ISLAMIC JIHAD AT THE HEART OF THE US MILITARY
Friday, November 6, 2009 at 07:50AM 
OK time for an update on the mass murders committed by Muslim Army Major Nadil Malik Hasan.
The line being retailed by the media here in the UK is that he was an Army Major who was a psychiatrist. That he killed so many of his colleagues is attributed to a sense of "anger" he felt about how the US was conducting the war in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
There's a wee bit more to it than that, of course...
Terry Lee, a retired Army colonel who knew Hasan, told Fox News about a story he heard secondhand. He said a fellow colleague had told him that Hasan had made “outlandish comments” about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and US involvement in them and that “Muslims had a right to rise up and attack Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan.” “[He] made comments about how we shouldn’t be over there – you need to lock it up, Muslims should stand up and fight against the aggressor,” Lee added.
There are also reports that
At least six months ago, Hasan came to the attention of law enforcement officials because of Internet postings about suicide bombings and other threats, including posts that equated suicide bombers to soldiers who throw themselves on a grenade to save the lives of their comrades.
Quite the patriot, eh? If these stories are true WHY was he not behind bars?
The UK media skirts over the central fact that Hasan's Islamic background is a central and very disturbing element in this story.
He's not the first Muslim "with issues" who has served in the US military. You will, of course, remember Sgt Asan Akbar - as will the families of those US soldiers he callously murdered. Then there was Beltway sniper John Mohammad - another follower of the ROP who "had issues."
So, here's a question that the MSM will never ask but one that we should consider;
Is it safe to allow Muslims to serve in our military at a time when we are at war with militant Islam?
And while you are reaching for your keyboard, can someone point me to the links from prominent Muslim clerics castigating the actions of Hasan in unambiguous terms? That would be comforting to report - since it would show that Islam distances itself from this killer.
Some of these points may make uncomfortable reading, I do understand that. However those grieving the loss of family this morning are having to come to terms with the awful reality of Islamic Jihad at the heart of the US military.
Fort Hood, Hasan, Islam, US Military 
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (24)
I don't doubt that it is possible to be a Muslim and a patriotic American who could serve with distinction in the armed forces. But irrespective of who you are if it is known that you are posting comments like Hasan did then you should be out of the Army immediately. That shouldn't even be a question and I fail to understand why such a policy is not in place.
The second point concerns media coverage. It's amazing how everybody falls in behind the line. Reports I heard on the radio in Ireland this morning failed to mention his religion or his political opinions.
It is of course possible that he cracked up because of a bad review or was afraid of going to Iraq (but not of being shot in Texas!) Sure the truth has yet to emerge but the media's job at this point is to lay out the known facts and not to decide that some facts are too dangerous to mention.
Because more and more people are concluding that we can't trust the MSM on the facts. That's a disaster for us, for the media, and for democracy.
Terry Lee, a retired Army colonel who knew Hasan, told Fox News about a story he heard secondhand.
With such a reliable source, there can be no doubt about the motive.
Peter
I agree - but it may prove more reliable than initial reports from within Fort Hood.
"The UK media skirts over the central fact that Hasan's Islamic background is a central and very disturbing element in this story."
The New York Times doesn't even mention Hasan's religion in their report of the incident!
the US has succeeded in producing a better integrated Muslim community who identify proudly as Americans than probably most other Western countries have . It would be wrong to have a blanket ban on good American citizens who are Muslims from serving in the military. However, there must be absolute robustness in ensuring the safety of US military personnel that any individual behaviour which causes concern should lead to removal of that person from the military and no 'sensitivity' to any group should be permitted to prevent such action.
"Is it safe to allow Muslims to serve in our military at a time when we are at war with militant Islam?"
What a ridiciolous question. Now, if you had asked "Is it safe to allow militant Muslims to serve in our military at a time when we are at war with militant Islam?" then it would have been a bit more acceptable and actually appropriate in this case. The fact that this man kept his commission when making some of the comments that he did is very surprising.
Peter, Are you for us or against us? Uncomfortable reading though it might be David has a point. At times like this are we safe having Muslims serving with the Armed Forces? Sanitising the facts is no use to anyone.
Seamus,
As usual, you can be relied on to make your usual 'gesture apology'.
You question the wording of David's question,
Rather than :- "Is it safe to allow Muslims to serve in our military at a time when we are at war with militant Islam?"
Should it not have been :-
"Is it safe to allow Muslims to serve in our military at a time when we are at war with Islam?" or even -
"Is it safe to allow Muslims to reside here at a time when we are at war with Islam?"
I say this because it appears that when these tragedies occur, it is invaribaly at the hands of one of those so-called. 'peaceful muslims'.
Perhaps they are a silent majority within their communities for the reason that they do not wish to reveal their real intentions, and wish to appear 'peaceful' until such time as they are ready to commit such acts.
Our liberal cogniscenti seem so imbued with the multicultural philosophy, or perhaps they are just so congenitally stupid, that they totally ignore the obvious dangers of keeping vipers in the nest! As they used to say - 'Stupid is as stupid does'.
The very philosophy of Islam is 'militant', that doesn't mean they all walk around in uniform, or even spouting the latest hate slogans, - it does mean they will fight when required...l
I read of militant islamists outside a mosque in manhattan preaching the sort of stuff hamza preached. Looks like America is in the same situation as western Europe, and yet one can read stuff like this on this board.
We need to take a lesson from our American cousins and get up off our knees as a Nation State. We need to assert control of our own future. Instead of looking to politicians for answers, we should look within and then TELL the politicians what we expect from them. If we don't it will be all over here and all that remains of liberty and hope will be over there.
As a society too many Americans look to solve their problems, whether personal or political, with firearms. In schools, in restraunts and other places. Guns are a sickness at the heart of American society. Of course soldiers would have guns readily available on a military base, but there are members of society over there better armed than law enforcement.
This can't be blamed on Islam alone, this scene is being replicated far too often in the states, where people lift guns to slove problems, whether they're personal problems or political. Looking within and finding the answer in firearms - hardly an example to emulate.
but there are members of society over there better armed than law enforcement.
Good. That's as it should be.
Pete, I doubt very much you are a conservative, there is a strain of anarchism that runs through your postings, which is quite unsettling. I'll bet if there were guns freely available in Britain, you'd be tooled up in your own bunker and looking for a fight with everybody ;-)
A my gun is bigger than your gun society, would of course stop these type of incidents? - not.
The only solution to this problem is the mass deportation of all muslims from western nations, not a single one can be trusted.
I hope our Charles is okay. He works on that base, David.
Daphne
I had no idea. Can we find out?
G -
I'm both a conservative and a libertarian, with a minarchist hint here and a touch of anarcho-capitalism there.
What baffles me - given the irrefutable evidence that government screws up absolutely everything it touches - is why not everyone thinks the way I do.
A my gun is bigger than your gun society, would of course stop these type of incidents? - not.
Of course it would. These types of incidents are stopped fairly often. However they take place in the home and the MSM isn't interested in the happy news of an invader with a hole in the chest. Of course, until fairly recently the British people were the most heavily armed people to be found anywhere. At the turn of the 20th Century no gun legislation existed and Britons routinely armed themselves with pistols.
Remember, police officers were armed only with a truncheon at the time. Read an account of the robbery committed in North London by two Russian anarchists in 1909. They were armed, the robbery went wrong - and Edwardian Londoners shot back. The anarchists were pursued through the streets by a spontaneous hue-and-cry. The police could not find the key to their own gun cupboard and borrowed at least four pistols from passers-by, while other Londoners armed with revolvers and shotguns preferred to use their weapons themselves to bring the assailants down.
Read that paragraph again, G, and be astonished at the true history of British society that has been all but erased from memory. Neither Hungerford nor Dunblane could have happened today. In fact, Michael Ryan in Hungerford carried on shooting for four hours before the police got to him. No-one else could bring him down because through the 20th Century the British people have been greatly disarmed while the State has gifted its civilian agents with ever more firepower.
In fact, go and read Sherlock Holmes. Conan-Doyle armed him routinely. His enemies were routinely armed. Passers-by and strnagers were armed. Being armed in Victorian and Edwardian Britain was common for a Briton. But we don't know about it now, that particularly fascinating aspect of our history is quite inconvenient.
But back to Fort Hood.
If this mass murderer had been Joe Soap in a shopping mall instead of a government employee on a government facility, the MSM would now be broadcasting anti- private gun propaganda. Yes, it would, of course the MSM would do that.
Let's be clear; this was mass murder carried out by a government employee on a government facility using a government gun - so where's the anti- government gun propaganda?
>>this was mass murder carried out by a government employee on a government facility using a government gun - s<<
Pete, if he can kill so many people in an army based full of - I presume - armed men, it rather undermines the argument for having all customers in every McDonalds, every pub and every disco armed in case of some random attack.
What baffles me is how someone with a head like yours can write so well :) I liked the bit about Holmes.
is why not everyone thinks the way I do.
I am so glad they don't pete. Lots of things happened in Victorian London and Victorian times that have gone today. We do not have a 'light tax', and if it is not paid they would board up the windows of the room a family lived in. We don't have servants living below stairs, nor kids climbing the chimneys of the wealthy to clean them, and old traditions like wearing 'Sunday best' have gone. Some things that are gone, we can be sorry about, and some things we can be glad about. That guns have gone is a good thing imo.
Let's be clear; this was mass murder carried out by a government employee on a government facility using a government gun - so where's the anti- government gun propaganda?
But the majority of such attacks are not happening in military bases, they're happening in schools and uni's, restraunts and other social places where people gather, where they ought to feel safe. When I went to school, it felt like an oasis, there you could learn and be free to learn without some other kid or nutter opening fire on the teacher. It's bad enough now that teachers can be attacked physically, without guns coming into the mix.
Such little vignettes, like you have posted above are enjoyable to read, but they don't actually make a case for the mass arming of society, nor do they make a case to stop such scenarios as this one from happening again.
If we go by your thinking and allow arms as freely as they do in the states, scenes like this and worse would be the norm in Bradford, Leeds and Birmingham, soon to arrive in Darlington, and other military towns.
This government employee was a product of US society, he looked within, and like too many of his fellow country men, found the answer in firepower, not politics nor negotiation, nor anything else. The gun is the answer to all problems, and has become for a lot of Americans, mightier than the dollar or the sword, or anything else.
I've emailed him, no response yet. I'll let you know if I hear back.
This was an islamic terrorist attack. He was yelling Allah Akbar before he opened fire.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_FORT_HOOD_SHOOTING?SITE=TXDAM&TEMPLATE=HOME.html&SECTION=HOME
I was thinking of Charles last night., yes, as he had recently spoken of his new job at Fort Hood.
Hopefully, he is not speaking as he, a pharmacist, has more important things to do at the moment.
Say a prayer, guys.
So if I shouted the queen is my hero while shooting 6 kinds of hell out of the local mall it would be a monarchist attack?
it's true that most Muslims will be faithful to their country and constitution but it's also true that some will be traitors and more so in the cause of their religion. most religions fail to understand the vigor and intensity of a Muslim's religious duties. early Christians showed this intensity of call of religion but not at Muslims' level. that Muslims have retained the early vigor and intensity is frightening for all countries which have Muslim presence. only china perhaps has displayed the courage and determination to confront this phenomenon. so ultimately the clash of civilization will be between Muslims and the Chinese. what a prospect!
Sean,
"So if I shouted the queen is my hero while shooting 6 kinds of hell out of the local mall it would be a monarchist attack?"
I don't think so Sir..
You would have been restrained and sedated first.
then they would have phoned around the nearest secure hospitals to see if one of their patients was missing...
The Muslims who do serve in our armed forces are loyal and patriotic, although no doubt among them are a few bad seeds. We also have Christians, Jews, and Atheists who have a few bad seeds among them.
Let's be clear; this was mass murder carried out by a government employee on a government facility using a government gun - so where's the anti- government gun propaganda?
So it was Obama's fault - I thought so as soon as I heard about it.
Pete, you become more and more a right-wing ideologist buffoon. You are capable of better.
Please stop and think before you post.