Army Recruiter Killed By Islamic Extremist?

By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Islam, Military, Terrorism

Awful news out of Little Rock, Arkansas…

A man with “political and religious motives” killed a soldier just out of basic training and wounded another Monday in a targeted attack on a military recruiting center, police said. The shootings were not believed to be part of a broader scheme. [...]

William Long, 24, of Conway, died, and Quinton Ezeagwula, 18, of Jacksonville, was wounded and in stable condition, Police Chief Stuart Thomas said. [...]

Police arrested Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, 23, along a crosstown interstate moments after the shootings at the Army-Navy Career Center in a shopping center in west Little Rock.

So in the last two days it appears as if we’ve had two acts of domestic terrorism because of horribly misguided religious beliefs. And nothing much to more to say than that until we find out more.

This entry was posted on Monday, June 1st, 2009 and is filed under Islam, Military, Terrorism. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

9 Responses to “Army Recruiter Killed By Islamic Extremist?”

  1. Chris Says:

    $50 bucks they call this terrorism.

  2. ExiledIndependent Says:

    Interesting point, Chris. Terrorism is willful destruction with the aim to bring about political change (via intimidation). Is this that or is it “just” murder?

  3. Jeremy from NJ Says:

    It is terrorism. Just like Tiller’s murder was terrorism. I never liked the term Islamofascist but I think if that word has officially entered the lexicon, then we need to officially add Christofascist.

    Something really needs to be done about all these religious fanatics. Perhaps we can get someone to sponsor a bill that officially recognizes that the United States was not founded on Judeo/Christian/Muslim values and will not tolerate persecution by religious groups. Heh.

  4. Tully Says:

    So far the only release from police is “possible political or religious motivations.” Insufficent information.

    Nice sucker bet though, Chris. By leaving “they” unspecified it’s a slam dunk win already. ;-)

  5. Jeremy from NJ Says:

    Obviously I am “they”!

  6. Chris Says:

    “they” being the media, and representatives of the government if they can get away with it.

  7. Tully Says:

    New info on the Little Rock shooter is that he’s been under active FBI surveillance since a recent trip to Yemen. Not quite active enough to save a life, I guess. Maybe a lone nut, maybe not. Maybe a knowingly manipulated nut. We’ll probably find out eventually, at least if there’s any evidence that rises to the point of admissability. Likewise with Roeder.

    No bets from me, Chris. “They” will undoubtedly at least raise the speculation. To me it becomes terrorism when you step past lone nut to group-supported efforts, even if only carried out by a lone nut.

  8. michael reynolds Says:

    Terrorism involves non-state actors using violence for purposes of political (using the word broadly) intimidation. It requires a supporting ideology. But it is also generally against civilian targets which this was arguably not.

    The Tiller murder was terrorism by all criteria, this killing is on the bubble, I’d say.

  9. Gregory Perrone Says:

    Mr Reynolds, the target was not a military base. It was a group of unarmed recruiters. The recruiters are not combatants, and therefore it qualifies as a civilian target. When police or US military go after recruitment campaigns of our enemies we do not drive up and start throwing lead, we use pshycological techniques, and propoganda.

    Has motive for the killings been determined yet? Motive is what will diferentiate this killing as terrorism as opposed to murder. Attempted terrorism is terrorism.

    The ironic thing about this act is that even if was intended as murder, the response to it developed it into a fairly effective terrorist act. The desired effect of a terrorist is political influence. A large response to their actions. As with 9/11, if the media, and the American people, would have muted their responses the terrorist act has no effect, and therefore fails. If the response is big, as it was in both of these cases, the campaign was successful.

    I have been in the counter terrorism community for a number of years now, and I can tell you. The proper response to a terrorist attack it to a) prevent it from happening. b) if you can’t prevent it, make the response immediate. c) if you can’t make the response immediate, openly ignore it!

    This will disarm the terrorist attack on all fronts. You will minimise casualties, possibly eliminate future terrorist opportunities, and minimise the political influence the action has on the target. We should quit giving these people ammunition. If we keep treating them like a legitimate army of a soveriegn state then we simply make them stronger!

Leave a Reply


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.

Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.

One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.

Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.

Related Posts: