4-Oct-17 World View -- Jihadist attacks in Mali surge with rise of al-Qaeda linked JNIM

[John]

> But yes I'm saying those Muslims who are not radical are not
> really muslims. You are American so I'm guessing you don't have
> much experience living with muslims but I grew up in the ghetto
> with 30% muslims in my city and those muslims were completely
> non-religious. The only thing they observed was not eating pork
> with the exception of bacon and they all partied and consumed
> alcohol. So of those 1.8 billion "muslims" that are not radical
> they are "muslim" in name only just like the Nazis were mostly
> "Christian" in name only and the Soviets were "Christian" in name
> only as if you study National Socialism it is not a coherent
> ideology but the teachings of Himmler, Hitler, Wiligut which were
> based on Guido Von List they are not Christian at all, they are
> based on a mix of pagan inspired esotericism mixed with Blavatsky
> and the Soviets were completely based on dialectical
> materialism.

This is a novel argument, but it completely supports what I'm saying,
and contradicts what you're saying.

Those who support the "all Muslims are evil" view point to madrassas,
and say that Muslims go to madrassas, and clerics tell them to go out
and kill the infidels. There are two major problems with this claim.

First, as you say, the Muslims committing crimes are not really
Muslims at all, and don't follow Muslim practices. I agree.
Committing crimes or killing infidels is not a Muslim practice. So
you're blaming all Muslims for the crimes of a few people who, by your
own testimony, are not Muslims at all.

Second, what exactly is a Muslim? Let's look at Catholics as an
example.

If a man goes to morning mass every morning, we'd certainly agree that
he's a Catholic. What if he only goes to mass on Sundays? Is he less
of a Catholic? What if he only goes on Christmas and Easter? Is he
only 0.001% Catholic? Can someone be Catholic who doesn't go to
church at all?

Here's another example: Suppose a husband and wife go to morning mass
every morning, but they still use birth control? Are they still
Catholics, even though they clearly and knowingly violate Catholic
rules and injunctions?

What about when two people live together without marriage. Do they
automatically stop being Catholics?

So the same issues are true about Muslims. First, madrassas do not
preach "kill the infidel" in any but the most extreme situations.
Second, Muslims are still Muslims even if they don't face Mecca and
pray five times a day. Third, if they go to Friday prayers every
week, they don't necessarily do what the cleric tells them to do, just
as married Catholics still use birth control.

You go to the ridiculous extreme of saying that Nazi policies were
based on the writings of Guido Von List, whoever that was. Do you
really believe that the millions of ordinary Church-going Christian
Germans who were cheering Kristallnacht and bashing Jews had ever
heard about Guido Von List, or cared?

Finally, a word about Sharia Law. Sharia Law doesn't exist or, to put
it another way, Sharia Law is just like Western law, in that it can be
anything a society wants it to be. The example I like to point to is
wearing a head scarf. Is that a part of Sharia Law? A lot of people
with the "all Muslims are evil" view think that it is. And yet,
headscarfs are not used in Egypt. They were not required in Iran
before 1979, and they are required today. In Turkey, they were
required before 1924, then they were forbidden until 2007 when they
became optional, and today they're becoming required again. So what
does Sharia Law say about it? Nothing, except what the society wants
to claim it says.

I wrote about all this and a lot more in a post to Coordinated Fires.
Check it out:

http://gdxforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php ... 009#p32009

http://gdxforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php ... 1&start=10

Read through the entire thread, because there was a lot of discussion
on all sides of the issue, and it may answer your questions.

[John]

> Alright then, I concede that your model explains that there is a
> universal collective application of State Power in the
> organization of violence that can be explained through DNA and in
> that regard religion is not the cause. But for your model to be
> valid you also have to account for all the non-state terrorist
> attacks in Europe and Africa by Muslims whereas there are next to
> no Christian terrorist attacks, and no terrorist attacks done in
> the name of Christianity. Yes in my country we had the terrorist
> attack of Breivik who wanted to create a Norse-Pagan "Crusader"
> movement to kill muslims, but even so that was not done in the
> name of Christianity as he himself said, and that was just one
> attack whereas there has been over dozens of muslim terrorist
> attacks, not to mention all the thousand of Jihadists that went
> from Europe to join ISIS and wage terror in Iraq and Syria. There
> are no Christians flocking to join up with anti-selekas in CAR to
> kill muslims.

Actually, I have done a lot to explain this phenonomenon, although
there are still many unanswered questions.

First off, there are plenty of terrorist acts committed by Christians
all the time. You have the drug cartels in Mexico, the Troubles in
Northern Ireland, the FARC in Colombia, and the Basque ETA in Spain.
There are terrorist acts being committed daily in Christian nations
like Rwanda, Burundi, and Uganda. Just like many things, it depends
on where a society or nation is on the generational timeline. Any
society can be at peace for a while, and then become terrorists for a
while. History does not always begin this morning.

After the 7/7/2005 London subway bombings, I became aware of some
research that suggests that suicide bombers tend to come from
countries in a Fifth Turning, and I wrote an article about it:

** Robert Pape's 'Dying to Win' sheds light on suicide bombers.
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... 18pape.htm

I believe that this article explains a great deal to answer your
question.

Also, the following article provides relevant details:

** 29-Dec-14 World View -- Do news organizations ignore jihadist attacks on Christians?
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e141229

[John]

> The Turkish Lira is imploding, Ankara and Washington are
> suspending the issuance of visas, and the Turkish economy is
> heading towards collapse. It looks like the realignment of Turkey
> is accelerating. The Turks appear to be throwing caution to the
> wind. They seem to have planned out this fiasco well in advance
> with the arrest of an American embassy employee on trumped up
> charges.

> What happens when NATO allies go to war with each other? What is
> the protocol for that?

There's no protocol. The whole point of the European Union and Nato
was to prevent European wars like WW I and WW II. It worked as long
as the WW II survivors were still around, but they're pretty much gone
now, and today's Gen-Xers and Millennials are so much smarter than
anyone else, so Europe is headed for another war.

[Guest]

Is there anywhere that is safe in Europe? Perhaps Portugal? Spain looks like it's heading for another civil war. Eastern Europe looks to be overrun by the Russians again. The Balkans are blowing up. How about Andorra? No, wait. Andorrans are ethnic Catalans...

[John]

> Is there anywhere that is safe in Europe? Perhaps Portugal? Spain
> looks like it's heading for another civil war. Eastern Europe
> looks to be overrun by the Russians again. The Balkans are blowing
> up. How about Andorra? No, wait. Andorrans are ethnic
> Catalans...

Here's an article that says that there are 20,000 secret bunkers in
Switzerland. If you have any relatives in Switzerland, then maybe you
can rent one of these.


16 eerie pictures of Switzerland's secret bunkers
Take a look at the underground bunkers and shelters that were made to
prepare Switzerland for war

https://www.timeout.com/switzerland/thi ... nd-museums

[Guest]

> Is there anywhere that is safe in Europe? Perhaps Portugal? Spain
> looks like it's heading for another civil war. Eastern Europe
> looks to be overrun by the Russians again. The Balkans are blowing
> up. How about Andorra? No, wait. Andorrans are ethnic
> Catalans...

Here's an article that says that there are 20,000 secret bunkers in
Switzerland. If you have any relatives in Switzerland, then maybe you
can rent one of these.


16 eerie pictures of Switzerland's secret bunkers
Take a look at the underground bunkers and shelters that were made to
prepare Switzerland for war

https://www.timeout.com/switzerland/thi ... nd-museums

What is your WW 3 escape plan?

[John]

> What is your WW 3 escape plan?

I'm in Cambridge MA, in an apartment on the edge of the MIT campus. I
expect (and hope) that one of the first Chinese missiles will kill me
quickly. Death is a part of life.

[Brendan]

> What is your WW 3 escape plan?

I'm in Cambridge MA, in an apartment on the edge of the MIT campus. I
expect (and hope) that one of the first Chinese missiles will kill me
quickly. Death is a part of life.

Thats what the Chinese want you to think

[Brendan]

I am curious to get your view on this John as you seem to be pretty knowledgeable on this where I'm not. Do you not draw a distinction between subcultures of Islam and other religions in regards to violence? Obviously the "all muslims are evil" is complete crap. However, from my understanding of the religion (obviously as an outsider) there are non trivial sub cultures of islam that while may not encourage killing people nonetheless see killing of non-muslims in many cases not "wrong". As to what degree and what cases this holds will obviously differ but this indicates to me there is cause for distinction. Specifically I have in mind the Saudi soccer team refusing to honor the death of a london terrorist attack. To me this seems a pretty non-trivial case of unjustified killing and their refusal to honor it indicates they view it differently. Obviously different cultures have different values and some have strict rules on taking of life whereas others may have lax or accepting views. I get the sense a sizable portion of sub cultures in the Islam community tend toward the latter (Saudi is a decent sized country). In some of your above comments I would also point out that many of the examples you have given are terror attacks by christians but not necessarily motivated by their religion, but if we look at the frequency of christian motivated terrorist attacks on a global scale to muslim it doesn't seem to compare. Point of all this being it really seems there is a distinction in values (to what degree is obviously up to debate/speculation).

[John]

> I am curious to get your view on this John as you seem to be
> pretty knowledgeable on this where I'm not. Do you not draw a
> distinction between subcultures of Islam and other religions in
> regards to violence? Obviously the "all muslims are evil" is
> complete crap. However, from my understanding of the religion
> (obviously as an outsider) there are non trivial sub cultures of
> islam that while may not encourage killing people nonetheless see
> killing of non-muslims in many cases not "wrong". As to what
> degree and what cases this holds will obviously differ but this
> indicates to me there is cause for distinction. Specifically I
> have in mind the Saudi soccer team refusing to honor the death of
> a london terrorist attack. To me this seems a pretty non-trivial
> case of unjustified killing and their refusal to honor it
> indicates they view it differently. Obviously different cultures
> have different values and some have strict rules on taking of life
> whereas others may have lax or accepting views. I get the sense a
> sizable portion of sub cultures in the Islam community tend toward
> the latter (Saudi is a decent sized country). In some of your
> above comments I would also point out that many of the examples
> you have given are terror attacks by christians but not
> necessarily motivated by their religion, but if we look at the
> frequency of christian motivated terrorist attacks on a global
> scale to muslim it doesn't seem to compare. Point of all this
> being it really seems there is a distinction in values (to what
> degree is obviously up to debate/speculation).

I see no evidence that the jihadist terror attacks are motivated by
religion, except that religion is used as a justification for an
attack that was going to happen for other reasons, such as ethnic.

There is one big difference between jihadist terror attacks and terror
attacks by Christian cultures: the jihadists justify the attacks by
religion, while the Christians don't, in most cases. However, the
attacks are the same, and how the attacks are justified matters only
politically.

However, there is one example where the Christians use religion in the
same way that the jihadists do: the Northern Ireland "Troubles."
Everyone talks about this in religious terms -- Catholics vs
Protestants. This is bullshit. Nobody except me wants to talk about
the fact that this is an ethnic battle between the indigenous Gaelics
versus the descendants of the English and Scottish invaders. And it
took me years to figure it out because no one wants to talk about it.
It's one of the best kept secrets in the world.

** 23-Jun-11 News -- Sectarian violence in Northern Ireland grows again
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... m#e110623b

The jihadists are not attacking Christians or the West, except to use
as publicity stunts for recruiting purposes, and to manipulate the
media. The number of Christians killed by jihadists is minuscule
compared to the number of Muslims killed, but even a tiny attack on
Christians gets days of media attention, while a huge massacre of
Muslims barely gets a paragraph. The jihadists are Arabs and Pashtuns
who are attacking Alawites and Persians and Balochs and Hazaras.
Framing what they do simply as "jihadists vs infidels," which is what
everyone does, is bullshit.