Understanding terrorism

[tw]

Having seperated the terrrorist and insurgent organizations from White House propaganda, we should now move on to who gets recruited as terrorists. Therein lies more problems with White House type propaganda. Terrorist typically are not just recruited by some ghostly organization called Al Qaeda. Most terrorists recruit themselves.

Take this example provided by The Economist on 14 July 2005:

One example of such amateurism is that of two Moroccan men from the Dutch city of Eindhoven, Ahmed el-Bakiouli and Khalid el-Hassnaoui, who tried to enter Afghanistan in December 2001 in the hope of fighting some Americans. Having failed, they went to Kashmir, where they were swiftly killed by Indian security forces. In Britain, several terrorist plots uncovered since 2001 have been striking for their incompetence and lack of outside expertise.

Most so called terrorists are not recruited as current government propaganda would have us all believe. Most go looking to be terrorists. If they get lucky, they encounter a real terrorist who can teach them. This is a nightmare for police. How do you locate and arrest an Al Qaeda recruiter when he does not actively recruit and when Al Qaeda does not exist as government tells its enforcement people?

The Economist also defines what a terrorist is as demonstrated by so many historical examples:

They began as a group of second- or third-generation Dutch Muslims, mostly male and in their late teens or early 20s, who became discontented with their country and surfed the internet for ideas. At least at first, this and other groups of disaffected Dutch Muslims were pathetically unsophisticated. One was caught in 2003 trying to make a bomb—drawing on tips from a website, but using the wrong fertiliser. At some point, however, the group found a mentor who was more sinister and sophisticated: a Syrian jihadist-recruiter who came to the Netherlands and coached them in doctrine.

In Britain, too, security services have concluded that these days, connections between local youths and foreign godfathers are usually formed at the youths’ behest. To a surprising extent, the onus is on individual zealots (or groups of them) to find mentors. Al-Qaeda does not actively seek recruits for the jihadist cause, partly because that would attract the attention of the security services and partly because, ever since the destruction of its bases in Afghanistan, it has—in the view of well-placed British observers—been too loosely organised to recruit systematically.

Notice who most terrorists were. They are not recent immigrants. Often they are the second or third generation - citizens for their entire life - who often become estrangeed even from their own family and then somehow find purpose in an extremist religion. This is not just Islamics. Zionists who would openly steal Palestinian land in violation of Israeli law are really no different - except that this latter group is given a wink and nod from the Israeli government that says they are illegal. Religious christian extremists are increasing in western nations where early examples include the bombing of women health clinics and other institutions that violate their radical religous beliefs. IOW what we see from Islamic extremists may become a growing problem from other religions. Why? Their underlying purpose is to save us from ourselves. We somehow are the misguided and confused sheep. Somehow their actions in the name of a stupid concept called god will save us all. Organized religion rarely condemns and 'rats out' their extremist brethern.

First the potential terrorist starts by becoming fantantically religious. That alone does not make one a terrorist. However another factor is their inability to cope with life's complexities. Richard Reed is a classic example. So pathetic that he could not even give himself a hot foot - thereby explode a small shoe bomb. Others received even less knowledge sufficient to damage. IOW there are more terrorists among us who simply don't get much attention. But they consistently have common breeding ground - extremist religion. Any and all religion; not just Islam.

London's recent copy cat bombings may only be just that. Wanna-be extremists trying to accomplish what other religious extremists did not accomplish. Most interesting are the differences between Madrid bombings, those two weeks ago in London, and those just yesterday. This last copycat group hoped to just throw their bomb into a train as the train left the station - rather then blow themselves up. Even the Spanish bombs used a completely different system for triggering and more destructive composition. Most in common with these bombings is the reason for the will. Each apparently used different explosive. Each is typical of a terrorist organization that duplicates only what they read in the papers. But all are based in classic nonsense of religious doctrine.

No organized terrorist group exists as George Jr would preach when he talks about a 'war on terrorism'. The common factor is in cult lies - religion that can be interpreted however the human wants. Even worse, other cult members stay quiet rather than 'rat out' the enemies of mankind.

At least Muslim leaders in Europe are finally asking the question - "we think we see a problem". They finally discovered mirrors. Suddenly religious leaders are seeing a problem when the non-religious use reality to question the motives of the religious extreme. Funny how extremist religious leaders once could never see themselves in those mirrors.

The Economist also make one more interesting point:

In many cases, ... groups of young, disaffected Muslims goad one another down the path to extremism. People who may be bound together by ethnicity, worship or criminal activity develop a common interest in the suffering of Muslims across the globe. Websites and satellite television channels then supply visual images and incendiary rhetoric from any place where Muslims are fighting non-Muslims. The favourite war used to be Chechnya; now it is Iraq.

Mission Accomplished?