Dazed and Confused

There is a lot to write about today, but since there was either an attempt to bomb or a real live attack on London this AM, I could not let another day pass without responding to a friend of mine. He and I had a "heated" discussion about Jihadists....And he contends that society's response to them is very similar to the way US society responded to Anarchists and the proponents of the Labor movement in the 19th Century. Additionally, the US and UK "bring this on" because we do things that the Jihadists find abhorrent: we support Israel and we are rooting out terrorism in Iraq.

Further, my friend contends, the Jihadists movement is not at all different than the American Revolution, in that people are just trying to make things "better". He also contends that because he heard a report from a University of Chicago professor on suicide bombing that the first "documented" case was in 1980 that all of this is recent.

I remember having quite an attitude when I graduated from my undergrad. It was soooo fun to think that older people just didn't know any better and that academia was the font of all knowledge. Professors were never to be questioned. My friend listens to NPR, one of the most biased news sources of all: LIBERAL BIAS AD NAUSEAM. Of course recent college students today are about to the left of Mao, which says a lot about the people who "educate" them. Not slackers necessarily, just inexperienced.

The thesis of the popular argument: the United States and the west is always to be "questioned". The west is always wrong. The west is racist, sexist, and is the cause of all things bad in the world today. If the third world is "angry" with us, we deserve it.

So let's start out parsing though the arguments.

1) Jihadists re just like the Revolutionary Patriots of 1776.

A- This is absolute hogwash. What Jihadists want to achieve is complete and total world domination. This will result in the complete enslavement of half of the population (women), people will be forcibly "converted" to Wahhabi Islam. And suicide bombers will kill themselves to achieve this objective. Actually, the patriots and revolutionaries were trying to create and achieve a situation in which rules were lessened, in which laissez-faire economics could be practiced, and to "lose" the tyranny of high taxes imposed by King George III. The Revolution was about freedom, Jihadism is about enslavement.

2) Jihadists are just like the Anarchists of the 19th century. America's response to Jihadists is racist just like in the 19th century, when the Anarchists were primarily of eastern and central European backgrounds.

A- Oh yes, I forgot to apologize for being a White Protestant...and a Male to boot! I am supposed to "accept" that impoverished people want to kill me and my family...I am supposed to just roll over and "take it". After all, the argument goes, WE BROUGHT THIS UPON OURSELVES!!

What a bunch of namby-pamby liberal crap, and ivory tower pontificating.
I think we should kill the perpetrators BEFORE they kill us, and better in Iraq than right here.

Again, the Anarchist movement and the Labor movements were all about responding to over-regulation, child labor and corporate slavery. The ultimate objectives were the IMPROVEMENT of conditions for workers, they were not about enslavement of populations. Yes, society did indeed have prejudices about ethnicity and religion, at the time. But most THINKING people now are able to discern between Jihadists and peace loving people who worship in the Muslim faith.

The first suicide bombing happened in 1980.
A- Interesting, but hundreds of cases of suicide bombing occurred during WWII in the form of Kamikaze pilots. Kamikaze pilots were "flying human bombs". Ask my father in law, who was a fighter pilot in WWII and did missions over Japan. It wasn't pretty.

Here is a brief history of suicide bombing

Also, since the Chinese invented gunpowder, cases of "suicide bombing" in battle can be found many centuries ago in Chinese battle.

Suicide attack is an ancient practice with a modern history. Its use by the Jewish sects of Zealots and Sicarii (“daggers”) in Roman-occupied Judea [1] and by the Islamic Order of Assassins (hashashin) during the early Crusader times are legendary examples.[2] The concept of “terror” as systematic use of violence to attain political ends was first codified by Maximilien Robespierre during the French Revolution. He deemed it an “emanation of virtue” that delivers “prompt, severe, and inflexible” justice, as “a consequence of the general principle of democracy applied to our country’s most pressing needs”. [3]The Reign of Terror, during which the ruling Jacobin faction exterminated thousands of potential enemies, of whatever sex, age, or condition, lasted until Robespierre’s fall ( July 1794). Similar justification for state-sponsored terror was common to 20th-century revolutions, as in Russia (Lenin), Cambodia (Pol Pot), and Iran (Khomeini).

From:
Source

JIHADISM IS NOT STATE SPONSORED TERROR, IT IS ABOUT WORLD CONQUEST.

Eloquently, Tony Blair addressed the "racist" accusations in his speech after the 7/7/05 London attack. Here are excerpts from the BBC:

I would also pay tribute to the stoicism and resilience of the people of London who have responded in a way typical of them.

In addition, I welcome the statement put out by the Muslim Council who know that those people acted in the name of Islam but who also know that the vast and overwhelming majority of Muslims, here and abroad, are decent and law-abiding people who abhor this act of terrorism every bit as much as we do.

It's through terrorism that the people that have committed this terrible act express their values and it's right at this moment that we demonstrate ours.

I think we all know what they are trying to do, they are trying to use the slaughter of innocent people to cow us, to frighten us out of doing the things we want to do, of trying to stop us going about our business as normal as we are entitled to do and they should not and must not succeed.

When they try to intimidate us, we will not be intimidated, when they seek to change our country, our way of life by these methods, we will not be changed.

Imagine that volatility (square root of the standard deviation adjusted for trading periods) is actually like a sound. And you are a guard at a big prison. It is rumored that there will be a BIG jailbreak very shortly, so guards are at highest alert.

Just before the jailbreak, the sound at the prison is very very quiet. But suddenly now the riot ensues, and alarms go off. The sound is deafening as prisoners fight to escape the prison. It is at this point that the Warden declares an emergency and calls in the Natiunal Guard.

So was the sound "predictive" before the jailbreak? Yes and no. The Warden knew from pervious experience that the "sounds" were so intense as they had been during previous prison breaks. And so based on that familiar "rumble" of noise, the Warden decided that the situation was out of control. Could he have been wrong ? Sure, but his experience listening to the prison "rumblings" tells him otherwise.

A market breakout is a lot like a big jailbreak. "Noise" and activity predcedes it.

Is this the dreaded "curve fitting" ?? Yep, but only as much as the emprical method of observing experience and extrapolating on that basis!!