O where, o where, did my 17 Afghans go?

June 18, 2010

Call me crazy, but isn’t this a problem? Even kinda-sorta?

Alert Issued for 17 Afghan Military Members AWOL From U.S. Air Force Base

A nationwide alert has been issued for 17 members of the Afghan military who have gone AWOL from an Air Force base in Texas where foreign military officers who are training to become pilots are taught English, FoxNews.com has learned.

The Afghan officers and enlisted men have security badges that give them access to secure U.S. defense installations, according to the lookout bulletin, “Afghan Military Deserters in CONUS [Continental U.S.],” issued by Naval Criminal Investigative Service in Dallas, and obtained by FoxNews.com.

The Afghans were attending the Defense Language Institute at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas. The DLI program teaches English to military pilot candidates and other air force prospects from foreign countries allied with the U.S.

“I can confirm that 17 have gone missing from the Defense Language Institute,” said Gary Emery, Chief of Public Affairs, 37th Training Wing, at Lackland AFB. “They disappeared over the course of the last two years, and none in the last three months.”

So, Muslim Afghans with military training and carrying valuable ID badges have just been going AWOL for two years? Umm… Jihad? Taqiyya? Shouldn’t we be a wee bit concerned?

Yes, but not quite in the way you think. From another part of the article:

A senior law enforcement official said Friday that the Afghans’ disappearance was more of an immigration violation than a security threat, saying there are no “strong indications to any terrorism nexus or impending threat.”

The official further said that an unspecified number of the 17 have been caught. “A number of these guys have already been located or accounted for by now,” the official said. “Some are in removal proceedings to be deported already. (Authorities) still need to locate the others, and that is why the bulletin went out.”

Okay, so some have been caught and they seem to have just been illegal immigrants, as opposed to jihadis. While FOX engaged in more than a bit of sensationalism in the headline quoted above, it doesn’t appear that this is some sort of mass jailbreak of jihadis with bombs strapped to their bellies, but something that happens often with a small fraction of the foreigners brought here for training and education.

Still, there are reasons to be concerned. Consider:

  • Because the captured Afghans had not committed acts of jihad terrorism does not mean they wouldn’t have, nor that those still out in the wild won’t. We must remember how Islamic doctrine enables the jihadist to dissimulate when in infidel lands to protect himself, conceal his real purpose, and justify his mission.
  • Those saying “there’s no real terrorism problem here” could be just as blinded by political correctness as those who failed to do anything about Major Nidal Hasan, the jihadist traitor who gunned down 14 people at Ft. Hood.
  • Even if these Afghans were not terrorists, even if they were just like “any other” illegal immigrant, the fact that we lost track of them and the restricted IDs they carried is another sign of our unwillingness to do what is necessary to guard against those who would pretend to be our allies. It’s another sign of how we are leaving ourselves inexcusably vulnerable.
  • Our complaisance in the shelter of our own vast power and our inability, even after 9/11, to conceive that “it could happen here” gives our enemies openings to attack us. Remember, on that day four jetliners were turned into deadly missiles by 15 Muslims armed only with boxcutters.

Thus the problem isn’t so much the 17 Afghans who have gone walkabout over the last couple of years (at least, I hope it won’t be much of a problem), as it is our apparent failure after nearly ten years of war with jihadist Muslims to take seriously the threat posed by those who are pretending to be our friends or at least be harmless. Because there is no magic device that can read the soul, we must be wary of those practicing taqiyya to insinuate themselves among us. And that means dropping the politically correct blinders and admitting that 17 missing Afghans with security IDs could be a serious problem.

Again, I am not saying all Muslims are terrorists; far from it. Most in the United States just want a peaceful life in a new land. But it is beyond dispute that the vast majority of terrorists active in the world today are Muslims who have chosen to obey the command of  Qur’an 9:111:

Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur’an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.

They’re still trying to kill us, so let’s not make it easy for them.

(via Obi’s Sister)


Islamists in the UK government? What could go wrong?

December 16, 2009

For several years now, Great Britain has been trying to deal with the growing radicalism in its Muslim population by bringing into government moderate Muslims who can advise the Crown as to the best ways to “reach out” and counter Salafist influence. Trouble is, the “moderates” they keep recruiting aren’t so moderate. Islamist Watch gives us two of the latest examples:

Not Jolly Good: Islamists in the UK Government

Is there any degree of radicalism that disqualifies someone from holding a sensitive government post in the UK? Probably. But it would be difficult to tell based on two recent stories.

First, Treasury official Azad Ali has begun advising the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) on combating Islamic extremism. Apparently his suspension earlier this year for blog entries steeped in — you guessed it — Islamic extremism presented no barrier to his joining the “community involvement” panel chaired by the CPS anti-terror chief. In addition to naming radical imam Anwar al-Awlaki, the email pal of Fort Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan, as “one of my favorite speakers and scholars”

And…

Second, there is Asim Hafeez, the new “head of intervention” at the Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism of the Home Office, where he is charged with “divert[ing] fellow Muslims from the path of violence.” However, Hafeez has been described by a knowledgeable colleague as a “hardcore Salafi,” one who follows a puritanical form of Islam. According to Harry’s Place:

A number of Hafeez’s talks are available online which appear to not only back up [these] accusations but also to suggest that Hafeez might additionally be a hard-line Islamist who wishes to replace the British constitution with “the Quran and the Sunnah.”

Do read the whole thing.

This is only the latest example of how, through a blind devotion to unquestioning multiculturalism and political correctness, we tie one hand behind our backs in our fight with the jihadis. For fear of seeming intolerant or bigoted against all Muslims (and for fear of angering those on whom we depend for our crack oil), we don’t dare inquire into what the people we want to place in sensitive positions might really believe. We turn a blind eye to the very real ideology of violent jihad, Islamic supremacism, and antisemitism that runs throughout the Qur’an, the hadiths, the writings of later scholars to the present day – the core of Islam, not a radical heresy or misunderstanding. At times, as at Ft. Hood, this leads to fatal results.

Do I think there are no moderate Muslims? Far from it. There are plenty who reject the jihad imperative and just want to live quiet lives among their neighbors. But there is a disturbingly large fraction who have taken Islam’s aggressive message to heart and support both the cultural and the violent jihad, seeking Islam’s eventual victory over Western civilization. We do ourselves no favors -indeed, we harm our own cause and that of genuinely moderate Muslims – by refusing to face head-on the ideological and theological challenges posed by Salafist Islam.

Screening for Islamist sentiments should be a basic precaution, hurt feelings be damned.


Ft. Hood: Why did Major Hasan do it?

November 20, 2009

Almost from the moment the news broke of the massacre at Fort Hood by a Muslim soldier, the mainstream press has tried desperately to explain it as anything but an act of Islamic religious devotion. Time wondered if stress had caused the psychiatrist to snap. Even as evidence piled up that clearly showed an Islamist connection, CNN was asserting a ludicrous theory of vicarious post-traumatic stress disorder.

Bunk. The man who screamed “Allahu Akbar” while gunning down soldiers was committing an act of jihad as a devout Muslim. But, aside from the sheer horror of the atrocity itself, a lack of understanding of Islamic doctrine makes it difficult to comprehend how someone who had been given the best of everything by his colleagues in the Army could then turn on them. How could someone practicing what we’ve been told again and again is a “Religion of Peace” shoot down a pregnant woman in cold blood?

Raymond Ibrahim supplies some answers. In a two-part article at Pajamas Media, he explores the Islamic doctrines that provided the intellectual and spiritual framework for Hasan’s assault. In the series, he looks at

  • Wala’ wa Bara’, the doctrine of loyalty and enmity, which requires of the Muslim absolute loyalty to his Islamic brethren and hatred of all things un-Islamic, including people. This is crucial to understand.
  • Taqiyya, the doctrine of permissible lying and deception, pretending to be a friend and ally of unbelievers while hiding the enmity in your heart.
  • Jihad. War for the sake of Allah.
  • Sakina. The peace that comes over the mujaheddin as he enters battle with the infidel.  By all accounts, Major Hasan displayed it.
  • Da’wa. Islamic preaching and proselytization in order to bring people to Islam. One of the few reasons under sharia law it is permissible for a Muslim to live in non-Muslim lands.

(Part One and Part Two.)

I can’t emphasize enough that these articles are excellent introductions to what is an all-too obscure topic. We can’t hope to defeat the jihadist enemy unless we know how he thinks. Otherwise we’ll again be left fishing for lame excuses when the next attack occurs.

RECOMMENDED READING: Mr. Ibrahim is the editor of The al-Qaeda Reader, a collection of translated documents written by Osama bin Laden and his deputy psychotic mass-murderer in al Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri. The first part collects essays aimed at other Muslims, marshaling arguments based on the Qur’an, the hadiths, and sharia rulings to justify their actions. The second collects propaganda aimed at Westerner, often very different from what they say when “speaking among themselves.” It’s dry, but I recommend it highly.


Do you think he’s a terrorist, or is he just weird?

November 13, 2009

Charles Krauthammer looks at the latest attempt to explain Major Hasan’s massacre of his fellow soldiers at Ft. Hood as “anything but Islam” -this time, as a psychiatric problem– and isn’t impressed:

Really? What about the doctors and nurses, the counselors and physical therapists at Walter Reed Army Medical Center who every day hear and live with the pain and the suffering of returning soldiers? How many of them then picked up a gun and shot 51 innocents?

And what about civilian psychiatrists — not the Upper West Side therapist treating Woody Allen neurotics, but the thousands of doctors working with hospitalized psychotics — who every day hear not just tales but cries of the most excruciating anguish, of the most unimaginable torment? How many of those doctors commit mass murder?

It’s been decades since I practiced psychiatry. Perhaps I missed the epidemic.

But, of course, if the shooter is named Nidal Hasan, whom National Public Radio reported had been trying to proselytize doctors and patients, then something must be found. Presto! Secondary post-traumatic stress disorder, a handy invention to allow one to ignore the obvious.

The “obvious,” of course, is that Nidal Malik Hasan was a devout Muslim who had chosen to obey the call to holy war against the infidel, the call to jihad fi sabil allah, and acted on it by gunning down 51 people, killing 14 – including the unborn child of the pregnant woman he murdered.

But we can’t say that. In our post-modern world besotted with multiculturalism, it is out-of-bounds to take a hard look and talk frankly about another culture or religion (unless it’s Western), such as Islam with its imperatives toward supremacism and war against the unbeliever. No, instead we have to repeat politically correct pabulum and invent psychological disorders that don’t exist, all so we can continue to ignore the jihadist elephant in the living room.

RELATED: The war goes on as the US moves to seize four mosques and an office building, all allegedly owned by Iranian fronts. Meanwhile, to others, Nidal Hasan is a hero.


Quote of the day

November 11, 2009

“We’re trained to shoot until there’s no longer a threat.”


A screw-up of colossal proportions, part two

November 11, 2009

In an earlier post, regarding the efforts of Major Hasan to contact al Qaeda prior to his rampage at Ft. Hood, I wrote:

It’s time for subpoenas to start flying. If this report is true, or if Intelligence passed on the information and the Army did nothing, then heads should roll and careers be ended.

We now know the answer – nobody told the Army:

The Pentagon said it was never notified by U.S. intelligence agencies that they had intercepted emails between the alleged Fort Hood shooter and an extremist imam until after last week’s bloody assaults, raising new questions about whether the government could have helped prevent the attack.

A top defense official said federal investigators didn’t tell the Pentagon they were looking into months of contacts between Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan and Anwar al-Awlaki. The imam knew three of the Sept. 11 hijackers and hailed Maj. Hasan as a “hero” after the shooting last week at Fort Hood that left 13 people dead.

“Based on what we know now, neither the United States Army nor any other organization within the Department of Defense knew of Maj. Hasan’s contacts with any Muslim extremists,” the official said.

Just to emphasize the mind-blowing incompetence this required, Ed at Hot Air reminds us that al-Awlaki was named several times in the 9-11 commission report as being an important contact for the 9-11 hijackers. We know also that he was the imam at a Virginia mosque attended by both Major Hasan and two of the 9-11 hijackers. And yet no one on the interagency task force that had learned of Hasan’s contacts with al-Awlaki thought there was a problem:

A person familiar with the matter said a Pentagon worker on a terrorism task force overseen by the Federal Bureau of Investigation was told about the intercepted emails several months ago. But members of terror task forces aren’t allowed to share such information with their agencies, unless they get permission from the FBI, which leads the task forces.

In this case, the Pentagon worker, an employee from the Defense Criminal Investigative Service, helped make the assessment that Maj. Hasan wasn’t a threat, and the FBI’s “procedures for sharing the information were never used,” said the person familiar with the matter.

Emphasis added. Excuse me while I go beat my head against the nearest brick wall.

UPDATE: Oh, looky here! Even more connections between Major Hasan and “people” being tracked by the FBI:

A senior government official tells ABC News that investigators have found that alleged Fort Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan had “more unexplained connections to people being tracked by the FBI” than just radical cleric Anwar al Awlaki. The official declined to name the individuals but Congressional sources said their names and countries of origin were likely to emerge soon.

Apparently the only thing Hasan didn’t do was wrap himself in flashing Christmas lights and skip through a park shouting “I’m a jihadi! I’m a jihadi!” How many clues did these schmucks need?

(via Hot Air)


The Ft. Hood jihadi explains Islam

November 10, 2009

The Washington Post has put up the Powerpoint presentation Major Nidal Hasan made to professors and students as part of his training at Walter Reed. The topic he chose was Islam, Muslims, and their relation to the US military.

hasan presentation

In it, he shows a good understanding of orthodox Islam and of the conflict devout Muslims may feel when asked to fight against other members of the Ummah, the worldwide Islamic community. Note his mention of the doctrine of abrogation and the progression of Islam from peacefulness through defensive jihad to offensive jihad. This is not a man who suddenly cracked and went berserk. Instead, he planned ahead of time what to do and knew exactly why he was doing it. This was not “pre-traumatic stress disorder” or “post-traumatic stress disorder caught from others.”

He chose to wage jihad against the United States because he believed it to be his religious duty, and his presentation -replete with citations from the Qur’an and the Hadiths- laid out the case for it. As Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch writes of Hasan’s understanding of Islam:

Islamic spokesmen in the U.S., if anyone asks them to comment on this at all, will dismiss it as an “extremist” interpretation of Islam and claim that no Muslims in the U.S., not one, believe in this understanding of Islam. But I guarantee you that none of the, not one, will offer a specific alternative explanation of the verses he cites, or of his doctrine of jihad, or of his understanding of Islam.

One wonders if this is what his imam in Virginia taught him. No, actually, one doesn’t.

I ask again: Why in God’s name was this man still in the Army? We are at war with people who believe in exactly the same things as Nidal Malik Hasan. Would they have let a devotee of Italian Fascism remain on staff in 1942? I’m not saying we should expel all Muslims from the military or place them all under surveillance, but until we honestly face the reality of the doctrines of Islamic supremacism and jihad (and Jew-hatred, and misogyny, and totalitarian collectivism) , we run the risk of another “Ft. Hood massacre” – or worse.

How many more have to die in the name of political correctness?