Individual Jihads

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

imported_dna

Golden Member
Aug 14, 2006
1,755
0
0
Originally posted by: Narmer
Wrong, the suffering was caused by America, not the muslims. Their vengence does not mean such an ummah exist, unless ummah is like jihad, where it's supposed to be within the individual. You're obviously biased against Muslims so it makes it difficult to take your opinions seriously.

EDIT: Your dumb assertion is akin to an arsonist blaming his deaths on the individuals sho stampeded out of a burning building. It's also akin to an individual spreading a vicious lie and blaming the recipients of such lie for their own problem.

There's plenty of rhetoric by radicals regarding the Ummah. We've also seen it manifest in opinion polls taken in the UK, and the attitude of muslims towards the country they are in; it was aptly phrased by one of the wackos as: "We are not European Muslims, we are Muslims in Europe" -- no doubt there are many that don't see themselves as part of the country they immigrated to.

As for your rather asinine analogy, the conclusion would be that the US started a fire, but we very well know that there were flames, although hidden from the public view, and that is the whole point: there wasn't the same kind of coverage during Saddam's time.

Nevertheless, I'm sure you'd like to think that if the USA hadn't intervened then the Sunni-Shiia problem in Iraq would have just resolved itself in a decade or so. That is the presumption upon which you base the validity of your accusation that the USA is reponsible for muslim on muslim violence.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: dna
Originally posted by: Narmer
The GWOT is real. the Ummah isn't. But don't let those facts stand in your way.

Tell that to the guys who bombed London and Madrid, as they've done that to "avenge" the suffering of their fellow muslims in Iraq.

Ironically, the suffering is caused by muslims, but that is just a little fact ignored by those who believe in this concept of the Ummah.

Wrong, the suffering was caused by America, not the muslims. Their vengence does not mean such an ummah exist, unless ummah is like jihad, where it's supposed to be within the individual. You're obviously biased against Muslims so it makes it difficult to take your opinions seriously.

EDIT: Your dumb assertion is akin to an arsonist blaming his deaths on the individuals sho stampeded out of a burning building. It's also akin to an individual spreading a vicious lie and blaming the recipients of such lie for their own problem.
are you actually saying that all, or even most, of the muslim on muslim violence, is America's fault? seriously?
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
32,067
32,592
146
Originally posted by: cwjerome
Random, personal meltdowns are one thing. The possibility that there could be a more coherent, planned meltdown based on religious ideology is another. The Kids at Columbine planned their actions, it just wasn't religously motivated. They aren't alone among those who plan the "shooting spree", and have what they believe to be intelligent and/or logical reasons motivating them. "religious ideology" is just another of the "insert rationale for psychopathic breakdown here"

Seems to me you're being extreme. On one end, you'll have people wanting Muslim crackdowns and racist checks and balances. On the other extreme end -YOU- you'll have people doing and saying nothing... Ignoring it, probably out of political correctness which ties the brain down. My counter to those observations is this; I find it extreme to focus fear and paranoia toward any particular group in society, based on the actions of a few individuals. The entire premise of using their common belief system as the motivation, IMO is tenuous. The terrorists win when we as citizens begin to eye each other with suspicion and doubt simply because they practice a different faith.

Youa re corrrect I'd have you do or say nothing, until their is solid evidence to warrant pointing a finger at a particular group of people in OUR society. So far, I haven't seen it, have you?


In the middle you'll have what I believe: "Something to be aware of."
Why? I'm not in a line of work like law enforcement or private sector security, so why should I be aware of it? What am I supposed to do? Warn the good christian folk? Honestly, what does it entail for me as a normal citizen to be aware? I pay taxes, it supports my local law enforcement, professionals with the proper training to handle such things. Read PaleHorse's Orwell quote, I know it to be so, and depend upon the feeling of security they engender. If it reaches the point where I need to join in that protection, I'll sign up and stand with them.

Concluding: I'm aware of potential dangers everyday, ones far more imminent as threats to my familys' safety, then another citizen going "postal".

 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
Why? I'm not in a line of work like law enforcement or private sector security, so why should I be aware of it? What am I supposed to do? Warn the good christian folk? Honestly, what does it entail for me as a normal citizen to be aware? I pay taxes, it supports my local law enforcement, professionals with the proper training to handle such things. Read PaleHorse's Orwell quote, I know it to be so, and depend upon the feeling of security they engender. If it reaches the point where I need to join in that protection, I'll sign up and stand with them.

Concluding: I'm aware of potential dangers everyday, ones far more imminent as threats to my familys' safety, then another citizen going "postal".

I don't know why you're acting like this is an imminent crisis and people need to take up arms. Are you always so extreme? You ask what does it entail for you to be aware, but that's rather self-evident isn't it? It means having knowledge of something... and then having the intellectual tools to help shape policy to minimize and mitigate the potential problems.

In a society like ours, the more people know about what goes on the better. The more people can talk about and debate issues, the better the outcomes will probably be.

I'll compromise my position: For those that follow current events and want to make learned discussion and decisions this might be something to be aware of.

For other people, like you, don't bother.
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
32,067
32,592
146
Originally posted by: cwjerome

I don't know why you're acting like this is an imminent crisis and people need to take up arms. Are you always so extreme?.[/quote] How the hell did you get that from my posts? Hope you read the bolded replies as well. I have clearly stated that I don't believe this is even a issue, and until there is solid evidence it is, I refuse to acknowledge it as such. How is that what you interpreted and wrote just now? You wrote
Seems to me you're being extreme. On one end, you'll have people wanting Muslim crackdowns and racist checks and balances. On the other extreme end -YOU- you'll have people doing and saying nothing... Ignoring it, probably out of political correctness which ties the brain down
Which end of the extreme am I on? Both at the same time? I'm Quantum Man! :p


The rest of your explanation is reasonable and I have no argument with.
 

Narmer

Diamond Member
Aug 27, 2006
5,292
0
0
Originally posted by: dna
Originally posted by: Narmer
Wrong, the suffering was caused by America, not the muslims. Their vengence does not mean such an ummah exist, unless ummah is like jihad, where it's supposed to be within the individual. You're obviously biased against Muslims so it makes it difficult to take your opinions seriously.

EDIT: Your dumb assertion is akin to an arsonist blaming his deaths on the individuals sho stampeded out of a burning building. It's also akin to an individual spreading a vicious lie and blaming the recipients of such lie for their own problem.

There's plenty of rhetoric by radicals regarding the Ummah. We've also seen it manifest in opinion polls taken in the UK, and the attitude of muslims towards the country they are in; it was aptly phrased by one of the wackos as: "We are not European Muslims, we are Muslims in Europe" -- no doubt there are many that don't see themselves as part of the country they immigrated to.

As for your rather asinine analogy, the conclusion would be that the US started a fire, but we very well know that there were flames, although hidden from the public view, and that is the whole point: there wasn't the same kind of coverage during Saddam's time.

Nevertheless, I'm sure you'd like to think that if the USA hadn't intervened then the Sunni-Shiia problem in Iraq would have just resolved itself in a decade or so. That is the presumption upon which you base the validity of your accusation that the USA is reponsible for muslim on muslim violence.

If China invaded and dethroned the Jews in Israel and their was a massive revenge and counter-revenge attacks between Jews and Arabs, who would you blame for the violence?
 

magomago

Lifer
Sep 28, 2002
10,973
14
76
Originally posted by: dna

"We are not European Muslims, we are Muslims in Europe" -- no doubt there are many that don't see themselves as part of the country they immigrated to.

Can you explain what you mean by that. Maybe it is just me, or am I'm being "Radicalized" by the ZOMG evil doers~~~ but I see nothing wrong with that.

If anything a Muslim in Europe could be ANY Muslim in Europe - converted, born there, immigrated, etc. etc..
A European Muslim would be one that was born there...

and we could probably argue all the more about how the definitions I used was NOT right...but then we are delving into semantics :p

There is nothing wrong at the fundamental basis of saying that you are a European Muslim or you are a Muslim in Europe. In the end it doesn't matter where you live according to the Quran because we are all simply muslims according to God.

Am I an American? Yes. Am I a Muslim? Yes. Am I an American Muslim? Well if A and B are positive, so should be this.
And am I also a Muslim IN America? Oh helllllll yes.
 

Narmer

Diamond Member
Aug 27, 2006
5,292
0
0
Originally posted by: magomago
Originally posted by: dna

"We are not European Muslims, we are Muslims in Europe" -- no doubt there are many that don't see themselves as part of the country they immigrated to.

Can you explain what you mean by that. Maybe it is just me, or am I'm being "Radicalized" by the ZOMG evil doers~~~ but I see nothing wrong with that.

If anything a Muslim in Europe could be ANY Muslim in Europe - converted, born there, immigrated, etc. etc..
A European Muslim would be one that was born there...

and we could probably argue all the more about how the definitions I used was NOT right...but then we are delving into semantics :p

There is nothing wrong at the fundamental basis of saying that you are a European Muslim or you are a Muslim in Europe. In the end it doesn't matter where you live according to the Quran because we are all simply muslims according to God.

Am I an American? Yes. Am I a Muslim? Yes. Am I an American Muslim? Well if A and B are positive, so should be this.
And am I also a Muslim IN America? Oh helllllll yes.

dna has a serious problem with Muslims. For him, a good Muslim is a pliant, soft, and emasculated Muslim.
 

imported_dna

Golden Member
Aug 14, 2006
1,755
0
0
Originally posted by: Narmer
If China invaded and dethroned the Jews in Israel and their was a massive revenge and counter-revenge attacks between Jews and Arabs, who would you blame for the violence?
Sorry, your analogy does not work because in Iraq you have muslim on muslim violence. Besides, there are already attacks by the Palestinians now, so there is nothing hypothetical about that.

Originally posted by: magomago
Can you explain what you mean by that. Maybe it is just me, or am I'm being "Radicalized" by the ZOMG evil doers~~~ but I see nothing wrong with that.
Google the quote, and I'm sure you'll find the video. What the wacko means is that they are muslims who simply happen to be in Europe and owe no allegeince to the countries in which they reside.

BTW, you should see that guy when he talks to Western media -- you'd never imagine he is a radical at all.
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,303
144
106
I'm scared to go outside anymore.

Thank goodness I can vote absentee for my favorite republicans. But that means I still have to hand my ballot to the mailman...

...and I dont trust him.
 

Narmer

Diamond Member
Aug 27, 2006
5,292
0
0
Originally posted by: dna
Originally posted by: Narmer
If China invaded and dethroned the Jews in Israel and their was a massive revenge and counter-revenge attacks between Jews and Arabs, who would you blame for the violence?
Sorry, your analogy does not work because in Iraq you have muslim on muslim violence. Besides, there are already attacks by the Palestinians now, so there is nothing hypothetical about that.

Originally posted by: magomago
Can you explain what you mean by that. Maybe it is just me, or am I'm being "Radicalized" by the ZOMG evil doers~~~ but I see nothing wrong with that.
Google the quote, and I'm sure you'll find the video. What the wacko means is that they are muslims who simply happen to be in Europe and owe no allegeince to the countries in which they reside.

BTW, you should see that guy when he talks to Western media -- you'd never imagine he is a radical at all.

I can see you're too scared to answer my question. Besides, you are wrong because Shias and Sunnis have hated each other for well over a thousand years. Besides, Jews and Arabs are both the same people (both semitic). Jews are a sub-sub-group of Semites (from Iraq). Furthermore, seeing that Jews and Arabs hate each other as much as Sunnis and Shiite hate each other, my analogy is spot on.

Now, are you going to answer my question or not?
 

Corbett

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2005
3,074
0
76
Originally posted by: Aimster
If you want to stop global terror, start with it right here at home with the history of the U.S.A.

wow! Care to explain this ignorant comment?
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,835
10,135
136
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: Aimster
If you want to stop global terror, start with it right here at home with the history of the U.S.A.

wow! Care to explain this ignorant comment?

His war is an internal one, against America as it is the big bad evil. His goal is to ?progress? it into a brand new image. Sickle and hammer.

This view is shared by the many who believe in Karl Marx?s ideals. Of course Stalin beat them to it, but they?ll be slow to admit how it turns out.
 

Siddhartha

Lifer
Oct 17, 1999
12,505
3
81
Originally posted by: cwjerome
I noticed the first two Utah/shooter threads were locked. I don't know why- hopefully this is an issue that can be openly discussed.

The FBI (law enforcement with Intelligence abilities, so to speak ;)), are the ones that have excluded ties to terrorism in the Utah situation. Pretty much what I figured.

BUT...

In October 2006, a pro-jihad internet site published a "Guide for Individual Jihad" explaining to jihadists "how to fight alone." It recommended, among other things, assassination with guns, mass public shootings, and running people over.

Talovic joins an unfortunately growing list of Muslims who have committed random acts of violence, only for officials to assure us that their actions have nothing to do with terrorism. Maybe none of them do, but the list is full of troubling details:

**On January 31, Ismail Yassin Mohamed, 22, stole a car in Minneapolis. He went on a rampage, ramming the stolen car into other cars and then stealing a van and continuing to ram other cars, injuring one person. His father told officials that Mohamed was suffering from mental problems; his mother added he had been depressed and hadn't been taking his medication. During his rampage, Mohamed repeatedly yelled, "Die, die, die, kill, kill, kill," and when asked why he did all this, he replied, "Allah made me do it."**

another incident
another incident
another incident
link
link

None of these were terrorist attacks in the sense that they were planned and executed by organized terrorist agents. And it is possible that all of them were products of nothing more ideologically significant than a disturbed mental state, although it is at least noteworthy that each attacker explained his actions in terms of Islamic terrorism. (Like many crazed Christian-inspired killing that have happened "Did it for God" type stuff)

Is it possible that Sulejmen Talovic and some of these others were waging this jihad of one? It is indeed, but with law enforcement officials trained only to look for signs of membership in al-Qaeda or other jihad groups, and to discount terrorism as a factor if those signs aren't there, it is a possibility that investigators will continue to overlook.

Did Sulejmen Talovic have Al-Hakaymah's "Guide for Individual Jihad" on his hard drive or elsewhere in his possessions. Probably not. But it is something to be aware of, and good police work means looking at all the possibilities.

If such attacks grow in number, it would behoove authorities at very least to consider the possibility that these attacks were inspired by the jihadist ideology of Islamic supremacism, and to step up pressure on American Muslim advocacy groups to renounce that ideology definitively and begin extensive programs to teach against it in American Islamic schools and mosques.

---

~~~ NOTICE ~~~

The previous two threads the op referred to were bigoted anti-Islamic rants. This thread will remain unlocked as long as the discussion remains on topic without similar bigotry.

We will be monitoring this thread. If you post bigoted flames, expect to be posting eleswhere for a length of time proportional to the gravity of the offense.

AnandTech Moderator

This "Individual Jihads" business sounds like a way to justify fearing, hating, all Muslims.
How long will it be before the KKK, skin heads, and all the other US hate groups add Muslims to their list which includes Jews and Afro-Americans?
 

imported_Shivetya

Platinum Member
Jul 7, 2005
2,978
1
0
Originally posted by: Shivetya
As soon as the so called "peaceful Muslims" spend more time denouncing the real muslim terrorist than protesting depictions of fictional ones on TV I will listen to them.


Muslims kill more Muslims than anyone else, yet for some reason they don't see a problem with it. Go figure, I say, cheer them on.

---

Did you read our notice in the op? You are getting close to the limit.

AnandTech Moderator


What I posted...

As soon as the so called peaceful Muslims spend more time denouncing the real muslim terrorist than protesting depictions of fictional ones on TV I will listen to them.

Muslims kill more Muslims than anyone else, yet for some reason they don't see a problem with it. Go figure, I say, cheer them on.



Your warning

We will be monitoring this thread. If you post bigoted flames, expect to be posting eleswhere for a length of time proportional to the gravity of the offense.


Definition of bigotry
A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own.

So what part of my reply is bigoted? I expressed no intolerance other that people of that faith refusing to acknowledge the fact people of their faith kill others while at the same time decrying fictional depictions of members of their faith doing what real members of their faith doing.

As long as they keep killing only themselves then cheer them on. Its when their actions negatively impact other faiths because of that faith is when a problem occurs. In fact, they are the ultimate bigots.
 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
Originally posted by: Siddhartha
This "Individual Jihads" business sounds like a way to justify fearing, hating, all Muslims.
How long will it be before the KKK, skin heads, and all the other US hate groups add Muslims to their list which includes Jews and Afro-Americans?

It sounds that way if you're a race-baiting, self-hating moron swimming in political correctness.

I didn't invent the idea of individual jihad. And I'm not going to stop talking about serious issues rooted in reality simply because A) some racists might twist it to serve their despicable ideals, and B) some intellectual and moral cowards will be upset over A.

 

imported_dna

Golden Member
Aug 14, 2006
1,755
0
0
Originally posted by: Narmer
I can see you're too scared to answer my question. Besides, you are wrong because Shias and Sunnis have hated each other for well over a thousand years. Besides, Jews and Arabs are both the same people (both semitic). Jews are a sub-sub-group of Semites (from Iraq). Furthermore, seeing that Jews and Arabs hate each other as much as Sunnis and Shiite hate each other, my analogy is spot on.

Now, are you going to answer my question or not?

:laugh:

Your attempts to extract an answer from me rely on your presumption that I think that the US has no reponsibility in the matter, when in fact I've never stated that. The only thing I've been trying to get through your (& others) thick skull is that the Iraqis bear a much larger responsibily, particularly that they've had animosity towards each others for years and that this fighting would've taken place anyway.

Alas, you just want to blame the USA, since muslim on muslim violence is either never an issue, or it is someone elses fault. The recent conflic in Lebanon clearly demonstrated the hypocrisy in play when some muslims are killed by non-muslims.

As for your analogy, try as you may it still not the same as the situation in Iraq. Consanguinity does not lend any more credibility to your argument, and it would be wrong to say that Jews hated arabs for a thousand years, or that they even hate arabs in the same way that the arabs hate them.

Anyway, it all comes back to the fact that the Iraqis share the same religion, while the Jews and Palestinians do not. Fundamentally different situations with the probability your hypothetical one to occur being practically zero.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Siddhartha
This "Individual Jihads" business sounds like a way to justify fearing, hating, all Muslims.
How long will it be before the KKK, skin heads, and all the other US hate groups add Muslims to their list which includes Jews and Afro-Americans?
Can we not discuss the concept of individual jihads without being labeled "racists"? The existence of this movement is real, so it needs to be recognized. Many of the most fanatical imams of the world have gone on TV and online to encourage their fellow Muslims around the world to commit acts of violent jihad "however, whenever, and wherever" they can.

I repeat: this threat is real, so stop throwing the racist card around when we discuss it rationally and maturely. We all know that the vast majority of Muslims do not support fanatical violence, so please stop assuming that we're all some sort of Muslim-hating jerks. We're not.

thankyou.
 

Corbett

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2005
3,074
0
76
Looks like aimster has done another hit and run job on another thread about Muslim extremists.

I would love to hear an explanation of how he associates the USA with terrorism.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
Originally posted by: Narmer
Tell me, what would you call a modern Christian terrorist?

"Extremely Rare" comes to mind. From what I can tell you could fit them all in a phone booth.

Fern
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
Originally posted by: Narmer
Let me get this straight, if this guy was a Christian and got his information on the web, this would be a law enforcement problem. But since he's a Muslim and got his information on the web, it'sm now part of the "Global War on Terror"?

Am I missing something here or are your assertions pure lunacy? Stop with the conspiracies, your head might explode.

Yeah, you're missing something - the publication of a book/guide by a radical Muslim on how to commit individual jihads. The fact that the book is made available on the web is pretty much irrelevant, the fact that this (maybe or) is a new suggested tactic is relevant.

Law enforcement currently looks to communication between conspirators to thrawt acts of terror. If it's a solo act there won't be communications to tip things off.

Fern
 

imported_dna

Golden Member
Aug 14, 2006
1,755
0
0
There was also a solo jihadist in NYC in 1997, shooting several people at the top of the Empire State building.

Kamal's widow insisted after the shooting spree that the attack was not politically motivated. She said that her husband had become suicidal after losing $300,000 in a business venture.

But in a stunning admission, Kamal's 48-year-old daughter Linda told the Daily News that her dad wanted to punish the U.S. for supporting Israel - and revealed her mom's 1997 account was a cover story crafted by the Palestinian Authority.
 

Narmer

Diamond Member
Aug 27, 2006
5,292
0
0
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: Narmer
Let me get this straight, if this guy was a Christian and got his information on the web, this would be a law enforcement problem. But since he's a Muslim and got his information on the web, it'sm now part of the "Global War on Terror"?

Am I missing something here or are your assertions pure lunacy? Stop with the conspiracies, your head might explode.

Yeah, you're missing something - the publication of a book/guide by a radical Muslim on how to commit individual jihads. The fact that the book is made available on the web is pretty much irrelevant, the fact that this (maybe or) is a new suggested tactic is relevant.

Law enforcement currently looks to communication between conspirators to thrawt acts of terror. If it's a solo act there won't be communications to tip things off.

Fern

What about the Turner Diaries? Oops, let's not discuss that since he's not Muslim, therefore it's not a terrorist act.

Originally posted by: dna
Originally posted by: Narmer
I can see you're too scared to answer my question. Besides, you are wrong because Shias and Sunnis have hated each other for well over a thousand years. Besides, Jews and Arabs are both the same people (both semitic). Jews are a sub-sub-group of Semites (from Iraq). Furthermore, seeing that Jews and Arabs hate each other as much as Sunnis and Shiite hate each other, my analogy is spot on.

Now, are you going to answer my question or not?

:laugh:

Your attempts to extract an answer from me rely on your presumption that I think that the US has no reponsibility in the matter, when in fact I've never stated that. The only thing I've been trying to get through your (& others) thick skull is that the Iraqis bear a much larger responsibily, particularly that they've had animosity towards each others for years and that this fighting would've taken place anyway.

Alas, you just want to blame the USA, since muslim on muslim violence is either never an issue, or it is someone elses fault. The recent conflic in Lebanon clearly demonstrated the hypocrisy in play when some muslims are killed by non-muslims.

As for your analogy, try as you may it still not the same as the situation in Iraq. Consanguinity does not lend any more credibility to your argument, and it would be wrong to say that Jews hated arabs for a thousand years, or that they even hate arabs in the same way that the arabs hate them.

Anyway, it all comes back to the fact that the Iraqis share the same religion, while the Jews and Palestinians do not. Fundamentally different situations with the probability your hypothetical one to occur being practically zero.

Who cares if they share the same religion. That's never meant sh!t in Europe when they were slaughtering each other for about two thousand years. Or how about in Africa? This isn't about religion, idiot. It's all about politics. You're inability to comprehend these simple thoughts makes me question whether or not I'm waisting my time talking to you. If China invaded Israel, Jews and Arabs would slaughter each other in the name of vengeance, not God, just like they're doing in Iraq right now.
 

imported_dna

Golden Member
Aug 14, 2006
1,755
0
0
:laugh:

I was 100% sure you were gonna go back hundreds of years in order to justify your analogy.

Keep up the good work, and give us more unrealistic hypothetical situations -- perhaps China invading Europe, and the French and Gernman starting to bomb each other.