Aaron Alexis who perpetrated the mass killing at Washington’s Navy Yard is part of the now familiar pattern of lone gunmen striking at American society with sickening frequency. There was no rational, political, social, or religious arguments behind what Alexis did. His actions, though thoroughly condemned, were explained away as the wayward and solitary acts of a mentally disturbed individual. America made the right noises–the president said the right words–and then went about its business.
The American media, after sniffing about for any Muslim connection and discovering none, did not use the word “terror” to describe the incident at the Navy Yard. Terrorism has unfortunately become a shorthand for “a violent act committed by a Muslim.” We see no “terror experts” pouring through the verses and holy books of Alexis’s former religion, Christianity, or his new religion, Buddhism, to find any reasons for his murderous act, as is the case whenever a Muslim commits any such violent crime. They rather pointed to his history of mental illness and paranoia, such as reports of hearing voices and claiming people followed him with a microwave machine.
What happened in Nairobi and Peshawar was quite different. In Peshawar, the Taliban group responsible for the attack declared that they had committed the suicide bombing of All Saints Church in revenge for American drone strikes in the Tribal Areas. A Taliban statement read, “Until and unless drone strikes are stopped, we will continue to strike wherever we will find an opportunity against non-Muslims.” In Kenya, al Shabab announced its assault on the Westgate Mall in Nairobi as revenge for the 2011 Kenyan military invasion to oust al Shabab from control of southern Somalia, where Kenyan troops are still stationed. An al Shabab spokesman stated, “Either leave our country or live with constant attacks.”It is clear that the actions of the Taliban and al Shabab, both emerging from tribal societies (the Pashtun and Somali, respectively) with defined codes of honor, is not motivated by religion but a mutation of tribal behavior which emphasizes revenge. All their violent actions, despite the ominous warnings of the “terror experts” who point to verses of the Quran, are in fact antithetical to both their tribal and Islamic traditions.
Islam categorically rejects this kind of violence, calling upon Muslims to practice compassion above all. Abu Bakr, the first caliph after the prophet, laid down the rules of war which were to be practiced by all Muslims, among them the forbidding of killing innocent people. The prophet was, likewise, explicit about the prohibition of violence against Christians. In a letter to St. Catherine’s Monastery in Sinai, he wrote, “No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses…The Muslims are to fight for them…Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants.” The violence in places like Peshawar and Nairobi has nothing to do with religion, but rather the broken relationship between central governments and tribal peripheries.http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/wp/2013/09/24/mental-illness-islam-or-revenge-understanding-terrorism-from-the-navy-yard-to-pakistan-to-kenya/
Firstly, the preponderance of religiosity in psychotic episodes is a well-documented phenomenon. That’s not to say that religion causes psychosis, of course, but that, probably due to religion’s central role in much of society, people given to psychotic episodes oftentimes latch on to religion in strange and severe ways.http://www.thenation.com/blog/169063/why-cant-terrorists-be-mentally-ill-too#
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/the-shameful-islamophobia-at-the-heart-of-britains-press-861096.html
On the morning of 7 October 2006 The Sun newspaper splashed a dramatic story across its front page. The story – billed as exclusive – concerned a callous and cynical crime committed by Muslims. A team of Sun reporters described in graphic detail how what the paper labelled a "Muslim hate mob" had vandalised a house near Windsor. The Sun revealed that "vile yobs hurled bricks through windows and daubed obscenities. A message on the drive spelled out in 4ft-letters: 'Fuck off '."One Tory MP, Philip Davies, was quoted venting outrage at this act of vandalism. "If there's anybody who should fuck off," Davies was quoted as saying, "it's the Muslims who are doing this kind of thing. Police should pull out the stops to track down these vile thugs".The Sun left its readers in no doubt as to why the outrage had been committed. Local Muslims were waging a vendetta against four British soldiers who hoped to rent the house on their return from serving their country in Afghanistan. The paper quoted an army source saying that: "these guys have done nothing but bravely serve their country – yet they can't even live where they want in their own".But there was one very big problem with The Sun story. There was no Muslim involvement of any kind. It is true that a house had been vandalised in Montagu Road, part of the comfortable and prosperous Windsor suburb of Datchet – as The Windsor Express had reported the previous day. It also looks very likely that the attack was connected with the potential arrival of four household cavalry officers.
The 'Black Widows'
An example of where females are used prevalently in terrorist attacks are the "Black Widows" within Chechnya. The Black Widows are female suicide bombers generally of Chechen origin, who have lost husbands (though sometimes also sons and brothers) in the Chechen secession wars against Russia.
Some attacks have been carried by group calling itself the "Black Widows Brigade".
The 'Mother of Believers'
One of the more controversial cases of the utilisation of women as terrorists was a previous tactic used by Ansar al Sunnah in Iraq. Known as the "Mother of Believers", Samira Jassim admitted to recruiting, indoctrinating and training women to carry out suicide attacks for the organisation, particularly in the Baghdad and Diyala provinces.
On her arrest, Jassim said she had recruited 80 female suicide bombers, 28 of whom went on to carry out attacks. She also admitted to taking advantage of these women and had some of them raped to shame them into conducting the suicide attacks. After the rape, Jassim told the women that the only way they could escape this shameful act was to act as a suicide bomber.
Though this type of manipulation of females is incredibly rare and not generally used by terrorist organisations and insurgencies, in this case it was used as a means to carry out an attack while avoiding detection.
Why do women commit acts of terror?
If the terrorist organisation or insurgency's membership is depleted, women are often recruited into the movement to not only build up numbers, but also to fill tactical gaps. Women are often considered capable in achieving "surprise attacks", because they are least expected.
Particularly in relation to attacks on "soft targets", such as public gatherings, markets and ceremonies, women are often considered to be able to blend into the crowd and subsequently are able to avoid detection. However in some movements, such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (the FARC), women are considered the military and are put on the frontline.
Why women choose to become terrorists depends on the individual, the organisation, and the political goal or aim of the group. In the case of some females – such as the Black Widows – it is to avenge the loss of a loved one such as a husband, brother, son or cousin. Sometimes the act of terrorism is also conducted to redeem the family name.
In this respect, women can become involved in terrorism for personal, rather than ideological, reasons. However, in the case of some movements like the FARC, female involvement is seen as a means of evening out patriarchy, and giving women a sense of empowerment, participation and accomplishment.
It is not surprising that significant attention has been given to the alleged involvement of the "White Widow", because the idea of a female terrorist is unexpected and quite confronting for some. However, it is also highly unlikely this will be the last time a female terrorist is propelled onto the scene.
 |
| (red is the original font) |
 |
| (red is the original font) |
 |
| (red is the original font) |
