Canada: Ottawa attacker was not a ‘lone wolf’

Hotair ^ | 12/16/2014 | NOAH ROTHMAN

[SeekAndFind]

October’s terror attack in Canada, in which a lone attacker tragically took the life of a Canadian soldier outside of the Parliament building in Ottawa, prompted a series of hand-wringing reports over the rise of “lone wolf” terrorists.

This attack was preceded by a radicalized man striking two members of Canada’s military with a car, killing one. The Ottawa attack was followed by another radicalized Islamist attacking New York City Police officers with a hatchet. Yesterday, a self-styled Islamic cleric took two lives and wounded may others after taking a group in Sydney hostage.

The rise of the “lone wolf” terrorist troubled many, but also confirmed for some that the era of high-profile terror attacks had passed. Perhaps Western counter-terror methods had grown so effective that aspiring terrorists could now only hope to achieve small-scale, low-tech attacks?

“The only lone wolf who killed a lot of people was not a jihadist,” Peter Neumann, director of the International Centre for the Study of Radicalization and Political Violence in London, told Time Magazine in October. “It was Anders Breivik in 2011 in Norway, who was very sophisticated, a good planner. He acted all on his own and pulled off a massive operation killing 77 people.”

“Typically, lone wolves do one attack, killing one or two people, because they do not have the expertise or sophistication.” Moreover, [Demos terrorism analyst Jamie] Bartlett suggests a rise in lone wolf acts can be seen to represent an increased success in counterterrorism operations. As a result of increased intelligence work in stopping larger, plots like 9/11 and the 7/7 bombings, he says, terrorist groups are “limited to conducting attacks that require very little training, very little preparation, very little communication.”

Those who took solace in the fact that “lone wolf” terrorists have little or no connection to foreign terrorists or are dissuaded by Western counter-terror practices from carrying out large-scale attacks got some bad news from Canadian officials on Tuesday.

“Several weeks after the Ottawa attack, Canada’s top law-enforcement official now says that gunman was not only was inspired by Islamic State, he may have been in direct contact with the group,” Bloomberg’s Josh Rogin reported.

After 32-year old Canadian Muslim Michael Zehaf-Bibeau stormed the Parliament building in Ottawa, shot a soldier on guard duty fatally in the back, made his way into the Hall of Honor, and opened fire before eventually being gunned down himself, Canadian officials said there was no evidence tying him to Islamic State.

But in late November, Canadian Justice Minister Peter MacKay told me in an interview that not only did the Canadian government believe that Zehaf-Bibeau and Martin Couture-Rouleau, a Muslim who drove over two soldiers only days earlier, were radicalized by the Islamic State, they now suspect both men may have been in direct contact with the group.

“They were influenced by ISIS there is no question,” MacKay told me at the Halifax International Security Forum.

Few are going to be surprised by the fact that these two Canadian terrorists, both of whom attempted to travel to the Middle East or North Africa and were steeped in Islamist ideology, carried out their attacks following the direct encouragement of Islamic State operatives.

Those who insisted that the War on Terror was evolving into a new stage, one in which the Islamist ideology of homegrown terrorists would be less directly attributable to threats overseas, must reassess this judgment in light of new information. It is clear, as it always was, that the threat of Islamic radicalism must be combatted abroad before it can ever hope to be contained at home.

[Paladin2]

Yeah, just another Known Wolf.

[TYVets]

Only in the US are Muslim terrorists always “lone wolves”

[SaxxonWoods]

The Indians used to do this. I saw it in Jeremiah Johnson.

[hal ogen]

Assume .01 % of moozlums want to murder you and your family. That’s a lot of blood-crazed moozlums. Good luck, all.

[JudyinCanada]

I don’t see any difference between so-called lone wolves and the rest of the terrorists.

They have a different m.o., but they are the same islamic jihadists as the rest of them. They are “recruited” to act on their own, to do whatever they can do to kill infidels wherever they are located. They are basically the subcontracted department of the formal groups.

To hear someone is just a “lone wolf” is neither here nor there, and should certainly not offer any consolation or relief.

[Little Pig]

Unfortunately, civilization is going to have to declare Islam to be anathema, and drive out its adherents wherever they may be, if we do not want to continue to experience this kind of thing (and worse). If said adherents aren’t themselves intending to murder “keffirs”, then they support those who do intend so.

Islam has shown itself to be incompatible with modern civilization. I’m not to the point of paraphrasing Cato yet, but each one of these incidents drives me closer, and by ever-increasing increments.

[expat2]

the threat of Islamic radicalism must be combatted abroad before it can ever hope to be contained at home

Another, easier approach would be to kick the Muslims out of Western countries. May come to that when all other routes have been tried, and failed.

[elpadre]

Back when both political parties were interested in protecting the nation against an enemy, they actually outlawed the Communist Party (CPUSA). Many of the card-carrying Communists fled to Mexico City, France and Russia. That is a better way than deportation. The perps leave at their own expense.

Wouldn’t it be great to outlaw Islam - a sworn enemy of the US.