Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Arrested Muslim activist helped pick chaplains for U.S. military
Washington Times ^ | 10/01/03

Posted on 09/30/2003 9:32:30 PM PDT by kattracks

Edited on 07/12/2004 4:08:49 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

A leading Muslim activist arrested for reportedly violating U.S. sanctions against Libya once helped select and train Islamic military chaplains as part of a Pentagon-approved process being investigated by the Defense Department and Congress.

Abdul Rahman al-Amoudi, founder of the American Muslim Council and the American Muslim Foundation, was involved with the American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council and the Islamic Society of North America, two groups that selected and trained Muslim clerics for the U.S. military, authorities said.


(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: abdulrahmanalamoudi; alamoudi; amc; amf; chaplain; cuba; espionage; ethiopia; gitmo; guantanamo; guantanamobay; jamesyee; muslimchaplains; saar; treason; yee; yousefyee

1 posted on 09/30/2003 9:32:30 PM PDT by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kattracks
INTREP
2 posted on 09/30/2003 9:36:05 PM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Our enemies keep their doors closed to us, but we open our doors to our enemies.

3 posted on 09/30/2003 9:36:16 PM PDT by dinok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Why does the Washinton Times refer to Hamas terrorists as Muslim 'activists?'
4 posted on 09/30/2003 9:36:32 PM PDT by Dialup Llama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Bttt...
5 posted on 09/30/2003 9:49:14 PM PDT by Chad Fairbanks (<Tag>Something unspeakably clever</Tag>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dialup Llama
At this point, I feel I should just be grateful they're not referred to as "Palestinian Freedom Fighters."
6 posted on 09/30/2003 9:52:24 PM PDT by D-fendr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dinok
I've got great news!!

A new Pentagon-approved process is now in place!!

First question asked....

"Are you Muslim?"

"Yes"

"Well that is great. Here are your deportation papers, and a nice big bag of Spicy Pork Rinds for your trip. Now get the F*** out of this country you POS!"

LVM

7 posted on 09/30/2003 9:54:19 PM PDT by LasVegasMac (Those that live by the sword get shot by those that don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kattracks; Sabertooth; 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub; SpookBrat; VaBthang4; aristeides; P-Marlowe; ...
I'm a retired chaplain....retired 2 years ago so my info is current. The process for picking a chaplain works like this. 1. Aspiring chaplain contacts military about requirements for becoming a chaplain.

2. Military sends info packet that lists these requirements:

a. Graduate of accredited college.
b. Graduate of denominationally approved seminary or equivalent granting a master's degree or equivalent.
c. Full ordination in the denomination/religion so the individual can officially perform all religious rites and roles of that denomination/religion.
d. Completion of any denominationally required period of time serving in civilian setting.

3. Once the aspiring chaplain has met these basic requirements, he/she applies to their denomination to be endorsed to the military as an official representative of their religion.

a. The religion must have already established contact between its endorsing arm and the US Army. If the religion is too small to have an endorser, or if it is an independent religion, then there are endorsing agencies that have been established by cooperating independent/small religions/denominations.
b. The aspiring chaplain sends his/her application packet to his endorser requesting either active or reserve duty. The endorser then sends that packet forward to the US Army with a recommendation about what it thinks is its best qualified candidates.
c. The US Army Chief of Chaplains Office takes all the packets from all the religions/denominations and selects those applicants it believes to be best qualified for the rigors of Army life. Intellectual and Physical fitness are significant criteria.
d. Since the Army contains soldiers from many different religions/denominations, it bears in mind as it selects chaplains that there must be a balance reached denominationally. There are not quotas, however, for different religions. (In the case of a Muslim, for example, there is no quota for a Muslim. The Army bears in mind, however, that it does have Muslim soldiers, so it will keep its eye out for fully qualified Muslim candidates.

4. This problem with the endorser of Chaplain Yee being suspected of nefarious involvement with Islamic Terror is not really an issue for the Army Chaplain Corps. They are required by regulation (law) to deal with the official Muslim denominational hierarchy and its official endorsing agency. The Army Chaplaincy is a small branch (about a 1000 chaplains) and is in no position to investigate anyone, and in fact, have no such authority. Investigating terror suspects, secular or religious, is the responsibility of the FBI, CIA, etc.

5. The Chaplaincy is authorized to require a "secret" level background check on every candidate chosen to enter active or reserve service. This should probably be elevated to a "top secret" requirement.

8 posted on 09/30/2003 10:07:01 PM PDT by xzins (And now I will show you the most excellent way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper; dinok; Dialup Llama; Chad Fairbanks; D-fendr; LasVegasMac
ping to #8
9 posted on 09/30/2003 10:09:36 PM PDT by xzins (And now I will show you the most excellent way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: xzins; Fred Mertz; piasa
Last week, the Defense Department ordered a review of how it recruits chaplains, particularly Muslim clerics endorsed by U.S. groups with reported ties to radical Islam. The Islamic Society of North America and the American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council are the only such groups recognized by the Pentagon.

That's good news.

10 posted on 09/30/2003 10:10:22 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Ping for later
11 posted on 09/30/2003 10:14:09 PM PDT by The Old Hoosier (Right makes might.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Abdul Rahman al-Amoudi, founder of the American Muslim Council and the American Muslim Foundation, was involved with the American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council and the Islamic Society of North America, two groups that selected and trained Muslim clerics for the U.S. military, authorities said.

The very same al-Amoudi who funneled $50,000 to the Hillary! for Senate campaign, whereupon one of her little lackeys made sure to employ a typo for the records so that the American Muslim Council became the American Museum Council...

12 posted on 09/30/2003 10:14:54 PM PDT by texasbluebell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
It says there are 2 Muslim endorsing agencies.

There must be a difference between the two. For example, the Methodist endorser and the Southern Baptist endorser are different denominations, and since we are part of this culture, we instantly recognize that.

These 2 Muslim endorsers must be different in some way similar to a denominational difference: Sunni, Shi'ite, perhaps????
13 posted on 09/30/2003 10:15:23 PM PDT by xzins (And now I will show you the most excellent way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Get muslims OUT of the military.
Get muslims OUT of America.
14 posted on 09/30/2003 10:57:17 PM PDT by tubavil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LasVegasMac
In our dreams, Mac.
15 posted on 09/30/2003 11:02:42 PM PDT by Let's Roll (And those that cried Appease! Appease! are hanged by those they tried to please!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Cast the jihadists out!
16 posted on 09/30/2003 11:25:19 PM PDT by sheik yerbouty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: kattracks
Outstanding research by kattracks.

References to earlier posts with excellent links:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/992799/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/991964/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/991452/posts
18 posted on 10/01/2003 1:45:56 AM PDT by XHogPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Thanks for the overview.
19 posted on 10/01/2003 6:25:40 AM PDT by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz; seamole
No problem.

As you can imagine, I'm following Chaplain Yee's case pretty closely.

This doesn't reflect that much on the Chaplain Corps as it does on the agencies that do background investigations for security checks. I imagine that to get the Gitmo assignment, Chap. Yee had to have a top secret clearance. If so, then where are the red flags raised by that investigation?

I'm embarrassed for the chaplaincy because I think we are naive about the interplay between Islam the religion and Islam the political philosophy. There is no distinction between the two in the Koran. Our insistence on bringing islamic clerics into the active force is not necessary.

I believe this will lead to the end of the chaplaincy as we know it. In the future, I imagine chaplains being in the same position as media reporters.....employed by their own organizations, but embedded at time of war with extremely controlled access. That is probably the best way to do this in terms of the long-range security of the nation.
20 posted on 10/01/2003 6:36:00 AM PDT by xzins (And now I will show you the most excellent way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
According to Daniel Pipes, a review of all chaplains is being done, all 2800 of them apparently, and not just the dozen or so imams.

He calls it more PC'ism and a waste of resources when only the twelve should be given the once over.
21 posted on 10/01/2003 10:00:25 AM PDT by swarthyguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: texasbluebell
Do you have a source for that?
22 posted on 10/01/2003 10:08:22 AM PDT by kevao (Fuques France!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: xzins
I imagine chaplains being in the same position as media reporters.....employed by their own organizations, but embedded at time of war with extremely controlled access. That is probably the best way to do this in terms of the long-range security of the nation.

How would this work in a combat, CS, or CSS unit Chaplain? I, for one, couldn't see someone from within this system writing the Religious Support Annex to my unit's OPLANs during active operations, much less participating in the MDMP itself.

23 posted on 10/01/2003 11:13:31 AM PDT by LTCJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: LTCJ
You would have your 4 put together the religious support annex. It would be no different than bringing food to the troops, or even than bringing "Bob Hope" type entertainment to the troops.

He would establish criteria for bringing available clerics to the troops when the combat situation allowed it.

Those denominations that care about our soldiers would have volunteer clerics available at their own expense in the clerical pool...probably a Corps rear area. The military would be out of the business of funding chaplains, assistants, and religious programs.
24 posted on 10/01/2003 11:26:11 AM PDT by xzins (And now I will show you the most excellent way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: LTCJ
Incidentally, the only reason I'm even discussing this is because of security concerns regarding the loyalties of some of our chaplains.

I have a great love for the chaplaincy.

But I have a greater love for our nation and our troops. I'd rather we lose that special position we have being integral parts of units than have someone take advantage of a religious position to endanger the lives of our troops. Yee had a list of the GUARDS and who they guarded.

I imagine the intent to be extortion from some outside force. If guilty, that's worse than reprehensible. It's traitorous and deserving of capital punishment.

If the denominations have to prove again their love for troops by paying the way for their ministers to get to our battlefields, if the ministers have to prove their love for troops by volunteering for such a demanding missionary work, then in the long run you will have the truly committed who are bringing God's word to your troops.

That wouldn't be a bad thing.

25 posted on 10/01/2003 11:44:29 AM PDT by xzins (And now I will show you the most excellent way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
How much of that money went to Cynthia McKinney?
26 posted on 10/01/2003 11:51:15 AM PDT by Shermy (Show us the glove box.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
I'd hate to see this happen. Far too many CDRS & staffs don't employ effective religious support as it is. I think this would hurt the ones that do.

Truth is, I believe the only change that is required is the politically incorrect recognition of the true underpinnings of the "war on terror". Here I will indelicately say: after all, we didn't incorporate Political Commissars into our staff structure during the Cold War.

It offers a real pandora's box but such is the nature of our (End?) times.

27 posted on 10/01/2003 12:15:26 PM PDT by LTCJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: kevao
Do you have a source for that?

Hillary Donor, Terrorist Sympathizer, Arrested

28 posted on 10/01/2003 12:19:52 PM PDT by CFW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: LTCJ
after all, we didn't incorporate Political Commissars into our staff structure during the Cold War.

And let me quickly add, while it was a bit before my time, we had no problems incorporating Lutheran chaplains in the European Theater of Operations during WWII.

29 posted on 10/01/2003 12:19:53 PM PDT by LTCJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: xzins; aristeides
The Islamic Society of North America and the American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council

From what I've read, they're both wahhabi outfits.

30 posted on 10/01/2003 12:22:45 PM PDT by swarthyguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: LTCJ
Reading between the lines, I agree.

What is different with the Islamic issue is that Islam itself repudiates any governmental system except one founded with an absolute ruler, a Caliph, who governs via Islamic law.

There is no recognition of the spiritual being separate from the political. Jesus said, "My kingdom is NOT of this world."

And, yes, we must keep the end-times in mind. There is a great falling away and the love of many has waxed cold.
31 posted on 10/01/2003 12:24:44 PM PDT by xzins (And now I will show you the most excellent way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: texasbluebell
THE CHAMELEON PRINCESS
HILLARY'S GRANDEST LIE

By: William Mayer

Hillary Clinton is attempting to reinvent herself again which, all things considered, is not the worst idea she's ever had.

It's just that this time the effort is so bald-faced and obviously self-serving that we simply can't resist triangulating a bit in her direction.

"Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton warned on Sunday that the United States would "root out" any terrorist elements in Yasser Arafat's Palestinian Authority" Verena Dobnick, 12/2/01 Associated Press

What a curious turnaround for the junior Senator from New York to take; especially considering her earlier support for a Palestinian state presumably to be headed by "Chairman Arafat".

"Speaking by satellite from Washington...Hillary Rodham Clinton said today..."Well, I think that it will be in the long-term interest of the Middle East for Palestine to be a state, to be a state that is responsible for its citizens' well-being, a state that has responsibility for providing education and health care and economic opportunity to its citizens." In Washington, Marsha Berry, a spokeswoman for Mrs. Clinton, said that the First Lady was giving her own personal views and that they did not represent the position of the Clinton Administration." 5/7/98 New York Times

Before it became political suicide to support Arafat, Hillary was always and consistently to the left of even the Clinton administration on this issue, not only supporting a fully functional Palestinian state [all the trimmings; an army, independent foreign policy, ability to make treaties & kill Jews, etc.] but greedily seeking out accepting campaign contributions from noted Hamas activists.

"...her Senate campaign has returned $50,000 collected at a Boston fundraiser...The First Lady posed for photos holding a plaque given to her by the event's organizers. It expressed the appreciation of the American Muslim Alliance for her human-rights activism. Mrs. Clinton now says she didn't know the award was from the Alliance, even though the group's name was emblazoned on the trophy in large letters. "I get handed thousands of plaques," Mrs. Clinton now says. Alas for the First Lady, the American Muslim Alliance's national president, Agha Saeed...believes the Palestinians "have the right to resist by armed force"

A code word for terrorism that, when viewed through the lens of the 9/11 attacks, even Hillary can't hide from.

"...Her Senate campaign returned a $1,000 contribution from Abduraham Alamoudi of the American Muslim Council [Editor's note: Almoudi's organization was misrepresented by the Clinton Senate campaign as "The American Museum Council"]...Alamoudi declared: "We are the ones who went to the White House and defended what is called Hamas," the Palestinian terrorist group whose 1994 -1996 suicide-bombing campaign killed 130 people and wounded some 600 others. Shortly after one of its bombs exploded in Jerusalem in August 1997, Alamoudi told Fox News about Hamas: "I think it's a freedom-fighting organization." Deroy Murdock - Scripps Howard News Service 10/25/00

Clinton's ill-fated Republican Senate opponent, Rick Lazio, in an October 2000 speech to students at Syracuse University, clearly demarcated the wide chasm between the two positions.

"If there was ever evidence that Arafat is not interested in peace, the blood in the streets of Jerusalem is it," said Lazio, a four-term Republican congressman from Long Island. "The peace process is dying, for the time being at least, and responsibility for this lies squarely with Yasser Arafat."

Of course Lazio was branded as an extremist for suggesting that Arafat and PLO were mere terrorists but then the World Trade Towers were still standing.

“During Mr. Clinton's presidency, American Muslim organizations were welcome in the White House and Mr. Arafat had accumulated an enviable amount of frequent flyer miles from his trips to Washington" - Muqtedar Khan, assistant t professor of political science at Adrian College, Michigan

Frequent flyer miles indeed.

Yasser Arafat made more trips and spent more time at the White House during the Clinton years than any other foreign leader and who can forget the Rose Garden meeting where Bawdy Billy kept Yasser waiting nearly an hour while he got "spiritual counseling" from a certain ditzy young intern entrusted to his care.

One has to presume that since Hillary supported Arafat even more than her husband, that she did indeed also support Yasser's White House revolving door and there is no denying she wasn't exactly repulsed by his comely wifey.

More to the point, there does seem to be a disjunct when the former First Lady refers to Arafat - until last Sunday, she gave no hint whatsoever that she considered him a terrorist, preferring instead to lay blame among his associates at worst - as if the head didn't know what the hands were doing on the PLO body.

"Chairman Arafat said he would continue to do all he could to combat terrorism, specifically Hamas but other groups as well, and I am satisfied with the response he gave and I believe he will attempt to implement it". - Hillary October 1994

With no evidence to the contrary, and given her history, we must assume that she also supported her husband's reckless intervention in Israel's electoral process - which sent James Carville, pollster Stanley Greenberg, and media specialist Robert Strum to Jerusalem to assist Ehud Barak in defeating Binyamin Netanyahu.

On Yom Kippur Eve in September 1998 Clinton lied to Netanyahu to get him to sign the "Territory for Peace" accord at the Wye Plantation, promising the release of convicted spy Johnathan Pollard in return.

Members of Netanyahu's inner cabinet (Sharon, Sharansky and Mordachai) were present and confirmed the deal.

"Bibi went to Wye knowing that Clinton would immediately release Pollard with the signing of the agreement with the Palestinians."

The Senator from New York has admitted lobbying her husband to grant Pollard a pardon thus completing the circle.

When viewed separately the above noted facts showcase Hillary Clinton's cavalier disregard for both US security and the truth, however when taken as a whole they outline a damning legacy of deceit and treachery which is what the Clintons have always been about - they are inseparable allies in self-aggrandizement with an effete contempt for anything that stands in their way.


32 posted on 10/01/2003 12:25:53 PM PDT by CFW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: swarthyguy
If I remember correctly, wahabbism does not infect shi'ism as it does sunn'ism.

There should be something different in the religious orientation of the chaplains each of them would endorse. Not necessarily, though. I imagine that in an effort to accomodate Islam that the chaplaincy would be thrilled to get prospects from that religion from whatever source.

33 posted on 10/01/2003 12:28:15 PM PDT by xzins (And now I will show you the most excellent way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: kevao
And here is a great opinion by Jesse Petersen which was printed in the Washington Dispatch on Sept. 28, 2001.

The Terrorist Attack On America: Who Is To Blame? (the case against Bill Clinton)

34 posted on 10/01/2003 12:35:05 PM PDT by CFW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: CFW
Thanks for the links.
35 posted on 10/01/2003 1:40:42 PM PDT by kevao (Fuques France!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: kevao
It's a well-known fact. Just do a google search. It was/is/has been widely reported.
36 posted on 10/01/2003 2:18:47 PM PDT by texasbluebell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: CFW
Thanks for posting those links, I didn't have them at the tip of my fingers.
37 posted on 10/01/2003 2:19:50 PM PDT by texasbluebell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson