The correct answer is a and b. They are both terrorists.
They are both attacking innocent people to cause terror.
The correct answer is a and b. They are both terrorists.
They are both attacking innocent people to cause terror.
Again, without in any way, shape, or form justifying or excusing the action – seriously?
In your view:
setting fire to empty mosque = bombing a crowded tree lighting ceremony
Ok …
Dude, stop making excuses for ‘The Religion of Peace.’ Muslim’s contempt for “inferior religions” is very well documented. In particular, if you look at sunni vs. shiite violence/terrorism, you might be shocked…but knowing where you stand, probably not. Muslims are the main instigators and provocateurs of terrorism in the world today. Not only against other religions but more so within their own religion. It sucks that someone would want to light up a mosque, but it also sucks that you cant open your eyes and observe reality.
“setting fire to empty mosque = bombing a crowded tree lighting ceremony”
Saying that they’re both acts of terrorism isn’t the same as saying they’re equal.
Muslim’s contempt for “inferior religions” is very well documented.
Actually you could insert nearly any other religion in there easily. Certainly most forms of Christianity and Judaism. And in some parts Muslims have an excellent history of tolerance towards minority religions.
On the other hand, I have contempt for most religions, but not enough to go on a terrorist campaign…
It sucks that someone would want to light up a mosque, but it also sucks that you cant open your eyes and observe reality.
Wow. You really don’t have a clue, do you? That’s exactly the same attitude you are fighting against. It’s guys like you who make this whole mess possible. * *
I do not need clues when I already have the facts. I have nothing to do with “this mess.” I make my observations based on a very solid knowledge and understanding of historical facts and current realities. The war on terrorism is not a war against Christians or Jews. It is a war against radical islam: this is a fact. It is fact because as I said, muslims are the primary provacateurs of terrorist activites these days. But this does not mean all muslims are. There are two guys still on the loose from the Mumbai attacks. What they want to do next is so horrifying, that it is not fit for this forum…I’ll leave it to your imagination. All of this ‘But, but…Christians’ or: ‘But…but…Jews…’ Stuff is a joke. You are grasping at straws. I certainly do wish all people of all faiths could coexist, live and practice there faiths in peace. However, this is not the world that we live in right now. It is a foolish fantasy to think otherwise. Sorry Bro, radical islam is the problem these days and until ‘we’ deal with the problem we will find ourselves in a state of perpetual war until the problem is dealt with.
How credulous you and the Left are, my little lefty analogue. It’s a false flag operation all the way and that’s been done before. So, let me get this straight: The “rednecker Oregonians” get into the below mosque:
and only start a fire in one office, away from the worship areas and then only burning 80 percent of that office? Color me skeptical, boyo, as you should be, too. But, hey…let’s just forget about the hundreds, or perhaps thousands, of people at the tree lighting ceremony this mook fully intended to to kill, from the looks of things (shouting “Allahu Akbar!” as the badges closed in isn’t something one does if one’s just out for a normal, non-entrapped, evening stroll, right?) and jump as fully to conclusions as the Left accuses those on the Right of doing, though those on the Right seem to be able to understand that Islam has a problem, a serious problem, with religious violence (sometimes called “Jihad Bil Saif” in Arabic and a favorite tool of the Wahabbist/Salafist faction that’s currently driving the jihadi bus-loaded-with-high-explosives) these days.
There’s plenty more out there, by the way, on Muslim faked hate crimes. For example, there was this one:
A Muslim student who said a masked gunman assaulted her after he wrote anti-Muslim slurs in a women’s restroom at Elmhurst College has been arrested for filing a false police report, officials said today.
Here are several more (courtesy, Daniel Pipes and Sharon Chadha):
CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) cites the July 9, 2004 case of apparent arson at a Muslim-owned grocery store in Everett, Washington. But investigators quickly determined that Mirza Akram, the store’s operator, staged the arson to avoid meeting his scheduled payments and to collect on an insurance policy. Although Akram’s antics were long ago exposed as a fraud, CAIR continues to list this case as an anti-Muslim hate crime.
CAIR also states that “a Muslim-owned market was burned down in Texas” on August 6, 2004. But already a month later, the owner was arrested for having set fire to his own business. Why does CAIR include this incident in its report
CAIR lists the March 2005 lawsuit filed by the Salmi family for the firebombing of their family van as one example of a hate crime report it received in 2004. However, the crime named in the lawsuit occurred in March 2003, was already reported by CAIR in 2003, and should not have been tabulated again in the 2004 report.
CAIR reports that “a home-made bomb exploded outside of the Champions Mosque in the Houston suburb of Spring, Texas,” staking its claim on eyewitness reports that on July 4, 2004, “two white males” were seen placing the bomb. We inquired about the incident and found that Spring’s sheriff department could not locate any police files about an explosion. Further inquiries to the mosque and an e-mail to CAIR both went unanswered. There is scant evidence that any crime even occurred.
CAIR notes that “investigators in Massachusetts are still investigating a potential hate-motivated arson against the Al-Baqi Islamic Center in Springfield.” However the case was long ago ruled a simple robbery, news that even CAIR’s own website has posted. The Associated Press reported on January 21, 2005, that prosecutors determined the fire was set by teen-age boys “who broke into the Al-Baqi mosque to steal money and candy, then set the fire to cover their tracks.” The boys, they clarified, “weren’t motivated by hatred toward Muslims.”
CAIR describes what happened to a Muslim family in Tucson, Arizona: “bullet shots pierced their home as they ate dinner in October 2004” and two months later their truck was smashed and vandalized. But the only evidence that either incident was motivated by hate of Muslims is the Dehdashti family itself, not the police. Detective Frank Rovi of Pima County Sheriff’s Department, who handled the shooting investigation, said that according to the neighbors, the desert area by the Dehdashti house was often used for target practice. Neither incident was classified as a hate crime and both cases were closed by February 2005, long before the CAIR report went to press.
I, of course, condemn ANY violence directed at ANY religion, and if this one turns out to have really been perpetrated by people acting out against innocent Muslims worshiping at an innocent mosque, those perps need to be punished to the fullest extent of the law, just as Mr. Mohamud should be also, if he’s found guilty as charged of the crime he’s being accused of committing. However, John Hinderaker puts the attempted bombing and this POSSIBLE act of arson in the correct light vis a vis Islam, “the religion of peace,” and its adherents:
The fact is that Islam has a huge problem–and, unfortunately, it is the world’s problem. Surveys consistently show that a substantial percentage of Muslims favor violent efforts to wipe out other religions and cultures and establish Muslim hegemony over the world. Jihadists like Khalid Sheihk Mohammed and Mohammed Mohamud enjoy the support of many millions of Muslims, world-wide. Many imams preach hatred and violence, so that it is common in some areas of the world for Muslims to stream out of their mosques after Friday services looking for Christians, Hindus or other infidels to kill. There is no parallel in other religions. No one leaves a Christian church service fired up with murderous zeal against those of other faiths. No one. It never happens. Of course an individual Christian or former Christian can be a murderer. But there is no movement within the Christian faith that advocates murder, and no Christian church services fire up worshippers to commit violence against non-Christians.
Most Muslims, obviously, are not crazy mass murderers. But every Muslim whose head is not buried deep in the sand knows that many of his co-religionists do support mass murder for political purposes. Some Muslims, to their credit, have distanced themselves from jihad, but not enough. No one I know of holds all Muslims responsible for the depraved actions of a relative few, but it is entirely reasonable to hold Muslims generally responsible for cleaning up their religion. Who can discredit, delegitimize and expel pro-jihad imams, other than their fellow Muslims? This needs to happen, right now; but it isn’t happening, or, at a minimum, it isn’t happening fast enough or effectively enough.
The Muslim religion needs to get its act together, pronto. Those of other faiths will never condone violence against Muslims, but at the same time, the world will never respect Islam until Islam shows that it is worthy of respect. So far, the world is still waiting.
The Portland mosque’s imam has a history, and the attendees refuse to cooperate with authorities. Either the congregation (if that’s the proper term) thinks their imam was set up by authorities and therefore refuses to cooperate out of genuine distrust, or they’re just going out of their way to make sure the American public feels no sympathy for their plight whatsoever.
Mr. Khan and Mr. Day said several people who worship at the mosque said that F.B.I. agents had knocked on their doors late at night on the day of Mr. Mohamud’s arrest, but that none had agreed to speak to the agents.
"People were finding cards in the doors that said F.B.I.,” Mr. Day said.
The mosque, the largest in Portland, has been at the center of controversy before. In 2002, the mosque’s imam, Sheik Mohamed Abdirahman Kariye, also a naturalized American citizen from Somalia, was arrested at Portland International Airport.
Prosecutors said that trace elements of TNT were found in his luggage, though those tests were later said to be inconclusive and he was not convicted of any crime.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/us/29suspect.html?_r=1&ref=us&pagewanted=print
There is no possible way to excuse the actions of the narrow-minded, racist, redneck coward(s) who set that fire.
But … “Who are really the terrorists here?” Seriously?
(a) Dude(s) sets fire to an empty mosque at 2 a.m.
(b) Dude parks a van full of explosives at a tree lighting ceremony packed with people.
You really do not know the answer to that question?
I don’t. Not having my terrorist handbook nearby, can you tell me how much real or potential damage or loss of life is required for an act to qualify as “terrorism”?
More info out today on Mohamud himself. Looks like he was a typical self-radicalizing, at least initially, young man (what we find in homeland defense is that many start out with a certain level of fervor which is strengthened by outside actors and forces once they make the initial decision to wage jihad). Also born in Mogadishu, Somalia (and trust me, that place is well worth escaping from) and moved here with his family as a child. Graduated from a U.S. high school and was an engineering student at, I think, UO before dropping out this last October. It might also be the case that it was his father or other members of his family that tipped off the FBI that Mohamud was becoming increasingly radical, reading copies of the online version of the publication *Inspire, *an English-language magazine delivered in .pdf form and apparently designed to “inspire” young Muslim youth in America to carry out jihad against their country. Mohamud, from published reports, also began increasingly speaking of carrying out acts of jihad against Americans.
The FBI, however it was tipped, made the approach to Mohamud after he’d been unsuccessful on several occasions in making contact with a person in eastern Africa or Pakistan and the Middle East looking for young Muslim men in the United States to wage jihad, and undercover agents have apparently been working on the case for some time, looking to see if they could develop further leads and insights into the burgeoning jihadist network forming within the U.S. As, thankfully, a very small number of these young men eventually do, Mohamud decided to finally carry out his act of jihad, looking to kill or maim as many people as he could using a car bomb (in this case, a van bomb) to do the dirty deed. It was only after Mohamud had entered into the cellphone he’d been provided (and which he thought would detonate the explosives in the van) the proper number sequence that agents from the FBI along with officers from the Portland police department (Portland refuses to participate in the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force, by the way, out of a declared fear that it would be used to infringe upon the civil rights of its citizens) swooped in and arrested Mr. Mohamud.
As you’ve pointed out, the mosque Mohamud occasionally worshiped at has been in the news in the past, and the Somali community in the U.S. seems torn between becoming full participants in the so-called American dream and self-imposed isolation, keeping the outside influences of the country the community’s found itself within as far away as possible. Typical first-generation isolationism, in other words. Mr. Mohamud fits the classic profile of the typical new jihadist these days; young, possibly disaffected, looking to “be somebody” and acting out in that regard by striking a blow for their religion, even though they themselves may not have been all that fervent in their past religious worship. But the new networks–many of which are only, at most, tangentially interrelated to Al-Qaeda–want those kind of men and women precisely because, from outward appearances, they don’t really seem to be all that interested in Islam or jihad. Fortunately, in this case, the IC (intelligence community) and the law enforcement apparatus heeded the warnings given to them and probably put forth by members of this young man’s own family or the community in which he lived, unlike in the case of the Underwear Bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. In that case, Abdulmutallab’s own father had walked into a U.S. embassy in Nigeria, warning folks there that his son was on a dangerous path and looking to strike out against the U.S. He was basically ignored, with personnel at the embassy not following up on the intel or seeing that it was delivered up the intelligence chain in a speedy manner.
Let’s find the terrorist white dudes that set the mosque on fire. Focus on that for a while.
Mohamud was entrapped.
"Mohamud was entrapped. "
Entrapment is when law enforcement gets someone to engage in an illegal activity that they would otherwise not have been likely to engage in. It seems pretty clear that this kid was very likely to engage in this type of illegal activity, and was actively trying to find people to help him get involved in terrorist activities.
Let’s find the terrorist white dudes that set the mosque on fire. Focus on that for a while.
Mohamud was entrapped.
How 'bout we focus on what we know: We have a young, Somali-born Muslim man of apparently self-declared jihadist intent who meant to kill hundreds, if not thousands of your fellow Americans. Are you sure you’re actually a lawyer, by the way? What’s your basis for the entrapment defense, and really…would it matter if we now declare Mohamud an enemy combatant, based on the volumes of intelligence developed by the FBI over the course of this investigation, and handled him in that matter? FWIW, we probably won’t, but that’ll be a purely political decision carried out by this administration. I’m sure, as well, that certain courts charged with overseeing the activities of the IC (intelligence community) and the domestic law enforcement agencies charged with homeland security issues, provided their stamp of approval on this operation, including the execution of the arrest warrant. You seem to be missing that key set of facts in all this.
Here’s what we don’t know: We don’t know all too much about this mosque and its Imam, who’s apparently had interaction with domestic homeland security agencies and entities in the past. We don’t know much about the local community of worshipers within that mosque because they’ve clammed up and refuse to talk to outsiders. We also don’t know much about the possible act of arson carried out within this mosque, though–to many here–it looks highly suspicious, for the reasons I’ve outlined in previous posts.
As I’ve said before: Your credulity is quite impressive.
Let’s find the terrorist white dudes that set the mosque on fire. Focus on that for a while.
Mohamud was entrapped.
You need to read what the legal definition of entrapment is, because Mohamud was definitely not entrapped. From the Law Library (note the bit in bold):
"A person is ‘entrapped’ when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case.
However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the Government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. For example, it is not entrapment for a Government agent to pretend to be someone else and to offer, either directly or through an informer or other decoy, to engage in an unlawful transaction with the person. So, a person would not be a victim of entrapment if the person was ready, willing and able to commit the crime charged in the indictment whenever opportunity was afforded, and that Government officers or their agents did no more than offer an opportunity.
On the other hand, if the evidence leaves a reasonable doubt whether the person had any intent to commit the crime except for inducement or persuasion on the part of some Government officer or agent, then the person is not guilty.
In slightly different words: Even though someone may have , as charged by the government, if it was the result of entrapment then he is not guilty. Government agents entrapped him if three things occurred:
- First, the idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from the person accused of the crime.
- Second, the government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing the crime. Simply giving him the opportunity to commit the crime is not the same as persuading him to commit the crime.
- And third, the person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the government agents spoke with him.
On the issue of entrapment the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entrapped by government agents."
Spot
More from one of Dirka-Dirka Triple Mohamud Jihadi’s old classmates, Andy Stull:
“The main thing was the way he said he hated Americans,” Stull said. * “It was serious. He looked me in the eye and had this look in his eye, like it was his determination in life – ‘I hate Americans.’”*
Makes you wonder about the oath of fealty he (Mohamud) swore to the United States when he became a naturalized citizen. Came to this country at age 5, from Somalia, and apparently didn’t absorb anything seemingly of any worth about his country. How sad.
Sorry Bro, radical islam is the problem these days and until ‘we’ deal with the problem we will find ourselves in a state of perpetual war until the problem is dealt with.
Your naive approach to opposition is comical.
Radical Islam is a problem… mostly to other Muslims. And how do you deal with that problem? By killing them all? That project only proves that their fears were correct, so their numbers swell. They hate us for a very good reason now. Plus we are fighting on their terms… and guess what, they are better at it. So… let’s blow up every mosque in the world and outlaw the religion entirely, eh? Good luck with that project, too. Attempts to eradicate major religions have been made in the past, and they always have the opposite of the desired effect.
We find ourselves in a perpetual state of war, because we are fighting on terms where “winning” can never occur. We are doing exactly what the terrorists wanted us to. It is idiotic in the extreme. Most likely the PTB wanted this never-ending war as well, but it’s silly to buy into the propaganda. There is no reason for it. Ignoring them as much as possible, is the the thing that would upset their plans.
Move away from Mohamud. Obviously the kid is screwed up and he is going to jail for the rest of his life. The FBI spent at least 9 months and tens of thousands of man hours and millions making sure the kid did what he did. I’m sure not even passive suggestion was used to direct him in his actions. We have him. Another example of needing to fight home grown terrorism at home.
Now let’s focus on getting the terrorists that burned the mosque before they do worse.
Dude, stop making excuses for ‘The Religion of Peace.’ Muslim’s contempt for “inferior religions” is very well documented. In particular, if you look at sunni vs. shiite violence/terrorism, you might be shocked…but knowing where you stand, probably not. Muslims are the main instigators and provocateurs of terrorism in the world today. Not only against other religions but more so within their own religion. It sucks that someone would want to light up a mosque, but it also sucks that you cant open your eyes and observe reality.
Could not have said it better…what no one seems to realize is that the Muslims’s view is to convert everyone to their religion and kill the infedels that do not convert
burning the Mosque is wrong
If Islam didn’t exist the world would be a safer place.
What other religion terorrizes the world like that?
None.
I’m glad this “misguided youth” is going to go away for the rest of his filth filled piggish life.
Why we don’t have an automatic death penalty for vermin like this is beyond me.
what no one seems to realize is that the Muslims’s view is to convert everyone to their religion and kill the infedels that do not convert
Even though it isn’t true, plenty of people “realize” it.