Pages

Monday, 6 June 2011

Understanding Islamic Terrorism

By Bob Waldrep

In the wake of the tragic events of September 11, and as evidence mounted that Islamic extremists committed the acts, the Muslim community in the United States quickly moved to distance itself from the terrorists. In stark contrast, Muslims in many parts of the Middle East could be seen on television news programs wildly cheering the attack on America. Those unfamiliar with Islam suddenly had a deep interest in knowing which of these really represented Islam.



In the first days after the attack, uncertainty bred fear and contempt in some Americans who lashed out at an innocent Muslim community. Many Muslims, fearing for their safety, would no longer go out in public. Political leaders and the media joined Muslim leaders in trying to educate the general public about the differences between “true” Muslims and those who committed these terrible crimes.






Despite these assurances and having moved several months past the attacks, the debate continues as to whether Islam is a “religion of peace” or does, in fact, support the terrorist actions that have taken so many innocent lives in America and throughout the world, in the name of Allah. This debate will no doubt continue for some time. Our purpose here is not to resolve that issue but to try and better understand the beliefs of our Muslim neighbors and our responsibility as Christians to reach out to them with the gospel.



Estimates of the Muslim population in the U.S. run anywhere from 1.5 to 6 million (4-6 million is the most common estimate) and includes both immigrants and converts. The African-American community accounts for over 40% of the Muslim population. Claims on the numbers of Mosques or centers in the U.S go as high as 3,000, and at the current growth rates, it is projected that the Islamic population will soon, if not already, exceed the Jewish population, becoming second in size to Christians (Protestant and Catholic).
The strategy of Muslims in the West is to convert Americans to Islam. Their methodology is certainly not through terrorist acts but primarily through public forums and personal contacts or dawa (literally, “invitation”), the Muslim equivalent of evangelism.



Long before September 11, 2001, Muslims in the U.S. realized that Islam was associated with terrorism and they set about to distinguish “moderate” Islam from that of Muslim “extremists,” “fundamentalists” and terrorists. Moderates claim Muslim extremists have given the wrong impression of Islam and contend that to equate religious terrorism and ethnic cleansing with Islam is like defining Christianity by David Koresh or Timothy McVeigh. The truth probably lies somewhere in between, for both history and fundamentalist theology present functional problems for Muslims to explain.


As a result of the recent terrorist attacks and the subsequent “War on Terrorism,” the media and many Americans have probably overly concerned themselves with the concept of jihad, or “holy war.” While Osama bin Laden and other terrorist leaders have certainly called for a jihad, none has materialized, because most moderate and Western Muslims emphasize the peaceful teachings of Islam and de-emphasize the jihad advocated by the terrorists.


Generally, Muslims believe there are two types of jihad: a “lesser” and a “greater.” Muhammad is said to have taught that warfare to destroy the infidel is actually a “lesser” jihad. Instead the Muslim should practice the “greater” jihad, which is the war every man must wage within himself to follow Allah and do what is right. In Middle Eastern countries the emphasis certainly seems to be on the “lesser” jihad. However, Muslims in democratic countries, and Western Muslims in particular, currently tend to interpret jihad as the “greater” jihad.



This is important to consider in light of the fact that, although the Muslim population worldwide numbers over 1 billion and even though the spiritual center of Islam remains in the Middle East, less than 1/8 of the Muslim population lives there. In fact, non-Arab Muslims outnumber Arab Muslims almost three to one with over 1/2 of all Muslims living in Asia. The four countries with the largest Islamic populations are all outside the Middle East: Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and India. Even in traditionally "Christian" Europe, Islam has become a significant force.

The Sects of Islam

Upon Muhammad’s death, two major sects of Islam developed: the Sunni and the Shi’ite (or Shia). While there are other minor sects today, these two groups still constitute the majority of Islam. The Sunni, which comprise 80-90% of all Muslims, follow the written traditions that consist of the Qur’an, the Sunnah (stories of Muhammad’s conduct, and the source of their name) and the Hadith (Muhammad’s non-Qu’ranic sayings). The Shi'ite sect is dominant in Iran, and until the 9th century believed God spoke through the Imam, a divinely appointed descendant of Ali, Muhammad’s cousin and son-in-law, through his grandson Al-Husayn. They believe the twelfth Imam did not die but that Allah took him away from human sight. It is believed that he will return as the Mahdi, the awaited Messianic figure who will bring the triumph of religion and herald the Last Judgment.



Some of the minor sects of Islam include the Sufis (a mystical group), the Druze (primarily in Lebanon, Syria and Northern Palestine), the Alawites (primarily in Syria), the Ahmadiyas (Pakistan), and the Wahhabis. The Wahhabis are found primarily in Saudia Arabia, and a strong legalistic group representing the radical wing of the Sunnis—terrorist Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban are followers of this sect.


Beliefs and Practices of Islam

Islam means “submission to the will of God.” The person who so submits is called a Muslim or “submissive one.” The religion of Islam is comprised of iman (“beliefs”) and deen (“practices”). While there are divergent sects of Islam, all of Islam recognizes five essential beliefs and practices, commonly called the “Five Pillars.”

 

The Five Pillars of Islam are:

  1. To recite the shahadah, a profession of faith in Islam asserting that “There is no deity except Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.” No person becomes a Muslim without reciting this.
  2. To pray (salat) five times a day: at dawn, midday, mid-afternoon, sunset, and two hours after sunset. Devout Muslims prepare for prayer with ceremonial ablutions (washings), the removal of shoes, and assuming correct postures, including facing Mecca.
  3. To fast (sawm) from sunup to sunset during the month of Ramadan, which begins when the moon reaches the crescent phase in the ninth month.
  4. To give alms (zakat), consisting of 2.5% of one’s income, to the poor and needy.
  5. To make the pilgrimage (hajj). Every able Muslim must make the trip to Mecca at least once in his lifetime. Each year millions of Muslims don the ihram, the white garments of the Islamic pilgrim, and make this trip during the twelfth month.
While knowing the basic beliefs of Islam is important to better understand the current status of Islam and the terrorist groups it has spawned, one must also have some understanding of its history.

The History of Islam

Though Muslims would claim that Adam was the first Muslim, historians and other non-Muslim scholars agree that the institutional religion of Islam cannot be found prior to Muhammad. Muhammad was born in 570 A.D. in Mecca, as a member of the Arabian Qurayish tribe, an influential tribe in the city of Mecca. Orphaned at age six, he lived with his grandfather until his death when Muhammad was eight. After that he lived with his uncle Abu Talib. At age twenty-five he married a wealthy widow, Khadijah, who was fifteen years his senior. They had two sons that died in infancy and four daughters who survived him.



Being born in Mecca was significant, for it was a center of commerce and also a religious center, boasting the presence of an important religious shrine, the Ka'aba. This is a cubical structure, which at Muhammad’s time contained 360 idols of Arabian pagan deities. Each Arab tribe had its own tutelary god, and made a yearly pilgrimage here to pay homage to this god. It is said that Muhammad, though exposed to these many deities, was spared from participating in the pagan activities in the life of Mecca.



As did many Arab men, Muhammad would go on an annual spiritual retreat to Mount Hira. At the age of forty, he was on just such a retreat when it is said that the angel Gabriel appeared to him. Initially he feared that this was a jinn (evil spirits of Arab folklore) trying to possess him. But after reporting it to his wife, she convinced him that it was actually God speaking to him and he should continue to listen. This led to many subsequent visions/visitations. His wife encouraged him to share these with others and he began to call people to worship the one true god, who he called Allah. These visitations would ultimately result in the Qur'an (“recitations”).



While Islam initially grew slowly, it was a steady growth. As Muhammad began to preach his message of one god, the majority of powerful and influential Meccans opposed it because they stood to loose much if the worship of only one god was popularized. Therefore, most of the first followers were young people of little or no social standing. In 622 A.D. Muhammad had to leave Mecca due to the opposition, and with a small band of followers went to Yathrib (Medina) some 200 miles to the north. This is known as Hijra—“the year of the flight”—and marks the beginning of the Islamic calendar. This same year both of his most trusted and influential confidants, his wife and uncle, died.



Because Medina was not a religious center, he found its people more open to his message and the religion began to increase in adherents. “So far as the prophet was concerned, there was absolutely no change in him from Mecca to Medina, except that in Medina external circumstances were favorable to him, something that he had longed for in Mecca.” These dedicated followers would fight many battles on his behalf, and by 630 A.D. they had gained control of Mecca. With over 10,000 men following him, Muhammad entered the city practically unopposed and cleansed the Ka'aba of its idols. Pardons were given to the majority of the city’s leaders and almost all Mecca became Muslim.
In 632 A.D. Muhammad died without having appointed a successor. A dispute over who should replace him quickly ensued and resulted in Islam dividing into the two major sects. The Sunnis insisted that Muhammad’s successor should be elected from the tribe of Muhammad, but the Shi'ites wanted his successor to come from his own family. As one authority explains it, “what basically distinguished Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims was the Shi’ite doctrine of the imamate. According to the Sunnites, the caliph, the elected successor of the Prophet, possessed political and military leadership but not Muhammad’s religious authority. In contrast, according to the Shi’ites, the imam (leader) is directly descended from the Prophet and is the sinless, divinely inspired political leader and religious guide of the community.” The real issue comes down to who interprets the law (shari’a). “Shi’ites claim that the imam does . . . Sunnites insist that interpretation comes from the consensus of the ulema, a group of religious scholars.”



Despite these developing factions, Islam would continue to advance, so that within 200 years of Muhammad’s death Islamic leaders had conquered most of the Arabian peninsula, Syria, Egypt, all of North Africa, most of Spain, and the Persian Empire, extending their rule to Kabul (present day capital of Afghanistan) and Kazakhstan. In 713 they even founded an isolated Islamic community in northern India.



This was a tremendous accomplishment, especially when you consider that the Arab world of Muhammad’s day consisted of tribal factions that had very little in common other than a common homeland and were constantly warring with one another. Through the religion of Islam, Muhammad “gave Arabs the idea of a unique and unified umma, or community, which consisted of all those whose primary identity and bond was a common religious faith and commitment, not a tribal tie. The umma was to be a religious and political community led by Muhammad for the achievement of God’s will on earth.”



United by a common faith and religious zeal, the followers of Islam were convinced of the necessity of jihad—“holy war.” “The Qur’an does not explicitly mention this subject, but because the Qur’an does suggest that God sent the Prophet to establish justice on earth, it follows that justice will take effect only where Islam triumphs.” However, the motivation for the spread of Islam cannot be reduced to so simplistic a reason as jihad. Obviously there were also other factors such as political and socio-economic considerations. To say that the religion of Islam grew in countries conquered by Muslim rulers is proof that the spreading of Islam was the sole reason for the conflict, would be like saying that the spread of the British Empire was motivated solely by a desire to spread Christianity. While it is true that Christianity followed British rule over conquered territories, it would be naïve to suggest that was the sole or primary motivation for the British conquest of other lands, and similarly naïve to make such a claim about Islam.



By the twelfth century Islam was in decline, due in part to a resurgence of tribal infighting and internal power struggles and from invasions by other powers such as the Turks, the Huns and the Mongols. Islamic rulers were also experiencing the difficulties of trying to rule over an extended empire with a diverse populous. This decline would continue into the modern era, and Islam was never able to return to the glory years of its vast united empire.
The umma, one of the keys to Islamic growth—particularly thorough jihad—finally fractured. “If one accepts the idea of God’s oneness and Muhammad’s claim to be his Prophet, then it follows that all authority comes from God through Muhammad. Within the umma, the law of God was discerned and applied through Muhammad. Thus, in the seventh century, Islam centralized authority, both political and religious, in Muhammad’s hands.” But with no prophet to unite the faithful, discord was inevitable.



The Islam of today no longer has that one voice, a unifying leader who can call all Islam into a united holy war. Thus it becomes extremely difficult, if not impossible, to cause the “all-out” jihad against the infidels that Islamic terrorists so stridently demand. The lack of response by Muslims globally to join bin Laden and other Muslim terrorists in jihad bears this out.
In his article “Muslim Ideology and Christian Apologetics,” Samuel P. Schlorff writes, “The Muslims began to experience setbacks and loss of territory as the vast empire began to disintegrate. In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the Muslim community experienced its darkest hour. It became politically fragmented, economically underdeveloped, and largely subservient to Western colonial powers. After the abolition of the caliphate in 1924, there was no longer a caliph governing the community anywhere, as required by Muslim ideology.” The great Muslim empire was now fragmented and very much of it under the control of “infidels.”



Schlorff continues, “About the middle of the twentieth century, Islam appeared to have turned a corner. In the decade following World War II, most Muslim countries became independent once again. Many adopted forms of government with a degree of continuity with Islamic Law but patterned mainly on Western political models, especially socialism . . . Most constitutions declared Islam to be the ‘Religion of the State’ . . . Few declared it to be the law of the land. The Western concept of the nation, defined in terms of the equality of its citizens, had widely replaced that of a universal ummah. Secularism was making inroads. All these things were in conflict with the Muslim ideal of a single community governed by a Muslim ruler, but they were accepted in hope of better things.”


In this context Muslim extremists have become part of the fabric of Islam, calling for a restoration of what they call “true” Islam. As author Randall Price points out, “After World War I, a fusion of religion and state that had existed as law in Muslim lands since the seventh century A.D. began to become more aggressively advocated in the interest of the purity of Islam. Having a Muslim population governed by a secular government that could be controlled by non-Muslim powers was considered an abomination . . . What was needed was a revival of revolutionary Islam, of jihadic extremism, to accomplish this unification.” The foundation was being laid for the successful development of the Islamic terrorist groups of today.


As these groups grow in number, their acts of hatred and vengeance increase as well. For them, Islam calls for a holy war against the United States and Israel and those who might support them. However, it is not limited to these, as is evidenced by the unjust treatment of fellow Muslims by the Taliban rulers in Afghanistan. The September 11th attacks and the current “War on Terrorism” have shown that the terrorist warrior, the mujahideen, spurred on by the call to jihad and the promise that paradise and its incumbent rewards are guaranteed those who die in battle for Allah, is committed unto the end.


Dr. Muqtedar Khan, an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Adrian College in Michigan and a moderate Muslim, finds this to be distasteful. He writes, “For over a decade we have watched as Muslims in the name of Islam have committed violence against other Muslims and other peoples. We have always found a way to reconcile the vast distance between Islamic values and Muslim practices by pointing out to the injustices committed upon Muslims by others. The point however is this—our belief in Islam and commitment to Islamic values is not contingent on the moral conduct of the US or Israel. And as Muslims can we condone such inhuman and senseless waste of life in the name of Islam?”


Let us hope that those Muslims who believe as Dr. Khan represent the prevailing opinion.

The New Age of Terrorism

A Commentary on Terrorism and Religion

by John W. Morehead

This is a CNN special report. This just in. The Center for Disease Control has just declared that an epidemic is widespread in Miami, Florida. Doctors have not yet diagnosed the specific cause of the rampant disease, but the illness initially resembles a chest cold that progresses into pneumonia-like symptoms. It then progresses rapidly into fever and shortness of breath. What is especially peculiar about this epidemic is that all the patients who have sought medical attention attended the Orange Bowl football game on New Year's Day. Authorities have asked that anyone who went to that game seek medical care if cold-like symptoms appear. Stay tuned to CNN for further developments on this story. Elsewhere in the news...


Terrorism has been defined as "the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives." While the 1980s saw a growth of politically inspired terrorism, the 1990s has seen a dramatic increase in terrorism motivated by a religious agenda. As a result, intelligence experts have claimed that we may well be witnessing an emerging trend and shift away from terrorism motivated by political ideology towards a dominant religious terrorism warranting a revision of our notions of the stereotypical terrorist organization. This trend has received some attention within the intelligence and law enforcement communities, and should be of particular interest to individuals and organizations involved in monitoring extremist and new religious groups and movements, especially with regards to the U.S. domestic terrorism threat.

A HISTORY OF RELIGION AND TERROR

The horrific attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, apparently perpetrated by well organized terrorists with ties to radical Muslim extremist groups, has America grappling with the threat of terrorism as never before. Unfortunately, the combination of religion and violence is not new in history. In fact, many English words used to describe terrorists and their actions, such as "zealot," "assassin" and "thug," derive from the names of religious groups. Yet in recent times, the religious motivation for terrorism has been overshadowed by "ethnic and nationalist separatist or ideologically motivated" political terrorism. While many secular terrorist groups do have religious elements, the political dimension is the predominant characteristic. This began to change in the 1980s with the rise of religious terrorism in the form of militant Islamic Shiite fundamentalism. As we will see, the shift toward terrorism motivated by religious considerations is one of the reasons for terrorism's increasing lethality.

DIFFERING FOUNDATIONS, DEADLY DIFFERENCES

RAND researcher Bruce Hoffman contrasts the ethical values of "secular political" terrorists with "religious political" terrorists, and notes that these differ radically in that for "holy terrorists...violence [is] first and foremost a sacramental act or divine duty executed in direct response to some theological demand or imperative." For such groups terrorism is a full time vocation and they take public credit for such acts as a means of influencing their perceived constituency on behalf of a goal with terrorism as the means to an end. By contrast, unlike "secular terrorists," religiously motivated groups have no external constituency for whom a terrorist act is designed to influence. Religious terrorists often act anonymously and for no one but themselves, which results in increased levels of violence and lethality. These differing ethical foundations for terrorism provide the basis for the disturbing trend over the last decade towards a willingness to use biological and chemical weapons, as well as the increasing potential for their use in the future.

HOLY TERROR'S NEW PLAYERS

Contrary to depictions in Western media, and popular stereotypes, religious terrorism is not limited to radical Islamic groups in the Middle East, and the U.S. domestic terrorist threat may lie closer to home. A few new religious groups and movements may pose the greatest threat. Before one is tempted to dismiss this thesis as alarmist and unwarranted, consider the following incidents:

In September 1984, 750 people became sick after eating in restaurants in The Dalles, Oregon. Investigators later learned that Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, the leader of the nearby religious commune of Rajneeshpuram, had ordered followers to spread the salmonella bacteria in restaurants in order to influence local elections. The event was thought to only be a trial run for a larger attack, and "resulted in the largest outbreak of foodborne disease" in the U.S. that year.

In 1987, a number of white supremacists, influenced by "Christian Identity teaching" (described below) were indicted for plotting to poison the municipal water supplies of two major American cities.

In March 1995, the Aum Shinrikyo ("Supreme Truth") sarin gas attack on Tokyo's subways killed 12 and injured more than 5,000 in March 1995. Despite the attempts by some to downplay the severity of Aum's activities, the Aum attack has the distinction of being the world's first mass-scale chemical terrorist attack. The group built a vast arsenal of biochemical and conventional arms, including mustard gas, anthrax, botulism, Q-fever, sarin nerve gas, and TNT. Aum also experimented with seismic weapons designed to trigger cataclysmic earthquakes in Japan, an idea dismissed by geologists but taken very seriously by the U.S. and Soviet militaries. While Aum appeared to meet its end with the arrest and trials of its founder, leadership and key members, recent news reports indicate the group is rebuilding and growing in membership. It poses a continued threat worth monitoring.

ACKNOWLEDGED POSSIBILITY

Admittedly, not every new religious group or movement should be considered a domestic terrorist threat to the U.S. Most do not exhibit violent tendencies or incorporate an eschatological emphasis (the theology of "last things," including the supernatural climax of human history) upon an apocalyptic vision which could be used to justify terrorism in a self-fulfilling prophecy of doomsday. But the real possibility for religious terrorism by a few such groups has not escaped the notice of those grappling with the challenge and complexities of national security. Michael Osterholm, state epidemiologist at Minnesota's Department of Health stated, "There is a growing number of millennium cults who believe the year 2000 could be the end of the Earth and should be the end of the Earth, and are actively pursuing ways to bring that about."


Osterholm's words are echoed by Jessica Stern, a former chemical and biological weapons specialist with the National Security Council: "These kinds of groups might turn to extreme violence and weapons of mass destruction because they believe Armageddon is coming...They want to hasten the appearance of the Messiah."


Even former Defense Secretary William Cohen said, "Regional aggressors, third-rate armies, terrorist cells, and even religious cults will wield disproportionate power" through the possible use of weapons of mass destruction [emphasis mine].

SOME WORTH WATCHING

Predicting who may commit an act of terrorism, and when, is a risky venture. Even so, given their doomsday eschatology, racist and/or anti-government rhetoric and activities, the following groups and movement are worth watching.


•House of Yahweh, founded by "Yisrayl" Hawkins, with branches in Odessa and Abilene, Texas. This group may have a large collection of weapons, they believe their group will play a major role in the coming War of Armageddon, and members of the group have been linked to Posse Comitatus, a radical, anti-government group connected to the racist Christian Identity movement.


•Nation of Yahweh, founded by Hulon Mitchell, Jr. (Yahweh ben Yahweh), in Miami, Florida. Although Mitchell is currently in prison for a murder conspiracy conviction, this militant black separatist group has a history of violence, including an incident in 1986 when Mitchell ordered the fire-bombing of a neighborhood, the sending of "death angels" to kill whites, and acts of retribution against blacks who interfered with Mitchell's business activities.17 The FBI has investigated this group in the past under terrorism guidelines established by the attorney general.


Nation of Islam under the leadership of Louis Farrakhan. This is another black separatist sect with militant tendencies. Although he has softened his rhetoric in recent years, Farrakhan has prophesied a doomsday for white America, including the total destruction of the country, while also calling for the establishment of a separate black territory in the U.S. He frequently makes anti-American statements in the media both in the U.S. and abroad, and has close ties to Libya and it's leader Qaddafi, a nation and leader known for supporting international acts of terrorism. He also has ties to El Rukn, a radical, black Muslim street gang in Chicago, which "reportedly offered to carry out terrorist operations in the United States on behalf of Libya in return for money."


Christian Identity Movement. Many of the episodes of terrorist violence in the U.S. have been perpetrated by white supremacists. They come from a variety of organizations, including neo-Nazi, Ku Klux Klan and the growing militia movement, with sympathizers found across the U.S. These white supremacists are radically anti-government, racist and anti-Semitic. The increasingly popular Christian Identity teaching is the ideological glue which holds a large segment of this movement of hate together:
The basic tenets of the Identity movement include the beliefs that Jesus Christ was not a Semite, but an Aryan; that the Lost Tribes of Israel are composed not of Jews, but of "blue eyed Aryans;" that white Anglo-Saxons and not Jews are the true "Chosen People;" and, that the United States is the "Promised Land."


The Christian Identity movement is of special concern given its emphasis upon a future racial and religious Armageddon, a holy war between Yahweh's Aryan race on the one side, and the Jews and other "sub-human races" on the other. Identity teachings are spreading rapidly through a growing number of hate groups, as well as undiscerning Christian fundamentalist churches in the South, Midwest and Pacific Northwest. It represents a powerful religious ideology who's teachings or teachers may have influenced both Timothy McVeigh, convicted and executed for the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, and the perpetrator(s) of the 1996 Centennial Olympic Park bombing in Atlanta.

INCREASED VIGILANCE

In commenting on the Aum gas attack in Tokyo, terrorism expert Bruce Hoffman stated, "We've definitely crossed a threshold. This is the cutting edge of hi-tech terrorism for the year 2000 and beyond. It's the nightmare scenario that people have quietly talked about for years coming true." It is also a scenario that may be repeated elsewhere, therefore the significance of Aum and other groups, must be noted and we would do well to learn the lessons in preparation for the possibility of similar incidents.


We have noted the current trend toward terrorism dominated by a religious imperative, coupled with the tendency towards increased violence and lethality. The FBI has also noted an increase in terrorist activities from right wing extremists and "special interest groups." These facts, combined with recent examples of terrorist acts carried out by new religious groups or movements, and the probable rise of new doomsday groups, as well as existing groups putting a new emphasis on doomsday eschatology give great cause for concern.


After investigating the Am attack (within the context of the global proliferation of weapons of mass destruction), a U.S. Senate investigative report asked:
'How does a fanatic [Am and its founder, Shoko Asahara], intent on creating Armageddon, with relatively unlimited funds and a world-wide network of operatives, escape notice of Western intelligence and law-enforcement agencies outside of Japan?'


The answer was as direct as it was alarming. 'They simply were not on anybody's radar screen,' replied a top U.S. counter-terrorism officer.


Not on anybody's radar screen? Apparently we need a new radar.
While the intelligence, defense, disaster response and medical communities continue to grapple with the implications of the Aum, and now World Trade Center attacks, and the prospect for future acts of domestic terrorism, those who monitor new religious groups and movements have an important contribution to make. Here those who labor in this field must give due recognition to the present trend and future prospects presented by such groups. While special attention is usually paid to the possibility of a new religious group's self-destruction in the wake of the Jonestown, the Branch Davidians, Solar Temple and Heaven's Gate tragedies, as we have seen, consideration must also be given to the possibility that some groups may direct acts of violence outside the group. While it may be that "[i]n dealing with unconventional groups that have both religious and political agendas, government officials and law enforcement agents have not always been sufficiently sensitive to their [religious] self-definitions," hopefully those monitoring extremist, fringe and new religious movements and groups can provide a needed corrective. With an increased vigilance, we may be able not only to stem the tide of false teaching and abusive practices, but may save lives as well.