Federal prosecutor Richard Tucker said: “This guy is for real and he is a bad guy. He is an honest-to-goodness al-Qaeda bad guy.”
Richard Tucker, like virtually all American officials, talks as if he is in fifth grade: “a bad guy.” This puerile usage is a manifestation of the general unwillingness to call things by their right names. Tucker et al won’t dare say “enemy,” or speak about the motivating ideology of the jihadis. Instead, it’s all playground cops and robbers, catching “bad guys.”
“Muhanad al-Farekh, one of Winnipeg’s ‘Lost Boys,’ found guilty in U.S. court of terrorism charges,” by Jane Rosenberg, Associated Press, September 29, 2017:
A former student at the University of Manitoba was found guilty of providing material support to al-Qaeda and helping to build a truck bomb in Afghanistan after leaving Canada with two friends in 2007.
On Friday, a federal jury in Brooklyn convicted Muhanad al-Farekh of nine criminal charges which carry a maximum punishment of life in prison. He is due to be sentenced on Jan. 11.
Mr. al-Farekh, an American citizen, was one of Winnipeg’s “Lost Boys,” three students who mysteriously disappeared and travelled to Pakistan, sparking alarm among intelligence officials in the U.S. and Canada….
Mr. Farekh, who was born in Houston and raised in Dubai, was once reportedly the subject of a debate at the highest levels of the U.S. government over whether he should be captured or killed in a drone strike. His return to the U.S. to face charges marks a victory for the officials who argued that American courts were the correct venue in which to weigh his crimes.
“This guy is for real and he is a bad guy,” said Richard Tucker, a federal prosecutor, of Mr. al-Farekh, during the closing arguments. “He is an honest-to-goodness al-Qaeda bad guy.”
The prosecution’s case relied heavily on the notion that Mr. al-Farekh was part of a trio who studied together, prayed together, became radicalized together and left Canada together….
A former close friend of the trio who also attended the University of Manitoba told jurors how they had discussed with excitement a sermon by a radical cleric on the duty to wage jihad. Jurors were shown a video in which Mr. al-Farekh urged friends, including Mr. Yar, to watch an online clip featuring attacks on American soldiers in Iraq.
JawsV says
The prosecutor wouldn’t dare say “Islamic Jihadist.” That would be “islamophobic.”
gravenimage says
Brooklyn: Muslim found guilty of aiding al-Qaeda, helping build truck bomb in Afghanistan
……………….
What are these barbarians doing in our country? A rhetorical question, of course?
Frank Anderson says
To bring “enlightenment” to us by killing us and destroying our society. What else do they have to offer, new welfare customers, no marketable skills, no desire to participate in our society, what?
Emilie Green says
“You very bad man, Jerry [Muhanad]. Very bad man”
Even Babu Bhatt agrees.
Adan Tirith says
So, they were considering sending a drone to kill this man, and yet he was still able to immigrate to this country? What the hell?
Halal Bacon says
next up, he gets to go back to Canada, pass go and collect 10.5 million from Trudeau
mortimer says
Federal prosecutor Richard Tucker does not realize that he is equating TRUE ISLAM with EVIL, and yet that is the logical conclusion.
If Muhanad al-Farekh is a devout, pious, Muslim, then Tucker is claiming that a pious Muslim is a ‘BAD GUY’.
Richard Tucker is concluding that JIHAD IS EVIL. We concur with that conclusion. That is what the counterjihad is saying. ‘JIHAD IS EVIL.’
Muhanad al-Farekh, a jihadist, is an EVIL GUY because he is a true Muslim jihadist imitating Mohammed.
Joe says
Leaving all of the people in the dark about Islam and lying to them that Islam would be somehow a holy religion is a crime if done consciously.
Alec Rawls says
Wait a minute, this prosecutor didn’t bypass motivation. He didn’t just call the al Qaeda bad guy a bad guy, or a generic “terrorist,” he called him an al Qaeda bad guy.
mortimer says
By identifying the ‘bad’ motivation of ‘HATE’ directed towards the kufaar through jihad (al Walaa wal Baraa… an essential doctrine), prosecutor Richard Tucker has unknowingly implied that Islamic hate and jihad, authentic Islamic doctrines, are ‘bad’.
Nonetheless, Richard Tucker doesn’t deny the ‘Standard Operating Explanation’ that Islam is a religion of peace and that jihadists ‘distort their religion’ and become ‘bad’. Thus Tucker does not become a heretic to the establishment which holds this delusional false theory tenaciously and against all evidence.
The legal system cannot respond to JIHADISM correctly until it understands jihadism as NORMATIVE ISLAM, rather than an aberration.
Frank Anderson says
Mortimer! A really big check mark and gold star for your last sentence! As long as the “religion of peace” lie spreads there is no way to resist. That is why I write so often about the delusion of reprieve described by Viktor Frankl. People just don’t want to face the truth. Well thought, well stated, and well written.