Survival UK Forums

Full Version: Jihadi Denial and Political Correctness
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
We know Orlando jihad terrorist Omar Mateen worked for a DHS contractor – the people supposed to guard our airports, federal buildings, and nuclear facilities.

We know in 2013 and 2014 his co-workers reported to his employer that he was acting weirdly and he was reported to the FBI and watched for a while. Why wasn't he fired?

Because the employer had a diversity requirement imposed by the DHS and because CAIR et. al. were sure to finance a lawsuit against them even if DHS didn't hold them to strict account for such a firing.

Of course the FBI agents, probably like the Ft. Hood shooters' military co-workers had to fear reprisals if they acted on their suspicions and stripped away his gun licence. But the media and government will, I predict, be all too happy to blame the contractor for the government’s failures...

Strong emotional reactions to dramatic events exacerbate the effects of two already serious flaws in our political discourse.

First, much of the public is ignorant about public policy issues, and forms opinions without serious consideration of the evidence. Such ignorance is not necessarily a sign of stupidity or bad moral character, but is usually just a result of rational behavior by individual citizens.

Nonetheless, if you know very little about terrorism, gun control, radical Islamism, and so on, your immediate emotional reactions to a terrorist attack are unlikely to be a good guide to policy. Anger and sorrow are not substitutes for knowledge.

Unfortunately, however, in the aftermath of a terrible tragedy, there is an even stronger instinct than usually to just “do something” that feels good in reaction to the event instead of carefully considering our options, or at least acknowledging the limitations of your insight.

At such times, politicians have incentives to cater to angry,but poorly-informed public opinion, often with harmful results. Second, most people have a strong tendency to evaluate political events in a highly biased manner.

Instead of acting as truth-seekers and weighing new evidence objectively, we often react to events “political fans,” overvaluing any new information that seems to reinforce our preexisting views, while ignoring or dismissing anything that cuts the other way. Often people re interpreting convenient evidence in ways that supports their views, even if it actually does not, a process known to experts as “confirmation bias.”

Such bias is particularly strong in an era of high political polarization, where we also have strong partisan bias in favor of our own party’s ideas, and against those associated with the opposition...
Powerful related story:

....For years, too many Americans – including the lion’s share of our elite media and most of our politicians — have been content to deny the obvious, namely that quite a few Muslims espouse beliefs that are deeply at odds with what the vast majority of Americans believe. Some of those Muslims openly advocate violence and, if they are otherwise maladjusted, the odds they may murder in the name of Islam increase commensurately. We need to have a robust national debate on this important issue. Donald Trump has opened the door to that discussion, in his customary brusque, ham-handed way. More tact is required, but we cannot put off talking about radical Islam and jihadism any longer.

After the Bataclan massacre last autumn, the French government in effect went to war with radical Islam, pledging a “merciless” response to terrorism. This wasn’t just talk. Mass arrests of suspected radicals followed, dealing a serious blow to ISIS networks in the country. Paris meant business, finally.

In the aftermath of our own Bataclan, President Obama has offered his usual platitudes about “hate” and “guns.” This is escapism-as-counterterrorism-policy. Americans must demand better, including a reality-based assessment of our terrorism threat, from our next commander-in-chief. If we cannot name our enemy, we are already halfway to losing the war.
More detailed coverage

The F.B.I. investigated Mr. Mateen in 2013 when he made comments to co-workers suggesting he had terrorist ties, and again the next year, for possible connections to Moner Mohammad Abusalha, an American who became a suicide bomber in Syria, said Ronald Hopper, an assistant agent in charge of the bureau’s Tampa Division. But each time, the F.B.I. found no solid evidence that Mr. Mateen had any real connection to terrorism or had broken any laws.

Mr. Mateen, who lived in Fort Pierce, Fla., was able to continue working as a security guard with the security firm G4S, where he had worked since 2007, and he was able to buy guns. The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said Mr. Mateen had legally bought a long gun and a pistol in the past week or two, though it was not clear whether those were the weapons used in the assault, which officials described as a handgun and an AR-15 type of assault rifle.

A former co-worker, Daniel Gilroy, said Mr. Mateen had talked often about killing people and had voiced hatred of gays, blacks, women and Jews.

Hours later, the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, claimed responsibility in a statement released over an encrypted phone app used by the group. It stated that the attack “was carried out by an Islamic State fighter,” according to a transcript provided by the SITE Intelligence Group, which tracks jihadist propaganda.

But officials cautioned that even if Mr. Mateen, who court records show was briefly married and then divorced, was inspired by the group, there was no indication that it had trained or instructed him, or had any direct connection with him. Some other terrorist attackers have been “self-radicalized,” including the pair who killed 14 people in December in San Bernardino, Calif., who also proclaimed allegiance to the Islamic State, but apparently had no contact with the group.

The Islamic State has encouraged “lone wolf” attacks in the West, a point reinforced recently by a group spokesman, Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, in his annual speech just before the holy month of Ramadan. In past years, the Islamic State and Al Qaeda increased attacks during Ramadan.

American Muslim groups condemned the shooting. “The Muslim community joins our fellow Americans in repudiating anyone or any group that would claim to justify or excuse such an appalling act of violence,” said Rasha Mubarak, the Orlando regional coordinator of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
Lot of food for thought there CH.