OT: 9-11 Hijackers wearing red headbands?

[Baculus]

I've lately been reading about terrorism, and as a result, the 9-11 attacks. As we know, several passengers on Flight 93, which crashed in PA, supposedly made calls which included the following statements:

Jeremy Glick: “There’s three of them, Arab looking, possibly Iranian. They’ve got red headbands on, one of them is standing in the aisle wearing a red sash and bag round his waist. Says there’s a bomb in it.”

Air Hostess Sandy Bradshaw: “My aircraft has been hijacked by three guys with knives. One of them is sitting in the back row first class. They’ve got red bandannas on their heads and they’re Islamic-looking people. We are in the back galley boiling water to throw on them”.

The commonality between these statements is the description of the attackers wearing RED headbands and sashes. This made me think--not always a good thing!--and my end results didn't make me happy at all.

One must realize an important detail: the color of Islam is green. Whenever you see groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah wearing headbands, they are ALWAYS green. If there is a draped coffin of a so-called martyr, it's green. The most common color you see in Islamic flags is green--even bin Laden is usually seen wearing green with white robes. (His camo gear is green, of course, but if you've seen pictures of his bodyguards, they are wearing green headbands.) In short, Islamic terrorists and fighters NEVER wear red or red headbands.

Thus, I have come to following conclusions:

1. The attackers on Flight 93 were not Islamic-based terrorists.

Or

2. The calls that supposedly were made from flight 93 never happened, and whoever created the language for the transcripts didn't realize their mistake when they choose red for the headband color.

If my thinking is correct, then I tend to believe the first conclusion: That the Flight 93 hijackers were not Muslims. What would this mean then if the Flight 93 terrorists were not Islamic based? Probably several things: The attackers on Flight 93 were most likely a Marxist/Leninist based group, of many which you have your pick. And most of which were, or are, financed by the Russians, Syrians, Iraq, China, et al. And most likely, if this is the case, they were not al-Queda.

The interesting thing is, right after the 9-11 attacks, The Japanese Red Army took credit for the attacks as retaliation for Nagasaki and Hiroshima. And, of course, as a Marxist/Leninist group, what color headbands do they wear? You got it--red. Now, of course we have to ask, is the Japanese Red Army organized, and extensive enough to carry on such as an attack? By themselves, probably not, but the group is known to have connections with Middle Eastern terrorist groups, as many of them received training in Lebanon-based training camps. (These camps were run by the PLO, and related groups, of course.) Of course, would these groups collaborate with Islamic based groups whose ideology may conflict with the religious conservatism of a group such as al-Queda? Probably not--it hasn't stopped these groups from collaborating previously for a common objective.

There are many suspicions that surround the events of 9-11 and resulting "evidence" that has been compiled. I have been dubious of many conspiracy theories, but I am always curious and open-minded since I have an innate distrust of the government. And frankly, I believe there is a lot more to the 9-11 attacks then the U.S. government would like to admit. If my suspicions is correct, we're in a lot of trouble: That the U.S. government does not truly know who carried out the Black Tuesday attacks, and that some of the evidence that has been produced has been falsified. (Which may lead to conclusion #2.) Many investigators are starting to question the evidence that has been produced by the U.S. government; interestingly enough, Dick Cheney and other high-ranking government officials have been strongly dissuading further investigation surrounding the events of 9-11. Why would they? It is possible that the commonly believed and oft-repeated mantra that al-Queda perpetuated the attacks is not completely correct? Or that, if al-Queda did conduct the Black Tuesday events, that another, UNKNOWN group may have been involved, and the U.S. government does not want to admit this fact...for whatever reasons?

Keep in that the Soviet Union and other socialist/Marxist-Leninist governments for years used terrorism as a tool against the west. What if the 9-11 attacks were simply a continuation of this "struggle against the west"? Does this mean that Marxist-Leninism is just as a much a threat as radical Islam at this time?

Now, I may be jumping to conclusions, but you have to realize that the roots of most global and international terrorist organizations had as their roots a commonality: The Belief in communism/Marxist-Leninism and the struggle against Imperialism. It's more of a recent trend to see the organizations that are more religious based in nature.

There is a lot of information on the Internet available surrounding the 9-11 attacks. Some of it is pretty flimsy in nature, but some of it is quite interesting, too much to detail here. But I would like to hear other's opinion on my theories. Bogus? BS? Plausible? (BTW, I have read several articles that have mimicked my own thoughts, including one on thenewamerican.com. I guess I am not the only person that noticed the "red bandana" detail.)

Just curious...

~B.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Baculus -

You've shown some stunning insight into evidence in plain sight. I've done some checking, and you're right: Islam is symbolized through color by green.

It would seem that if the witness reports of red bandanas are accurate, then the choice of red is indeed curious: it is clearly not an expression of Muslim devotion at the moment of martyrdom. However, I think you are moving far afield with your subsequent speculation.

There are many possible explanations for the color red. One explanation, as you say, is that the phone transcript is a clumsy fraud, intended to point initial 9/11 suspicions toward radical Islamic militants, and the red bandanas were just a bit of clueless atmosphere thrown in. (Understand even in this case, the hijackers could be Islamic militants *and* the phone transcripts could be a fraud, fabricated to point the investigation toward Islamic terrorists -- for good or bad reasons.)

However, you are missing what is probably the most likely explanation: accurate phone transcripts, with the red bandanas symbolizing a secret commando color or even an entire national flag.

For example, look at the Morocco's flag:

The CIA provides this explanation: "Flag Description: red with a green pentacle (five-pointed, linear star) known as Solomon's seal in the center of the flag; green is the traditional color of Islam"

So red could easily be identification with Morocco, among many possibilities. Highly relevant here is the fact that the "20th hijacker" or "5th pilot", Zacarias Moussaoui, currently in U.S. custody and facing capital prosecution, is from Morocco.

So red symbolizing Morocco is one of a number of plausible explanations.

What I want to know is why our government won't let Zacarias Moussaoui speak freely to the media or have the ordinary rights of people accused of crimes -- and why so much of his prosecution is secret. What does Zacarias Moussaoui know that we are not being allowed to know?

[Art]

Guys, don't tell anyone, but, red could be a way for the hijackers to easily identify each other through a crowed of terrified people in the process of the hijacking. You know, kind of like how a red car stands out and gets more tickets? Don't let the mind wander too close to the mundane though. Not when there are so many more fabulous thoughts to process

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

An update: although Islam is symbolized by green, it appears that red headbands or red bandanas are customary badges of martyrs and/or Islamic Jihad.

For example, this Israeli site casually notes:

The family of Palestinian baby photographed wearing a mock suicide bomber's uniform - replete with sticks of 'explosives' and the traditional martyr's red headband

So, the red headband points more and more toward Islamic militants. This shouldn't be surprising, since few question that Islamic militants were the suicide hijackers on 9/11. (My doubts center more on who they were working for, and whether the militants were duped in a "false flag" operation.)

Although some question whether Islamic militants were involved at all, I'm persuaded that they were.

[Baculus]

ASF,

Thanks for replying. I am glad this post was moved to The Tailgate since it's probably the more appropriate venue of discussion.

I thought about the usage of red to signify a certain commando team, or as you suggested, perhaps a national color. Your example of a Morrocan flag is good, though I still believe that, if the terrorists were Muslims conducting a martyrdom attack, they would wear green since it's such a vital color to the religion. And in the Hadis, which is a collection of teachings, Mohammed was shown to disapprove of the color red.

I did find a image of a group that was wearing red: http://www.terrorismanswers.com/groups/pflp.html

This article shows images of the PFLP, which is a Marxist organization based in Lebanon. While they are not considered an international terrorist organization, they are wearing red.

I suppose it's just my feeling that, if the 9-11 attackers were Muslims, if this was their moment of truth before they reached heaven, they would surely made sure they would wear green, especially if red is a color that Mohammed did not approve of as appropriate. The only other colors I tend to see are black, and white, but green seems so vital, even if the attackers wanted to show national pride by wearing red. (Also, remember that most of the attackers supposedly were Saudi, anyways. Of course, the government gave the names, incorrectly, of several of the attackers.)

Perhaps I am reading too much into this detail, but I just *feel* there is something to this, a detail that has to provide some insight. I just have this strange feeling that the government isn't telling us everything, that the standard, "It was al-Queda," is not the whole truth...or simply not the truth at all.

Yes, I have been rather curious about Moussaoui as well. Does he know details that would reveal implicity of certain parties? And I don't think they are gagging him for the simple reason of dis-allowing Moussaoui from using his situation as a pulpit.

Hmmm...

~B.

[Baculus]

I remember seeing that photo, and after seeing the article, I was rather confused about the statement that red was "traditional martry's headband." EVERY time I have seen the various "martyr brigades" marching, they always have green headbands with white arabic lettering. Here is a quote from the following article:

"The images, filmed against a background of green and white religious slogans and with the hero wearing a green and white headband, were identical to many shown before. Only this time the suicide murderer was not some half-crazed stripling, but a man who grew to maturity within Israeli society."

http://www.jewishsf.com/bk010914/ip20.shtml

Interestingly, it comes from a Jewish publication as well.

I tried to search further, using "red headband martyr," and the first page had some details on a group in Turkey wearing red headbands, but they are a Marxist group. (http://www.dhkc.net/en/article.php?sid=138) Wheh I searched using "green headband martyr," I received a bunch more hits.

Another article had a quote, "Mohammed placed a green Hamas headband on his mother."

And another article stated: "Izzedine al-Masri left home on Wednesday, telling his family he was going to stay with friends in another West Bank town for a while. Before his death, al-Masri posed for a photo showing him wearing a green Hamas headband and holding an assault rifle"

I kept finding examples of the green headband references. NOw, this may show green as just being particular to these groups, of course, but each of these examples are from Palestinian resistance groups.

This page even has some pictures of some of the martyrs all-dressed up for their death: http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=4278

Now, perhaps I am reading too much into the red headbands. I admit I love a good mystery, and these details just proved very tantalizing to me. Since most of the adherents seem very feverish in adherence to particulars, the red headbands just seems...out of place.

~B.

[fansince62]

fellas...some of the terrorists were caught on film...their histories have been established.........

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by Baculus1

I suppose it's just my feeling that, if the 9-11 attackers were Muslims, if this was their moment of truth before they reached heaven, they would surely made sure they would wear green, especially if red is a color that Mohammed did not approve of as appropriate.

Perhaps I am reading too much into this detail, but I just *feel* there is something to this, a detail that has to provide some insight. I just have this strange feeling that the government isn't telling us everything, that the standard, "It was al-Queda," is not the whole truth...or simply not the truth at all.

The problem is that while Islam may be symbolized by green, it is also documented that Islamic Jihad and other Islamic "martyrs" frequently use red headbands as badges. So the empirical evidence is against your position.

I'm persuaded that the red headbands were worn for one of two (opposing) reasons:

• As a straightforward symbol of Islamic martyrdom or jihad.
  
• As a "false flag" symbolizing the same, along with other evidence of Islamic militants, to show a trail of evidence pointing solely at an Islamic conspiracy. An abundant trail of evidence now makes it obvious that the militants were not hiding their trail in the U.S., and indeed the trail is so obvious that it begs the question as to whether this evidence trail is deliberate to show Islamic culpability.
  

To me, the more interesting evidence trail is the lack of a clear connection to Osama bin Laden; evidence pointing toward Israeli awareness of the plot; blocked U.S. investigations before and after 9/11; the suppression of certain media stories embarrassing to the U.S. and Israel; and the incredible secrecy surrounding such figures as Moussaoui and the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. In short, there is a rather shocking lack of evidence pointing toward Osama bin Laden, and enough smoke surrounding the U.S. and Israel to raise serious questions that aren't being aired in the mass media, by Congress, or by the administration.

Yes, I have been rather curious about Moussaoui as well. Does he know details that would reveal implicity of certain parties? And I don't think they are gagging him for the simple reason of dis-allowing Moussaoui from using his situation as a pulpit.

Moussaoui is a very troubling case. He seems clearly to have been involved either in 9/11 or a second-wave, post-9/11 plot. He's also probably the only person in custody about whom we can have that degree of certainty. So his knowledge is obviously critical, though one must realize that agents in these operations are often intentionally isolated from the masterminds. (This is particularly true if there's anything to my "false flag" scenario, in which case Moussaoui might not even know whom he was working for at the highest levels.)

It's clear to me that our government fears that Moussaoui could disclose very damaging information. Exactly what that information might be is anyone's guess. The more he is isolated, the worse my suspicions become.

[Baculus]

As I heard, some of the terrorists were caught on film, purveyed by al-Jeezra. This does not mean all of them were, which which still indicate that all of their indentities are not known, especially since some of the names given were of individuals that are actually still alive.

Incidentally, were the tapes of the attackers themselves, or members of al-Queda who claimed responsibility for the attacks?

BTW, I did find a reference to red headbands in a page talking about Iranian fighters:

"[p. 157] When Arash volunteered to fight in 1984 [when he was sixteen] he became what was known as a Basiji. Basijis were known by the headbands they wore. These headbands could be red, or green, or white, or black; though what was usually [p. 158] shown on television in Iran and abroad was the red headband. Red was the symbol of blood and sacrifice and the faith."

Perhaps if red was worn by some Iranians, then the Saudis may wear them as well, with the green headbands being particular to the Palestinian groups.

Now, I've been thinking--some of the terrorists were recruited in Europe, in countries such as Germany. Could this indicate, then, a possiblity for the terrorists to have Marxist ties?

Eh.

~B.

[Baculus]

The problem is that while Islam may be symbolized by green, it is also documented that Islamic Jihad and other Islamic "martyrs" frequently use red headbands as badges. So the empirical evidence is against your position.

This is interesting, if Islamic Jihad fighters do wear red headbands. This could imply a couple of issues:

--Islamic Jihad has started it's movement on a global scale

--Islamic Jihad is a directly link with Iran, though it does not always conduct operations with Terhan's approval.

But, still, whenever I see images of Islamic Jihad fighters, they are still wearing green headbands; none of the photos showing these fighters show any red headbands. Does this mean anything? No. Interestingly, Islamic Jihad has its roots in Palestinian groups from the 70's that were originally Marxist-Leninist in orgin.

Of course, Islamic Jihad is never mentioned as being involved with this attack. If this is the case, another failure of intelligence?

To me, the more interesting evidence trail is the lack of a clear connection to Osama bin Laden; evidence pointing toward Israeli awareness of the plot; blocked U.S. investigations before and after 9/11; the suppression of certain media stories embarrassing to the U.S. and Israel; and the incredible secrecy surrounding such figures as Moussaoui and the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. In short, there is a rather shocking lack of evidence pointing toward Osama bin Laden, and enough smoke surrounding the U.S. and Israel to raise serious questions that aren't being aired in the mass media, by Congress, or by the administration.

This is interesting as well. Of course, we have the tapes that supposedly demonstrates bin Laden's insight into the details of the attacks. But he could be either attempting to take credit for an attack that he was not involved in, or, he was involved, but the actual attack was actually conducted by elements outside of al-Queda. But, true, there has been a disturbing lack of direct evidence to bin Laden and al-Queda. Perhaps I am too concerned about the headband issue, but I think it may point to, though, details of the attack that are not being produced by the government.

I, too, think the administration is being less then truthful. Perhaps the Moussaoui could demonstrate this troubling thought.

~B.

[Baculus]

Upon further reading, I wonder if the Islamic Jihad mentioned is the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and not the Palestinian Islamic Jihad? This could actually dispell my theory, since some of the attackers were Egyptian, correct?

Inicidentally, this fascinating article discusses the Marxist roots of the Middle Eastern radical groups: http://chnm.gmu.edu/ematters/issue6/911exhibit/emails/postmodern_jihad.htm

LOL, sorry, I am not trying to spam my own thread; I usually have to post a thought before I move on to something else. :-P

~B.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by Baculus1

Of course, we have the tapes that supposedly demonstrates bin Laden's insight into the details of the attacks.

The videotape is the only evidence that has been publicly presented linking Osama bin Laden. However, the audio on the tape is extremely poor, and the translation at the key parts has been asserted by a German study to be inaccurate and "manipulative".

Google "Gernot Rotter", "video" and "bin Laden" to go down that rabbit hole. It helps if you know German.

When you look closely at the actual public evidence linking Osama bin Laden, and understand its flaws, you see that the entire U.S. position on 9/11 falls apart.

And then you look around at the incredible suppression of public inquiry by the mass media, the Congress and the DOJ, and you get to a very unhappy place.

[AdmiralWaugh]

When I looked from the main Xskins page at this thread, all I could see was "OT: 9-11 Hijackers wearing red" and I was like, "Oh my GOD, were they wearing Redskins clothing?!?!"

If I was one of them, that's what I'd do. There's no better way to show you're an upstanding citizen of the United States, or the world, than by being a Redskins fan.

[Brave]

al, please refrain from interrupting this vital, detailed investigation into the color of headbands.

This could break open the case!

Solve the mystery!

Expose the conspiracy!!!

[fansince62]

apologies Brave...I hear that none of the hijackers were wearing underwear..........is there deeper meaning in this? perhaps this was really a splinter group of muslims who support a more free swinging society....one unencumbered by the conventions of western culture. my bust........

let's see...we know who the 19 hijackers were....we know much of the details of their lives leading up to 9/11. we have letters they wrote in hand. we have eye witnesses who have relayed conversations held with these folks.......there's fairly good eveidence on intentions and connections......but never mind...all the intelligence we had that, according to others, could have prevented 9/11. well, it was accurate in every respect except identifiing who the hijackers actually were...all the investigations, communications taps, wiring trees that identified relationships: arrant nnonsense!

[Tommy-the-Greek]

It could also be that the bloods were mad at the cia for giving the crypts the ok to put drugs in the popeye chicken batter. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :rolleyes:

[Larry Brown #43]

One of the Islamic terrorists who perpetrated on 9/11 was later shown on al Jazeera asking his God to accept him as a martyr as he prepares for his destiny. And he was wearing a black and white headband during the filming, for whatever that's worth.

Why do you suppose an Islamic terrorist would go on camera to discuss his soon-to-be-met fate as a "martyr," later to be broadcast on al Jazeera transposed in front of an image of the burning World Trade Center, if the whole thing was not an Islamic plot? I suppose the Cole bombing was an Israeli attack as well, even though al Qaeda has used that attack in its recruitment videos.

[Kilmer17]

I knew it was the Crenshaw Street Bloods.

[Brave]

Originally posted by Kilmer17

I knew it was the Crenshaw Street Bloods.

I'm not buying it, Kilmer. There wouldn't be any conspiracy there!

It must have been the "Eight-Tray Gangsta Crips" framing the Bloods.

Or those sneaky vatos from "18th Street."

One thing is for sure. What is ... can't be. It must be something else.

[Blade]

The latest suicide terrorist in Israel wore blue jeans, a green shirt, and carried the a red bag which, presumably, had some of the bomb components in it.

Are we going to start a thread on how the jeans represent the total world domination of Levi Strauss, Co.?

[redman]

:doh:

I'll leave the horoscopes and tea leaves to others.

[Darth Tater]

If you really want to believe there could be a conspiricy:

Abu Dujana was a man of courage who used to stand proud and brave in war. He had a red headband that he wore round his head. Whenever he was head-banded everybody knew that he was determined to fight to death. Therefore as soon as Abu Dujana took the Prophet's (s.a.w) sword, he banded his head and started strutting proudly amongst the Mujahideen. Upon seeing this, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) said, "This is a sort of walking that Allah detests except in such a situation (Jihad)."

[Baculus]

Perhaps most of you may not realize that colors do mean something. Anyone in the Special Forces, with their appropriate colored beret, would agree. And as Redskins fans, doesn't the Burgundy and Gold mean something as well? (After all of the posts I read debating the color of last year's "throwback" jerseys, I would think so!) Also, to a conservative muslim, it also means a great deal, since, in their interpretation, the color red is often a no-no--I have accounts of travellers in the Middle East noticing on the lack of the color red. Does this mean it's not worn? No, but to some of these groups, since they don't wear uniforms, their bands are their uniforms. I think this detail seem to have been overlooked by some in your mockery of my post.

The reason why I thought it was an interesting detail is because, from memory and research, I didn't see any use of red headbands, except by groups usually associated with left-wing radical groups. (BTW, OPM, interesting detail...) Which, as I had indicated, lead to my theories. Oh, BTW, judging by some of the replies, I don't think most of you read anything that was discussed in this post; if you don't have anything of value to add, why even reply?

I wouldn't expect anyone who is too lock-stepped on their thinking to actually take my considerations very seriously or entertain them. And none of you actually showed any insight into the various groups in the Middle East. That's fine with me, but personally, I like to investigate and do not like "the truth" always spoon-fed to me. "Here you go little citizen, this is the way things are, here is your reality." "Yes, thank you sir, may I have another!" "Ditto!" <----Rush Limbaugh reference.

Some of you claim that we know their detailed lives of the attackers: Do we? All of them? Who? We have details on Atta and a couple of others, but some of them are complete unknowns in their personal details. After we released the names of attackers, as it turned out, some of the names were either incorrect or of individuals that weren't even dead, still alive living in another country such as Saudia Arabia. The details of the attackers that have been released are incomplete, at times incorrect, and have been questioned by some investigators. The fact that the government has tried to supress further investigation immediately causes suspician. And if we knew so many details about the attackers then we were already familiar with some of the individuals, which would point to further intelligence incompetence that resulted in Black Tuesday even happening in the first place. Of course people will start questioning if things "just don't add up"--if this is due to faulty intelligence, then so be it, but why attempt to prevent further investigation if this is the case? (And for anyone that is interested, there is a ton of material surrounding the inconsistencies of the 9-11 details and the government evidence and reports. And I am not talking about some of the "bogus" conspiracies, but some rather valid questions and concerns.)

Do not discount a theory just because the government said "we have all the details--everything is OK." Let me ask you this question if all of you believe the government has been completely forth-coming with the 9-11 investigation: How many of you believe that there was more then one gunman involved in Kennedy's assassination? How many believe that the investigation into his murder should be closed since we know everything and it's a solved case? It's foolish to think that the government does not often inhibit the truth, and this is a prime example, I believe.

I do not look for conspiracies in every corner, but I am sometimes a little dubious of certain events and the government explanations of such events.

The point of my post was to offer the possibility that some of the 9-11 members were not al-Queda. And if they were not al-Queda members, then it points to other group(s) involvement, which would signify a further threat: Third-party "proxy" groups conducting attacks against the US. If these "loose-cannons" are an unknown, then it may be a mistake in concentrating solely on al-Queda. (Which, by the way, inspite of the government efforts, still seem able to conduct attacks against U.S. interests, inspite of the recent arrests that supposedly broke the back of the organization.)

Also, my interest in another group's involvement was partly due to the connection between some of the radical groups and Marxist-Leninsts, whose ties usually lead further to communist or socialist sympathetic groups or countries. To me, this is an important matter, since many (not just me, but Terrorist watchdog groups as well) are concerned that modern terrorism, inspite of the demise of the Soviets, is a continuation of the East vs West war, and not just radical Islam vs the West. Especially since many of the Middle Eastern groups have roots in 60's and 70's left radicalism (even bin Laden, who is actually more steeped in Marx and Engles then the Koran), and whose brand of exporting ideology through violence is very similiar to the goals of global-wide revolution conspired by Marxists-Leninists. Furthermore, modern left and Marxist-Leninsts radicals see an ideological "purity" in radical Islam that is closer to their own ideals.

Perhaps some of the posters that replied to this thread would be better off going back and discussing the weight gain of Christine Aguilera--your insight seemed more valuable in those discussions. :-P

BTW, I invited discussions revolving around this thread--if you disagree, add something that shows the faults in my theory, but reply with "hyuck! hyuck! hyuck!" type posts is a waste of time for everyone.

~B.

[fansince62]

B....no......basing a hypothesis on something as slender as the color of a headband (and, oh by the way, special forces do not wear colored berets when they go into battle: I know for a fact that SEALS don't) is quite a stretch.

make your case...but to be taken seriously you need some actual supporting information. a lot of data has come out since 9/11. the canard that the governemnt is somehow lieing to us or itself involved in a plot (ASF anyone?) begs for some investigative work beyond the pap we have bourne witness to over the last days and months on this message board. leaping from the color of a headband to an association with a defunct political philosophy requires just a few more linked pieces of information...don't you think? no corroborating information? why should anyone take this seriously?

before you leap and expect others to jump...please ensure there is a place to land.......

[Darth Tater]

The point is, that even if the color is significant, it is extremely more likely to be because of the relevence of the red headband to the Mujahideen -- a red headband is an audacious jihad symbol indicating violent intent. Green is used in Islam because it is a more subtle color that doesn't draw attention.