Perspectives: 'Sudden Jihad Syndrome' - A reason to carry firearms for self-defense

[TexasRifleman]

I've never been to any of those sites.

I actually own a couple of books (you know, on paper ) on the subject.

Interesting reading if anyone is interested.

Islam Unveiled, Robert Spencer

The Return of Anti-Semitism, Gabriel Schoenfeld

And in fairness another good read is:

Christianity on Trial by Vincent Carroll

 

[bogie]

While y'all are further dividing our culture, and taking bandwidth away from keeping gun control from happening, I'd just like to mention that I'm Anna Nichole Smith's babydaddy.

There's a very SLIGHT chance that could be proven.

Now, there is a SLIGHTLY LESS SLIGHT chance that I'll meet up with a religious nutjob who is bent upon doing me harm (possibly for being the babydaddy, but I digress...).

The odds of this happening are literally millions to one. But if it happens, and I meet up with a religious nutjob who wants to do bad things to me, it's more likely that he'll be a Christian than a Muslim. Not likely at all that he'd be Jewish. Unless I get snippy the next time I drive into town for a pastrami on rye - one really should not refer to the guy behind the counter as the "sandwich nazi."

 

[Master Blaster]

Here are a pieces of evidence that Islam is intollerant of other faiths I would like you all to refute.

Saudi Arabia is the Home of Mecca, and all Muslims are required to make the Haj, or pilgrimage to Mecca at least once in their lifetime.

I am Jewish, other folks here are Christian, Hindu, Muslim etc. Can anyone here who is not a Muslim participate in the Haj? Would Saudi Araian religous authorities allow you to even set foot in Mecca??? The answer is yes, but you would have to convert to Islam first.

Why is that?? I can visit Rome, I can attend a papal prayer session.
I can climb the mountain in Tibet and meditate with a Monk.
I can enter a Shinto Shrine in Japan.

If you travel to Saudi Arabia and you bring a bible, stand on a street corner, and start to read from it what do you think will happen to you? Proselytizing any religion other than Islam in Saudi Arabia is punishable by beheading.

The Saudis are the Guardians of Mecca, they are the Guardians of the Faith.
Most Imams here in the USA were trained by Saudi Clerics this includes the new Imam at the Mosc in Newark De, near where I live.

Saudis have zero tolerance for other faiths. They despise Jews and Christians, say so frequently and officially, and in their laws, and will execute anyone who dares to openly practice another faith in their country. The Mosc is the state, ther is no seperation what so ever Islam is a way of life, Sharia law is the law of the state, it does not tollerate other religions.

But please tell me this is wrong what I have typed here, and provide some evidence to back it up.

Here is another book about Islam you may have heard of, The Satanic Verses by Salaaman Rushdie, a muslim.

 

[Kaylee]

Appropriate for THR? Honestly, I'm torn. It is a discussion that needs to be taking place in America at large though I think. So I ain't locking it yet.

Now Derek, when you say

And this is where these things always end up. XXXXXXXX entertainment personality says it's so, so it's got to be, regarldless of the actual words of the Qur'an or of the history of the religion since its inception.

I don't think you're being fair. It's not just "XXXXXXXX entertainment personality" saying these things. Or "prophetofdoom.com" or whatever.

Now I'm going to admit at this point... I just plain don't know.

Like many Americans, I've been reading from sources from all over trying to find an answer to that very question - how inherent is the present militancy we see in the nutcases to Islam as a whole? I started giving everyone 100% benefit of the doubt. I figured... "Muslims.. kinda like Catholics right? They pray in language I don't understand and wear funny clothes. But same Hebraic God.. how different can it be?" That's where I started.

My TENTATIVE conclusion so far is that the many MANY good and decent people who are Muslim are good and decent people in spite of Muhammad's example rather than because of it. And it IS "the history of the religion since its inception" that leads me to that conclusion. More important is what I read about Muhammad himself - and Derek, that's why I was asking for a neutral source as possible on the hadith.

Obviously,that's not a THR official position, I'm not 100% sold on it yet, and I WELCOME any argument to the contrary, if for no other reason than I don't like thinking bad things about a billion of my fellow travelers on this ol' blue ball. And I like Derek, and don't want to hurt his feelings.

But that's where I sit so far.
I think the best any of us can do is research as honestly as possible, and be willing to accept whatever answer comes whether it agrees with our prejudices or not.

-K

 

[bogie]

Yawn. I'm gonna go have a Sudden Cold Frosty Beverage Syndrome down the street at the sports pub. Thus far I think Kaylee's about the only voice of reason here. Except for the babydaddy bit, of course...

You know, I'm far more likely to be the victim of "Sudden Bubba Who Thinks I'm Looking At His Girlfriend Who Isn't Wearing Anywhere NEAR Enough Clothing Syndrome" than I am to be the victim of "Sudden Religious Nutjob Of Any Faith Syndrome."

Maybe I should just stay home...

But then I'd type more.

And Bogie's bored, and he's been told that that is dangerous...

 

[Titan6]

The day on the Saudi's yacht in the Persian Gulf when the SA Col offered the Jewish US Army Sergeant Major one of the beers he was drinking (real beer not the fake stuff) got me to thinking. How serious can he be as a defender of the faith? I didn't even realize it was a Friday until we got back to shore. This was between the wars...

Are there are a bunch of nutsos spewing hatred every day from their pathetic little corner of the world? Sure.

Are some of the Muslim?
Yep.

Do a lot of people hate the US out of fear, jealousy, cultural contempt or simple annoyance and arrogance?
Even many of the French; and we saved their bacon twice.

Are many Muslims bigoted against other religions and females as set forth in the Koran?
Certainly.

Are 1% of the seven million muslims in this country going to rise up and commit suicide attacks against me and my family?
Nope. It is as likely as those Japanese were to sabotage US military posts during WW II. Which is to say as the government said 50 years later, not at all.

It is quite telling that in 2000 a significant majority of Muslims voted for GWB. Given how close it was you might even say they swung the election in his favor. And why not? Shared conservative values, pro-immigration, pro freedom on most issues, very strong faith.....

Not in 2004 though... Did GWB change that much?
I think so.

 

[Derek Zeanah]

Here are a pieces of evidence that Islam is intollerant of other faiths I would like you all to refute.

If you get to use modern-day Saudi Arabia to prove that Islam is racist and bigoted and anti-semitic and has a lot of evil traits associated with it, can I turn around and make the same claims about Christianity based on Spain under Isabella?

Your answer is likely "no, that's stupid."

Can I judge all of Christianity by that line of it that can trace its roots back to Jesus himself (or nearly -- not interested in a debate on this point)? If they can pray to Jesus' mom, and saints, and offer indulgences, isn't that an indictment of the entire religion? Isn't that evidence that they've moved away from following the God of Abraham/Noah/Moses/etc?

You'll answer "no," and some will defend the practices of the Catholic Church. Even if this were a valid indictment of the Catholic Church, Methodists wouldn't feel terribly tainted by the brush of my question. And that's my point (not an attack on religion) -- there is no single "Christianity" that you can shake a stick at -- what Christianity consists of is hundreds of groups who've organized themselves based on their view of the religion, and no-one would point their finger at David Koresh's Branch Dividian Sect (which originally came out the the Shepherd's Rod, if wikipedia can be trusted) to indict the Seventh Day Adventists as a bunch of loony kiddie-raping death cultists (no arguments please -- let's accept the MSM interptetation for now), and then let the taint continue up through the other protestant sects.\

But heaven forbid some extremist in Saudi Arabia preach hate and intelerance. Proof that all Muslims are jew-hating jihaddis. Especially when you take Osama Bin Ladin (a follower of Wahabbi thinking) and those (mostly Saudi citizens) who flew airplanes into the World Trade Center.

No - we're not at war with a small sect -- we're at war with a significant chunk of the world population.

And it IS "the history of the religion since its inception" that leads me to that conclusion. More important is what I read about Muhammad himself - and Derek, that's why I was asking for a neutral source as possible on the hadith.

My take on Hadith:

This Persian guy, once the Muslims have conquered his proud nation, decides to go on walkabout in the area where Islam started. He collects a bunch of snippets from different folks, along the lines of "Bob Johnson says his uncle was getting drunk with Thomas Covenant's great-granddad after a coon hunt once, and Thomas Covenant's ancestor said Mohommad used to drink the piss of pre-menustrating girls because he thought it was healthy." (I'm not being offensive on purpose -- look it up).

Now, modern historians might argue about the goals and mindset of the guy collecting the "sayings of the prophet," but as is there's something of a science to interpreting the veracity of the claims of each of the people involved in translating these messages. Mohommad didn't want anything written about him, but people are people after all, and now we've got divisions within the Umma over which sayings are correct and which are irrelevant (or offensive).

I don't see a need for Hadith, and don't feel bound by what is/isn't in them. At best they're a reference to the way that folks lived way back when in a different society. It's like this: if we unearth a scroll detailing the daily habits of Jesus, and it turns out he only wiped his ass with his left hand, only ate with his right, and he was a staunch believer in a bath every 14 days, would those be compelling guides for how his followers should live? I'd say no - we have indoor plumbing now, and while one bath a fortnight might be a incredibly clean for the time, we can do better now.

Going further, we've got a branch of Islam that can trace the "lineage" from Mohommad to this guy who once ran to the hills and never came back. now, the belief is that one day this guy will come back and lead the Muslim people once again. There's no real reason for this line of thinking, but there's no real reason for praying to Mary and the saints either -- it's what people do.

Not meaning to insult anyone here, just trying to stimulate conversation.

 

[Derek Zeanah]

Thus far I think Kaylee's about the only voice of reason here.

Thanks Bogie. I love you too.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

not sure which is more laughable

in the "one legged man witha rubber crutch way" the "article" or the way some folks are so willing to line up behind it. but its good to have a way to seperate the players clearly since they quit handing out brown shirts its more complex.

i'm looking at religous killing though from an irish catholic viewpoint and find the stats over there make this "gentlemans" syndrome look like a game of go fish at a baptist church picnic.

and thats too flavors of christians slaughtering each other. i think a lotta folks here are lucky to live here wouldn't last long anywhere else

 

[wooderson]

Somewhere along the line we as rational persons

You're an atheist?

(rimshot, please)

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Know This:

None of these acts - either postal, Jihad, Columbine, jealousy, or simply criminal in nature - are "sudden". It all began in the first six or so years of each and every one of our lives; the only years in which we are supposed to(or are able to) develop a conscience. Anyone lacking that conscience can be led in just about any direction. Without a conscience, there is no sense of guilt or remorse, and no inhibition to set out on such a course in the first place.

A conscience I believe is the one feeling that can overrule, or at the least can temper, a conscious act or desire to act. I believe it is more powerful than logic. It can keep you from slicing off your nose to spite your face, so to speak. Therefore, these dastardly acts are nothing more than the result of an open window in these people's personality, open to just about any suggestion if it appears to benefit them, without any forethought of consequence. These people are sociopaths.

This is not the same as killing in a war. A person with a conscience can kill in defense of self, family, and country, but does so without anger, revenge, or lust. It's a matter of survival.

I don't believe all these jihadis are sociopaths, but those acting alone or in pairs(along with those who go "postal", etc.) are sociopaths. Put "Sudden Jihad Syndrome" in with any act a sociopath is capable of doing.

Worry about the sleeper cells that might be here if you feel the need to worry. The lone actor, or the pair that "find each other" are dangerous, but not in any organized capacity you would find in an active cell of jihadis who are on a mission. For them, it's war. That said, "Knowing the past, I'll not surrender any arms and march less prepared into the future."

Woody

 

[Kaylee]

Thanks Derek, I really REALLY appreciate hearing from you on this.

Yeah, I get the whole "Christians slaughtering each other/Spain under Isabella/30 years war/English Civil War" so forth an so on. Thing is, you can look at every one of those events, and look at Christ's life as recorded in the Gospels, and it's a difference of night and day. Testy as He got with the whip at the temple, Jesus never killed anyone to make his point.

Contrariwise, when I look at the violence from Islamic nations, and look at what I can find of Mohammad's life.. I don't see that contrast, and that's what bothers me. When binLadin and his buddies went up to Afghanistan to start a new Islamic nation, they intentionally based their strategy on Mohammad's life.. as I recall, essentially "go to Medina, build up a base of power, and then come back to Mecca in (military) strength."

Mohammad did kill for worldly power.

Jesus of Nazereth did not.

However many sects or interpretations they are, whether a pope or a bishop or a right reverend or an imam or whoever says something is okay or not okay... if I follow Christ's words and Christ's example, I don't kill my fellow people. If I follow Mohammad's... I might.

And that's what leads to my discomfort.
And that's why I'm sincerely asking for what to look at next to explain that, to understand it.


-K



PS - funny you should mention that thing about Jesus wiping and eating and all, since as I recall one of the things the priests of the day hollered at him about was his disregard for traditional cleanliness mores. His response as I recall was to the effect of "it ain't what goes into a man's mouth that makes him unclean, it's what comes out of it."

Smart guy.

 

[grampster]

Why should I carry a firearm and pay attention to my surroundings? That is simple. America is the land of the free. The more freedom we have, the more danger we have. With some 300 million free souls wandering around there are going to be some bad people. Really bad people. Really bad people that do really bad things for an infinite variety of reasons.

Personally, I'll take the freedom in spite of the danger. Actually adds to the spice of life imho. That spice makes one more aware, thus more alive. Sometimes lightning strikes. (shrug) To argue about what religion requires of folks is an exercise in futility. What a person does or doesn't do regarding his beliefs is a personal decision. I hope my actions are a reflection of my beliefs. I disappoint myself in that regard all the time. (I was trying to match up the vent in the bottom of the dryer to the duct in the floor. As a result, it is surprising the vocabulary that was coming out of a Christian mouth. It's been bugging me all day, that loss of gentlemanliness.)

To reiterate. It is not too productive to make judgments about what some folks may or may not do. One is never going to be sure one is right, especially about multiple millions of individuals. It is productive to be aware, prepared, skilled, and to pass that attitude along to your family.

 

[bogie]

I'm still alive!

And I lusted after a rather fetching waitress with an intoxicating smile. Or maybe it was the beer she was carrying. I'm not sure.

Nothin' quite like "Hot Wings Pizza" for dinner on a Sunday evening.

If I die of indigestion, it's y'all's fault.

Nobody bearing vests of C4 appeared. Didn't see anyone waving venomous reptiles around either. But I was ready...

Because I AM THE BABYDADDY!

What's the kid's name again?

 

[shootinstudent]

Mohammad did kill for worldly power.

Jesus of Nazereth did not.

Jesus's followers most certainly did, and they didn't consider themselves unChristian for doing so.

Muhammad himself (peace be upon him) did not kill anyone solely to increase his power. Look over the historical records...he was invited to Medina as a respected arbitrator, and it was the increase in the success of that city that led the Meccans to threaten it with destruction.

The only allowable war, if you were to follow the example of Muhammad, would be self-defense and the defense of others from physical acts of aggression.

The difference between Christianity and Islam on this point is only that Islam makes the doctrine of self-defense explicit, whereas Christianity does not. The details of the teaching are identical-you are not to attack others who have done you or others no harm, under any circumstances.

 

[XavierBreath]

I find the idea of "Sudden Jihad Syndrome" as coined by Daniel Pipes on March 14, 2006 in the New York Sun to be laughable. Calling it a syndrome gives it an aura of professional acceptance that it does not deserve. It is neither a psychatric diagnosis, nor a psychological diagnosis. It is not listed in the DSM IV. It is merely a bigoted observation of events based on data that is skewed, while other significant data is ignored.

It is normal for people to want explanations for events that lead to tragedy. Bigots use this desire to demonstrate deceptive reasoning in the unreasonable, to further their personal agendas. As free thinking people, we must guard against this. Are we to assume there is a Sudden Texas Woman Syndrome in response to Andrea Yates? Are we to assume that the "N" word sets black Americans off in an uncontrollable rage? Should Colin Ferguson walk free because of Black Rage? What about Air Rage? Road Rage? Office Rage? Even Thomas Junta, who killed a fellow father at their sons' hockey practice in Massachusetts, was said to be suffering from a variant of the "rage" syndrome, Rink Rage.

There is a very real danger in this. Like Black Rage, the "N" word factor, and a host of other spurious para-psychological concepts, SJS is very likely to be used in courts of law to demonstrate that the criminals who commit these acts are not competent to stand trial, or were legally insane when they committed their crimes. This is unacceptable. We must remember that while most states require sophisticated tests based on psychiatric and/or psychological testimony, the testimony is evaluated by a jury of laypersons or a judge without psychiatric training. We simply cannot allow killers to avoid prosecution because a crackpot bigoted theory some writer conjures up is used by a psychologist whose only practice is providing testimony for defense attorneys.

We must remember that we are a nation of tolerance. When we toss our tolerance aside, we cease to be the nation our forefathers fought and died for. We have American citizens who are Muslim, who strive diligently every day, to be productive citizens. I personally work with three devout Muslim physicians who save and repair American lives. This SJS idea is as insulting to them as telling me I am a member of the KKK because I am a white Southerner. I would be ashamed to dignify the concept by even asking them their opinion of SJS while we had our hands bloody in a patient's abdomen.

The willing use of this spurious concept to justify relaxed CCW laws by Larry Pratt tells me a lot about where I want my money going in support of the 2nd amendment. It will not be to GOA. In February, 2005, Mr. Pratt wrote another article, Why Do Criminals Break The Law? In that article, he assigned responsibility of crimes to the criminal's choice to commit the crime. In fact, Larry Pratt wrote, "Also, criminals are quick to pick up on psychological jargon and get good at feeding it back to the practitioners. In other words, crooks are good at scamming mental health workers. If someone thinks they are nuts, not a crook, and that will get them out of jail, then, they quickly learn to sound as if they are mentally ill........Until criminals choose to change, they will be criminals and the rest of us make a huge mistake to ignore that simple fact."

It seems to me that Larry Pratt needs to remember that criminals are criminals because they commit crimes, not because they practice a certain religion. Bigoted concepts like SJS need to be shown for what they are, lest criminals walk free rather than pay for their crimes.

 

[Autolycus]

Originally posted by Master Blaster:
Here are a pieces of evidence that Islam is intollerant of other faiths I would like you all to refute.

Saudi Arabia is the Home of Mecca, and all Muslims are required to make the Haj, or pilgrimage to Mecca at least once in their lifetime.

I am Jewish, other folks here are Christian, Hindu, Muslim etc. Can anyone here who is not a Muslim participate in the Haj? Would Saudi Araian religous authorities allow you to even set foot in Mecca??? The answer is yes, but you would have to convert to Islam first.

Why is that?? I can visit Rome, I can attend a papal prayer session.
I can climb the mountain in Tibet and meditate with a Monk.
I can enter a Shinto Shrine in Japan.

If you travel to Saudi Arabia and you bring a bible, stand on a street corner, and start to read from it what do you think will happen to you? Proselytizing any religion other than Islam in Saudi Arabia is punishable by beheading.

The Saudis are the Guardians of Mecca, they are the Guardians of the Faith.
Most Imams here in the USA were trained by Saudi Clerics this includes the new Imam at the Mosc in Newark De, near where I live.

Saudis have zero tolerance for other faiths. They despise Jews and Christians, say so frequently and officially, and in their laws, and will execute anyone who dares to openly practice another faith in their country. The Mosc is the state, ther is no seperation what so ever Islam is a way of life, Sharia law is the law of the state, it does not tollerate other religions.

But please tell me this is wrong what I have typed here, and provide some evidence to back it up.

Here is another book about Islam you may have heard of, The Satanic Verses by Salaaman Rushdie, a muslim.

Actually all it takes to get into Saudi Arabia is a passport.

Salman Rushdie wrote the book but he is in hiding because some religious fundamentalists want to kill him. By the way it is a novel not a religious text.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Satanic_Verses_(novel)

 

[Kaylee]

I deleted this post because it was rapidly heading in the direction of the ol "My God is better than your God" debate, which is verboten on THR, and I should know better than to participate in that.

My apologies to the membership.

 

[foob]

For every Quran quote that looks to justify violence, I can quote the Bible for one that is equally violent. Humans have founds ways to rationalize contradictions and inconsistencies in the teachings in various ways. Most of the time to suit their selfish purpose.

A religious text must be sufficiently vague to reduce the likelihood of falsehoods in the future, yet this allows humans to interpret the text as they see fit.

Jesus of Nazereth
Mohammad

So basically most Christians aren't real Christians, and most Muslims aren't real Muslims.
Edit: Damn it Kaylee , now my quote of you looks out of place.

 

[Derek Zeanah]

If I'm misreading something, PLEASE tell me where Derek.

Not tonight. My recollection/impression is that Mohommad wasn't a very loved man, and while he and his crew of followers were trying to live in peace according to their weird, new, scary faith, they ran into opposition.

I want to say that Mecca was conquered for reasons other than decisively ending the fight -- the Ka'ba (sp?) was filled with pagan idols, and as this was the temple to God that Abraham built, it simply had to be cleansed. And you know what happens when you demand people turn their backs on the Gods and Goddesses of their fathers...

Beyond that, I believe the guidance in the Qur'an is simply to give treaties where they're asked for, treat the other parties fairly, allow them to keep their faith (at least Christians, Jews, and Sabians -- can't be sure off the top of my head about pagans), but to show no mercy if it turns out the treaty was some kind of scheme to bargain for time to amass troops and attack. There's certainly a lot in there about the obligation to fight oppression, even when what you really want to do is have a cup of hot cocoa and retire to bed and the company of one's spouse.

It's late though, and I'm not thinking as clearly as I'd like to. I'll need to poke around a bit before I can give a more definitive answer (and shootingstudent is probably more qualified to give you a more mainstream Islamic answer, anyway).

 

[XavierBreath]

I deleted this post because it was rapidly heading in the direction of the ol "My God is better than your God" debate, which is verboten on THR, and I should know better than to participate in that.

Apology accepted Kaylee.

Let's redirect this thread towards the veracity of "Sudden Jihad Syndrome" itself, it's use by Larry Pratt, Excecutive director of GOA to promote CCW legislation, and the dangers it presents towards successful prosecution of criminal offenders.

(see my attempt in post #91)

 

[bogie]

So, what am I more likely to see?

SJS, or Sudden Bubba Syndrome?

And is Larry (Daniel?) likely to see my money? Maybe.

Of course, he'll likely get an irritated note.

Why?

Because we are ALREADY TOO DAMN FRAGMENTED.

================================
"Why can't we all just get along?" - R. King

 

[XavierBreath]

OOps, Larry Pratt.

Does SCS, or Sudden Criminal Syndrome, of any sort occur? Or is there a period of escalation in actions and thought processes that allow the person who was once law abiding to become a mass murderer?

If there is a period of escalation then there are markers one can look at to predict and prevent the danger before it occurs, if we consider the problem rationally.

Conversion to dogmatic religious beliefs of any sort is one of the first indicators that a person of any race or religion is embarking on a path towards murder. The religious fervor may seem like a cause under quick observation, but under scutiny it is often found that the homocidal impulse was already there. The religious dogma simply gave the previously law abiding citizen the twisted internal justification to commit heinious acts of violence, not in his own name, but in the name of his God.

The urge to commit mass murder is often brought on by feelings of inadequacy and persecution, with a desire to be remembered for something, anything. The religion only gives the killer the ability to resolve this internal conflict while transfering the responsibility from himself. Any religion will do. If there is no religion immediately available, Goth culture, Hip hop culture, PTSD, any of these excuses will do. Hell, you could even say the so-called Gun Culture provided the justification and vehicle towards murder.

Do we want Sudden Gun Owner Syndrome to be used as an excuse for murder? If we continue along this path, that door is open. It's time to condemn such notions all together, and hold criminals personally accountable for their actions.

 

[Grey54956]

I don't really agree with the 'Sudden Jihad Syndrome' thing. It's more of a 'Sudden Whack Job Goes Off the Deep End Syndrome', or SWJGODES. It doesn't matter if your Muslim, Christian, Jewish, or Atheist, its all the same.

The author may be off on that count, but is it a reason to carry firearms for defense? Most definitely yes. From a defenders perspective, it doesn't matter if they are being attacked for religion, money, or because someone wants to use their skin to make lampshades. Aggression is aggression regardless of the reason. The appropriate response should be to put a few hot ones in the attackers center-of-mass.

 

[bogie]

If there is a period of escalation then there are markers one can look at to predict and prevent the danger before it occurs, if we consider the problem rationally.

A lot of youts and street thugs go through an escalation process - harming someone actually -is- a difficult thing to rationalize to much of our species...

A consistent theme is "he's got that nice car/jacket/woman/chain/beer, and that should be mine." Then it goes to "he's got that, and it belongs to me." Which proceeds to "The SOB stole it, and I'm gonna get it back!" (anger fuels rage at this point), and the comes the attack. They work themselves up to it.