s.242 (quot.ayatollah M.Mutahhari - Jihad)

The shahid can be compared to a candle whose job is to burn out and get extinguished in order to shed light for the benefits of others. The shuhada' are the candles of society. They burn themselves out and illuminate society. If they do not shed light, no organization can shine...The shuhada' are the illuminators of society. Had they not shed their light on the darkness of despotism and suppression, humanity would have made no progress...


s.246

For all the virulence of his rhetoric and his assertion of the need for Islamic revolution, which reminds of Mawdudi or Qutb, Khomeini was in essence a traditional Muslim moral teacher. Yes, corrupt regime must be overthrown. The war against ´Iraq was not just directed against Saddam but against "all unbelief". But why was this necessary? It was because of the traditional duty of the Muslim scholar: "when evil innovations appear, it is the duty of the scholar" to condemn them. This was a form of the traditional requirement to command right and forbid wrong, which created in its wake "a wave of broad opposition" on the part of "all religiously-inclined and honourable people".


s.297

Political violence was legitimized in moral and religious terms as defensive jihad, since its paramount aim was the self-preservation. Before we analyse the means, however, we need to consider the priority that Hizbullah placed on the ends, which represented a complete reversal of the Sunni priority as defined by Faraj in The Neglected Duty. For Faraj, only when society was sufficiently Islamicized and Islamic rule was instituted, could the external enemy be confronted. Conversely, for Hizbullah, Shi´a-led resistance against Israel took primacy over confrontation of the Gemayel regime. The external enemy must first be confronted; only then could society be freed...


s.318 (quot.E.Said - Palestinians under Siege)

The most demoralizing aspect of the Zionist-Palestinian conflict is the almost total opposition between mainstream Israeli and Palestinian points of view. We were dispossessed and uprooted in 1948; they think they won independence and that the means were just. We recall that the land we left and the territories we are trying to liberate from military occupation are all part of our national patrimony; they think it is theirs by biblical fiat and diasporic affiliation. Today, by any conceivable standards, we are the victims of the violence; they think they are. There is simply no common ground, no common narrative, no possible are of genuine reconciliation. Our claims are mutually exclusive. Even the notion of a common life shared in the same small piece of land is unthinkable. Each of us thinks of separation, perheps even of isolating and forgetting the other.

The greater moral pressure to change is on the Israelis, whose military actions and unwise peace strategy derive from a preponderance of power on their side and an unwillingness to see that they are laying up years of resentment and hatred on the part of Muslims and Arabs. Ten years from now [od r.2000 - pozn.a.c.] there will be demographic parity between Arabs and Jews in historical Palestine: what then? Can tank deployments, roadblocks and house demolitions continue as before?


http://www.amazon.com/Jihad-Quran-Laden-Richard-Bonney/dp/1403933723