The Politics of Homegrown Jihadi (satire)

Radicalized Islam is more political than religious, and thus inspires a cult of homegrown jihadis with nothing to lose except their lives.

God Almighty has no mercy for the evil that men are capable of doing. 

This is not Satan's work; the body count suggests that, despite their religious leaning, al Qaeda, Islamic State, Taleban, and other radicalized religious group including Army of God antiabortion radicals only hide behind the holiness of God himself.

For these men and women who radicalize may speak of God but their use of violence shows their materialist political activism to be a clear and present danger to society

As long as the West continues forcing its Crusade of Democracy on the Middle East, so shall we experience more attacks by lone wolf jihadi at home.

Yes, I am suggesting that the US foreign policy of forcing the Middle East to accept democracy is what is causing the Muslims to radicalize against it.

If you think the two reported incidents in recent months of radical Muslims killing Canadian soldiers had nothing to do with the Islamic State, then you are mistaken.

By trying to force democracy on Syria by tacit support of the rebels there, it became obvious that this was all a laughable cover for intrigue against Russia by the US which culminated in the Ukraine crisis.

However, the European Community is rallying around the supposed underdog, the Ukraine — controlled by a far right government — while Russia is only protecting its Russian citizens, many of whom had dual citizenship. The problem started when the new government wanted to enfranchise only Ukrainians.

In response, the far right elements of the Russian-Ukrainians rebelled, but both sides are right-wing. Very few Ukrainians and Russians are left-wing, who they view as criminals who should never hold power, due to the economic devestation that the Soviet government had caused in the Ukraine, including massive starvation.

However, the Ukrainian crisis is also a proxy war with the US government propagandizing to the Europeans and Russia aiming to protect its citizens.

All in all, both the Syrian and the Ukrainian crises are designed to polarize the world's people. The anti-Russian propaganda is almost as bad as the Russian propaganda but the Ukrainian counter-propaganda is just as bad.

As for Syria, its propaganda gets almost everything right but condones the corruption of top Syrian oligarchs. Likewise, Russia's leader Putin also condones the corruption of top Russian oligarchs with their billions being invested in the European Community.

It is only a matter of time before World War 3 flares up, should cool heads not prevail. However, what you see in each area — be it the Islamic State being carved out of northern Iraq this year, the Syrian crisis declares as of October 2011, and the Ukraine-Russia conflict — is merely the US-led West versus Russia with full support from China.

I guess the Cold War still is in its death throes, and the incident on September 11, 2001 was an aftershock with the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts a few tremors. A decade later, Arab Spring majorly affected Libya and Syria.

It is time America stopped caring about the Middle East so much that it thinks forcing democracy on Afghanistan, Iraq and now Syria will lead to peace. The resultant anarchy is a sure sign that democracy at gunpoint is not working.

Returning to the recent two incidents of homegrown terrorism in Canada, that is just karma for Harper sending 16 jets and 300 personnel to Kuwait. Nobody was surprised in Ottawa.

Remember that Kuwait also has a handful of al Qaeda veterans who were released from Gitmo not too long ago. So it is obvious that these former Jihadis are working for Kuwait, and most likely Canada and America are collaborators in a proxy war between the West and the Red axis (China and Russia).

Although it looks good to bomb northern Iraq in the news, the IS may likely be a puppet of the Qatar, Kuwait and Saudi axis, funded by oil money.

Overall, this makes us all complicit in the Middle Eastern problem every time people in the free world drive their SUVs to fill up at the gas pump. That is why I take the bus, because I have already paid for my portion of the gas to run that bus in advance. ;)

NEWS UPDATE: the Ottawa gunman purported by PM Harper and mainstream media to be a possible terrorist are false and defamatory.

M. Zehaf-Bibeau was not a homegrown terrorist — al-Qaeda, Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), and the Taleban have a tendency to lie to support their cause. I am sure Osama bin Laden did it after 9-11, which is evidenced by his first video denying involvement, but later changing his tune when he saw the effect it had on the stock market.

It looks like Zehaf-Bibeau did not get help for his addictions and mental health issues in 2011 as he demanded, simply because the homeless and poor are rejected by most drug rehabilitation centres due to their profit mentality e.g. drug rehab for profit.

At the street level, very few major cities in Canada are willing to cough up public money to put addicts requesting treatment into a treatment program, mainly because most homeless addicts in rehab will walk away because they lost the ability to await positive changes, which can take up to three or more years.

If M. Zehaf-Bibeau had entered a treatment centre for the homeless, there is a good chance that he would have gotten kicked out within a week. Therefore, this article has me bleeding heart a-going.

Therefore Ottawa's shooting scare is because their hands are not clean of how they treat the homeless addicts daily. Indeed, karma is a bitch - too bad three people had to die. May they all rest in peace.

---

Reference:

• http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/martin-couture-rouleau-a-homegrown-madman

• http://globalnews.ca/news/1639555/why-didnt-ottawa-gunman-zehaf-bibeau-get-treatment-3-years-ago/

My Reply to Vancouver Observer (satire)

Throughout this article I emphasized that Ottawa considers any confrontation between radicals and politicians and their corporate sponsors to be terrorist acts.

However, I did not identify anyone to filter out of the anti-pipeline meetings for security purposes.

Instead I pointed them to Greg Renouf's genuinewitty website, which is slanted in favor of the right but I feel that Greg uses rightwing rhetoric to bait the New Left radicals.

Hopefully the lady who runs the Observer will reply.

Anyway here is the email I sent her:


From Me
To Vancouver Observer

Today at 1:06 PM

You realize that the pipeline will go through. The problem now is when it does, what will you do to prevent radicalism?

You could do the Harsha Walia move and condone it, but any radical action against the pipeline is a Terrorist Act in Ottawa's eyes.

We don't need any Squamish Five incidents.

Why? Because radicalism leads to violent acts against corporate monoliths like McDonald's, banks, etc.. It would be a waste of potential volunteers and not solve anything.

Radicalism wouldn't survive in the prison system since it would require everyone being middle class radicals from upper middle income families, the people who made it through financial crises by buying low and selling high.

Instead, you need to come up with contingency plans to deal with radicalism e.g. including a list of people who are barred from your meetings because they tend to show up at the rally to mete confrontational "justice" including "pie in the face" attacks, which are also a Terrorist Act in Ottawa's eyes.

I suggest you Google Greg Renouf and look at his genuinewitty website to see the faces of radicals who have crossed the line into criminal behavior.

Thank you very much for your time


Sincerely,


When the oil pipeline goes to the US, will the anti-pipeline activists condone confrontational and potentially violent radicalism like Harsha Walia did two years ago?

IMO we won't know until the fermented fat of animals and plants sluices southward in the pipeline in a couple years' time.

However, nobody understands that Harper will get his way because he's afraid of a US invasion, should he really fuck things up by helping everyone to realize that the anti-cyber-bullying bill should be killed and separated into the wheat of a real cyber bullying bill (4 pages long) and a privacy compliant cyber security bill (650+ pages) that still has warrants to keep it morally correct.

Note: since I sit on the political fence a lot, my hope is no pipeline but feel that nobody is listening to the refinery in Texas the pipe is terminating at when they said: "We have no urgent need of frakked tar-sand because we can find other sources of oil."

Therefore, Ottawa is pushing the pipeline to skim a few thousand dollars of oil lobbyist money in taxes from it when Texas sends us the checks for delivery of high sulphur tar sand oil; which nobody really wants to buy because it destroys car engines, exhaust pipes, the ozone layer, and people who breathe the sulphur dioxide laden air and develop asthma.

Jerry Rubin Quote Echoes Unabomb Manifesto 230

"What would happen if the white ideological Left took power? The hippie streets would be the first cleaned up by the 'socialist' pigs. We'd be forced to get haircuts and shaves every week. We'd have to bathe every night, and we'd go to jail for saying dirty words. Sex, except to produce children for the revolution, would be illegal. Psychedelic drugs would be capital crimes and beer drinking mandatory. Rock dancing would be taboo, and mini-skirts, Hollywood movies and comic books illegal." - Jerry Rubin

"The more dangerous leftists, that is, those who are most power-hungry, are often characterized by arrogance or by a dogmatic approach to ideology. However, the most dangerous leftists of all may be certain oversocialized types who avoid irritating displays of aggressiveness and refrain from advertising their leftism, but work quietly and unobtrusively to promote collectivist values, "enlightened" psychological techniques for socializing children, dependence of the individual on the system, and so forth. These crypto-leftists (as we may call them) approximate certain bourgeois types as far as practical action is concerned, but differ from them in psychology, ideology and motivation. The ordinary bourgeois tries to bring people under control of the system in order to protect his way of life, or he does so simply because his attitudes are conventional. The crypto-leftist tries to bring people under control of the system because he is a True Believer in a collectivistic ideology. The crypto-leftist is differentiated from the average leftist of the oversocialized type by the fact that his rebellious impulse is weaker and he is more securely socialized. He is differentiated from the ordinary well-socialized bourgeois by the fact that there is some deep lack within him that makes it necessary for him to devote himself to a cause and immerse himself in a collectivity. And maybe his (well-sublimated) drive for power is stronger than that of the average bourgeois." - T. Kaczynski, unabomb manifesto 230

So, then if the unabomb manifesto author is merely rephrasing Rubin's quote, then surely Kaczinski is not the original author of the manifesto.

Indeed, quite probably Industrial Society and its Future was not originally penned by Kaczinski, as can be determined by the use of "we" and "us", two pronouns anarchists do not use but have been used by radicals writing in anonymity as part of a "domestic terrorist" group.

Jaggi Singh on The Police State

Jaggi Singh has been targeted by the RCMP since 1997 when he was detained by police at APEC Vancouver. At APEC Quebec City, he was detained in 2005.

His crime? Exercising free speech without violence. Let's listen to Jaggi explain his situation, and how the State may work in limiting free speech.

"It looks like I'll be here for the next few months. I'm surprised by the situation in general. But the judgment, no. You can get a sense of a judge and the Crown and how serious they want to be about things. I was getting ready to expect this.

"We had two solid witnesses. The catapult (the weapon Singh is charged with possessing) was taken out of my hands. Judy Rebick testified to that. After I saw you on Rene Levesque Blvd. (in Quebec City last Friday), it seems everything that happened there is being put on my shoulders, but I'm not being charged with any of it. They're saying I gave orders. Well, if I gave orders, then charge me with incitement (to riot). They're not. They're saying Molotovs and rocks were thrown. If there were, I didn't throw them. And I didn't give anybody orders to throw any of them.

"So the charges against me are very clear, and on the merit of each of them, it's arguable whether I would be found guilty. I'm sure I'll be found innocent. There's no reason I should be kept in custody now.

"It's a ratcheting up, a step up of the levels of intimidation. There are different levels to this. One is using 5,000 canisters of tear gas, building a fence and mounting a huge security operation. Another level is legal intimidation, to use legal means to try to silence voices.

"Each time, whenever a handful of major world leaders are due to arrive in a Canadian city, I get abducted. They justify refusing bail by saying it would undermine confidence in the Canadian justice system. I feel the reverse: my continued detention undermines confidence because I was exercising free-expression rights. I mean, people saw me. Judy saw me. You saw me. Other people saw me. They saw my role. I wasn't some street general. I was trying to be a helpful presence, and then I left after talking to you. How can you deny liberty on these grounds?

"The people I know are upset, and this will inspire them to be more active. Obviously, instead of trying to get someone out of jail, we'd rather spend our time raising awareness and organizing more actions. We've actually managed to build up a pretty impressive movement against capitalist globalization. The next 10 years might be interesting. Various social forces might have a certain amount of power.

"There are different ways of policing this. One is this counter-insurgency model, which has three stages. The third stage is all-out civil war. The second stage is when movements become a potential threat. The first stage is when it's not a threat, when everything is open, like it is now. At that stage you get as much information as possible on everybody. You target who the leaders are because you target them in Stage 2. And you eliminate them in Stage 3.

"It's the model that's been applied in Latin America, almost word-for-word. In Quebec, an example of Stage 2 is when the October Crisis happened. Where did all these names come from? The names of the 3,000 or so people they arrested?

"The police forces were keeping track. And if you have to eliminate these 3,000 people or put them in jail, you can potentially nip in the bud any progressive politics for that time of so-called crisis.

"Other things in that model is to make lessons of people. To say that if you fight back you will have to suffer punishment. The idea being that people won't fight back, they'll simply abide by the status quo. And if they do you get to Stage 2.

"Another model that is perhaps more applicable here is this whole idea of four categories of people: the radicals, idealists, realists and opportunists. Everybody is an idealist. Everybody has this idea that things should be better and that's really a non-ideological thing. The fear is that those idealists will become radicals and start questioning the roots of the system, start questioning the power structure. People in power don't like that. You have to turn these idealists into realists, because once they're realists, they can accept the compromises that opportunists make; those being the politicians.

"And how do you turn an idealist into a realist instead of a radical? Well, a baton blow to the head is one way. Getting wafts of tear gas is another. Yet another is making the radicals seem crazy and criminal. Give the distinct impression through the media that you will be jailed. You will be treated differently and it's not worth the trouble. As long as idealists stay that way, or even better become realists or opportunists, that's great.

"It's really important to remain engaged. To avoid that dynamic of marginalization and sectarianism. To present a human face, through the community and the media. (The repression) is going to backfire because it's not like this is happening out of the blue. People understand this movement. And on a personal level they know who I am. They can't marginalize me in this way because of that track record. And it's laughable the day when a teddy-bear-launching catapult becomes a threat to national security. Apparently, it has."