London bomber's uncle's strange 4 day conversion into a radical Jihadist.

[stickdog]

On July 12th, Shahzad Tanweer was the first terrorist suspect to be identified by name in the British press. The following day, Tanweer's uncle Bashir Ahmed was the first relative of any terrorist suspect to speak to the press. At the time, his reaction seemed a bit strange to me in that he was overly accepting of the press's contention that his nephew had somehow become a suicide bomber behind his back. Note that Scotland Yard didn't make its suspicions about Tanweer official for another 2 days.

Here's what Bashir Ahmed said on July 13th:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=355677&in_page_id=1770

Bashir Ahmed, 65, said the family of Shehzad Tanweer had been "left shattered" by the news that the 22-year-old was a suicide bomber. Speaking at the family home in Beeston, Leeds, he said: "The family is shattered. This is a terrible thing."

Mr Ahmed said it was hard for the family to accept their son had caused such loss of life, adding: "It wasn't him. It must have been forces behind him. He was a very kind and calm person. He was respected by everyone. He was intelligent. He went to university, Leeds Met, to study sport science. His plan was to go into sports."

Mr Ahmed said his nephew went to Pakistan for two months earlier this year to study religion. He denied earlier reports that his nephew travelled to Afghanistan and took part in training camps. "There is no way, I have seen his passport."

He said he now accepted the family may have to move away from the area. Mr Ahmed said his nephew, who had studied in Lahore in Pakistan, was "proud to be British". He said if he had known he was involved in any fanatical groups or organisations he would have put a stop to it.


More from Bashir Ahmed from the same July 13th interview:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/13/london.suspects.relatives/

"What drove him to it, who pushed him to it, I don't know. I wish I could find out. Our lives are shattered. It's impossible to describe it.

...

"We've had a pleasant time here, but I don't think we can survive here much longer like this. We were respected by the community. How is the community going to treat us now?"

"It's unbelievable," he said, saying Tanweer had "everything to look forward to. He had no reason to do something like that. He had everything to live for. He was in our life; his parents are loving and supporting. They had no financial difficulties. So I can't see how could he do that."

"It wasn't him; it must have been some forces behind him. He was born here," Ahmed said. "He didn't do anything other than British culture."


*****


Now, here's what Bashir Ahmed told the Murdoch owned The News of the World yesterday:

http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=44870&version=1&template_id=38&parent_id=20

"These suicide bombers are desperate people. They are not getting their rights. They can see that their brothers are not getting their rights, so they take extreme action. This lad has made a name for himself in the world. Muslims call it a sacrifice, the Europeans call him a terrorist."

Tanweer's uncle laid the blame for the rush-hour attacks on London's transport network at the feet of Prime Minister Tony Blair and US President George W Bush, warning, "There will be more."

Citing US policy in Iraq and the Middle East, as well as its treatment of detainees at the Guantanamo Bay base in Cuba, Ahmed told the paper that Western disregard for the rights of Muslims was driving young men to violence.

"Britain and America are saying that they will defeat terrorism. I am saying that terrorism can be finished in one second. Why can't Blair and Bush apologise for the way they have abused the human rights of Muslims. They should apologise. They should stop these injustices."


So the same guy who just a few days ago couldn't understand how his nephew had done such a thing, said that if he had known Tanweer was involved in any fanatical groups "he would have put a stop to it," and who bemoaned the fact that his family's life was now shattered and they would never again be respected in the community, yesterday somehow decided it would be a good idea to grant an interview to Rupert Murdoch's right-wing London tabloid to announce that he feels that suicide bombers are practicing Muslim self-sacrifice?

Who's zooming whom here?

[Igel]

1. Is it the "Arafat effect"?

Different audiences, different messages?

Or maybe he came up with a rationale in the course of a couple of days?

Or both? (Or something else entirely?)

[stickdog]

4. On your "different audiences, different messages" tack,

Bashir Ahmed also yesterday became the first named source to confirm ANY relationship between ANY of the hijackers other than the young neighbors Tanweer and Hussain.

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article299871.ece

Bashir Ahmed, Shahzad Tanweer's uncle, said Khan "groomed" his nephew in a gymnasium below the Hardy Street mosque near the family's home in Beeston, Leeds. "It was below the mosque and the only adult inside was Khan. At the time, no one had a problem because he was a respected teacher," he said.

[sendero]

2. I think..

.... if you study the "7 stages of grief" you will get your answer :)

[Greeby]

3. Or

Or maybe that the News of the World, of all the papers on a British newsstand, is not worth using for toilet paper. Anyone who'd use it as a source for news needs their head examined.

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. News of the World's 'reporting' already denounced by Tanweer's cousin

I have been disturbed by how the bombings have been reported in some parts of the media. I have watched how words have been twisted, strewn and bent into whole other shapes by parts of the media.

I was present at a meeting between Shehzad's uncle, Bashir Ahmad, and a reporter from the News of the World. I heard every word spoken be tween them. Three days later I read a conversation that did not take place.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1530736,00.html

[Mairead]

7. "Three days later I read a conversation that did not take place."

Exactly. They manufacture conversations out of whole cloth and, like the scummier tabloids in the US, have big legal departments to wear down and discourage anyone trying to get justice in court.

[stickdog]

5. So which of the seven stages explains describing the murder of innocent

Londoners as "Muslim sacrifice" to a right wing Murdoch-owned London tabloid?

Because I don't happen to see "make yourself into exhibit A for the speedy passage of anti-Muslim terror laws" on the traditional list.

[sendero]

9. ok

I didn't notice that this was "News of the World".

Never fucking mind.

[ikri]

8. If the News of the World

Printed that my own head was on fire I'd have a hard time believing them.

That paper usually prints Right-wing fear-mongering crap. They're masters of half quotes and quotes taken out of context. There's the line:

"There will be more."

Does this mean that he knows that there are more attacks or is this half a quote? Is he trying to back up the rest of his argument that appears later?

"They should apologise. They should stop these injustices.....There will be more (attacks unless they do)".

Taken as a single quote out of context you have a jihadist threat. Newspapers like the News of the World are as guilty for spreading hate and intolerance in the UK as the jihadists and nut-job neo-nazi types that read that paper.


I'd check very hard for the actual quotes that the guy used rather than what the paper added in its own opinion helpfully using the same italic text for both opinion and quotes.