I’m hoping this is just a case of a crazy man acting independently and not affiliated with AlQueda.
A British tourist has been killed and five others wounded when a man opened fire on them in Amman, a Jordanian government spokesman said. The other tourists injured in the attack were two British women, an Australian woman, a New Zealand woman and a Dutchman.
A security source said a man, identified as an Iraqi national, was arrested by police who cordoned off the site of the attack near the Roman amphitheatre in the central area of the capital.
“I was walking when I saw someone pull out a pistol from his pocket and start shouting Allahu Akbar (God is Greatest) and fire repeatedly,” Mohammad Jawad Ali, an Iraqi who witnessed the shooting, told Reuters. “Then I saw one tourist who appeared to be dead and three who were injured. They were in a group of seven. A woman told me they were tourists from New Zealand and England.”
Jordanian police and officials had no immediate comment and no group claimed responsibility for the attack. [source]
According to Jordanian Al-Ghad newspaper, Interior Minister Al-Fayez has denounced the “terrorist act”…“in the name of the King, government and people”. Earlier reports that it was “two gunmen” (one of them Iraqi) have been denied (corrected).
Al-Ghad also reports according to witnesses that there were 13 to 15 shots fired; the gunman emptied an entire round and then reloaded. It also reported that a police sergeant was injured when trying to apprehend the terrorist who was soon after brought down and captured by street vendors at the entrance of the Roman theater as well as a street cleaner.
Update #2: An official source has leaked the name of the terrorist as Nabil Ahmad Isa Jaora, born 1968 of Jordanian nationality.
This is really a bad news! I am glad they captured him.
Like you, I hope this is just a crazy man as well.
Well, I will wait for the Travel Alert email that will most likely go out tomorrow to every employee in the company (and many other companies) in the US, “advising” them not to travel to Jordan.
This is the price we jordanians have to pay for the our government’s little tortoure shops. But who cares, right? after all, those who make these terrible decisions on our behalf and without our consent are protected by snipers and armored vihecals and machine guns. We the average jordanains who have to bear the brunt of this insecurity.
Ahmad, nothing justifies terrorism.
how is this terrorism?
just a crazy guy with a gun..
This is absolutely insane! brainwashing seems to be taking precedence over common sense!
Ahmad, nothing justifies such vulgar act!
Basil, hmm…in a way, you do have a point! there is a serious case of misuse of the term…it’s almost sickening!
By the way, why is this incident immediately considered a “terrorist act”, even by our government (according to Al Ghad), while in most likelihood what it is is an isolated hate crime?
would it have made a difference if instead of a gun he had an uzi and he shot up a whole crowd of foreigners killing 20 maybe? the man went up to these foreigners, emptied an entire round of bullets while yelling allahu akbar. do i need to draw a picture? whether he acted alone or was part of a group, it is an act of terrorism. had he killed a Jordanian one might say its just another crime, but targeting tourists in a tourist destination strengthens the definition or at least the parameters of terrorism a bit.
Not sure what you’re getting at. I don’t think anyone here denies that there essentially is no difference between the crime that took place and the one that you describe.
I disagree, according to the legal definition of what a terrorist act is, the perpetrator must have one of the following objectives in mind when carrying or planning the act:
Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã˜Â§Ã˜Â®Ã™?Ã˜Â§Ã™? Ã˜Â¨Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã™?Ã˜Â¸Ã˜Â§Ã™? Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã˜Â¹Ã˜Â§Ã™? Ã™?Ã˜ÂªÃ˜Â¹Ã˜Â±Ã™?Ã˜Â¶ Ã˜Â³Ã™?Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã˜Â© Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã™?Ã˜Â¬Ã˜ÂªÃ™?Ã˜Â¹ Ã™?Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã™?Ã™? Ã™?Ã™?Ã˜Â®Ã˜Â·Ã˜Â± Ã˜Â§Ã™? Ã˜ÂªÃ˜Â¹Ã˜Â·Ã™?Ã™? Ã˜ÂªÃ˜Â·Ã˜Â¨Ã™?Ã™? Ã˜Â§Ã˜ÂÃ™?Ã˜Â§Ã™? Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã˜Â¯Ã˜Â³Ã˜ÂªÃ™?Ã˜Â± Ã˜Â§Ã™? Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã™?Ã™?Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã™?Ã™? Ã˜Â§Ã™? Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã˜ÂªÃ˜Â£Ã˜Â«Ã™?Ã˜Â± Ã˜Â¹Ã™?Ã™? Ã˜Â³Ã™?Ã˜Â§Ã˜Â³Ã˜Â© Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã˜Â¯Ã™?Ã™?Ã˜Â© Ã˜Â§Ã™? Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã˜ÂÃ™?Ã™?Ã™?Ã˜Â© Ã˜Â§Ã™? Ã˜Â§Ã˜Â¬Ã˜Â¨Ã˜Â§Ã˜Â±Ã™?Ã˜Â§ Ã˜Â¹Ã™?Ã™? Ã˜Â¹Ã™?Ã™? Ã™?Ã˜Â§ Ã˜Â§Ã™? Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã˜ÂªÃ™?Ã˜Â§Ã˜Â¹ Ã˜Â¹Ã™?Ã™? Ã˜Â§Ã™? Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã˜Â§Ã˜Â®Ã™?Ã˜Â§Ã™? Ã˜Â¨Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã™? Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã™?Ã˜Â·Ã™?Ã™? Ã˜Â¨Ã™?Ã˜Â§Ã˜Â³Ã˜Â·Ã˜Â© Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã˜ÂªÃ˜Â®Ã™?Ã™?Ã™Â Ã˜Â§Ã™? Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã˜ÂªÃ˜Â±Ã™?Ã™?Ã˜Â¨ Ã˜Â§Ã™? Ã˜Â§Ã™?Ã˜Â¹Ã™?Ã™Â
So far we have not heard of any evidence that this incident was the result of planning on the level of organized crime with any of the objectives listed above. So far there is no reason to believe that this man had the objective of disturbing the public safety or obstructing the law or influencing government policy or threatening national security. So far the only objective that is clear is to kill or injure foreigners and that doesn’t qualify it to be a terrorist act.
Now, I don’t believe calling it either makes any difference in terms of the severity of the crime itself or how it must be punished. But I do believe there are other consequences to calling it this or that. The most relevant of all is the impact on Jordan’s tourism. Data that shows one terrorist attack taking place in a certain touristic destination has a lot more negative impact on tourism there than data that only speaks of one hate crime.
It would have been smarter for the police or whoever was in charge of making official statements (if such a person existed shortly after this incident) to simply state the facts that “a man armed with a gun opened fire on a group of people who were all tourists and killed one of them while injuring others”, and then in responce to the obvious questions asked of “was this a terrorist act?” they would respond “so far there is no reason to suspect any involvement of terrorist organizations and it looks more like an isolated homicide case. It is more likely that this is a hate crime.”
Naseem, the truth of the matter is how we catergorize incidents, people responsible and invovled matters – and it matters a whole lot … 10-15 years ago, terrorist would not have even been used to describe the man who fired at a crowd of tourists…it would’ve been reported as a man armed with a gun fired shots at a group of tourists in downtown Amman killing x and injuring x …
Why are we employing western media rhetoric and for what purpose exactly?
Weird, I tried to reply but it flagged my comment as spam :s Can you still see messages that were flagged?
10, 15 years ago? are you kidding me? when the pflp blew up planes in queen alia airport in the 1970’s, was the word “terrorism” used at that time just western media rhetoric? if the amman bombings took place 10, 15 years ago would we have said it was not 3 suicide bombers and it was not an act of terrorism…that it was “3 men strapped with bombs blew themselves up in 3 hotels”?
terrorism is terrorism is terrorism. the western world can define every Muslim or Arab as a terrorist for all I care. For me personally, someone who opens fire on a crowd of tourists is a commiting and act of terrorism. i’d also consider it treason against the nation and it’s people.
What a comparison … you’re comparing blowing up planes and hotels to a criminal firing at a crowd of people leaving one dead and a few injured (not to say that this is not considred a crime..but surely it shouldn’t be classified as a terrorist act!..that’s purely irresponsible on the gov’t side and media’s side…it’s almost as though arabs can’t wait to have something like this to happen so they can go to the west and say see! we’re victims of “terrorism” too) and 10-15 yrs ago, the term was never used in the extent that it is used these days … it has gotten to the point that if one sneezes, he’s categorized as committing some type of terror act…
and so it turns out that this man has past criminal history!
whats the difference? whats the difference between one victim, 60 victims or empty planes? what is the difference between one gunman or 3?
when someone weilds a weapon with an intention to kill for a specific puprose that purpose is what is defined. had he killed his sister and turned himself in, it would be deemed an “honor” crime. specifically targeting toursists with the intention of killing them for the mere fact that they ARE tourists, is an act of terrorism. he didn’t sneeze, he killed someone…there is a difference, there is an intention, there is a target and there is a mindset.
and newsflash…in case you haven’t noticed we ARE victims of terrorism. we are the biggest victims of terrorism. more muslims and arabs die of terrorism than anyone else in the world. what is the alternative to not saying we are victims of terrorism? tell the world that it was just some ordinary man taking a stroll with his revolver and misfired?
zarqawi had a criminal history too, literally.
and a more urgent newsflash: israel is the biggest terrorist nation on the face of this earth …yet it’s never classified as such…state terrorism practiced on palestinians daily for 58yrs and counting…yet some don’t mind mourning the dead PMs of a terrorist state…What are we doing to bring to the world’s attention that we ARE victims of terrorism and continue to be? we are jumping at any opportunity that doesn’t even come close to REAL terror classifying it as terrorism and in return reinforcing the idea that WE ARE the terrorists… and i guarantee that if an israeli mad man fired shots at a group of tourists in the heart of tel aviv, the act nor the man would be referred to as terrorist by the israeli gov’t nor media…
Iman, there is a difference between a terrorist state and an act of terrorism. moreover, to throw Israel into this mix is a bit absurd. I am talking about Jordan and how we view terrorism. Israel doesn’t even acknowledge the existance of a Palestine so forgive me if I am not as prepared as you are to jump on their bandwagon of definitions and worldviews. also, it doesn’t reinforce anything…it is an acknowledgement of a greater reality that there are terrorist elements within our own societies…the idea is not to spin it in the media and by doing so sweeping it under the rug, but to bring it to the forefront and to acknowledge that these elements need to be rooted out. the first step is calling a spade a spade otherwise we’re just dancing around the obvious.
I tend to agree with Nasim that terrorism is the same regardless of how many died due to a terrorist act. If that man was capable of hurting more people he would have gone for it.
I forgot to metnion my deepest condolences to victim’s family!
And that’s exactly the problem with the Arab world!
How so? (and this addresses the above as well!)We should actually take a few lessons from israel and its people…it may do our image a bit of good … no way would israel calssify the same act committed by a jew or israeli in tel aviv or jerusalem as a terrorist attack! anyway, it so happens that the gov’t retracted what it said earlier and ruled terrorist attack out! People, we have to understand that jumping to conclusions and calssifying something like this incident as a terrorist attack is dangerous! Arabs’ and Muslims’ image does not need more of the same… inflicted blindly from our own people…
Right!! and the Arab version of war on terror begins!
funny how we insist that we should be taking lessons from the same people we demonize. funny how we insist on taking those lessons when it suits our needs. an israeli walks into a palestinian church or mosque and shoots up the joint and they say the man was just crazy, not an act of terrorism. this is who we should be taking our cues from when it comes to ethical behaviour?
it wasnt a retraction: the government said he had no ties to a terrorist organization. it doesn’t mean that what he did was not an act of terrorism. you don’t have to be a card carrying member of a larger organization to committ such an act.
so basically there are no elements of terrorism in our own societies right? all the terrorists happen to be japanese now? everything it fine and dandy.
it’s funny…we have this cancer that’s growing and we refuse to acknowledge it. we refuse to even put language to it and by doing so it’s like we’re pretending it doesn’t exist.
funny yet more sad and yet more appalling how we succumb to those same people we demonize.
funny yet more sad and even yet more disgraceful how we’ve become its puppet ( a more appropriate term would be bi*ch)
LOL! Actually considering how we seem to be on ‘good diplomatic’ relations with them, and more recently how we’ve adopted the US & israel’s war on ‘terror’ then I don’t see why it should stop here! so yes! for they are more ethical when it comes to their own people.
And the cancer that growing – aside from israel is our own ignorance, impotence and our some of our own … leaders!
more usual puppet talk
your political intuitions are frightening and redundant iman. if you prefer to take every single conversation about jordan into the usual “oh jordan is evil” and “oh jordan should be blamed for everything” and “oh i hate the king” then its best we end such a futile conversation here before it expands into more useless banter.
I’m not alone…
Pardon me, would you mind doing me a favor?! point out where I stated that?
It is best, for you seem to have a complex of some obvious sort!
and that’s the scariest part
I did’t say you said it…I said if you prefer to take it in that direction. You’re aware this isn’t our first conversation ever, right?
ah ending it with a psychological analysis, the signs of a well argued point.
you’re awesome 😉
Apparently he wanted to avenge his slain brothers by attacking those who had absolutely nothing to do with it.
What logic is that?
Dumb people, I swear.