Post

More from @S_Coughlin_DC

Stephen Coughlin

@S_Coughlin_DC

Oct 2

1/3) As you take note of BBCs characterization of the synagogue attacker, it may be worth tracking it in the context of three "completely unrelated" activities, and consider that they may reflect a tactical to operational to strategic framework - and design.

Tactical. The immediate call and the the activity. europeanconservative.com/articles/news/…

2/3) Operations to Strategic -

Note the 2 part X from September 26 confirming that state actors recognized that IUMS and MWL, both acting under color of authority, released fatwas calling for direct action when posting their messages. It is a 2-parter.

BUT ALSO NOTE that it is linked to a 9-part September 20 X thread explaining how how those messages served that purpose and, hence, are incorporated into this explaination. x.com/S_Coughlin_DC/…

3a/3) STRATEGIC Exploitation. Complete disorientation & dislocation at a time when hostile operations are running concurrenly.

From jihad, through Dawah, to the Ummah. Just as explained in the 2016 paper, “Burning Down the House.” (3b/3)

The reporter asks a question that answers itself. For those with eyes to see, Leavitt’s response is cringe. Ego up. Bright shiney objects, and peace plans with the very entities overseeing the violence.

x.com/BulwarkOnline/…

Read 8 tweets

Stephen Coughlin

@S_Coughlin_DC

Sep 27

1) Addressing the low-lying fruit first, doesn’t your Strauss/Marcuse construct conform to the Marxist notion of a ‘unity of opposites’?

As a Lincoln Fellow, I asked this question, or rather tried to, in a Claremont forum on Plato and they first sh*t the bed and then kicked me out.

But really, if Marxism operates dialectically, doesn’t Marcuse demand an opposite to make things work? (Yes, it does!) As such, wouldn’t it be wise to game out the question as to whether the Strausian understanding of the Symposium checks Marcuses, or whether it completes it. Just asking for a friend, and also Claremont.

(** Institut fur Sozialforschung - The Institute for Social Research - is the actual name of the "Frankfurt School.")

2) Admit it! When you saw the word “dialectic,” your eyes glazed over. And that’s why we will lose. Why? Because Lenin (and Marx, and Mao, and Marcuse, и так далее) all said that the dialectic is the very basis of Marxism.

Lenin used the word “essence” to explain this core nature. For those with only a passing familiarity with the language, “essence” is a power word that reaches into the very Platonic nature of the bargain proposition - that Lenin leaned into.

In the official English translation, as with the original Russian, “essence” is derived from the Latin “essentia” which hardwired translates the Greek “ουσια” (ousia) which sometimes translate to ‘substantia’ and then ’substance’. You cannot negotiate Lenin (or Marx, or Mao, or Marcuse, и так далее).

3) Picking up on knowledge as a circle in motion, it turns out that it's neither an accident nor a coincidence that it bears unmistakable signs of being Platonic.

It is, as Lenin said, the ousia! But that self-moving spiral turns out to be the "self movement" of opposites, kind of like a negative and positive charge cycling each other, or a thesis and antithesis cycling each other around a common narrative.

For some reason, almost by design, this resonates Plato's "contraries," which in turn, seem to pick up that continuous motion vibe that, understood along a parallel axis, could easily represent continuous revolution.

Read 5 tweets

Stephen Coughlin

@S_Coughlin_DC

Sep 21

1) This IUMS open letter can be understood to be a fatwa calling for defensive jihad. As such, details of what was said must be culled out.

Are we approaching one of those “rubber meets the road” historical inflection points? The NCTC (National Counter-Terrorism Center) issued a warning of imminent Al-Qaeda terrorism in the United States in a “Spotlight” report. Discussed in an earlier “X” was the International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS) release demanding the standing down of the interfaith active measure, particularly the Abrahamic Religion Project, which would have the effect of undermining the Abrahamic Accords without saying so.

This X thread will focus on the NCTC’s “Spotlight” warning with a focus on two other releases earlier this week, and IUMS open letter to the heads of states of all Arab and Islamic countries, and what appears to be a supporting release from the Muslim World League (MWL). IUMS is hosted by Qatar, and the MWL by Saudi Arabia.

2) Earlier this week, at a forum dated 14-15 September 2025, the International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS) issued an “open letter” to the leaders of the Muslim World from its headquarters in Doha, Qatar.

IUMS was founded by Yusuf Qaradawi, the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, and functioned as that organization’s chief jurist from his office in Doha, Qatar, with the oversight and support from the al-Thani family.

As a scene setter, it might be appropriate to provide a few quotes from Qaradawi and his Brotherhood friends that landed him on the terrorism watch list.

3) Given that the IUMS open letter calls for defensive jihad, a few pointers are in order – they are not exhaustive.

Early on, reference is made to the “cry of the oppressed.” This might ring a faint bell. When BLM and Antifa were rioting in American cities in June 2020, they were screaming from the “prayer of the oppressed,” a booklet recently translated and published by Hamza Yusuf, that same Hamza Yusuf that Sec State Pompeo appointed as “Human Rights Advisor” on State’s “Commission on Inalienable Rights” a month later. These violent riots were directed at President Trump in his first term.

Read 9 tweets

Stephen Coughlin

@S_Coughlin_DC

Jan 2

1) Yesterday, the lead spokesperson for the FBI response to the terror attack in New Orleans came from the BAU, indicating that the response would be narrative-based along well trodden lines.

Today, we are told that the events of New Orleans were an act of terror by a "Lone Wolf." Do you see the contradiction? To be an act of terror, there must be an entity that benefits. Who or what entity would that be? Cui bono? More on Lone Wolf later.

The response to the event is incoherent—it cannot survive contact with the real. In 2011, I briefed Congressman Lungren. A few weeks later, in oversight, he was mugged by the reality of the crisis. Yet, this is the narrative we see being deployed just weeks before Trump takes office.

news.sky.com/video/fbi-beli…

2) The FBI and DHS adopted the term "Lone Wolf" around the same time Al Qauida released its first volume of Inspire Magazine, which was written and produced in America (if memory serves). In this first edition, Volume 1, AQ announced a change of strategy. I remember it well because I was set to brief members of the HPSCI (House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence) in a few days, and it forced me to redo the presentation.

3) As coincidence would have it, at about the same time the FBI et al. adopted "lone wolf," al-Qaida announced to the world that its new strategy would be based on "individual jihad" and "jihad by bands." As it turns out, and as briefed when assigned to CENTCOM FWD in 2005, Individual Jihad turns out to be a formal/doctrinal element of Islamic law on Jihad.

In fact, in 1915, the last fatwa from a sitting Caliph issued an order to kill all non-Muslims that included individual jihad. The Caliph supported his call to jihad by the fact that the Prophet himself promoted it. Go figure.

So, at a time when Al-Qaida announced a new form of operation that could be associated with known doctrinal templates driving specific forms of operations that could service a deliberate decision-making process, a term that, coincidentally, accurately explains the cause-in-fact, of most 'lone wolf' acts in America to date, the term Federal LE adopted was "Lone Wolf."

"Lone wolf," it turns out, has no specific meaning and, hence, can be used to service any number of BAU explanations, beginning with the understanding that all true (gnostic) knowledge of these acts of terror are to be gleaned from their "underlying causes," which turns out to be any psycho-social explanation that sticks to the wall so long as it's not "individual jihad" or those entities actively promoting it. (Blade attacks anyone?)

This is how the real, the cause-in-fact, is replaced by the pseudoreal, the underlying cause. Now, this is a sustained active measure that can cause nations captured by it to fail.

Could this be what the Muslim Brotherhood meant when they said "by their hands" in the Explanatory Memorandum - a document that was served into evidence in a federal trial? (Meaning that the defeat of America would be based on a strategy where America would defeat itself for them - by their (own) hands?)

Read 8 tweets

Stephen Coughlin

@S_Coughlin_DC

Dec 6, 2024

1) John, that's a 'been there, done that' observation. (LOL)

When the OIC revised its charter and rebranded itself (Organization of Islamic Conference to Organization of Islamic Cooperation) in 2008, they also defined themselves as the leader of the Ummah in terms that match the status of a Caliphate.

Because this OIC Charter was formally and officially ratified by the heads of every Muslim Country (I could say 'Islamic State' but that would short circuit too many people), it's legal status is dispositive. When the OIC Secretary General was asked about the 'caliphate' status of the OIC, the Turkish Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu that the OIC fills that role.

So, none of this is speculative.

And what does it mean that the American component of the IM (which, in North America is lead by the Ikhwan Muslimin - i.e., the M Brotherhood).

After all, when the US MB has their national conferences, they don't hesitate to broadcast him in as a keynote speaker - Rabia gesture and all.

2) And whenever Erdogan comes to America, he does like to leadership meetings with his subordinates. But Erdogan's Sultan-esque leadership is also reflected by how the OIC writ large perceives him. And he certainly seems to have sustained experience with the . . . shall we say, global left. It really is a concern.

But even more concerning is that it's not on anyone's radar.

3) And yet, as one notes the openly hostile attitude towards then President Trump and now the incoming President Elect Trump as posted earlier, and also the openly hostile statements directed towards Western Europe, which already has a well developed Diyanet structure, should there be reasons for concern? After all, as we look at all the ISIS-style violence in Syria right now, shouldn't there be concern regarding a leader show moved such forces around?

Read 6 tweets

Stephen Coughlin

@S_Coughlin_DC

Sep 1, 2024

1) There's so much to ripsaw through here. After a few brief pointers however, we'll focus on the initiate signaling of "Ur-Platonists."

Beware of Post Vatican II philosophers discussing Plato and Aristotle, you may be reading a mugging.

Pointers.

Note the assessment of Plato along materialist terms that put the discussion in line with Marxist notions of dialectical materialism.

"The ultimate cause is God, or soul . . ." The Platonic discussion primarily concerns the soul. Plato may refer to small "g" gods, but not "God," and any monotheistic tendencies would be, as noted in earlier posts, with notions of "One" (Monad) from which the "many" are to become sublated aspects of at some end point in history a la Chardin, Hegal, Blavatska, the Hermticists, Alchemists, Neoplatonists, and Plato.

There is warning that when Aristotle and Aquinas are put in this "Ur-Plato" continuum, one should take time to assess whether it's the Aquinas in the Neoplatonic box Aristotle (and by extension Aquaina).

On the 2nd page (80), the text on Plato morphs into Aristotle's "Nicomachian Ethics." Maybe it's just too blurred for my sense of things, but "The Ethics" discussion on happiness, ευδαιμονια - eudaemonia - a much deeper sense of the term than its use suggests, does come from habituation along the entire telos of one's life.

This is Plato in a blender with an admixture of Aristotle.

Now, on to "Ur-Plato" and how materialism might yield a nexus (or two).

2) The first thing to ponder when hearing of "Ur-Platonist" is that it can be traced to Plato's Symposium, specifically to Pasuanias's defense of high-minded pedophilia, as opposed to the lowly "Pandemic" pederasty that gave it a bad name.

Uranian reflects that the Aphrodite in question comes from the primordial Greek god of the heavens, Uranus, in Latin, Ουρανος - Ouranos in Greek, placing Pausanius's position in the preferred status.

Of course, within the language itself, "pan" all - "demos" people, one can see that this privilege was withheld from the hoi polo and reserved for those in a higher status.

Of course, there's good reason to suspect that Plato himself thought that such arguments were contrived nonsense.

3) It's the "Catholic" nexus imported into these professorial discussions of classical philosophy that should elevate the standard of review given the rash of such "X" "discussions" in which those unfolding their narratives (the Neoplatonic term for this is "evolve") know there's a 98% chance those reading have no outside reference to measure the points being made.

Pausanias is clear that pederasty should be criminalized for the many (the MANY, the oi polloi), but not for the few owing to the special privileges they enjoy. The interesting thing is, when looking into the cult of pedophile priests, they seem to make the same type of argument as it (dare I say "AS IF") that's the archetype argument to be made.

But there is more. As noted, there is an ongoing nexus between Marxism and the esoteric. To the extent that Pausanius's views constitute a metaphysical view today, they would be esoteric. This would constitute yet another Platonic nexus between New Theologian priests and academics with their modern "materialist" partners. Take Marcuse and his orienting on the "Symposium" for his view of the perfectly formed society published around the same time the Church began having, ahem, issues.

Read 4 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Stephen Coughlin

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @S_Coughlin_DC

Stephen Coughlin

Stephen Coughlin

Stephen Coughlin

Stephen Coughlin

Stephen Coughlin

Stephen Coughlin

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!