Blog Post 3: An analysis of a terrorism group

According to Gale Thomson, Al-Jihad (also known as Egyptian Islamic Jihad; Jihad Group; Talaa'al al-Fateh—the Vanguards of Conquest) is an Egyptian Islamist extremist group. They have been involved in a variety of atrocities throughout the years. Egypt, during the time of Gamal Abdel Nasser, was very oppressive to Muslims. The new President Anwar Sadat attempted to make relations between Egypt and Muslims better. He started by embracing the Muslim Brotherhood. He hoped this would widen his support and legitimacy as President. In 1971, Gale Thomson says that thousands of Brotherhood members and other Islamists were released from prison and in subsequent years, restrictions on meeting, publications and other rights of association were lessened. Regardless of these efforts, Sadat’s relationship with the Islamists remained very shaky. According to Gale Thomson, the economy was dislocated and the Camp David Accords of September 1978 (which afforded recognition of and peace with Israel) led to popular dissatisfaction. Because of this, a large number of extremist groups emerged. Harsh measures to stop these groups from emerging were implemented by the Egyptian Government, though the groups continued to grow. Gale Thomson says that the most dangerous of these appeared in the late 1970s, and was known as al-Jihad, or the Jihad organization.

Al-Jihad was the most radical offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. They broke away from the Brotherhood because they didn’t agree with their nonviolent tactics. According to Salama and Bergoch, it began as a small underground group based out of the Cairo districts of Boulaq, Nahia, and Kerdasa, under the leadership of jihadi ideologue Muhammad 'Abd al-Salam Farraj. Al-Jihad absorbed many people, including leaders from a number of other groups. Farraj provided the groups ideological background. Military expertise was provided by an Egyptian Army Colonel by the name of Abbud Abd el-Latif al-Zumor. Members of al-Jama’a al-Islamiya joined up with Al-Jihad. A consultative council was also created for the group. According to Salama and Bergoch, the organizational and decision-making structure of al-Jihad al-Islami was thus finalized by the end of the fall of 1980, complete with Upper and Lower Egyptian branches, and multiple cells throughout Egypt's urban centers. The group’s motivation is to overthrow the Egyptian government and to replace it with an Islamic state. Ted Thornton says that Farraj wrote in a pamphlet; in this, he argued that apostates ruled Egypt and an apostate has to be killed. Farraj believed that these apostates or infidel leaders needed to be killed and replaced by an Islamic Order. Military.com says that the group split into two factions sometime in the late 80s. The old faction has receded in recent years due to many members arrest. The newer group, led by Al-Zawahiri, has merged with Al Qaeda.

Anthony Keats says that Egypt has long claimed that both Iran and Sudan provided assistance to al-Jihad. These countries have been accused of providing arms to al-Jihad. Financial ties have been linked to al Qaeda. It is believed that Osama bin Laden provided resources for al-Jihad. Also, Anthony Keats explains that many members of al-Jihad have trained at al Qaeda-financed Kunar and Khost terrorist training camps in Afghanistan. Al-Jihad is believed to receive funds from non-governmental Islamic organizations, cover businesses and criminal acts.

The al-Jihad is known for many different incidents. They have carried out assassination attempts on the Egyptian Interior Minister Hassan al-Alfi and the Prime Minister Atef Sedky. Information from Gale Thomson supports that al-Jihad has been involved in the Luxor massacre that killed 62 people, 58 were western tourists and 4 were Egyptians. U.S. Embassies have also been bombed by al-Jihad. The assassination of President Sadat and the September 11th World Trade Center attacks are the most prominent incidents. The plan to assassinate Sadat was proposed to Farraj. Khalid al-Islambouli had been in command of the armored transport vehicle that would take part in the military parade. Some of the group leaders argued that the timing of the Sadat assassination was off and were against the idea. They believed they needed more time and members, though the council ultimately overruled objections. According to Salama and Bergoch, on October 6, 1981, as al-Islambouli’s vehicle approached Sadat’s reviewing stand, he and his accomplices opened fire and advanced toward the president. Killing Sadat had immense impact, though this was only one element in a larger strategy. The other part of the plan was to seize control of the Army’s operation room and the Central Security headquarters. Next, they were to gain control of the Radio, Television and Telephone Exchange buildings to communicate the beginning of an Islamic Revolution. The last part was to assault the city of Asyut in central Egypt. The uprising in Asyut did not occur on time and the government suppressed the attack.

After the split, Al-Jihad was greatly weakened. The original group was destroyed because most of the members were arrested. The newer group, lead by Ayman al-Zawahiri, became known as The Vanguards of Conquest. They still carried the name of al-Jihad but they used the other name as an alias. Jonathan White says that in 1998, Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) was absorbed into al Qaeda when Osama bin Laden announced that he was forming the World Islamic Front against Jews and Crusaders. At this point, al-Jihad was taken over by al Qaeda. Also, Jonathan White says the experiences of al-Jihad evolved al Qaeda into a more sophisticated international network. Due to this merger, al-Jihad is stronger then ever.


Works Cited: Keats, Anthony. In The Spotlight: Al-Jihad (Egyptian Islamic Jihad). Center for Defense Information. 1779 Massachusetts Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20036-2109. 2002. http://www.cdi.org/terrorism/aljihad.cfm

Military.com. Al Jihad (aka Egyptian Islamic Jihad, Al-Jihad, Al-Islami Al-Jihad, Islamic Jihad, Jihad Group). 2009. http://www.military.com/Resources/ResourceFileView?file=AlJihad-Organization.htm

Salama, Sammy & Bergoch, John-Ryan. Special Section: Terrorist Attacks on America, Al-Jihad al-Islami. James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Monterey Institute of International Studies. 2008. http://cns.miis.edu/research/wtc01/aljihad.htm

Thomson, Gale. Al-Jihad. The Thomson Corporation. 2006. http://www.novelguide.com/a/discover/exgi_0001_0001_0/exgi_0001_0001_0_00019.html

Thornton, Ted. History of the Middle East Database: Al-Jihad. 2007. http://www.nmhschool.org/tthornton/jihadorgan.php

White, Jonathan R. Terrorism and Homeland Security. Wadsworth Cengage Learning, Belmont, CA 2009.

Blog post 2: Crime for a cause

Crime is something that can be understood in many ways. A terrorist’s crime is done for a cause; while for the ordinary criminal it is usually a crime of opportunity. What separates the terrorist from the ordinary criminal is the cause. It is important for law enforcement to recognize the differences between typical criminal behavior and terrorism. If this can be achieved, prevention of crime and apprehension of criminals will be more successful. If they fail to recognize that the crime committed was something more than ordinary crime, they will miss the point of the investigation.

In cases of malicious destruction of property, law enforcement tends to classify it as ordinary crime. However, these cases could very well be something more. Let me use an example from Jonathan White. He tells a story of unlawful entries on farms. While there, the perpetrator destroys the cages and frees all the animals. The farmer comes out in the morning and sees the destruction, then, goes inside and calls the police. Is this really just an ordinary crime? The ordinary criminal would just destroy the cages and leave. But in this situation, we have someone that took the time to release the animals. Now, I will add in another piece of information. There is an animal rights group that has been upset about the caging of animals at farms. They believe that all animals should be free. With this information, it could be possible that the recent crime at that farm was part of a greater cause. This crime could very well be an attack by a terrorist.

Ordinary criminals are unfocused when it comes to the goals they have. They strike when the opportunity presents itself. There is little preparation because of the fact that everything is unplanned. They usually live in an underworld of crime but they very rarely are devoted to crime as a philosophy. When confronted with force, the criminal will run. When captured, this person will make deals to try and avoid punishment.

Terrorists, on the other hand, are completely different. According to Jonathan White, they find strength in a cause and the ideology or religion behind the cause. These people are supported by an organization that sends them on missions. They tend to work in teams or cells that work together to achieve a goal. The whole idea of being part of a greater cause is what fuels them to act. The targets that are chosen by terrorists are symbolic targets. The attack on these targets will be carefully planned. The terrorists will receive training to prepare them for the operation. They will rehearse the plan over and over to execute the attack without error. When confronted with force, terrorists tend to attack and die for their cause. They believe that they will become martyrs and strengthen the cause. If they are captured, they will rarely cooperate with law enforcement because they refuse to betray the cause they are dedicated too.

The ordinary criminal and the terrorist are two very different people. For me, it is important to understand how they are different. Because, if it this isn’t understood, law enforcement will assume that everything is just an ordinary crime. It is clear with the explanation I have given, that not all crime is just ordinary. Sometimes it can be part of something that is much bigger. If law enforcement always assumes that crime is done by your typical criminal, they will not capture the proper person that did the crime. As a result, law enforcement could even contribute to the problem because they aren’t going after the right person. While this is occurring, the terrorist will have free reign to commit more acts of terror; which can cost the lives of many people.

Here is an interesting article with a similar theme.

Works Cited: White. Jonathan R. Terrorism and Homeland Security. Wadsworth Cengage Learning, Belmont, CA. 2009.

Blog Post 1: Terrorism

Terrorism is a subject that has been in the media a lot. Currently, it is still being reported on and the threat is great. Terrorism needs more attention for people to understand what it has become. Terrorists are more advanced in the technology they use and can strike from anywhere. The worldwide threat is very real. The reason for this is that it has become more scattered and as a result more dangerous. This link will give you an idea of the evolving nature of terrorism.

There are a great number of people who are affected by terrorism. Of course, this number can be small if the terrorist plans it that way. A lot of times terrorists will target things that will attract a large amount of media attention. Media attention gives them the ability to get their message out. It can also dramatize the struggle, which can provide support from sympathizers to their cause. The amount of people that can be affected could be in the thousands or many more. A good example is the September 11, 2001 attacks. According to the New York Times, this attack claimed the lives of nearly 3,000 people. Here is a quick link to the article.

Another area to talk about is the financial aspect of terrorism. Terrorism needs money and lots of it to function. Funding for terrorism is gained through many ways. According to Jonathan White, examples are: robbery, kidnapping, extortion, fraud, larceny, smuggling, drugs, forgery, counterfeiting, state-sponsorship, underground channels, organized crime and charities. Some of those should be startling for us to see. The most startling of these examples are government sponsorships and the possibility that money you have donated to charity could be supporting terrorism.

Attacks from terrorists have become more and more bold. The September 11, 2001 attacks should show you this. The reality of terrorism is that this problem will not go away. With advancements in technology terrorists will become more deadly. The most powerful weapon used by terrorists is probably the media. The media can be used to benefit their cause and doesn’t cost them anything. The future of terrorism is one that will continue to evolve and because of this it will become a greater threat. In order for us to combat terrorism we must also evolve and educate society on the severity of its threat.

Works Cited: White. Jonathan R. Terrorism and Homeland Security. Wadsworth Cengage Learning, Belmont, CA. 2009.

New York Times: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/s/sept_11_2001/index.html

PBS: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/front/view/1_hi.html