April 20, 2013

Or then again ...

From Slate:
Is Boston Like Columbine? 
Were the Tsarnaev brothers a “dyad” like Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, with a charismatic leader and submissive follower?  
By Dave Cullen|Posted Friday, April 19, 2013, at 11:28 PM

My Twitter feed has been flooded with this theme today: The Tsarnaev brothers seem more like the Columbine killers than al-Qaida. 
Maybe. Either, neither, or it could easily be a combination. It’s way too early to know. The first thing I learned covering Columbine all those years was that most of the theories that gain traction this week will be wrong. 
But we do have an interesting situation developing with a pair of brothers as suspects: potentially, the classic dyad scenario. Notorious dyad examples include Bonnie and Clyde, Leopold and Loeb, and the D.C. snipers. The dyad tends to be a twisted, particular relationship that plays out very differently than the lone gunman or the terrorist team.

Since that idea is getting a lot of attention, let’s explore the “dyad” phenomenon and how dyads typically play out. 

And so forth and so on ...

I have a shorter diagnosis: They were Chechens acting particularly Checheny.

68 comments:

Dave Pinsen said...

Check out the vanity plate on the terrorists' friends' car

Anonymous said...

We have to direct attention away from their being Muslim because then people might realize that, short of their violent actions, these guys aren't terribly different from most native-born Muslim-Americans or Muslims who spend a significant part of their youth in the United States.

Spend any amount of time with even vaguely pious Muslims (hijabs are a dead give-away for the girls, you actually have to talk to the dudes) and you notice how endemic to the community are things like 9/11 trutherism, atavistic social attitudes (even for the alt-right), disrespect for free speech, etc.

Anonymous said...

Nailed it, Steve.

Maxwell Power said...

On Thursday I thought of Leopold and Loeb too, after the (apparently unrelated) bit about the 7-Eleven robbery. But since Muslim-flavored terrorism *is* a known-to-exist thing lately it's a bit silly to hastily dismiss it as a contrived playing-too-much-GTA plot from boredom. Probably at least the elder bro had a personal meeting with a deep-pocketed Wahhabi evangelist type at some point; those guys tend to get around

Anonymous said...

"...short of their violent actions, these guys aren't terribly different from most native-born Muslim-Americans..."

I think Steve actually got this one right. The Christian mountain tribes of the Caucasus are also very hot-headed. If there were significant communities of them in the US, they wouldn't engage in political terrorism, granted, but they'd certainly set up mafia networks for fun and profit. Compared to them Sicilians are amateur wimps.

Others have mentioned this in the comments, but it bears repeating: the neocons supported the Chechens against Russia. And even though the Russian government specifically warned the FBI about Tamerlan Tsarnaev, I wouldn't be shocked if American media ends up portraying Russia in a more negative light than the Chechens on this.

Chicago said...

Propaganda. They're trying to find an excuse to put some white non-Muslims into the picture. Why not put the DC snipers into it? Psychological engineering at work here.

Anonymous said...

Actually, I thought I was replying (in Nailed it, Steve) to the "bell curve shift" post. Though this post is good too.

Anonymous said...

"They were Chechens acting particularly Checheny."

Doesn't wash. They were very Americanized. Unless there's a Chechen gene that makes people act crazy, the 'national character' excuse only works partly.

Yes, different peoples have different 'national characters', and Chechens in America are surely unique in some ways.
But they were also highly adapted into American society and picked up many of the habits.
And America has produced its own share of nuts.

We need to know more about what happened to straighten this out. If the brothers did it for some crazy reason, they were indeed like Columbine loonies, V-tech nut, Sandy Hook screwball, the Dark Knight movie theater blaster, and etc.

But if they had a specific or political reason, then it makes more sense to compare them with the weather underground, Black panthers, Irgun, FMLN, immigrant terrorists of early 20th century(usually of anarchist ilk) etc.

The thing is this... some people have an intellectual culture while others don't. So, different peoples take out their hostilities differently. Jews, for instance, are very aggressive, vindictive, and vendetta-oriented. But they are smart and book-readers, and so they take out their anger through the law, media, culture, and government. They become lawyers like Dershowitz and others of the ACLU. They use media to trash Palestinians and white conservative 'racists'. They use ADL and SPLC to silence debate and criticism. They make 1950s Jewish communists to be saints while making McCarthy the equal of Hitler. Jews use legal bullets and bombs, economic explosives that are far more destructive. You can bet that Kagan will blow up the constitution that guarantees free speech and gun rights in yrs to come.

Chechens may be no more nasty and aggressive than Jews, but they are not an intellectual people. They've been a people who've taken out their spleen and anger through fighting, ambushing, slitting throats, eat-biting, eye-gouging, bombing, and etc.
But the funny thing is, unlike Jewish terrorists who served communism in Russia or Zionism in the Middle East, Chechens also have an honor culture where people must be willing to die as well as to kill.

Where Americanism comes into play is the 'tolerant' notion that America accommodates all sorts of cultures, values, and etc. So, you don't have to assimilate to traditional American values(and indeed, what are American values when 'gay marriage' and 'diversity' are all the rage among Americans?).
According to the new 'propositional americanism', you can be a proud Jew and wave the Zionist flag than the American one. You can be an illegal and cross into America and wave the Mexican flag and deal in drugs and spit on the American flag. (If anything, it's unAmerican and 'extreme' to deny that the illegal who waves the Mexican flag is an American.)
Or, you can wave the 'gay flag' and have mass gay day parades. Or you can be black and listen to rap music as your anthem and spit on white America. DJANGO UNCHAINED is the new Americanism.

In the past, when immigrant anarchists blew stuff up in the early 20th century, they were punished harshly and immigrant groups were told to ASSIMILATE to anglo-americanism.
But new Americanism is 'multi-culturalism', so you can be free to do as you want.

So, the two brothers practiced a kind of chechenism buoyed by american multi-culti libertinism. They smoked pot, partied and had a good time, played sports, and also figured they should act as chechen-americans in a newly hyphenated america where each group should maintain its own culture, identity, and values. And boy oh boy, they sure done that. So, in a way, they were as american as the fruit-salad-pie.

Diversity-American all the way, baby.

Kibernetika said...

They were Chechens acting particularly Checheny.

This is, unfortunately, true. For a couple of hundred years Russia has been trying to occupy the Caucasus. Who needs/wants them?!

Anyone here ever read M.U. Lermontov?

Or seen a modern version: http://youtu.be/n_XSJxkP8Ic

Anonymous said...

The big media Nothing-To-See-Here push today is kind of like the Keyser Söze legend in reverse--"If you don't start heeding our most elite associate professors of sociology's nuanced rationalizations, further bad things will happen"

Jacob A. Geller said...

There is no such thing as "particularly Checheny": http://www.antifjaka.org/literatura/materijali_katunaric_2/SEO.Russia_islamic%20identity.pdf

Anonymous said...

Maybe the guys suffered from Radioactive Jihad Syndrome.

One thing that was striking about a lot of the radical Muslim leaders and terrorists was that they were both extremely pious and extremely porous(or westernized/modernized).

If someone is totally into the Muslim or traditionalist/fundamentalist way of life, he's likely to find peace in his certitudes of what is right and wrong. He's happy in his conservatism.

And if someone is totally into modern libertinism of drugs, sex, and pop culture, he would be comfortable with that too.

But when a person is caught between the two realms, a radioactive meltdown might threaten within him.

We saw this with Yukio Mishima. He was both a super ultra-right Japanese nationalist and a decadent bohemian westernized artist. Both sides existed within him, and they detested one another. The decadent/bohemian side mocked his ultra-patriotic side that still revered the emperor. The ultra-patriotic side loathed his decadent hedonistic perverted side. So, paradoxically, the existence of two cultural modes made him even more extremely decadent and extremely patriotic. It's like the more he indulged in decadence, he felt a need to purify himself through extreme patriotism. And the more he became extremely patriotic, the more he needed to do outrageous things to prove that he's a creative artist who pushes the envelope. Certain cultural modes can co-exist together, but certain modes are inherently opposite and incompatible. With Mishima, it finally came to an extreme act of attacking a military headquarter, an attempted coup, and ritual suicide.

There was some of this in Hitler too. He was both extremely traditionalist and conservative AND extremely bohemian and creative-oriented. It's no wonder he went nuts.
And Malcolm X was also a deeply troubled individual because one side of him was a jazzy hustler pimp and another side was a radical searching for the pure unfettered truth rooted in the tradition of Islam.

Maybe something similar happened with the brothers. Paradoxically, the more they assimilated into America, the more they hated America. If they'd become full-fledged lovers of pot, rap music, and Hollywood culture, maybe they would have been okay. But maybe the traditionalist/Muslim Chechen side lingered within them, and a voice inside their heads said, 'You are scum for surrendering to all these American vices of the infidel'. But the Americanized side of them resented the traditional side that preached Chechen manhood and 'ethics'. Both sides wrestled with one another in their souls.
So, their act wasn't just against America but a projection of the battle raging inside their souls.

Maybe by blowing up stuff, the Chechen side could finally quell and destroy the filthy Americanized side. It's like the men in ZORBA THE GREEK both want the woman and hate the woman. They want her cuz she's beautiful. But in wanting what they can't really have, they hate her, and only by killing her can they find peace.

Anonymous said...

And maybe there was a sexual element. Chechen men are awful macho. To live in America, especially in Boston, where gays prance around like princes and where women can easily call the cops and 'emasculate' boyfriends who are 'abusive'--but not by Chechen macho standards--, maybe the brothers' political hatred of America came via personal humiliation.

A news story said the older brother was arrested for hitting his girlfriend. We might think it's no big deal--as men are arrested for such thing all over the country every day--, but maybe in his Chechen mind, it was a very BIG deal. He felt American culture emasculated and humiliated him in front of a woman, and this personal hatred maybe became politicized.

Consider Travis Bickle in TAXI DRIVER. He falls in love with Betsy, but when she turns him down and humiliates him, he doesn't just take it as a rejection. He sees it as the entire system conspiring to keep him down. Betsy is seen as the willing prostitute of the system ruled by politicians like Palantine. So, the personal becomes political, and he plots to kill Palantine. He undergoes the Mad Cabbie Meltdown Syndrome.

rob said...

Maybe the domestic violence is something to play up? Do we really to bring primitive misogynists over here to beat American women? But that might cause the left to start pushing for refugee status for all women from the third world. Then they'd bring their violent husbands, sons, etc. But even a left-driven campaign focusing on how the blacks, browns, and swarthies violent even towards their own wouldn't be bad.

Anonymous said...

Paul Schrader wrote TAXI DRIVER and later made MISHIMA. Indeed, the idea of TAXI DRIVER was inspired by Mishima's problems with modernism/traditionalism and SEARCHERS.

Schrader was also messed up because he came from an ultra-religious family where watching movies was considered SINFUL. He didn't watch a movie until he was like 19 and thought he was doing the dirtiest thing. He both fell in love with movies and loathed himself for falling in love with this sinful thing.

He gave himself over to the decadent excesses of modern life and big cities But the traditionalist puritanical side of him never went away.
Maybe if he hadn't turned to art, he might have either killed himself or killed others.
He said he was on the verge of suicide before he embarked on TAXI DRIVER.

http://paulschrader.org/writings.html

Good article under:

Screenwriter: Taxi Driver’s Paul Schrader – Film Comment – March/April 1976

Anonymous said...

When the traditionally old and radically new clash in the soul of man, maybe it can lead to something like Tradical Tragedy.

Horatio Caine said...

The finest trick of human nature is to persuade you that it does not exist, even if you drive it out with a pitchfork. And so the overclass (puts on sunglasses) becomes the teacher's pet

Anonymous said...

I have a shorter diagnosis: They were Chechens acting particularly Checheny.

Steve, that is petty and childish.

They were courageous young men retaliating against the United States for its slaughter of thousands of innocents across the globe.

"Evil triumphs when good men do nothing."

--Dzokhar Tsarnaev tweet, March 20

Anonymous said...

But if they had a specific or political reason, then it makes more sense to compare them with the weather underground, Black panthers, Irgun, FMLN, immigrant terrorists of early 20th century(usually of anarchist ilk) etc.

How about comparing them to the U.S. military and its bombing of civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Anonymous said...

It's funny. Afghanistan was attached to the USSR, and we got involved with Afghans, and it came back to us with 9/11.

Chechnya is attached to Russia, and we got involved by 'saving' Chechen refugees, and it came back to us with Boston bombing.

Russia plays invader, we play savior, and we get bombed in both cases.

Anonymous said...

How about we gift the Russians with our Mexican gang illegals?

Anonymous said...

How about we get a whole bunch of Chechens and settle them in Hollywood near where Tarantino lives?

Anonymous said...

I don't understand the contorted attempts in the mainstream (and even here on iSteve) to explain what has just happened. The United States, directly and indirectly, is waging war against multiple groups of people across the globe. We should expect that people will fight back.

Rob said...

You could also have added that over 60 percent of Muslims in Britain support Sharia law being implemented in the UK, and one in three of them between the ages of 16 and 24 believe Muslims converting to another religion should be executed.

Nick Diaz said...

@Steve Sailer

"I have a shorter diagnosis: They were Chechens acting particularly Checheny."

I have an even shorter one: they were individuals acting according to their own characters and volition.

Your argument is ridiculous: let's stop immigration from such and such countries because such and such countries have staistically such and such tendencies.

You bring the figure that 1% of Chechens in America turned out to be mass murderers. This, of course, means that 99% are not. But according to your logic, the 99% must pay for the sins of the 1%. How about judging people as INDIVIDUALS rather than statistical trends?

Also, you act like people are immutable robots that cannot change. What about the Scots-Irish? They were marauders, murderers and thieves back in their homeland, and yet in the U.S they are some of the most trustworthy citizens. You most likely have a rapist, a marauder and a com-artist among your ancestors, Steve Sailer. A LOT of people who are good people do.

Anonymous said...

The FBI has already arrested other people, so there may well be a larger conspiracy at work. Also, the FSB (aka KGB) alerted the US to the older brother a long time ago.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2312123/Boston-latest-Terrorista-1-license-plate-friends-Boston-bomber-arrested-female.html

Anonymous said...

There is the issue of the bombs: who made them. Tamarlan was a palooka, so at first I had my doubts that he made them. Then I found out his father trained him in the art of auto repair. Somebody who can fix cars can build a bomb from a pressure cooker, surely. On the other hand T. was a failure as a CC student, and probably had minimal reading skills; perhaps this is where the smarter younger brother, Joker, came in -- he read the directions and instructed his manually capable brother. But perhaps it was the father who made the bombs, then left the country. The mother left shortly thereafter. Add the fact that the father had cancer, and you now have a family going through a serious existential crisis. Perhaps this manic depressive family decided they should all go to heaven together -- parents of jihadhis get paradise bonus points.

Nutty theory, but we are talking about nutty people.

Rob said...

Another example of crazy Caucasians, this time the Azeris:

Lieutenant Ramil Seferov was on a training course organised by NATO at a Hungarian military academy in 2004. There he met an Armenian fellow trainee who he said insulted Azerbaijan, to which Seferov responded by killing him with an axe while he was sleeping.

He got a minimum of 30 years in prison, but in 2012 Hungary was persuaded to send him back home on condition that he'd be made serve out his sentence there.

He came back to a hero's welcome. The Government promptly gave him his job back, promoted him to major and gave him eight years' back pay, along with an apartment.

Corn said...

"Spend any amount of time with even vaguely pious Muslims (hijabs are a dead give-away for the girls, you actually have to talk to the dudes) and you notice how endemic to the community are things like 9/11 trutherism, atavistic social attitudes (even for the alt-right), disrespect for free speech, etc."

I don't know any Muslims, but I remember nine or ten years ago someone (Samuel Huntington maybe?) pointed to an opinion poll in which 70% of American Muslims placed their primary allegiance with another country. Whatever their virtues are as people, I don't think it's irrational to question the worth of Muslim immigrants as citizens.

Anonymous said...

I seem to remember that the Al-Qaeda rear guard at Tora Bora (the battle to take Bin Laden's cave complex in Afghanistan) was mostly Chechen and they were the ones who put up the most fight at the end. Seems more or less right:

"Al Qaeda Chechens Fight to Death in Tora Bora", By Sebastian Alison and Jeremy Page, Reuters, Saturday December 15.

"Chechen fighters loyal to Osama bin Laden fought to the death on Saturday in the mountains of eastern Afghanistan in battles with U.S. special forces..."

`All those who surrendered had guns, but the Chechens don't want to surrender,'' he told Reuters, adding that 20 Chechens had been killed in the latest fighting."


"At Tora Bora, the majority of the fighters escaped, while only the Chechen “die-hards” stayed."

I also don't see that this is a complex, hard-to-understand big-deal, religious, or "ism". The tribe has been fighting "enemies" for a long time. The war goes on. The war is eternal. Like a rock it is just there.

The old ethnic tit-for-tat "even if we lose, there's a payback cost from our ethny that you are going to remember in your future calculations when dealing with us." Of course young men don't think this through, they just do it.

Anonymous said...

Their uncle says they were brainwashed by an Armenian.
http://www.today.com/news/uncle-mentors-radicalized-older-boston-bombing-suspect-6C9529666
Whether they lie constantly because of their ethnicity or their religion or both, the main thing is they can't be
believed.

Anonymous said...

"You bring the figure that 1% of Chechens in America turned out to be mass murderers. This, of course, means that 99% are not."

I think Sailer's logic here is a bit forced too, but the idea of 1% of a population being terrorist-oriented is pretty dangerous. That means out of a million people, ten thousand could be terrorists.

. said...

If you have set off bombs you should panic like the rest and not act casual or nonchalant.

Anonymous said...

For a while, the internets believed that one of the bombers was a poor missing Indian Brahmin boy. I realized immediately that this was almost impossible - Brahmins would not literally hurt a fly. But in the modern world, we are all the same - Hindus, Muslims, lambs, lions, etc., so we think ANYTHING is possible. Perhaps anything is possible, but the usual things (Muslim terrorists) are likely. But mentioning this is as raaacist as bringing up black murder rates.

Rob said...

What's the Chechen position on gay marriage?

Anonymous said...

"I think Sailer's logic here is a bit forced too, but the idea of 1% of a population being terrorist-oriented is pretty dangerous. That means out of a million people, ten thousand could be terrorists."

No doubt terrorist proclivities are analogous to IQ, controlled by a complex array of interacting genes. If 1% on the right hand side of the bell curve are capable of mind bending violence, surely 33% are capable of extreme, physical violence, and 50% are capable of just being extremely unpleasant assholes.

fnn said...

US-Israel supporting Jihadists/Al-Qaeda in Syria:

April 21, 2013 (LD) - The US has announced that it will provide militants in Syria, now openly admitted to being Al Qaeda terrorists, with $123 million in military aid - while thousands of cancer patients at home are being turned away from clinics because of budget cuts. Compounding the the criminal negligence of telling sick people to seek help elsewhere, is the fact that the military aid the US is providing terrorists in Syria will be used to perpetuate an already 2 year long, sectarian-driven humanitarian disaster.
(...)

Anonymous said...

I've got an idea: Young Chechen males should be allowed to immigrate without question; to the North Dakota oil patch. This should be interesting.

Neil Templeton

Mr. Anon said...

Nick Diaz said...

You bring the figure that 1% of Chechens in America turned out to be mass murderers. This, of course, means that 99% are not. But according to your logic, the 99% must pay for the sins of the 1%. How about judging people as INDIVIDUALS rather than statistical trends?

Also, you act like people are immutable robots that cannot change. What about the Scots-Irish? They were marauders, murderers and thieves back in their homeland, and yet in the U.S they are some of the most trustworthy citizens."

Because the Scots-Irish were founders of this nation. The Chechens were not. As to the other 99% of Chechens who are not (so far) terrorists. F**k em'. They have no right to immigrate. It should be entirely at the discretion of Amercians whether or not we want them here.

And once again, F**k off, dip-s**t.

Mr. Anon said...

"Anonymous said...

The old ethnic tit-for-tat "even if we lose, there's a payback cost from our ethny that you are going to remember in your future calculations when dealing with us." Of course young men don't think this through, they just do it."

That may work to a certain degree.......until you come up against a real tough enemy, like the Romans, whose response to that is: "Okay then. We'll just kill off every last one of ya'".

Anonymous said...

Did you see the aunt talking to the press on T.V.? let's just say 'tough fucking woman'.

Whiskey said...

Oh please, the US is not at war with all sorts of countries. To the contrary we are undergoing a great, roaring withdrawal from the world. The only "fight" is our existence and Hollywood, etc. showing things that traditional societies abhor in favor of kidnap/marriages, polygamy, and vendettas.

The brothers did it because they were Muslim. Being Chechen just pushed them into more aggressiveness, but most young Muslim men in the West (and outside) believe killing lots of non-Muslims is a good thing that Allah demands and is a ticket to heaven. That's what Islam is all about.

America keeps withdrawing, post Cold War, and Muslims keep following. There won't be a change until we really fight back -- kick out the Muslims, respond to atrocities like Benghazi by flattening places, etc.

Jews "aggressive?" The people who went passively to the death camps? Are you kidding me? Really? The problem with modern Jewry is that they don't fight, instead intermarry and self-extinguish save guys and gals in Israel. [The Palestinians are a useless rabble -- only the Pakistanis, Egyptians, and Saudis are rivals in general uselessness.] Media power did so much in Germany, right? Meanwhile actual Jews who figure there is a threat have their own nuclear armed state to protect them, trusting to arms rather than any nebulous media persuasion (which signally failed with the Borat Brothers).

rob said...

Jacob A. Geller said...
There is no such thing as "particularly Checheny"


Really? They are a cultureless people? Fantastic! We can finally get some research on human nature uninfluenced by culture. Wait, without being particularly Checheny, how could they contribute to the diversity of our multicultural land? Maybe that's why they were so violent.

The left has doubled-down on the aliens so many times that they really can't change course. Some chunk of the left was only in it for spite: the sort who want to flood the country with hostile primitives because rednecks think it's a terrible idea. After all, didn't the liberals do a pretty good job uplifting Southern whites?

A huge chunk of liberals are just clueless to actual behavioral and cultural diversity: it's more than exotic foods and silly dancing; blood feuds and beating non-compliant women are too. Conmen and fraudsters are admired That sort of progressive has universalist values, morals, and ethics. They can't imagine people with different psychologies. Can't imagine that there are people who enjoy fightin' rapin' and stealin'. Some progressives may not think White Man's Burden, but they're pretty sure everyone will turn into reasonable Midwesterners and New England Yankees. But they don't realize how much selection it would take pacify Chechens They're wrong: Chechens could've assimilated into the Soviet state, freed their women from bondage...They didn't want to so much that they'll

Anthony said...

If the time comes again when we've always been at war with Eurasia, and we need some special forces types, we should just draft all 200 or so Chechens. Including the grandmothers.

周樹人 said...

Re: Meshima - the older brother had an Amazon wishlist.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/registry.html?ie=UTF8&type=wishlist&id=1PNVMAW2D4CT1

He loved books about the Chechen wars against Russia:

The Lone Wolf And the Bear: Three Centuries of Chechen Defiance of Russian Rule

and

Allah's Mountains: The Battle for Chechnya, New Edition

He also seems to be fond of books about the Italian mob.

@Nick Diaz - it's people like this that worries me. Yet another white guy who knows ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the centuries old Caucasian race hatred -- they've been killing each other for longer than the USA has existed. Stay out it, and keep them out of the US!

Anonymous said...

10,000 is about the size of an infantry division, support troops and all.

Do you really want 10,000 suicide infantry in your backyard?

when do we end the cultural death pact with diversity at all costs?

rob said...

Nick Diaz said...

You bring the figure that 1% of Chechens in America turned out to be mass murderers. This, of course, means that 99% are not. But according to your logic, the 99% must pay for the sins of the 1%. How about judging people as INDIVIDUALS rather than statistical trends?


How will we be punishing other Chechens? If they don't come here, would they just be living with Chechnya with other Chechens. Having Chechens around is so bad you think it's a punishment? Why should we be punished by living among Chechens.

The aliens don't have a right to come here. They are just fine in their own lands, living with themselves in the cultures they create. What, you think Chechens and Mexicans and whatnots are such horrible, incompetent people that having them around is punishment? That they're so stupid and evil that they didn't and won't build countries where they can have decent lives? What's the tipping point? Is there going to starvation in a quarter-Mexican place? What about a half?

Anglo-Saxons look like magic, but we can't uplift everyone: we'll be lucky if we can do much for the aliens already here. Many Mexicans escaped the Mexicans in Mexico, only to be stuck among Mexicans who themselves wanted to live among whites, not Mexicans.

Nick Diaz said...

Anonymous 7:49 PM

"No doubt terrorist proclivities are analogous to IQ, controlled by a complex array of interacting genes. If 1% on the right hand side of the bell curve are capable of mind bending violence, surely 33% are capable of extreme, physical violence, and 50% are capable of just being extremely unpleasant assholes."

The problem is that many of you are "genetic fetichists" who want to ascribe extremely complex behavior to genes, when there is no evidence that any given gene causes any given behavior.

Do you know where you can find the genetic descendants of Genghis Khan's Mongol hordes today? Among Peace-loving Buddhist monks in Nepa and índia. There is no such thing as gene "X" causing "Y" behavioral characteristic that has been established by the scientific method.

Nick Diaz said...

@Anonymous 9:09 PM

"Because the Scots-Irish were founders of this nation. The Chechens were not."

My point, which your dumbass missed, is that, just like the Scots-Irish were the Chechens of the British Islands and CHANGED their behavior to become good citizens, so can the Chechens. My point is that human behavior is not immutable, but rather flexible, and that people have vlition. And the Scots-Irish did not found América, not for the most part.

"As to the other 99% of Chechens who are not (so far) terrorists. F**k em'. They have no right to immigrate. It should be entirely at the discretion of Amercians whether or not we want them here."

Actually, you don't have a choice in this matter. Immigrants will continue to come to América, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. Your impotent rage amuses me.

"And once again, F**k off, dip-s**t."

You mad, bro? It's not my fault that you are unintelligent and get owned every time you argue with me. Maybe it's time for you to accept that you are stupid and give up?

Anonymous said...

"Do you know where you can find the genetic descendants of Genghis Khan's Mongol hordes today?"

Sure. A violent environment will select for traits that are useful in violence. If the environment changes then those violent traits will be selected against and over time will mostly disappear - evolution in action.

Populations that have most recently lived in a clan-based raiding culture e.g. Chechens, Somalis, Albanians will have more of those traits than other populations - same reason the mafia were Sicilian.

Among other traits i bet Chechens have disproportionately good eyesight for example.

Anonymous said...

"There is no such thing as gene "X" causing "Y" behavioral characteristic that has been established by the scientific method."

Yes, but that's like saying that no one line of code determines the behavior of an entire program and therefor an entire program doesn't have a particular behavior. "No single gene determines a particular behavior. Behaviors are complex traits involving multiple genes that are affected by a variety of other factors."

First google hit:

"What indications are there that behavior has a biological basis?"

This from the web-page "Human Genome Project Information: Behavioral Genetics". It's a government web site, so it's got to be right. Surely they wouldn't lie.

Some things are pretty obvious. Watch dogs, even those who have never seen a dog of the same breed. Are you claiming there's something really special about humans in this regard?

"Consider the instinctive retrieval behavior of a yellow Labrador or the herding posture of a border collie."

"Where can I learn more about the genetics of different behavioral traits?"

HAR said...

Steve, you have your own interests, but others have theirs. Different people may want to investigate different aspects of this case. "They were Chechens" may be enough for you, but others want to know more. This is an interesting story in that the younger brother seemed completely different from any other terrorist we've seen: well adjusted, liked, no previous signs of radicalization or even interest in politics.

It's true that there's probably no way they would've done this if they weren't Muslims. But it doesn't mean that other people might be interested in other parts of the story.

Anonymous said...

re the Amazon wishlist - some decent history books there.

Also several books on forging IDs

Nick Diaz said...

@Anonymous 9:09 PM

"Because the Scots-Irish were founders of this nation. The Chechens were not."

My point, which your ignorant self missed, is that, just like the Scots-Irish were the Chechens of the British Islands and CHANGED their behavior to become good citizens, so can the Chechens. My point is that human behavior is not immutable, but rather flexible, and that people have vlition. And the Scots-Irish did not found América, not for the most part.

"As to the other 99% of Chechens who are not (so far) terrorists. F**k em'. They have no right to immigrate. It should be entirely at the discretion of Amercians whether or not we want them here."

Actually, you don't have a choice in this matter. Immigrants will continue to come to América, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. Your impotent rage amuses me.

"And once again, F**k off, dip-s**t."

You mad, bro? It's not my fault that you are not very bright and get owned every time you argue with me. Maybe it's time for you to accept that you accept that and give up?

Anonymous said...

It's true that, for example, the descendants of the feared Vikings are the Scandinavians. But you don't have to go that far back - what happened to the English in three generations?

Anonymous said...

"They were Chechens acting particularly Checheny."

Doesn't wash. They were very Americanized.


Even the brother who said he had made no American friends and didn't understand Americans at all?

Cennbeorc

Mr. Anon said...

"Nick Diaz said...

The problem is that many of you are "genetic fetichists" who want to ascribe extremely complex behavior to genes, when there is no evidence that any given gene causes any given behavior."

But there is ample evidence that the combined effect of many genes in the agregate DOES cause behavior. The problem with you is that you are a not-very-bright knee-jerk defender of an intellectually fraudulent conventional wisdom. Oh, and also a dick.

Mr. Anon said...

"Nick Diaz said...

You mad, bro? It's not my fault that you are not very bright and get owned every time you argue with me. Maybe it's time for you to accept that you accept that and give up?"

Mad? No, I'm not mad, asshat. You're arguments are astoundingly weak - glaringly wrong, actually. And I'm a hell of a lot smarter than are you. I'm just pointing out that you are a dipshit.

Mr. Anon said...

"Nick Diaz said...

My point, which your ignorant self missed, is that, just like the Scots-Irish were the Chechens of the British Islands and CHANGED their behavior to become good citizens, so can the Chechens."

No, you are changing your point after the fact. And whatever point you are making, it is wrong (this is actually a general statement about you).

"And the Scots-Irish did not found América, not for the most part."

Horseshit. You know nothing about American history, or you are just a shameless liar. Perhaps both.

Cretin.

Matthew said...

"You bring the figure that 1% of Chechens in America turned out to be mass murderers. This, of course, means that 99% are not. But according to your logic, the 99% must pay for the sins of the 1%."

No one is arguing that we "punish" the Chechens. No one has a right to immigrate to the United States. It is not a punishment to tell them that they can't. It is not a punishment to tell someone he can't take what isn't his. Immigration is a gift, and we have the right to choose who receives it.

Anonymous said...

The problem with modern Jewry is that they don't fight, instead intermarry and self-extinguish save guys and gals in Israel.

Why do you consider intermarriage a problem?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 5:47--that's bad to hear Jhokar tweeted an Edmund Burke quotation; how many columns do you think Paul Krugman will get out of that? At least 2

Anonymous said...

This idea is espoused by Bartcop: if protecting Afghan women from their own culture is the only reason we're staying there, why not just grant asylum to them en masse? Females only.

Anonymous said...

"YOU'RE arguments...
I'm... smarter"

Does not compute.

rob said...

Eventually the immigrants will stop. The Chechens come here to mooch off whites. The Mexicans to mow lawns for white people. What's gonna happen manana? Will Chechens mooch of Mexicans? Will Mexicans mow lawns for Chechens? Mexican-Mexicans will go back to starving in greater numbers than now. Mexicans here, they'll either be swept out by paramilitaries going house to house, like we saw up in Boston, or they'll be in Mexico del frio, and will envy the warm Mexicans.

American-Americans aren't an infinite resource. You hate us so much your pushing the end game too fast. The simultaneous push to disarm whites and flood us with criminal and terrorist trash while taunting us.

Even if Mexicans' could be turned to brown, fat little Swedes, how will that happen without Anglos? If Mexicans could do it for themselves, you wouldn't have to come here. Without enough whites to uplift you, you'll just be lethargic with hunger and shivering.

Think really hard, and wonder if breaking the US is a good idea for the Mexicans squatters already here. After all, you have had some conflicts with whites before. How did those turn out?

Mr. Anon said...

"Anonymous said...

"YOU'RE arguments...
I'm... smarter"

Does not compute."

Yeah, right. You've never typed the wrong word while dashing off a post. I bet you've never run a red light either.

Cail Corishev said...

I was going to point out that you should proofread extra carefully when you're telling someone you're smarter than him, but then I realized you were talking to Senor Corte, so....carry on.

Svigor said...

The people who went passively to the death camps?

They didn't go passively to the death camps. Yes, Jews are highly aggressive. They just also happen to be highly urban and educated, so their aggression shows itself on the intellectual, rather than physical, plane.

The problem is that many of you are "genetic fetichists" who want to ascribe extremely complex behavior to genes, when there is no evidence that any given gene causes any given behavior.

Nonsense. There's lots of evidence.

There is no such thing as gene "X" causing "Y" behavioral characteristic that has been established by the scientific method.

Oh, I get it, you conflated "evidence" and "proof." Silly man.

Actually, you don't have a choice in this matter. Immigrants will continue to come to América, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. Your impotent rage amuses me.

Your unselfconscious display of statist (AKA "liberal," AKA "progressive") power-worship amuses me.

Steve, you have your own interests, but others have theirs. Different people may want to investigate different aspects of this case. "They were Chechens" may be enough for you, but others want to know more.

You have this a bit backwards, I think. Steve is probably interested in the details, too, but unlike many of the different people you refer to, he doesn't want "they're Chechen, duh" ruled out as a topic of discussion, or from consideration as the primary salient characteristic.

Why do you consider intermarriage a problem?

Because Jews do.