Terrorism is a method, not an ideology; hence, it's the ideology that ought to be of interest, but, you know, we're not supposed to talk about that. "Three accused 'intoxicated by the evil of terrorism'," from BBC News, February 18:
Three men "intoxicated by the evil of terrorism" trained in a park to join or carry out violent jihad, a court heard.
Edward Brown QC, prosecuting, said they gathered a stockpile of weapons as they studied guerrilla warfare and filmed the training in Blackburn, Lancashire.
The trio styled themselves as The Blackburn Resistance, a jury at Manchester Crown Court was told.
Abbas Iqbal, 24, his brother Ilyas Iqbal, 23, and Muhammed Ali Ahmad, 26, deny preparing for acts of terrorism.
Abbas Iqbal also denies disseminating terrorist publications and possessing documents likely to be useful to a terrorist.
Ilyas Iqbal pleaded not guilty to two counts of possessing documents likely to be useful to a terrorist.
'Firing weapons'
Mr Brown told the court: "The prosecution does not suggest that this group is a highly sophisticated, well-trained or well-funded terrorist cell.
"We do suggest however these three young men from Blackburn had become intoxicated by the evil of terrorism and had started to train themselves to join or carry out violent jihad...
"Terrorism is a method, not an ideology; hence, it's the ideology that ought to be of interest, but, you know, we're not supposed to talk about that."
Like blaming "blitzkrieg" instead of Nazism.
I still can't reconcile how Islam attacks us on 9/11, and W immediately submits by calling Islam a "religion of peace" and doesn't retaliate, visits mosques and hosts Muslims for dinner at the WH...
And the PC submission continues. Muslims love "PC" because it makes them Untouchable.
The town of Blackburn, in northern England, has one of the highest percentage Muslim populations in the whole of Britain.
This BBC report on Blackburn (2007) is euphemistic:
"White Fright"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/6631541.stm
People - You MUST read this article from Andrew Breitbart.
Video footage of American Nazis parading in the U.S. in the 1930's. How long before the Mohammedans start doing it?
http://bigjournalism.com/mwalsh/2010/02/19/flashback-to-the-1930s-has-the-enemy-within-returned/
As well as the more obvious 'spectacular' types of terrorism, Britain is being swept by an epidemic of low-level terrorism known as 'Street Jihad' - vicious and sadistic attacks by gangs of adult Muslim men on adolescent kafir boys, sometimes involving eye-gouging and castration. These attacks seldom get reported in the MSM: http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/muslim-street-jihad.html
Arrest
Convict
Imprison
Deport
Deport relations to second degree
Repeat
Could they have read the Qur'an? I have searched a translation, but there is noting really intoxicating in it. Unless you are a murderous sociopath.
Supplementary report from local Blackburn newspaper:
"Jury in Blackburn 'terror' trial see 'pretend beheading' video"
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/5018440.Jury_in_Blackburn__terror__trial_see____pretend_beheading__video/
Dan Simmons uses an analogy in his story about the future of islam:
“Let’s imagine,” said the Time Traveler, “that on December eighth, Nineteen forty-one, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt spoke before a joint session of Congress and asked them to declare war on aviation.”
“That’s absurd,” I said.
“Is it?” asked the Time Traveler. “The American battleships, cruisers, harbor installations, Army barracks, and airfields at Pearl Harbor and elsewhere in Hawaii were all struck by Japanese aircraft. Imagine if the next day Roosevelt had declared war on aviation... threatening to wipe it out wherever we found it. Committing all the resources of the United States of America to defeating aviation, so help us God.”
“That’s just stupid,” I said. If I’d ever been afraid of this Time Traveler, I wasn’t now. He was obviously a mental defective.“The planes, the Japanese planes,” I said, “were just a method of attack... a means... it wasn’t aviation that attacked us at Pearl Harbor, but the Empire of Japan. We declared war on Japan and a few days later its ally, Germany, lived up to its treaty with the Japanese and declared war on us. If we’d declared war on aviation, on goddamned airplanes rather than the empire and ideology that launched them, we’d never have...”
I stopped. What had he called it? Category Error. Making the problem unsolvable through your inability – or fear – of defining it correctly.
Read the rest:
http://www.dansimmons.com/news/message/2006_04.htm
They're intoxicated by the evil of Islam; thats why they're intoxicated by the evil of terrorism, oh dumb judge.
DJM,
I just finished reading that short story by Dan Simmons. Very Scary. I hope that's not what is really in store for us.
Today I had a bit of a revelation - bit of background first. I grew up in an abusive family and developed something called 'hypervigilance'. It's a symptom of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Basically, it means that my instinct is to try to head off any conflict (because conflict always results in a bad or painful outcome), even if that means danger to me, and appease and apologise for the abuser.
It struck me that that is how Western governments and judiciary behave towards Islam - but I have no idea why. My instinct is due to parental abuse and I work hard to overcome it - what's their excuse?
This judge has it in spades.
Three men "intoxicated by the evil of terrorism" trained in a park to join or carry out violent jihad, a court heard.
...
Terrorism is a method, not an ideology; hence, it's the ideology that ought to be of interest, but, you know, we're not supposed to talk about that.
...................
Well, I do agree with the limits of this British judge. However, he does eventually use "the J-word".
And more than that, at least he doesn't imply that it is the British public themselves to blame for Jihad violence, because of their "racism" and "Islamophobia".
DJM, thank you for the link to the short story about the time traveler from the future reporting on the progress of the War of the Century. Very scary stuff, indeed. I read it twice and have bookmarked it for sending out to friends. The story was written in 2006, and if it were updated using more recent events, such as the election of a U.S. president sympathetic to Islam, it would be scarier still. Recommended reading for everyone.
The term "Category Error" in the story linked to above by DJM is the formal term that captures the disconnect between tactics and motives, and is worth thinking about a little.
From Wikipedia:
Category mistake
For the fallacy, see fallacy of composition and fallacy of division.
A category mistake, or category error, is a semantic or ontological error by which a property is ascribed to a thing that could not possibly have that property. All (propositional) mistakes involve some sort of misascription of properties, so in a sense any mistake is a "category mistake": putting a thing into a class to which it does not belong. But a "category mistake" in colloquial philosophical usage seems to be the most severe form of misascription, involving the endorsement of what is in fact logically impossible. Thus the mistaken claim that "Most Americans are atheists" is not a category mistake, since it is merely contingently true that most Americans are theists. On the other hand, "Most bananas are atheists" is a category error. To show that a category mistake has been committed one must typically show that once the phenomenon in question is properly understood, it becomes clear that the claim being made about it could not possibly be true.
The term "category-mistake" was introduced by Gilbert Ryle in his book The Concept of Mind (1949) to remove what he argued to be a confusion over the nature of mind born from Cartesian metaphysics. Ryle alleged that it was a mistake to treat the mind as an object made of an immaterial substance because predications of substance are not meaningful for a collection of dispositions and capacities.
Specifically, the phrase is introduced in chapter 1, section 2. The first example he gives is of someone being shown Oxford or Cambridge, and after seeing colleges, libraries, playing fields, museums, scientific departments and administrative offices asks 'but where is the University?' 'The University is just the way in which all that he has already seen is organized' says Ryle. The visitor's mistake is presuming that a University is part of the category "units of physical infrastructure" or some such thing, rather than the category "institutions", say, which are far more abstract and complex conglomerations of buildings, people, procedures, and so on.
Ryle's second example is of a child witnessing the march-past of a division. After having had battalions, batteries, squadrons, etc. pointed out, the child asks when is the division going to appear. 'The march-past was not a parade of battalions, batteries, squadrons and a division; it was a parade of the battalions, batteries and squadrons of a division.' (Ryle's italics)
His third example is of a foreigner being shown a cricket match. After being pointed out batsmen, bowlers and fielders, the foreigner asks: 'who is left to contribute the famous element of team-spirit?'
He goes on to argue that the Cartesian dualism of mind and body rests on a category-mistake.
----------------------------------------------
Now we have a proper term to discuss what's wrong with the "war on terror" concept that we all instinctively knew had a problem with it, and therefore also a way to respond to those who abuse it.
"Could they have read the Qur'an? I have searched a translation, but there is noting really intoxicating in it. Unless you are a murderous sociopath."
I wonder why Charlie Manson never found Islam?
Radical Islamists are already holding demonstrations in the most insulting of places, such as in front of the ruins of the World Trade Center. For a truely revolting look into the twisted world of these savages, take a look at the "Islamic Thinkers Society" channel on YouTube. This organization (though I personally think that "Islamic" and "Thinkers" are oxymoronic) holds demonstrations near the WTC site and in other public spots. No one seems to bother them, something which actually troubles me. I hope at least the authorities have their collective eye on the members.
http://www.youtube.com/user/islamicthinkers
Hear! Hear!
Any one listening?
Jim, thank you for the link to the oxymoronically named "islamic thinkers society." I've bookmarked it for following in the future. It is indeed disgusting to see Muslims essentially celebrating at the World Trade Center site.
OT: I was amused by the sound tracks on the clips on the site, and reminded that one of the distinctive differences between ME and Western music is the almost complete absence of harmony in the former. I have noticed that even an orchestral backup may consist of, say, 25 different instruments all playing the melody, with maybe a drum and tamborine providing rhythm. Nowhere nearly as rich as Western music. I wonder if harmony is considered haram in Islam. Wouldn't be surprised, since Islam has rules for nearly everything else. Maybe it's like the Amish or Mennonites who split hairs when confronted with modern "innovations" so that in some places one finds tractors, but with steel wheels instead of rubber tires, or electricity is allowed in the barn, but in the house. In the case of Muslim music, which in some places is banned completely, perhaps the hair splitting took the form of music as long as no harmony was included. Or maybe it's a purely cultural characteristic and has nothing to do with Islam itself. Anyone know anything about this?
In the above, "...but in the house" should read "...but not in the house".
Gives a new meaning to the Beatle's lyric "four thousand holes in Blackburn, Lancashire"
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)
also available in French intro+Chapter 1 so far
‘Le Guide Politiquement Incorrect de l'Islam’ disponible en Français intro+chapitre 1
don' t hesitate to share this with your french speaking friends using social networks buttons available on the website or email share options.
http://www.avraidire.eu/category/islam/robert-spencer-islam/le-guide-politiquement-incorrect-de-lislam-robert-spencer-islam-islam/
Yes, Mrs. J, I have often thought along those lines regarding how western society panderers to abusive people in their form of socio-politico parasitism. To take this line a thought a bit further, if I have worked hard to overcome my appeasement of abusive people, and/or, of having an apologetic attitude towards others, why should I respond to islam's oppressive, intrusive, power-hungry attitude any differently than how I would deal with any other person who treated me this way? I think that dhimmitude is codependency on a mass level.
Mrs J - that's really interesting.
You're not the only person on this forum who's a survivor of abuse.
On February 10, a poster here, one Steve Carroll, said - 'One of my colleagues who teaches psychology told me people have negative attitudes towards muslims because of childhood trauma.'
Funnily enough, whereas the psychologist clearly put forward this theory to Steve to 'explain away' people's fear of Muslims, I don't think it necessarily does.
Certain abuse survivors - such as yourself - might be seen as our 'canaries', able to sense the danger signs, written all over Islam, that others in our society, lacking personal bitter experience of abuse, do not.
Here's what I said to Steve, back then:
"A child who is subjected to severe abuse by a parent or by some other person, can react in three main possible ways.
"One involves denial, suppression of memory, etc; the person may even be so 'programmed' to be a victim, that they will be attacked by other abusers as their life proceeds.
"Since Islam is inherently and severely abusive, such a damaged person may, if they come into contact with Islam, even convert; just as a girl who's been raped or beaten by her father may end up with a succession of abusive 'lovers'. If you have no boundaries - because your sense of having any boundaries was destroyed early on - then you will let yourself be eaten.
"Another response, identification with the abuser, will lead the sufferer to *become* an abuser themselves in later life; thus, the boy who is beaten, may himself grow up to beat others.
"Such a person, in the modern West, may be attracted to Islam because it mimicks the abuse s/he suffered and also offers 'power'.
"But there is a third road: the person neither suppresses or denies the abuse he or she suffered, nor mimicks it (indeed, the person may consciously vow NOT to become an abuser), but 'learns' from it;
"escaping at the first chance they get, he or she is thenceforth intelligently wary.
" And when such intelligently wary people, survivors of traumatic childhood abuse in a non-Muslim family or institution, encounter Islam - Islam that is a quintessence or formal codification of severe physical, sexual, mental and spiritual abuse [just read Wafa Sultan or Nonie Darwish or Brigitte Gabriel! or watch 'Submission'!] - they are repelled.
"They may not be able to articulate why.
"They may just, simply, feel in their bones that a very high proportion of the Muslims that they meet "smell" exactly like the (non-Muslim) abusers they've already endured and survived and escaped.
"And they are not to be ridiculed or belittled; for their 'negative attitude' is 100 % correct; it's their survival instinct kicking in, their alarm bells ringing."
From the article - "Mr Brown told the court...'We do suggest however these three young men from Blackburn had become intoxicated by the evil of terrorism and had started to train themselves to join or carry out violent jihad'".
Judge Brown is on the right track.
On page 356 of V S Naipaul, "Among the Believers" (1981; rev. ed. 2001), Naipaul records something he was told by an Indonesian Muslim:
"Islam can become a cocaine. It makes you high. You go to the mosque, and you get high, and when you get high, everything that happens becomes Allah's will". END QUOTE.
It is worth reflecting on the fact that the word 'assassin' and the phrase 'run amok' have come into English from Islamic societies.
Mrs. J wrote:
Today I had a bit of a revelation - bit of background first. I grew up in an abusive family and developed something called 'hypervigilance'. It's a symptom of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Basically, it means that my instinct is to try to head off any conflict (because conflict always results in a bad or painful outcome), even if that means danger to me, and appease and apologise for the abuser.
......................
I'm sorry this happened to you, Mrs. J. I have a very similar background, and dealt with it in much the way you describe before I was able to get away from the situation (I ran away from home at 15).
I agree with your comments that about the way the West deals with Islam. One of the things that most struck me in the wake of the horrific 9/11 attacks were the abject cries of "why do they hate us?".
What they most reminded me of were the attitudes and actions of abused women–wondering what it was *they themselves* had done to provoke the the violence. It still sickens me.
I agree very much with Dumbledore's Army's comments, though—I think it is possible for the former victims of violent abuse to take their experiences and learn from them—and use them to fight against such horrors as Jihad terrorism.
Terrorism should be prosecuted as a hate crime. Jihad crimes should be specifically defined as hate crimes against non-Muslims. If President Obama forbids the use of the "J" word by the government, then it should become a people's initiative. State laws specifically outlawing Sharia law principals in jurisprudence and making jihad crimes hate crimes against non-Muslims with abundant restitution to the victims (i.e. taking jihad money and giving it to victims of jihad) should be a legal movement in this country before Obama's Islamic Socialism becomes too ingrained.