Sunday, July 17, 2016
Why is it that only a tiny minority of Muslims in the Western world take up terrorism?
I wrote a post on the topic above recently. In reply, a fellow psychologist has also addressed his mind to the question. See below:
I think many more Muslims are involved in Jihad than is visible. All things are part of spectrums between extremes, and aggression and Jihad are too. The bulk of Muslims support the few active Jihadis in ways ranging from conscious active support through passive support to the most unconscious subtle encouragement of it.
I think Islam is to Jihad what HIV is to AIDS. One arises from the other, inevitably and automatically, as the fulfilment of its nature. Beliefs are the drivers of individuals and nations. Islam is driven by its beliefs in its scriptures.
Depending on the individual and their place in the collective, the attitudes, thoughts and behaviour resultant from those beliefs may be active or passive, conscious or barely conscious, but is still of the same beliefs, and is made active and conscious in its circumstances, order, or in its turn.
Not every HIV virus is involved in actively destroying the infected body as AIDS, but they are all at least passively involved. I don’t think Islam is a cancer in the body of the west, it is more like a virus, although it eventually makes Islamic no-go zones that are like tumours, its main behaviour is more as a virus waging its war on the body of the West rather than as a cancer as some say Islam is.
Every individual virus by its existence in the infected body is supporting those viruses that are actively attacking the body, because each unit of the virus in its own way is part of the spectrum of activity from most unconscious/subtle activity to most conscious/active. Naturally those virus units most active are the least numerous, but they are being produced and replaced by the lesser active reservoir of viruses from which they come, and which must have greater number.
I think the only solution is to cause Islam to turn against itself. Its leaders must reform it, must make Jihad an individual effort against oneself, against one’s own bad habits and lesser aspects, or against one’s own internal infidels, rather than a group effort against us external infidels. That is the only change that will keep roughly in keeping with the Koran, for that book is always going to drive them.
So far no Islamic leaders are voluntarily stepping up to the plate to do that job, though some like Ayaan Hirsi Ali seem to be preparing the ground. What happens in individuals is reflected in the collective, so, such a movement of individual internal jihad within islam will reflect itself in a division across collective Islam, possibly a greater intra islamic divide or a war which may or may not be fully external/hot.
Their leaders may need severe prompting to do this, and so applying extreme external pressure, even to threaten their survival, may be required. So I agree nuclear bombs may have to be part of the solution as destroying one city after another may indeed be the motivation necessary to turn Islam against itself and bring forward the Islamic leaders it needs to lead it in a reforming direction.
Other pressures may be needed too, or better suited – containment, famine, starvation, disease? But something powerful and clearly death dealing will probably have to be used to motivate them.
They are not smart like the Japanese. Generally, the Japanese's intelligence is stronger than his emotions, his ability to restrain himself is at least as strong as his ability to let loose. The average Japanese can reason, can foresee, and has an internal locus of control.
Muslims/Arabs lack these qualities and abilities. They are generally of low intelligence, their emotions and impulses are stronger than their intelligence and ability to restrain and redirect themselves. Their locus of control is not within their own faculty of conscious choice, of which they are unaware, but is outside of themselves, and they actually believe it is and cannot see it any other way, which is why the males believe their sexual control depends on how females dress, and why they blame others for everything they feel and do.
Whereas the Japanese substantially changed within one generation’s lifespan, I think the Muslims/Arabs are unlikely to do that. The Japanedse were concentrated in their islands and that made change easier.
Muslims are dispersed around the world and millions are across Europe. That could make changing their attitude more difficult and take long time. Civil strife, even civil wars, in western countries between Muslim and non-Muslims could be part of the picture.
Also, and significantly, Leftists of influence in the media, politics, academia, in community work fields,... are currently using Muslims as pawns, as foot soldiers to do their dirty work by proxy, subtly and cunningly encouraging and manipulating Muslims towards their worst, bring out in them their propensity towards resentment and envy, and subsequent hostility towards the West, which extreme leftists want to see fall.
The Japanese didn’t have Leftists smarter than themselves manipulating them and trying to undermine their change for the better. Any persuading force applied by the West upon Islam to prompt its change is going to have to come from a West that has largely silenced its Left or is unaffected by its Left – perhaps a temporary excursion to the Right, even by the Left, which the Left could easily do. Of course all this is surmising. Something different altogether might occur.
Nice attack was due to ‘decades of multiculturalism and political correctness’ says Polish Interior Minister
Good that there's SOMEONE with a brain in national politics
Poland's right wing interior minister Mariusz Blaszczak has blamed last night's terror attack in Nice on 'multiculturalism' after it emerged the killer was a French Tunisian living in the city.
Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel, 31, killed 84 people as he drove his large lorry along the main promenade in Nice indiscriminately knocking down pedestrians who had just finished watching the city's Bastille Day fireworks.
Unlike other international politicians, Blaszczak blamed France and the European Union's Foreign affairs commissioner Federica Mogherini for last night's deadly attack.
He said: 'We must reject political correctness and call things by their true names. Rather than shedding tears like Mogherini and ... organising marches that solve nothing, authorities should ensure the safety of citizens.'
In an interview on Polsat News, he said the attack in Nice is the consequence of many years of 'multi-cultural policies and political correctness. This is how it ends.'
He added: 'We don't have such problems. We don't have districts where law other than Polish law reigns. We don't have no-go zones for police.'
He also praised his party, Law and Justice, for standing firm against accepting migrants.
Blaszczak is seeking to introduce tough new surveillance laws to deal with terrorism. Warsaw wants the ability to keep those suspected of terrorism links under close surveillance.
The law also allows for monitoring of suspects' phone calls, mail and internet activity, especially in the case of foreigners.
It allows authorities to remove suspicious content from the internet, ban public gatherings and use sharpshooters in emergencies.
It also coordinates the task of various intelligence and security forces.
Do you think ISIS gives two pins for your pathetic hashtags, prayers and candles? Stop waiting to be slaughtered and demand our leaders DO something!
Mohamed took a truck and drove it into men, women and children celebrating Bastille day in Nice. He killed 84.
And who yet knows of the horrors still to spew from hospital wards - lives fractured, crumpled, crushed.
One minute they were jubilant, locals and tourists alike celebrating Bastille day together. The next, lying splintered on the floor.
And the most sickening thing of all - worse than spilt blood, fractured bodies, children with legs contorted out of human control, the reek of death, is our horribly sanitised response to it all.
Evil mowed us down in a monster truck. And we tweeted like lethargic birds between Egyptian cotton sheets.
Celebrities rushed to social media with their message 'not again', designers comforted with a patriotic graphic, tea candles were lit and instagrammed. There will be a vigil in a public square. Again.
A hashtag is born #PrayForNice, exploding into a thousand others as people want to #PrayFor France or #PrayForHumanity, failing to acknowledge the horrible truth that this attack was done in some spurious god's name. You want to pray for Nice? You think religion will help solve this?
Religion and its bonkers side-shoots are the problem.
Politicians tell us to stand united. The Prime Minister of France has said he will not allow the country to be destabilised.
Well big news: France IS destabilised - in a perpetual state of Emergency. We do not stand united. We are divided, we are ripped apart. And yet we tolerate it every time.
We do not stand strong. We sit like ducks. Waiting to be shot. Helpless, pathetic, slow.
We are reminded to be more tolerant. Liberal lefties takes to the airways lecturing at us, not to react. To remind us of the good and humanity in most people.
Muslim mayors stand and tell us we will be there, shoulder-to-shoulder with France, reminding us Mohamed has nothing to do with ordinary Muslims or Islam.
As with every other time, someone from the BBC informs us many of the victims will have been Muslim, as if that helps.
Trying to give credence to the notion Islam can't be blamed because Muslims died too. And again, we hear a familiar refrain.
The suspect was known to the police - he had a 'fiche S' on his file marking his links to terror and ISIS.
He was a French national from Tunisia. (Why are they always French-Tunisians, never Tunisian/French? What do you think he called himself?)
He was known to the police, but he was still able to get a truck and plough people down, laughing as he drove. Oblivious to (or enjoying?) the crunch of children, mums, dads, under his tyres, in his god's name.
He was a French National because France - like Britain - is an extraordinarily tolerant nation; accepting of new, integrating migrants, opening its arms to welcome those from elsewhere.
Too tolerant. And that needs to stop.
Don't spend three days in National mourning. Spend three days hunting down all those with 'fiche S' on their file and work out whether they really deserve a place in France.
Are they an asset or a liability? Are they part of a solution or the problem?
And if they are part of the problem get rid. Or at least get put under lock and key.
We voted to leave the EU and thank god we did. Free movement of people is also free movement of those will a file marked fiche S. Free movement of a suicide bomber. Or of a man who can laugh as he drives over children and destroys lives.
I am shouting for positive action. For something to be done. For countries to act against terror. Not sit and react amongst the carnage.
Predictably I am called Islamophobic. A phobia is an irrational fear of something. Like spiders. Or men in speedos.
I am not Islamophobic. I have an entirely RATIONAL fear based on the fact these horrors find home in some form of that religion. I have no hate. Only a powerful intolerance of those who murder.
And I look to the people of France and tell them. Do not light a candle, hold a vigil in a public square or share a hashtag. Do not stand united against terror or spend three days mourning.
Take all this emotion and bundle it into energy for action, for change.
This is not sustainable. We are not bowling pins. Ready to be knocked down and replaced by the the naive, the believers in multiculturalism. Imagining there is tolerance.
Your hashtags and pretty pictures might make you feel better. But they solve nothing. You are self-medicating on nonsense.
We need action. We need all those 'known' to the police with a fiche S - links to terror and ISIS rounded up. Secured. Locked down. We need to deport those we can't control, control those we can't deport.
France needs to change tack. The enemy knows you talk about unity while holding a tea candle. They laugh at you as they run you over in a truck or open fire in your restaurants or clubs.
You cannot continue to be tolerant. You, the French, are broken. We are broken. And until we acknowledge that we will not get well.
We need action. Not reaction. We don't need liberals preaching tolerance.
We don't need another hashtag. Don't #PrayForNice like sheep waiting to be slaughtered. Do something.
Australian Left’s stance on Hanson is hypocritical
Jennifer Oriel points out that it is the Left which is discriminatory. She is initially talking about a prominent anti-immigration politician, who has just got a seat in the Senate, after a long period of absence from elective office
The rebirth of Pauline Hanson has sent left-wing men into a state of mass hysteria. Greens leader Richard Di Natale denounced her as divisive. NSW Labor MP Ron Hoenig taxed logic by correlating Hanson with the Holocaust.
The Lebanese Muslim Association called her a hate preacher. Race Discrimination Commissioner Tim Soutphommasane compared her with Brexit and Donald Trump — all proof of xenophobia and racism.
The leftist party line is settled; Hanson is racist and divisive. Three words come to mind. Pot. Kettle. Black.
Western civilisation has been transformed from the love child of Christianity and the Enlightenment into a malformed neo-Marxist culture where minority groups manufactured for political purposes are bestowed with special privileges by the state.
As I have written in these pages, most citizens designated minority status under Australian law are not political minorities. They are numerical minorities who have equal and often superior rights to their fellow citizens under discrimination and affirmative action measures.
To justify the special privileges regime, activist organisations such as the Australian Human Rights Commission change the meaning of inequality to “historical disadvantage”. In the absence of substantial evidence to demonstrate existing disadvantage, the Left creates imaginary friends like unconscious bias to replace objective fact with subjective feelings as the evidentiary standard of Western law and public reason.
We have arrived at a point in Western history where thought crimes justify a regime of codified prejudice that privileges manufactured minorities while censoring dissenters who dare cry the emperor has no clothes.
Well, the emperor is butt naked and minority fundamentalists know it. In Queensland, 9 per cent voted for Hanson’s One Nation.
The same state has played host to a case exemplifying the absurdity of minority politics. In the race case before the Federal Circuit Court, students were barred from a computer lab at the Queensland University of Technology because of their race. One would presume the prima facie case of race discrimination would be against the person who barred their access. But the staff member who turned the students away, indigenous woman Cindy Prior, filed a complaint against them under the Racial Discrimination Act.
Prior claimed that the computer lab in the Oodgeroo Unit was reserved for “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students only” and described the unit as “culturally safe space”.
The arguably racist presumption that people who are not indigenous make a space culturally unsafe has gone unchallenged by the activist Left. In a recent submission to the court, barrister Anthony Morris QC, acting on behalf of the students, lampooned the absurdity of the premises of the case and criticised the AHRC’s handling of it. He asserts that the commission has not upheld the students’ right to be equal before the law.
The case exposes the meaning of equality in Australia and, I would argue, its perversion by minority activism. The requirement to treat all parties to a complaint equally and impartially means treating the complainant in a discrimination case — typically a member of a state minority group — equally to respondent/s.
But the modern human rights movement has substituted universal human rights with minority rights. The result is a system of codified privilege for manufactured minorities and codified prejudice against citizens excluded from minority groups.
The AHRC is well known for its political activism and prosecution of the minority rights agenda.
Its commissioners commonly advocate positions aligned with Greens and Labor Left policies. In the wake of the federal election, Soutphommasane made the sweeping generalisation that Brexit, Donald Trump and Pauline Hanson all are manifestations of racism or xenophobia.
He has criticised nationalist groups allegedly for promoting violence at rallies, but appears less inclined to identify the ideological origins of the militant Left. In a recent tweet, he made the categorical error of classifying left-wing violence as a right-wing phenomenon: “People can repudiate far-right extremism without adopting the far-right’s violence.” That communist regimes murdered millions of their own citizens because they dissented from the Left party line appears to have eluded him.
Soutphommasane declined to comment on the QUT case as it is before the court, but cited “special measures” in a brief statement.
The commission promotes special measures as “positive actions” that “protect disadvantaged racial groups”. It justifies the measures “as an exception to the general rule that all racial groups must be treated the same”.
It is evident that affirmative action is not an exception to the general rule of racial equality in Australia, however. The general rule of race politics in Australia is the codification of racial inequality in discrimination law and affirmative action.
The codified bigotry of the Racial Discrimination Act and censorship of dissent under s18C offends the principles of equality and fairness that made the modern West. The cultural Left has repudiated the Enlightenment by substituting minority rights for universal human rights, subjectivity for objectivity, and politically correct speech for free speech. It has failed to protect the legacy of the Enlightenment and instead introduced a new tribalism under manufactured minority politics that embeds a combustible combination of privilege and prejudice in the heart of the state.
Hanson represents a form of prejudice no more extreme than that defended by the minority Left. She advocates fewer rights for minority groups while the Left prosecutes superior rights for them. Hanson and the minority Left represent the polar opposites of a corrosive politics whose resolution lies in the full restoration of equality under law.
Formal equality should replace discrimination legislation. The list of protected attributes should be reduced to two: people with disabilities and primary carers for the disabled, the young and the elderly. The welfare net should be generous enough to prepare people mired in poverty for gainful employment.
State-made minorities, women included, need to become mature members of liberal democracy by cultivating independence from the state and genuine equality with fellow citizens. The Trumps and Hansons will set forth and multiply as long as minority groups demand special rights and superior privileges under Western law. Equality or backlash. It’s our choice.
Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.
American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of other countries. The only real difference, however, is how much power they have. In America, their power is limited by democracy. To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges. They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did: None. So look to the colleges to see what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way. It would be a dictatorship.
For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and DISSECTING LEFTISM. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here.