Severly hacked condensation of ns post.

Everything you have said, ns, makes perfect sense, as always. The following passages are those particular comments from your last post that I believe most directly bear upon the question that I pose at the end of your abbreviated post.



First, some premises. There is in all cultures the natural drive for the ability to live a free, healthy and proserous life for oneself and one's loved ones - particularly one's children. The average Muslim must see the comforts of life available in the West. While their access is more restricted, they can read the same books, and surf the same internet. As a result, they can not be completely blind to the fact that their belief in the whole "superiority through their noble suffering and higher moral/religious road" rationalization doesn't help them one whit to change their lives for the better. (The sharper ones must realize that, in fact, this is exactly the chain that binds).

My question, ns, is: What accounts for the continued almost absolute success of Islam in convincing the populace that it is better to endlessly suffer and struggle, with no other hope than suffering, than it is to be free with the opportunity to prosper and be happy that freedom bestows? Something is terribly, terribly wrong here. How can any system of beliefs enslave and impoverish millions of people; some of whom actually live and prosper in the modern world. Don't these ex-patriots, at least, see the tragedy and try to "send an urgent telegram back to what used to be home?"

Frankly, this whole Islamic culture seems to be it's own kind of self-created, self-sustaining and self-destructive" crime against humanity.

The following are extracted from the supporting URL sources listed at the end of each section. They provide a brief overview of the history of suicide/homicide terrorism that was discussed in an earlier post by ns.

The original “Assassins” were a quasi-religious sect of murderous “defenders of Islam” formed in 1090 by “al-Hasan ibn-al-Sabbah” -– the same period that the Templars and the Catholic Church began their ill-fated attempt to “retake” the Holy Land in the Crusades. According to Islamic scholar Edward Burman, author of The Assassins - Holy Killers of Islam, though founded in Egypt, the Order soon moved to a mountainous region of Persia (modern-day Iran), organizing their campaigns against the invading knights from a well defended castle called “Alamut.” According to Berman, the cult was a ruthless, closed, secretive –- even occult –- society, one that used murder, guerrilla warfare, and (at times) overt military conquest to achieve its aims. The Assassins were much feared (and, paradoxically, simultaneously admired) by the Templars during the Crusades, for their almost mystical ability to strike at any time and without warning -- and against any target. Their almost inhuman willingness to sacrifice their own lives for the cause they were fighting (sound familiar ..?) made them a fearsome enemy.

According to the famed explorer, Marco Polo, who visited Alamut in 1273, the Assassins used a variety of techniques that we today would call “mind-control” to obtain and indoctrinate new members. These reportedly involved the use of drugs like hashish, and the transfer of the recruit to “a sumptuous garden filled with beauty, feasts and women.” In this drug-induced state, the recruit on waking was convinced that he had literally gone to Paradise. Upon his return to the "real" world, over time and at the hands of artful teachers, the recruit’s original beliefs in Islam were replaced with a perverted version called the “Nizari Ismailis” -- which ultimately convinced him he could return to this Paradise by means of sacrificing himself for the Cause and its leaders. Internally, the leaders of this sect referred to it as the ‘New Propaganda.”

Eventually, the Assassins were driven out of the Holy land, only to retreat to Afghanistan and Pakistan –- precisely where bin Laden now has his base (in fact, perhaps subtly referring to this ancient heritage, bin Laden calls his current world-wide assassination network “Al Qaeda” -– “the Base”).

http://www.ragistan.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cg...amp;t=001713&go=older

The first appearance of a wide-scale use of suicide bombing in modern times was by the Vietcong in the 1960’s as a tactic used against US forces.

In the ME, suicide attacks began in Lebanon in 1983 (some say 1981, when a sole suicide attack hit the Iraqi embassy in Beirut), at the instigation of Hezbollah, a Lebanese Shiite terror organization. Six months after an attack on the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, simultaneous truck bombings killed 241 U.S. Marines and 58 French paratroopers; just four months later, U.S. troops left Lebanon. Five other organizations (most of them not religious) in Lebanon carried out about 50 suicide attacks before this modus operandi was exported to other areas of the world. The use of suicide attacks garnered considerable prestige for the perpetrators and their organizations -- particularly in light of the withdrawal of foreign troops from Lebanon, which many attributed to the bombings -- and turned the act into a symbol of martyrdom and a source of inspiration for other terror organizations worldwide.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/wideangle/shows/suicide/

A review of a database of every suicide bombing and attack around the globe from 1980 through 2003 - 315 in all ... The data show that there is far less of a connection between suicide terrorism and religious fundamentalism than most people think.

The leading instigator of suicide attacks is the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, a Marxist-Leninist group whose members are from Hindu families but who are adamantly opposed to religion. This group committed 76 of the 315 incidents, more than Hamas (54) or Islamic Jihad (27). Even among Muslims, secular groups like the Kurdistan Workers' Party, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Al Aksa Martyr Brigades account for more than a third of suicide attacks.

What nearly all suicide terrorist attacks actually have in common is a specific secular and strategic goal: to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from territory that the terrorists consider to be their homeland. Religion is often used as a tool by terrorist organizations in recruiting and in seeking aid from abroad, but is rarely the root cause.

Three general patterns in the data support these conclusions. First, nearly all suicide terrorist attacks - 301 of the 315 in the period I studied - took place as part of organized political or military campaigns. Suicide bombings are thus primarily a military tactic of a desperate nationalist liberation movement.

Second, democracies are uniquely vulnerable to suicide terrorists; America, France, India, Israel, Russia, Sri Lanka and Turkey have been the targets of almost every suicide attack of the past two decades. It is interesting that "Democracies" seem to be the favored targets for suicide attacks. This may be due to the antiquated perception that citizens in a democracy can affect the war plans of their rulers.

Third, suicide terrorist campaigns are directed toward a strategic objective: from Lebanon to Israel to Sri Lanka to Kashmir to Chechnya, the sponsors of every campaign - 18 organizations in all - are seeking to establish or maintain political self-determination.

At the moment, our best information indicates that the attackers in Iraq are Sunni Iraqis and foreign fighters, principally from Saudi Arabia. If so, this would mean that the two main sources of suicide terrorists in Iraq are from the Arab countries deemed most vulnerable to transformation by the presence of American combat troops. This is fully consistent with what we now know about the strategic logic of suicide terrorism.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/5/18/31050/4765

jd, as an American do find this information new or surprising?

As a Brit I find it neither.

One of the long running issues here has been the definition of the correct terminology for the terrorists associated with Al Qaeda, they are variously called Muslim Terrorists, Muslim Fundementlists, Muslim Fanatics, Muslim Extremists, always with the 'Muslim' tag. But as is rightly pointed out their actions have nothing to do with Islam, Islam is simply used as a guise. Out of correctness, rather than political correctness we are starting to see the 'Muslim' and 'Islamic' tags dropped, and terms like 'ME' and 'Al Qaeda' used instead.

For today's tidbit, whilst we as still dealing with history and the Knights Templar, my current home town Baldock was reputedly named by the KT after Baghdad. Baldock being a corruption of the French 'Baldak'. I much prefer this derivation to the more credible 'Bald (Dead) Oak' one .

Hmmm, the photographs on the 'External links:Information about the town' webpage look mightily familiar (he didn't even bother to change the image filenames from when they were originaly published on my now defunct website ), as is the text familiar. Me thinks I will have to broach the issue of copyright with Mr John Baldock. The photographs from top to bottom are St. Mary's Church with its classic Hertfordshire Spike spire, the High Street looking North and the Art Deco frontage of the Tesco Supermarket, which was formerly the Keyser Bonder factory and before that a film studio. Purely for information purposes, my archive codes for the negatives are 00122GB, 00122GD, 00122FA respectively and the pictures were taken almost 10 years ago to the day using an Olympus XA with Agfa ISO 200 film stock, processing by Truprint

For what we get upto in Baldock each May look here .

[to LH]In light of this information it appears that I have more studying to do, Lawrence. This sounds like a very useful function, indeed. Perhaps bb can explain (or provide a link to) how this process actually works. From what I had read, it appeared to me that the House of Lords could hold up (suspension) a bill from the House of Commons for a maximum of one year. It was never clear why, and to what purpose this power was exercised as I was under the impression that they HL could not veto a bill approved by the HC. Certainly, any revised changes must be sent back to the HC for final approval?

[to bb]While I had read about the 1999 Reform Act eliminating all but 92 hereditary peers (temporarily soon to be permanent?), the odd election process in the HL (House of Lords) made it unclear exactly what impact these changes would mean. Additionally, I had thought that there were only 185 cross-benchers out of (I believe) some 732 members. This does not sound like even a substantial impartial minority as, from what I can tell, the majority of the HL members are Conservatives or Tories.

Any yes, my friend, while my graduate level education included numerous history courses, my cirriculum revolved almost exclusively around the history of Western Civilization. Studying the history of the ME, of late, has been quite taxing. This is a rather volatile history in which racial, geographic and religious divisions appear to get dealt and then reshuffled again after only one or two hands have been played. Still, it is easy to start from Mesopotamia vs. Persia & factor in Arab. However, when I then attempt to separate the meaning and significance of Islamic texts such as Haddith and Sunnah (depending upon, of course, whether it is Sunni or Shiia) half the time I am not sure which one is supposed to be alluding to the other, or visa versa.

I really don't think that the European community realizes that most of us Yanks are far more fundamentally knowledgeable about quantum mechanics and particle physics than we are about ME history. If only it could have stayed that way.

Excuse me, if you will. My studies have left me feeling "a little green," as usual. It is time for a mug of hot green tea accompanied by one of my favorite Zen texts and a good dose of precious silence.

Hacked another bb post again. Sorry, mate.

[to bb]You may notice that I am slower to respond to your tidbits. There is actually a very good reason for this. I have what my wife considers to be a very odd habit. The more that I enjoy a particular food or beverage, the more likely I am NOT to consume it immediately, or in its entirety. Instead, I will stash some or all of it away and simply wait for that "most appropriate moment" to enjoy it. I use your tidbits in much the same manner. During the day I will get to a point where all the information either overwhelms, discourages or depresses me a bit. One of my favorite ways (like walking my dogs) to "plug back in to the truly important things" is to use your tidbits as a "vacation excursion in absentum," if you will. It is quite effective, my friend, and I do appreciate them.


If you have a reference to the "botched New Labour reform efforts," I would be grateful (as I am for all of your previous references).

Your fundamental position re: HL appointment I believe can be correctly paraphrased as: "We need policymakers who are politically independent as a means of obtaining the accurate/impartial information; thorough/objective analysis; and impartial/appropriate decision making necessary to effectively govern/guide through clear/effective policy implementation."

Unfortunately, while Britain can perhaps "de-partyize" the HL, it really can not "de-politicize" the process as politics is simply everyday human interactions focused around the theme of governance. While I agree whole-heartedly with your fundamental position, I am concerned that the problem with lifetime appointments is that there is too little incentive to change or compromise for all the right reasons. This fosters a more idiopathic, isolationist and provincial disconnect (which could be even more dysfunctional) than are the distortions introduced by the "party system." As you mentioned in other posts, bb, "it comes down to trust in the integrity of our elected representatives."

While I have never put much tought into the "finer practical points," the political process would most benefit from the inclusion of voting governing members drawn from the most prestigious scientific/academic institutions in the country. While the institutions would be selected based upon a rational merit system, the representatives themselves would be elected/appointed by the institutions themselves. By disconnecting a portion of the body politic from its current inevitable ties to the corporate/industrial complex, not only do we reduce the influence of graft and secularism; but through including scientific objectivism we benefit from having the discussion of real facts and real consequences (and less political rhetoric/rationalization) as an integral part of the decision-making process. If you let your thinking go down this road for a bit, all of the obvious benefits and inevitable healthy reforms start jumping out at you.



The Lords Spiritual should be dumped immediately. Politics and religion do not, and should never, be mixed. This is not a position, it is common sense based upon the overwhelming proof of both historical precedent and objective scientific reasoning.


Thank you, bb. They sound perfect. Before I look into them, I wonder: What is their inherent bias; conservative, liberal, traditionalist, reformist, etc. Are they fairly comprehensive as well as accurate? Do they need to be accompanied by some other primary source material to ensure accuracy?