Jihad's 5th Column

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/ArticlePrint.aspx?id=511702
IBD Editorials

War On Terror: The Fort Hood terrorist is being portrayed as an "anomaly," an "aberration," a "lone wolf." Sadly, he's just one of many examples of jihadist traitors in the ranks of the military.

Together they form a dangerous Fifth Column, and the Pentagon — thanks to institutionalized political correctness — is doing next to nothing to root them out .

Instead, brass are actively recruiting Muslim soldiers — whose
ranks have swelled to more than 15,000 — and catering to their faith by erecting mosques even at Marine headquarters in Quantico, Va. More, they're hiring Muslim chaplains endorsed by radical Islamic front groups, who convert and radicalize soldiers.

In the wake of the worst domestic military-base massacre in U.S. history, this is an outrage to say the least. And the PC blinders explain how Fort Hood commanders could have failed so horrifically in protecting their force from the internal threat there.

The terrorist suspect, an Islamic fanatic, penetrated deep into the Army's officer corps before gunning down, execution-style, more than 40 of his fellow soldiers. Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan allegedly killed 13 at the Texas post, which boasts some 40 Muslims.

Witnesses say he shouted "Allahu Akbar" — Allah is great! — before opening fire in a crowded building where troops were sitting ducks, waiting to deploy to Iraq and Afghanistan, both wars that Hasan angrily opposed. "Muslims should stand up and fight the aggressor," he reportedly said earlier this year, referring to the U.S. — the country he swore to protect.

During the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, another devout Muslim in the Army had a similar conflict. Sgt. Hasan Akbar also resorted to violence, fragging 17 fellow soldiers, killing two. Why? He opposed the killing of fellow Muslims. "You guys are coming into our countries, and you're going to rape our women and kill our children," he was overheard by soldiers who survived the grenade attack as saying.

Clearly, his loyalties lay elsewhere. And he's hardly alone:

• Navy Signalman Hassan Abujihaad last year was convicted of tipping off al-Qaida to battle group movements in the Persian Gulf, including disclosing classified documents detailing the group's vulnerability to terror attack.

• Army reservist Jeffrey Battle in 2003 pleaded guilty to conspiring to wage war against the U.S., confessing he enlisted "to receive military training to use against America."

• Army reservist Semi Osman in 2002 was arrested for providing material support to al-Qaida and pleaded guilty to weapons charges after agreeing to testify against other terror suspects.

• Marine Abdul Raheem al-Arshad Ali trained at a suspected al-Qaida camp and was charged with selling a semi-automatic handgun to Osman.

• Army Sgt. Ali Mohamed trained Green Berets at Fort Bragg's elite special warfare school before stealing military secrets for al-Qaida and helping plan bombings at three U.S. embassies in 1998.

• Army Spec. Ryan Anderson in 2004 was convicted of leaking military intelligence to al-Qaida terrorists, including sensitive information about the vulnerabilities of armored Humvees.

• Army sniper John Muhammad was put on death row after fatally shooting 10 in the nation's capital a year after 9/11.

While good and decent Muslim soldiers have served admirably, the list of those who have put their allegiance to Islam above country is long, and this is by no means an exhaustive accounting.

The Pentagon must do a better job of vetting such recruits. And it must do a better job of force protection — starting with beefing up its counterspying operations — before more intelligence is compromised and more soldiers are lost.

_______________________________________

Our Brain Dead Country
2009 November 6
tags: Fort Hood Massacre, News, Politics
by David Horowitz

A Muslim fanatic with an Internet site praising Islamic suicide bombers as defenders of their comrades is a Major in the U.S. Army with access to military intelligence and lethal weaponry. And it’s not as though the army didn’t know that he was a Muslim fanatic and supporter of the Islamic jihad against the West. He was under investigation for six months because of his anti-American, jihadist rantings. He did not want to be deployed. He wanted to be discharged.

But despite his identification with America’s enemies, the army kept him in its officer corps. How in God’s name was this possible? But it was. And so, after calling America the “aggressor” in Afghanistan and Iraq this Muslim jihadist traitor army officer picks up his semi-automatic weapons and heads for the center at Ft. Hood where soldiers are being deployed to fight the jihadists in Afghanistan to conduct his massacre. Yet this morning the Fox News Channel chiron says “Investigators search for a motive in the Ft. Hood killings.” Is everybody out of their mind?

The Ft. Hood killings are the chickens of the left coming home to roost. Already the chief political correspondent of The Nation has decried even mention of the fact that the jihadist killer Hasan is a Palestinian Muslim. According to The Nation this is “Islamophobia.” This fatuous attempt to protect America’s enemies carries on The Nation’s 60-year tradition as the leading fifth column collaborator with America’s enemies — defender of the Rosenbergs, defender of Hiss, defender of their boss Stalin, defender of Mao, defender of Castro and now defender of Islamic terrorists. But The Nation is only the tip of an iceberg. The fifth column formed out of the unholy alliance between radical Islam and the American left is now entrenched in the White House and throughout our government. And in matters like the Muslim jihadist Major Hasan our military is its captive.

The Fort Hood massacre is the first of the preventable atrocities we have been warning about on our websites since 9/11 — the atrocities which are apparently necessary for Americans to wake up to the threat that confronts us. We have a vast internal threat in this country in the form of this unholy alliance between the anti-American Left and radical Islam – whose Muslim Brotherhood network extends through our universities, our government and our military. It is “politically incorrect” to recognize this fact. You can be barred — as I have been — from speaking at universities for even talking about it. The embargo of discussion of the Islamo-fascist threat puts every American (including the infidel collaborators) at risk. Hasan had semi-automatic weapons. But they weren’t nuclear. That possibility is just around the corner unless we undergo a sea change in our attitudes and marshal the intelligence and the courage to recognize the threat.
______________________________
http://www.newsmax.com/frank_gaffney/Fort_Hood_Obama/2009/11/06/282652.html
As Fort Hood Tragedy Unfolds, Obama Is Politician in Chief

Friday, November 6, 2009 9:19 AM

By: Frank Gaffney Jr.


Former Vice President Dick Cheney was castigated widely when he declared two weeks ago that Barack Obama was “dithering” with respect to Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s urgent request for the dispatch of additional troops to Afghanistan.

President Obama’s astonishing response to the murderous attack at Fort Hood suggests the commander in chief is not merely a ditherer, but someone who reflexively subordinates national security to political considerations.

I appeared Thursday night on Lars Larson's terrific nationally syndicated talk radio program. He pointed out something probably missed by those who did not catch in real-time the president’s first public comments on the Fort Hood attack in which 13 members of the armed forces were killed and more than 30 others wounded. Mr. Obama delivered them during a previously scheduled appearance at the White House “Tribal Nations Conference.”

Lars remarked that, as the Nation and the world waited to hear the President’s response to this horrific incident — what light he could shed on who did it and the motive, as well, of course, as an expression on behalf of all Americans of sympathy and solidarity with the victims and their loved ones — the commander in chief’s focus was elsewhere.

From the outset and for fully two minutes, Mr. Obama did what he does best: He pandered to a special interest of political value to him and his agenda. In this case, the panderees were Native Americans. Following is what the president felt compelled to say before he got around to addressing the act of home-grown terror at one of America’s most important military installations, according to the White House transcript,.

“Let me first of all just thank [Interior Secretary] Ken [Salazar] and the entire Department of the Interior staff for organizing just an extraordinary conference. I want to thank my Cabinet members and senior administration officials who participated today. I hear that Dr. Joe Medicine Crow was around, so I wanted to give a shout-out to that Congressional Medal of Honor [actually, Dr. Crow received the Presidential Medal of Freedom] winner. It’s good to see you. (Applause.)

“My understanding is that you had an extremely productive conference. I want to thank all of you for coming and for your efforts, and I want to give you my solemn guarantee that this is not the end of a process but a beginning of a process, and that we are going to follow up. (Applause.) We are going to follow up. Every single member of my team understands that this is a top priority for us. I want you to know that, as I said this morning, this is not something that we just give lip service to. And we are going to keep on working with you to make sure that the first Americans get the best possible chances in life in a way that's consistent with your extraordinary traditions and culture and values.

“Now, I have to say, though, that beyond that, I plan to make some broader remarks about the challenges that lay ahead for Native Americans, as well as collaboration with our administration, but. . . ”

It was only at that point, roughly half-way into his remarks, that Mr. Obama finally turned to what he called “a tragic shooting at the Fort Hood Army base in Texas.” He then proceeded to take about the same amount of time to note that the details were not fully known but that “a number of American soldiers have been killed, and even more have been wounded in a horrific outburst of violence.” He sympathized and promised to keep those lost and harmed and their loved ones in “our thoughts and prayers.”

(When Lars Larson pointed out this extraordinary sequence of presidential comments, my immediate reaction was to hearken back to the relatively few seconds it took George W. Bush on Sept. 11, 2001, to internalize and respond to the first news that a plane had crashed into the World Trade Center.

(Michael Moore's virulently anti-Bush film “Fahrenheit 911” damningly transformed that brief moment in a Florida classroom into an agonizingly protracted period of indecision and cynical calculation. I mused on air whether Moore and his ilk would now find similar fault with The One, whose initial public reaction to the Fort Hood attack made W’s to 9/11 seem a model of swift decisiveness, even though the former had had several hours to take aboard reports of the attack and to decide how to address it. Fat chance.)

Then, with a final pandering promise — “I am confident that this [conference] is going to be resulting in terrific work between this government and your governments in the weeks, the months, and years to come” — the commander in chief was off to his next pressing engagement.

Perhaps the president publicly handled this attack as he did because he was unsettled by the fact that the alleged shooter is a devout Muslim, Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who evidently adheres to the theo-political-legal program authoritative Islam calls “Shariah.”

Now, Shariah requires its adherents to engage in jihad — the imposition of Islam, by force wherever possible. This reality was characteristically obscured by Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American Islamic Relations, a Muslim Brotherhood front and unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism financing conspiracy.

During a news conference, he preposterously declared: “No political or religious ideology could ever justify or excuse such wanton and indiscriminate violence.”

Actually, Shariah not only justifies such violence but also demands it.

To cite but one example of the requirement for individual Muslims to wage jihad, Shariah expert Andrew Bostom observes that the influential Ottoman cleric, Sheikh Shawish, wrote in 1915:

“To whoever kills even one single infidel of those who rule over Islamic lands, either secretly or openly, there is a reward like a reward from all the living ones of the Islamic world. And let every individual of the Muslims in whatever place they may be, take upon him an oath to kill at least three of four of the ruling infidels, enemies of Allah, and enemies of the religion. He must take upon him this oath before Allah Most High, expecting his reward from Allah alone, and let the Muslim be confident, if there be to him no other good deed than this, nevertheless he will prosper in the day of judgment and we ask the Most High to extend the People of the Faith by the favor of their Lord.”

In short, the Fort Hood “outburst of violence” (to use the president’s formulation), looks like the first successful incident of jihadist mass murder in America since 9/11. This could not be a message happily conveyed by a chief executive committed to “outreach to the Muslim world” and so deprecating of his predecessor, who had managed for seven years to prevent such incidents here in America.

Whatever Mr. Obama’s motivation for his conduct Thursday, it provides an important insight into the inadequacies of his wartime leadership. However much he tries to cloak his administration’s protracted dithering over Afghanistan with a laudable determination to “get the decision right,” however much he denies the toxic reality of Shariah and both the violent and stealthy jihad it requires, this president’s preoccupation with politics — and, in particular, with currying favor with his base — seems an integral part of his genetic code.

Unfortunately, to the extent such a hard-wiring interferes with, or at least takes precedence over, his responsibilities as commander in chief, the lives of more Americans — probably civilian, as well as military — are likely to be lost unnecessarily, at home and abroad.

Frank J. Gaffney Jr. is president of the Center for Security Policy and host of the nationally syndicated program, “Secure Freedom Radio.”