FrontPageMag.com By Robert Spencer By Hugh Fitzgerald Books Dhimmi Watch Islam 101 Qur'an Blog Raymond Ibrahim Robert Spencer
 
« Terrorists ready for jihad in 40 American states | Main | Brooklyn Jihad Money Probe »

February 12, 2004

Alleged coconspirator testifies at Virginia jihad trial

Some people have pointed to the fact that the Virginia jihad group trained by playing paintball games is evidence of scapegoating: how could they have been serious if they were just playing paintball? Well, yesterday ex-Marine Donald Surratt testified: "I wasn't sure I wanted to keep going. Some people were really serious about this. ... They really wanted to implement the training." It got very serious "after one group member returned from a 2000 trip to Pakistan, where he trained with a militant Islamic group called Lashkar-e-Taiba that has since been designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. government." From AP:

An ex-Marine who has pleaded guilty to his role in an alleged "Virginia jihad network" testified Wednesday that the group began playing paintball games to learn self-defense, but the games became more intense as some members used the games for military training.

Donald Surratt, 31, of Suitland, Md., said the games became more serious after one group member returned from a 2000 trip to Pakistan, where he trained with a militant Islamic group called Lashkar-e-Taiba that has since been designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. government.

The group as a whole never discussed using the games as a means to train and join Lashkar, Surratt testified at the trial of four purported group members. But the increasing intensity of the games and their use by some as a training platform for overseas holy war caused him and others to re-evaluate the games' propriety.

"I wasn't sure I wanted to keep going," Surratt said. "Some people were really serious about this. ... They really wanted to implement the training."

Four men--Masoud Khan, Seifullah Chapman, Hammad Abdur-Raheem and Caliph Basha ibn Abdur-Raheem, all U.S. citizens who live in the Washington suburbs--are on trial for conspiracy to aid the Taliban against the United States. Khan faces the most serious charges, including conspiracy to levy war against the United states and conspiracy to provide support to Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida terrorist network.

Surratt said he talked about the games with Hammad Abdur-Raheem, who shared his concerns. But they decided their participation was OK because they they had no plans to engage in holy war.

The government alleges that the men were part of a Virginia jihad network that used paintball games as a means to train and join Lashkar, which is seeking to drive India from the disputed Kashmir region. Engaging in a military expedition against India violates the federal Neutrality Act.

The government further alleges that the group's aims took a hostile turn against the United States after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, alleging that the groups' religious leader told his followers that Islam required them to defend the Taliban against the United States, and that the U.S. military was a legitimate target of holy war.

The defendants contend that the paintball was merely a way for the men to fulfill their religious duties to learn self-defense and that they never intended to fight against the United States.

Surratt, in his testimony, acknowledged that the religious leader, Ali al-Tamimi, recommended fighting alongside the Taliban as the optimal course of action. But if that were not possible, a person could simply leave the United States and live in a Muslim country, or even just pray on behalf of the Taliban to fulfill their obligation.


Posted by Robert at February 12, 2004 7:31 AM
Print this entry | Email this entry | Digg this | del.icio.us |

Comments
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)

"Surratt, in his testimony, acknowledged that the religious leader, Ali al-Tamimi, recommended fighting alongside the Taliban as the optimal course of action. But if that were not possible, a person could simply leave the United States and live in a Muslim country..."

Can we get al-Tamimi some airtime? I think this view should be advertised.

Posted by: David at February 12, 2004 2:38 PM

So if I moved to Iraq or Iran or any other nation in the middle east I would be supporting the Taliban?? I guess that means that I will be staying right here in the US.

Posted by: bartb at February 12, 2004 2:52 PM

"But if that were not possible, a person could simply leave the United States and live in a Muslim country"

They are not saying that living in a muslim country means that a majority of muslim country think the United States is the "Great Satan"? The religion of peace is not saying that most Muslim country's believe its ok to kill Americans military or otherwise?

Nah.. thats not what they are saying "Rolls eyes"

Posted by: Wild Hare at February 12, 2004 6:29 PM

I believe the government's case is shaky at best and Consititutionally abusive at worst. First of all, the four who are still maintaining their innocence, having refused government attempts at plea bargaining, having been submitted to psychological torture (ie.-periods of solitary confinement,constant questioning from the FBI, FBI threats of detention in Guantonimo Bay and bribes of short sentences if they would co-operate with the government to implicate their friends), did nothing wrong. Their only crime was being committed Muslims who happened to love paintball and hunting and had licenced firearms in their posession, which is the Constitutional right of every American citizen. I have been following the trial closely and my conclusion is that Ashcroft is so desperate to prove his so-called war on terror is effective that he is scapegoating innocent young men, whose lives and the lives of their wives and children have been destroyed.

Posted by: walter at February 26, 2004 12:16 AM

Web Site Counter