This is my personal view and comments on the issues and events that I feel a need to talk about or express my view. You don't have to agree, but lets carry on a adult, discussion and maybe you will see it the right way, mine. ;)
Salt Lake Jihad? New American Jihad??
Published on March 13, 2007 By ShadowWar In War on Terror
Are we facing a new and increasing type of criminal/ terrorist act? Is there reason for concern of the general public at large? Should we begin to prepare ourselves for the possibility of bigger and more spectacular attacks?

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.” She did state that he was being misled my "outside" sources. Who were these "outside" sources? It has not been revealed yet. 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 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.
  • The 2005 University of Oklahoma bombing occurred on Saturday, October 1, 2005 at approximately 8:00 p.m. CDT, when a bomb went off near the George Lynn Cross Hall on the University of Oklahoma (OU) campus. The explosion was approximately 500 feet away from a stadium with 84,501 spectators watching a football game,and reports are mixed on whether or not the bomber tried to enter the stadium before the explosion. The Norman, Oklahoma police department reported that the bomber, Joel Henry Hinrichs III, was killed in the explosion, and have described it as a suicide bombing. No one other than the bomber was killed.

None of these were terrorist attacks in the sense that they were planned and executed by al-Qaeda agents that we know of. 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 supremacy, 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 or at least call it for what it is.

What is the purpose of these types of attacks? Is it to instill fear in the mainstream public? Is it to try and show the extent to which these people will go to try and make their point? What point is that? That they are willing to die to make people fear them? I don't get that one. But I will have to sit back and take a wait and see posture.

Majority of post from http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=26961 My comments and additions in Blue..


Comments (Page 4)
5 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 
on Mar 17, 2007
What did it matter when Lucas stole articles and everyone gang raped him endlessly about it? It mattered then. What gives me the right? Uh, why do I need a right? What PREVENTS me from it?

Definitely not cowards that they can't use their real account out of shame that they are defending a thief.
on Mar 17, 2007
Definitely not cowards


Yeah, I'm definitely thinking this "frogleg" person is an old pissy regular, back under a new name to piss everyone off.

Nice way to start out, buddy.
on Mar 17, 2007
What did it matter when Lucas stole articles and everyone gang raped him endlessly about it? It mattered then. What gives me the right? Uh, why do I need a right? What PREVENTS me from it?

Definitely not cowards that they can't use their real account out of shame that they are defending a thief.


You are so long in the tooth it is become tiresome. With reference to the person above and the gang rape - gang rape or flame throwing is favorite pastime of this site - sadly a flaw of some horrid users,a flaw that is never fixed but enjoyed by the perpetrators of which it can be said you are one when the mood takes you.

It is all well and good to mention the plagiarism once and leave it at that, but it seems you are hell bent on causing as much destruction and damage as you can to this person and their reputation, you want to start a flame war, a gang rape or get them banned - your hunger for blood knows no bounds (sarcasm on)you sir are an insatiable hyena.

You could try maturing a little and start to learn when to actually let something go instead of harping on like a stuck record or an old women.
on Mar 17, 2007
Nice way to start out, buddy.


You mean Jennifer1?   

ShadowWar: I'm not sure I understand why you're so hesitant to make things right. I don't think you intentionally "stole" someone's work. I think it was a misunderstanding, but instead of clearing it up you seem to have decided it's more fun to play with Baker.

I think you're a decent stand-up guy, and I'm confused as to why it's ok with you to be seen as a plagiarist.
on Mar 17, 2007
You mean Jennifer1?


I was thinking that's who it was. And that's why I immediately disregarded it as rubbish.
on Mar 17, 2007
Jennifer also plagiarized articles, if I recall. I think I even called her on it during her whole "Poor Hussein Family, the people who hung Hussein were as bad as Hussein" nonsense. I'd be more apt to believe it is someone here that is too embarassed to support plagiarism with their real account.

Regardless, whoever it is is obviously projecting the 'life' stuff, because they've already devoted one of their four blogs to this, and another to critiquing all the main people who blog here. The fact is, I've never had much of a problem with ShadowWar that I can recall. People are free to go through my articles and see how many are due to/contribute to flame wars.

This needs to go, though. It's important for a site to deal with this, just like it is important for an art site to deal with thieves. If you don't, then you become known for being a 'problem' place, a database full of stolen work, and the merits of the site itself end up being overlooked on that account.

So, since JU has the policy, and it is in JU's interest to purge itself of stuff like this before it the stigma of it attaches itself, I think they will. I think they are just busy, and now it is the weekend. I've been around Stardock for eight years now, and while sometimes they have a lot on their plate, they almost always get the right thing to do done.
on Mar 17, 2007
This needs to go, though. It's important for a site to deal with this, just like it is important for an art site to deal with thieves. If you don't, then you become known for being a 'problem' place, a database full of stolen work, and the merits of the site itself end up being overlooked on that account.

So, since JU has the policy, and it is in JU's interest to purge itself of stuff like this before it the stigma of it attaches itself, I think they will. I think they are just busy, and now it is the weekend. I've been around Stardock for eight years now, and while sometimes they have a lot on their plate, they almost always get the right thing to do done.


And blah, blah, blah, on and on he goes, where he stops nobody knows......boohoo, blow your nose.
on Mar 17, 2007
bump. Plagiarized article.
on Mar 18, 2007
Here's something to consider, ShadowWar. This isn't just JU. Paste

When Sulejmen Talovic entered the Trolley Square

into Google and hit search. Here's a link to the results. The five are by Robert Spencer. The next one, his article, is supposedly by you. Is that something you want hanging out of your fly?



on Mar 18, 2007
But I maintain, the religiously-minded jihadist is not going to yell "Die, motherf***ers, die" as he guns people down. Which is, according to all eye-and ear-witnesses, exactly what Talovic was yelling.


Just to play Devil's Advocate: You also wouldn't expect them to be hanging out in bars and strip clubs, but isn't that what the 9/11 hijackers did?


You've called him on it and he "has" acknowledged it in reply #10.


The problem there is that a) most people don't read the comments, and people perusing Google and other search engines can't tell the difference.


ShadowWar: I'm not sure I understand why you're so hesitant to make things right.


I have to agree. It wouldn't even take 10 minutes to rewrite the article to give full attribution and make all the relevant points you need while pointing people to the full article for reference. Why not just do that? You have the ability to end this now. It's not BS that's doing anything to your reputation, it's your own stubborn refusal to make a simple "correction" to the original article. If you really want the article's points rather than the article itself to be the object of discussion, that's the fastest, easiest way to accomplish it.

For the sake of all the participants and JU in general, please just rewrite the original article and end this.



(P.S. This is Gene Nash. When I post in the forums, it lists me as "smartaz." Remember, "it's a feature, not a bug." )
on Mar 18, 2007
I think it was a misunderstanding, but instead of clearing it up you seem to have decided it's more fun to play with Baker.

I think you're a decent stand-up guy, and I'm confused as to why it's ok with you to be seen as a plagiarist.


David Viscott said that maturity is doing the right thing even if it's what our parents want us to do. That can be extended to "even if it's what someone whose nose we'd rather rub in it thinks should be done."

Maturity is doing the right thing regardless. This article either needs rewritten or removed. That is the right thing.

It's really a shame that if this was an honest mistake, the immediate reaction wasn't a simple "my bad" and quick change to the original article, instead of a snotty "attribution" buried in the comments.

The longer this goes on, the harder it is to dismiss it as a mistake.
on Mar 18, 2007
I don't think you intentionally "stole" someone's work.

How can you write the same paragraphs verbatim without intentionally stealing someone's work? I don't jump on the bandwagon on my husband's issues usually. I am neither eloquent enough nor do I give such weighty matters (i.e. the content of the article) enough thought to give my two-cents, but plagiarism is low. I've watched bakerstreet's ranting on JU and I've done my own little thing (comics) and I've gained a large amount of respect for the bloggers here, even if I don't exactly agree with their points of view. And there is no getting around the fact he did plagiarize (He quoted verbatim, without quotes and without citing references or credit in the body of the article).

I just thought the ethical standard here was a bit higher than at someplace like, say, Deviantart, or the other myriad and forgettable blogs on the internet. I'm just curious what view of plagiarism Mr. Robert Spencer at the Jihad Watch would take on this issue. I think I'm going to ask. Perhaps Mr. Spencer is a personal friend of SW, in which case he probably had permission to post Mr. Spencer's words. Even title the subtitle the same as Mr. Spencer's original title.

As far as "getting over it", this is a piddley little thing. But it sets the example for other people and next thing you know, JU gets hit with a remove it or lose it lawsuit from someone who does care about plagiarism...
on Mar 19, 2007
I don't think you intentionally "stole" someone's work.


i'm not so sure. i'm not ready to convict, but even after reading the "redone" article with the 10% contributed by SW in blue. the opening paragraph, from the way i read it, does not even suggest crediting someone else. the way it was written, it looks like it was intended to be set up that way. this does at least appear to look like a textbook case of plagarism...but again, i'm not ready to convict.
on Mar 19, 2007
"...but again, i'm not ready to convict."


uh... why? There wasn't a link in the article for the first week that it sat here, even with people pointing out where it came from. He says he forgot where he got it, but you can put the first few words of the original in google and it is the first hit.

So, he purposely took someone's entire article, posted it to his blog, with a few sentences pasted in. There's really no other definition of plagiarism. It damn well isn't "fair use", because it is the entire article.

If you did that in a newspaper you'd get sued. If you did it in a college class you'd fail. I have a sincere feeling that if the original was a JU blogger's article, and it was posted to the other site with a couple of sentences pasted in, there'd be a mob from here with torches ready to convict...
on Mar 19, 2007
The thing is we've seen stuff like this in the skinning community for years. People who wander in and post other people's skins, wallpapers, icons, etc., having recolored them a little, or made them grayscale, etc. When someone points out their thievery they inevitably call the person a whiner, ask what the big deal is, etc.

So ShadowWar's characteration of me isn't hitting me the way he thinks it is. I've seen this since 1999 on a regular basis. I've forced websites to take my work down when people like him have taken it and put their name on it. They always, without fail, act like he is right now. The only surprise in the situation is that ShadowWar ended up being that kind of person.

Now that I know what he is, it won't be a surprise in the future. Sadly, for him, people will have to wonder when he posts articles whether it is his work or not. At the end of the day, he's lowered himself, not me. If it makes him feel better to call me a whiner, fine, but down deep he knows what the reality of the situation is.
5 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5