Magic Statistics

“I accept no responsibility for statistics, which are a form of magic beyond my comprehension.” — Robertson Davies

February 22nd, 2006 at 6:55 pm

al-Qaeda: Another big bureaucratic organisation

One wonders whether al-Qaeda suffers from problems endemic to other large non-profit institutions. Is it plagued by bureaucratic sclerosis, poor accountability rules, rigid and unresponsive control procedures, and the demoralising effects of office politics? Evidence has been found that al-Qaeda is indeed beset by paperwork and red tape. Thanks to recently declassified papers found in Iraq and Afghanistan by US soldiers, we now have an inside look into al Qaeda's corporate policies and practices. An employment contract specifies a recruit's salary and working conditions.

An al-Qa'eda mujahed brother is paid a monthly wage of 1,000 Pakistani rupees (about £10 at current rates) if a bachelor, 6,500 rupees (£65) if married, with an additional 500 rupees (£5) for every child. Air fares for home leave are paid for by the firm. Tickets cannot be cashed in but are transferable for performing the Haj pilgrimage.

Other papers have been released, including

documents that set out the internal structure of al-Qa'eda and illuminate disputes over tactics. They also analyse past failures such as the crushing of an Islamist uprising in Syria in 1982, speculate on new regions for jihad and discuss the use of the internet. Many were clearly written before the September 2001 attacks and the fall of the Taliban. However, some reveal dismay over the loss of al-Qa'eda's bastion in Afghanistan.

Given al Qaeda's high-stakes corporate mission of establishing Islamist rule by force, infighting and back-biting within the chain of command must be particularly hellish.

On June 13, 2002, more than six months after the fall of the Taliban, an unknown member of al-Qa'eda called Abdel-Halim Adl asks a colleague identified only as Mukhtar to convince Osama bin Laden to change course. Today we are experiencing one setback after another and have gone from misfortune to disaster. There is a new hand managing affairs and that is driving forcefully; every time it falters, it gets up and rushes again, without understanding or awareness. It is in a hurry to accomplish actions that now require patience because of the security activity throughout the whole world. . . . "During six months, we lost what we built in years. Does not that merit that we pause and sit down to identify the errors that have been behind these disasters, and not to blindly ignore them and become a joke for all the intelligence agencies in the world? My beloved brother, stop all foreign actions, stop sending people to captivity, stop devising new operations, regardless of whether orders come or do not come from Abu Abdallah [bin Laden].

Another document contains written questions from rank-and-file grunts to the Big Cheese hisself Osama:

  • There are infidels in Pakistan and India, of Christians and others. Is it OK for us to kill them and take their possessions and properties? Is it OK to steal from the infidels residing the Islamic and non Islamic countries?
  • Does the freedom fighter face his creator in his tomb if he goes out for jihad and dies as a result of a snake bite or a kick of mule?

I bet officers in NATO armed forces never get those kinds of questions. New al-Qaeda recruits guerillas freedom fighters warmongers holy warriors blood-thirsty terrorists brothers sign an employment contract signifying their agreement with the organisation's beliefs, objectives, sphere of activity, and job expectations. Salary and vacation benefits are also spelled out. A brother (and family, if married) is entitled to an annual one-month vacation, including paid round-trip transportation to the home country. Pretty standard stuff for a large non-profit organisation.

Print This Post Print This Post
February 22nd, 2006 at 6:22 pm

Investing based on religious morality is a money-loser

. . . unless you're a Muslim investor.

Timothy Middleton, mutual fund columnist at MSN Money, looks at five mutual funds that practise morally responsible investing. They refuse to invest in certain equities because of moral, not economic, considerations. One of the funds is Catholic; three are Protestant; one is Muslim. Only the latter receives an A rating based on fund performance. Hot issues that influence these funds to avoid purchasing company stock include: defence contracting, abortion, pornography, gambling, tobacco, alcohol, treatment of the environment, anti-union policies. One or more of the funds rule out investments in firms implicated in these activities. Based on his survey of religiously-based mutual funds, as well as the track record of so-called progressive, i.e., politically leftist, investment funds, Mr Middleton says:

The idea that screening companies based on non-economic criteria can actually benefit performance — the central claim of socially responsible investing — is baloney.

So, why does the mutual fund based on Muslim moral teaching do so well? It seems to arise from Islam's ban on lending at interest. Interest is ubiquitous in capitalism and so impossible for the fund to eschew completely, but it compromises by avoiding investing in firms with large debt loads. It is also the only one of the five funds to prohibit investments in banks. Full disclosure: I do not own an interest in any of the funds discussed in this post.

via Christianity Today Weblog.

Print This Post Print This Post
|