Posted on 02/15/2007 9:37:33 AM PST by flynmudd
When Sulejmen Talovic entered the Trolley Square mall in Salt Lake City Monday night with a shotgun, a pistol, and a backpack full of ammunition, he intended to “kill a large number of people,” according to Salt Lake City Police Chief Chris Burbank. Talovic killed five people and wounded four before he himself was killed by an off-duty Ogden police officer who happened to be in the mall.
Why did Talovic do it? No one knows. Talovic’s aunt, Ajka Omerovic, told reporters: “We want to know what happened, just like you guys. We have no idea...We know him as a good boy. He liked everybody, so I don’t know what happened.” Talovic, who was eighteen at the time of the murders, was a Bosnian Muslim who came to the United States with his family in 1998. Could he have been motivated by jihadist sympathies?
FBI special agent Patrick Kiernan discounted that possibility. “We’re working closely with the Salt Lake P.D. and we’re obviously aware that that [terrorism] is a potential issue out there,” he explained. “But at this point there is nothing that is leading us down this road.” And with Talovic dead and apparently having acted alone, unless something he wrote explaining his actions is discovered, it is unlikely that his motive will ever be definitively known.
But was Kiernan really correct that “there is nothing that is leading us down this road”? Unfortunately, he didn’t explain how he came to this conclusion. 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.” Omeed Aziz Popal, a Muslim from Afghanistan, who killed one person and injured fourteen during a murderous drive through San Francisco city streets in August 2006, during which he targeted people on crosswalks and sidewalks, identified himself as a terrorist after his rampage, according to Rob Roth of San Francisco’s KTVU. Later the murders were ascribed to Popal’s mental problems, and to stress arising from his impending arranged marriage. On July 28, 2006, a Muslim named Naveed Afzal Haq forced his way into the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle. Once inside, Haq announced, “I’m a Muslim American; I’m angry at Israel,” and then began shooting, killing one woman and injuring five more. FBI assistant special agent David Gomez stated: “We believe...it’s a lone individual acting out his antagonism. There’s nothing to indicate that it’s terrorism-related. But we're monitoring the entire situation.” In March 2006, a twenty-two-year-old Iranian student named Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar drove an SUV onto the campus of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, deliberately trying to kill people and succeeding in injuring nine. After the incident, he seemed singularly pleased with himself, smiling and waving to crowds after a court appearance on Monday, at which he explained that he was “thankful for the opportunity to spread the will of Allah.” Officials here again dismissed the possibility of terrorism, even after Taheri-azar wrote a series of letters to the UNC campus newspaper detailing the Qur’anic justification for warfare against unbelievers, and explaining why he believed his attacks were justified from an Islamic perspective. None of these were terrorist attacks in the sense that they were planned and executed by al-Qaeda 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. As 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.
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 and running people over. 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.
Muhammad a Gulf War vet, Islam convert Ex-wife described as 'in shock' over Muhammad's arrest Monday, January 26, 2004
(CNN) -- John Allen Muhammad, one of the two suspects in the Washington, D.C.-area sniper attacks, is a twice-divorced, 41-year-old Gulf War veteran who converted to Islam 17 years ago and earned an expert marksmanship badge in the U.S. Army.
[snip]
He described Muhammad as a strong believer in Islam who attended the Million Man March in Washington in 1995. The Associated Press reported that a former neighbor of Muhammad's said he provided security at the march, which was organized by Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. Nation of Islam officials in Chicago had no immediate comment, according to the AP.
[snip]
Converted to Islam after first marriage ended
The Times reported Thursday that Muhammad converted to Islam after he and Williams divorced. The Times quoted Williams as saying he converted to Islam 17 years ago, about the same time he joined the Army. "After he changed his religion, he called and told me what not to feed my child," she said. "I told him as long as he [their son] lived with me, it was up to me." ============================================
A pretty straight-forward account, it seems to me.
I see no mention of jihad in that story. Muhammad and Malvo were waging jihad.
One of two things must happen: a muslim reformation, or relocation. The "Clash of Civilizations" is here - bigtime.
Here's my guess. Deprive the enemy of the propoganda impact of the killings by burying it. Smother the jihad with soothing BS about mental illness and stress. In an interesting way, this is a great way to neuter the jihadists - don't even acknowledge them. I only hope that this is being done in concert with our own forces targeting and killing as many as the jihadists as possible in the privacy of their Afgani caves and Tehran apartments. I hope.
Uh... OK... What's the population supposed to be doing, then? Are you disappointed that people aren't panicking and running mad in the streets?
People know there's a war going on, but for most folk their only role is to continue to live their lives. What else should they do?
Maybe, but sometimes it really is just a mental case. Some guy acting alone doesn't stand out and create widespread terror even if the loser IS a muslim.
Now five guys, coordinating an assault on a mall, panicking and running people into a mass kill zone... THAT would be what a terrorist would do.
But one lone teen nutcase is more than likely just that.
Interesting audio. thanks.
OK. fine. He's a terrorist. This makes a difference how?
Am I supposed to be afraid? He's dead. He doesn't appear to have any buddies that got away. There's no indication he was sent by a foreign government, so there's nobody to invade. I don't understand what difference you think it makes what label we put on him?
I for one think he can be a lone jihadi nutcase whacked out teen all rolled into one.
Search is your friend.
Since that's the case any analysis is nothing more than idle speculation, which is always fun but frequently wrong.
We're doomed.
There has to be a point where the MSM can't bury the Muslim/Jihad motive. Maybe the body count has to be in triple digits or he's blown up an entire school and mailed an explicit suicide/video to a TV station. What happened to 'hate crime'? Presumably this killer hated ordinary Americans. But it's only a hate crime if minorities are killed by straight whites. (I forgot.)
Of course every thinking person knows these are terrorist acts.
The problem is that if the masses stop going shopping the economy will tank because consumer spending comprises 2/3 of our economy.
If that happens the jihadists will have accomplished their goal.
It wasn't the families looks alone that led me to the statement. I was strictly limiting my comments to the family NOT to Talovic. As I said, it would be interesting to see how much influence his religion had if Mayor Anderson ever lets any information out about it.
I do also agree with you that terrorism shouldn't require an umbrella organization. Just as other examples have been cited, if he killed for Allah etc - it is a promotion of an ideology or goal by violence and fear (compulsion) of the masses. That's terrorism in my book.
In the end, I doubt we'll get many details on this especially if his Muslim religion was involved - Anderson will suppress it.
I don't know if they teach hate or not, but they do all teach that Islam must become the official religion of the world, by whatever means that is available.
I'm still trying to view the video site must be getting tons of hits) - I can't confirm the Allah Akbar stuff.
My sound system on the computer (cheapy) isn't good enough to make it out. Ping me if anybody has the high tech stuff to get make a clear case on this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.