Modernity's Enemies

There have been few successful dramatic attacks on the West by committed jihadis in the past few years because the Western intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies are competent and professional and able to thwart the jihadis' grand gestures. Conversely, the jihadis are mostly idiots. Where the latter succeed is in small and unorganized attacks on random individuals, so-called "sudden jihad syndrome" attacks in which a lone jihadi attacks unarmed and unprepared civilians out of the blue, as it were. Because such attacks are frequent, the number of victims of this form of jihadi terror will soon enough rival any of the more spectacular attacks of the recent past. More, the low intensity of the attacks and the frequency keeps the jihadis and their programme in the public eye, even though nearly none of the "sjs" attacks are publicly and officially attributed to jihad itself. The jihadis win by acting out, and the few who are captured are instantly replaced by more who are emboldened to imitate them. The average Modernist citizen is terrorized not mere by jihadi attacks but also by the intelligentsia who will not allow the public to acknowledge the attacks for what they are: Islamic terrorism. And so the attacks continue and the terror continues, and the people live in fear of both the jihadis and the state's denial of jihadis in our midsts. Speaking out in public, or even among friends against the jihadis, is a daring proposition, a daring act of freedom. The jihadis continue. One here, one there, relentlessly.

"One- man cell, the new face of Al Qaeda terror."


15 Aug 2008 (ANI): The creation of one-man cell seems to be the new strategy of Al Qaeda terrorists.

According to the Fox News, intelligence officials have discovered an online Al Qaeda manual that prescribes that group leaders should training new recruits to operate as smaller cells around the globe.

The manual, called "Method for Building the Personality of a Terrorist Mujahid" and written by an Islamist forum contributor nicknamed "Shamil al-Baghdadi," encourages militant followers to stop focusing on pulling off attacks on the scale of 9-11 and to start executing numerous smaller attacks.

If for some reason the mission fails, the Jihadi must not abort, but instead carry on alone, as a one-man cell, the paper quotes New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly as saying while quoting from the manual.

It advocates assassinations by shooting, poisoning and booby-trapping cell phones and computers.

Further, targets are to be prioritised by ranking them into categories such as "high profile," which represent presidents and prime ministers.

Recruits are also told to organize credit card scams and to rob police stations in order to get hold of weapons.

However, the most shocking revelation are the lessons on kidnapping, with orders to slaughter hostages in a way that will terrify the public.

Dr. Matthew Levitt, director of The Washington Institute''s Stein Program on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, said that the structure has shifted from a centralized operation toward smaller cells at a global scale.

"You know, it used to be that the face of Al Qaeda was bin Laden and the core. That is still the case, but now we are reminded about Al Qaeda on a regular basis more because of the activities of the local cells," added Levitt.

Referring to the manual as being specifically tailored to its audience Levitt said, "What this does more than anything else is provides people who are inclined to carry out such attacks with the sense that they now have some information and pushes them to actually go through with it." (ANI)
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/entertainment/one-man-cell-the-new-face-of-al-qaeda-terror_10084517.html

We have legitimate law and a legitimate government in America, and we are obligated to obey our state as citizens, not resorting to our own private interpretations of laws, obeying those we like and disregarding the rest. It's an all or nothing proposition. The following might shed some light on what the government thinks of us, regardless of our obeyance.

An interview with Ralph Peters, a retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel who served in infantry and intelligence units before becoming a Foreign Area Officer and a global strategic scout for the Pentagon, shows the following:

FP: Tell us about the military officers who had vital knowledge who were dismissed by Washington during the Clinton years. What were the consequences?

Peters: It was heartbreaking. My close circle of comrades and I--all Russian speakers and adventurers by nature--would dive into the guts of the Soviet Union (often at our own expense, by the way--there was always money to buy new billion-dollar satellites, but no money for officers like us to crawl over the Soviet sickbed and discover things no satellite can see). We'd come back with first-hand accounts of the developing ethnic strife, of the corruption, of the KGB/FSB's machinations, even with battlefield reports we risked our lives to gather--and back in Washington we were just blown off (not by the Army, but by the CIA, the other intel agencies and the administration).

If the intelligence didn't benefit Boeing or Lockheed Martin and cost billions, it was written off as worthless. There was zero value placed on human intelligence--it was surreal. I'd come back from Country X with an eyewitness account and some twenty-something Clintonista who'd never been farther from the USA than Cancun would tell me that I didn't know what I was talking about. And the State Department, with its pathetic apparatchiks, was the worst of all--as the book recounts, I once returned to our embassy in Armenia with a first-hand account of fighting where there wasn't supposed to be any--and our diplomat on duty, who was cowering in the embassy, terrified of leaving the Yerevan city limits, essentially called me a liar. My views just didn't match the Clinton administration's, and State actually trusted the reports from the Armenian government over the word of a U.S. Army officer.

[T]he State Department--the most dysfunctional agency in our government--just wanted to maintain smooth relations with Russia. In trying to uncover the truth, we faced two enemies: The Russian security services (the old KGB in new suits) and our own diplomats. Again, it was heartbreaking.... But, thanks to State, we'll never really know. (Our diplomats just hated military officers--it seemed downright Freudian--and, frankly, it hasn't changed all that much.)

[....]

Peters: I saw the Saudis doing damage while I was in uniform, and I keep seeing it now. They are our enemies. They cozy up to our "elite," then fund extremism all around the Muslim world (personally, I wish I could apply Sharia law against any American university or think-tank that accepts Saudi Funding). Again and again, from Central Asia to Kenya to northern Virginia, and from Indonesia to Senegal, I've seen how the Saudis use their oil profits to prevent Muslims from integrating into host societies and to foster ferocious anti-American hatred. If I could do one single thing to make this a better world, I'd make the entire Saudi royal family disappear. And by the way--they're also the worst enemy Muslims have, too. The key to understanding the Saudis is to realize that they don't give a damn about individual Muslims--they only care about their perverted Wahhabi vision of Islam. Human suffering doesn't bother them at all--as long as those bloated pigs in nightgowns don't suffer themselves.

[....]

FP: What is Washington in denial about?

Peters: You name it. Reality. Islamist extremism. Putin. China. Immigration. Washington is clinging passionately to the pathetically failed 20th-century theories of international relations its creatures learned at Harvard or Princeton. Washingtonians, Democrat and Republican alike, are as out of touch with global down-and-dirty reality as Osama bin Laden in his cave--if not moreso. Washington is a city that indulges itself in pleasant foreign-policy fantasies--at our expense....

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=EF162FA1-7B3F-4A4C-848A-8A722B662293

There's little mystery here: our government is staffed and stuffed with careerist hippies. Nevertheless, it is our government. We are obligated to obey our own laws. We don't have to like it.

Uzbek Muslims Attacked in Sweden.

The two stories below concern attacks on a mosque in Sweden. There are some genuine problems with this. First, what is a mosque? Who frequents the mosque? Why on earth would Swedes attack it? What benefit arises in the struggle against Islam in attacking a mosque?

A mosque is an Islamic fortress, a place meant not just for ceremonial prayers and Islamic rituals but for the storage and distribution of Islamic propaganda and weapons. Mosques, other than those temporary places rented out till a fortress can be built, are usually private property belonging to non-Muslims. A real mosque won't bun: it's made of re-enforced concrete. Things inside might burn but not the mosque. Burning someone else's place is easy. Burning a mosque is near impossible. The mosque itself isn't important. It's just a building. What happens inside the mosque is the problem, if it is a problem. Someone else's building is not a good target to begin ones struggle against jihadis.

Not all people who frequent a mosque are jihadis. Most are simply peasant immigrants, in the case below from Uzbekistan. Yes, Muslims. Not, not necessarily jihadis. Enemies of Swedish culture, probably, but not necessarily jihadis. It makes a difference. Peasants are peasants. They aren't worth anyone's trouble. Why bother with them when there are serious problems one might deal with?

Why would Swedes attack Uzbekis? They are primitive people, and they pose little threat to Sweden or even to the government of Uzbekistan itself. What benefit is there in attacking sheep and goats, acting like mad fools, like Ajax, whom the gods destroyed by first making him mad? A fool's victory. Someone is not thinking clearly.

But even were this mosque a flammable Sunni or Shi'ite mosque financed by Saudi Arabia or Iran, what is the gain? What is the profit in a pile of ashes? In a combat zone one looks for positive effect. Drama is not on the programme. But there is some benefit here, which we can look at below.

Sweden: Mosque attacked

A fire was set to a mosque in Strömsund (Jämtland) Thursday night. The mosque, which is located in the basement of an apartment block, serves the local Muslims, mostly immigrants and refugees from Uzbekistan.

The fire burned along the wall under the window. The police found burned cartons inside and did not find any natural causes for the fire, says Per Hanspik, police forensic investigator.

Police are taking the case very seriously and have given it top priority. Thomas Gutke, heading the investigation, doesn't rule out hate crime, but says that it's currently classified as attempted arson. It might be that the people who've done this can't even spell hate, according to Gutke.

[....]

Anders Fabricius, the municipality refugee coordinator, says that the mosque has a great symbolic value and that the incident causes fear of being subjected to persecution after fleeing it in their homeland.

[....]

In a separate story on the same subject we read the following:

On Friday evening several people tried breaking into the temporary mosque, set up after the fire. Several mosque members were inside at the time.

At 23:10pm police received a report that several people were involved in a fight in central Strömsund. When they arrived at the scene they found about 50 people outside the temporary mosque.

Anders Fabricius was called up and says that when he arrived there were many youth outside on the street and a gang of intoxicated youth tried to force the doors to the mosque.

According to police officer Magnus Hamstig the police had received reports of assault, illegal threats, vandalism and illegal entry. One 25 year old reported he was beaten, two windows were broken and two people had entered the mosque. They have identified four people as suspects. The fight had moved from another part of town to the mosque and it was there that the vandalism and illegal entry occurred.

Hamstig says that there is no connection between the fire in the mosque and the fight, and there is no indication that the same people are responsible for both. He says he thinks these are two separate incidents.

http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2008/08/sweden-mosque-attacked.html

"[T]the mosque has a great symbolic value and that the incident causes fear of being subjected to persecution ...."

It's a real stretch to see this as anything interesting. Scaring a bunch of illiterate peasants isn't anything one should brag about. In no way does this attack on a privately owned building rival the efforts of the jihadis on any significant level. One can be sure the mosque does not have any symbolic importance to the Muslims who used it. To them it's just a building. Causing fear among the peasants? Not significant. Who cares if some goat herders are nervous? The question is will such activities drive any of them into the arms of serious jihadis? If so, then one might claim some small success. To tighten the tensions between those who are jihadis and those who are passive but supportive is the key. Will this action move potential jihadis into radical arms? If so, then one knows. If not, then to the good, they are not a threat.

"[A]t the scene they found about 50 people outside the temporary mosque."

There are now about 50 people who have a direct and conscious opinion about Islam in Sweden. Some of those are Muslims. Regardless, about 50 people have entered the Combat Zone.

What is not to be done

The following piece comes from a Trotskyite site. It shows one more example, and even more, of where people go wrong in the struggle against Left dhimmi fascism in the real world. What is the gain in shooting some nobody political hack in Arkansas? Lenin covers this completely in What is to be Done? If Timothy Dale Johnson wanted to express his displeasure against the Left, in what way did he succeed?

He is not merely a fool, he is dead.

Patrick Martin,"Gunman murders Arkansas Democratic Party chairman." World Socialist Web. 15 August 2008

The Arkansas state chairman of the Democratic Party was shot to death Wednesday by a gunman who was himself killed in a later exchange of gunfire with police. Bill Gwatney, 48, was murdered in his office in Little Rock. ...

The gunman, Timothy Dale Johnson, entered the premises pretending to be interested in volunteering, then pushed past several staff members to reach the chairman's office. He introduced himself to Gwatney and they shook hands, whereupon he pulled out a handgun and opened fire, hitting the Democratic Party official four times, including once in the head. Gwatney died four hours later.

[....]

The Little Rock murder is the fourth recent incident in the South of violence or threatened violence against groups or individuals demonized by the ultra-right.

On July 27, Jim Adkisson, 58, walked into the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church near Knoxville, Tennessee and opened fire with a semiautomatic shotgun on the audience attending a children's play, killing two members of the church, Greg McKendry, age 60, and Linda Kraeger, age 61, and wounding six others. He subsequently killed himself, leaving a suicide note in which he stated "his hatred for the liberal movement," particularly the church's openness to gays.

On August 2, 22-year-old Raymond Hunter Geisel was arrested in Miami and charged with making death threats against Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. Police found weapons, body armor and other military gear in his car and hotel room. Geisel made the threats against Obama, including a reference to the candidate with a racial epithet, during a training session he was undertaking to become a bail bondsman. Others in the class reported him to the police. He faces federal charges.

On August 8, 48-year-old Jerry M. Blanchard was arrested in North Carolina for making similar threats to kill Obama. A Secret Service agent claimed that Blanchard may have mental health issues due to a recent head injury, and Blanchard has denied threatening the Democratic presidential candidate.

Johnson fits the social profile of these cases. He was white, middle-aged and under considerable economic stress. He was socially isolated, living alone in the home he had shared with his parents until his father's death in 2006. He owned a small arsenal of weapons—14 guns in the house, two more in the truck in which he died—and took regular practice at a local shooting club.

He was undoubtedly conservative in his political views, and had voted in Republican primaries for most of the past decade, except in 2006 when he voted in a Democratic primary. He voted in the Republican presidential primary February 5, which was won by the former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/aug2008/arka-a15.shtml

Trotskyites are here gloating over fools. Good for them. Maybe the ridicule they spew will wake up some people enough that they will realize the Communists have sometimes a better approach to revolution that some idiot with a gun in his pocket.

As the slogan above reads: A successful revolutionary is a statesman. Perhaps I could change it to: "An unsuccessful one is dead." One dead fool.

We should struggle to win, not to be idiot jihadi homicide-bombers and fools. To win requires intelligence and planning. Even that can lead to death, but at least one won't die a total fool.

Small, Small, Small. Small enough to put in Pocket.

"When she was arrested in Afghanistan last month, Aafia Siddique allegedly had in her possession maps of New York, a list of potential targets that included the Statue of Liberty, Times Square, the subway system and the animal disease center on Plum Island, detailed chemical, biological and radiological weapon information that has been seen only in a handful of terrorist cases, as well as a thumb drive packed with emails, ABC News has learned."

What can we learn from this story? We can learn that if we have an agent with a Ph. D. in useful technologies for warmaking, and if we have hundreds of thousands of active supporters contributing arms, money, manpower, and dedicated expertise, as well as nations willing to dedicate their hearts and souls and materiel to our efforts, then we might find someone who can be-- captured by a couple of illiterate uniform- wearing peasants toting shotguns!

Or we can learn to live and work effectively by using our wits and developed skills, our actions smaller than small. What is this?:

That haul of information has led multiple government sources to describe Siddique, a 36 year-old MIT graduate, as a potential "treasure trove" of information on terrorist supporters, sympathizers or 'sleepers' in the United States and overseas.

[....]

Only a "handful" of captured alleged Al Qaeda associates have had the kind of detailed information on weapons of mass destruction that Siddique, who attended MIT as an undergraduate and earned her PhD in neuroscience at Brandeis, had in her handbag, multiple current and former US intelligence and law enforcement officials told ABC News. [...]

"Her education troubled us. We know that she's extremely bright. She's radicalized. We knew that she had been planning, or at least involved in the planning, of a wide variety of different operations, whether they involved weapons of mass destruction or research into chemical or biological weapons, whether it was a possible attempt on the life of the President," said Kiriakou.

[....]

When nabbed by a team of Afghanistan National Police officers on July 17th, she also had in her possession a one gigabyte digital media storage device - a thumb drive - whose contents included a large trail of emails that authorities are now poring over, sources said. Those e-mails, a source involved in the investigation said, are between "what she described as 'units' and what we would call 'cells'."

In her papers she had maps and information concerning potential targets in New York City that sources say included the subway, Times Square and the Statute of Liberty, ABC News has learned. She also carried excerpts from "The Anarchist's Arsenal" and "documents detailing United States military assets", according to the federal complaint against her filed July 31st in Manhattan. [...]

ABC News sources said that she also had information indicating the possibility of "an attack" on Plum Island Disease Center, a secure US government facility off the tip of Long Island, New York where research into foot and mouth disease, swine fever and other animal pathogens is conducted by the Department of Agriculture and security is provided by the Department of Homeland Security. [...]

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/022181.php

If ever you wondered where you would find an example of how stupid smart people can be, this above should do you well. Think small. There is no winning in tiny tactical victories; but strategic smallness is winning. Compare, for example, a homicide bombing in a crowded marketplace. Try to recall one you have not been involved in directly. They are a dime a dozen. Even the murder of Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan has lead the jihadis to nothing successful at all. A big an flashy target, a well-executed operation, and to no effect. Pakistan's enemy is India, not a local politician. No gain. That's a loss for their team.

We cannot stand losses on our side, especially at this point. Later, as the tide turns in our favor, we might be more daring and less concerned to protect our assets, but at this time we must think in terms of the maximum gain at no human cost on our part. We are at a point at which we can only smile in envy at the Viet Cong member who claimed: "In all these years we have not lost a single plane, a single tank, or a single ship: because we do not have those things." We have, as our only and as our great assets, Will and intelligence. We must think small.

In what way does any expenditure bring us profit, both monetary and publicly? How do we further our goal of ridding the world of Islam as a political and social power? What does Islam and its jihadis have that we do not have but that we could use if we could take from them? In what way does taking from them further our goals? What is small enough to take from those small enough to take it from? Advice, I might venture, from single people well considered; people well known to us; people who have advice we have tracked and plotted and planned to take and use for benefit later to further our goals. Advice, written down, put in wallet, perhaps banked for later. Small. Individual. Small. Small.

Dead Man Stalking

Some acts are stupid even if the motive is right. But this is the work of morons for little good reason. Thus, we can forget about the Israelis being involved and turn immediately to the more likely suspects, the ones caught, i.e., the Muslims captured at the scene. But there's far more to this idiot story than inept Palestinians trying to settle scores among themselves and being too stupid to get it right.

Palestinians: Mossad tried to assassinate West Bank exile

Sources in Ireland claim Israeli agents attempted to shoot Jihad Jaara, one of most wanted men sent to exile following siege on Church of Nativity in 2002

Ali Waked

Published:

08.07.08, 07:22 / Israel News

Palestinian sources have accused Israel of trying to assassinate Jihad Jaara, one of the Palestinians sent to exile following the siege on the Church of the Nativity in 2002, who now resides in Ireland.

According to the sources, Jaara escaped an assassination attempt and the Irish police arrested two suspects – a Palestinian from Gaza who has a European citizenship and a Moroccan with a French citizenship.

A Palestinian source in Ireland told Ynet that while Jaara was making his way on Wednesday to the PLO embassy building, shots were fired at him from a passing car, but he escaped unharmed. Immediately afterwards, another vehicle crashed into Jaara's car, dropping it into a nearby valley. Jaara was lightly injured, and police officers who were in the area chased the other car and detained the two suspects travelling in it.

[....]

Palestinian sources in Ireland told Ynet that "this is beyond any doubt an assassination attempt by the Israeli Mossad."

According to the sources, the car the suspects were travelling in contained the photos of three of three of the Palestinians sent to exile following the siege on the Church of the Nativity – a picture of Jaaara, a picture of Ibrahim Abayat who was expelled to Spain, and a photo of Mahmoud Said who was sent to Italy.

Some 40 Palestinians, most of them Fatah members, were expelled from the West Bank in May 2002, following a siege on the Church of the Nativity after Operation Defensive Shield. Twenty-six men were sent to the Gaza Strip and 13 others to European countries, where they reside to this day.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3578991,00.html

Some readers will follow the party line regardless.Those very people will end up somewhere at the bottom of history's garbage heap. The rest of us will continue on and succeed in our limited aims. I mean limited. I mean SMALL.

We can look at this story as one showing that nearly every stupid thing that could be done was done.People so stupid as those above don't deserve to continue. What, at root, did they do wrong? They thought too big. They thought in term of daydreams and glory. They assumed that a spray of gunfire would have to hit the target. Why? Who is the actor in charge of making the rightness of things happen? That something should happen is no reason to assume it will happen. It is that, the expectation that should equals will, that we see the primitive mind of a Muslim at work.Muslims fail. They get captured. They get killed or kill themselves in the process of failing. On those rare occasions that the Muslim does succeed in his task, he is later caught and punished and is a failure. To blame this kind of idiocy on Israelis is stupider than blaming the theft of cookies on your sister. Why would one do that? How could a grown man with a family and a job expect other adults to believe ones sister stole the cookies? Even children don't pull such stupid antics. We witness in this story the utter failure of the mind to do more than operate at the reptile level and the automatic. These people will end up in the garbage heap of history because they are garbage people.

The man in question is still alive, and someone still wants him otherwise. How is it he still walks? If someone wishes he were otherwise than he is, then a thinking man would consider that such is worth money. Who would consider paying? How would one find and approach those who would offer a settlement for such a proposition? And like any business deal, how does one provide the service and get the payment? Anything other than the means to reinvest in ones business is a stupidity based on wage-slavery and lack of clear thought. To think small, to think clearly, to think of the future, that is the greatness of SMALL.

Social Revolution in Germany

Is this the Germany we used to hate and fear? Not at all. This is a new and equally disturbing Germany. Things change but they seldom improve in the world of European politics. The question is whether the people will act as responsible citizens or if they'll continue acting like farm animals, roused and riled into frenzies, or stupefied into states of zombie-like obedience to the ruling cliques as per usual.

The German intelligentsia has consistently betrayed the telos of Humanity since at least the time of Fichte, and nothing better seems to be on the horizon of Germanic thought. More and more German Revolution, and not a spark of that which makes man a free and independent creature, that which his nature demands of Right. Betrayal of the Human is the consistent theme of the German Revolution. Will it turn? Or will the German people once again follow their rulers into destruction and perhaps this time utter oblivion?

Germany's Intifada

By Stephen Brown
FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, August 01, 2008

First it was France, and now Germany.

German authorities are reporting that, within their cities, areas now exist where police fear to tread. In many German urban areas drug dealing, theft, brawls, and assaults on police officers are the order of the day. The problem is becoming so severe police scarcely dare enter some quarters except in strength, while in others they concentrate on their own safety first.

But this is old news to French law enforcement officials. The 2005 riots woke France up to the fact that an anti-civilization had arisen in the "banlieues" (housing projects), which surround major French cities. Populated mainly by immigrants from North and West Africa, many with a Muslim background, they are known as places of anger and aggression towards anyone who represents "official" France.

French police are sometimes attacked with Molotov cocktails when they enter such areas. Firemen and ambulance attendants are not treated much better. Police even had difficulty protecting a French president, Jacques Chirac, and his interior minister when they went campaigning in a banlieue. The two high-ranking politicians were also met with Molotovs and had to retreat.

In all, the French housing projects have the look of scarred battlefields with burnt out cars littering the landscape. The extent of France's lawlessness problem manifested itself last month when 592 cars were torched in France in the two nights surrounding Bastille Day, July 14 and 15, 150 in the Paris region alone. To make matters worse, Islamic fundamentalists have attracted many of the banlieus' unemployed, uneducated and frustrated young men to their cause. These fundamentalists, it is suspected, were the ones directing the 2005 disturbances and their recurrence in 2007.

In Germany, the problem neighbourhoods are often located within the city and not on the outskirts. Like in France, though, urban anti-societies have arisen, but in Germany they consist mainly of Turkish and Arab immigrants, many from Lebanon. In their districts, German laws and values now have little, if any, validity, while their culture of lawlessness does.

Police complain that when they conduct routine checks in these neighbourhoods, they are met with angry crowds and often risk assault. Even when a policeman is carrying out a simple duty, like inspecting someone's identification, out of nowhere suddenly appear 20 to 30 men, yelling wildly, who push and shove him. They assemble quickly after having been contacted by cell phone.

While confrontations occur over nothing, violence can occur when the stakes are higher. When Berlin police arrested three drug-dealing Arabs in Kreuzberg, for example, a district where Turks and Arabs form the majority, they were immediately swarmed by two dozen men who tried to free the suspected criminals by force. Only the quick arrival of reinforcements saved the day. It is also in Kreuzberg that the first car burnings in Germany took place.

For the last ten years Berlin has been the leading German city for such "resistance-to-police" incidents. Overall, Germany's police union records an average of 26,000 such occurrences a year, an increase of 60 per cent from the 1980s. Berlin accounts for about 3,000 of this total. In Germany's capital, a union official said, there exists "an alarm level red" concerning violence against police.

"We have been registering for years a loss of police authority and a rapid sinking of a lack of restraint," said Eberhard Schonberg, the police union's head.

But what is even more disturbing to law enforcement officials is the increase in violent crime among minors, especially those with a foreign background. Germany was shocked this year when two youths, one Turkish and the other Greek, nearly beat a 76-year-old retired school principal to death in Munich last December. The pensioner had admonished them for smoking on a commuter train. The two criminals kicked and yelled "s**t German" at the man's prostrate form after having knocked him down.

There is also an overrepresentation of immigrant youth in crime statistics. A survey of schools in western German cities showed that ten per cent of the Turkish students were repeat offenders, who had committed more than five violent offences. The same survey showed 8.3 per cent of students from the former Yugoslavia were in the same category along with 5.9 per cent from the former Soviet Union. Native-born Germans, who also included those from migrant backgrounds with German citizenship, made up only 2.9 per cent of such delinquents.

And while German teenagers are more often the victims of youth crime, immigrant youth brutality very often occurs between different ethnic groups. Violence between Turks and Arabs at one high school in Berlin, for example, became so bad the principal asked the city to close her school. This incident then led other principals across Germany to request the same for their schools.

But even immigrant children as young as eight are committing illegal acts. Police report of an Arab neighborhood in Duisburg, a city in the Rhineland, where such youthful miscreants "kick old ladies, demand sexual intercourse from women, throw water-filled balloons against business windows and deliberately cross streets at red lights to create traffic jams." Their aim, police say, is to generate fear among outsiders.

The overall purpose of such disturbing behavior and anti-police incidents is to turn these immigrant neighbourhoods into lawless mini-states, where their tribal and religious customs and rules predominate, and criminals can act freely. In scuffles and confrontations German police are often told, in threat[ening] and obscenity-filled language, to go away and that these streets belong to the ethnic group that lives there.

As everyone knows, a competent and effective police force is necessary to protect the law-abiding citizen, guarantee his rights and carry out one of the main functions of the state: law and order. But increasingly in some European urban areas, a police uniform has come to mean nothing. And countries like Germany do not act now to reverse this, their cities will become as burnt out and eviscerated as the carcasses of cars France knows only too well.

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=7E34D79C-D2A7-4709-B7BE-1CDD528A9B1F

****

The problem is not of German cowardice but of German collectivism.

In most nations the people are concerned with the daily privacies of life, of feeding themselves and their families, of finding the necessary stuff of living, and such leads to a normal apathy regarding the greater polity, leaving the masses to pursue their private needs and interests solely. Nothing in that sense is different in Germany or Ghana or Guyana. But in Germany, swarmed by an invasion of primitivism from outside, undermined by a swarm of destructive nativist Romanticism, the problem is acute and inflamed.

What is to be done, as Lenin asked so forthrightly?

Germany, more than most nations, is the one European nation that is culturally committed to collectivism. The people act in turn with the whole rather than as individuals, to a greater extent than many other Modernist nations. Still, there will be those few who act as the initiators of social change, leading the masses into some indescribable future. That would be you, dear reader.

One must not expect much activity from those who suffer the result of invasion, not from the invaders themselves nor from those invaded, daily life taking immediate precedence at all times for nearly all people, leaving only a tiny vanguard of intellectuals and activists to pursue the coming agenda, whatever it might be. But something must be done because it is in the nature of Man to do, even if it is from the tiniest minority of Man. There is no sitting back and living daily routines forever for the placid, simply because Man is not forever content with any status quo, regardless of the conditions. Some will act, regardless of the action. Some will move and shake. One must assume here that our readers are such movers and shakers.

What is to be done? In fairness, it matters not at all what is done. Some will do and some will be done.

On Idiots and Useful Idiots

Jim David Adkisson of Knoxville, entered the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church, headquartered in Boston, with a shotgun and killed two, wounded others.

A news report from Boston:

There was one previous shooting at a Unitarian Universalist congregation. In 2001, police in Brattleboro killed a man wielding a knife in a church there, and there have been several recent shootings at churches of other denominations.

"The first reaction is, 'Why a Unitarian Universalist church, and why go in there when there are children there and try to kill people because of liberalism?' " said the Rev. Kristen Harper, minister of the Unitarian Church of Barnstable on Cape Cod.

"Even though he's crazy, you still wonder, why a liberal church, and how does shooting up liberals make sense?" she said. "For people to use violence against us, it's really sad."

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/07/30/unitarians_are_rattled_by_attack_on_church/

OK, call me a heartless reactionary, but I think it's a bit more than "sad" to have people shot down in a church like dogs. If one is a brain-dead flake, then maybe "sad" is as deep as one gets. Still, in the real world where the living die and where the living live on if they survive, what good did the man do in furthering his own cause? I think it's fair to say he did nothing in his own cause, either case above. Failure. There is no welcome of failures here. It is more than sad to see people killed for no reason at all other than to satisfy ones own rage against ones own failure in life. No place here for those.

The Washington Post and Newsweek come up with this, quoting people Jim David Adkisson would likely have delighted in shooting. He didn't shoot them. They speak to the press:

The Unitarian Universalist Association might be the most liberal denomination in the country. Most members consider themselves part of a post-Christian religion that draws wisdom from all religions and philosophies. There is no central creed, but the denomination promotes a set of principles that includes a belief in "the inherent worth and dignity of every person."

David Gushee and Rachel Laser used a similar phrase earlier this month when they called on Barack Obama and John McCain "to bring a just end" to the culture wars.

"Gay and lesbian issues, like abortion, have also been tearing the nation apart," Gushee, an evangelical and professor at Mercer University, and Laser, a program director for the progressive think tank called Third Way, wrote in a guest column for On Faith.

"But on these issues too we can find a shared common value and shared path forward. That shared value is human dignity. We can all agree that all human beings are created in God's image and have and deserve an innate human dignity - even those with whom one differs or disagrees. We can all agree that honoring this human dignity is a high moral and religious calling."

"Senators McCain and Obama," they concluded, "each of you has great potential to model a new type of leadership. Each of you has the power to heal the country and carve a new path forward through our shared common values. We humbly submit our joint prayer that you, Senators McCain and Obama, help bring a just end to the culture wars."

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/2008/07/a_whole_lotta_ugly_in_church_s.html

V.I. Lenin would have referred to Adkisson as a "useful idiot." But Adkisson was not useful. He was merely an idiot. A homicidal idiot, but an idiot nonetheless.

Crowd Control

A riot is tactical when thugs conduct it; it is strategic when conducted by professional revolutionaries determined to gain political power.

No private citizen is in a legitimate position in attacking the police in self-defense. That is an offense. Attacking the police is a crime. To be successful and not a criminal, one must become the masters of the police system, i.e. one must legitimate hold power in the governing party. To go from private citizen to legitimate politician means one will go from criminal to one who will act as the lead authority in the state with the help of the police. Consider carefully the relationship you will have as a politician if you are known to have previously assaulted a policeman.

Those who wish to conduct revolutionary activity for the furtherance of universal democratization will have the sense to refrain from attacking those who will later stand as their guard. Police defend order, not individuals. But the police are individuals, and if one assaults them they will likely retaliate in time even against a politician.

When a riot is in full swing, police will deploy in a square formation with a command team at the center. The command team is protected on all four sides by echelons of troops deployed in groups of 10 or 12 officers. There is also an arrest team at the center of the square.

When horses come charging forward, drop bags of marbles on the street under their hooves. When men on foot come, roll out your skate boards under the feet of those charging at you. If you're chased by dogs, stick up a balloon full of urine in a place a dog will find it and bite it.

This tactical unit is very mobile and able to adapt on the fly to changes in the situation. If a threat suddenly appears behind or to one side of the unit, then the echelon facing that direction is designated the front of the unit. The entire team can then change the direction it's facing without a lot of maneuvering. Also, the echelons can cover each other when the team moves to take advanced positions. If the unit is under attack, the whole team does not move together: One echelon moves while the others provide covering fire or an actual physical screen (with riot shields). Then another echelon moves up into position.

The echelon is not meant to be an impenetrable wall of cop. In fact, the riot squad often leaves an escape route to let rioters run past the squad. The officers can adopt a passive position, in which they spread out and leave several yards between each officer. The crowd can then easily filter through them. If a particularly violent group moves toward the officers or they spot specific suspects they want to arrest, they can quickly close the gaps and form a tight line.

As the unit moves forward into a crowd, it will prod and push at anyone who doesn't respond to requests to move away by the time the front echelon reaches them. If they still refuse to move, the unit continues moving forward, but the front echelon opens up and passes around the protesters. Once the protesters are inside the square, the unit stops, the front echelon reforms and the arrest team processes the rioters. When they're done, the unit can continue moving.

One forms "affinity groups" of three to four people well-known to each other by sight; and these affinity groups will spot each other and rescue each other as a team. Each affinity group will pair with another, one person from each group knowing one from the next group, and then to the next group so all four people are connected to a further group, and in turn are connected.

If or when a group is contained or restrained or scattered, then there must be a place to flee to in advance for regrouping. maintain contact with other groups. Signal by number the rendezvous to other affinity groups. In case of arrest in a non-police-state, have lawyer's telephone numbers inked on non-sweaty areas of the body. Have a command centre relay names and numbers so help is on the way in advance of detention. If people know you're missing, they will account for you.

When a crowd-control unit gets ready for action, the first thing it does is put on protective gear. The full outfit is known as hard tac and consists of:

• Helmet with face shield
• Body armor
• Large body shield

If you will be in what could be a riot situation, the police have a right and a duty to arrest you for showing up in combat gear. You can justifiable show up in a bike helmet and shin guards, gloves and wrist and knee guards, if you seem to have a bike somewhere near. You can also wear wrist guards, knee guards, a helmet, and kidney belt if you hold a skate board or have roller-blades around your neck. You can wear long pants with the cuffs tied to keep out tear-gas. Bring petroleum jelly to cover your face and hands from the gas, and you will wish to wear goggles, even those meant for swimming. But you cannot arrive dressed for combat.

Shields are not allowed. One may find garbage can lids, though they're increasingly rare on city streets. Instead, one might substitute cafe tables and folding chairs from near-by patios.

The most basic offensive weapon a riot-control officer has is a baton. These are usually between 24 and 42 inches (60-107 cm) long and are made of any hardwood. Most crowd-control units use these instead of rifles because the mere presence of rifles tends to escalate any kind of disturbance, and if the crowd manages to wrest a rifle away from an officer, the results could be tragic.

You cannot defend yourself against a police charge and hope to talk your way out of it in a court of law. If you are in danger of being beaten by a person with a club you can use a chain to disarm him. You might, if you're agile, disable his arm or ankle.

The first step in crowd management is making sure a riot doesn't happen in the first place. Although sometimes riots erupt unexpectedly, they are frequently tied to planned protests and organized strikes. When the police think there is the potential that such a situation could get out of control, they contact the organizers and leaders of the protest or strike ahead of time. They set up ground rules that the protestors are to follow, and they designate a specific area for the event to happen in. The police assign specially trained officers to monitor the event. The point is that the police will simply provide a presence and work to ensure that everyone stays safe. Only if the ground rules are broken will any police action be needed at all.

While officers are trained to stay polite with the people in the crowd, they are careful to not give off an air of subservience. The police have to be seen as being in charge and in control at all times, even while they stay passive and allow the crowd to operate within the ground rules set out ahead of time.

Sometimes, though, these preventative measures don't work, and a riot breaks out despite police efforts to keep everyone calm.

The first step in crowd management is making sure a riot doesn't happen in the first place. The question then is why would you attend a riot situation in the first place? One attends a riot for the sake of furthering ones goals. The goal is not to allow the police to talk you into going home early. Agree with the police on all counts, then, and act responsibly in every instance right up till the rioting starts. Lie to the police with full confidence that you mean not a word of what you say and that you will ignore everything you've told them. The next time you encounter the police they will not trust you. From then on, you are in charge of whether you lie further or tell the truth. If you do the latter, you can complain the police don't trust you and have betrayed their word. Do not allow the other side to feel confident about controlling the situation. If you lie to them and betray their trust, they will not have the control they expect. Destroy your credibility so you are automatically unpredictable but assumed to be lying regardless. The other side will the have to respond in the worst case scenario each time.

Use the Arafat technique: Tell the opposition you're attempting to calm the crowd; tell the media something outrageous about the police; and tell the home troops to go wild.

Organize in such a way that your main group is at an edge of your assigned space. This gives you running room in three directions. The other side will often seal off an area, in which case you'll have reserves outside the zone and the opposition will be boxed in with the central core. The opposition is flanked and you have a rescue team. You move inward and the opposition has to break up to meet the new threat. If your main core is boxed in, you must have reinforcements to use a pincer to box in the opposition.

If a crowd gets unruly and starts taking violent action, then the police will switch to a more aggressive attitude. Their actions here reflect the fact that almost all riots are incited and lead by a few individuals who feel strongly or have something to gain from a violent confrontation. The majority of the people present either show up because something exciting is going on or are bystanders who got carried into the mob mentality. Faced with the possibility of arrest or confrontation with police, most of them simply want to escape and go home.

Most people who show up for riots have no idea why they are there. They are mostly by-standers curious and looking on. They will generally move as they are directed by those with the authority to move a herd. One must then salt the crowds with motivated leaders who guide the masses into proper formations. One does this by chanting and sloganeering. Engulf the collective mind in a single voice of short and choppy repeated slogans, for example: "Gag Garg, Hark Chark!". [Call it a spiritual chant from the mystic ancestral spirits.] Accompany this with rhythmic hand-clomping and foot-stomping in unison. Keep the group in solidarity by unifying the mind.

The first step is simple intimidation. Riot officers stand in strict formations and act with military precision. Once they form echelons -- lines of officers that effectively work as barriers -- the officers tap their batons on their shields or stomp their feet in unison. The result can be quite frightening to unarmed civilians -- it looks and sounds as if this group of armed and armored officers is getting ready to come crashing down with clubs swinging. In truth, this display is meant to scare off as many of the rioters as possible without the officers ever getting near them.

Use half of the first group to stand against the opposition thus: they will be committed and determined, some of the strongest of your forces. Those will meet the first rank of out-riding opponents, a medium echelon. Send in the weakest group against the strongest scene of resistance from the opposition, those in the center of the opponent's group. And finally, leave the strongest to battle the medium of the opposition in reserve. Ideally, weakest against strongest, strongest against medium, medium against weakest, guaranteeing at least two victories out of three with a loss of the weakest.

Police do not try to arrest every rioter. Their first targets are those who are leading the riot, because often the crowd will disperse without their leaders firing them up and encouraging them. All people who are spotted breaking a law are also targeted for arrest, especially if they injure or kill another person.

When it gets to the point where officers are actually in conflict with the rioters, the goal is still to disperse the crowd. A combination of advancing lines of officers and the use of noxious gas is used to direct the crowd in a certain direction or keep them away from a certain area. The crowd is never pinned down -- rioters are always given an escape route, since the whole point is to get them to run away.

If your crowd does run away, you want them to return next day for more. Everyone who is able can use the Internet and cell phones to propagate the incredible victory of the rioters against the forces of oppression. Next time the victory will be certain.

Be organized well in advance of your action. Know your routes to advance and to escape. Dress for success. Assign affinity groups and identify each others' contact. Set a number of rendezvous points by number. Mark down the number of a lawyer you will contact in case of arrest. Have your defensive gear with you. Know your terrain. Know where you wish to approach from and where you wish to exit from. Give yourself room to move but not room enough to allow for easy desertion of the less motivated. Leave room for rescue. Take the initiative from the opposition by lying and destroying any trust of your intentions. Assign your forces so that at least two out of three time you are struggling against a weaker opponent, giving you the chance of two victories rather than three defeats. Claim victory and claim brutality and unfairness on the part of the opposition. Really, all we want is fairness, right? Anything else isn't fair.

Ruthlessness might seem effective in the short term, but one must keep an eye on the future when rule is day-by-day. That is strategic.

A Moral Holiday

"The real problem is work. If they had any these riots would not have happened."

I heard the voice saying, "Don't piss against the wind." So there I go, knowing I'd get blasted, and I didn't care at all. I'm sure I burst out laughing, laughing all the harder the wetter I got. What? six? seven years old? I did it once, got over it, and never thought again of doing anything so deliberately stupid just for the fun of it. I don't piss on anyone else either. If I'm upset, there are better ways of showing my displeasure. Pissing on myself isn't even a way of displeasing myself; it's a way of celebrating my lack of care for the obvious rules of civility. I don't do that. Not since I was six. I don't piss on those who piss me off. There are adult ways in the adult world.

Much of living is about power. If one has power, things go better than if one does not have power. Power is much in the mind. It's a matter of attitude. Metaphorical pissing in the wind is a sure sign of contempt for power outside oneself; but it's not furthering ones own cause. For some that isn't a big point. For mature adults it is. Mature adults want effective power. They use it effectively to create good. They use power to affect good for themselves and thereby good for others as a spin-off. Not always. There is crime. Leaving that aside, we can look on power as a good thing. It's a leveler. You have power, I have power, we compromise. You get a bit, I get a bit, everyone is more or less satisfied. You have power and you burn my car; I have power and I set you on fire. Maybe I win but I don't have my car anymore. You die, I might land in prison. Then I lose my power and someone else has more than most over me. Bad situation. It's pissing in the wind. But you can't just burn my car without some penalty against you. I call the police. They come and do nothing. Maybe they call me a racist. They go away. I have no car. I am pissed-off. I buy a new car, and you burn that one too.

From The Times
October 21, 2006

Why 112 cars are burning every day

A year after the Paris riots violence and despair continue to grip the immigrant suburbs

By Charles Bremner

FLAMES lick around a burning car on a tiny telephone screen. Omar, 17, a veteran of France's suburban riots, replayed the sequence with pride. "It was great. We did lots of them and then we went out and torched more the next day."

Omar, whose parents immigrated from Mali, was savouring memories of the revolt that erupted 12 months ago from his home, the Chêne Pointu estate in Clichy-sous-Bois, in the eastern outskirts of Paris. "We're ready for it again. In fact it hasn't stopped," he added.

Before next week's anniversary of the Clichy riots, the violence and despair on the estates are again to the fore. Despite a promised renaissance, little has changed, and the lid could blow at any moment.

The figures are stark. An average of 112 cars a day have been torched across France so far this year and there have been 15 attacks a day on police and emergency services. Nearly 3,000 police officers have been injured in clashes this year. Officers have been badly injured in four ambushes in the Paris outskirts since September. Some police talk of open war with youths who are bent on more than vandalism.

"The thing that has changed over the past month is that they now want to kill us," said Bruno Beschizza, the leader of Synergie, a union to which 40 per cent of officers belong. Action Police, a hardline union, said: "We are in a civil war, orchestrated by radical Islamists."

Car-burning has become so routine on the estates that it has been eclipsed in news coverage by the violence against police. Sebastian Roche, a sociologist who has published a book on the riots, said that torching a vehicle had become a standard amusement. "There is an apprenticeship of destruction. Kids learn where the petrol tank is, how to make a petrol bomb," he told The Times.

Nicolas Sarkozy, the Interior Minister who hopes to win the presidency next May, has once again taken the offensive, staging raids on the no-go areas and promising no mercy for the thugs who reign there.

With polls showing law and order as the top public concern, his presidential chances hang on his image as a tough cop.

M Sarkozy's muscular approach is being challenged not just by Socialist opponents. President Chirac and Dominique de Villepin, his Prime Minister, are waging their own, softer, campaign to undermine the colleague whom they do not want to be president. M de Villepin called in community leaders this week and promised to accelerate hundreds of millions of pounds of measures that were promised last autumn to relieve the plight of the immigrant-dominated suburbs.

National politics seem far from Clichy, a leafy town of hulking apartment buildings only ten miles but a universe away from the Elysée Palace. However, the Interior Minister is cited by the estate youths as the symbol of their anger. "Sarko wants to wipe us out, clear us off the map," said Rachid, 19. "They said they would help us after last year, but we've got nothing."

Rachid is to attend a march next Friday for Zyed and Bouna, the teenagers whose deaths in an electrical station sparked the rioting that engulfed the Seine-Saint-Denis département, known from its registration number, 93, as le Neuf-Trois. The boys, aged 17 and 15, who were hiding from police when they were electrocuted, are seen in Clichy as martyrs. Amor Benna, 61, the Tunisian father of Zyed, appealed this week to the young to refrain from violence and use their votes for change. "I don't want to see cars burning again," he said from his home on the Chêne Pointu estate. But the unhappiness was understandable, said M Benna, a street cleaner. "The young were born here and they are French. But they have nothing. The real problem is work. If they had any these riots would not have happened."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article607860.ece

The story above comes from two year ago. Today things in France are even worse. More cars burn each night than before.

A Riot Primer
National Review Online | September 1, 2005 | Eugene H. Methvin

Posted on September 01, 2005 02:02:06 PM by ExpandNATO

A Riot Primer
The importance of using force to control the spread of urban riots.

By Eugene H. Methvin

EDITOR'S NOTE: This piece appeared in the June 10, 1991, issue of National Review.

Do we have to relearn every couple of decades — at high cost in blood and treasure — the ABCs of riot ignition and suppression?

Two recent outbursts of urban mass violence suggest we may be in for a chain reaction of anti-police rioting like the ones that erupted in Harlem and five other cities in 1964, followed by the bloody "long hot summer" riots in Watts, Newark, Detroit, Washington, and many other cities in 1965-68. Following the vicious Los Angeles police beating of Rodney King on March 3, police attempts to arrest street drunks, a routine occurrence, produced a minor riot in Houston and major violence in Washington, D.C.

In a drug-and-gang-infested neighborhood in Houston, on Saturday night, May 4, a solo policeman came upon a man who appeared intoxicated. The officer told the man he would have to go to jail. The man refused and shoved the officer. "At that time I noticed another man standing behind me with a video camera, filming the whole thing. It was an obvious setup," said Officer J. R. Deugenio, who wisely beat a retreat. A crowd of some 75 to 100 people gathered, and bottles and rocks rained down on his patrol car before he could escape. He reported hearing four or five shots. Two similar incidents had occurred in the same neighborhood on Saturday, April 20. In each case an officer's car was pelted with rocks, sticks, and bottles, and he was forced to yield a prisoner. Houston Police Chief Elizabeth M. Watson ordered her cops not to enter the area, less than a mile west of downtown, without backup.

In Washington, D.C., on Sunday, May 5, a black female police officer attempted to arrest a Hispanic man who was drinking and unruly on a street in the Mount Pleasant area, heavily populated by recent Central American immigrants. The man drew a knife and advanced, the officer reported, whereupon she shot and severely wounded him. The rumor spread that he was dead, shot while handcuffed. A flashfire of violence erupted as hundreds of youths set fire to police cars, smashed windows, and looted. Washington's new mayor, Sharon Pratt Dixon, at first ordered police to disperse crowds but make no arrests. The second night, running gangs of youths fought a thousand policemen, burning and looting as they spread out. Mayor Dixon then declared a curfew and ordered arrests, whereupon the violence subsided. Police made 230 arrests in three days.

City officials said no more than six hundred youths were involved and claimed a great triumph since no one died, in contrast to the 1968 riots, in which 13 people died. But merchants and residents in the area bitterly criticized the initial police inaction.

Mayor Dixon's no-arrest order precisely replicated the initial blunders of 1968. If other mayors and police chiefs follow her example, the nation will be in for a "long hot summer" indeed. For the lesson of history is plain: In riot situations, the earlier the police make arrests, and the more arrests they make, the lower will be the toll in life, limb, and property. And the cop on the street will not act decisively unless he feels he has the support of his superiors — principally his chief and mayor.

The social phenomenon is well documented, but the books lie on library shelves, dusted off only once a generation or so by mayoral or presidential commissions. We need only look at Atlanta in 1905; East St. Louis in 1917; Charleston, Chicago, Washington, Boston, and Knoxville in 1919; Harlem in 1935; Detroit in 1943; and Harlem to Watts to Washington and nearly everywhere else in 1964-68.

Moral Holiday

In a nutshell: Riots begin when some set of social forces temporarily overwhelms or paralyzes the police, who stand by, their highly visible inaction signaling to the small percentage of teenaged embryonic psychopaths and hardened young adults that a moral holiday is under way. This criminal minority spearheads the car-burning, window-smashing, and blood-letting, mobbing such hate targets as blacks, or white merchants, or lone cops. Then the drawing effect brings out the large crowds of older men, and women and children, to share the Roman carnival of looting. Then the major killing begins: slow runners caught in burning buildings and-as civic forces mobilize-in police and National Guard gunfire.

The books are on the shelf- let the responsible authorities in city hall and police headquarters check them out.

The time to halt a riot is right at the start, by pinching off the criminal spearhead with precise and overwhelming force. The cops will usually be caught flat-footed (no pun intended) by the initial outbreak. But they need to spring into a pre-arranged mobilization that should always be as ready in every major city as the fire-department or hospital disaster-response program.

While Detroit Burned

In the worst urban riots of the 1960s — Watts, Newark, Detroit, and Washington — the police did nothing or next to it for the first several hours. Deaths and property destruction soared. Contrast what happened in Toledo 36 hours after Detroit's outburst.

There, five hundred young men began breaking windows along a six-block stretch. The fourth police cruiser arriving radioed: "Do you want us to observe?" That such a question should even have been asked was damning proof that Americans had let years of extreme court rulings and hysterical "police brutality" propaganda paralyze our last line of defense against criminal anarchy.

Yet in Toledo the answer snapped back steely and clear. Police Chief Tony Bosh happened to be monitoring the radio and he barked: Arrest every lawbreaker you can — and meet illegal force with legal force!"

Just as quickly, Toledo's mayor requested and Ohio Governor James Rhodes called in five hundred National Guardsmen to stand behind police in reserve, with well-publicized orders to kill if necessary to maintain order. They were never needed. Toledo's police arrested 22 people (nine for possessing firebombs) in the first three hours. That was almost triple the number Detroit and Newark police arrested in the same period.

Chief Bosh laid out for a Senate committee the criminal records, "some as long as your arm," of the rioters jailed in his city's three-day eruption. Of the 126 adults a startling 105 had prior arrests, averaging six apiece. Every single one of the 22 young adults jailed in the first three hours had criminal records; they averaged only twenty years old and three prior arrests apiece. The twenty young men jailed on firebomb charges averaged four apiece.

The result of the quick arrest policy: Toledo's trouble hardly earned the name "riot." No one died — not one person, looter, policeman, or innocent bystander. The will that Toledo's civil authorities displayed, like a heavy rain on a kindling forest fire, made the difference between "incident" and "insurrection." They withdrew the one essential ingredient for a major riot: implied official permission for criminals and rowdies to coalesce and rebel.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1475088/posts

We'll continue with this line of inquiry. There is no site meter here to track you. Feel free to leave comments if you so choose.

Combat Zone.

Agon: Moral Flux / Moral Absolute

"Take Lithuania, for example, where 240,000 Jews lived at the start of the war," says Levin, a survivor of - and expert on - the Holocaust. "Some 220,000 perished, most at the hands of the Lithuanians themselves who began murdering Jews in 40 communities even before the Germans invaded in June 1941. They were organized in the LAF (Lithuanian Activist Front) and anyone wanting to prove his loyalty had to murder at least one Jew.

http://skiptraceamerica.com/ARTICLES/art06.html

There is moral relativism and there is moral popularity and there is moral. Who knows where we end up? That's because there is no end to end at. History doesn't end at all. We do, and we are what we did, others deciding that moral to their own satisfaction later, that morality not being to them what we do/did but what they decide among themselves according to themselves. Forget the judgments of history: Immoral people will reign in immoral times and condemn the Just. Those who are moral live accordingly and live without concern for the judgments of those who come later, regardless.

Does it mean we are trapped in a personal vacuum of personal morality? Not if we act according to Reason, intuition, and tradition. If we think, then we are able to save ourselves perhaps from immorality. Mistakes? We'll make a few. And the authority we base our moral actions on? That decides it for us. That's personal. Sartre writes of it nicely, writing that we choose our own moral authorities to obey. He takes at least some of the foundation for such thought from, of all people, Heidegger. We live anyway, and we must do our best.

At the Combat Zone the point is to bring forth examples of moral questions in action. There's no theology here; not a philosophy to follow. No ideology informs these posts. A thesis, yes.

Below is some of a piece from Latvia, close to Lithuania geographically and culturally, historically and morally. In fact, it's hardly different from anyplace. The same moral questions are pervasive no matter where we are or the times. A Lett is tried for crimes against Humanity in the story below for siding with a group now out of favor, and he seems to have been a particularly brutal bastard on the face of it. You, in a position perhaps similar sometime, will have to make decisions that will define you as a moral person. Times will change around you and today's friends might become tomorrow's prosecutors. Today's right might seem to be tomorrow's crimes against Humanity. How will you know today that this is good and that isn't? What, if anything, will you do today?

Latvian seeks £4million compensation after being jailed for killing Nazi sympathisers in World War Two

Daily Mail Reporter; 26th June 2008

More than 60 years after the end of World War Two, a man is to be judged by Europe's highest court on whether he was right or wrong to kill Nazi sympathisers collaborating with Hitler.

Latvian Vasiliy Kononov, 85, is claiming compensation of £4 million for being convicted and sentenced to six years imprisonment by his own country in 2001 for the unlawful killing of civilians who had betrayed a partisan group to the Germans.

Kononov, a guerrilla attached to the Soviet Red Army, helped kill the civilian collaborators after tricking them into admitting they had handed the partisans over to the Nazis.

Years later courts in Latvia found him guilty of crimes against humanity.

But Kononov is claiming that he acted correctly in killing the nine civilians in a Latvian village in 1944, because at the time he was legitimately fighting with the Red Army, and on the side of the Allies including Britain, to repel the Nazis from the Baltic state.

He also claims that he is the victim of political correctness in modern day Latvia, a European Union country where the State now openly defends those who fought for the Nazis against the Soviet army in the Second World War.

The Latvians argue the Soviets were seen as the greater threat to the country's independence, and this justified siding with Hitler.

The verdict from the European Court of Human Rights, due next month, will effectively re-open the issue of war crimes during the Second World War as established under the Nuremberg trials, by deciding whether a man can be punished for fighting against the Nazis.

[....]

In March, 1944 he was assigned to discover the fate of a partisan group of 12 men led by a Major Chugunov who disappeared near the village of Maliye Baty after being betrayed by villagers in the pay of the Nazis.

Disguised in a Nazi greatcoat, Kononov talked to villagers who boasted how they had betrayed the partisans.

Then Kononov and his men held a war court that convicted the villagers. The villagers were given a written judgement sentencing them to death.

Most were shot, although a man, and two women were in a building that Kononov set on fire and died in the flames.

In all, nine people were killed, including a child, which Kononov admitted was a mistake.

[....]

The case brings into focus Latvia's contempt for the former Soviet Union after over four decades of occupation, with Kononov being cast as a Stalinist thug massacring civilians.

It hinges on whether the highly decorated former guerilla can be classified as a Soviet occupier of Latvia or as a Latvian citizen fighting the Nazi invaders.

'The Latvian courts agree that Kononov was a member of an anti-Hitler coalition, they do not dispute that,' said Joffe.

'They also agree that those villagers were in collaboration with Nazis.

'Yet they claim that Kononov was representing Soviet occupiers and killed the civilians who were acting according to the laws of that time.

'But this is nonsense. He is a native Latvian, he was fighting for his country.

'And according to the rules of war, people taking guns from invaders in exchange for food and protection were not civilians anymore, but collaborators.

'This process is purely political like other things Latvia has been doing recently - such as reburying Nazis as heroes, and organising monuments and eternal flames at Nazi cemeteries.'

Kononov, now 85, said : 'I have never doubted that I was fighting for the right thing.

'It was a shock for me to know that what I did to defend my country is now considered a crime.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1029692/Latvian-seeks-4m-compensation-jailed-killing-Nazi-sympathisers-World-War-Two.html

In the Modernity we share we have "rules of engagement" and legitimate control over who does what and where and when. We don't lawfully act as individuals in combat but act under direction of authority of our nations and governments. We have a duty, legal and moral, to refuse to act on orders immoral and illegal, known to most at least at an intuitive level: that we don't set fire to buildings with people inside, and that we don't shoot children. That part shouldn't be too hard to figure. But we kid ourselves in thinking it's all an easy story to discover the sense of. In the comfort of the moment the horror is difficult to grasp, and it's very easy to condemn. Cold sobriety demands that after the fact we do judge coldly and soberly and act accordingly. Individuals who commit crimes against civilians must be punished for those crimes, regardless of their motives and the urgencies of the times. It's a price actors pay for life. No one is perfect, and even the best commit wrongs that require punishment. It's a price one might willingly pay for the terrible mercy of "later still."

Combat Zone: War is Deceit

This is the first installment of Combat Zone. The theme is of civil war in the Western world. The intention is to provide information about the state of our struggle against jihad from outside our Modernity, and to look closely at those who use Islam and other socialist forces inside and outside Modernity to destroy Modernity itself.

For those curious, this is neither Left nor Right in orientation, such dichotomy arising originally during the French Revolution as a seatting arrangement of political factions, and today having no meaning politically. The days of Left and Right are gone. Today we face a division between those forces who struggle either for Modernity and political liberty for the individual; or they struggle for a return to the Middle Ages with its collectivist totalitarianism.

The struggle in the Western world today moves toward active combat, and this is the Combat Zone. To give an indication of how things seem to be today and how they might further play out as we progress, below is a short piece from Cornwall, England.

This piece comes originally from Islam Online, a jihadi pit. We pick it up from the entirely excellent Esther in Europe. Aside from the whingeing throughout the piece, the typical moaning of Muslim victimization, and the cries of "racism," one also sees too clearly, as usual, the demands for power for Islam in the West. As Mohammed records in the Qur'an, "War is deceit."

Wherever possible we will quote from authorative texts to make clear the points and to give the reader the chance to verify them. Immediately below, to set the stage, are quotations from the Qur'an and ahadith.

War is deceit:

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 269:

Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:

The Prophet said, "War is deceit."

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/052.sbt.html#004.052.269

Sura 3:54 says that Allah makara. The Arabic word makara means to deceive, scheme, or plan.

[....]

The person who is a makir (same form as the word kafir) speaking of the attribute of a person is one who would outwit someone else to cause them harm. It speaks of one who would reveal the opposite of what he plans to do. The reality is that he is scheming evil for that person. So yes there is the sense of planning and scheming but mostly it means to trick, outwit and deceive for the purpose of overpowering and conquering the other. A makir is one who devises a secret scheme against someone else. Synonyms would be cheating, defrauding, double-crossing, deceiving, tricking, in all cases makara has the sense of defeating the one you have tricked.

[....]

Pickthall's translation of 3:54: "And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them); and Allah is the best of schemers."

http://www.muslimhope.com/DeceptionInIslam.htm#_Toc170282507

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/011-taqiyya.htm says that on the transmission on 9-11 flight 93, the hijackers told the passengers there was a bomb on board, but that everyone will be safe if their demands are met. That was certainly a lie, but were the 9-11 hijackers being hypocrites here? No, they were not, because the hadiths said they could practice deception in war. But again, until the hijackers took over the plane, the men, and even women and children on board had no idea their fellow passengers were at war with them.

At: http://www.muslimhope.com/DeceptionInIslam.htm#_Toc170282495

Islamic culture is primitive and savage. Those who follow it are, thus, primitives and savages. The greater the depth of immersion in Muslim culture the deeper ones depravity. We are at war with Islam, a world-wide poligion, a political religion, an historically ethnically based imperialism of Arab supremacy. Anyone can join. Thus, though Islam is an Arab supremacy, it is not strictly a racist but a world-wide totalitarianism. To struggle against Islam is not to be racist, if it matters to those who struggle indeed, but a struggle for human freedom-- even for Arabs and Muslims. The struggle for human freedom is universal. Below is how a a deceitful Muslim sees it:

Cornwall: Attacks against Islamic Center

Racism is rearing its ugly face in Britain's south-western county of Cornwall with a series of Islamophobic attacks against British Muslims of Asian origin, The Independent reported Saturday, June 21.

"Racism is showing its ugly head," Tipo Choudhury, deputy secretary of the Islamic Center of Cornwall, said.

Choudhury has recently announced plans to establish a community center in the city to serve the Asian community.

But since then, the center has been the target of spate of racist attacks in the recent weeks.

Last Thursday, an obscene graffiti defaming Islam and espousing the cause of Cornish nationalism (the movement calling for more autonomous authorities for the county) was splattered across the center walls.

A pig's head was also nailed early this month to the center's door and "KKK" - referring to the Ku Klux Klan which is a name given to racist organizations – was painted in red gloss on an outside wall.

In a third incident, grafitti featuring far-right nationalist Party BNP slogans was painted on the center walls.

Choudhury also was racially abused by a passing motorcyclist while standing outside the building.

"It shows prejudice is alive and kicking," Choudhury said.

Police said they are dealing with the attacks as "critical" and linked.

So far, only one suspect has been arrested in connection with the attacks but he was later released on bail.

Shame

The attacks have drawn a strong condemnation from all the county leaders.

"(The attacks had) brought shame on us all," said local MP Andrew George, who also doubles as president of the Council for Racial Equality in Cornwall.

Dick Cole leader of Mebyon Kernow, the Party for Cornwall, also denounced the attacks.

"(It is) a crude attempt to foster division and intolerance," he said, calling for confronting these racist attacks by all means.

Police inspector Mark Richards said the attacks are tarnishing the country's reputation.

The graffiti was offensive "not only to Asians and Asian religions, but also to Christians and Cornish nationalists whose name has been taken in vain," he said.

Victor Downer, director of the newly-founded anti-racism group Unity Cornwall, said the attacks have sent shockwaves across Cornwall.

"If people are prepared to do this, to sneak out in the middle of the night and run the risk of arrest, what next? The community is feeling very vulnerable," he said.

Britain is home to a sizable multi-ethnic Muslim minority of nearly 2 million, mostly of Indian, Pakistani and Bengali backgrounds.

UK Muslims, who have been in the eye of the storm since the 9/11 attacks, complain of a growing Islamophobic climate in the European country.

A recent Financial Times opinion poll showed Britain is the most suspicious nation about Muslims.

A poll of the Evening Standard also found that a sizable section of London residents harbor negative opinions about Muslims.

An earlier British study had accused the media and film industry of perpetuating Islamophobia and prejudice by projecting Muslims as violent, dangerous and threatening people.

Source: Islam Online (English)

http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2008/06/cornwall-attacks-against-islamic-center.html

The Western world is a Combat Zone. Throwing tantrums and nailing pig-heads to gates is not an effective response to such a struggle. Over the course of the life of this effort we will look perhaps at strategies and tactics better suited to our struggle and its eventual victory in freedom universally.

Welcome to the Combat Zone.