British suicide bomber no poster child for humanity

Abdul-Waheed-Majeed-kiddies.jpg

The Islamist ideology, which has spawned terrorist movements that increasingly threaten political liberty and and religious freedom across the globe, is seldom confronted directly in the current media, for reasons I won’t go into here.

But inevitably the Islamist extremists themselves, by means of the essentially fraudulent nature of their belief system, produce a counternarrative to their own rhetoric about purity, mercy, and love.

As a recent example, see the photo above, which shows British suicide bomber Abdul Waheed Majeed, posing with Syrian children at a refugee camp. Majeed, married and a father himself, reportedly sent this photo to his family of three children in England from Syria, according to the London Evening Standard. After leaving his home in Sussex for Syria about six months ago, the Guardian reported, Majeed detonated in an Al Nusrah Front suicide assault in Aleppo on Feb. 6.

Majeed was no disadvantaged cave-dweller or brainwashed teen, but rather, a 41-year-old British-born UK resident and an accomplished, literate student of radical Islam. English was his native language and he did not speak Arabic comfortably. Growing up in the UK, he must have been taught about Western values, including human rights and the rule of law — but just as clearly rejected them.

The Al Nusrah Front, al Qaeda’s branch in Syria, has established outreach programs and schools for children, as it tries to groom another generation for the jihadist ranks. The students will undoubtedly not be instructed in the fatal contradictions between the extremists’ rhetoric and their conduct.

Tags: , ,

8 Comments

  • Gaz says:

    Jihadists wouldn’t see it as a contradiction, they are following the Quranic verse of being harsh against the unbelievers, and merciful to one another.
    To put it another way, Majeed was probably being entirely honest in wanting to help those (sunni muslim) kids, and was also quite happy to kill himself in order to kill large numbers of infidels or apostates.

  • Bigot Bill says:

    “The Islamist ideology is seldom confronted directly in the current media”
    Pretty much every news outlet is confronting this ideology?
    The issue we should be confronting is regarding the unshaken belief of these guys. We wont ever defeat these people. They run into battle hoping for death!

  • Evan says:

    It’s not just their rhetoric that they completely disprove by their actions. Regardless of whether or not you’re a religious person or whether or not if you believe that Islam is a religion of peace, anyone who follows the ideology of hate, the ideology of murder, the ideology of Al Qaeda is fooling themselves. Fooling themselves into thinking that they can kill their way to peace, murder their way to paradise and Allah. But that’s just it. They don’t want peace, not real peace. They want a never ending, worldwide war. And they aren’t far off from making it happen. But the truth will shine through as it always must, and the thugs and murderers that fight for extremist ideologies will lose.
    A while ago I was reading an article with a jihadist in it who was trying to give his men a pep talk, and he was saying, we fight for jihad, we fight for Islam, what do they fight for?
    We fight for each other, and we fight for our people and for real freedom , not the kind that you and your mullahs preach, we fight for a better world, one free of senseless hatred, and evil ideologies spread by evil men. We fight so our sons won’t have to.

  • g says:

    Agreed and mind boggling. I guess he showed us.
    I am curious, though; what are the reasons the Islamist ideology is seldom confronted directly in the current media? Wouldn’t confronting Islamic leaders often and forcing them to stand with or against the radicals be the most effective way to educate all?

  • Dean says:

    Well, let’s keep in mind, Lisa, that humanity itself is no poster child for righteousness in God’s sight.

  • sundoesntrise says:

    Dean,
    I think we would all do better on this planet if we kept “God” out of our affairs and finally got our act together. Too many people these days, of various affiliations, keep mentioning the word “God” as if they are some type of authority or source of knowledge on it.
    How about we clean up our act, and fix our problems, then we can start making claims about supernatural entities afterwards? Sound good?

  • Jack says:

    Lisa,
    You are accusing this man of an act of terrorism. How is attacking a military target, Allepo prison (a target that would certainly be on USAs target list if ever they chose to intervene) – an act of terrorism? It certainly is not and act of terrorism by any definition of the tactic I’m aware of.
    If a suspected Jihadi does it, then it’s terrorism? Is that your definition? That’s a definition that may suit Assad but I certainly don’t think it’s helpful in understanding this conflict.

  • mike says:

    Jack I think one potential difference in defining an act of terrorism is the lack of caring if there is collateral damage

Iraq

Islamic state

Syria

Aqap

Al shabaab

Boko Haram

Isis