Studies on radicalization & comments

[davidbfpo]

This is a far better, shorter question for aspiring jihadists, my emphasis:

We have to disassociate from the two words Islamic and State...There is nothing Islamic about these individuals, nor is it a state. My question to these young people [who might be sympathetic to Isis] is simple: who is living closer to the message of the Qur'an? Is it Isis, or is it somebody like Alan Henning?

The speaker is a well known Muslim civic leader from Leicester:http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...lim-community?

[AdamG]

So compared to the glory of combat (shrouded in the tapestry of Jihad) that applies to youts' worldwide, the sense of fulfillment to a higher calling (see also Jihad) and the monthly stipends (thanks to a currently-unnamed Gulf State or two), what exactly is he offering as an alternative?

[davidbfpo]

A short article with links to the areas covered:http://digest.bps.org.uk/2014/10/the...extremism.html

[OldyButGoodie]

Religious Fundamentalism is not explainable. It is a failure of reason. It is also distinct from faith which is a triumph of reason. ISIS cannot be understood or reasoned with. They are not curable. When fundamentalists choose to proselytize they should have full freedom to do so. On the other hand, proselytizing with a gun or very long knife should quickly result in the use of prevailing violence to those so armed.

[TheCurmudgeon]

Religious Fundamentalism is not explainable. It is a failure of reason. It is also distinct from faith which is a triumph of reason. ISIS cannot be understood or reasoned with. They are not curable. When fundamentalists choose to proselytize they should have full freedom to do so. On the other hand, proselytizing with a gun or very long knife should quickly result in the use of prevailing violence to those so armed.

I am curious how you see faith as the "triumph of reason"?

All religions of every religious strip rely on faith, and not reason, to justify their beliefs. Fundamentalist, regardless of religion, take that faith to the level of addiction. It replaces reason in their lives. But it is not the religion that is the problem. It is the deep seeded need. It is a desire for a purpose to life.

So while I agree that you cannot reason with a religious zealot, I do believe that they can come to their senses on their own, once they realize that that level of fundamentalism does not fill the void either, if they ever come to that realization.

[OldyButGoodie]

Curmudgeon. More accurately, faith for me in particular has been a reasoning process. And I have spent enormous effort trying to reach a shared reasoning with the zealots with out much success. Although, to your point, there has been some. They probably claim some success with me as well.

My real point was that the Islamic State has made it undeniable that reason has no interest for them.

[OldyButGoodie]

A short article with links to the areas covered:http://digest.bps.org.uk/2014/10/the...extremism.html

Certainly interesting. As I read history, this process is not limited to a small group of close friends. Whole nations can and have made a "Risky Shift". Germany, Cambodia, Rwanda, and others. At large scales, these shifts look very much like self-determination.

Here's the question: If self determination leads to a nation or people bent on world conquest or tribal slaughter, must that self-determination be respected?

[davidbfpo]

Certainly interesting. As I read history, this process is not limited to a small group of close friends. Whole nations can and have made a "Risky Shift". Germany, Cambodia, Rwanda, and others. At large scales, these shifts look very much like self-determination.

Here's the question: If self determination leads to a nation or people bent on world conquest or tribal slaughter, must that self-determination be respected?

Your question, if worded differently, regularly appears here on SWC. I recall discussions over R2P (Right to Protect) and Mass Atrocities (usually with an African setting). Rwanda crops up too IIRC.

The world remains imperfect, but there is some form of concensus that genocide should be responded to - Darfur comes to mind and the LRA's longterm campaign of murder plus. It is a political decision of course, as non-state responses are rarely, if ever, effective.

Respecting 'self-determination' now that is a question that Bill C. often raises, usually on SWJ, about the American wish to pursue its own values beyond its shores: free trade, markets, democracy etc.

[davidbfpo]

A lengthy article in The Guardian, on the city of Aarhus programme. Citing an academic psychologist

Look: these are young people struggling with pretty much the same issues as any others – getting a grip on their lives, making sense of things, finding a meaningful place in society. We have to say: provided you have done nothing criminal, we will help you to find a way back.

(Citing a local police officer) What’s easyis to pass tough new laws. Harder is to go through a real process with individuals: a panel of experts, counselling, healthcare, assistance getting back into education, with employment, maybe accommodation. With returning to everyday life and society. We don’t do this out of political conviction; we do it because we think it works.

Link:http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...ria?CMP=twt_gu

Added. A short three minute BBC News report:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30045214

[davidbfpo]

A three part, superb Der Spiegel article:http://www.spiegel.de/international/...a-1003468.html

The actual title is: The Jihad Cult: Why Young Germans Are Answering Call to Holy War.

Full of good quotes on how to understand why.

[SWJ Blog]

Prisons and Radicalization

Entry Excerpt:



--------
Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

[davidbfpo]

Parents in The Netherlands worried their boys and girls will join the ranks of ISIS now have a place to call.

Link:http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...es-jihad.html?

A nice, simple step - a hotline for help. Sadly it took till 2015 to arrive.

[davidbfpo]

An Australian academic's contributution, which is entitled as above and sub-titled:

There is no empirical evidence that religion and ideology are primary motivators for violent extremism. Radicalisation is a social issue

Link:http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...-overestimated

It is a very good contribution IMHO.

[davidbfpo]

A useful contribution via WoTR by Lorenzo Vidrino, a European SME, which will be copied to the Paris attacks thread too: 'Wrong assumptions, integration, responsibility and counterterrorism in France':http://warontherocks.com/2015/01/wro.../?singlepage=1

This passage needs some explanation or sources, with my emphasis:

On the other side, the rhetoric (particularly in some quarters of the U.S. debate) about the French suburbs (banlieues) often populated by large minority communities) is largely exaggerated. It is undeniable that areas like Les Minguettes in Venissieux (Lyon) or Clichy sous Bois (outside of Paris) are not exactly St. Tropez or central Paris. But they are not the lawless and squalid “no-go” zones they are often made out to be. In fact, based on crime rates, health care, education, and public transportation, the banlieues are actually significantly better off than neglected cities and communities in the United States.

[davidbfpo]

A short article prepared by Professor Daniel Byman for the CVE conference on February 18th @ The White House. Nicely put:http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...e2b_story.html

One point is about Europe, which ends with:

Europe’s bigger problem is the divide between its Muslim and non-Muslim communities. This is less about counterterrorism and more about the need for better political and economic integration.

This article, with useful diagrams, helps to set the context in the UK:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...he-answer.html

[Bob's World]

David, the type of self determination we are talking about among disaffected European Muslims is not that of a nation of people seeking governance determined by themselves rather than some foreign, and therefore illegitimate, power.

What we are talking about is a vital sub-set of that same principle - one I think of as Empowerment.

For me, this is belief that I and a critical segment of the population that I identify with, have available to us trusted, certain and legal means to participate fairly and adequately in the political process of the place we live. This is heavily colored by cultural expectations and perception.

This is why one cornerstone of the US civil rights reforms of the 1960s was the Voting Rights Acts. That was what we needed in the US at that time to begin creating a sense of empowerment, and why there was such a powerful reaction when President Obama was elected.

[davidbfpo]

David, the type of self determination we are talking about among disaffected European Muslims is not that of a nation of people seeking governance determined by themselves rather than some foreign, and therefore illegitimate, power.

What we are talking about is a vital sub-set of that same principle - one I think of as Empowerment.

For me, this is belief that I and a critical segment of the population that I identify with, have available to us trusted, certain and legal means to participate fairly and adequately in the political process of the place we live. This is heavily colored by cultural expectations and perception.

This is why one cornerstone of the US civil rights reforms of the 1960s was the Voting Rights Acts. That was what we needed in the US at that time to begin creating a sense of empowerment, and why there was such a powerful reaction when President Obama was elected.

Bob,

My remarks only refer to the UK, not Europe.

'Disaffected Muslims' are a very small minority, within whom some have been and are being radicalised to use violence abroad and at home. They already have access to power here, but remain a minority and the majority appear to have rejected their demands. How can these people be empowered further?

One issue is that the 'disaffected Muslims' have failed to mobilise other Muslims. Nor are British Muslims a coherent group, except when practising their faith. There is no single, legimitimate public body to represent them for example. Many Muslims, especially those of Kashmiri / Pakistani origin, supported the Labour Party and generally remain loyal, if reluctant voters.

If you compare the influence the British Jewish community (which is more cohesive, but not always united) has on UK politics it is far greater than that the Muslim communities have - this is very noticeable in the two main parties in parliament.

We know what the jihadists and their non-violent followers seek already. First and foremost that the UK radically changes its foreign policy, for example ending support for the USA. Their goal of a society that turns to a particular school of Muslim thought and practice - would require them to be a majority, which is simply hard to imagine.

[Bob's World]

The demands of the vocal few rarely reflect the reasonable concerns of the groups the claim to represent. One must look past the noise to hear the sounds that really matter. One also must attempt to step back from the bias of their own perspective to hear those sounds clearly.

Too often what I see is a highly biased listener who is overly focused on the express words of that vocal few.

(My own Yank bias showing - didn't realize the UK was not part of Europe). ��

[davidbfpo]

The demands of the vocal few rarely reflect the reasonable concerns of the groups the claim to represent. One must look past the noise to hear the sounds that really matter. One also must attempt to step back from the bias of their own perspective to hear those sounds clearly.

Too often what I see is a highly biased listener who is overly focused on the express words of that vocal few.

(My own Yank bias showing - didn't realize the UK was not part of Europe). ��

My caveat maybe a bias, but I cannot reasonably comment on the situation in Europe on these issues.

You can make a good case that the UK is struggling to adjust at home to the changes seen in the last forty years and that the 'disaffected' are legion, not just Muslims. The far larger disaffected pool can be seen in many ways: declining political participation, single issue pressure groups, the call for independence, ineffective governance and more. Rarely spoken about has been a steady rate of emigration, so Brits make up one of the largest expat communities - IIRC second after Mexicans.

Some see similar patterns in the USA - which has found expressions on SWC before in at least one thread, if not more.

A small group of Muslims in favour of the violent jihad exploit that within their own communities as they have no traction beyond. Their activities have led to arguably greater security and less liberty - which affects all citizens, not just the 'disaffected' or Muslims alone.

[Firn]

The Danish security forces are of course for obvious reasons still stilent on many aspects of the latest attacks so there are many blanks yet to be filled. It seems that the terrorist was born in Denmark as a son of Palistinian immigrants. He was possibly radicalized in jail but it is of course early days:

Michael Gjorup, head of the country's prison and probation service, told Danish media that authorities were concerned about changes in El-Hussein's behaviour in prison and passed on information to Danish intelligence before the attack.

The head of Danish intelligence, Jens Madsen, acknowledged that El-Hussein had been "on the radar" of his services.

Mr Madsen said investigators were working on the theory that he could have been inspired by the shootings in Paris last month.

The story of a criminal of arabic descent, Islamic faith and a background of violence becoming a terrorist sounds quite familiar. It is obviously important to point out the tiny amount of terror attacks compared to the population(s) as a whole.

Some also put flowers at the place where police shot the suspect dead. One told Danish TV2: "I did it because I am Muslim and because I knew him."

I'm pretty sure that the persons with question will get checked. As I stated before such signals given by the persons themselves mean that they are far more likely to be a potential threat as a person from the same demographic background. However as the terrorist in question has shown even if somebody is on the radar for excellent reasons due to some big red flags attacks can still happen.

P.S: Once again the internet dragnet by Western intelligence played seemingly no part in flagging the terrorist.