[HenrySeiden]

Anybody seen this?

> The psychology behind suicide bombings.
> By - Pierre Rehov, documentary filmmaker
>
>
> On July 15, MSNBC's "Connected" program discussed the July 7th London
> attacks. One of the guests was Pierre Rehov, a French filmmaker who
> has filmed
> six documentaries on the intifada by going undercover in the
> Palestinian
> areas.
> Pierre's upcoming film, "Suicide Killers," is based on interviews
> that he conducted with the families of suicide bombers and would-be
> bombers
> in an attempt to find out why they do it. Pierre agreed to a
> request for
> a Q&A interview here about his work on the new film.
>
>
> Q - What inspired you to produce "Suicide Killers," your seventh film?
>
>
> A - I started working with victims of suicide attacks to make a
> film on
> PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) when I became fascinated with
> the personalities of those who had committed those crimes, as they
> were
> described again and again by their victims. Especially the fact that
> suicide bombers are all smiling one second before they blow themselves
> up.
>
>
> Q - Why is this film especially important?
>
>
> A - People don't understand the devastating culture behind this
> unbelievable phenomenon. My film is not politically correct because it
> addresses the real problem, showing the real face of Islam. It
> points the finger against a culture of hatred in which the
> uneducated are
> brainwashed to a level where their only solution in life becomes to
> kill
> themselves and kill others in the name of a God whose word, as
> transmitted by other men, has become their only certitude.
>
> Q - What insights did you gain from making this film? What do you know
> that other experts do not know?
>
>
> A - I came to the conclusion that we are facing a neurosis at the
> level
> of an entire civilization. Most neuroses have in common a dramatic
> event, generally linked to an unacceptable sexual behavior. In this
> case, we are talking of kids living all their lives in pure
> frustration,
> with no opportunity to experience sex, love, tenderness or even
> understanding from the opposite sex. The separation between men and
> women in Islam is absolute.
> So is contempt toward women, who are totally dominated by men. This
> leads to a situation of pure anxiety, in which normal behavior is not
> possible. It is no coincidence that suicide killers are mostly
> young men dominated subconsciously by an overwhelming libido that
> they not only
> cannot satisfy but are afraid of, as if it is the work of the devil.
> Since Islam describes heaven as a place where everything on Earth will
> finally be allowed, and promises 72 virgins to those frustrated kids,
> killing others and killing themselves to reach this redemption becomes
> their only solution.
>
>
> Q - What was it like to interview would-be suicide bombers, their
> families and survivors of suicide bombings?
>
>
> A - It was a fascinating and a terrifying experience. You are dealing
> with seemingly normal people with very nice manners who have their own
> logic, which to a certain extent can make sense since they are so
> convinced that what they say is true. It is like dealing with pure
> craziness, like interviewing people in an asylum, since what they say,
> is for them, the absolute truth. I hear a mother saying "Thank God,
> my son is dead." Her son had became a shaheed, a martyr, which for
> her was
> a greater source of pride than if he had became an engineer, a
> doctor or
> a winner of the Nobel Prize.
> This system of values works completely backwards since their
> interpretation of Islam worships death much more than life. You are
> facing people whose only dream, only achievement goal is to fulfill
> what
> they believe to be their destiny, namely to be a Shaheed or the
> family of a shaheed.
> They don't see the innocent being killed, they only see the impure
> that
> they have to destroy.
>
>
> Q - You say suicide bombers experience a moment of absolute power,
> beyond punishment. Is death the ultimate power?
>
> A - Not death as an end, but death as a door opener to the after life.
> They are seeking the reward that God has promised them. They work for
> God, the ultimate authority, above all human laws. They therefore
> experience this single delusional second of absolute power, where
> nothing bad can ever happen to them, since they become God's sword.
>
>
> Q - Is there a suicide bomber personality profile? Describe the
> psychopathology.
>
> A - Generally kids between 15 and 25 bearing a lot of complexes,
> generally inferiority complexes. They must have been fed with
> religion.
> They usually have a lack of developed personality. Usually they are
> impressionable idealists. In the western world they would easily have
> become drug addicts, but not criminals. Interestingly, they are not
> criminals since they don't see good and evil the same way that we
> do. If
> they had been raised in an Occidental culture, they would have hated
> violence. But they constantly battle against their own death anxiety.
> The only solution to this deep-seated pathology is to be willing to
> die
> and be rewarded in the afterlife in Paradise .
>
> Q - Are suicide bombers principally motivated by religious conviction?
>
>
> A - Yes, it is their only conviction. They don't act to gain a
> territory
> or to find freedom or even dignity. They only follow Allah, the
> supreme judge, and what He tells them to do.
>
>
> Q - Do all Muslims interpret jihad and martyrdom in the same way?
>
>
> A - All Muslim believers believe that, ultimately, Islam will
> prevail on
> earth. They believe this is the only true religion and there is no
> room, in their mind, for interpretation. The main difference
> between moderate
> Muslims and extremists is that moderate Muslims don't think they will
> see the absolute victory of Islam during their lifetime, therefore
> they respect other beliefs. The extremists believe that the
> fulfillment of
> the Prophecy of Islam and ruling the entire world as described in the
> Koran, is for today. Each victory of Bin Laden convinces 20 million
> moderate Muslims to become extremists.
>
>
> Q - Describe the culture that manufactures suicide bombers.
>
>
> A - Oppression, lack of freedom, brain washing, organized poverty,
> placing God in charge of daily life, total separation between men
> and women, forbidding sex, giving women no power whatsoever, and
> placing men
> in charge of family honor, which is mainly connected to their women's
> behavior.
>
>
> Q - What socio-economic forces support the perpetuation of suicide
> bombings?
>
>
>
>
> A - Muslim charity is usually a cover for supporting terrorist
> organizations. But one has also to look at countries like Pakistan ,
> Saudi Arabia and Iran , which are also supporting the same
> organizations through different networks. The ironic thing in the
> case of Palestinian
> suicide bombers is that most of the money comes through financial
> support from the Occidental world, donated to a culture that utterly
> hates and rejects the West (mainly symbolized by Israel ).
>
> Q - Is there a financial support network for the families of the
> suicide
> bombers? If so, who is paying them and how does that affect the
> decision?
>
>
> A - There used to be a financial incentive in the days of Saddam
> Hussein ($25,000 per family) and Yasser Arafat (smaller amounts),
> but these days
> are gone. It is a mistake to believe that these families would
> sacrifice
> their children for money. Although, the children themselves who are
> very attached to their families, might find in this financial
> support another
> reason to become suicide bombers. It is like buying a life insurance
> policy and then committing suicide.
>
>
> Q - Why are so many suicide bombers young men?
>
> A - As discussed above, libido is paramount. Also ego, because this
> is a
> sure way to become a hero. The shaheed are the cowboys or the
> firemen of
> Islam. Shaheed is a positively reinforced value in this culture.
> And what
> kid has never dreamed of becoming a cowboy or a fireman?
>
>
> Q - What role does the U.N. play in the terrorist equation?
>
>
> A - The U.N. is in the hands of Arab countries and third world or
> ex-communist countries. Their hands are tied. The U.N. has condemned
> Israel
> more than any other country in the world, including the regime of
> Castro,
> Idi Amin or Kaddahfi. By behaving this way, the U.N. leaves a door
> open
> by
> not openly condemning terrorist organizations. In addition, through
> UNRWA,
> the U.N. is directly tied to terror organizations such as Hamas,
> representing 65 percent of their apparatus in the so-called
> Palestinian
> refugee camps. As a support to Arab countries, the U.N. has
> maintained Palestinians in camps with the hope to "return" into
> Israel for more
> than 50
> years, therefore making it impossible to settle those populations,
> which
> still live in deplorable conditions. Four hundred million dollars
> are spent
> every year, mainly financed by U.S. taxes, to support 23,000 employees
> of
> UNRWA, many of whom belong to terrorist organizations (see Congressman
> Eric
> Cantor on this subject, and in my film "Hostages of Hatred").
>
> Q - You say that a suicide bomber is a 'stupid bomb and a smart bomb'
> simultaneously. Explain what you mean.
>
>
> A - Unlike an electronic device, a suicide killer has until the last
> second
> the capacity to change his mind. In reality, he is nothing but a
> platform
> representing interests which are not his, but he doesn't know it.
>
>
> Q - How can we put an end to the madness of suicide bombings and
> terrorism
> in general?
>
>
> A - Stop being politically correct and stop believing that this
> culture is a
> victim of ours. Radical Islamism today is nothing but a new form of
> Nazism.
> Nobody was trying to justify or excuse Hitler in the 1930s. We had to
> defeat
> him in order to make peace one day with the German people.
>
> Q - Are these men traveling outside their native areas in large
> numbers?
> Based on your research, would you predict that we are beginning to
> see a
> new
> wave of suicide bombings outside the Middle East ?
>
> A - Every successful terror attack is considered a victory by the
> radical
> Islamists. Everywhere Islam expands there is regional conflict. Right
> now,
> there are thousands of candidates for martyrdom lining up in
> training camps
> in Bosnia , Afghanistan and Pakistan . Inside Europe , hundreds of
> illegal
> mosques are preparing the next step of brain washing to lost young men
> who
> cannot find a satisfying identity in the Occidental world. Israel
> is much
> more prepared for this than the rest of the world will ever be. Yes,
> there
> will be more suicide killings in Europe and the U.S. Sadly, this is
> only
> the
> beginning.

[HenrySeiden]

[QUOTE=HenrySeiden]Anybody seen this?

> The psychology behind suicide bombings.
> By - Pierre Rehov, documentary filmmaker


http://www.pierrerehov.com/

[Kr0nos]

So the solution is more sex and less patriarchy, authoritarianism and religion?

Hmmmm, somehow I had the feeling this would be the case.

Thanks for the great post Henry. Interesting stuff.

Especially this here:

Interestingly, they are not criminals since they don't see good and evil the same way that we do.

If they had been raised in an Occidental culture, they would have hated violence. But they constantly battle against their own death anxiety.

The only solution to this deep-seated pathology is to be willing to die and be rewarded in the afterlife in Paradise.

[Pendergast]

So a film maker is a psychologist now?

As I believe the informations on what he observed may be accurate, I'll wait for a real psychologist to make comments... or provide a research paper that is worthy of it.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

So the solution is more sex and less patriarchy, authoritarianism and religion?

That is what you got from that? Not surprised.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by Kevin

That is what you got from that? Not surprised.

So why are you turning this thread into something personal Kevin?

How about taking his argument and counter-argue instead?

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by Kevin

That is what you got from that? Not surprised.

Well, after a second reading, actually atheism and hedonism is clearly to fault here (not to mention gay liberals).

[Kevin]

I don't think they were trying to blame religion Kronos. They are blaming humans. Humans are at fault.

[DBursey]

There was an article in this past weekend's Toronto Star which probed the psychology behind radical Islam and suicide bombings:

Shame, rage and Mideast violence

... in the Muslim world, "widespread sexual abuse leads to paranoid, highly traumatized and revenge-seeking adults. ... barbarous family and clan dynamics in which children, both girls and boys, are routinely sexually abused by male relatives, infant males are sometimes over stimulated by being masturbated, boys between the ages of seven to 12 are publicly and traumatically circumcised, many girls are forced to undergo clitorectomy, and women are seen as the source of all shame and dishonour and treated accordingly: very, very badly.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by DBursey

There was an article in this past weekend's Toronto Star which probed the psychology behind radical Islam and suicide bombings:

Shame, rage and Mideast violence

Since the 1980s, Marvin Zonis, a political economist self-taught in psychology, has repeatedly warned there was more to the escalating violence in the Middle East than meets the eye. Challenging testimony given to a U.S. Senate sub-relations committee, Zonis wrote, "Those committing violence against the U.S. in Iraq have different ideological and political justifications for their actions," he said. "But psychologically their justifications are driven by rage, the rage generated by deep narcissistic wounds. Narcissistic rage knows no boundaries and no limits."

Now, that's a specialist!

There is no doubt that abuse may happen in the Muslim world just as it happens elesewhere in the world. Does it trigger suicidal behaviors through kamikaze-type of actions necessarily? Certainly not, because Canada and the U.S. would be covered with craters...

There is certainly a basic rage being channeled that motivates such terroristic acts. And it is possible that some of the Muslim kamikaze were vicitmized as children.

The article is clearly culturally biased in such a way that it makes a portrait of the Muslim culture compared to the Western culture in a very detrimental way. Is the Muslim culture an ideal compared to the Western one? Certainly not; our democratic and egalitarian values outweigh the totalitariansim we find in most of these countries, and politically speaking, those states are certainly the craddle of a lot of corruption.

But let's go back to the article.

In this article, I speculate about some psychological underpinnings that might lead young people to become "ferociously" angry and have "powerful" feelings of humiliation. But first a brief look at the differences between the emotions of shame and guilt is in order.
In classical psychoanalysis, shame is viewed as an earlier, more basic emotion than guilt, shame being tied to the very early phases in the formation of a cohesive sense of self.

When one uses psychoanalysis as a theoretical model, one has to remember its origins: very conservative Vienna. The extrapolations made by Freud are in no way akin to science, as it has been made quite clear that psychoanalysis is not a science. So its theory has only a historical value.

However, Chesler is still right to question whether the child-rearing habits of Muslim fundamentalists contribute to an adult propensity for extreme violence. Few journalists seem willing to join the dots between the vilification of women, the mistreatment of children, and the deeply pervasive sense of shame-and-rage reactions so readily exploited by Islamic leaders. To explore, let alone expose, such matters may provoke the very shame reactions that are so dangerously disproportionate. Journalists feel safer emphasizing less psychologically loaded, more proximal sources of humiliation, such as Israeli checkpoints and regular harassment by soldiers.

Woaw; so journalists are to make such analysis?

First of all, the way children are being raised will certainly affect their way of looking at the world. Whether Muslims are victims or not, if they are raised in a culture where parents support one way of violence or another, the children are likely to perpetuate these attitudes. If the behaviors of parents towards children are that of abuse, it is very possible the children will act the same way to their own children, and may generalize that behavior to others.

Now, is that the job of journalists to make these relationships? I think not. To report they exist, yes.

But as per this quote, journalists should make an analysis of Muslim behaviors, and their source, but not that of the deeper psychological roots of the Israeli checkpoints...

Psychotherapists also know that the first step in being able to manage powerful emotions is the ability to accurately identify them.

That is beautiful. However, that does not work as easily as it is written. For one to recognize specific emotions, one has to be able to abstract himself from the situation allowing the emotions to persist, or develop. In a context where a lot of propaganda is mediatized, where the culture of the area has been one of hatred for many generations, how can one be able to pause and think: "I am angry and it is not justified!". Once your culture entertains the same and usual beliefs about a supposed Evil, the work to undo this paradigm is never going to be resolved over night. It is very possible that the hatrred towards Jews is now part of a sub-culture of a religion, to the point that it has been officialized by some fundamentalists leaders.

And we see similar reactions in the Western world towards Muslim in general when the concern is about the fundamentalists, and a small minority controlling the Muslim mob and sacrificing some of its innocents by suicide bombing.

A recent Hamas newspaper editorial gives us hope, then. Editor Ghazi Hamad, amid escalating violence in Gaza since Israel's withdrawal, called for Palestinians to examine their own behaviour rather than blaming Israel for all their problems. He stressed "self-criticism and self-evaluation," two character traits of which the entire Middle East is in urgent need.

Yet, as long as will find reasons to hate, or channel their hate, wherever that hate comes from, the hatred will just continue. That train started a long time ago and won't stop easily.

As interesting it can be to psychologise issues such as this so-called "clash of civilisations", one should never forget that things are never quite so simple. There may be some truth in some observations, but I questionned all those psychological opinions, as none of those are supported by a scientific paper.

The need to psychologise is great because we want to understand. If we take the time of looking at the various articles related to the Dawson College shooter, they all seem to provide a "profile" in an atempt to explain his behavior, but none of these profiles come even close to what really motivated the shooter, beyond what he admitted as his intentions: to die fast and with effect, and without any political agenda.

Pretty much all terrorists have a political agenda (whether it is justified or not remains disputable). The psychology of it is only a part of the issue.

[DBursey]

Well Pendergrast, you seem to fault the author for reductionism while generally concurring with the thrust of his conclusions. I certainly agree that psychoanalysis on a cultural scale may be a fool's venture. However we glean and recognise nuggets of truth where they tend to be self-evident. The author of the piece readily admits to his indulgence in hypothesis, to wit:

... I speculate about some psychological underpinnings that might lead young people to become "ferociously" angry and have "powerful" feelings of humiliation.

In a context where a lot of propaganda is mediatized, where the culture of the area has been one of hatred for many generations, how can one be able to pause and think: "I am angry and it is not justified!". Once your culture entertains the same and usual beliefs about a supposed Evil, the work to undo this paradigm is never going to be resolved over night

Absolutely, and yet there are voices coming from Hamas, of all entities, which are voicing just this type of critical self evaluation.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by DBursey

Well Pendergrast, you seem to fault the author for reductionism while generally concurring with the thrust of his conclusions. I certainly agree that psychoanalysis on a cultural scale may be a fool's venture. However we glean and recognise nuggets of truth where they tend to be self-evident. The author of the piece readily admits to his indulgence in hypothesis, to wit:

DBursey, thank you for pointing this out. To clarify my thoughts on this: there are no such things as self-evidence in this case. There are possibilities, and generalizations are not nuggets of truth; they are nuggets, and self-evident for whomever has the bias.

This is Science: from memory, a longitudinal study showed that less than 10% of children victim of abuse turned into abusers themselves once they became adults. That is a (sad) minority. And that is what makes the difference between speculations (which may very well mislead the public as well as discredit true psychological research) and scientific results.

There is no doubt that there are psychological dimensions in what is happening in the Middle East, but what these are I am not sure there are many who can venture a solid opinion, except for practitioners whom had to work with the participants in that area.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by DBursey

Absolutely, and yet there are voices coming from Hamas, of all entities, which are voicing just this type of critical self evaluation.

And there is probably something happening at the leadership level that lead to a change.

Who knows if what the Israeli Prime minister did by stopping the attack on Lebanon, for which he was quite criticized for, has not triggered something in the form of a self-reflection amongst Hamas leadership?

[BRussell]

What crud. "Most neuroses have in common a dramatic event, generally linked to an unacceptable sexual behavior."

Uh-huh. No one even uses the term "neurosis" any more, let alone explains it that way.

In my view, if the culture (including the religion) supports it, that's really all you need. People do all kinds of crazy things if the culture accepts and supports it, and some elements of Islamic/Middle-Eastern culture certainly support violent extremism. In the same way, American culture supports all kinds of whacky things that objectively seem destructive and stupid. WHY the culture supports what it does is the real question, IMO. Why are Americans so materialistic, and why does Islamic culture support violent extremism?

One of the best explanations I've seen draws on a theory of aggression called "threatened egotism."

People used to believe that violence arose from low self-esteem, but there's little evidence of that, and it's no longer the current view. The current view is that threats to one's ego lead to aggression; one of the corollaries is that people with inflated opinions of themselves are most likely to perceive threats, rather than people with low opinions of themselves. If you think you're God's gift, but others don't seem to share your opinion, you're going to be ticked off.

I think Islamic culture has a high opinion of itself, based partially on its past, and deserved. But things have changed. That sense of superiority clearly no longer holds up to the evidence of the current success of other cultures, i.e., Europe and the US, compared to Islam. This reality ticks them off, and they lash out at the cultures that have been more successful.

Perhaps monotheistic religious cultures, where one's people are the "chosen people," are most prone to this.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by BRussell

I think Islamic culture has a high opinion of itself

Besides that, nice post.

[DBursey]

Well, I'm happy to have linked the article for you fine anthropsychologists to postificate on.

I do think some of the ideas presented in the piece are worth more than casual dismissal. Psychology is not a discipline of mine. I recognize its significance in any attempt to understand more of a suicide bomber's underlying motivations than a simple "oh ... it's an accepted part of their culture" brushoff.

What's more; I disagree that Muslims have a collective sense of superiority. More probable to say they're conflicted over a perceived dichotomy between what Islam claims to be morally and where its practitioners find themselves existentially.

But then I'd be generalizing

[Pendergast]

Who does not?

We can take another route with this reasoning.

Do canadians feel conflicted over a perceived dichotomy between what their respective religion claims to be morally and where its practitioners find themselves existentially?

I bet the response will be quite interesting, and probably not that different than with the question you asked about Islam. But in that case, I'd wait for muslim of various origins to provide an answer. I somehow doubt that their responses will be as generalized as any of our conclusions about our own religions.

[DBursey]

Do Canadians feel conflicted over a perceived dichotomy between what their respective religion claims to be morally and where its practitioners find themselves existentially?

Not at all - not in the sense that I intended. Canada leads the world in any measure of a modern, civilized seat of society. It is pluralistic, secular, progressive and tolerant. How many of these would we apply to those places the suicide bomber calls home?

I'm not trying to be obstinate - I'm speaking to the idea of a moral / existential dichotomy (if you'll excuse my french) over what these young guys must experience between what they're taught in Mosques and Madrassas and in what they hear on the street, see in their own lives and know of other cultures in terms of modernity and of material or ethical measure of progress.

The other dichotomy, open for debate I suppose, is the notion that such a heavily patriarchal (if not downright misogynous) culture injects its young with issues that bring an increased vulnerability to exploitation.

I'm not necessarily taking the freudian angle .... having a vest full of explosives, screws and ball bearings strapped on is a seriously messed up means of dealing with repressed feelings about your mom.

Everyone understands the fundamentalist nature of religious brain-washing that goes into motivating these bombers to do what they do. I'll acknowledge the questionable science behind this particular author's ideas in this particular piece. I was more intrigued in what I perceived as its larger scope - examining potential causalities in what might be a more taboo aspect of the aforementioned child-ordinance delivery wielding culture.

Freudian or not.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally Posted by HenrySeiden

Anybody seen this?

> The psychology behind suicide bombings.
> By - Pierre Rehov, documentary filmmaker

I don't think I've come across such an atrociously flawed analysis before. The author attempts to explain the phenomenon of suicide bombing by isolating the individual from any causal factors other than Islam. He is essentially suggesting that Islam is some kind of infectious disease that causes all its adherents to become violent and irrational. He continues with his culturalist analysis by suggesting that those residing in the Orient are inherently developmentally flawed and prone to violence. This is a classic enthnocentric, even racist, analysis.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by DBursey

Do Canadians feel conflicted over a perceived dichotomy between what their respective religion claims to be morally and where its practitioners find themselves existentially?

Not at all - not in the sense that I intended. Canada leads the world in any measure of a modern, civilized seat of society. It is pluralistic, secular, progressive and tolerant. How many of these would we apply to those places the suicide bomber calls home?

Well, I am not certain we lead the world that much in this regard. But I love my country nevertheless. However, I am not so certain we have no issues between practice of the belief and the beliefs themselves, and I personally would never generalized to "all canadians".

I'm not trying to be obstinate

I don't think you are; we are having a pretty nice discussion here I believe

- I'm speaking to the idea of a moral / existential dichotomy (if you'll excuse my french) over what these young guys must experience between what they're taught in Mosques and Madrassas and in what they hear on the street, see in their own lives and know of other cultures in terms of modernity and of material or ethical measure of progress.

Why would there be a dichotomy? See, if we take the stand of the neo-cons of this forum and use their most stereotypic perception of extreme islamism, what prevents us from thinking that some ultra-fundamentalists islamist are not thinking that way? I am actually pretty sure that this is true in some cases. However, I disagree with the opinion that says that all fundamentalists think the same way, or that they are all just the same. It goes as evident that I do not believe that all muslim think the same way as extremists fundamentalists.

And yet, it is possible that some of these extreme fundamentalist are like so in tought, and never in practice, like our own armachair generals here!

The other dichotomy, open for debate I suppose, is the notion that such a heavily patriarchal (if not downright misogynous) culture injects its young with issues that bring an increased vulnerability to exploitation.

Exploitation is found in the most liberal cultures. I am actually certain that on the contrary, some of those extremists fundamentalist are just as loving and protective as your ma and pa. Again, simplifying family dynamics from our perception of their acts of violence towards innocents does not have relevance. There is that mix of rage and tender loving care that goes very well when there is a purpose tagged as "the greater good", which is relative, of course.

I'm not necessarily taking the freudian angle .... having a vest full of explosives, screws and ball bearings strapped on is a seriously messed up means of dealing with repressed feelings about your mom.

And yet, the sacrifice of oneself for the "greater good" by the simple act of going down on the carrier with your plane, or sitting in a bus full of the progeniture of your long time "natural" enemy can make sens in some minds.

Everyone understands the fundamentalist nature of religious brain-washing that goes into motivating these bombers to do what they do. I'll acknowledge the questionable science behind this particular author's ideas in this particular piece. I was more intrigued in what I perceived as its larger scope - examining potential causalities in what might be a more taboo aspect of the aforementioned child-ordinance delivery wielding culture.

I am still not so sure we all understand that. There are certainly well understood recipes to turn people into "smart-drones" to deliver ordinance as you say. But not all brainwashing techniques work the same on all poeple, and I am certain that many are rejected.

Freudian or not.

I just read an article on the buildup of Afghanistani resistance in which some Taliban had to show videos of the "efficiency" of suicide bombings, which is then the resistance started to use it and recruit. First recruits apparently came from outside Afghanistan, and many were the siblings or partners of people who died in that WOT over there. There appears to not have been required to do any brainwashing; a balanced mix of thirst for revenge and the realisation that these loved ones died and would never come back seems to be sufficient in their reasoning to kill themselves. The relative "greater good" does not even seem to have any importance whatsoever in these cases...

If your French is good, you could read "Le Monde Diplomatique" of September 2006, where there is a nice dossier on 5 years of war against terror.

[DBursey]

Thanks! My French can always use a little practice.

There appears to not have been required to do any brainwashing; a balanced mix of thirst for revenge and the realisation that these loved ones died ... seems to be sufficient in their reasoning to kill themselves.

I disagree. Perhaps if I substituted 'heavily indoctrinated' in lieu of 'brain-washing'. From what I know of the Madrassas critical thinking is not something well engendered. Actually nothing is, save recitation and memorization of the Qu'ran. That and a sense of absolution of any sense of collective culpability for many of the problems faced by their societies.

... and the realisation that these loved ones died and would never come back seems to be sufficient in their reasoning to kill themselves

Many, perhaps most suicide bombers have no personal connection whatsoever with someone who has died as a result of 'conflict' with their perceived foes.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by DBursey

Thanks! My French can always use a little practice.



I disagree.

I was talking of that very specific example of that bunch that entered Afghanistan as suicide bombers and what I read about them, not the lot of "all suicide bombers in Islamic world".

Perhaps if I substituted 'heavily indoctrinated' in lieu of 'brain-washing'. From what I know of the Madrassas critical thinking is not something well engendered. Actually nothing is, save recitation and memorization of the Qu'ran. That and a sense of absolution of any sense of collective culpability for many of the problems faced by their societies.

Yes, that is possible.

Many, perhaps most suicide bombers have no personal connection whatsoever with someone who has died as a result of 'conflict' with their perceived foes.

Maybe. How do you know that for a fact? Again, I was using the the specific example from that article I read, not generalizing to the population of suicide bombers as a whole.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by DBursey

What's more; I disagree that Muslims have a collective sense of superiority. More probable to say they're conflicted over a perceived dichotomy between what Islam claims to be morally and where its practitioners find themselves existentially.

That's really what I mean. It's the disparity between how you view yourself and what reality suggests that's the key in this approach. It's just that having an inflated opinion of yourself is much more likely to lead to such a disparity than having a humble view of yourself.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by BRussell

That's really what I mean. It's the disparity between how you view yourself and what reality suggests that's the key in this approach. It's just that having an inflated opinion of yourself is much more likely to lead to such a disparity than having a humble view of yourself.

Absolutely 100% wrong. The root of terrorism and the psychological aspect that leads to suicide bombing has to do with low s.o. and a twisted sense of being persecuted more than anything else.

The other main ingredients are religious fundamentalism and a lack of sexual identity which in almost all cases lead to an over-inflated ego (which in our culture is mostly (still?) referred to as "machoism").

...However, I disagree with the opinion that says that all fundamentalists think the same way, or that they are all just the same. It goes as evident that I do not believe that all muslim think the same way as extremists fundamentalists.

Of course not. I know more than enough muslims who would NEVER even think about committing murder let alone becoming a terrorist or suicide bomber.

Like I said above, there are many ingredients that lead to becoming a suicide bomber - they are a mixture of religious doctrine, lack of sexual identity and usually a combination of economic disparity and a heavy persecution complex.

And yet, it is possible that some of these extreme fundamentalist are like so in thought, and never in practice, like our own armchair generals here!

This is completely circumstantial though. Given the right economic and cultural circumstances, I can guarantee you that some of MacNN's finest here would turn into suicide bombers in a heartbeat.

People are a product of their environment, and no essentialist theory will ever come to any other conclusion, because that's a basic fact of life.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

Absolutely 100% wrong. The root of terrorism and the psychological aspect that leads to suicide bombing has to do with low s.o. and a twisted sense of being persecuted more than anything else.

The other main ingredients are religious fundamentalism and a lack of sexual identity which in almost all cases lead to an over-inflated ego (which in our culture is mostly (still?) referred to as "machoism").

Wow, it's THAT wrong? 100%?

Unfortunately, I don't know what "low s.o." is, so I can't really respond to that part of your theory. I do think a sense of being persecuted is part of it. A strong sense of entitlement and victimhood is a part of narcissism, which is basically what this "threatened egotism" theory of violence is about. Anything that's said (e.g., the Pope's comments) can be taken as an insult and a threat to the heightened sense of one's own honor, and cannot be simply ignored, as non-narcissists would, but must be responded to in the strongest manner possible, sometimes with violence.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

Absolutely 100% wrong. The root of terrorism and the psychological aspect that leads to suicide bombing has to do with low s.o. and a twisted sense of being persecuted more than anything else.

The other main ingredients are religious fundamentalism and a lack of sexual identity which in almost all cases lead to an over-inflated ego (which in our culture is mostly (still?) referred to as "machoism").

I tend to agree to this in part. However, I know for a fact that transfering any concept of Western psychology to another culture is usually unfruitful, or just weird.

So I think both you an BRussell are walking on very slippery ground here.

Of course not. I know more than enough muslims who would NEVER even think about committing murder let alone becoming a terrorist or suicide bomber.

Like I said above, there are many ingredients that lead to becoming a suicide bomber - they are a mixture of religious doctrine, lack of sexual identity and usually a combination of economic disparity and a heavy persecution complex.



This is completely circumstantial though. Given the right economic and cultural circumstances, I can guarantee you that some of MacNN's finest here would turn into suicide bombers in a heartbeat.

People are a product of their environment, and no essentialist theory will ever come to any other conclusion, because that's a basic fact of life.

I agree with this (circumstancial aspect) as well. However, how this gets to be organized in terms of the inner dynamic and cognitions remain difficult to explain from a Western point of view.

This the usual ethnocentrism. If psychology works the people here, it should work just the same elsewhere. There is also the usual attribution that for any theory "A", there is a practice "a".

I welcome research papers on Muslim psychology by Muslim psychologists though...

[DBursey]

LOL So would the rest of the civilized world ....

sorry ... been having a few ... couldn't resist

[HenrySeiden]

So I guess the answer to my original question is no one has seen the film documentary nor the MSNBC show, eh?

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by HenrySeiden

So I guess the answer to my original question is no one has seen the film documentary nor the MSNBC show, eh?

I read the the webpage from your link and my opinion stays as is.

[marden]

Pierre Rehov's Middle East Documentaries

[Kr0nos]