Posted on 09/25/2003 10:13:31 AM PDT by quidnunc
The arrest of two Muslim-American servicemen based at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, (a developing story originally broken by this newspaper), raises some complex questions about the conflicting loyalties of Muslim-American soldiers in the war against radical Islamic terror. Dueling it out are two policy imperatives dear to our tradition of government: equal treatment of all regardless of race and religion, and the need to guarantee national security. The threshold must be high for a policy to curtail one of these fundamental values in favor of defending the other — but it is a threshold that can be met in extreme cases. The ancient imperative of self-defense is such a case, but it remains to be seen whether we have reached that situation.
The complex connections between terrorist organizations, Islamic charities and some mainstream Muslim groups bring up the uncomfortable issue of whether Muslim chaplains and men in the ranks should be treated differently than recruits of other faiths. The military is confident in checking with the Vatican to confirm the character of a Catholic priest, but relying on the judgment of Muslim groups has proven to be less reliable.
Trouble was bound to happen eventually, as the military has sought assistance to approve chaplains from Muslim groups that are themselves questionable. According to Robert Spencer, author of the new book "Onward Muslim Soldiers," the Air Force "in July 2002 asked for help recruiting Muslim chaplains from the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). ISNA is subsidized by high-placed Saudi Wahhabis. Many Muslim military chaplains have been trained by the American Muslim Foundation's American Muslim Armed Forces and Veteran Affairs Council; the AMF has been investigated for suspicions of funding terrorism." Because of this system, many Muslim chaplains in the U.S. military have strong Wahhabi beliefs. The risk of conflicting loyalties is not limited to the chaplain corps.
Considering that there are only approximately 4,500 Muslims in uniform, their record of religious-based crimes is significant. The most notorious case of conflicting loyalties was that of Sgt. Hasan Akbar, who killed two of his commanding officers in a grenade attack in Kuwait last winter and shouted, "You guys are coming into our countries, and you're going to rape our women and kill our children." As Mr. Spencer pointed out to us yesterday, "He explicitly identified himself as a Muslim, and not an American."
The author provides other serious examples of enemies within the ranks. Naval Reservist Semi Osman was charged last May with illegally trying to become a U.S. citizen (he had altered birth certificates and other related papers) and possession of a handgun whose serial number was altered. Maj. Ali A. Mohamed, an Egyptian, joined the Army as a resident alien in the late 1980s even though he was on a State Department terrorist watch list. After leaving the Army in 1989, he joined Egyptian Islamic Jihad, worked directly with Osama bin Laden and was charged with involvement in the bombings of the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, in 1998. Army reservist Jeffrey Leon Battle was indicted last year for conspiring to wage war against the United States, and according to the Justice Department, "enlisting in the Reserves to receive military training to use against America." He planned to go to Afghanistan to join up with the Taliban.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
The Nisei performed honorably, loyally and bravely, but they were assigned combat roles in Africa and Europe, not the Pacific.
Recent events seem to demonstrate a need for a return to a more prudent policy.
In a more enlightened age, a high court ruled that islam was illegal in the U.S. and "religion" in the American Constitution and other official documents refered to Christianity, not those who follow an "imposter such as Mahommet" or anyone who bloddies a chicken over an alter.
Too bad we have given away the country to a "religious" free-for-all in the name of political correctness.
We don't. Is that concise enough for you?
So we just don't bother trying to prevent the jihadists from working their will on us as they conceal themselves within the American ummah, right?
What in the world are yoiu babbling about?
Nobody's advocating internment or mass-expulsion of all Muslim non-citizens.
What is being advocated is increased awareness that a not-inconsiderable number of Muslims living in America consider their primary allegience to be to Islam and not to the United States, and that these Fifth Columnists constitute a real and present danger.
This fact is incontravertibele, having been borne out time and time again.
No, not at all. Preventing our enemies from attacking us is generally a good idea. Do we do that by casting a wary eye on ALL Muslims? I would argue no.
Start with excluding non-citizens from countries that support terrorism. Proceed onto extensive background checks for the lowliest Muslim enlistee, with red flags for those who have studied Islam in the Middle East, or who are or have been associated with radical Islamic organizations and/or mosques.
Transfer certification of Islamic chaplains to moderate groups who have no history of ties to terrorist groups. Discourage the current recruitment techniques openly admitted by Islamic chaplains, and stop giving them soapboxes in the name of "tolerance."
In short, take the lessons learned from these cases and shore up our defenses, instead of hiding behind the same political correctness that gave us 9/11.
Stupidest thing I"ve ever head of in my life.
I repeat, how in the name of hell are we going to determine which are which if we don't look at them all with a gimlet eye?
The Justice Dept. is consistantly rooting out terrorists and their supporters who had previously been considered moderate Muslims loyal to the U.S.
Al Qaeda held classes instructing their operatives how to blend into their host countries' societies without attracting attention.
Notice if you will that nobody is saying "Death to all the heathens in the name of holy Christendom!"
Muslims — Muslims, not Jews or Hindus or animists, but MUSLIMS — killed almost 3,000 Americans on 9/11 and another 800 or so in the two decades prior to that to the general approval of the Muslim world.
They have not shown themselves to be worthy of the benefit of the doubt.
Again, we don't and can't unless we do exactly what you apparently describe. It is patently and obviously unfair. If you disagree, fine.
They were also all male. Do we start casting a wary eye on all males now, too?
I'm not arguing that people who claimed to be Muslim carried out 9/11; that is obvious. What I'm arguing is that not all Muslims are radicals and terrorists, and therefore, not all Muslims should be looked upon such. That's all.
I think what you're seeing on this thread is hyperbole born of frustration. No sooner is an American muslim arrested -- military or not -- than we are treated to a flood of "he's innocent!" "it's racism!" or specious diatribes about the first amendment. This started way before 9/11 (think cold-blooded killer H. Rap Brown, among others), fostered by the race-baiting liberal media and politicans who put campaign funds before country.
Incredibly, two years post-9/11 we're seeing the same apologies and spin from academia, media and politicians, and many of us who didn't know a turban from an abayah before 9/11 have had to fast-track some learning about Islam, and with the flood of books printed in the past two years, and the continual stream of vitriolic diatribes and bloodshed emanating from the Muslim world, it's not been a pleasant learning experience. What we've learned is more "sickening" and "frightening" than any comments on this thread.
There's a massive problem facing the western world, and no amount of wishful thinking is going to solve it. If America doesn't start taking some prudent, un-pc steps to protect itself soon, we can kiss our future good-bye.
Fair to whom, the Muslims or to the people whom their batshit-crazy, jihadist fellow religionists are trying to kill?
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.