"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.
RSS Feed
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.