The Chattanooga, still apparently, Shooting.

On Thursday (16/7/15) a lone gunman opened fire on US military recruiting offices in a strip mall in Chattanooga, Tennessee. He then drove around 11km (7 miles) to a US Navy reserve barracks where he opened fire again. The gunman was shot and killed at the scene but not before he had killed 5 US servicemen along with wounding another and a civilian police officer.

The US government's response to this was really one of blind panic. Initially they ruled out any connection to Islamist terrorism but then did an almost immediate U-turn and announced they were investigating it as a possible act of domestic terrorism. In the meantime it was announced that the jury had reached a verdict in the trial of James Holmes for the killing of 12 people at a cinema in Aurora, Colorado. However that verdict would not be announced for another five hours which suggested to me the jury were being told they were being given five hours to reach a verdict in what was really an open and shut case.

Although I long ago took the editorial decision to ignore him the Colorado shooter has become something of a cause celbre for America's extremely vocal "Black Lives Matter (BLM)" movement. Their main demand - illustrated by a poor cartoon widely circulated on Twitter - is that why when an Muslim carries out a mass shooting of this type it is labelled "Terrorism" and when a black person carries out this type of mass shooting it is labelled "Gang Violence" but when a white person does it their actions are labelled the result of mental health problems.

In the Aurora case the answer is quite simple. This particular white man had no connections to any criminal gang or indeed any history of criminal behaviour. Nor did his actions against civilians have any political dimension to them. However he did have a history of mental illness and prior to the shooting had been asked to leave his university due erratic behaviour.

Therefore I think it was entirely right that he was allowed to argue an insanity defence but I would have been very surprised if a properly instructed jury would have decided that his mental health problems were severe enough to pass the very strict M'naghten test of criminal responsibility.

I've always thought that the Colorado shooter was motivated mainly by ego and vanity and throughout his trial he seemed happy to revel in his status as a celebrity of BLM. To this end he grew a Salafi-style thick beard that he wore throughout the trial. The intention being to pose the question of whether we would have viewed his actions any differently if he'd been wearing that beard at the time of the shooting?

Despite the US attempts to cover up the shootings in Chattanooga the deceased shooter was quickly identified as Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez - a Muslim. The first photograph of him that became available was a police mugshot of him from an arrest in April 2015 which was a matter of public record. In that photograph Abdulazeez was sporting a Salafi-style thick beard and due to his intense stare and orange custody issue jumpsuit very closely resembled pictures of the Aurora gunman.

The fact that Abdulazeez was arrested for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) of either alcohol or recreational drugs would - to a casual observer - seem to cast doubt on whether he was a devout follower of a religion that bans the use of these things. However to people who are better versed in the subject matter this actually poses deeper questions about the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).

When I say that ISIL are not Islamic I am not being politically correct. I mean that there is Islam and then almost completely separate from that there is what ISIL are doing. One particular area where ISIL differ widely from Islam is in the use of mind altering substances such as alcohol that inhibit a persons ability to communicate with God and resist the temptation of sin. Muslims are dead against this whereas ISIL fighters make wide use of mind altering substances - particularly amphetamines and cocaine.

One possibly explanation for this difference for this is that the overwhelming majority of ISIL fighters do not come from Islamic societies such as Syria and Iraq. Instead they come from secular, western societies particularly European nations such as the UK. These children and grand-children of immigrants from places like Pakistan do culturally identify as Muslim and can recite the Shahada but don't really practise the religion. So for example they'll happily tell you about their duty to go and fight for ISIL but they will do so in a bar while drinking vodka and smoking a joint.

At his arrest Abdulazeez admitted to being under the influence of alcohol and marijuana. However he also had a white, powdery residue his nostrils. The police believed this to be either cocaine or amphetamine but Abdulazeez claimed it was legal caffeine pills that he had crushed up and snorted. With the amount of residue being so small and with it not being relevant to proving the DUI offence the police decided not to have the substance tested. I am however somewhat familiar with all the substances mentioned in the police report. In fact that is a little bit of a game - particularly in climate change circles - of guessing which one I'm under the influence of at any particular time. The most recent answer is of course caffeine. Lots and lots of caffeine. So much caffeine in fact it made me a little ill.

Details of Abdulazeez's background also began to quickly emerge and they very closely resemble those of Mohammed Emwazi - a naturalised British citizens who found limited infamy as ISIL executioner-in-chief under the name "Jihadi John." While the Emwazi family had initially emigrated to Kuwait from Iraq the Abdulazeez family had emigrated there from Jordan. However both Mohammed Emwazi and Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez were both born in Kuwait before both families were kicked out for engaging in extremist activity in the early 1990's with the Emwazis ending up the in UK and the Abdulazeezs ending up in the US.

When he was publicly identified a supposedly mainstream Muslim protest group by the name of Cage UK immediately leaped to Emwazi's defence claiming that he was just a troubled young man who had been radicalised by the British government's racist persecution of Muslims. The Abdulazeez family have since come out with a remarkably similar story of Muhammad Youssef being an all-American boy who suffered terribly at the hands of an abusive father. Fitting in neatly with the Aurora shooting story it is also claimed that he suffered with mental health problems.

Amid rumours that the Adbulazeez family may have to come Jordan as refugees from Palestine much of the initial investigation has focused on frequent and recent trips he made back to Jordan. This seems to be a reference to the recent scandal over the April 30th 2003 (30/4/03) suicide bombing of Mike's Place Cafe in Tel Aviv, Israel. This was carried out by two British Muslims who went down in history as the first British Muslims to kill themselves in a suicide bombing.

In the run-up to the recent 10th anniversary of the July 7th 2005 (7/7/05) bombings in London, UK it emerged that one of the suicide bombers - Mohammed Sidique Kahn - had travelled to Jordan and Israel just prior to the Mike's Place bombing. The Israelis suspected him of playing a role in that attack - specifically scouting a border crossing between Jordan and Israel that the bombers used. This information was passed to the British authorities. However no action was taken.

Obviously this could be an indication that that UK security services are so badly under-resourced that they were unable to follow up on the Israeli lead. Alternatively though - as you may have noticed from the rise of ISIL - western intelligence agencies do have a tendancy to find Islamist terrorism highly amusing. When it's happening to someone else.

In his then role of Foreign Minister the current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netenyahu was in London on 7/7/05. The fact he avoided the bombings by delaying departure from his hotel has spawned millions of conspiracy theories about the attacks being a Zionist plot some of which are just plain wrong while others are intentionally anti-semitic. As a result the entire episode remains extremely contentious.

Despite it being an attack against the US state - specifically the branch of the state dealing with war, the most extreme form of political dispute - with BLM having poisoned the debate of the past year there has been a long delay in declaring Adbulazeez's actions a terrorist attack. One thing that investigators are looking at is a text sent by Adbulazeez containing the segment of the Hadith 38 which reads; ""Whosoever acts with enmity towards a friend [wali] of Mine, I will indeed declare war against him."

Again this is highly contentious issue in discussions over Islamist terrorism. Although it's not as bad as Farsi Arabic is quite a flowery and metaphorical language. As a result the Qu'ran and the Hadith are both open to very wild interpretation. As a recent example the Egyptian government has published a style guide for journalists covering that nation's fight against ISIL. On thing that it recommends is that terrorists are not referred to as "Jihadists."

That is because under the mainstream interpretation of Islam "Jihad" is an internal struggle against sin. So for example you may want to drink, smoke and engage in casual sex rather then praying five times a day but it is your duty to wage Jihad against those impulses. However groups such as ISIL frequently try and use the concept of Jihad as an excuse to commit acts of violence against people who simply don't agree with them. Therefore by referring to ISIL and their ilk as "Jihadists" you help legitimise their interpretation of Islam. So I think the Egyptian government actually make an extremely valid point and I will endeavour to do better. However writing largely for a western audience I must surely be allowed the occasional rhetorical flourish.

This interpretation of Islamic texts issue is a nightmare for those trying to prosecute terrorists. That's because every time someone who is blatantly engaged in terrorist activity uses Islamic text as a code all the mainstream Muslims will line up behind groups such as Cage UK to argue that rather then using a term like "War" to mean war they were instead using it as a metaphor and accuse the prosecutors of racism. If this is a road BLM want to continue down they're really going to have to raise their game.

Despite there being no possibility of a trial to prejudice US President Barack Obama has still not found himself able to come out publicly to comment on this terrorist attack. As Obama did see fit to comment on both the Chapel Hill shootings and the Charleston shootings I find this extremely worrying and a symptom of his complete lack of leadership.

16:25 on 20/7/15 (UK date).