"Defense: Kuwait Attack Not Premeditated," from AP, with thanks to Teri:
FORT BRAGG, N.C. - An Army sergeant charged with a grenade attack that killed two U.S. officers in Kuwait went on trial Monday, with his lawyer trying to stave off a possible death sentence by arguing that his client suffered from mental illness.But a military prosecutor said Sgt. Hasan Akbar knew exactly what he was doing, pointing to his detailed diary entries before the March 2003 attack and the fact that he stole the grenades and cut power to his camp just before striking.
Premeditation is the central issue in the court-martial of the 33-year-old Akbar, who confessed several times and allegedly told investigators he carried out the attack in the opening days of the Iraq war because he was worried that U.S. forces would harm fellow Muslims.
With the fact of the attack not in dispute, his lawyers hope to spare him a possible death penalty for premeditated murder by alleging a history of mental illness that stretched back to his teen years and was apparent to the military.
"The enemy was in Sgt. Akbar's mind, and had been there 15 years," defense lawyer Maj. Dan Brookhart told the military jury in his opening statement.
Brookhart said Akbar's mental illness stemmed from the sexual abuse of his sister by his stepfather, and as a teenager he was diagnosed with depression and an adjustment disorder. He also developed a sleep disorder and sometimes fell asleep while standing up. In the Army, his problems led to Akbar being demoted from a squad leader's position and being given menial duties in his combat engineer company.
"He was basically a failure as a soldier," Brookhart said. He noted that as the 101st awaited orders to invade Iraq in the spring of 2003, Akbar was panicked by talk among his colleagues about their plans to kill Iraqis and rape women.
Military prosecutor Capt. John Benson countered that evidence indicates Akbar did extensive planning. In diary entries and actions - which included stealing grenades and turning off a generator that lit the camp - Akbar laid the groundwork for his fatal attack.
The brigade was on alert for an enemy attack, Benson said, but "their enemy was already inside the wire."
Fourteen soldiers were wounded, either by the grenades or when Akbar opened fire with a rifle in the ensuing chaos....
The gorilla in the living room in this case is the question of Muslim loyalty in the U. S. military.
There is Army Sergeant Hasan Akbar. There was Marine Wassef ali Hassoun who, having been charged with desertion in Iraq, stoutly proclaimed his innocence in the most convincing mannter --"I would like to tell all the Marines as well as all those others serving in Iraq to keep their heads up and spirits high. Once a Marine, always a Marine, Semper Fi," Hassoun said, invoking the Marine Corps motto, Latin for "always faithful."-- a few weeks before he deserted again, and again showed up in Lebanon. There was the case of the terrorists whom, it was reported, were contacted by a Muslim sailor on one of the American warships in the Persian Gulf, a case still, one presumes, under investigation. There was the case of the Muslim F. B. I. agent who refused to be wired to record the conversation of a fellow Muslim.
There is the attitude of CAIR and other Muslim organizations, not one of pitching in, of understanding and collaborating with the government in its anti-terrorism efforts, but one rather of constantly being on the lookout for ways to impede the government, ways to suggest that Muslims should insist "on their rights" and do everything they can to prevent "profiling" -- falsely labelled as "racial profiliing" -- in selecting those for closer scrutiny at airports.
But why should anyone be surprised? Islam emphasizes the collective, the umma al-islamiyya, the Community of Fellow Muslims. The world is divided between Muslims and Unbelievers. Hostility, or even hatred (do not take them as friends, for they are friends only to each other) toward Unblievers (Infidels) is inculcated through Qur'an, Hadith, Sira.
No loyalty can possiby be owed Infidels, whose religious holidays must not even be recognized, who must not be treated as friends (except insofar as doing so will help promote Islam), and no loyalty can possibly be owed the Infidel nation-state, by Muslims.
Why should it be a surprise that save for some American Black Muslims, whose Islam is hardly that of the orthodox or mainstream Islam -- they even offer music at some of their gatherings outside the mosaues), the number of Muslims in our armed services is nearly invisible, far less than 1% of the total. It can hardly be otherwise.
It is silly to ignore this problem. And not only in the armed services, but also among those who take, as part of their naturalization, an oath of allegiance ot the United States. Really, one has yet to see a convincing argument by any Muslim spokesman that suggests Muslims can owe their loyalty not to fellow Believers, but to fellow citizens who are Infidels. When that convincing argument is made, we will all feel a small bit better. But until then, we must assume that those who call themselves Muslims mean what they say, and follow what Muhammad said, and what Qur'an and Hadith offer as texts -- which is to say, not the well-known problem of dual loyalty but a much more intractable problem, that of single loyalty --a loyalty only to Islam and to fellow Muslims.
It could be argued that islam is like a mental illness, it sure causes it's true followers to basically become raving lunatics.
I could just see a commerical for islam, i have the perfect catch phrase.
"Islam catch the fever"
"Warning fever may cause one to strap bombs to ones body, behead infindels and wreak unspeakeable evil in the name of Jihad and Allah"
This guy is an idiot, plain and simple.
I don't really care what people have to say about Islam, or the state is in considering I in part agree with some of it.
However, I am a little bit offended that people seem to believe that none of us could be loyal to our country, or our military.
I served quite a big part of my young life in the United States Army, my MOS the good old 11/B.
I pleged an oath to protect the nation, the people, and the constitution of the United States of America before religion. That's just the way it was.
It made me proud to do this, even though I sometimes had to endure the teasing from being the "token Ay-rab" in the unit.
There are those of us out there who love what America stands for. I would never trade it for my homeland. Ever.
-Former Sgt. Issac Ali bin Kharish Al-Hamidah
626th Forward Support Battalion
Take heart Isaac.
For my part religion is a neurological disorder, and it is in the name of religion (or rather using religon as an excuse) that man does some of the most horrible things to other men (and women).
And as many folk believe that loyalty to Islam overrides loyalty to country (and I'm sure that it does) it is my profound opinion that the same holds true for Christians and Jews.
Most American Jews are Israeli firsters.
Most American Christians are Christian firsters, Meaning that they mimic the muslim and want a "Christian Nation" or select verses from their bible to justify policies and actions that fulfill their needs and assuage their fears.
Christian Evangelicals Plotting to Remake America
Which makes them in my book indistinguishable from Muslims who wish to remake America in their image.
Issac, I think Giaour needs his head examined. Christians have no desire to rule other people, they only want to have their beliefs allowed alongside the rest. There is a concerted effort to remove all traces of Christianity from the public square while allowing nearly any other religion to remain.
I do not know what Christianity did to old Giaour,but he certainly has a hate on for it. I don't know any of these hand-rubbing secretly evil Christians that Giaour seems to know. There are all types of people who are Christians, some better than others. The only Christian country I want is when Jesus himself will rule and reign.
I don't think most jews in the US are israel firsters, how else could you explain the overwhelming embrace of the democratic partiy by americas jewish community, not to mention hollywood and there embrace of almost liberal facism.
Im jewish myself , i belive if it weren't for american christians, especially envangelical baptists Isreal would be fuct.
Jews in the states have done more to hurt isreal by supporting the democracts than they could possibly imagine.
Many jews in the states belong to the lonney left and preach israel's destruction in the name of appeasement.
Can A Muslim Serve in the US Army?
Can Muslims offer themselves for recruitment in the Army of the United States or any other non-Muslim state and keep in mind that such recruitment may later result in fighting against and killing Muslims?
The Muslims have been directed by the Qur’an to be just and equitable in their actions. Regarding their personal lives.
The Qur’an says:----
"Believers, remain steadfast in justice, bearing its witness for Allah. Even though it be against yourself, your parents or your kinsfolk. Be they rich or poor, Allah knows better about them both. So do not be led by passion, lest you swerve from the truth." (Al-Nisa’ 4: 135)
Then again, at another instance, regarding their collective lives.
The Qur’an says:
Believers, remain steadfast for Allah bearing witness of justice. Do not allow your hatred for another nation to turn you away from justice. Deal justly, that is closer to true piety." (Al-Maidah 5: 8)
Keeping this directive in mind, it is quite logical to derive that a Muslim only fights for the cause of justice. A Muslim cannot be a promoter of injustice and inequity. But again this is between you and your god.
In light of the above explanation, a Muslim may offer himself for recruitment in any army of the world, as long as he is aware of the fact that all his actions shall be guided by the principles of equity and justice. Even while serving a Muslim army, he cannot afford to be unheedful of this fact.
A just action taken by the army of the United States is as commendable as a just action taken by a Muslim army. And an unjust action taken by a Muslim army is as condemnable as an unjust action taken by any other army of the world.
The defendent won't have any luck in any American court. Justice Souter (US Supreme Court) reaffirmed the co-extensivity of intentional and incidental (felony) murder under inherent "malice of forethought" culpability in 1991, and his Conservative colleagues agreed:
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/search/display.html?terms=pre-meditation&url=/supct/html/90-5551.ZO.html
"...it is significant that Arizona's equation of the mental states of premeditated murder and felony murder as species of the blameworthy state of mind required to prove a single offense of first-degree murder finds substantial historical and contemporary echoes. At common law, murder was defined as the unlawful killing of another human being with "malice aforethought." The intent to kill and the intent to commit a felony were alternative aspects of the single concept of "malice aforethought." See 3 J. Stephen, History of the Criminal Law of England 21-22 (1883). Although American jurisdictions have modified the common law by legislation classifying murder by degrees, the resulting statutes have in most cases retained premeditated murder and some form of felony murder (invariably including murder committed in perpetrating or attempting to perpetrate a robbery) as alternative means of satisfying the mental state that first-degree murder presupposes. See 2 W. LaFave & A. Scott, Substantive Criminal Law 7.5, pp. 210-211, and nn. 21, 23, 24 (1986); ALI, Model Penal Code 210.2, p. 32, and n. 78 (1980). Indeed, the language of the Arizona first-degree murder statute applicable here is identical in all relevant respects to the language of the first statute defining murder by differences of degree, passed by the Pennsylvania Legislature in 1794. [n.8]
A series of state court decisions, beginning with the leading case of People v. Sullivan, 173 N. Y. 122, 65 N. E. 989 (1903), have agreed that "it was not necessary that all the jurors should agree in the determination that there was a deliberate and premeditated design to take the life of the deceased, or in the conclusion that the defendant was at the time engaged in the commission of a felony, or an attempt to commit one; it was sufficient that each juror was convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had committed the crime of murder in the first degree as that offense is defined by the statute."
-----------------
Of course, American Muslims subscribe to Sharia paramountcy. That is one reason why I do not respect their freedom of conscience anymore than do I respect Aztec Temple cannibalism of antiquity. Muslims are a social liability wherever they pollute.
How many here would ban the Koran ("Recitation" from the perverse depths of Mohammed's sick mind)? I would outlaw it because it is nothing but a jihad manual, and the work product of a self-interested, philandering pedophile and pathological liar.
Please read this whole book on an earlier attempt to ban the Koran:
http://voi.org/books/tcqp/
If partial exposure of Janet Jackson's boob is unconscionable, why on earth should the transient majority indulge Arab depravity?
Hug a Southern Baptist today.
Isaac Ali K.-
As long as your faith doesn't trump your duty to uphold the Constitution (the essence of the military oath taken by all soliders at induction), it is immaterial.
The Islamic belief in the ultimate desirability of a Religious State, though, makes the taking of an oath to serve any lesser secular state seem 'tainted' to many ordinary non-Muslim citizens. And looked on by them as 'one taken with your fingers crossed behind your back'. Mouthed, but not seriously meant.
I can't read minds (except my dogs' when I hold up a marrow bone), so I can only assume that you served as you say you did, and as I did, with loyalty to the Bill of Rights (and not 'the flag', as many silly members of the Congress perennially assume) being of FAR more importance than the religion of one's upbringing.
Few think that 'christians' are plotting for some global, parallel state when they serve in the U.S. military. There's no big precedent for it to even enter peoples' minds. The same goes for Jewish soldiers in the U.S. services (although there was one 'civilian' spy who tried 'to serve two masters', but was caught and is still in prison).
However, more and more examples of Muslim soldiers being disloyal will only make average person think that the Koran and not the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) means most to them.
The way the nineteen 9/11 hijackers blended-in and deceived those around them makes any mere proclamations of loyalty by their fellow-faithful ring a little hollow.
RE these military guys who have been caught:
For being traitors, I think they should be put into a medically-painless coma, and then fed to wild pigs.
Mere shooting and hanging wouldn't hit their real fear. It might even appeal to their martyr wish.
But, being fed to feral swine -which WILL devour human flesh if starved a little- could give any future traitors SERIOUS pause.
And Al Araaf might be hard to get across from the cramped belly of an 'unclean' hog.
The punishment must not only fit the crime, but the mind.
Any true soldier who served honorably would agree.
The enemy was in Akbar's head not 15 but 33 years, since the day he was born and was exposed to the teachings of his Muslim parents. That enemy is called Islam. That enemy is in the heads of the millions of Muslims who live in this country, and makes them ticking time bombs. We are harboring terrorists and paying for our own destruction with our stupid political correctness.
I want to quote Smokem from above because it's worth repeating over and over and over again until people get it:
"Of course, American Muslims subscribe to Sharia paramountcy. That is one reason why I do not respect their freedom of conscience anymore than do I respect Aztec Temple cannibalism of antiquity. Muslims are a social liability wherever they pollute."
BigSleep:
I agree.
Unfortunately, military justice has so called "progressed" from the days of hanging folks from a yard arm.
Dear Mackie and angry kafir:
Criticism and skecptism about Islam is one thing, but spewing hatred is another. Angry Kafir and Mackie, your comments are alarmingly broad (although I understand and agree with your underlying enmity). Does Islam currently pose a threat? Yes.
"Of course, American Muslims subscribe to Sharia paramountcy. That is one reason why I do not respect their freedom of conscience anymore than do I respect Aztec Temple cannibalism of antiquity. Muslims are a social liability wherever they pollute."
So all Muslims are a social libaility? And we "pollute"? You might want to qualify your statement. I know American Muslims in the military who have put their life on the line for their country. Their loyalty lies with the United States and the Constitution. Make the distinction.. as an American you owe all soldiers, including those Musilm soldiers (who are genuine in their love and support of America).
Visit this site www.apaam.org...
Ban the Qur'an? Do you also advocate genocide of all Muslims?
Yours sincerely
Thomas
Giaour said:
"Christian Evangelicals Plotting to Remake America"
"Which makes them in my book indistinguishable from Muslims who wish to remake America in their image."
Hey Giaour, take more than 5 minutes to study the difference before spewing arrogant comments.
You owe it to yourself to read the Quran, The New Testment and the Torah and decide before you die. Each is readily available online.
"Adherents of militant Islam account for some 15-20 percent of the Muslim world..."
www.meforum.org/article/168
This case is going to be a real test of the Army's mettle to see if the Pentagon will set aside racial political correctness and give this traitorous scum bag the death penalty he deserves. The military must send a clear and convincing message to all Muslims serving in the armed forces that acts of treason will be met with the harshest of penalties.
How many more circumstances such as this case and the others on record must occur before the Pentagon admits they've got a problem with Islam in the military.
Anyone who cannot choose between islam and US citizenship - in a heartbeat - is a moron. Police up the gene pool and deport him.
No muslims. No mosques.
Anyone who cannot choose between islam and US citizenship - in a heartbeat - is a moron. Police up the gene pool and deport him.
No muslims. No mosques.
Anyone who cannot choose between islam and US citizenship - in a heartbeat - is a moron. Police up the gene pool and deport him.
No muslims. No mosques.
LAT says next Pope could be a dhimmi:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-pope-newest-cardinals,1,4367305.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines&ctrack=1&cset=true
Why do I have to read this al-Sadr incitement on a Muslim extremist website? Are our journalists on strike?
http://www.masnet.org/news.asp?id=2331
I could care less if he's crazy or not. Most of Islam looks batty to me anyway. Execution is in order for this rat bastard.
Thomas,
I can see your skepticism about some of the posters here; some posts sound very over-the-top, and I certainly do not agree with those individuals.
At the same time, they're reflective of a specific trend; the slow dawning of realization that relations between the islamic world and the secular-Christian-Jewish one are just not working. I think we all have to admit that the 'grand experiment' has failed; intellectually, spiritually, economically, theologically, democratically. There is no room for the West in the East nor the East in the West. Perhaps it is time indeed that adherent of the so-called 'Western' religions - those eternal 'distractors', 'obfusticators' and 'obstinate opponents of the (so-called) beauty of islam' - in islamic countries departed, and that those of islam - whom, it seems, we cannot really trust, indicators of 'moderacy' and 'extremacy' lacking - did so in the West, and presumably in India also.
We might also make the case that Europeans should depart the New World: and maybe they should. Of course, in that case, muslims would also be required to depart all of North Africa, Pakistan, Jordan, Egypt and everywhere else, except, ostensibly, Saudi Arabia. But we are, in fact, discussing pragmatic solutions here, rather than completely just ones. In a just world, we'd know who the bad guys were; they'd send their names in to the appropriate authorities, and after a good talking-to, they'd abandon all their 'miscomprehensions' of islam. Unfortunately, as some muslims themselves argue, we are living in a brutal world, and that approach would not be terribly effective.
You say you know muslims who have put their life on the line, who believe in the US and the Constitution; but who? and how do we know that they can be trusted? and don't 'normal', 'happy' people also decide to become terrorists? Of course they do. We have only the word of one person or another to stand for all this, and, unfortunately, that is insufficient.
Geoff
Geoff:
You raise a fair and valid point. I am skeptical as well, and the truth is we don't know, and we cant be absolutely certain. I just want to avoid making such sweeping annd broad judgments that I damn all Muslims, when there are a core (albeit small) who are decent.
Cheers
Thomas
I think people need to remember that many Muslims are the first to be victims of Islam (women and children 1st - then the men). Many don't even speak arabic, and many, when they do get hold of the Koran and Hadiths in their own language, want to get away from it. Trouble is, even in the "West", their former "peace loving" "brothers" kill them, and their families. It takes a brave person to leave this cult.
Maybe if our pollies actually spoke the truth (that Islam = hate), then more Muslims would take the plunge. While at the same time, if you are going to wage a war - admit who or what the enemy is and do it with both hands - at the moment the west is doing it with one hand tied behind their backs, and as such we are going to get kicked in the nuts (which if hard enough can be a fatal blow).
Some say that they are muslim and are loyal to the United States. More islamic lies. How could you really do any research and come up with choosing to be a muslim? Why not just sign up with a death cult and admit it? The only reason I could see for becoming a muslim is the power trip. To call islam a religion is a lie. It is a political party with world domination as a goal. Plain a simple.