I recall a scene from _Illuminatus!_ where an ancient Atlantean
scientist overcomes his vague feelings of guilt by doing something
(firing a rocket into the sun which results in a solar flare wiping out
most of humanity) that gives him a definite unmistakeable sense of
really heavy guilt.
So, to run an effective terrorist organization, especially one that
relies on suicide bombers, you'd order new recruits to do something
terrible, like murdering some random child. This might instill a sense
of probably going to hell, which can then be avoided by becoming a
martyr for the faith. But the guilt itself might also be a factor, like
in 'yes, the infidels are my enemies, but the one i shot was an innocent
child', which would then be a continual nagging psychic wound. Closure
might be achieved by then suiciding yourself via crashing an airplane
into a skyscraper, kiling thousands, because now you are *really* a
guilty bastard. No more doubt about it.
The religious aspects with the promised glorius afterlife then need not
be more than a dim hope. Combined with promises to look after the
martyr's family, there would be both economic and psychic benefits to
martyrdom.
Let's assume Osama had knowledge and approval of the 9/11 attacks. Being
a terror kingpin, he isn't a willing suicide bomber himself, thus
remaining alive, so the terrorist attacks simply contribute to his sense
of nagging guilt. Only by goading the west into a reaction that goads
the islamic world into a total holy war will these nagging feelings of
guilt be resolved. One way that closure would be achieved here is in the
purity-thru-fire nuclear annihilation of islamic peoples. And there's
always the dim hope of victory (or paradise). And the embarassing
question of why the west is ahead while the superior islamic culture
should be dominant could be avoided.
Is this it? Is the whole islamic terrorist agenda just a rationalized
death wish?
-Mike
--
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:11 MDT