EDITOR'S NOTE: John Birch is a retired U.S. Army Intelligence Officer who held the rank of Major. Birch also was the founder and former President of Conceal and Carry, Inc. The following commentary is unedited and might include language not suitable for children.
What You Won't Hear From The Dominant Media
Guest Commentary by Retired U.S. Army Major John Birch
I am a former Intelligence Officer, and still get some pretty interesting information that I would say, while not classified, is "insider." I have a few comments on "Major" Hasan, and have appended some information that I think will enlighten the picture of what is going on in our military. Political Correctness carried to the extreme.
Major Hasan is an abomination. The place he martyred those soldiers is the same building I was in a year ago prepping to go to Afghanistan, only I was at Fort Jackson. This facility is a one stop building to certify soldiers for deployment to a combat zone. And it was there that Hasan chose to martyr America's best while yelling Allahu Akbar!"
But it is not terrorism, so says de facto President Obama and his, apparently, kiss ass generals.
Hasan attended the same Mosque as the 9-11 terrorists in Virginia. Yes, it is still a thriving Mosque. He only wore his uniform, or Muslim robes. Hassan received a poor evaluation, and promotion to Major (what? not back in my day, one bad evaluation and you were toast.) Hasan was counseling our young soldiers that we are at war with his faith. (I think we are, but we didn't start it.) Hasan had time to procure two weapons. And lots of ammo. A man who snapped? Sounds like home grown, domestic, Islamic, premeditated terrorism to me. And word is he was on leave, and in a zombie like state when he arrived on post. No one dares question a Muslim though. You end up in "Sensitivity Training" for life if you do. Islam is a religion of peace! LOL! If it were not so sad.
But the Army dares not call it terrorism. In fact, the Obama administration will not use the word terrorism anymore (overseas contingency operations, is the PC term du jour.) This is just a "violent tragedy?." A man who snapped because of combat he never saw, and never would have? I call Bullsh*t!
This building on Fort Hood was full of young patriots. You are only in the building to qualify for combat, or to qualify other soldiers for combat. Having been there, these are just older teenagers. Innocents! Now martyrs. They are mingled in with a few older Vets like me, retreads. I know he didn't just snap. He picked his target with precision, and now we can only mourn our honored dead.
None in the leadership of our US Army dare call it terrorism? Our generals have bowed to the new Messiah, the de facto President Obama. I am repulsed, and believe these martyrs may have died in vain, and for a false prophet.
In fairness, Obama's speech today at Ft. Hood must have been a great comfort to surviving families. It was well spoken. (I can't believe I just said something nice about Obama.) But Hasan was not disturbed or mental. He knew what he was doing. He was apparently in one of those Islamic trances they seem to be able to immerse themselves in. I wonder if his body was shaved?
"Allahu Akbar!" he shouted from a table top as he gunned down the unarmed sons and daughters of patriots. I hope and pray their precious blood refreshes the tree of liberty. And as for Obama treading on such sacred ground? I will show remarkable restraint for my disgust, good speech or not.
Expect to hear "Allahu Akbar" more, and more. How far can the American be pushed in the name of Political Correctness?
BTW: I don't think being in a shopping mall over Christmas is a good idea. What better way to wound our economy? Shoppers are lambs to the slaughter, protected by unarmed security guards.
John Birch
Major, US Army, Retired
With that I present, without attribution, one intelligence analysts view:
34 Clues to US Army Major Nidal Hasan's Motivations
"His motivations are unknown....."
"The motive behind the shootings was not clear....."
"Agents were trying to find a motivation for the attack....."
"It was unclear what the motive was....."
"There are many unknowns, most of all his motive....."
"The motive remains unclear....."
"It's too early to draw conclusions ....."
"It is unclear what might have motivated Major Hasan ....."
"The jury's still out on motivation....."
The media are still quite puzzled by Major Nidal Hasan's motivations that led him to gun down his fellow American soldiers at Ft. Hood. Yet in the same media's reporting, the below clues emerge. When gathered together, you would think the dots could easily be connected.
CLUES (sources: various mainstream media)
1. At the shooting, Hasan first bowed his head in prayer and then shouted “Allahu Akbar” (God is Great) as he shot over 50 soldiers in a calm and measured manner.
2. Store video the morning of the shooting shows Hasan wearing a traditional Muslim WHITE robe and hat. He had began wearing Arabic/Muslim-style clothing in recent weeks.
3. Hasan handed out Qurans to his neighbors a few days before and the day of the shooting, including giving a Quran to his neighbor at 9 am the day of the shooting, telling her, “I’m going to do good work for God” before leaving for the base.
4. A recent convert to Islam described how he frequently prayed with Hasan at the town mosque after Hasan was deployed to Fort Hood in July. They last worshiped together at predawn prayers on the day of the massacre when Hasan “appeared relaxed and not in any way troubled or nervous.”
5. Hasan told the convert that the ‘war on terror’ was really a war against Islam. Hasan also expressed anti-Jewish sentiments and defended suicide bombings.
6. During dinner the night before the shooting, Hasan felt he should not go to Afghanistan, that he was supposed to quit. “In the Koran, it says you are not supposed to have alliances with Jews or Christians, and if you are killed in the military fighting against Muslims, you will go to hell.”
7. Hasan’s deceased parents were Palestinians immigrants from the West Bank/Jordan. Hasan’s father was 16 years old when he immigrated to America and later operated a bar and grill in Roanoke, VA.
8. On a form Hasan filled out at the Muslim Community Center in Silver Spring, Maryland, he gave his nationality not as “American” but as “Palestinian.” Yet he was born in Arlington, Virginia on 8 Sep 1970. (See Allegiance in a Time of Globalization, DOD PERSEREC, Dec 2008)
9. Hasan has family in the Middle East, including a grandfather, uncle and cousins which he and they would visit each other.
10. Hasan’s cousin in the Palestinian city of Ramallah, Mohammad Munif Abdallah Hasan, said the Army major had wanted to leave the military because he felt disrespected over his religion.
11. His cousin said: “If he had killed one or two, I could say that he was defending himself. I could say that there could have been a problem between two sides which led to the use of weapons.”
12. Hasan visited websites espousing radical Islamist ideas.
13. Hasan made these kinds of statements to coworkers: Muslims have the right to rise up against the U.S. military. Muslims have a right to stand up against the aggressors. He spoke favorably about people who strap bombs on themselves and go into Times Square.
14. Hasan gave a presentation to military masters degree students in which he argued the war on terrorism was a war against Islam. This was in an environmental health class at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, MD. When challenged about what does his topic has to do with environmental health, Hasan became agitated, sweaty, nervous and emotional.
15. Hasan “made himself a lightning rod by making his extreme views known to everyone.”
16. Hasan was “put on probation early in his postgraduate work” and was “disciplined for proselytizing about his Muslim faith with patients and colleagues.”
17. Hasan was a “very devout” member of and daily visitor to the Muslim Community Center in Silver Spring, Md. Attended prayers at least once a day, seven days a week. (See Saudi Publications On Hate Ideology Fill American Mosques. Important reading for security professionals)
18. A friend who also attended the mosque said, “He was my role model when it came to the Islam life. He was so devout. He would come to the early morning prayers -- even in the summer when it began at 4 am or 5 am, the early prayers I wouldn’t go to, he would be there.”
19. Hasan wrote “Allah” on his door in Silver Spring, MD according to his neighbor.
20. Hasan wrote an internet posting defending suicide bombers: “.....Suicide bombers whose intention, by sacrificing their lives, is to help save Muslims by killing enemy soldiers. If one suicide bomber can kill 100 enemy soldiers because they were caught off guard that would be considered a strategic victory.....”
21. At the Muslim Community Center in Silver Spring, MD, he asked for feedback about a talk he had prepared for his Army supervisors on the role of Muslims in the military. Hasan argued that if military duties contradicted a soldier’s religion, the soldier should be released from duty.
22. After 9/11 and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, Hasan seemed to grow more disenchanted with his duties. “He did not talk war or politics, but he did tell me once the war started that what he worried most about was having to fight against other Muslims. He did not feel it was right.”—Friend at Muslim community center
23. Hasan attended two matchmaking events at his Muslim community center to find a “good Muslim woman” for his wife but he “had too many conditions” for his match . He wanted a very religious wife who adheres to the Quran, wore the hijab and prayed five times a day. First preference was an Arab woman followed by someone of Indian, Pakistani or Bangladeshi descent.
24. Hasan avoided contact with his female coworkers. Refused to be photographed for an office Christmas photo since women were in the photo.
25. Hasan worshiped at the Texas mosque each day at 6 am, and often prayed there five times a day, especially during the holy month of Ramadan. (See Saudi Publications On Hate Ideology Fill American Mosques)
26. Hasan had been mentoring an 18-year old Catholic man on the ways of Islam. Only once during their 12 meetings did Hasan NOT talk about religion. Hasan told this man that Muslims shouldn’t be in the U.S. military, because obviously Muslims shouldn’t kill Muslims. He told him not to join the Army.
27. At the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Maryland, Hasan told his fellow military master degree students, “I’m a Muslim first and an American second.” (See Allegiance in a Time of Globalization, DOD PERSEREC, Dec 2008)
28. Hasan gave an hour-long talk on the Koran in front of dozens of other doctors at Walter Reed Army Medical Centre in Washington DC. He said non-believers should be beheaded and have boiling oil poured down their throats. That non-Muslims were infidels condemned to hell who should be set on fire.
29. Fellow doctors have recounted how they were repeatedly harangued by Hasan about Islam.
30. During a conversation with a leader of the Texas mosque he attended, Hasan seemed obsessed with the question of what to tell Muslim soldiers about fighting fellow Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan.
31. Hasan attended the controversial Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Falls Church, Virginia, in 2001 at the same time as two of the September 11 terrorists.
32. This mosque was led by radical imam Anwar al-Awlaki said to be a ‘spiritual adviser’ to three of the hijackers who attacked America on 9/11. al-Awlaki was born in the US but now lives in Yemen. He is an al-Qaeda supporter who targets US Muslims with radical online lectures on Islam.
33. Hasan’s eyes “lit up” when he mentioned his deep respect for al-Awlaki's teachings, according to a fellow Muslim officer at the Fort Hood base in Texas.
34. Today (9 November 09), al-Awlaki wrote on his blog a post titled, “Nidal Hassan Did the Right Thing.”
“Nidal Hassan is a hero. He is a man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people.
.....Any decent Muslim cannot live, understanding properly his duties towards his Creator and his fellow Muslims, and yet serve as a US soldier. Nidal opened fire on soldiers who were on their way to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan.
How can there be any dispute about the virtue of what he has done? In fact the only way a Muslim could Islamically justify serving as a soldier in the U.S. army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of men like Nidal.
The heroic act of brother Nidal also shows the dilemma of the Muslim American community. Increasingly they are being cornered into taking stances that would either make them betray Islam or betray their nation. Many amongst them are choosing the former.
The fact that fighting against the US army is an Islamic duty today cannot be disputed. No scholar with a grain of Islamic knowledge can defy the clear cut proofs that Muslims today have the right -- rather the duty -- to fight against American tyranny.
Nidal has killed soldiers who were about to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan in order to kill Muslims. The American Muslims who condemned his actions have committed treason against the Muslim Ummah and have fallen into hypocrisy.
Allah(swt) says: Give tidings to the hypocrites that there is for them a painful punishment......May Allah grant our brother Nidal patience, perseverance and steadfastness and we ask Allah to accept from him his great heroic act. Amen.”
Among the reader comments to his post:
• “May Allah grant our brother Nidal patience, perseverance and steadfastness and we ask Allah to accept from him his great heroic act.”
• “That’s the first thing that came to my mind, may Allah reward this man for his bravery. Allah has enlightened him with his duty unlike the hypocrites of this age and time. May he be accepted as a shaheed.”
• “May Allah give brother Nidal ease and may Allah give pain to the enemies.”
34 "clues", probably more to come.
CI Centre instructor Dr. Tawfik Hamid, a Muslim reformer, author and expert, wrote on Friday:
There is a tendency among various decision makers to discuss why some Muslims turn to the use violence while others do not, considering Muslims are exposed to the same religious teachings.
This approach may theoretically allow decisions makers to avoid addressing the role of religious teaching as the true cause of the problem and allow them to focus instead on the individual factors that make a particular person use violence.
In this regard, I would like to mention the following illustrative example: When people smoke cigarettes only some of them develop lung cancer. This does not mean that smoking is not a main cause of lung cancer.
The same applies to Islamism phenomenon. When Muslims are exposed to the radical Islamic teaching, only some of them become violent. This also does not mean that the teaching is not the cause of developing the violence.
The most simple solution for the problems in the previous examples is simply to limit the exposure to the offending agent (either smoking or to the radical teaching) rather than trying to change the response of the cells or the humans to the causative agent. This can happen in Muslim societies by providing them with an alternative to the radical teachings to promote values of love and peaceful coexistence instead of hatred and intolerance.
If I could make a suggestion to the senior officials in the Military, Intelligence, Homeland Security, and others, I would tell them to learn how to detect early signs of Islamic Radicalization among their employees in order to take appropriate measures before radicalization manifests. Failure to do so or learn these signs can lead to a disaster inside the US, especially if Islamic radicalism appears in facilities that deal with radiological or biological material or weapon.
(MORE)
------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
The following was written by CI Centre instructor Dr. Tawfik Hamid who is a Muslim reformer, author and expert on the Jihadist radicalization process (as he himself had become radicalized while in Med school in Egypt):
US Reaction to Muslims in its Military MUST be well calculated
by Dr. Tawfik Hamid
9 Nov 09
After the Ft. Hood tragedy, I have been asked by many to address what the US must do with American Muslims in the military.
Some took an emotional response and promoted the view that Muslims should not be allowed in the US military.
Others tried to approach the issue in a more rational manner. The WSJ addressed some aspects of this sensitive topic (See: Muslim Population in the Military Raises Difficult Issues).
The possibility of a backlash against Muslims in the military was also discussed on the CNN. I will summarize my answer as follows.
There are three possibilities (or options) for the reaction:
Option 1: Stop all Muslims from working in the military
Option 2: Give permission to Muslims in the US Army so that they do not fight against their fellow Muslims.
Option 3: Do nothing
The first option (to stop all Muslims from working in the military) will deprive the US from benefiting from the experience of true moderate Muslims who also fight Islamic Radicalism.
The experience of these moderates can be pivotal and invaluable in achieving the needed victory over radical Muslims. This situation makes it imperative for the US officials to set parameters to define who is moderate and who is radical.
Using proper parameters to define these terms can allow the US to use the knowledge of true moderate Muslims effectively to fight radical Islam and at the same time avoid discrimination against all Muslims.
Failure to set these parameters can allow many radicals to infiltrate sensitive positions in the military and may end in catastrophic consequences.
ABC's Test to Define Radical Islam by Tawfik Hamid:
If a Muslim or an Islamic organization, school or mosque is moderate, they should be able to unambiguously and publicly denounce the following concepts:
Apostates killing
Beating women and stoning them to death for adultery
Calling Jews pigs and monkeys
Declaring war on Non-Muslims to spread Islam after offering Non Muslims three options - subjugate to Islam, pay Jizia (a humiliating tax), or be killed
Enslavement of other human beings
Fighting and killing Jews before the "End of Days"
Gay discrimination, hostility, execution
A true moderate person or organization must be able to immediately denounce the above concepts and stand publicly and unambiguously against them. The Muslim world can not expect the world to consider Islam peaceful as long as they teach and promote such tenets.
For investigators: Note that Muslims are allowed to lie to non-believers and those they consider apostates so as to protect the Islamic faith.
The second option (to give exemptions to Muslims in the US military so that they do not fight against their fellow Muslims) raises several important concerns as well.
This option could be seen as a form of discrimination against non-Muslims in the military. In other words, why should non-Muslims take the risk of going to war and die while their fellow Muslim soldiers are refusing to defend their nation? In this case we will face one of the most bizarre situations in history when non-Muslims have to die to defend Muslims who sympathize with the enemy and refuse to fight it.
What if ALL US military soldiers converted to Islam? Shall we just surrender to Islamic Radicals because No one in the military is willing to defend the country anymore?
Accepting this option casts doubt on the loyalty of these Muslims (who refuse to fight another Muslim to protect the US) to the US. If these Muslims were more loyal to their "Umma" (Muslim nation) than to the US then they should be considered a fifth column and MUST not be allowed to work in military or any sensitive position.
Those American Muslims who refuse to fight another Muslim to defend the US must be ready to answer the following imperative question: Is it OK for them to kill Christians or Hindus if they attacked the US but it is unacceptable by them to kill Muslims if they did attacked their country?
If Radical Muslims declared war on the US, will Muslims in US military allow the killing of their fellow American citizens to avoid fighting their radical Muslim brothers? In other words, are the lives of their fellow Americans less in their view than the lives of the radical Muslims?
As we can see the second option raises serious concerns.
If the third situation (Do Nothing) is accepted as the best type of reaction, many Islamic radicals will be able to infiltrate our military.
In this situation, the disaster of Ft. Hood may look trivial compared to what could happen if these radicals managed to use radiological, biological, or chemical weapons against our society.
In such a case, we may wake up one day to the news that an Islamic radical in US army released a lethal bacteriological or viral agent inside the US that will kill thousands of people or more and will destroy the economy of the country. The tragedy that could happen in this case is far beyond words to describe it.
Doing nothing and just waiting for another attack by a radical Islamist inside the US is a catastrophic approach. We were just lucky in the US that Dr. Nidal Hasan, who allegedly committed the atrocity in Ft. Hood, did not have access to a biological weapon.
An important approach to deal with such a complex situation is to educate senior officials in the US how to detect early signs of radicalization -- both overt and covert -- as this can allow these officials to take appropriate measures to prevent a possible disaster.
The following was written by CI Centre instructor Dr. Tawfik Hamid who is a Muslim reformer, author and expert on the Jihadist radicalization process (as he himself had become radicalized while in Med school in Egypt):
US Reaction to Muslims in its Military MUST be well calculated
by Dr. Tawfik Hamid
9 Nov 09
After the Ft. Hood tragedy, I have been asked by many to address what the US must do with American Muslims in the military.
Some took an emotional response and promoted the view that Muslims should not be allowed in the US military.
Others tried to approach the issue in a more rational manner. The WSJ addressed some aspects of this sensitive topic (See: Muslim Population in the Military Raises Difficult Issues).
The possibility of a backlash against Muslims in the military was also discussed on the CNN. I will summarize my answer as follows.
There are three possibilities (or options) for the reaction:
Option 1: Stop all Muslims from working in the military
Option 2: Give permission to Muslims in the US Army so that they do not fight against their fellow Muslims.
Option 3: Do nothing
The first option (to stop all Muslims from working in the military) will deprive the US from benefiting from the experience of true moderate Muslims who also fight Islamic Radicalism.
The experience of these moderates can be pivotal and invaluable in achieving the needed victory over radical Muslims. This situation makes it imperative for the US officials to set parameters to define who is moderate and who is radical.
Using proper parameters to define these terms can allow the US to use the knowledge of true moderate Muslims effectively to fight radical Islam and at the same time avoid discrimination against all Muslims.
Failure to set these parameters can allow many radicals to infiltrate sensitive positions in the military and may end in catastrophic consequences.
ABC's Test to Define Radical Islam by Tawfik Hamid:
If a Muslim or an Islamic organization, school or mosque is moderate, they should be able to unambiguously and publicly denounce the following concepts:
Apostates killing
Beating women and stoning them to death for adultery
Calling Jews pigs and monkeys
Declaring war on Non-Muslims to spread Islam after offering Non Muslims three options - subjugate to Islam, pay Jizia (a humiliating tax), or be killed
Enslavement of other human beings
Fighting and killing Jews before the "End of Days"
Gay discrimination, hostility, execution
A true moderate person or organization must be able to immediately denounce the above concepts and stand publicly and unambiguously against them. The Muslim world can not expect the world to consider Islam peaceful as long as they teach and promote such tenets.
For investigators: Note that Muslims are allowed to lie to non-believers and those they consider apostates so as to protect the Islamic faith.
The second option (to give exemptions to Muslims in the US military so that they do not fight against their fellow Muslims) raises several important concerns as well.
This option could be seen as a form of discrimination against non-Muslims in the military. In other words, why should non-Muslims take the risk of going to war and die while their fellow Muslim soldiers are refusing to defend their nation? In this case we will face one of the most bizarre situations in history when non-Muslims have to die to defend Muslims who sympathize with the enemy and refuse to fight it.
What if ALL US military soldiers converted to Islam? Shall we just surrender to Islamic Radicals because No one in the military is willing to defend the country anymore?
Accepting this option casts doubt on the loyalty of these Muslims (who refuse to fight another Muslim to protect the US) to the US. If these Muslims were more loyal to their "Umma" (Muslim nation) than to the US then they should be considered a fifth column and MUST not be allowed to work in military or any sensitive position.
Those American Muslims who refuse to fight another Muslim to defend the US must be ready to answer the following imperative question: Is it OK for them to kill Christians or Hindus if they attacked the US but it is unacceptable by them to kill Muslims if they did attacked their country?
If Radical Muslims declared war on the US, will Muslims in US military allow the killing of their fellow American citizens to avoid fighting their radical Muslim brothers? In other words, are the lives of their fellow Americans less in their view than the lives of the radical Muslims?
As we can see the second option raises serious concerns.
If the third situation (Do Nothing) is accepted as the best type of reaction, many Islamic radicals will be able to infiltrate our military.
In this situation, the disaster of Ft. Hood may look trivial compared to what could happen if these radicals managed to use radiological, biological, or chemical weapons against our society.
In such a case, we may wake up one day to the news that an Islamic radical in US army released a lethal bacteriological or viral agent inside the US that will kill thousands of people or more and will destroy the economy of the country. The tragedy that could happen in this case is far beyond words to describe it.
Doing nothing and just waiting for another attack by a radical Islamist inside the US is a catastrophic approach. We were just lucky in the US that Dr. Nidal Hasan, who allegedly committed the atrocity in Ft. Hood, did not have access to a biological weapon.
An important approach to deal with such a complex situation is to educate senior officials in the US how to detect early signs of radicalization -- both overt and covert -- as this can allow these officials to take appropriate measures to prevent a possible disaster.
Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact: [email protected]
NOTE: Comments to RFFM.org's blog which include ad hominems or personal attack will automatically be rejected. No hyperlinks allowed.
"Human evolution could easily take a quantum leap into the distant future the day after mankind realizes that God does not choose sides".....J.J.Walker
Posted by: John James Walker | November 15, 2009 at 12:55 PM
Hey, I'm a muslim teenager living in Ohio. I just have to say that this Hassan guy was a complete idiot, and whoever agrees with his ideologies are just as ignorant.
But one last thing, there are over 1.2 billion Muslims in the world, and just because you only hear about the bad ones, I ask that you look for the 1.1+ billion good ones
Posted by: Hussain | January 10, 2010 at 08:53 AM