Distinctions of terrorism matter: Analysis

Terrorism analysts quickly took to Twitter to voice their doubts. Wrote J.M Berger: “It’s not totally impossible that a 64-year-old white guy from Mesquite is an ISIS supporter, but it’s pushing the envelope pretty hard.”

Aymenn Jawad al-Tamimi, a British researcher wrote: “My advice for people is to wait & see before leaping on it to make a polemical point.”

The FBI soon after said they had found no links, although the investigation continues.

Meanwhile, in Edmonton, there was little hesitation in calling the Sunday attack outside a football game an act of terrorism. Daesh’s black flag was found in the Chevy Malibu the suspect had used to ram a police barricade and strike Const. Mike Chernyk.

Yet, Daesh did not claim this attack. Or they haven’t yet anyway.

RCMP Supt. Stacey Talbot said Monday that while the investigation is ongoing, suspect Abdulahi Hasan Sharif has not yet been charged with terrorism-related crimes, but five counts of attempted murder, along with vehicular and gun offences.

Alexandre Bissonnette, facing six counts of murder for the January Quebec City mosque shooting, also does not face terrorism offences, despite the fact that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said, “Make no mistake — this was a terrorist attack.”

So do these distinctions of terrorism matter?

Yes. And no.

Terrorism, as a label in a post-9/11 world, is politically and legally fraught.

But no matter how a crime is classified, murdering Muslims in a mosque, or hitting a police officer in a car, or massacring people at a Vegas concert all creates terror.

But here are the distinctions:

Legal

As Ottawa law professor Craig Forcese writes on his blog, pursuing a terrorism offence requires “proof of motive and purpose — the violent act is not enough.” If an offence such as murder can be proven without a reasonable doubt, pursuing a terrorism charge that may not add to the length of a sentence, could be seen as unnecessary, or make a straightforward case complicated.

Political

But as Forcese and others have noted, this can create the narrative of a double standard whereby only Muslims are charged for Al Qaeda-affiliated crimes. U.S. President Donald Trump, always quick with a Tweet, did not immediately offer Canada condolences in the mosque shooting, nor did he call the crime an act of terror.

Responsibility

Daesh doesn’t claim every attack and have certain criteria to verify. But recently there have been more frequent false claims, including the murders in a Philippine casino earlier this year. Police charged a heavily indebted Filipino gambling addict, and called it a botched robbery.

The Vegas claim — should it be completely unfounded — would be embarrassing for a group that has lost almost all its territory in Iraq and Syria, but still prides itself on its propaganda prowess.

“The linkages are getting sloppier and less rigorous,” says Canadian researcher Amarnath Amarasingam about Amaq’s claim. “They are trusting less reliable people to pass along contact information and so on, which has led to some of these claims, which on the face seem utterly ridiculous.”