form government that mankind can
acclimatize with? Or, are there glitches hidden within the democratic framework that
can make it susceptible to outside influence, most notably that of an evil characteristic
that rots the good in mankind and his actions?
Free Enterprise in a WDS
One of the major aspects that belong to a WDS is its entitlement to a “free
enterprise”. A WDS uses the economic model of Capitalism to flourish itself to
unprecedented levels never seen before in its history. It is arguable that a WDS would
not be that of a WDS without the economic prosperities that are direct results from a
“free enterprise” economy. Does not a “free enterprise” system violate the Western
moral tradition that a WDS adheres (at least in theory) to? “It tells us to concentrate on
personal advantage and to interpret personal advantage from a monetary perspective. It
tells us to forget about the welfare of others and the public interest; let others take care of
themselves and let the market take care of the public interest”13. The WDS will then
concentrate upon the rights of the individual that it recognizes to its constituents in so far
as it is favorable economically for the Nation-State. What we have now come to unearth
is that our prerogative that a WDS system is the finest in the world, maybe just that of our
imagination. We can now absorb that a WDS is prone to corruption, greed, and possibly
13
Tinder, Glenn. Political Thinking: The Perennial Questions. Pg. 153

9
even evil at times. What was once conceived, as the best system, must be examined
through another perspective. For if we are to recall in our recent history a tragic event
that made headlines worldwide at the time. The ocean liner, Titanic, was said to be
unsinkable by its architect because it was built upon a solid foundation made of steel.
However, inevitability caught up to this majestic ship in which outside conditions acted
upon her bluff, ultimately bringing the Titanic to her early demise before she could even
make a legacy. Democracy is arguably the preeminent system of governance in the world
today for the measly fact that it provides hope of a better life for mankind. On the
contrary, the democratic system of order has its flaws that can easily be subjugated by
outside agents if taken the appropriate measures and action. What seem to antagonize
those outside of the WDS is that “Democratic men will come to the aid of one another if
it involves no loss or inquiry to themselves”14. Continuing with what seems to frustrate
those outside of the WDS can best be seen through Samuel Huntington’s analysis of
Western loyalties. He states15:
“Along a continuum of narrower to broader entities,
Western loyalties thus tend to peak in the middle, the
loyalty intensity curve forming in some measure an inverse
U. In the Islamic world, the structure of loyalty has been
almost exactly the reverse. Islam has had a hollow middle
in its hierarchy of loyalties. The “two fundamental,
original, and persisting structures,” as Ira Lapidus has
observed, have been family, the clan, and the tribe, on the
one hand, and the ‘unities of culture, religion, and empire
on a ever-larger scale,” on the other”.
Diagram 1 shows Huntington’s argument in simpler form. These particular thoughts
contribute drastically to the WDS flawed ideology. What a Nation-State that chooses to
adopt a WDS system for itself must realize then is that the very model that they have
14
15
Huntington, Samuel. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. Pg. 174

10
enacted is prone to being infiltrated from the outside because of the many cracks within
the structure. It is only when a WDS recognizes these small cracks, or fractures, that it
can accordingly take swift and proper action to assure itself a protected and profitable
future.

11
Diagram 1*
Western Loyalties Islamic Loyalties
* The Red dotted line represents the peak line of loyalties for the two different categories. The blue and the
orange colored lines represent those in the category that are closet to the peak loyalty. As the line begins to
move away from the peak line, the color changes, as does the thickness, which represents the degree of a
person’s loyalty moving away from what the category deems as the highest submission of loyalty.
Conservative
(Traditional)
Liberal
(Modern)
The family, the clan, and the tribe
Unities of culture, religion, and empire

13
The Framework of Terror Groups
The word terrorism today is a word that most people toss around without actually
possessing any knowledge of what the word means. It is as though the world today uses
terrorism to define those acts of violence, which it knows nothing about. For in this
world, it is far more acceptable to categorize an action without the proper validity of
doing so than to just leave the action in the realm of uncertainty. Mankind fears the
uncertain label because it attests to the notion of truth with a capital “T” that man has
fabricated into cultures. Therefore if we cannot classify an act, or a group of people, it
implies that we do not have a grasp on the particular event or action, which would
insinuate to us that we have not done our job in securing ourselves in life. Most of what
we do in life can be pinpointed to one word: “security”. We do everything in life for
reasons of security. We get up and go to work everyday in order to provide (secure) for
our family. It is therefore beneficial for us to label certain actions of violence and
intimidation that we know little about, or don’t care to know about, as an act of terrorism.
In doing so, we have secured the situation and have some control over an uncontrollable
situation.
Defining Terrorism
As noted above, the word terrorism is misunderstood, which is due in large part to
its broad meanings. Terrorism can be defined a “system of terror” or “a policy intended

14
to strike with terror those against whom it is adopted; the employment of methods of
intimidation; the fact of terrorizing or condition of being terrorized”16. This definition
applies the root word “terror” within its context of explanation quite excessively. The
root word terror seems to imply the method of creating uncertainty within an established
framework. Terrorism would not be terrorism if it were to be deployed with a
geographical area that had nothing to lose. It would not have any legitimacy in creating
uncertainty for there would be nothing certain about the area. For the word terrorism to
be used there must be two elements present; a certainty level of understanding and an
uncertainty level. The level of uncertainty follows the certain level as its policing force of
brute strength. Terrorism therefore becomes a method of promoting and countering
change.
Forms of Terrorism
Arguably there exist many forms of terrorism in the world today ranging from
religious to economic forms, the basic premise is that when the method of terrorism is
used, it is arguably used for creating change; particularly rapid and sudden change.
When studying terrorism one must alert to the absence of the normal and the presence of
the abnormal17. The method of terrorism would not be needed if everything were in line
with each other. Unfortunately, there are those that feel that the method of terrorism is a
just means to bring about change. To these individuals and groups this violent tactic is
not evil in nature because it is justifiable from previous instances that the oppressor
16
Hoffman, Bruce. Defining Terrorism (TACT). Pg. 3
17
Institute for Defense Analyses. Understanding Terrorism: Lessons of the Past- Indicators for the Future. September
2004. III-58

15
committed, usually against the group or individual that is adhering to the method of
terrorism.
Modernity vs. Modernization
The terror group today is not static; rather it is an adapting and morphing
institution, or entity, that modernizes with itself with time. One of the fallacious
misunderstandings that plagues societies is that terror groups, especially Islamic ones, are
using terrorism to fight against the modernization of their respected lands; and the rest of
the world. The terror groups that do choose to employ terrorist tactics for the reason of
defeating modernization are in actuality not fighting against modernization, they are
fighting against modernity. It is modernity that takes their cultures, shakes them up, and
forces them to adapt or else they will be left in the dust. If a terror group did not use
modernization today as their ally, then they would be at a significant disadvantage to
their “oppressors”. It is greatly understood that the structure of the terror group is in no
way in contention to defeat a civilized and modernized military apparatus of a WDS.
The terror group is only seen to be in the same playing field because it uses the tools
adopted from the process of modernization. Much of the terror groups that are seen to
be in existence in a WDS do not belong to the category of those that are in a rebellion
against modernization. Generally, the terror groups today use modernization because
they are born into societies that have developed somewhat with the times. The
imperative point that a terror group must accentuate within its ideology is that
modernization is a tool, not a privilege for them to dwell within. Modernization allows

16
for them to draw closer to their targeted enemies. To the terror group, de-modernizing
their members in everyday life is what brings their members to adopting a terror
ideology. It can be assumed that terror-training camps are significant in the way that
they de-modernize the new terror recruit from their previous society. While in the
training camp they use methods of modernization, but only so they can defend
themselves against their enemy. The new recruit, upon successful completion of the
training camp is thrown back into the “modern” society in which they came from. The
new recruits become less distracted by the modern amenities in life that are based upon
evil thoughts and principles from the terror groups’ perspective.
As mentioned previously there are many forms of terrorism today in the world,
which then suggests that there must be different terror groups under different ideologies.
For the purpose of this report, only Muslim Extremist Terror Groups will be analytically
examined within the context of a WDS. This is not to suggest that non-Muslim terror
groups and organizations are not significant in our counterterrorism strategy equation.
These non-Muslim terror groups have proven themselves over the past recent decades to
be considered a major threat to international security. However, Muslim Extremist
Terror Groups are the most pronounced today. These groups retain the most support
internationally over any other type of terror group that may exist. It is for these reasons
that this group must be examined in order to fully understand the catastrophic means to
which they can detonate upon others at any time.
A Malevolent Ideology

17
One of the first answers that we must emit is the origin of the Muslim Extremist
Terror Groups. It is obvious that terror groups do not act upon random fanatical
behavior. The plans that they draw up are not those that have not carefully been
constructed and frivolously put together. Instead, these groups are complex organizations
that follow a pungent ideology. The generalization is that most Muslim Extremist Terror
Groups all follow the same ideology, just slightly different at certain points within the
ideology. What we are then talking about is a core ideology that is shared amongst these
groups. “The Global Salafi jihad is a worldwide religious revivalist movement with the
goal of reestablishing past Muslim glory in a great Islamist state stretching from Morocco
to the Philippines, eliminating present national boundaries”18. Essentially what this
ideology calls for is the reestablishment of the Islamic Caliphate throughout all previous
Muslim territories. An example of this ideology can be seen in Diagram 2. Diagram 2
shows the structure of the Khilafah Islamic State from the viewpoint of the Islamic
Thinkers Society, a proscribed Terror organization by the United States. When one has
made an understanding of this bold ideology, then one can see that this trend does not
happen instantaneously. It is likely, whether or not the Muslim extremist terror groups
like to openly admit to this, that the individuals of these groups will never see the final
stage of their ideology. The amount of support worldwide needed to complete such a
ideal is austerely not conceivable by western standards, or is it? Islam is the fastest
growing religion in the world today. It has been said that Muslim extremists make up less
then 1% of all Muslims worldwide. What then happens as the population increases? Will
the number of extremists upsurge in a similar fashion as the population? Or will Muslim
extremism be quietly quelled? What we are seeing today is that this trend in Muslim
18
Sageman, Marc. Understanding Terror Networks. Pg. 1

18
Diagram 219
19
http://www.islamicthinkers.com

19
extremism is rising, without the indicator of the population of Islam worldwide..
What then makes this Global Salafi jihad so nerve racking to a WDS? After all, if
we crack open the history books and look for religious revivalism, there exist very few
instances in which the religion examined won out in a conflict. Whether or not you think
the Crusades were a true religious struggle between diverse religions, or the King of
England (Richard the Lion Hearted) fulfilling his yearning of war, the ending result is still
the same, neither religion won outright, thus dividing up territories in order to settle as a
stalemate. Only time will tell if this Global Salafi jihad is just that of a minute infraction
that has morphed its physical stature into that of a giant, or perhaps it is truly a “sleeping
dragon”, waiting patiently for the right opportune time to unleash its fury. It is the
violence against foreign non-Muslim governments and their populations in furtherance of
Salafi objectives that separate this ideology apart from any other terrorist ideology that
uses religion as its way of reviving legitimate power to itself20. The prime example of a
Muslim Extremist Terror Group that uses this ideology is al Qaeda (The Base). Al Qaeda
is the vanguard of this Global jihad. They seemingly act as the spokesperson for this
radical ideology. Smaller terror groups collaborate with the al Qaeda label while tapping
into its support base to elevate themselves within the Muslim extremist community.
Geographical Origin of Terrorists
What we then have is a simple ideology that most Muslim extremist terror groups
follow to some degree. Even if these groups do not follow this ideology in practice, in
public they make sure that they adhere to this ideology. It is this ideology that has made
20

20
them an international threat; therefore, they will not turn their backs upon it and
condemn it openly in public. Where has previous thought led us to believe that these
Muslim Extremist Terror Groups originate? Most subconscious answers to this question
produce the phrase “Middle East”. Although this answer is partially accurate and in
someway justified, “Middle East” does not some up the entirety of where Muslim
Extremist Terror Groups and their individual constituents originate from. Before any
analysis is made of the geographical areas of the origination of these groups, the plea has
to be made for Western thought to assume that Muslim extremism is not the same
throughout the world because the Muslim label is worldwide. It is true that a Muslim is
worldwide in the sense that Islam exists everywhere. Then it would be fair to state that
Republicans and Democrats exist across the United States of America. However, very
few people would honestly rationalize that Republicans and Democrats are the same
everywhere in the United States. A California Republican differs greatly than that of a
Southern Republican from Mississippi. A Massachusetts Democrat is not the same as a
Democrat from Texas. What this example shows is the possibility of a universal accepted
label to be different in some aspects while still holding true some core values, statements,
and principles. A Muslim who engages in a Muslim Extremist Terror Group in Pakistan
does not have the same short-term objective as that of a Muslim of the same terror group
from Algeria. The Muslim extremist from Pakistan would most likely be focused upon
the situation in Kashmir, domestically speaking, while the Muslim in Algeria would be
fighting other Muslims and the French government. Although they both recognize a
Global Salafi jihad ideology, they do not acknowledge the same oppressors. The only
idea that they recognize as having any similarity outside of the core ideology is the label
of the West. We will engage upon this argument at a later point in the report, but for the

21
time being, the West can be thrown into the oppressor slot for any Muslim extremist
terror group worldwide.
Categorization of Individual Members
It is thought that there are four different categories in which to classify different
Muslim extremists into based upon their geographical origin. Diagram 3 shows the
different categories that individuals can fall into. The first category that is mentioned is
that of the Central Staff of al Qaeda and of the Global Salafi movement.21 When
looking at Diagram 3 one notice’s that this category is above the rest. This group houses
the leaders of the Global Salafi jihad, who in turn are mostly the founding members of al
Qaeda. A few key roles and functions possessed by the group is they are not usually
mixed up in the physical operations of the terrorist attack, instead they inspire and
support from afar. “They provide training, some financing, and sometimes logistical
support and are responsible for propaganda in support for the jihad”22. The remaining
categories are straightforward and less complex then the first. The next largest category
is that of the Core Arabs that represents those from the states of Saudi Arabia, Egypt,
Yemen, and Kuwait.23 The third largest category includes those individuals coming from
primarily the North Africa region; mainly Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia24. The fourth
and final smaller category that has been created by scholars is the Southeast Asians
category, which in particular consists of the members belonging to the Jemaah Islamiya
21
22
Ibid
23
Ibid
24
Ibid

22
Diagram 3*
*
*The four categories with red outline are from The Global Salafi Jiahd in figure 1 of Marc Sageman’s
Understanding Terror Networks pg. 71. The green colored category is the label that has been created as a
trend indicator of a possible new category emerging out of this Muslim extremism movement. The broken
up green lines insinuate towards possible connections between the categories.
Central Staff
Shura
4 Committees
Maghreb Arabs
Core Arabs
Southeast
Asians
Western Arabs
(Modern)

23
centered in Indonesia and Malaysia25. It is these four categories that have been thought
to be the agreed upon structure of determining Muslim Extremist Terror Groups based
upon their geographical origin. The four initial categories (minus the Western Arab
category) are representative of their respected areas. Table 1 shows the correlations
between 102 Muslim extremists and their categories in which they belong (the 102
individual names Dr. Sageman derives from the most significant names attached to the
major terrorist attacks over the past decade). Fortunately for the scholars at the time of
the creation of this framework, Muslim Extremist Terror Groups had not yet defined the
fifth category. The fifth category was initially created upon the victorious terrorist attack
of July 7th, 2005; the London Bombings which killed over 50 people and wounded
hundreds. Up until this time most, if not all, Muslim Extremist Terror Groups and
individuals could arguably fit into one of the existing categories. July 7th baffled the
scholars as to where to categorize the four terrorists that executed the London Bombings.
What had to be created then was a fifth category that could accommodate these four
gentlemen. To the amazement of most scholars, once the category was created as a
reactionary action, more individuals and groups began to be put into it. This fifth
category of Western Arabs (Modern) in a nutshell means “homegrown Muslim
extremists”. What this label of the category presents to us is that those within this
category are not from a state mentioned in the four prior categories, rather they are from
a WDS. No longer can we categorize Muslim extremists using prior methods of
analyzing Muslim extremists. We now have to broaden our perspective to encompass an
innovative method of categorizing the geographical origins of Muslim Extremist Terror
Groups.
25

24
Table 1
*The fifth category numbers are taken from the London Bombers (not a part of Dr. Sageman’s original
work)
26
Sageman, Marc. Understanding Terror Networks. Pgs. 74-75
Socioeconomic Status of Family of
Origin26
Upper Class Middle Class Lower Class Total
Central Staff 5 7 2 14
Southeast Asian # 10 2 12
Maghreb Arab # 16 15 31
Core Arab 13 23 9 45
Western Arab* 3 1 4
Type of
Education
Secular Religious Total
Central Staff 24 3 27
Southeast Asian 8 11 19
Maghreb Arab 49 # 49
Core Arab 33 9 42
Western Arab 4 4
Educational Level Achieved
Less than HS High School College B.A/B.S M.A. Doctorate Total
Central Staff 1 1 1 16 1 5 25
Southeast Asian # 2 3 8 4 # 17
Maghreb Arab 13 8 9 6 1 # 37
Core Arab 8 5 25 14 1 # 53
Western Arab 2 1 1 4

25
Characteristics of Terror Groups
What then are Muslim Extremist Terror Groups searching for in terms of recruits to
carry on their Global Salafi jihad? The one prevailing thought before 9/11, and even
arguably thereafter, was that anyone who would engage within such malicious violent acts
would have to be of the following nature (at least possess one of the traits listed):
• Economically Poor = Individuals were so poor that the means to employ
violence could only come from the method of terrorism.
• Insane = No person with a sane, mental, and rational mindset could conceivably
adhere to and execute such an ideology. Also known as the mental illness thesis’s,
these “sophisticated versions claim that terrorists suffer from some form of
personality pathology due to childhood trauma”27.
• Outside the Norm (outcasts) = Anything from not being virtuous enough
within the family to not being smart enough for a particular society meant that
you were outside, this would then leave an individual more prone to commit
terrorist attacks.
At first glance over this list, automatically some may agree with the vague and broad
points. This preconceived notion of falseness is due in large part to what is known as
“The CNN Effect”. Within this effect one is exposed only to about 90 seconds of
coverage of any one incident; mainly those incidents that play out in the international
community28. The short amount of time does not permit enough information to be
portrayed accurately. What is then left is the “meaty”, or bulk, of the story. “Such
27
28
Rieff, David. A Bed for the Night. Pg. 33

26
coverage, which can often be biased and without context, can inform, but it also can
inflame animosity and polarization”29. Since most viewers of media outsourcers are not
government agents with all the deciphering information in front of them, what we see
broadcasted is what we think is the truth. When we are suddenly shown videotapes of
men in training camps running around in “the desert” with robes and turbans (i.e.
different clothing than the West), our bias perceptions invade our brain, thus making a
negative correlation to terrorists. The terrorists must be poor, outcasts, or insane.
However, this rationale is the farthest thought from what the truth is about the identities
of individual Muslim extremists. The main trait of an individual Muslim extremist is
their adaptability to their surroundings. These individuals do not stand out like a sore
thumb in a crowd in societies, rather they blend in to fit the norm around them.
Furthermore, there is not one norm to which a terrorist must fit. It is the adaptability of
the individual Muslim extremist to his society that makes him who he is. However, there
do exist distinctions between the terrorists themselves. It is fair to state that Osama Bin
Laden is not the same as the latest suicide bomber. Although they both “believe” in the
same ideology and want to accomplish, for the most part, the same goal, they really have
nothing in common. Muslim Extremist Terror Groups need an administrative staff,
much like most businesses in the United States. This calls for a somewhat educated, or at
the least, an intelligent individual(s) to fill this / these spot(s). Obviously as you descend
down the hierarchy within the organization itself, the individual becomes less and less
skilled. Within the terror group the hierarchy takes the shape of a flow chart / web
cluster. Usually there are leaders at the top, and then there are the followers. It is for this
29
2004. II-11

27
reason that the optimal recruit for a terror group should not be that of a charismatic
leader; such as Osama Bin Laden. For if a recruit adopts this role at some point, then
they will usually split off from the group in order to exercise their own “power” that they
feel they possess. The best example today of such an act is that of the former al Qaeda
leader in Iraq Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi (killed by American Forces in 2006). The
acceptable mold of what constitutes a terrorist cannot be generated because of the fact
that the terror groups select and choose for what they need. Even though we can make
generalizations as to what a Muslim extremist looks and acts like, the proper question /
analytical approach would be to glimpse at the area in which the Muslim Extremist
Terror Group exists and make an analysis of the surrounding population. For it is almost
certain that the individual(s) will be fairly representative of those around. The one aspect
of an individual terrorist that cannot be observed from the outside is why the individual
might want to partake in membership within the Muslim Extremist Terror Group.
Complexity of Terror Groups
The one aspect of a Muslim Extremist Terror Group that we can acknowledge is
the multifarious structure of information sharing that goes on throughout the terror
group. A terror group is one of the most complex organizations / groups to effectively
analyze. There is no pre-existing framework that says how such groups must be run or
how they must conduct themselves in terms of rules of order. The terror group itself is
always evolving, as mentioned earlier. A terror group is multifaceted for the very reason
that it hinders authorities form easy surveillance. One member can very rarely be tied to

28
other members in the group. It usually takes a handful of members first before any
information can be extracted for future inclinations. Diagram 4 shows the complexity of
the Muslim Extremist Terror Group that surrounded the 9/11 attack. The individual
Muslim Extremist Terror Group can be conceived as a small world network, which
contains many social relationships that tie it to other similar groups. “Small-world
networks have interesting properties. Unlike a hierarchical network than can be
eliminated through decapitation of its leadership, a small-world network resists
fragmentation because of its dense interconnectivity”30. The only hierarchy that exists in
the Global Salafi jihad is that al Qaeda is at the top, every other group must jockey for
position below al Qaeda. In this sense, al Qaeda is outside of the mold because al Qaeda
was the creator of the system. Nonetheless, the complex astringency of the makeup of a
Muslim Extremist Terror Group makes analyzing such groups impractical on the surface.
Social Network Theory
“They (terror groups) can also create new social
networks because of the increasing dependence of
the individual on the group for reinforcement,
validation, and security and because of the cult
status of certain leaders. Indeed, as time progresses
this new social network can supplement more
traditional networks such as family and
community”31.
Regardless of how one is to analyze a Muslim Extremist Terror Group, the
problem arises from the basic structure of the social network, the Muslim Extremist
30
31
2004. III-33

29
32
32
http://webzoom.freewebs.com/vinman15/figure4.gif. A link to the page can be accessed through
www.sathome.org.
Diagram 4

30
Terror Group itself. Drawing on the work of Malcolm Sparrow, he notes that three
problems are likely to plague the social network analyst regardless of text. These are33:
1. Incompleteness – the inevitability of missing nodes and links that the
investigators will not uncover.
2. Fuzzy Boundaries – the difficulty in deciding who to include and who
not to include.
3. Dynamic – these networks are not static; they are always changing.
No accurate map can be drawn up because of the social bonds that exist within the
particular social network (group). Outside of al Qaeda, most of the Muslim Extremist
Terror Groups plunge into the category of a small-world network. Diagram 5 shows the
structure of the Algerian Network in London under Abu Doha. What this Diagram
demonstrates is that although the Algerian Network is classified as a small-world network,
one cannot let the “small” label underestimate the power of the terror network. This
small network in fact was had numerous connections to large-world terror networks.
These networks share no hierarchical structure, for that only exists throughout the top
half of al Qaeda. “A small-world network resists fragmentation because of its dense
interconnectivity. A significant fraction of nodes can be randomly removed without
much impact on its integrity”34. The only point in which these social networks run into
problems is at their hub, the place in which all entities of the network have a direct tie to.
This hub can be a substantial and complex apparatus, like al Qaeda was once thought to
have had. It could simply be one person who seemingly incorporates the jobs of twenty
33
Valdis Krebs, “Uncloaking Terrorist Networks”, First Monday,
http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue7_4/krebs/
34

31
members into one single individual. Abu Qatada, who was widely considered to be the
representative of al Qaeda in Europe, most likely would have been the hub, or near the
top of the hub within al Qaeda in Europe. Once the hub is exposed, all links can be
deciphered to the remaining members of the particular Muslim Extremist Terror Group.
However, although this task sounds effortless in its basic conception, the daunting task of
finding the hub proves to be insurmountable to most international government agencies.
As the report will uncover later, these particular groups do not make information
obtainable to the public. Everything is done in secret, away from the eyes and ears of the
public. For if it is evident in the public, one can be rest assured that it will be presented in
the fashion of an agreed upon code between the two individuals. It is for this reason that
when international governmental agencies find secret information that was obtained
through laziness and improper security of the material by the individual member of the
group, the authorities must analyze even the smallest amount of content. It is what is in
the content that will crack the social network of the Muslim Extremist Terror Group.
Embeddedness
The most important aspect of the social network of a Muslim Extremist Terror
Group is its embeddedness. “Embeddedness refers to the rich nexus of social and
economic linkages between members of an organization and its environment”35. Being
embedded within a society offers a degree of trust in terms of the interactions of the group
in the society that would not have existed if the group had not been embedded. It is
35

32
important to note that the social bonds that exist within a Muslim Extremist Terror
Group only apply to the members of the group. The social bond from the group to the
society seems to be valid from the outside. On the contrary though, the social bond is
nothing more than a meaningless front of deception. Therefore the embeddedness of the
group in society allows for the deceiving social bond to be created. The lack of this social
bond, which has been replaced by a deceiving one, frees people (members of the group)
from their responsibilities and local concerns (mainly towards society). This allows for
members of the group to exist within societies that had previously been thought to be
taboo, a place off limits, to the terror groups to embed members within. It is this concept
of social bonds that allows for the new category of Western Arabs (homegrown terrorists)
to come into existence; and be successful.
Optimal Size of Terror Groups
Understanding chaotic systems, such as Muslim Extremist Terror Groups, is
problematical, and it is fundamentally impossible to do correctly. Therefore, why should
predicting the optimal size of these groups be any easier? Since there can be no
established code as to what the size(s) of these groups are, one has to make a
generalization based upon the group itself and its goals. It is fair to assume that a Muslim
Extremist Terror Group who wants to establish an Islamic caliphate across most of the
world (i.e. al Qaeda) will need hundreds of thousands of members. Does there need to be
a distinction between members and supporters before we can agree to the above
statement? The pictures seen on the next page were taken at a Free Palestine Protest on

33
July 12th, 2005 in London across from 10 Downing Street. The first three pictures could
be rationalized as being individuals that belong to the member category, while the last
three could be those belonging to the supporter category. After examining the pictures
closely, can we in actuality be convinced about their classification? The only reason that
we think we know is because we have been groomed to socially profile individuals. What
is to say that the older gentleman in picture 6 could not have been a member of a terror
group? What these pictures unravel is the difficulty in identifying the difference(s)
between members and supporters of terror groups. A member is a supporter of the group
and is active within the group; meaning the member carries out actions set down upon
them by the group. A supporter on the other hand supports, or encourages, the group.
Supporters rarely get involved in the actions of the group. “A percentage of these
supporters, including the bulk of the hard core, will of course subscribe to the same
ideology as the group, although not usually with the same fervor”. Furthermore, “a
terrorist group that can secure and maintain community support for its activities will have
access to a substantial source of revenue”36. What is making this concept complicated to
accept today is whether or not incitement to terrorism constitutes being a member of a
group. In the last few months, this debate has been taken up by most WDS’ throughout
the world. There must be a distinction between members and supporters. Normally for
a Muslim Extremist Terror Group to be effective in completing its goals, it needs a
mixture of both members and supporters. There can be no way of illuminating which
category needs to be more in numbers, unless you look at the goals of the group.
Supporters can be used to protest from the society (public) upon the oppressor (normally
36
2004. III-80

34
governments). The rationale behind this is that after enough protesting, which will lead
eventually to uprisings, the oppressor will have to give in to the demands, or at least listen
to them. Those belonging to the members’ category will take part in more “hands on”
actions that involve more dramatic schemes of getting the oppressor to cave into their
Free Palestine Protest
July 12th, 2005
Adjacent to 10 Downing Street

35
demands. A number of Muslim Extremist Terror Groups have little to no supporters.
Although these groups flourish very quickly from existence, they nonetheless stay in
existence for a matter of time. Having an effective balance between members and
supporters of a particular terror group allows for them to successfully grow and progress
with time.
The social network theory plays a enormous role in determining the optimal size
of these groups. Since social bonds between the groups are always under constant
unveiling by security forces, the number of social bonds within a given small range is
extremely minimal. Therefore, cells, which are small sub-divisions within the terror
group, normally can only accommodate 7-8 individuals. If the cell grows any larger than
this, it risks being exposed. Therefore, when a Muslim Extremist Terror Group is said to
have been displaced somewhere, say London, we can use a theoretical formula to
estimate the number of active members that might be in the selected Muslim Extremist
Terror Group. The theoretical formula is:
• (Number in cell) x (numbers of cells in the area) / (number of supporters)
Although this formula does not produce the truthful number of those within a particular
group, it does however give a target number in which investigators can start from.

36
Ultimately the optimal size of a Muslim Extremist Terror Group comes down to the
point of what type of actions the group is seeking to attack with. If the group is seeking to
pull off another 9/11-style attack, then the terror group must be larger than the group
who wants to start protests in the streets of a major city against their oppressor. So as the
terror group itself is dynamic, so to is the size of the group.
Religion and Muslim Extremist Terror Groups
Can religion alone be the one deciding factor that separates a Muslim Extremist
Terror Group from the rest of the groups in existence today? It would appear today that
religion is the deciding factor for most groups. In large part this consensus is impressed
upon the minds of media watchers. A society depends on the media for its information.
Unfortunately, the media must cover Muslim Extremist Terror Groups. This is not
unfortunate for the fact that the media has to cover a Muslim group; it is unfortunate
because the media grossly misrepresents those groups. Whenever a reporter is showing
any footage of a terror group, the only footage we ever see almost certainly will have a
religious edict within the mix of it. The phrase “Allah Akbar” is a popular phrase to be
heard in most footage. One could make the argument that it is not the fault of the media
because they are not the ones who have created it; they have only presented it to their
viewers in the fashion in which they received it. Muslim Extremist Terror Groups want
media sources to think that religion is their justification for their actions. In doing so, this
image that they have created allows for the war on terror to be seen in some instances as

37
a war against Islam. When this image is formed, mainstream Muslims that would
otherwise have not wanted to support such Muslim Extremist Terror Groups find
themselves agreeing with the very groups that they oppose openly. Thus the group will
gain more supporters and the group will be strengthened over time. As mentioned
before, is religion really what drives the Muslim Extremist Terror Group to accepting
their per versed ideology of evil, hatred, and intolerance? “The key to understanding the
jihadist and his journey lies in politics, not in religion”37. Religion is simply used as a
pathetic mean to justify an evil act. “Extremist clerics can provide the terrorist with a
god-given legitimacy and divine justification for acts of violence”38. Along with religion in
general comes support. For religion is viewed as being outside of the physical world in
which we live. Therefore, a vast majority of humans have a strenuous time arguing with
religion because it is beyond them. Thus religious edict can be used to brainwash minds
in pushing those very same minds to accept terrorism as a legitimate act of bringing about
change and reform. The religion of Islam is not at fault here. “The real culprits are the
ideologues who would twist religion-any religion- to serve their political agenda. The
challenge is to decipher what Muslims say and do rather than get bogged down talking
about Islamic or Quranic doctrine”39. What religion does is it gives validity to the
argument of the terror group. “The religious dimension was also used to exaggerate the
preexisting division that existed between the two traditions in order to further inflame
ethnic hatred and rivalry”40. Without religion, mainly the religion of Islam and its holy
texts (Quran, Hadith, etc.), the authors of Islamic terror would not be able to convince
37
Gerges, A. Fawaz. Journey of the Jihadist. Pg.11
38
2004. II-15
39
Gerges, A. Fawaz. Journey of the Jihadist. Pg.11-12
40
2004. III-8

38
individuals in killing innocent humans based on retaliation for a prior oppression that was
felt on behalf of past individuals. The author of the report has a very difficult time in
accepting that a rationale non-religious human without any mental disorders would strap
a bomb to his/her chest and walk into a crowd of unfamiliar people and maliciously end
their lives, while taking their own. For the suicide bomber, not only does he believe he is
making his ultimate mark within the organization and will be praised for the rest of the
days of the group, he/she, mainly he, believes that his sacrifice will amount to something
more in the next life. The concept of the next life has thus been provided by the religious
doctrine of an afterlife. The suicide bomber feels that he is acquiring something that he
would otherwise not have been able to acquire without the help of religion shaping his
thoughts. What religion offers is the truth about life, without actually having to prove an
absolute truth. The only way that religion becomes a truth is through the support of
people that buy into it. Through support, the religion gains an unquestionable status by
mankind that cannot be diminished, unless all support is eliminated. The major religions
have been around longer than most people can trace their family trees back to, therefore,
loss of support and a disproving of truth is highly unlikely.
Misrepresentation of Religion
It can be said that religion provides a faulty front for the justification of the actions
of Muslim Extremist Terror Groups. The fault is not in the notion that the groups accept
a religion, but in how they use religion, and as Dr. Fawaz eloquently stated; twist religion
to say what they want it to say. Religious texts are considered sacred under the religion in

39
which they derive from. The Quran is no exception to this statement. However, it is a
respected thought that the Quran is not a static text, rather it is dynamic in the sense that
it’s meanings can be interpreted differently with the times. “The concept of the
unchangeability of the interpretation of the Qur'an can be attributed mainly to the
misunderstanding of the following two facts: first, the Prophet Muhammad interpreted
the Qur'an to the early Muslims; and second, the existence of highly respected classical
exegetical works of the whole Qur'an”41. It is fair to assume that early Muslims differ
from Muslims in the world today. Muslims who live in modern Western cities should not
be expected to interpret the text in the same way as the prophet Mohammed once had.
“Beautified for mankind is love of the joys (that come) from women and offspring, and
stored-up heaps of gold and silver, and horse branded (with their mark), and cattle and
land. That is comfort of the life of the world”42. If this were to be the case then most
modern Muslims today would not have love of the joys, for most do not have stored-up
heaps of gold and silver within their confines. They may however have the joys in
something else today that takes the place of the previous words. It is noted that the
Quran is an allegorical text. The meanings of each particular Surah rarely can be seen
from just one side. “He it is who hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture
wherein are clear revelations-They are the substance of the Book-and others (which are)
allegorical”43. For if the Quran were to be static, then there would not be any need for
the hundreds of exegeses that exist of the Quran. The point to establish is that no group,
or thought, can claim to be the absolute truth because of the allegorical sense in which
41
http://www.quranicstudies.com/article110.html
42
The Quran. Surah 3:14
43

40
the Quran was written. How can a Muslim Extremist Terror Group claim to have the
justified right answer when the Quran, their religious text, states that it is allegorical?
As stated above, it is how the Muslim Extremist Terror Groups use the religion of
Islam falsely that essentially diminishes their arguments and ideologies. Many Muslim
Extremist Terror Groups and their individual members will reassert their belief in
nonviolent acts while speaking openly. Once they are finished ranting about their
nonviolent stance, then they immediately change their tunes and begin to defend the use
of force. “According to Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman in an interview shortly after the
1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, a Muslim can never “call for violence, only
for love, forgiveness and tolerance”. But he added that if “we are aggressed against, if our
land is usurped, we must call for hitting the attacker and the aggressor to put an end to
the aggression”44. For the terror group then, as long as they, or their people (as stated by
Mohammad Siddique Khan in his suicide video released in May 2006) are being
oppressed according to them, then they have the religious right to act upon it by any
means necessary. Dr Azzam Al-Tamimi is Director of the Institute of Islamic Political
Thought in London and a supporter of Hamas. Dr. Tamimi has stated, “suicide
bombers in Palestine can be justified because they have been oppressed by the West in
the past” (referring to the creation of Israel and the removal of the Palestinians from the
area)45. People are “oppressed” all the time in the world. Bullies beat-up individuals;
some lose their jobs because they are not doing a good enough job. If the terrorist
mentality holds up, then we can create “oppression” out of these two instances, which we
then can act violently on behalf of. You could kill the bully and kill the boss, but that
44
Juergensmeyer, Mark. Terror in the Mind of God. Pg. 80
45
Palestine Protest outside of 10 Downing Street. July 2006

41
would not do anything to fix your “oppression” that you had felt, very much in the same
way that killing innocent individuals as terror groups do does not take away the
“oppressed” feeling. This rationale is problematic for the reason that the Muslim
Extremist Terror Group misinterprets the word oppression. The word oppression takes
the meaning to these groups as anything that does goes against their ideology.
Apparently these groups live outside of the world because a good portion of what
mankind does and says goes against someone’s beliefs, values, or principles. We do not
see the vast majority of those individuals seeking to kill those that do not agree with them.
This misrepresentation of the word oppression allows for the terror group to broaden
their scope of possible targets. It is a combination of the view of oppression with religion
that makes the Muslim Extremist Terror Group difficult to deal with. The oppression
takes on a religious form, which will surely generate support.
The Quran
The Muslim Extremist Terror Group is picky about what it chooses to extract
from the Quran. Within the Quran, Surahs 8 and 9 are viewed to be the war Surahs in
which Muslim Extremist Terror Groups choose to get their information from. Surah
8:60 says46:
“Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses
tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy,
and others beside them whom ye know not. Allah knoweth them.
Whatsoever ye spend in the way of Allah it will be repaid to you in full,
and ye will not be wronged.”
46

42
Under the thought of such terror groups, this verse can be distorted to propose that it is
acceptable to use all the forces possible to kill the enemies of Allah, because they are your
enemy to. If you die fighting for Allah, aka Martyrdom, then Allah will repay you kindly.
You are doing the right thing! However, what most Muslim extremist terror groups fail
to present along with this Surah is the verse right after it. Surah 8:61 says47:
“And if they incline to peace, incline thou also to it, and trust in Allah. Lo
He is the hearer, the Knower”.
If both of these Surahs were to be presented together, then the terror groups’ ideology
would have no legitimacy. No person would escalate himself or herself to killing others
first without trying to resolve the matter peacefully. The Muslim Extremist Terror Group
argues against this by saying they have attempted to make peace. Their justification for
an attempt at making peace is when Osama Bin Laden told the West, “If you leave all the
lands that were once occupied by Muslim Caliphates, then you will be spared. If you do
not, you will suffer the pain of the sword; God willing”. This statement that Osama Bin
Laden made in 2005 was not the extension of peace toward the west, it was an ultimatum
made at the West. Abu Izzadeen, whose western name is Trevor Brooks (the report will
speak on him in Part 2), uttered these words about Osama Bin Laden’s statement of
peace (the Madam and Sir are two Western Journalists)48:
Bin Laden, he offered before 7/7 by a few months, he made a
statement when he offered to the European public, he never
addressed the governments . . .. he offered to you Madam non-
Muslim and to you Sir non-Muslim, he offered to you an offer of
truce. . . Did you accept it Madam, you Sir!
47
48
http://hotair.com/archives/2006/07/10/video-british-islamist-parasite-defends-london-bombings/
*Translation provide by Students Against Terrorism (www.sathome.org)

43
Another quote from this grotesque video commemorating the anniversary of July 7th
bombings of 2005 in London from the Muslim Extremist Terror Group standpoint had
this to say49:
“These people have made a very clear statement, If you stop, you
be saved, if you don’t stop, we are going to kill you;
indiscriminately”.
The slanting of the religion of Islam by Muslim Extremist Terror Groups is what
bestows them their coercive power. The contemporary Egyptian writer Abd al-Salam,
who wrote The Neglected Duty (perhaps the second most widely used text that justifies
terrorism; Islamic), has shaped much of the thinking today. “This is an interesting idea-
that the approval of force for the defense of Islam can be expanded to include struggles
against political and social injustice”50. Since the Muslim Extremist Terror Group uses
the religion entity, it can broaden its spectrum, or range, to the entirety of a society.
These terror groups ultimately use the religion of Islam as a justifier for what would
normally be considered a condemned and false ideology.
A Muslim Extremist Terror Group is completely complex in its fundamental
structure. It is of the essence to understand these groups if we are to develop a strategy
that will eliminate such groups from existence.
49
Ibid
50
Juergensmeyer, Mark. Terror in the Mind of God. Pg. 82

45
Muslim Extremist Terror Groups in
“Islam will return to Europe as a conqueror and
victor, after being expelled from it twice”.
- Sheikh Yusuf al Qaradawi
What now can be made of these two different categories? On the surface, both of
these categories have noticeably zilch in common. However, there must be some
correlation(s) that exist between the two. Why then would there be so many Muslim
Extremist Terror Groups in WDS’? It would be reasonable to assess that it would be
easier for such a group to exist within a society of subjectivity. A society where order is
not respected each day would allow for these groups to gain a stronghold in the specified
area and gain supporters, through their own willingness or through the use of coerced
force, the group would see an unimaginable amount of new support being extolled
everyday. After all, the Taliban did much of this in the late 90’s. It is arguable that
Afghanistan was not the worst country in the world in which easy exploitation of its

46
citizens could be retained immediately. However, Afghanistan was plagued by key
virtues that made it prone to exploitation. Governmental control was not in order.
Warlords ran most of the areas outside of Kabul, the capital of Afghanistan. Afghanistan
had the highest infant death mortality rate during these times. What the Taliban
provided was some sense of order and rules in which the people had to adhere, or they
would suffer the consequence. The leadership of the Taliban horrified a large deal of the
people of Afghanistan. Eventually the Taliban was ousted out of power by allied forces in
late 2001. The case to make here is that why then have more Muslim extremist terror
groups not taken the Taliban model of acquiring power? It is true that Osama Bin Laden
is probably not in a WDS, he is said to still be in hiding in the mountainous area between
Afghanistan and Pakistan. Bin Laden is not al Qaeda though. Bin Laden co-founded al
Qaeda and became its figurehead and charismatic leader in which those belonging to the
group looked at him for guidance and reassurance in their cause. He does not run al
Qaeda as most in the West think that he does. Al Qaeda has morphed itself into separate
entities that fend for themselves while paying homage and respect to the core ideology
that Bin Laden proposed. A immense portion of all al Qaeda cells and splinter groups
today exist in most of the WDS’ throughout the world. Table 2 shows us the number of
terror groups in WDS’ today. What we see from this list is that there exist about 100
Muslim Extremist Terror Groups throughout most of the WDS’ in the world. As
mentioned in the footnote of Table 2, splinter groups that have morphed from a group
are not listed because of a lack of information about the splinter group. Therefore the
total number of groups is inflated to around 130 Muslim extremist terror groups. This
table projects then that on average there are 4.5 Muslim extremist terror groups in each

47
one of the WDS’ listed in table 2. If this is the case, then sincere analyses of such groups
must be undertaken.
The Attraction of a WDS
“Their presence and activities may have a radicalizing effect on
parts of the Islamic community in the Netherlands and lead to
increasing polarization and confrontation between population
groups”51
.
Table 2
And
Muslim extremist terror groups list52
Austria 3
Belgium 5
Cyprus 2
Denmark 3
Germany 13
Finland 1
France 17
Greece 5
Iceland #
Ireland 1
Italy 4
Luxembourg #
Netherlands 3
United Kingdom 9
51
http://www.aivd.nl/contents/pages/2285/recruitmentbw.pdf
52
The information was taken from http://www.tkb.org/DFI.jsp?page=method. The numbers only reflect
those Muslim extremist terror groups that have known whereabouts. Smaller splinter groups of these
indicated groups are not mentioned because of a lack of information on the knowledge of the splinter
group. Therefore the total number needs to be inflated by about 30-35, making the new number around
135.

48
Norway 1
Portugal 1
Spain 5
Sweden 2
Switzerland 5
United States 10
Canada 3
Israel 9
Total
22 99
It is accepted that there is tangible evidence to back up the instinct that Muslim
Extremist Terror Groups do in fact reside within WDS’. “The environment where terror
operates has mutated. Traditional armed organizations, such as the IRA or the Kurdish
Workers Party, pursued irredentist objectives and were active only in a single region or
country. Today, terror is transnational; it freely moves from one state to another”53.
What correlations exist to make such a significant relationship (obscured on one end) be
effective for one side? In other words, what is it that makes these groups attracted WDS’?
“It has never been much of secret that an extensive radical Islamic infrastructure was
operating on a large scale in the UK; Islamic charity funds, bank accounts, Islamic web
sites, and newspapers in Arabic all serve as legitimate and legal platforms for illegal
activities and incitement”54. Professor Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law School, sheds light
on why such groups choose WDS’ to reside within. He starts out by pointing out why
these groups might not pick a tyrannical regime to associate with. It is hopeful then that
53 Napoleoni, Loretta. Terror Incorporated. Pg. 151
54 Shahar, Yael. Islamic Radicals in the UK: A Double-Edged Sword. The Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT).
July 7th, 2005. http://www.ict.org.il/articles/articledet.cfm?articleid=537

49
by understanding why these groups do not benefit from tyrannical regimes, the
effectiveness as to why a WDS is so lucrative becomes more perceptible. He says55:
“Moreover, the effectiveness of terrorism relies, at least to
some degree, on a bottom-up, grassroots phenomenon, whereby
the public is terrorized into demanding change from the
leadership. Tyrannical regimes, which operate in a top-down
manner, are somewhat less susceptible to this tactic. Finally,
tyrannical regimes have few if any constraints on the responses
they make to terrorism. Unlike democracies, which are subject to
civil libertarian, humanitarian, and constitutional limitations,
tyrannical regimes can employ the most brutal counter-measures
against terrorists, their supporters, their families, their co-
religionists, and anyone else”.
Legitimacy becomes the deciding factor for the terror group. “While there have
historically been many forms of legitimacy, in today’s world the only serious source of
legitimacy is democracy”56. On the other hand though, “Authoritarian countries,
moreover, have long-term problems with legitimacy”57. It can be understood that:
1. Democracies produce legitimacy
2. Muslim Extremist Terror Groups yearn for legitimacy
3. Authoritarian nation-states have long-term problems with legitimacy
Therefore, we see a correlation between the three groups centered on the concept of
legitimacy. Using the group signatories above, we can assume that group 2 cannot
survive in group 3, but group 2 aspires to survive in group 1 in hopes of gaining
legitimacy, even though group 1 does not want group 2. One of the prime reasons why
Muslim Extremist Terror Groups’ chose a WDS before a tyrannical regime is because
group 3 will eliminate group 2 in a shorter time than group 1.
55 Dershowitz, Alan M. Why Terrorism Works: Understanding the threat, responding to the challenge. Pg. 106
56 Fukuyama, Francis. State-Building: Governance and World Order in the 21st Century. Pg. 26
57 Fukuyama, Francis. State-Building: Governance and World Order in the 21st Century. Pg. 28

50
Terror groups choose WDS’ for the superlative reason that they know they will
not be a target, much like they would within a tyrannical regime Nation-State. The
whole aim of a Muslim Extremist Terror Group is to transform the existing target society
in which they reside in. For instance, if their aim is establishing an Islamic Caliphate, and
the terror groups want the United Kingdom to be included in the Caliphates geographic
area (most of the terror groups in the UK proscribe to such a thought), they are less prone
to walk into the Prime Ministers office on 10 Downing Street and command that the
Prime Minister and Parliament begin to sign into law the new orders that the Islamic
Caliphate has established. First of all they would not get past the heavy security
surrounding government and parliamentary officials in the UK, and secondly, the
government would never attest to this. Therefore, a group must establish change from
the bottom-up, as within a grassroots phenomenon as pointed out by Prof. Dershowitz.
When the terror group seeks change from the bottom up, they can foster support on the
way up. Samuel Huntington, who is arguably one of the greatest Political Science
thinkers of our time coined the term “Snowballing”. This “Snowballing” works much as
a real snowball rolling down a hill during winter. As the snowball begins to roll down the
hill it begins to become larger in circumference because it is picking up more snow with
each revolution. By the end of the hill the snowball that initially started out as a fist-sized
ball, has morphed into one the size of a six-foot tall man. This effect is only possible from
the bottom-up. As the terror group starts at the bottom and works its way to the top (i.e.
government), it collects supporters and members along the way. So in reality, a group
that was once one hundred members strong is now the size of around one thousand or so
members. Power resides in numbers. Maccahevelli stated, “It is better to be feared than
it is to be loved”. As the number of terrorists within a particular group grows, so do its

51
level of fear that it exudes towards those outside the group. This fear factor gives the
group power through intimidation, so by the time the group reaches the government
level, in theory they have something then to bargain with, something other then there
obscure and ridiculous ideology; they have support.
Previous thinking about such Muslim Extremist Terror Groups has stated that a
failed state is better for such groups to reside in then any other, including WDS’. One
such work that portrayed this thought was published in the Washington Quarterly in the
summer of 2002. The article states58:
“Failed states hold a number of attractions for terrorist
organizations. First and foremost, they provide the opportunity to
acquire territory on a scale much larger than a collection of
scattered safe houses-enough to accommodate entire training
complexes, arms depots, and communications facilities. Generally,
terrorist groups have no desire to assume complete control of the
failed state but simply to acquire de facto control over specified
areas where they will then be left alone”.
Essentially the terror group does not need a WDS to provide for funding,
guarantee free speech, or gain access to supplies. This concept pinpoints the past when
considering the development of terror groups over the past decade. When al Qaeda was
establishing itself in 1989, territory was vital to acquire because they had to show that
they had power. Today, al Qaeda is a well-established terror group that does not need
territory like it used to. The territory that al Qaeda does need becomes that of the WDS.
It should be apparent from this reason that terrorism in general will target democracies
over tyrannies in the present and in the future.
58
Takeyh, Ray and Gvosdev, Nikolas. Do Terrorist Networks Need a Home? The Washington Quarterly:
Summer 2002. Pg. 98

52
The Right of Freedom
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;
or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a
redress of grievances”59. The individual notion of freedom is by far the most significant
reason as to why Muslim Extremist Terror Groups choose WDS’ as their place of
residence. The basic notion of freedom implies certain unalienable rights that cannot be
taken away from the individual. When members of these such groups become citizens (or
perhaps they are already citizens to begin with), then they are free to enjoy the same
benefits that the average Westerner receives, despite the fact that they are terrorists.
Anjem Choudary is one of the main Muslim extremists in the UK for the fact that he is at
the top of three extremist groups and is their spokesperson. What makes the case of
Anjem Choudary relevant to the discussion becomes evident after reading this excerpt60:
“Despite his hatred of all things British - he says: "If
British means adopting British values, then I don't think we
can adopt British values. I'm a Muslim living in Britain. I
have a British passport, but that's a travel document to me"
- he and his family live on state benefits” . . .. “Rubana
(Anjem’s wife) is said by friends to claim £1,700 a month in
housing benefit and income support while Choudary has
also claimed £202 a month in income support”.
Anjem Choudary enjoys the same benefits of the British citizen, because he is a British
citizen. The reason that it has been so troublesome for the government of the UK to
apprehend Choudary is because of his citizenship. Despite the fact that he has openly
stated that his British passport is essentially worthless, he is allowed to get away with these
59
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1
60
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1706018/posts

53
comments because of his many freedoms that he is granted through his citizenship.
Although Choudary’s case is very extreme by most standards, however, most extremists
living within a WDS will enjoy the exact same benefits as Choudary. Muslim Extremist
Terror Groups realize that if they can get members inside a WDS, then their members
are likely to enjoy these freedoms, thus allowing them to operate under the umbrella of
security of the government that they are seeking to oust and terrorize. The notion of
individual freedom (sovereignty) is what draws individuals to become part of a WDS and
to support it once they become a member of the system. However, just as westerners love
this system; individual terrorists seem to recognize the advantages. Although it is the goal
of the terror group to abolish the WDS, they have a hierarchy of enemies. Within this
hierarchy there exists the idea that you first need to exploit and use the WDS before you
can rid the world of it. What better place to accomplish this objective than within a
system that preaches freedom to the death.
Freedom of Speech
The freedom of speech, which is surely granted by most WDS’ throughout the
world, is one of the main attractions to a Muslim extremist terror group. It is fairly
assumed that freedom of speech has its limits. Citizens of a WDS know in the back of
their minds that they cannot say certain things that may be offensive to others. It is in this
sense that those who use it safeguard freedom of speech for the rest. On the contrary, do
we really know what the limits to freedom of speech are? Or do we simply learn the
limits through negative reinforcement (being reprimanded for our actions if they are
deemed faulty)? Freedom of speech does have a threshold that once the threshold is

54
surpassed, then the freedom of speech becomes obscured, thus resulting in the freedom
being taken away. It is fair to assume that most citizens do not know what the threshold
is before they begin to speak freely. Rather the threshold for them becomes the emotions
and reactions of their audience towards their free speech. It then becomes the job of the
audience in general to determine what the threshold is for what constitutes a violation of
freedom of speech. This argument may sound far-fetched, but in reality it could not be
closer to the truth. “The firebrand clerics who preached jihad and hatred of the West
were dismissed as “armchair warriors” by British Intelligence and security services”61.
For it is this argument that Muslim Extremist Terror Groups have used in order to
validate what Westerners see as hate speech. To them it is not hate speech; it is rather
expression of their feelings of oppression. Omar Bakri Mohammad, who is known for his
hate speech while preaching “Islam” in the UK, said this:62
“We don't make a distinction between civilians and non-
civilians, innocents and non-innocents. Only between
Muslims and unbelievers. And the life of an unbeliever has
no value. It has no sanctity”.
Although this quote is extremely soft (during part II more extreme quotes will be
presented), it still has remnants of what we call hate speech in it. As stated before, it does
not relatively cross the threshold, therefore these men that state such sayings are free to
walk about the streets of WDS’ worldwide and deliver hate filled messages. When the
threshold is crossed, especially from an international perspective, sever repercussions are
aimed at the WDS. “After Abu Hamza, welcomed the massacre of 58 European tourists
at Luxor in October 1997, Egypt denounced Britain as a hotbed for radicals. The
61
Shahar, Yael. Islamic Radicals in the UK: A Double-Edged Sword. The Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT).
62
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/04/19/1082326119414.html?from=storyrhs&oneclick=true

55
Egyptian State Information Service posted a “Call to Combat Terrorism” on its official
web site. Of its 14 most wanted terrorists, seven were based in Britain”63. Westerners
love their freedom of speech, after all, freedom of speech allows for competing thoughts to
battle each other for who has the correct theory. Competition only makes competing
theories stronger because it makes the arguments represent themselves from countless
different perspectives. Freedom of speech is a guaranteed strength to the Muslim
extremist terror group in a WDS because it allows for them to convey a message publicly
that they otherwise would not have had the chance to do under any other system but that
of a WDS.
The idea of a Free Press
“The literature of all brands of Islamic political
thought is printed, distributed, and read throughout
London. Much of it is given out on Fridays at the
100 or more mosques in the city. In some areas of
London, videotaped sermons are on sale calling for
the killing of all infidels and Jews; leaflets are
distributed on street corners urging Muslims to
travel to various hotspots around the world to wage
Jihad; while radical preachers incite the faithful to
take up arms against the “Crusaders and the
Jews”64.
The entity of a free press makes WDS’ extremely pleasant for a terror group.
Censorship in a WDS is very dissimilar than within a tyrannical regime. As mentioned
earlier, a free press is a direct result of the right of freedom of speech that most WDS’ give
to their citizens. Although there is a line that if crossed, the application of freedom of
63
64

56
speech is then removed form the individual (i.e. Hate Speech), determining that threshold
proves to be inherently impossible because it is up for interpretation continuously. The
problem remains in the manifold meanings of statements made under the freedom of
speech right. Therefore, Muslim Extremist Terror Groups are allowed to settle on the
threshold as what they can get away with while still honoring the governmental rules set
in place within the society. WDS’ have a very arduous time in taking out secret actions
against the terror groups without the possibility of it backfiring in their faces and being
exposed to the public. Open societies (WDS’), with freedom of the press, make it far
easier for terrorists to get their message out and far more difficult for the government to
take actions against them. One reason why these groups will not reside within the
borders of a tyrannical regime (unless they control the regime, i.e. State Terror) is that “a
regime that exercises total control over the media can also disseminate false and
damaging information against the terrorists, calculated to turn the population – including
those who support their cause – against them”65. A WDS cannot run the risk of falsifying
information to root out the extremists because if exposed, the credibility of that
government becomes slashed and open to frustration from its constituents. This is much
of the case that has plagued the United States and the United Kingdom over the last
couple of years concerning the Iraq War. A tyrannical regime can falsify its information
because its constituents are not allowed to express their discontent that they have with
their government; it is a catch 22 situation for them. You most certainly can express your
frustrations, but you can certainly expect to be punished severely by the government, if
not killed or removed from the society in which you live. The right of freedom of speech
65
Dershowitz, Alan M. Why Terrorism Works: Understanding the Threat, Responidng to the Challenege. Pg. 108

57
and the free press notion allow for Muslim Extremist Terror Groups to breath their hate
within the limits that a government (WDS) has established.
Media
Going further than just the free press notion, what is it that makes the free press so
important to such groups? The deciding factor of free press is the media sources
themselves. Free press is just that, a free resource for Muslim Extremist Terror Groups to
propagandize. “Jihadists frown on unpleasant publicity and want to foster an image that
will convince people to join their groups”66. The very action that they commit, whether it
be a protest, demonstration, or an attack, still they can be certain that it will be covered
by the media sources of that particular area. Also, because of the growth of the
international media, they run the likelihood of being picked up by an international media
source as well, which will only propagandize to a larger arena of people. The act(s) then
of terrorism become the deciding factor for the group in terms of free publicity. “Acts of
terrorism – especially conditional acts, such as hostage taking – are natural news stories,
because they create real-time drama involving individuals whose identities are known,
whose faces are shown, and whose relatives can be interviewed”67. If we look back to the
terrorist attacks that took place before 1980, most noticeably pre-Munich 1972, terror
organizations such as Black September, would carry out attacks with masked faces in
order to secure their identities. These men that committed the acts did not want to be
recognized because they still resided within the borders of tyrannical regimes. These
66
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/16/jihad.study/index.html
67
Dershowitz, Alan M. Why Terrorism Works: Understanding the Threat, Responding to the Challenge. Pg. 108

58
regimes, if they knew who had embarrassed them publicly, would immediately pursue
them, possibly murder them, and rid the area of their family and friends to be sure that
no further public embarrassment was carried out on behalf of the regime. Eventually
with the growth of media sources, terror groups realized the growth encompassed free
publicity. If you see any significant or large terror group today marching in the streets
(i.e. Hezbollah, Hamas), you will see their faces and their identities. This effect of
revealing ones identity gives themselves power because of the identity theory. If someone
knows that you are part of this “powerful” group, then they will respect you and will be
less inclined to threaten you for doing wrong, according to your standards (this thought is
very much how gangs in America operate, it is the threat of identity with a particular
gang that gives them their power). Do you think it is by accident that the footage that we
have of the 9/11 attackers and the 7/7 attackers reveal their full identities? The fact of
the matter is that they wanted to be picked up by media sources, for if they were, it would
add more embarrassment to the government they “attacked” (indirectly), thus they would
be deemed as being more successful by their counterparts and supporters. Today, most
of the citizens inside a WDS love real time drama. Simply look at the ratings for the
shows Survivor, The Bachelor, The Amazing Race, Who Wants to be a Millionaire, etc. These
shows define real time drama with little to no scripts that the “actors” memorize. The
WDS philosophy thrives on understanding people in their personal context. Such citizens
find some comfort in knowing the real world in which we live. Media sources in the West
have realized this indicator, and they have built upon it. If they can show real time up to
the minute coverage, people will be more likely to tune in and watch. Therefore, if a
Muslim Extremist Terror Group can get itself known on one of the media sources, they
are more likely to attract support that they would have otherwise not been able to get

59
from those individuals. The role the media plays enhances and furthers the cause of the
Muslim Extremist Terror Group existing inside of a WDS.
The Internet
The West has defined the progression on technology. As the West has
modernized, it has grasped the technological aspect of life, which brings about simplicity
into the daily lives of its citizens. This is a good thing for most because now we can
communicate in seconds with each other, whereas time ago, the very same
communication may have taken days, or even weeks. Therefore the Internet has
revolutionized the West. Although the West holds the Internet in very high esteem, the
Internet has also been a contributor that attacks the West. It is generally accepted that
Muslim Extremist Terror Groups thrive upon the Internet. “The internet has
dramatically affected the global jihad by making possible a new type of relationship
between an individual and a virtual community”68. There are a few aspects of this
remark that need to be explained. The new type of relationship that the Internet has
created for the terror group is its ability to be in contact with different locations at the
same time. No longer does al Qaeda need a hub leader, such as Abu Qatada, in Europe
to run its operations. They can run their operations from outside Europe, thus
decreasing the possibility that one of their hub leaders will be confronted and imprisoned
by government security forces that are actively seeking the individual. How they
68

60
communicate via the Internet is incredibly easy in its conception. The way in which the
communication is done is69:
In order to prevent agencies like the National Security
Agency (NSA) from intercepting messages sent online, operatives
have adopted a cunning e-mail method dubbed the “dead drop
box”70. It was used by Mohammed Momin Khawaja, a Canadian
man arrested in March 2004, and by a cell of Pakistani militants in
London accused of planning to bomb unspecified targets in
Britain71.
A message is written and simply saved in the draft box of an e-mail account. Various
people in different parts of the world who have the password of the account can read the
message without it ever being sent, thereby avoiding the risk of interception.
The social bond theory becomes diminished even further because there can be
less physical interaction between members of a particular cell, or even an entire group.
What was once the roll of the café (by this the café means a place in which to meet and
fraternize with other members), the Internet takes the place of. Members only have to go
into public to live their “false” lives, to give off the perception that everything is okay in
life. The Internet has allowed for the leaders of an organization to be in contact with
those that it would otherwise not have been able to. Osama Bin Laden can now get in
contact with groups all over the world to give them support and advice, thus
strengthening their dedication to his ideology.
The Internet also provides another free means of public propaganda to be spread.
Videos can be recorded and immediately put up all over the Internet for individuals to
view. The Internet makes the role of the governmental agencies obscure because it takes
69
Vidino, Lorenzo. Al Qaeda in Europe. Pg. 84-85
70
“Mol’ Lekt naar Hofsadgroep,” Volkstrant, January 11, 2005
71
Keith B. Richburg, “From Quiet Teen to Terrorist Suspect,” Washington Post, December 5, 2004.

61
time for such agencies to unravel information on the Internet. Michael Scheuer, former
chief of the CIA unit that tracked bin Laden said, “al Qaeda’s innovation on the Web
erodes the ability of our security services to hit them when they’re most vulnerable”72.
The plus side to this for the Muslim extremist terror group is that if they are shut down on
one of their sites, they can immediately create another site in the matter of hours. It is no
wonder that Muslim Extremist Terror Groups have stepped up their recruitment efforts
to encompass those with technical skills.
The Internet becomes a site of recruitment that the terror group can tap into a
vast array of potential recruits. “It appeals to isolated individuals by easing their
loneliness through connections to people sharing some commonality”73. Those
individuals who have the feelings that are instilled in the mentality of the global jihad can
share a bond with those that they otherwise would not have been able to. What the
Internet does is it makes individual Mujaheed feel like they are part of the global jihad
without actually being in the global jihad. In the very same fashion that sport fans wear
their respected jerseys of their favorite team; they begin to feel that they are part of the
team, despite the fact that they are in no way associated with the team. SITE institute,
which stands for the Search for International Terrorist Entities74 (a non-profit
organization), had this to say concerning the role of the Internet to terror groups75:
“In a posting not long after the London attacks, a member of one
of the al Qaeda-linked online forums asked how to take action
himself. A cell of two or three is better, replied another member in
an exchange translated by the SITE Institute. Even better than
72
Coll, Steve and Glasser, Susan B. Terrorists Turn to the Web as Base of Operations. Washington Post.
August 7, 2005
73
74
http://www.siteinstitute.org/
75
Coll, Steve and Glasser, Susan B. Terrorists Turn to the Web as Base of Operations. Washington Post.
August 7, 2005

62
that is a “virtual cell, an agreement between a group of brothers
over the internet”. It is “safe” extolled the anonymous poster, and
“nobody will know the identity of each other in the beginning”.
Once “harmony and mutual trust are established, training
conducted and videos watched”, then “you can meet in reality and
execute some operation in the field”.
The “virtual cell” becomes a safe-haven, in which individual terrorists can then
conjugate without taking the risk of being caught by authorities while meeting in a
physical place, such as a bookstore, etc. The sense of acceptance and “brotherhood” gets
expressed through the Internet to new recruits.
Recruitment Galore
“If a Muslim is in a combat or godless area, he is not obligated to
have a different appearance from (those around him). The
(Muslim) man may prefer or even be obligated to look like them,
providing his action brings a religious benefit of preaching to them,
learning their secrets and informing Muslims, preventing their
harm, or some other beneficial goal”76.
Sheik Ibn Taymiyah, Islamic scholar (1263-1328)
Quoted in an al Qaeda Training Manual
Shifting gears away from the non-human advantages of having a well-established
Muslim Extremist Terror Group in a WDS, we find ourselves embarking on perhaps the
chief reason as to why these groups see a WDS as an advantage. The culture and society
that surrounds a WDS’ structure is perfect breeding grounds for terror groups to recruit
from. Generally, before an Islamist can turn into a terrorist, a Muslim Extremist Terror
Group must recruit them. “The notion of recruitment implies an active process through
which an organizational insider gets a new person to work for the organization”77. The
76
Vidino, Lorenzo. Al Qaeda in Europe. Pg. 71
77

METGs in WDS

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

Similaire à METGs in WDS

Similaire à METGs in WDS (12)

METGs in WDS