Remember that guy at UNC that drove the SUV into the students?

Status
Not open for further replies.
"Allah gives permission in the Koran for the followers of Allah to attack those who have raged war against them, with the expectation of eternal paradise in case of martyrdom," Mohammed Taheri-azar wrote in a two-page letter sent to a TV station in Durham."

American rebuttal to those who believe and act upon this may be delivered in the caliber of your choice.

And I HOPE this guy gets put in Fed prison.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A good lawyer probably could have plea-bargained it down to "exhibition of speed." But he wrote a letter to the local TV station.

I'm surprised he didn't burn his lips trying to blow up a bus.

Did he REALLY graduate from UNC? What was his GPA, I wonder?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nice summary of facts in the case. Amazing how both UNC Chapel Hill and FBI refuse to consider it terrorism given the dood's own words.
http://www.danielpipes.org/pf.php?id=3450

Sudden Jihad Syndrome (in North Carolina)

by Daniel Pipes
New York Sun
March 14, 2006

[NY Sun title: "The Quiet-Spoken Muslims Who Turn to Terror"]

"Individual Islamists may appear law-abiding and reasonable, but they are part of a totalitarian movement, and as such, all must be considered potential killers." I wrote those words days after September 11, 2001, and have been criticized for them ever since. But an incident on March 3 at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill suggests I did not go far enough.

The Pit at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, the pedestrian area where Taheri-azar struck.

That was when a just-graduated student named Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, 22, and an Iranian immigrant, drove a sport utility vehicle into a crowded pedestrian zone. He struck nine people but, fortunately, none were severely injured.

Until his would-be murderous rampage, Mr. Taheri-azar, a philosophy and psychology major, had a seemingly normal existence and promising future. In high school, he had been student council president and a member of the National Honor Society. The Los Angeles Times writes that a number of UNC students found him "a serious student, shy but friendly." One fellow student, Brian Copeland, "was impressed with his knowledge of classical Western thought," adding, "He was kind and gentle, rather than aggressive and violent." The university chancellor, James Moeser, called him a good student, if "totally a loner, introverted and into himself."

In fact, no one who knew him said a bad word about him, which is important, for it signals that he is not some low-life, not homicidal, not psychotic, but a conscientious student and amiable person. Which raises the obvious question: Why would a regular person try to kill a random assortment of students? Mr. Taheri-azar's post-arrest remarks offer some clues.

* He told the 911 dispatcher that he wanted to "punish the government of the United States for their actions around the world."
* He explained to a detective that "people all over the world are being killed in war and now it is the people in the United States' turn to be killed."
* He said he acted to "avenge the deaths of Muslims around the world."
* He portrayed his actions as "an eye for an eye."
* A police affidavit notes that "Taheri-azar repeatedly said that the United States government had been killing his people across the sea and that he decided to attack."
* He told a judge, "I'm thankful you're here to give me this trial and to learn more about the will of Allah."

In brief, Mr. Taheri-azar represents the ultimate Islamist nightmare: a seemingly well-adjusted Muslim whose religion inspires him, out of the blue, to murder non-Muslims. Mr. Taheri-azar acknowledged planning his jihad for more than two years, or during his university sojourn. It's not hard to imagine how his ideas developed, given the coherence of Islamist ideology, its immense reach (including a Muslim Student Association at UNC), and its resonance among many Muslims.

Were Mr. Taheri-azar unique in his surreptitious adoption of radical Islam, one could ignore his case, but he fits into a widespread pattern of Muslims who lead quiet lives before turning to terrorism. Their number includes the hijackers responsible for the attacks of September 11, the London transport bombers, and the Intel engineer arrested before he could join the Taliban in Afghanistan, Maher Hawash.

A Saudi living in Houston, Mohammed Ali Alayed, fit the pattern because he stabbed and murdered a Jewish man, Ariel Sellouk, who was his one-time friend. So do some converts to Islam; who suspected a 38-year-old Belgian woman, Muriel Degauque, would turn up in Iraq as a suicide bomber throwing herself against an American military base?

This is what I have dubbed the Sudden Jihad Syndrome, whereby normal-appearing Muslims abruptly become violent. It has the awful but legitimate consequence of casting suspicion on all Muslims. Who knows whence the next jihadi? How can one be confident a law-abiding Muslim will not suddenly erupt in a homicidal rage? Yes, of course, their numbers are very small, but they are disproportionately much higher than among non-Muslims.

This syndrome helps explain the fear of Islam and mistrust of Muslims that polls have shown on the rise since September 11, 2001.

The Muslim response of denouncing these views as bias, as the "new anti-Semitism," or "Islamophobia" is as baseless as accusing anti-Nazis of "Germanophobia" or anti-Communists of "Russophobia." Instead of presenting themselves as victims, Muslims should address this fear by developing a moderate, modern, and good-neighborly version of Islam that rejects radical Islam, jihad, and the subordination of "infidels."
 
Does anyone know if the Koran (or Qu'ran) does, in fact, authorize Muslims to attack non-Muslims? If so, does that authorization extend to members of the nationality or race that are the perceived "attackers of Islam," who are not themselves the individuals carrying out the "attacks"?

In other words, U.S. soldiers have killed Muslims in Iraq. Given. But these students the moron attacked were not in Iraq and had not attacked any Muslims. They weren't even members of the military. For all this guy knew, the people he ran down might have all been anti-war protestors. He ran them down just because they were Americans.

If the Koran's authorization is so broad as to countenance that kind of reprisal, against innocent non-participants, then the religion needs some reworking.
 
I gotta go with Ma's grandson. It is irrelevant what the Koran says. What is important is there are those who thiink it says its ok to kill the infadel. Those who attempt murder in this country stand before our bar of justice and are judged by our standards regardless of what they believe. That said, I'd feel a little more comfortable if those enforcing terror laws were a little more evenhanded in interpreting said laws.
 
Seems A Little Disingenuous

It seems a little disingenuous to me that one would commit a vile act in the name of their faith in order to "get to Paradise" rather than live according to the teachings of the religion that would make sense, promote peace and harmony, and get to "Paradise " by living an exemplary life according to those righteous teachings. I think all these terrorists who commit the suicide attacks are looking for a short-cut to heaven. I feel sorry for them. When they get to "Paradise" they'll likely find the only virgins there are themselves.

Woody

Look at your rights and freedoms as what would be required to survive and be free as if there were no government. If that doesn't convince you to take a stand and protect your inalienable rights and freedoms, nothing will. If that doesn't convince you to maintain your personal sovereignty, you are already someone else's subject. If you don't secure your rights and freedoms to maintain your personal sovereignty now, it'll be too late to come to me for help when they come for you. I will already be dead because I had to stand alone. B.E.Wood
 
Here is a link to Chapter 4 of the Koran, titled "An-Nisa" or "Women."

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/004.qmt.html#004.089

Please note, that this page contains verses in three different English translations of the Koran, and each different translation is noted by the name of the translator at the start of each verse.

Also note that this link is at the University of Southern California. And I'm pretty sure that MSA stands for "Muslim Student Association"

Anyway, check out this book from the Koran and see what it says about unbelievers.

For a highlight, here's one interesting verse to consider.

Again, three different translators, but all the same verse.


004.089
YUSUFALI: They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks;-
PICKTHAL: They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them,
SHAKIR: They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.
 
Amazing how both UNC Chapel Hill and FBI refuse to consider it terrorism given the dood's own words.

Maybe not, if they're trying to keep the Fed out of it and get an actual *conviction* with a *death sentence*. Given the Fed's track record of prosecution as of late, could be a good idea.

jmm
 
Have you guys not already been told by our keepers in the unbiased media that islam is a religion of peace?

Come on fellas, get with the program!
 
Does anyone know if the Koran (or Qu'ran) does, in fact, authorize Muslims to attack non-Muslims?
That depends on who you ask and how they interpert it. Much like how different people get different messages when reading the christian bible. Or the 2nd amendment even.
 
Blatant 7th century Individual Hero worship,
Any reasoning person who reads the Koran and believes any of it is in a bad way.
Of course, that also applies to the mystical portions of the Torah and the New Testament, too.
Anyone who belives in superstitions is really having a vacant mind moment.:neener:
 
Does anyone know if the Koran (or Qu'ran) does, in fact, authorize Muslims to attack non-Muslims? ...

Hawkmoon, here are three different translations of a passage from Chapter 8 of the Koran, called to our attention by Hillbilly. What the three translations have in common is that what we have been calling attacks by individual Muslims are in fact the actions of Allah himself (the Compassionate, the Merciful) using those individuals as his instrument.

So it's quite possible that Muslims believe their religion is one of peace while also believing that when they murder non-Muslims they are merely his instruments. They don't attack non-Muslims. Allah attacks non-Muslims through them when he choses to do so.

In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful.
...

YUSUFALI: It is not ye who slew them; it was Allah: when thou threwest (a handful of dust), it was not thy act, but Allah's: in order that He might test the Believers by a gracious trial from Himself: for Allah is He Who heareth and knoweth (all things).

PICKTHAL: Ye (Muslims) slew them not, but Allah slew them. And thou (Muhammad) threwest not when thou didst throw, but Allah threw, that He might test the believers by a fair test from Him. Lo! Allah is Hearer, Knower.

SHAKIR: So you did not slay them, but it was Allah Who slew them, and you did not smite when you smote (the enemy), but it was Allah Who smote, and that He might confer upon the believers a good gift from Himself; surely Allah is Hearing, Knowing. --From Chapter 8 of the Koran

Go in peace.
 
Muslims should address this fear by developing a moderate, modern, and good-neighborly version of Islam that rejects radical Islam, jihad, and the subordination of "infidels."

Where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, been hearing that for half a decade now every time the subject of muslim violence is broached. That means they have heard it too.

Their inaction is digging a hole that won't be easy to climb out of.
 
Nice summary of facts in the case. Amazing how both UNC Chapel Hill and FBI refuse to consider it terrorism given the dood's own words.

You mean he is not an avowed islamist?

not a hate crime either

Oh, is he one of those so-called, "moderate," "secular" muslims? Could it be that it is not a hate crime because his motives run counter to the tenets of the so-called, "peaceful religion"? ;)

Could it be the FBI and law enforcement and UNC officials are in denial that ideology has no stake in the culprit's motives?
 
Hawkmoon, I don't know what the Koran says. What I do know is that there is that small percentage of Islamics which interpret certain passages to have that meaning.

In other words, a large percentage of muslims take the moderate view, that islam is a "peaceful religion," despite the "prophet" mohammad's murderous actions to the contrary and islam's violent 1400 year legacy. Could it be that a large percentage of muslims hold to a mistaken interpretation of the koran?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top