US - Actual number of Muslims in the U.S. military believed much higher than records

Beau Geste

Longterm Registered User
US - Actual number of Muslims in the U.S. military believed much higher than records show

The U.S. military plans to begin a review of the rising number of Muslims in its ranks.Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, born in the United States and alleged to have killed 13 soldiers in the army base at Fort Hood, Texas, did not identify himself as a Muslim when he enlisted. Officials said Hasan was recruited as part of a U.S. military drive to reach out to the Muslim community.

Officials said the Defense Department and Joint Chiefs of Staff plan to discuss an examination of the Muslim presence in the U.S. military and the threat of Al Qaida influence. They said the Congress was pressing for such a review in wake of the Nov. 5 killing of 13 U.S. troops by a Muslim officer.

"We have to go back and look at ourselves and ask ourselves the hard questions," U.S. Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey said. "Are we doing the right things? We will learn from this."

Officials said the review would focus on the exact number of Muslims in the U.S. military, which has encouraged such enrollment. The Defense Department reported 3,409 Muslims on active military duty as of April 2008, but officials said the number could be at least three times higher.


"We believe there are many more Muslims who when recruited did not list their religion," an official said. "Some of these people simply wanted to avoid harassment; others might have had a sinister agenda."

Over the last decade, the military has intensified its recruitment of Arabic-, Farsi- and Pashtun-speaking soldiers for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Officials said the Pentagon has been receiving reports of Muslim soldiers who expressed opposition to the U.S. military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. They said the opposition was encouraged by Islamic clerics as well as Muslim officers such as Hasan, who warned Muslims against harming co-religionists.

In 2003, U.S. Army Sgt. Hasan Akbar, said to have opposed the U.S. invasion of Iraq, killed two officers and injured 14 others in a grenade attack. Akbar, a convert to Islam, was sentenced to death.

Officials said the U.S. military has sought to shield Muslims from retaliation in Afghanistan and Iraq. In many cases, they said, Muslim soldiers were ordered to use fake family names to prevent reprisals against their families abroad.

Some in Congress have called for clear guidelines on allowing soldiers to express political views in the military. They said Hasan's pro-jihad views were tolerated by officers concerned over charges of discrimination.

"I want to say very quickly we don't know enough to say now, but there are very, very strong warning signs here that Dr. Hasan had become an Islamist extremist and, therefore, that this was a terrorist act," Sen. Joseph Liberman, a Connecticut independent and chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said.

Lieberman said his committee would investigate the Hasan shooting, particularly the motive for the attack. He said a focus would be whether the U.S. Army ignored warning signs that Hasan was heading for an attack.

Officials acknowledged that Hasan underwent an investigation in April 2009 on suspicion that he had adopted Al Qaida doctrine of holy war against the West. They said Hasan was suspected of trying to contact Al Qaida via the Internet.

"I am intending to begin a congressional investigation of my homeland security committee into what were the motives, what were the motives of Hasan in carrying out this brutal mass murder and to ask whether the army missed warning signs that should have led them to essentially discharge him," Lieberman said.

"If Hasan was showing signs, saying to people that he had become an Islamist extremist, the U.S. Army has to have zero tolerance. He should have been gone."
 
Pr**ks like him gives everyone a bad name.... Burn in hell

DH...

US - Actual number of Muslims in the U.S. military believed much higher than records show

The U.S. military plans to begin a review of the rising number of Muslims in its ranks.Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, born in the United States and alleged to have killed 13 soldiers in the army base at Fort Hood, Texas, did not identify himself as a Muslim when he enlisted. Officials said Hasan was recruited as part of a U.S. military drive to reach out to the Muslim community.

Officials said the Defense Department and Joint Chiefs of Staff plan to discuss an examination of the Muslim presence in the U.S. military and the threat of Al Qaida influence. They said the Congress was pressing for such a review in wake of the Nov. 5 killing of 13 U.S. troops by a Muslim officer.

"We have to go back and look at ourselves and ask ourselves the hard questions," U.S. Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey said. "Are we doing the right things? We will learn from this."

Officials said the review would focus on the exact number of Muslims in the U.S. military, which has encouraged such enrollment. The Defense Department reported 3,409 Muslims on active military duty as of April 2008, but officials said the number could be at least three times higher.


"We believe there are many more Muslims who when recruited did not list their religion," an official said. "Some of these people simply wanted to avoid harassment; others might have had a sinister agenda."

Over the last decade, the military has intensified its recruitment of Arabic-, Farsi- and Pashtun-speaking soldiers for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Officials said the Pentagon has been receiving reports of Muslim soldiers who expressed opposition to the U.S. military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. They said the opposition was encouraged by Islamic clerics as well as Muslim officers such as Hasan, who warned Muslims against harming co-religionists.

In 2003, U.S. Army Sgt. Hasan Akbar, said to have opposed the U.S. invasion of Iraq, killed two officers and injured 14 others in a grenade attack. Akbar, a convert to Islam, was sentenced to death.

Officials said the U.S. military has sought to shield Muslims from retaliation in Afghanistan and Iraq. In many cases, they said, Muslim soldiers were ordered to use fake family names to prevent reprisals against their families abroad.

Some in Congress have called for clear guidelines on allowing soldiers to express political views in the military. They said Hasan's pro-jihad views were tolerated by officers concerned over charges of discrimination.

"I want to say very quickly we don't know enough to say now, but there are very, very strong warning signs here that Dr. Hasan had become an Islamist extremist and, therefore, that this was a terrorist act," Sen. Joseph Liberman, a Connecticut independent and chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said.

Lieberman said his committee would investigate the Hasan shooting, particularly the motive for the attack. He said a focus would be whether the U.S. Army ignored warning signs that Hasan was heading for an attack.

Officials acknowledged that Hasan underwent an investigation in April 2009 on suspicion that he had adopted Al Qaida doctrine of holy war against the West. They said Hasan was suspected of trying to contact Al Qaida via the Internet.

"I am intending to begin a congressional investigation of my homeland security committee into what were the motives, what were the motives of Hasan in carrying out this brutal mass murder and to ask whether the army missed warning signs that should have led them to essentially discharge him," Lieberman said.

"If Hasan was showing signs, saying to people that he had become an Islamist extremist, the U.S. Army has to have zero tolerance. He should have been gone."



Posted via Mobile Device
 
Let's not forget that Muslims have also died fighting the GWOT.

One should not paint everyone with the same brush.

Interesting article Beau, thanks for posting.

H
 
Food for thought?

I think the issue that should be addressed and remembered is that Islam, is essentially a 'raceless' religion. The fact that it has evolved from a middle eastern strand of judaic christianity 1500 years AD, seems to have been misplaced within modern thinking.

The point is, that as a WASP, I could very easily be a radically thinking muslim, hell bent on all sorts of death and destruction, and you'd never know.

It's no good starting a witch hunt for anybody who may have a healthy tan, own a shamagh or have contacts in the middle east (that's most of the mil isn't it :rolleyes:). We must all be far more constructive than that. A keystone of the answer is that we must all be hyper-vigilant for behaviors and activitities, that may pose a risk. At the moment civvies walk around with their heads up their arrses, oblivious to what's around them.

If that means I will have to be spoken to from time to time, then so be it. Better to be safe than sorry.

Remember, soft targets make the best targets. Next time you're out at the local supermarket or in the local shopping precinct/mall, think of the thousands of people that are around you. It only takes one of those to really fook your day up.

Should the government for instance, ban the wearing of hoods and masks, to include for religious reasons? This is quite clearly a method of avoiding detection either before, during or after an offence has been commited.

That will of course cause upset and offence amoungst certain sections of the community. But they should note, that we are not their enemies. These actions are necessary, not because of some anti-islamic witch hunt, but because of the actions of small but very dangerous section of the islamic community. So bollox, if they're offended, tough. Live with it.

They key lays within the islamic community. They need to step up and help deal with the problem.

No more sitting on the fence. One side or another.

Starlight Out
 
I think the issue that should be addressed and remembered is that Islam, is essentially a 'raceless' religion. The fact that it has evolved from a middle eastern strand of judaic christianity 1500 years AD, seems to have been misplaced within modern thinking.

The point is, that as a WASP, I could very easily be a radically thinking muslim, hell bent on all sorts of death and destruction, and you'd never know.

It's no good starting a witch hunt for anybody who may have a healthy tan, own a shamagh or have contacts in the middle east (that's most of the mil isn't it :rolleyes:). We must all be far more constructive than that. A keystone of the answer is that we must all be hyper-vigilant for behaviors and activitities, that may pose a risk. At the moment civvies walk around with their heads up their arrses, oblivious to what's around them.

If that means I will have to be spoken to from time to time, then so be it. Better to be safe than sorry.

Remember, soft targets make the best targets. Next time you're out at the local supermarket or in the local shopping precinct/mall, think of the thousands of people that are around you. It only takes one of those to really fook your day up.

Should the government for instance, ban the wearing of hoods and masks, to include for religious reasons? This is quite clearly a method of avoiding detection either before, during or after an offence has been commited.

That will of course cause upset and offence amoungst certain sections of the community. But they should note, that we are not their enemies. These actions are necessary, not because of some anti-islamic witch hunt, but because of the actions of small but very dangerous section of the islamic community. So bollox, if they're offended, tough. Live with it.

They key lays within the islamic community. They need to step up and help deal with the problem.

No more sitting on the fence. One side or another.

Starlight Out

Good post.

I would expand that to "moderate Islamic community".

Whilst i do agree, to an extent that suspicious behavior and pre-attack indicators can assist in mitigating the risk posed by both individuals and groups, the real defense (on a nationwide scale) is by the intelligence agencies.

The Major that perpetrated the recent attacks was posted at the base. I doubet very much that there were any field indicators that he was planning an attack, collecting information etc. He did not need to, he worked there.

The intelligence agencies (in this case FBI) knew that he had contact with a "person of interest" related to a terrorist organization, but did not pursue this as there was no "topic of interest" in their communications. Nor did they (AFAIK) relay this information to the Army - Military Police or other.

I also do not see how banning masks and head coverings will make anywhere safer? Please elaborate how this will help?

I am not versed in every attack there has ever been, but i can tell you that the vast majority of pre-attack intelligence had no masks or head coverings involved - unless everyone was wearing them. There is absolutely no connection between the two.

There has been much crime, violent attacks as well as terrorism by Muslims, Jews and Christians, should we ban yarmulka's and Priests uniforms and monks robes?

Thank you for your posts, of which i enjoy reading.

m
 
Back
Top