Is Islamic Terrorism a Motive?


Take 1. The media talking heads were emphasizing the probability that the Boston marathon bombers would turn out to be Tea Party activists protesting Tax Day. There was absolutely zero evidence of that aside from the date, which also happened to coincidence with a scheduled event that was being targeted. But that didn’t stop the suggestions from flowing.

Take 2. The terrorists were captured. They are not only Muslims, but were enthusiasts of Islamic terrorism. And the same talking heads not say we should refrain from jumping to conclusions.

While there is still some possibility that it could turn out that the Tsarnaev brothers were really angry about gun control or the Keystone pipeline or the cancellation of The Cleveland Show, considering the amount of Islamic terrorist attacks and their support for Islamic terrorism, the obvious motive is still the obvious motive.

If the Tsarnaevs were named Bob and Bill White and had playlists full of Neo-Nazi videos, the media would not spend the next month cautioning us not to jump to conclusions. It would jump to conclusions with both feet and it would generally be right.

It is the job of the police not to jump to conclusions. It is the job of juries not to jump to conclusions. It’s not the job of the media not to jump to conclusions. Sure reporting should reflect realistic speculation, and it should be labeled as such, but selectively pretending ignorance for political reasons in situations where no such ignorance would be pretended otherwise is hypocrisy.

Instead the media has bizarrely bent over backward to try and minimize the motive. The entire preposterous thing reaches its peak when the Boston Globe runs a piece suggesting that Tamerlan Tsarnaev could not have been an Islamic Jihadist because he had Jihadist music on his playlist.

A YouTube page created by someone named Tamerlan Tsarnaev in August 2012 — and who adopted the user name Muazseyfullah, or “Muaz sword of God” — suggests the user had begun dabbling in radical ­Islamism.

It could not be confirmed that the page belonged to the bombing suspect.

But even with that page, a mixed picture emerges. There are a number of videos of Feiz Mohammed, a controversial Australian fundamentalist sheik and, like Tsarnaev, a former boxer, who has drawn criticism for suggesting that women are responsible for their own rape and calling for the radicalization of children.

Another is a slick production that invokes the apocalyptic symbolism of Al Qaeda.

Other videos, labeled “terrorism,” appear to have been deleted.

On the other hand, the page also includes music videos featuring Timur Mutsuraev, a singer who is a hero in the Chechen fight for independence, sympathizing with the insurgents seeking independence from Russia.

Fundamentalist Wahhabis see music as “the work of the devil,” said Monica Duffy Toft, a professor at the University of Oxford.

The Boston Globe, helpfully, leaves out the name of the song, “We Dedicate Our Lives to the Jihad” and the fact that Timur’s songs are all about Islamic Jihadism.

This is blatant journalistic malpractice and it’s senseless at that. The Boston Globe is actually trying to disprove Tamerlan as an Islamic terrorist by citing his Islamic terrorist playlist on the grounds that some Islamist terrorists reject music altogether.

Monica Duffy Toft, an associate professor of public policy, doesn’t seem to grasp the difference between the Nasheeds, the chants used by Timur and a full orchestra. And she also assumes an inaccurate universal position by all Islamist terrorists loosely associated with international terrorist networks.

But the likelihood is that the Globe and Tuft know better. What they are trying to do is grab on to any straw that can undermine the obvious facts.

The root cause is the denial of Islamic terrorism as a motive. Once that attempt to subvert an obvious fact takes hold, all the remaining data has to be warped or distorted to accommodate that first original lie.

  • gsr

    As Mark Steyn asked rather bluntly on Friday's Rush Limbaugh show, pinch hitting for Rush, (paraphrased) – "why are all these people HERE in this country"? Our immigration system must be examined. Why do let so many people in and even worse, the endless "family re-unification" rules of legal immigration. Whole villages in the 3rd world empty out as whole clans move to the USA.

    This must end.

    • Mary Sue

      1. we let them
      2. they think they have to come here to convert us all to Islam or kill us trying.

  • Michael Copeland

    Excellent and perceptive. What an indictment of the "enemedia", as Pamela Geller calls them.

  • geoffreybritain

    Islamic 'terrorism' is NOT the motive. Islam's TENETS are the motive. There is no 'moderate' Islam, there is only Islam. There are only observant Muslims and 'cafeteria' Muslims.

  • Cathy

    Allen West: “Let me be very clear…we have a domestic radical Islamic terror problem in America”
    April 19, 2013

    Let me be very clear, the terrorist attack in Boston and evolving events indicate we have a domestic radical Islamic terror problem in America. We must no longer allow the disciples of political correctness and the acolytes of the Muslim Brotherhood (CAIR, ISNA, MPAC, MAS) to preach to us some misconceived definition of tolerance and subservience. When tolerance becomes a one way street it leads to cultural suicide. Carlos Bledsoe in Little Rock, MAJ Hasan in Ft Hood, the Ft Dix Six, Faisal Shahazad in NYC Times Square — these are just the examples I can type now. When Rep Peter King attempted to have hearings on domestic terrorism he was attacked for being racist. No more excuses. No more apologies. We are in a war of ideological wills, and we shall prevail. Congratulations to all the law enforcement agencies.

  • RealisticSpeech

    I will "speculate". I doubt I will be wrong as the odds are on my side but there is always a possibility and that is keeping it "real". Even Bill Mayer on Friday called liberal political correctness BS and stated to keep it real when a guest stated that all religions are hypocrites and attempted to equate Islam with Christianity based upon the dark ages during which Christiandom as was led then was a problem – especially the Spanish Inquisition. But as Bill pointed out, this is 2013 not the dark ages. The point as Bill made and I also make is that all religions are not equal anymore than all ideologies are equal. There is only one religion that will kill you or threaten to kill you if you draw cartoons of its founding leader. There is only one religion that will kill you if you later decide to leave their religion. There is only one religion that is bombing innocent people the world over – it is Islam. How does a Muslim become radicalized? By becoming more religious and studying the Koran. It is not taking the verses out of context in some strange interpretation but instead it is believing exactly what as written in the Koran as the truth. There is a war of civilizations going on and the west refuses to believe it even though the enemy is dedicated as any devoted religious zealot to the west's total destruction and a world caliphate. The young men were radicalized alright – by the Koran which makes every Muslim a "sleeper cell". We can no longer deny reality nor continue to attempt "political correctness" on those who could care less if our last breath was the next moment. We know the enemy – now, what to do about it is a completely different discussion.

  • AdinaK

    Islamic terror is not only a motive but it effectuates the end goal – Sharia Law, or else…

    Whether it comes via Chechen "refugees" or any other adherent of Islam from the west or throughout the world is beside the point. Those who strictly adhere to Islam must embrace what the jihadists do and this is beyond dispute. Not only that, "cannibalism" is sanctioned too, so don't be surprised when you hear about this as a new tactical jihad –

    "Arson jihad" has been around for a while too –

    Know this: nothing is off the table when it comes to Islamic jihad. Nothing! Boston is a foretaste. While it is intrinsic to know who their handlers are – to exact proper revenge – it is imperative to tackle the scourge of Islam.

    Adina Kutnicki, Israel

  • Michael Copeland

    An Ideology, yes. A "civilisation"? No.

  • Rifleman

    In the checkout line at the grocery store yesterday, I noticed the headline of the Atlanta paper said something about, "…Now a search for motive," and busted out laughing. The checkout gal looked at me, and I said, "Duh, what is jihad?"

    The left just has no answer for why 'privileged' muslims, not 'oppressed' ones, are the ones slaughtering us. Like most of reality, it clashes with their worldview.

  • Ar'nun

    In order for this alleged journalist to come to this stupid conclusion, they need to omit a certain word. Islamists do not reject music. Go to any Islamist country and there is plenty of music. They reject "WESTERN MUSIC" and Western pop culture in general. But even in the first days of the invasion in Iraq, you would here music coming from homes, cars, broadcast over radio. It is true they have their own music, and it tends to be religious in nature, much of it is derived or inspired by Ancient Islamic poetry similar to what Judeo/Christian religions call Psalms. But seeing that this music that inspired Tamerlin was written by an Islamist, and deals with things known by the religion, the Left's childish tactic should be exposed as the Epic Failure it is.

    • Ar'nun

      Oh, and a simple Google search would have cleared this up for the idiot Globe writer.

  • RealisticSpeech

    Though you are correct that many Muslims and the majority Islamic sects in many countries do not forbid music, you would also be just as wrong in saying Muslim's don't ban western style music. You are not familiar with the different sets of beliefs within Islam. If you are familiar with western Christianity, then try to see it as similar to protestant vs. catholic or other denominational differences in their beliefs they hold. In Islam, the Koran is silent on music though some scholars strain to find justification for their religious rulings or Fatwas on the subject. The Hadith, the collection of matters of Islamic Law and history, also have conflicting accounts and thus no definitive answer can be seen without interpretation though many of those who forbid music use various ahadiths to justify their rulings. Thus the various sects within Islam run the gamete from acceptance to total condemnation of music and the arts without universal agreement. Even within the same sect, Fatwas, Islamic ruling of faith, can be given by one imam that is conflicting with other imams. Fatwas, in general, binding upon the followers of that Imam for he is their spiritual scholar though some do privately disagree. Many in the US and the west have read where in Somalia, the Muslim terrorists there who pursue Shariah law forbid Western Music or anything Western in origin. This is true and public flogging can be the reward of those who listen to western music or embrace western culture. Or, you can go and find plenty of various music in Saudi Arabia that also practices a form of Shariah Law. On music, there is no standard and if the music is "western" in origin it is probably only forbid, if at all, because of their intense hatred of the west.