Monday, March 27, 2017

Supremacist Ideology and Crime

The mother of the London Islamic killer said this:

"I wish to make it absolutely clear, so there can be no doubt, I do not condone his actions nor support the beliefs he held that led to him committing this atrocity."

It is a very sensitive defensive and weak statement. 

Yet, we must consider it by asking questions:

 Is it because she feels the weight of accusation due to her belief system?

Is she a non Muslim fearful of being politically incorrect?

Is she afraid of backlash from ISIS supporters?

Is it because she is deceptively using political correctness in public?

It is a very weak statement.  

The distancing language begins with her "wish."  We must also note that she does not say what he did was "wrong" in any form.  

She does not "condone" but she also does not "condemn."  
She does not say she is "sorry" for what her son did.  

Is she deceptively using tacquia?

Or, might there something else in play here?

If she is sensitive because of Islam, we should not discount the possibility that she fears violent repercussion if she condemns the jihadist action her son took. She, herself, could face the wrath of her local mosque.  

            Muslims are often the first victims of Islam.  

If she is not a Muslim, she could fear offending others.  

Why the need to "not condone" rather than "condemn"?

When Islam turns violent, Muslims who are not jihadists choose self preservation, no different than Germans who had to "join the Nazi party" just to hold a job, at first, and later to save their own lives.  


Bob had Thanksgiving dinner with his wife's extended family.  His brother-in-law insulted Bob's favorite football team, the New England Patriots with a Tom Brady joke.  Most everyone at the table roared with laughter.  

Bob did not find it funny. 

With plenty of wine in him, Bob slammed his fist on the table, cursed his brother-in-law, and stormed away from the table, knocking over some of the wine glasses and plates. 

The pleasant family dinner came to a screeching uncomfortable halt.  

In our culture, we believe that Bob lost his temper and is, therefore, in a weakened position where he should apologize for his inability to restrain himself. 

**************************************************** Any supremacist ideology, by its own nature, must survive on demonization of another.  This is the same with moral narcissism:  'my moral view is so high that you're failure to agree with it is a failure to acknowledge me; my very existence. 

In analyzing and interviewing supremacists, there are two basic categories:

1.  The Supremacist 
2.  The Supremacist Convert 

First, consider supremacist ideology separate from individuals.  A good example is National Socialism. 

If you read first person historical accounts of World War II, you will find intimate details that you may be read through the lens of whatever statement analysis training you've had.  Specifically with Nazi Germany:

There were many Germans who resisted the ideology of National Socialism. 
There were many Germans who joined the Nationalist Socialist party early on because they believed in its basic principles including socialism, where the government is responsible for the "social security" of citizens, who later resisted the party's evil, while being members. 
There were many German Nazis who were coerced into National Socialism's crimes.
There were many Germans who feared resigning from the party.  

There were "good" and moral Nazis.  

This is why in criminal analysis we deal with ideology; not with individuals personal experiences and feelings.  We then note the ideology's impact in general. 

If you argue National Socialism is either "good" or it is "bad" by presenting persons, you will fail to see the ideology and fail to respond to it. For each "bad" person you present, someone else will find a "good" person. This is the illogical haze of emotionalism. 

 It will come down to your emotion and personal experience.  You met a "good" Nazi, so Nazism is not evil.  This says more about you, who has elevated your emotion and personal experience above truth.  This is an example  moral narcissism:  how I feel about something is superior to the truth.  

It is popular today and it is leads to illogic, supremacist ideology, and it leads to anger, rage, tyranny, shout downs,  and eventually, violence.  

Principle is built on a general, not upon exceptions. 

Supremacy ideology always leads to violence.  It begins with the demonization of the others.  

The Nazi Party blamed Jews for the Treaty of Versailles and this became not only epidemic, but it became cultural, in just two decades of time because it targeted all aspects of society, including children.  They grew up believing that they were superior.  

Because life is unequal, no matter what belief we may hold, supremacist ideology must demonize and this eventually led to violence.  

I.  The Supremacist 

The Supremacist has a culture of supremacy.  National Socialism taught that Jewish blood was different than German blood, microscopes and science be damned.  The Jews were railed against privately, and then publicly, and then with the complicit press, which lead to protests. 

With emotion enflamed, eventually small skirmishes broke out.  As anger grew, violence grew where Jews were eventually considered less human.  (This is the same argument that was used by slave holders and today by abortionists).  

Islam is a criminal supremacist ideology, whether or not individual Muslims believe or adhere to this.  Inherent in its teaching is violent coercion.  It specifically teaches violent conquest and does so not only by declaring its own supremacy (the death penalty is ascribed to anyone criticizing Islam, which is why it has been immune to reformation), but by demonizing others, beginning with Jews.  This is where you read about Jews being "descendants from pigs" and other insults.  What Canada calls "Islamophobia", Islam calls the Sharia blasphemy laws; calling for death for anyone who criticizes Islam.  

What the political elite call "Radical Islam", is actually "Islam."  What the political elite call "Moderate Muslims" (Muslims who do not want violence), Islam calls "apostates" and assigns to them, as well, the death penalty.  

A jihadist is a "devout" or "obedient" follower of Islam.  In nations that have fallen to this ideology, cultural Muslims (including atheists) were the first targeted.  

Islam spreads by coercion:

First, Islam is demanded to be followed.  This is the "submission" that one must give and then "peace" is settled.  

For Jews and Christians who refuse to submit, the "peace" permitted is Dhimmitude:  that is, the specific "tax" (jizrah) to be paid to Muslims to be allowed to live.  Not only must they pay the tax but they must verbally acknowledge their inferiority to the satisfaction of the Islamist. 

The women are to wear coverings so as not to be sexually molested.  Those who refuse to wear the covering are fair game for rape.  In Sweden, even with government statistics taken into account, Sweden's native women are raped in the highest percentage in the western world.  By refusing to "cover" (hijab, etc) and importing Islam by the hundreds of thousands, the political elite are endangering women who refuse to submit to Islam's demand.  They are paying a terrible cost. 

Dhimmitude is a form of slavery and it is to bow before Islam in varying degrees. 

When young men pay $10,000 to a smuggler, and walk into Sweden, and are immediately welcomed with money their hands have not earned, including free housing, medical care, internet access and so on, it affirms what they have been taught since childhood. 

The Islamic Supremacist raised in the Islamic culture has also experienced acute desensitization to violence against women.  

The impact upon children of even viewing violence against their own mothers is still bewildering in studies and its impact upon society is seismic.  

Islamic culture in the workplace

I interviewed Islamic women who immigrated from Somalia and eventually took work ("liberal Muslims") in nursing homes.  There, no higher educational standards were needed and some companies hired almost exclusively Somali women to take care of elderly New Englanders who were incapable of taking care of themselves. 

Repeatedly, they struck elderly men and women, particularly, in the face. 

There was nothing I could do to talk them out of this norm. 

First, they had no fear of prosecution. (This is one of three elements in Employment Analysis that helps companies hire the best and brightest of their pool, as well as the most low risk for theft and fraudulent claims.) 

They long had learned that they would not face prosecution lest the prosecutor be called "racist", "Islamophobic" and face hostile and violent threats.  This would be accompanied by the complicit support of local media.  

Next, it was I who did not "understand" the "kuffar" element within these nursing homes.  The elderly were "unclean" and "should have been cared for by their families."  If the victim was a Jew, there was no dialog.   

These women had been raised since childhood in violence.  They were then targeted with violence by their husbands who beat them in obedience to the Koran. 

They did not grasp our society's shock over such treatment of the elderly.  

They felt no need to stay with their initial unreliable denials, which increased the risk to the elderly.  "Tacquia", that is, the Islamic lie (to protect Muslims, or to propagate Islam) was something they all abandoned early in the interview process.  

The Supremacist is dangerous.  He or she believes in an ideology that states that they are superior to others, and they migrate to cultures that confirm this belief.  

                                          What About Bob?

Bob had Thanksgiving dinner where his brother-in-law made a Tom Brady joke, enjoyed by the crowd, except for Bob.   

 Bob blew.   

In our culture, we believe that Bob should apologize for his behavior. 

In Islamic culture, Bob is the powerful respected one and the brother-in-law who did not stand up and fight Bob, is the weaker one, to be despised. 

Now consider the "sinful" Muslim male who has adopted the Western culture of "weakness", ostracized by his own insulated community.  

He drinks, smokes and eats ham sandwiches and listens to western music and dates a western woman. 

How can he be "redeemed"?

This is why imans say one thing to the media, while stocking cache of weapons in the mosque, targeting young males, particularly with mental health issues, for "redemption" of Islam.  

When the Orlando Islamist was insulted by being called "towel head", the analyst concluded, from his own projective western value, that "sticks and stones may break our bones, but names will never hurt us."  He wrote that the Orlando Islamic terrorist did not pose a risk of violence but was a victim of "Islamophobia."  

The analyst did not consider how he was in need of Islamic "redemption" due to his "disobedience" to Islam by embracing western culture.  

II.  The Supremacist Convert 

The Supremacist Convert is distinctly different than the Supremacist who was raised in the culture.  He is still dangerous, but in a different way and for different reasons. 

He is, in a sense, a Supremacist "wanna be" who, dangerously, has something to prove. 


In a murder case, John Doe became Mohammad Doe in prison, which is the perfect storm for violence. 

By listening to prison imans, the violent criminal is told:

*You are superior to others.  (combine this with both his violent history and testosterone). 

*You are here because of the fraud committed against you.  

*The violence you feel is holy and approved in religion by "god" (allah) but it must be properly used.  

*You may rape "infidel" women under certain conditions.  Women hold a "one-half value" of the man when she is Islamic.  Infidel women do not even reach this percentage.  

*Pray five times a day 

*Wage Jihad.  

If you die as a martyr, you will be raping virgins in the afterlife.  

Here, he was not raised to be considered supreme to others and his violent and criminal history shows a constant 

White Supremacy is a very tiny portion of the population.  It is only significant to main stream media. 

Yet, even in small number, the danger is in the "need to prove" one's own superiority can assist in removing the common cultural restraints against violence, posing an increased risk.  

This supremacist wanna be can be interviewed from this specific standpoint.  Whether it is a new prison convert, or any other type of supremacist, there is a ready-made excuse for:

criminal behavior

Failure to succeed in life

by the ideology. 

Islamic nations do not report criminal statistics. Wherever Islamic nations have had western influence, they have made some progress, but the supremacist ideology leads to violence even when the nation is finally 100% Islam.  

This is because of life's inequalities inherent in creation.  

One person is born with more intellect than another.  Socialism says to take away what the smarter has gained by coercion (theft) and give it to the lesser. 

When this is combined with religion or religious like zealousness (including National Socialism, extreme leftist, pseudo science, elevation of emotion, etc), the violence is hastened. 

In criminal interviewing, the better the understanding of the ideological impact upon the subject's own culture, the better the strategy, and even the more pointed the tactics within the interview. 

For training in detecting deception, visit  


General P. Malaise said...

it never ends well. we are in for a fight that started centuries ago and has been removed from the history book. we will get a brutal dose of reality soon.

thanks again for posting this Peter. in Canada we would already be on the watch list (or worse charged with a hate crime) for posting this article.

here is a link for another view of what is coming.

Anonymous said...

His mother is not a muslim. She is a middle class Christian.

Hey Jude said...

Not based on SA - opinion based on info gleaned from news reports. I think she says what she does because she believes locals suspect she might condone and support her son's actions and beliefs. The lady lives in an isolated village in rural Wales - It is very likely she is regarded as an outsider by others, though she has lived there for almost twenty years - that's how it is in some parts. She runs an online business called 'Folksy' which sells hand-made cushions - that in itself would have made her New Ageish, or bohemian, in the eyes of some, plus her son was dark-skinned (she might be, also?).

I think that is why she is so defensive - apparently there is a police guard outside her house and feelings are running high amongst her neighbours. Not fair to generalise, but It can be a bit Wickerman-like for incomers who set up home out in the sticks in some parts of rural Wales. Maybe she is not a Welsh speaker, or understands little of the language, in which case she might not even understand what the local gossip is, as many people in that area speak primarily in the Welsh language - some make it a point to only speak in Welsh in the presence of non-Welsh speakers.

Anonymous said...

She is not "dark-skinned". She is white.

Hey Jude said...

It does not specify. ^.

Anonymous said...

"he was an outsider as the black child born out of marriage in the 1960s to a teenage white mother in Kent."

Hey Jude said...

Ah, okay. I thought she probably was white, but did not assume it. There are very few non-white people in rural Wales.