by Ghassan Kadi
In the closing article of “The Daesh Chronicles”; The Prognosis, I raised the alarm about the high likelihood of Daesh attacks increasing in frequency and domain of activity. I even warned that they may become daily events that the West will one day have to contemplate.
In hindsight, I did not expect the escalation of those attacks to reach this threshold so soon, because daily attacks are already a reality in the West; especially Europe.
Western nations feel like they are fighting a ghost. Their massive armies and nuclear power have been designed to fight regular armies. And whilst they use those armies to stir up trouble and instigate unrest in different corners of the globe, they are totally useless and powerless when it comes to confronting home-grown terror. After all, the Nice attack proved that terror does not need a weapon of mass destruction, and not even a hand-held weapon, because if one has a criminal mind, he can turn a truck into a massive weapon.
And how did President Hollande respond? By dispatching France’s only aircraft carrier Charles De Gaulle to the Middle East. French fighter jets have also bombed the Syrian town of Manbij killing more than a reported hundred innocent Syrian civilians and maiming hundreds others. As a matter of fact, some local sources put the number of casualties in the 300 hundred mark. This is not how to stop further acts of terror. This retaliation is revenge killing in its worst form. And of course, the hundred or so citizens of Manbij who perished are not news worthy. They did not make headlines in the West. And it is in retaliations like these that recruitments drives are lubricated and more terrorists will be generated; not exterminated.
But why France? Some ask, probably even Hollande himself asks this question. France has played a huge role in assisting the Islamist/Jihadists/Takfiris in Syria in their “struggle” to topple President Assad and establish a fundamentalist Muslim state. So why would those same militants reciprocate a French “favour”, as it were, with a seemingly endless wave of terror?
Many analysts and observers are pointing the finger at the refugees that France and other EU nations have taken in recently. And certainly, ultra-right wing EU politicians are riding on this band-wagon that suits their xenophobic anti-migration policies. However, in pointing the fingers at those recent migrants, analysts, observers, and right-wing politicians alike are ignoring the basic fact that some of the attackers, in fact most, are not recent migrants.
Salah Abdeslam, the main man behind the Paris November 2015 attacks, is a Belgian born French national of Moroccan descent. Mohamed Lahoueiej, the Nice attacker, had lived in France for a long time.
More significant perhaps is the fact that most of the perpetrators were not known to have a history that associates them with Daesh. Unlike Abdeslam, Lahoueiej was not known to the police as a potential terror threat, and as many in the EU would be blaming the security apparatus for allowing individuals “known to the Police” to roam free instead of detaining them pre-emptively, the identity of the perpetrators thus far reveal that even such draconian measures would not work effectively.
The above, among many other reasons, is why security personnel and experts in the West and the EU in general are feeling totally and utterly non-the-wiser in knowing how to deal with this situation and how to identify a potential killer.
Few anti-terror experts and analysts seem to realize that by focusing at individuals with history only, they are most likely not looking at the entire picture. And the reason they don’t know what to do is perhaps simply because they do not fully understand the Daesh mind and what fuels it.
Much has been said about the “quick radicalization” of Lahoueiej. The man has been known for womanizing, indulgence in alcohol and taking drugs and all sorts of activities that are not allowed in Islam. This is not quite what a Jihadist would normally be involved with. However, in trying to understand how would someone like Lahoueiej turn almost overnight from a lifestyle that is seen, from a Muslim perspective as being debauched, to become a person who was prepared to kill others (and himself) for “the cause” in the most heinous and criminal manner possible, many are unable to put two and two together. They therefore resort to find explanations in what does not meet the eye, including conspiracy theories. Many theories, some of which are very valid, were put forward to explain this rather strange phenomenon of overnight changeover. In simple reality, new converts to Daesh are perhaps much more dangerous than seasoned ones.
Daesh has only been around for two years or so, and there are no such members who can be described as old-timers or veterans. However, the “recent” Jihadi craze is in fact a few decades old, given different names in the past, but they are all the same monsters in different cloaks and guises. To this effect, an old “veteran Jihadist”, say one who is forty years old and over, one who has been an indoctrinated Jihadist for say ten years or so, whether under the banner of Daesh or any other banner, is one who has virtually outlived the test of succumbing to suicide bombing. Had he been the suiciding type, he would have done already. What stopped him?
In reality therefore, we should expect suicide killers to be younger Jihadists, and ones who have joined the “force” relatively more recently, say from a few days to perhaps a maximum of five years or so.
What makes recruits who have virtually just joined a few days ago or so more dangerous is related to many issues:
1. First of all, those of them who had a debauched past will feel very resentful for the environment that they see responsible for leading them in the “wrong” direction.
2. Secondly, they will hate their own past and feel a huge urge for following their distorted belief system.
3. Thirdly, they may feel worried that should they not die NOW as “believers”, they may later on fall victim to temptation and go back to the bad old ways of drinking and womanizing.
4. Last but not least, and most importantly perhaps, it is their belief that the best way for redemption is to die in battle fighting and killing as many infidels as possible. This form of “martyrdom” as they see it, assures forgiveness from all previous sins and guarantees entry to heaven “ bila hisab”, ie without judgement.
Jihadists believe that they are on a daily D-Day mission, the timing of which is a question of when; not what if. This is the essence of the dilemma.
In the final analysis however, terrorist Jihadi suicide bombers are not far different from addicts who prostitute themselves to support their habit. To stamp out drugs, government agencies need to focus on the so-called elusive “Mr. Big”. In the case of Jihadis, those in the position of Mr. Big are the recruiters, not the actual suiciders. The street workers do not operate alone.
And even though the infamous Lahoueiej used a truck as a weapon, and even though he proved that one does not need a weapon of mass destruction, and not even a pistol in order to be able to inflict mass casualties, he most certainly did not radicalize himself. Someone must have been in his ears and brain.
The French Prime Minister is now planning to ban foreign funding of mosques. This step will only be seen as a diplomatically-incorrect move and it will not stop terror. The Nice massacre did not need funding apart from the few Euros needed to hire a truck. Even if French or other western governments monitor the teachings inside mosques, this won’t solve the problem either. To begin with, it is only a low percentage of mosques who actually promote terror overtly. And if the preachers in those mosques are put under some form of surveillance, they will find secret places to meet with their “disciples”.
In more ways than one, the horse has already bolted. In more ways than one, sweet little can be done to undo what has already been done to the minds of the “suiciders-in-waiting”. This is a sad and horrific predicament that the whole world is now contemplating.
I do not profess to have the answers and ways to find a resolution. But the danger of recent recruits is something that anti-terror personnel should be aware of. It may help to urge citizens to report any change in behaviour of people they know. The change can include all aspects of demeanour, dress code, demanding the veiling up of women family members and even growing a beard. These are early tell-tale signs. They are not to be taken lightly.
Tough calls call for tough decisions, and the big onus here, as I said in the past, is on wise and knowledgeable Muslim clerics to push for reform within Islam and to utterly reject the Jihadi drive that feeds Daesh and similar organizations. The West has also a big role to play, not only because it has to, not only because Daesh is attacking the West almost on daily basis, not only because the West has Muslim citizens many of whom are Western born, but also because the West has a moral obligation to undo what it has done in creating the Jihadi drive which it initiated when the USSR invaded Afghanistan.
If the West found a gap in certain distorted Muslim doctrine and capitalized on them in order to gain some mileage without thinking too much ahead, it must now find a way to reverse what it had done.
Just like the West previously fostered violence, financed it, armed it and trained it, it must now work on educating Muslim youth. And just like the West has been successful in the past in finding and identifying radical Muslim preachers and mosque Imams who rounded up Muslim youth to pump their minds with hatred and violence, the West must now identify Muslim clerics who are capable of undoing this indoctrination. And, just like in the past radical clerics were successful in identifying individuals to push to go and fight in places like Syria, they must now be able to identify them once again, be able to look for early signs and ”symptoms”, but this time the objective will have to be to find a way to lure them into reform and rehabilitation schools; as virtually impossible as it may be.
The new wave of Muslim schools and sermons must be based on the understanding that the Quran does not call for murder, it does not open the gates of heaven for people who blow themselves up killing others.
As virtually impossible as this task may be, what other options does the West and the rest of the world have? What better option are there? After all, indoctrination cannot be stopped and reversed by guns.
This may not solve the problem entirely, not as swiftly as we all desire, but it may plant a new seed, one that has the potential to reduce the number of potential Jihadi terrorists and a new trend may gradually be inaugurated.
Please consider the possibility that the daily attacks from Daesh/ISIS/ISIL/etc. are false flag events being run by the US deep state.
You make some great points, but I don’t have a problem with banning foreign funding of mosques. We don’t need to make it any easier for the Saudis to stir up religious hatred.
If you were a Christian minority in a foreign land, and wishing only to worship with no ulterior motive, wouldn’t you appreciate some wealthy donors, or even your country of origin, coming along to build you a Church?
I admit that there are serious possibilities of interference and hidden agendas today as regards Mosque constructions, but the principle should be maintained, and instead of blanket bans, there should be control.
If Mr. Kadi’s advice is followed, jihadism will be defeated in several years, after which such bans should be lifted.
Or else non-Christian countries will also ban churches on their land…
Thank you, Mr. Kadi, for another profound piece.
don’t they already do that in saudi?
Of course Hollande and Merkel can´t provide a solution because they exclude the only solution for ideological reasons.None of these attacks would have happened if these people werent in already in France or Germany.The open borders policy, the globalist ideology of multiculturalism,the globalist hostility towards homogenous populations are the reasons IS can carry out these attacks and these attacks will end only if either Europe is turned into a califate and the europeans are either dead,enslaved or converted or multiculturalism and hence globalism is defeated.The muslims have to leave.Of course even the Saker for political correctness reasons will say: “That is not possible…that is immoral” whatever.The war wont care about political correctness,it will get worse.The best policy would be a process over a period of several years of first closing all borders and end all non-white immigration into Europe,then push for a return of muslims and other non-whites by incremently use carrot and stick methods.The only other option to this is a 30 years all out european war which will end in a genocide never seen in history.
People have always migrated between regions for all kinds of reasons like political and religious persecution, economic reasons, famine, ethnic cleansing, mass expulsions, war, etc..
The great migration phase of labor migrants in the 20th century began in Europe during the 1950s after WWII to rebuild Europe, while many Europeans were still leaving until the 1960s and 70s to the US, Canada, Australia, etc..
Since the 50s and 60s hundreds of thousands of North Africans and Turks were brought to rebuild Europe.
……then the baby boom generation (born after WWII) felt so economically comfortable, modern, emancipated and sexually revolutionized, that they stopped having enough kids to even sustain a population let alone economic growth….
They way I see it….it seems as if the Europeans were doomed even prior to WWII. If there are actually globalists who are pushing for European multiculturalism, open-borders and anti-homogeneous populations, then it seems they have been working and planning even before WWII.
But lets also be honest…..Europe deserves what it gets, it has been subjugating and plundering Africa and the Middle-East (Asia) for the past decades……..it is only normal that an uncontrollable exodus of Africans and Asians are heading to the promise land.
It is also normal that the same corrupt leaders of Europe who have been plundering the world also do not care of their own population’s homogeneity or safety.
Europe is finished as a political, economic and strategic entity…..its elite follow orders from the Americans and Zionists……and the chances of it getting nuked by Russia or economically collapsing in the coming 30 years is much much higher…
Europe cannot even protect itself, let alone produce another genocide.
Forget the carrot-and-stick, or any other method. Just stop acting like the earth is yours (the West) to administer and that your lived-values contain even the merest speck of anything other than hypocrisy and arrogance to most human beings on this planet.
There are two possibilities that I can see.
1 Hollande and Merkel are compromised (bribed or blackmailed) agents of NATO.
2. They are too incompetent to tie their own shoelaces.
Would NATO/USA (same thing), who spent quite a few million dollars to subvert the EU, allow a leader who would act in the interests of his/her people?
As with the third Reich, so with the Fourth Reich, Europe will pay the price while the USA stands behind the curtain and pulls the levers and gets its much-needed cash flow.
Unfortunately the power elites within western governments still have much use of groups such as Daesh, radical Islam and jihad. They also ‘know’ that it will only be the cannon fodder common citizen that will be the targets of any attack and any attack is a useful event for these neo-liberal, neo-con Globalists. If these random attacks suddenly switched targets to the actual policy people and centers of power that have waged war against Muslim peoples and nations then the velvet glove would quickly come off exposing the iron fist of the perpetrators of all the violence aboard and at home. This is hybrid war aimed at entire populations, especially the democracy loving indigenous peoples of the west. This is plainly evident by their allowing recruiting to continue unabated without simply jailing those involved, as they have done to even the innocent in operations in Muslim nations. The perpetrators of all this chaos and violence are the Apex Elites of the western power structure and no one else and they are not about to start reversing that which they find eminently useful for the task at hand and none should so naively think they would.
You are spot on there.
Exactly the same approach was taken with the IRA in the 70s/80s/90s.
So long as they were just using the general citizenry as cannon fodder, then they were more or less tolerated and exploited as a political tool for furthering the state’s agenda.
Once they started attacking economic targets, such as the City of London and transport infrastructure, then suddenly the government got serious about finding a solution.
The IRA were a militant response to an increasingly discriminatory socio-economic situation, which was initially ‘solved’ by sending in the British Army.
The ‘solution’ only agravated an already explosive situation: instead of protecting Catholics from Protestant militants, the Army, in alliance with the police (RUC) who had Protestant militants in their ranks, behaved more like an occupying force targetting, not protecting the Catholics.
The killings of Bloody Sunday (1969) – an Army attack on unarmed Cathokic protestors, including a kneeling priest waving a white ‘surrender’ handkerchief beside a slain protestor lit the fuse: the situation escalated overnight with young Catholics radicalized by the killings.
This was followed by suspension of civil code – trial without jury (Diplock courts) and internment without trial. The H-Block became notorious for being filled with Catholics, culminating in the hunger/strike of Bobby Sands.
Nevertheless, the IRA did have a ‘code’ and abided by it – all bombings were preceded by warnings to the RUC to evacuate targets.
It has since been revealed that they deliberately did not act on those warnings at times to discredit the IRA. Even worse, was the Thatcher policy of fighting ‘terror with terror’ – recruiting of locals for ‘special ops’ – bombings and then releasing media claims that the attacks were carried out by the IRA.
Among the worst bombings were atracks in Dublin and Monaghan on a single day killing more than thirty people. Nobody understood why they would attack the Republic, with whom they sought a united island of Erin.
If course, it was most likely conducted by the SAS (British Army ‘special ops) to force the passage of the Emergency Powers Act through the Dail ( Irish parliament in the Republic). This allowed arbitrary detainment of suspects in the South, and granted the police unconstitutional powers, so making them an arm of British Goverent policy and ensuring a pro-gov line in the Republic’s media.
Recent release of classified documents reveal that out of a hundred+plus ‘IRA’ members, more than ninety were actually hired by MI5: not IRA at all.
How many bombs can be laid at their door? They are not telling…but the ‘no warning’ so-called ‘change of policy’ was not the case at all – it was a strategy to turn popular support against the ‘armed struggle’ by the Britsh Establishment.
As the IRA were trying to ‘win hearts and minds’ ( much like the DLR today) to get arms (from the US mainly, but also from Spain), the policy was always to minimize loss of life or avoid it entirely: the use of bombs to target buildings, infrastructure and enemy personnel was policy from the start, not a subsequent change of tactics.
This is about right.
On RT on 31 July on the midnight news Sean Thomas, newsreader, in a topic about events in Turkey interviewed an ex CIA operative turned whistleblower who gave the following reply to the question as to what he made of the current upheaval in Turkey.
“What you have going on globally is a Rothschild Zionist orchestrated war on the whole of humanity in Europe, Russia and across the world”, he said.
All these different “brand names” for the same thing are just a front.
Needless to say that was the only question he got to answer as the astonished Thomas shut the conversation down lest more truth come out.
Please Saker – look at who is really behind the war of terror. Where are the millions and millions of dollars coming from?
“Fethullah Gulen operates the largest number of charter schools in the United States of America”
And until this week quite a few in places like Pakistan too.
Whilst commandos who now lie buried alongside the architects of the great pyramid of Giza were hunting down “OBL” (alongside Sinbad, Ali Baba and the Fourty Thieves) in a residential compound in Pakistan after fleeing there upon their magic carpet from Tora Bora, weaving their way past daisy cutters, barrel bombs, satellites and spys, master Gulen was living in a castle in Pennsylvania guarded by a combat ‘copter no less.
If a numbnut like me could have predicted what happened to the Maghreb after the eccentric (mad) Gaddafi was wiped off the map (as per the well known plan) such insight is nothing special and certainly it is nothing to shout (or write) about.
As Edwards says, alongside others, one simply just needs to connect the dots.
Fortunately, and there is some tiny little evidence for this, (the subsequent article on this site also counts) people have been speaking to others, and they appear, according to the aforementioned evidence, to appreciate the importance and the significance of Damascus. For themselves and others too. True dialogue, and true understandings. And for that we can all be grafteful in our prayers whatever form they take.
Phil Ochs “Love me, I’m a Liberal”
Terrorists learn to be terrorists at home, in school, on the playground, in front of the tv.
Sam or Osama showing him where he can get a truck load of fertilizer does not make him a terrorist. It only shows him how to howl louder.
Anglo-French conspiracy to build up Wahabi terrorism as a destructive tool in the service of Imperialism, and to destroy Russia, is a Frankenstein’s monster that is turning against its creator. Same as the Anglo-French conspiracy to build up Nazi Germany before the war, as a tool in the service of Capitalism, and to destroy Soviet Russia – same evil intent, same desperate defence against the inevitable blowback.
Until the US and its allies drop their Wahabi weapon and until the head of the beast in Saudi Arabia is cut off the terror will not stop. The mosques and schools preaching and teaching terror must be shut down. The sources of funding must be turned off. Here the intel services must play the major role in identifying those specific targets. Above all the wars in the middle east and North Africa must end. If this is done the terrorism will die out. Terrorism exists today because it is the West’s tool for world hegemony. Without western support it will die.
Globalization brought us rats and nothing will ever change it. They are permanent residents. You can’t reprogram a rat. On another level globalization weakens the native nihilists to the point they can’t reject the broken system or even dent it. “Changing the system” has been outsourced to the lowest common denominator. The home crowd are too busy struggling to survive to be bothered.
We can rail against random massacres all we like, but random massacre is true history of globalization. They only get noticed when the news media picks it up.
RS, I am intrigued by your profound comment. Don’t you reveal the solution in your explanation of the problem? “The home crowd are too busy struggling to survive to be bothered.” That’s it then, isn’t it. Free the home crowd and they’ll deal with the rats? That was a eureka moment, I thought.
How Long Can Russia and China Wait?
“My case rests. There is no countervailing evidence against the fact
that unadulterated evil rules the West and is driving the world to extinction.”
— Paul Craig Roberts
The west has been through this before. Operation Gladio false flags were run with murders and bombs ran supposedly by ‘The Left’. They were actually carried out or created/controlled by far right deep state units with the aim of discrediting a left wing solutions and strengthening the grip of right wing politicians/oligarchs.
Overall good article that I have no desire to quibble with on any minor or major points.
Instead I am inclined to highlight this, that Kadi wrote”
“2. Secondly, they will hate their own past and feel a huge urge for following their distorted belief system.”
This matter of self-loathing , IMHO, is the key to comprehension and resolution of the current crisis of humanity. Kadi deals with it here, on the tactical level, of diagnosing the mental illness of cannon fodder dupes, suddenly “getting religion” (or so they think, hope, in total delusion…..) and unconsciously fulfilling the terror agenda of their Wahabi controllers, who, also enslaved by self-loathing, are also trapped into fulfilling the agenda of their New World Order controllers, who, also enslaved by their own “elite” self-loathing, are also trapped into fulfilling the agenda of “principalities and powers” that aren’t even corporeal!!!!
I’d like to see it also dealt with here on this blog and more generally in the world, on that higher strategic level, which I have called “really getting into the ‘skivvies’ of the NWO garbage can elites . Because who but self-loathing Bonesmen, Zionazis or buggered and buggering members of the British so-called governing “elites” could adhere to the disgusting, deceitful and odiously poisoned world view and strategic agenda they have embraced and promulgated, like the physically and spiritually buggered pedophiles that they are?
If someone more experienced and qualified (self-loathers need not apply….) than I gives it a shot, I won’t mind one bit. Nor will I mind giving it a go, in a Cafe or someplace,if no one else will. I am a novice, but I find I am not entirely slow on these fundamental matters.
It may be hard for anyone who is not self-loathing to imagine self-loathing, but the evidence of its existence at ALL levels is available in such abundance, that one who starts looking at this phenomenon is quickly and readily convinced not only of its existence, but also of it’s near ubiquity.
As it was explained to me, the elite self-loathers’ view of the material world as a prison is symbolically represented by their adoption of the hypercube/tesseract, as their elite symbol, while the pentagram ( goat, baphomet, etc) is for their masses of low level flunkies and servants, like the performers and political “leaders” audience at the recent tunnel ceremony in the Swiss alps. http://thesaker.is/wanna-see-the-new-european-homo-erotic-culture/ Self loathing on full public display, for the skeptics among you.
Non-self loathers, we are a minority, and this is the root of the human problem. In my view, work on this problem is the key to cutting the Empire’s legs from under it, and is far, far more than a responsibility of Islamic teachers and clerics!! Which is why I wanted to expand considerably on Kadi’s point # 2……..…they hate their won past…...
A lack of love of truth, beauty, humanity and the Universe and its cause (the higher self one is part of) starts with lack of love of one’s smaller self. There is a vast epidemic of self-loathing that needs to be cured to avert collective human suicide.
Your comment sparked a train of thought…
what part of ‘them’ hates what part?
this requires some further information.
a russian/armainian ‘philosopher’ of the early 29th century
came to the west and had considerable ‘success’ but not
in a very public way.
just one of his many ‘ideas’ was that the true essence/self
stopped developing around six or seven years old.
have you looked into the eyes of children of that age?
before they learn ‘the ways of the world – parents lie to them,
lie to others and the children absorb all this ‘conditioning’ and
hence there grows rapidly after that age what is commonly
referred to as an ego, which dominates most of their behaviour.
since it is artificial is is very vulnerable and extremely protective
so again what part hates what part?
the colletion of ‘parts’ which reside in everyone comes to the
surface almost on command if attacked. this could be an
explanation of why people who hold ‘beliefs’ cannot allow
any new information to disturb their illusions and can only
attack the messenger.
full frontal confrontation has no chance of penetrating the
complex shielding of fervently held beliefs.
only a kind of sideways hint can perhaps cause a pause
Do you mean Gurdjieff ?
Age seven is the traditional ‘age of reason’, meaning there is sufficient ‘self-control’ or socialization that a person can do things on his own (cross the street, buy something at a shop, etc).
I have always likened the construct we call character or ego to one of those childhoold toys that where you can only put triangles in the triangular holes, round things in the round holes, and squares in the square holes, etc. Character or personality is much esteemed (giving a person a firm course of action and predictability), but usually functions to filter out all experience that would normally change one’s being.
I see a lot of self-loathing in the rejection of childhood (people don’t want them anymore, they are not part of society anymore … have their own separate institutions, are regarded as aberrant form of non-rational consciousness). If you compare primitive people (no modern culture) to urban specimens, they are in many ways much more child-like and open, laugh easily, less serious, mischievous, playful, etc. They also tend to have more “life” etched into their faces as they get older, in contrast to walking urban streets where most people typically look rather bland.
Institutional thinking creates people who are at odds with themselves and are always at work to reinforce “what they are”.
I appreciate your spark and further questions, ON007. Right now I’m running on fumes with little energy left in the tank.
But I will think and follow-up and be back on topic soon, probably in one of those cafes on time and space wheels. Or train tracks. Or whatever makes them move.
If these are disaffected nationals, why attack random civilians? The history of violent acts would suggest they would target institutions – welfare agencies, police stations, politicians – they had a grudge against.
If they are Daesh attacking the state why attack random civilians? NATO, churches or the French Assembly would more logically be targets if it was an ideological/religious war.
If the idea is to sow a generalized fear in the population, random civilians would be the target, but in that case there are other perpetrators who might benefit more.
The queen bee of all this terrorist horror resides in Saudi Arabia, and the pressure to reverse the frankenstein ideology of the jihadi monster has to start with the Saudi rulers and the Wahhabi clerics they control. After all, did Bandar ‘Bush’ not confess to Putin that they control terrorists and can switch them on and off as they wish? Does the west have the moral fibre to call Saudi Arabian rulers what they are, terrorist enablers, and to deal with them accordingly? Can the west overcome its lust and greed for billions of dollars in Saudi oil and as a market for arms?
No … Because it is West who empowered them in order to further their own strategic interests. Al-Saud wouldn’t last six months without Weatern backing
ISIS, like ‘al CIA Duh’ before it, are reliable assets of the West that are funded, supplied weapons, given satellite intelligence, medical care and political cover by the same ones who proclaim to be fighting ISIS.
This is more theater to cover up the war crimes of Israel and protect that Apartheid nightmare from reality.
I am afraid that the solutions proposed: banning foreign funding of mosques, identifying radical Muslim preachers and mosque Imams who rounded up Muslim youth to pump their minds with hatred and violence, Muslim clerics pushing for reform within Islam and to utterly rejecting the Jihadi drive that feeds Daesh and similar organizations, stop half way. They are just band-aids which wouldn’t treat even the symptoms of the profound disease.
We must stop deluding ourselves that “Islam has nothing to do with terrorism” and that watering down the passages of the Quran inciting to violence against the ‘infidels’ by countering them with the passages forbidding mistreatment of cats and dogs, one would remove the ultimate causes that generate the violence: the duty of all Muslims to work to establish a global caliphate and impose Sharia Law, the division of the world into two parts, Dar al Islam and Dar al Harb. The Ummah has the religious duty to “Fight against ‘them’ until idolatry is no more and Allah’s religion reigns supreme. Fight them until there is no persecution and the religion is God’s entirely.” – Sura 8:39. ‘Allah religion’ is sharply defined as: “lā ʾilāha ʾillā-llāh, muḥammadur-rasūlu-llāh” (There is no god but God. Muhammad is the messenger of God). So, denying that Muhammad is the ‘messenger of God’, which in Islamic parlance means the ultimate messenger of God, surpassing all other ‘messengers’ and in particular the Christ (“Those who say: ‘The Lord of Mercy has begotten a son,’ preach a monstrous falsehood, at which the very heavens might crack, the earth break asunder, and the mountains crumble to dust”), is ‘persecution against Muslims’, against which the true Muslims must fight to the death (even their own, for which they are promised unending delights with perpetual virgins in the afterlife). This is not a ‘certain distorted Muslim doctrine’, but the very core belief of the sect (which is a Judaic sect, make no mistake, adopting the same ‘victimhood’ ideology as the mother sect).
It is true that the West financed, armed and trained the jihadis, but not just for Afghanistan, but much earlier, with the delusional hope “the Muslims would be impressed with the moral and spiritual strength of America” and would “make some important contributions to both short and long term US political objectives in the Moslem area.” The President Eisenhower, in a bout of senile imbecility declared that: “I have argued that belief in God should create between them and us the common purpose of opposing atheistic communism.” The objectives were to “guide and promote the Islamic Renaissance,” meaning the Muslim Brotherhood. Moreover he declared: “We should do everything possible to stress the ‘holy war’ aspect” shoving aside the objections of Mr. Dulles “that if Arabs have a ‘holy war’ they would want it to be against Israel” on the ground that “[King Ibn] Saud . . . had called on all Arabs to oppose Communism”, therefore deflecting their attention from Israel. The Americans pushed to back the “reformists,” MB under Said Ramadan, versus so-called “reactionary groups.”
It is indeed the West which helped to ‘revive’ Islam which was slowly withering.
There can be no solution if the Islamic outlook itself is not eliminated. As long as Muslims follow a religion which tells them that they are ‘different’ and ‘superior’ to any nation among which they live and which necessarily ‘persecute’ them, there will be no peace. The best solution is for them to convert to Christianity (but that is opposed by the “West’ which fights for the eradication of Christianity). Other solutions like stoping Muslim propaganda, closing mosques, stoping pilgrimages to Mecca won’t work, they would only exacerbate in their minds the sense of victimhood and the desire to punish the persecutors, as commanded by Mahomet.
While this may be true, how do you explain the ‘communist’ style ‘direct democracy of Libya, and the anti al-Quaeda, anti-terror policy of Ghadaffi?
It was overwhelmingly Muslim, yet the takfiri scourge was imported by NATO, not native to Libya. And the Mistrata who aided and abetted his overthrow were essentially a Turkish mafia with origins in Judaism prior to Muslim conversion.
And none of this really explains how mostly Muslim societies like Syria were not violent before the conspiracy to overthrow Assad. Nor does it explain Iran which does not have – that I can see – any ambition to impose sharia on the entire globe: they are anti-caliphate aren’t they?
At question 1: please re-read (if you did it in the first place) more carefully what I wrote: “It is indeed the West which helped to ‘revive’ Islam which was slowly withering”.
The Libyan Republic was only partly inspired by ‘Islamic socialism’. Arab nationalism, African nationalism and partly by the principles of direct democracy. It was socialism in an Islamic country, like the Baath Party in Iraq, Syria. Eventually, it attracted the wrath of the ‘pure Islam’.
At question 2: They might be ‘anti-caliphate’ (in fact for their own Shia reason), but they have the same idea that since the Quran contains the ultimate answers to all the problems of the world, Islamic law must be introduced everywhere, albeit through ‘ijtihad’ (jurisprudence). But it will be imposed by force at the End of Times by the Mahdi.
It is impossible to deny that the seeds of terror are now growing all over the Western countries who either colonized and pillaged or attacked many countries in the middle east and North Africa, with a notable exception of the U.S. (for the time being)
These countries take in people from those countries to feed their labour market needs, but neglect to provide them with equal treatment in housing, health care, education or employment opportunities. Typically, these people cannot fully integrate because integration is a two-way street, therefore, non acceptance becomes a fertile ground for rebellion, Islamist style.
Brief comment on an excellent article and a most interesting subject.