Fact: terrorists scare the hell out of me.
I do not understand the drive to slaughter other human beings in the name of a holy war. As far as I’m concerned, mass murder seems to contradict the tenets of love, forgiveness, and making an effort to do good for others that I learned in ten years of CCD.
Of course, I’ve read the Bible extensively since then and have studied other religions, learning to my grief and eventual cynicism that there’s an unfortunate correlation between organized religion and violence. From the Crusades to the Israeli-Palestinian mess to 9/11 and everywhere in between, shedding the blood of the innocent as a necessary by-product of God’s glory has been a recurring theme.
Even with that knowledge, however, it’s still possible to be taken by surprise at the ingenuity—and truly depraved nature—of terrorists.
Especially when they’re women.
I know that sounds sexist, that extremist women are just as likely to exist as extremist …
… men, that the idea of women as nurturers completely freaked out by bloody violence is a stereotype that I, as a modern-day feminist, should at the very least not buy into, but … well, there it is.
The story of Amina Farah Ali and Hawo Mohamed Hassan, both U.S. citizens of Somali descent, is the latest to make my blood run cold … and force me to consider why this stereotype is, in fact, alive and well inside me.
Ali and Hassan have apparently been instrumental in getting funds to al-Shabab, a shady group based in Somalia that was outed by the U.S. government in 2008 as being tied to al-Qaeda.
Yup, they pulled this shit off on U.S. soil out of their homes in Minnesota.
And they further desecrated the already-put upon concept of charity in the process.
Imagine, for example, that you are upset and concerned about the goings-on in Somalia. After all, the stories out of that African nation are enough to reach the heartstrings of pretty much anybody. You go looking for a charity to make a donation to, trying to make some small difference to people who face starvation, violence, and no hope on a daily basis.
And your donations end up going not to orphans or the destitute but to support a jihad with unquestionable ties to the people behind the September 11th attacks.
The base of the prosecution’s case against Ali and Hassan is their own words, collected via wiretap over the course of nearly a year. They are absolutely chilling.
In a teleconference on Feb. 10, 2009, an unidentified man asks who the fundraising is for. Ali replies: “Brother, whom do you want to give it to? The orphans, the poor … the Mujahidin (holy warriors)? Actually, jihad is your duty brother. What are you going to pledge?”
While I’m sure some screening went on, how frightening is it that these women would come out and say that? I cannot fathom the notion that they’d be pimping for the Mujahidin, and it’s especially disturbing that they used orphans and victims of violence to do it.
In one October 2008 call between Ali and Hassan, prosecutors allege that as the two women were discussing where the money should go, Ali said the priority be those who stand up for Islam. “Let the civilians die,” she said. In a Feb. 10, 2009, teleconference, Ali told others, “Let’s forget about the other charities – how about the jihad?”
Let the civilians die? Forget about the other charities? Forget about the families at this moment, because the frontline is empty? These words were actually spoken, words that are despicable on so many levels.
Also disturbing are the sanitation attempts put forth by Ali’s attorney, Dan Scott, who argues that his client made sure that money “donated specifically for orphans went to the orphans—and nowhere else”. Is that supposed to rehabilitate her image in any way, shape, or form?
Ali also scooted around the concept of legitimatizing the charity by choosing not to get a license for it, meaning that she did not have to explain where the money was going or for what purpose. While she explained, “I don’t want to lie to God”, her willingness to lie to everyone else using the images of Somali people who have withstood horrors most of us cannot fathom to do so is just disgusting.
But perhaps the sleaziest part, the thing that makes me so angry about these women contributing to atrocities while using American lawyers well-versed in semantics, is this:
Scott also noted that after the U.S. declared al-Shabab a terror group in February 2008, the FBI made no attempt to “inform her that she should not be sending money to this newly declared foreign terrorist organization.”
So she had her rights infringed upon because she was not aware that the terrorist group she’d knowingly been funneling money into had been identified as a terrorist group?
There is a knee-jerk reaction to buy into the stereotype of women as kind, maternal, patient, caring supports. Even for those of us who know better, the lesson that women have the potential to be involved in using the starving faces of orphans to raise money for large-scale killings is shocking.
So even as I recognize that it’s feeding into a gender stereotype, mentally pigeonholing women into that “Mommy and Wife” role that we have tried desperately to move beyond, I am shocked, sickened, and saddened more so by Ali and Hassan than I would be by their male counterparts.
I’d love to know your thoughts on this one …
