T Nation

Another Inauthentic Muslim Gives Islam a Bad Name


#1


Michael Joseph Hall...recently converted to [inauthentic / not the "real"] Islam...

A[n inauthentic / not "real"] Muslim convert shot dead a Canadian soldier at the National War Memorial in Ottawa today before exchanging dozens of shots with guards inside Parliament in a terrifying attack that left the nation's capital on lockdown...

Michael Zehaf-Bibeau fatally shot Corporal Nathan Cirillo, a 24-year-old father, as he stood guard at the War Memorial on Wednesday morning...

Zehaf-Bibeau then ran inside the Parliament, where he opened fire before he was shot dead by the House of Commons Sergeant-at-Arms...

His attack comes just two days after another Canadian soldier was killed in Quebec by a man with [confused understanding of peaceful "inner struggle" aka] jihadist sympathies.

As gunfire erupted in the hallways, journalists and politicians scrambled for safety, while members in the [Islamophobic] Conservative Party caucus room blocked the door with a stack of chairs...

A parliamentary guard was shot in the leg during the gunfight...

The government said there is not yet any evidence that Zehaf-Bibeau has any ties to violent [and therefore inauthentic / not "real"] Islamic extremism but noted that it is still early in the investigation...

Witnesses...told the Citizen that they saw a man wearing an 'Arabic scarf' and carrying a long rifle...


Another Western convert to inauthentic Islam that it is not in anyway related to genuine, authentic Islam which is of course one of the world's great religions and so on and so forth.


#2

Dude, laugh all you want, but this is a real turning point - the converts have started attacking.

People from the margins of the Western society, performing attacks on the cheap with ZERO cost. So no need to invest in local imams, expensive training camps, lengthy indoctrination…

It’s more like a franchise, you just provide the materials online, and some unstable, lonely, pathetic asshole (usually with a history of drug abuse and a short prison stint) falls for it and commits such an act, which has a disproportionate effect on the general public. Again, at ZERO cost for them.

In the last twenty years or so, Saudi Arabia has invested HUGE sums in Bosnia (islamic banks, mosques, madrassas) and spent lavish sums on the Chechens.

The reason? They are, or can pass as Western. I know western security agencies aren’t supposed to racially profile, but when you see a six foot white guy with blonde or ginger hair, you are unlikely to assume he’s a suicide bomber or a terrorist. Even their muslim names and surnames are not so easily recognized by Western Europeans or Americans.

I know there were some stories from Iraq that Chechens dressed up in captured US military gear tried to infiltrate US bases and checkpoints…

Now, this huge effort into such recruits is joined by this local franchise system with Western converts. Terror on the cheap. Fuck.


#3

[quote]loppar wrote:
In the last twenty years or so, Saudi Arabia has invested HUGE sums in Bosnia (islamic banks, mosques, madrassas) and spent lavish sums on the Chechens.

The reason? They are, or can pass as Western. I know western security agencies aren’t supposed to racially profile, but when you see a six foot white guy with blonde or ginger hair, you are unlikely to assume he’s a suicide bomber or a terrorist. Even their muslim names and surnames are not so easily recognized by Western Europeans or Americans.

I know there were some stories from Iraq that Chechens dressed up in captured US military gear tried to infiltrate US bases and checkpoints…

Now, this huge effort into such recruits is joined by this local franchise system with Western converts. Terror on the cheap. Fuck.[/quote]

Can you provide any evidence at all for any of the above?


#4

[quote]TheCB wrote:

[quote]loppar wrote:
In the last twenty years or so, Saudi Arabia has invested HUGE sums in Bosnia (islamic banks, mosques, madrassas) and spent lavish sums on the Chechens.

The reason? They are, or can pass as Western. I know western security agencies aren’t supposed to racially profile, but when you see a six foot white guy with blonde or ginger hair, you are unlikely to assume he’s a suicide bomber or a terrorist. Even their muslim names and surnames are not so easily recognized by Western Europeans or Americans.

I know there were some stories from Iraq that Chechens dressed up in captured US military gear tried to infiltrate US bases and checkpoints…

Now, this huge effort into such recruits is joined by this local franchise system with Western converts. Terror on the cheap. Fuck.[/quote]

Can you provide any evidence at all for any of the above?[/quote]

On the top off my head, if I recall correctly Chris Kyle mentioned in his book “American Sniper” how in Iraq they ran into a group of light-haired Chechens dressed up in US Army fatigues carrying captured equipment. I’m pretty sure I’ve ran into numerous references to Chechens operating as heavy weapon specialists in Iraq and Afghanistan, and for that matter in Syria (Kobane).

As far as Bosnia is concerned, here are some links after a few seconds of googling. Please note that the articles in question are five years old and that the situation has drastically deteriorated in the meantime.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130801242

The reason for such an influx of Saudi money are pretty much common knowledge in the Balkans.


#5

It’s true. Islam sure does seem to have a lot of inauthentic converts

2002 Belt Way Sniper
2004 Madrid Subway (Jose Luis Galan Gonzales (Yousuf Galan))
2005 London Underground Bombing
2009 Fort Hood Shooter
2009 Little Rock Recruiting Center

Between 9/11 and June 30, 2010, 42 Islamist, terrorism-related plots and incidents took place or were foiled in the United States, according to my calculations.* Violent converts were directly engaged in 26 of those 42 cases, almost 62 percent of the total.


Reminds me of all those converts to Judaism who suddenly go out and demand wholesale prices at retail outlets, and other such violent acts.


#6

I lived for years in Ottawa and have many times paid my respects at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier upon which Cpl. Nathan Cirillo was murdered as he stood guard. I was born and now live again in Hamilton which was Cpl. Cirillo’s hometown. Therefore, this obscenity which occurred yesterday really hit close to home.

The most insulting thing is that less than a kilometre down the road (Wellington Ave) from where these terrorist acts took place, a muslim woman is suing the Government of Canada in the Supreme Court for making her remove her face covering while taking the Canadian oath of citizenship. Whether they are native born converts or immigrants, why come or stay in the West in the first place if our values and way of life is so abhorrent to them?

It’s better for everyone if they GTFO of here and go back to the country that they made a conscious decision to leave (or that their parents did). On a positive note, as is always the case in such heinous acts, there were so many countless acts of bravery and kindness shown yesterday in Ottawa that I’m left amazed by.

From the half dozen average citizens that ran to Cpl. Cirillo’s aid and began performing CPR and trying to stop his bleeding while the terrorist was still prowling nearby to the Parliamentary security guard Sam Son who grabbed the asshole’s shotgun and pointed it to the floor to allow other guards to arrive on scene even while he’d been shot during the process, to Kevin Vickers (Sergeant-at-Arms for Parliament) who shot and killed the asshole.

Also, the many classy acts and words from our allies around the world, such as the Pittsburgh Penguins and their fans who sang our anthem before the hockey game yesterday, make days like yesterday more bearable.


#7

[quote]CMdad wrote:
I lived for years in Ottawa and have many times paid my respects at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier upon which Cpl. Nathan Cirillo was murdered as he stood guard. I was born and now live again in Hamilton which was Cpl. Cirillo’s hometown. Therefore, this obscenity which occurred yesterday really hit close to home.

The most insulting thing is that less than a kilometre down the road (Wellington Ave) from where these terrorist acts took place, a muslim woman is suing the Government of Canada in the Supreme Court for making her remove her face covering while taking the Canadian oath of citizenship. Whether they are native born converts or immigrants, why come or stay in the West in the first place if our values and way of life is so abhorrent to them?

It’s better for everyone if they GTFO of here and go back to the country that they made a conscious decision to leave (or that their parents did). On a positive note, as is always the case in such heinous acts, there were so many countless acts of bravery and kindness shown yesterday in Ottawa that I’m left amazed by.

From the half dozen average citizens that ran to Cpl. Cirillo’s aid and began performing CPR and trying to stop his bleeding while the terrorist was still prowling nearby to the Parliamentary security guard Sam Son who grabbed the asshole’s shotgun and pointed it to the floor to allow other guards to arrive on scene even while he’d been shot during the process, to Kevin Vickers (Sergeant-at-Arms for Parliament) who shot and killed the asshole.

Also, the many classy acts and words from our allies around the world, such as the Pittsburgh Penguins and their fans who sang our anthem before the hockey game yesterday, make days like yesterday more bearable. [/quote]

I was house boating in B.C. when the 9/11 attacks went down, basically isolated from information with my family and wife who was, at the time, an American Airlines flight attendant. Without recounting everything here, I will say that without exception that every Canadian we encountered was so gracious and considerate that it was really a heartening ray of light that helped us get through a very dark time. My thoughts are with you guys.


#8

So does anyone have any ideas about why people who have grown up in the west would be attracted to something like this?


#9

Something that made sense to me is recent converts are more likely to take the koran literally. Whereas those who are born into may be able to have a more rational view and realize that religious violence shouldn’t have a place in this day and age.


#10

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Something that made sense to me is recent converts are more likely to take the koran literally. Whereas those who are born into may be able to have a more rational view and realize that religious violence shouldn’t have a place in this day and age.[/quote]

But what is it about Islam that would attract a Westerner in the first place? Whatever form Islam takes, whether benign or not, is antithetical to the West. Why would they be attracted to radical, ultra-objectivism?


#11

#12

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
It’s true. Islam sure does seem to have a lot of inauthentic converts

2002 Belt Way Sniper
2004 Madrid Subway (Jose Luis Galan Gonzales (Yousuf Galan))
2005 London Underground Bombing
2009 Fort Hood Shooter
2009 Little Rock Recruiting Center

Between 9/11 and June 30, 2010, 42 Islamist, terrorism-related plots and incidents took place or were foiled in the United States, according to my calculations.* Violent converts were directly engaged in 26 of those 42 cases, almost 62 percent of the total.


Reminds me of all those converts to Judaism who suddenly go out and demand wholesale prices at retail outlets, and other such violent acts.[/quote]

But Jewbacca, Muslim leader Lal Khan Malik says "Ottawa shooting was ‘grossly unIslamic’"


#13

[quote]zahmad wrote:

One of the problems with these “condemnations” is that they don’t challenge the underlying assumption of legitimate grievances. It’s no good simply saying, violence is the wrong way to go about things. They need to state unequivocally that there are no legitimate grievances underlying Islamic violence.


#14

This is an example of what I’m talking about:

126 prominent Muslim leaders, imams and scholars condemning IS. But they accept as given that IS’s cause is just; that IS has legitimate grievances. It’s this assumption of legitimate grievances that needs to be condemned. It’s no good condemning the means; the ends must be condemned.

When you look at what these “grievances” actually are you get different answers depending upon the who’s making the claim. Generally the grievances fit into one of the following:

  1. The West itself; specifically secularism, pluralism, modernity, parliamentary democracy

  2. The West’s actions; specifically stationing troops in Muslim countries, “propping up” regimes that are antithetical to Islam, attacking Islamic regimes/institutions

  3. The West’s ideology; the idea that secularism and modernity are permeating and destroying the Islamic world and Islamic values and culture

  4. The West as a force that is obstructing Islam’s goal of “liberating” Muslims from oppression; symbolically expressed in terms of “occupation” of Muslim lands and Islamic holy sites such as the Dome of the Rock and the disputed territories in Palestine

  5. The West as the political manifestation of Christianity and the “crusades” against the Muslim world

The only genuine “condemnation” by Muslim leaders is one which condemns these ideas. I don’t think Islam can actually condemn all of these ideas without becoming something else entirely. If Islam condemns these things then it becomes a kind of abstract Sufism in which the “inner struggle” cannot be defined in recognisable terms. It cannot define what it is struggling against without identifying the West in some way.


#15

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
This is an example of what I’m talking about:

126 prominent Muslim leaders, imams and scholars condemning IS. But they accept as given that IS’s cause is just; that IS has legitimate grievances. It’s this assumption of legitimate grievances that needs to be condemned. It’s no good condemning the means; the ends must be condemned.

When you look at what these “grievances” actually are you get different answers depending upon the who’s making the claim. Generally the grievances fit into one of the following:

  1. The West itself; specifically secularism, pluralism, modernity, parliamentary democracy

  2. The West’s actions; specifically stationing troops in Muslim countries, “propping up” regimes that are antithetical to Islam, attacking Islamic regimes/institutions

  3. The West’s ideology; the idea that secularism and modernity are permeating and destroying the Islamic world and Islamic values and culture

  4. The West as a force that is obstructing Islam’s goal of “liberating” Muslims from oppression; symbolically expressed in terms of “occupation” of Muslim lands and Islamic holy sites such as the Dome of the Rock and the disputed territories in Palestine

  5. The West as the political manifestation of Christianity and the “crusades” against the Muslim world

The only genuine “condemnation” by Muslim leaders is one which condemns these ideas. I don’t think Islam can actually condemn all of these ideas without becoming something else entirely. If Islam condemns these things then it becomes a kind of abstract Sufism in which the “inner struggle” cannot be defined in recognisable terms. It cannot define what it is struggling against without identifying the West in some way. [/quote]

Where did you get the list of grievances from or what sources did you use to compile them? I think your thesis here is interesting.


#16

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
This is an example of what I’m talking about:

126 prominent Muslim leaders, imams and scholars condemning IS. But they accept as given that IS’s cause is just; that IS has legitimate grievances. It’s this assumption of legitimate grievances that needs to be condemned. It’s no good condemning the means; the ends must be condemned.

When you look at what these “grievances” actually are you get different answers depending upon the who’s making the claim. Generally the grievances fit into one of the following:

  1. The West itself; specifically secularism, pluralism, modernity, parliamentary democracy

  2. The West’s actions; specifically stationing troops in Muslim countries, “propping up” regimes that are antithetical to Islam, attacking Islamic regimes/institutions

  3. The West’s ideology; the idea that secularism and modernity are permeating and destroying the Islamic world and Islamic values and culture

  4. The West as a force that is obstructing Islam’s goal of “liberating” Muslims from oppression; symbolically expressed in terms of “occupation” of Muslim lands and Islamic holy sites such as the Dome of the Rock and the disputed territories in Palestine

  5. The West as the political manifestation of Christianity and the “crusades” against the Muslim world

The only genuine “condemnation” by Muslim leaders is one which condemns these ideas. I don’t think Islam can actually condemn all of these ideas without becoming something else entirely. If Islam condemns these things then it becomes a kind of abstract Sufism in which the “inner struggle” cannot be defined in recognisable terms. It cannot define what it is struggling against without identifying the West in some way. [/quote]

Where did you get the list of grievances from or what sources did you use to compile them? I think your thesis here is interesting.
[/quote]

This is my list from listening to and taking note of the justifications given by Muslims themselves. I’ve had an interest in this for quite a while. Most people in the West knew nothing about radical Islam - or at least nothing about Sunni radicals - until after 911. However, I’d taken note of AQ from the start - from the early to mid-90’s. When 911 happened I knew immediately it was AQ as soon as the first plane hit the WTC while the media where still undecided as to whether or not it was even a terrorist attack. I was expecting something like 911 because I had read about OBL, Ramzi Yousef and the Bojinka Plot.

After 911 I took a great deal more interest - as many people did - and I went back and looked at the ideological basis of the radical Sunnis. I looked at the origins and ideological basis of the movement; specifically, the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, Sayyid Qutb and the Saudi Wahhabis who turned against the Orthodoxy of state sanctioned Wahhabism - guys like Juhayman al-Otaybi who charged that the House of Saud had lost its legitimacy due to its corruption by “the West”.


#17

Brilliant analysis by Gary Brecher. Politically incorrect, but spot on.


#18

The self-radicalized madman who attacked four rookie Queens cops with a hatchet had more than just ­jihad on his mind - he also wanted to kill white people.

“He wanted white people to pay for all that slavery and all that racism,” the father of slain hatchet loon Zale Thompson, 32, told The Post Saturday. “I think he committed suicide - and he was taking one of y’all with him,” his father, Ralph Thompson, said, speaking through the screen door of the two-story Queens Village house where his unhinged son also once lived.

Asked if “one of y’all” meant white people," the father said, “Yeah.”

“He just said, ‘They have to pay for all their unfairness,’” the father added. “Unfairness for the way they treat black people.”

“Strike their police, security and intelligence members, as well as their treacherous agents,” ISIS spokesman Aub Mohammad al-Adnani posted on Sept. 21. “If you are not able to find an IED or a bullet, then single out the disbelieving American, Frenchman, or any of their allies. Smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car, or throw him down from a high place, or choke him or poison him.”

I wonder who had the most influence in radicalising this cockroach? Eric Holder or IS?


#19

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
But what is it about Islam that would attract a Westerner in the first place? Whatever form Islam takes, whether benign or not, is antithetical to the West. Why would they be attracted to radical, ultra-objectivism?[/quote]

Because everyone, even the freaking westerners, keep saying that western culture is immoral/corrupt/blah blah blah would be my guess.

Radicalism breeds radicalism.


#20

[quote]magick wrote:

Because everyone, even the freaking westerners, keep saying that western culture is immoral/corrupt/blah blah blah would be my guess.

[/quote]

So you’re saying:

  1. Critiques of modernity, consumerism, liberalism and the decadence of the West in the tradition of Oswald Spengler are unfounded arguments.

And

  1. Such unfounded arguments contribute to the radicalisation of young people in the West such as the guy who shot up the Canadian parliament?

Is that what you’re saying?