Exceptionally attention-seeking urban guerrilla
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fuchs
Did anyone else think "exceptionally attention-seeking urban guerrilla" when he read about the mall attack?
Yes, we invariably forget terrorism is a tactic which is armed propaganda.
I increasingly feel that much of the propaganda is aimed within the group, to maintain itself and to the tiny fraction who might just join them. Plus those who for a variety of reasons, including making a profit, provide support.
What is strange, maybe that is how Kenya works, is how such a symbolic target was ill prepared and the response appears to be so chaotic. It will be interesting to see how many attackers bodies are found and then matched to the video footage. Why? Because identification aside, how many escaped?
Telling the Truth to the Public
In terms of US politicians, the 10 most prominent reasons for not being frank with the public on this issue are:
1. I have to say this (or not say that) to stay in office.
2. I have to say this (or not say that) to stay in office.
3. I have to say this (or not say that) to stay in office.
4. I have to say this (or not say that) to stay in office.
5. I have to say this (or not say that) to stay in office.
6. [Other Reason - Viewer's Option]
7. [Other Reason - Viewer's Option]
8. [Other Reason - Viewer's Option]
9. [Other Reason - Viewer's Option]
10. We have to protect American Muslims
More seriously, American politicians perceive that Americans have a zero risk tolerence for attacks here; Americans do not want to be reminded that there are man-eating human beings roaming this world; and that even minor attacks generate wide-spread panic states in Americans well beyond the actual effect of the attacks. The politicians may be accurate in their perception of the voters who elect and re-elect them.
My views on killing "bad guys" are well-known and set out in this thread, The Rules - Engaging HVTs & OBL, and elsewhere at SWC.
From the OP:
Quote:
Comments on the practical military aspects of all this are welcome. Of course, if you think all of this Laws of War stuff is Bravo Sierra, you're welcome to say that.
The more I think about this event [killing OBL] - and the lesser cases of PIDs entering buildings "somewhere", I think of my dad saying not to send a patrol when you can send some 105s. My question is, if you have positive ID and know you will get the target by some kind of "fire mission", why not just eradicate the target if you want the target dead ?
To me, "bad guys" are still human. The savage traits (laid out in Dawn Perlmutter's Frontpage piece) have been well accepted in some otherwise very human societies of the 20th, 19th, 18th, 17th, 16th, 15th ... centuries. In short, we (human beings) have some very savage traits. They were survival effective (or at least not survival detrimental) in the "modern human" of 10,000 bce, or 250,000 bce, if you want to carry modern HSS that far back. So, it would be surprising if those savage traits did not appear in the 21st century among a "band of brothers" - a closed grouping in terms of ideology, whose most extreme features reinforce themselves into a very "we-they" psychology.
To paraphrase (as to the extreme ends of the "bands of brothers" spectrum): They were the best of men; they were the worst of men.
On to my views on some specific "gems" of mine - buried in much longer pieces - which I still believe.
On Beheadings
Quote:
5-21-2009
Both the beheadings and hostage use (if evidenced - not always that easy) are war crimes. They are also typical of the AQ-Taliban way of war - they have their own LOAC (Law of Armed Conflict). You can verify that via many sources on and off line. For a quick overview, see at SWJ,
The Erosion of Noncombatant Immunity within Al Qaeda [2008].
...
The media and many Americans are simply incapable of seeing AQ-Taliban for what they are - as determined by what they do.
Those folks should assemble a group of beheadings videos - usually done according to the law and process adopted by AQ-Taliban - and watch them while dwelling on what they are watching.
Quote:
10-12-2010
How should one class the beheading videos (having watched a few) in terms of reciprocity and the reasons for them ? I expect that is very much in the eyes of the beholder. In my own eyes, comparing them to what the Gurk did (based on our limited facts) suggests that he was guilty of a breach of etiquette.
and
10-25-2010
First, the facts, as stated from article:
Quote:
His unit had been told that they were seeking a ‘high value target,’ a Taliban commander, and that they must prove they had killed the right man. The Gurkhas had intended to remove the Taliban leader’s body from the battlefield for identification purposes. But they came under heavy fire as their tried to do so. Military sources said that in the heat of battle, the Gurkha took out his curved kukri knife and beheaded the dead insurgent. He is understood to have removed the man’s head from the area, leaving the rest of his body on the battlefield.
Second, looking at these first facts from a Laws of War standpoint, the more appropriate COA (removal of the entire body from the field) was foreclosed by enemy fires.
The Gurk, utilizing judgment in terms of the military necessity to ID the HVT, took an alternative COA to achieve that goal and complete his mission. [JMM !!]
On Not Being Terrorized
Quote:
3-28-2009
Terror is an Effect
Terror, like its cousin Shock & Awe (and other "EBOs"), is subjective, based on the psychological reaction of the targeted population (an effect) to the violent event (the means). As such, it is essentially useless in classifying the means or the actor, either for legal or military purposes. One must concede that consideration of terror is important to the targeted population because, if a substantial segment of that population is terrorized, it will lose its resolve to resist and will be inclined to submit to the will of the attacker. Thus, the best tool to fight "terrorism" (or any other "EBO") is a targeted population that refuses to be terrorized, shocked or awed by the violent means used by the attacker.
Quote:
9-12-2011
As to mindset, a starting point (and the ultimate defense against terrorism as a tactic) would be the civilian population's refusal to be terrorized. Soldiers accept risks in the field; civilians should also accept risks in this kind of conflict (the risks not being anywhere close to existential with respect to the civilian population as a group).
The Sermonette
9-16-2009
Quote:
This is my personal take, which I've had since 9/11.
1. We must expect attempts at violence in the US by AQ, either directly, via supported groups or by persons who are simply thinking in parallel with AQ.
2. So far, the violent incidents have been few (e.g., the DC snipers & the Arkansas shootings by "parallel thinkers"); and a number of plots have been foiled.
3. We cannot expect this successful record to continue without a serious incident happening. It will occur. Homeland security will not be perfect.
4. How people react will depend on the person. If you were terrorized by 9/11, you probably will be terrorized by the event which will surely happen. If you were intensely angered by 9/11 without feeling terrorized, the same emotion will probably flow from that event.
5. I (and every US citizen, for that matter - some will disagree with this), since 9/11, have sent hundreds of thousands of guys and gals into situations where they don't have our at home luxuries and are subject to far greater risks than we have at home. So, it is time for the homeland to grow up about risks of violence.
6. I don't suggest we adopt the mentality of a herd of prey stalked by predators. But, I do suggest that, besides the logical COA to arrest or kill when we can, we realize that AQ (as it presently stands) is not an existential threat to the US. It is simply a threat.
End sermonette.
Regards
Mike
Mutilation @ Westgate? Not in Mumbai!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
commart
I am not an expert, let alone well read on the presence of sadism in Jihadist violence, but this passage simply did not sound truthful:
Quote:
The Westgate Mall massacre is comparable to the mass murder of 166 people by members of the Islamist Jihadist group Lashkar-e-Taiba, in ten coordinated shooting and bombing attacks across Mumbai, India on November 26 -29, 2008. During their siege operation the LeT Jihadists also took the time to sexually humiliate, torture and mutilate some of the victims before shooting them dead.
So I contacted an Indian friend, a Mumbai resident, who officially investigated the attacks and is "in the know". He responded:
Quote:
There was no "ritualistic" killing, no "beheading" and no rape in Mumbai. The gory details carried on this web site did not happen here. They did not carry any knives. They did not even mutilate the Jews in Chabad House". All they did was to open fire indiscriminately on innocent civilians.
Several of the victims in Nairobi were from India or of Indian origin. Had there been any mutilation or slaughter of children, Indian press would have published.
The Indian police charge sheet, which details what property was recovered and no such weapons are shown (I have a copy).
I do not doubt mutilation has happened, for example in London, but the author is wrong about Mumbai and I suspect such violence did not occur in Nairobi.
Who attacked Westgate Mall?
Clint Watts asks 'Was Kenya Westgate Attack More AQAP/AQ Central Than Shabaab?'. Link: http://selectedwisdom.com/?p=1164
From Satanic Symbolic to Islamist Symbolic Killings
Ms Permutter, of Symbol & Ritual Intelligence (apparently its only key figure), formerly "The Institute for the Research of Organized & Ritual Violence", founded in 2001 -
Quote:
Symbol & Ritual Intelligence specializes in the research, analysis and investigation of symbolic and ritual violence. Specific areas of expertise include; unfamiliar cultural traditions, ritual activities, religious terrorism, desecration controversies, ritual murder, and the identification of symbols, artifacts and unusual practices. What distinguishes Symbol & Ritual Intelligence from other institutes is our concentrated study of images and the application of symbolic methodologies for use in law enforcement. We can assist you in identifying emblems, tattoos, colors, graffiti, clothing, ritual objects, etc. of hundreds of gang and terrorist organizations. We produce specialized charts, intelligence reports, and group bulletins from our unique perspective.
branched off from philosophy (in which, she has a PhD) into satanic and occult ritual crimes (big back in the 80s and 90s), and after 9/11 into Islamist ritual crimes.
As to these subjects, she wrote Investigating Religious Terrorism and Ritualistic Crimes (2003):
Quote:
•Presents over 100 illustrations of signs and symbols to look for at crime scenes that indicate ritual practice
•Includes background and investigation techniques for crimes involving religion-based terrorism
•Details domestic and international terrorist religions
•Provides organizational structures of large clans and covens, membership and recruitment policies, and homicide case studies
•Offers intelligence strategies inclusive of indoctrination techniques, negotiation and prosecution strategies, and advantages of understanding religious violence
•Examines types of criminal profiling and provides a crime classification system to distinguish between types of ritual homicide
and True Believers: A Symbolic Anthropological Study of Islamist Culture (tbp 2014):
Quote:
•Includes detailed descriptions of the use and origins of Islamist loaded words, embedded symbols, and collective rituals used in indoctrination and psychological warfare
•Demonstrates how honor and shame is utilized to inculcate children, recruit moderates, train soldiers, and motivate violence
•Includes descriptions of specific rituals and burial rites related to martyrdom operations that can assist in preventing suicide attacks and the investigation of previous attacks
•Explores the use of overt and subliminal messages in Islamist communications, cartoons, advertising, music, and videogames
•Provides a detailed symbolic analysis of honor killing, beheadings, suicide attacks, dismemberment, and other Islamist atrocities.
•Explains the disproportionate violent responses to Quran desecration and how Islamists exploit these and other incidents
•Explores the difference and significance of tribal and rational societies
•Demonstrates the impact of Islamist conspiracy theories for indoctrination, recruitment, and propaganda
•Illustrates the significance of Muslim victimhood for Islamist strategic and psychological operations
•Features full color photos
I haven't read either book; nor do I intend to. I have read her 2006 article, Mujahideen Blood Rituals: The Religious and Forensic Symbolism of Al Qaeda Beheading (obviously the title rings my feeding time bell), which concludes (in snips):
Quote:
It is difficult to remain in denial when there is actual proof of ritual murders and not just remnants of the crime scene. The American public is all too familiar with images of violent murder. What the public cannot accept is the fact that these beheadings are communally sanctioned and religiously justified. These are not violent crimes committed by psychopaths or a form of group hysteria; beheading, suicide bombing, and ritual mutilation are the sacred blood rituals of the Holy warriors of Islam. This is a highly organized community that consistently and proudly professes their ideology, values, and goals and persistently identifies themselves as Mujahideen. They do not hide the fact that they are fighting a holy war and that they have a religious imperative to kill Christians, Jews, and unbelievers. All we have to do is listen to what they are telling us.
...
The media is fond of using the word "desecration," particularly in reference to Islamic beliefs. Desecration is a sacred concept, and although we are supposedly not fighting a holy war, the word "desecration" has made headlines quite frequently; desecration of the Quran, desecration of enemies’ bodies, and desecration of mosques. We are hypersensitive to what Muslims hold sacred even when it jeopardizes our national security and puts soldiers’ lives at risk. We are not going to be defeated by terrorism but we will be defeated by political correctness unless we stop sugarcoating the sacred nature of this war. There are many people who recognize the implications of this religious threat; however, not one politician will acknowledge that we are involved in a holy war. It would be political suicide to announce that this is not a war on terrorism but a war on Islam.
...
True believers are the most dangerous enemies. You may be able to get a soldier to fight and die for his country in battle, but you would be hard pressed to find one willing to strap on C-4 attached to a vest full of nails and ball bearings and commit suicide as a walking claymore mine. Mujahideen are lining up for this duty. These holy warriors are willingly blowing themselves up because they have faith. As a consequence of our Western view of the world and standard behavioral science analysis of crime, we fail to see the nature of these true believers. Al-Qaeda has already won the most important strategic battle; they know their enemy, but we are in denial of their religious imperative to annihilate us. Our worst opponent is not the Mujahideen, it is our refusal to acknowledge that we are fighting soldiers of God in a centuries-old holy war.
Nothing in these snips is that much different from what I've said; but I worry about Ms Perlmutter's facts. That is, is she taking (esp. as in the current Frontpage article) killings by Muslims - not part of a jihadist organization - and using them to amplify the acknowledged killings by jihadist organizations ? And, is she amplifying the Mumbai killings (and perhaps other events she cites) by adding non-facts ?
Personally, if I were to hire someone to advise me on jihadist killings, I'd hire someone like Scott Atran from the Univ. of Michigan (includes his scientific and popular pubs), who's played that game at the major league level, with such as Marc Sageman, etc., Theoretical Frames on Pathways to Violent Radicalization (2009).
Regards
Mike
Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
omarali50
Well, one could say that OEF was misdirected. Still, there has not been another attack, not just because one group of attackers was disrupted and scattered, and because huge investments were made in security, but also because those states capable of hosting and organizing a really serious group of attackers are now scared of the consequences. Deterrence may have been possible at much less cost, but that is a separate issue. Some deterrence was undoubtedly created by that response..and organized groups with serious and capable backers are still (at least somewhat) scared. Otherwise, they would have tried something by now. Or at least, taken very few steps to prevent an operation being carried out by crazier, smaller, less-sane groups.
There were 8 years between the two WTC attacks. In between there were smaller acts outside of CONUS. AQ has been very active around the globe in the past decade, and have successfully diversified the operational entities into multitudes of wholly owned subsidiary actors. As for sponsorship, I'm not sure I understand exactly who is afraid of whom, but I don't see AQ and the related entities suffering for a lack of safe havens. Finally, the investment in security will, as ever, be gotten around soon enough.
We have done a whole lot with force and not really changed or improved the situation - and given the time and financial resources expended, this is troubling. We have done blessed little in other areas comparatively, and we certainly haven't done much to understand why there is such permissive support for the animosity towards the West. And that, my friends, is why we are in no better place than 13 years ago. Shame.
Jill