Tuesday, 15 April 2008

Suspect attempted mass murderer’s self justification full of holes

I happened to catch the confused pathetic inept and juvenile attempt at self justification of the would be mass murderer Ahmed Abdulla Ali’s so-called ‘martyrdom’ video on TV yesterday.

I noted he was careful to try to address certain points. He was for instance anxious to point out that he had not been ‘brainwashed’ and was "educated to a high standard" and "old enough" to make his own decisions. Though age and education are no bars to ideological blindness and confused, illogical thinking.

Brainwashed? Certainly there is something peculiar, or out of the ordinary in the way strong belief can, in certain individuals, often combined with prejudice, hatred or racism, allow them to justify terrible crimes against others to themselves, that normal decent people would baulk at.

I thought it telling when he said that: ”"This the opportunity to punish and humiliate the kuffar (all non Moslems), to teach them a lesson they will never forget.” this would appear to indicate a deep religiously based hatred of all who do not share his particular beliefs, or surely he would not have used those particular terms. It is reasonable to conclude he felt that Kuffars needed to be taught a damned good lesson, simply for the crime of being Kuffars.

The thing that really struck me as undermining his whole house mental of cards was that he justified the evil he planned on the basis that the public had collectively voted for the government who were apparently oppressing his people’s lands.

His peoples lands? He lived and had made a home in the UK. He had benefited from this. He no doubt expected to enjoy and in fact did and still does benefit from the rights and protections that come with that. Among other things it allows him to plead not guilty in the face of what amounts to his own self made recorded confession.

He complained that the public hadn’t protested sufficiently against, presumably the removal of Saddam Hussein, or possibly the situation in Israel.

That they were willing to pressure the government over fox hunting, but not over his perceived persecution of Moslems. "You don't care about the Muslims that are being killed."

This sounds rather like a set piece of anti Western Democracy rhetoric circulated by hate mongers that he was not bright enough to see through. It is paranoia to suppose that bad things that happen to people who also happen to be Muslims take place because they are Muslims.

It does not follow at all that simply because there were protests and because a fox hunting ban was imposed the British public does not care that Muslims, or anyone else, are being killed. It is a Non-Sequitur and is easily shown to be the lie it is by the outcry over the killing of Muslims in the Balkans when British troops, together with other western troops including American troops, were sent in specifically to prevent this. He conveniently chooses to ignore this, or perhaps never picked it up in the course of his vaunted ‘education’.

Any deaths in Iraq are squarely at the door of the insurgents many coming in from outside the country who seem to be doing to prevent it ever getting on it’s feet. Western troops would have been long gone by now if it were not for this. It is the insurgents who are deliberately slaughtering presumably fellow Muslims wholesale.

If he felt that further demonstrations (because there were demonstrations) might have helped he could have organised a pressure group, peaceful protests, lobbying. He chose not to do this.

He also fails to follow his own distorted logic to it’s conclusion. It is probable he would have had the opportunity to vote. By his own logic he is as ‘responsible’ as any other member of the electorate for the wrongs he apparently perceives. By his own logic he is just as deserving of ‘punishment’.


Roger Thornhill said...

I think it is high time Ali G was dusted off to do a martyrdom video.

They need some more ridicule to follow up from the "muppet show" we had in the middle of last year.

CFD Ed said...

Spot on – absolutely. As I was pointing out it was a pretty poor justification, logic so full of holes you could use it to drain spaghetti and about as cringe worthy as those adverts where a company owner who can’t act insists on getting in on the action.

Maybe the meta context disguises it some too, murder carries it's own gravitas.

The only way these immature grotesque grandstanders have got away with any credibility up to now is we couldn’t understand how bad their martyrdom videos were.

Having said that people often don’t get that without it being OTT obvious. Ali G, or maybe Alan Partridge could rub it in ‘till most everyone got it.

Baht At said...

all it says to me is we are wasting time prosecuting people for terrorism who are so mentally ill they should be treated not punished.

As far as I can see on the evidence presented thus far in all the "muslim" terrorism trials to date they've not managed to catch on serious terrorist.

If there wre as many competent muslims terrorists around as there were ira terrorists when we still had proper liberal laws then we'd be knee deep in blood.

The fact we aren't convinces me that it's all a put up job by the nutter in government.

CFD Ed said...

Baht At, The fact is that if the ‘nutters’ under discussion had been left to their own devices and they had got lucky - then there would have been a bloodbath, just like there was on the London Tube and bus bombings.

Most normal people can’t get their head round suicide bombers, especially those who seem to actually prefer to go up with their bombs.

They are ‘bic’ terrorists, disposable resources, and so almost bound to be flaky and amateurish by their natures. Going for the grandstand and imaginary shag pad in heaven after.

It’s the ones who aren’t so dumb talk them into it, train and finance them and wave them off.

So they are only nominally ‘nutters’ not clinically insane - they are still criminals and responsible for their own evil actions.

So no. I don’t think it is a Government put up. It’s dangerously real.

But I do think you have some right of it. I do think the government are taking advantage of it to advance other agenda.

Baht At said...

Dangerously real? In the years since 2001 they have managed exactly one successful attack in the UK.

How many did the IRA manage in a similar period?

When they start arresting and prosecuting credible terrorists who can manage to terrorise without killing themselves (or their pawns) I'll worry until then I'll quietly thank OBL for convincing the americans to stop encouraging and funding the IRA.

CFD Ed said...

Yes they are real and I dealt with this above, so to some extent I am reiterating my points. I wasn’t claiming they were professional, in fact I specifically highlighted reasons why they are not.

The IRA were/are much more professional and they were effectively much more integrated/imbedded in Anglo-Irish/British culture

The whole point is that these terrorists are not professionals almost by definition - they are a disposable resource, rather like stupid girls who act as drug couriers.

These people do still need to be stopped though. You seem to be suggesting it would be possible to rely on their own incompetence to protect us from their real intentions. When a country does that they end up with things like the Madrid train bombings, 9/11 or the Tube bombings.

I fully agree we should not let the potential threat eat into our liberties or rights, or inconvenience us to any great extent, the chances of being killed by terrorists in the UK are significantly less than being killed in a road accident.

You may have a point that 9/11 caused something of a paradigm shift and opened the eyes of many to the fact that murdering terrorists are murdering terrorists and not romantic freedom fighters.

It is a shame that sometimes it takes something like that to do it. But as you point out the IRA are professionals and know the value of the right sort of image and publicity in the right sort of place, being embedded in sections of American political culture too.