In his December 25th “Christmas” column, “Every
Christmas Now Comes with Muslim Terrorism
,” Daniel Greenfield observed
about the average, unassuming Muslims in our midst:
They may lapse at
times. They may get through a university education, attend nightclubs, listen
to the same music all the other kids their age do– but there’s still a ticking
time bomb inside their heads. And that bomb is the same one that appears as the
lit fuse on the turban of the cartoon
An average and unassuming Muslim next door
or down the street can douse the fuse himself by repudiating Islam. He can
convert to Christianity, to Judaism, to Buddhism, to Scientology, or even
become an atheist. Apostasy is absolutely imperative, but comes with some risk because
Islam, the “religion of peace,” decrees the death of an apostate.
Honor killings of girls and women who are “seduced”
by Western cultural and social norms are a result of a partial or full repudiation
of Islam by their victims. The killings are committed by average and unassuming
Muslim parents and relatives. The perpetrators preserve their ethereal “honor”;
the victims lose their lives.
Still, repudiation entails some very
serious thinking and reflection. But repudiation in some form is necessary to
douse that fuse or to defuse the ticking mechanism inside his turbaned mind
before it eventually explodes the bomb. Only the prospective apostate knows which
color wire needs to be snipped.
For otherwise he may take the car jihad
route, or plant bombs among throngs of Marathon spectators or Christmas
shoppers, or toss fire bombs at passing cars. Or shoot two policemen in cold
blood as they have lunch in a patrol car in Brooklyn. Or murder two hostages
inside an Australian chocolate shop. Lately, and too often, it’s the ordinary-looking
Muslims who have been waging “lone wolf” jihad against Westerners. They haven’t
telegraphed their intentions by wearing suicide vests or toting AK-47’s and
wearing ski-masks in public as they approach their targets. They infiltrate
crowds or stroll past a café and do what they came to do. Destroy.
But it’s the ticking time bomb metaphor of
Greenfield’s that piqued my resolve to offer additional comments about how and
why “lone wolf” terrorists are not “alone.”
Nancy Hartevelt Kobrin, in her December
18th FSM column, “Man
Haron Monis’ Politically Incorrect Developmental Problem
,” argues that many
terrorists, such as the Sydney, Australia chocolate shop hostage-taker and
killer, or the Chechen
, are somewhat autistic, are terrified of being alone, are bereft
of or derogate the basic norms of social behavior, and as a consequence are unable
to “bond” or empathize with anyone, especially not with their victims.  Their victims are simply objects to be
controlled and destroyed. After all, one can’t “bond” with a rock, except
perhaps when one is using it to bash someone’s brains out.
[Jihadis]… are
obsessed with the infidel and their feminization of the Other as well as
bonding to hard objects such as weapons.
Just think of the
Taliban attack on the Pakistani
military school
. They might brag that their [own] children are jewels but
no one else’s are – for them the Pakistani victims were merely objects in their
poorly developed minds. Jihadis harbor a terror of the other. They do not know
how to relate to anyone who is not exactly like them. They are the ultimate
narcissists. They did not learn the corollary to “Some of these things are
just like the other” which is “Some of these things and people are
different and that is okay.” No, we must become Muslim just like them as
they are terrified to be alone.
I purchase some of Kobrin’s argument, but
not all of it. Perhaps there is some truth in Kobrin’s thesis that a terrorist
wishes to instill in his victims the terror he feels himself at the sight of
those who appear to have lived successfully. He wishes to reduce his victims to
the metaphysical state of A.E. Houseman’s alienated
“I, a stranger and afraid, in a world I never made.”
Islam gives that manqué an excuse and a
chance to unmake the world he never
In the final analysis, however, whether or
not an Islamic terrorist, or even a non-terrorist, is autistic, developmentally
arrested, or has developed sociopathic, pathological, or psychotic symptoms or
habits, diagnosed or not, he chooses to take his actions based on his
fundamental epistemology and metaphysics. If they are dark and obsessed enough,
that will be enough to drive him to become what is commonly called a “lone
wolf” terrorist.
What the “lone wolf” terrorist craves is
something to fill the void of his internal being, a cause, a religion, or a
movement that will dictate his actions and his purpose for existing. HIs
“internal being” acts like a stellar black hole. It sucks everything within
range of its gravity into its crushing mass and obliterates everything’s
identity. Unable to form his own first-hand values, he borrows values from
others. HIs nihilistic, malevolent universe “soul”—that hunk of venomous glop –
is naturally attracted to anything that exhorts him to help “change the world” –
or to take revenge on it because it does not automatically supply him with a
reason for living.
Islam does that: It supplies anyone born
into it, or anyone who choses to convert to it, with an automatic reason for living.
Islam doesn’t require deep thinking or reflection. Islam punishes it.
As I remarked in “’Lone
Wolf’ Terrorists are Not “Alone
,” the Islamic “lone
” terrorist seeks the company of his ilk. He wants to “belong” to
something, or to some tribe that seems to be having a consequence in the world
he never made. Of all the religions that ask one to give oneself to a higher
being and its purposes, Islam is the most demanding and thorough. It demands
that one regard oneself as superfluous, as inconsequential, as selfless. What
better creed could an essentially selfless person be attracted to like a filing
to a magnet but Islam? He “gives” himself to Allah.
As I remarked in my previous column, he
need not even come into contact with his ilk. All he need do is absorb all the
nihilist, Islamic calls to jihad on such Internet sites as “Inspire” that urge
Muslims to take up arms, even if it’s only with a carving knife or a machete,
against Western infidels.  As Pamela
Geller on Atlas
The latest issue of
the slick jihad magazine, “Inspire”, is devoted to lone jihadi attacks (or as
the media calls them lone wolves). The Islamic State’s recently released video
called for more bloody lone wolf jihadi attacks.
Clearly Muslims
across the US, Canada and Europe are “inspired” by the Islamic State, al Qaeda
and the Qur’an to wage jihad. They are taking their marching orders quite
seriously as we have witnessed this past week alone – the cold-blooded murder
of two NYPD cops by a jihadi, three distinct “allahu akbar” attacks in France
in as many days, and thwarted attacks in Denmark, Canada and the UK.
What’s fascinating is
the Asperger-like insistence by Obama, the EU, and the media that these attacks
are not Islamic or religiously motivated. It would be laughable if there
weren’t so many dead and bloodied bodies.
The treacly, fear-driven divorcing by many
American and European politicians of Islam from the piles of bodies and smoking
ruins and carnage produced by Islamic terrorists and ISIS and the Taliban is
worth another column. As for President Barack Obama, his affinity for Islam is
too well known to comment on here (I’ve discussed his malodorous policies and
actions in past columns); his intention to “accelerate” the “transfer” or
“release” of Gitmo
is, I’m certain, motivated by his own “lone wolf” malignity.
There is a proven record that those already released are
certain to return
to the “battlefield” to kill more Americans and plan more
jihad. He must know this. This knowledge damns him.
To help gauge the “internal workings” of a
“lone wolf” terrorist – one who acts on his own at the behest of his inner
demons and answers the call to rampant or random jihad – read the life stories
of Ted Bundy, the serial
killer, Richard Speck,
and Charles Manson.
Speck and Manson were not serial killers. In fact, Manson did not kill anyone,
he ordered his Family to commit murders. To his Family, he acted as a kind of
Mohammad whose example must be followed without question and who must be
obeyed. Speck had no “family” of cultists; he was a shiftless “ne’er-do-well” who
raped and murdered on opportunity. Bundy, whose rape-murder-dismemberment spree
produced at least thirty victims, was evil incarnate.
But the common denominator between the
three men is that they lived empty, aimless, itinerate lives, in whom grew a
festering  pustule  of resentment and hatred for everyone and
everything. Their nihilist criminal careers presaged those of “lone wolf’ Islamic