New modes of disseminating terror threaten the basic notions of survival in general, creating a generalized state of terror where death hangs over, regulates, every moment that is lived. Such necrocracy is the goal of heretical Islamic agencies of Terror such as Jama’at-e Takfir and its T'akfiri agents – a militant Jihadi movement believing in the absolute excommunication of infidels A Takfiri engages as a shadow terrorist in White War – the endo-militarization of peace, a state of hypercamouflage (best defined as complete and consequently symmetrical overlap between two entities on a mereotopological plane). The Takfiri’s favoured mode of warfare is to program a new type of tactical line which totally blends with the enemy’s lines in such a configuration that it introduces radical instability and eventually violent fissions into the system from within. This happens in such a way that not only does recovery become impossible, but in addition any corrective or restorative initiative is ineluctably turned into a military subversion. In attempting defence, the enemy can only necrotize and dissolve itself.
In militarized Taqiyya, survival is transformed into a sort of highly-charged parasitical endurance which inherently threatens the catalysis of all those whose survival is afforded more easily. Survival becomes as risky as a contagious terminal illness.
Taqiyya should not be merely a deception, a hiding tactic; it should consist of seeking the highest degree of participation with infidels, with their civilians: “if they take drugs we must do the same, if they take part in every type of sexual activity we must drive those activities to the point of excess”, etc.
When a Takfiri becomes as one with ordinary civilians – no longer dissimulating but moving and behaving like a true, unfaithful civilian in every aspect of his or her public and private life – then the weapon begins autonomously to be activated from the other side; the government (of a foreign non-Islamic country, for example) itself begins to filter, purge and hunt down its own civilians, curtailing their rights, confining them to economic, social and political quarantine to isolate or
even purge the disease and its potential hosts at the same time. Each individual is potentially a Takfiri cell or niche, a site of infestation, a primary military target. So that the most offensive, active phase of a Takfiri’s life is not when
he or she is on a high-profile mission like 9/11, but rather when he or she becomes a mere civilian, totally unarmed and dissociated from any line of command. A Takfiri
levels himself with everyone and consequently levels everyone with himself; when it comes to hunting a Takfiri, one ineluctably ends up exterminating non-military entities, far away from the battlefield, in the heart of one’s own land.
The Takfiri shuts down all his military potential, tactically ‘dies’ (not even being camouflaged anymore), and later is resurrected again in ‘his’ true form. The Takfiri war machines of extremist Jihad operate on transient and divergent tactical lines. As a result, they cannot be reached or communicated with: communication which is the prerequisite for the clash between war machines and entropically-based military conflicts, mechanisms considered by Deleuze and Guattari as the processes which fabricate the very machinery and space of War.
Faraj presents a Takfiri alternative to the megadeath machinery (of the USA): He discusses a new doctrine of hypercamouflaged terror which he calls ‘Dieback machinery’, a term borrowed from botany and agriculture.What he defines as ‘Dieback’ can be applied to an entire ‘civilization just as well as a Tree or any arborescent mode of collectivity’: in order to introduce a Tree to extinction, a Takfiri terrorist never interferes with the roots, attempting to uproot the whole tree, as this would merely remove the taproot, leaving rootlets and other root parts in the soil that would eventually grow and give rise to many new trees. The terrorist or Jihadi extremist launches a dieback disease against the tree: to be precise, he starts to extinguish the most expendable and smallest leaves growing at the top of the tree and its branchlets, and continues his work to the rest of leaves, without damaging the main trunk or roots. By destroying leaves from top to bottom
and by marring branchlets, the tree will wither: excommunicated and dejected, the tree will eventually be entirely incapacitated and will start to (over)react autophagically and allergically to the artificial dereliction effected by the dieback disease. Taqiyya provides Takfiris with ample opportunity to use this dieback machinery, starting from the leaves (civilians or what they call ‘expendable
entities’) and branchlets (small organizations, etc.), ultimately rendering the tree obsolete without ever having launched any direct attack against its main organs.
Various stages in the dieback of a civilization would be: paranoia; lack of investment; civilians as primary targets for both fronts; dereliction. When a Takfiri extremist goes under Taqiyya he embeds his sabotaging mechanisms within civilians, uses civilians as back-doors.
A desert nomad does not migrate, as it is minimally under the influence of climatic
factors; it burrows tunnels of its own, making its own niches within the desert, crossing the dimensions of holey and smooth spaces, exploiting and betraying them
equally. Scorpions are burrowers not architects, they do not build upon compositions of solid and void, nor do they move restlessly, they devour volumes and snatch spaces; for them the holey space is not merely a dwelling place, a place to reside (a niche for occupation) but more than that, it is the Abode of War (dâr al-harb), the holey space of unselective hunting.
In a Takfiri sense, deserted trees are no different from a desert without trees: dieback purifies, desertifies, the infidel organism, bringing the Earth within the compass of the utter desolation of the Desert of the Divine.
Every warmachine or tactical line occupies a niche (whether in wartime or peace), a space through which it can move, feed and function; it is not only defined by the
distinctive properties of a tactical line or warmachine but also by its enemies, the incompatible dynamism of other tactical lines, types of predators, the exposure to environmental factors, its threshold for receiving data from the environment, the types of data it receives and its propin-quity to what it pursues or probes (there is a common misunderstanding that attributes solid or crisp boundaries to niches; but niches are assembled wherever an entity economizes a portion of its environment and survives / functions in that economized space).
However, as niches are connective entities (entity-as-event in a Deleuzian sense); they do not exclusively belong to one entity or one tenant. Multiple entities can share one niche and niches can form nested niches (territorial forces diminish – but never disappear – in grouping bonds) linking to each other, being connected in various modes.
In the Deleuze-Guattari model of the nomadic warmachine, the warmachines are external to the State’s effective boundary, restlessly eroding it, gnawing at the consolidated borders of the State.
Overlap draws lines of coincidence between two events or entities by specifying an
address that two entities partly or completely share in a spatio-temporal or a functional region. Both the State’s appropriations and counter-state insurgencies happen through this mode of connection. Whilst it is exploitable by the State and by affordance, this does not mean that ‘overlap’ cannot also be the main source of insurgency – it is the connection-domain through which warmachines leave their border-eroding externality and directly arrive at the State’s grid, either to be specialized by the State apparatus and turn into military formations or to be
reinvented as contagious, endo-symbiotic and parasitic entities coinciding with the State and its machineries and consequently discovering a wide array of clandestine
and manipulative functions.
On a more technical plane, all camouflage exploitations are essentially consistent because they all involve the use of ‘overlap’ (or, more accurately, coincidence, as
the question of overlap between entities here is the question of overlapping niches which these entities occupy)
All types of camouflage draw a disruptive function from the overlapped part (which mainly occurs on a fragmented level) by conducting the address or niche of another entity (for example, the prey) to the camouflaged entity (hunter) and consequently disrupting the mereologic (part-whole) correlations at work with regard to what should be camouflaged, making it temporally and partly untraceable, camouflaged. Such disruptions(which generally target a reference-point or a reference-link by which an entity is detected) can produce cognitive-glitches as well as the subversion of some specific environing bonds that pass through both the camouflaged entity and its object (its prey).
A Takfiri under Taqiyya (Islamic hypercamouflage) does not occupy a niche to replace another entity, or dwell as a hidden agent; he pushes the connection with
his environment toward a complete overlap, an unbroken field of connection and correspondence, a complete coincidence with its target, i.e. a complete overlapping of its niche with the niche of its target. He entirely overlaps his prey and its niche and thus remains silent. In complete overlap, every region, function or part of the hypercamouflaged entity orpredator, the ‘Takfiri under Taqiyya’ (X) can correspondwith its identical region, function or part of theprey/host/civilian (Y). Therefore if every x (part or function of X) homologizes its corresponding y (part or function of Y) or more precisely, if every x corresponds with its y ‘on all levels’ then every function of X (the tactical movement of the Takfiri under Taqiyya, or hypercamouflaged predator) can be transferred to Y and they mutually fulfill each other.
By seizing any y, a corresponding x is triggered and covertly unleashed; and since we are dealing with complete overlap, the very survival and communication of Y deploys, activates and fulfills the menacing body of X, the Takfiri under Taqiyya.
In militarized Taqiyya, survival is transformed into a sort of highly-charged parasitical endurance which inherently threatens the catalysis of all those whose survival is afforded more easily. Survival becomes as risky as a contagious terminal illness.
Taqiyya should not be merely a deception, a hiding tactic; it should consist of seeking the highest degree of participation with infidels, with their civilians: “if they take drugs we must do the same, if they take part in every type of sexual activity we must drive those activities to the point of excess”, etc.
When a Takfiri becomes as one with ordinary civilians – no longer dissimulating but moving and behaving like a true, unfaithful civilian in every aspect of his or her public and private life – then the weapon begins autonomously to be activated from the other side; the government (of a foreign non-Islamic country, for example) itself begins to filter, purge and hunt down its own civilians, curtailing their rights, confining them to economic, social and political quarantine to isolate or
even purge the disease and its potential hosts at the same time. Each individual is potentially a Takfiri cell or niche, a site of infestation, a primary military target. So that the most offensive, active phase of a Takfiri’s life is not when
he or she is on a high-profile mission like 9/11, but rather when he or she becomes a mere civilian, totally unarmed and dissociated from any line of command. A Takfiri
levels himself with everyone and consequently levels everyone with himself; when it comes to hunting a Takfiri, one ineluctably ends up exterminating non-military entities, far away from the battlefield, in the heart of one’s own land.
The Takfiri shuts down all his military potential, tactically ‘dies’ (not even being camouflaged anymore), and later is resurrected again in ‘his’ true form. The Takfiri war machines of extremist Jihad operate on transient and divergent tactical lines. As a result, they cannot be reached or communicated with: communication which is the prerequisite for the clash between war machines and entropically-based military conflicts, mechanisms considered by Deleuze and Guattari as the processes which fabricate the very machinery and space of War.
Faraj presents a Takfiri alternative to the megadeath machinery (of the USA): He discusses a new doctrine of hypercamouflaged terror which he calls ‘Dieback machinery’, a term borrowed from botany and agriculture.What he defines as ‘Dieback’ can be applied to an entire ‘civilization just as well as a Tree or any arborescent mode of collectivity’: in order to introduce a Tree to extinction, a Takfiri terrorist never interferes with the roots, attempting to uproot the whole tree, as this would merely remove the taproot, leaving rootlets and other root parts in the soil that would eventually grow and give rise to many new trees. The terrorist or Jihadi extremist launches a dieback disease against the tree: to be precise, he starts to extinguish the most expendable and smallest leaves growing at the top of the tree and its branchlets, and continues his work to the rest of leaves, without damaging the main trunk or roots. By destroying leaves from top to bottom
and by marring branchlets, the tree will wither: excommunicated and dejected, the tree will eventually be entirely incapacitated and will start to (over)react autophagically and allergically to the artificial dereliction effected by the dieback disease. Taqiyya provides Takfiris with ample opportunity to use this dieback machinery, starting from the leaves (civilians or what they call ‘expendable
entities’) and branchlets (small organizations, etc.), ultimately rendering the tree obsolete without ever having launched any direct attack against its main organs.
Various stages in the dieback of a civilization would be: paranoia; lack of investment; civilians as primary targets for both fronts; dereliction. When a Takfiri extremist goes under Taqiyya he embeds his sabotaging mechanisms within civilians, uses civilians as back-doors.
A desert nomad does not migrate, as it is minimally under the influence of climatic
factors; it burrows tunnels of its own, making its own niches within the desert, crossing the dimensions of holey and smooth spaces, exploiting and betraying them
equally. Scorpions are burrowers not architects, they do not build upon compositions of solid and void, nor do they move restlessly, they devour volumes and snatch spaces; for them the holey space is not merely a dwelling place, a place to reside (a niche for occupation) but more than that, it is the Abode of War (dâr al-harb), the holey space of unselective hunting.
In a Takfiri sense, deserted trees are no different from a desert without trees: dieback purifies, desertifies, the infidel organism, bringing the Earth within the compass of the utter desolation of the Desert of the Divine.
Every warmachine or tactical line occupies a niche (whether in wartime or peace), a space through which it can move, feed and function; it is not only defined by the
distinctive properties of a tactical line or warmachine but also by its enemies, the incompatible dynamism of other tactical lines, types of predators, the exposure to environmental factors, its threshold for receiving data from the environment, the types of data it receives and its propin-quity to what it pursues or probes (there is a common misunderstanding that attributes solid or crisp boundaries to niches; but niches are assembled wherever an entity economizes a portion of its environment and survives / functions in that economized space).
However, as niches are connective entities (entity-as-event in a Deleuzian sense); they do not exclusively belong to one entity or one tenant. Multiple entities can share one niche and niches can form nested niches (territorial forces diminish – but never disappear – in grouping bonds) linking to each other, being connected in various modes.
In the Deleuze-Guattari model of the nomadic warmachine, the warmachines are external to the State’s effective boundary, restlessly eroding it, gnawing at the consolidated borders of the State.
Overlap draws lines of coincidence between two events or entities by specifying an
address that two entities partly or completely share in a spatio-temporal or a functional region. Both the State’s appropriations and counter-state insurgencies happen through this mode of connection. Whilst it is exploitable by the State and by affordance, this does not mean that ‘overlap’ cannot also be the main source of insurgency – it is the connection-domain through which warmachines leave their border-eroding externality and directly arrive at the State’s grid, either to be specialized by the State apparatus and turn into military formations or to be
reinvented as contagious, endo-symbiotic and parasitic entities coinciding with the State and its machineries and consequently discovering a wide array of clandestine
and manipulative functions.
On a more technical plane, all camouflage exploitations are essentially consistent because they all involve the use of ‘overlap’ (or, more accurately, coincidence, as
the question of overlap between entities here is the question of overlapping niches which these entities occupy)
All types of camouflage draw a disruptive function from the overlapped part (which mainly occurs on a fragmented level) by conducting the address or niche of another entity (for example, the prey) to the camouflaged entity (hunter) and consequently disrupting the mereologic (part-whole) correlations at work with regard to what should be camouflaged, making it temporally and partly untraceable, camouflaged. Such disruptions(which generally target a reference-point or a reference-link by which an entity is detected) can produce cognitive-glitches as well as the subversion of some specific environing bonds that pass through both the camouflaged entity and its object (its prey).
A Takfiri under Taqiyya (Islamic hypercamouflage) does not occupy a niche to replace another entity, or dwell as a hidden agent; he pushes the connection with
his environment toward a complete overlap, an unbroken field of connection and correspondence, a complete coincidence with its target, i.e. a complete overlapping of its niche with the niche of its target. He entirely overlaps his prey and its niche and thus remains silent. In complete overlap, every region, function or part of the hypercamouflaged entity orpredator, the ‘Takfiri under Taqiyya’ (X) can correspondwith its identical region, function or part of theprey/host/civilian (Y). Therefore if every x (part or function of X) homologizes its corresponding y (part or function of Y) or more precisely, if every x corresponds with its y ‘on all levels’ then every function of X (the tactical movement of the Takfiri under Taqiyya, or hypercamouflaged predator) can be transferred to Y and they mutually fulfill each other.
By seizing any y, a corresponding x is triggered and covertly unleashed; and since we are dealing with complete overlap, the very survival and communication of Y deploys, activates and fulfills the menacing body of X, the Takfiri under Taqiyya.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий