Hey, I've got a great idea! Let's capture user behavior on all devices and communication media and use machine learning to preemptively predict how people behave! Maybe Amazon, Facebook, and Twitter can autosuggest who to Follow.
i think the reasons for being a terrorist are very personal....for me, i was abused by two priests when i was a young innocent. if they were still alive, i would likely kill them w/o remorse b/c of the damage they caused to me and to the nice person i might have been. they stole my life and i wish i had the chance to steal theirs.
Let's see if I can connect the dots.... in 2015 there were 27,596 deaths in Islamic attacks in 53 countries. In the last 30 days alone there have been 1165 killed by 147 Islamic attacks in 25 countries... and what is the common denominator in all these attacks ? I'm guessing it must be Donald Trumps fault. Wake Up !!!
2
I'm surprised that the article doesn't mention the work of Anne Speckhard- or allude to her hard-won insights- accumulated through hundreds of interviews with terrorists and their families, throughout the Middle East and Europe. The psychological profile of a terrorist is at least as important and predictive as the socioeconomic milieu. Common characteristics that emerge time and time again, are: 1) A sensitive personality- exposure to injustice and oppression (e.g. the murder of a loved one) affects them deeply; 2) The compelling need to take action (however misdirected) rather than remain passive; 3) A sense of desperation- their situation is so painful that they think they have no other options, and death becomes an attractive choice- sometimes a welcome escape from hellish reality and psychological suffering. Unless we truly understand the motives of terrorists and their perspectives as human beings (the horrifying nature of their acts notwithstanding), I doubt that coarse profiling and statistical analyses (typically carried on impoverished and incomplete datasets), will get us very far. The type of information that is needed is neither readily documentable nor made available to counter-terrorism organisations. Our goals should be: 1) Having a network of informants and infiltrating neighbourhoods that tend to 'breed' terrorists; 2) Understanding their motives (which their family members often do); 3) Addressing the problems that plague their societies in the first place.
2
Something seemingly ignored in this article is how the beliefs of the terrorists might inform their behaviour. Whilst their education, social class, nationality, age and upbringing all differ considerably - two criteria stay almost constant:
1) Commitment to a theological ideology that preaches religious purity, hatred towards non-believers and the promise of an afterlife.
2) An exaggerated perception of victimhood/self-inflicted disenfranchisement. A paranoia that exists in the very origins of Islam, a paranoia from which Islamists recruit and a paranoia that is too often indulged by the Regressive Left.
1) Commitment to a theological ideology that preaches religious purity, hatred towards non-believers and the promise of an afterlife.
2) An exaggerated perception of victimhood/self-inflicted disenfranchisement. A paranoia that exists in the very origins of Islam, a paranoia from which Islamists recruit and a paranoia that is too often indulged by the Regressive Left.
3
Goodfellas...will always turn into assassins in the long run.
Nonsense. Most have committed violent crimes in the past, have been on a terrorist list, are known to have traveled to syria or another country known for recruiting and training terrorists, and have a stated commitment to Islam.
That's a pretty tight profile. But governments are incompetent at sharing information and often base decisions on political correctness and idealism over facts. The US was wrong to go into iraq, but I fear we easily swing to the other extreme approach.
That's a pretty tight profile. But governments are incompetent at sharing information and often base decisions on political correctness and idealism over facts. The US was wrong to go into iraq, but I fear we easily swing to the other extreme approach.
4
Commendable, yet ultimately doomed effort on government's part - this is exactly how the attempts to understand why people get AIDS would have looked if there was no germ theory of disease.
3
Several comments suggest that it is easy to identify potential terrorists - check if they are Muslims.
However, only a tiny minority of Muslims become terrorists. So, this is not a very useful criteria.
I think a fundamental difficulty in predicting human and managing human behavior is our extreme ignorance of the human mind. We seem to avoid not only doing biologic research on it, but even discussing our minds with each other.
Until we devote resources to understanding the human mind and the social behavior that it directs, we will continue to struggle with a whole raft of "bad" and flat out stupid behaviors. (The Drumpf phenomenon and the craziness of the Republican party are another and much more dangerous example of bad behavior than these "terrorists".)
However, only a tiny minority of Muslims become terrorists. So, this is not a very useful criteria.
I think a fundamental difficulty in predicting human and managing human behavior is our extreme ignorance of the human mind. We seem to avoid not only doing biologic research on it, but even discussing our minds with each other.
Until we devote resources to understanding the human mind and the social behavior that it directs, we will continue to struggle with a whole raft of "bad" and flat out stupid behaviors. (The Drumpf phenomenon and the craziness of the Republican party are another and much more dangerous example of bad behavior than these "terrorists".)
1
All the muslim terrorists have only killed a fraction of the people killed by gun deaths in the US.
5
We profile white supremacists for that reason. We recognize the problem with their racist beliefs. Yet we refrain from doing the same with Muslims. We refuse to challenge them on their intolerance and anti-Western thinking.
1
I guess that means they get a pass.
I guess that means that until we solve the gun problem, murders of lesser magnitude are inconsequential.
I guess that means that until we solve the gun problem, murders of lesser magnitude are inconsequential.
I think that purpose and motivation are keys to becoming a terrorist. But what is one of the easiest ways of making a normally moral person immoral? Religion. If you can make someone believe something as absurd as believing in a "god", then you can also make them commit absurdities. Tell a person they are doing something backed by a "god" (and the person can't understand that all religions are mythology) and that a "god" not only approves of their actions but will ultimately reward them (thus the believer thinks their immoral actions are moral), what credulous person can argue against being motivated by a "god"?
2
Most terrorism in the us is perpetrated by white Christians. why does this article focus on Muslims?
2
All we need is love - as simple and difficult that is.
Another way to spot potential terrorist is tracking their comments on forums, social media and NYTimes.
Terrorism is considered unjustifiable by most standards; purposely targeting civilians with the intend of causing maximum casualty doesn't fit with most Euroasian based philosophies. Yet terrorist and potential terrorist often rationalize an act of terror with twisted logic to make it justifiable. They often cite a very rare Christian terror act as "the Christians are doing it", false equivalency of equating gun violence, racial violence, car accident deaths as terror acts, blame the victim by claiming the West did something somewhere, and employs the informal fallacy "No true Scotsman" by denying the terror act was carried out in the name of religion.
Every time I see someone commenting on NYTimes, Facebook, etc. with one of the above four logical fallacies to rationalization terrorism, I am thinking that's a guy that convinced himself terror is an acceptable tool in the right circumstance. All he needs now is a cause and he will rationalize his way out of his moral boundaries. Anyone could be a terrorist, but the easiest way to spot one is to start with those sympathetic to terrorism.
(For the record, I see many women justify terror acts as well)
Terrorism is considered unjustifiable by most standards; purposely targeting civilians with the intend of causing maximum casualty doesn't fit with most Euroasian based philosophies. Yet terrorist and potential terrorist often rationalize an act of terror with twisted logic to make it justifiable. They often cite a very rare Christian terror act as "the Christians are doing it", false equivalency of equating gun violence, racial violence, car accident deaths as terror acts, blame the victim by claiming the West did something somewhere, and employs the informal fallacy "No true Scotsman" by denying the terror act was carried out in the name of religion.
Every time I see someone commenting on NYTimes, Facebook, etc. with one of the above four logical fallacies to rationalization terrorism, I am thinking that's a guy that convinced himself terror is an acceptable tool in the right circumstance. All he needs now is a cause and he will rationalize his way out of his moral boundaries. Anyone could be a terrorist, but the easiest way to spot one is to start with those sympathetic to terrorism.
(For the record, I see many women justify terror acts as well)
2
"a very rare Christian terror act"
Historically Christian acts of terror were not at all rare.
(Ooooh, you'd better sic the FBI on me!!)
Historically Christian acts of terror were not at all rare.
(Ooooh, you'd better sic the FBI on me!!)
1
DW, historically FBI also doesn't exist.
See the logical fallacies I stated above? You are saying Islamic terrorism is ok because of the Crusades or something Christian have been hundred of years ago.
See the logical fallacies I stated above? You are saying Islamic terrorism is ok because of the Crusades or something Christian have been hundred of years ago.
2
No, not what I said.
(The "amateur" part of your moniker is certainly apt.)
(The "amateur" part of your moniker is certainly apt.)
"And then there are the dozens of other young American men and women who have been arrested over the past year for trying to help the Islamic State. Their backgrounds are so diverse that they defy a single profile."
Let me guess, religion and ethnicity are not categories researchers can use in their study. If I am going in a ring with both arms bonded behind me, why do I even bother to step into the ring? Guess lots of people just want government research grants.
Let me guess, religion and ethnicity are not categories researchers can use in their study. If I am going in a ring with both arms bonded behind me, why do I even bother to step into the ring? Guess lots of people just want government research grants.
8
The attack in Lahore was carried out by the Taliban to target Christians celebrating Easter. Perhaps someone could talk about how Muslims have been marginalized in an overwhelmingly Muslim country?
7
The reason varies according to the region and societies. In east, mostly in South Asia and Middle East, the main reason behind becoming a terrorist is, the only radicalization. Other issues, poverty, alienation, suppression fuels in radicalization. Mostly people blame Muslim for all wrong doings around the world, but the facts is; there are few sects among Muslim who are constant source of humiliation for Muslim. Like Whaabis, Salafis and Deobandis; these are bigoted radicalized sociopaths for whom killing an innocent person is a victory and a certificate for a Palace in Heaven. According to them they are the only one who follow divine religion, all others, including other Muslim sects, are infidel.
These groups are funded and brainwashed by Saudi Arabia, U.A.E and other Middle Eastern states who have plenty of oil to invest on these monsters.
All the terrorist factions like ISIS, Taliban, Al Qaida, Al Nusra Front and et el are funded and owned by these Deobandi, Wahabi and Salafi states. They still raise slogan that Usama is our brother and Taliban are our Mujahids (zealots), who one day will establish an Islamic State all over the world, and all other either have to surrender to their allegiance or will be killed.
These groups are funded and brainwashed by Saudi Arabia, U.A.E and other Middle Eastern states who have plenty of oil to invest on these monsters.
All the terrorist factions like ISIS, Taliban, Al Qaida, Al Nusra Front and et el are funded and owned by these Deobandi, Wahabi and Salafi states. They still raise slogan that Usama is our brother and Taliban are our Mujahids (zealots), who one day will establish an Islamic State all over the world, and all other either have to surrender to their allegiance or will be killed.
2
Humans are an intolerant and aggressive species. We confuse justice for sufferers with vengeance. We devise ways to only appear more ethical and delude ourselves. We lack empathy. We destroy the peace of others. We truly have little right to our own lives. Sadly, fewer humans would make for a better world. It won't change, it is only to get worse. Just like the Bible says it will. Terrorists are created not born; ask instead, how does our society create terrorism?
Think, would Earth be better off without humans? We have to step out of our narcissistic personality to even rationalize terrorism. Terrorist are created not born; ask instead, how does our society create terrorism?
"Worde has not released its intervention protocols or its method for assessing things like political grievances. Ms. Mirahmadi said such tools would be too easily misunderstood." has the malodorous whiff of political correctness, the fatal social disease of liberalism, which now permeates even supposedly-rigorous scientific enquiry. After-all we wouldn't want to confuse the great unwashed with facts that might lead them to reach conclusions that can be "too easily misunderstood."
And the elites are wondering why Trumpism is triumphing?
And the elites are wondering why Trumpism is triumphing?
6
Then maybe you shouldn't actually demonstrate with your own post their concern about their tools being misunderstood.
1
Maybe the experts should interview gang members in out country to find out their reasons for joining and killing people.
2
If you have a kid brewing rank smelling chemicals and storing a cache of weapons and hanging out with the others like him or her, you might just have a problem on your hands...
4
Maybe this might shed some light, we invade a country under false pretenses and end up responsible for 660,000 Iraqi deaths (The Lancet 2006 figure, more than a million now), we obliterate their infrastructure, including their whole education system, we support tyrants across the Middle East, we support a country that holds the longest occupation in modern history, of course with one of the worst records as far as the UN charter and international law are concerned, and then we are bewildered by the rise of extremism, or better yet, we ask where are the Ghandis of Middle East? Seriously? Meanwhile, we're so proud of our "civilized" and "free" world, that we can't even fathom the idea that there is a connection between "our" evil and "their" evil. Amazing, to say the least.
11
Thank you, unfortunately your views are not going to be popular here.
The focus in so many of the comments on how we must identify pathological individuals is very disheartening.
The focus in so many of the comments on how we must identify pathological individuals is very disheartening.
1
You might have cited the 1980-1988 Iraq vs Iran War an internecine Sunni vs Shia conflict which cost both sides in lives and economic damage with best estimates of half a million Iraqi and Iranian soldiers, with an equivalent number of civilians, believed to have died, with many more injured. You might also recall when President Barack Obama removed the last U.S. forces from Iraq in December 2011, "he announced that—as he had planned—the U.S. was leaving behind a “sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government.”
It was a "moment of success," he said". How did that work out?
It was a "moment of success," he said". How did that work out?
2
This is why people are driven to Trump. He at least calls a spade a spade.
The excruciatingly obvious avoidance of Islam as the mathematical correlate of all of this terror apparent to all except the clueless author. By this, the New York Times become part of the problem, as it strays far away from it’s role and instead joins the ranks of the adroit obfuscatory class of jive-talking apologists.
19
I'm afraid you are not finally facing facts, you are turning your back on the past, which as I'm sure you've heard dooms us to repeat it.
Islamic terrorism is just ONE form of terrorism. The method itself has a long, long history and isn't somehow uniquely correlated with one particular religion or ethnicity. Christians, for instance, aren't the ones chopping off heads or burning people at the stake these days, but have we forgotten that Christians did all this stuff and worse for centuries?
Islamic terrorism is just ONE form of terrorism. The method itself has a long, long history and isn't somehow uniquely correlated with one particular religion or ethnicity. Christians, for instance, aren't the ones chopping off heads or burning people at the stake these days, but have we forgotten that Christians did all this stuff and worse for centuries?
OMG what an excruciating rationalization.
2
The answer is their community and circle of friends/family.
2
Some of the comments on this news article are well-said; I note in particular that the work of some of the researchers interviewed does NOT reflect much mainstream knowledge in terrorism research. I am dismayed that the article focuses on terrorism committed by Muslims (who historically have committed the minority of terrorist acts in the USA). The article ignores the terrorist acts committed by gangs, right-wing Christian groups, and paramilitaries within the US. It ignores the Oklahoma City bombing, which was home-grown terrorism. The article focuses on the US and Europe, and fails to recognize the suffering of people in the Middle East and Pakistan, who currently are the primary victims of terrorist acts. Fortunately the academic journals cited, and the leading researchers in this field, take all these events and people into consideration.
The article is quite right, however, in noting that our research in this area is often disregarded by the public. The CIA and FBI have done much work on threat analysis, but they at times ignore some research and at times experience political obstacles. The article is also right in noting that research suggests that community outreach focusing on prevention and peacebuilding are effective steps (peace education is another area that research supports); but if we restrict community outreach only to Muslim communities, then we are practicing discrimination - and, at our peril, ignore the rise of terrorism in non-Muslim groups.
The article is quite right, however, in noting that our research in this area is often disregarded by the public. The CIA and FBI have done much work on threat analysis, but they at times ignore some research and at times experience political obstacles. The article is also right in noting that research suggests that community outreach focusing on prevention and peacebuilding are effective steps (peace education is another area that research supports); but if we restrict community outreach only to Muslim communities, then we are practicing discrimination - and, at our peril, ignore the rise of terrorism in non-Muslim groups.
4
The author, together with many commenters, makes the reasonable point that religious identification or political affiliation are not unique markers of a potential terrorist. But the examples that the author provides, together with the undeniable climate of our times, seems to point in a certain particular direction. While only an tiny minority of Muslims commit terrorist acts, there are at least a few troubling matters of predisposition. Timothy McVeigh was hardly motivated by the Pope or by a radical Sunday Christian preacher. He was also not disposed to gloriously commit suicide in the name of his barbarous mission. None of this, of course, matters to his victims. But, if we ARE trying to profile a potential terrorist, we might want to look more closely at why a group of young, unattached foreign males might be requesting unusual flight training in the take-off of commercial airliners, or buying one-way airline tickets, instead of deliberately ignoring such factors. Surely it is not that startling to find a disproportionate sympathy for terrorism amongst the young male population of Molenbeek? That alone doesn't find the needle in the haystack, but it at least tells one which haystack to search. And terrorists who happen to be Christian are not the same as Christian Terrorists. I doubt that we would have any problem in targeting the latter.
2
Terrorism is a tactic that is most often used by a weaker foe to make a point to a stronger force. Terrorism is not limited to Islam, or any religion for that matter.
As many commenters have noted there are lots of people who use, or threaten to use, terrorism to convey their message inside the USA. The numbers of Islamic peoples committing or threatening terroristic acts is relatively small. Yet, we ignore the threats by people who look and sound like us and focus on those we perceive as different usually with the justification of: "We don't know who they are..." We do know who the local Nazi, Clan Member, Women's clinic bomber, hate monger with a personal arsenal, et cetera are - so we're not frightened by them.
A large part of the problem is that people can be sociopathic to psychopathic yet still live and function in society till they, as the phrase goes, snap! Unfortunately, the sociopath/psychopath is usually very good at "fitting-in" and we hardly notice them or overlook much of what they have to say. Give one of these socio/psychopathic people a cause and there is your terrorist threat. Psychology compounded by sociolgy, not religion is the issue.
As many commenters have noted there are lots of people who use, or threaten to use, terrorism to convey their message inside the USA. The numbers of Islamic peoples committing or threatening terroristic acts is relatively small. Yet, we ignore the threats by people who look and sound like us and focus on those we perceive as different usually with the justification of: "We don't know who they are..." We do know who the local Nazi, Clan Member, Women's clinic bomber, hate monger with a personal arsenal, et cetera are - so we're not frightened by them.
A large part of the problem is that people can be sociopathic to psychopathic yet still live and function in society till they, as the phrase goes, snap! Unfortunately, the sociopath/psychopath is usually very good at "fitting-in" and we hardly notice them or overlook much of what they have to say. Give one of these socio/psychopathic people a cause and there is your terrorist threat. Psychology compounded by sociolgy, not religion is the issue.
8
"Terrorism is a tactic that is most often used by a weaker foe to make a point to a stronger force."
Stop justifying this kind of violence. The only point made by kidnapping and raping little girls, as Boko Haram has done, is to express depravity. The only point in shooting children who go to school or using them as human shields is because of depravity. There is nothing even remotely normal about harming children in any animal species, including humans. When you rationalize this violence, you encourage it.
Stop justifying this kind of violence. The only point made by kidnapping and raping little girls, as Boko Haram has done, is to express depravity. The only point in shooting children who go to school or using them as human shields is because of depravity. There is nothing even remotely normal about harming children in any animal species, including humans. When you rationalize this violence, you encourage it.
6
He didn't rationalize it or excuse it. He was just pointing out reality. Historically, the people who turn to terrorism are those who don't have the resources to wage war any other way. Of course many of their actions are depraved, but so are those of powerful countries with powerful military forces.
1
Looking in the wrong place.
How politically correct can any gaggle of researchers be to ignore a root cause of radicalization, religious fanaticism? Or were the researchers cautioned to ignore "religious" beliefs as a primary cause and look at personal behavior, abnormal behavior, criminal behavior, et al, as precursors of a terrorist. The researchers chose for their own reasons to ignore the root cause of violence,Islam, against Christians, Jewish, members of other non-Muslim religious beliefs in the Middle East and other areas of the world.
"The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter."
"http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/violence.aspx
The internecine warfare between Islamic sects only adds to the violence against all Christians, non-believers and non-Muslims in the Middle East and the world today.
How politically correct can any gaggle of researchers be to ignore a root cause of radicalization, religious fanaticism? Or were the researchers cautioned to ignore "religious" beliefs as a primary cause and look at personal behavior, abnormal behavior, criminal behavior, et al, as precursors of a terrorist. The researchers chose for their own reasons to ignore the root cause of violence,Islam, against Christians, Jewish, members of other non-Muslim religious beliefs in the Middle East and other areas of the world.
"The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter."
"http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/violence.aspx
The internecine warfare between Islamic sects only adds to the violence against all Christians, non-believers and non-Muslims in the Middle East and the world today.
11
You easily find a 100 instances of call for violence towards non believers in the Bible. Just look.
2
You can distract from anything if you have an agenda.
The terrorists claim what they wanted to do but you can say they don't know what they wanted, or they don't mean what they say.
And then you can pretend that you're trying to solve the terrorist problem...
"Jamaat-e-Ahrar, a splinter group of the Pakistani Taliban, claimed responsibility for the attack, saying that it had targeted Christians. Pakistani officials were skeptical about the claim, as most of those killed and wounded were Muslims. But because Sunday was Easter, a large number of Christian families had come to the park."
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/29/world/asia/pakistan-bombing-lahore.htm...
The terrorists claim what they wanted to do but you can say they don't know what they wanted, or they don't mean what they say.
And then you can pretend that you're trying to solve the terrorist problem...
"Jamaat-e-Ahrar, a splinter group of the Pakistani Taliban, claimed responsibility for the attack, saying that it had targeted Christians. Pakistani officials were skeptical about the claim, as most of those killed and wounded were Muslims. But because Sunday was Easter, a large number of Christian families had come to the park."
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/29/world/asia/pakistan-bombing-lahore.htm...
This is journalistic malpractice! It's Islam that's the white elephant in the room. Enough of these pathetic PC lies! People are dying because we can't admit who our true enemy is in this war.
13
Mr. Obama, constantly romanticizing about Islam, does not help matters.
The erudite readers of the Times must certainly recognize this.
For PC to rule during such grave times is unforgiving.
The erudite readers of the Times must certainly recognize this.
For PC to rule during such grave times is unforgiving.
Ask a Donald Trump supporter.
Look, it is disingenous to operate under the assumption that these radical extremists are seeking violence as the first manner of recourse. What drives a person to violence? What would compel a person to kill themself to send a message?
It is quite literally the LAST resort for these people who feel deeply enough that the situation leading to their anger cannot be resolved through any other means. If you want to stop terrorism, you cannot contribute it through propagation of the feeling of terror in the region; you cannot reinforce their perception that this is the ONLY way for their voice to be heard.
So, there may be a number of reasons they are angry: religious oppression, economic insecurity, oppressive government, lack of freedom of speech, unsafe living conditions, loss of loved ones. These conditions are present in all corners of the world; the major difference is the method through which they are spoken out against.
This is entirely an anger-management issue, violent terrorists are predominately male. I'm not saying there are no female terrorists nor would I presume to say that females do not have anything to be angry about, the major difference is how do individuals handle their anger.
It has been the policy of past regimes to not negotiate with terrorists; when the only interaction between two opposing viewpoints is VIOLENCE and not PEACEFUL COMMUNICATION, a resolution will not be found.
Look, it is disingenous to operate under the assumption that these radical extremists are seeking violence as the first manner of recourse. What drives a person to violence? What would compel a person to kill themself to send a message?
It is quite literally the LAST resort for these people who feel deeply enough that the situation leading to their anger cannot be resolved through any other means. If you want to stop terrorism, you cannot contribute it through propagation of the feeling of terror in the region; you cannot reinforce their perception that this is the ONLY way for their voice to be heard.
So, there may be a number of reasons they are angry: religious oppression, economic insecurity, oppressive government, lack of freedom of speech, unsafe living conditions, loss of loved ones. These conditions are present in all corners of the world; the major difference is the method through which they are spoken out against.
This is entirely an anger-management issue, violent terrorists are predominately male. I'm not saying there are no female terrorists nor would I presume to say that females do not have anything to be angry about, the major difference is how do individuals handle their anger.
It has been the policy of past regimes to not negotiate with terrorists; when the only interaction between two opposing viewpoints is VIOLENCE and not PEACEFUL COMMUNICATION, a resolution will not be found.
1
Whoops, I made a mistake in my calculations just posted. It is 1.8 million Muslim adults, meaning one in just under 100,000 were involved in killing Americans on US soil. Sorry.
2
How typical of the NYT comments section that an article regarding the difficulty of understanding the causes of terrorism is followed by armchair sociologists espousing their evidence-free pet theories.
3
"What brings people to political violence?" A naive guest ion that demands a nice answer! Possibly the best would be Why did the USA use violence to become the USA in its war of liberation from British domination.
This way most Americans will understand
This way most Americans will understand
5
the guy is absolutely right
2
Which is why it was initially called a "War on...Terror". It was considered a legitimate battle to be fought. Now we are pretending it's not a real war. It's just a few renegades and we mustn't show fear or "they will have won".
1
Though the term was not used and perhaps should have been, the article makes it very clear that they are talking about Muslim extremists. Since 9/11, 32 American civilians were killed on American soil by Muslim Jihadi individuals. There were 8 attacks (I do not count the Fort Hood shooting, as that involved soldiers at an army base connected to our war effort, but even if you include them, that makes 45 Americans in 9 attacks). There are approximately 1.6 Muslim adults in the US. Guessing roughly two person per incident, that would mean that one out of 100 million Muslims in the U.S. were involved in murdering American civilians. Maybe we should round up all the Muslims because one in 100 million have killed Americans.
There were 18 attacks by right-wing extremists, with their ideology usually involving their view of Christianity, leading to 48 deaths during that time. Given that there are more Christians in the U.S., their rate is slightly less than one in 100 million, but hey, you can't be too safe. Round up all the Christians.
As for the Jews....
Since 9/11 there have been approximately 145,000 Americans killed by their fellow Americans with guns, and nearly a half million if you include accidents and suicides. As a person who believes in probabilities, I am much more afraid of my fellow citizens.
There were 18 attacks by right-wing extremists, with their ideology usually involving their view of Christianity, leading to 48 deaths during that time. Given that there are more Christians in the U.S., their rate is slightly less than one in 100 million, but hey, you can't be too safe. Round up all the Christians.
As for the Jews....
Since 9/11 there have been approximately 145,000 Americans killed by their fellow Americans with guns, and nearly a half million if you include accidents and suicides. As a person who believes in probabilities, I am much more afraid of my fellow citizens.
4
if you want ANY legitimacy in your arguement, do not, do not, include accidents and suicides in your calculation. you are trying to compare pre-meditated killings in your 1st analysis. stick to the same premise throughout. otherwise you come off as just some anti gun nut and you lose all credibility.
2
First, I kept them separate so one could compare intentional shootings to intentional shootings, but second, I then added- separately as not to confuse- the other gun deaths, because a second point I made, though not my primary one, has to do with the risk of deaths.
And, additionally, I am "some anti gun nut." I'm also an anti global warming nut, an anti-racist nut, an anti-poverty nut, and many others. If I was around several centuries ago, I would hope that I would have been an anti-theworldisflat nut.
And, additionally, I am "some anti gun nut." I'm also an anti global warming nut, an anti-racist nut, an anti-poverty nut, and many others. If I was around several centuries ago, I would hope that I would have been an anti-theworldisflat nut.
1
"I am no expert, but...", but I was a teenage male once, too.
Every young man wants glory, wants to belong to something bigger than himself, wants to prove himself. There is a reason the US military recruits from high schools. And who here goes into the military? Beyond the group of those who want to belong and to prove themselves, often it is those who cannot pay for the things things they want with the jobs they can get. The military offers them a leg up in the world. There is no secret here. The conceptual difference is that "we are the good guys", and we have a process of command and control that serves the greater society.
Given that, is it any mystery that ISIS can recruit young men who have no prospects with promises of glory and brotherhood, while offering a salary?
Every young man wants glory, wants to belong to something bigger than himself, wants to prove himself. There is a reason the US military recruits from high schools. And who here goes into the military? Beyond the group of those who want to belong and to prove themselves, often it is those who cannot pay for the things things they want with the jobs they can get. The military offers them a leg up in the world. There is no secret here. The conceptual difference is that "we are the good guys", and we have a process of command and control that serves the greater society.
Given that, is it any mystery that ISIS can recruit young men who have no prospects with promises of glory and brotherhood, while offering a salary?
2
And adding to your comment, your (immoral) actions are approved of and will be rewarded by a "god". Who can argue with this? Religious belief is one of the easiest ways to turn a normally moral person into an immoral person.
Interesting to read this article about how science has so little to say about how to prevent terrorism the day after reading an article callend "What Research Says about Defeating Terrorism" in Scientific American: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-research-says-about-defea...
There were several related articles too, compiled to give an overview of what we know about terrorism from a scientific perspective.
Of course the problem is that the necessary solutions do not involve bombings or other actions that will make a politician look powerful and decisive, but rather subtle interventions aimed at undermining the environment in which the terrorist mindset can flourish.
And indeed, much of the "actions" that we take today serve instead to create such an environment, a situation in which a group like ISIS can credibly make the absurd claim that the West is at war with Islam. This would be a lot harder if there were no western bombs falling on Syria ...
There were several related articles too, compiled to give an overview of what we know about terrorism from a scientific perspective.
Of course the problem is that the necessary solutions do not involve bombings or other actions that will make a politician look powerful and decisive, but rather subtle interventions aimed at undermining the environment in which the terrorist mindset can flourish.
And indeed, much of the "actions" that we take today serve instead to create such an environment, a situation in which a group like ISIS can credibly make the absurd claim that the West is at war with Islam. This would be a lot harder if there were no western bombs falling on Syria ...
1
A long and good article, does not answer even few of the questions like m out of the times.
May be studying relatively less violent or terrorist producing countries like, Indonesia, Malaysia and Jordan can help to determine society's role as an institution to produce or not produce disgruntle youth and adults.
From Islamic and Religious perceptive,(that is misinterpreted and thought by recruiters of terrorism by the way) terrorists are trying to find meaning in death or life after death. They commit crimes against humanity on a wrong notion that killing innocents people will earn them heaven.
Its systematic desensitization of decent human values of dignity, tolerance, respect, freedom and coexistence that transforms ordinary teenagers and adults into suicide bombers, mass killers, shooters and bomb plotters.
Probably, political oppression, undiagnosed mental health, economic or financial challenges and above all isolation all are fertile soil to sow seeds of terrorism.
Isolated people become gang members, or join cults to be somebody. Terrorists are probably a clan, a cult or an organization that offers these isolated people a platform, somewhere to belong.
How we know what's going on in someone's mind?
Family, neighbours, colleagues, friends & religious preachers, someone know if something is not right in someone. There should be law in place, Citizen;s Responsibility to Ensure Citizen's Safety and their Own. Failure, to Act-get charged, loose privileges.
May be studying relatively less violent or terrorist producing countries like, Indonesia, Malaysia and Jordan can help to determine society's role as an institution to produce or not produce disgruntle youth and adults.
From Islamic and Religious perceptive,(that is misinterpreted and thought by recruiters of terrorism by the way) terrorists are trying to find meaning in death or life after death. They commit crimes against humanity on a wrong notion that killing innocents people will earn them heaven.
Its systematic desensitization of decent human values of dignity, tolerance, respect, freedom and coexistence that transforms ordinary teenagers and adults into suicide bombers, mass killers, shooters and bomb plotters.
Probably, political oppression, undiagnosed mental health, economic or financial challenges and above all isolation all are fertile soil to sow seeds of terrorism.
Isolated people become gang members, or join cults to be somebody. Terrorists are probably a clan, a cult or an organization that offers these isolated people a platform, somewhere to belong.
How we know what's going on in someone's mind?
Family, neighbours, colleagues, friends & religious preachers, someone know if something is not right in someone. There should be law in place, Citizen;s Responsibility to Ensure Citizen's Safety and their Own. Failure, to Act-get charged, loose privileges.
2
The scariest terrorist are those willing to die as part of their terrorist act. Often that involves a mindset warped by some arcane religious belief system. They are willing to accept the preaching of their religious leaders who are skilled in their ability to find the absolute wrongs of other religions and the need to eliminate them. Ending your own life in doing so is proclaimed a virtue followed by the promise of a blissful afterlife. More people are recognizing the folly of this position, some to the point of saying too much religion is becoming a distinct problem, and in some cases they are joining the growing column of the unreligious.
1
I feel people miss something in this debate: what people think, not just their circumstances, not just a foreign presence. What they are taught as education or as religion is what makes the difference. If people are taught that the Bible or Koran (or Dialectical/Historical Materialism or Origin of Species, whatever), is literal fact, not rife with speculation, suggestion, symbol and/or parable, they may take it all literally.
So, when reading in good books, say, how God gave something to mankind, they are taught that God has a hand, not what it might mean.
Sunni Islam basically closed itself to rational investigation way back around the 12th century, if not earlier. Thus, fundamentalists of all stripes take their texts literally, rather than interpret them for modern circumstance, thus advised by reason and science. And hence, why some still believe in the literal resurrection of body or how Christ will come flying in on clouds, or that violent revolution will eventually succeed, or that life proceeds from random mutation. Not going to happen, and not true. As the ancient writer put it, "Come, let us reason together." Law and order exists in the inanimate and animate worlds. There's a beginning. ...
So, when reading in good books, say, how God gave something to mankind, they are taught that God has a hand, not what it might mean.
Sunni Islam basically closed itself to rational investigation way back around the 12th century, if not earlier. Thus, fundamentalists of all stripes take their texts literally, rather than interpret them for modern circumstance, thus advised by reason and science. And hence, why some still believe in the literal resurrection of body or how Christ will come flying in on clouds, or that violent revolution will eventually succeed, or that life proceeds from random mutation. Not going to happen, and not true. As the ancient writer put it, "Come, let us reason together." Law and order exists in the inanimate and animate worlds. There's a beginning. ...
Mr. Apuzzo seems puzzled as to whe will become a terrorist when the answer seems to lie plainly in sight. People with self-righteous religious beliefs who think they are empowered to kill people who have different religious beliefs are the bulk of the seeds that grow into religious terrorism. How can the Koran which apparently endorses jihadist killing be ignored as a source of religious terrorists when, if some of its leaders are correct, the Koran instructs adherents to engage in jihadist killings? If human beings are to ever get along without wars and jihadist killings, we will have to have religions which embrace brotherhood and understanding instead of violence and hatred. Jihadist killing is murder not brotherhood and needs to be dealt with as murder instead of being worshipped as religion. We are all brothers and sisters whether Moslems, Jews, Hindus, or any other set of beliefs.
2
Your reply begs the question. No one is born with self-righteous religious beliefs or feeling "empowered to kill." This is like saying, "Terrorists are people who have an inclination to bomb public places and kill civilians in the name of their religion." Not helpful, we already knew that.
2
Research data suggest that roughly 1% of the population meet criteria for a diagnosis of psychopathy, characterized primarily by a total disregard for others, no will toward or capacity for empathy. Add sadists who actually achieve pleasure through inflicting pain on others then add to the mix militant religious piety and you have a workable profile. Fact is their violence typically remains private until they find a "worthy" victim. Then they strike.
I think the problem is precisely that terrorists are not all sadists or psychopaths (though I suppose these aren't undesirable qualities in a would-be terrorist).
Far more frightening is the distinct possibility that terrorists are recruited from ordinary people.
Far more frightening is the distinct possibility that terrorists are recruited from ordinary people.
2
The one thing that was not addressed in this article id the combination of those feelings of hopelessness and worthlessness that are common to terrorists and the perpetrators of mass killings here and abroad. There are various causes in these cases but the result is the same. Men (yes, the overwhelming majority are male) who can't find meaningful purpose in their lives and attribute that condition to a society that devalues them. There arre any contributing factiors in this shifting world of ours, most of which are beyond anyone's control now unfortunately.
4
Might a clue lye with someone who's lived under occupation for as long as they can remember, with generations of kids raised under military rule, with all it's trappings and no end in sight?
What about a person lining in a country where it's first democratically elected president was removed by some 'foreign power', for the benefit of such 'foreign power'; installation of a brutal leader to control people who are then subsequently punished further with economic sanctions, murdered scientist's or a cyber war for a nuclear weapons program never proven to exist?
Or maybe someone who lost a loved one in a war 'of choice' enacted by a 'foreign power' supposedly looking for non existent WMD's? Drone attacks where innocent's are dismissed with a 'cliche' collateral damage? Maybe those who object to being forced at gun point, by people from another side of the world, to change their culture, economics and even religion, so as to suit such 'foreign powers? Just a guess!
What about a person lining in a country where it's first democratically elected president was removed by some 'foreign power', for the benefit of such 'foreign power'; installation of a brutal leader to control people who are then subsequently punished further with economic sanctions, murdered scientist's or a cyber war for a nuclear weapons program never proven to exist?
Or maybe someone who lost a loved one in a war 'of choice' enacted by a 'foreign power' supposedly looking for non existent WMD's? Drone attacks where innocent's are dismissed with a 'cliche' collateral damage? Maybe those who object to being forced at gun point, by people from another side of the world, to change their culture, economics and even religion, so as to suit such 'foreign powers? Just a guess!
3
"Researching terrorism is admittedly difficult. It involves tough questions about who qualifies as a terrorist, or as a rebel or a soldier. Nelson Mandela? Palestinian suicide bombers?"
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt Mr. Apuzzo and will choose to believe that you never meant to imply that Palestinian suicide bombers may not in fact be terrorists. Because the only people who truly do believe this are Palestinian terrorists themseves and allies of theirs.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt Mr. Apuzzo and will choose to believe that you never meant to imply that Palestinian suicide bombers may not in fact be terrorists. Because the only people who truly do believe this are Palestinian terrorists themseves and allies of theirs.
3
So I read maybe 70 or 80 responses to this article. I do not understand why when Islamic terrorists murder folks people seem to think they are in greater peril from so called white supremacist right wing wackos than they are from people who have killed thousands of Americans and tens of thousands of other folks since September of 2001.
5
Because white supremacists have actually killed more people in the US than Islamic terrorists. They are not even really Islamic--they are just psychopaths.
2
Militant Moslem Jihadists are terrorists because they are angry and hate Christians and Jews. They want Sharia law as they think western values are too permissive. They want "control"; why is this so difficult to comprehend? Their demand our allegiance to their "Allah" above everything else. They make strong statements by killing people and themselves.
7
Well said. Precise and no spin. Bravo.
3
I call it the "purity monster". I suffered from it in my youth, wanting to be perfect, wanting to conform absolutely to a charismatic leader. Luckily, the leaders I met were up to the task, wise and against judgmentalism.
It is not so different from rebelling against parents, either. Sadly, I heard a radio interview with a mother of such a child. After the usual, he became very devout, and at first she was pleased. Next thing, he died in Syria. The women volunteers are puzzling as they submit to degradation.
[Thes are the ones with a roof over their heads, enough to eat, and an internet connection, not those whose lives have been upended by endless conflict and have little or no hope of getting a job and having a normal life. In particular, teenage boys will get guns and start shooting, of course they will.]
Back to my thesis, I think, as with priest pedophilia, people cannot bear the conflict when they do things their more ethical side cannot approve, and they split into two. They ignore and hide from themselves. They may become more sanctimonious and disapproving. They may even vow to do better, but then the temptation and enabling circumstances arise.
Parents are too busy, or for various reasons don't have the opportunity to monitor their offsprings' behaviors, and influences come in without adult guidance about life's complexities.
I think all too often our inability to accept the imperfections of the human condition lead to this kind of absolutism.
It is not so different from rebelling against parents, either. Sadly, I heard a radio interview with a mother of such a child. After the usual, he became very devout, and at first she was pleased. Next thing, he died in Syria. The women volunteers are puzzling as they submit to degradation.
[Thes are the ones with a roof over their heads, enough to eat, and an internet connection, not those whose lives have been upended by endless conflict and have little or no hope of getting a job and having a normal life. In particular, teenage boys will get guns and start shooting, of course they will.]
Back to my thesis, I think, as with priest pedophilia, people cannot bear the conflict when they do things their more ethical side cannot approve, and they split into two. They ignore and hide from themselves. They may become more sanctimonious and disapproving. They may even vow to do better, but then the temptation and enabling circumstances arise.
Parents are too busy, or for various reasons don't have the opportunity to monitor their offsprings' behaviors, and influences come in without adult guidance about life's complexities.
I think all too often our inability to accept the imperfections of the human condition lead to this kind of absolutism.
2
As a former State Dept whistle blower, I looked at your photo and had to laugh, if sardonically and sadly. Who is at the desks? Im guessing mostly millenials. How did they get these jobs and signing bonuses (I live in DC and frequent a cafe popular with government employees and get to overhear the going rates for signing bonuses). This is part of why your 'checklists' and the latest data crunching programs are a fail.
Have these folks lived in the regions they are preoccupied with? Have they studied Middle Eastern studies or Islamic studies AND spent at least a year in the relevant regions? Usually, no. Why? Because the hiring authorities are often biased against hiring people who do have such backgrounds, fearing they may be potential 5th columners. Another wrong assessment but seems to be the norm, sadly. These guys work off data and good luck connecting the dots. They are just 9-5ers and well paid at that. Bonus if such employees have a connection. In Washington and the Beltway (including NoVA), connections matter far more than job knowledge. Meanwhile Americans who would have better insight and knowledge -- are screened out. And the bad guys run circles around us. Fix the broken hiring and firing processes (I remember experienced colleagues being forced out because some political appointee wanted to bring in contractors - yet another reason). Otherwise, save the taxpayer money if you can't put half the effort into doing the job right
Have these folks lived in the regions they are preoccupied with? Have they studied Middle Eastern studies or Islamic studies AND spent at least a year in the relevant regions? Usually, no. Why? Because the hiring authorities are often biased against hiring people who do have such backgrounds, fearing they may be potential 5th columners. Another wrong assessment but seems to be the norm, sadly. These guys work off data and good luck connecting the dots. They are just 9-5ers and well paid at that. Bonus if such employees have a connection. In Washington and the Beltway (including NoVA), connections matter far more than job knowledge. Meanwhile Americans who would have better insight and knowledge -- are screened out. And the bad guys run circles around us. Fix the broken hiring and firing processes (I remember experienced colleagues being forced out because some political appointee wanted to bring in contractors - yet another reason). Otherwise, save the taxpayer money if you can't put half the effort into doing the job right
5
Um, here's a clue: they tend to come from deeply oppressed people so they attack their oppressors. "Research", lol.
3
Right...look at all those Tibetan terrorists reacting to the Chinese oppression they face. Please wake up. The ideology behind most of the despicable actions we are seeing in the past several years puts jihad and martyrdom at the top of the list of best things an adherent can do to please it's imaginary leader. That ideology is the problem.
1
Don't think ONLY Muslims when looking at potential terrorists because the US has had plenty of problems with Christian terrorists. I think there is a link to depression and feeling suicidal--a desire to make the ending of their lives meaningful and glorious in some way. Young people often feel this way when life is difficult emotionally. Of course, most don't become terrorists. When other people or groups are seen as the reason for their angst, the pieces can fall into place, so politicians play their part when they make scapegoats. Dying and killing only become more romanticized as the media endlessly focuses on terrorists acts. The cult of hero-worship leads a troubled mind towards a path that will supposedly confer that status. Empathy and understanding are goals that serve us better.
2
I have no proof, but I did once comment on an interesting common denominator I have noticed in several of the terrorist cases involving young people. This theory would also explain why brothers sometimes do this together.
San Bernardino:
Rafia Farook said she was forced to move out of her home with three of her children because her husband continually harassed her “verbally and physically and refused to leave the home,” according to the divorce records. (media)
In Chattanooga:
"Court records say his mother sought a divorce in 2009, alleging her husband physically abused her and their children and, citing Islamic law, wanted to take a second wife." (media)
The father is abusive in both cases. Eerily similar. When we try to analyze cause leading to violence we talk a lot about guns or extreme religious ideology. There is no talk about the one variable which seems to be a common thread in so much explosive deadly violence of all types and contexts: Domestic and child abuse. Take any murder case scratch a little and it's almost always there.
Not everyone who is abused, or watches their mom or dad be abused becomes a killer- so this is certainly not an excuse- but the explosive anger that underlies such killings, especially mass killings, seems to often be related to abusive backgrounds.
As a society we should be investing more in this area.
San Bernardino:
Rafia Farook said she was forced to move out of her home with three of her children because her husband continually harassed her “verbally and physically and refused to leave the home,” according to the divorce records. (media)
In Chattanooga:
"Court records say his mother sought a divorce in 2009, alleging her husband physically abused her and their children and, citing Islamic law, wanted to take a second wife." (media)
The father is abusive in both cases. Eerily similar. When we try to analyze cause leading to violence we talk a lot about guns or extreme religious ideology. There is no talk about the one variable which seems to be a common thread in so much explosive deadly violence of all types and contexts: Domestic and child abuse. Take any murder case scratch a little and it's almost always there.
Not everyone who is abused, or watches their mom or dad be abused becomes a killer- so this is certainly not an excuse- but the explosive anger that underlies such killings, especially mass killings, seems to often be related to abusive backgrounds.
As a society we should be investing more in this area.
2
In Pakistan recently, their legislators proposed a law criminalizing domestic violence. The religious leaders announced that such law in against Islam. So, here you have it in black and white. Formally, with governmental supports, many Muslim countries fear the Imams, and perpetuate the 7th century backward behaviors.
4
This keeps coming back to Saudi Arabia.
We fund Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia in turn funds the hate factory schools called madrassas. The Imams from these hate factories help strap on the suicide vests and recruit losers to wear them.
So, the circle of death begins and ends with the deal the fake Saudi monarchy cut with a radical wing of Islam so that they can keep their personal 747's.
A deal, literally, with the devil.
We fund Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia in turn funds the hate factory schools called madrassas. The Imams from these hate factories help strap on the suicide vests and recruit losers to wear them.
So, the circle of death begins and ends with the deal the fake Saudi monarchy cut with a radical wing of Islam so that they can keep their personal 747's.
A deal, literally, with the devil.
9
Rather than the impossible task of identifying would-be terrorists, wouldn't it make more sense from both a security standpoint and an individual rights framework to have agents infiltrate terrorist cells and identify the ringleaders and the recruits? Don't try to predict recruits. Identify actual recruits. The U.S. does this with other organized criminal syndicates. ISIL is an organized criminal syndicate.
Of course, this would be of limited value in the U.S. itself, where the overwhelming majority of (the very rare) ISIL-oriented terrorists are lone wolves. Infiltration would work better in Europe and elsewhere outside the U.S., where cells are organized.
Random violence by lone wolves is terrifying, but organized violence, as we've seen, is even deadlier. It's sad that many readers are more frightened of lone-wolf terrorists who commit violence in the name of Islam than they are of lone-wolf terrorists who commit violence in the name of other causes. The focus on Islam undermines religious freedom, other constitutional rights, and security interests.
To tackle organized violence of any stripe, target those criminal organizations.
Belgium failed to do that, and look what happened.
Of course, this would be of limited value in the U.S. itself, where the overwhelming majority of (the very rare) ISIL-oriented terrorists are lone wolves. Infiltration would work better in Europe and elsewhere outside the U.S., where cells are organized.
Random violence by lone wolves is terrifying, but organized violence, as we've seen, is even deadlier. It's sad that many readers are more frightened of lone-wolf terrorists who commit violence in the name of Islam than they are of lone-wolf terrorists who commit violence in the name of other causes. The focus on Islam undermines religious freedom, other constitutional rights, and security interests.
To tackle organized violence of any stripe, target those criminal organizations.
Belgium failed to do that, and look what happened.
2
When will anyone in the media or elsewhere put aside
the "radical Islamic terrorist" label and ask: Why are the people in the Middle East and their relatives so upset and revengeful?
Then take a look at the carve-up job by France, England and the United States,
the puppet-Shah put in place in Iran by the U.S., note the biggest
foreign policy blunder in America's history: the Iraq War, and the pitiful
collateral damage of drone strikes.
Just who are "the terrorists" here?
the "radical Islamic terrorist" label and ask: Why are the people in the Middle East and their relatives so upset and revengeful?
Then take a look at the carve-up job by France, England and the United States,
the puppet-Shah put in place in Iran by the U.S., note the biggest
foreign policy blunder in America's history: the Iraq War, and the pitiful
collateral damage of drone strikes.
Just who are "the terrorists" here?
3
And the cartoons, don't forget that. Who wouldn't shoot people over an offensive cartoon?
5
And if both were wrong ?
And it there is no one solution that fits all ?
The article makes me shudder. If it is well researched it would mean that the US government tries to tackle a crime problem - terrorism - as if there were too many bank robbers. The government seems to forget the political, strategic, economic, cultural,etc. etc. frames which makes people think that blowing up innocents will further their cause.
And, of course, the US government does not want to attack its own policy - who attacked Iraq without reason ? - , its own allies - who is the country with the motto Liberté, fraternité, égalité which routinely tortured suspects in Algeria ? -, its own financers - who paid the Ben Laden terrorist project in Afghanistan ?
So, let's pretend terrorism is a question of individual maladaptation to society. And let researchers find the pill to deliver to make people behave.
And wwhat about people like the National Rifle Association which furthers gun touting, trains young people in shooting, and hinders gun control laws ? Of course, such a policy does not further any physical violence. Not at all.
And it there is no one solution that fits all ?
The article makes me shudder. If it is well researched it would mean that the US government tries to tackle a crime problem - terrorism - as if there were too many bank robbers. The government seems to forget the political, strategic, economic, cultural,etc. etc. frames which makes people think that blowing up innocents will further their cause.
And, of course, the US government does not want to attack its own policy - who attacked Iraq without reason ? - , its own allies - who is the country with the motto Liberté, fraternité, égalité which routinely tortured suspects in Algeria ? -, its own financers - who paid the Ben Laden terrorist project in Afghanistan ?
So, let's pretend terrorism is a question of individual maladaptation to society. And let researchers find the pill to deliver to make people behave.
And wwhat about people like the National Rifle Association which furthers gun touting, trains young people in shooting, and hinders gun control laws ? Of course, such a policy does not further any physical violence. Not at all.
Malcolm Gladwell wrote an article about the increasing prevalence of school shootings that I think has a parallel in the phenomena of Islamic terrorism, and the violence of other similar cult groups that turn to terrorism.
Here's the link: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/thresholds-of-violence
The idea was that the first violent incident in a social trend breaks the mold, but each successive incident makes the action easier and more familiar to the next people who choose to participate.
By the time you get to the 100th person in a mass riot, breaking a store window isn't such a big deal, as much as it was when no one else was doing it. The 100th person can be quite unusual, quite normal, whereas the 1st offender more often stands out.
So the failure to find a commonality of characteristics among violent terrorists is really asking the wrong question. It's not so much WHO committed the act, but WHEN and WHERE? At what point in the chain of violence did each person act; in the beginning, or well into the progression of incidents?
I think the message of violent terrorism has two elements. First, is the sense of alienation from society and a search for a deeper more meaningful life. Second, is the access to weaponry that amplifies the effects of violence in body count and spectacle.
Gladwell's conclusions did not point to any specific solution, only to a better grasp of the complexity of the problem.
It should be a no-brainer to focus on access to weaponry.
Here's the link: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/thresholds-of-violence
The idea was that the first violent incident in a social trend breaks the mold, but each successive incident makes the action easier and more familiar to the next people who choose to participate.
By the time you get to the 100th person in a mass riot, breaking a store window isn't such a big deal, as much as it was when no one else was doing it. The 100th person can be quite unusual, quite normal, whereas the 1st offender more often stands out.
So the failure to find a commonality of characteristics among violent terrorists is really asking the wrong question. It's not so much WHO committed the act, but WHEN and WHERE? At what point in the chain of violence did each person act; in the beginning, or well into the progression of incidents?
I think the message of violent terrorism has two elements. First, is the sense of alienation from society and a search for a deeper more meaningful life. Second, is the access to weaponry that amplifies the effects of violence in body count and spectacle.
Gladwell's conclusions did not point to any specific solution, only to a better grasp of the complexity of the problem.
It should be a no-brainer to focus on access to weaponry.
3
To oh: Thanks for the Gladwell article. You make a good point with adding the article to your post.
In the U.S.A., there are more domestic terrorists than foreign ones. We just call our domestic terrorists patriots, occupiers or something else. We really need to understand the all-American terrorists and not ignore them as being somewhat ok because they are usually right-wing and Christian.
7
Dear Mr. Apuzzo,
Camus once wrote (my non-literal translation of the original French): "The only really important question in all of philosophy is whether to keep living or to kill oneself."
Given that a jihadist who blows her- or himself in a crowd believes he or she will wake up in Paradise in the presence of God a martyr, it is pretty clear why the suicide bomber does this: Because he or she believes that dying a martyr and going to Heaven is a better choice than remaining alive here on Earth.
Of course, to materialists who worship money (which describes most people in Europe and North America regardless of their stated religious beliefs), this just seems crazy!
What is less clear is how people (in this case Muslims) can have this Christian Crusader mentality in the 21st century.
However, according to the Islamic calendar, Muslims live in the 14th century A.H. (After Hegira). And some people still prepare a "spiritual" life over a "material" life.
It is that simple, even to me, a materialist who rejects spirituality.
Camus once wrote (my non-literal translation of the original French): "The only really important question in all of philosophy is whether to keep living or to kill oneself."
Given that a jihadist who blows her- or himself in a crowd believes he or she will wake up in Paradise in the presence of God a martyr, it is pretty clear why the suicide bomber does this: Because he or she believes that dying a martyr and going to Heaven is a better choice than remaining alive here on Earth.
Of course, to materialists who worship money (which describes most people in Europe and North America regardless of their stated religious beliefs), this just seems crazy!
What is less clear is how people (in this case Muslims) can have this Christian Crusader mentality in the 21st century.
However, according to the Islamic calendar, Muslims live in the 14th century A.H. (After Hegira). And some people still prepare a "spiritual" life over a "material" life.
It is that simple, even to me, a materialist who rejects spirituality.
2
Unsatisfied, poor, misstreated people exist all over the world, but, at least in Latinamerica, they don't loose the sense of respect for life. They want to live for their families and want their children to have fulfilling lives. These terrorists are stranged from their families and alienated with a single idea that the world is divided in good and bad; they don't reason and will not discuss their ideas, because they don't have any. They have been brainwashed by pseudoreligious leaders.
2
All this research is a waste of time and resources.
It is all very simple. You kill us and we will kill
you. The west has been invading, exploiting
and killing middle easterners for the last 100
years. Many muslims are outraged. Why do
Americans and Europeans think they can kill
those people with impunity and they will roll over
and beg for mercy? They have feeling of hatred
and vengeance. Education and income level make
no difference. Anyone can be hateful or provoked
to be such. Consider how Americans became so
angry with the Muslims after 9/11 attack. It is
the same psychology driving Muslims to indulge
in terrorism. It is bad but hateful people are not
cool and rational. There will be no checklist to
screen out, monitor or arrest potential terrorists.
It is all very simple. You kill us and we will kill
you. The west has been invading, exploiting
and killing middle easterners for the last 100
years. Many muslims are outraged. Why do
Americans and Europeans think they can kill
those people with impunity and they will roll over
and beg for mercy? They have feeling of hatred
and vengeance. Education and income level make
no difference. Anyone can be hateful or provoked
to be such. Consider how Americans became so
angry with the Muslims after 9/11 attack. It is
the same psychology driving Muslims to indulge
in terrorism. It is bad but hateful people are not
cool and rational. There will be no checklist to
screen out, monitor or arrest potential terrorists.
2
You are right in pointing to the historical legacy of Russian, British, French, American colonial powers since the fall of the Ottoman Empire in the current mess.
Noone of them had any interest in establishing a more civil society in one of their colonies, territories, mandates, etc.
But the Arabs , and their rulers and Western-oriented middle classes had no interest in creating their proper version of democracy either. The Western powers - besides Israel - left the Middle East in the mid 1950s. So there was some time to try out a more liberal way of doing politics. The only one that succeded was the Libanon. But we let that poor state and its fragile balance get killed by the PLO and our ally, Israel.
Looking for psychological checklists to identify potential terrorists sounds ridiculous when you don't want to attack the political roots of terrorism.
Noone of them had any interest in establishing a more civil society in one of their colonies, territories, mandates, etc.
But the Arabs , and their rulers and Western-oriented middle classes had no interest in creating their proper version of democracy either. The Western powers - besides Israel - left the Middle East in the mid 1950s. So there was some time to try out a more liberal way of doing politics. The only one that succeded was the Libanon. But we let that poor state and its fragile balance get killed by the PLO and our ally, Israel.
Looking for psychological checklists to identify potential terrorists sounds ridiculous when you don't want to attack the political roots of terrorism.
By that measure, all of European Jewry should have been terrorizing the region after 1945. Odd, they didn't.
1
Aside from analyzing causes, I can think of one mutually beneficial, possible cure. Compulsory national service for all young people at an age when basic education is complete. Model it after the depression-era Civilian Conservation Corps. Get young adults outdoors, preferably in a non-urban setting, doing physically exhausting but meaningful work projects, all while rubbing shoulders with a wide variety of other people their age, while learning skills.
The PBS production "American Experience" has an excellent documentary about the CCC. FDR's administration had it up and running within two months of conception. It saved lives, both literally and spiritually. Watching video testimonials of elderly men who had participated in youth is profoundly moving.
The PBS production "American Experience" has an excellent documentary about the CCC. FDR's administration had it up and running within two months of conception. It saved lives, both literally and spiritually. Watching video testimonials of elderly men who had participated in youth is profoundly moving.
3
Judging by the comments on this article, readers seem to be confusing three separate issues. One issue is how do you identify people who have become terrorists and how do you stop terrorist attacks by such people. The answer to that is through surveillance, which may or may not involve profiling, intelligence and law/military enforcement. A second issue is why did a particular individual become a terrorist. It is not difficult to determine after the fact why someone became a terrorist, e.g. religion, mental illness or for political reasons. The third issue, which is what the article was intended to address, is whether you can determine if someone is likely to become a terrorist in the first place and, if so, how. The answer to that question is you can't.
1
The problem with Americans is that they don't read the foreign press and they get all their information from the same echo chambers here.
I suggest a perusal of the words of Abu Dhabi based Dr. Janal Sanad Al Suwaidi on the mistakes Sweden, and Europe as well, have made in trying to break down the nation state instead of insisting on immigrants being in sync with the host country values. He discusses the limits of religious expression given how many mosques function as school for terrorism, among other issues, and his scholarship should not be overlooked here. He faults Europe not for being intolerant, but for being too tolerant and for perpetuating the same mistakes over and over again. I have provided a link below. He can hardly be accused of European racist bigotry.
http://www.thelocal.se/20160321/if-you-come-to-sweden-you-must-be-loyal-...
I suggest a perusal of the words of Abu Dhabi based Dr. Janal Sanad Al Suwaidi on the mistakes Sweden, and Europe as well, have made in trying to break down the nation state instead of insisting on immigrants being in sync with the host country values. He discusses the limits of religious expression given how many mosques function as school for terrorism, among other issues, and his scholarship should not be overlooked here. He faults Europe not for being intolerant, but for being too tolerant and for perpetuating the same mistakes over and over again. I have provided a link below. He can hardly be accused of European racist bigotry.
http://www.thelocal.se/20160321/if-you-come-to-sweden-you-must-be-loyal-...
6
Pakistan is shutting down Madrassas which they suspect is preaching terrorism. But if America does the same NYT will be crying religious discrimination. Liberal Newspapers boast freedom of speech by specifically criticizes, some times mocking Christianity, Christians, whites etc, but carefully not to make any mention of Islamic terrorism, even if it is plain obvious. Obama is a clear example for that. He twisted Bible verses how barbaric it is and then again twisted Quran verses to show how lovable Islam is. This western society is becoming more anti Christian than standing for freedom of speech.The liberalism which once brought purification of Christianity in western society is gone. And that is exactly Islamist wanted.
3
Show the evidence !
Where did Obama twist the Bible ?
Where did Obama twist the Bible ?
1
Becoming an Evil person is EASY
Becoming a Giving person DIFFICULT
Becoming a Giving person DIFFICULT
1
Families and friends of the terrorists ought to be examined and studied more persistently and thoroughly by the expert researchers in this field. Surely these family members and friends had all told us that they saw nothing, yet they might know much more than they are aware of.
I love the experts who appear whenever an article like this is published and talk about "Muslims" or "Islam".
Quick question - how many of these suicide bombers are Shi'ite? Sufi? None? Gosh, maybe your penetrating analysis didn't penetrate the surface.
Quick question - how many of these suicide bombers are Shi'ite? Sufi? None? Gosh, maybe your penetrating analysis didn't penetrate the surface.
3
While I applaud Ms. Mirahmadi's social service initiative, I disagree with her statement that 'nobody would disagree' with her proposed warning signs. She has her bias, and Ted Cruz has his. In the absence of data, they need to wrestle in a cage match to determine whose bias is stronger. I would pay to see that.
A muslim cleric in Belgium, interviewed on BBC,
described some of these terrorists involved in
crimes such as drug dealing.Somehow they turned to
religion. However, they hated the western societies.
This hate and their willingness to harm the
society turned them into jihadists. As former
criminals they had no respect for law and morality.
They had no hesitation to kill people. Their
embrace of religion was shallow, an attempt to
change themselves from criminals to respected
religious person. They didn't absorb the message
of the religion spiritually or morally.
described some of these terrorists involved in
crimes such as drug dealing.Somehow they turned to
religion. However, they hated the western societies.
This hate and their willingness to harm the
society turned them into jihadists. As former
criminals they had no respect for law and morality.
They had no hesitation to kill people. Their
embrace of religion was shallow, an attempt to
change themselves from criminals to respected
religious person. They didn't absorb the message
of the religion spiritually or morally.
2
There is certainly a link between Terrorism and drug use.
1
And an even bigger link between terrorism and hatred of the West.
In historical usage, "terrorism" is a tactic used by the weak or otherwise powerless against those possessing overwhelming power.
It is a tactic borne of desperation, used by a few fervent 'believers' in a cause that may or may not be supported by a majority. When a few pursue goals not held by a majority, the end result will be failure to advance the cause. But when the cause IS supported by a large number but otherwise suppressed politically or militarily, then that goal can still be achieved - Algeria's independence from France for example ( the 'war' was won by France militarily but lost politically). The establishment of Israel is another with terrorist acts against the British in Palestine. As all other means of protest and change are suppressed, fewer and fewer people are willing to take part in opposing a dominant power but those that remain become more 'radicalized' - willing to go to prison or even die in pursuit of goals they consider to be just (even if others disagree). Eliminating all other opportunities to express outrage and discontent, making it impossible to change things leads to such extremism.
History has also shown governments and other powers all too willing to use 'terror' to justify their own extreme behavior - even staging 'false flag' terrorist events as an excuse to exert even greater control.
It is a tactic borne of desperation, used by a few fervent 'believers' in a cause that may or may not be supported by a majority. When a few pursue goals not held by a majority, the end result will be failure to advance the cause. But when the cause IS supported by a large number but otherwise suppressed politically or militarily, then that goal can still be achieved - Algeria's independence from France for example ( the 'war' was won by France militarily but lost politically). The establishment of Israel is another with terrorist acts against the British in Palestine. As all other means of protest and change are suppressed, fewer and fewer people are willing to take part in opposing a dominant power but those that remain become more 'radicalized' - willing to go to prison or even die in pursuit of goals they consider to be just (even if others disagree). Eliminating all other opportunities to express outrage and discontent, making it impossible to change things leads to such extremism.
History has also shown governments and other powers all too willing to use 'terror' to justify their own extreme behavior - even staging 'false flag' terrorist events as an excuse to exert even greater control.
What about the white-on-white crime? More than 80 percent of violent crimes committed against our white majority citizens in the United States is done by other whites, meaning that it dwarfs any risk of violence from the groups focused on in this article.
If logic applied ignorantly to the black lives matter movement is applied here, we must solve white-on-white crime before thinking about the crimes discussed in the article.
Also, there is a huge problem with the fact that no consideration is made for domestic terrorists who aren't Muslim. The sheer preponderance of acts committed by the majority white domestic terrorists is a huge elephant in the room. Possibly by understanding that we can understand other forms of terrorism better as well. Just need to expand the research sample a bit.
If logic applied ignorantly to the black lives matter movement is applied here, we must solve white-on-white crime before thinking about the crimes discussed in the article.
Also, there is a huge problem with the fact that no consideration is made for domestic terrorists who aren't Muslim. The sheer preponderance of acts committed by the majority white domestic terrorists is a huge elephant in the room. Possibly by understanding that we can understand other forms of terrorism better as well. Just need to expand the research sample a bit.
The only folks who profit from terrorism are global war mongers and global arms manufacturers and dealers. It's a catch-22, the increasingly armed world becomes increasingly violent and its the unarmed and peaceful people's rights, freedoms and lifestyles that suffer.
It's time to turn the other cheek and embrace peace ya think? Demilitarize and demobilize, lay down our arms for peaceful neighborly relationships across borders, cultures and religions? Vietnam has done quite well without the French and us the past 40 years? My Nikes are made in Vietnam.
I don't fear global warming as much as I do violent people of whatever kind bearing arms and telling me what I've got to do.
It's time to turn the other cheek and embrace peace ya think? Demilitarize and demobilize, lay down our arms for peaceful neighborly relationships across borders, cultures and religions? Vietnam has done quite well without the French and us the past 40 years? My Nikes are made in Vietnam.
I don't fear global warming as much as I do violent people of whatever kind bearing arms and telling me what I've got to do.
1
If global warming submerges the world's coastal areas and increases destructive drought and rainstorms, you'll have lots more violent people to contend with.
1
Research yields plenty of clues if you decide to actually look at the research. I am posting a link that has all terror attacks listed per month for the whole year of 2015. Most of the attacks are carried out by radicalized Muslims. It is hard to believe that some people will go out of their way to avoid looking at actual facts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_January%E2%80...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_January%E2%80...
4
But what radicalizes these Muslims and what makes some of them turn to violence? That's the problem and the point of the research.
1
In every populationthere are people who are just nuts. Perhaps we're now learning to see how big this group is, and how the crazy manifests in different societies... and in the modern world how this affects us all.
Who knpwswhat's next?
Who knpwswhat's next?
Given the increasing progress being made by the high tech companies in AI, this is an area that the government and companies could work together to get ahead of the curve. Proactive efforts to identify individuals at risk of joining groups as well as individuals and their patterns prior to terrorist actions would benefit all.
Terrorists, or to be more specific, Islamic terrorists, are being grown here in France. Recently, tens of Salafist mosques were shut down by the French government. Evidently "extreme" Islamic dogma was being preached to young boys.
Maybe researchers would yield more "clues" about who might become a terrorist if they looked in the right places.
Maybe researchers would yield more "clues" about who might become a terrorist if they looked in the right places.
11
So, we are essentially funding our assumptions. What kind of men and women join terrorist groups? Are they poor, marginalized, and uneducated? Or are they well educated, privilege, and outgoing? Terrorism is not a phenomenon and we ought to stop treating it like it is.
There will always be 'all kinds' of terrorists, but any good social scientist knows the right question is: "what kind of conditions breed terrorism?" From the failed states of Somalia to Libya to the regional power struggle for Syria, terrorism grows when there is no government structure, effective political process, or protection for the most vulnerable. The independent variable is America's presence and influence that fuels regime change and support of dictators that terrorize their civilians. This is the context in which terrorism functions and thrives.
It's clear those who are willing to commit an act of terrorism believe that their radicalism serves a higher purpose, and most importantly they are willing to follow through. That is the difference between someone who exercises their freedom of speech vs. a terrorist. Any 'preventative' measures that we try to implement only make us 'feel' safer while infringing on the rights of others or squandering our taxes. As long as Western countries continue to tout human rights, while pummeling weak regimes and hypocritically supporting dictators, there will terrorists and there will be sympathizers.
There will always be 'all kinds' of terrorists, but any good social scientist knows the right question is: "what kind of conditions breed terrorism?" From the failed states of Somalia to Libya to the regional power struggle for Syria, terrorism grows when there is no government structure, effective political process, or protection for the most vulnerable. The independent variable is America's presence and influence that fuels regime change and support of dictators that terrorize their civilians. This is the context in which terrorism functions and thrives.
It's clear those who are willing to commit an act of terrorism believe that their radicalism serves a higher purpose, and most importantly they are willing to follow through. That is the difference between someone who exercises their freedom of speech vs. a terrorist. Any 'preventative' measures that we try to implement only make us 'feel' safer while infringing on the rights of others or squandering our taxes. As long as Western countries continue to tout human rights, while pummeling weak regimes and hypocritically supporting dictators, there will terrorists and there will be sympathizers.
10
These states failed because Islamic teachings create paranoia.
1
I find it puzzling that there are no actionable answers to the question: Who Will Become a Terrorist?
I am puzzled that the results of the research are inconclusive and whatever suggestions that are proposed result in some form of meaningless racial profiling,
The facts and evidence of past terrorists have shown that terrorists are indoctrinated by:
1. the web sites that glorify and promote terrorism and their philosophy and/or
2. radical preachers of religious extremism.
It would seem to me to be an obvious method and objective of detective work to monitor and track those who are visiting such web sites and those who are communicating with radical preachers of religious extremism.
This investigative work should be supported with improved communication and cooperation with Muslim leaders and others in the Muslim community. The message to solicit the support of the Muslim community is: “Muslim terrorists are killing Muslims. What do you want to do about this?”
Another option for policy legislators and security departments is to shut down or block domestic access to the web sites that glorify and promote terrorism and their philosophy.
I am puzzled that the results of the research are inconclusive and whatever suggestions that are proposed result in some form of meaningless racial profiling,
The facts and evidence of past terrorists have shown that terrorists are indoctrinated by:
1. the web sites that glorify and promote terrorism and their philosophy and/or
2. radical preachers of religious extremism.
It would seem to me to be an obvious method and objective of detective work to monitor and track those who are visiting such web sites and those who are communicating with radical preachers of religious extremism.
This investigative work should be supported with improved communication and cooperation with Muslim leaders and others in the Muslim community. The message to solicit the support of the Muslim community is: “Muslim terrorists are killing Muslims. What do you want to do about this?”
Another option for policy legislators and security departments is to shut down or block domestic access to the web sites that glorify and promote terrorism and their philosophy.
1
Should the question also be asked why do some governments become terrorist organizations that use violence to spread their influence and interests at home and abroad?
As mentioned in the article, Mandela was considered a terrorist by the apartheid South African government, does that mean he was a terrorist? South Africa terrorized the front line states. What about Ghandi, George Washington, Aung san suu Kyi etc.? Terrorists or freedom fighters?
What did Martin Luther King do that justified his terrorization by violent elements in our government and society when he called for voting rights, equality, economic opportunity and peace? The worst recent terrorist atrocity I can remember was the shooting up of the Charleston Church that was sheltering African American Christian worshippers.
The media should do its duty and investigate why we have such high levels of terrorizing violence in our own society. Investigating why our culture proliferates the bearing of weapons and ammo at home and abroad, and why the Feds, the Justice Department and FBI, don't investigate all shootings of unarmed American citizens in our municipalities. Americans are terrorized by their own culture, why millions of Americans are drug addicts of some kind. If the Feds investigated the municipalities, our excessively high violent death statistics might drop to levels seen in the more civilized countries of the world. By being more peaceful at home we'd then be in a position to spread more peace abroad.
As mentioned in the article, Mandela was considered a terrorist by the apartheid South African government, does that mean he was a terrorist? South Africa terrorized the front line states. What about Ghandi, George Washington, Aung san suu Kyi etc.? Terrorists or freedom fighters?
What did Martin Luther King do that justified his terrorization by violent elements in our government and society when he called for voting rights, equality, economic opportunity and peace? The worst recent terrorist atrocity I can remember was the shooting up of the Charleston Church that was sheltering African American Christian worshippers.
The media should do its duty and investigate why we have such high levels of terrorizing violence in our own society. Investigating why our culture proliferates the bearing of weapons and ammo at home and abroad, and why the Feds, the Justice Department and FBI, don't investigate all shootings of unarmed American citizens in our municipalities. Americans are terrorized by their own culture, why millions of Americans are drug addicts of some kind. If the Feds investigated the municipalities, our excessively high violent death statistics might drop to levels seen in the more civilized countries of the world. By being more peaceful at home we'd then be in a position to spread more peace abroad.
A potential terrorist is anyone who has no doubt about what is written in a book or has no doubt about what is said by a "reputable" character. These followers are prone to act even violently because of their faith and consequent blind obedience. During the Nazi era the worst perpetrators of crimes against humanity were people having "no doubts" about their party officials.
2
rather, the question is whether Christianity stands or falls.... We tolerate no one in our ranks who attacks the ideas of Christianity... in fact our movement is Christian. We are filled with a desire for Catholics and Protestants to discover one another in the deep distress of our own people.
— Adolf Hitler, speech in Passau, October 27, 1928, Bundesarchiv Berlin-Zehlendorf
— Adolf Hitler, speech in Passau, October 27, 1928, Bundesarchiv Berlin-Zehlendorf
Steven Weinberg put his finger on the thing that politicians and the media go to great lengths to pretend not to know: “With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.”
1
he being a noble laureate astrophysicist
Terrorists are psychologically moulded. Terrorism is a twisted means to an end only because the media gives 24/7 attention to it because it helps ratings. Any intuitive person can see this. In the US, the dilemma seems to be which Muslims are on which side? A small percent may be jihadist, and a percentage may be American patriots. But the feeling is the majority are neutral, and there is the dilemma. Why would people want to immigrate to a country whose values and responsibilities they didn't share?
"Last year, the Intercept news organization revealed a government checklist ... based on factors, including whether they feel mistreated by the government, distrust law enforcement or suffer from discrimination ...
... a Muslim-led interfaith organization called Worde ... provided families and faith leaders with lists of warning signs: depression, trauma, economic stress and political grievances."
Don't these lists better describe homegrown, right wing terrorists than foreign ones? The second list, in particular, puts me in mind of a recent much-discussed study on suicide adn early death among poor whites in the US.
... a Muslim-led interfaith organization called Worde ... provided families and faith leaders with lists of warning signs: depression, trauma, economic stress and political grievances."
Don't these lists better describe homegrown, right wing terrorists than foreign ones? The second list, in particular, puts me in mind of a recent much-discussed study on suicide adn early death among poor whites in the US.
Until we stop trying to understand terrorism through the lens of our own individualistic culture we will get nowhere. To suggest that factors like psychological development, parental behavior and or poverty create terrorists -- is to miss the crucial point: terrorism is not an attempt to right the wrongs that have been done to the self -- it is rather a kind of self-sacrifice in the service of some greater cause. In this sense it can also be distinguished from crime which is motivated by a desire for personal gain of some sort.
Societies or sub-cultures that give rise to terrorists are those in which the group -- whether secular or religious -- matters much more to the members than their own individual life or that of their children. These values are so different from Western ones that they are easily dismissed. But until we understand that terrorists are more likely to emerge in certain cultures rather than others -- an idea so un-American that you can be shunned for even suggesting it -- we will make no headway.
Societies or sub-cultures that give rise to terrorists are those in which the group -- whether secular or religious -- matters much more to the members than their own individual life or that of their children. These values are so different from Western ones that they are easily dismissed. But until we understand that terrorists are more likely to emerge in certain cultures rather than others -- an idea so un-American that you can be shunned for even suggesting it -- we will make no headway.
3
It seems this question is much like the inquiries into what makes a criminal. Any answers that suggested looking at the social conditions surrounding criminal behavior were rejected.
As to why brothers? Because brothers will support each other. When one hesitates the other can support the cause to them. It probably does require an outside handler who can manipulate both. Note that the third man took steps to hide his identity. The other two went in uncovered.
As to why brothers? Because brothers will support each other. When one hesitates the other can support the cause to them. It probably does require an outside handler who can manipulate both. Note that the third man took steps to hide his identity. The other two went in uncovered.
If "nearly anyone is a potential terrorist" and "there is still nothing close to a consensus on why someone becomes a terrorist," would it be the same logic as to kill oneself? People from all walks of life take their own lives, if all of a sudden something of impact happened to them, that gave them suicidal thoughts. Unless someone helps them change their minds, one fine day they commit suicide.
2
There are more excuses for violence than are warranted, but it appears that people fascinated with explosives are more likely to be either of lower than normal intelligence or living in poverty stricken circumstances.
Every Nation ought to be concerned about the tendency of wars to destabilize whole neighborhoods already living on the edge of poverty.
Every Nation ought to be concerned about the tendency of wars to destabilize whole neighborhoods already living on the edge of poverty.
1
Why not read the article before commenting? The link to poverty was debunked.
"There are more excuses for violence than are warranted, but it appears that people fascinated with explosives are more likely to be either of lower than normal intelligence or living in poverty stricken circumstances."
Knock-down examples in support of this thesis are to be found in the cadres of elite scientists who ganged together to develop the A-bomb and the H-bomb.
Knock-down examples in support of this thesis are to be found in the cadres of elite scientists who ganged together to develop the A-bomb and the H-bomb.
And no link to the "lower intelligence" demonstrated by Ms. De Braose was even suggested.
If the United States had never meddled in the Middle East it would not have a terrorism problem.
6
9/11 occurred before any US 'meddling' but after a hundred years of European meddling.
1
When did the meddling start? What was the meddling?
1
Why must we try to reduce human choices to an illness or a defective gene. People follow the call of Isis because they buy the narrative that the west is largely at fault for the plight of the Muslim people around the world. They have a well thought out comprehensive world view which is compelling to many people. Our failure here it to not understand that these people are not ill, they are not defective rather by their ideology they are our mortal enemies.
5
This article is more evidence that "vetting" immigrants is ineffective and pointless. "Vetting" is a way for the government to assuage the concerns the public has about who they are allowing into this country, when in fact, it does not work. A person's intentions and ideology can not be vetted. The female shooter in San Bernardino is a prime example. She was thoroughly vetted by the State Dept. before she was allowed to enter this country and then proceeded to randomly kill in the name of ISIS. Sure, "vetting" will snare the obvious potential terrorists, but it is deceiving to think it will snare the less obvious, which is the majority.
5
The vetting procedure through which resettled refugees go is far more rigorous than the background checks undergone by the woman shooter in San Bernardino, who entered on a fiancee visa. Only 2% of the resettled Syrians are males in their 20s and 30s, which is perhaps the only predictor for violence. The femail SB shooter was born in Pakistan and educated in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan at institutions known for their Wahabi interpretation of Islam. The consular officer should have seen the red flags.
It surprises me that no attention seems to be given to the fact that the majority of today's terrorists are suicidal. Some may just be violent individuals who just don't care if they go down with their victims, but surely in most the fact that these are people who actively wish to die is salient.
Why not combine anti-terrorist efforts with public health measures against suicide? Would be seen as coddling criminals or appeasing terrorists I suppose.
Why not combine anti-terrorist efforts with public health measures against suicide? Would be seen as coddling criminals or appeasing terrorists I suppose.
1
"It surprises me that no attention seems to be given to the fact that the majority of today's terrorists are suicidal."
It shouldn't surprise you. _Freedom_ was defined as "nothing left to lose" over a half-century ago.
It shouldn't surprise you. _Freedom_ was defined as "nothing left to lose" over a half-century ago.
"The fact that . . ." is the non sequitur crutch of those bereft of facts. No one wishes to die. Yes, under pressure from higher ups, jihadist puppets succumb to immediate glory and the promised "paradisiacal hereafter" as incentive, just as the Russian officials in Stalinist times willingly allowed themselves to be voicelessly executed as "servants of the state."
Your suggestion of "public health measures" is obviously good, would be practical and fruitful. But, remember, although everyone cares about their own lives, they may not care (enough) about others' lives.
In school I ws asked if put in a position of having to kill one person to save a thousand, the murder of that one person was justified. I said yes. Imagine, that is exactly the question a suicide bomber faces. He believes that the monster (us) will stop picking on him if he hurts us enough. What a life-sacrificing terrorist does not realize, is that his bomb that kills 60 is less than a mosquito bite on the body of society and its economy.
Although "No man is an island . . ." the juggernaut of a nation is only marginally hurt by terrorism. However, John Donne is right: the death of one eventually affects everyone . . . everyone on the planet. As terrorism spreads -- the natural reaction to economic terrorism waged by the one-percenters of the world -- only forbearance and change by the one-percenters can turn aside the tide of resentment.
Your suggestion of "public health measures" is obviously good, would be practical and fruitful. But, remember, although everyone cares about their own lives, they may not care (enough) about others' lives.
In school I ws asked if put in a position of having to kill one person to save a thousand, the murder of that one person was justified. I said yes. Imagine, that is exactly the question a suicide bomber faces. He believes that the monster (us) will stop picking on him if he hurts us enough. What a life-sacrificing terrorist does not realize, is that his bomb that kills 60 is less than a mosquito bite on the body of society and its economy.
Although "No man is an island . . ." the juggernaut of a nation is only marginally hurt by terrorism. However, John Donne is right: the death of one eventually affects everyone . . . everyone on the planet. As terrorism spreads -- the natural reaction to economic terrorism waged by the one-percenters of the world -- only forbearance and change by the one-percenters can turn aside the tide of resentment.
At the root of attracting aggression is most often the victim's beligerance, arrogance and selfishness. The economic interests controlling western Governments -- principally the banking, tobacco, petroleum, mineral and agricultural multinationals -- have angered the citizens of many countries in Latin America and SouthEast Asia for the last hundred years.
For 9 years, having lived and worked in, as well as written about a continuously terrorist attacked country, I can tell you that the primary mover in attracting terrorism is either an outsider country's aggressive economic colonialism, or the government of that very country. The United States of America, primarily through economic hit-men ("Confessions of an Economic Hitman," John Perkins), far from circumspect or clandestine, has been unapologetically aggressive in enslaving myriad countries in a scenario, summed up in the 1960s catch phrase, "I owe my soul to the company store."
It is not the fault of 99.999% of American citizens. I, from a white elitist society, lived at the ground level of Peru's Shining Path terrorism, often near to losing my life merely because of who I represented. controllng the United States and Western Europe, the Western World's banking families are the cause of terrorism.
Whatever the reason for becoming radicalized, it is because there is a clear, visible target beckoning. The Western World's leering face of economic seduction begs a punch in the nose.
For 9 years, having lived and worked in, as well as written about a continuously terrorist attacked country, I can tell you that the primary mover in attracting terrorism is either an outsider country's aggressive economic colonialism, or the government of that very country. The United States of America, primarily through economic hit-men ("Confessions of an Economic Hitman," John Perkins), far from circumspect or clandestine, has been unapologetically aggressive in enslaving myriad countries in a scenario, summed up in the 1960s catch phrase, "I owe my soul to the company store."
It is not the fault of 99.999% of American citizens. I, from a white elitist society, lived at the ground level of Peru's Shining Path terrorism, often near to losing my life merely because of who I represented. controllng the United States and Western Europe, the Western World's banking families are the cause of terrorism.
Whatever the reason for becoming radicalized, it is because there is a clear, visible target beckoning. The Western World's leering face of economic seduction begs a punch in the nose.
9
Accurate as to resultant consequences of all human greed,hate,and delusion(that impermanent things will be possessed and owned permanently ).But,"the leering face of economic seduction",found not just in the Western World but everywhere, must be re-educated to see that the beautiful living biosphere is the true treasure in our fleeting lives.....punch in the nose ideas lead to never ending violence
Based on the title of this article, I thought it would be about terrorists in general: Muslim-motivated, Christian-motivated, White-male dominance=motivated, etc. But this article only addresses Muslim-motivated.
2
There's nothing wrong with community outreach and social services, but trying to predict a future violent extremist of any stripe is truly a fool's errand in a country the size of the U.S. We are constitutionally protected from the government's prying into our private affairs and this should be the 'wall' that concerned citizens are worried about maintaining. All levels of government would do better to focus on their emergency response protocols and tightening up physical security procedures when weaknesses are detected.
2
Pakistan is paying the price for its deeds. ISI -intelligence agency of Pakistan ,has been guiding terrorist plots in Afghanistan and India for the last many years. The trained now are turning inward and harming the innocent children ,women and other minorities. The country needs to dismantle all such organizations and adopt apath to be a civilized country. There are many good people there who condemn violence.
Is Pakistan the only country harming Afghanistan?
This country has been invaded throughout the history.
The latest by NATO. Regarding India, it has been
supporting separatist movement in Bilochistan
and violence in karachi. The other day Indian
spy has been captured in Bilochistan who admitted
helping Biloch independence movement and mentioned
other Indian spies in that territory. Pakistani newspapers
are full of details. India did the same in East Pakistan which
later became Bangladesh with the help of Indian invasion.
This country has been invaded throughout the history.
The latest by NATO. Regarding India, it has been
supporting separatist movement in Bilochistan
and violence in karachi. The other day Indian
spy has been captured in Bilochistan who admitted
helping Biloch independence movement and mentioned
other Indian spies in that territory. Pakistani newspapers
are full of details. India did the same in East Pakistan which
later became Bangladesh with the help of Indian invasion.
It surprises me that no attention seems to be given to the suicidality of many of these individuals. Some Re just violent and seem not to care if they go down with their victims - but surely in others their own suicidality plays the largest role.
Why not combine antiterrorism efforts with public health measures on suicide?
I suppose that would be seen as coddling and appeasing criminals ...
Why not combine antiterrorism efforts with public health measures on suicide?
I suppose that would be seen as coddling and appeasing criminals ...
2
Perhaps using the research into gang membership would provide some answers.
4
And what is the one thing they have in common, religion. We in the West as society has become more secular forget the draw of religion. Look to that.
6
Many, if not most, of these cited predictive traits, exist in most young men I've known. Two risk factors I haven't seen mentioned are urban population congestion, and cultural/individual misogyny. But, since those words describe much of the Middle East, Africa, and Muslim ghettos within Europe, it isn't helpful as a filter.
Eventually, I predict even liberals will be compelled to consider cultural separation from Islam, if this continues. Will the value of cultural relativism be able to trump basic survival instinct? I doubt it.
I am trying to recall a time in history when one cultural group was being pressured to shelter another cultural group, whose membership includes individuals who want to kill the sheltering culture. It's a huge ethical dilemma, that may not have a completely ethical solution.
Eventually, I predict even liberals will be compelled to consider cultural separation from Islam, if this continues. Will the value of cultural relativism be able to trump basic survival instinct? I doubt it.
I am trying to recall a time in history when one cultural group was being pressured to shelter another cultural group, whose membership includes individuals who want to kill the sheltering culture. It's a huge ethical dilemma, that may not have a completely ethical solution.
12
Europe's ghettoization of Muslims is part of the problem, not the solution.
1
"I am trying to recall a time in history when one cultural group was being pressured to shelter another cultural group, whose membership includes individuals who want to kill the sheltering culture."
So, you are not able to recall slavery and slave revolts in what eventually became the "land that we love," as the song goes. Well, I reckon that, technically, White America wasn't either "pressured" - after all, the "other cultural group" was the source of both economic power and political power, each slave being worth an extra three-fifths of a vote - for "sheltering another cultural group, whose membership include[d] individuals who want[ed] to kill the sheltering culture."
So, you are not able to recall slavery and slave revolts in what eventually became the "land that we love," as the song goes. Well, I reckon that, technically, White America wasn't either "pressured" - after all, the "other cultural group" was the source of both economic power and political power, each slave being worth an extra three-fifths of a vote - for "sheltering another cultural group, whose membership include[d] individuals who want[ed] to kill the sheltering culture."
The organization "Worde" may be onto something. According to them, warning signs are: depression, trauma, economic stress and political grievances. Possibly, this could be expanded to depression or anxiety (co--morbidity is so common), trauma, stress (may or may not be economic) and grievances. The antidote may be promoting well-being. This involves nurturing meaningful relationships, encouraging learning, encouraging giving, access to a healthy lifestyle and being mindful, that is paying attention to our thoughts, environment without judging them which is used in therapy. One of the Brussels perpetrators wrote about being stressed; one of them had served time in jail and was unemployed; the couple in San Bernardino seemed emotionally isolated from their families. Are these not patterns?
2
I love how people are so quick to react to terrorism by bombing a civilian population of a foreign country without perceiving an ounce of irony.
Just think about that thought process. Why do Amercans think drone strikes are necessary? Why do we label any untargetted adult male hit as a 'combattant'? Why are our young men willing to join the military and die fighting against those who bomb us?
Why are we so surprised other people are just as violent as Americans?
Just think about that thought process. Why do Amercans think drone strikes are necessary? Why do we label any untargetted adult male hit as a 'combattant'? Why are our young men willing to join the military and die fighting against those who bomb us?
Why are we so surprised other people are just as violent as Americans?
8
Many comments argue that there is an obvious common denominator that is being ignored by the article for the sake of political correctness, and that is being a Muslim. And while it is true that most, if not all, of the suicide terrorists have been Muslims, that doesn't narrow the net to any practical level. The article correctly warns of the risks of checklists that would flag more innocent people than true terrorists-in-the-making, but that risk doesn't seem to bother the authors of these comments.
The truth of the matter is that Islamic teachings can be exploited to mobilize some followers to commit crimes in support of certain political goals. This has been the approach of ISIS, the Taliban, Chechnyan separatists, and even the CIA when it relied on Afghan mujaheddin fighting the USSR during the cold war. But flagging all Muslims as potential terrorists would only magnify the ability to exploit and would give the exploiters credibility with a larger group of followers of Islam.
One approach that may prove effective in my non-professional view is to identify the certain aspects of the faith that are most exploited by terrorist recruiters and examine behaviors of followers who exhibit behavioral changes or practices that are correlated with those aspects. The doctrine of Jihad is an obvious aspect, but there are others such as the principle of "loyalty and disavowal", punishment for apostasy, and such.
The truth of the matter is that Islamic teachings can be exploited to mobilize some followers to commit crimes in support of certain political goals. This has been the approach of ISIS, the Taliban, Chechnyan separatists, and even the CIA when it relied on Afghan mujaheddin fighting the USSR during the cold war. But flagging all Muslims as potential terrorists would only magnify the ability to exploit and would give the exploiters credibility with a larger group of followers of Islam.
One approach that may prove effective in my non-professional view is to identify the certain aspects of the faith that are most exploited by terrorist recruiters and examine behaviors of followers who exhibit behavioral changes or practices that are correlated with those aspects. The doctrine of Jihad is an obvious aspect, but there are others such as the principle of "loyalty and disavowal", punishment for apostasy, and such.
5
But, you only make sense. The highest learning center of Islam, the Azhar University in Cairo still teaches the extremist jihadi dogma and the Takfiri Salafi Wahabism.
1
The truth of the matter is that Christian teachings can be exploited to mobilize some followers to commit crimes in support of certain political goals.
For example, Christian teachings have been exploited to mobilize some followers to commit crimes in support of certain political goals ranging from the defense of slavery to the prohibition of abortion and the criminalization of sex.
For example, Christian teachings have been exploited to mobilize some followers to commit crimes in support of certain political goals ranging from the defense of slavery to the prohibition of abortion and the criminalization of sex.
2
It's been widely reported that many of the terrorists involved in Paris and Brussels, including the Abdeslam brother apprehended in Brussels and the female involved in the Paris shoot-out, only "got religion" a few months before the attacks. Religion is the veneer that justifies political violence. It's not the cause.
Like Donald Trump, terrorist groups tap into secret resentments. Trump travels to our southwest states to disparage Mexicans; to New York City to disparage middle-easterners and Muslims; to the Midwest to disparage China. People who lost jobs to China and other overseas locations are hurting; people who saw the towers go down are still suffering the consequences, both emotional and physical. And when there is a large influx of immigrants (anywhere), the locals feel overwhelmed. People want to be perceived as good people so they hide and/or deny their less-than-perfect real feelings. Enter Donald Trump. He will hate right along with us and validate the feelings we've hidden for so long.
Then there's ISIS. People in the Middle East have resented/hated the U.S. and the West for a long, long time. They hate our intrusions, our lust for oil, our freedoms at home and our perceived arrogance so ISIS and other terrorist groups don't have to look far for recruits.
Giving voice to and legitimizing our secret hates is the attraction. Hate is a powerful emotion, especially when denied, and can be easily manipulated.
Then there's ISIS. People in the Middle East have resented/hated the U.S. and the West for a long, long time. They hate our intrusions, our lust for oil, our freedoms at home and our perceived arrogance so ISIS and other terrorist groups don't have to look far for recruits.
Giving voice to and legitimizing our secret hates is the attraction. Hate is a powerful emotion, especially when denied, and can be easily manipulated.
3
You are partly correct. Trump talks freely as the rest of us are muzzled by PC police. ISIS preaches actual Islam as it was practiced in seven century, just as mediate Muslim leaders try to deny the truth.
1
Isis is pretty much like a biker gang......
2
But ISIS isn't regarded as consisting of white people.
Eric Hoffer in "The True Believer", "Ordeal Of Change" and "Challenge Of Our Times" answers the "Who Will Become a Terrorist" question with intuitiveness and rationality. The follower of a mass movement that absolves the individual for his inhumanity to man while at the same time, serving as a mooring for the self-worth of that unattached member of Society. A great deal of nihilism that requires the erasing without pity of the Other from the blackboard of existence by those whose empowerment (AK47) by the great Leader gives meaning to their lives.
5
Yes, I think Hoffer has insights as per his book, "The True Believer". Additionally, "authoritarian personality" research may be very relevant.
Anybody out there old enough to remember the movie “If” from the late 60’s? A few “clues” on how to turn even “upper class” Brits into terrorists!
2
We should broaden our idea of terrorism if we want to understand its root causes. Terrorism applies to a young man whose family is killed at a wedding party by a drone-launched bomb, because one of the attendees may possibly be an insurgent. It happens quite often, with the net result not to deter terrorism, but to create a resentment that in turn creates more terrorism. Collateral damage is terrorism to its victims. To mothers and daughters who have seen their men and fathers dragged away during the purposeless Iraqi war, terrorism has been a daily occurrence, aiming at killing men who resisted being attacked. Regardless of religion or sect this is what most people would have done if their country was taken over by a foreign army. Again resentment, whose extreme seeks vengeance. To a Palestinian boy growing up in an occupied land, there is only injustice in seeing a powerful country protecting Israel indiscriminately, rather than seeking peace for all involved: a very different objective. After the latest iteration of the cyclical destruction of whatever life they manage to put together they may feel the same, resentment, anger, frustration and a few will, no doubt, be driven mad to the point of harming others in desperation. This is the world we have created, war after war, drone after drone and umpteenth dictator removals, rather than seeking peace, dialogue and an understanding of our differences. Some causes of what turns people globally to violence may be found here?
7
I agree with many of the comments here that point out that the NYTimes is avoiding the obvious elephant in the room: Most of these terrorists are young Muslim males.
Of course, being a young Muslim male is hardly sufficient for becoming a jihadi terrorist. It's necessary, but not sufficient. Moreover, the degree of religiosity also seems a pretty poor predictor of whether a Muslim man becomes a terrorist. Many of these terrorists didn't use to be religious at all, but found (fundamentalist) religion in prison.
In the end, I don't think it makes sense to create a profile of a "general terrorist". Rather, each country should try to figure out which of its citizens are most likely to become terrorists. In Belgium and France, that means young Moroccan or Algerian males with a criminal background. Again, not sufficient, but a good indicator. For whatever reason, this subset seems to be MUCH more likely to be involved in terrorists acts than any other. Not young Moroccan women. Not old Moroccan men. Not young Moroccan men without any criminal background (though some of the terrorists qualify as such, most do not). And, interestingly, not other young male Muslim immigrants living in Belgium. Belgium has a large Turkish immigrant population. Some of them are criminals, yet none of them have been implicated with domestic terrorism. Belgian security forces have a list of 1,000 people whom they are monitoring as possible suspects of terrorist activities. 900 of those are Moroccan.
Of course, being a young Muslim male is hardly sufficient for becoming a jihadi terrorist. It's necessary, but not sufficient. Moreover, the degree of religiosity also seems a pretty poor predictor of whether a Muslim man becomes a terrorist. Many of these terrorists didn't use to be religious at all, but found (fundamentalist) religion in prison.
In the end, I don't think it makes sense to create a profile of a "general terrorist". Rather, each country should try to figure out which of its citizens are most likely to become terrorists. In Belgium and France, that means young Moroccan or Algerian males with a criminal background. Again, not sufficient, but a good indicator. For whatever reason, this subset seems to be MUCH more likely to be involved in terrorists acts than any other. Not young Moroccan women. Not old Moroccan men. Not young Moroccan men without any criminal background (though some of the terrorists qualify as such, most do not). And, interestingly, not other young male Muslim immigrants living in Belgium. Belgium has a large Turkish immigrant population. Some of them are criminals, yet none of them have been implicated with domestic terrorism. Belgian security forces have a list of 1,000 people whom they are monitoring as possible suspects of terrorist activities. 900 of those are Moroccan.
7
What needs to be addressed is not who joins or is enticed by a terrorist organization but how to prevent terrorist organizations from being created in the first place.
2
As a retired clinical psychologist, I'd like to remind all of us that mental health professionals have done research for years in an effort to predict when people might become violent. Not just engage in political violence. And despite all that careful research, what's clear is that violence is extremely hard to predict. Full stop!
Frankly, I'm more concerned about homegrown, right wing, radical groups, who've armed themselves to the teeth. These folks, in my view, have a much greater potential for radicalizing and harboring violent individuals. More of our terrorist events in the US have been due to white extremists. There are now nearly 1000 of such groups. And I hope to God the govt is tracking them!
We also have one presidential candidate today whose outrageous and vitriolic remarks constitute inciting violence. And as a consequence one presidential convention could erup in rioting, mayhem and a great deal of damage.
Homegrown extremists who are here already, hiding among the white citizenry, not sneaking into the country, are greater in number and have already engaged in a greater number of terrorist incidents - even if we did not call them such at the time. Think Timothy McVeigh!
We do better, as this article suggests, to consider how our own foreign policiy or national behavior fuels resentment and anger, whether at home or abroad, than to assume we can find that needle in the haystack - the true terrorist in waiting.
Frankly, I'm more concerned about homegrown, right wing, radical groups, who've armed themselves to the teeth. These folks, in my view, have a much greater potential for radicalizing and harboring violent individuals. More of our terrorist events in the US have been due to white extremists. There are now nearly 1000 of such groups. And I hope to God the govt is tracking them!
We also have one presidential candidate today whose outrageous and vitriolic remarks constitute inciting violence. And as a consequence one presidential convention could erup in rioting, mayhem and a great deal of damage.
Homegrown extremists who are here already, hiding among the white citizenry, not sneaking into the country, are greater in number and have already engaged in a greater number of terrorist incidents - even if we did not call them such at the time. Think Timothy McVeigh!
We do better, as this article suggests, to consider how our own foreign policiy or national behavior fuels resentment and anger, whether at home or abroad, than to assume we can find that needle in the haystack - the true terrorist in waiting.
34
"Homegrown extremists who are here already, hiding among the white citizenry, not sneaking into the country, are greater in number and have already engaged in a greater number of terrorist incidents - even if we did not call them such at the time.
ow about the "homegrown extremists" hiding among the black citizenry that have already engaged in terrorist acts such as the Ferguson and Baltimore riots?
ow about the "homegrown extremists" hiding among the black citizenry that have already engaged in terrorist acts such as the Ferguson and Baltimore riots?
2
"Nothing to see here, Move on!"
1
Why is it that after Muslim extremists kill someone, people voice their fear of white hate groups?
2
This is an important article. Nonetheless, I take issue with this line and am appalled that you even ask this question:
"Researching terrorism is admittedly difficult. It involves tough questions about who qualifies as a terrorist, or as a rebel or a soldier. Nelson Mandela? Palestinian suicide bombers? The Taliban of today? The Afghan mujahedeen when the C.I.A. supported them?"
How it is even possible that you question that, for example, Palestinian suicide bombers may not be terrorists, is just unconscionable. New York Times, get with the program and call a spade a spade. It's time. If we are going to fight terrorism then we need to be honest with ourselves and stop taking positions that are illogical and undercut our efforts to ensure safety and security for civilians around the world.
"Researching terrorism is admittedly difficult. It involves tough questions about who qualifies as a terrorist, or as a rebel or a soldier. Nelson Mandela? Palestinian suicide bombers? The Taliban of today? The Afghan mujahedeen when the C.I.A. supported them?"
How it is even possible that you question that, for example, Palestinian suicide bombers may not be terrorists, is just unconscionable. New York Times, get with the program and call a spade a spade. It's time. If we are going to fight terrorism then we need to be honest with ourselves and stop taking positions that are illogical and undercut our efforts to ensure safety and security for civilians around the world.
34
How it is even possible that you question that, for example, Nelson Mandela may not have been a terrorist?
Well, it depends upon whose ox is being gored, you see.
Well, it depends upon whose ox is being gored, you see.
1
I don't approve of blowing up civilians. Having said that, I note that our government does it all the time (directly or indirectly by arming other governments) and calls it fighting terrorism. Since 9/11 that approach has backfired spectacularly.
I am sure the article's point about suicide bombers is "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter"; what should we call the Japanese pilots who aimed their planes at American warships in WWII, or the American soldiers who went out on missions certain to result in their deaths, in hopes of furthering the cause of winning the war for their side?
Palestinians have a legitimate grievance; unfortunately they lack a partner for peace which might allow them to work things out more peaceably, such as the eventual resolutions in South Africa and with Northern Ireland groups.
As you say, "we need to stop taking positions that are illogical and undercut our efforts to ensure safety and security for civilians around the world" but the meaning of that sentence is far more complex than you imply.
I am sure the article's point about suicide bombers is "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter"; what should we call the Japanese pilots who aimed their planes at American warships in WWII, or the American soldiers who went out on missions certain to result in their deaths, in hopes of furthering the cause of winning the war for their side?
Palestinians have a legitimate grievance; unfortunately they lack a partner for peace which might allow them to work things out more peaceably, such as the eventual resolutions in South Africa and with Northern Ireland groups.
As you say, "we need to stop taking positions that are illogical and undercut our efforts to ensure safety and security for civilians around the world" but the meaning of that sentence is far more complex than you imply.
Any statistician will tell you the basic problem is it is by definition impossible to precisely predict rare events, and despite the massive coverage of these horrific terrorist attacks they are extremely rare. All we have are rough, imprecise predictors and given our emphasis on individual rights we just can't start locking up or droning every frustrated, angry, young, male, religious fundamentalist with ready access to modern munitions.
2
Terrorists are the bottom of a pyramid, one needs to trace the cause-effect chain up to the top, just as when fighting drugs. Arresting street-pushers is ineffective,so too with terrorism.The common thread among terrorists is not economic, social, geographic, or even religious-it is a particular belief+type of idealism.
The cause-effect chain/pyramid is: kids are taught alternative-history conspiracy theories eg the West is at war directed against Islam. Some become ‘preachers’, above them agitators of holy war against the West, above are some inciting to violence, and some set up terror orgs. At the bottom of pyramid are the many youngmen eager to fulfill religious duty, fight against war against Islam. The top of the pyramid is the source of the information-flow. One can’t stop terror if one has no handle on the historical narrative believed by the average Muslim.
Onemustfight alternate-history conspiracy-theory teachings. Judge the danger of preachers not by whether they incite to terror, but by the degree to which they’re part of this chain. The more a person’s beliefs are in line with historical actuality, the less likely that they will be so full of rage and so convinced that ordinary people are guilty of a war against Islam that they would engage in terror, and believe that blowing up civilians is justified. When seeking a thread leading to terror, look for those most influenced by antiWest conspiracy theories and you’ll find some who are part of the terrorism- chain
The cause-effect chain/pyramid is: kids are taught alternative-history conspiracy theories eg the West is at war directed against Islam. Some become ‘preachers’, above them agitators of holy war against the West, above are some inciting to violence, and some set up terror orgs. At the bottom of pyramid are the many youngmen eager to fulfill religious duty, fight against war against Islam. The top of the pyramid is the source of the information-flow. One can’t stop terror if one has no handle on the historical narrative believed by the average Muslim.
Onemustfight alternate-history conspiracy-theory teachings. Judge the danger of preachers not by whether they incite to terror, but by the degree to which they’re part of this chain. The more a person’s beliefs are in line with historical actuality, the less likely that they will be so full of rage and so convinced that ordinary people are guilty of a war against Islam that they would engage in terror, and believe that blowing up civilians is justified. When seeking a thread leading to terror, look for those most influenced by antiWest conspiracy theories and you’ll find some who are part of the terrorism- chain
5
We have someone sitting in federal prison who can give us some answers. Tamerlin Tsarnaev was an immigrant whose parents thought asylum in the US and has opportunities and benefits not available to many other immigrants. He was a popular student with employment and many friends. He was not religious. Yet he became a radical Muslim terrorist who killed with no regard for human life. He espoused the online garbage of Muslim extremists who claimed Muslims were dying due to US imperialism and foreign intervention.I suspect he could give interrogators a lot more insight into how he became radicalized.
The biggest failing of our President is his failure to condemn radical Muslim terrorism . His speech about Christians and the Crusades just exacerbates the excuses of Muslim terrorists. We are losing the ideology war that emanates from too many websites and clerics. We need someone like Tamerlin Tsarneav and the neighbor of the San Bernadino duo who is also incarcerated to broadcast a message of regret for the brainwashing and terror they supported.We have another one in captivity now for the French terror attack who could add to the message, I am sure there dozens of others who can be persuaded by other Muslims to stem the tide of hatred coming from ISIS and elsewhere,
The biggest failing of our President is his failure to condemn radical Muslim terrorism . His speech about Christians and the Crusades just exacerbates the excuses of Muslim terrorists. We are losing the ideology war that emanates from too many websites and clerics. We need someone like Tamerlin Tsarneav and the neighbor of the San Bernadino duo who is also incarcerated to broadcast a message of regret for the brainwashing and terror they supported.We have another one in captivity now for the French terror attack who could add to the message, I am sure there dozens of others who can be persuaded by other Muslims to stem the tide of hatred coming from ISIS and elsewhere,
15
"We need someone like Tamerlin Tsarneav and the neighbor of the San Bernadino duo who is also incarcerated to broadcast a message of regret for the brainwashing and terror they supported."
Why would these people broadcast such a message? Because doing it will get them released from prison? Because white, Christian Americans didn't hesitate to attack Iraq for no particular reason?
Why would these people broadcast such a message? Because doing it will get them released from prison? Because white, Christian Americans didn't hesitate to attack Iraq for no particular reason?
It is THE existential question: what is life all about? Joining any group is about searching for meaning. Sex, money, possessions (the perennial selection of most of us) fail in providing it. When we are lost and desperate we will join the first group that offers us meaning, no matter how wrong the choice may look at another time or to another person.
13
And that explains why other immigrant groups who also suffered did not take this route? By your measure, Jews throughout Europe should have turned to terrorism the moment they got out of the concentration camps. Why do you suppose they did not?
6
"When we are lost and desperate we will join the first group that offers us meaning, no matter how wrong the choice may look at another time or to another person."
Yep. That's the way that religions work, all right!
Yep. That's the way that religions work, all right!
People are IMITATORS. If they're around jihadist recruiters, their talk and
behaviors, they will start to imitate them. Yes, it's THAT simple.
behaviors, they will start to imitate them. Yes, it's THAT simple.
Governments might be clueless about the terrorist impulses but not so ignorant about their own policies contributing to the rise of terrorism or sometimes using the same terrorism as a policy weapon and strategic asset against the enemy nations.
7
Should the question be reframed into what turns governments into terrorist organizations that use violence to spread their influence and ideology at home and around the world?
Nelson Mandela was classified as a terrorist as you mention, does this mean the apartheid South African government was legitimate in their classification of Mandela? To these eyes the shooting up of a Christian church sheltering African American worshippers in Charleston recently was the worst recent American terrorist atrocity.
What about Gandhi? George Washington? Aung San Suu Kyi? Were they not considered terrorists by certain governments?
Martin Luther King was surveilled, harassed and jailed in our country what terrorism was he guilty of, by calling for voting rights, equality and peace, that he deserved the treatment he received at the hands of our violent authorities and certain violent authoritarian segments of our public?
What we are seeing happen in the Middle East and Europe today are the result of decades of poor and often violent foreign policy by the western nations including our country. Western policy has spawned the Middle Eastern Frankenstein that is lurching violently around Europe today.
The war mongers and weapons manufacturers are the only groups who are going to profit from this violent mayhem. It's time for everyone to turn the other cheek and embrace peace across borders, cultures and religions. Demand non-violent intercourse from all leaders.
Nelson Mandela was classified as a terrorist as you mention, does this mean the apartheid South African government was legitimate in their classification of Mandela? To these eyes the shooting up of a Christian church sheltering African American worshippers in Charleston recently was the worst recent American terrorist atrocity.
What about Gandhi? George Washington? Aung San Suu Kyi? Were they not considered terrorists by certain governments?
Martin Luther King was surveilled, harassed and jailed in our country what terrorism was he guilty of, by calling for voting rights, equality and peace, that he deserved the treatment he received at the hands of our violent authorities and certain violent authoritarian segments of our public?
What we are seeing happen in the Middle East and Europe today are the result of decades of poor and often violent foreign policy by the western nations including our country. Western policy has spawned the Middle Eastern Frankenstein that is lurching violently around Europe today.
The war mongers and weapons manufacturers are the only groups who are going to profit from this violent mayhem. It's time for everyone to turn the other cheek and embrace peace across borders, cultures and religions. Demand non-violent intercourse from all leaders.
4
It is difficult to analyze what goes on in the mind of a terrorist. But here is what I think might be the anatomy of a terrorist.Those boys and girls or men and women who commit atrocities against humanity have not been integrated well enough in their new societies so they consider these as their own to protect. Faced with disenfranchisement, ostracized, left out of the normal day to day business of being part of society(read - having a good job or attaining a good education that can open doors) they opt out after seeing no other way to better their lives. They easily turn to a version of religion to find models that can explain their predicament. But one could object by saying that there are groups that have historically faced those odds in society yet not resorted to violence. That could be true but if you look at South Africa or even the Palestinians where you had or have a majority social group with economic and military power, soon you discover that ostracism or disenfranchisement can lure people to turn to violence. But what about the US where it took a Martin Luther King to voice these grievances without resorting to violence? Here again you had a social group of whites who had overwhelming economic and military power. You could not meet on the same level using violence. Instead, the strategy was to appeal to the wisdom of those with power to change. One could also add the propensity of certain social groups to use violence in order to express their views.
1
"One could also add the propensity of certain social groups to use violence in order to express their views."
As Saddam Hussein, for example, discovered the hard way!
As Saddam Hussein, for example, discovered the hard way!
"Here again you had a social group of whites who had overwhelming economic and military power..."
over a captive people who, after centuries of inculturation, had no other place to call "home" except their place of captivity. Jihadists are not so psychologically encumbered.
over a captive people who, after centuries of inculturation, had no other place to call "home" except their place of captivity. Jihadists are not so psychologically encumbered.
What we know how to do well is spending money, not solving problems. The number of pundits and scholars dealing with the problem of terrorism, the number of dissertations written on this subject, the number of centers and specialists with six figure salaries are growing exponentially, but there is not a dent in our understanding of terrorism. Something must be wrong in this picture. Yet nobody says anything. How can you say something if your six figure salary is at stake? And that's why we continue to spend money without resolving the problem. Moreover, at some point you begin to realize the fact that your drawing six figure salary depends on the existence of this problem. Solving the problem will leave you without a job. And so it goes ad infinitum and ad nauseam.
4
@Neil and Julie
Well, sure Neil & Julie. Especially, if we stack the deck.
Let’s try:
Ted Kaczynski – Polish American, Harvard grad, Professor of Mathematics
Timothy McVeigh – Irish American, US Army infantry School, Bronze Star recipient
Anders Behring Breivik – Norwegian, customer service worker
See any pattern here???
OMG - none was a Muslim!!!
Well, sure Neil & Julie. Especially, if we stack the deck.
Let’s try:
Ted Kaczynski – Polish American, Harvard grad, Professor of Mathematics
Timothy McVeigh – Irish American, US Army infantry School, Bronze Star recipient
Anders Behring Breivik – Norwegian, customer service worker
See any pattern here???
OMG - none was a Muslim!!!
2
Very disappointed not to find Maajid Nawaz mentioned here, whose work deprogramming jihadists has special credibility given that he himself was successfully deprogrammed--and is now a secular Muslim. NYT goes to absurd lengths not to implicate any version of Islam. Imagine an entire article on the followers of Warren Jeffs that fails to mention his fundamentalist Mormon theology.
16
The liberal media is still making the same mistakes over and over and over again. They are like dogs with bones. Would anyone try to divorce the Inquisition from Catholicism? When attacks are perpetrated by white supremacists, does anyone carefully avoid the word White because not all white people are ideological supremacists? What the public sees here, which the media continues to deny to itself, is pandering, political correctness gone amok, and double standards. They still don't get that this is how they enhance the view that Trump Tells It Like It Is While The Establishment Does The Politically Correct Dance.
Crazy was defined once as doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting a different result. This is what the hapless liberal media are doing.
Crazy was defined once as doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting a different result. This is what the hapless liberal media are doing.
13
"Very disappointed not to find Maajid Nawaz mentioned here, whose work deprogramming jihadists has special credibility given that he himself was successfully deprogrammed"
After all, even potential Christian terrorists contemplating blowing up a federal building or assassinating an abortion-provider or bashing a gay guy would seek Nawaz out for deprogramming, were they but aware of his existence!
After all, even potential Christian terrorists contemplating blowing up a federal building or assassinating an abortion-provider or bashing a gay guy would seek Nawaz out for deprogramming, were they but aware of his existence!
1- To all Muslims If you see something say something...
2- Fight the Jihadi ideology and its amazing media empire correctly...
3- Find the governments that help these Jihadi ideas and put them in check..
4- Tell Muslim religious leaders to preach globalization instead of Us vs them..
2- Fight the Jihadi ideology and its amazing media empire correctly...
3- Find the governments that help these Jihadi ideas and put them in check..
4- Tell Muslim religious leaders to preach globalization instead of Us vs them..
9
I can't believe this article skirting around the main cause of terrorism Is it to be politically correct? The main cause is the violent understanding of the Quran which leads to Islamic radical fundamentalism. The terrorists are incited by Imans and religious leaders and their followers to hate all those that don't accept their beliefs or follow their ideology. Their rage and frustrations leads to a violence meant to instill fear. It's pretty simplistic.
30
Yes your answer is simplistic. Apparently you don't that the meaning of that word is "treating complex issues and problems as if they were much simpler than they really are" (Check Google). Every knows that these Imams are making these speeches. What no one knows is why so many people are listening to them and acting on what they hear.
1
Peter Ustinov — 'Terrorism is the war of the poor, and war is the terrorism of the rich.'
US policy makers should keep Peter Ustinov's adage in mind before launching a "shock and awe" bombing campaign against a civilian population for an offense that their unelected leader was only thought to have committed. Then we shouldn't be too surprised when the poor respond in kind.
US policy makers should keep Peter Ustinov's adage in mind before launching a "shock and awe" bombing campaign against a civilian population for an offense that their unelected leader was only thought to have committed. Then we shouldn't be too surprised when the poor respond in kind.
7
Ustinov had it right - terrorism is the war of the poor. The western world, caught up in the capitalist lie of a better life for all, cannot see that it is creating the breeding ground for terrorism.
1
Why do they call (police, FBI or military) intelligence agencies when they are always scratching their heads saying “Duh” after the muslim terrorists attacks? Intelligence should mean figuring out something before it happens.
The 9/11 arab terrorists came to the U.S. legally. Only one of the 19 arab terrorists came to the U.S. on a student visa. The rest of the arab terrorists arrived here on tourist or business visas. Of these arab terrorists, some went to flight school. Zacarias Moussaoui got his flight training on a flight simulator at the Pan Am International Flight Academy in Eagan, Minnesota. He raises suspicions when he tells instructors that while he wants to learn how to fly a 747 jet, he does not intend to earn a pilot’s license. The other arab terrorists were called "muscle hijackers" and they used box cutters about 7 inches long to restraint the airplane stewards and to cut the throats of the airplane’s pilot, co-pilot, and engineer, then allow the arab terrorist to fly the airplanes. The arab muscle hijackers were allowed to board the airplanes carrying these box cutters. All these arab terrorists lived quietly and comfortably in the U.S. while they meticulously planned their evil deed.
These arab terrorists, had no guns, yet the U.S. showed the arab terrorist how to fly the 747 jets, they used existing commercial jets, and were allowed to carry 7 inch box cutters inside the airplanes to successfully commit their criminal terrorist act.
The 9/11 arab terrorists came to the U.S. legally. Only one of the 19 arab terrorists came to the U.S. on a student visa. The rest of the arab terrorists arrived here on tourist or business visas. Of these arab terrorists, some went to flight school. Zacarias Moussaoui got his flight training on a flight simulator at the Pan Am International Flight Academy in Eagan, Minnesota. He raises suspicions when he tells instructors that while he wants to learn how to fly a 747 jet, he does not intend to earn a pilot’s license. The other arab terrorists were called "muscle hijackers" and they used box cutters about 7 inches long to restraint the airplane stewards and to cut the throats of the airplane’s pilot, co-pilot, and engineer, then allow the arab terrorist to fly the airplanes. The arab muscle hijackers were allowed to board the airplanes carrying these box cutters. All these arab terrorists lived quietly and comfortably in the U.S. while they meticulously planned their evil deed.
These arab terrorists, had no guns, yet the U.S. showed the arab terrorist how to fly the 747 jets, they used existing commercial jets, and were allowed to carry 7 inch box cutters inside the airplanes to successfully commit their criminal terrorist act.
3
Very interesting article and very interesting comments. May I suggest something crazy and radical? We (the West, the US) stop meddling in others political affairs. Maybe they'll hate us less.
7
Afraid not. They want to eradicate the Western World as they see it. They want Sharia Law. Getting out of the M.E. will not stop these religious Muslim fanatics from doing just that.
2
Should the question be reframed into what turns governments into terrorist organizations that use violence to spread their influence and ideology at home and around the world?
Nelson Mandela was classified as a terrorist as you mention, does this mean the apartheid South African government was legitimate in their classification of Mandela? To these eyes the shooting up of a Christian church sheltering African American worshippers in Charleston recently was the worst recent American terrorist atrocity to these eyes.
What about Gandhi? George Washington? Aung San Suu Kyi? Were they not considered terrorists by certain governments?
Martin Luther King was surveilled, harassed and jailed in our country what terrorism was he guilty of, by calling for voting rights, equality and peace, that he deserved the treatment he received at the hands of our violent authorities and certain violent authoritarian segments of our public?
What we are seeing happen in the Middle East and Europe today are the result of decades of poor and often violent foreign policy by the western nations including our country. Western policy has spawned the Middle Eastern Frankenstein that is lurching violently around Europe today.
The war mongers and weapons manufacturers are the only groups who are going to profit from this violent mayhem. It's time for everyone to turn the other cheek and embrace peace across borders, cultures and religions. Demand non-violent intercourse from all leaders.
Nelson Mandela was classified as a terrorist as you mention, does this mean the apartheid South African government was legitimate in their classification of Mandela? To these eyes the shooting up of a Christian church sheltering African American worshippers in Charleston recently was the worst recent American terrorist atrocity to these eyes.
What about Gandhi? George Washington? Aung San Suu Kyi? Were they not considered terrorists by certain governments?
Martin Luther King was surveilled, harassed and jailed in our country what terrorism was he guilty of, by calling for voting rights, equality and peace, that he deserved the treatment he received at the hands of our violent authorities and certain violent authoritarian segments of our public?
What we are seeing happen in the Middle East and Europe today are the result of decades of poor and often violent foreign policy by the western nations including our country. Western policy has spawned the Middle Eastern Frankenstein that is lurching violently around Europe today.
The war mongers and weapons manufacturers are the only groups who are going to profit from this violent mayhem. It's time for everyone to turn the other cheek and embrace peace across borders, cultures and religions. Demand non-violent intercourse from all leaders.
4
Look at the question from the other point of view. The question should be: Who will become a hero for the cause? If this framework is used identifying the next one will be easier because it removes the negative value that clouds the rational mind. Terrorist is a very scary word!
1
How can the article ignore that Muslims are more likely to become terrorists than non-Muslims? Someone who ignores this obvious pattern cannot be taken seriously.
11
In the continental United States, the real terrorists are the screwed-up, disaffected, white "christians" who shoot innocent fellow citizens. What were the numbers last year? Something like 15 Americans dead from islamist terrorists; over 35,000 from homegrown terrorists.
"Someone who ignores this obvious pattern cannot be taken seriously."
But they are being "politically correct".
But they are being "politically correct".
3
Because that it is not true, at least in America. If you look at the number of terrorist incidents in this Country, the vast majority are far right types like Root and McVeigh.
Islamoid terrorism is a real danger, and is greatly exacerbated by Wahhabi fundamentalist propaganda, But the real challenging question is why do some Muslims respond to this propaganda by initiating violence, and others don't.
Islamoid terrorism is a real danger, and is greatly exacerbated by Wahhabi fundamentalist propaganda, But the real challenging question is why do some Muslims respond to this propaganda by initiating violence, and others don't.
Another long, carefully researched article which offers no answer to deal effectively with terror.
As DM and KB below argue, the focus needs to be on what terror is, what it objectively manifests: cowardice and stupidity, and a lethal danger that needs to be defeated, not analyzed ad nauseam to no effective end.
When America had elements in sympathy with Nazism during WW II, did it commission psychological studies to understand who the people were and how impliedly to prevent formation of new Quislings? No, it sent out the FBI, used emergency powers, used search and seizure and detention powers, expulsion, and other techniques. Also, citizens were encouraged to report suspicious actions and weren't deterred from doing so by lawsuits and the justice process in general. Was it perfect? No, but it was a necessary part in winning the war effort.
This is what we need today, revised laws to allow authorities to deal effectively with apprehended murderers. They may not read exactly like they did 70 years ago, but they can be fashioned, I'm sure, much better than they are now.
Public security, public confidence in civil society, demands it. I only hope many more tragedies will not have to occur before this can be achieved.
As DM and KB below argue, the focus needs to be on what terror is, what it objectively manifests: cowardice and stupidity, and a lethal danger that needs to be defeated, not analyzed ad nauseam to no effective end.
When America had elements in sympathy with Nazism during WW II, did it commission psychological studies to understand who the people were and how impliedly to prevent formation of new Quislings? No, it sent out the FBI, used emergency powers, used search and seizure and detention powers, expulsion, and other techniques. Also, citizens were encouraged to report suspicious actions and weren't deterred from doing so by lawsuits and the justice process in general. Was it perfect? No, but it was a necessary part in winning the war effort.
This is what we need today, revised laws to allow authorities to deal effectively with apprehended murderers. They may not read exactly like they did 70 years ago, but they can be fashioned, I'm sure, much better than they are now.
Public security, public confidence in civil society, demands it. I only hope many more tragedies will not have to occur before this can be achieved.
7
Do Me A Favor ...
Read the recent Times op-ed, "Salute to a Communist" by John McCain.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/25/opinion/john-mccain-salute-to-a-commun...
For as long as I have known anything about the Spanish Civil War and the Abraham Lincoln Brigade, I have admired the Americans who volunteered to fight there, especially against the fascists.
By the same token, I have admired the Castros and Che Guevara for their role in ousting Fulgencio Batista in Cuba.
Likewise, I have admired those Iranian revolutionaries who ended the reign of the American puppet, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.
Adolph Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Francisco Franco, Fulgencio Batista, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Pol Pot, Augusto Pinochet, Slobodan Milošević, Bashar al-Assad, and many others ... all evil men who should have been removed from the face of the Earth by force.
Don't get me wrong -- I am neither advocating nor defending them (not even close) -- but the line between the incentives and reasoning of McCain's hero, Delmer Berg, and those young people who are inexplicably joining the forces of ISIL and al-Qaeda is very fine indeed.
Read the recent Times op-ed, "Salute to a Communist" by John McCain.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/25/opinion/john-mccain-salute-to-a-commun...
For as long as I have known anything about the Spanish Civil War and the Abraham Lincoln Brigade, I have admired the Americans who volunteered to fight there, especially against the fascists.
By the same token, I have admired the Castros and Che Guevara for their role in ousting Fulgencio Batista in Cuba.
Likewise, I have admired those Iranian revolutionaries who ended the reign of the American puppet, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.
Adolph Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Francisco Franco, Fulgencio Batista, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Pol Pot, Augusto Pinochet, Slobodan Milošević, Bashar al-Assad, and many others ... all evil men who should have been removed from the face of the Earth by force.
Don't get me wrong -- I am neither advocating nor defending them (not even close) -- but the line between the incentives and reasoning of McCain's hero, Delmer Berg, and those young people who are inexplicably joining the forces of ISIL and al-Qaeda is very fine indeed.
7
If the Jesuits Order were right by their "Give Me the Child; You Can Have the Man", it then followed that children growing up indoctrinated with intolerance, hate, will carry these sentiments no matter how successful or educated they later become.
5
This is truly a remarkable 1200-word article on terrorism in the 21st century! It is remarkable in the sense that Mr. Apuzzo makes no mention of the
Wahhabi and Salafi ideology which provides the motivation for recruitment of the would be martyrs to this cause. There have always been thugs and criminals, and there always will be. I am amazed by the lack of understanding and discourse, as to what drives said individuals to sacrifice self for a higher cause. If you do not recognize the ideology, you have no effective way to combat it in the future.
Wahhabi and Salafi ideology which provides the motivation for recruitment of the would be martyrs to this cause. There have always been thugs and criminals, and there always will be. I am amazed by the lack of understanding and discourse, as to what drives said individuals to sacrifice self for a higher cause. If you do not recognize the ideology, you have no effective way to combat it in the future.
15
Not once in this article are the words "Islam" or "Muslim" mentioned without referring to specific groups who use those words in their name. The word "Islam" is only used when referring to the Islamic State, and the word "Muslim" is only used to describe an anti-terrorism group (hahaha). Here's a hint NYT - we'll never be able to identify potential terrorists if we wear politically correct blinders and earmuffs when discussing the topic.
32
Just a thought: people likely to become radicalized enough to cause violence are probably unassimilated members of ethnic/religious minorities.
You know, like almost every other time in history?
You know, like almost every other time in history?
7
Adolescence and arrested development are the answer. Look no further. Why do people assume that the motivation to join ISIS is much different that which drove young men to rally to the First World War or to The Civil War? We're talking about young idiots. I remember - I was one once.
The prefrontal cortex, regarded by scientists as the seat of judgement, is not fully developed in human males before age twenty-five, give or take. It should be a crime, internationally, for any government or military group to put a gun in the hands of any many younger than twenty-six.
The prefrontal cortex, regarded by scientists as the seat of judgement, is not fully developed in human males before age twenty-five, give or take. It should be a crime, internationally, for any government or military group to put a gun in the hands of any many younger than twenty-six.
8
Yes, the same drive that produces patriotism and commitment to what YOUR government or faith convinces you is right, form " good causes" is identical to the emotional and idealistic appeal that drive young people towards "bad" causes. And often it is intertwined with genuine reasons for grievance ( altho' no necessarily those of the volunteer) - The whole reason for recruiting or drafting the youth is because they are malleable and far less likely to think about how they are manipulated.
2
“Truancy is also going to be an early warning sign for violent extremism”
This comment is disturbing and it demonstrates law enforcement's primary concern with concocting a poor rationale to get around the 4th amendment and get a warrant.
If truancy is probable cause, there are no civil liberties.
This comment is disturbing and it demonstrates law enforcement's primary concern with concocting a poor rationale to get around the 4th amendment and get a warrant.
If truancy is probable cause, there are no civil liberties.
1
I realize I am not a counterterrorism researcher, but I have conducted research. I think that these organizations are casting their nets a little too far and wide. From Matt Apuzzo's exceedingly absorbing article, I take it that research organizations are looking for some general characteristic that makes one resort to terrorism. We don't have thorough knowledge of why people commit crimes, so that fact should sober one's attempts to research terrorism.
And, dare I bring it up, but there is some level of political correctness that drives the research. It becomes uncomfortable to undertake actions that identify targets that are within social groups, but who are not specifically identifiable. Hence the goal bends towards generality.
One of the motivators of terrorism that seems to be absent from the research from Matt's article is that of religious zeal. This is hard to quantify, but if ISIS is using religion to motivate or cajole individuals to join their ranks, then that changes the conversation. If religion is the motivation, then the question should be, why to these religious groups seek terrorism, rather than a question of what makes an individual turn to terrorism. We understand religious fanaticism better.
This means that we would do better confronting the ideology of religious groups that encourage terrorism. But this specifies to particular religions, and researchers may feel uncomfortable in uncovering such pointed facts.
And, dare I bring it up, but there is some level of political correctness that drives the research. It becomes uncomfortable to undertake actions that identify targets that are within social groups, but who are not specifically identifiable. Hence the goal bends towards generality.
One of the motivators of terrorism that seems to be absent from the research from Matt's article is that of religious zeal. This is hard to quantify, but if ISIS is using religion to motivate or cajole individuals to join their ranks, then that changes the conversation. If religion is the motivation, then the question should be, why to these religious groups seek terrorism, rather than a question of what makes an individual turn to terrorism. We understand religious fanaticism better.
This means that we would do better confronting the ideology of religious groups that encourage terrorism. But this specifies to particular religions, and researchers may feel uncomfortable in uncovering such pointed facts.
7
The history of Christianity records more violence than any other religion on the earth. That white christians run the global show right now does not negate the sins of the past; nor does it excuse the violence that so-called christians in the US commit against their own citizens. Since 9-11 a total of 3,380 Americans have been killed by terrorist violence. Within that same timeframe, 406,500 Americans have been killed by firearm violence on their home turf.
Be very careful when you suggest a particular religion as the culprit of violence.
Be very careful when you suggest a particular religion as the culprit of violence.
Rosalind, you've missed it completely. I am saying that it is *not* fruitful to generalize the causes of violence. I am not suggesting that a particular religion is the cause of violence in general.
But you do exemplify the problems with political correctness against which I argue. You cannot make an argument that Christianity advocates the violence that all Christian, gun-owning perpetrators cause. But some interpretations of Christianity, notably that of Timothy McVeigh, evidently contribute, in some way, to violent acts. So it is with Islam.
Both IS and McVeigh have perversely interpreted their religions to their contorted psychological needs. This aspect is worth investigating.
But you do exemplify the problems with political correctness against which I argue. You cannot make an argument that Christianity advocates the violence that all Christian, gun-owning perpetrators cause. But some interpretations of Christianity, notably that of Timothy McVeigh, evidently contribute, in some way, to violent acts. So it is with Islam.
Both IS and McVeigh have perversely interpreted their religions to their contorted psychological needs. This aspect is worth investigating.
Not enough attention is being paid to the lack of sexual freedom in the lives of the young Muslim men who volunteer for ISIS. Add a lack of ability to participate in the modern world (due to combination of poverty and Islamic teachings) to that problem and you've got a bored, sexually frustrated young man desperate for any kind of activity at all. They are aware of how the rest of the world lives...the internet and TV have changed that. When you join ISIS you are promised a wife and a reason to exist (kill the Infidel!). I can only surmise that many young men cannot resist.
24
I don't believe they choose to be repressed. The 911 attackers reportedly chose to celebrate with alcohol and strippers before their ignominous act.The Parisian and Belgian terrorists do not seem to be devout religiously and used recreational drugs and partied through their lives. There may be hopelessness that has overwhelmed them but there is also the striving for heroism which is misguided and unexplainable.
There is a similarity as to cult type mentality. However, these cults here in the US were the source of 'religious fanatics', which is mistakenly thought to be the same with ISIS. The source of ISIS and the Talban comes for the 'governments and corporations' of the West direct influence in the affairs of what is considered backward people who can be used to fight wars instead of US troops.
We a mislead by political propaganda to believe that it is thousands of years of religious differences between Sunni and Shite that is at the cause of all of this killing. Sunni and Shite have lived in relative peace, even marrying each other and live in the same community fighting together when threated like during the Iran/Iraq war.
We a mislead by political propaganda to believe that it is thousands of years of religious differences between Sunni and Shite that is at the cause of all of this killing. Sunni and Shite have lived in relative peace, even marrying each other and live in the same community fighting together when threated like during the Iran/Iraq war.
1
'Terrorists' of all backgrounds are fighting against oppression for their freedom. Illegitimate states like the US (which, by the way commit so much more violence on their own citizens and foreigners than any terrorist group) wondering "what makes a terrorist" should look in the mirror. Look up anarchism if you aren't afraid of new ideas and want to know how humans might one day come together to solve our problems collectively.
1
Really, it's easy - those who care deeply about achieving a political or social objective, and are frustrated in their attempts to achieve it via non-violent means, often turn to violence. It is, for example, how this country was born.
2
The writer makes assertions as to the Brussels event last week, when no third-party investigation is complete, let alone commissioned. It is therefore merely speculative and not helpful as to fitting credible data to causality, let alone even correlation. The article itself however provides organizing data points as to extremism: ideological solidarity; critical surrender; emotional detachment--sociopathology--irrational speculation and cognitive dysfunction characterized by nearly comprehensive logical fallacy including counter-factual reasoning. As terror is social predation activated through institutionalism, often sophisticated, asking for predictive rules as to origin naturally weights probability in the state.
1
Perhaps the reason we have found no unifying pattern characterizing terrorists is because there is none. We try and place meaning, order, and reason to every situation even though these futile efforts commonly lead us astray.
5
Minority Report movie has become a reality. very dangerous on many levels.
1
Thank you W Bush, thank you Obama, thank you Hillary for your relentless efforts to fight against the Terrorism which, as everybody knows, has nothing to do with our interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya. These people are just born Terrorist.
5
who will become a murderer ? a thief ? a goldman sachs executive ?
who will ever know what evil forces drive those people toward their nefarious ends ?
who will ever know what evil forces drive those people toward their nefarious ends ?
2
Um, how about male Muslims under 40, typically unmarried?
15
Even though this article does not want to talk about radical Islam, it is so obvious to everyone today that most terrorist activities are committed by young Muslims, so the question we have to ask is why are they attracted to ISIS and other terror groups. The answer is simple. ISIS provides these three basic needs for these youngsters right away, the ISIS provides a job, a girl to marry and power. These are disillusioned teenagers trying to find purpose and make their mark. For many, it boils down to a lack of a sense of identity or belonging. For some it is a way to boost their self esteem .Some are drawn by the desire to die as a martyr who would enjoy a sumptuous afterlife if they die fighting the "infidel" enemy.
16
The real question is how Western countries got to the point where they let Muslim immigrants into their countries in large numbers. knowing that their chance of assimilation into their respective societies is low and the potential for some members to be either terrorists or terrorist sympathizers is high? Perhaps it is the result of two horrific world wars which have left the West in fear of nationalism. Perhaps now we believe that if we are nice to our enemies, they won't harm us. Whatever the case, this will not last. Like many unstable equilibria, the changes may be swift, violent and the results unpredictable.
58
dDo you know how many Americans were killed by Islamic Extremists the past 10 years in the U.S.? The answer: 27. Much higher chances of being killed by lightening than extremist Islamist terrorism. As for domestic killing by guns--tens of thousands killed during the same period with nary a concern about better gun control.
Imagine yourself heading over to Europe and being stopped at the border because so many of your fellow countrymen possess guns and murder fellow Americans. The border agent declines your entrance because you come from a violent country. You protest that is unfair because you don't even own a gun. Sorry. You are part of a Country that fails to condemn gun violence and refuses to enact laws to curtail gun deaths. How can we expect you--from a gun culture--to ever assimilate into a European Country that forbids gun ownership (think the UK).
Painting all Muslims with the same brush is racist. And on another note--you understand why there are so many refugees don't you? It's called the Iraq war,, bombing of Libya and attempt to overthrow the Syrian government by arming rebels. We have supported and trained radical Islamists in the M.E. Before the Iraq war there were few refugees--now there are tens of millions being forced to leave because of violence at home created by the U.S.
Best to judge people as individuals rather than stereotypes.
Imagine yourself heading over to Europe and being stopped at the border because so many of your fellow countrymen possess guns and murder fellow Americans. The border agent declines your entrance because you come from a violent country. You protest that is unfair because you don't even own a gun. Sorry. You are part of a Country that fails to condemn gun violence and refuses to enact laws to curtail gun deaths. How can we expect you--from a gun culture--to ever assimilate into a European Country that forbids gun ownership (think the UK).
Painting all Muslims with the same brush is racist. And on another note--you understand why there are so many refugees don't you? It's called the Iraq war,, bombing of Libya and attempt to overthrow the Syrian government by arming rebels. We have supported and trained radical Islamists in the M.E. Before the Iraq war there were few refugees--now there are tens of millions being forced to leave because of violence at home created by the U.S.
Best to judge people as individuals rather than stereotypes.
11
"The real question is how Western countries got to the point where they let Muslim immigrants into their countries in large numbers."
Germany invited more than one million guest workers, mostly Muslim Turks, to rebuilt their country. I guess France and other European countries welcomed them too for menial work they did not want to do themselves. Everything was OK till the onslaught of Western powers to mostly Muslim Asian and Middle East countries, not before.
Germany invited more than one million guest workers, mostly Muslim Turks, to rebuilt their country. I guess France and other European countries welcomed them too for menial work they did not want to do themselves. Everything was OK till the onslaught of Western powers to mostly Muslim Asian and Middle East countries, not before.
I have always found it strange that the American families of terrorists had no idea their kids were becoming radicalized. A nagging question remained in my mind: What were the conversations like at home if radicalization went undetected? In the case of Islamic terrorists, was it routine to be anti-Western? Was it normal to speak negatively about the West?
Just as a white supremacist might be able to speak freely in a racist household, are Muslim extremists also able to speak freely in anti-Western households?
In other words, maybe the first red flag is a combination of being Muslim and holding anti-Western views, which might be more commonplace than is being admitted.
Just as a white supremacist might be able to speak freely in a racist household, are Muslim extremists also able to speak freely in anti-Western households?
In other words, maybe the first red flag is a combination of being Muslim and holding anti-Western views, which might be more commonplace than is being admitted.
53
same for those columbine dudes, eh
4
And it we start arresting and/or harrassing every Muslim holding anti-Western views, there are going to be a lot more of them.
1
AACNY: What were the conversations like at home if radicalization went undetected? ... are Muslim extremists also able to speak freely in anti-Western households? ... the first red flag is a combination of being Muslim and holding anti-Western views, which might be more commonplace than is being admitted."
No, they are not free to discuss this with their families. That is the whole issue. Do you believe that the Columbine shooters discussed mass murder with their parents? Children learn what is and is not table conversation at home very, very young in every culture. And children in every culture, esp. bi-cultural children believe they understand more than their naive parents.
No, they are not free to discuss this with their families. That is the whole issue. Do you believe that the Columbine shooters discussed mass murder with their parents? Children learn what is and is not table conversation at home very, very young in every culture. And children in every culture, esp. bi-cultural children believe they understand more than their naive parents.
"...warning signs: depression, trauma, economic stress and political grievances."
It's interesting that these also appear to be the most common precursors to becoming a born-again Christian. In other words, there may be nothing special about the sort of circumstances that result in one choosing to become a terrorist or choosing to make any massive change in one's life. Perhaps, since there are so few common characteristics of terrorists, our attention should focus on ameliorating the political and social environments in which terror is bred: warfare, xenophobia, religious rivalry, exploitation, etc. It's the circumstances that go in to the making of the self, not the pre-existing self, that determines whether a portion of the population will turn to these violent acts. Focusing on individuals and personalities diverts attention from the policies and structural injustices that make violence more likely in the first place. It allows us to focus blame and avoid self-scrutiny.
It's interesting that these also appear to be the most common precursors to becoming a born-again Christian. In other words, there may be nothing special about the sort of circumstances that result in one choosing to become a terrorist or choosing to make any massive change in one's life. Perhaps, since there are so few common characteristics of terrorists, our attention should focus on ameliorating the political and social environments in which terror is bred: warfare, xenophobia, religious rivalry, exploitation, etc. It's the circumstances that go in to the making of the self, not the pre-existing self, that determines whether a portion of the population will turn to these violent acts. Focusing on individuals and personalities diverts attention from the policies and structural injustices that make violence more likely in the first place. It allows us to focus blame and avoid self-scrutiny.
14
Inexplicably the term "terror" seems to hold some allure to some of these persons.
If the media started calling these what they are - acts of stupidity, carried out by cowards - at every single opportunity, perhaps whatever the illogical rationale for these would start to diminish?
If the media started calling these what they are - acts of stupidity, carried out by cowards - at every single opportunity, perhaps whatever the illogical rationale for these would start to diminish?
6
In all sympathy . . . naive! They are not cowards. Sociopathic, yes. But terrorists have a point: the economic and political aggression of the Western world's controlling forces, principally the banking families (through petroleum and economic instruments), are enslaving the world. Whatever the individual reason someone wants to strike back, they see their actions as just and justifiably called for. Bullies attract resentment, anger and guerrilla tactics.
If the countries of the western world want to stop terrorism, they must first stop being economic terrorists, crushing entire peoples. My heart goes out not to one nation under attack, but to the human condition of aggression and counter aggression. Either violence -- economic aggression or bombing of innocent civilians -- is wrong.
We Readers find our hearts broken every time we read of an attack. But there are reasons for attacks. We readers are responsible for changing the system that enslaves, subjugates and angers much of the world.
If the countries of the western world want to stop terrorism, they must first stop being economic terrorists, crushing entire peoples. My heart goes out not to one nation under attack, but to the human condition of aggression and counter aggression. Either violence -- economic aggression or bombing of innocent civilians -- is wrong.
We Readers find our hearts broken every time we read of an attack. But there are reasons for attacks. We readers are responsible for changing the system that enslaves, subjugates and angers much of the world.
It's difficult to imagine a more compelling reason to redevelop sensible criteria for so-called 'political correctness' than the fact that it plays a roll in preventing useful data to be a factor in identifying potential antisocial behavior.
Let's get real. Please!
Let's get real. Please!
9
It is futile to address the major global problem by studying phycology - focus should be on problem identification and policy actions to address those problems. US has a immigration policy and culture to assimilate the visible immigrants in spite of its dark history of racism. Europe does not have that culture - visible immigrants are not integrated to European society. This is the problem - terrorism is the symptom of this problem. To address this problem Europe need two actions - (1) find out ways how to integrate second and third generation visible immigrants to the European society, (2) till this is done, stop all immigration of visible immigrants. In the mean time, allow the intelligence community to protect the society as far as possible from this violence of social injustice.
Back in the 1970s, thousands of teenagers and 20-somethings in the US were leaving their families to join religious cults like the Hare Krishna, the Unification Church (or "Moonies"), or the Children of God. Desperate parents would sometimes kidnap their own children in order to "deprogram" them. The most famous of these deprogrammers was Ted Patrick, who wrote a book about his experiences in 1976 called "Let Our Children Go." While many civil libertarians were dubious, what Patrick described as a form of "mind control" in these cults seems very similar to what happens to ISIS recruits. Patrick warned of what would happen if any of these religious cults turned violent. Two years later, 918 members of the Jim Jones cult committed mass suicide in Guyana.
If we're going to understand who becomes a terrorist, we have to stop thinking in Muslim vs. Christian terms. ISIS is an apocalyptic cult, not much different from the hundreds of religious cults that have preceded it. What we're dealing with here is an old psychological phenomenon that we still know very little about.
If we're going to understand who becomes a terrorist, we have to stop thinking in Muslim vs. Christian terms. ISIS is an apocalyptic cult, not much different from the hundreds of religious cults that have preceded it. What we're dealing with here is an old psychological phenomenon that we still know very little about.
106
My niece after flunking out of a "finishing school" joined the Hare Krishna group. It is interesting how this group controlled their people starting with diet. After a couple of meals with her, it became obvious after her comments about meat, milk and eggs she was being programmed. She went to N CA and joined that group. A young man who grew up next door also joined and after he signed over all of his possessions to the HK's, he disappeared forever. An Asian American detective investigated this group of HK's and concluded they were all about getting wealthy from their followers after their disappearance/death.
The HK's kicked my niece out after they determined she had nothing of value.
Yes controlling people's lives to a group's own purpose has been around for a long time.
There are five tenants to being a good Muslim - the jihadists have added two, thus hijacking the Muslim religion. We still have snake handlers in TN and holy rollers abound in S IN.
The HK's kicked my niece out after they determined she had nothing of value.
Yes controlling people's lives to a group's own purpose has been around for a long time.
There are five tenants to being a good Muslim - the jihadists have added two, thus hijacking the Muslim religion. We still have snake handlers in TN and holy rollers abound in S IN.
1
Hare Krishna, the Unification Church (or "Moonies"), and the Children of God, while annoying to some people with their parking lot soliciting did not commit organizational sanctioned violence and/or mass suicide.
Lumping the Hare Krishna, the Unification Church or the Children of God together with Jim Jones and again with ISIS then creating it as an Editors Pick out of it just shows the subject is not at all understood by the author or NY Times.
Lumping the Hare Krishna, the Unification Church or the Children of God together with Jim Jones and again with ISIS then creating it as an Editors Pick out of it just shows the subject is not at all understood by the author or NY Times.
That may be so!; but such evil will always rear it s head from most unexpected corners...note how the educated, civilized Germans, supported Hitler who tried to exterminate Jews and other non-Aryans.
As long as we disregard the insightful statement recorded in the Tanakh (The Hebrew Bible) that "The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure, Who can understand it? I the Lord search the heart and examine the mind..." Jeremiah 17:9-10, terrorism will be curse of mankind for ages to come...
As long as we disregard the insightful statement recorded in the Tanakh (The Hebrew Bible) that "The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure, Who can understand it? I the Lord search the heart and examine the mind..." Jeremiah 17:9-10, terrorism will be curse of mankind for ages to come...
1
Terrorism arises from a desire for vengeance spurred by a perceived or real existential threat to communities, nature, a way of life, etc. Alienation from society's core values inspired by crimes against humanity and inflamed by the direct or indirect exposure to grave injustice.
Terrorists can be radicalized over time. They often are idealistic and may be intellectual. The internal conversation and group encouragement become self reinforcing, ultimately leaving few options in the terrorist's mind.
Mental health, instability and trauma can play a role and may be deliberately exploited to recruit.
Thugs and criminals in the traditional sense may also be used to further the aims of terrorist organizations- but they may be distrusted as potential infiltrators.
If the above is true, then the only effective way to counter terrorism is to reduce the level of violence, end unceasing militarism, give more voice to grievances, admit responsibility and take credible actions to promote justice. You won't stop terrorists by disrupting terrorist organizations, because more may arise in their place. While you may stop imminent imminent dangers, more will follow. You cannot crush the human spirit.
Terrorists can be radicalized over time. They often are idealistic and may be intellectual. The internal conversation and group encouragement become self reinforcing, ultimately leaving few options in the terrorist's mind.
Mental health, instability and trauma can play a role and may be deliberately exploited to recruit.
Thugs and criminals in the traditional sense may also be used to further the aims of terrorist organizations- but they may be distrusted as potential infiltrators.
If the above is true, then the only effective way to counter terrorism is to reduce the level of violence, end unceasing militarism, give more voice to grievances, admit responsibility and take credible actions to promote justice. You won't stop terrorists by disrupting terrorist organizations, because more may arise in their place. While you may stop imminent imminent dangers, more will follow. You cannot crush the human spirit.
2
There is no terrorism. A remarkable statement for sure. But there are acts, thoughts and words which are wrong in that that thier purpose is to create fear and abnormal responses.
Is it an act of terrorism to tell people to believe in a godhead and if not they will go to an unspeakable hell on death?
Is it terrorism to tell voters that a vote for an opponent will lead to their rights be taken from them including the right to carry weapons (aka as arms) or their right to believe in a particular godhead.
Is it terrorism to bomb a country without regard to the military significance of the target (i.e. carpet bombing cities) such as the allies did near the end of WW II or drop an atomic bomb or two on a country near total collapse and defeat?
Is it terrorism to make people march from where they are found to camps miles away during which they will die as in the Bataan march in the Philippines or the forced marches of Native Americans from Florida and in other parts of America over 100 years?
Is it terrorism to force people because of the color of their skin or religion to live in ghettoes as in Nazi Germany controlled countries or in America with its camps for Japanese-Americans and reservations for Native Americans?
Is it terrorism to round up suspected people for their political beliefs as in America's Palmer raids or Trump proposals?
Is it terrorism when ignorant, religiously driven individuals use a godhead to destroy themselves and others by indescriminate bombing?
?
Is it an act of terrorism to tell people to believe in a godhead and if not they will go to an unspeakable hell on death?
Is it terrorism to tell voters that a vote for an opponent will lead to their rights be taken from them including the right to carry weapons (aka as arms) or their right to believe in a particular godhead.
Is it terrorism to bomb a country without regard to the military significance of the target (i.e. carpet bombing cities) such as the allies did near the end of WW II or drop an atomic bomb or two on a country near total collapse and defeat?
Is it terrorism to make people march from where they are found to camps miles away during which they will die as in the Bataan march in the Philippines or the forced marches of Native Americans from Florida and in other parts of America over 100 years?
Is it terrorism to force people because of the color of their skin or religion to live in ghettoes as in Nazi Germany controlled countries or in America with its camps for Japanese-Americans and reservations for Native Americans?
Is it terrorism to round up suspected people for their political beliefs as in America's Palmer raids or Trump proposals?
Is it terrorism when ignorant, religiously driven individuals use a godhead to destroy themselves and others by indescriminate bombing?
?
6
Was it terrorism when the US in the Philippines circa 1898 killed and buried in an open pit 15,000 Islamic people who had struggled to overthrow the Spanish imperialists but died as the Americans became the new conquerors. To add insult to injury the 15,000 were buried with pig blood and pig parts to prevent the souls of these freedom fighters from reaching their Heaven?
Is it terrorism to kill returning US troops after WW I by public hanging for no apparent charge other than their skin was not white? Or wear white KKK garb. burn crosses would have made Jesus proud) and burn down homes, violate women and abuse children because they were not white?
Terrorists are defined as such by their opponents; usually oppressors. The victor keeps to their history story that the opponents were terrorists. Or when the former terrorists win they rename themselves as Freedom Fighters, Patriots, etc.
So was George Washington a terrorist, a traitor or a Founding Father?
For the answer, please see who won.
P.S. The British apparently did not in their efforts to win the war use wholesale brutality, wanton destruction, etc. as a means of war. Did they do occasional stupid things which it seems from the results did not work but instead inflamed.
Question: In what year of the Revolutionary War did the British burn down the homes of the Revolutionary leaders?
Answer: Provided in next issue of the NYT. [Hint: Did not happen.] The question is why?
Is it terrorism to kill returning US troops after WW I by public hanging for no apparent charge other than their skin was not white? Or wear white KKK garb. burn crosses would have made Jesus proud) and burn down homes, violate women and abuse children because they were not white?
Terrorists are defined as such by their opponents; usually oppressors. The victor keeps to their history story that the opponents were terrorists. Or when the former terrorists win they rename themselves as Freedom Fighters, Patriots, etc.
So was George Washington a terrorist, a traitor or a Founding Father?
For the answer, please see who won.
P.S. The British apparently did not in their efforts to win the war use wholesale brutality, wanton destruction, etc. as a means of war. Did they do occasional stupid things which it seems from the results did not work but instead inflamed.
Question: In what year of the Revolutionary War did the British burn down the homes of the Revolutionary leaders?
Answer: Provided in next issue of the NYT. [Hint: Did not happen.] The question is why?
1
Instead of focusing on who will become a terrorist, we need to figure out why our message is failing. I suppose that goes hand in hand. We need to better understand why someone would be so disenfranchised with Western freedoms, lifestyle, freedom to worship how one wants, etc. and figure out what causes that person to believe that sick, misguided attacks on innocent people in the name of Islam is somehow a better choice.
5
Who is likely to become terrorists?
Wealthy, well educated Muslims- Osama Bin Laden and the current head of Al'Queda
Married Middle Class, American Muslims- The couple in San Bernidadino, California
Working Class single Muslims- The Boston Marathon attackers
Poor Muslims- The Brussels attackers.
Why can't we admit to ourselves that there is a pattern here?
Wealthy, well educated Muslims- Osama Bin Laden and the current head of Al'Queda
Married Middle Class, American Muslims- The couple in San Bernidadino, California
Working Class single Muslims- The Boston Marathon attackers
Poor Muslims- The Brussels attackers.
Why can't we admit to ourselves that there is a pattern here?
96
It's that PC elephant in the room that no one including our President wishes to address.
3
Who are the "we" you are describing? You select three examples, and then fault the "we" -- presumably at least everyone reading your comments in the New York Times -- for not recognizing the pattern created by your self-selected examples. I am a legal services lawyer, and I represent many Muslims, including Muslims in all the categories you name, who are hard-working employees of the City of New York -- engineers, architects, city planners, graphic artists, and so on. They are all horrified -- and also, sad to say, ashamed -- of the actions of terrorist who happen to claim a perverted view of Islam as their motivation. Horrified for the same reasons that you and I are horrified. But ashamed because people like you, Neil & Julie, vilify every single Muslim with your deeply fearful and hateful views that encourage mass retaliation against everyone who is a member of a very, very large religious group. What religion are you, Neil & Julie? What ethnicity? Can you honestly say that no member of your religious group or ethnicity has ever committed an atrocity? Unless you can, your conclusion that Muslims all over the world -- of all types, from all classes, from all sects, from all countries -- are likely to become terrorists are both meaningless and potentially harmful to large numbers of our population, Muslim and otherwise.
What about Tim McVeigh, the Okalahoma City bomber? What about Anders Breivik, who shot dozens in Norway? What about Dylan Roof, the kid who shot up a black church (in SC?) a couple of months ago? Etc., etc. One can argue that these are also acts of terrorism. So this hearkens to how exactly do you define "terrorism." You seem to be concerned only with radical Islamic terrorism, while while ignoring other strains.
We do have good research, the problem is the academics interviewed are just unaware of it. A study of the Muslim world published in the Journal of Peace Research showed that approval of Islamist terror is not associated with religiosity, lack of education, poverty, or income dissatisfaction. It is associated instead with urban poverty. It appears that Islamist terrorists obtain support and recruits from the urban poor in developing countries, who live in an environment where most struggle in groups over state privileges, which usually go to elites. It has been shown how this can make terror and genocide socially acceptable. The rise of militant Islam can be attributed to high rates of urbanization in many Muslim countries in recent decades. Because many of the urban poor are migrants from the countryside, the politically ambitious appeal to their traditional rural values and identify modernity as their enemy. This is why a mutated in-group version of Islam—Islamism—struck a chord in several large cities around the globe at the same time, including in the immigrant-receiving centers of the West, which is associated with the enemy modernity. If this is the cause of terror what is the solution? Jobs. Without jobs the urban poor are often dependent for health care and education on Islamist-inclined groups. With jobs they are free to feed their families and are not beholden to Islamist leaders.
46
It's interesting that this comment was chosen as an "NYT Picks" comment given that it directly contradicts an assertion in the NYT article based on a study that found no link between economic distress and these terrorists.
8
In other words, rich Muslims are paying young, poor, Muslims to fight a religious war? What else is new?
Look, poor people in general do not go out and kill a lot of strangers because they get paid to do so. They have to believe it is their religious duty to do so.
Look, poor people in general do not go out and kill a lot of strangers because they get paid to do so. They have to believe it is their religious duty to do so.
1
Michael M.;Few know, even the terrorists themselves as to their roots.
It started before the war when Germany preyed on the hatred between tribes and first recruited tribesmen to help Germany to commit acts of terrorism so Germany could step and control the flow of oil. The English followed the German lead in Africa and the ME.
After the war the English used these terrorists that were left without a cause or work. Later the after the English left the region the US took over where the English left off. The US continued to train people to comit acts of terrorism. 100,000 Taliban were trained by the US, Saudis and Pakistan to commit acts of terrorism in Russia after the Afghan war with Russia. Obama worked with his ME allies to ship arms from Libya to arm and train so-called insurgents, terrorists, to overthrow the Assad government. Many of these terrorists went home or joined ISIS making it what it could have never become on its own.
It started before the war when Germany preyed on the hatred between tribes and first recruited tribesmen to help Germany to commit acts of terrorism so Germany could step and control the flow of oil. The English followed the German lead in Africa and the ME.
After the war the English used these terrorists that were left without a cause or work. Later the after the English left the region the US took over where the English left off. The US continued to train people to comit acts of terrorism. 100,000 Taliban were trained by the US, Saudis and Pakistan to commit acts of terrorism in Russia after the Afghan war with Russia. Obama worked with his ME allies to ship arms from Libya to arm and train so-called insurgents, terrorists, to overthrow the Assad government. Many of these terrorists went home or joined ISIS making it what it could have never become on its own.
1
I am curious to know if they have asked cult experts to collaborate with them in understanding what would draw someone in to these groups, because they are very cult-like.
2
“What turns people toward violence…are questions that have bedeviled governments around the world for generations.” Generations? A bit longer I think. But then again the NYT saw fit to publish an article this week re Irish identity, which claimed it is a recent phenomenon. Is history no longer being studied? Or did all life begin 100 years ago? (And perhaps literature would be a good place to look for answers as well.)
I especially love the warning signs cited: “depression, trauma, economic stress and political grievances” (traits common to many of us Bernie Sanders’ supporters!), and the promise to “arrange mental health or religious counseling.” Now that’s just what’s needed to deal with economic stress and political grievances!! And only if/when mental health or religious counseling doesn’t work, then drop the dime (I’m dating myself here) and lock us up – or just shoot us – depending on our melanin levels. Hahaha – not.
P.S. I just checked out the government checklist referred to in the article - aka Countering Violent Extremism. Very, very scary.
I especially love the warning signs cited: “depression, trauma, economic stress and political grievances” (traits common to many of us Bernie Sanders’ supporters!), and the promise to “arrange mental health or religious counseling.” Now that’s just what’s needed to deal with economic stress and political grievances!! And only if/when mental health or religious counseling doesn’t work, then drop the dime (I’m dating myself here) and lock us up – or just shoot us – depending on our melanin levels. Hahaha – not.
P.S. I just checked out the government checklist referred to in the article - aka Countering Violent Extremism. Very, very scary.
4
Creation of a checklist is profiling. To be acceptable it must measure all the costs. When the target is a very small portion of the total population, the largest costs are those from false positives. We need to be very careful with the response to the identification of a potential terrorist. The cost to the person so identified can be substantial.
The notion of having a multi tiered approach is very attractive. Initial identification resulting in a social assistance effort can lead to turning the identified person away from terrorist action and may permit closer scrutiny. The costs will be large measured against the pure terrorist identification goal, but it can lead to improvement to our society as a whole.
It's a messy, delicate problem that threatens our personal liberties.
The notion of having a multi tiered approach is very attractive. Initial identification resulting in a social assistance effort can lead to turning the identified person away from terrorist action and may permit closer scrutiny. The costs will be large measured against the pure terrorist identification goal, but it can lead to improvement to our society as a whole.
It's a messy, delicate problem that threatens our personal liberties.
3
Terrorists, like all violent offenders, have one thing in common: physical or emotional violence (humiliation, denigration) in the home during childhood. Alice Miller described this in the book "For Your Own Good." About how a militaristic, cruel, and disengaged parenting style, in vogue in the early part of the 20th century, created an entire population of German citizens who either actively participated in murdering millions of their neighbors, or who quietly watched from the sidelines. How to become part of the solution? Acknowledge the humanity of children. See them. Ask them questions. Support their dignity. I know for a fact that a neighbor, grandparent, or stranger - can turn a child's life around in a single interaction - by acknowledging his or her humanity. Terrorists are emotionally impoverished and twisted people who never experienced compassion or love. Like the Nazis, the seeds of violence were planted in early childhood.
4
1.It is difficult to generalise because Terrorism in different regions have different causes.
2. The differences in cultures, societies, nations and regions have been their
since very long time.
3.The matter has become serious and worse because of easy availability of arms and ammunitions for even a layman. Anybody can own arms those can challenge and harm society.
4. Whether it is a nation or a group or an individual, all think that all problems can be solved at gun point killing.
5. Afganistan, Iraq and Syria are the examples. Pouring ,ore arms and ammunition can not be a solution.
6. Globalisation has led to societies with different believes and lack accommodative mind set leads to friction and societal misfits.
7.Greed for power among leaders within a society has also resulted in terrorism.
8.This can change only if our mind set towards killing of others as a way of winning them over changes to co-existence and accommodation.
9. All these things get more complicated because of economic reasons, disparities that exist in this imperfect world.
2. The differences in cultures, societies, nations and regions have been their
since very long time.
3.The matter has become serious and worse because of easy availability of arms and ammunitions for even a layman. Anybody can own arms those can challenge and harm society.
4. Whether it is a nation or a group or an individual, all think that all problems can be solved at gun point killing.
5. Afganistan, Iraq and Syria are the examples. Pouring ,ore arms and ammunition can not be a solution.
6. Globalisation has led to societies with different believes and lack accommodative mind set leads to friction and societal misfits.
7.Greed for power among leaders within a society has also resulted in terrorism.
8.This can change only if our mind set towards killing of others as a way of winning them over changes to co-existence and accommodation.
9. All these things get more complicated because of economic reasons, disparities that exist in this imperfect world.
"As a practical matter, scientists note, checklists are mathematically certain to fail. Even a test with 99 percent accuracy would be wrong far more often than right. It is a counterintuitive thought, but in a country with a huge population and a tiny number of terrorists, even a nearly perfect test would flag many more innocent people than actual terrorists."
What you're describing would NOT be a perfect test. Good tests are both sensitive (they would identify those people who would become extremists) and specific (they would not identify those people who would not become extremists). What you're describing is a test with a high rate of false positives. A test with "99% accuracy" should have both very few false positives and very few false negatives.
As a policy question, it comes down to what rate of false positives and false negatives would be acceptable. No one wants to get it wrong in either direction; no one wants to see the innocent punished any more than they want to see actual terrorists escape punishment. But waiting for a perfect test before we do anything isn't an answer, either.
What you're describing would NOT be a perfect test. Good tests are both sensitive (they would identify those people who would become extremists) and specific (they would not identify those people who would not become extremists). What you're describing is a test with a high rate of false positives. A test with "99% accuracy" should have both very few false positives and very few false negatives.
As a policy question, it comes down to what rate of false positives and false negatives would be acceptable. No one wants to get it wrong in either direction; no one wants to see the innocent punished any more than they want to see actual terrorists escape punishment. But waiting for a perfect test before we do anything isn't an answer, either.
2
Throughout the world, because of economic inequality, men in their teens and 20s and early 30s (most of the recruits seem youngish) are lacking in viable opportunities to serve as socially-acceptable and legal outlets for their energies. Their libido has to be directed somewhere. They see joining ISIS as a chance for recognition and validation. There is also a sexual dimension to this, given their "delight" at traffiking and prostituting the girls and women they capture and rape and justifying this using and perverting the Koran. A PBS Frontline episode reporting on their kidnapping of Yazidi women shows ISIS men in their dens looking like idiotic, titillated, giggling, teenagers, cradling their Kalashnikovs, who can't get a girl any other way that through pillage and rape. The atmosphere is heavy with adolescent, sexual incitement. ISIS gives these guys a chance to finally be "real men."
I am surprised that given all the thought seemingly going into this problem, no one has been able to come up with any kind of anti-ISIS propaganda campaign that would dissuade at least those potential recruits who have a shred of human decency in their bones. A campaign that highlights their atrocities, their rapes, their murders, and that shows the emptiness of their ideology and version of masculinity. For those without a shred, I guess there is no hope of dissuasion. From this article, those currently on the case seem to be lacking in psychological subtlety.
I am surprised that given all the thought seemingly going into this problem, no one has been able to come up with any kind of anti-ISIS propaganda campaign that would dissuade at least those potential recruits who have a shred of human decency in their bones. A campaign that highlights their atrocities, their rapes, their murders, and that shows the emptiness of their ideology and version of masculinity. For those without a shred, I guess there is no hope of dissuasion. From this article, those currently on the case seem to be lacking in psychological subtlety.
3
Runaway population growth leaves even highly talented people out of opportunity.
3
The lead article on politico.eu today is about Molenbeek - where 8 of the 11 imams in the area do not speak the local language.
The article makes clear that a totally foreign culture has been allowed to take root and grow, not just in Belgium but throughout Europe. This has been the Achilles Heel of multiculturalism - which has led, in small European countries like Sweden where nearly everyone shared language, values, and saw themselves reflected in history, not to One Big Happy Family, but to a cultural fracturing that produces more tribalism -now euphemistically called identity politics - not less, to instability, and to angry host populations who rightly feel something they valued has been stolen from them by policies they were impotent to influence.
Enter the far right.
Europe will pay a very heavy price in the coming years for its failures on integration in favor of multiculturalism, which by its very name announced that the host culture is meaningless and not worth defending. Until, of course, the day comes when they find out their cultures did mean something and they start nattering on about European Values and British Values and French Values - only no one quite knows what those mean any longer because no one through immigration policies made clear their worth. E.g., refusing to enforce language assimilation is plain stupid: language is the glue of culture.
As the British say, you cannot run with the fox and hunt with the hounds.
Europe has to make up its mind.
The article makes clear that a totally foreign culture has been allowed to take root and grow, not just in Belgium but throughout Europe. This has been the Achilles Heel of multiculturalism - which has led, in small European countries like Sweden where nearly everyone shared language, values, and saw themselves reflected in history, not to One Big Happy Family, but to a cultural fracturing that produces more tribalism -now euphemistically called identity politics - not less, to instability, and to angry host populations who rightly feel something they valued has been stolen from them by policies they were impotent to influence.
Enter the far right.
Europe will pay a very heavy price in the coming years for its failures on integration in favor of multiculturalism, which by its very name announced that the host culture is meaningless and not worth defending. Until, of course, the day comes when they find out their cultures did mean something and they start nattering on about European Values and British Values and French Values - only no one quite knows what those mean any longer because no one through immigration policies made clear their worth. E.g., refusing to enforce language assimilation is plain stupid: language is the glue of culture.
As the British say, you cannot run with the fox and hunt with the hounds.
Europe has to make up its mind.
67
Great comment. But, saying "Achilles Heel" of multiculturalism implies that it is perfect otherwise. It is not an Achilles Heel, but one of many weaknesses.
The cat's probably out of the bag in Europe. But there's still time to set this right here in the U.S. if we can all learn quickly from their example. The political left, especially, needs to sit up and take notice.
1
abstractly, how to make a terrorist is no different from how to make any 'career.' there are 2 basic approaches to the process: start with the individual and build up to the societal conditions that create him/her and the other from the society down. decades ago a similar/same problem was urban or other guerilla warfare. the most difficult issue is admitting to the complicity of the rest of us in creating and maintaining incubators for those who seek personal fulfillment in destroying their creator. i wrote this 'a while ago' "Secret Societies and Guerilla Organizations." in Joseph S. Roucek (eds.) So¬cial Control for Order in a Democratic Society. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1978: 245 56.
1
How very cleaver of those commenting here to deduce that Muslim terrorists have a commonality - they are Muslim. And Jewish terrorists are Jewish. And Christian terrorists are Christian. And Hindu terrorists are Hindu. And Buddhist terrorists are Buddhist. And some terrorists have no religion what so ever and are Agnostic or perhaps Atheists.
How does religion explain the K.K.K., white supremacy, black radicalism, left and right wing extremism, nationalistic groups such as FALN, anti-government terrorists....and the list goes on and on.
A simple solution is no answer at all.
How does religion explain the K.K.K., white supremacy, black radicalism, left and right wing extremism, nationalistic groups such as FALN, anti-government terrorists....and the list goes on and on.
A simple solution is no answer at all.
2
Perhaps belief in afterlife is a common indicator of potential terrorists.
2
What you resist persists. They are simply responding to the refusal of large groups of Americans to acknowledge that link.
Political correctness dictates what can and cannot be acknowledged, and, thus, is as big an impediment to progress in this area as bias.
Political correctness dictates what can and cannot be acknowledged, and, thus, is as big an impediment to progress in this area as bias.
4
Steve Bolger, there were many communist and anarchist terrorists in the previous century who were atheists.
1
From the gang member in the inner city who terrorizes his neighborhood to the alienated muslim man who joins an islamist group to terrorize his immediate community or the world community, all of these males share this simple fact- they have a life without purpose and want to connect/belong to something. This is not hard to figure out... young men without jobs, skills, education and girlfriends have nothing to live for. Why don't we start thinking about how we can work on giving these young men hope for their future instead of ignoring their pain and emptiness?
63
Except that most terrorists are employed, from middle income countries, often are married with children, and have higher education. Yes, it is hard to figure for anyone serious about solutions. Nothing is ever hard to figure out for the armchair quarterbacks that espouse inaccurate information as a quick fix.
6
I guess you forgot that women are also on this earth......and can be more ruthless than men.
1
That's the point of the article. Your common-sense theory isn't true. Some "terrorists" have been doctors.
I notice that the article addresses only Islamists, and not the right wing form of terrorism represented, for example by Tim McVeigh, nor the left wing form, represented for example by the RAF. In writing such an article, the Times is pandering to the Islamophobia that is being promoted in the West, in addition to overlooking a more fundamental question: why do people turn to violence of any kind?
Speaking for myself, it matters little to me whether someone who attacks me is simply after my sneakers, or who dislikes me for some reason, or who is trying to make some kind of statement. The result is the same. Furthermore, with a little thought, one can arrive at the conclusion that there will be violence as long as there are people. Unfortunately, based on hundreds of generations of human history, it appears to be the nature of the beast.
Speaking for myself, it matters little to me whether someone who attacks me is simply after my sneakers, or who dislikes me for some reason, or who is trying to make some kind of statement. The result is the same. Furthermore, with a little thought, one can arrive at the conclusion that there will be violence as long as there are people. Unfortunately, based on hundreds of generations of human history, it appears to be the nature of the beast.
3
Beast ! Precisely ! Human beings are merely a part of the animal kingdom !
And oh ! It's not terrorism ! The word "terrorism" is the current iteration for the creation of a meme, used by the dominant creeps both in our country and (owing to its success !) internationally (read "political leaders and their enforcers") formulating ways to manipulate the collective consciousness.
Hook line and sinker, folks !
To be clear, their animal violence is a *response* to our animal violence after some personal/social group/tribal or national threshold is reached. You deserve it !
The violent action is a REACTION, carried out covertly for maximum effect because it seems the only remaining way to get some vengeance. Always justified !
omg the emperor has no clothes !
The animals in our pack and allied to our pack have been carrying out acts of social, economic and military violence (in an animal, single-minded, piratical pursuit of resources), openly and covertly for nigh on to 250 years because of a surfeit of resources purloined by that social unit in our society given to that kind of reprehensible violent behavior.
Offense as defense lol
Defund the animals in the military and its various relevant barbaric cousins, retool our social infrastructure into something better with all that extra money, and prove to man, country and god (as it were) that we are in fact more than mere bloody-minded animals in pursuit of the biggest possible pile of bananas
And oh ! It's not terrorism ! The word "terrorism" is the current iteration for the creation of a meme, used by the dominant creeps both in our country and (owing to its success !) internationally (read "political leaders and their enforcers") formulating ways to manipulate the collective consciousness.
Hook line and sinker, folks !
To be clear, their animal violence is a *response* to our animal violence after some personal/social group/tribal or national threshold is reached. You deserve it !
The violent action is a REACTION, carried out covertly for maximum effect because it seems the only remaining way to get some vengeance. Always justified !
omg the emperor has no clothes !
The animals in our pack and allied to our pack have been carrying out acts of social, economic and military violence (in an animal, single-minded, piratical pursuit of resources), openly and covertly for nigh on to 250 years because of a surfeit of resources purloined by that social unit in our society given to that kind of reprehensible violent behavior.
Offense as defense lol
Defund the animals in the military and its various relevant barbaric cousins, retool our social infrastructure into something better with all that extra money, and prove to man, country and god (as it were) that we are in fact more than mere bloody-minded animals in pursuit of the biggest possible pile of bananas
Peter Bergen's "United States of Jihad" utilizing the research of Mitchell Silber, points out causes of Muslim radicalization and subsequent behavioral traits which law enforcement can observe and use use to identify terrorist threats. He describes Jihadi terrorists in the West as "unremarkable male Muslims between 15-35,generally educated and middle class, ...who were non observant or Muslim converts, with no ties to terrorist organizations". He writes that some personal crisis or moral outrage such as the death of Muslims elsewhere providing a "cognitive opening" for radicalization.This is followed by growing traditional beards and adoption of Muslim dress, association with other radicalized Muslims, and traveling abroad for training, This would seem to provide a useful paradigm for predicting potential terrorists. There would seem to be similarity between some jihadi's search for "family"and the attraction of street gangs for American youth. The collective family of an Internet web site could be a valuable tool for recruitment,and reach young people who were unreachable until recently.
19
Good background info to have, DS. Thanks.
Bergen is one of the few out there telling the truth. And isn't it curious that we sympathize with Muslims seeking like minded community and family and cultural frameworks, but condemn white Europeans for wanting the same things?
It would seem that a proactive message debunking the terrorist message should be a central component of cautioning those who feel the siren's call of hatred - whoever they might be. Indeed, if you want to define the world in terms of winners and losers, there is no greater loser in life than one who is consumed with hatred. ISIS is nothing new in this regard. Look at the track record - Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin. Where are they now? - dead and despised - leaving no legacy other than deep wounds that take generations to heal - all for that brief moment of delusional exhilaration. When all is said and done, memorials are not built for them but for their victims. So get the message out - on some level we all need to be on the alert for that enemy within. Offer an outreach program with nonjudgmental assistance to those brave enough to admit they are in trouble. Help make them the heroes.
Wilhelm Tell, our National hero and and symbol worldwide of freedom and democracy, once refused to salute the symbol of Authority, got arrested on that count, was compelled to shoot an apple placed on his son's head, concealed another arrow to kill the sheriff if he had hurt his son, got jailed for this offense, escaped and killed said sheriff in ambush.
My question Urbi et Orbi: Was Wilhelm Tell a patriot, or was he a terrorist ?
My question Urbi et Orbi: Was Wilhelm Tell a patriot, or was he a terrorist ?
8
Clearly a freedom fighter in the American vernacular. We do so love our wild west idiocy.
2
Why not just try and determine whos next to go on a killing spree... 12,000 Americans are shot every year. We have mass shootings almost every day. If you find the determinants of that, more Americans will be saved then in decades of terrorism and the same factors probably apply to determining who the next terrorist will be.
34
There is one characteristic about who will become a terrorist that is known and indisputable--he will be a young male. Males do not take responsibility for their violent tendencies and neither do nations. All are created in their likeness. Until that changes nothing much will work except perhaps one heck of a jobs program.
24
There are many characteristics about who will become a terrorist, but most share one common characteristic. They are Muslim. They are usually displaced by war and have no home of their own nor do they have money or education, at least usually not to start with. They are not limited to just young men as in the case of the Taliban. There are Taliban villages and towns that contain hundreds of thousands of men, women and children of all ages. The US, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have trained over 100,000 Taliban to commit acts of terrorism in Russia and many of them are not just young men.
The US and its middle east allies have trained, and armed insurgents to overthrow Assad's government and many of them have ended up joining ISIS.
They key is that we can not allow Muslims into this country who don't want to become Americans first. Trump says we should provide safe zones in Syria for displaced Muslims rather than automatically we will allow them into America. With Russia, Syria, Iran, Iraq support this could happen. However, the fighting in Syria is because, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey want to build and control a pipeline from Qatar through parts of the ME Syria and Turkey to EU. Qatar has spent 3 billion to support the overthrow of Assads' government which is moderate compared to Saudi Arabia.
The US and its middle east allies have trained, and armed insurgents to overthrow Assad's government and many of them have ended up joining ISIS.
They key is that we can not allow Muslims into this country who don't want to become Americans first. Trump says we should provide safe zones in Syria for displaced Muslims rather than automatically we will allow them into America. With Russia, Syria, Iran, Iraq support this could happen. However, the fighting in Syria is because, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey want to build and control a pipeline from Qatar through parts of the ME Syria and Turkey to EU. Qatar has spent 3 billion to support the overthrow of Assads' government which is moderate compared to Saudi Arabia.
3
It is rather easy to see why people might choose terrorism/violence. It's a three or four step process.
1) The search for meaning. These individuals found it in Islam.
2) Of all the versions of Islam out there, they were most persuaded by a particular version of Islam, e.g., Salafi Islam.
3) They embraced this version of Islam as their worldview, and they became committed to act in an effort to bring about the ideal world.
4) Thus they engaged in jihad.
What makes me chuckle is that the media's own secular values prevent them from understanding what's going on. They have the ability to put themselves in the place of others from disparate cultures, but when it comes to religion, they don't see it.
Go educate yourself and read Viktor Frankl's book "Man's Search for Meaning" - it might help you understand.
1) The search for meaning. These individuals found it in Islam.
2) Of all the versions of Islam out there, they were most persuaded by a particular version of Islam, e.g., Salafi Islam.
3) They embraced this version of Islam as their worldview, and they became committed to act in an effort to bring about the ideal world.
4) Thus they engaged in jihad.
What makes me chuckle is that the media's own secular values prevent them from understanding what's going on. They have the ability to put themselves in the place of others from disparate cultures, but when it comes to religion, they don't see it.
Go educate yourself and read Viktor Frankl's book "Man's Search for Meaning" - it might help you understand.
3
I have a story idea for the NYTimes because I personally would love to read it: an in depth discussion with the parents of suicide bombers and terrorists. Perhaps it's been done, but I would love to read about the parents (on both sides) of the San Bernardino killers, the men of Brussels and Paris, etc. What their lives are like after, how much they knew after their children left to join ISIS, etc. Do they revere the children for their actions? How are they treated by their neighbors, etc.
36
The parents and friends of Paris accomplice Abdeslam actively hid and supported him for 4 months. Why they haven't been arrested and charged is unfathomable. I could care less what these selfish monsters think.
5
I could not recommend the work of Anne Speckhard more highly- Talking to Terrorists: Understanding the Psycho-Social Motivations of Militant Jihadi Terrorists, Mass Hostage Takers, Suicide Bombers & 'Martyrs'. I had exactly the same questions as you, and after Paris, I picked it up. Deep, satisfying, real answers- ones that this article (and many others) don't even approach.
Maybe we should bomb everyone? Oh yes we are bombing everyone and we wonder why terror thrives. Terror thrives because that's the way the psychotic greed controlling the planet like it just like the so called news media thriving on ignorance and intentionally created fear instead of reporting the truth. Journalism is as dead as freedom and we have only ourselves to blame for continually drinking the kool-aid.
3
If we really do not know what makes a terrorist, don't those people who are suggesting we put certain types of immigration on hold until we do make some sense? Wouldn't it be better not to exacerbate matters further and wind up with conditions that are now plaguing parts of Europe, Pakistan, and elsewhere until we understand what we need to do? Don't we owe it to the people who are already here and who, for the most part, eschew terrorism that we do not allow terrorists to become their neighbors? This may sound totally politically incorrect, but there is a serous problem that we do not know how to fix. Should we risk making it worse?
20
"Nothing close to a consensus on why someone becomes a terrorist." "We still have no compelling answers." Gee, I have an idea. Why don't we look at why the terrorists say they become terrorists - such as the Boston Marathon Bombers or the San Bernadino bombers, or the Charlie Hebdo killers, etc. etc etc. They all say it's because of their adherence to Islam. But the article is not allowed to mention that "cause" of terrorism, because of political correctness. Imagine if you can from Mars; had no prior information about terrorism and this was the first article you read. You would have no idea whatsoever about what is going on in the world today with the fight against radical Islam. You would think that society had absolutely no clue as to why people were blowing themselves up in airports; that it was a big mystery. The Times is really abdicating its responsibility as the paper of record.
176
Here's the refutation: https://theintercept.com/2016/03/25/highlighting-western-victims-while-i...
But what about terrorists like Eric Rudolph or Tim McVeigh? I think the better marker is radical religious adherence to religions where absolutes take hold. If one feels afraid or uncertain in life, finding "truth" to answer all questions can be comforting, and give one a sense of purpose, however misguided.
Personally, when I see what radical Christian conservatives are willing to do, albeit currently with legislation moreso than actual weapons, I worry more about the damage they can do to millions of people by taking away rights, legislating against activities that don't agree with their severe religious views, etc.
Personally, when I see what radical Christian conservatives are willing to do, albeit currently with legislation moreso than actual weapons, I worry more about the damage they can do to millions of people by taking away rights, legislating against activities that don't agree with their severe religious views, etc.
5
Interesting viewpoint, R.P., but I have to ask: When someone bombs an abortion clinic or murders innocent people in the name of 'baby parts,' that is in the name of Islam? Or is that not considered terrorism as long as it is performed in service of the Christian God?
3
The psychology of terrorism has long defied a profile. Instead we attempt to discern a increased likelihood versus a prediction. This is usually ascertained by getting a complete history and track record of behavior and then followed up by a skilled behavioral interview. The trained interviewer needs to be cognizant of mental health issues that pervade politicalization. Most importantly we look for the emergence of a malignant narcissism that begins with a disorganized personality. There are no cookie cutter checklists or magic formulas. It takes disciplined critical thinking and an informed intuitive sense to sniff out potential dangerousness in a human being.
7
An entire article on motives but nary a mention of U.S. interventions and occupation in Muslim territories which countless intelligence reports have cited as the primary reason.
71
@Salmon
And that relates how to bombings in Europe and Pakistan?
And that relates how to bombings in Europe and Pakistan?
4
I've heard this excuse so many times. And yet its completely fatuous.
Read some history,. Look up the Barbary pirates, the Battle of Vienna, The Battle of Tours, Charles Martel etc etc.
Islam was founded and still is an aggressive expansionist ideology.
If you're so self loathing that you're desperate to find a reason to blame your own fellow citizens so be it. But its nonsense on stilts.
Read some history,. Look up the Barbary pirates, the Battle of Vienna, The Battle of Tours, Charles Martel etc etc.
Islam was founded and still is an aggressive expansionist ideology.
If you're so self loathing that you're desperate to find a reason to blame your own fellow citizens so be it. But its nonsense on stilts.
13
The primary reason for radicalization of people safely tucked away in prosperous European countries many of whom are second and third generation?
Eight of the 11 Imams in Molenbeek don't speak the local language. In Sweden, long before the invasion of Iraq, the Swedish government ordered law enforcement to stop identifying the ethnicity of sexual assault perpetrators to keep from the public how high a percentage of them were men of immigrant background. Moroccans, Tunisians, and Algerians are the main ones in Sweden terrorizing passengers in the Stockholm Central Station in the evening.
Public swimming pools in northern Europe have had to set separate hours for local migrants who are being housed in reception centers, because they began to sexually harass local women using the pools. What happened in Cologne, Hamburg, Stuttgart, Helsinki, and Stockholm on New Years Eve was also all about geopolitics.
Culture has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Eight of the 11 Imams in Molenbeek don't speak the local language. In Sweden, long before the invasion of Iraq, the Swedish government ordered law enforcement to stop identifying the ethnicity of sexual assault perpetrators to keep from the public how high a percentage of them were men of immigrant background. Moroccans, Tunisians, and Algerians are the main ones in Sweden terrorizing passengers in the Stockholm Central Station in the evening.
Public swimming pools in northern Europe have had to set separate hours for local migrants who are being housed in reception centers, because they began to sexually harass local women using the pools. What happened in Cologne, Hamburg, Stuttgart, Helsinki, and Stockholm on New Years Eve was also all about geopolitics.
Culture has absolutely nothing to do with it.
12
Does this effort have to provide answers that are correct all the time? Or, is it good to gain insights into warning signs? If we can't find perfect answers do we just give up trying? It seems to me that a great deal of good thinking goes into these efforts, and the implementation of the ideas is more a matter of political will than anything else. This about priorities. Are civil rights absolutely more important than security? I have no doubt that sufficient information exists to put pressure on would be terrorists that would discourage them from acting on their inclinations, but I doubt we have the will to do so.
2
Since many of these people are inflicting harm by suicide bombs, doesn't it relate to the relaxation in a will to live that is evidenced in suicides generally? The connection to Muslim faith provides a blur to an afterlife that is more appealing than their present existence, but that seems almost an accelerant.
Hard to see how you easily stop this, and more suicides beget even more in copy cat fashion.
Hard to see how you easily stop this, and more suicides beget even more in copy cat fashion.
10
Is this really such a hard question to answer? Here are the motivators that radicalize people and perhaps turn them towards terrorism: Lack of inclusion, loss of hope, and the lure of religious dogma.
25
All of which could have been said of Jews in the ghettos of Europe for eons, the Irish in America, and a host of other immigrant groups who had a generation of adjustment and gradual assimilation. Seen photos of the Lower East Side in New York City in the early years of the 20th century? The Triangle Shirtwaist Company fire and the sweatshops of the area, almost all of which were staffed with young immigrant girls on starvation wages?
Did they become radicalized?
Did they become radicalized?
5
And destruction of their homes, killing of their innocent children, wife, husbands and parents.
1
Living in the 'ghetto' as a youth I was able to meet members of the Black Panthers, the Brown Berets, and the SDS. While the Panthers and Brown Berets came from humble backgrounds the SDS were typically university students, many from affluent backgrounds. Later on while in the Marines a member of the KKK joined the unit and formed a small group of followers. Some of us warned him to avoid making trouble in the unit as we were a pretty diverse and tight unit. During the Clinton years some co-workers, engineers, were especially prone to talk of violent actions against the government, just like the SDS was a couple of decades earlier. Thinking back on those people some of the few common traits were:
1. Obviously disconnected from society at large. There were many reasons but the net result was the ability to view others as the ones either causing or supporting others who caused the perceived problems that they were addressing.
2. Embracing a dogma that essentially develops a cult, thus making it difficult to reason with the people.
3. Due to their convictions from #2 above and their distance from others in #1 above the willingness to potentially inflict or actually inflict harm on others.
Religion is a multiplier, amplifying the effects of #1 and #2 above, pushing individuals in some cases to self-sacrifice. The question of who is prone to violence is still open, as the simple list above covers a lot of people.
1. Obviously disconnected from society at large. There were many reasons but the net result was the ability to view others as the ones either causing or supporting others who caused the perceived problems that they were addressing.
2. Embracing a dogma that essentially develops a cult, thus making it difficult to reason with the people.
3. Due to their convictions from #2 above and their distance from others in #1 above the willingness to potentially inflict or actually inflict harm on others.
Religion is a multiplier, amplifying the effects of #1 and #2 above, pushing individuals in some cases to self-sacrifice. The question of who is prone to violence is still open, as the simple list above covers a lot of people.
64
Thank you for your thoughts. I appreciate that you show many different life experiences and how this has helped you see that it isn't just one simple variable. I think the same way and, when people try to make it a "simple" solution, they miss so much of what is happening.
Thank you for this cogent analysis. The knee-jerk "It's all about Islam" doesn't get to the heart of the problem. Religion is epiphenomenal to traits 1 & 2: Social isolation & ideological/dogmatic thought.
By the way - the elephant in the room that maybe all these of anti-Muslim commenters are missing is based on trait #2: fudamentalist enter-religion here. Killing abortion providers because of "Christian" beliefs; killing Palestinians because of "Jewish" beliefs, etc. etc. Anyone remember the Crusades? Yeah...Judeo-Christian beliefs don't get a pass here either.
By the way - the elephant in the room that maybe all these of anti-Muslim commenters are missing is based on trait #2: fudamentalist enter-religion here. Killing abortion providers because of "Christian" beliefs; killing Palestinians because of "Jewish" beliefs, etc. etc. Anyone remember the Crusades? Yeah...Judeo-Christian beliefs don't get a pass here either.
1
This article clearly — and painfully —avoids the elephant in the room. To say that there are no clues to uncovering potential terrorists is completely disingenuous. We know who *not* to be worried about.
Should we be worried the Amish? Jains? 5-year-old Icelandic girls? No, no, and no.
Most terrorists today are jihadists. 100% of jihadists are Muslims who really believe in doctrines such as martyrdom and Paradise. Beliefs are what matter. Not education, wealth, nationality or skin color. Beliefs.
Is it really so difficult to be this intellectually honest?
Should we be worried the Amish? Jains? 5-year-old Icelandic girls? No, no, and no.
Most terrorists today are jihadists. 100% of jihadists are Muslims who really believe in doctrines such as martyrdom and Paradise. Beliefs are what matter. Not education, wealth, nationality or skin color. Beliefs.
Is it really so difficult to be this intellectually honest?
178
The elephant (terrorists) in the room is real... the question never discussed is who put and allow the elephant in the room? We are bringing thousands of possible elephants from the middle east and that is what needs addressed. We, America's government created the Syrian crisis by bring in Terrorists from around the world to overthrow Assads's government.
Compared to our so-called ally Saudi Arabia, Syria was moderate. Our coalition wanted to pipe gas eventually going through Syria and Turkey from Qatar to the the EU. Assad wanted the gas to come from Iran.
Obama shipped arms from Libya ending up in the hands of our mercenary terrorists, which Hillary helped cover up, because it was a direct violation to international law.
People who are similar in beliefs and culture stick together, so those of the Islamic faith rarely try to prevent those of the Islamic faith from being terrorists. Until the Islamic community denounces and exposes terrorists in their ranks, we neet to throw them out, throw them all out.
Compared to our so-called ally Saudi Arabia, Syria was moderate. Our coalition wanted to pipe gas eventually going through Syria and Turkey from Qatar to the the EU. Assad wanted the gas to come from Iran.
Obama shipped arms from Libya ending up in the hands of our mercenary terrorists, which Hillary helped cover up, because it was a direct violation to international law.
People who are similar in beliefs and culture stick together, so those of the Islamic faith rarely try to prevent those of the Islamic faith from being terrorists. Until the Islamic community denounces and exposes terrorists in their ranks, we neet to throw them out, throw them all out.
3
Should we worry about the Jewish settlers who are killing and displacing Palestinians on the West Bank, in violation of international law?
We're not ignoring the elephant in the room. We're taking off the blinders which lead you to see only those you disagree with as terrorists.
We're not ignoring the elephant in the room. We're taking off the blinders which lead you to see only those you disagree with as terrorists.
As I replied in another post, your "insight" is laughable for anyone trying to understand or predict terrorist activity.
Even if the government checklist for potential terrorists did include a single item -- "Are they Muslim?" -- as you seem to suggest, that would be a terrible test. It would produce an extraordinary number of false positives (only a tiny portion of the world's 1.6 billion have carried out terrorist attacks), and a large number of false negatives (not all terrorist attacks are carried out by Muslims).
Then again, shouting "political correctness!" and "Muslims!" is so much easier than actually trying to understand radicalization.
Finally, I can't help but ask, how many 5-year-olds, Icelandic or otherwise, are terrorists?
Even if the government checklist for potential terrorists did include a single item -- "Are they Muslim?" -- as you seem to suggest, that would be a terrible test. It would produce an extraordinary number of false positives (only a tiny portion of the world's 1.6 billion have carried out terrorist attacks), and a large number of false negatives (not all terrorist attacks are carried out by Muslims).
Then again, shouting "political correctness!" and "Muslims!" is so much easier than actually trying to understand radicalization.
Finally, I can't help but ask, how many 5-year-olds, Icelandic or otherwise, are terrorists?
The problem is that we know the effects of terrorism, but rarely are we told anything about the cause. The real terrorists are the Taliban and ISIS who became what they are because they were trained by US Government Agencies on terrorists tactics.
The Taliban were trained and educated in Afganistan and Pakistan with the support of the Saudis and US government to commit acts of terrorism in Russia. Some `100,000+ have been trained.
The revolution nor ISIS had nothing to do with Arab Spring and was not a threat, until the Obama and his ME allies decided to US train and arm so-called insurgents, who were actually mercenary terrorists hired to invade and overthrow Assad's government for a gas pipeline to EU. The CIA and special opts illegially supplied Arms from Libya for these terrorists and trained them even here on US soil. This was in direct violation of a UN law signed by Obama that arms were not to go in or out of Libya and even having knowledge of it happening was in violation of international law. The US presidents are the cause of terrorism.
The Taliban were trained and educated in Afganistan and Pakistan with the support of the Saudis and US government to commit acts of terrorism in Russia. Some `100,000+ have been trained.
The revolution nor ISIS had nothing to do with Arab Spring and was not a threat, until the Obama and his ME allies decided to US train and arm so-called insurgents, who were actually mercenary terrorists hired to invade and overthrow Assad's government for a gas pipeline to EU. The CIA and special opts illegially supplied Arms from Libya for these terrorists and trained them even here on US soil. This was in direct violation of a UN law signed by Obama that arms were not to go in or out of Libya and even having knowledge of it happening was in violation of international law. The US presidents are the cause of terrorism.
5
Certainly, there are multiple factors that prompt one to turn to violence and extremism. How and where a person was raised are strong influences. But there is a common denominator that nobody seems to recognize - paranoia. We were all born with fear in our DNA from evolution. And it is on a continuum, the more you have, the further right on the political spectrum until you reach a point where healthy fear begins to resemble symptoms of paranoia. The #1 symptom is the false sense that everyone is out to get you and it is sub-conscious. I posit that paranoia is the common denominator in all extremists. The downside is there may nothing that can be done about it even if we could identify it is someones DNA or Genome. Then what? Gene editing? Tough nut to crack.
3
So it's the Republicans fault?
5
No, OldEngineer, democrats'. They are setting the groundwork for a "War on Muslims" and a "War on Hispanics" in this upcoming election.
They already have Hispanic students shaking at the sight of the words, "Trump 2016", chalked on campus. Hillary is meeting with Muslims making sure they understand how Islamaphobic Trump is.
Democrats have a vested interest in Muslims' sense of victimization.
They already have Hispanic students shaking at the sight of the words, "Trump 2016", chalked on campus. Hillary is meeting with Muslims making sure they understand how Islamaphobic Trump is.
Democrats have a vested interest in Muslims' sense of victimization.
3
This sounds very much like the fretting of monarchists about the rise of democracy around the time of the American and French revolutions. If a better political idea comes along - better in that it convinces people - shouldn't we welcome it? Free spoeech and open argument is the way we improve as a society, eplet the most convincing ideas win
2
So the gist of this article is that we can't prevent terrorism by trying to predict who will become a terrorist. Big surprise! Have we ever prevented serial killings by predicting who will become a serial killer? Have we ever prevented murder by predicting who will become a murderer? Someone has been watching too many re-runs of "Minority Report."
27
"Nearly anyone is a potential terrorist" ? Wow what an unbelievably pc article.
Despite its length the article hardly mentions Islam or Muslims. The answer to the article's headline is: most likely young Muslims, preponderately male, are most disposed to become terrorists. Maybe we should start from that premise.
Despite its length the article hardly mentions Islam or Muslims. The answer to the article's headline is: most likely young Muslims, preponderately male, are most disposed to become terrorists. Maybe we should start from that premise.
143
Indeed, but I wouldn't just lay it on Islam. That is the most prevalent right now, but religious extremism in any form is a catalyst. For example, Christian extremists in this country have done as much if not more damage than Islamic extremists. Identifiable hatred of an extreme nature would be a good umbrella.
Good thing we've never seen acts of terror and violence perpetuated in the name of Christ.
1
Except when they are white American right-wing militia types, ethnic/political separatists (e.g. Basque, Corsican), left-wing militants in Greece, extremist Buddhists (seriously) murdering Muslims in Burma and Sri Lanka. In Europe, less than two percent of terrorist attacks are committed by Muslims. In the U.S., it is six percent (this is according to the FBI). So focusing in on Islam as the cause of terrorist attacks starts to sound, well, kinda ignorant and racist.
1
How is it a "tough question" whether Palestinian suicide bombers are terrorists?
83
Well, if the Israeli "Defense" forces killed your fiance, your brother, and your cousin, and you decided to fight back, are you a terrorist, or are you just acting in the same way Europeans and Israelis have acted?
Seriously?
It's not. The tough question is to identify them before they become suicide bombers.
It's not. The tough question is to identify them before they become suicide bombers.
1
Paradoxically, it is the post-Ottoman Western imperial fragmentation of the Islamic world and repeated invasions which threatens the West and not its strength. China and India emerged from Western imperialism with intact hegemonic state and market institutions. The West would never dare to militarily threaten them and instead is reconciled to trade and peaceful diplomacy. If Western armies had devastated and occupied Mumbai, Shanghai, Bangalore, or Harbin they would face similar retaliation from young radicalized Indians and Chinese.