In a scene from Norwegian journalist Paul Refsdal’s new documentary Dugma: The Button, Abu Qaswara, a would-be suicide bomber, describes the sense of exhilaration he felt during an aborted suicide attack against a Syrian army checkpoint. “These were the happiest [moments] I’ve had in 32 years. If anyone had felt exactly what I felt at that moment, Muslims would want to go through the same feeling and non-Muslims would convert just to experience it,” he enthuses to the camera, visibly elated by his attempted self-immolation.
Abu Qaswara’s attack failed after his vehicle was blocked by obstacles on the road placed by the Syrian military. But speaking shortly after he returned from his mission, it was clear that his brush with death had filled him with euphoria. “It was a feeling more than you can imagine,” he says. “Something I cannot describe, it cannot be described.”
Dugma follows the lives of several volunteers fighting with Jabhat al-Nusra, al Qaeda’s former affiliate organization in Syria. Refsdal, who previously produced a film while embedded with the Afghan Taliban, spent six weeks living with al-Nusra fighters in Syria. The men profiled are not Syrians, but volunteers from abroad. Abu Qaswara is a Saudi citizen who traveled to fight in Syria, while another character in the film, Abu Basir al-Britani, is a British-born convert to Islam. Raised in London, Abu Basir came to public attention last year when British reporters discovered that he had formerly been an amateur rock musician named Lucas Kinney in a band called Hannah’s Got Herpes.
The film profiles Abu Qaswara and Abu Basir as they prepare for their respective missions. The men have been approved by al-Nusra leadership to be placed on “the list,” a roster of individuals cleared to conduct suicide attacks. As one al-Nusra religious leader counsels Abu Qaswara, “[This] is about a human life, the most precious thing you have.” Adding, “A person would not sacrifice himself for tons of money, but as you can see, the young men compete over martyrdom operations.”
The lives of the volunteers leading up to their suicide missions are remarkably quotidian. Abu Qaswara meets friends at a fried chicken restaurant, talks on the phone to his family in Saudi Arabia, and beams while watching videos of his young daughter on his laptop. Abu Basir reads the news, picks flowers, and sarcastically jokes with friends about American foreign policy. Describing his own path to joining al-Nusra, he tells Refsdal that while growing up in Britain, “I saw myself as a little different to the people around me. I questioned a lot more.”
Only the few Syrians who appear in the film speak at length about their grievances over the crimes of the Syrian government. In contrast, the foreign volunteers appear largely driven by personal motivations. Liberating the local people from oppression appears at best a secondary concern. Perishing in the conflict and reaping the existential rewards of such an end takes precedence. Both Abu Qaswara and Abu Basir gave up comfortable lives to come to Syria, knowing that certain death would be the outcome of that decision. But rather than deterring them, the prospect of a rewarding death was a primary factor motivating their decision to fight.
This impulse toward self-destruction is actually seen as selfish by some fellow insurgents. In his co-authored 2014 memoir The Arabs at War in Afghanistan, Mustafa Hamid, a former high-ranking Egyptian volunteer with the Afghan mujahideen in the 1980s, described his own frustration with many of the later waves of volunteers arriving to that conflict. “One of the negatives that emerged from the jihad, and which continues to have severe consequences today, was the tendency for the youth to focus not on success and achieving victory and liberating Afghanistan, but on their desire for martyrdom and to enter paradise,” Hamid wrote. This overriding preoccupation with becoming a martyr meant that participation in the conflict, “became individual instead of for the benefit of the group or the country where the fight for liberation is taking place.”
Tracing how the contemporary practice of jihad deviated from his own ideal of defending the rights of oppressed populations, Hamid lamented that “this desire for martyrdom and the rise of a sentiment that nothing matters in war except for retaliation has come to result in suicide operations against civilian targets.” This has in turn bred a callous attitude toward violence that “has reached the level of bragging in front of the camera while carrying out horrific violent acts.”
Abu Qaswara, right, seeking advice about his coming “martyrdom operation” from a Jabhat al-Nusra leader.
The degeneration of mass movements over time that Hamid lamented has been widely documented in other contexts by political scientists. Although the Islamic State militant group is considered to be the most depraved purveyor of violent jihadism today, it is not hard to glimpse the same sense of heedless fanaticism among Jabhat al-Nusra’s foreign recruits. Despite volunteering to join a civil war, they evince little altruism. In their zeal to die, they manage to transform what in theory is the ultimate act of self-sacrifice — giving one’s life for a cause — into a profoundly selfish act. The distance between this nihilistic attitude and the ad hoc internationalism of Mustafa Hamid, or even the illiberal utopianism of Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb, is difficult to overstate.
Suicide bombing has become a common feature of the current age of terrorism and state collapse. As a tactic of war, it was initially pioneered not by Islamists, but by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, a Marxist-Leninist separatist group fighting a civil war against the Sri Lankan government. But after being adopted by Middle Eastern militants in the late 1980s and early 1990s (including by several leftist groups), the tactic has since become synonymous in the public imagination with Muslim extremism.
When Abu Qaswara seeks out advice about his coming martyrdom, the al-Nusra leader he speaks with tells him to reflect on his intentions to ensure that he is not simply attempting to “escape from life.” Although the act of suicide has for centuries been considered impermissible by Muslim religious tenets, it was given an aura of ambiguity in modern times after being defended by unscrupulous religious authorities during the Palestinian armed resistance against Israeli occupation. That initial, tacit legitimation of suicide bombing has since contributed to the spread and institutionalization of this tactic by terrorists and insurgent groups around the world.
Belated efforts to put the genie back in the bottle have proven difficult.
Though beautifully made, in many ways Dugma is a difficult film to watch. The characters methodically prepare for death, but at the same time, evince profound love and concern for the wives and children they will leave behind. The ideological circumlocutions they use to justify their impending suicides are often infuriating.
Toward the end of the film, some of the would-be suicide bombers begin expressing reservations about their decision. After learning that his wife is pregnant, Abu Basir al-Britani begins to grapple with the magnitude of his decision to give up his own life. “If I go to a battle and get killed, that’s one thing,” he says, pausing to reflect. “But if I take the conscious decision to go and press the button — if I have a wife and children, they will not forgive me for this.”
Thanks a lot for the article! In yesterday’s CNN Amanpour interview Paul was asked whether the risk of showing the deeply human side of suicide bombers isn’t that we would feel empathy. Goodness!?! Can we please distinguish empathy and human understanding from agreement or justification?!
If we find any solutions at all, it will be because it is entirely possible and healthy to understand and feel connection to suicide bombers and terrorists. I find the Western tenet of depicting terrorism as incomprehensible and specifically targetting the Western world (while 90% of its victims die in the Middle East, where the West regularly sets of civil war) ridiculous, hypocritical, short-sighted (if not ethno-centric) and problematic.
Although I have not yet found a way to really contribute, I find it facinating to live as a Dutch Buddhist in Cairo, working for a Catholic organisation serving Muslims. Let us disagree, but above all let us understand and be moved by complex films and articles like this.
Its against Islam to take the life of an “innocent” yes, but what Islam deems to be innocent is vastly different than what you or I would living in a secular society. Apostates, Gays, and Adulterers are not considered innocents within Islam. Stoning to death for crimes against the faith are directly linked to the Quran and Hadiths. There’s a reason so many Muslims in the middle east and abroad can rationalize the stoning of gays and apostates. There’s a reason that 30% of British Muslims supported the death of the Danish cartoonists. There’s a reason that well educated and well off Muslims can come to the conclusion that flying planes into buildings is a good thing to do. The notion that economic disparity and Muslim subjugation is the main reason we see so many injustices happening in the Muslim world is in my opinion very short sighted and not getting to root of the problem. The problem isn’t Muslims but Islam itself. The lack of separation of church and state within the Quran, the idea that the book is perfect and has no flaws, and the notion that criticism of the prophet is a crime against the religion as a whole. These things are holding the Muslim world back from any true reformation and social progress. I take into account the counter productive efforts of our foreign policy of course. The idea that we’re going to bomb these people into submission is naïve, and the disregard for civilian casualties is not only disheartening but counterproductive to any idea of a true lasting peace in the region.
It is a common mistake that my fellow countrymen make. They think because they have military superiority that they will win the war. What they fail to understand is that they are not fighting an army, they are fighting a people.
This was the real lesson of Vietnam.
Author writes: “Dugma follows the lives of several volunteers fighting with Jabhat al-Nusra, al Qaeda’s former affiliate organization in Syria.”
A dead giveaway of the western (US) bias. “former Qaeda’s former affiliate?????”
Just few days ago ANF unsuccessfully tried to pull a trick of leaving al-Qaeda affiliation to avoid Russian bombing, why a guy writing of the past even mentioned it, legitimizing this charade.
One button pressed (on keyboard) and author’s credibility blew up in our faces.
By the way, if author bothered to read some books about politics of Christian Crusaders he would have found the same exaltation amount crusaders as among suicide bombers, a normal reaction to massive peer pressure and religious brainwashing, altered brain functions via chemical intervention, drugs or special foods or starvation, all augment such sensations.
Almost every shallow, sham of analysis on this subject as we have been presented here omits decisive role in making suicide bomber or crusader namely a role of socioeconomic context. Fame, respect for family, opened financial economic opportunities, relations and excellent standing within economic mafia that runs ME as much as Church ran economic system in Middle Ages in Europe.
It is all enormously enhanced by specific enticement for the really political sacrifice such as religious blessing, respect and distinctions such as instant sainthood, and worry free, orgiastic life of opulence in paradise after death with 40 virgins (Muslims) or 50 virgins (Christians). Definitely current suicide bombers are short changed getting ten virgins less than Christians did. The other type of enticement is simple revenge for death in the family or friend suicide bombers are often lied that they would kill family members of somebody responsible for death of their own kin, while dying for general cause (freedom etc.,) is usually least enticing.
And the last enticing factor to cross the line used in medieval Europe as much as in ME now, an instant lump sum payment to the family mostly to cover debts (often payable to the same people who sent suicide bomber (crusader) out to kill and be killed or immediate costs of funeral celebrations and campaign for promoting sainthood, sometimes school expanses for siblings etc. or some business expenses like new truck or something like that.
In fact in medieval Europe there was so many volunteers for crusades from lower classes that it had to be stopped by repealing instant sainthood and requirement to wait 50 years after death and prohibition on money payments for killing infidels or dying doing so.
A religious fervor faded as fast as money dried up.
In the end except for 0.1% real psychotics eliminating enticements I mentioned about would stop 99% of suicide bombing. The other solution would be much more expensive such as to match or exceed the payment to family if they prevent suicide bombing in a first place. But that would mean economic boom in those areas since everybody would claim that he/she prevented suicide bombing to cash in on that.
Ironically such a big stimulus is needed for most economies collapsing under neoliberal policies of oppression.
There is no doubt that the core of this political problem and emigration problem is a socioeconomic of collapse societies in ME and anywhere.
In truth situation is so bad that with proper incentives, much higher than in ME, say pay $10 millions to blow yourself up in the US you can count on many, prepped up, pushed to do it by their own families in dire straits, in desperation, similar to many GI sent to the war to die or be maimed for much less, just so family can brag about patriotism or reek tangible economic benefits or to avoid calamities of joblessness or homelessness.
In 2003 many parents of future recruits were told that if their son or daughter served in US military the coming layoffs would not touch them, or that their promotion would have been more likely and more such a extortionists crap under guise of patriotism.
Suicide bombing is an industry now like Holy Crusades millennium ago, and will continue as long as money is coming.
This is nothing but an abuse of psychology and dubious political analysis of suicide bombings that supposedly explains something without really explaining anything. And this very piece of sensationalism for clicks and abhorrent humanization of those who send those young people to their deaths for nothing but money and their own political ambitions proves this point.
TIC more and more disappoints with its lack of any depth but shallow propaganda.
Um, yeeeah….if it’s a DOCUMENTARY (!), the usual nomenclature for Basir would be ‘subject’, NOT ‘character’. *eyeroll*
“Describing his own path to joining al-Nusra, he tells Refsdal that while growing up in Britain, “I saw myself as a little different to the people around me. I questioned a lot more.”” Too bad the questioning doesn’t extend to the lunatic, evil idea that you can go out and commit mass murder, not in order to benefit others but in order to escape this hellish world and have a good time. But if you think like that, if you actually believe that, then you’re just brain damaged. You’re pathological. Because no God of love would approve of such an evil act. And there is a God of love. Heaven, for one thing, is not meant for everyone. Think of it as government. A small handful of humans (Christendom calls them Saints, although Christendom is in darkness and is due for destruction) will be taken into heaven, if you want to believe what the Christian Bible, not a particular religious organization, teaches. There’s no hell in the Bible outside of careless translation and the desire of certain translators to inject their own beliefs into God’s word. But a careful study of that Word will reveal those deviations from it. And if you choose to disbelieve the Bible – I disbelieve some of it – you still can’t come to any conclusion other than there’s pathology at work here. A pathology that otherwise mentally sound, but utterly evil, people find very convenient for so many to possess.
The martyr who blows himself up along with others, unless he’s ‘seriously’ brain damaged, won’t go anywhere. He has requested death and God will force no one to live. It’s my position that culture can excuse only so much. We are all made in God’s image. We reason and, unless we snuff them out ourselves, we possess qualities of (a desire for) justice, mercy, truth, love. But we are free to modify ourselves into images of the angry dragon of Revelation chapter 12, which that Bible book also identifies as Satan. Therefore, a human conscious that hasn’t been ignored so often that it’s an alarm one no longer hears, tells you when you cross the line, regardless what your cultural norms might say. These mass murderers for personal gain called suicide bombers, along with promoters and practitioners of female genital mutilation and those who support and pratice honor killings can’t be excused on account of their cultural rules and norms. They cross a line (unless they are truly profoundly brain damaged) that they should know puts them in opposition to the true God. God will hold them to account. When they die, they will not exist in any form.
I am not claiming to have good mind reading skills, but I wonder if you realize that was just the narrative that Paul Refsdal/Hussain chose to entertain.
Also, are Obama, USG officials “truly profoundly brain damaged”?
Is it Christiany and good genocidally invading people based on well known lies and then come on Independence day and claim that only 116 have lost their lives as unintended, collateral damage, when you yourself have been bragging about kill lists and especially double taps?
Obama claimed they were only 116 or whatever number you can write on one of his buttocks with a 6″ font size, the only important aspect is that that figure be a prime number, he said.
// __ Obama Brags About Out of Control Drone Strategy
youtube.com/watch?v=vAah_HYFsgk
~
// __ Obama ‘Really Good At Killing People’
youtube.com/watch?v=rxYPGVs4FD0
~
// __ Obama Drone Strikes Are ‘Mass Murder’ – Jeremy Scahill
youtube.com/watch?v=L9Trh8iwNt8
~
I remember once Jeremy Scahill talking about the careless reaction of U.S. government officials when he points out to them that killing people just based on “patterns”, without knowing their identities to any extent is murder. U.S. government officials simply said, well we do our best to find out whom did we kill … (after you kill them and just to check if you killed the people you intended to kill)
Again, are Obama, USG officials “truly profoundly brain damaged”? Probably, they are just “God blessed America” kinds of Christiany patriots
I hope Paul Refsdal/Hussain will one of these days talk about the psychology of politicians
By the way there is quite a bit of outright non-sense, racism, abuse, controlling b#llsh!t and nincompoopery in the Bible as there is in most religious texts. That is why I simply prefer St. Francis little flowers
// __ Holy Quran Experiment in New York City
youtube.com/watch?v=riDlxCvFZWw
~
RCL
https://ipsoscustodes.wordpress.com/2016/07/31/theintercept-dugma-the-button-psychology-of-modern-suicide-bombers/
Well, it doesn’t seem to be about niggah me. There were already 9 “status”:”hold” messages, before I posted mine. All you need to do is view the source text of the page.
They have kept “status”:”hold” messages on the latest Chelsea Manning article for almost 2 days already?
Most of us here are pretty good at questioning what they do even if we don’t agree with each other.
I haven’t figured out rhyme or reason yet. Probably, they are censoring, rating our comments based on “suggestions” by the NSA or Israeli Mossad?
RCL
The options being: they can “escape from life” or ” they will be freedom-lovingly exited from the hell in which they have been conditioned to live by a drone”
Per Hollywood specifications the closure to any for of entertainment must have a happy ending
But, how will we Westerners be able to consume it if it is not propaganda?
Thank you!
If at all. Thank you!
1st) notice how no one disputes your main point
2nd) I would even say that even those 9/11 terrorists had more honor than the U.S. military invading people who can’t defend themselves on an equal basis based on lies and just killing people for the “freedom-loving” fun of it (and then put and abuse Manning in prison for letting the world at large know).
https://collateralmurder.wikileaks.org/
They targeted the main USGs military and political institutions responsible for genocidally messing with their countries and people instead of bombing Harlem and Hialeah “with USG approval” … as USG claims
3rd) Have you heard anything lately about the South China Sea? Why is it that Western media stopped talking about it at once? Why is it so hard to make up some b#llsh!t about WMDs when it comes to China or Russia? Don’t they actually have enough nukes?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_proliferation
I thought and hoped gringos would finally have a good chance to test if “God” truly gave a sh!t about them:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/28/conflict-us-china-not-inevitable-empire
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/12/philippines-wins-south-china-sea-case-against-china
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/25/neighbours-avoid-criticising-beijing-over-south-china-sea
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/27/us-warship-lassen-defies-beijing-sail-disputed-south-china-sea-islands
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/18/south-china-sea-fighter-jets-unsafe-intercept-us-spy-plane
But then, after USG made friends with and started “aiding” (you won’t believe this), Vietnam!, regional countries don’t even dare to tickle China
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/25/neighbours-avoid-criticising-beijing-over-south-china-sea
Hopefully, it there is any left!
But they need to checkpoint reality in convenient ways and always someone else sh!t will smell worst than one’s own!
What we and our allies do it not terrorism but freedom loving, also we have a free media, “democratic” goverments while their social order is based on Al Qur’an.
truth and peace and love,
RCL
$ date
Sun Jul 31 17:22:21 EDT 2016
Yes, the Quran does glorify the martyrdom of soldiers who fight in the “Way of Islam.” But suicide (the taking of one’s own life) is not at all the Way of Islam, the last time I checked. In so far as I know, within Islam, suicide has always been haram or considered as a sin, no?
Yes its actually directly referred in the quran “dont make your hands a mean to your own destruction” [2:195]
The Middle East. Not like its a place full of desperately poor and traumatised people with no sense of attachment or place in the world set against insurmountable odds and manipulated by shady operators on behalf of the Players of the Great Game.
We don’t need to know the mind of a suicide bomber. Anyone who has got angry enough and frustrated enough to want to kill or commit suicide has started on that route. We need to know the minds of the people manipulating them, the people that are happy to let someone else vanish in a high-speed shower of meat and blood and bone to satisfy their agendas. Because a suicide bomber is the same as a soldier or a drone or a mass metadata collection or a lop-sided trade agreement or a political move to oust a rival or a clandestine transfer of funds or a media lie. Just a tool for the Bad Guys, and a rather blunt and ineffective one at that.
Anyone got the number of M.N. Barack Obama or M.H. Dick Cheney…?
Did the Prophet Mohammed ever promote or condone one’s taking of one’s own life by one’s own hand under any circumstances? I would think that perhaps these young men need to be taught that by any serious reading of the Hadith and the Quran, they would be receiving the rewards of one who has committed suicide, and not those of a true martyr. How can they be led so far astray by their supposed imams?
It’s sad to see how the writer just glossed over the fact that the Muslim majority feels this suicide bombing is against Islam. Taking an innocent life is against Islam. Just because the enemy does so does not make it right. One must not die by their own hand but at the hands of the enemy. That’s Jihad.
Great review. This movie seems like it may be a good bridge between somebody like a Greenwald and somebody like a Sam Harris. It seems that the story affirms and complicates what is essentially true in each of their perspectives.
Maybe The Intercept could pay for a co-viewing/interview between Greenwald and Harris. I don’t need those guys to agree, but I think everybody would benefit if they started finding bridge language that didn’t water down either side.
A WAR BASED ON LIES – by a war criminal George W. Bush….opened “Pandora’s box” ….or do you prefer ” letting the genie out of the bottle” ?.? EITHER?.? or NEITHER?.? Before it can be stopped / or fixed – YOU first have to address the truth… CONGRESS – changed the law of protecting past presidents to cover only twenty-yeara…then reinstated the life protection to George W. Bush..
Started by LIES – & – still carried out by LIES….how do you take the high-road ( to failure – faulty intelligence – – – war of terror without borders / without end…
The slippery slope has been long gone – WE will be welcomed as liberators – roses thrown at our feet…..weapons of Maas destruction?.? ( as cluster bombs – made in the U.S.A. are used indiscriminately ! )
TRY the WAR CRIMINALS… as you would try Aldolph Holder…..T R U T H – – J U S T I C E –
yes, The AMERICAN WAY…..
While death smiles upon us all, I suspect the relatively new phenomenon of deliberately killing innocent people by suicide bombing (or ‘collateral damage’ bombing for that matter), will be frowned upon at the Pearly Gates of Heaven!
Otoh, dying for a noble cause is as old as the hills …
The US has engaged in covert warfare against much of the world for many years, destroying entire countries. It used Islamic jihad as a weapon against the Soviets and in Yugoslavia, Syria, Libya, Iraq, Egypt, Iran and has continues to this day.
One of the first car bombs to go off in the ME was from CIA director William Casey.
http://cosmos.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/php/event.php?eid=582
Here is a name you may recognize.
CORRECTION: The Tamil Tigers did not “pioneer” suicide bombings, Hezbollah did five years before the first Tigers attack when Ahmad Qassir hit the IDF HQ in Tyre, South Lebanon 11/11/82. The attacks on the US Marines and CIA station in Beirut in 1983 were also suicide truck-bombings. It was already a proven tactic against occupation troops before the Tigers adopted it.
Try again.
Only cops stage suicide bombings.
It’s the ol’ “nuttin to lose” scenario. It’s the ultimate “Myway or Hiway” negotiation. Meanwhile Hellery Clinton is busy making more enemies by declaring Jerusalem to be owned by israel. Meanwhile Barack Obama is making more enemies by casually and carelessly droning and acceptin mistakes and collateral damage. By all appearances you cannot be a muslim outside the US and protest US policies of occupation and sanctions without risking lots of lives unless you wave the American flag and praise Jesus.
Hellery’s TPP global initiative solution is to get all muslims a credit card, pay high prices by borrowing on the card, then sicking the collection agencies on them. And when they protest, the TPP will make them pay One World income tax and if they refuse, she will sick the global police collection force on them and toss them into prison for not following court orders.
Then what happens?
Notwithstanding all the pejorative descriptions of suicide bombers, “It’s just not fair”, is it now? What would happen if guys on our side, blew themselves up amongst innocents…Oh wait s minute now.. How many “mass shootings” (non-Muslim) and “terrorist attacks” (Muslim) have there been in the USA, not to mention Europe in the past few months.
The same region of the brain affected by schizophrenia is also susceptible to religion..
I appreciate the article giving the view from the other side.
“the prospect of a rewarding death was a primary factor motivating their decision to fight”
Rather than resort to hard work and dedication, Muslim youth want the easy way out.
Just walk into a crowd and push a button, then you are on top of the heap!
Seems “youth” the world over are more interested in just one quick roll of the dice, versus trying to make a difference.
the US taught children “COMMUNISM HAMMER AND SICKLE IS GOING TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD!!!”…. cold war
then told people “CHINA IS MARCHING ACROSS ASIA TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD!!!” ….. vietnam
then “IRAQ IS AN AXIS OF EVIL WITH WMD AND THREATENING THE US!!!” …. illegal invasion
then “IRAN IS GOING TO WIPE ISRAEL OFF THE MAP!!!”…. billing us for billions
honest to Christ, this fairy tale bullshit will bankrupt the US and then the moneychangers can buy up all the land and evict the population?
Wait wait, go back further. It was, “Blacks are trying to Africanize America!!”…. Reconstruction.
“Remember the Maine!!” … The Spanish American war.
“The Germans blew up the Lusitania, never mind that it had explosives being shipped and Britain’s similar embargo that’s been there for months!!” …. WW1
“The British are coming!!” … Oh come on the tea tax wasn’t that bad, you stingy Yankee bastards.
Don’t forget those Savage inhuman Indnians! …. Genocide
You may also want to read this CIA’s assassination manual that was declassified long time back.
Suicide-bombing is classified as “lost” case in our terminology. There are other versions of this manual online. The same principles apply, and these techniques are many centuries old.
The documentary entitled Paradise Now from 2005 is really worth watching.
No propaganda; just a disturbing reality.
The recruitment of suicide bombers by radical Islamic terror groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda doesn’t seem so different from the recruitment of Japanese kamikaze suicide bombers in World War II.
The manual given to Japanese kamikaze bombers shows this; a few minor edits in religious doctrine and it would serve the takfiri salafist suicide bomber just as well:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/sep/07/japanese-kamikaze-pilots-second-world-war
Religious fanaticism allied to a state’s quest for expanded territory and individual desires for more wealth and power are at the root of the suicide bomber recruitment programs. All the architects of such efforts have to do is find young people, ideally those who’ve lost friends and family members to state-sponsored violence (in drone strikes, for example), fill their heads with religious ideology, and give them a target.
However, it does seem to require the alliance of a religious ideology with a state for maximum effect. Japan had the militant Shinto religion (kamikaze means “divine wind”); Saudi Arabia has its state-supported militant takifir – salafist Wahhabi Sunni preachers who praise the young ISIS suicide bombers and guarantee their entrance into heaven, and the Iranian suicide squads fighting Iraq in the 1980s (and the truck bombers in Lebanon in the 1980s) were also products of state-religious alliances.
Ultimately, suicide bombers are just another tool of war; winding up a sucide bomber and sending him off to kill people is not all that different from launching a drone and sending it off to kill people, or loading up a helicopter with soldiers and sending them off to kill people. The real question is always, “who is directing these activites and what is their agenda?”
Very astute commentary. Convincing young warriors to put themselves in harms way has taken many forms throughout history. By the time that the Greek and Roman empires came on the scene, warfare tactics had advanced to a degree that individual heroics were understood to be a breech of the type of discipline necessary to affecting group strategies. Yet the willingness to fight and die for ones side or cause was no less evident for a phalanx infantryman as it is for a Palestinian suicide bomber. The ongoing curse of culture is that it leaders invariably rob its constituents of the necessary circumspection whereby they can resist the instinctual drive to run with the herd. There is little difference between a soldier who has been thoroughly inculcated with the defining doctrines of ones culture and the religious zealot who has been indoctrinated with the precepts of a given faith. In both cases, the individual’s innate capacity for individual thought and action is harnessed via a contemporaneous system of rewards and punishments that assures conformity.
Japanese kamikaze pilots – despite what boneheaded propaganda movies like the awful Pearl Harbor have to say – fastidiously avoided civilian casualties.
Japan’s Kamikaze Pilots and Contemporary Suicide Bombers: War and Terror
(The Japanese evidently had more honor than the US, also, who obliterated two cities – 80,000 civilians – with atomic bombs.)
Tell the Chinese about the Japanese fastidiousness for avoiding civilian casualties. If one’s perspective is that one is fighting for God or for the Emperor (man god), what part of that equation is a civilian?
I’m talking about kamikaze pilots in reference to suicide bombing. You?
So according to you, Kamikaze pilots had a special code of honor, instilled in them not to kill civilians, as opposed to the rest of the Japanese military. I find that unlikely. I find it more likely that Kamikaze pilots were used against the military because they would serve as more efficient weapons against those targets. I’m obviously talking about likely, unlikely, as I don’t know for sure.
You could read the article I linked. Then you’d learn all about them.
The US were bombing Japanese cities, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians prior even to Nagasaki and Hiroshima, and the Japanese indeed wanted to strike terror into the Americans. But the kamikaze pilots had instructions to only attack military targets, whether you find that “unlikely” or not.
I read the article. Frankly I find it quite unbelievable that anybody would buy this bullshit. They had a limited number of Kamikaze pilots. Obviously they’re not going to use it against civilians, when they have other munitions that can do that more efficiently.
I’m not defending American behavior, when they fire bombed Tokyo and killed civilians. But to pretend that the Japanese had some sort of higher standard during their conduct of WWII is ridiculous. Honestly, you should talk to a Chinese person, and find out how they feel about Japanese honor, and Japanese behavior, during WWII. The Japanese behavior was totally unrestrained, and amongst the most racist that I know of.
The point I made is that one thing distinguishing suicide bombers from kamikaze pilots is that the latter did not target civilians.
Remember this point.
The only mention of ‘honor’ that I made was to contrast this with the US obliteration of countless civilians in their air attacks. The fact that you for some reason want a tangential debate about how honorable the Japanese military was in general does not take away from the point.
I understand your point. My point is that they didn’t use them against civilians for practical reasons, not because they cared about civilians.
Your point is a distraction – and uninformed.
In fact, even in Pearl Harbor itself, care was taken to avoid civilian targets like hospitals, etc., by all the Japanese military involved – not just the kamikaze pilots – and the civilian toll was 68 people compared to 2043 military personnel (Pearl Harbor Fact Sheet). And furthermore, “it seems likely that most, if not all, of the casualties in civilian areas were inflicted by ‘friendly fire,’ our own anti-aircraft shells falling back to earth and exploding after missing attacking planes.” So your claim about the pilots having some deal unique to them to avoid civilians based on “practical reasons” is obviously just an incorrect guess on your part.
This is by no means an excusing of Japanese atrocities in China, nor an appraisal of how virtuous or consistent a culture’s claim to a code of honor actually is. The central issue is that the comparison between suicide bombers and kamikaze pilots is inappropriate; my mention of honor was merely parenthetical, and you’ve established quite clearly how you feel.
> The central issue is that the comparison between suicide bombers and kamikaze pilots is inappropriate
the article made a small mistake by quoting someone suggesting that suicide bombing implies killing civilians. but the “martyrdom operation” doesn’t necessarily target civilians. the target can be military, such as the camp chapman attack in afghanistan. also see: “ISIS says it targets Iraqi military in day of [suicide] attacks”
If bombers attack military targets (and do not incur civilian casualties) that is technically simply a form of warfare – not that such is an excuse for violence, I’m just referring to official descriptions. I’ve never been impressed with the claims that all or even most of the suspects (and those people in the blast radius with them) murdered in drone strikes/air strikes/special ops are as described by the establishment; if you’re right, and some of even the legitimate “terrorism” suspects are actually acting to avoid civilian or “collateral” damage, then obviously the Western propaganda about these militants is even more deceptive and manipulative than regular cynicism can even imagine – for the entire pose of Western high-ground morality in this regard is claimed on the preposterous lie that the West (alone) avoids shedding innocent blood in conflict.
the thing is, ‘photosymbiosis’ in his/her comment (and ‘Karl’ in his reply) wasn’t distinguishing between military and civilian targets of suicide attacks. and neither did the statement he was probably responding to:
you introduced that distinction, and i replied because i thought it might have been because of that one quote i mentioned. the article was primarily about the motivation behind suicide attacks and that’s also what photosymbiosis was addressing
that said, it’s a obviously a good distinction you’re making (whether or not you’re right about the Japanese) and i’ve been trying to find out if the tamil tigers were the first to use suicide attacks against civilians. if so, then hussain almost certainly meant “Suicide bombing of civilians” in that paragraph, and photosymbiosis and i made the same mistake, though i think hussain should have been clearer. in any case, it was an interesting discussion
Insofar as suicide bombers avoid civilian casualties, then, they can be likened to kamikaze pilots. But otherwise, not. It certainly isn’t a generally applicable comparison – which is why I summarily described it as inappropriate.
I’m glad you found the discussion interesting.
“Your point is a distraction – and uninformed.”
You address yourself with that line.
The Kamikaze was limited in supply. It was pointless to waste a very valuable weapon to kill civilians. The Japanese did not give a rat’s ass about collateral damage. You have never spoken with WWII Pacific theater vets, have you.
Note the civilian figures versus the military personnel killed in Pearl Harbor, and you’ll see that all the gunships, fighter planes etc. made a careful effort to avoid civilian casualties, so the policy was not restricted to kamikaze pilots – at least in battles with the States. That way you can be informed, as you bizarrely claim I am not.
Easy to claim an effort was been made when there were NO CIVILIANS present on the ships, planes, airfields, etc.
That is -Mona-.
The Japanese would never waste a weapon on civilians when there was a military target of higher value. The cost to civilian life was never a consideration.
Look up the bombings of Philippine cities by Japanese bombers and comprehend aerial bombardment of cities is the very definition of what you claim the Japs didn’t do.
But then you will deny you said it …
Your ‘knowledge’ of warfare is striking in its simplicity.
I’ve presented proof of my position, which is not in the least degraded by atrocities committed on POWS and non-Westerners by the Japanese which you mention. I know all about what they did, and I also know what they did not do, and whether it was considered a matter of honor or not.
Read what is said, and stop interpreting what you read as a defense of Japan.
The point is in the comparison between kamikaze pilots and suicide bombers, a difference is in the civilian casualties. Whether or not this is a matter of honor is ultimately a distraction, as I’ve pointed out several times, but that it was their policy is a documented fact.
In Pearl Harbor where many civilians were present, (and this is before even kamikaze pilots were officially exerted, though some comprehensively damaged fighters did steer into military targets), care was taken to avoid hospitals etc, by all the Japanese military were involved. This is fact, and I mentioned it to show that that the contemporary kamikaze pilots’ orders were thereby not peculiar to them in their engagements risking Western casualties. One can see these facts and still acknowledge the inexcusable and insane brutality of Japan in China, and its hideous treatment of POWs and so forth.
The Japanese biological warfare unit, 731, active in China in World War II, made a point of targeting civilians and also of using civilians as guinea pigs in biological warfare experiments. Of course, Shiro Ishii, who ran that unit, was pardoned for handing all his biowarfare data over to the U.S., which employed it in some covert Korean War biowarfare attacks.
I suppose your point is that suicide attacks are attacks of desperation; if the kamikaze pilots had a better fuel supply, they would have returned to base, refueld, and loaded up a second bombing run?
Nevertheless, my central point remains: it’s the agenda of those who direct the wars that matters, not so much that of the tools used to fight those wars.
The Final Secret of Pearl Harbor
by John T. Flynn
October 1945
https://www.antiwar.com/rep/flynn1.html
imo, ww2 was ALL ABOUT RUBBER.
Back then, automobiles were in big, and i mean BIG, production.
The tires back then were made of RUBBER, not oil like they are today.
And the tires back then also had rubber inner tubes. That’s a lot of rubber. And America had a thirst for rubber. And all the rubber came from the FAR EAST as it was called then. The french colonised that area, the brits had some, Japan had trade deals and the US wanted it all.
soon, it will be water and sunlight.
ps… the transition between rubber tires and oil tires did not happen until the 1970’s. hence, vietnam.
Hillary is trained in the ART OF LYING. She even had her lieutenant dirty debbie run a false flag operation on Trump.
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/dnc-emails-here-staff-staged-fake-anti-trump-protests-used-bernies-jewish-faith-discredit-him
Horilly Clinton, every warmongers wet dream.
The Japanese evidently had more honor than the US, also, who obliterated two cities – 80,000 civilians – with atomic bombs.
You seem to forget that you wrote that part. Where was Japan’s honor in Nanking? Of course the kamikaze pilots targeted military personal and equipment. Who is gonna give you more trouble, unarmed woman and children or the US military? Obviously the US did and still does terrible things in the name of Justice but don’t talk about Japan’s honor in ww2. You would have wished to be a US POW over a imperial Japanese POW 10 times out of 10.
I’m not forgetting that part, I’m asserting its tangential nature relative to the point – the honor remark was obviously (as you can see for yourself) parenthetical, an entirely bracketed sentence, referring sardonically to the briefly illustrative comparison (kamikaze/Hiroshima) of codes of behavior between US/Japanese strikes on one another. Pearl Harbor’s attackers (gunships, fighter planes etc., all avoided civilian targets, which shows you kamikaze pilots orders were not peculiar or original to them for reasons regarding “who is gonna give you more trouble” as you erroneously claim. None of this excuses Japanese atrocities to POWs etc., nor is it meant to. The point, away from this tangent, is the functional distinction between permitting civilian casualties or not doing so in modes of warfare – strictly as a functional matter, not as a cultural critique.
“The Japanese evidently had more honor than the US,”
Look up Bataan Death March or the Rape of Nanking. If the Japs had the bomb they would have used it against any city regardless of civilians.
Kamikaze didn’t avoid civilian causalities; the best use of the Kamikaze was a military target devoid of civilians.
What I said at 3.37:
And yes, the kamikaze avoided civilian casualties.
“And yes, the kamikaze avoided [areas devoid of] civilian casualties.”
So there …
are you -Mona-?
It isn’t a “so there,” it’s plainly in the history of kamikaze pilots, indistinguishable from the policy observed by the rest of the military in their engagement with the US.
Here, I’ll give the link again: Japan’s Kamikaze Pilots and Contemporary Suicide Bombers: War and Terror
Also see Davie Earhart, “All Ready to Die: Kamikazefication and Japan’s Wartime Ideology.”
This is not my opinion (a “so there,”) it is documented fact, and (to repeat) it does not excuse any of the Japanese brutality witnessed elsewhere.
You are making a distinction without a difference. There was no military value in expending a very valuable weapon on civilians instead of military.
There was no honor in not attacking something which was never on the table.
In other words, they were not brave … for not attacking civilians.
My friend’s father was on a Pacific Island and a Japanese officer charged them with a sword held high. Another soldier emptied his M1 at the guy and missed with every round because of the fear created by the maniacal Banzai screams. My friend’s father shot the guy, calmly, with his 45. The officer was committing suicide after losing the battle. That is what the Japanese did. Honor; brave or stupid? You tell me.
I’ll tell you, then. It’s irrelevant to the point being made. That the Japanese were often manic and violent bastards does not take away from the inappropriate nature of a comparison between suicide bombers and kamikaze pilots.
The civilians at Pearl Harbor frankly wouldn’t give a hoot whether their being avoided by the attacks was a matter of honor or not, it would simply be something fortuitous and consequential – which is why avoidance of civilians (for whatever reason) is a critical factor in distinguishing strategy.
The manual given to Japanese kamikaze bombers shows this; a few minor edits in religious doctrine and it would serve the takfiri salafist suicide bomber just as well:
Until you read the link anyway. It is almost entirely about the specific mechanics of carrying out the job: crashing a plane into a ship. The religious part is minor, and I think is has very little relationship to that of current bombers.
I am getting really tried of the BS you post here, as well as your inane replies.
Suicide is the 10th leading cause of death in the US.
Each year 42,773 Americans die by suicide.
Suicide cost the US 44 billion annually.
Additional Facts About Suicide in the US
The annual age-adjusted suicide rate is 12.93 per 100,000 individuals.
Men die by suicide 3.5x more often than women.
On average, there are 117 suicides per day.
White males accounted for 7 of 10 suicides in 2014.
Firearms account for almost 50% of all suicides.
The rate of suicide is highest in middle age — white men in particular.
http://afsp.org/about-suicide/suicide-statistics/
Hellery is looking forward to “giving” women equal power (to die) by promoting her agenda for drafting women into the US armed forces. Perhaps this crazy lady has an agenda of expanding conflicts to turn the US into a giant army base to patrol the world for her TPP GLOBAL INITIATIVE.
[“Hellery is looking forward to “giving” women equal power (to die) by promoting her agenda for drafting women into the US armed forces.”]
That’s because “women” demanded equal rights when it came to the military…so, if a draft is drawn then they shouldn’t have anything to cry about. I am witness to their “equal” share of the murdering, prison abuse, torture, and everything a male soldier is privy to. I hate the military and it’s arrogance…what comes around, goes around.
Believe me when I say…the “women” in the military are just as bad as Clinton. From the generals to the MP’s to the Special Forces……I kid you not.
Col. Janis Karpinski, the Former Head of Abu Ghraib, Admits She Broke the Geneva Conventions But Says the Blame “Goes All the Way to The Top”
http://www.democracynow.org/2005/10/26/col_janis_karpinski_the_former_head
The Japanese pioneered suicide bombing as a tactic of modern war. The Kamikaze is well known.
They also had a 2000 lb warhead powered to over 600 MPH by solid fuel rockets.
It was piloted and had they developed that weapon early in the war it would have changed the outcome.
Really, the article made little sense to me. The documentary looks like propaganda. It is interesting that the men profiled are not Syrians but foreigners including from the West and converts to Islam.
Suicide bombing is such a perversion of religion.
I would think that defeated, hopeless people would be recruited. Destroying cities, and peoples past, present and future, putting them under siege, leads to desperation.
If the middle east were allowed to thrive politically and economically, people would not fall prey to such perversions like seeking martyrdom by killing others. A people under siege on the other hand become more regressive and inward looking.
Islam needs to modernize and it can only do so in conditions of peace, economic prosperity and political stability.
Mr. Hussain
“…….At least 80 people were killed and 231 injured Saturday when suicide bombers attacked a large demonstration in the Afghan capital of Kabul,…….The demonstration was organized by ethnic Hazaras demanding that a major regional power line be rerouted through their impoverished home province. Most Hazaras are Shiite Muslims but most Afghans are Sunni…….”
More often than not suicide bombers like the ones who targeted the minority Shia Hazara population in Kabul prey on innocent people. This is much more than just a selfish act by the suicide bombers and their support (whether ISIS or the Taliban etc.). They target innocent civilians that have no desire to leave their families for a “better” life. So this is the ultimate selfish act – taking the lives of men, women and children to fulfill their own dream of killing themselves. In reality, it makes no difference to me one way or the other why they become suicide bombers. The reasons for their callous disregard for innocent lives are irrelevant.
> In reality, it makes no difference to me one way or the other why they become suicide bombers. The reasons for their callous disregard for innocent lives are irrelevant.
to predict or prevent behavior it’s useful to know its causes
” . . . The reasons for their callous disregard for innocent lives are irrelevant.”
The same argument could be applied to the ‘collateral damage’ involved in CIA drone strikes, or the many thousands of people killed during the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, or all the people killed by Israeli assaults on Lebanon and Gaza.
However I disagree that suicide attacks are all that modern of a phenomenon. The mass assaults of World War I in the trenches were basically suicide attacks; they were ‘human wave’ attacks in which most if not all of the first waves were expected to die. The Japanese kamikaze pilots of World War II were also suicide bombers.
Furthermore, it was the militaries of the industrialized countries that began attacking civilian targets as a means of winning wars or crushing popular resistance to occupations. The destuction of cities full of civilians by aerial bombardment in World War II, from Dresden and Hamburg and London to Tokyo and Hiroshima and Nagasaki? This is civilian-targeting, too.
These strategies continued after World War II. Examples include attacks on dams and food crops in the Korean War, aimed at starving an entire country into submission; destruction of villages in Vietnam to deny resources to Vietcong, etc. Ethnic warfare has progressed the same way; in such conflicts the goal is the slaughter of civilians, in order to seize their land and resources; the Rwanda conflict, the Israeli land grabs in the West Bank, the fracturing of Yugoslavia, Saddam Hussain’s war against marsh Arabs, etc.
As far as the ISIS/Al Qaeda suicide bombers attacks on civilians, that’s the result of the ideology of the salafist Wabbahi preachers who claim anyone not a member of their specific radical branch of Islam is an enemy who shoud be slaughtered. Since Islam as a religion is still associated with theocratic dictatorships, these states finance these fanatical religious groups (ISIS, Al Qaeda, al-Nusra) as tools to increase the political power of these states. Christian states in medieval Europe did the same thing, with widespread persecution of pagans – and the Spanish Inquisition was really just an alliance between the state of Spain and the Catholic Church aimed at driving Jews and Muslims out of Spain.
This is why religious states that promote one branch of religion over another always devolve into violence and persecution of religious minorities, a standard theme in Saudi Arabia, Israel and Iran, and also common in Pakistan and India. Such states often give support to religious groups that justify the murder of non-believers as a righteous religious activity. And yes, today’s Israel, like today’s Saudi Arabia, falls into this category:
http://www.pewforum.org/2016/03/08/israels-religiously-divided-society/
Thus, those who justify the murder of civilians do not just include the takifir Wahhabi radicals of Saudi Arabia; the slaughter of Palestinian civilians in Gaza and the west Bank is justified by orthodox Jewish radicals and Israeli politicians; and the slaughter of civilians in drone strikes and regime change actions is justified by American Empire-builiding neocons and neoliberals like Bush and Clinton.
“…….The same argument could be applied to the ‘collateral damage’ involved in CIA drone strikes, or the many thousands of people killed during the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, or all the people killed by Israeli assaults on Lebanon and Gaza…..”
There were a couple of noteworthy observations from your long winded and off topic anti-western rant. Fist f all, there was the total absence of any examples of Russian/USSR bombing of civilians despite the most recent charge by HRW of the indiscriminate use of cluster bombs in Syria by Russia. There were plenty of examples of Russian terrorism as they pushed their way to Germany. The second is the clustering of religious states like Saudi Arabia, Iran etc with Israel which is completely false. Israel is a vibrant democracy. Arab citizens of Israel have voting rights, political parties, attend the same universities, serve in the Knesset and so on.
There are also plenty of examples of the US and western allies committing acts of terrorism directed at civilian populations like the fire-bombing of Tokyo and Dresden, or the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Targeting civilians is always terrorism despite the cause. However, collateral damage (from drone attacks) is not terrorism and is recognized in the Geneva Conventions. There is a world of difference (in international law) between terrorist acts and collateral damage.
Russia was terrorizing its own citizens even before WWII sending them to the Gulags for political reasons to die. Political repression was common in the USSR within Russia and the satellite countries. Thankfully, Gorbechev had the foresight to free so many people.
Thanks.
“Targeting civilians is always terrorism despite the cause.” says you. OK. That makes Nuttinyahu the lead terrorist does it not?
No.
1, these people have nothing to lose, 2, Arafat pushed young men to suicide while he and his family enjoys a royal life in Paris, 3, no one told them god is a big boy and can take care of himself, 4, the real power is those who do not suicide.
You don’t need to be a Psychologist to understand the power of propaganda (creating a TINA mindset); just drive down a country road in a blizzard and look for the Amish/Mennonite going along in an open buggy. Or, you could talk to an American worker explain why she/he is supporting the republithugs or the democreeps as while their policies and laws keep screwing the working class over. As to the SBs; you don’t see any70 year old Mullahs blowing themselves up; they know there is no paradise other than here but they are so immoral they send the young believer to his/her death but then again, we send the working class to do the fighting and murdering just like Pharaoh did 4000 years ago.
The psychology of these people is EVIL, GULLIBLE, and WEAK!!!!
When you are stupid enough to believe in man made stuff as stupid as RELIGIONS and GOVERNMENTS, that is your #1 problem. I have never heard of one religion that doesn’t contradict itself in its teachings. Early Governments were indeed religions. Now that there is freedom of speech (being attacked now) and religion the Government uses 501-C3 to control the heard of sheep.
ALL GOVERNMENTS AND RELIGIONS ARE A JOKE!!!!
If everyone understand the real laws of the world and COMMON LAW, this would be a much better place.
All religions are businesses and cults to destroy the individual.
Speaking of fanatics…
You sir are correct…… I’m a fanatic of FREEDOM and COMMON SENSE!
Amen.
I would want to hear more about the “support payments”. See http://www.cbsnews.com/news/salaries-for-suicide-bombers/ , though I’ve seen similar items for Palestine and other countries. Now maybe there are a few freaks who will blow themselves up for the hell of it, but if a support payment is not mentioned, I am inclined to assume it happened. In these desperately poor countries, $50,000 is a tremendous amount of money, and even $10,000 can be more than a year’s salary. Whether we are speaking of the crooks in charge of Muslim countries, or the thugs running ISIS, we are always too willing to credit genuine idealism for what is really just something sordid. But in a religion of evil, faith is no virtue.
“Support payments” for radical Islam suicide bombers, will turn into US taxpayers having to pay for bombing hospitals, wedding parties, ect…. I do not believe in war unles being physically attacked.
This evil in the world would not exist (to this extent) if we didn’t have governments or taxes.
We should ban all Muslims in the US. Of course I believe in freedom of speech and religion, but if you believe in a religion that condones and promotes death and violence to people that aren’t Muslims, then you do not believe in freedom of religion and speech and therefor be banned from entering.
This is no surprise though, this has been orchestrated for over a Century. The Rothschild’s use NATO to control the third world and use these people equivalent to dogs to help carry out their NWO with fear. This is why EU and NATO are flooding Europe with Muslims. They know they will not assimilate, and through destroying your countries will come more control and rule over you.
Islam is the largest religion in the world and the US is a democracy. How long until Sharia Law comes to America?
Now that’s just crazy talk.
Anti-Islamic sentiment should be a beautiful, well-sourced philosophy that you’re just using like a club until it’s all smashed and ruined. Oh, I’ll agree with you that Muhammad was a robber, slave trader, killer, rapist/child molester etc., and that the Koran is a mushy remash of Jewish holy books focusing almost entirely on threats and promises. I’ll agree that for every 1000 Muslims we’ve had an extra murder, just as with 1000 KKK followers during its heyday in the early 1900s. However, the “normal” murder rate is roughly 1 per 333 people, so the increase is not apocalyptic, even if everyone believed this dreck. And there is other dreck just as homicidal believed in by more people, such as the “War on Drugs”, which really has increased the overall murder rate in our society by about this much, if not more.
So I’ll put Muslim Americans in camps or deport them right around the time when I put War on Drugs believers through the same process; and I can only do that when America is ready to go whole hog and incarcerate the majority of the population, a day which is bound to come but which I’d prefer to put off for a few more decades.
Now by “banning all Muslims” maybe you just mean keeping them from talking in public, but that never works; you’d just have them talking more radical shit in private. Deterrence doesn’t deter if you’re sending people to jail anyway, just for talking!
No, society is full of bad ideas and the way we deal with that is by being unapologetic in expressing our contrary opinions, while respecting the right of Americans to believe what they want, not just when they’re right but also when they’re wrong! As per Milton in Aeropagitica, we have to let all the winds of doctrine blow… and have faith that the one with God on its side will prevail.
> and have faith that the one with God on its side will prevail
god is an irrational argument for any conclusion one wishes. mlk had god on his side, too. the problem is how to respond to ideas we consider senseless and dangerous, regardless of how they are conceived, while remembering that the same judgment and remedies may be applied to ourselves
MLK had God on his side and he did prevail. And when he started out, no “rational” person would have said he had a chance. We need to be highly skeptical when someone comes up to us and tells us God wants us to vote this way, pass this law. But we need to have just as much confidence that God will throw a trick or two at the world at times when we think all hope is lost. There is no shortage of miracles now relative to any Gospel; we need only look at big things like MLK’s fifty years of success and little things like Megan Rice sauntering into the middle of the Oak Ridge nuclear facility and holding a protest while the guards seemed as clueless as any hired by the Sanhedrin to guard the tomb after the crucifixion. Oh, you can say that this was G4S hiring lowball help (think Omar Mateen), with crib sheets for their tests left for the responding police to find. I don’t even know Sister Megan is realistically right about nuclear pacifism; but she believes with an honest heart, and no matter whether she stopped a nuclear war or only a terrorist raid that sets off a dirty bomb, I think she has accomplished something. A miracle is not an impossible intervention to achieve some mundane end, but a mundane intervention that achieves an impossible end. And so we have to be willing to tear free of the bonds of reason now and then, believe that the impossible can happen, have faith in the good to succeed in a fair contest of ideas even when we don’t know what it is, if we are to succeed.
The other way – the way too much modern liberalism/radicalism/socialism/communism/anarchism has gone down – is to be a slave to rationality, assume there’s no God, no reason for right to prevail, to put all confidence in some limited notion, and watch as everything gets more and more corrupt and unreasonable until it falls apart. How can any idea, even the Caliph’s notion of Islam, be wrong, if there is not some idea that is right? And how can an idea being right have meaning – beyond what we think and what he thinks – unless there is some supreme sentience by which its rightness can be determined?
> And how can an idea being right have meaning – beyond what we think and what he thinks – unless there is some supreme sentience by which its rightness can be determined?
yikes, i’m totally with you about not being “a slave to rationality,” but with “god” i only wanted to go as far as saying that having him on one’s side should not be a disqualification. us nonbelievers ignore the god argument and evaluate the conclusion (e.g., civil rights) by our own lights
“an idea being right can have meaning” if two or more people agree on the idea. being “right” doesn’t have to mean that everyone agrees, or there is some omniscient authority to decide it. what we actually see everyday is people disagreeing about what is right. that isn’t a problem, in fact, accepting that reality is the basis for a civil democratic society. we would never need to debate or vote if we always agreed. if you want to confer with a “supreme sentience” in private, that’s ok. but in public debate, the appeal to such an entity should always be rejected (ignored), without necessarily rejecting the conclusion being argued
@wnt – i just realized that i read “and have faith that the one with God on its side [NOT] will prevail.” that’s what i expected after stuff like “Muhammad was a robber, slave trader, killer, rapist/child molester etc.” so, that explains my limited defense of having god on one’s side, and the mlk reference. apologies
The main issue is that the U.S. should no longer run military interventions and regime change programs in foreign countries that result in mass chaos and floods of refugees. As far as this:
Umm . . . but what if you believe in a religion or ideology that “condones and promotes death and violence to people that are Muslims”?
Religions like Neoconservativism, Neoliberalism, Empire, etc.? Of course it’s really not that Muslims; they just happen to sit on top of the world’s biggest oilfields. If they were Hindus, you’d have puppet Hindu theocracies with close ties to Washington and London sitting on top of all that oil, instead of Islamic ones. So yes, American foreign policy is anti-democratic and pro-empire.
Domestically, if you were to ban every religious or ideological group with members who condone and promote death and violence to other groups of people, well, that’s a long list. For example, most Americans don’t want to hear from the Westboro Baptist Church; but the Constitution says government can make no law banning religious groups on the grounds of religion only.
Of course, religious exception (in the United States) cannot be used as an excuse for crimes like murder, domestic violence, etc. But neither one cannot condemn all members of a religious group based on crimes committed by other members, at least not in a democracy where individual rights are protected.
This is called separation of church and state, and is necessary for any democratic state. And our so-called “allies” in the Middle East, i.e. apartheid Israel and theocratic Saudi Arab and military Egypt and autocratic Turkey, are fundamentally anti-democratic for this reason, just as theocratic Iran is.
So no, I don’t agree that the U.S. should become a country where religious groups are banned; that’s unConstitutional and undemocratic. However, we should also not be giving aid and weapons and training to anti-democratic states that promote violence and terrorism around the world (Saudi Arabia), or domestic oppression of religious and ethnic groups (Israel).
Unfortunately we do not have separation of church and state here in the US thanks to 501-C3 tax exempt status. The migrant crisis is being orchestrated by our administration that is owned by the Rothschild’s. They want chaos, destabilization and war so they can try to further set up their NWO. W e have to protect our country from immigrants at this time. Just look at what is going on in Germany and Europe with the Muslims,
Wonderful, illuminating piece! It has helped me understand why suicide bombers perform acts that are so senseless, by indiscriminately killing the innocent to such an extent that the killing of their ostensible enemies can be almost considered incidental.
It does not, however, explain state terrorism, as practiced in the Middle East by the US and its allies Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, or by the Syrian regime of Assad.
Thanks for plugging Israel. No such thing as bad publicity!
My pleasure! I would never miss the chance to give the government of Benjamin Netanyahu and all its supporters, domestic and foreign (including two US presidential candidates) recognition for the terrorism they practice.