Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2006, Page 61
Acknowledgement
This paper is an enlarged and revised version of a paper published in Strategic Insights, a
monthly electronic journal produced by the Center for Contemporary Conflict at the Naval
Postgraduate School in Monterey, California (2005, Vol. IV, No. 5). The views expressed are
solely those of the author and do not reflect the Naval Postgraduate School or the U.S.
military.
An officer in the US Air Force, Major Jaime Gomez, Jr., is a recent graduate of the Naval
Postgraduate School‘s (NPS) MS Defense Analysis program with a specialty in National
Security Affairs. A career intelligence officer and an international affairs specialist, Major
Gomez is currently assigned to the Air Staff, US Air Force Headquarters at the Pentagon,
Washington D.C. He has served as a detachment commander assigned to Osan Air Base,
Republic of Korea, and as a command briefer and intelligence specialist deployed to Riyadh,
Saudi Arabia, and Vicenza, Italy in support of joint and combined air operations over
Southwest Asia and the Balkans. He is the former Dean of Faculty for the Air Force‘s
Information Operations School, responsible for the training of AF personnel assigned to
Information Warfare Flights. While at NPS, Major Gomez concentrated his studies in the
area of terrorism, insurgency, and irregular warfare. His thesis, ―The Race Against Nuclear
Terror,‖ was a featured topic on Strategic Security for the AF‘s annual Institute for National
Strategic Studies Research Conference in 2005. Major Gomez earned his undergraduate
degrees in International Affairs and History, and his first MS degree from Johns Hopkins
University.
This article is an electronic version of an article originally published in Cultic Studies Review, 2006, Volume 5, Number 2,
pages 244-267. Please keep in mind that the pagination of this electronic reprint differs from that of the bound volume.
This fact could affect how you enter bibliographic information in papers that you may write.

Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2006, Page 62
Responding to Jihadism: A Cultic Studies Perspective
Michael D. Langone, Ph.D.
Editor, Cultic Studies Review
Abstract
This paper applies a cultic studies perspective to the problems posed by
Jihadism. The paper (a) describes the conversion process and how this
process can lead some individuals down a pathway to violence (b) argues
that a clash of civilizations between Islam and the West is by no means
inevitable and that advocacy of the clash-of-civilizations view risks becoming
a self-fulfilling alarmism (c) proposes that the respectful ―deep
communication‖ of the psychotherapeutic process is vital to communication
across worldviews and (d) offers action recommendations in the areas of
prevention, assistance, law enforcement, and research.
In the summer of 2006 British counterterrorism officials foiled a plot to blow up airliners.
Among the many news stories was that of a British Muslim woman who planned to use her
baby to get by security and blow up an airliner with liquid explosive in her baby‘s bottle.
Newscasters and viewers were shocked and bewildered. How could any mother do such a
thing?
People asked the same question in 1978 after the mass suicides/murders in Jonestown,
Guyana of People‘s Temple members, led by Jim Jones. Among the nearly 1,000 bodies
authorities found in the jungle of Guyana were more than 276 children (Singer, 2003).
Many of these children died from poison that their own mothers administered. ―I can‘t
believe they poisoned their own babies!‖ was an anguished cry heard again and again.
Twenty-eight years separate these two events. During this time period the world has
witnessed many horribly destructive events perpetrated by terrorists and cultists, including
but by no means limited to the Jonestown suicide/murders Aum Shinrikyo‘s gas attack on
the Tokyo subway the Solar Temple murders the Salmonella poisoning of residents of
Antelope, Oregon by members of the Rajneesh group the first World Trade Center
bombing the terror attacks in Bali, Madrid, and London and, of course, 9/11.
When people try to understand the motives for such seemingly incomprehensible violence,
they usually begin, as Gomez (2006) says about terrorist violence, ―with our reaction to the
terrorist act itself.‖ Parents tend to do the same when confronted with a child‘s cult
involvement, especially one that includes sudden changes of behavior. In such
circumstances, parents of cultists and observers of ―unbelievable‖ terrorist acts will often
use the term ―brainwashing‖ in their attempts to understand events that seem to defy
explanation. Mutch (2006), for example, cites Muslim parents and officials who use
―brainwashing‖ in reference to certain Muslim extremists. In the popular mind
―brainwashing‖ is seen as a powerful and mysterious process or ―force‖ that moves people
out of the zone of the understandable into the zone of the inexplicable. But when used in
this way, the term merely restates our lack of understanding in a way that comforts us with
the illusion of an explanation. Other cognitively comforting labels can provide a similar
illusion. Some individuals, for example, have said that terrorists commit barbaric acts of
violence because they are ―evil.‖ They may indeed be construed as evil, but tagging that
label on them provides no more explanatory power than saying, ―Cancer kills people
because it is a horrible disease.‖ Labels used in this way function as ―thought-terminating
clichés‖ (Lifton, 1961) that provide the illusion of understanding when one is confronted by
a mystifying phenomenon.