Key Concepts

in
American History
Terrorism
Set Contents
Key Concepts in
American History
Abolitionism
Colonialism
Expansionism
Federalism
Industrialism
Internationalism
Isolationism
Nationalism
Progressivism
Terrorism
 Key Concepts
in
American History
Terrorism

Trevor Conan Kearns

Jennifer L. Weber, Ph.D.
General Editor
University of Kansas
Key Concepts in American History: Terrorism

Copyright © 2010 by DWJ BOOKS LLC

DEVELOPED, DESIGNED, AND PRODUCED BY DWJ BOOKS LLC

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any
means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information
storage or retrieval systems, without permission in writing from the publisher. For
information contact:

Chelsea House
An imprint of Infobase Publishing
132 West 31st Street
New York NY 10001

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Kearns, Trevor Conan.

â•… Terrorism/Trevor Conan Kearns; Jennifer L. Weber, general editor.
â•…â•…â•… p. cm. – (Key concepts in American history)
â•… Includes bibliographical references and index.
â•… ISBN 978-1-60413-226-7 (hardcover)
â•… ISBN 978-1-4381-3231-0 (e-book)
1.╇ Terrorism–History–Chronology–Encyclopedias, Juvenile.â•… 2.╇ Terrorism–History–20th
century–Encyclopedias, Juvenile.â•… 3.╇ Terrorism–History–21st century–Encyclopedias,
Juvenile.â•… I.╇ Weber, Jennifer L., 1962–â•… II.╇ Title.
â•… HV6431.K37 2009
â•… 363.32503—dc22
2009025287

Chelsea House books are available at special discounts when purchased in bulk quantities
for businesses, associations, institutions, or sales promotions. Please call our Special Sales
Department in New York at (212) 967-8800 or (800) 322-8755.

You can find Chelsea House on the World Wide Web at http://www.chelseahouse.com

Cover printed by Bang Printing, Brainerd, MN

Book printed and bound by Bang Printing, Brainerd, MN
Date printed: May 2010
Printed in the United States of America

10╇ 9╇ 8╇ 7╇ 6╇ 5╇ 4╇ 3╇ 2╇ 1

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Acknowledgments
p. 1: AP Photo/Al Jazeera; p. 14: AP Photo/Hamid Jalaudin; p. 24: Reuters/STR/Landov;
p. 39: Reuters/DOD/Landov; p. 46: Reuters/Tim Cocks/Landov; p. 66: Library of Congress,
Prints and Photographs Division; p. 79: AP Photo/JamesNachtwey/VII; p. 97: Reuters/
U.S. Navy/Landov; p. 100: AP Photo/Lower Manhattan Development Corp./File; p. 108:
AP Photo/Jae C. Hong.

List of Illustrations ...........................vi
Reader’s Guide to Terrorism ...........vii
Milestones in Terrorism
(1920–Present).............................viii
Preface ...............................................x
What Is Terrorism? ........................... 1
Terrorism from A to Z
Afghanistan ...................................... 9
Then & Now: “The Graveyard
of Empires”.................................. 11
Al Jazeera ....................................... 13
Al Qaeda ......................................... 15
Al-Zarqawi, Abu Musab
(1966–2006) ................................. 17
Al-Zawahiri, Ayman (1951– ) ........ 19
American Taliban ........................... 20
Baghdad.......................................... 21
Bali Attacks (2002).......................... 22
Bin Laden, Osama (1957– )............ 24
History Speaks: Osama bin
Laden After the 9/11 Attacks ..... 26
Bush, George W. (1946– ) .............. 27
Cyberterrorism................................ 29
Department of Homeland
Security ........................................ 30
Then & Now: Abraham Lincoln
and the Secret Service................. 31
Ecoterrorism ................................... 33
Fatwa .............................................. 34
Gaza Strip and the West Bank ....... 36
History Makers: Mahmoud
Abbas (1935– ) ............................ 37
Guantánamo Bay, Cuba ................. 38
Hamas ............................................. 41
Hizbollah......................................... 42
Iran .................................................. 44
Iraqi War ......................................... 45
History Makers: Saddam
Hussein (1937–2006) ................... 49
v
Contents
Islamic Fundamentalism................. 50
Istanbul Bombings (2003) .............. 55
Jihad ................................................ 56
Kenya and Tanzania
Bombings (1998) ......................... 57
London Bombings (2005) ............... 59
History Speaks: Tony Blair on
the London Bombings ................ 60
Madrid Bombings (2004) ............... 61
Mujahideen .................................... 63
Mullah Omar (1959?– ).................. 64
New York City Attack
(September 16, 1920) .................. 65
Oklahoma City Bombing................ 67
Pakistan........................................... 68
History Makers: Benazir
Bhutto (1953–2007)..................... 70
Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO) ..................... 71
History Makers: Yasir Arafat
(1929–2004) ................................. 73
Patriot Act (2001) ........................... 75
Pentagon ........................................ 77
September 11, 2001 (9/11) ............. 78
History Makers: Rudolph
Giuliani (1944– ) ......................... 82
Shoe Bomber .................................. 86
Sleeper Cells.................................... 86
Somalia ........................................... 88
Symbionese Liberation Army......... 89
Taliban ............................................ 90
History Speaks:
George W. Bush on
Toppling the Taliban ................... 92
Terrorist Organizations .................. 93
Unabomber..................................... 95
USS Cole Bombing (2000) .............. 96
Weapons of Mass Destruction
(WMDs) ........................................ 98
World Trade Center, One ............... 99
vi ✪ Terrorism
Viewpoints About Terrorism
Speech After the Tanzania and
Kenya Bombings, President
William Clinton, 1998 ............... 101
War on Terrorism Speech,
President George W. Bush,
September 20, 2001 .................. 102
Condolences to the U.S.,
Russian President
Vladimir Putin, 2001 ................. 104
Iraqi War Resolution, 2002 .......... 105
List of Illustrations
Photos
Osama bin Laden.............................. 1
Newsroom at Al Jazeera ................ 14
Aftermath of attacks in Bali .......... 24
Holding cells at
Guantánamo Bay, Cuba .............. 39
U.S. troops in Iraq........................... 46
Aftermath of 1920 attack on
Wall Street, New York................. 66
World Trade Center
devastation .................................. 79
Speech at Annapolis, Israeli
Prime Minister Ehud
Olmert, 2007.............................. 106
Inaugural Address,
President Barack Obama,
January 20, 2009 ....................... 108
Glossary of Key Terms ................. 110
Selected Bibliography .................. 113
Index ............................................. 116
USS Cole after bombing near
Yemen .......................................... 97
Artist’s rendering of One World
Trade Center, New York City .... 100
President Barack Obama.............. 108
Maps
Terrorist Attacks Around the
Globe ............................................. 8
Flight Paths and Crashes of
Hijacked Planes, 9/11 .................. 80
 Reader’s Guide
to Terrorism
The list that follows is provided as an
aid to readers in locating articles on
the big topics or themes in the study
of terrorism in the twentieth and
twenty-first centuries. The Reader’s
Guide arranges all of the A to Z en-
tries in Key Concepts in American
History: Terrorism according to
these 7 key concepts of the social
studies curriculum: Countries,
Cities, and Nations; Economics
and Trade Issues; Government
and Law; People and Society;
Policies and Programs; Religion;
and Social Movements. Some arti-
cles appear in more than one cate-
gory, helping readers see the links
between topics.

Countries, Cities, and Enemy Combatants (See Bhutto, Benazir (1953–2007)

Nations
Afghanistan
Baghdad
Bali Attacks (2002)
Gaza Strip and the West Bank
Guantánamo Bay, Cuba
Iran
Iraqi War
Istanbul Bombings (2003)
Kenya and Tanzania
Bombings (1998)
London Bombings (2005)
Madrid Bombings (2004)
Oklahoma City Bombings
New York City Attack
(September 16, 1920)
Pakistan
Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO)
Somalia
Economics and Trade
Issues
Al Jazeera
Al Qaeda
Bali Attacks (2002)
Cyberterrorism
Ecoterrorism
New York City Attack
(September 16, 1920)
One World Trade Center
Terrorist Organizations
Government and Law
Cyberterrorism
Department of Homeland
Security
Ecoterrorism
Guantánamo Bay, Cuba)
Iraqi War
Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO)
Patriot Act (2001)
Pentagon
Symbionese Liberation Army
Taliban
USS Cole Bombing (2000)
Weapons of Mass Destruction
Policies and Programs
Al Jazeera
Enemy Combatants (See
Guantánamo Bay, Cuba)
Fatwa
Hamas
Hizbollah
Guantánamo Bay, Cuba
Iraqi War
Islamic Fundamentalism
Jihad
Patriot Act (2001)
Taliban
Terrorist Organizations
People and Society
Abbas, Mahmoud (1935– )
(See Gaza Strip and the
West Bank)
Al Jazeera
Al-Zarqawi, Abu Musab
(1966–2006)
Al-Zawahiri, Ayman (1951– )
American Taliban
Arafat, Yasir (1929–2004) (See
Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO))
Bin Laden, Osama (1957– )
(See Pakistan)
Bush, George, W. (1946– )
Cheney, Richard B. (1941– )
(See Bush, George W.)
Clinton, William J. (1946– )
Giuliani, Rudolph (1944– )
(See September 11, 2001)
Hussein, Saddam (1937–2006)
(See Iraqi War)
Mujahideen
Mullah Omar (1959?– )
Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO)
Shoe Bomber
Sleeper Cells
Symbionese Liberation Army
Taliban
Terrorist Organizations
Unabomber
USS Cole Bombing (2000)
Religion
Al Jazeera
Al Qaeda
Bin Laden, Osama (1957– )
Fatwa
Islamic Fundamentalism
Jihad
Mullah Omar (1959?– )
Taliban
Social Movements
Al Jazeera
Al Qaeda
Islamic Fundamentalism
Jihad
Sleeper Cells
Symbionese Liberation Army
Terrorist Organizations

vii
Committing acts of violence against others for political purposes can be
traced throughout history. Beginning in the twentieth century, how-
ever, such acts of violence took on a new significance. With the growth
of the mass media, the impact of terrorist acts of violence could be
spread around the globe instantaneously. No longer did a bombing or
killing affect just a single city or country.
With the advent of television and the Internet, the horrible emotional
toll of violent death was brought into peoples’ homes. Terrorism—acts
of violence meant to kill and injure as many people as possible—is a
part of everyday life in the twenty-first century.

1920 Anarchists carry out terrorist
bombing in New York City; the
case is never solved.
1964 Palestine Liberation Organization
(PLO) is founded.
1978 President Jimmy Carter (1977–
1981) secures the Camp David
Accords, establishing peace
between Israel and Egypt.
1979 The Iranian Revolution estab-
lishes a fundamentalist govern-
ment in Iran; Soviet forces invade
Afghanistan; Muslim fighters
from many countries come to
Afghanistan, forming the mujahi-
deen to fight the Soviets.
1988 George H. W. Bush (1981–1989)
is elected the 41st president of
the United States.
1990 Iraq invades Kuwait.
1991 Allied troops force Iraqi troops
to flee Kuwait in the Persian Gulf
War.
1993 Oslo Accords establish a frame-
work for peace between Israel
and the Palestinians; President
Bill Clinton (1993–2001), PLO
Leader Yasser Arafat, and Israeli
prime minister Yitzhak Rabin
oversee the signing of the his-
toric accord in Washington,
D.C.
1998 Al Qaeda, an international terror-
ist organization, bombs U.S.
embassies in the East African
nations of Kenya and Tanzania;
in retaliation, President Bill
Clinton orders cruise missile
attacks on suspected targets in.
2000 Terrorists attack the USS
Cole while it is refueling off
the coast of Yemen, killing 17
American sailors.
2001 September 11 terrorist attacks:
two hijacked airplanes crash into
the World Trade Center in New
York City; a third plane crashes
into the Pentagon in Washington,
D.C.; a fourth plane crashes in
Somerset County, Pennsylvania;
Osama bin Laden, leader of the
terrorist organization al Qaeda,
praises the attacks; Patriot Act
passed by Congress and signed
into law by President George W.

viii
Terrorism (1920–Present)
Bush (2001–2009); the United
States invades Afghanistan.
2001 Iraq War Resolution is passed by
the U.S. Congress; U.S. Depart-
ment of Homeland Security
(DHS) becomes the 15th cabinet
department.
2002 Iraq War Resolution is passed
by the U.S. Congress; U.S. Depart-
ment of Homeland Security
(DHS) becomes the 15th cabinet
department.
2003 The United States and its allies
invade Iraq in March, toppling
dictator Saddam Hussein; terror-
ist bombings occur in Istanbul,
Turkey in November.
2004 Terrorists set off a series of bombs
on commuter trains in Madrid,
Spain, killing 191 and injuring
thousands.
2005 Terrorists bomb the London
subway system, killing 12 and
injuring hundreds.
2006 Saddam Hussein, the deposed
dictator of Iraq, is found guilty of
war crimes by an Iraqi court and
executed; Hezbollah, which many
ix
Western nations identify as a
terrorist organization, invades
Israel from Lebanon, setting off
the 2006 Lebanon War; a U.N.
cease-fire ends the war in August
2006.
2007 Pakistani leader Benazir Bhutto
is assassinated; the militant
Palestinian organization Hamas
takes over the Gaza Strip.
2008 The United States and Iraq reach
an agreement to remove all
American troops from Iraq by
201l; Pakistan’s President Perez
Musharraf, a strong ally in the
war on terrorism, resigns; Asif Ali
Zadari, the widower of Benazir
Bhutto, is elected president,
ending more than eight years of
military rule.
2009 Israel responds to Hamas rocket
attacks and refusal to continue
a cease-fire by sending troops
into the Gaza Strip; Israel begins
a blockade of the Gaza Strip;
al Qaeda threatens terrorist
attacks in Germany if that nation’s
troops are not withdrawn from
Afghanistan.
 Preface

T he United States was founded on ideas. Those who wrote the U.S.
Constitution were influenced by ideas that began in Europe: reason
over religion, human rights over the rights of kings, and self-governance
over tyranny. Ideas, and the arguments over them, have continued to
shape the nation. Of all the ideas that influenced the nation’s founding
and its growth, 10 are perhaps the most important and are singled out
here in an original series—KEY CONCEPTS IN AMERICAN HISTORY. The vol-
umes bring these concepts to life, Abolitionism, Colonialism, Expan-
sionism, Federalism, Industrialism, Internationalism, Isolationism,
Nationalism, Progressivism, and Terrorism.
These books examine the big ideas, major events, and influential indi-
viduals that have helped define American history. Each book features three
sections. The first is an overview of the concept, its historical context, the
debates over the concept, and how it changed the history and growth of
the United States. The second is an encyclopedic, A-to-Z treatment of the
people, events, issues, and organizations that help to define the “-ism”
under review. Here, readers will find detailed facts and vivid histories,
along with referrals to other books for more details about the topic.
Interspersed throughout the entries are many high-interest features:
“History Speaks” provides excerpts of documents, speeches, and letters
from some of the most influential figures in American history. “History
Makers” provides brief biographies of key people who dramatically in-
fluenced the country. “Then and Now” helps readers connect issues of
the nation’s past with present-day concerns.
In the third part of each volume, “Viewpoints,” readers will find lon-
ger primary documents illustrating ideas that reflect a certain point of
view of the time. Also included are important government documents
and key Supreme Court decisions.
The KEY CONCEPTS series also features “Milestones in. . . ,” time lines
that will enable readers to quickly sort out how one event led to an-
other, a glossary, and a bibliography for further reading.
People make decisions that determine history, and Americans have
generated and refined the ideas that have determined U.S. history. With
an understanding of the most important concepts that have shaped our
past, readers can gain a better idea of what has shaped our present.
Jennifer L. Weber, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of History, University of Kansas
General Editor

x
 What
Is
Terrorism?

W hat exactly are acts of terrorism? These are

systematic, or planned, attacks designed to
create fear among the public, often to further a po-
litical or fundamentalist religious agenda. Terror-
ism is also used as a tool to influence the government
policy of a nation. Terrorism is different from con-
ventional warfare.
Although, since the beginning of history, na-
tions and other groups have used violent attacks
and warfare in attempts to force opponents into
submission, past violence was usually directed at a
specific enemy. For example, the ancient Persian
Empire attacked the Greek city-states from 600 to
800 B.C. in an attempt
to control their wealthy
commercial ports. Be-
fore the outbreak of
the American Civil War
(1861–1865), proslav-
ery settlers and anti-
slavery settlers brutally
attacked each other in
the Kansas Territory,
each trying to force
its views upon the
other. After the Civil
War, the Ku Klux Klan,
a white supremacist
group, murdered, beat,
and terrorized recently
freed African Ameri-
cans and their white Osama bin Laden, the leader of the terrorist organization al
supporters. The Klan Qaeda, praises God after the September 11, 2001, attacks on the
also sought to prevent United States. Bin Laden’s message, in which he threatened that
America “will never dream of security” until “the infidel’s armies
African Americans leave the land of Muhammad,” was broadcast by Al Jazeera, the
from attending school, popular Arabic-language news network.

DWJ_Terror_F_replacedlinks.indd 1 4/5/10 2:48:11 PM

2 ✪ Terrorism

getting better jobs, and voting. In other words,

these groups targeted another group.
During World War II (1939–1945), the Nazi
dictator Adolf Hitler attacked neighboring countries
to spread German power, enslave conquered peo-
ples, and create a so-called Aryan race. An essential
part of his plan included the extermination of all
Jews living in Europe. Indeed, Hitler’s troops mur-
dered more than 6 million Jews during the Holo-
caust, in addition to millions of other targeted
groups.
Despite the death and destruction caused by
such events, these violent acts differ from modern
terrorism in one essential way: They were directed
toward a specific group—whether it was another na-
tion or a definite people. Terrorism in the twenty-
first century is targeted toward everyone—civilians
and the military, blacks and whites, Jews and
Gentiles.
Terrorists, those who perpetrate acts of terror-
ism, lack regard for human life—even their own.
Thus, terrorists are willing to kill themselves as part
of their plan to inflict death and destruction on the
public. In general, their goal is to injure as many
people, cause as many deaths, and destroy as much
property as possible. In this way, terrorists try to
cause as much fear within society as they can.
TOLERANCE IN THE UNITED STATES
Terrorism tends to thrive in countries or regions
that deny their citizens basic or essential freedoms.
One of the basic strengths of the United States as a
nation is its open, free society. Toleration is guaran-
teed by the Constitution. American citizens enjoy a
culture that accepts a wide range of personal beliefs
and private behaviors. These freedoms, called civil
liberties, allow Americans to be active members of
a political party, or to not vote at all. They allow
Americans to practice the faith of their choice, or to
not practice or believe in any religion at all. They
also provide Americans with the freedom to experi-
ment, to share ideas, and to learn from one another.
In a free society, creativity and individual expres-
sion flourish.
 Terrorism ✪ 3

Freedom to Learn and Fail More importantly,

Americans have the freedom to fail in their endeav-
ors and to learn from their failures. Thanks to the
open pursuit of science, Americans, as well as the
peoples of many other nations, continue to learn
about the world and can apply new knowledge in
productive ways.
This capacity for learning, both from failure and
from science, translates into a key advantage of
open societies—they are mechanisms for self-
correction. In other words, open societies have the
means to change themselves for the better. For ex-
ample, if one elected government pursues policies
that lead to negative consequences for the nation,
citizens of that nation can speak out, organize, and
apply political pressure in a number of peaceful
ways to change those policies. They also can vote
into office a new government with better policies.
This ability to peacefully change how society func-
tions is perhaps the most powerful means for self-
correction that Americans possess as a nation.
Necessity of Civil Liberties Seen in this way, consti-
tutionally guaranteed civil liberties are not mere
luxuries; they are necessities for an open society.
Americans and other peoples who live in open soci-
eties use these freedoms to ask questions, to criti-
cize, to debate, to evaluate, to censure, to suggest, to
praise. Open societies are created and maintained
only through the guaranteed freedoms of expres-
sion and inquiry—the right to speak out and the
right to question and change what may already
exist.
LACK OF SOCIETAL TOLERANCE
In contrast to the United States—as well as to
Europe, Israel, and many other societies—are na-
tions where the tolerance of differences is nonexis-
tent or severely limited. In such societies, citizens
usually must support the same political party and
follow the same faith. In Communist nations, peo-
ple may profess no faith at all. In general, differences
in thought, belief, and behavior of any kind are sup-
pressed by the authorities. Individuals who dare to
speak out against the government or the official
4 ✪ Terrorism

religion are often declared criminals, jailed, and

executed.
Today, Belarus, North Korea, Vietnam, and the
People’s Republic of China deny their citizens the
human rights that most Western societies take for
granted. Their governments are described as totali-
tarian. In elections, people may vote only for the
Communist Party candidate. Religious beliefs are
suppressed.
Iran Iran’s theocratic government requires citi-
zens to believe in Islam. People who hold other be-
liefs are sometimes arrested or forced to leave the
country. Similarly, many nondemocratic nations in
Southwest Asia and northern Africa do not tolerate
dissent among their citizens. These nations often
demand complete loyalty to the government, do not
allow political discussion, and require all people to
be followers of Islam.
Afghanistan Prior to 2001, a group known as the
Taliban ruled Afghanistan. It mandated an extremely
strict interpretation of the Qur’an, the holy book of
Islam. Men were required to grow beards, and
women were to be completely covered when out-
side the home, as well as be accompanied by a male
relative. Girls were forbidden to attend school.
Western-style clothing and music were outlawed.
Liberal and Theocratic Societies In essence, two
distinct and starkly different ideologies, or philos-
ophies, are prevalent in the world today. One mod-
ern ideology is primarily secular and liberal. These
two qualities underlie American, European, and
Israeli society. In a secular society, the government
does not promote one religion over another, nor
does it interfere in the free practice of any religion.
In a liberal society, the government recognizes that
individual rights are vital to a healthy, flourishing
society and therefore need to be protected.
The opposing ideology is narrow-minded. It may
be based on a totalitarian philosophy such as
Communism, which is officially atheistic. Or, it may
be a theocracy that relies upon a fundamentalist
 Terrorism ✪ 5

interpretation of a holy book, such as the Bible or

Qur’an.
All faithful Muslims believe that the Qur’an is the
final revelation of Allah (God) to the world, given to
the prophet Muhammad in the seventh century. Mil-
lions of Muslims live in, embrace, enjoy, and help
strengthen open societies like the United States and
Europe while practicing their faith. They recognize
and honor the choices of other citizens to live
differently.

The Extreme Fundamentalist View Those who take

a fundamentalist view of the Qur’an, as do the Tal-
iban in Afghanistan and the international terrorist
group al Qaeda, believe that they have an obligation
to destroy secular governments and establish a
global Islamic regime. Under such a government,
called a caliphate, individual rights would be lim-
ited to those outlined in the Qur’an. This ideology
holds that what is written in the Qur’an is more im-
portant than individual rights such as freedom of
speech, freedom of religion, freedom of dress, and
so forth.
These ideologies could not be more at odds with
one another. One allows for and even encourages
change in society, while the other tries to fix society
through scripture.
Those Muslims who seek to establish theocratic
societies see liberal societies, mainly those of
Europe, Israel, and the United States, as sinful by
nature and therefore deserving of destruction. In
addition, they resent the intrusion of these societies
into the Muslim world. Their different religious be-
liefs have been combined with anger and resent-
ment at the social and political policies, as well as
the military and economic power, of liberal nations.
For example, fundamentalists view Western media—
such as television shows, movies, and music—as
offensive to Muslims. Without government censor-
ship, it would be difficult to keep such media out of
a society. Consequently, some states with a Muslim
majority have strong censorship laws that prohibit
this media. Muslims living in these societies see
6 ✪ Terrorism

censorship as a necessary measure against the im-

moral influence of liberal societies.
STATELESS TERRORISM
In the late twentieth century, fundamentalist groups
such as al Qaeda organized to attack liberal societies
and to protect Islam from what they viewed as the
immoral dangers of Western society. Al Qaeda and
groups who support it view the governments of
most Muslim countries as weak and too eager to ac-
commodate Western, liberal society. For example, al
Qaeda members believe it is sinful to have American
troops stationed in Saudi Arabia or to allow West-
ern-style dress in Egypt. Al Qaeda therefore has de-
termined that it must use acts of terrorism to destroy
Western society and to spread its interpretation of
Islam throughout the world.
A New Type of War The devastating terrorist at-
tacks that occurred in the United States on Septem-
ber 11, 2001, suggest that the West has entered a
new stage in history. Soon after the attacks, this
suggestion was articulated by President George
W. Bush (2001–2009) when he declared that
Americans were at war. This was a new kind of
war, however, one fought, not against another
sovereign nation, but against the elusive interna-
tional terrorist organization known as al Qaeda. It
was a difficult kind of war, Bush pointed out,
because the enemy did not fight according to inter-
national treaties governing warfare, nor did they
use conventional weapons.
Coercion or Conversion? There is one feature that
underlies all terrorist acts: They are acts of coercion,
attempts at forcing another person—or govern-
ment—to behave in a certain way. Coercion is often
accomplished through the use of violence. For ex-
ample, when a suicide bomber blows himself up in
a European market or train station, killing as many
bystanders as possible, he is trying to force a change
in that government’s policies.
In open societies, however, collective or
governmental action is carried out through conver-
sation instead of coercion. In other words, open
 Terrorism ✪ 7

debate between politicians, lawyers, analysts, and

ordinary citizens allows individuals to influence
each other’s views, perhaps changing their minds,
converting their way of thinking, or enlisting them
in a cause.
This is an important way in which open societ-
ies differ from totalitarian ones. Open societies do
not sanction or tolerate coercion—forcing someone
to behave a certain way—while totalitarian ones can-
not exist without it.
Because open societies are opposed to coercion,
it follows that they are opposed to terrorism as well.
Simply put, terrorism is the opposite of the tolerant,
open processes that underlie societies such as those
of the United States, Europe, and Israel. It is in this
light that the West’s struggle against al Qaeda and
other fundamentalist Islamic groups can accurately
be seen as a war—a war of fundamental or basic ap-
proaches to society, or a war of ideologies.
HOW SHOULD THE UNITED STATES RESPOND?
As the United States tries to defend itself against ter-
rorist organizations, many argue that the nation’s
primary duty is to preserve the freedoms that allow
America’s open society. Others, however, argue that
some contraction of civil liberties is necessary to
protect Americans from further terrorist attacks.
Given the fundamental ideological opposition be-
tween all forms of terrorism and an open society—
coercion versus conversion—it is essential that the
United States, as well as other liberal nations, remain
true to secular and liberal values. If they do not, then
the terrorists will have succeeded in their attempts
to change the West.
FURTHERREADING
Hiber, Amanda. Should Governments Negotiate with Terror-
ists? Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2008.
Mason, Paul. Israel and Palestine. Tarrytown, N.Y.: Marshall
Cavendish Benchmark, 2008.
 Terrorist Attacks Around
the Globe

Terrorism in the twenty-first century has affected countries across the globe. Many of
the terrorist attacks are attributed to extremist groups such as al Qaeda; other attacks,
such as those in Colombia, are mostly related to illegal drug dealing and that govern-
ment’s attempt to crack down on drug smuggling.
 Terrorism
from
A to Z
A
Afghanistan
Landlocked and impoverished coun-
try in south-central Asia, home to
many ethnic groups, and one of the
main fronts in the U.S.-led war on in-
ternational terrorism. An extended
conflict between the Afghans and oc-
cupying forces of the Soviet Union in
the 1980s devastated the nation, es-
tablishing political, economic, and
social conditions that led to the rise
in the 1990s of the fundamentalist
Taliban government and its support
of the international terrorist organi-
zation al Qaeda.
Following the tragic events of
September 11, 2001, the United States
invaded Afghanistan in an attempt to
capture the founder and leader of al
Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, and other
terrorist leaders believed to be hid-
ing there. Although the power of the
Taliban was largely destroyed as a re-
sult, the U.S. invasion further desta-
bilized conditions in Afghanistan
and, toward the end of the first de-
cade of the twenty-first century, re-
sulted in a resurgence of terrorist
activity there.
PEOPLES
Afghanistan is a multiethnic country.
The Pashtuns make up the largest
DWJ_Terror_F_replacedlinks.indd 9
ethnicity, while the Tajiks, Hazaras, A
Uzbeks, Aimaks, and Turkmen com-
pose the remaining half of the popu-
lation. Although there are significant
differences in language and culture
among Afghanistan’s peoples, the
vast majority of the population is
Muslim, or followers of Islam. An
estimated three-fourths of the people
are Sunnis, while the remaining one-
fourth is a mixture of Shias and Sufis.
A very small minority are either
Hindus or Sikhs.
MODERN HISTORY
In 1964, Afghanistan became a con-
stitutional monarchy, officially
headed by a king but with democrati-
cally elected officials. A new constitu-
tion was written that established a
bicameral, or two-house, legislature
and open elections. Afghanistan’s
politics became highly polarized as
conservative religious parties, some
heavily influenced by the militant
Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, vied
with secular and leftist parties that
included the Marxist People’s Demo-
cratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA).
However, the transition to a constitu-
tional state was never completed.
In 1973, Mohammad Daoud Khan,
a former prime minister, seized
power in a coup. He established the
4/5/10 2:48:13 PM
10 ✪ Afghanistan
Republic of Afghanistan with a new
constitution and attempted to intro-
duce a number of socioeconomic re-
forms. However, he was opposed by
both religious parties and the PDPA,
which, with Soviet support, seized
power in 1978. The PDPA also at-
tempted to introduce reforms, but
they were even more radical and
sparked widespread revolts within a
year. On December 24, 1979, the So-
viet Union invaded Afghanistan in
order to support its Marxist regime.
The Mujahideen and Soviet With-
drawal Although the Soviets secured
a communist government in Kabul
with the help of the pro-Marxist Af-
ghan military, anticommunist forces
began to grow throughout Afghani-
stan, and much of the country re-
mained primarily in the control of
fundamentalist Muslims who were
inspired by the Iranian Revolution of
1979, when the shah, or ruler, of Iran
was overthrown and a theocracy
was established in that nation.
Muslim mujahideen (holy war-
riors) came from around the world to
help fight the Soviet occupation. Most
fighting occurred on the Afghanistan-
Pakistan border, where small groups
would cross in order to carry out hit-
and-run attacks. Many of these guer-
rilla fighters came from the ranks of
the several million Afghan refugees
who had fled to Pakistan following
the Soviet invasion.
However, thousands more fight-
ers came from foreign states. One of
the most successful recruiters was
Osama bin Laden, a Saudi Arabian
fundamentalist and billionaire who,
though he did not take part in much
direct fighting, used his financial re-
sources to support the mujahideen
and to initiate recruiting activities
worldwide. Bin Laden later founded
and led the international terrorist or-
ganization al Qaeda. Other foreign
mujahideen came from Iran, Pakistan,
and countries of the Middle East.
Thanks in great part to logistical
and military aid given to the mujahi-
deen by China, the United Kingdom,
and the United States, the Soviet
Union was forced to withdraw from
Afghanistan in the late 1980s. A peace
accord was signed in April 1988, and
the last Soviet soldiers departed in
February 1989.
Civil War and the Taliban The con-
flict between militant Islamists and
the Afghan government only grew
more pronounced following the So-
viet withdrawal. The main mujahi-
deen resistance groups formed a co-
alition government in Pakistan that
formally took control of Afghanistan
in April 1992. The Marxist govern-
ment had continued to receive eco-
nomic and military aid from the So-
viet Union until then, but the breakup
of that nation in 1991 cut off this im-
portant source of support and trig-
gered a political collapse.
However, the power-sharing
agreement the coalition government
had created quickly broke down, and
chaos spread throughout Afghanistan
as the nation fragmented into zones
controlled by local warlords. Afghani-
stan effectively disappeared as a co-
hesive nation during this time.
Taliban Rise to Power In late 1994,
however, a new religious and politi-
cal faction emerged that promised to

restore order to the stricken country.
Known as the Taliban (Persian for
“student”), this group was led by for-
mer mujahideen Mullah Mohammad
Omar. Originating in the southern
province of Kandahar, the Taliban
quickly won widespread support
among the Pashtun regions of Af-
ghanistan. The group seized control
of Herat in 1995, Kabul in 1996, and
the important northern city of Mazar-
e Sharif in 1998. By 2001, the Taliban
controlled all of Afghanistan except
for a small portion of the north, which
remained in the hands of a coalition
“The Graveyard of Empires”
In the past three decades, Afghanistan has
experienced two major invasions by for-
eign powers. Although the political back-
drops differed significantly, the invasions
nevertheless shared some important
characteristics.
The 1979 Soviet invasion was meant to
support the pro-Marxist regime that had
seized power several years earlier. The So-
viets intended to transform Afghanistan
into a friendly buffer state. The 2001
American-led invasion did not grow out of
an intent to spread any particular ideol-
ogy, as did the Soviet invasion, but was
rather a response to the September 11,
2001, attacks. The goal was to eliminate al
Qaeda’s headquarters and training camps,
as well as depose the Taliban.
Ironically, however, these archrivals, or
longtime enemies, shared a common goal
in their respective invasions: to support a
modern, secular government in the face of
Islamic theocracy. Both the Soviet Union
Afghanistan ✪ 11
of mujahideen militia known as the
Northern Alliance.
The Taliban were at first well re-
garded by the international commu-
nity for reestablishing order in
Afghanistan and disarming the nu-
merous mujahideen militia in the
areas it controlled. However, this pos-
itive perception was soon eroded by
the Taliban’s radical religious views. A
They established a government based
on sharia, or Islamic law, passing
edicts outlawing music, television,
chess, kite-flying, and a host of other
activities considered blasphemous.
and the United States regarded secular so-
ciety as a stabilizing and positive force.
Nonetheless, the Soviet Union engaged in
forms of oppression just as objectionable
as theocratic ones, but in the name of
Marxist ideology instead of religion. The
Soviet Union, like all theocracies, had a to-
talitarian form of government.
The two invasions shared other quali-
ties: duration, cost, and outcome. The U.S.
invasion entered its eighth year in
October 2008, yet the Taliban maintained
and even expanded its resistance. The So-
viets withdrew after 10 years of occupa-
tion, leaving behind nearly 15,000 dead
soldiers and approximately one million
dead Afghans. While U.S. casualties have
not climbed as high, it is possible that
American forces will have to withdraw,
much as the Soviets did. This parallel be-
tween these invasions recalls a common
nickname for Afghanistan: “Graveyard of
Empires.”
12 ✪ Afghanistan
Women were forbidden from attend-
ing school or working, and could not
go out in public unless they were
fully covered in a garment called a
burka and accompanied by a male
relative. Any one who broke these
laws was dealt with harshly by a reli-
gious police force who often beat,
maimed, or killed offenders.
Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, and the
2001 U.S. Invasion During the cha-
otic 1990s, Osama bin Laden and
other militant Islamist leaders such as
Ayman al-Zawahiri were able to es-
tablish terrorist training camps in Af-
ghanistan, mostly in the mountainous
eastern regions. Bin Laden’s recruit-
ing network came to be known as al
Qaeda, Arabic for “the base.” Having
helped establish an Islamic govern-
ment in Afghanistan, these fighters
turned their attention to what they
perceived as the excesses and insults
of foreign powers, especially the
United States. Al Qaeda members car-
ried out bomb attacks at the World
Trade Center in New York City in
1993, killing six and injuring more
than 1,000, as well as in the East Afri-
can nations of Kenya and Tanzania in
1998.
Bin Laden, who had departed for
Sudan after the Soviet withdrawal, re-
turned to Afghanistan in 1996, allied
with the Taliban, and began to finance
their operations. This support made
them less dependent on foreign aid
and allowed them to make some of
their more radical and controversial
governmental changes. After the 1998
bombings in East Africa, the United
States demanded that the Taliban turn
over bin Laden, but they refused.
Toppling the Taliban By 2001, bin
Laden and al Qaeda were well known
among intelligence agencies as
perpetrators of terrorism. Shortly
after the September 11, 2001, attacks
on the World Trade Center and the
Pentagon, the United States de-
manded again that the Taliban turn
over bin Laden and other al Qaeda
leaders, to no avail. Within a few
weeks, the United States and the
United Kingdom began bombing Tal-
iban strongholds in retaliation. They
also provided military support to the
Northern Alliance as part of a coordi-
nated ground invasion. By December,
the Taliban had effectively surren-
dered control of the country, and its
remaining leaders had gone
underground.
Osama bin Laden and many other
key al Qaeda leaders fled into the
mountains on the Afghanistan-
Pakistan border. Despite years of con-
certed effort to capture them, they
remained at large at the beginning of
2010. It was believed that they es-
caped across the border to the moun-
tainous, Pashtun region of Pakistan.
Post-Taliban Era The years follow-
ing the fall of the Taliban were cha-
otic, though not nearly as devastating
as the decades of strife that had previ-
ously befallen Afghanistan. A new,
democratically elected government
was established by October 2004,
when Hamid Karzai was first elected
president. A year later, legislative
elections were successfully held, de-
spite threats of disruption made by
Taliban and al Qaeda remnants.
However, fighting among Afghan,
American, and North Atlantic Treaty

Organization (NATO) forces and
those of the Taliban never wholly
ceased during this time. By the end of
2005, the fighting also had increased
significantly. In addition, these years
saw the rampant rise of opium grow-
ing throughout the country. Toward
the end of the decade, it was esti-
mated that nine-tenths of the world’s
opium production took place in Af-
ghanistan. Profits from this illegal
crop helped fund the Taliban’s ongo-
ing insurgency.
Many leaders worldwide believe
that the threat of a resurgent, or
revived, Taliban, which would sup-
port al Qaeda’s terrorist activities,
makes the establishment of a strong
secular government in Afghanistan a
necessity. This is not possible with-
out rebuilding Afghanistan’s infra-
structure and economy, a prospect
that is enormously complicated by
the Taliban insurgency, or movement
to overthrow the Afghan govern-
ment, and the production of opium.
See also: Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama;
Iran; Islamic Fundamentalism; Muja-
hideen; Pakistan; September 11, 2001;
Taliban; Terrorist Organizations;
Al-Zawahiri, Ayman.
FURTHERREADING
Gritzner, Jeffrey A. Afghanistan: Modern
World Nations. New York: Chelsea House
Publishers, 2002.
Rashid, Ahmed. Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil,
and Fundamentalism in Central Asia. New
Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2000.
Wahab, Shaista, and Barry Youngerman. A
Brief History of Afghanistan. New York:
Facts On File, 2007.
Woodward, John. Afghanistan. Detroit:
Greenhaven Press, 2006.
Al Jazeera ✪ 13
Al Jazeera
The most popular news network in
the Arabic-speaking world. Founded
in 1996, Al Jazeera broadcasts via sat-
ellite and has been praised for pro-
viding coverage that, unlike many
other media sources in the Arab
world, is free of governmental con-
trol. Al Jazeera is very controversial in A
Western countries, however, where
its critics assert that it provides a
forum for terrorist organizations.
Al Jazeera English is the world’s
first English-language news channel
to broadcast from the Middle East.
It is best known for its broadcasts
of video statements by Osama bin
Laden (founder and leader of the in-
ternational terrorist organization
al Qaeda) as well as other al Qaeda
leaders.
EARLY YEARS
In 1996, Qatar’s ruler, Sheikh Hamad
bin Khalifa Al-Thani, founded Al
Jazeera (which means “The Island,” a
reference to the station’s uniquely in-
dependent status among news orga-
nizations in the area). Many former
staff members of the BBC World
Service’s Arabic-language station,
which had been shut down by the
Saudi Arabian government, joined
Al Jazeera upon its founding.
Al Jazeera’s entrance on the stage
of Arabic media was nothing short of
groundbreaking. Because it broad-
cast by satellite, it was available to
people in the Middle East and across
the world who previously had access
only to state-controlled stations
whose content was often heavily cen-
sored. Al Jazeera thus provided one
14 ✪ Al Jazeera

The English-language newsroom of Al Jazeera, the only independent news agency in the
Middle East, prepares for a television broadcast. Al Jazeera claims to offer a balanced
perspective of the news, but its viewpoints have been strongly criticized by both Western
and Arab nations.

of the few sources of free speech in
the region and was able to present
sensitive material that had never be-
fore been available through the Mid-
dle East’s mass media.
Al Jazeera rapidly gained an enor-
mous worldwide following and gar-
nered dozens of international prizes
for its coverage of social and political
issues. Many topics, such as govern-
ment censorship or women’s rights,
had never before been addressed ob-
jectively because of religious and cul-
tural taboos. In 1999, Al Jazeera
began broadcasting continuously, of-
fering a full slate of educational
programs, news, and talk shows. By
2000, it claimed 35 million to 45 mil-
lion viewers in 20 countries and was
widely regarded as the leading Arab
news network.
CRITICISM AND CONTROVERSIES
Although Al Jazeera’s editorial free-
dom was unprecedented in the Mid-
dle East, the station soon began to
draw criticism from two sources. One
was from the Islamic world, where Al
Jazeera’s critics included state gov-
ernments and fundamentalist reli-
gious leaders who criticized the
openness with which the station

discussed current events. Al Jazeera’s
broadcasts were blocked in some
Arab countries as a result of this criti-
cism. There was harsh reaction in
Arab countries to Al Jazeera’s inde-
pendent reporting of the 2000 inti-
fada, or uprising, of Palestinian Arabs
against Israel. State-run Arab news or-
ganizations clearly supported the in-
tifada’s violent tactics. Al Jazeera,
however, adopted a more balanced
view and was criticized for it. After
this controversy, the station’s tone
grew more inflammatory when re-
porting about the United States and
Israel. Criticism from Arab sources
has led to numerous closings of Al
Jazeera offices in Arab countries.
The second source of criticism
came from Western nations, where
Al Jazeera was soon seen as an outlet
for radicals to broadcast their threat-
ening messages to the world. This
shift in opinion began with the 2000
intifada, the violent Palestinian upris-
ing in the West Bank in which both
Israeli citizens and soldiers were
killed. The change in tone further in-
tensified after the September 11,
2001, terrorist attacks on the United
States. After Al Jazeera broadcast in-
terviews with Osama bin Laden and
other terrorist leaders, as well as tapes
from radical organizations with ex-
plicitly violent material, Western gov-
ernments denounced the station as a
mouthpiece for terrorists. Moreover,
Al Jazeera regularly broadcasts shows
featuring Islamic clerics with anti-
Western viewpoints. As a result, al-
though Al Jazeera is considered by
some to be a well-respected news or-
ganization that operates in an inde-
pendent way unique among Arab
Al Qaeda ✪ 15
news networks, it is also persistently
controversial.
See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda;
Bin Laden, Osama; Iraqi War;
Islamic Fundamentalism; Terrorist
Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
El-Nawawy, Mohammed, and Adel Iskander.
Al-Jazeera: How the Free Arab News Net- A
work Scooped the World and Changed the
Middle East. Cambridge, Mass.: Westview,
2002.
Miles, Hugh. Al-Jazeera: The Inside Story of
the Arab News Channel That Is Challeng-
ing the West. New York: Grove Press,
2005.
Rushing, Josh, and Sean Elder. Mission Al-
Jazeera: Build a Bridge, Seek the Truth,
Change the World. New York: Palgrave
Macmillan, 2007.
Al Qaeda
Militant Islamic organization founded
and financed by Osama bin Laden, a
Saudi billionaire, revolutionary, and
perpetrator of numerous terrorist at-
tacks throughout the world, includ-
ing the attacks of September 11, 2001.
Its name means “the base” in Arabic,
reflecting its fundamentalist orien-
tation, as well as its stated aims of
supporting Muslims worldwide in re-
sisting any perceived oppression and
of establishing Islamic regimes in
numerous countries.
Since its formation in the late
1980s, the militant group has be-
come one of the world’s best-known
perpetrators of terrorism. Most of the
international community considers it
a terrorist group, as it is so designated
by the United Nations (UN). Within
the Muslim world, however, al Qaeda
16 ✪ Al Qaeda
occupies an ambiguous position.
Many fundamentalists support its
campaign against the Western influ-
ences they see as responsible for the
decline of Muslim societies. Al Qae-
da’s most notorious attacks, carried
out against the United States on Sep-
tember 11, 2001, ushered in a new
era of global conflict between Islamic
fundamentalist groups and the secu-
lar governments and societies they
oppose.
IDEOLOGY AND ORGANIZATION
Members of al Qaeda seek nothing
less than the overthrow of the mod-
ern world order, replacing all secular
states—and what they see as corrupt
Islamic states—with a unified, funda-
mentalist Islamic government. The
organization differs from other fun-
damentalist movements in that it em-
braces violence as a way of achieving
this ultimate goal. As fundamentalists,
they view this goal as a holy mission
decreed by Allah (God), and they be-
lieve there is no higher honor than
dying for the cause.
Consequently, al Qaeda often em-
ploys suicide bombers as a way to
deliver attacks. These bombers are
widely regarded as martyrs in the
world of fundamentalist Islam, since
they are dying for their beliefs.
Appeal of Fundamentalism This
ideology, or organized system of be-
liefs, is very attractive to a broad
range of Muslims for several reasons.
For one, it recalls the Islamic Golden
Age, lasting from the eighth to the fif-
teenth centuries, when the Islamic
world saw unparalleled achievements
in science, art, architecture, law, and
virtually every other human endeavor.
In effect, al Qaeda seeks to reinstate
this period of power and influence
for Islamic societies.
Another reason for al Qaeda’s
popularity is its fierce opposition to
Western cultures, particularly the
United States. Many Muslims around
the world live in countries that are
former European colonies, and the
multigenerational resentment of the
abuse they and their ancestors expe-
rienced under foreign rule continues
to shape their reactions to the West-
ern world.
Moreover, the United States, al-
though never a colonial power in the
Middle East, is by far the most visible
and influential Western nation cultur-
ally and economically. American
products, media, and ideas, many of
which are offensive to fundamental-
ist Muslims, can be found every-
where. In addition, many Muslims
resent American support of Israel, as
well as its stationing of troops in
Saudi Arabia, Islam’s holy country,
since the Persian Gulf War (1990–
1991). For these reasons, al Qaeda
primarily targets the United States in
its rhetoric and attacks.
High Level of Organization Al Qaeda
has a highly effective organization
that has allowed it to carry out a num-
ber of successful terrorist attacks. Its
senior leadership remains hidden
and inaccessible, providing broad
planning and funding to a number of
smaller terror cells scattered across
an estimated 60 countries. These cells
are composed of a few highly dedi-
cated agents who plan the details of
attacks and carry them out. This orga-
nization makes al Qaeda a difficult
 Al-Zarqawi, Abu Musab (1966–2006)
foe to fight, since the cells can remain
undetected for months or years,
while the senior leadership has re-
mained elusive.
HISTORY
Many of al Qaeda’s founding mem-
bers were mujahideen, or holy war-
riors, who fought the Soviet invasion
of Afghanistan from 1979 to 1988.
The conflict attracted the support of
militant and fundamentalist Muslims
worldwide, who saw it as essentially
an assault on Islam by a secular for-
eign power. The organization was
not called al Qaeda when it was
founded by Osama bin Laden in the
1980s, nor did it engage in what are
today considered terrorist acts. In-
stead, it was a well-run (and very well-
funded) recruiting network that
brought thousands of fresh volun-
teers to Afghanistan, then trained and
equipped them for the ongoing guer-
rilla war against the Soviet occupy-
ing forces and their Afghan army
allies.
In these endeavors, al Qaeda was
assisted by other foreign powers
(most notably the United States) both
materially and logistically. The United
States Central Intelligence Agency
(CIA) in particular helped fund
and train the mujahideen, because
it was in the best interest of the
United States to ensure that the So-
viet Union (its archrival at the time)
lost money and manpower in the
conflict.
After the Soviets withdrew their
last forces in 1989, bin Laden and a
few others, including the Islamic
scholar and doctor Ayman al-
Zawahiri, renamed the organization
✪ 17
al Qaeda. Instead of disbanding, mem-
bers refocused efforts on carrying
out a global jihad, or holy war, against
any power they perceived as op-
pressing or hindering the kind of
fundamentalist Islam in which they
believed.
It is believed that from 1991 to
1996, al Qaeda was headquartered in
Sudan. When the Taliban, an Islamic A
fundamentalist organization, finished
seizing power in Afghanistan in 1996,
bin Laden and others were invited
back to establish training camps and
other facilities. During this time, al
Qaeda slowly grew in power and in-
fluence, finding support from similar
organizations around the world, in-
cluding Hizbollah in Lebanon and the
Egyptian Islamic Jihad.
See also: Afghanistan; Bin Laden,
Osama; Jihad; Mujahideen; Septem-
ber 11, 2001; Sleeper Cells; Terrorist
Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Isaacs, April. Critical Perspectives on Al-
Qaeda. New York: Rosen Publishing Group,
2006.
Margulies, Phillip. Al-Qaeda: Osama Bin Lad-
en’s Army of Terrorists. New York: Rosen
Publishing Group, 2003.
Perliger, Arie. Middle Eastern Terrorism. New
York: Chelsea House, 2006.
Al-Zarqawi, Abu Musab
(1966–2006)
Jordanian-born militant behind ter-
rorist attacks in Jordan and Iraq in
southwestern Asia and the most
wanted insurgent leader in Iraq after
the 2003 U.S.-led invasion. Before he
18 ✪ Al-Zarqawi, Abu Musab (1966–2006)
was killed in 2006, al-Zarqawi led the
terrorist organization known as al
Qaeda in Iraq, which was respon-
sible for many gruesome and lethal
attacks.
EARLY LIFE
Al-Zarqawi was born on October 30,
1966, in Zarqa, Jordan, an industrial
city to the northeast of Amman, the
capital. He abandoned his original
name, Ahmed Fadhil Nazar al-
Khalaylah, some time after 2000. Zar-
qawi grew up in poor conditions and
was a troubled youth, dropping out
of school and getting into brawls. He
adopted fundamentalist Islamic be-
liefs that led him to Afghanistan in
the late 1980s, where he became a
reporter for an Afghani newspaper.
During this time, he was influenced
by Osama bin Laden, founder and
leader of the international terrorist
organization al Qaeda, though he did
not join al Qaeda outright.
TERRORIST PLOTS
His plan to bomb the Radisson Hotel
in Amman, Jordan’s capital, along
with several other tourist sites, was
discovered before he could carry it
out. Zarqawi fled to Pakistan, then to
Afghanistan, where, with support
from al Qaeda, he established a mili-
tant training camp near the town of
Herat.
Though he was forced to flee the
country after the U.S. invasion in late
2001, Zarqawi increased his militant
activities. His movements became
very difficult to track, but U.S. intelli-
gence experts generally believe he
traveled to Iran, Syria, Jordan, and
Iraq, establishing a wide-ranging net-
work of terrorist contacts.
Zarqawi was linked to the Octo-
ber 2002 assassination of Laurence
M. Foley, a U.S. diplomat working in
Amman. By that time, Zarqawi had es-
tablished a firm headquarters in
northern Iraq, where he carried out
attacks against the Kurds, an ethnic
group who lives in the area.
In August 2003, Zarqawi claimed
responsibility for an attack on a Shia
(one of the major sects of Islam)
shrine in An Najaf, an attack that
some see as the start of the Iraqi in-
surgency. Over the following years,
he was either linked to or claimed re-
sponsibility for dozens of violent at-
tacks that resulted in hundreds, if
not thousands, of casualties. These
attacks included the videotaped be-
heading of a British engineer, as well
as a bombing that killed 125 people
in the city of Al Hillah in February
2004 and was the most deadly of the
insurgency.
By July 2004, Zarqawi was the
most wanted militant in Iraq, but he
was difficult to locate and capture,
despite a $25 million reward offered
by the United States. Zarqawi was
finally killed in a U.S. bombing raid
in Ba’qubah, Iraq, on June 7, 2006.
His death was considered a major set-
back to the Iraqi insurgency.
See also: Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama;
Iraq War.
FURTHERREADING
Brisard, Jean-Charles, and Damien Martinez.
Zarqawi: The New Face of Al-Qaeda. New
York: Other Press, 2005.

Calvert, John. Islamism: A Documentary and
Reference Guide. Westport, Conn.: Green-
wood Press, 2008.
Napoleoni, Loretta. Insurgent Iraq: Al Zar-
qawi and the New Generation. New York:
Seven Stories Press, 2005.
Al-Zawahiri, Ayman (1951– )
Egyptian physician who is thought to
be the doctor of and closest adviser
to Osama bin Laden, founder and
leader of the international terrorist
organization al Qaeda. He is one of
the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s
(FBI) most wanted terrorists, having
founded the radical Egyptian Islamic
Jihad (which later merged with al
Qaeda). Al-Zawahiri is viewed as a
likely successor to bin Laden. He is
also suspected of being a major player
in the September 11, 2001, terrorist
attacks on the United States, and of
providing the organizational and in-
tellectual leadership that turned al
Qaeda into a global threat.
INFLUENCES AND PLANS
Al-Zawahiri was born in Cairo, Egypt,
on June 19, 1951, to an Egyptian fam-
ily prominent in medicine, religion,
and academia. From an early age, he
was deeply influenced by funda-
mentalist Islamic thought, especially
the writings of the Egyptian militant
Sayyid Qutb. As a teenager, Zawahiri
became involved with the Muslim
Brotherhood, a militant group banned
in Egypt for its stated aims of over-
throwing the secular government
and establishing an Islamic theoc-
racy. During the 1970s, he helped
found Egyptian Islamic Jihad, a group
Al-Zawahiri, Ayman (1951– ) ✪ 19
whose aims were similar to those of
the Muslim Brotherhood.
Shortly thereafter, his militant
plans began to bear fruit. Anwar El
Sadat, the Egyptian president, was as-
sassinated in 1981 by Zawahiri’s orga-
nization in retaliation for Sadat’s
crackdown on Islamic militants. Za-
wahiri admitted to planning the event
and spent several years in jail for ille- A
gal possession of firearms. In 1986,
he left for Pakistan, where he treated
soldiers wounded in Afghanistan.
There, he met bin Laden and, accord-
ing to sources close to both men, rev-
olutionized his thinking. Zawahiri
combined a deep understanding
of Islamic thought with a political
savvy that bin Laden lacked. When
Zawahiri merged Islamic Jihad with
al Qaeda in 2001, the latter organiza-
tion became more explicitly anti-
American, and its political ambitions
grew more aggressive.
From the mid-1990s on, Zawahiri
directed Islamic Jihad in numerous
terrorist attacks, including assassina-
tion attempts and embassy bombings,
most of which targeted the Egyptian
government. However, Zawahiri was
also indicted by the United States
for his role in planning the 1998
bombings of the U.S. embassies in
East Africa.
AFTER SEPTEMBER 11, 2001
It was only after the September 11,
2001, attacks that Zawahiri became a
well-known figure outside the Mus-
lim world, however. He appeared in a
video with bin Laden released con-
currently with the initial U.S. attacks
in Afghanistan in October 2001. In
20 ✪ Al-Zawahiri, Ayman (1951– )
the video, Zawahiri spoke passion-
ately about the holy war undertaken
by al Qaeda. His appearance in the
video as well as his speech marked
him as a highly influential leader
within the organization.
Since then, Zawahiri has appeared
in several more videos. He has contin-
ued to criticize the United States and
its allies and to call on Islamic mili-
tants to continue fighting them. He is
a top target of numerous national in-
telligence services, but his where-
abouts remained unknown as of
2010.
See also: Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama;
Islamic Fundamentalism; Jihad; Paki-
stan; September 11, 2001; Terrorist
Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Ibrahim, Raymond, Ayman Zawahiri, and
Osama Bin Laden. The Al-Qaeda Reader.
New York: Doubleday, 2007.
Zayyat, Muntasir. The Road to Al-Qaeda:
The Story of Bin Laden’s Right-Hand Man.
London: Pluto Press, 2004.
American Taliban
Refers to John Walker Lindh, a young
American who joined the Taliban,
Afghanistan’s rogue regime, in fight-
ing the U.S. forces that invaded
that country after the September 11,
2001, terrorist attacks on the United
States.
Lindh was born in Washington,
D.C., on February 9, 1981. Although
he was raised Roman Catholic, he
converted to Islam in 1997, inspired
by the autobiography of Malcolm X,
himself a convert to the religion. A
year later, he traveled extensively in
Yemen and learned Arabic to be able
to read the Qur’an, Islam’s holy book.
In 2000, he traveled to Pakistan to
study in a madrassa, or Islamic reli-
gious school.
During this time, it seems that
Lindh became increasingly militant
in his beliefs. He eventually attended
a militant training camp in Afghani-
stan, where he met Osama bin Laden
(the source of the camp’s funding).
Soon after, Lindh joined the Taliban
in fighting the Northern Alliance and
the U.S. invasion of late 2001. Along
with other Taliban foot soldiers, he
saw himself as a defender of Afghan
Muslims who had suffered at the
hands of native warlords and foreign
aggressors for decades.
In November 2001, he was cap-
tured by U.S. and Northern Alliance
forces. After he was identified, he
was sent back to the United States to
face 11 charges of terrorism. In July
2002, Lindh reached a plea bargain
with federal prosecutors, pleading
guilty to one of the charges in ex-
change for a reduced sentence of
20 years.
See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Bin
Laden, Osama; Islamic Fundamental-
ism; Jihad; September 11, 2001; Tal-
iban; Terrorist Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Kukis, Mark. “My Heart Became Attached”:
The Strange Journey of John Walker Lindh.
Washington, D.C.: Brassey’s, 2003.
Mahoney, Richard D. Getting Away with
Murder: The Real Story Behind American
Taliban John Walker Lindh and What the
U.S. Government Had to Hide. New York:
Arcade Pub, 2004.

B–C
Baghdad
Capital of Iraq as well as its largest
city, with an estimated population of
6–7 million. The cultural center of Is-
lamic civilization for centuries, Bagh-
dad experienced a period of decline
from the thirteenth through the early
twentieth centuries. However, the
city once again claimed an important
role when it became the capital of the
newly founded Iraq in 1920. At the
start of the Iraqi War in March 2003,
it was a site of critical struggle be-
tween insurgents and foreign forces
led by the United States.
In recent years, much of Baghdad
has become less dangerous as the
American-led forces have restored
order to the ravaged city. However, it
remains a place of violence.
AFTERMATH OF THE IRAQI WAR
Baghdad was particularly hard-hit by
the U.S. invasion of Iraq. It was heav-
ily bombed and American forces
moved quickly to take it over after
the war began in March 2003. Orga-
nized resistance in Baghdad quickly
crumbled because Iraqi forces were
outgunned and outmaneuvered by
the better-equipped American troops.
By mid-April, Baghdad was caught up
in widespread looting that American
forces were unable to control. Al-
though planners in the Bush adminis-
tration had predicted that American
troops would be welcomed as libera-
tors, and that the Iraqi people would
cooperate to help maintain order,
Baghdad ✪ 21
these expectations quickly proved
misguided and unfounded.
More ominously, Baghdad soon
became one of the primary centers
of a fast emerging guerrilla war
against the occupying forces. Former
Ba’athists (members of the Arab na-
tionalist Ba’ath political party that
had ruled Iraq since 1963), who had
B–
gone underground during the inva- C
sion, began to organize an insur-
gency. This group targeted foreign
troops in Baghdad and elsewhere,
usually inflicting casualties through
the use of suicide bombers and im-
provised explosive devices (IEDs).
These attacks also targeted Iraqi sol-
diers and police officers employed
by the Coalition Provisional Author-
ity, the transitional Iraqi government
established by the United States.
Under the leadership of Abu Musab
al-Zarqawi, Baghdad also became the
focus of al Qaeda activity in Iraq.
THE GREEN ZONE AND
THE CIVIL WAR
After the 2003 invasion, American
forces established two large security
zones within Baghdad: an area sur-
rounding the international airport on
the western side of the city and an
area called the Green Zone in the
northeast, where former president
Saddam Hussein and his most impor-
tant supporters maintained lavish
residences. Outside these two rela-
tively secure areas, Baghdad became
a very dangerous place after May
2003.
22 ✪ Baghdad
What amounted to a civil war be-
tween the minority Sunni Muslims
and the majority Shia population
(Sunni and Shia being the two
branches of Islam) erupted later in
the year. Hussein and the Ba’ath Party,
who were Sunni, had inflicted de-
cades of suffering and terror on the
Shia of Iraq, who saw an opportunity
for justice in the Iraqi War. The civil
war, fought as a guerrilla war, took
place primarily in Baghdad and other
large cities. Mosques, stores, and
other buildings were blown up by ex-
tremists on both sides, usually led by
Zarqawi and al Qaeda on the Sunni
side and by Muqtada al-Sadr, a theolo-
gian and leader of a militia known as
the Mahdi Army, on the Shia side. The
U.S. government termed the fighting
sectarian violence. The citizens of
Baghdad experienced the worst of
the attacks.
PEAK AND DECLINE IN VIOLENCE
The number and deadliness of attacks
in Baghdad greatly increased be-
tween 2005 and 2006, but by 2007,
the fledgling Iraqi government, in
conjunction with an increased Amer-
ican troop presence, had managed to
quell most of the violence in Bagh-
dad. The focus of the insurgency
shifted to other cities such as Fallu-
jah, and the long process of rebuild-
ing Baghdad’s infrastructure (roads,
bridges, and other basic elements
usually required for business and in-
dustry to function) began in earnest
in late 2007. While attacks still
plagued the city in 2010, their fre-
quency had fallen significantly com-
pared with the peak of violence in
2006.
See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Bin
Laden, Osama; Islamic Fundamental-
ism; Jihad; September 11, 2001; Tal-
iban; Terrorist Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Cockburn, Patrick. Muqtada: Muqtada Al-
Sadr, the Shia Revival, and the Struggle for
Iraq. New York: Scribner, 2008.
Fallows, James M. Blind into Baghdad: Amer-
ica’s War in Iraq. New York: Vintage Books,
2006.
Ferguson, Charles H. No End in Sight: Iraq’s
Descent into Chaos. New York: Public
Affairs, 2008.
Bali Attacks (2002)
Terrorist attacks that occurred on Oc-
tober 12, 2002, at a popular tourist
bar and outside the U.S. consulate on
the Indonesian island of Bali. Two
bombs exploded within seconds of
each other, one inside Paddy’s Pub by
a suicide bomber with a backpack
and the other just outside the Sari
Club by another suicide bomber in a
white van. These bombs killed 202
people and injured 209 more. The
consulate attack did not physically
harm anyone.
In the subsequent investigation, it
became clear that the group behind
these attacks, Jemaah Islamiyah, was
linked to al Qaeda, the international
terrorist organization funded and led
by Osama bin Laden.
BACKGROUND
Nearly 90 percent of Indonesia’s total
population (about 222 million peo-
ple) is Muslim, making the country
the world’s most populous Muslim-
majority nation. In its history as a na-
tion, beginning in 1945, numerous

Muslim groups have attempted to es-
tablish an Islamic government, but
Indonesia remains a democratically
elected republic because its Muslim
population remains split between
traditional practitioners and those
who have adopted more modern
practices. Sunnis, followers of one
branch of Islam, make up all but a mi-
nuscule percentage of the country’s
Muslim population.
CONSEQUENCES AND
AFTERMATH
The majority of those killed in the
Bali attacks were foreigners, primar-
ily Australian (80 people) and British
(26 people). Another 35 were Indo-
nesians. The locations were targeted
because of their popularity among
foreign tourists. The reasons given
for the attacks, after arrests had been
made, included defending Islam from
those considered infidels, or unbe-
lievers of a particular religion (in this
case Christians and Jews). A week
after the attacks, the Arab news net-
work Al Jazeera aired a recorded mes-
sage, purportedly from bin Laden,
claiming that the attacks had been in
retaliation for foreign support of the
U.S. war on terror as well as for Aus-
tralian support of the liberation of
East Timor, which from 1975 to 1999
had been occupied by Indonesia.
Jemaah Islamiyah, the group that
was eventually identified as the per-
petrator of the attacks, was founded
in the late 1960s in order to spread
fundamentalist Islamic beliefs
throughout the area. Only in the
1990s did it develop into an outright
terrorist organization, after it estab-
lished ties with al Qaeda and began
Bali Attacks (2002) ✪ 23
to receive funding from bin Laden’s
network.
Two leaders of Jemaah Islamiyah,
the cleric Abu Bakar Ba’asyir and
Imam Samudra, were arrested within
months of the attacks, along with
more than 30 other people. Samudra
confessed to planning the attacks and
was sentenced to death. He was exe-
cuted on November 9, 2008, along
with two other convicted perpetra-
tors. Ba’asyir served a brief prison B–
sentence.
C
SIGNIFICANCE
The bombings were the worst terror-
ist attack in the history of Indonesia.
For years afterward, Bali’s economy
struggled with a steep drop in tourist
revenue. Another series of suicide
bombings in 2005, seemingly carried
out by Jemaah Islamiyah as well, fur-
ther cut into the tourist trade and in-
tensified the rising tensions between
traditionalist and modern Indonesian
Muslims. Together, these two sets of
bombings brought Jemaah Islamiyah
onto the world stage. The Indonesian
government continues to battle the
terrorist organization.
See also: Al Qaeda; Islamic Funda-
mentalism; Bin Laden, Osama; Terror-
ist Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Anggraeni, Dewi. Who Did This to Our Bali?
Victoria, Australia: Indra Pub, 2003.
Schreyer, Karmel. An Ordinary Courage:
Naomi in Indonesia. Winnipeg: Great
Plains Publications, 2006.
Bhutto, Benazir
See Pakistan.
24 ✪ Bin Laden, Osama (1957– )

Indonesian police examine bodies at the site of one of the Bali attacks, in which more than
200 innocent civilians, mostly tourists, were killed. The attacks were carried out by an Islamic
terrorist group in retaliation for foreign support of the U.S. war on terror.

successfully eluded capture for years

Bin Laden, Osama (1957– )
Founder, financier, and leader of the
international Islamic fundamental-
ist terrorist organization al Qaeda.
Bin Laden is the mastermind behind
the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001, which targeted locations in
Washington, D.C., and New York City.
Since these attacks, bin Laden’s name
and face have become synonymous
with terrorism and militant Islam.
Bin Laden is one of the most
wanted men on the planet, but he has
despite a widespread international
effort to detain him. As of 2010, it
was believed that he was hiding in
the mountainous region along the
Afghanistan-Pakistan border.
EARLY LIFE
Bin Laden was born on March 10,
1957, in Riyadh, the capital of Saudi
Arabia. He was the 17th son of a total
of 51 children born to a billionaire
businessman, Mohammad bin Laden.
Bin Laden’s father had founded a very

lucrative construction company in
Saudi Arabia, and upon his death in
1968, his children inherited his vast
wealth.
Bin Laden grew up a devout Sunni
Muslim, studying in Mecca and Jidda.
He married his first of four wives at
the age of 17 (four is the maximum
allowed to Muslims by the Qur’an,
Islam’s holy book). He was reportedly
heavily influenced by radical Muslim
thinkers while studying public man-
agement at King Abd al-Aziz Univer-
sity in Jidda.
AFGHANISTAN AND THE START OF
AL QAEDA
In 1979, bin Laden departed for Af-
ghanistan to help fight the Soviet in-
vasion; he was joined by thousands of
other mujahideen, or holy warriors.
He used his inheritance to build a re-
cruiting network to bring more muja-
hideen from around the globe, as well
as to build training camps and roads
and to buy weapons and medicine.
These fighters also received money
and training from the U.S. Central
Intelligence Agency (CIA), al-
though bin Laden would not associ-
ate with the Americans.
After the Soviets withdrew in
1989, bin Laden and his colleague
Ayman al-Zawahiri used the records
they kept of the mujahideen to start a
new organization that would combat
secular governments and Islamic re-
gimes that they considered heretical.
Bin Laden returned to Saudi Arabia
and became an outspoken critic of
the Saudi royal family. When Ameri-
can forces were stationed there in
1991 in preparation for the Persian
Gulf War, bin Laden increased the
Bin Laden, Osama (1957– ) ✪ 25
intensity of his criticism, believing
that non-Muslims should not be al-
lowed in Saudi Arabia, Islam’s holy
country. The same year, he left for
Sudan, where an Islamic government
had recently been established.
BIN LADEN AS A TERRORIST
LEADER
With bin Laden’s financial and politi-
cal help, al Qaeda continued to grow
throughout the world. He was linked B–
with several terrorist attacks in the
1990s, some of which killed Ameri-
C
cans in Riyadh. The United States
pressured Sudan to hand bin Laden
over, and he fled to Afghanistan,
where the Taliban, another funda-
mentalist Islamic regime, welcomed
him.
In 1996, bin Laden, who had be-
come a highly influential leader
among militant Islamists, declared a
jihad, or holy war, against Americans
and Jews. This inspired his followers
to further acts of terrorism in Saudi
Arabia. Two years later, he also issued
a fatwa, or religious decree, for the
death of all Americans. However, be-
cause bin Laden is not a religious
scholar, nor a cleric with the religious
qualifications necessary to be able to
declare jihads or fatwas, he was
widely criticized among Muslims
who did not support him.
That same year, 1998, bin Laden
was linked to the deadly bombings of
the American embassies in Kenya and
Tanzania in East Africa. The U.S.
search for him began, and it was not
long before it became clear that he
was a guest of the Taliban. After the
terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001, the American government
26 ✪ Bin Laden, Osama (1957– )

Osama bin Laden After

the 9/11 Attacks
A fter the attacks of September 11, 2001, Osama bin
Laden made a statement that was broadcast on Al
Jazeera, the Arabic news channel, claiming that he was
not responsible for the attacks. However, he did claim
responsibility for them in a videotaped statement
released in 2004. On October 7, 2001, he spoke in
glowing terms about the attacks in the following
remarks, also broadcast on Al Jazeera.

What America is tasting anyone raising his voice or

now is something insignifi-
cant compared to what we
have tasted for scores of
years. Our nation has been
tasting this humiliation and
this degradation for more
than 80 years. Its sons are
killed, its blood is shed, its
sanctuaries are attacked, and
no one hears and no one
heeds.
When God blessed one
of the groups of Islam,
vanguards of Islam, they
destroyed America. I pray
to God to elevate their
status and bless them.
Millions of innocent children
are being killed as I speak.
They are being killed in Iraq
without committing any sins,
and we don’t hear condemna-
tion or a fatwa from the rul-
ers. In these days, Israeli tanks
infest Palestine—in Jenin, Ra-
mallah, Rafah, Beit Jalla, and
other places in the land of
Islam, and we don’t hear
moving a limb.
When the sword comes
down, after 80 years, hypoc-
risy rears its ugly head. They
deplore and they lament for
those killers, who have
abused the blood, honor and
sanctuaries of Muslims. The
least that can be said about
those people is that they
are debauched. They have
followed injustice. They
supported the butcher over
the victim, the oppressor
over the innocent child. May
God show them His wrath
and give them what they
deserve.
I say that the situation is
clear and obvious. After this
event, after the senior offi-
cials have spoken in America,
starting with the head of infi-
dels worldwide, Bush, and
those with him. They have
come out in force with their
men and have turned even
the countries that belong to

Islam to this treachery, and
they want to wag their tail at
God, to fight Islam, to sup-
press people in the name of
terrorism. . . .
These events have divided
the whole world into two
sides. The side of believers
and the side of infidels, may
demanded bin Laden from the Tal-
iban, but they refused to hand him
over. This sparked the U.S. invasion
of Afghanistan in October 2001.
ESCAPE AND PROCLAMATIONS
Bin Laden escaped with many of his
associates into the mountains of east-
ern Afghanistan. Since then, he has
appeared on several video and radio
broadcasts, aired on the Arab-
language network Al Jazeera. He has
praised further terrorist attacks and
encouraged his supporters to con-
tinue the fight against America, Israel,
and all Muslims who do not share his
fundamentalist views.
Bin Laden sees himself as carrying
out a necessary religious war against
foreign powers, perversions of Islam,
and those who have suppressed or
insulted the true Islam. His violent
approach has polarized the Muslim
world and made him one of the most
despised persons of modern times.
See also: Afghanistan; Al Jazeera;
Al Qaeda; Fatwa; Islamic Fundamen-
talism; Jihad; Kenya and Tanzania
Bombings (1998); Mujahideen; Paki-
stan; September 11, 2001; Taliban;
Terrorist Organizations; Al-Zawahiri,
Ayman.
Bush, George W. (1946– ) ✪ 27
God keep you away from
them. Every Muslim has to
rush to make his religion vic-
torious. The winds of faith
have come. The winds of
change have come to eradi-
cate oppression from the is-
land of Muhammad, peace be
upon him.
B–
FURTHERREADING
Greene, Meg. The Hunt for Osama Bin Laden. C
New York: Rosen Publishing Group, 2005.
Landau, Elaine. Osama Bin Laden: A War
Against the West. Brookfield, Conn.:
Twenty-first Century Books, 2002.
Louis, Nancy. Osama Bin Laden. Edina, Minn.:
ABDO Pub. Co, 2002.
Blair, Tony
See London Bombings (2005).
Bush, George W. (1946– )
Forty-third president of the United
States (2001–2009), who declared
that the United States was embarking
on a “War on Terror” in response to
the September 11, 2001, terrorist at-
tacks on the World Trade Center and
the Pentagon (“9/11”). A polarizing
figure, Bush left office with one of
the highest disapproval ratings in
American polling history. This was
due to numerous scandals, the Iraqi
War (ongoing since 2003), an un-
precedented national debt (more
than $10 trillion), and the administra-
tion’s slow reaction to domestic cri-
ses such as the devastation of New
Orleans, Louisiana, by Hurricane
Katrina in 2005.
28 ✪ Bush, George W. (1946– )
A wartime president, he put forth
what has become known as the Bush
Doctrine. According to this foreign
policy principle, the United States
has the right to preemptively attack
the source of any perceived threat.
For good or ill, Bush was one of the
central figures that defined the first
decade of the twenty-first century.
EARLY LIFE
Born on July 6, 1946, in New Haven,
Connecticut, Bush was the oldest of
six children of George Herbert
Walker Bush, who would serve as
vice president under Ronald Reagan
(1981–1989) and president of the
United States (1989–1993).
FIRST PRESIDENTIAL TERM
In a bitterly contested presidential
election, Bush narrowly defeated in-
cumbent Vice President Al Gore in
2000. His choice for vice president,
Dick Cheney, was a former represen-
tative and secretary of defense.
Bush began his first term with a
number of controversies. He ap-
pointed Cheney to head a task force to
determine the nation’s energy policy,
but this group met secretly with com-
panies it did not identify. This secrecy
would characterize both of Bush’s
terms in office. After 9/11, Bush scored
some of the highest approval ratings
in American history for his response
to the attacks on the World Trade Cen-
ter and the Pentagon. He ordered the
invasion of Afghanistan in October
2001, declaring that the United States
was engaged in a new, global “War on
Terror.” In a famous speech, he de-
scribed Iran, Iraq, and North Korea
as forming an “Axis of Evil” that the
United States had to confront.
The rest of Bush’s first term, how-
ever, was marred by controversy. For
example, many questioned the harsh
treatment of prisoners captured in
the Afghanistan invasion and held at
Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, but Bush in-
sisted that the United States did not
practice torture.
Perhaps most controversial was
Bush’s argument that Iraq posed an
immediate threat to the United States,
necessitating an invasion to depose
Saddam Hussein, its dictator. The
Bush administration presented evi-
dence, gathered from both American
intelligence and foreign sources, that
Hussein was hiding weapons of mass
destruction, such as biological and
chemical weapons. However, after
the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, it was
revealed that the evidence was based
on false information. No weapons of
mass destruction were ever found in
Iraq, but Bush vigorously defended
his decision to go to war.
SECOND PRESIDENTIAL TERM
AND LEGACY
Running on a national security plat-
form, Bush defeated Senator John
Kerry of Massachusetts in the 2004
presidential election. Public percep-
tion of his second-term performance
continued to plummet, however,
after another series of scandals and in
the face of an increasingly troubled
economy. Although the U.S. military
campaigns had deposed the Taliban
in Afghanistan and Hussein in Iraq,
fighting continued in both countries,
which threatened the fragile govern-
ments the United States had helped
establish. Moreover, Bush’s tax cuts
and spending policies had plunged

the country into the greatest debt up
to that point.
Although Bush declared a war on
terror, terrorist attacks worldwide
(though not in the United States)
climbed after he entered office. His
administration failed to capture
Osama bin Laden, founder of al
Qaeda, and the Iraqi War became a
major recruiting point for terrorist
organizations that opposed Western
influence on Muslim societies.
See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Bin
Laden, Osama; Guantánamo Bay,
Cuba; Iran; Iraqi War; Patriot Act;
September 11, 2001; Taliban; Terror-
ist Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Engdahl, Sylvia. Domestic Wiretapping. De-
troit: Greenhaven Press, 2008.
Jones, Veda Boyd. George W. Bush. New
York: Chelsea House, 2007.
Venezia, Mike. George W. Bush: Forty-Third
President, 2001-Present. New York: Chil-
dren’s Press/Scholastic, 2008.
Cheney, Richard B.
See Bush, George W.
Cyberterrorism
Terrorist attacks carried out through
or targeting computer and communi-
cations networks. In order to consti-
tute an act of cyberterrorism, and not
mere computer hacking, such an at-
tack must result in real-world harm.
For example, an act of cyberterror-
ism, also known as information war-
fare, might disable government
computer systems so that social
services are temporarily disrupted,
Cyberterrorism ✪ 29
potentially denying resources to peo-
ple in acute need.
The most common kind of attack
is called a “denial of service” attack.
Hackers flood targeted computers
with a vast number of requests for in-
formation, blocking legitimate re-
quests for access until the computers
are disconnected from the Internet
or until the attack ends. Not all such
attacks are classified as cyberterror-
ism; most, although malicious as- B–
saults, are executed by people who
do not have terrorist aims in mind.
C
One example of a true cyberter-
rorist attack, however, occurred in
Queensland, Australia, in April 2000.
An employee of a company that had
installed a computerized sewage con-
trol system in the area launched the
attack after his application for a new
job had been turned down. Gaining
access to the computer network, he
caused millions of liters of raw sew-
age to spill into local parks and rivers.
He was arrested and imprisoned in
October 2001.
Since the terrorist attacks of
September 11, 2001, many national
governments, including that of the
United States, have been increasingly
wary of cyberterrorism. If terrorist
organizations such as al Qaeda were
to acquire the skills necessary to gain
control of utility networks that gov-
ern power grids, gas lines, or other
parts of the national infrastructure,
they could potentially cause wide-
spread harm. To date, however, no
such terrorists have succeeded in
employing cyberterrorism to harm
America.
Cyberterrorism is an area of grow-
ing concern to security experts. As
30 ✪ Cyberterrorism
the world becomes increasingly con-
nected through the Internet and
other communications networks, it is
becoming easier and easier to obtain
the skills necessary to attempt cyber-
terrorism. Also, as military equipment
relies more and more on computer
technology, the potential opportuni-
ties for cyberterrorism increase.
See also: Al Qaeda; September 11,
2001; Sleeper Cells; Terrorist
Organizations.
D–F
Department of Homeland
Security (DHS)
Created in 2003, cabinet department
charged with preventing terrorist at-
tacks on U.S. soil. The Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) was cre-
ated to coordinate various security
functions that were previously
handled by several different depart-
ments and agencies of the federal
government.
Proposed by President George W.
Bush (2001–2009) in June 2002, the
DHS set up all security resources
under a single line of authority. The
department’s creation was a direct
result of the devastating September
11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the na-
tion. Congress approved the new
cabinet in late 2002, and it began op-
eration in January 2003 as the 15th
cabinet department of the federal
government. The DHS brought to-
gether the Secret Service, Customs
Service, Immigration and Naturaliza-
tion Service, and the Coast Guard,
FURTHERREADING
Brown, Lawrence V. Cyberterrorism and Com-
puter Attacks. New York: Novinka Books,
2006.
DeAngelis, Gina, and Austin Sarat. Cyber
Crimes: Crime, Justice, and Punishment.
Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers,
2000.
Menhard, Francha Roffe. Cyberwar: Point,
Click, Destroy. Berkeley Heights, N.J.:
Enslow Publishers, 2003.
Townsend, John. Cyber Crime. Chicago: Rain-
tree, 2005.
among other agencies. The new de-
partment has more that 180,000 em-
ployees, making it one of the largest
cabinet departments.
FUNCTIONS AND OPERATIONS
The DHS has three main functions.
The first is to work to prevent terror-
ist attacks within the United States.
The second function is to reduce the
nation’s vulnerability to terrorism. Fi-
nally, the DHS is charged with mini-
mizing the damage from any attacks
that might occur. In the event of a cri-
sis, the DHS is expected to ensure the
continued operation of the govern-
ment and the country’s essential ser-
vices, such as law enforcement. To
achieve its goals, the DHS partners
with state and local governments as
well as with private companies to
share information and strengthen the
nation’s ability to respond to emer-
gency situations.
Another key responsibility of the
DHS is coordinating information
about potential terrorist threats. The
 Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
department also reviews the vulnera-
bility of the nation’s infrastructure—
roads, bridges, airports, buildings—to
possible attack. Furthermore, the
DHS is responsible for enforcing
trade and immigration laws, protect-
ing against financial and electronic
crimes, and preventing counterfeit-
ing of the nation’s money. Because
the new department includes the
Abraham Lincoln and
the Secret Service
The U.S. Secret Service, now a part of the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS),
was established by President Abraham
Lincoln (1861–1865) on April 14, 1865, the
day he was shot. Before Lincoln’s time,
the president and his family had no
formal bodyguards or other protections.
At first, the main duty of the Secret Ser-
vice was to prevent counterfeiting of
money. In the 1800s, America’s money sys-
tem was unsystematic as individual banks
issued their own paper currency, which
was relatively easy to counterfeit. During
the Lincoln administration, about one-
third of the nation’s money was counter-
feit, or fake. On the advice of Secretary of
the Treasury Hugh McCulloch, President
Lincoln established a commission to review
the problem. On April 14, 1865, the presi-
dent created the Secret Service, carrying
out the commission’s recommendations.
On the evening of April 14, 1865, the
president and Mrs. Lincoln attended a play
at Ford’s Theatre in Washington, D.C. Dur-
ing the performance, John Wilkes Booth
crept into the president’s balcony and, fir-
ing a pistol at close range, assassinated the
✪ 31
Secret Service, it is responsible for
the protection of the president, vice
president, their families, and visiting
world leaders.
Early Successes Since it began func-
tioning, the department has been
credited with improving border
safety without limiting the flow of
people and goods across the nation’s
D–
F
president. Lincoln died early the next
morning. It was the first time in the na-
tion’s history that a president had been as-
sassinated. Citizens mourned and called
upon Congress to do more to guard the
president by providing some sort of official
police or military protection. However,
Congress was slow to act. Thirty-six years
later—after the assassination of two more
presidents—James A. Garfield (1881) and
William McKinley (1897–1901)—Congress
finally added protection of the president
to the list of duties performed by the
Secret Service.
Beginning in 1901, every president from
Theodore Roosevelt (1901–1909) on has
been protected by the Secret Service. In
1917, making threats against the president
became a felony, and Secret Service pro-
tection was expanded to include the entire
First Family. In 1951, protection of the vice
president and the president-elect was
added. After the 1968 assassination of
presidential candidate Robert Kennedy,
President Lyndon B. Johnson (1963–1969)
ordered the Secret Service to protect all
presidential candidates.
32 ✪ Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
borders. The DHS has also created
comprehensive strategies intended
to prevent and respond to terrorist
threats.
Criticisms The DHS has been criti-
cized for a variety of reasons. Some
critics believe that the Federal Bureau
of Investigation (FBI) and Central
Intelligence Agency (CIA) should
have been moved into the DHS, espe-
cially because these two intelligence
services failed to share information
about some of the September 11 ter-
rorists with each other and other gov-
ernment agencies. Some of the poli-
cies adopted by the DHS also have
been criticized. For example, other
nations have resented the require-
ment that foreign visitors be photo-
graphed and electronically finger-
printed when arriving in the United
States. The most controversial DHS
program was the National Security
Entry-Exit Registration System, which
was established in 2002. This pro-
gram required male citizens from
Security Color Indication
Red severe risk
Orange high risk
Yellow elevated risk
Blue guarded risk
Green low risk
Muslim countries to immediately reg-
ister with the DHS. Many people con-
demned the system as discriminatory
against Arabs and Muslims. The sys-
tem proved ineffective and was
ended in late 2003.
Many civil liberty groups con-
tinue to warn that the DHS intrudes
on people’s personal rights and liber-
ties. In particular, these groups point
out that various government agencies
share private information about the
nation’s citizens. Although the DHS
has made progress in making the
nation more secure, the long-term
effects of its policies on civil liberties
remain to be seen.
COLOR-CODED ALERTS
A nationwide system of color-coded
security alerts was adopted in early
2002. This system was designed to in-
form the American public of the risk
of a terrorist attack. The following
colors indicate the nation’s risk and
what the DHS recommends people
do at each level:
DHS Recommendation
• Listen to radio or watch
television for updated information
and instructions; be prepared to
evacuate to a safe place.
• Use caution when traveling, pay
attention to travel advisories, and
expect delays.
• Develop alternative routes to
school or work.
• Be alert and report suspicious
activity.

At first, the DHS set the same risk
level for the entire nation. Respond-
ing to criticism, however, the DHS
made the color-coded alerts geo-
graphically specific. For example, in
January 2004, the DHS lowered the
overall threat level from orange to
yellow but maintained an orange
alert for the cities of New York, Los
Angeles, Las Vegas, and Washington,
D.C. Later, the department made the
alerts even more specific, announc-
ing evidence of threats in the finan-
cial districts of New York, northern
New Jersey, and Washington, D.C.
The DHS has advised citizens to
develop and practice a family emer-
gency plan and to store extra food,
water, and other supplies. In the
twenty-first century, the relationship
between individual citizens and gov-
ernment is being tested. Most citizens
realize the need for increased secu-
rity in light of the 9/11 attacks and
other threats, but many people are
concerned that the DHS is restricting
individual civil liberties.
See also: September 11, 2001; Ter-
rorist Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Aleinikoff, T., et al. The Department of Home-
land Security’s First Year: A Report Card.
New York: Century Foundation Press,
2004.
Grack-Koestler, Rachel A. The Department of
Homeland Security. New York: Chelsea
House, 2007.
Kettl, Don. System Under Stress: Homeland
Security and American Politics. Washing-
ton, D.C.: CQ Press, 2007.
Samuels, Richard J., ed. Encyclopedia of
United States National Security. Thousand
Oaks, Calif.: SAGE Publications, 2006.
Ecoterrorism ✪ 33
Detention Camps
See Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
Ecoterrorism
Acts of terrorism committed by
groups or individuals in order to sup-
port environmental causes. These
assaults usually involve the destruc-
tion of property rather than direct
attacks on human targets.
Supporters of environmental
causes have also used the term ecoter-
rorism to describe acts usually under- D–
taken by corporate entities that
F
allegedly harm the natural world.
Often, in response to the actions
taken by corporations or other
business groups, environmental sup-
porters will sabotage equipment
that, in the eyes of the saboteur,
will be used to harm animals or the
environment. This form of ecoterror-
ism is sometimes called monkey-
wrenching.
Ecoterrorists differ from other
kinds of terrorists in that their pur-
pose is not to instigate a widespread
political, social, or religious change
but to resolve or draw attention to a
specific, limited issue that is related
to animal rights or the preservation
of the natural world.
ECOTERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS
Organizations accused of committing
ecoterrorism include the Animal Lib-
eration Front (ALF), whose activist
members attempt to free animals
from laboratories and sabotage ani-
mal testing facilities; the Earth Libera-
tion Front (ELF), a loose association
34 ✪ Ecoterrorism
that focuses on monkeywrenching;
the Sea Shepherd Conservation Soci-
ety, which split from the environ-
mental organization Greenpeace in
1977 in order to actively disrupt
whaling activities around the world;
and Earth First!, a radical group that
refuses to compromise on ecological
issues.
Among these groups, the Federal
Bureau of Investigation has identified
ALF and ELF as serious terrorist
threats within the United States. They
are accused of hundreds of terrorist
acts, mainly of animal liberations and
arson. Although none of these have
injured humans so far, they have
caused an estimated $200 million of
damage collectively.
Many alleged ecoterrorists engage
in what is called “direct action,”
which can include acts of civil dis-
obedience as well as sabotage. A fa-
mous example of the former is a “tree
sit,” in which demonstrators form
rings around or occupy old-growth
trees that are in danger of being cut
down. This mixture of activities, all of
which are aimed at preventing some
type of harm to the environment,
often makes it difficult to draw the
line between an ecoterrorist and a
protester or activist. This highlights
the inherent ambivalence of the term
itself.
See also: Terrorist Organizations;
Unabomber.
FURTHERREADING
Liddick, Don. Eco-Terrorism: Radical Environ-
mental and Animal Liberation Movements.
Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2006.
Long, Douglas. Ecoterrorism. New York: Facts
On File, 2004.
Mcfall, Kathleen. Ecoterrorism: The Next
American Revolution? Concord, Mass.:
Paul And Company, 2004.
Enemy Combatants
See Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
Fatwa
A formal legal opinion given by an Is-
lamic legal authority or one who has
undergone a rigorous course of for-
mal education in religious law, in-
cluding detailed study of the Qur’an
(Islam’s holy scripture) and Hadith
(stories about the prophet Muham-
mad) as well as legal precedents. A
fatwa can be given on any subject,
though most address complicated
legal questions.
OFFICIAL OPINIONS
Only a few people have the official
capacity to issue fatawa (plural of
fatwa). Within the religion of Islam,
there are three major divisions
(Sunni, Shia, and Sufi), and each of
these in turn has a number of differ-
ing legal codes. Accordingly, fatawa
may only be issued by scholars who
have attained a sufficient level of legal
authority within a given code. Usu-
ally, one must attend a madrassa, or
religious school, for many years, com-
pleting requirements that grant reli-
gious degrees roughly equivalent to a
Western master’s degree or doctoral
degree.
Furthermore, Islamic jurispru-
dence (called fiqh), establishes four
criteria that a fatwa must meet. First,
it must be in accord with past legal
proofs, all of which are based on the

Qur’an and Hadith. Second, it must
be issued by a person of sufficient
education and virtue. Third, it must
not be self-serving, nor issued for
political reasons. Last, it must meet
the needs of the contemporary
world.
Fatawa are not necessarily bind-
ing. Some schools of Islamic law hold
that fatawa are only binding on those
who issue them, while others hold
that they are binding on all Muslims,
except in the case of extenuating cir-
cumstances that prevent the faithful
from following them.
WESTERN MISUNDERSTANDING
Fatawa have often been misunder-
stood in Western nations as, essen-
tially, religious death threats. Perhaps
the most infamous example is the
fatwa issued in 1989 by Iran’s Ayatol-
lah Ruhollah Khomeini. (An ayatollah
is a high-ranking Shia cleric capable
of issuing fatawa.) The fatwa pro-
nounced a death sentence on Indian
author Salman Rushdie for writing
The Satanic Verses, a novel consid-
ered heretical by many Muslims. As
a result of this fatwa, Rushdie had to
seek protection from militant Mus-
lims who tried to kill him.
Other such fatawa have included
two issued jointly by Osama bin
Laden, founder and leader of the in-
ternational terrorist organization al
Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri (bin Lad-
en’s closest adviser), and others, in
1996 and 1998. These documents ex-
plicitly declared war on the United
States for basing its troops in Saudi
Arabia, the holy land of Islam. How-
ever, bin Laden lacks the formal train-
ing required to issue fatawa and has
Fatwa ✪ 35
consequently been criticized by Is-
lamic scholars for issuing these.
Many fatawa in recent years have
addressed questions about the proper
response to non-Muslim powers.
Some have called for boycotts of
American and Israeli products, while
others have supported interfaith dia-
logue with Christian and Jewish reli-
gious leaders. Others have condemned
or explicitly forbidden violent acts
such as those committed by members
of terrorist organizations. Many of
these fatawa are only observed by
followers of those who issue them, D–
however, because there is no inter-
national body governing Islamic
F
religious law.
See also: Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama;
Iran; Islamic Fundamentalism; Jihad;
Terrorist Organizations, Al-Zawahiri,
Ayman.
FURTHERREADING
Bar, Shmuel. Warrant for Terror: Fatwas of
Radical Islam and the Duty of Jihad. Lan-
ham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2006.
Gleave, R., and E. Kermeli. Islamic Law: The-
ory and Practice. London: I.B. Tauris,
1997.
Haddad, Yvonne Yazbeck, and Barbara Freyer
Stowasser. Islamic Law and the Challenges
of Modernity. Walnut Creek, Calif.: Al-
taMira Press, 2004.
Williams, Julie. Islam: Understanding the His-
tory, Beliefs, and Culture. Berkeley Heights,
N.J.: Enslow, 2008.
Freedom Tower
See World Trade Center, One.
Fundamentalism
See Islamic Fundamentalism.
36 ✪ Gaza Strip and the West Bank
G–H
Gaza Strip and
the West Bank
Territories held and administered by
Israel and that are home to millions
of Palestinian Arabs as well as Israeli
citizens who have built settlements
there. Gaza has been the site of vio-
lent conflict between Palestinians
and Israelis and the base of numerous
terrorist groups that seek the destruc-
tion of the state of Israel.
These territories, and the way Is-
rael has treated their inhabitants, have
been a primary element of the Arab-
Israeli conflict that continues to fun-
damentally shape the Middle East and
world politics. Numerous groups
dedicated to the establishment of a
Palestinian state, and some to the total
destruction of Israel, operate within
these territories, committing what
many consider to be terrorist acts.
Currently, the Gaza Strip and the
West Bank, which are sometimes re-
ferred to as the Israeli-occupied terri-
tories, are officially administered by
the Palestinian Authority (PA), the
first Palestinian government of mod-
ern times. The PA was formed in 1994
as a result of the Oslo Accords be-
tween representatives of Israel and
the Palestinian people. However, ever
since a conflict known as the Battle
of Gaza in 2007, the PA no longer
wields effective control over the Gaza
Strip.
GEOGRAPHY AND HISTORY
The Gaza Strip is a 25-mile-long (40-
km-long) strip of land bordered by
the Mediterranean Sea on its north-
west side, Egypt on the southwest,
and Israel on all other sides. It varies
in width and covers a total of approx-
imately 140 square miles (104 km2).
Its largest city is Gaza, and the terri-
tory is home to about 1.4 million peo-
ple, making it one of the most densely
settled areas on the planet.
The West Bank, named for its po-
sition along the Jordan River and the
Dead Sea, is a much larger region
than Gaza, covering about 2,270
square miles (5,900 km2) and includ-
ing among its cities Hebron, Nablus,
Bethlehem, and Jericho. Approxi-
mately 2.7 million people, mostly Is-
raelis and Palestinian Arabs, live in
the West Bank, which is bordered on
the east by Jordan and on the south-
east by the Dead Sea. It is bordered by
Israel on all other sides.
Israeli Control Both of these territo-
ries were captured by Israel during
the 1967 Six-Day War, in which Israel
defeated Egypt, Jordan, and Syria.
Until 1994, these territories had no
legal status, being occupied by Israeli
military forces. In the intervening de-
cades, Israelis built numerous settle-
ments in the West Bank and improved
the area’s infrastructure. However,
Israeli settlement grew, allowing set-
tlers to take over towns and villages
formerly inhabited by Palestinians
who had fled the region during the
war. The West Bank was originally
part of Jordan, which ceded its claim
to the territory to the Palestine Liber-
ation Organization (PLO) in 1988.

The PLO is recognized by other na-
tions as the official representative of
the Palestinian people.
Violent Uprisings During the de-
cades these territories were under Is-
raeli control, organizations such as
Fatah, the Popular Front for the Lib-
eration of Palestine, and the Abu
Nidal Organization (most of which
were constituent members or splin-
ter groups of the PLO) committed
many acts of terrorism, including
suicide bombings, gunfights, car
Mahmoud Abbas (1935– )
Along with his longtime associate
Yasir Arafat, Mahmoud Abbas helped
found the influential Palestinian po-
litical party Fatah. He is also the first
chairman of the Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO) to follow Arafat’s
decades of leadership in the same role.
He served as prime minister of the Pal-
estinian Authority from 2003 to 2005,
when he was elected president of the
PA after the death of Arafat.
In the late 1970s, Abbas served as
head of the PLO’s international de-
partment, negotiating with Israeli
groups to advance the Palestinian
cause. He was a chief negotiator in
crucial peace conferences between
Palestinian and Israeli leaders in 1991
as well as at Oslo, Norway, in 1993.
Abbas is seen as a moderating fig-
ure because of his opposition to the
violence of the two intifadas and his
insistence on continuing the peace
Gaza Strip and the West Bank ✪ 37
bombs, firing rockets into Israeli ci-
vilian areas, and attempted assassina-
tions. All of these acts were directed
against Israelis as a means of advanc-
ing the Palestinian cause, which is to
establish an independent Palestinian
nation. This state would most likely
occupy the Gaza Strip and the West
Bank.
These violent acts reached a peak
during three periods: 1987–1993
(the first intifada, Arabic for “upris-
ing”), 2000–2003 (the second inti-
fada), and in 2007 (the Battle of
G–
H
process with Israel. In the face of the
second intifada, Israel, the United
States, and other nations pressured
Arafat to appoint Abbas as prime
minister of the PA because they felt
they could no longer trust Arafat.
Abbas, on the other hand, has a well-
established history of negotiating in
good faith. It was no surprise that
when Hamas won a surprise victory in
the 2006 PA parliamentary elections,
these same nations stood behind Ab-
bas’s decision to suspend the newly
elected government. Neither he nor
the leaders of these nations trusted
Hamas to stop using violence as a
means to achieve its aims.
As a result, the PA effectively split.
As of 2010, Abbas leads what many
recognize as the legitimate PA gov-
ernment in the West Bank, where he
continues to advocate for a peaceful
resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
38 ✪ Gaza Strip and the West Bank
Gaza). These periods of heightened
violence were met with Israeli mili-
tary incursions into the territories.
THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY
As part of the Oslo Accords (a set of
peace agreements between Palestin-
ian and Israeli leaders reached in
1993), the Palestinian Authority was
given partial control of the West Bank
and full control of the Gaza Strip in
1994. A gradual drawdown of Israeli
military forces in the West Bank was
also planned. Israeli settlements in
both territories were to be slowly re-
moved, although some settlers pro-
tested or engaged in violent acts
against the Palestinians.
The transfer of power to the PA
was impeded by the second intifada,
though the resolution of this second
uprising resulted in agreements that
further reduced Israeli influence in
the Gaza Strip.
Then, parliamentary elections in
2006 resulted in a surprise victory for
Hamas, a radical Palestinian terrorist
organization that was responsible for
many violent acts, over Fatah, a more
moderate political party founded by
Yasir Arafat (1929–2004), longtime
chairman of the PLO and first presi-
dent of the PA. Hamas’s victory
spurred many sanctions and boycotts
from Israel, the United States, and
other countries that viewed the party
as a terrorist organization. In the face
of increasing violence in the Gaza
Strip, PA president Mahmoud Abbas
dissolved the Hamas-led government
there. This resulted in the Battle of
Gaza, lasting from June to July 2007,
in which Hamas and Fatah forces
fought each other in both territories.
Fatah retained control of the West
Bank, while Hamas took over the
Gaza Strip. Most foreign powers rec-
ognized Abbas’s government as the
legitimate one.
Israeli forces besieged Gaza, ef-
fectively cutting off all outside aid,
until desperate Gazans broke through
a barrier on the Egyptian border in
search of food and fuel in January
2008. The siege resulted in a humani-
tarian crisis, and Israel relented under
international pressure.
However, violence continued in
November 2008, when groups associ-
ated with Hamas started to fire rock-
ets into Israel after promising a
six-month cease-fire. Israel responded
with airstrikes against Hamas’s secu-
rity installations in late December,
killing hundreds and wounding hun-
dreds more. In early 2009, Israeli
forces invaded Gaza in an attempt to
stop Hamas’s rocket attacks.
See also: Hamas; Islamic Fundamen-
talism; Palestine Liberation Organiza-
tion (PLO); Terrorist Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Pendergast, Tom, Sara Pendergast, and Ralph
Zerbonia. Middle East Conflict. Biogra-
phies. Detroit: UXL/Thomson Gale, 2006.
Sharp, Anne Wallace. The Palestinians. De-
troit: Lucent Books Thomson/Gale, 2005.
Stefoff, Rebecca. West Bank/Gaza Strip. New
York: Chelsea House, 1988.
Guantánamo Bay, Cuba
Well-sheltered bay on an inlet of the
Caribbean Sea in the island nation of
Cuba. The name of this bay is often
used to refer to the U.S. naval base lo-
cated there and, more particularly, to
 Guantánamo Bay, Cuba ✪ 39

the high-security military prisons, or the Geneva Conventions, a set of in-

“detention camps,” that house many
people accused of being, or support-
ing, Muslim militants. Because of
accusations that these prisoners
have been tortured or otherwise mis-
treated, as well as objections that most
of them have been held for years with-
out being charged with any crimes,
Guantánamo Bay has become a focal
point for worldwide controversy.
Critics of the camps argue that
the prisoners are not being treated
according to the laws governing pris-
oners of war (POWs) laid down in
ternational laws recognized by nearly
all countries in the world. Supporters
of the camps argue that the United
States has gathered intelligence vital
to the war on international terrorism
from the detainees and that President
George W. Bush (2001–2009) had
the right to identify enemy combat-
ants and hold them indefinitely if
necessary. In 2006, however, Bush
bowed to widespread political pres-
sure and agreed that the prisoners
should be protected under the Ge-
neva Conventions.

Military police escort a prisoner to his cell at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. The prison there has
been controversial since it opened in 2002. While supporters believe it provides a secure
place to house dangerous terrorists, opponents claim prisoners are held unfairly.
40 ✪ Guantánamo Bay, Cuba
HISTORY
Guantánamo Bay Naval Base, also
known as “Gitmo” (from its airport
code, GTMO), is the oldest overseas
naval base of the United States. Occu-
pying an area of 45 square miles (116
km2) and currently home to more
than 9,500 U.S. sailors and Marines,
Guantánamo was first established in
1898 as a naval station during the
Spanish-American War (1898).
In 1903, after successfully driving
the Spanish out of Cuba, the United
States signed a lease for this land. This
lease was reaffirmed in 1934 by
treaty.
DETENTION CAMPS
Until 2002, Guantánamo was not well
known outside of the U.S. military
and Cuba. In January of that year,
hundreds of people designated as
enemy combatants were brought to
the detention camps at Guantánamo
from the battlefields of Afghanistan
following the October 2001 U.S.
invasion.
Enemy Combatants Because it lies
outside the United States, Guantá-
namo does not fall under any U.S.
legal jurisdiction. The laws there are
entirely military in nature, and it is
the legal right of U.S. military com-
manders to designate captured pris-
oners as “enemy combatants.” This
designation is key to U.S. policy re-
garding the holding and treatment of
these detainees. Furthermore, the
Bush administration asserted that
such prisoners could legally be held
in secret locations for an indefinite
period of time.
This is the fate of an unknown
number of people at this time. In
2006, Bush admitted that the U.S.
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) op-
erates a number of secret detention
centers scattered around the globe.
Allegations of Torture More impor-
tantly, observers, some former mili-
tary service members, and detainees
themselves claim that the prisoners
at Guantánamo have been subjected
to various controversial techniques,
including sleep deprivation, being
chained in a fetal position for up to a
day at a time, and being subjected to
practices that the Qur’an (Islam’s
holy book) forbids as unclean. The
most notorious technique allegedly
used at Guantánamo is waterboard-
ing, in which a detainee is made to
believe he is drowning. These tech-
niques are used to force detainees
into providing information about
terrorist organizations and their
plans.
The allegations of torture in-
creased between 2002 and 2006.
Ironically, the use of these methods
to extract information from detain-
ees has resulted in increased support
for terrorist organizations such as al
Qaeda in some Muslim communities.
It has also contributed to a sharp
decrease in support for the United
States worldwide. Many have argued
that the United States’ image as a
nation committed to doing good in
the world has suffered because of
what allegedly has transpired at
Guantánamo Bay.
In June 2008, the U.S. Supreme
Court ruled that Guantánamo detain-
ees were entitled to the protections
of the U.S. Constitution. However, at
the beginning of 2009, detainees still

had not received this protection.
After taking office in January 2009,
President Barack Obama (2009– )
called for the closing of the Guantá-
namo detention camps. However, be-
cause of many legal and security
concerns, the process will likely take
some time.
See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda;
American Taliban; Bush, George W.;
Patriot Act; September 11, 2001; Ter-
rorist Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Haugen, David M., and Susan Musser. Can
the War on Terrorism Be Won? Detroit:
Greenhaven Press, 2007.
Rose, David. Guantánamo: The War on
Human Rights. New York: New Press,
2004.
Scheppler, Bill. Guantánamo Bay and Military
Tribunals: The Detention and Trial of
Suspected Terrorists. New York: Rosen
Publishing Group, 2005.
Giuliani, Rudolph
See September 11, 2001.
Hamas
Militant Islamic organization cen-
tered in the West Bank (region along
the west bank of the Jordan River and
the Dead Sea) and the Gaza Strip, a
coastal land that borders Egypt and
Israel. Founded in 1987 by members
of the Muslim Brotherhood and the
Palestine Liberation Organization
(PLO), Hamas is regarded by the
United Nations (UN) as a terrorist or-
ganization, notorious for its suicide
bombings against Israelis. However,
many Palestinians support the group
Hamas ✪ 41
because of its dedication to creating
a Palestinian state.
FOUNDING HAMAS
The Muslim Brotherhood, an organi-
zation founded in the late 1920s that
is dedicated to establishing Islamic
governments, set up a series of clin-
ics and schools throughout Gaza and
the West Bank in the late 1970s.
While these areas are home to numer-
ous Palestinian Arabs, they have been
under the control of Israel since
1967. Though many of the Brother-
hood’s activities have been nonvio-
lent, some connected groups in
these occupied territories began to
call for jihad, or a holy war, against
Israel.
G–
Along with the Palestine Libera- H
tion Organization, these groups even-
tually founded Hamas in 1987, at the
start of the first intifada—a violent
Palestinian uprising against Israelis.
Hamas, which is an acronym for Hara-
kat al-Muqawamah al-Islamiyyah (“Is-
lamic Resistance Movement”) and
also an Arabic word meaning “zeal,”
declared that Palestine was a Muslim
state that should never be surren-
dered to non-Muslims. The group
called explicitly for the destruction
of Israel and began a campaign of ter-
rorist attacks against Israelis, mostly
consisting of suicide bombers and
armed assaults. Although the PLO
later denounced these attacks, having
recognized Israel in 1988, there were
many political and financial ties link-
ing the two organizations. This made
the actions and words of PLO chair-
man Yasir Arafat, when denouncing
or attempting to limit Hamas, seem
insincere to many critics.
42 ✪ Hamas
TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY ACTIONS
Hamas continued to wage its cam-
paign through the first decade of the
twenty-first century. The scope and
brutality of the violence it and other
groups committed greatly increased
after a second intifada began in 2000.
However, Hamas participated in a
2005 cease-fire as negotiations pro-
gressed for the establishment of a
Palestinian government. Surprisingly,
the group won a political victory
over a less radical rival party, Fatah,
in 2006 elections. Clashes between
these two parties forced Mahmoud
Abbas, president of the Palestinian
Authority (PA)—Palestine’s first inde-
pendent government—to dissolve the
government in June 2007.
Hamas seized control of the Gaza
Strip, while Fatah dominated the
West Bank. Because Hamas did not
relent in its attacks on Israelis and Is-
raeli targets, Israel instituted severe
sanctions on Gaza later in 2007. These
sanctions have led to what some ob-
servers describe as a humanitarian
crisis, as Gaza’s nearly 1.4 million resi-
dents have run short on medical sup-
plies, fuel, food, and clean water.
Though Hamas remained committed
to its ultimate aim of destroying Is-
rael, it agreed to another cease-fire in
June 2008. This peace was short-lived,
however, as both Israel and Hamas
accused the other of violating the
truce. As of 2010, the sanctions re-
mained in place on Gaza, and Hamas
continued its campaign of bloody
violence.
See also: Gaza Strip and the West
Bank; Islamic Fundamentalism; Jihad;
Palestine Liberation Organization
(PLO); Terrorist Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Hiber, Amanda. Should Governments Negoti-
ate with Terrorists? Detroit: Greenhaven
Press, 2008.
Mason, Paul. Israel and Palestine. Tarrytown,
N.Y.: Marshall Cavendish Benchmark,
2008.
Rosaler, Maxine. Hamas: Palestinian Terror-
ists. New York: Rosen Publishing Group,
2003.
Tamimi, Azzam. Hamas: A History from
Within. Northampton, Mass.: Olive Branch
Press, 2007.
Hizbollah
Established in Lebanon in 1982, mili-
tia and political party whose name
means “Party of God.” Hizbollah is a
militant Shiite organization regarded
as a terrorist group by the United Na-
tions (UN) for its attacks on Israel as
well as on rival militant groups in
Lebanon. Its initial goals included
establishing an Islamic regime in
Lebanon as well as destroying Israel.
Although popular in Muslim coun-
tries as a resistance movement, Hiz-
bollah does not officially represent
any nation or state.
FOUNDING HIZBOLLAH
Shiite clerics in Lebanon founded
Hizbollah in response to the 1982 Is-
raeli invasion. The organization drew
material support from overwhelm-
ingly Shiite Iran, which had estab-
lished an Islamic government in
1979. The group also received fund-
ing from disaffected Lebanese youths.
Lebanon had suffered from a civil

war since 1975, in which another
powerful militia and political party,
Amal, had risen to prominence with
support from neighboring Syria.
However, Hizbollah’s more radical
views attracted great support from
southern Lebanon (occupied first by
the Palestine Liberation Organization
and later by Israel), and the new par-
ty’s challenge to Amal intensified the
civil war.
The war was brought to an end in
1990 only by Syrian armed interven-
tion. Over the course of the war,
Hizbollah had killed hundreds if
not thousands of fellow Lebanese,
Palestinians, and Israelis, as well as
Westerners. Because Hizbollah had
grown so strong by the war’s end,
Syria was unable to force it to disarm.
The group was thus able to continue
a guerrilla war against Israel’s forces
in southern Lebanon until they with-
drew in 2000.
TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
ACTIONS
Since then, Hizbollah has continued
to grow in power and influence. On
July 12, 2006, the group launched an
attack on Israel as a means of pressur-
ing the Jewish state into releasing
several prisoners of war. Israel re-
sponded with a massive bombing
campaign in southern Lebanon com-
bined with a ground invasion that
claimed the lives of more than 1,000
Lebanese. Nearly one million more
were displaced. However, Hizbollah
managed to fight the Israeli forces to
a standstill. They withdrew again
soon afterward, and Hizbollah en-
Hizbollah ✪ 43
joyed a broad popularity not only
among previously hostile groups
within Lebanon but also elsewhere in
the Muslim world.
Hizbollah used this new support
to mount an opposition campaign
against the Western-backed Lebanese
government. It failed to topple the
government, but it did demand the
formation of a new one that recog-
nized its newfound strength. Further
clashes in May 2008 led to negotia-
tions that gave Hizbollah the veto
power it had demanded, as one of
the most powerful political parties
in the country, since 2006. Later
that year, Hizbollah also reached an
agreement with Israel to exchange G–
prisoners, the original purpose of
H
the 2006 war.
Hizbollah continues to hold a
commanding position in Lebanese
politics, which has alarmed its critics.
In some of their eyes, its terrorist
tactics as well as its close and long-
standing ties with Iran have made it
seem little more than an arm of the
militant Shia who took control of Iran
in 1979.
See also: Gaza Strip and the West
Bank; Hamas; Iran; Islamic Funda-
mentalism; Jihad; Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO); Terrorist
Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Byers, Ann. Lebanon’s Hezbollah. New York:
Rosen, 2003.
Harik, Judith P. Hezbollah: The Changing
Face of Terrorism. London: I.B. Tauris,
2004.
44 ✪ Iran
I–K
Iran
Officially the Islamic Republic of Iran,
a populous, multiethnic country in
Southwest Asia that is run by a fun-
damentalist Islamic government.
Since the Iranian Revolution of 1979,
when an Islamic theocracy was es-
tablished, Iran has provided a great
deal of political, financial, and mate-
rial support to Islamic terrorist orga-
nizations as well as to political parties
such as Hizbollah in Lebanon. Be-
cause of Iran’s controversial history
with Western nations, much of this
support is directed toward groups
that oppose Western influences on
Muslim societies.
Since the start of the Iraqi War
(ongoing since 2003), Iran has be-
come a base for terrorists working to
destabilize Iraq’s new democratic
government. Also, the rhetoric, or
grandiose language, of Iranian lead-
ers often includes calls for the violent
attack or destruction of Israel, the
United States, the United Kingdom,
and other nations.
HISTORY
Before the twentieth century, Iran
was home to numerous Islamic states,
ruled mostly by emirs, over the past
millennium. For most of the twenti-
eth century, Iran experienced a series
of governmental crises. By the 1970s,
many groups in Iran, including
leftist organizations and Islamic
religious groups, were opposed
to the government of Mohammad
Reza Pahlavi. Pahlavi had partially
modernized Iran, but his regime en-
gaged in many totalitarian activities
such as imprisoning and torturing
political opponents, censoring the
media, and limiting which parties
could participate in elections.
Political opposition to the Pahlavi
government culminated in wide-
spread strikes and riots. A coalition of
opposition groups became domi-
nated by a fundamentalist Islamic fac-
tion, led by the Ayatollah Ruhollah
Khomeini, a popular Shia cleric who
had been exiled from Iran since the
mid-1960s. Khomeini was notably
anti-American and supported violent,
militant tactics to achieve political
ends.
In the 1979 Iranian Revolution,
Khomeini and his supporters suc-
ceeded in establishing an Islamic the-
ocracy. Under this government, the
Supreme Leader, an Islamic cleric,
holds ultimate authority, and all deci-
sions of the democratically elected
president and parliament have to be
approved by one of several councils
composed of mullahs (Islamic reli-
gious scholars). Under Khomeini,
Iran’s first Supreme Leader, Iran’s
government continued many of the
oppressive totalitarian policies of the
Pahlavi government, though the justi-
fication for these policies was now
religious and not secular. Since the
transition to an Islamic government,
Iran has been widely criticized for its
numerous human rights abuses.
These include the executions of po-
litical prisoners, the imprisonment
and beating of political dissidents,

and the oppression of women, non-
Muslims, and homosexuals.
IRAN AND TERRORISM
In the decade leading up to the Ira-
nian Revolution, numerous opposi-
tion groups committed acts of
political violence considered terror-
ist acts, such as suicide bombings
and kidnappings. However, after the
Islamic Republic of Iran was estab-
lished on April 1, 1979, Iranian ter-
rorism was directed toward to other
nations.
Iranian Revolution In November
1979, student militants seized control
of the American embassy in Tehran,
Iran’s capital. They were enraged by
the decision of the American govern-
ment to admit Pahlavi to the United
States for medical treatment. Sixty-six
Americans were taken hostage, blind-
folded, and intimidated by armed
guards on a daily basis. After 13 were
released, months of threats, sanc-
tions, and negotiations failed to con-
vince Khomeini to liberate the
others. A secret rescue mission in
April 1980 also failed. The two na-
tions continued negotiating until Jan-
uary 1981, when the remaining hos-
tages were released. This incident,
known as the Iranian Hostage Crisis,
emboldened other militant groups
because it demonstrated that the
United States could be forced to ne-
gotiate with terrorists, despite its of-
ficial stance against doing so.
Spreading Revolution Until his
death in 1989, Khomeini declared
that Iran would export its revolution
to the whole world. The Iranian
government did this by supporting
Iraqi War ✪ 45
militant Shia Muslims worldwide. In
particular, Iran financed and sent
troops to support Hizbollah, a radical
political party and terrorist group
in Lebanon, as well as Hamas, in the
Palestinian territories held by Israel.
It is also believed that Iran has
taken an active role in supporting Shia
militias in Iraq since the U.S. invasion
in 2003. This practice is in line with
the country’s revolutionary Islamic
stance. More significantly, Iran has
been accused of trying to develop a
nuclear weapons program. This is a
highly controversial, ongoing issue,
because Iran claims that it is building
nuclear reactors to meet its energy
needs. However, the ongoing violent,
anti-Israel, and anti-American rhetoric
of Iran’s government makes the pros-
pect of it acquiring nuclear weapons a I–
disturbing one for Western nations.
K
See also: Fatwa; Gaza Strip and the
West Bank; Hamas; Hizbollah; Iraqi
War; Islamic Fundamentalism; Jihad;
Terrorist Organizations; Weapons of
Mass Destruction.
FURTHERREADING
Axworthy, Michael. A History of Iran: Empire
of the Mind. New York: Basic Books,
2008.
Gerdes, Louise I. Rogue Nations. Detroit:
Greenhaven Press, 2006.
Gray, Leon, Edmund Herzig, and Dorreh
Mirheydar. Iran. Washington, D.C.: Na-
tional Geographic, 2008.
Murphy, John. Ali Khamenei. New York:
Chelsea House Publishers, 2007.
Iraqi War
The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March
2003 and the occupation that fol-
lowed. For months before the war,
46 ✪ Iraqi War

President George W. Bush (2001– invasion, no trace of these WMDs was

2009) and his administration made a
sustained argument that Iraq’s dicta-
tor, Saddam Hussein, posed a serious
threat to the United States and other
nations. This argument rested largely
on the misguided assertion that Hus-
sein was stockpiling weapons of mass
destruction (WMDs). However, fol-
lowing a swift and decisive ground
ever found.
The foreign troops occupying
Iraq, mainly from the United States
and the United Kingdom, then faced
a much more difficult, complex, and
lethal situation: a guerrilla war
fought by Hussein’s supporters, as
well as by militant Islamic groups,
including some supported by the

U.S. troops patrol the streets of war-torn Baghdad, the capital of Iraq. While terrorist bomb-
ings still occur in the city, it has become much safer since 2009. President Barack Obama
(2009– ) plans to withdraw most American troops by the end of 2010, while leaving behind
advisers to help the Iraqis and protect American interests in the country.

terrorist organization al Qaeda. This
war defied the expectation that
the Iraqis would greet the foreign
troops as liberators and would move
quickly to establish a strong secular
democracy in the midst of the
many anti-American theocracies and
constitutional monarchies in the
Middle East.
A death toll of more than 5,300
American soldiers and private mili-
tary contractors and, by one estimate,
one million Iraqis (civilian and mili-
tary) also cast the war in an increas-
ingly negative light.
BACKGROUND
The conditions that led to the Iraqi
War were established during the Per-
sian Gulf War (1990–1991). Saddam
Hussein invaded the small neighbor-
ing country of Kuwait in August 1990
on charges that the Kuwaitis were
using slanted drill holes to tap into
Iraq’s oil reserves. In response, the
United States and the United King-
dom built a military coalition to
force the Iraqi troops out of Kuwait.
The Invasion Based in Saudi Arabia,
the coalition forces invaded Kuwait
in January 1991 and quickly forced
the Iraqi troops out. Coalition forces
also bombed major cities in Iraq, in-
cluding Baghdad. Their ground
troops moved to within 150 miles
(241 km) of the Iraqi capital before
halting. President George H. W. Bush
(1989–1993) declared a cease-fire on
April 6, 1991.
Although coalition forces could
have removed Hussein from power
then, they did not, deciding that
doing so would fragment Iraq into
several mutually hostile regions.
Iraqi War ✪ 47
Hussein’s ruthless and secular dicta-
torship, in fact, had held the country
together for decades. As a result, co-
alition forces did not support armed
revolts that followed the cease-fire
from Shiites in southern Iraq and
from Kurds in northern Iraq against
Hussein. Both revolts were brutally
put down by Hussein’s forces. After-
ward, the United States and the
United Kingdom maintained no-fly
zones in these areas to prevent Hus-
sein from retaliating further against
these populations, who had long
sought independence.
Peace Terms The peace terms of the
war forced Hussein to destroy his
stockpiles of weapons of mass de-
struction, also known as WMDs (bio-
logical and chemical weapons, though
he had also begun a program at the I–
time to develop nuclear weapons). K
However, Hussein only reluctantly
cooperated with the United Nations
(UN) inspectors charged with ensur-
ing he had destroyed his weapons,
and it was clear for many years that
he intended to rebuild his WMD pro-
grams. Strict sanctions were imposed
on Iraq, with the intention of weak-
ening Hussein’s regime and forcing
him to cooperate. These sanctions
only strengthened his power because
he used the aid meant for the Iraqi
people to bolster his own supporters.
During this entire time, Hussein’s
public statements remained ex-
tremely anti-American, although he
could do little to strike back at the co-
alition forces.
THE MARCH TO WAR
In 2002, President George W. Bush
(2001–2009), son of the president
48 ✪ Iraqi War
who successfully led the coalition
during the Persian Gulf War, argued
that Saddam Hussein presented a real,
immediate threat to the United States
because of his stockpiled WMDs.
Therefore, he asserted that the United
States needed to invade Iraq and de-
pose Hussein in order to neutralize
the threat. Bush also alleged that Hus-
sein was a supporter of Islamic ter-
rorism. He was aided in his arguments
by many other members of his admin-
istration, including Vice President
Richard B. Cheney (who had over-
seen the Persian Gulf War as secre-
tary of defense) and Secretary of State
Colin Powell (who had helped plan
and conduct the same war as chair-
man of the Joint Chiefs of Staff).
The official rationale for invading
Iraq rested on questionable evidence,
however. After the invasion, numer-
ous intelligence agencies, includ-
ing America’s Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA) and Defense Intelli-
gence Agency, alleged that the Bush
administration had been highly selec-
tive in accepting and interpreting evi-
dence that supported its case against
Hussein. In fact, some evidence, it
was revealed, had been fabricated.
Even before the invasion began,
many questioned Bush’s rationale
for war. Hussein had no history of
cooperating with al Qaeda. Also, UN
weapons inspectors that Hussein
had allowed into the country in
late 2002 had uncovered no evidence
of WMDs.
INVASION AND AFTERMATH
Bush issued an ultimatum on March
17, 2003, demanding that Hussein
give up power within 48 hours.
Hussein defied this ultimatum, and
the U.S.- and British-led invasion
began on March 20.
Several precision-guided bombs
were dropped on targets in Baghdad
where it was believed that Hussein
was meeting with senior staff. Air-
strikes followed against military and
communications targets throughout
Iraq, and several days later, ground
troops invaded from Kuwait.
Armed Resistance Most regular Iraqi
Army troops provided little resistance
to the invaders, though heavy resis-
tance came from paramilitary units
organized by Hussein’s Ba’ath Party.
(Ba’athists had always been his most
dedicated supporters, both during
the invasion and the guerrilla war af-
terward.) By April 9, 2003, U.S. forces
had taken control of Baghdad, though
Hussein managed to avoid capture
until December 13 of that year.
Widespread looting and violence
followed the collapse of Hussein’s
government. Though coalition casu-
alties had been exceedingly light
during the invasion, a determined
and elusive guerrilla force, or insur-
gency, began killing many soldiers as
well as civilians by the end of sum-
mer 2003. Suicide bombers and im-
provised explosive devices (IEDs),
or bombs cobbled together and dis-
guised as anything from roadside de-
bris to children’s toys, had killed
more than 1,000 American soldiers
by November 2004.
Breakup of Iraqi Society Iraqi soci-
ety had begun to disintegrate into
four distinct segments: the majority
of Shia Muslims; the minority Sunni

Saddam Hussein (1937–2006)
For several decades, Saddam Hussein
was one of the most recognizable and
hated Middle Eastern leaders. He ruled
Iraq in various capacities for more than
20 years. Born on April 28, 1937, near
Tikrit, in northern Iraq, Hussein was a
mediocre student and accomplished
little before joining the Ba’ath Party in
1957. This revolutionary party advo-
cated secular pan-Arabism (the estab-
lishment of a united Arab nation) as
well as an Arab form of socialism, a
kind of government that controls, at
least partially, a nation’s economy.
After helping an Iraqi general stage a
coup in 1958, then trying and failing
to assassinate him in 1959, Hussein
fled to Syria, then Egypt. He advanced
within the Ba’ath Party and was re-
warded for his support when his
cousin, Ahmad Hassan al-Bakr, took
over Iraq in another coup in 1968.
Hussein used his position as head of
who had controlled the government
for decades; Kurds in the north, who
were a distinct ethnic group that had
long sought independence; and non-
religious Iraqis who wanted to re-
build a civil democracy. Shia, Sunni,
and Kurdish militias formed and
struggled against each other as well
as against the occupying forces.
MILITIAS, AL QAEDA, AND
WESTERN RESPONSES
Hussein’s regime had driven out
many religious leaders, particularly
Iraqi War ✪ 49
security forces to begin building his
personal power. He developed a large
network of Ba’athist supporters and
essentially ran the country by 1979,
when he forced al-Bakr to resign and
declared himself president.
Hussein transformed Iraq into a
modern, secular state and maintained
his power through the development
of a massive apparatus of state terror.
His numerous intelligence agencies
spied on his people and ruthlessly tor-
tured and killed many dissenters.
Moreover, in the 1970s and 1980s he
provided assistance to several terrorist
organizations, including the Palestine
Liberation Organization (PLO), in the I–
pursuit of pan-Arabism.
Hussein was captured by U.S. forces K
on December 14, 2003, and tried in an
Iraqi court for war crimes. Found
guilty, he was executed on December
30, 2006.
Shia Muslims who had ties with the
Shia theocracy in Iran. When his re-
gime fell, these leaders returned to
Iraq and began a struggle for power
that had long been denied to the
majority Shia population.
One of the most influential and
dangerous Shia groups to form was
the Mahdi Army, created by popular
Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in June
2003. Tens of thousands strong, the
Mahdi Army staged a bloody uprising
on April 4, 2004, seizing several im-
portant cities. Negotiations broke
50 ✪ Iraqi War
down in May, when coalition forces
launched successful counterattacks
in Karbala, Ad Diwaniyah, An Najaf,
and Sadr City. The fighting ceased in
June only when al-Sadr directed the
Mahdi Army to stop. The Mahdi Army
remains a powerful political force,
however.
Other such militias continued to
fight in Iraq, including groups that
have explicitly associated themselves
with al Qaeda. The leader of a group
calling itself al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu
Musab al-Zarqawi was one of the
most wanted terrorists in the world
from the time of the invasion to his
death in June 2006. He was responsi-
ble for hundreds of brutal deaths,
some of which were recorded and
broadcast in order to incite further
violence among those resisting the
occupation.
Ongoing Violence Although the pres-
ence of foreign troops kept Iraq from
dissolving completely into civil war,
it was also one of the main factors
that continued to provoke terrorist
attacks and sectarian violence, or vio-
lence occurring between different
religious sects—mainly Shia and Sunni
Muslims. While true democratic elec-
tions had been held in Iraq for the
first time in many decades, the coun-
try’s infrastructure, economy, and
governmental unity lay in ruins.
THE COST OF WAR
The hopes of the Bush administration
that Iraq would become a thriving de-
mocracy had not become a reality by
2010. Some observers note that Iraq
has become another breeding ground
of terrorism. In addition, the various
peoples and religious sects have only
been able to forge a fragile, somewhat
unstable government. The human
and financial cost of the Iraqi War
also severely hampered U.S. efforts in
Afghanistan to capture al Qaeda lead-
ership and put an end to a resurgent
Taliban, a fundamentalist Islamic
group that had seized power there in
the 1990s.
Perhaps most detrimentally,
worldwide opinion of the United
States shifted dramatically following
the 2003 invasion. Millions world-
wide have protested Bush’s decisions
regarding Iraq.
See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda;
Baghdad; Bush, George W.; Iran;
Taliban; Terrorist Organizations;
Weapons of Mass Destruction;
Al-Zarqawi, Abu Musab.
FURTHERREADING
Richie, Jason. Iraq and the Fall of Saddam
Hussein. Minneapolis, Minn.: Oliver Press,
2003.
Rivera, Sheila. Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Edina, Minn.: ABDO & Daughters, 2004.
Shields, Charles J., and Rachel A. Koestler-
Grack. Saddam Hussein. New York: Chel-
sea House Publishers, 2005.
The War in Iraq: From the Front Lines to the
Home Front. New York: Franklin Watts,
2008.
Islamic Fundamentalism
Term used to refer to a broad range
of social, political, and religious
movements that share the key charac-
teristic of urging Muslims to con-
duct their lives according to a literal,
or strict, interpretation of the Qur’an,
Islam’s holy book. The term is highly

controversial among Muslim and non-
Muslim scholars alike.
Some strains of Islamic funda-
mentalism are incompatible with
open societies such as those found in
democratically elected republics.
This incompatibility, along with the
increasingly numerous acts of vio-
lence committed by some militant
Islamic fundamentalists (or Islamists),
has resulted in a generally negative
perception of Islamic fundamental-
ism among non-Muslims.
CHARACTERISTICS
Islamic fundamentalism depends on
the idea that there is one true inter-
pretation of the Qur’an—a strictly lit-
eral one—and that any deviation from
this interpretation in theory or prac-
tice is at best mistaken and at worst
sacrilegious. The term fundamental-
ism originally referred to the Chris-
tian belief in the literal truth of the
Bible, but it has since been adapted
to describe other faiths as well.
Islamists believe that the Muslim
world is in a state of decline, thanks
to the domination of Western civiliza-
tion. Western principles such as de-
mocracy and the focus on individual
liberties are at odds with Islam,
which prioritizes submission to Allah
(God) in all the forms prescribed by
the Qur’an. According to the funda-
mentalist view, a basic lack of piety
in secular societies leads to immoral-
ity. That such societies project their
immorality into the Muslim world,
through products, media, ideas, and
even military force, is intolerable to
Islamic fundamentalists.
Accordingly, many Islamists seek
to limit the influence of non-Muslim
Islamic Fundamentalism ✪ 51
cultures, particularly Western ones,
on Muslim societies. They also seek
to bring their societies in line with
their literal interpretations of scrip-
ture. Politically, these aims have
manifested as agitation for Islamic
governments whose laws are founded
on the Qur’an. Another manifestation
is a hostility, violent or not, toward
Western societies and their values.
As for the interpretation of scrip-
ture, there exists in the Muslim world
no universal agreement on sharia
(Islamic law) or what exactly it pro-
claims about how to live. Instead, a
number of interpretive traditions
teach different doctrines, though
some basic principles do not vary
from school to school.
Fundamentalist Doctrines All strains I–
of Islamic fundamentalism insist on a
return to the basics of Islam, as ex- K
pressed in the Qur’an and Hadith—
accounts of the prophet Muhammad’s
life that further reveal how Muslims
should live. Over the 14 centuries
since the religion’s inception, many
strains of Islam have been mixed with
local religious practices and customs,
or have developed beyond a strictly
literal interpretation of scripture.
Fundamentalists believe that these
deviations must be abandoned.
The basic tenets of Islam are, of
course, shared by all fundamental-
ists. They believe that Muhammad
(c. A.D. 570–632) received God’s final
revelations, making him the last and
greatest of a long line of prophets
that extend back through the Chris-
tian and Jewish traditions. These
revelations were recorded in the
Qur’an, which describes five “pillars”
52 ✪ Islamic Fundamentalism
(religious practices) required of all
Muslims. In addition to these five pil-
lars, the Qur’an has rules for diet,
dress, inheritance, and so forth. Vari-
ous traditions of Islamic law have
developed to apply these rules in
practical situations, but the inter-
pretation and prioritization of the
Qur’an’s rules vary considerably
among the traditions.
Opposition to Secular Govern-
ments Another common fundamen-
talist belief is a suspicion of, and
even an outright antagonism toward,
secular government. Most Islamic
fundamentalists do not believe that
religion and politics can be separated
because the Qur’an gives ample in-
struction on virtually every aspect of
living for Muslims. Consequently,
fundamentalists reason that if Islamic
law is to be strictly observed, civil
courts and political processes must
be replaced with those founded on
sharia to ensure accordance with
scripture.
A final point of commonality
among the majority of fundamental-
ists is that they view the world in a
dualistic way. The Qur’an divides
the world into two parts: the Muslim
world and areas that have not yet
been converted to Islam. Most funda-
mentalists see themselves engaged in
a struggle with the non-Muslim world,
which they must either convert or
conquer. Some interpret this struggle
in violent terms, while others seek to
spread Islam through peaceful means.
As with all dualistic thought, this per-
spective assumes only two possible
states for everything: good or evil,
high or low, inside or outside. Unfor-
tunately, when the complexity and
diversity of human experience is re-
duced to these terms, misunderstand-
ings and open conflict often result.
HISTORY OF ISLAMIC
FUNDAMENTALISM
Islamic fundamentalism is, at root, a
reaction to modernizing and secular-
izing European influences, including
religious tolerance, equal rights for
women, and the idea of free speech.
Forms of fundamentalism have only
existed for about two-and-a-half cen-
turies, making them relatively recent.
As the Muslim world declined in
power with the fall of the Ottoman
Empire in the early twentieth century,
European countries grew to dominate
the Middle East and North Africa both
politically and economically. Funda-
mentalism, which affirmed the inde-
pendence and superiority of Muslim
societies, grew as a result.
Beginning of the Movement The ear-
liest fundamentalist movement of
lasting importance was Wahhabism,
founded on the ideas of the Islamic
scholar Muhammad ibn Abd al-
Wahhab (1703–1792). He con-
demned what he saw as widespread
moral decline and deviation from the
Qur’an throughout the Arabian Pen-
insula, and called for the abandon-
ment of such practices as worship-
ping saints and visiting tombs. His
stance was extremely conservative
and largely unpopular, though it was
adopted by the powerful House of
Saud, which would, over the follow-
ing century and a half, conquer the
Arabian Peninsula and establish the
nation of Saudi Arabia. Today, Wah-
habism is the official state religion of
that country, one of several theocra-
cies established by fundamentalists.

The Muslim Brotherhood A more re-
cent and even more influential move-
ment started in Egypt in 1928—the
Society of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Hassan al-Banna, its founder, sought
to free Muslims from what he per-
ceived as the corruption of secular-
ism and Western culture. The Muslim
Brotherhood grew rapidly in Egypt as
well as throughout the Middle East.
Its main goal was the overthrow of
secular governments and the estab-
lishment of theocracies based on
sharia. The Brotherhood’s activities
have always ranged from the charita-
ble (building schools and clinics, pro-
viding aid to the poor) to the violent
(assassination attempts, armed upris-
ings). Although al-Banna failed to es-
tablish an Islamic state in Egypt, his
ideas became highly influential.
Recent Developments Two individu-
als who furthered the cause of Islamic
fundamentalism were Sayyid Qutb
(1906–1966) and Ayatollah Ruhollah
Khomeini (1902–1989). Qutb, a
prominent Egyptian literary and so-
cial critic, was directly involved with
the Muslim Brotherhood beginning
in the 1950s. His Islamic beliefs were
strong since childhood and were in-
tensified by a brief period of graduate
study in the United States. Qutb was
disgusted by what he saw as signs of
moral depravity in American culture
(including materialism, individual
freedoms, and fascination with trivial
entertainment). He was also dis-
tressed by the weakness of Egypt’s
government in the face of Western
powers.
Qutb was briefly imprisoned for
his vocal opposition to Egypt’s gov-
ernment in the 1950s, after which he
Islamic Fundamentalism ✪ 53
wrote one of the most influential
manifestos of fundamentalist Islam:
Ma’alim fi-l-Tariq (Milestones). He
felt that only an Islamic government
could prevent the excesses and moral
failures he despised in Western na-
tions as well as in Egypt’s secular gov-
ernment. Qutb was executed in 1966
on charges of plotting assassinations
of government officials. For this, he is
widely regarded as a martyr, dying
for his religious beliefs.
Milestones became one of the
most influential texts in the modern
Muslim world. Many fundamentalists
and fundamentalist terrorist organi-
zations, including al Qaeda, Hamas in
the Gaza Strip, and Hizbollah in Leba-
non, adopted key ideas from it. Qutb
effectively redefined jihad as an ex-
plicitly violent struggle against the I–
morally corrupt Western nations. He
also called for the development of a
K
global Islamic movement to establish
sharia in all countries, so that all hu-
mans would live according to divine
law instead of what he saw as the im-
perfect, arbitrary, and abusive secular
systems.
Fundamentalism in Iran Ayatollah
Ruhollah Khomeini, another Islamic
fundamentalist who profoundly
changed the modern world, also fer-
vently opposed the secular govern-
ment of his native country of Iran. By
the 1960s, Khomeini was a major re-
ligious scholar with a widespread fol-
lowing, and when he publicly con-
demned Iran’s leader, Shah Moham-
mad Reza Pahlavi, his arrest sparked
riots throughout Iran. He was exiled
to Iraq in 1964, though he continued
to urge his followers to revolt. Many
other groups apart from fundamen-
54 ✪ Islamic Fundamentalism
talists were dissatisfied with the
shah’s oppressive government, and
by the late 1970s, they had formed a
coalition that culminated in the Ira-
nian Revolution of 1979.
Through this revolution, Kho-
meini established a theocracy in
Iran based on a fundamentalist inter-
pretation of Shia Islam. Since then,
Iran has been a strong supporter of
militant fundamentalists, as well as
an inspiration to those who hope to
establish theocracies in their own
countries.
ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM
AND TERRORISM
Because of its profoundly anti-
Western, anti-secular orientation, Is-
lamic fundamentalism has inspired
numerous Islamic terrorist organiza-
tions. This is problematic for the
many fundamentalists who are not
militant, or not as radical as terrorists,
because they share many of the same
beliefs and are therefore vulnerable
to being confused with militants.
Types of Fundamentalist Groups The
most notorious organizations with a
fundamentalist orientation include al
Qaeda, Hamas, and Hizbollah. While
al Qaeda is little more than a terrorist
organization, Hamas and Hizbollah
are also political parties and social
movements. The violent tactics of all
three groups have killed thousands
worldwide. They also have served to
polarize the Muslim world as well as
to negatively affect the non-Muslim
world’s collective perception of
Islam.
The political gains made by Hamas
and Hizbollah in the last several
decades have helped rally fundamen-
talists to their causes, while al Qaeda’s
ranks have grown in the past decade
in response to its successful attacks
on September 11, 2001, as well as to
the consequent U.S.-led invasions of
Afghanistan and Iraq. On the other
hand, many Muslims have also be-
come disillusioned with these organi-
zations and their aims because they
have killed a great number of Mus-
lims as well as non-Muslims.
Islamic Fundamentalism Today Is-
lamic fundamentalism is a powerful
force in the world because it seeks to
improve political, social, and eco-
nomic conditions in majority Muslim
countries. Many of these conditions
have not been successfully addressed
by sometimes corrupt and oppressive
secular governments, a fact that pro-
vides powerful evidence for funda-
mentalist arguments.
However, the record of violence,
human rights abuses, and religious
oppression committed by Islamic
fundamentalists provides equally
powerful evidence against their
cause. Scholars from many disciplines
argue that until oppressive social
conditions—including widespread
and persistent poverty, lack of ade-
quate education and health care, and
economic systems dominated by for-
eign nations—are improved, Islamic
fundamentalism will remain a potent
global force.
See also: Al Qaeda; Gaza Strip and the
West Bank; Hamas; Hizbollah; Iran;
Iraqi War; Jihad; London Bombings
(2005); September 11, 2001; Taliban;
Terrorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING
Gerges, Fawaz A. Journey of the Jihadist:
Inside Muslim Militancy. Orlando, Fla.:
Harcourt, 2006.
Ojeda, Auriana. Islamic Fundamentalism. San
Diego, Calif.: Greenhaven Press, Thomson/
Gale, 2003.
Whitehead, Kim. Islamic Fundamentalism.
Broomall, Pa.: Mason Crest Publishers,
2004.
Wright, Lawrence. The Looming Tower: Al-
Qaeda and the Road to 9/11. New York:
Knopf, 2006.
Istanbul Bombings (2003)
Four terrorist attacks carried out by
suicide bombers driving trucks full of
explosives into two synagogues, a
British bank, and the British Consul-
ate in Istanbul, Turkey. The syna-
gogue attacks occurred on November
15, 2003, while the other attacks oc-
curred on November 20. Together,
these attacks claimed nearly 60 lives
and resulted in more than 700 inju-
ries. The international terrorist
organization al Qaeda claimed re-
sponsibility for the attacks.
LOCAL OUTRAGE
These violent attacks shocked Turkey,
which, though it had been experienc-
ing an upsurge in fundamentalist
Islamic sentiment, remained a secu-
lar nation that identified strongly
with Europe and Western culture.
Most of the dead and wounded were,
in fact, Turkish Muslims. Because al
Qaeda was responsible for killing
Muslims, Turkish public opinion
turned solidly against the group.
Turkish investigators questioned
dozens of suspects, of whom 74 even-
tually stood trial. They claimed that
Istanbul Bombings (2003) ✪ 55
Osama bin Laden, founder and leader
of al Qaeda, had given them money
and instructions as early as 2001,
though they had formed an indepen-
dent terror cell before then that
was unconnected but sympathetic
to al Qaeda. The leaders, including
the Turk Harun Ilhan and the Syrian
Loai al-Saqa, were sentenced to life
in prison. Al-Saqa remains at large,
but Ilhan and five other Turks were
jailed.
WORLDWIDE RESPONSE
The international reaction was one of
immediate sympathy and solidarity.
Syria, which lies to the south of Tur-
key, condemned the attacks and re-
turned for trial more than 20 suspects
who had fled from Turkey.
The motivation for the attacks I–
seemed to be one basic to terrorist
actions: to sow fear among perceived K
enemies by demonstrating the ease
with which the terrorists can wreak
havoc and take innocent lives. To-
gether with other attacks in Indone-
sia, Madrid, and London, the 2003
Istanbul bombings clearly demon-
strated the global scale of the menace
posed by al Qaeda and by militants in
general.
See also: Al Qaeda; Bali Attacks (2002);
Bin Laden, Osama; Islamic Fundamen-
talism; Jihad; London Bombings
(2005); Madrid Bombings (2004);
Sleeper Cells; Terrorist Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Wagner, Heather Lehr. Turkey. New York:
Chelsea House, 2008.
Williams, Julie. Islam: Understanding the
History, Beliefs, and Culture. Berkeley
Heights, N.J.: Enslow, 2008.
56 ✪ Jihad
Jihad
“Struggle” or “battle,” often translated
as “holy war.” The concept of jihad is
more expansive than a literal war
against perceived enemies of Islam,
however. It incorporates violent as
well as nonviolent meanings and in a
broad sense refers to any kind of
struggle on behalf of Islam.
There are four main ways of un-
dertaking jihad: by the heart (strug-
gling to overcome evil in oneself);
the tongue (using words to spread
Islam and to draw attention to wrong-
doing); the hand (doing right and
correcting wrongdoing); and the
sword (fighting physically for Islam,
either against enemies or unbeliev-
ers). Because Islamic fundamental-
ists have often invoked the term
when calling for resistance against,
or hostile action directed at, non-
Muslims, people in Western nations
have tended to associate jihad with
the notion of a holy war undertaken
to spread Islam.
VIOLENT JIHAD
According to fiqh, or “Islamic juris-
prudence,” jihad by the sword is the
only form of warfare allowed by the
Qur’an. It is not intended to convert
non-Muslims to the faith but to de-
fend the Islamic state. However, ac-
cording to the interpretations of
some Islamic scholars, including fun-
damentalists, jihad can include the
aim of establishing Islamic rule
through violence. The term was in-
voked, for instance, to establish sev-
eral Islamic caliphates in sub-Saharan
Africa in the eighteenth and nine-
teenth centuries.
A particularly influential funda-
mentalist scholar, Abdul Ala Mawdudi
(1903–1979), insisted that jihad is a
basic duty of all Muslims, the real sub-
stance of Islam without which all re-
ligious practices are empty and
meaningless. Mawdudi’s vision of
jihad also focused on violent resis-
tance to any oppression. Jihad in this
sense is a means of liberating Muslims
from non-Muslim rule as well as a
means of establishing Islamic rule
when a Muslim leader does not en-
force sharia, or Islamic law.
This vision of jihad grew very in-
fluential in the twentieth century,
supplying many terrorist organiza-
tions with a religious justification for
their otherwise illicit, destructive,
and fundamentally political actions.
The terrorist groups Hamas, Hizbol-
lah, and al Qaeda have all declared
their intent to replace secular gov-
ernments in Southwest Asia with Is-
lamic states, and Ayatollah Ruhollah
Khomeini led a jihad that established
an Islamic theocracy in Iran in 1979.
Led by Osama bin Laden, the mujahi-
deen who drove the Soviets out of
Afghanistan in the late 1980s saw
themselves as waging jihad in defense
of Islam, while the jihad al Qaeda now
wages against Western powers and
their perceived allies is surely of this
second kind: violence committed as a
means of resistance.
NONVIOLENT JIHAD
The conception of jihad as a violent
means to establish or defend Islamic
rule remains the majority view in
modern Islam. This view has been
strengthened by the U.S. invasions
of Afghanistan and Iraq, which have
 Kenya and Tanzania Bombings (1998)
resulted in a great loss of life and have
come to be perceived as hostile take-
overs by a non-Muslim foreign power.
However, a significant minority of
Muslims understands the term pri-
marily in the “by the heart” sense: as
an internal, spiritual struggle, or as a
broader, religiously based struggle
against some social ill. For example,
jihad has been declared on poverty in
Tunisia. Some Islamic scholars even
argue that the use of any violence is
expressly forbidden by the Qur’an.
While Western scholars tend to
emphasize the originally expansive
notion of jihad, nonviolent jihad has
not yet had any effect on changing
the idea of violent jihad. That is, be-
lievers in violent jihad, especially Is-
lamic militants, have continued to
grow in number and find increasing
support for their aims among popula-
tions that have been harmed or op-
pressed by non-Muslim powers.
CONFUSION OVER JIHAD
Thus, jihad today is a highly charged
and somewhat unclear term. While it
can indicate a nonviolent and indi-
vidual struggle of the spirit, its use
as a kind of call-to-arms for violent
action against non-Muslims or Mus-
lims thought to have betrayed their
faith in some way has resulted in
uncounted deaths and untold de-
struction. Leaders of extremist orga-
nizations are well aware of the
confusion over its meaning and have
invoked jihad in both senses simulta-
neously, calling for violent support
from their followers while deflecting
criticism by insisting that jihad only
indicates peaceful struggle. This con-
fusion is unlikely to disappear as long
✪ 57
as extremists see their actions as a
legitimate form of jihad.
See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Al-
Zawahiri, Ayman; Bin Laden, Osama;
Islamic Fundamentalism; Mujahideen;
Taliban; Terrorist Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Haugen, David M. Islamic Fundamentalism.
Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2008.
Katz, Samuel M. Jihad: Islamic Fundamental-
ist Terrorism. Minneapolis, Minn.: Lerner
Publications Co., 2004.
Lewis, Bernard. The Crisis of Islam: Holy War
and Unholy Terror. New York: Modern
Library, 2003.
Kenya and Tanzania
Bombings (1998)
Two coordinated terrorist attacks on I–
U.S. embassies in Africa—one in Nai-
robi, Kenya, and the second in Dar es K
Salaam, Tanzania, both carried out on
August 7, 1998. These attacks killed
224 people and wounded more than
4,500 more. The attacks marked a
turning point in public awareness of
al Qaeda, the terrorist organization
founded and led by Osama bin Laden
and which was behind the attacks.
The bombings demonstrated the vul-
nerability of U.S. facilities overseas
and foreshadowed the broader ter-
rorist campaign al Qaeda would begin
to undertake against the United States
and its allies.
Al Qaeda essentially stepped onto
the world stage with these embassy
attacks. Unfortunately, retaliatory
strikes ordered by President Bill
Clinton (1993–2001) resulted in
increased hostility toward the
United States, because one strike was
58 ✪ Kenya and Tanzania Bombings (1998)
misdirected and the others proved
ineffectual. As a result of the investi-
gations that followed, Osama bin
Laden was placed on the Federal Bu-
reau of Investigation’s Ten Most
Wanted list.
THE ATTACKS
The bombings were carried out with
explosive-filled trucks only 10 min-
utes apart, despite a distance of 400
miles (644 km) between the bomb-
ing sites. The level of coordination
and expertise behind the attacks im-
mediately indicated a serious threat
from an organization with substantial
resources. Although U.S. embassies
were targeted, few Americans were
killed. Most of the casualties were
local people working in nearby build-
ings or passing by on the streets.
The Nairobi attack, which came at
10:30 A.M., far outstripped the one in
Dar es Salaam in terms of casualties
and destruction. More than 4,000
people were wounded and around
211 killed in the Kenyan capital, and
while the embassy survived the at-
tack, a nearby office building was
completely destroyed. The second at-
tack in Dar es Salaam came at 10:40
A.M. when a refrigeration truck ex-
ploded outside the front gate of the
U.S. embassy there, killing security
guards and Tanzanians working in-
side the building.
MOTIVATION
Soon after the attacks, claims of re-
sponsibility were faxed to news out-
lets in Qatar, the United Arab
Emirates, and Paris. These stated that
the bombings were meant to force
American troops out of all Muslim
lands, particularly Saudi Arabia (Is-
lam’s holy land), where American
forces had been stationed since 1990,
in preparation for the Persian Gulf
War (1991).
Osama bin Laden offered several
contradictory explanations for the at-
tacks, including U.S. participation in
the early 1990s United Nations (UN)
peacekeeping mission in Somalia, a
predominantly Muslim country. How-
ever, investigations since then have
turned up evidence that bin Laden
was, in fact, trying to lure the United
States into Afghanistan, where al
Qaeda was primarily based. Provok-
ing the United States with these
bombings might have led to a com-
plex military commitment in Afghan-
istan, a country with a history of
hindering large-scale military inva-
sions through a combination of
cultural factors and difficult terrain.
If this was indeed bin Laden’s ulti-
mate goal, he did not achieve it
with the East African bombings but
rather with the September 11, 2001,
attacks.
AFTERMATH AND U.S. RESPONSE
Four men were prosecuted for the
bombings: Mohamed Rashed al-
Owhali (Saudi), Mohamed Sadeek
Odeh (Jordanian), Khalfan Khamis
Mohamed (Tanzanian), and Wadih
el-Hage (Lebanese-born, but a natu-
ralized U.S. citizen). All four had ties
to bin Laden, and one, Odeh, de-
scribed himself as an al Qaeda soldier.
During the trial, which began in Janu-
ary 2001, the connections between
bin Laden, the mujahideen, the So-
viet-Afghanistan war, the U.S. military
presence in Southwest Asia, and al
Qaeda was made clear for the first

time in public. All four men were
jailed, despite U.S. insistence on the
death penalty.
The immediate U.S. response to
the attacks was ineffective and highly
controversial. On August 20, 1998,
President Clinton ordered a series of
cruise missile strikes on targets in
Sudan and Afghanistan. The Sudanese
target, the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical
factory in Khartoum North, was the
country’s primary source of medi-
cine. After it was destroyed, an inves-
tigation revealed no evidence that
it was a chemical weapons plant,
as the Clinton administration had
been wrongly informed by its advis-
ers. The Afghanistan strikes targeted
al Qaeda training camps, but later in-
vestigation revealed that the camps
L–N
London Bombings (2005)
A series of bomb attacks carried out
in London, England, on July 7, 2005,
on a bus as well as on three London
Underground trains. These terrorist
attacks, the biggest and deadliest ever
on London’s transit system, killed 52
people and wounded more than
700.
The attacks were carried out by
four suicide bombers, all of whom
were British-born Muslims. Two of
the bombers videotaped statements
explaining their motivations; these
videos were later aired by the Arab
news network Al Jazeera. Although
they were not connected with any
terrorist organization, they echoed
London Bombings (2005) ✪ 59
were largely empty at the time. Un-
fortunately, these strikes bolstered
support for al Qaeda among militant
Muslims.
See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Bin
Laden, Osama; Islamic Fundamental-
ism; Jihad; Mujahideen; Somalia; Ter-
rorist Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Akhahenda, Elijah F. When Blood and Tears
United a Country: The Bombing of the
American Embassy in Kenya. Lanham, Md.:
University Press of America, 2002.
Ferguson, Amanda. The Attack Against the
U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
New York: Rosen Publishing Group, 2003.
Hirsch, Susan F. In the Moment of Greatest
Calamity: Terrorism, Grief, and a Victim’s
Quest for Justice. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton
University Press, 2006.
L–
many sentiments of militant Mus- N
lims to the effect that Western societ-
ies need to be destroyed because of
their oppression of Islam. The bomb-
ers were motivated in part by Great
Britain’s participation in the U.S.-led
invasions of Afghanistan (2001) and
Iraq (2003).
TIMELINE AND INVESTIGATION
Three bombs exploded on three dif-
ferent trains of the London Under-
ground at 8:50 A.M. on July 7, 2005.
The fourth bomb exploded at 9:47
A.M. on the back of a double-decker
bus. All four bombers were killed.
These bombings, which occurred
without any warning, stunned the
world. They were immediately
60 ✪ London Bombings (2005)

Tony Blair on
the London Bombings
I n response to the devastating 7/7 attacks in London,
British prime minister Tony Blair delivered a speech
on July 16 in which he identified the true cause of such
attacks, what he called the evil ideology that drove
extremists to kill in the belief that they would go
to heaven as a result.

Senseless though any such We don’t have to wonder

horrible murder is, it was not
without sense for its organis-
ers. It had a purpose. It was
done according to a plan. It
was meant.
What we are confronting
here is an evil ideology.
It is not a clash of civilisa-
tions—all civilised people,
Muslim or other, feel revul-
sion at it. But it is a global
struggle and it is a battle of
ideas, hearts and minds, both
within Islam and outside it.
This is the battle that must
be won, a battle not just
about the terrorist methods
but their views. Not just their
barbaric acts, but their bar-
baric ideas. Not only what
they do but what they think
and the thinking they would
impose on others. . . .
They demand the elimina-
tion of Israel; the withdrawal
of all Westerners from Mus-
lim countries, irrespective of
the wishes of people and
government.
what type of country those
states would be. Afghanistan
was such a state. Girls put out
of school. Women denied
even rudimentary rights. Peo-
ple living in abject poverty
and oppression. All of it justi-
fied by reference to religious
faith. . . .
The idea that elected gov-
ernments are the preserve of
those of any other faith or
culture is insulting and
wrong. Muslims believe in
democracy just as much
as any other faith and,
given the chance, show
it. . . .
The spirit of our age is one
in which the prejudices of the
past are put behind us, where
our diversity is our strength.
It is this which is under
attack. Moderates are not
moderate through weak-
ness but through strength.
Now is the time to show it in
defence of our common
values.

likened to the September 11, 2001,
attacks that al Qaeda carried out
against the United States and are
referred to in a similar way (as 7/7,
whereas the American attacks are
referred to as 9/11). Because of
increased security measures put in
place after the blasts, a second round
of attempted suicide bombings was
stopped on July 21, 2005.
Simple Materials Investigations
soon revealed that the bombers had
been caught on security cameras as
they boarded the trains and bus. The
bombs were created from simple
materials that required little exper-
tise to assemble. The plan was also
quite simple. These details were
deeply disturbing, since they raised
the question of how many other
“homegrown terrorists” might be
planning similar attacks, or how many
others might have been inspired by
the bombings.
The Perpetrators The four bombers
were soon identified as Hasib Mir
Hussain (an 18-year-old college stu-
dent), Mohammad Sifique Khan (a
teaching assistant and youth worker),
Germaine Lindsay (a 19-year-old),
and Shehzad Tanweer (a young
university graduate). Both Lindsay
and Khan were married, expectant
fathers.
In two videotaped statements
(made before the attacks) that were
aired by Al Jazeera on September 1,
2005, and July 6, 2006, Khan and
Tanweer spoke about their devotion
to Islam and their anger at the ac-
tions taken by Western governments
against Muslims worldwide. They
described their attacks as partial
Madrid Bombings (2004) ✪ 61
retaliation for British support of the
United States and Israel.
A NEW ERA
Although London had experienced
occasional terrorist attacks prior to
7/7, those attacks were mostly the
work of the Irish Republican Army
(IRA), a terrorist organization that
had been fighting for the reunifica-
tion of Northern Ireland (part of the
United Kingdom) with the Irish
Republic.
In a sense, the 7/7 attacks marked
a new era in British history, much
as 9/11 started a new chapter of
American history. Britain’s Muslim
and Arab-descended citizens were re-
garded with newfound suspicion,
while the British Muslim community
was further polarized by the violent
tactics. Many expressed solidarity
with Britain’s open, democratic soci-
ety and denounced the attacks.
L–
See also: Afghanistan; Al Jazeera; Is-
lamic Fundamentalism; Jihad; Madrid
N
Bombings (2004); September 11,
2001; Sleeper Cells; Terrorist
Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Langley, Andrew. The Bombing of London
2005. Oxford: Raintree, 2006.
Stewart, Gail B. The London Transit System
Bombings. Detroit: Lucent Books/Thomson
Gale, 2006.
Madrid Bombings (2004)
Series of 10 coordinated bombings
targeting the commuter train system
of Madrid, Spain, which took place
on March 11, 2004. The bombings,
which killed 191 people and injured
62 ✪ Madrid Bombings (2004)
about 1,800 more, are the deadliest
attacks during a time of peace in
Spanish history.
An investigation into the attacks
lasting nearly two years concluded
that there was no direct link with al
Qaeda, although the terrorist organi-
zation stated that it was “proud” of
the attacks. Instead, the attacks were
carried out by a loose organization of
Moroccan, Syrian, and Algerian Mus-
lims inspired by al Qaeda. As such,
this group constituted a sleeper cell.
The bombings, which took place
three days before Spain’s general
elections, greatly influenced Spain’s
new government.
THE ATTACKS
A total of 10 bombs were exploded
aboard four commuter trains at the
peak of rush hour on March 11, 2004.
The explosions all took place be-
tween 7:37 and 7:39 A.M. Bomb dis-
posal units discovered three more
bombs left unexploded and defused
them. The four trains were either
stopped at or just outside three train
stations: Atocha Station, El Pozo del
Tío Raimundo Station, and San Euge-
nia Station. The victims of the attacks
came from 17 different countries, but
the majority were Spanish.
The attacks shocked the country
and the world. Over the following
several days, about one-fourth of
Spain’s 45 million people partici-
pated in protests against terrorism
and held memorial services. The day
of the attacks has come to be known
as 3/11 (mimicking the 9/11 that
stands for the September 11, 2001,
terrorist attacks on the United States),
or, in Spanish, 11-M.
POLITICAL RAMIFICATIONS
The perpetrators of the attacks were
not immediately known. Speculation
arose that Euskadi Ta Askatasuna
(ETA), a Basque separatist group,
was responsible, but this was quickly
disproven. (ETA has committed many
acts of terrorism against Spain to try
and achieve its goal of creating an in-
dependent Basque state; the Basques
are an ethnic group who live in north-
ern Spain near the French border.) It
is clear, for example, that had ETA
been involved the Partido Popular, or
People’s Party (PP), likely would have
remained in power. However mas-
sive demonstrations against Prime
Minister José María Aznar’s govern-
ment on the day before the election
helped guarantee a victory for the
Socialist Party, led by José Luis
Rodríguez Zapatero.
MOTIVATION
The bombs were set off by suicide
bombers carrying backpacks, a fact
that helped investigators trace the
support and training given to the per-
petrators. A militant Islamic organiza-
tion in Morocco, the Islamist Combat
Group, was identified as a likely
source for this support. This organi-
zation has been known to provide
logistical support for al Qaeda opera-
tives, although the Madrid attacks
were not officially sanctioned nor
directed by al Qaeda.
A group of seven suspects blew
themselves up on April 3, 2004, when
police surrounded their apartment in
Leganés, a Madrid suburb. Twenty-
one men were eventually found guilty
of participating in the attacks, three
of whom were given the maximum

Spanish prison sentence of 40 years
for their leadership: Jamal Zougam
(Moroccan), Othman el Gnaoui (Mo-
roccan), and Jose Emilio Suarez
Trashorras (Spanish).
SIGNIFICANCE
The Madrid bombings were particu-
larly shocking because they occurred
in a country unused to terrorist
attacks by Islamic militants. How-
ever, because their perpetrators
were acting on their own rather
than on instructions from al Qaeda
or any other group, these attacks
potentially pointed to a new and
more troubling phase in the global
struggle against terrorism, one in
which independent cells of terror-
ists might operate in Western na-
tions without the direction of a
centralized organization.
See also: Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama;
Islamic Fundamentalism; Jihad;
London Bombings (2005); Septem-
ber 11, 2001; Sleeper Cell; Terrorist
Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Barrett, Jane. “Court finds 21 guilty of Ma-
drid train bombings.” 31 October 2007.
Reuters. Available online. URL: http://
www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSL3
08491320071031?sp=true. Accessed 29 No-
vember 2008.
Bawer, Bruce. While Europe Slept: How Radi-
cal Islam Is Destroying the West from
Within. New York: Doubleday, 2006.
Mujahideen
Literally “holy warriors,” or Muslims
engaged in a spiritually involved
struggle known as jihad. Although a
Mujahideen ✪ 63
mujahid (the singular of mujahideen)
might be construed as a person en-
gaged in any sort of jihad, violent or
nonviolent, mujahideen refers to sol-
diers who fight on behalf of Islam,
and particularly to the loose alliance
of Afghanis who fought to expel
forces of the Soviet Union from their
country in the late 1970s and 1980s.
These mujahideen organized
against the Marxist government that
took control of Afghanistan in a 1978
military coup. The People’s Demo-
cratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA)
faced stiff resistance from traditional
Afghanis, those who felt threatened
by the government’s attempts at con-
trolling the economy, as well as by
the government’s close ties to the
Soviet Union (USSR). The USSR in-
vaded Afghanistan in late 1979 in
order to defend the PDPA against the
mujahideen. This invasion quickly
proved disastrous for both Afghani-
stan and the USSR. More than 6 mil-
L–
lion refugees fled to Pakistan and N
Iran, while the United States and
other countries opposed to the USSR
funneled arms, supplies, and training
to the rebels.
LACK OF UNITY
The mujahideen were by no means
united. They were made up of many
groups (including some from other
countries) who shared the goal of
ousting the USSR from Afghanistan.
Some fought for nationalistic rea-
sons, but the majority was religiously
motivated. Muslims traveled from
around the world to fight alongside
the mujahideen, who, with the train-
ing and material support they re-
ceived from the United States in
64 ✪ Mujahideen
particular, waged a successful guer-
rilla war against the Soviets and the
PDPA.
Osama bin Laden, an idealistic
Saudi billionaire at the time, traveled
to Afghanistan to help the mujahideen.
He built an organization that recruited
and trained Muslim fighters from
other countries to fight in the jihad
against the Soviets. This organization
would eventually develop into the in-
ternational terrorist organization al
Qaeda, and the training and materials
provided by the Americans would ul-
timately be used against them.
After the Soviets withdrew in
1989, the mujahideen continued to
fight the PDPA until they overthrew
the government in April 1992. After
this, many of the foreign mujahideen
returned to their homes, where many
helped form militant Islamic organi-
zations to carry on a broader jihad
aimed at establishing Islamic rule in
various secular nations, or at retaliat-
ing against non-Muslim powers
thought to have oppressed or harmed
Muslims. In effect, the mujahideen
exported the guerrilla training they
had received from anti-Soviet coun-
tries around the world; this training
was used to orchestrate most of the
terrorist attacks of the following
decades.
INTERNAL FIGHTING
The mujahideen left in Afghanistan
fought among themselves until they
were defeated by the Taliban, a group
who promised to put an end to the
decades-long warfare. The Taliban
ruled the country from 1996 through
2001, when mujahideen groups
known as the Northern Alliance
fought with U.S. forces to topple the
Taliban. The mujahideen remained
an important, if fractured, source of
military and political power through
the rest of the decade.
See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Bin
Laden, Osama; Islamic Fundament-
alism; Jihad; Pakistan; Taliban; Sep-
tember 11, 2001; Terrorist Organiza-
tions.
FURTHERREADING
Saikal, Amin, A.G. Ravan Farhadi, and Kirill
Nourzhanov. Modern Afghanistan: A His-
tory of Struggle and Survival. London: I.B.
Tauris, 2004.
Tanner, Stephen. Afghanistan: A Military His-
tory from Alexander the Great to the Fall
of the Taliban. New York: Da Capo Press,
2002.
Mullah Omar (1959?– )
Reclusive and mysterious leader of
the Taliban, a strict fundamentalist
group that ruled Afghanistan from
1996 until 2001. The Taliban govern-
ment provided a safe haven for the
international terrorist organization al
Qaeda. Very little is actually known
about Mohammad Omar (mullah is
an honorific title given to Islamic
clergy with rigorous training in theol-
ogy and religious law). He is thought
to have been born near Kandahar, in
southern Afghanistan, in 1959, and is
a Pashtun, the largest single ethnic
group in Afghanistan.
TALIBAN LEADER
Omar led the Taliban in their success-
ful fight against the mujahideen who
had toppled the People’s Democratic
Party of Afghanistan in 1992. From
 New York City Attack (September 16, 1920)
1996 to 2001, Omar was the ruler of
Afghanistan without having been
elected; he had the title Head of the
Supreme Council. He also was given
the title emir, or commander of the
faithful, an ancient title bestowed on
Muslim rulers.
Omar was originally one of the
mujahideen who fought against the
Soviet invasion in the late 1970s and
1980s. He was wounded in action
four times, losing one eye and becom-
ing disabled. He then studied at a ma-
drassa, or Islamic religious school,
and became a mullah.
After the mujahideen seized
power in 1992, various factions
began fighting each other, and the
people of Afghanistan despaired of
emerging from the decade of strife
brought on by the Soviet invasion.
During this time, Omar led a group
called the Taliban (“students”) com-
posed largely of recruits from reli-
gious schools and refugee camps.
Afghanis saw in the Taliban an oppor-
tunity to restore order and peace, and
Omar’s forces swelled as they cap-
tured more and more territory in
1994 and 1995.
TALIBAN CONTROL OF
AFGHANISTAN
In 1996, the Taliban captured Kabul
and essentially began its rule of Af-
ghanistan, although groups of muja-
hideen in the north continued to
resist. Under Omar’s rule, a strict
form of fundamentalist Islamic law
was established. Women were forbid-
den from working or attending
school and had to dress very conser-
vatively, covering their entire bodies
and heads when in public. Public
✪ 65
executions were carried out, theaters
were shut down, and music was
banned. These harsh measures began
to attract the attention of the interna-
tional community, especially when,
in 2001, Omar ordered the destruc-
tion of two giant statues of Buddha
carved in the Bamyan valley (the Bud-
dhas of Bamyan) that dated from the
sixth century. According to Omar,
these irreplaceable monuments were
mere idols that Muslims were obliged
to destroy.
Omar’s power came to an end
with the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan
in November 2001. He went into hid-
ing and is still at large, though several
statements attributed to him have
been released in the intervening
years. Intelligence officials believe he
might be in the Pashtun areas of
Afghanistan or Pakistan.
See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; L–
Bin Laden, Osama; Islamic Fundamen-
talism; Jihad; Pakistan; Taliban; N
September 11, 2001; Terrorist Orga-
nizations.
FURTHERREADING
Chayes, Sarah. The Punishment of Virtue: In-
side Afghanistan After the Taliban. New
York: Penguin Press, 2006.
Stewart, Gail B. Life Under the Taliban. San
Diego, Calif.: Lucent Books, 2005.
New York City Attack
(September 16, 1920)
Also known as the Wall Street Bomb-
ing, a terrorist attack carried out in
the Financial District of New York
City that killed 70 people and injured
300 more. A horse-drawn wagon
66 ✪ New York City Attack (September 16, 1920)

A photograph taken on September 16, 1920, shows some of the devastation of the bombing
of Wall Street in New York, among the worst terrorist attacks up to that time. The case has
never been solved.

loaded with hundreds of pounds of England, was experiencing an in-

TNT and steel shards was taken down
to Wall Street during the lunch hour,
then exploded at the corner of Wall
and Broad Streets with a timing mech-
anism in front of the offices of J.P.
Morgan & Co. The victims were
mainly brokers, clerks, and other in-
dividuals who worked at the financial
institutions along Wall Street.
It was several days before the gov-
ernment considered this incident a
terrorist attack, since no one stepped
forward to claim responsibility. The
street was quickly cleaned, and the
next day business resumed as usual.
BACKGROUND
At the time, the United States, and
in particular New York and New
creased level of tension over immi-
grants from Eastern Europe, people
who were viewed with suspicion
because of active Communist and
anarchist political parties in their
lands of origin. Some of these immi-
grants were, in fact, communists or
anarchists themselves and agitated
politically in the United States to im-
prove conditions for workers who
suffered from workplace abuses as
well as hazardous conditions.
Followers of an Italian revolution-
ary, Luigi Galleani, had previously
incited violence based on his power-
ful speeches. Galleani believed that
only armed insurrection could over-
throw the capitalist institutions that
oppressed workers. In this, he was

certainly a radical anarchist, and
spent most of his life fleeing from
country to country for starting riots
and plotting violent acts.
In the years before the 1920 at-
tack, he and his followers, known as
the Galleanists, were involved in sev-
eral bomb attacks in New York. In
1914, these bombings increased in
number, and evidence uncovered
in 1915 connected them with the
Galleanists. All in all, these bombings
claimed the lives of dozens of people
across the United States, though the
attacks were concentrated in New
York City. Galleani and many of his
followers were deported in 1919,
after which the number of bombings
decreased.
INVESTIGATION
It is quite possible, even likely, that
the 1920 Wall Street Bombing was
carried out by a disgruntled Gallean-
ist. However, the investigation turned
up no actual evidence to this effect.
The September 16 attack was ini-
tially attributed to either radical com-
munists or anarchists. Detectives
visited stables and sash weight manu-
facturers across America, but to no
avail. (The steel shards had turned
out to be sash weights, which were
used to help open and close win-
dows.) Although thousands of sus-
pects were interrogated, none were
O–P
Oklahoma City Bombing
The 1995 truck bombing that
destroyed the Alfred P. Murrah Fed-
eral Building in Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma City Bombing ✪ 67
charged. It has been suggested that
the quick cleanup removed evidence
that could have led to charges. The
case on the attack was officially closed
in 1940, and to this day, the perpetra-
tors remain a mystery.
SIGNIFICANCE
At the time, the bombing was the
deadliest terrorist attack in American
history. It came at the end of several
years of sustained terrorist attacks,
mostly by radical anarchists, through-
out the United States. Whatever the
motivation of its perpetrators, it ac-
complished very little except to in-
crease ethnic tensions in the United
States; Russians, Jews, and Italians, in
particular, faced intense hostility and
suspicion. Today, scars from the
attack can still be seen on the stone
edifice of the Morgan building in
New York City.
See also: Terrorist Organizations. L–
FURTHERREADING N
Feuerlicht, Roberta Strauss. America’s Reign
of Terror: World War I, the Red Scare, and
the Palmer Raids. New York: Random
House, 1971.
Finan, Christopher M. From the Palmer Raids
to the Patriot Act: A History of the Fight
for Free Speech in America. Boston: Bea-
con Press, 2007.
Galleani, Luigi, and Barry Pateman. Anarchy
Will Be!: Selected Writings of Luigi Galle-
ani. Edinburgh: AK, 2006.
Oklahoma. This domestic terrorist
attack killed 168 people and wounded
more than 800. The deadliest act of
terrorism within the United States
prior to the events of September 11,
68 ✪ Oklahoma City Bombing
2001, the attack was perpetrated by
Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols,
both supporters of antiestablish-
ment militias that opposed the
federal government.
McVeigh and Nichols were both
former members of the U.S. Army as
well as survivalists. They were angry
at the federal government because of
disastrous confrontations between
the Federal Bureau of Investigation
and two separate groups, the Branch
Davidians at a compound outside
Waco, Texas (February 1993), and
the Weaver family, who lived on Ruby
Ridge in northern Idaho (August
1992). During both confrontations,
federal agents killed members of each
respective group, generating intense
controversy and resulting in disci-
plinary actions for the federal em-
ployees involved.
McVeigh and Nichols believed the
federal government had become a
tyranny. They sought revenge for
what they saw as government aggres-
sion against private citizens and
began planning the bomb attack in
1994. A combination of fundamen-
talist Christian and libertarian be-
liefs helped them rationalize their
actions; they considered the federal
employees they planned to kill guilty
of what they viewed as the crimes of
the federal government.
On April 19, 1995 (the two-year
anniversary of the Waco confronta-
tion), McVeigh left a rental truck he
and Nichols had loaded with more
than 6,000 pounds of explosives
(made with fertilizer and motorcycle
fuel) outside the Murrah Federal
Building. He and Nichols had meticu-
lously planned every detail of their
attack, and the truck exploded suc-
cessfully shortly after 9 A.M. It obliter-
ated one-third of the building and
damaged hundreds of others in the
area.
McVeigh was arrested the same
day, and Nichols turned himself in
several days later. While McVeigh was
sentenced to death and executed on
June 11, 2001, Nichols was given a
life sentence, which he is serving in
Florence, Colorado.
The Oklahoma City Bombing
shocked the United States for several
reasons. Its scale was unprecedented,
but more significantly, it was carried
out by Americans who had grown
hostile toward their own govern-
ment. While McVeigh was reviled by
the majority of Americans, he became
a kind of martyr for those who dis-
trusted the federal government.
See also: New York City Attack
(September 16, 1920); September 11,
2001; Unabomber.
FURTHERREADING
Brownell, Richard. The Oklahoma City Bomb-
ing. Detroit: Lucent Books, 2007.
Giordano, Geraldine. The Oklahoma City
Bombing. New York: Rosen Publishing
Group, 2003.
Marcovitz, Hal. The Oklahoma City Bombing.
Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers,
2002.
Paul, Michael. Oklahoma City and Anti-
Government Terrorism. Milwaukee, Wis.:
World Almanac Library, 2006.
Pakistan
Multiethnic country in South Asia
where the majority of the population
is Muslim. Pakistan has a long and

troubled history with terrorism,
mainly due to its geographic location
between India, a country with a
Hindu majority, and Afghanistan, a
country known for its primarily fun-
damentalist form of Islam.
Pakistan has been an unpredict-
able ally of the United States in its
various efforts to curb Islamic terror-
ism in the region. At the same time,
its internal political tensions have
made it a place where terrorists have
sought refuge, as well as a place
where terrorism is fought. Pakistan is
often the focus of international atten-
tion because of its political tensions
with India as well as its possession of
nuclear weapons.
UNSTABLE GOVERNMENTS
Since 1947, Pakistan has suffered
many breakdowns in its political
processes. Military dictatorships have
become the norm in this country,
which has seen no less than three
(1958–1971, 1977–1988, and 1999–
2007). During the second dictator-
ship, Pakistan became one of
America’s close allies in opposing the
Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (1979–
1989). The Pakistani intelligence
agency, Inter Services Intelligence
(ISI), became the chief means of de-
livering foreign military aid to the
mujahideen who fought the Soviet
forces.
From 1999 to 2007, Pakistan was
ruled by Pervez Musharraf, a former
general and Chief of Army Staff of the
Pakistan Army who seized power in a
coup. Throughout his rule, he was
threatened by Muslim extremists
who disagreed with his liberal re-
forms. They were also angered by
Pakistan ✪ 69
Musharraf’s decision to support the
U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, as well
as his intention to combat extremists
within Pakistan. Although Western
nations criticized him for not doing
more to combat terrorism, he did ban
several militant Islamist organiza-
tions. He was subjected to several as-
sassination attempts as a result.
Musharraf’s decision to support
the United States resulted in a rever-
sal of American policy toward Paki-
stan; the United States had previously
regarded the country as a sponsor of
Islamic terrorism. Musharraf’s gov-
ernment consequently received sig-
nificant financial and material aid
from the United States. However,
he was an unsteady ally because he
suspended Pakistan’s constitution
several times during his tenure, a
move that many regarded as anti-
democratic. After a turbulent and
questionable reelection in 2007,
Musharraf resigned from his post on
August 18, 2008, in the face of im-
peachment threats. Asif Ali Zardari,
widower of the famous Pakistani
O–
leader Benazir Bhutto, was elected on P
September 6, 2008.
PAKISTAN AND TERRORISM
From its inception as a state, Pakistan
has had an odd relationship with ter-
rorism. It has been estimated that
more terrorists live and operate in
Pakistan than in any other nation.
Since 2000, the death toll in Pakistan
from suicide bombers, who are re-
garded by militant Hindus and Mus-
lims as martyrs, numbers in the
hundreds if not thousands. Moreover,
it is likely that many such attacks in
India and Afghanistan occurred with
70 ✪ Pakistan
Benazir Bhutto (1953–2007)
Benazir Bhutto held the rare distinc-
tion of becoming the first woman
leader of a modern Muslim nation. In
Muslim societies, men often hold most
if not all positions of power. However,
Bhutto defied this typical order by
leading a major political party in
Pakistan as well as being elected
prime minister twice.
Born in Karachi on June 21, 1953,
Bhutto studied at Harvard University in
the United States and Oxford Univer-
sity in Great Britain before returning
to Pakistan to take up the leadership
of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP),
the party her father led before serving
as prime minister. He was executed in
1979 when a dictator seized control of
Pakistan. Because of her active leader-
ship against the dictatorship, Bhutto
was exiled in 1984. Returning in 1986,
she spearheaded the political opposi-
tion against the dictatorship. Bhutto’s
party won a majority of seats in the
National Assembly, and she became
prime minister on December 1.
Her first term ended when her gov-
ernment was dismissed on charges of
the support of terrorists operating
from within Pakistan.
Of particular concern are the
areas closest to Kashmir and Afghani-
stan, which are very mountainous
and hard to govern. In the Northwest
Frontier Province, Pashtun tribes
who practice a fundamentalist kind
of Islam have sheltered al Qaeda
members fleeing from Afghanistan.
As of mid-2009, it was thought that
corruption in August 1990. She served
again from 1993 to 1996. She and her
husband, Asif Ali Zardari, were con-
victed of corruption in 1999, but this
conviction was overturned in 2001.
However, she was exiled until 2007,
when she returned after reaching
a power-sharing agreement with
Musharraf.
Tragically, Bhutto’s triumphant
return to Pakistan in October 2007
was marred by a suicide attack on her
motorcade that killed more than 100
people. Bhutto herself was assassi-
nated in a similar attack in December.
The loss of this inspirational and pow-
erful figure sparked widespread riots
throughout Pakistan, paralyzing the
nation. Her assassination was mourned
around the globe; world leaders, in-
cluding President George W. Bush and
British prime minister Gordon Brown,
condemned the attack. A year later,
her loss was felt even more keenly,
though, in a bittersweet turn, her wid-
ower, Zardari, was elected prime
minister.
Osama bin Laden and other senior al
Qaeda leadership were among these
tribes. In Kashmir, terrorist attacks
by nationalistic Muslims are almost a
daily occurrence.
The political situation in Pakistan
continued to worsen in the first de-
cade of the twenty-first century.
Islamic militant organizations, includ-
ing political groups, gained increas-
ing power, while Pakistan’s secular
 Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)
government only maintained control
through Musharraf’s imposition of
martial law at times.
This political instability has al-
lowed terrorism to establish a secure
stronghold in Pakistan. On the other
hand, Pakistani authorities have man-
aged to capture some al Qaeda lead-
ers, and a growing segment of the
population seems to be tiring of the
violent methods employed by funda-
mentalists. The 2007 assassination of
the beloved politician Benazir Bhutto,
for example, galvanized support for
centrist and moderate politicians.
See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Is-
lamic Fundamentalism; Mujahideen;
Terrorist Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Aykroyd, Clarissa. Pakistan. Growth and influ-
ence of Islam in the nations of Asia and
Central Asia. Philadelphia: Mason Crest
Publishers, 2005.
Englar, Mary. Benazir Bhutto: Pakistani Prime
Minister and Activist. Minneapolis, Minn.:
Compass Point Books, 2006.
Gerdes, Louise I. Rogue Nations. Detroit:
Greenhaven Press, 2006.
Haque, Jameel. Pakistan. Milwaukee, Wis.:
Gareth Stevens Pub, 2002.
Heinrichs, Ann. Pakistan. New York: Chil-
dren’s Press, 2004.
Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO)
Organization that seeks to establish
an independent, Islamic, Palestinian
state in an area now occupied by Is-
rael. The PLO has consistently called
for the destruction of Israel. It is re-
garded by many as a terrorist organi-
zation because it has advocated and
actively sponsored terrorist attacks
✪ 71
against Israelis as well as Muslims
who oppose its aims or tactics. Its
numerous supporters, on the other
hand, regard it as a bold organization
of freedom fighters. This split in per-
ception highlights the complicated
nature of politically motivated acts of
violence.
After decades of underground re-
sistance to Israeli rule, the PLO slowly
achieved legitimacy by using its pop-
ularity with the Arab population of
Israel and the territories it controls
(the Gaza Strip and the West Bank) to
gain political power. It was recog-
nized by the United Nations (UN) as
the official representative of the ap-
proximately 8 million Palestinian
people in 1974. Under the leadership
of Yasir Arafat, PLO chairman from
1969 until his death in 2004, the PLO
began to achieve some of its aims
through diplomacy. Today, it is less
relevant in Palestinian politics than
in previous years, due in part to these
partial successes.
HISTORY OF THE PLO
O–
The PLO is an umbrella organization P
that represents at least eight different
political parties or factions. It is gov-
erned by an executive committee of
15 members elected by the Palestin-
ian National Council, a parliament
of representatives from the PLO’s
member organizations.
Before 1948, the region known as
Palestine was under the rule of Great
Britain, which, along with France,
had taken control of the area after de-
feating the Ottoman Empire in World
War I (1914–1918). Jewish settlers,
supported by a worldwide movement
known as Zionism, began moving to
72 ✪ Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)
Palestine in great numbers in the
1920s and 1930s. As World War II
(1939–1945) raged, tens of thou-
sands more fled to the region to es-
cape the horrors of the Holocaust, in
which more than 6 million European
Jews were exterminated by the Ger-
man Nazis. The settlers sought to es-
tablish a Jewish state (Israel) where
Jews could live in peace following
centuries of anti-Semitism, or violent
persecution against Jews as a reli-
gious, ethnic, or racial group. In the
process of building Jewish communi-
ties in Palestine, many died as a result
of violent conflict between Palestin-
ian and Jewish militias, both of
which fought for the establishment
of independent nations. This strife
set the tone for Israeli-Palestinian
relations afterward.
Division of British Palestine In
1947, the recently formed United Na-
tions divided British-held Palestine
between the Arabs and the Jews. This
partition plan went into effect on
May 15, 1948, and Israel then de-
clared its independence. This, in turn,
provoked an invasion of the new na-
tion of Israel by several neighboring
Arab nations, becoming the first of
several Arab-Israeli wars to be fought
in the succeeding decades. The Pales-
tinians, many of whom had fled to
these Arab states in the decades be-
fore Israel’s founding, lacked any cen-
tralized leadership. Many of them
formed independent organizations,
some paramilitary, some political, to
fight for what they perceived to be
their rightful homeland. Some re-
sorted to terrorist acts such as sui-
cide bombing, killing Israeli
civilians.
Organizing the PLO The PLO was
created in 1964 at an Arab summit
meeting in Cairo, Egypt. This meeting
was held to determine and organize
the Arab response to Israel, as well as
to establish how the needs of the Pal-
estinian people could best be served.
The PLO was created to fight for the
establishment of an independent
state for the millions of Palestinians
who lived in Israel and refugee camps
in surrounding countries.
The PLO’s first chairman, Ahmad
Shuqairi, opposed the terrorist and
guerrilla tactics of groups like Yasir
Arafat’s Fatah, a political party with a
militant wing that was gaining in
popularity. After another Arab-Israeli
war in 1967, the Six-Day War, support
for guerrilla tactics gained in popu-
larity because clear military action by
Arab states had failed to topple the
Israeli government.
As a result, Arafat was elected
chairman in 1969, a post he held until
his death. Fatah became the most in-
fluential faction within the PLO. At
this time, the PLO was based primar-
ily in Jordan, where it drew support
from Palestinian refugee camps. It
conducted cross-border raids into Is-
rael, to which Israel responded with
military strikes of its own. Groups be-
longing to the PLO, including the
Popular Front for the Liberation of
Palestine, also carried out terrorist at-
tacks, such as hijacking commercial
aircraft in other countries. A bloody
confrontation in September 1970, in
which Palestinian terrorists who had
hijacked four planes and landed them
in Jordan were killed by the Jorda-
nian army, came to be known as Black
September to PLO supporters. King
Hussein of Jordan expelled the PLO
 Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)
Yasir Arafat (1929–2004)
Yasir Arafat was one of the most pro-
vocative and memorable Middle East-
ern leaders of modern times. Born on
August 24, 1929, in Cairo, Egypt, Ara-
fat became an Arab nationalist early
in life. He worked with underground
organizations to smuggle weapons to
Arab militias that fought with the
Jewish settlers in the region of Pales-
tine. He fought in the Gaza Strip dur-
ing the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, then
built up a network of Palestinian refu-
gees and founded Fatah in 1959. (The
name of the party is a reverse acronym
of an Arabic name translating into
“The Palestinian National Liberation
Movement.”)
Under Arafat’s leadership, Fatah
grew in popularity, particularly after
the 1967 Arab-Israeli war. Arafat dedi-
cated himself to violent means of
achieving a Palestinian state and
from his country as a result of this
confrontation.
Political Inroads The PLO then op-
erated out of Lebanon and expanded
the range of its efforts beyond terror-
ism. It built charity networks and cre-
ated the Palestinian Red Crescent So-
ciety, which provided health care to
Palestinian refugees. By this time, the
PLO was highly regarded among Arab
nations, who supported it financially
and politically. The number of its sup-
porters continued to grow.
The year 1974 was a momentous
one for the PLO. It was recognized
by the Arab League (a powerful
✪ 73
swayed many supporters with his
swagger and threatening public
statements.
He changed tactics in the late 1980s,
however, shifting into a diplomatic
role. Many critics called into question
his true motives during the 1990s,
when he would negotiate with Israeli
leaders and speak of wanting peace,
while simultaneously urging his sup-
porters to commit further terrorist
acts. He was seen as cunning and
deceitful.
Arafat did advance the Palestinian
cause, however. For his efforts with
the Oslo Accords, producing recogni-
tion of the state of Israel, he shared
the 1994 Nobel Peace Prize with Israeli
prime minister Yitzhak Rabin and Is-
raeli foreign minister Shimon Peres.
He died in a Paris hospital on Novem-
ber 11, 2004.
O–
organization of 20 Arab nations) as P
the legitimate representative of all
Palestinians. Soon after, Arafat ad-
dressed the United Nations General
Assembly, which voted overwhelm-
ingly to grant the PLO observer sta-
tus, meaning that it could participate
in UN meetings but without the
power to vote. Two years later,
the PLO was recognized as the 21st
member of the Arab League. Despite
this unprecedented acceptance, the
United States refused to negotiate
with the PLO until it recognized
Israel’s right to exist, a point that
Arafat and his supporters were
against from the start.
74 ✪ Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)
Increasing Violence and Internal
Strife The political situation in Leba-
non was highly unstable, however.
Civil war broke out in 1975 as Chris-
tian, Muslim, and secular militias
fought each other for control of the
country, while the PLO controlled
some areas in southern Lebanon, par-
ticularly the Palestinian refugee
camps. In the following years, both
Syria and Israel invaded Lebanon in
attempts to restore order and bolster
the faction that would most benefit
each respective country if it were in
power. Fighting between the PLO
and Israel continued until a 1981
cease-fire.
The following year, another Is-
raeli force isolated PLO forces in
Beirut, the Lebanese capital. The PLO
left Beirut cease-fire negotiations and,
as a result, hundreds of Palestinian
refugees who were left unprotected
by PLO forces were killed by other
forces within Lebanon.
This disaster was perceived as a
failure of the PLO, and other Arab
leaders tried to take control of the or-
ganization away from Arafat. An at-
tempted coup by Syrian forces drove
Arafat and the PLO to Tunis, Tunisia,
where the PLO regrouped as best it
could. In the following years, some
groups split off from the PLO, while
those that remained engaged in in-
creasingly violent acts of terrorism.
New Resolutions In 1988, a year
after the first intifada, or violent Pal-
estinian uprising against Israel, broke
out in the territories of Gaza and the
West Bank, the PLO accepted two
key UN resolutions: One effectively
recognized Israel’s right to coexist
alongside a Palestinian state, while
the other rejected terrorism. The
United States responded by engaging
in its first talks with the PLO.
Times of Change The 1990s were an
uncertain decade for the PLO, how-
ever. Despite Arafat’s willingness to
concede the key point of recognizing
Israel, the PLO was associated with
continued terrorist attacks. Arafat also
explicitly supported Iraq’s Saddam
Hussein, one of many Arab leaders
who supported the PLO financially.
In 1993, however, Arafat met with
Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin
in Oslo, Norway, to negotiate a peace
process. This resulted in the Oslo Ac-
cords, a set of agreements that al-
lowed the PLO to return to Gaza and
the West Bank and establish the Pal-
estinian Authority (PA), the first mod-
ern Palestinian government. Arafat
was elected president in 1995.
The Second Intifada and the PLO
Today The PA began administering
Gaza and the West Bank, but the
peace process once again stalled
when a second intifada broke out in
2000. From this time on, the PLO
seemed to lose the control it had pre-
viously held over its constituent
groups. Arafat was confined by the Is-
raeli military to his compound in Ra-
mallah, in the West Bank. Widespread
fighting between Palestinian guerrilla
fighters and Israeli forces continued
over the next several years.
When Arafat died in 2004, Mah-
moud Abbas succeeded him as leader
of the PLO. However, the PA and the
PLO have continued to lose power in
the territories. In the 2006 elections,
for example, Hamas, a more militant

Islamist group, won a surprise major-
ity. This sparked infighting between
Hamas and the more moderate Fatah,
which had previously dominated Pal-
estinian politics. Hamas seized con-
trol of Gaza, while Abbas and Fatah
continued to hold the West Bank.
Member organizations of the PLO
continue to launch attacks against Is-
rael. The larger organization now has
less control over its member groups
than ever, which has brought the
fight for an independent Palestinian
state almost to a stop. Declared a ter-
rorist organization by the United
States in 2004, the PLO has an uncer-
tain future.
See also: Gaza Strip and the West
Bank; Hamas; Terrorist Organiza-
tions.
FURTHERREADING
Hall, John G. Palestinian Authority. New York:
Chelsea House Publishers, 2003.
King, John. Israel and Palestine. The Middle
East. Chicago: Raintree, 2006.
Reische, Diana L. Arafat and the Palestine
Liberation Organization. New York: F.
Watts, 1991.
Williams, Colleen Madonna Flood. Yasir Ara-
fat. New York: Chelsea House Publishers,
2003.
Worth, Richard. The Arab-Israeli Conflict.
New York: Marshall Cavendish Benchmark,
2007.
Patriot Act (2001)
American law with the full name
“Uniting and Strengthening America
by Providing Appropriate Tools Re-
quired to Intercept and Obstruct Ter-
rorism,” signed into law by President
George W. Bush (2001–2009) on Oc-
tober 26, 2001. The Patriot Act was
Patriot Act (2001) ✪ 75
created to empower the U.S. govern-
ment in detecting and suppressing
terrorism.
The Patriot Act vastly expanded
the federal government’s power to
conduct surveillance and intelli-
gence-gathering within the United
States as well as outside of the coun-
try. Though it was rapidly and over-
whelmingly passed by Congress, the
Patriot Act was extremely controver-
sial because of its restrictions on the
civil liberties of Americans, especially
the right to privacy. For example, the
act compels librarians and booksell-
ers to make their patrons’ reading
choices available to the government
authorities, an unpopular mandate.
The Patriot Act also was deemed
controversial for the way it empow-
ered the federal government to iden-
tify domestic terrorists. Critics of
the act charge that the government
has too much freedom to declare citi-
zens terrorists, without providing the
same amount of evidence it was once
required to. The act was so contro-
versial that many American cities and
O–
even states passed resolutions against P
it. It remains unclear to what extent
the act has aided the nation’s pursuit
of international terrorists or to what
extent it has actually impacted civil
liberties. This points in part to one of
the most troubling aspects of the
act: the secrecy with which it empow-
ers the federal government to pursue
whatever course of action is deemed
necessary to combat terrorism against
the United States.
HISTORY AND PROVISIONS
The terrorist attacks carried out by
the international fundamentalist
76 ✪ Patriot Act (2001)
Islamic organization al Qaeda on Sep-
tember 11, 2001 (or 9/11), forced the
United States to reexamine its domes-
tic security systems. The Patriot Act
was written and passed as part of
the government’s response to these
attacks and the vulnerability of the
nation the attacks demonstrated.
The far-reaching changes it made to
U.S. law mirrored the dramatically
changed position America seemed
to occupy in the wake of the 9/11
attacks.
History The first draft of the Patriot
Act was introduced to the House of
Representatives on October 23,
2001.Although the bill received over-
whelming support in both the House
and the Senate, some legislators ex-
pressed concerns over the radical
changes the act proposed. In particu-
lar, Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI),
the only senator to vote against the
act, protested the changes related
to wiretapping (government sur-
veillance of phone conversations),
search and seizure laws, and the ex-
panded powers of government to ac-
cess private records. The parts of the
act he found most objectionable
were those that resulted in serious
controversy in the following years.
Despite these objections, the bill was
passed and signed into law three days
later.
CONTROVERSIES ABOUT ABUSE
OF POWER
Since the passage of the Patriot Act,
there have been several controversies
related to how it is used by the gov-
ernment. For example, in March
2007, a Justice Department audit
revealed that the FBI had used
provisions of the act illegally to ob-
tain personal information about
American citizens. Later, in June, it
was revealed that FBI agents had
abused the powers granted to them
by the act more than 1,000 times. An
investigation was launched into these
abuses that continued throughout
mid-2009.
Though this case developed after
the act was reauthorized in 2005, crit-
ics had been growing in number
since the act first passed. They argued
that the powers the act granted to
government infringed on the civil lib-
erties granted to citizens by the Con-
stitution. Many court cases at all levels
have affirmed this argument since. At
the same time, because the act autho-
rizes the government to withhold in-
formation regarding the actions it
takes to combat terrorism, it is also
very difficult to judge the positive im-
pact of the act on countering poten-
tial attacks.
See also: Al Qaeda; Department of
Homeland Security; Guantánamo Bay,
Cuba; Islamic Fundamentalism; Sep-
tember 11, 2001; Taliban; Terrorist
Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Gerdes, Louise I. The Patriot Act: Opposing
Viewpoints. Detroit: Greenhaven Press,
2005.
Haugen, David M. National Security. Detroit:
Greenhaven Press, 2007.
Scheppler, Bill. The USA Patriot Act: Antiter-
ror Legislation in Response to 9/11. New
York: Rosen Publishing Group, 2006.
Torr, James D. The Patriot Act. Detroit:
Lucent Books/Thomson Gale, 2006.

Pennsylvania Plane Crash
See September 11, 2001.
Pentagon
A massive five-sided building in Ar-
lington County, Virginia, headquar-
ters of the U.S. Department of
Defense, which comprises the Army,
Navy, and Air Force. The Pentagon
can also refer to the Department of
Defense itself or the collective leader-
ship of the American military.
The Pentagon is a distinctive
American landmark, as well as a sym-
bol of America’s military power. For
this reason, it was selected as one of
the targets of the September 11, 2001,
attacks carried out by members of al
Qaeda, an international fundamen-
talist terrorist organization.
HISTORY OF THE PENTAGON
Initial construction of the Pentagon
took place from 1941 to 1943. It
brought together numerous offices
of the War Department (the precur-
sor of the Department of Defense)
that were scattered around Wash-
ington, D.C. The War Department
also required additional space be-
cause the possibility that the United
States would enter World War II
(1939–1945) was rapidly becoming
a certainty. The building was de-
signed to use a minimal amount of
steel, an important resource needed
for the war effort. Because of this ar-
chitectural limitation, the building
could not rise very high and instead
had to spread out over a relatively
large area.
Pentagon ✪ 77
Building the Pentagon Only a few
suitable sites for such a large building
were available in the Washington
area. The site that was eventually
chosen was very swampy. In order
to stabilize the ground, 5.5 million
cubic yards of dirt were trucked
in and dumped, and more than
40,000 concrete piles were set under
and around the building’s founda-
tion. Groundbreaking began on Sep-
tember 11, 1941. Upon its comple-
tion in 1943, the Pentagon was the
largest office building in the world—
some 25,000 people could work
there—and today it remains among
the largest.
The Pentagon is so named for
its pentagonal design (a figure with
five sides of equal length). It actually
consists of 5 concentric pentagons,
with 10 interconnecting corridors,
totaling 17.5 miles (28.2 km) in
length. Each of these rings has enough
space to contain the U.S. Capitol. De-
spite this enormous amount of space,
the Pentagon was designed so that it O–
only takes about seven minutes to
walk between any two points. In ad-
P
dition to office space, the Pentagon
houses several libraries, two cafete-
rias, a number of snack bars, and a
shopping center for Pentagon
employees.
Starting in 1998, the Pentagon
underwent a major renovation that
involved bringing the building up to
modern architectural standards as
well as reinforcing its structure.
The Pentagon as a Symbol The Pen-
tagon has come to represent a great
number of things to Americans and
78 ✪ Pentagon
foreign citizens alike. To many
Americans, the Pentagon symbolizes
the nation’s military strength and
the relative security and stability
U.S. society has enjoyed over the
past 50 years because of it. To other
Americans and many foreigners, the
Pentagon symbolizes America’s
reliance on military means to pursue
its national interests. The Pentagon
is thus a highly potent symbol as
much as a physical building, and it
has been the site of numerous anti-
war protests.
S–T
September 11, 2001 (9/11)
Day on which horrific terrorist at-
tacks were carried out by funda-
mentalist Muslims on the United
States of America. The attacks claimed
nearly 3,000 innocent lives.
It is believed that 19 militants,
trained by or otherwise associated
with the international terrorist orga-
nization al Qaeda, hijacked (or
illegally seized control of) four com-
mercial aircraft on the morning of
September, 11, 2001. The terrorists
diverted three of the planes to crash
into two buildings of the World Trade
Center, known also as the Twin Tow-
ers, in New York City, as well as into
the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia,
near Washington, D.C. The collapse
of the Twin Towers, after being
struck by the planes, resulted in the
majority of the deaths. The fourth air-
craft crashed into a field in Somerset
See also: Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama;
Department of Homeland Security;
Iraqi War; Islamic Fundamentalism;
September 11, 2001; Terrorist
Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Britton, Tamara L. The Pentagon. Edina,
Minn.: ABDO Pub. Co, 2003.
Schaefer, Ted, and Lola M. Schaefer. The
Pentagon. Chicago: Heinemann Library,
2005.
Wheeler, Jill C. September 11, 2001: The Day
That Changed America. Edina, Minn.:
ABDO Pub. Co., 2002.
County, Pennsylvania. It is believed
that the passengers and crew on this
plane tried to regain control from the
hijackers, leading to a crash instead
of an attack on an unknown target
thought to be the White House or the
Capitol.
These attacks marked a crucial
turning point in world history. A
number of American responses to the
events established conditions, do-
mestically and internationally, that
have shaped the contemporary world
in essential ways. These responses
include a constriction of civil liber-
ties within the United States and
two costly wars in Afghanistan and
Iraq. Since the September 11, 2001,
attacks, terrorist activity around the
world has increased, fed in part by
the scale of al Qaeda’s success as well
as by anger at the controversial mea-
sures taken by the United States and
its allies.
 September 11, 2001 (9/11) ✪ 79

East Africa to Afghanistan

in Southwest Asia. One or
more terror cells of al
Qaeda–supported agents
were established in the
United States. It is unknown
how many people sup-
ported them or how long
they were making their
preparations before the
attacks. However, their
movements and actions on
9/11 are now well known
as a result of the later inves-
tigations.

The North Tower American

Airlines Flight 11 (a Boeing
767) took off from Boston’s
Logan Airport shortly be-
fore 8 A.M. Soon afterward,
five hijackers seized control
of the plane by killing the
pilots and several passen-
gers with plastic box-cutters
they were able to sneak
through airport security.
They also used some sort of
A firefighter searches the rubble of New York’s World chemical irritant, perhaps
Trade Center in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, mace, to confuse and con-
terrorist attacks on the United States. The attacks remain trol the passengers. (The S–
the most devastating ever on U.S. soil, killing almost
3,000 innocent people and causing billions of dollars of hijackers of the other planes T
damage. Osama bin Laden, the leader of the interna- used the same methods.)
tional terrorist organization al Qaeda, brazenly claimed At 8:19, a flight attendant
responsibility for the attacks.
contacted the American Air-
lines operations center to
TIMELINE OF THE ATTACKS let them know the plane had been
From the investigations that followed hijacked. Soon after, Flight 11 turned
the attacks, a fairly detailed timeline toward New York City, and minutes
of the events on 9/11 has been recon- after the Air National Guard had been
structed. The planning for the terror- alerted (8:46), the plane crashed into
ist attacks began as early as 1996, the the North Tower of the World Trade
same year that al Qaeda moved its Center (or WTC) in New York City
central operations from Sudan in between floors 93 and 99. The plane
 Flight Paths and Crashes
of Hijacked Planes, 9/11

Washington, D.C.

On the morning of September 11, 2001, 19 Islamic fundamentalists hijacked four jetlin-
ers, killing the pilots and flight attendants. The hijackers then crashed into New York’s
World Trade Center, a symbol of the nation’s economic power, killing thousands. The
third plane crashed into the Pentagon, a symbol of the United States military. On the
fourth plane, believed to be headed to Capitol or the White House, passengers overpow-
ered the hijackers, and the plane crashed into a field in Pennsylvania.

DWJ_Terror_F_replacedlinks.indd 80 4/5/10 2:48:22 PM


started a massive fire in the building’s
core, preventing escape from the
upper floors.
The South Tower A second plane,
United Airlines Flight 175 (also a
Boeing 767), took off from Boston at
8:14. It was hijacked after 8:40, and a
flight attendant managed to call a
United Airlines office to alert them at
8:52. At 9:03, the plane crashed into
the South Tower between floors 78
and 85, also starting a massive fire.
After this second attack, the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) banned
all takeoffs nationally, an unprece-
dented action during peacetime in
the United States.
The Pentagon The third plane, Amer-
ican Airlines Flight 77 (a Boeing 757),
departed Washington Dulles Interna-
tional Airport in Virginia at 8:20 A.M.
Five hijackers were aboard this air-
craft and began taking control of it
after 8:50. They turned it toward
Washington, D.C., and government
agencies were unable to locate it for
more than half an hour. At 9:37, it
crashed into the western side of the
Pentagon, starting a fire and demol-
ishing its newly renovated section.
All 64 passengers were killed, along
with 125 Pentagon workers.
Pennsylvania The fourth plane,
United Airlines Flight 93 (another
Boeing 757), took off from Newark
International Airport in New Jersey at
8:42 A.M. The four hijackers aboard
this plane took control of it shortly
before 9:30. Unlike on the other
planes, however, passengers success-
fully fought the hijackers, though they
did not manage to regain control
September 11, 2001 (9/11) ✪ 81
before the plane crashed 80 miles
(129 km) southeast of Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania. All on board were
killed. It has been speculated that
the hijackers of this plane intended
to crash it into the White House or
the Capitol in Washington, D.C.
A Number of Failures Just before
10:00, the South Tower of the World
Trade Center suddenly collapsed, re-
leasing a huge cloud of fire, debris,
and toxic compounds swirling
through nearby streets. At 10:28,
the North Tower collapsed as well.
Both of these collapses, along with
the plane striking the South Tower,
appeared on live television as millions
of viewers watched worldwide.
Debris from the North Tower
struck 7 World Trade Center, a smaller
building nearby. This debris damaged
the building and started fires that re-
sulted in the collapse of this building
as well, at 5:20 P.M. By that time, New
York’s mayor, Rudolph Giuliani,
had ordered an evacuation of Lower
Manhattan.
The Twin Towers were only par-
tially evacuated when they collapsed.
In addition, more than 400 firefight- S–
ers, rescue workers, and police who T
had entered each building to help
control the fires and direct the evacu-
ations were killed when the buildings
collapsed, adding to the chaos that
followed.
All told, 2,974 people died as a re-
sult of these four attacks. Of these,
2,603 died in the Twin Towers or in
their area, 246 on the planes, and 125
inside the Pentagon. These numbers
do not include the 19 hijackers,
whose number was unknown until
82 ✪ September 11, 2001 (9/11)
Rudolph Giuliani (1944– )
One of the most prominent public fig-
ures associated with 9/11 is Rudolph
William Giuliani, then the mayor of
New York City. He is widely admired
for the leadership he demonstrated in
the face of the attacks.
Giuliani earned a law degree from
New York University in 1968 and then
served as a U.S. attorney in the De-
partment of Justice. After working as
an attorney for the Southern District
of New York, he ran for the mayor’s
office in 1989 but lost. He won the
1993 mayoral election, however, be-
coming the first Republican mayor of
New York City in the previous two de-
cades. His tenure was controversial,
although he is credited for reducing
crime rates and reforming the city’s
finances.
revealed by later analysis. The 9/11 at-
tacks killed more people in any attack
on American territory since the Civil
War (1861–1865), nearly a century
and a half earlier.
A STUNNED NATION
The magnitude of the shock that
these events caused is difficult to
imagine. The last time the United
States had been attacked on its home
soil was on December 7, 1941, when
the Japanese launched a naval attack
on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, during
World War II (1939–1945). Unlike
Pearl Harbor, however, millions of
people watched the 9/11 events
Many considered Giuliani’s political
career to be over before the 9/11
attacks. However, his eloquence,
strength, and determination during
and after 9/11 transformed this image.
An inspiration to millions of Ameri-
cans, he was named Time magazine’s
Person of the Year in 2001 and man-
aged to turn his newfound popularity
into a presidential bid in 2007, when
he ran in the Republican primaries.
Part of what made Giuliani’s leader-
ship so memorable was the sincerity
with which he expressed his concerns
for the victims’ families, as well as for
all New Yorkers and, indeed, all Amer-
icans. He became an international
celebrity as a result, even earning an
honorary knighthood from Queen
Elizabeth II of Great Britain.
unfold in real time on television.
This resulted in significant and per-
sistent emotional trauma for many,
and certainly influenced the deci-
sions made by American leaders in
the following weeks.
The area where the World Trade
Center had stood came to be called
Ground Zero, a term that indicates
the point of ground directly beneath
an explosion, usually from a bomb.
Plans were made to convert the area
into a park, called the World Trade
Center Memorial. Meanwhile, cleanup
of the site continued for months.
Hundreds of volunteer workers,
mostly police, firefighters, and para-

medics, traveled to New York from
around the country to assist with the
cleanup and the reestablishment of
order. In addition, nations around the
globe as well as millions of people
worldwide expressed their sympathy
for the United States.
The Nation Responds Within weeks
of the attacks, it became clear that the
international terrorist organization al
Qaeda, founded and financed by the
Saudi multimillionaire Osama bin
Laden, was responsible. This organi-
zation’s headquarters was known to
be in Afghanistan, and the United
States, along with allied forces from
several other countries, launched an
invasion there in early October in
order to capture or kill al Qaeda’s
leadership and to destroy its organi-
zational backbone as well as its train-
ing camps there.
The attacks provoked several
significant changes in America’s gov-
ernment. One was the largest reorga-
nization of government in 50 years.
About 40 different offices and agen-
cies responsible for domestic secu-
rity were absorbed into a new
government division: the Depart-
ment of Homeland Security (DHS).
An even more far-reaching change
was the passage of the USA Patriot
Act (“Uniting and Strengthening
America by Providing Appropriate
Tools Required to Intercept and Ob-
struct Terrorism Act of 2001”), signed
into law by President George W. Bush
(2001–2009) on October 26, 2001.
This controversial act greatly ex-
panded the ability of law enforce-
ment and intelligence agencies to
gather information inside and outside
September 11, 2001 (9/11) ✪ 83
of the United States. Its purpose was
to allow these agencies to more easily
compile, analyze, and share informa-
tion that might prevent another 9/11-
type attack. However, the numerous
and vocal critics of this act have criti-
cized it on two broad points—its cur-
tailment of civil liberties (particularly
privacy laws) and the haphazard way
in which it was passed. It is now
known that few, if any, members of
Congress read the act in its entirety
before voting for it.
A New Era The 9/11 attacks also re-
sulted in a new sense that the United
States was under attack by hostile for-
eign powers. This was only partially
true. No foreign government was di-
rectly involved with these attacks;
rather, al Qaeda and its loose but in-
ternational network of supporters
was responsible. The majority of the
Muslim world, in fact, condemned
the attacks. This did not prevent some
Americans from committing hate
crimes, or crimes directed at specific
groups of people in America who
looked as though they had come from
the Middle East.
In addition, the 9/11 attacks made S–
concrete a clash of cultures that had
been developing for several decades.
T
This clash is between the conserva-
tive world of fundamentalist Islam
and the progressive modern societ-
ies of industrialized nations. The ter-
rorists ultimately seek to destroy the
liberal democracies of the West and
replace them with strict Islamic
theocracies.
President Obama Looks Forward In
his Inaugural Address in January
2009, President Barack Obama
84 ✪ September 11, 2001 (9/11)
(2009- ) spoke of the ongoing con-
flict, noting “That we are in the midst
of crisis is now well understood. Our
nation is at war, against a far-reaching
network of violence and hatred.” He
indicated his commitment to defend-
ing the nation but also stated the
United States’ willingness to pursue
new avenues to peace, noting, “To
the Muslim world, we seek a new way
forward, based on mutual interest
and mutual respect. To those leaders
around the globe who seek to sow
conflict, or blame their society’s ills
on the West—know that your people
will judge you on what you can build,
not what you destroy. To those who
cling to power through corruption
and deceit and the silencing of dis-
sent, know that you are on the wrong
side of history; but that we will ex-
tend a hand if you are willing to un-
clench your fist.”
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
The National Commission on Terror-
ist Attacks Upon the United States (or
the 9/11 Commission) was estab-
lished on November 27, 2002, in
order to fully investigate the causes of
the 9/11 attacks. The commission was
composed of five Democrats and five
Republicans. Although the president
and many of his advisers opposed the
establishment of this commission at
first, they eventually gave in to public
and political pressure.
The Commission’s Work The com-
mission reviewed millions of pages
of documents, including some that
were classified, and interviewed more
than 1,200 people, including former
president Bill Clinton and President
Bush. Its investigations culminated
with the publication of the 9/11 Com-
mission Report on July 26, 2004.
These investigations revealed that
the 9/11 plot was originally devel-
oped by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a
Kuwaiti member of al Qaeda who
was captured in Pakistan on March 1,
2003, then moved to the American
military prison at Guantánamo Bay,
Cuba, in 2006. In 2007, Mohammed
confessed to planning the 9/11 at-
tacks, as well as those in Bali, Indone-
sia, in 2002 and several others.
As for the hijackers, 15 of them
were from Saudi Arabia, although it
was clear that the Saudi government
did not support them in the attacks.
The report firmly established the hi-
jackers’ ties with al Qaeda and re-
vealed their motivations: to retaliate
against the United States for what
they perceived as wrongdoings
against Islam, a common sentiment
among fundamentalist Muslims. The
hijackers chose American and United
Airlines because of the symbolism of
their names. The targets were also
heavily symbolic of America’s eco-
nomic, military, and political power.
In addition to all this, the report also
established that, counter to the claims
of the Bush administration, there was
no cooperation between al Qaeda and
Saddam Hussein, the dictator of Iraq
who was deposed when the United
States invaded in March 2003. After
Saddam Hussein was captured, how-
ever, he was tried by an Iraqi court
and executed for war crimes in De-
cember 2006.
Failed Security The report also
pointed to numerous failures in the

security systems at airports as well as
to failures within the American intel-
ligence community that allowed
preparation for the attacks to be car-
ried out undetected. However, these
last failures were strongly protested
by members of this same community,
since it was also revealed that govern-
ment officials were warned that an al
Qaeda attack was imminent before
9/11.
The 9/11 report made a large
number of recommendations for
changes in policy to help prevent fur-
ther attacks. For example, it advo-
cated that the United States reach out
to other nations in developing a com-
prehensive strategy against militant
Islamic terrorists. It also recom-
mended that the nation work to help
improve social, political, and eco-
nomic conditions in countries where
terrorism thrives, as a way of reduc-
ing the incentives to join a terrorist
organization. Some of these recom-
mendations have been carried out
and some not.
DEBATES ON THE COMMISSION’S
REPORT
The handling of the 9/11 attacks gen-
erated much controversy, however. A
significant number of Americans de-
veloped conspiracy theories about
the 9/11 attacks, claiming that the
government knew about them in
advance but allowed them to take
place in order to advance a political
agenda. Other theories asserted that
the government had demolished the
World Trade Center deliberately by
using controlled explosions inside
their cores. However, nearly all of
these theories rely on a few anoma-
September 11, 2001 (9/11) ✪ 85
lies in the facts of the 9/11 attacks,
whereas the official explanation
draws on many lines of inquiry from
multiple disciplines. So far, none of
the conspiracy theories have proven
to be true, and most are highly ques-
tionable.
Nevertheless, they point to a
wider problem of credibility. There
are many other criticisms of how the
government carried out its investiga-
tion of the 9/11 attacks. For example,
some members of the 9/11 Commis-
sion had close political ties with the
White House. Furthermore, President
Bush as well as Vice President Dick
Cheney resisted testifying before the
9/11 Commission. When they did so,
they refused to testify under oath and
also prohibited any transcription of
their testimony. Moreover, the White
House was reluctant to release infor-
mation requested by the commission.
Regardless of the administration’s
motivations, this behavior seemed
suspicious to many.
See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Bin
Laden, Osama; Bush, George W.; De-
partment of Homeland Security; S–
Guantánamo Bay, Cuba; Iraqi War;
Islamic Fundamentalism; Patriot Act;
T
Sleeper Cells; Terrorist Organiza-
tions; World Trade Center, One.
FURTHERREADING
Bankston, John. Rudy Giuliani. Hockessin,
Del.: Mitchell Lane Publishers, 2004.
Haulley, Fletcher. Critical Perspectives on
9/11. New York: Rosen Publishing Group,
2005.
Kowalski, Kathiann M. A Pro/Con Look at
Homeland Security: Safety Vs. Liberty After
9/11. Berkeley Heights, N.J.: Enslow, 2008.
86 ✪ September 11, 2001 (9/11)
Lalley, Patrick. 9.11.01: Terrorists Attack the
U.S. Austin, Tex.: Raintree Steck-Vaughn
Publishers, 2002.
Lee, Nancy, Lonnie Schlein, and Mitchel
Levitas. A Nation Challenged: A Visual
History of 9/11 and Its Aftermath. New
York: Scholastic Nonfiction, 2002.
Shostak, Arthur B. Defeating Terrorism/
Developing Dreams: Beyond 9/11 and
the Iraq War. New York: Chelsea House
Publishers, 2004.
Shoe Bomber
Al Qaeda operative Richard Colvin
Reid, who attempted to blow up an
airplane on December 22, 2001, by
lighting explosives he had packed
into the soles of his shoes. This inci-
dent prompted the U.S. Transporta-
tion Security Administration to
introduce stricter examination meth-
ods in order to prevent another such
attack. Airline passengers now must
remove their shoes for scanning be-
fore boarding a plane.
Reid was born in London in 1973.
He had a difficult childhood, partly
because his father was absent for
much of it. In 1989, he dropped out
of school and was arrested for mug-
ging shortly thereafter. He spent sev-
eral years in jail and upon his release
converted to Islam. Over the follow-
ing years, he became more militant in
his views and grew distant from his
family. Investigators later discovered
that during this time he had come to
associate with radical Muslims con-
nected with the international terror-
ist organization al Qaeda.
Reid disappeared in 1998, and
then returned briefly in 2001 before
departing again to Israel, Egypt, Tur-
key, and Pakistan. It is believed that
during this time he received terrorist
training from al Qaeda operatives and
helped identify opportunities for
attacks.
In December 2001, Reid bought a
pair of expensive basketball shoes
and paid nearly $2,000 cash for an
airplane ticket from Paris to Antigua,
via Miami, Florida. The large amount
of cash and lack of luggage triggered
a security search, and he was pre-
vented from boarding a plane until
the next day. During the flight on De-
cember 22, 2001, a flight attendant
caught Reid trying to set fire to the
tongues of his shoes with a match. He
knocked her down and attacked an-
other attendant when they tried to
stop him, but other passengers man-
aged to restrain him, and a doctor on
board sedated him.
The flight was redirected to Bos-
ton, Massachusetts, where investiga-
tors discovered the soles of Reid’s
shoes had been packed with plastic
explosives. E-mails between Reid and
al Qaeda contacts helped build a case
against him. A year later, Reid pled
guilty to charges that he intended to
blow up the plane. He was sentenced
to life in prison on January 30, 2003,
and is currently incarcerated at a fed-
eral Supermax facility in Colorado.
See also: Al Qaeda; Department of
Homeland Security; Islamic Funda-
mentalism; September 11, 2001; Ter-
rorist Organizations.
Sleeper Cells
Groups of secret agents who blend
into a society and remain inactive
until they are signaled to carry out a

predetermined plan. In the context
of terrorism, these agents usually be-
long to a militant organization that
plans a violent terrorist attack such as
a bombing or kidnapping. During the
past decade, there has been increas-
ing concern over the possibility of
sleeper cells established by the inter-
national terrorist organization al
Qaeda in various countries.
In such a situation, cell members
(“sleepers”) would be Muslims with
radical beliefs, terrorists who have
developed close and trusting relation-
ships with members of al Qaeda,
though not necessarily with the high-
est-ranked members such as Osama
bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri.
These sleepers then would be in-
structed to recruit other agents to
carry out specific tasks related to an
attack, such as gathering materials,
manufacturing bombs, identifying
possible targets, and so forth. In the-
ory, such sleeper cells are very hard
to detect, much less infiltrate, be-
cause of their small scale and the care
sleepers take in blending into their
respective societies. Furthermore, if a
sleeper cell is discovered, the autono-
mous structure ensures that sleepers
are unable to provide useful informa-
tion about their superiors.
SLEEPER CELLS IN THE
UNITED STATES
The most infamous and horrific ex-
ample in recent years of a sleeper cell
was the group that hijacked four air-
planes on September 11, 2001, crash-
ing them into the World Trade Center
in New York City, the Pentagon in
Washington, D.C., and a field near
Shanksville, Pennsylvania. This group
Sleeper Cells ✪ 87
had extensive logistical and material
support in the United States, some of
which had been uncovered in intelli-
gence analyses before the attacks.
However, for controversial and still
unclear reasons, the U.S. government
failed to act on this intelligence be-
fore the sleeper cell was activated
and carried out its tasks.
RELIANCE ON SLEEPER CELLS
The organization of al Qaeda relies
heavily on sleeper cells, especially
since the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan
in November 2001, which destroyed
al Qaeda’s main headquarters. Scat-
tered throughout the world are an
unknown number of al Qaeda sleeper
cells, all acting independently or wait-
ing for a predetermined signal to ac-
tivate them. The existence of such
cells has led to a series of controver-
sial restrictions on civil liberties,
many of them established with the
Patriot Act, which allows government
agencies more flexibility and free-
dom in their attempts to track down
terrorists before they carry out
attacks.
Other examples of sleeper cell
attacks include the bombings in S–
Bali, Indonesia, in 2002, as well as
numerous attacks by al Qaeda
T
operatives in Iraq since 2003.
See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Bin
Laden, Osama; Bali Attacks (2002);
Iraqi War; Islamic Fundamentalism;
Patriot Act; September 11, 2001; Ter-
rorist Organizations; Al-Zawahiri,
Ayman.
FURTHERREADING
Carlisle, Rodney P. September 11, 2001. New
York: Collins, 2007.
88 ✪ Sleeper Cells
Temple-Raston, Dina. The Jihad Next Door:
The Lackawanna Six and Rough Justice in
an Age of Terror. New York: PublicAffairs,
2007.
Somalia
Muslim-majority country on the Horn
of Africa. Somalia is bounded to the
west by Djibouti, Ethiopia, and Kenya;
to the east by the Indian Ocean; and
to the north by the Gulf of Aden. It is
located in a strategic position be-
tween the Arabian Peninsula and sub-
Saharan Africa.
U.S. military intervention in So-
malia in the early 1990s inflamed
anti-American sentiment in the Mus-
lim world, particularly among funda-
mentalists. Despite the intervention,
which was designed to remove a
powerful warlord who controlled
the capital of Mogadishu, Somalia
remains a failed state today and one
of the world’s poorest nations.
In the early 1990s, Somalia was
emerging from a long and oppressive
military dictatorship. Civil war devas-
tated most of the country, leading to
a widespread humanitarian crisis as
warlords battled each other over
shipments of foreign aid. The United
States participated in a United Na-
tions (UN) peacekeeping mission
between 1992 and 1995 that ulti-
mately failed to restore order to the
nation.
TOWARD FUNDAMENTALIST RULE
From this chaos emerged the Islamic
Courts Union (ICU), a group of
sharia courts that allied in opposi-
tion to the weakened transitional fed-
eral government. (Sharia courts are
religious courts that decide cases
based on a strict interpretation of Is-
lamic law.) From the mid-1990s
through the beginning of the twenty-
first century, the ICU gained power
in the southern reaches of Somalia.
Aided by the Eritrean government as
well as by foreign Islamist extremists,
who introduced suicide bombings
and other terrorist tactics largely un-
known in Somalia before, the ICU
was able to capture most of southern
Somalia. By June 2006, they con-
trolled the capital of Mogadishu and
most of its surroundings.
The order the ICU imposed was
based on fundamentalist Islam. While
the relative peace the ICU brought to
areas under its control was welcome,
the ICU’s association with foreign
mujahideen, or holy warriors, was
not. U.S. intelligence identified many
al Qaeda cells in Somalia that pro-
vided support to the ICU, and the
ICU’s reliance on al Qaeda sparked
widespread protest among Somalis.
The ICU’s power began to fail in
December 2006, when Ethiopian
forces supporting the transitional
federal government drove them out
of Mogadishu. The ICU began to fight
a guerrilla war as it retreated to its
strongholds in the south. The United
States also provided some tactical
support in the form of air strikes. By
2007, the ICU had effectively gone
underground, its organization and
popular support shattered.
A FAILED STATE
As of 2010, Somalia remained a di-
vided country. The transitional gov-
ernment still had not reestablished
control in all areas, and Islamic ex-
tremists, including the ICU and its

remaining followers, continued to
fight using guerrilla tactics.
Like other failed states, Somalia
unfortunately provides a chaotic en-
vironment that is ideally suited to the
violent aims of terrorist organizations
as well as provide a safe haven for
increasingly aggressive pirates. A
shattered economy, long-term civil
strife, and few prospects for a peace-
ful future are all factors that drive
people to militancy, especially of a
religious nature.
See also: Al Qaeda; Islamic Funda-
mentalism; Jihad; Kenya and Tanzania
Bombings (1998); Mujahideen;
Sleeper Cells; Terrorist Organiza-
tions.
FURTHERREADING
Hassig, Susan M., and Zawiah Abdul Latif. So-
malia. New York: Marshall Cavendish
Benchmark, 2008.
Human Rights Watch (Organization). Shell-
Shocked: Civilians Under Siege in Mogadi-
shu. New York: Human Rights Watch,
2007.
Somerset County,
Pennsylvania
See September 11, 2001.
Symbionese Liberation Army
American criminal organization ac-
tive between 1973 and 1975. Its
members, believing themselves at the
forefront of a revolution, committed
several serious crimes, including
murders and bank robberies, before
they were killed or captured by law
enforcement. The SLA was most fa-
mous for kidnapping Patricia (“Patty”)
Hearst, a college-age heiress to a large
Symbionese Liberation Army ✪ 89
publishing fortune. They also became
infamous for their mastery of mass
media, creating interviews, posters,
and publications of professional qual-
ity to spread awareness of their
activities.
FOUNDING THE ARMY
The SLA was founded by Donald De-
Freeze and Patricia Michelle Soltysik.
DeFreeze was a criminal who had met
and been impressed by political ex-
tremists while serving time in prison
in Soldedad, California. He met
Soltysik after escaping from prison on
March 5, 1973. The name of the group
was derived from the word symbio-
sis, which is a state in which two or-
ganisms rely on each other for mutual
survival. Although the SLA claimed to
support leftist ideals of collective ac-
tion and the freedom of repressed mi-
norities, the group began criminal
activity almost immediately, stealing
money, food, and guns from the
homes of fellow organizers.
The SLA shot and killed Marcus
Foster, a school superintendent in
Oakland, California, on November 6,
1973. They opposed Foster’s plan to
introduce identification cards to Oak- S–
land schools. Two SLA members, Jo-
seph Remiro and Russell Little, were
T
imprisoned for the murder.
HEARST KIDNAPPING
In response, the SLA kidnapped Patty
Hearst from her residence in Berke-
ley. She soon joined the SLA, although
she later claimed to have been brain-
washed into supporting its cause.
Hearst participated in the SLA’s
next major attack, a bank robbery at
the Hibernia Bank in San Francisco,
on April 15, 1974. Two bystanders
90 ✪ Symbionese Liberation Army
were killed as the group stole about
$10,000. After this, the group moved
from San Francisco to Los Angeles.
However, it alienated its potential
supporters with its violent, comman-
deering behavior.
END OF THE SLA
On May 17, 1974, police surrounded
the house where SLA members were
hiding. An hours-long gun battle re-
sulted in the death of DeFreeze and
several other members. On April 21,
1975, the remaining members of the
SLA robbed another bank in Carmi-
chael, California, killing a woman.
This marked the effective end of the
SLA; its chief members were captured
later that year or fled the country.
Although its members espoused
a confused mixture of leftist politi-
cal ideals, the SLA was a criminal or-
ganization that used terrorist tactics
to acquire the money and supplies
it needed to carry out its illegal
actions.
See also: Oklahoma City Bombing;
Terrorist Organizations; Una-
bomber.
FURTHERREADING
Baker, Marilyn, and Sally Brompton. Exclu-
sive! The Inside Story of Patricia Hearst
and the SLA. New York: Macmillan, 1974.
Hearst, Patricia, and Alvin Moscow. Patty
Hearst: Her Own Story. New York: Avon
Books, 1988.
Hornberger, Francine. Mistresses of Mayhem:
The Book of Women Criminals. Indianapo-
lis, Ind.: Alpha, 2002.
Taliban
Government of Afghanistan between
1996 and 2002, which was domi-
nated by Sunni Muslims who fol-
lowed a strict interpretation of Islam.
Persian for “seekers” or “students,”
the Taliban briefly restored order to
the war-torn country before impos-
ing a rigid, fundamentalist Islamic
theocracy, a government that en-
gaged in many human rights abuses.
This group was so named because
its leaders and many of its members
had attended Islamic religious schools
(madrassas) in refugee camps in
northern Pakistan. Many had fled
there following the Soviet Union’s in-
vasion of Afghanistan in late 1979.
The Taliban allowed Osama bin
Laden, leader of the international ter-
rorist organization al Qaeda, to estab-
lish training camps for the terrorist
group in Afghanistan, partly in ex-
change for financial support. Follow-
ing the 2001 U.S.-led invasion of
Afghanistan, the Taliban regime was
destroyed. In the following years,
however, they waged a guerrilla
war and slowly began to take control
of Afghanistan’s rural areas.
HISTORY OF THE TALIBAN
Thousands of mujahideen (holy war-
riors) from around the world helped
expel the Soviet Union from Afghani-
stan after the communists invaded
in 1979. After the Soviet withdrawal
in 1989, these fighters attempted to
establish a coalition government, but
this dissolved because of infighting
in the early 1990s. Afghanistan de-
scended into a state of civil strife as
local warlords fought each other.
The Taliban was founded by Mul-
lah Mohammed Omar, a veteran of
the Soviet war who had begun study-
ing in a madrassa after the 1989

withdrawal. Starting with a small
group of about 30 companions, he
defeated a minor warlord and seized
an arms depot in October 1994.
The Taliban then started to con-
solidate power in the southern prov-
ince of Kandahar. They defeated local
warlords and turned north and east,
gradually incorporating more and
more territory into their holdings.
Popular support for the Taliban sky-
rocketed as they swept north. In late
1996, they took control of Kabul, Af-
ghanistan’s capital. A few years later,
they ruled over all but some remote
regions of northern Afghanistan.
Since the Taliban were almost ex-
clusively Pashtun, an ethnic group
spread throughout Afghanistan as
well as Pakistan, they received signifi-
cant support from tribes across the
border. Most important, perhaps, was
support from the majority of Afghan-
istan’s population, who was weary of
decades of fighting.
AFGHANISTAN UNDER
THE TALIBAN
In 1996, Mullah Omar (r. 1996–2001)
declared a new government, the Is-
lamic Emirate of Afghanistan. He was
named emir (an ancient Arabic title
meaning “commander of the faith-
ful”). Saudi Arabia, the United Arab
Emirates, and Pakistan, all of which
provided the Taliban with monetary
or material aid, were the only coun-
tries to recognize this government as
legitimate. This was due in part to a
fundamental similarity in their reli-
gious orientation: All three were
dominated by believers in strict,
though slightly varying, forms of
Sunni Islam.
Taliban ✪ 91
Political opposition from the rest
of the international community
began to intensify in 1998 after the
Taliban killed several thousand civil-
ians in the city of Mazar. For several
years prior to this, the Taliban had
imposed many strict Islamic prac-
tices on the areas it controlled. In
particular, women’s rights were se-
verely curtailed. Women were pro-
hibited from attending school,
playing sports, and working; if they
wanted to go out in public, they had
to be accompanied by a male relative
and be dressed in a burka, a garment
that covers the entire body, includ-
ing the face.
Moreover, the Taliban interpreted
Islamic law, or sharia, as prohibiting
music, dancing, photographs, and
even kite flying. A number of elec-
tronic devices and appliances such as
computers and televisions were pro-
hibited as well. Corporal punishment,
such as the cutting off of a thief’s
hand and the stoning to death of mar-
ried adulterers, was carried out in
public.
FALL AND RECOVERY
The U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in S–
October 2001 put a swift end to the T
Taliban’s rule. However, rather than
being disbanded entirely, the Taliban
went underground, fleeing across the
border to Pakistan or taking refuge in
Afghanistan’s mountains. As Afghani-
stan has struggled to establish a stable
democracy, the Taliban have con-
tinued to carry out terrorist attacks
across the country. It has reconsti-
tuted as a powerful organization,
especially in rural areas, and as of
2010, the embattled Afghanistan
92 ✪ Taliban

George W. Bush on Toppling

the Taliban
O n September 20, 2001, President George W. Bush
(2001–2009) addressed a joint session of Congress
about the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States.
He identified al Qaeda as the responsible party and
spoke of the necessity of ending the Taliban’s regime
in order to strike at al Qaeda in Afghanistan.

The terrorists practice a imprisoned. Protect foreign

fringe form of Islamic extrem-
ism that has been rejected by
Muslim scholars and the vast
majority of Muslim clerics—a
fringe movement that per-
verts the peaceful teachings
of Islam. The terrorists’ direc-
tive commands them to kill
Christians and Jews, to kill all
Americans, and make no dis-
tinction among military and
civilians, including women
and children. . . .
The leadership of al-Qaeda
has great influence in Afghan-
istan and supports the Tal-
iban regime in controlling
most of that country. In
Afghanistan, we see al-
Qaeda’s vision for the
world. . . .
And tonight, the United
States of America makes the
following demands on the
Taliban: Deliver to United
States authorities all the lead-
ers of al-Qaeda who hide in
your land. Release all foreign
nationals, including American
citizens, you have unjustly
journalists, diplomats and aid
workers in your country.
Close immediately and per-
manently every terrorist train-
ing camp in Afghanistan, and
hand over every terrorist, and
every person in their support
structure, to appropriate
authorities. . . .
I also want to speak tonight
directly to Muslims through-
out the world. We respect
your faith. It’s practiced freely
by many millions of Ameri-
cans, and by millions more in
countries that America counts
as friends. Its teachings are
good and peaceful, and those
who commit evil in the name
of Allah blaspheme the name
of Allah. The terrorists are
traitors to their own faith, try-
ing, in effect, to hijack Islam
itself. . . .
Our war on terror begins
with al-Qaeda, but it does not
end there. It will not end
until every terrorist group of
global reach has been found,
stopped and defeated.

government was hard-pressed to
maintain control.
See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda;
American Taliban; Bin Laden, Osama;
Islamic Fundamentalism; Jihad; Muja-
hideen; Mullah Omar; Pakistan; Sep-
tember 11, 2001; Terrorist Organiza-
tions.
FURTHERREADING
Burgan, Michael. Afghanistan. Vero Beach,
Fla.: Rourke Pub, 2009.
Perl, Lila. Theocracy. New York: Marshall Cav-
endish Benchmark, 2008.
Stewart, Gail B. Life Under the Taliban. San
Diego, Calif.: Lucent Books, 2005.
Terrorist Organizations
Politically motivated groups of fight-
ers who use illegal, violent means to
achieve their goals. The definition of
terrorism is ultimately subjective,
since a group identified as a terrorist
organization by a particular govern-
ment might be viewed by its support-
ers as a group of guerrilla or freedom
fighters.
Although the interpretations may
be subjective, definitions of terrorism
have been agreed upon in interna-
tional treaties. In general, any group
that uses fear in order to force others
to concede to their demands can be
labeled a terrorist organization. By
this definition, underground organi-
zations and revolutionaries as well as
state-sponsored police and military
forces can be viewed as terrorists.
However, they are not official repre-
sentatives of any organized nation or
state.
Terrorist Organizations ✪ 93
THE HISTORY OF TERRORISM
Terrorism has existed just as long
as the state. There are innumerable
examples of state-sponsored terror-
ism, as well as terrorism committed
by opponents of a given state. The
frequency and scope of terrorist
acts increased dramatically during
the twenty-first century for many
reasons. Perhaps the single most im-
portant explanation was the devel-
opment of mass media—television,
radio, newspapers, and the Internet—
because terrorist acts, by their very
nature, are intended to create fear,
and much larger audiences could be
secured through the numerous mass
media organizations of the twentieth
century than in previous times. In
other words, more people could be
traumatized by terrorist acts, and
more potential supporters could re-
ceive the messages of terrorist orga-
nizations through mass media.
Drama and Symbolism Accordingly,
terrorist acts have increased in their
dramatic effects. Hijackings, sui-
cide bombings, kidnappings, violent
executions, and assassinations are
common acts committed by terrorists.
S–
Perhaps the most dramatic recent ter- T
rorist acts occurred on September 11,
2001, when hijackers sponsored by
the fundamentalist Islamic terrorist
organization al Qaeda crashed two
large commercial airliners into the
two tallest buildings in New York City,
buildings One and Two of the World
Trade Center (WTC).
Millions of people worldwide
watched in real time as the second
plane hit 2 WTC and as both
buildings collapsed suddenly and
94 ✪ Terrorist Organizations
dramatically within hours. Attacking
the WTC served no strategic purpose
for al Qaeda other than a symbolic
one: It demonstrated the organiza-
tion’s power as well as the United
States’ vulnerability, and by destroy-
ing a target closely associated with
capitalism, al Qaeda effectively sent
an anticapitalist message to its poten-
tial supporters.
Most importantly, al Qaeda cre-
ated a spectacle, becoming more visi-
ble on the world stage and reaping
both the benefits and detriments of
this increased visibility. For example,
after the attacks, unknown thousands
of volunteers joined the ranks of al
Qaeda. On the other hand, it became
the top target of the U.S. military and
was effectively driven from its head-
quarters in Afghanistan in the Octo-
ber 2001 American invasion.
Illegal Activities Terrorist organiza-
tions usually rely on illegal monies to
finance their activities. Often, the
leadership of such groups has mili-
tary experience or has worked for a
national intelligence agency. All
terrorist groups also rely heavily on
constant recruitment of new mem-
bers, because of their exposure to
state authority and because of the
members they lose in attacks. Accord-
ingly, many of these organizations
have some sort of public face, usually
a political party, which seeks to dis-
guise its true relationship with its vio-
lent wing. They also seek to develop
strong underground networks in
local communities, offering material
support for populations who might
sympathize with their aims. For
example, they might offer money or
food to families of terrorist members
or promise to protect them from
other groups or the government.
CONTEMPORARY
ORGANIZATIONS
The most visible terrorist organiza-
tions at the beginning of the twenty-
first century were Islamic or Arab
nationalist groups. Generally speak-
ing, Islamic groups seek to topple
governments they perceive to be en-
emies of a fundamentalist kind of
Islam. They also seek to establish Is-
lamic theocracies in these nations
and, ultimately, across the entire
world. The religious convictions that
underlie these groups’ actions make
it difficult to negotiate with them,
since they believe, at a fundamental
level, that it is their divine duty to de-
fend Islam and expand its influence.
Another major goal of these groups is
to destroy the state of Israel.
There are, however, three main
sects within Islam: Sunni, Shia, and
Sufi. Most of the Muslim world is
Sunni, and although Shia Muslims live
in all majority Sunni societies, they
only constitute a majority in Iran,
Iraq, Bahrain, and Azerbaijan. Sunni
and Shia terrorist organizations often
target believers of the opposite sect
as well as non-Muslims. Hizbollah is
an example of a Shia group, while al
Qaeda is Sunni.
Arab nationalist groups, on
the other hand, are secular, or non-
religious. They seek to establish a
pan-Arab nation or, in the case of Pal-
estinian groups, an independent Pal-
estinian state. Examples of this kind

of group include the Palestine Libera-
tion Front and the Abu Nidal Organi-
zation. Some nations are also widely
recognized as sponsors of terrorist
acts. These include Iran and Pakistan,
both of which have been traditionally
dominated by Islamic elements.
See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Bali
Attacks (2002); Bin Laden, Osama;
Gaza Strip and the West Bank; Hamas;
Hizbollah; Iran; Islamic Fundamental-
ism; Istanbul Bombings (2003); Jihad;
Kenya and Tanzania Bombings
(1998); London Bombings (2005);
U–W
Unabomber
Refers to Theodore John Kaczynski
(b. May 22, 1942), a terrorist and an-
tiestablishment former professor
who was responsible for the worst
serial bombing case in U.S. history.
Kaczynski killed 3 people and injured
more than 20 (many of them univer-
sity professors or researchers) with
mail bombs, sent out between 1978
and 1995.
The term unabomber comes from
the name assigned by the Federal Bu-
reau of Investigation to the mysteri-
ous figure who carried out these
attacks; it is a shortening of “univer-
sity and airline bomber.” Kaczynski’s
attacks were motivated by his desire
to seek revenge against the social and
industrial systems in the United States
that, in his view, were destroying the
Unabomber ✪ 95
Madrid Bombings (2004); September
11, 2001; Taliban.
FURTHERREADING
Byers, Ann. Lebanon’s Hezbollah. New York:
Rosen Publishing Group, 2003.
Gunderson, Cory Gideon. Terrorist
Groups. Edina, Minn.: ABDO Pub. Co,
2004.
Margulies, Phillip. Al Qaeda: Osama Bin Lad-
en’s Army of Terrorists. New York: Rosen
Publishing Group, 2003.
Orr, Tamra. Egyptian Islamic Jihad. New York:
Rosen Publishing Group, 2003.
Streissguth, Thomas. International Terrorists.
Minneapolis, Minn.: Oliver, 1993.
Earth and making its future habita-
tion impossible for humans.
These attacks came at a time in
American history when the social un-
rest and violent clashes of the 1960s
and 1970s had largely disappeared.
The Unabomber’s attacks were deeply
disturbing because the FBI was un-
able to identify a suspect for several
decades. Only in 1995 was Kaczynski
identified as the perpetrator, after
the Unabomber mailed copies of a
35,000-word manifesto entitled U–
Industrial Society and Its Future W
(also known as the “Unabomber
Manifesto”), demanding that it be
printed in a major newspaper or else
he would continue to kill. The New
York Times and the Washington Post
agreed to publish it on September
19. Kaczynski’s brother David then
recognized the writing style and
96 ✪ Unabomber
contacted the FBI. The following
April, FBI agents arrested Kaczynski
at his cabin in a remote area near
Lincoln, Montana.
Although he had a promising
academic career in his twenties—
receiving his Ph.D. in mathematics
from the University of Michigan, pub-
lishing a brilliant dissertation, and ac-
cepting a post at Berkeley—Kaczynski
abandoned this life for one of isola-
tion and simplicity. He despised tech-
nology, arguing in his manifesto that
the technological society of the mod-
ern world was doomed to collapse,
but not before it severely damaged the
natural world. Kaczynski lived with-
out electricity or running water for
decades, learning survivalist skills
that allowed him to meet most of his
needs from the land around him.
Kaczynski, who is currently serv-
ing consecutive sentences in a prison
in Florence, Colorado, is an unusual
figure. Highly gifted intellectually,
he chose to use terrorism to fight
what he saw as an engulfing ideol-
ogy that threatened civilization. Al-
though his attacks have been
universally denounced, some schol-
ars admit that a few ideas in his mani-
festo are compelling and require
serious thought.
See also: Department of Homeland
Security; Ecoterrorism; Oklahoma
City Bombing; Symbionese Libera-
tion Army.
FURTHERREADING
Douglas, John E., and Mark Olshaker. Una-
bomber: On the Trail of America’s Most-
Wanted Serial Killer. New York: Pocket
Books, 1996.
Waits, Chris, and Dave Shors. Unabomber:
The Secret Life of Ted Kaczynski. Helena,
Mont.: Helena Independent Record, 1999.
Yancey, Diane. The Unabomber. Detroit:
Lucent Books, 2007.
USS Cole Bombing (2000)
An October 12, 2000, terrorist attack
on the USS Cole, an Arleigh-Burke-
class destroyer, while it was harbored
in the port of Aden, the capital of
Yemen, a poor Arab country on the
Arabian Peninsula. The attack blew a
large hole in the side of the craft and
killed 17 American sailors and
wounded 39 more. Though it was
not immediately clear who carried
out the attack, investigations later
connected the bombers with the in-
ternational terrorist organization al
Qaeda. The bombers also received
substantial support from Sudan, a
country known to harbor Islamic
extremists.
The USS Cole was refueling in
port when a small motorboat pulled
up alongside and detonated, cutting a
massive hole in the side of the ship.
Sailors aboard apparently thought the
craft was a garbage service ship and,
unsuspecting, allowed it to approach.
The attack was unprecedented in
American naval experience and, in
hindsight, helped signal a new phase
in global terrorism.
While the Cole was repaired with-
out mishap, the attack accomplished
much for al Qaeda. Osama bin Laden
spoke about the glorious success of
the bombing in a video released in
2001, and word of the attack brought
many fresh recruits to al Qaeda train-
ing camps.
 USS Cole Bombing (2000) ✪ 97

U.S. navy and marine personnel patrol the waters near the USS Cole after the destroyer was
attacked by terrorists on October 12, 2000. The attack occurred while the destroyer was re-
fueling off the coast of the nation of Yemen. The terrorist attack, linked to al Qaeda, killed
17 American sailors and wounded 39 more.

The U.S. response included an of the bombing escaped from a

equally unprecedented incident.
Investigations proceeded slowly in
the months following the attack,
due to overwhelming hostility from
militant Yemeni tribesmen. However,
by 2002, one of the suspected plan-
ners of the attacks had been iden-
tified—Abu Ali al-Harithi. He was
driving in Yemen when his vehicle
was destroyed by a missile fired by
a U.S. Predator Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle. This was the first such strike
by a UAV, which raised questions
about due process in responding to
terrorists. Other suspected planners
Yemeni prison in February 2006
and remain on the loose.
See also: Al Qaeda; Islamic Funda- U–
mentalism; Jihad; Mujahideen; Sleeper W
Cells; Terrorist Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Burnett, Betty. The Attack on the USS Cole in
Yemen on October 12, 2000. New York:
Rosen Publishing Group, 2003.
Wright, Lawrence. The Looming Tower: Al-
Qaeda and the Road to 9/11. New York:
Knopf, 2006.
98 ✪ Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs)
Wall Street Bombing
See New York City Attack (September
16, 1920).
Weapons of Mass Destruction
(WMDs)
Advanced weapons with the power
to kill large numbers of people and
cause other damage of catastrophic
size. WMDs can be nuclear, biologi-
cal, chemical, radiological, or high
explosives.
Although nuclear weapons have
been of great concern to the public
since the end of World War II (1939–
1945), these other kinds of weapons
have only become well-known in re-
cent years. In this age of increased
terrorist activity, WMDs are a more
serious threat than ever.
HISTORY, TYPES OF WEAPONS,
AND DEGREE OF THREAT
The term weapons of mass destruc-
tion originated in World War II, refer-
ring to large formations of bomber
aircraft that were used by the Allies, a
coalition of nations fighting in the
war, to firebomb cities in Germany
and Japan. Just one of these attacks
could kill tens of thousands of
people.
During the Cold War between the
United States and the Soviet Union
that followed World War II, both
superpowers built up massive
stockpiles of nuclear, chemical,
and biological weapons. Several
treaties, particularly the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (1968), the
Biological Weapons Convention
(1972), and the Chemical Weapons
Convention (1993), significantly re-
duced these countries’ nuclear stock-
piles and banned entirely their
chemical and biological ones.
While nuclear weapons require
enormous resources to produce and
deploy, chemical and biological
weapons are comparatively easy and
cheap to cultivate and unleash. These
weapons include any toxic materials
or organisms that can be spread
throughout a population. Examples
include chlorine gas (a nerve agent
that paralyzes its victims) and the
bacteria that cause anthrax, cholera,
or other acute diseases.
A newer kind of WMD, radiologi-
cal weapons, involves mixing con-
ventional explosives with radioactive
waste. This waste is vaporized and
spread widely by the explosion in
order to poison many people. Such
bombs are known as “dirty bombs.”
Experts agree that these do not pose
much of a threat, however.
Today, all types of WMDs are care-
fully controlled by international trea-
ties that ban the use of most of them
in warfare. However, the knowledge
and technology for developing and
delivering WMDs is more widely
available today than ever before, and
various terrorist organizations, as
well as states known to sponsor ter-
rorism (in particular, Iran), might eas-
ily develop and use WMDs on their
enemies. Moreover, since the dissolu-
tion of the Soviet Union in the early
1990s, much of the material for its
nuclear warheads has disappeared,
and security experts fear that this
material might be sold to terrorists.
By far, nuclear weapons remain
the most dangerous type of WMD.

Their destructive capacity is un-
matched by any other weapon, and a
large enough exchange of nuclear
weapons by two countries could
trigger a “nuclear winter” in which
nearly all life on Earth would likely
end.
TERRORIST ATTACKS WITH WMDS
Because of the devastating effects of
WMDs on civilian populations (a
chemical or biological attack could
poison a large metropolis for years),
both Cold War superpowers were de-
terred from actually using them.
However, terrorist organizations who
have no state or nation to protect do
not face this limitation.
In 1995, the religious cult Aum
Shinrikyo released sarin gas (a nerve
agent) in a Tokyo subway, killing
more than a dozen people and injur-
ing 50. Another recent WMD attack
occurred in the United States in Sep-
tember and October 2001. Anthrax
spores were included in letters
mailed to two Democratic senators
and several media outlets. The
poison in these letters killed 5 people
and infected 17 more. Investigations
began in 2001 and continued through
August 2008, when the anthrax was
traced to a government scientist
working in a biodefense laboratory
in Fort Detrick, Maryland.
The Bush administration insisted
that Iraq’s dictator Saddam Hussein
was stockpiling WMDs, making him
dangerous enough to justify invading
Iraq in 2003. However, after the inva-
sion, no evidence was found to sup-
port the administration’s claims. Yet,
it is true that Hussein had a history of
using WMDs to suppress revolts in
World Trade Center, One ✪ 99
Iraq, as well as during the 1980–1988
Iran-Iraq War.
Most disturbing is the prospect
that a terrorist organization might
acquire a nuclear weapon. Indeed,
Osama bin Laden, founder and finan-
cier of al Qaeda, has described acquir-
ing a nuclear weapon as a religious
duty.
See also: Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama;
Department of Homeland Security;
Iran; Iraqi War; Islamic Fundamental-
ism; Pakistan; September 11, 2001;
Terrorist Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Davis, Mary D., and Arthur H. Purcell. Weap-
ons of Mass Destruction. New York: Facts
On File, 2006.
Logan, Michael. Weapons of Mass Destruc-
tion. Farmington Hills, Mich.: Greenhaven
Press/Thomson Gale, 2006.
Torr, James D. Weapons of Mass Destruction:
Opposing Viewpoints. San Diego, Calif.:
Greenhaven Press, 2005.
West Bank
See Gaza Strip and the West Bank.
World Trade Center Attacks
See September 11, 2001.
U–
World Trade Center, One
W
Formerly called Freedom Tower, the
first building of the rebuilt World
Trade Center in Lower Manhattan,
New York City. The New York Port
Authority decided to call the struc-
ture One World Trade Center, rather
than Freedom Tower, on March 26,
2009.
100 ✪ World Trade Center, One
An artist’s rendition of One World Trade
Center, formerly called Freedom Tower,
shows the proposed new building on the site
of New York’s World Trade Center, which
was destroyed by the terrorist attacks of
September 11, 2001. The new One World
Trade Center will be 1,776 feet tall, recalling
the year of the signing of the Declaration of
Independence.
The previous One World Trade
Center (WTC) was destroyed in the
terrorist attacks that occurred on
September 11, 2001. The new build-
ing sits in the northwest corner of
the World Trade Center site and,
along with the other WTC buildings,
will frame the National September 11
Memorial and Museum still under
construction.
When One World Trade Center is
complete, it will be the most visible
structure of the rebuilt World Trade
Center site. As such, it has been de-
signed to inspire onlookers with the
hope that liberty and civil society will
triumph over the violence and chaos
brought on by terrorist acts. This is to
be accomplished through many sym-
bolic aspects of its design, such as its
height (1,776 feet), which recalls the
year the Declaration of Independence
was signed.
The tower will incorporate many
safety features that will make it less
vulnerable to 9/11-type attacks. It
will sit on a 186-foot-high concrete
base for extra stability, and its interior
staircases and passages are designed
to allow for quick and safe
evacuations.
Construction began on April 27,
2006. It is expected to be completed
in 2013.
See also: Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama;
New York City Attack (September 16,
1920); September 11, 2001; Terrorist
Organizations.
FURTHERREADING
Levy, Debbie. The World Trade Center. De-
troit: KidHaven Press, 2005.
Oxlade, Chris. Skyscrapers: Uncovering Tech-
nology. Richmond Hill, Ontario: Firefly
Books, 2006.
 Viewpoints
About
Terrorism

Speech After the Tanzania and Kenya

Bombings, President William Clinton, 1998
Al Qaeda’s first major attacks against the United
States occurred on August 7, 1998, when the Ameri-
can embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam,
Tanzania, in East Africa were bombed. Hundreds
were killed and thousands wounded. The following
day, President William Clinton (1993–2001) used a
radio address to emphasize the importance of stand-
ing firm in the face of terrorist attacks.

Good morning. I want to talk to loved ones gave their lives to the

“ you about the terrorist bomb-

ings yesterday that took the
lives of Americans and Africans
at our embassies in Nairobi,
Kenya, and Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania;
to tell you what we’re doing; and
how we are combating the larger
problem of terrorism that targets
Americans.
Most of you have seen the horrible
pictures of destruction on television.
The bomb attack in Nairobi killed at
least 11 Americans. In Dar-es-Salaam,
no Americans lost their lives, but
at least one was gravely wounded.
In both places, many Africans were
killed or wounded, and devastating
damage was done to our embassies
and surrounding buildings.
To the families and friends of
those who were killed, I know noth-
ing I can say will make sense of
your loss. I hope you will take some
comfort in the knowledge that your
highest calling—serving our country,
protecting our freedom, and seeking
its blessings for others . . .
Americans are targets of terror-
ism in part because we have unique
leadership responsibilities in the
world . . . and because we stand
united against terrorism.
The bombs that kill innocent
Americans are aimed not only at
them, but at the very spirit of our
country and the spirit of freedom.
For terrorists are the enemies of
everything we believe in and fight
for—peace and democracy, tolerance
and security.
As long as we continue to believe
in those values and continue to fight
for them, their enemies will not
prevail. And our responsibility
is great, but the opportunities
it brings are even greater. Let
“
us never fear to embrace them.
Thank you for listening.

101

DWJ_Terror_F_replacedlinks.indd 101 4/5/10 2:48:27 PM

102 ✪ Terrorism

War on Terrorism Speech, President George

W. Bush, September 20, 2001
After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,
the United States, and indeed much of the world,
was in a state of shock. In an address to a joint ses-
sion of Congress, which was televised on Septem-
ber 20, President George W. Bush (2001–2009)
explained that American intelligence had identified
al Qaeda as the culprits. In his speech, he also em-
phasized the spirit of solidarity in which many na-
tions expressed their support for the stricken
nation. This speech was also notable for Bush’s dec-
laration of a war on global terrorist organizations.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. President America was touched on the evening

“ Pro Tempore, members of

Congress, and fellow Ameri-
cans, in the normal course of
events, presidents come to this
chamber to report on the state of
the union. Tonight, no such report is
needed; it has already been delivered
by the American people . . .
We have seen the state of our
union in the endurance of rescuers
working past exhaustion.
We’ve seen the unfurling of flags,
the lighting of candles, the giving of
blood, the saying of prayers in Eng-
lish, Hebrew and Arabic.
My fellow citizens, for the last
nine days, the entire world has seen
for itself the state of union, and it is
strong.
Tonight we are a country awak-
ened to danger and called to de-
fend freedom. Our grief has turned
to anger, and anger to resolution.
Whether we bring our enemies to
justice, or bring justice to our
enemies, justice will be done.
I thank the Congress for its leader-
ship at such an important time. All of
of the tragedy to see Republicans
and Democrats joined together on
the steps of this Capitol, singing
“God Bless America.” And you did
more than sing; you acted, by deliver-
ing $40 billion to rebuild our com-
munities and meet the needs of our
military. . . .
And on behalf of the American
people, I thank the world for its
outpouring of support. America will
never forget the sounds of our Na-
tional Anthem playing at Bucking-
ham Palace, on the streets of Paris,
and at Berlin’s Brandenburg Gate.
We will not forget South Korean
children gathering to pray outside
our embassy in Seoul, or the prayers
of sympathy offered at a mosque in
Cairo. We will not forget moments of
silence and days of mourning in Aus-
tralia and Africa and Latin America.
Nor will we forget the citizens of
80 other nations who died with our
own: dozens of Pakistanis; more than
130 Israelis; more than 250 citizens of
India; men and women from El Sal-
vador, Iran, Mexico and Japan; and

hundreds of British citizens. America
has no truer friend than Great Brit-
ain. Once again, we are joined to-
gether in a great cause. . . .
On September the 11th, enemies
of freedom committed an act of war
against our country. Americans have
known wars—but for the past 136
years, they have been wars on foreign
soil, except for one Sunday in 1941.
Americans have known the casual-
ties of war—but not at the center of
a great city on a peaceful morning.
Americans have known surprise at-
tacks—but never before on thousands
of civilians. All of this was brought
upon us in a single day—and night
fell on a different world, a world
where freedom itself is under attack.
Americans have many questions
tonight. Americans are asking: Who
attacked our country? The evidence
we have gathered all points to a col-
lection of loosely affiliated terrorist
organizations known as al-Qaeda.
They are the same murderers indicted
for bombing American embassies in
Tanzania and Kenya, and responsible
for bombing the USS Cole.
Al-Qaeda is to terror what the
mafia is to crime. But its goal is not
making money; its goal is remaking
the world—and imposing its radical
beliefs on people everywhere.
The terrorists practice a fringe
form of Islamic extremism that has
been rejected by Muslim scholars
and the vast majority of Muslim cler-
ics—a fringe movement that perverts
the peaceful teachings of Islam. The
terrorists’ directive commands them
to kill Christians and Jews, to kill all
Americans, and make no distinction
among military and civilians, includ-
ing women and children.
Terrorism ✪ 103
This group and its leader—a per-
son named Osama bin Laden—are
linked to many other organizations
in different countries, including the
Egyptian Islamic Jihad and the Islamic
Movement of Uzbekistan. There are
thousands of these terrorists in more
than 60 countries. They are recruited
from their own nations and neigh-
borhoods and brought to camps in
places like Afghanistan, where they
are trained in the tactics of terror.
They are sent back to their homes
or sent to hide in countries around
the world to plot evil and destruc-
tion. The leadership of al-Qaeda
has great influence in Afghanistan
and supports the Taliban regime in
controlling most of that country. In
Afghanistan we see al-Qaeda’s vision
for the world. Afghanistan’s people
have been brutalized, many are starv-
ing and many have fled. . . .
The enemy of America is not our
many Muslim friends. It is not our
many Arab friends. Our enemy is a
radical network of terrorists and every
government that supports them.
Our war on terror begins with al-
Qaeda, but it does not end there.
It will not end until every terror-
ist group of global reach has been
found, stopped and defeated. . . .
After all that has just passed, all
the lives taken and all the possibili-
ties and hopes that died with them,
it is natural to wonder if America’s
future is one of fear.
Some speak of an age of terror. I
know there are struggles ahead and
dangers to face. But this country will
define our times, not be defined by
them.
As long as the United States of
America is determined and strong,
(continues)
104 ✪ Terrorism

(continued)

this will not be an age of terror. This
will be an age of liberty here and
across the world.
Great harm has been done to us.
We have suffered great loss. And in
our grief and anger we have found
our mission and our moment. . . .
Our nation, this generation, will lift
the dark threat of violence from our
people and our future. We will
rally the world to this cause by
our efforts, by our courage. We
“
will not tire, we will not falter
and we will not fail. . . .

Condolences to the U.S., Russian

President Vladimir Putin, 2001
In the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001, even nations such as Russia, which has often
had an antagonistic history with the United States,
reached out to Americans, offering comfort and
support in the face of the tragedy. President of the
Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin (2000–2008),
was the first to telephone President George W. Bush
(2001–2009) and offer condolences, signifying
Russia’s strong stance against international terror-
ism. Below is the text of a telegram Putin also sent,
as well as the text of an address Putin gave to the
American people.

I am deeply shocked by reports unpunished. The whole international

“ of the tragic events that have

occurred today on the terri-
tory of the USA. The series of
barbaric terrorist acts, directed
against innocent people, has evoked
our anger and indignation.
Please convey our most sincere
condolences to the relatives of the
victims of this tragedy, as well as to
all those injured, the whole American
people. We well understand your
grief and pain. The Russians have
themselves experienced the horror of
terror.
There is no doubt that such
inhuman actions cannot be left
community must rally in the fight
against terrorism.
The United States today faced an
unprecedented act of aggression on
the part of international terrorism.
First of all, I express sincere and
profound condolences to all the vic-
tims and the families of the dead.
The event that occurred in the US
today goes beyond national borders.
It is a brazen challenge to the whole
humanity, at least to civilized human-
ity. And what happened today is
added proof of the relevance of the
Russian proposal to pool the efforts
of the international community in
 Terrorism ✪ 105

the struggle against terrorism, that people of the United States on

plague of the 21st century.
Russia knows at first hand what
terrorism is. So, we understand as
well as anyone the feelings of the
American people. Addressing the
behalf of Russia I would like
to say that we are with you,
we entirely and fully share and
“
experience your pain. We sup-
port you.

Iraqi War Resolution (2002)

Before President George W. Bush (2001–2009)
could send American forces into Iraq, he had to se-
cure the support of the U.S. Congress. After present-
ing evidence to Congress that seemed to support its
argument that Saddam Hussein was a danger to the
United States, the Bush administration succeeded in
receiving this support. In October 2002, Congress
passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force
Against Iraq Resolution of 2002. This resolution,
also known as the Iraq War Resolution, advocated
that Bush work through the United Nations (UN) to
peacefully come to terms with Hussein’s resistance
to international inspections of his weapons stock-
piles. Failing a diplomatic solution, the resolution
granted Bush the power to use military force to ac-
complish his aims, power that was to become ex-
tremely controversial and also contribute to Bush’s
leaving office with one of the lowest approval rat-
ings of any president in U.S. history.

Whereas after the liberation Whereas the efforts of interna-

“ of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq en-

tered into a United Nations
sponsored cease-fire agree-
ment pursuant to which Iraq
unequivocally agreed, among other
things, to eliminate its nuclear,
biological, and chemical weapons
programs and the means to deliver
and develop them, and to end
its support for international
terrorism;
tional weapons inspectors, U.S. intel-
ligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors
led to the discovery that Iraq had
large stockpiles of chemical weapons
and a large scale biological weap-
ons program, and that Iraq had an
advanced nuclear weapons develop-
ment program that was much closer
to producing a nuclear weapon than
intelligence reporting had previously
indicated;

(continues)
106 ✪ Terrorism

(continued)

Whereas Iraq both poses a continu- determines to be necessary and

ing threat to the national security of
the United States and international
peace and security in the Persian Gulf
region and remains in material and
unacceptable breach of its interna-
tional obligations by, among other
things, continuing to possess and de-
velop a significant chemical and bio-
logical weapons capability, actively
seeking a nuclear weapons capability,
and supporting and harboring terror-
ist organizations; [. . . ]
Whereas it is in the national secu-
rity of the United States to restore in-
ternational peace and security to the
Persian Gulf region;
Now, therefore, be it resolved by
the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America
in Congress assembled,
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR
USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED
FORCES.
appropriate in order to
(1) defend the national security
of the United States against
the continuing threat posed
by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United
Nations Security Council
Resolutions regarding
Iraq. . . .
(c) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION
REQUIREMENTS. —
(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY
AUTHORIZATION.—Consistent
with section 8(a)(1) of the
War Powers Resolution, the
Congress declares that this
section is intended to
constitute specific statutory
authorization within the
meaning of section 5(b) of
the War Powers Resolution.
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER

(a) AUTHORIZATION. The President

REQUIREMENTS.—
Nothing in this
resolution supersedes
“
is authorized to use the Armed any requirement of the
Forces of the United States as he War Powers Resolution.

Speech at Annapolis, Israeli Prime Minister

Ehud Olmert (2007)
Palestinian terrorist groups such as Hamas contin-
ued to agitate for an independent state in the first
decade of the twenty-first century. With apparently
more interest in retaining power than in the safety
of civilian populations, such groups often used vio-
lent means, including firing rockets into Israel or
sending suicide bombers onto civilian buses.
In his speech delivered at the Annapolis Confer-
ence, a Middle East peace conference held on
November 27, 2007, at the U.S. Naval Academy in
Annapolis, Maryland, Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud
Olmert (2006–2009) expressed in very strong and

clear terms Israel’s desire to find a peaceful solution
to the ongoing conflict. He also expressed sympa-
thy for the decades-long suffering of Palestinians in
the territories and refugee camps.
The memory of the failures of
“ the near and distant past weighs
heavily on us. The dreadful ter-
rorism perpetrated by Palestin-
ian terrorist organizations has
affected thousands of Israeli citizens,
destroyed families and attempted to
disrupt the lives of all the citizens of
Israel. I witnessed it personally during
my term as Mayor of Jerusalem, at
times of bombings at cafés, buses and
recreational centers in Jerusalem and
other cities in the State of Israel.
The continued firing of Qassam
rockets against tens of thousands of
residents in the south of Israel, partic-
ularly in the city of Sderot, serves as a
warning—one which cannot be over-
looked. The absence of governmental
institutes and effective law-enforce-
ment mechanisms, the Hamas rule in
the Gaza Strip, the ongoing activity
of murderous organizations through-
out all the territories of the Palestin-
ian Authority, the absence of a legal
system which meets the basic criteria
of a democratic government—all
these are factors which deter us from
moving forward too hastily.
I do not ignore all the obstacles
which are sure to emerge along the
way. They are right in front of me.
I came here, despite the concerns
and doubts and hesitations, to say
to you, [Palestinian Authority] Presi-
dent Mahmoud Abbas, and through
you, to your people and to the entire
Arab world: it is time. We no longer,
and you no longer, have the privilege
of clinging to dreams which are
Terrorism ✪ 107
disconnected from the sufferings
of our peoples, the hardships they
experience daily and the burden of
living under ongoing uncertainty,
with no chance for change or hope.
We want peace. We demand an
end to terror, incitement and hatred.
We are willing to make a painful
compromise, rife with risks, in order
to realize these aspirations.
I came here today not to settle
historic accounts between us on what
caused the conflict and hatred and
what, for many years, stood in the
way of compromise and peace.
I wish to say, from the bottom of
my heart, that I know and acknowl-
edge the fact that alongside the con-
stant suffering which many in Israel
have experienced because of the
history, the wars, the terror and the
hatred towards us—a suffering which
has always been part of our lives in
our land—your people have also suf-
fered for many years, and some still
suffer.
For dozens of years, many Pales-
tinians have been living in camps,
disconnected from the environment
in which they grew, wallowing in
poverty, neglect, alienation, bitter-
ness, and a deep, unrelenting sense
of deprivation.
I know that this pain and depriva-
tion is one of the deepest founda-
tions which fomented the ethos of
hatred towards us.
We are not indifferent to this suf-
fering. We are not oblivious to the
tragedies you have experienced. I
(continues)
108 ✪ Terrorism
(continued)
believe that in the course of nego-
tiations between us we will find the
right way, as part of an international
effort in which we will participate,
to assist these Palestinians in finding
a proper framework for their future,
in the Palestinian state which will be
established in the territories agreed
upon. . . . Israel will be part of . . .
finding a solution to this problem. . . .
The agreement with you and its
gradual implementation, cautiously
Inaugural Address, President Barack
Obama, January 20, 2009
After Barack Obama was sworn in as the 44th pre-
sident of the United States, he touched upon the
many challenges facing the nation in the twenty-
first century. Among these was a controversial
war initiated by the previous administration and
terrorism.
and responsibly, is part of a much
wider complex, which will lead us,
hopefully, to peace with all the Arab
states. There is not a single Arab
state in the north, east or south with
which we do not seek peace. There
is no Muslim state with which we do
not want to establish diplo-
matic relations. Anyone who
wants peace with us, we say to
“
them, from the bottom of our
hearts: welcome!
In his inaugural address on Janu-
ary 20, 2009, President Barack
Obama (2009– ) offered to begin a
new dialogue with the nations of
the Middle East, saying, “To the
Muslim world, we seek a new way
forward, based on mutual interest
and mutual respect.”

I stand here today humbled by
“ the task before us, grateful for
the trust you have bestowed,
mindful of the sacrifices borne
by our ancestors. . . .
Forty-four Americans have now
taken the presidential oath. The
words have been spoken during ris-
ing tides of prosperity and the still
waters of peace. Yet, every so often
the oath is taken amidst gathering
clouds and raging storms. . . .
That we are in the midst of crisis
is now well understood. Our nation
is at war, against a far-reaching net-
work of violence and hatred. . . .
We will begin to responsibly leave
Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-
earned peace in Afghanistan. With
old friends and former foes, we will
work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear
threat, and roll back the specter of a
warming planet. We will not apolo-
gize for our way of life, nor will we
waver in its defense, and for those
who seek to advance their aims by
inducing terror and slaughtering in-
nocents, we say to you now that our
spirit is stronger and cannot be bro-
ken; you cannot outlast us, and we
will defeat you.
For we know that our patchwork
heritage is a strength, not a weak-
ness. We are a nation of Christians
and Muslims, Jews and Hindus—and
non-believers. We are shaped by
every language and culture, drawn
from every end of this Earth; and
because we have tasted the bitter
swill of civil war and segregation,
Terrorism ✪ 109
and emerged from that dark chapter
stronger and more united, we cannot
help but believe that the old hatreds
shall someday pass; that the lines of
tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the
world grows smaller, our common
humanity shall reveal itself; and that
America must play its role in ushering
in a new era of peace.
To the Muslim world, we seek a
new way forward, based on mutual
interest and mutual respect.
To those leaders around the globe
who seek to sow conflict, or blame
their society’s ills on the West—know
that your people will judge you on
what you can build, not what you
destroy. To those who cling to power
through corruption and deceit and
the silencing of dissent, know that
you are on the wrong side of
history; but that we will extend a
hand if you are willing to unclench
your fist. . . .
America. In the face of our com-
mon dangers, in this winter of our
hardship, let us remember these
timeless words. With hope and vir-
tue, let us brave once more the icy
currents, and endure what storms
may come. Let it be said by our chil-
dren’s children that when we were
tested we refused to let this journey
end, that we did not turn back nor
did we falter; and with eyes fixed on
the horizon and God’s grace
upon us, we carried forth that
great gift of freedom and
“
delivered it safely to future
generations.
 Glossary of Key Terms
anarchist One who opposes all
forms of government.
antiestablishment Opposed to
well-established social, political,
or economic principles or values.
brainwash To use various tech-
niques to force a person to adopt
or give up certain beliefs.
caliphate Religious and political
organization of the Muslim world
under one leader, known as the
caliph, which began in southwest
Asia in the seventh century.
capitalism An economic system in
which the means of production is
owned by individuals and busi-
ness, and decisions about what
goods to produce are made by the
free market.
capitalist One who believes in capi-
talism, free enterprise, and private
ownership of the means of pro-
duction—land, labor, and capital.
censorship The act of stopping in-
dividuals or groups from speak-
ing, writing, or publishing infor-
mation freely.
Central Intelligence Agency
(CIA) Federal agency in the
United States that engages in
secret intelligence operations
to protect the nation; now a part
of the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS).
civil disobedience Nonviolent re-
fusal to meet governmental
demands.
civil liberties Freedoms granted to
individuals (freedom of expres-
sion, belief, action, etc.).
coalition Temporary alliance to
achieve a goal such as winning a
war or an election.
110
communist One who follows the
teachings of communism and be-
lieves that all means of produc-
tion—land, labor, and capital—
should be owned by the people.
conservatives Individuals who are
opposed to rapid change in
society.
constitutional monarchy A gov-
ernment headed by a king or
queen.
counterfeiting The act of making
a copy, as in making fake copies
of coins and currency.
coup A sudden takeover of a
government.
democracy A government in
which the people govern them-
selves through elected
representatives.
destabilized Having undermined
the power of a government or a
leader by subversive or terrorist
acts.
dictator A government leader who
exercises absolute control over all
citizens and every aspect of their
lives.
diplomacy The practice of con-
ducting international relations in
a peaceful manner.
domestic terrorism Terrorism
committed within and against a
country by citizens of that
country.
dualistic Having two views or
interpretations.
federal government Term used to
describe the national government
of the United States.
fundamentalist One who advo-
cates a return to the “fundamen-

tals” (basics) of culture; character-
istics of Islamic fundamentalists
include support of jihad, hatred
of Western culture as a corrupt-
ing influence, and desire for
Islamic law.
guerrilla war A type of war that
involves a small group using un-
conventional weapons and meth-
ods against a larger, less mobile
opponent.
hacking Gaining unauthorized
entry into secure computer sys-
tems, often to cause harm or ob-
tain protected information.
Hadith The collective body of the
sayings or actions of the prophet
Muhammad.
heretical Of or pertaining to her-
esy, the rejection of the official
teaching of a religion.
hijacking The act of illegally taking
over of an aircraft, ship, or vehicle.
ideology A systematic group of
theories and concepts by which
an individual attempts to under-
stand, explain, and perhaps
change society.
individual liberties Rights such as
freedom of speech, freedom of as-
sembly, and freedom of the press.
infrastructure Constructed ele-
ments—such as roads, bridges,
electric plants and transmission
lines, and water and sewer lines—
that serve vital functions to large
numbers of people.
insurgency Uprising of militia
against an established government.
intellectual Person given to study,
reflection, and the exercise of the
mind.
intelligence agencies Organiza-
tions within a government
charged with information gather-
Terrorism ✪ 111
ing for the purposes of national
security.
intifada Violent uprising of Pales-
tinians in the West Bank and the
Gaza Strip to show opposition
to the Israeli presence in those
areas.
Islam Religion characterized by the
acceptance of the doctrine of
submission to Allah (God) and to
Muhammad as the chief and last
prophet of Allah.
Islamism An Islamic movement,
often characterized by moral con-
servatism, literal interpretation of
the Qur’an, and the attempt to
implement Islamic values in all
aspects of life.
Islamists Members or supporters
of an Islamic fundamentalist
movement.
leftist A person or group who sup-
ports the ideas of the political
Left, usually associated with
socialism.
libertarian Political philosophy
that values individual liberty
above all.
mail bomb An explosive device
sent through the mail and de-
signed to detonate upon
opening.
manifesto A public declaration of
principles or policies.
martyr A person who chooses to
suffer death rather than renounce
religious principles.
Marxist One who follows the po-
litical and economic philosophy
of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels,
in which the concept of class
struggle plays a central role in so-
ciety’s development from capital-
ism to a socialist and ultimately
classless society.
112 ✪ Terrorism
mass media Means of communica-
tion such as television, radio, and
newspapers.
militant A fighting, warring, or
aggressive person or group.
militia An army composed of ordi-
nary citizens rather than profes-
sional soldiers.
Muslim Follower of Islam, a major
world religion.
nationalist A person who has great
devotion to his or her nation; a
policy that promotes national in-
dependence or a strong national
government.
no-fly zone Airspace in which cer-
tain aircraft, especially military
aircraft, are forbidden to fly.
opium A highly addictive narcotic
drug prepared from the dried
juice of unripe pods of the opium
poppy.
parliament The branch of govern-
ment that holds legislative pow-
ers within a nation.
piety Religious devotion and rever-
ence to one’s God.
precedents In law, judicial deci-
sions that may be used as a stan-
dard in subsequent similar cases.
progressive Favoring reform or
change.
Qur’an The Holy Book of Islam.
rationalize To provide plausible
but ultimately invalid reasons for
a particular action.
rhetoric A style of speaking or
writing the specialized language
of a subject; also grandiose
language.
sabotage Any action carried out to
hinder or hurt some other course
of action.
Secret Service The agency of the
U.S. federal government that is
charged with protecting presi-
dents, vice presidents, presidents-
elect, certain presidential
candidates and their families, as
well as foreign heads of state visit-
ing the United States.
secular Of or pertaining to some-
thing nonreligious.
separatist Marked by a desire to
split from a national government
or state to form a new state.
sharia Islamic law.
Shiite A member of the branch of
Islam that regards Ali and his de-
scendants as the legitimate suc-
cessors to Muhammad, the last
and greatest prophet of Islam.
Silk Road An ancient trade route
between China and the Mediter-
ranean region.
Socialist Party A political party
that supports large amounts of
government control of society
and a welfare state that provides
the basic needs of the people.
suicide bombings Incidents in
which individuals blow them-
selves up in a public place.
survivalist One who prepares for
large-scale disasters of various
kinds.
taboos Actions or beliefs that are
forbidden by a society’s cultural
norms and values.
terror cell A secret group of indi-
viduals organized to commit acts
of terrorism.
theocracy A type of government
headed by religious leaders.
totalitarian Of or relating to a
form of government in which
the political authority exercises
absolute control over all aspects
of life.
tyranny Form of government in
which power is maintained by
oppressive action.
 Selected Bibliography
Akhahenda, Elijah F. When Blood and
Tears United a Country: The Bombing
of the American Embassy in Kenya.
Lanham, Md.: University Press of
America, 2002.
Andryszewski, Tricia. Terrorism in Amer-
ica. Headliners. Brookfield, Conn.:
Millbrook Press, 2002.
———. The Militia Movement in America
Before and After Oklahoma City.
Brookfield, Conn.: Millbrook Press,
1997.
Baker, David. The Department of Home-
land Security. Vero Beach, Fla.: Rourke
Pub, 2006.
———. Hijacking & Security. Vero Beach,
Fla.: Rourke Pub, 2006.
———. Infiltration & Spying. Vero Beach,
Fla.: Rourke Pub, 2006.
Bar, Shmuel. Warrant for Terror: Fatwas
of Radical Islam and the Duty of
Jihad. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Little-
field, 2006.
Barrett, Jane. “Court finds 21 guilty of
Madrid train bombings.” 31 October
2007. Reuters. Available online. URL:
http://www.reuters.com/article/
newsOne/idUSL308491320071031?
sp=true
Bawer, Bruce. While Europe Slept: How
Radical Islam Is Destroying the West
from Within. New York: Doubleday,
2006.
Brewer, Paul. September 11 and Radical
Islamic Terrorism. Milwaukee, Wis.:
World Almanac Library, 2006.
Brisard, Jean-Charles, and Damien Marti-
nez. Zarqawi: The New Face of Al-
Qaeda. New York: Other Press, 2005.
Burnett, Betty. The Attack on the USS
Cole in Yemen on October 12, 2000.
New York: Rosen Publishing Group,
2003.
Byers, Ann. Lebanon’s Hezbollah. New
York: Rosen Publishing Group, 2003.
113
Calvert, John. Islamism: A Documentary
and Reference Guide. Westport,
Conn.: Greenwood Press, 2008.
Carlisle, Rodney P. September 11, 2001.
New York: Collins, 2007.
Chayes, Sarah. The Punishment of
Virtue: Inside Afghanistan After the
Taliban. New York: Penguin Press,
2006.
Cockburn, Patrick. Muqtada: Muqtada
Al-Sadr, the Shia Revival, and the
Struggle for Iraq. New York: Scribner,
2008.
Doak, Robin S. Conflicts in Iraq and Af-
ghanistan. Milwaukee, Wis.: World
Almanac Library, 2007.
Docalavich, Heather. UN Action Against
Terrorism: Fighting Fear. Philadel-
phia: Mason Crest Publishers, 2007.
Donohoe, Helen. Terrorism: A Look at
the Way the World Is Today. North
Mankato, Minn.: Stargazer Books,
2006.
Fallows, James M. Blind into Baghdad:
America’s War in Iraq. New York:
Vintage Books, 2006.
Ferguson, Amanda. The Attack Against
the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and
Tanzania. New York: Rosen Publish-
ing Group, 2003.
Feuerlicht, Roberta Strauss. America’s
Reign of Terror: World War I, the Red
Scare, and the Palmer Raids. New
York: Random House, 1971.
Finan, Christopher M. From the Palmer
Raids to the Patriot Act: A History of
the Fight for Free Speech in America.
Boston: Beacon Press, 2007.
Fiscus, James W. America’s War in Af-
ghanistan. New York: Rosen Publish-
ing Group, 2004.
Frank, Mitch. Understanding September
11th: Answering Questions About
the Attacks on America. New York:
Viking, 2002.
114 ✪ Terrorism
Fridell, Ron. Terrorism: Political Violence
at Home and Abroad. Berkeley
Heights, N.J.: Enslow, 2001.
Galleani, Luigi, and Barry Pateman.
Anarchy Will Be!: Selected Writings of
Luigi Galleani. Edinburgh: AK Press,
2006.
Gay, Kathlyn. Silent Death: The Threat of
Chemical and Biological Terrorism.
Brookfield, Conn.: Twenty-first Cen-
tury Books, 2001.
Gerdes, Louise I. Rogue Nations. Detroit:
Greenhaven Press, 2006.
Gottfried, Ted. Homeland Security Ver-
sus Constitutional Rights. Brookfield,
Conn.: Twenty-first Century Books,
2003.
Gunderson, Cory Gideon. Terrorist
Groups. Edina, Minn.: ABDO Pub. Co,
2004.
Haddad, Yvonne Yazbeck, and Barbara
Freyer Stowasser. Islamic Law and the
Challenges of Modernity. Walnut
Creek, Calif.: AltaMira Press, 2004.
Hampton, Wilborn. September 11, 2001:
Attack on New York City. Cambridge,
Mass.: Candlewick Press, 2003.
Hassig, Susan M., and Zawiah Abdul Latif.
Somalia. New York: Marshall Caven-
dish Benchmark, 2008.
Haugen, David M. Islamic Fundamental-
ism. At issue. Detroit: Greenhaven
Press, 2008.
———. National Security. Detroit: Green-
haven Press, 2007.
Haugen, David M., and Susan Musser. Can
the War on Terrorism Be Won? De-
troit: Greenhaven Press, 2007.
Hiber, Amanda. Should Governments
Negotiate with Terrorists? Detroit:
Greenhaven Press, 2008.
Hinton, Kerry. Terrorist Attacks: A Practi-
cal Survival Guide. New York: Rosen
Publishing Group, 2006.
Ibrahim, Raymond, Ayman Zawahiri, and
Osama Bin Laden. The Al-Qaeda
Reader. New York: Doubleday, 2007.
Isaacs, April. Critical Perspectives on Al
Qaeda. Critical anthologies of nonfic-
tion writing. New York: Rosen Pub-
lishing Group, 2006.
Katz, Samuel M. At Any Cost: National
Liberation Terrorism. Minneapolis,
Minn.: Lerner Publications, 2004.
———. Jerusalem or Death: Palestinian
Terrorism. Minneapolis, Minn.: Lerner
Publications, 2004.
———. Jihad: Islamic Fundamentalist Ter-
rorism. Minneapolis, Minn.: Lerner
Publications Co, 2004.
———. U.S. Counterstrike: American Coun-
terterrorism. Minneapolis, Minn.: Le-
rner Publications, 2005.
Keeley, Jennifer. Deterring and Investi-
gating Attack: The Role of the FBI and
CIA. San Diego, Calif.: Lucent Books,
2004.
Koestler-Grack, Rachel A. The Depart-
ment of Homeland Security. New
York: Chelsea House, 2007.
Kowalski, Kathiann M. A Pro/Con Look
at Homeland Security: Safety Vs. Lib-
erty After 9/11. Berkeley Heights, N.J.:
Enslow, 2008.
Lee, Nancy, Lonnie Schlein, and Mitchel
Levitas. A Nation Challenged: A Visual
History of 9/11 and Its Aftermath.
New York: Scholastic Nonfiction,
2002.
Lewis, Bernard. The Crisis of Islam: Holy
War and Unholy Terror. New York:
Modern Library, 2003.
Mason, Paul. Israel and Palestine. Tarry-
town, N.Y.: Marshall Cavendish Bench-
mark, 2008.
Meltzer, Milton. The Day the Sky Fell: A
History of Terrorism. New York: Ran-
dom House, 2002.
Miles, Hugh. Al-Jazeera: The Inside Story
of the Arab News Channel That Is
Challenging the West. New York:
Grove Press, 2005.
Napoleoni, Loretta. Insurgent Iraq: Al
Zarqawi and the New Generation.
New York: Seven Stories Press, 2005.
El-Nawawy, Mohammed, and Adel Iskan-
der. Al-Jazeera: How the Free Arab
News Network Scooped the World and

Changed the Middle East. Cambridge,
Mass.: Westview, 2002.
Paul, Michael. Oklahoma City and Anti-
Government Terrorism. Milwaukee,
Wis.: World Almanac Library, 2006.
Pellowski, Michael. The Terrorist Trial of
the 1993 Bombing of the World Trade
Center: A Headline Court Case. Berke-
ley Heights, N.J.: Enslow, 2003.
Perliger, Arie. Middle Eastern Terrorism.
The Roots of Terrorism. New York:
Chelsea House, 2006.
Porterfield, Jason. Terrorism, Dirty
Bombs, and Weapons of Mass Destruc-
tion. New York: Rosen Publishing
Group, 2005.
Romero, Anthony D., and Dina Temple-
Raston. In Defense of Our America:
The Fight for Civil Liberties in the Age
of Terror. New York: William Morrow,
2007.
Rosaler, Maxine. Hamas: Palestinian
Terrorists. New York: Rosen Publish-
ing Group, 2003.
Ross, Stewart. Witness to History: The
Arab-Israeli Conflict. Chicago: Heine-
mann Library, 2004.
Rushing, Josh, and Sean Elder. Mission Al-
Jazeera: Build a Bridge, Seek the
Truth, Change the World. New York:
Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.
Scheppler, Bill. The USA Patriot Act: Anti-
terror Legislation in Response to 9/11.
New York: Rosen Publishing Group,
2006.
Sonder, Ben. The Militia Movement:
Fighters of the Far Right. New York: F.
Watts, 2000.
Terrorism ✪ 115
Stewart, Gail B. Life Under the Taliban.
San Diego, Calif.: Lucent Books,
2005.
———. The London Transit System Bomb-
ings. Detroit: Lucent Books/Thomson
Gale, 2006.
Tamimi, Azzam. Hamas: A History from
Within. Northampton, Mass.: Olive
Branch Press, 2007.
Tanner, Stephen. Afghanistan: A Military
History from Alexander the Great to
the Fall of the Taliban. New York: Da
Capo Press, 2002.
Temple-Raston, Dina. The Jihad Next
Door: The Lackawanna Six and
Rough Justice in an Age of Terror.
New York: PublicAffairs, 2007.
Torr, James D. Civil Liberties in the War
on Terrorism. San Diego, Calif.: Lucent
Books, 2004.
———. Responding to Attack: Firefighters
and Police. San Diego: Lucent Books,
2004.
Uschan, Michael V. Suicide Bombings
in Israel and Palestinian Terrorism.
Milwaukee, Wis.: World Almanac
Library, 2006.
Woolf, Alex. Why Are People Terrorists?
Exploring Tough Issues. Chicago: Rain-
tree, 2005.
Wright, Lawrence. The Looming Tower:
Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11. New
York: Knopf, 2006.
Zayyat, Muntasir. The Road to Al-Qaeda:
The Story of Bin Laden’s Right-
Hand Man. London: Pluto Press,
2004.
 Index
Page numbers in boldface indicate topics covered in depth in the A to Z section of the
book.
3/11 attacks, 61–63
7/7 attacks, 59–61
9/11 attacks. See September
11 attacks
A al-Sadr, Maqtada, 49
Abbas, Mahmoud, 37, 38, 42
Abu Nidal Organization, 95
Afghanistan. See also
Pakistan; Taliban;
individual leaders
about, 9–13
and bin Laden, Osama,
25–27
societal tolerance in, 4
Soviet invasion of, 17,
63–64
U.S. invasion of, 28, 50, 54,
56–57, 58, 94
U.S. missile strikes on, 59
Al Jazeera, 13–15, 23, 26–27,
59, 61
al Qaeda. See also al-Zarqawi,
Abu Musab; al-Zawahiri,
Ayman; bin Laden,
Osama; September 11
attacks
about, 15–17
and Afghanistan, 12–13
in Baghdad, 21
establishment of, 10, 12,
64
and fundamentalism,
53–54
and Iraqi War, 46–47,
49–50
Istanbul bombings, 55
and Jemaah Islamiyah, 22
and jihad, 56
Kenya and Tanzania
bombings, 57–59
Madrid bombings, 62
in Pakistan, 70–71
and Richard Reid, 86
sleeper cells of, 87
Sunni membership of, 94
USS Cole bombing, 96–97
Western culture,
disapproval of, 6
al-Banna, Hassan, 53
alerts, national, 32–33
al-Saqa, Loai, 55
al-Zarqawi, Abu Musab, 17–
18, 22, 50
al-Zawahiri, Ayman, 12, 17,
19–20, 25, 35, 87
American Taliban, 20
Animal Liberation Front
(ALF), 33–34
Arab League, 73
Arafat, Yasir, 37, 38, 41,
71–75
ar-Harithi, Abu Ali, 97
Aum Shinrikyo, 99
B Earth Liberation Front (ELF),
Ba’asyir, Abu Bakar, 23
Ba’ath Party, 48–49
Baghdad, 21–22
Bali attacks, 22–24
Battle of Gaza, 36–38
Bhutto, Benazir, 69, 70
bin Laden, Osama. See also al
Qaeda
about, 24–27
Bali attacks, 22–23
establishment of al Qaeda,
10, 12, 64
fatawa issued by, 35
and jihad, 56
support of mujahideen, 10
and the Taliban, 12, 25–
27, 90
and weapons of mass
destruction, 99
biological weapons, 98
Blair, Tony, 60
Bush, George W., 27–29, 75,
83, 84–85, 92, 99. See
also Iraqi War
116
C
Cheney, Richard B., 48, 85
civil disobedience, 34
civil liberties, 2–3, 7, 32–33,
75–76, 78, 83, 87
Clinton, Bill, 57, 59, 84
Cole (ship), 96–97
counterfeiting, 31
cyberterrorism, 29–30
D
DeFreeze, Donald, 89
Department of Homeland
Security (DHS), 30–33,
83
E
Earth First! 34
33–34
ecoterrorism, 33–34
Euskadi Ta Askatasuna
(ETA), 62
F
Fatah, 38, 42, 72, 73
fatwa, 25, 34–35
Feingold, Russ, 76
Foley, Laurence, 18
Foster, Marcus, 89
Freedom Tower, 99–100
fundamentalism. See Islamic
fundamentalism
G
Galleani, Luigi, 66–67
Gaza Strip and the West
Bank, 36–38. See also
Hamas; Palestine
Liberation Organization
(PLO)
Geneva Conventions, 39

Giuliani, Rudolph, 81, 82
Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, 28,
38–41
guerrilla warfare
in Iraq, 21–22, 46, 48
in Lebanon, 43
and Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO), 72,
74
in Somalia, 88
and Soviet occupation, 10,
17, 63–64
of the Taliban, 90
H and Western culture, 6, 51
Hadith, 34, 35, 51
Hamas, 38, 41–42, 53–54,
56, 74–75. See also Gaza
Strip and the West Bank
hate crimes, 83
Hearst, Patricia, 89–90
history of terrorism, 1–2, 93
Hitler, Adolf, 2
Hizbollah, 17, 42–43, 44,
53–54, 56, 94
Hussain, Hasib Mir, 61
Hussein, Saddam, 21–22, 28,
45–50, 84, 99. See also
Iraq
I mujahideen
Ilhan, Harun, 55
intifadas, 37–38, 41–42
Iran
about, 42–43
as “Axis of Evil,” 28
Iranian Hostage Crisis,
44–45
Iranian Revolution, 10,
44–45, 53–54
Iraq, war with, 99
societal tolerance in, 4
terrorist organizations in,
95
weapons of mass
destruction in, 98
Iranian Hostage Crisis, 44–45
Iranian Revolution, 10, 44–
45, 53–54
Iraq. See also Hussein,
Saddam
and al-Zarqawi, 18
Baghdad, 21–22
and Bush, George W.,
27–29
Iran, war with, 99
Iraqi War, 21, 45–50
U.S. invasion of, 54, 56–57,
59
Iraqi War, 21, 45–50
Irish Republican Army (IRA),
61
Islam. See also jihad; Qur’an
basic tenets of, 51–52
branches of, 22, 23, 34, 94
defense of, 23, 27, 84, 94
fatwa, 34–35
perversion of, 92
and societal tolerance, 4–5
Islamic Courts Union (ICU),
88
Islamic fundamentalism, 5–6,
16, 24, 50–55, 65, 83, 94
Islamic Jihad, 19
Islamist Combat Group, 62
Israel, 3–5, 16, 36–38, 42–
43. See also Palestine
Liberation Organization
(PLO)
Istanbul bombings, 55
J Nichols, Terry, 68
Jemaah Islamiyah, 22–23
jihad, 25, 41, 56–57. See also
K O
Kaczynski, Theodore John,
95–96
Karzai, Hamid, 12
Kenya bombings, 57–59
Khan, Mohammed Daoud,
9–10
Khan, Mohammed Sifique,
61
Khomeini, Ruhollah, 35, 44–
45, 53, 56
Ku Klux Klan, 1–2
Kuwait, 47
L Palestine Liberation
Lebanon, 42–43, 71–75
Lincoln, Abraham, 31
Lindh, John Walker, 20
Lindsay, Germaine, 61
Little, Russell, 89
London bombings, 59–61
Terrorism ✪ 117
M
Madrid bombings, 61–63
martyrdom, 16, 53, 68, 69
Mawdudi, Abdul Ala, 56
McVeigh, Timothy, 68
media, 13–15, 93, 95
Milestones (Qutb), 53
Mohammed, Khalid, 84
monkey-wrenching, 33
mujahideen, 63–64. See also
jihad
mullah, 44, 64
Musharraf, Pervez, 69
Muslim Brotherhood, 9, 19,
41, 53
N
national alerts, 32–33
National Commission on
Terrorist Acts, 84–85
National Security Entry-Exit
Registration System,
32
New York City attack
(1920), 65–67
New York Times, 95
Northern Alliance, 11, 12,
20, 64
nuclear weapons, 98–99
Obama, Barack, 83–84
Oklahoma City Bombing,
67–68
Omar, Mohammed, 11,
64–65
Oslo Accords, 36, 38, 73,
74
P
Pahlavi, Mohammad Reza,
44–45, 53
Pakistan, 68–71. See also
Afghanistan
Organization (PLO), 36–
37, 41, 71–75, 95. See
also Arafat, Yasir; Gaza
Strip and the West Bank;
Israel
Palestinian Authority (PA),
36–38, 42
118 ✪ Terrorism
Patriot Act, 75–76, 83, 87.
See also September 11
attacks
Pennsylvania plane crash.
See September 11
attacks
Pentagon, 77–78, 81
People’s Democratic Party of
Afghanistan (PDPA), 63,
64
Persian Gulf War, 16, 47
Powell, Colin, 48
Q Pennsylvania. See
Qur’an
and fatwa, 34–35
and jihad, 56, 57
Muslim belief in, 5
strict interpretation of, 4–
5, 50–55
Qutb, Sayyid, 53
R in Iraq, 21, 48
radiological weapons, 98
Reid, Richard Colvin, 86
religion. See Islam; Islamic
Fundamentalism
Remiro, Joseph, 89
Rushdie, Salman, 35
S (PLA), 89–90
Sadat, Anwar El, 19
Samudra, Imam, 23
Sea Shepherd Conservation
Society, 34
Secret Service, 30–31
September 11 attacks. See
also al Qaeda; Patriot
Act; World Trade
Center, One
about, 78–86 enforcement of Qur’an, 4
and al-Zawahiri, Ayman, 20 and Omar, Mohammed,
bin Laden’s remarks on, 64–65
26–27 Taliban, American, 20
and Bush, George W., Tanweer, Shehzad, 61
27–28 Tanzania bombings, 57–59
drama of, 93–94 terrorist organizations,
sleeper cells in, 87 93–95
shoe bomber, 86 torture of prisoners, 40–41
Shuqairi, Ahmad, 72 Turkey, 55
sleeper cells, 86–88 Twin Towers, 78–81
Soltysik, Patricia, 89
Somalia, 88–89
Somerset County, U
unabomber, 95–96
September 11 attacks USS Cole bombing, 96–97
suicide bombers
in Bali attacks, 22, 23
and Benazir Bhutto, 70 W
drama of, 93 Wahhabism, 52
in Gaza Strip and the West Wall Street Bombing, 65–67
Bank, 37 Washington Post, 95
of Hamas, 41 weapons of mass
introduction of, 88 destruction, 28, 46,
98–99
in Istanbul bombings, 55 West Bank and Gaza Strip,
in London bombings, 59, 36–38
59–61 Western culture, disapproval
in Madrid bombings, 62 of, 5–6, 16, 29, 51, 59
and martyrdom, 16 World Trade Center, One,
in Pakistan, 69 99–100. See also
in Somalia, 88 September 11 attacks
Symbionese Liberation Army World War II, 2, 72, 98
Z
T Zardari, Asif Ali, 69, 70
Taliban. See also Afghanistan Zionism, 71–72
about, 9–13, 90–93
and bin Laden, Osama, 12,
25–27
defeat of mujahideen, 64
deposal of, 28