The Daily Bias - Cutting the crap since 2005

In the US, the Council on Foreign Relations has put out a report entitled "A New Beginning - Strategies for a More Fruitful Dialogue with the Muslim World", in which the council has asked focus groups in Morocco, Egypt and Indonesia about their perceptions of the US. What the report says is basically that the US in its relations with Muslim should quit defending itself against their attacks, give them more money, and stop telling them that their barbaric customs are.....well, barbaric customs. As such, nothing new.

Where it becomes interesting is in the treatment of how the focus groups view jihadist leaders, both local and global. Seems as if many dont know their homegrown jihadis:

Despite their hopes for Islamic influence on politics, focus group members gave little support to local Islamist leaders in Morocco and Egypt and only moderate sympathy in Indonesia. In Morocco, several participants confused Abdeslam Yacine, leader of the largest local Islamist group, al-Adl Wah Ihsane, with the late Palestinian Hamas leader Ahmed Yacine, killed by an Israeli last year. “We don’t know much about him,” said an older woman. A few alluded to his learning and stature (“teacher,” “respected”). Among those who offered opinions, some were wary or anxious. Many thought him an extremist.

Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammed Akef was even less well known in Cairo, where almost none of the participants knew his name. Their affect and body language when he was mentioned gave the impression of genuine puzzlement, not fear.

In contrast, Abubakir Bashir, a controversial figure in Indonesia, drew mixed reactions in Jakarta. Accused of being the spiritual leader of the al-Qaeda affiliate responsible for the deadly bombings in Bali and Jakarta in the past three years, he was awaiting retrial on terrorism charges at the time the focus groups met. Many associated him with violence or extremism (“terrorist,” “hard-line,” “bomb,” “uses religion as cover”). But roughly as many people were sympathetic, seeing him as a “religious person” who is a “victim” or “scapegoat” facing unfounded charges. (One claimed Bashir was the object of an American vendetta.)

As such, this could be seen as pretty encouraging news. Then comes the description of how people see Osama bin Laden, though:

In contrast to local Islamists, Osama bin Laden received rock-star reviews from many young Muslims. “He is a good man [who] fights for his beliefs,” said one young Egyptian woman. Other associations included “very clever,” “cunning,” “a good businessman,” “intellectual,” “idealistic,” “courageous,” and “hero.” Many dismissed his ties to terrorism as American propaganda, describing him as a “victim of false accusation” and “a name invented by the United States to justify its acts.”

Oh really? How about we nuke the entire Middle East, then tell them that the United States is just a name invented by Muslims to justify their terrorist attacks.

Sheesh!

Read the whole thing here.

Henrik