I put in notice to some relevant VIPs on this one-and one each to VFW & American Legion.
I've also a friend who works at the NARA records center in St. Louis, aka MILRECS, where DD-214's (discharge forms) are kept (for the most part).

We'll find out rather quickly how full of BS this scam is...not if, but by how much.

Posted by: jcom972 at November 4, 2007 8:09 AM

Fifty-two years ... that means most of the first-hand witnesses have passed on.

Posted by: Occupant at November 4, 2007 8:27 AM

jcom972, please post details as soon as you hear.

Posted by: miira at November 4, 2007 8:32 AM

Just wait till they start to islamize other American icons, like Elvis, Marilyn and James Dean.

Muhammad Elvis ?

Marylin Maymunah Monroe ?

James Ibrahim Dean?

Coming to a city near you, folks.

People who feel the need to rewrite tha past in order to get acceptance and/or recognition have to stop, and think why they need to rewrite the past.

If reality doesn't conform to your beliefs, don't change reality; change your beliefs.

Posted by: Crusader at November 4, 2007 8:45 AM

" Before we dedicate the Prayer Center, I also wish to thank the International students who have used this facility and who will be graduating tomorrow from the Command and Staff College."

....I hope they do no place Muslim graduates from this college into sensitive command positions.....We have seen several incidents where Muslims in command positions have harmed our military operations and have place our troops in a more dire situations than would have normally expected...

Ban Muslim Immigration.

Posted by: exsgtbrown at November 4, 2007 9:13 AM

I have done a search at the National Archives for the name Nazim Abdul-Hakim and have found nothing. I did a search for my Grandfather who know was in the army in WWII and found all sorts of stuff just as a test to see if I was doing the search right.

http://aad.archives.gov/aad/fielded-search.jsp?dt=893&tf=F&cat=WR26&bc=sl

I will continue to play with it and see what i can come up. Maybe not everyone is listed in the archives from WWII. Maybe he did not enlisted in this country?

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 4, 2007 9:25 AM

....CAIR is only assisting....Islam is rewriting the history books at every turn....start reviewing the the history books your child brings home. pay attention to the class assignments your child is told to complete...go to your childs parent/teacher meetings and see if you see anyone wearing Islamic clothing...In Muslim controlled lands, the history of its former inhabitants no longer exists....so too, is the fate of the history of you and your forefathers if Islam takes over..

Ban Muslim Immigration...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at November 4, 2007 9:28 AM

Muslim Army Sgt. Nazeem Abdul Hakeem claims to have fought with the US Army at Normandy on June 6th 1944 along the sides of the English and Canadian troops and yet the Muslim Grand Mufti al-Husseni had issued a Fatwa to "summons to a holy war against England in May of 1941.

Muslim Army Sgt. Nazeem Abdul Hakeem went against a holy decree by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and fought along side of the British troops at the invasion of Normandy (from England), if so, then Muslim Army Sgt. Nazeem Abdul Hakeem was not a true Muslim.

What unit was Muslim Army Sgt. Nazeem Abdul Hakeem in, where are his discharge papers, why does he not show up in any database search's in the USA ?

Bill Warner

www.wbipi.com

Posted by: Youssef at November 4, 2007 9:32 AM

Muslim Army Sgt. Nazeem Abdul Hakeem claims to have fought with the US Army at Normandy on June 6th 1944 along the sides of the English and Canadian troops and yet the Muslim Grand Mufti al-Husseni had issued a Fatwa to "summons to a holy war against England in May of 1941.

Read the fatwa here, now.

Muslim Army Sgt. Nazeem Abdul Hakeem went against a holy decree by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and fought along side of the British troops at the invasion of Normandy (from England), if so, then Muslim Army Sgt. Nazeem Abdul Hakeem was not a true Muslim.

What unit was Muslim Army Sgt. Nazeem Abdul Hakeem in, where are his discharge papers, why does he not show up in any database search's in the USA ?

Posted by: Pamela Geller at November 4, 2007 9:36 AM

Re: CAIR rewriting American history?

These are same people who believed the Reverend Jim Nutter. Birds of a feather flock together. Fibriam Hooper is the head clown in their lying circus. Their judgement is warped by their habits of deception.

Posted by: Frank at November 4, 2007 9:46 AM

"What unit was Muslim Army Sgt. Nazeem Abdul Hakeem in, where are his discharge papers, why does he not show up in any database search's in the USA ?

Posted by: Pamela Geller "

....either he was a Muslim Infiltrator sent to gather data on western military operations and procedures or he is a figment of the Islamic imaginations....a lie....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at November 4, 2007 10:04 AM

Somebody call Steven Spielberg. I see another film is coming on.
Saving private Nazeem Abdul Hakeem...

Posted by: pr126 at November 4, 2007 10:05 AM

The emblem, no doubt newly created, is of importance. Note it places the Quran ABOVE the symbols of the United States – the eagle and the Stars and Stripes. It is a re-emphasis, though subtle, that Muslims place Sharia religious law above the secular US Constitution. (Dr. Steve Carol)

Posted by: Pamela Geller at November 4, 2007 10:13 AM

CAIR, isn't that a wing of supremicist islam ?

Posted by: dgene at November 4, 2007 10:16 AM

The fatwa link provided by Pam does not work. Was the link disabled? Did anyone see it? What did it say please?

Posted by: USorThem at November 4, 2007 10:17 AM

If these so-called military veterans are indeed real , then why not just join the Veterans of Foreign Wars like every other American Veteran rather than this grandstanding with their own veterans association...

Posted by: rejjie at November 4, 2007 10:34 AM

The fatwa link provided by Pam does not work. Was the link disabled? Did anyone see it? What did it say please?

Summons to a Intifada Against Britain

A "Fatwa " Issued by Haj Amin al-Husseini 10, May, 1941*

* Translated from:-"Oriente Modemo," 1941, pp. 552-553; broadcast over the 'Iraqi and Axis radios.

In the name of Merciful and Almighty God.
I invite all my Moslem brothers throughout the whole world to join in the Holy War for God, for the defense of Islam and her lands against her enemy. O Faithful, obey and respond to my call.
O Moslems!

Proud 'Iraq has placed herself in the vanguard of this Holy Struggle, and has thrown herself against the strongest enemy of Islam certain that God will grant her victory.

The English have tried to seize this Arab-Moslem land, but she has risen, full of dignity and pride to defend her safety, to fight for her honor and to safeguard her integrity. 'Iraq fights the tyranny which has always had as its aim the destruction of Islam in every land. It is the duty of all Moslems to aid 'Iraq in her struggle and to seek every means to fight the enemy, the traditional traitor in every age and every situation.

Whoever knows the history of the East has everywhere seen the hand of the English working to destroy the Ottoman Empire and to divide the Arab countries. British politics toward the Arab people is masked under a veil of Hypocrisy. The minute she sees her chance, England squeezes the prostrate country in her Imperialist grasp, adding futile justifications. She creates discord and division within a country and while feeding it in secret openly she assumes the role of advisor and trusted hiend.

The time when England could deceive the peoples of the East is passed. The Arab Nation and the Moslem people have awakened to fight British domination. The English have overthrown the Ottoman Empire, have destroyed Moslem rule in India, inciting one community against another; they stifled the Egyptian awakening, the dream of Mohammed Ali, colonizing Egypt for half a century. They took advantage of the weakening of the Ottoman Empire to stretch out their hands and use every sort of trick to take possession of many Arab countries as happened to Aden, the 9 Districts, the Hadramut, Oman, Masqat and the Emirates of the Persian Gulf and Transjordania. The vivid proof of the imperialistic designs of the British is to be found in Moslem Palestine which, although promised by England to Sheriff Hussein has had to submit to the outrageous infiltration of Jews, shameful politics designed to divide Arab-Moslem countries of Asia from those of Africa. In Palestine the English have committed unheard of barbarisms; among others, they have profaned the el-Aqsa Mosque and have declared the most unyielding war against Islam, both in deed and in word. The Prime Minister at that time told Parliament that the world would never see peace as long as the Koran existed. What hatred against Islam is stronger than that which publicly declares the Sacred Koran an enemy of human kind?

Should such sacrilege go unpunished? After the dissolution of the Moslem Empire in India and of the Ottoman Caliphate, England, adhering to the policy of Gladstone, pursued her work of destruction to Islam depriving many Islamic States both in the East and in the West of their freedom and independence. The number of Moslems who today live under the rule of England and invoke liberation from their terrible yoke exceeds 220,000,000.

Therefore I invite you, O Brothers, to join in the War for God to preserve Islam, your independence and your lands from English aggression. I invite you to bring all your weight to bear in helping 'Iraq that she may throw off the shame that torments her. O Heroic 'Iraq, God is with Thee, the Arab Nation and the Moslem World are solidly with Thee in Thy Holy Struggle!
Source:The Arab War Effort-A Documentary Account The American Christian Palestine Committee (New York, n.d.).

Posted by: Youssef at November 4, 2007 10:34 AM

....I hope they do no place Muslim graduates from this college into sensitive command positions.....We have seen several incidents where Muslims in command positions have harmed our military operations and have place our troops in a more dire situations than would have normally expected...

Point considered; but who put muslims in "command positions [that] have harmed our military ..." in the first place?

Should these individuals be held accountable for these acts of treason?

Are muslims now in charge of dd-214 databases now?

Is history about to be re-written in more ways than we can imagine, thanks to phony records inserted into the databases by cheap labor controlling the servers because real American's are too expensive and too stupid for these jobs?

I am not liking this one damned bit!

Posted by: witness at November 4, 2007 10:45 AM

If Muslims and CAIR want to attempt to rewrite American history and shine a spotlight on Muslim soldiers in the US Army, there's an easy way to counter it.

I'd start by shining a glaring spotlight onto to far more recent incident in American history involving a very pious Muslim soldier, one Hasan Akbar, the devout Muslim traitor who fragged his superior officers in the first week of the Iraq war.

In a cowardly, dastardly, and piously Islamic way, this filthy and sinister Muslim dog tossed a grenade into the tent where two officers were sleeping. The shrapnel of the grenade ripped these patriot Americans to shreds -- they didn't even stand a chance. THAT is a more accurate history, and a far more vivid and recent example of what Islamic involvement in the US Army looks like, and will continue to look like as long as Muslims are permitted into our society, and into the ranks of our national and social institutions.

Posted by: jsla at November 4, 2007 10:56 AM

Hmmm, I wonder how many of these muslim vets were drafted, and how many volunteered...
Every muslim who fights with a infidel army is an apostate while doing it. Helping filthy kufrs achieve their disgusting goals, is not something Allah approves of, as a departure from Islam, it is apostasy. According to most Islamic schools of jurisprudence, and scholars, these vets should be killed, not celebrated...

Posted by: duh_swami at November 4, 2007 10:57 AM

Greatcometof1577, I followed your link and found my late father's info. All I used was his name and state of residency.

If this Nazeem Abdul Hakeem was a veteran, he would eagerly give us his service number. I do not know when the military stopped issuing service numbers. I think they use the social security number now. If Hakeem claims to have forgotten it, I'll bet that he is lying. My mother remembers my father's service number!

Posted by: Pelayo at November 4, 2007 11:12 AM

Either it's a pleasant surprise or confirms some of my deep concerns. It's a win-win. Just letting these sorts of things slip by ends up with Mohammed Jihad Shahid Mohammed inventing the lightbulb by 2012.

Posted by: Beagle at November 4, 2007 11:16 AM

Remember, They discovered America, chemistry, surgery, math, the number zero, built the Haigi Sophia, painted the Sistine Chapel, discovered preservation of foods through canning, developed the steam engine, electricity, refrigeration, air conditioning, manufactured the first computer, invented the internet and global warming. /Sarcasm

What a load of Taqqiya.

Posted by: senor doeboy at November 4, 2007 11:25 AM

according to the picture on Pamela's web site, Sgt. Hakeem is black. as I recall, U.S. military units during WWII were (shamefully) segregated by color. So if he fought at Normandy, wouldn't it have to have been in an all-black company? this should be easy to check. what's more, the military (again to America's shame) were loath to place blacks in important combat positions, generally relegating them to menial positions. it seems to me these facts argue strongly against his having fought at Normandy.

Posted by: sheik yer booty at November 4, 2007 11:32 AM

And even if CAIR's story is 100% true, and there were Muslim soldiers participating in the Normandy invasion, does this really do anything to answer questions about the attachment of Muslims in America, and CAIR itself, to political Islam? Since CAIR has never clarified its position about ultimately replacing the U.S. Constitution with Islamic Sharia, and Ibrahim Hooper is on record saying he'd like to see an Islamic government in the U.S., these are legitimate questions. But don't hold your breath waiting for answers from the helpful folks at CAIR.

Sharia law is a power play. The Arab culture thinks itself (without any justification) as supreme in the world, so its Sharia derived from Islamic ideology is seen as the correct power structure for the world. Therefore in the Arab mind, Sharia must replace the US Constitution, and all forms of national governments, to make their supremacist ideology the supreme power in the world. Rewriting history to achieve this end is merely one more tick of the clock for them, because Sharia ambitions are immensely patient in achieving their goals of world domination. Whether or not Moslem soldiers served in WW II is irrelevant here.

The impetus driving this Sharia world domination mentality is a very powerful Arab ego (without justification) which sees itself as the right rulers of everyone on the planet. Constitutional laws such as we have in the West, derived from a very long and rich history of social contracts, for them is invalid when presented with their alleged Mohammedan 'law of Allah' (their god, with no justification) as described in the Koran and hadiths, so our secular laws hold no power over them. This is not only seditious but outright subversive activity, if Sharia is allowed any foothold in any country. Our freedoms, which are not respected by the Arab supremacist ego, have no validity under Sharia, because in their world it is a master-slave relationship, with Allah (the Arab supremacist god, with no justification) holds the largest whip over his slaves. All other religions are therefore considered inferior, so religious freedom of conscience and faith has no meaning under Sharia. Our social freedoms and rule of law, all our human rights, then become suspended, since they too are considered inferior to the rule of Allah (by Arab supremacist clerics of the Ummah), which Sharia is compelled to impose on us all. Therefore, what are organizations like CAIR eager to rewrite history really telling us? The answer to this is simple: Overthrow civil laws and constitutional government so Sharia law, the Arab superego, rules the world. This is pure power, with religion used as an excuse to dominate all of us with their Allah based government.

There is really only one way to deal with this power grab by Arab supremacism: Sharia must be outlawed, universally. There is no room for two masters in any one country, two governments operating on totally different levels over its members, one constitutional and the other a supremacist theocracy, which is Sharia. Even if it is allowed only for the Moslem world, it must compete incessantly to eventually overpower constitutional law. So Sharia may not be allowed even for its own Moslem community, if living in countries ruled by Constitutional laws, because a citizen cannot serve both his country and the Ummah without being unfaithful to one. To then allow any Sharia becomes subversive, where Islam will try to use our laws to drive a wedge with which it can lever itself to supremacy over us. Therefore, organizations such as CAIR are in fact subversive in nature (as dictated by their Arab supremacist masters, without justification) to undo Western civilization built up on our history of social agreements, what we call our Social Contract and rule of law. Only as free people can we be ruled by such Social Contract of agreements, but Sharia will not allow this, because our agreements are considered invalid. Only Allah may rule the world in the Arab supremacist mind (without justification except its opposite, that Arab society fails world wide), and eventually the whole world must bow to Mecca. This is a pure power play, and nothing religious about it. Arab supremacism must be outlawed, which means, of necessity, Sharia must be outlawed. CAIR and others ambitions to rewrite history, with their supremacist Allah world ideology, must not be allowed to do this under any form of religious tolerance, or any coexistence with Islamicism anywhere. Sharia is subversive activity, a power grab at government, unconstitutional and a danger to every human being of the free world.

There is only one conclusion to be drawn here: CAIR, and all Islamic societies, pushing for Sharia law must be banned and expelled from all countries without recourse. Our secular human freedoms, equality before the law, and religious freedom guaranteed by a separation of 'church and state' by our Constitutional law, is supreme to Islamic Sharia in every possible way. History proves this. The world cannot have two masters, one as Allah, where his Sharia slavery rules, and the other as a social agreement of our Constitutional laws, where our secular freedoms rule. Sharia may not powershare, but must become explicitly illegal, outlawed, and shut down. Subversive religious seditious activities are illegal, and must be circumscribed and banned by our Constitutional law.

Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at November 4, 2007 11:32 AM

The England speech linked above says this:

I'm particularly honored we have with us today Sergeant Nazim Abdul-Hakim. US Army.

62 years ago today on June 6, 1944...D-Day, “The Longest Day”... Sergeant Abdul-Hakim now 86 years-old, was fighting on the beaches of Normandy with the Army’s Amphibious Engineers bringing soldiers and supplies ashore and paving the way to establish a permanent beachhead and to bring freedom to Europe.

There's no reason to doubt this on its face. Honor is certainly due to those who served, especially since they were going against Islam's highest religious authorities.

But this raises the case of Mahmoud El-Yousseph, which Robert posted on last week, who is a retired US Air Force veteran that openly praises Hezbollah as "freedom liberation fighters" and calls suicide bombers "reasonable". He claims to be a great American hero, and yet supports an organization that is designated a global terrorist group by the US in violation of his military induction and naturalization oaths that call for opposing "all enemies, foreign and domestic". Not only do Hezbollah leaders regularly chant "Death to America", but they are also responsible for the deaths of hundreds of US military personnel (250 Marines in Beirut, 19 Airmen in the Khobar Towers bombing, et al.).

What about open traitors, such as Mahmoud El-Yousseph, Scott Beauchamp, and other "phony soldiers", who regardless of their religion believe their military service immunizes them from criticism or gives them special rights to speak?

Posted by: scanderbeg at November 4, 2007 11:36 AM

Greatcometof1577, I found five Hakeems.

HAKEEM, TOFICK
HAKEEM, WILLIAM J
HAKEEM, WILLIAM J
HAKEEM#GEORGE#A
HAKEEM#ELWOOD#J

And 22 Hakims, all the Hakims have traditional western first names.

I thought I would post the results so that there will be no room for argument.

Youssef, Americans, Canadians, and British soldiers did not fight "alongside" one another. They were in separate armies and even landed on their own beaches.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 4, 2007 11:42 AM

Sheik yer booty, if Hakeem (Hakim) were a black American, his being in a unit ferrying supplies to the beach is probably true. Blacks were universally kept in service units. The famous "Red Ball Express" was made up of almost all black inlisted drivers and material handlers.

I suspect that this veteran was not a Muslim in 1944. This is probably not his birth name.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 4, 2007 11:52 AM

As per Peyalo; Americans, Canadians, and British soldiers did not fight "alongside" one another at Normandy

Dear Peyalo, read a book.

Gen. Sir Richard Dannatt, the Commander-in-Chief, Land Command, British Army“We are amazed and impressed with the adaptability of your Army in Iraq,” Dannatt said.

This trait had been noticed before. He said that when the British and American Army had fought together in Normandy in 1944, it was the American Army which adapted to fighting through the Norman hedgerows faster than the British Army.

Also Peyalo as per Sgt Nazeem Abdul Hakeem in the US Army data base...no record, 0 partial records out of 8,706,394 total records in this file.

Posted by: Youssef at November 4, 2007 12:02 PM

senor doeboy LOL!!

"And even if CAIR's story is 100% true, and there were Muslim soldiers participating in the Normandy invasion, does this really do anything to answer questions about the attachment of Muslims in America, and CAIR itself, to political Islam?"

Muslims are working yet another angle to gain brownie points for "political Islam". Even if they did fight in that war, they were fighting as American soldiers, not for the cause of Islam!

If they like Islam so much, then why don't they simply move back to the middle east? And those loyal to our US Constitution should not allow these cry babies to change one WORD of our Constitution.

Rather, we should work like dogs to change our immigration laws.

Posted by: champ at November 4, 2007 12:15 PM

Youssef, Americans, Canadians, and British soldiers did not fight "alongside" one another. they were in separate armies and even landed on their own beaches.

Individual American and British soldiers did not fight along side one another!!!!!

What part of "separate armies" did you not understand. The fact that some units interacted every now and then does not change my assertion!!!!!

Posted by: Pelayo at November 4, 2007 12:19 PM

Pelayo; Individual American and British soldiers did not fight along side one another!!!!! What part of "separate armies" did you not understand.

Pelayo;

The D-Day invasion at Normandy began with a dangerous attack by American and British paratroopers. Eisenhower and Montgomery decided that airborne troops would need to be dropped or in some cases sent in by gliders, in advance of the invasion force to secure these objectives.

They decided that the British 6th Airborne would be dropped on the eastern flank and the American 101st and 82nd Airborne would be dropped on the western flank. http://72.14.209.104/search?hl=en&q=cache:HlX6Q902koQJ:http://www.warfarehq.com/articles/wargame_articles/allied_airborne.shtml

My father, Robert Warner, dropped with the 82nd Airborne,the drops went all over the place, he and other American units hooked up with Britiish paratoopers to secure bridges to stop the advance of German reinforcements, this is from first hand account told to me.

The story in "Atlas Shrugs" is my story and the four American soldiers pictured are my father and his 3 brothers, prior to their involvement at Normandy.

Bill Warner

Posted by: Youssef at November 4, 2007 12:33 PM

Mr Warner, I might have misunderstood what you meant by "alongside." I took it to mean that you thought units were mixed with British and American soldiers in the same company or platoon.

I took extreme exception by your "read a book" insult.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 4, 2007 12:41 PM

Sheik yer booty,

Unfortunately US military units were segregated during WW2 with African-American soldiers serving in support units rather then in combat. So Sgt. Hakkem would not have been in combat at Normandy. Also if Sgt. Hakkem was a member of the "Nation of Islam" (founded in 1930) he would not have volunteered for military service as the Nation of Islam (at that time) taught hatred of America and the white race along with the overthrow of the government of the United States.

Posted by: Roxane at November 4, 2007 12:43 PM

Just a couple of thoughts here . . .

* Many such names have multiple spellings, and some are known to lengthen,

Nazeem vs. Nazim

or juggle

Abdul Nazim Hakim vs. Hakim Abdul Nazim etc.

or shorten the combination of names,

Nazim Abd-Hakim or Nazim Hakim.

* Perhaps this veteran is a revert, like Muhammad Ali was once known as Cassius Clay . . .suppose this individual currently using the identity of "Nazim Abdul-Hakim" was enlisted under his birth name.

Posted by: miira at November 4, 2007 1:54 PM

They fought alongside at the flanks. The Americans rolled up the penisula while the Brits and Canadians held the heavy German armor back at the left flank over by Calais.

Posted by: Beagle at November 4, 2007 2:03 PM

"Cair rewriting history?"
-- the title of the article above

It is not CAIR alone, but many Muslim groups and individual Muslims, who are not rewriting "American hisory" but also the history of the world. And Islam teaches them how to do it. What came before Islam, wherever Islam goes, is waved out of memory and consideration, as merly the time of ignorance, Jamhaliya. In the West, we are now in our own Time of Ignorance, just as the Arabs of Arabia were before Muhammad came along to receive -- over 23 years -- successive revelations from Allah, who had chosen the Arabs as the best of peoples, to receive his message, and the Arabic language, in which to present it -- and Arabs still maintain that only the Arabic Qur'an is the true Qur'an, that no translation, no matter how faithful, can be the "Holy Qur'an."

For 1350 years they have been rewriting history. The zero is in their retelling an Arab invention, as is algebra (the Arabic name apparently is enough to dismiss everything taken from the Sanskirt mathematicians). Like Soviet propagandists on steroids, they claimn for "Islam" and "Islamic science" Greek texts translated and preserved, by Jews and Christians in the schools of translators at Cordoba and Baghdad. They claim not only the Hindu "zero" but paper-making, brought (see Dard Hunter) from China to Damascus. They insist that in the first 200-300 years of Muslim conquest, when the Christians and Jews still outnumbered the Muslims who ruled over them, that the intellectual activities of those Jews and Christians, or of those who were one or at most two generations from being Jews and Christians, and were raised in a milieu not yet stifled by Islam, and its hatred of free inquiry, are attirbutable to "Islam" and claimed for "Islamic civilization." And the most famous Muslim scientist, Rhazes (al-Razi) was a freethinker, as were many of the dozen or two Muslim names -- always the same names, but we in the West are kept constantly confused by those same names, with Ibn Rushd (or is it Averroes?) and Avicenna (or is it Ibn Sina) or is Ibn Sina Ibn Rushd, or what the hell is going on, so in place of the thousands of names of writers, sculptors, painters, musicians, philosophers, thinkers in the non-Muslim West, we keep getting handed the same pitiful list, of the same people, and we keep being impressed as Muslims and their ahistoric apologists tell us over and over again such fables as "when the West was in the Dark Ages [a phrase, and idea, put paid to by the past half-century of Western historiography] Islamic science was flourishing." Utter crap. Start with Toby Huff, or Father Jaki.

Was it just a year or two ago that the State Department, in an excess of desire to please, agreed with the preposterous Muslim claim that Muslims had been with Columbus when he discovered America? And of course we have also heard the Muslim claim that Muslims discovered America not with Columbus, but before 900 A.D., and not only discovered America but settled here. Anything will be said, or claimed -- just as Muslims are given to embracing the wildest conspiracy theories about Infidels, they are also given to the wildest fantasies about their own achievements, because the habit of mental submission, the habit of discouraging all skeptical and critical and free inquiry, has its consequences, and the most obvious consequence is the primitive mental conditioning that makes people susceptible to those conspiracy theories, and those baseless dreams of glory.

The Muslim claim to have "discovered" America in 880 A.D., or that Muslims were with Columbus [who had a great interest in claiming the New World for Christian Spain, and was keenly aware of the menace of Islam to Western Christendom], or the still-more recent Muslim claim that long before the Europeans arrived, Muslims had arrived in and settled in Australia are all part of the same Muslim impulse to stake a claim to the world. In Muslim terms, for Muslims only, the claim may not be necessary. After all, in the Muslim view everyone was born a Muslim, so why isn't that enough to make the Muslim claim? But of course they have taken note of Infidels, who apparently are not impressed with this everyone-is-born-a-Muslim argument (which is why people are said not to "convert" but rather to "revert" to Islam) , need a little something more for them to accept Muslim claims,whether to land or to cultural achievements, that are not their own.
And these are not the simple claims of simple folk who simply derive pleasure from some achievement of others like them, the way someone might keep track of famous sports stars or entertainers or scientists or political leaders sharing the same ethnic or racial or religious background. Not at all. These are claims made by Muslims with a more sinister intent: to make sure that the Infidels undersetand that Muslims have a claim, a claim on territory, a claim that is somehow validated by the backdating of a Muslim presence, or the exaggeration of Muslim efforts.

This claim about Muslim veterans isprompted by current concerns. It is the attempt to claim a specious loyalty, with a specious – because grossly exaggerated if not entirely fictioinal – “Muslim contribution to the American war effort.” Of course there may have seen a Muslim or two in the American army, no doubt an early precursor of the Black Muslims – never regarded by Arab Muslims as real Muslims because of their practices, which include a much wider acceptance of music, as well as a much less fierce attitude toward Christians – or possibly, this “Hakim” (a name that can also be used by Christians from Arabic-language societies) was not at the time a Muslim, but converted later.

The whole thing is designed to allow some kind of “Muslim ceremony” by “Muslim veterans” (aside from Black Muslims, there cannot have been very many Muslims serving in combat positions in either Afghanistan or Iraq, and the odd Bangladeshi-American or two, serving not with the support of fellow Muslims, proudly displaying in their grocery stores pictures of American Muslim servicemen, as any other immigrant community would and did do so, but rather either stonily silent about, or actively hostile to, the handful of Muslims who have joined the American military (and even there it is now clear that throughout the Western world Muslims, when they do join the military or, as in England, the police, they turn out to be sources of anguish and necessarily must be monitored, for they themselves onstitute, given the Total Belief System of Islam, and inculcated loyalty to the Umma and to Islam, a permanent security headache that has to be recognized even by those Infidels who keep whistling in the dark, and insisting on “integration” of Muslims into Western society as the answer, without explaining how, given the texts and tenets of Islam, such “integration” can realistically be achieved.

The Muslims are late to the West, and they are attempting some Nunc Pro Tunc backdating of everything. They were here a thousand years ago, or five hundred. They discovered America. They discovered Australia. They settled here among the Indians – or perhaps they predated the Indians who walked across the frozen wastes of the Bering Strait. They invented this, they built that. And in a certain sense, all of those claims are true – because everyone who ever lived was born a Muslim, and only became something else because of a wrong turn, a bad upbringing, a wretched environment. You, and I, and every little boy and girl, was a Muslim once.

But let’s get back to our own little lambs, those lambs among our elites who are being readied for some Eid al-Fitr slaughter. It is they who will report breathlessly on, they who will insert into sentimental speeches, news of this “Muslim Veteran” and the Muslim group that will “honor” him, without understanding what malevolence and calculation, not loyalty to America, is afoot. It is they who will fail to note that during World War II, the Arabs were stoutly on the side of the Nazis. Sadat, Saint Sadat himself, was imprisoned by the British for his pro-Nazi activites, as was Nasser (and Nasser’s brother published an Arab edition of “Mein Kampf” in 1939). In Iraq, there was the pro-Axis Rashid Ali, fortunately undone by a British-sponsored coup. In Iran, the Shah was replaced, because of his pro-German views, by his son, the late Shah Reza Pahlevi. And the most important, best known Arab leader, the Mufti of Jerusalem, not only supported Hitler, being especiallyenthusiastic about his palns for an “Endlosung” or that “Final Solution” of the “Judische Frage” (Jewish Question) but volunteered to raise an S. S. battalion among the Muslims of Bosnia, and did so – with a young Izetbegovic helping out as a recruiter. The Muslim Arabs of North Africa, similarly, were hardly to be found in the ranks of the Free French, nor of the Resistance – though here and there, there might be one, or possibly two, or even three or four, exceptions. And if the Arabs and Muslims admired Hitler, admired the Nazis and what the Nazis could do to what was seen as Western Christendom, the admiration of Hitler for Islam, his wish that Europe had been Islamized because this would have been a better foundation for his own Nazi ideology and plans, has been well and frequently recorded – by such people as, for example, Rudolf Hess. The emphasis on fighting, on mental submission, on the cult of death and of world-conquering plans – all this Hitler found most appealing.

In raising the little matter of a single, and doubtful example, of a “Muslim veteran” of World War II, the organizers of this have opened all of these matters up for discussion. And they have similarly opened up discussions about the behavior of the Muslims who have recently been in the American military and made the news. These include Hassan Akbar, a soldier who rolled grenades into the tents of sleeping officers, killing two, and that Muslim Marine (who ended his press conference, the one he held just before sneaking off to Lebanon, with a stout “Semper Fi”) who deserted his post, and made his way through Iraq to Lebanon, and the Muslim on a Navy ship who apparently made known his willingness to betray secrets to the enemy, and there are other cases, as yet unpublicized, of behavior in and around the Iraqi theatre that at least some soldiers are aware of, but that may, or may not, come to light.

Go ahead. Let’s talk about both the doctrine, and the practice, of Islam, and about where Muslim loyalties must – according to Islam – lie. Do they, or don’t they? If they do, or if they could or should, even if this or that individual chooses to ignore or overlook the doctrine, but can always return to it, re-impressed with its truth, can we Infidels entrust, say, an Air Force plane, or any major weaponry, or any security operations at all, whether by the military, or the C.I.A., or the F.B.I., to those who still identify themselves, for whatever reason, as Muslims? Does that make sense? Is that an intelligent wager to make with our own security?

Posted by: Hugh at November 4, 2007 2:05 PM

Hasan Akbar, the Muslim traitor and murderer of two Americans in the first week of the Iraq war wrote these entries in his diary:

1992: "I made a promise that if I am not able to achieve success because of some Caucasians, I will kill as many of them as possible."

1993: "I do not like the military. They have too much control over people's lives. I suppose I am just anti-government…. A Muslim should see himself as a Muslim only. His loyalty should be to Islam only."

1996: "Anyone who stands in front of me shall be considered the enemy and dealt with accordingly."

1996: "destroying America was my plan as a child, and as a juvenile and in college. Destroying America is my greatest goal."

**********

These excerpts were featured in an article at Daniel Pipes' website some time ago.

It is interesting to note that this vile Muslim animal joined the U.S. military in 1998 -- long after he'd formed his demonic plans to subvert, harm, murder, and destroy for the sake of Islam. He was considered an excellent Muslim by his peers -- devout, pious, extremely dedicated to Islam.

And we apparently had (and still have) no way to differentiate such Muslim maniacs within our society or within our institutions -- more evidence mounts daily that they are utterly opposed to our system of man-made laws, and our plurality.

There is mounting evidence that while all Muslims do not turn into murdering maniacs, far too few if any really fight against the impulses of violence and hatred sacralized within their heinous "religion" of Islam.

If there's even a distinction to be made, it is perhaps this: some Muslims will go all the way to full out acts of violence, vengeance, and terrorism to further Islam --while others will further Islam however they might. In the end is this really a distinction we should care about? For if, in the end, terrorism, hatred, fascism, and murder are a few of the undeniable aspect of Islam itself wherever it rears its ugly head, then aren't all who practice, preserve, or promulgate this vile belief system guilty of heinous crimes against humanity?

It's also interesting to note that this particular Muslim traitor appeared to worship a strange brew of "Nation of Islam" though he apparently attended mosques of several varieties. But in the end with regards to America, and infidels in general, he came to the exact same conclusions about infidels and America that any run-of-the-mill Sunni, or Shiite might come to, namely that Muslims are separate from all others, that Islam is superior to all other strands of thought and belief, that Muslims form a special family of brothers, that the goal must be the destruction of all else and the implementation of Islam uber alles, that Muslims share an abject hatred and enmity for all things "un-Islamic", that Muslim fealty is to Islam first, to Muhammad first, and always to Allah first, and that the desecration, subversion, and destruction of all impedences to Islam and the free spread of Islam is a tantamount goal for all Muslims.

Posted by: jsla at November 4, 2007 2:30 PM

Hugh,

Was reading this fantastic commentary, when in para. 4, a lapse in though occurred:

"In Muslim terms, for Muslims only, the claim may not be necessary. After all, in the Muslim view
And all of these are not the simple claims of simple folk who simply want to take pride in some...."

The second sentence seems incomplete.

Thanks. Great analysis!

Posted by: boneshack at November 4, 2007 2:35 PM

The only Muslim of note who may have served should be listed in the Graves Registration. Marked by anything other than a Cross or Star.

The Dead fought for America . The rest???

Posted by: flowerknife_us at November 4, 2007 2:55 PM

Does anyone know more about this Muslim American Veterans Association? - JW

Only CAIR and Pakistanies seem to know it. There is no known record of him listed.

Were its World War II vets actually Muslims during the war, or did they convert afterward? - JW

As many have pointed out some African-American Servicemen were Muslims. Hence there were more than one Muslim fought against the Germans.

Hugh - It amazes me about your ability to write so much in depth on a short notice. Keep up the Good work, buddy.

Posted by: MusHuntCowboy at November 4, 2007 4:45 PM

Just wait till they start to islamize other American icons, like Elvis, Marilyn and James Dean.

Muhammad Elvis ?

Marylin Maymunah Monroe ?

James Ibrahim Dean?

Coming to a city near you, folks.

People who feel the need to rewrite tha past in order to get acceptance and/or recognition have to stop, and think why they need to rewrite the past.

If reality doesn't conform to your beliefs, don't change reality; change your beliefs.

Crusader,

Yes, and I wonder how many of our founding fathers were Muslims. Stay tuned!

Look also for our Congress to start handing out Congressional medals of honor to Muslims. I'll bet the word's aslready out to Commanders to seize in the slightest pretext to recommed them for the honor.

Posted by: rational at November 4, 2007 4:50 PM

Does anyone know more about this Muslim American Veterans Association? - JW

MUSLIM AMERICAN VETERANS ASSOCIATION
official website
http://www.mavapost1.com/
For More Information contact: (240) 354-4035 or (202) 903-7278;

Registrant:
Lyndon Bilal
3635 Martin L. King ave
Washington, District of Columbia 20032
United States

Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: MAVAPOST1.COM
Created on: 27-Apr-05
Expires on: 27-Apr-08
Last Updated on: 23-Oct-07

Administrative Contact:
Bilal, Lyndon mrbilal_2000@yahoo.com
3635 Martin L. King ave
Washington, District of Columbia 20032
United States
12025611366 Fax --

Technical Contact:
TechContact, YahooDomains domain.tech@yahoo-inc.com
701 First Ave.
Sunnyvale, California 94089
United States
16198813096 Fax --

Domain servers in listed order:
NS41.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
NS42.DOMAINCONTROL.COM

The previous information has been obtained either directly from the registrant or a registrar of the domain name other than Network Solutions. Network Solutions, therefore, does not guarantee its accuracy or completeness.

Show underlying registry data for this record

Current Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.
IP Address: 64.202.163.57 (ARIN & RIPE IP search)
IP Location: US(UNITED STATES)-ARIZONA-SCOTTSDALE
Record Type: Domain Name
Server Type: Apache
Lock Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Web Site Status: Active
DMOZ no listings
Y! Directory: see listings
Secure: No
E-commerce: No
Traffic Ranking: Not available
Data as of: 14-Jun-2005

CAIR's Headquarters:
453 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.
Washington, DC 20003
Tel: 202.488.8787
Fax: 202.488.0833

FROM; Bill WArner
WBI Inc Private Detective Agency
Sarasota Fl
www.wbipi.com

Posted by: Youssef at November 4, 2007 5:16 PM

Look also for our Congress to start handing out Congressional medals of honor to Muslims. I'll bet the word's aslready out to Commanders to seize in the slightest pretext to recommed them for the honor.
Posted by: rational

If this starts to happen, then we will be on the shit-end of the stick for a very long time to come. You cannot re-write history with giving out undeserved Medals of Honor, especially to a barbaric religio-death-war Cult.

It would be far more advisable to start shuttering Islamic operations in America, especially those angling for Sharia, and deporting undesirables than to cowtow to their primitive instincts. Will it happen? A 30 years war? If Congress does this, make it 130 years. Bad move if this happens. You cannot appease the Beast.

Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at November 4, 2007 5:29 PM

Yes..whenever I think of America's fighting minorities, the first group that would come to my mind would be those legendary military heroes..always the first to answer their nation's call..the fierce..the fearless..uh uh the..my nation right or wrong red white and blue muslim warrior...yesiree bob.

Posted by: pismopal at November 4, 2007 5:35 PM

Pelayo

I just got back...man I miss everything. Military history! Love it!

I found those HAKEEMs and many other variations. In fact I tried all sorts of things like different spellings..nope. There were other muslim type name however (esp. Syrians and some Egyptians) so it is possible that a muslim could have been involved in front line combat. The problem I have with this story is I can't find this individual at all.

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 4, 2007 5:36 PM

The only mention I could find of Lyndon Bilal, an Air Force Sergeant back in March 1991, who was part of Muslim Military Members, who met with Pentagon officials, along with officials from convicted terrorist leader Abdurahman Alamoudi's American Muslim Council:

American Muslim Council Discusses with Pentagon Needs of Muslim US Soldiers in Gulf War

The article is from the anti-Jewish publication, Washington Report on Middle-East Affairs, where every Israeli soldier eats a live Palestinian child for breakfast every morning. Um yum.

Posted by: scanderbeg at November 4, 2007 5:45 PM

"Thanks. Great analysis!"
-- from a poster who also notes in passing that I have left some of the verbal props on stage and need to remove them posthaste

Don't mention it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcAIksVwNsw

Posted by: Hugh at November 4, 2007 6:00 PM

I have seen the updates on Atlas with pictures so everything makes sense now.

They were converts after the fact no doubt.

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 4, 2007 6:01 PM

Folks you're looking at a whitewashing and astroturfing operation with this Muslim American Veterans Association.

IOW its a PR offensive and probably funded by CAIR to make Muslims look patriotic and create a false history of their service to this country as well.

Gobbels would like it.

Posted by: waltc at November 4, 2007 6:55 PM

Great Comet, I haven't looked at the search reasults again, but I do not recall any of the Hakims or Hakeems being born anywhere but the US. I suspect these men might be Arab Christians. I wish the Muslims would get into a counting contest to see how many Jews were in the US military in WWII.

Have you seen a Military Channel feature about the Ritchie Boys - a group of German Jews who fled NAZI Germany and later were fromed into an Army intelligence group and sent to Germany?

Posted by: Pelayo at November 4, 2007 7:25 PM

Greatcomet, I agree; these guys must be converts. Therefore, it doesn't count because before they became Mohamedans, they were not alive and had no history.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 4, 2007 7:32 PM

If an extremely rare Muslim or three fought against the Nazis on D-Day, he (they) was (were) confused, at best, and must not have gotten the Mufti of Jerusalem's proper Islamic marching orders.

In any case, Islam's dogmas are anti-secular, thus anti-Constitutional, and anti-Bill of Rights.

So his (their) enlistment oath(s) to defend both doctrines were bogus and invalid.

Confused Muslims need to fight over this schism among themselves, and within Islam, -and leave us out of their internecine Islamic carnage.

Once they sort out their doctrinal mess, we are more than willing to accept the results.

Which will mean:

1) a tamed (reformed-of-Koranic-calls-to-violence, and therefor a peaceful) Islam.

Or:

2) fight total war against the resulting theocratic tyranny.

Posted by: profitsbeard at November 4, 2007 9:20 PM

Ok, short & sweet...
It...didn't...happen.
Remember the guilt-trip incessant pounding of racism during WWII?
Well, though it is, sad to say, true (despite the purveying race-baiters who use it for other agendas), it also shows something that backfires on them...
Here's a pic of the *ahem* mOslem in question...
http://www.defenselink.mil/dodcmsshare/newsstoryPhoto/2006-06/screen_20060607170115_11islam4-20060607.jpg
That's a person of african ancestry (if he was even AT Normandy he was in support role the first few days, NOT in on any first of 5 waves, NOT in direct fire of enemy forces, and thus, did NOT fight in Normady. NO "colored troops" (their term at the time, not mine) were in combat until much later.

They said he "fought in Normandy"...that implies he was under arms in direct fire of the enemy forces.
WE know that is outrageously BOGUS...NO troops of "of color" did.
He was most likely under a birth name and converted...that's as far as it goes.
He WAS in the Army, he WAS in Europe, and maybe he WAS in combat later on, but NOT in Normandy.
Not...even...close...

The real despicable act here? It wasn't the CAIR FRAUD...it was the defense departments complicity in perpetuating this outrageous FRAUD and DECEIT.
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=16101

But what else is new?
They bought into that bogus kwanzaa BS (which was MADE UP OUT OF THIN AIR by militant black panthers for their own bogus agenda of an entirely different nature altogether), which is as bogus as the militant mexican separatist's "aztlan" scam...
though both are a different forum entirely.

Judge Judy needs to tell ibby the fibby:
"don't pee on my leg & tell me it's raining!"
which is EXACTLY what they are doing.

This is as BOGUS as scott thomas beauchamp & jesse macbeth (or better known as jesse al-zaid, which is itself a dead giveaway).

BOGUS...BOGUS...BOGUS.
PERIOD

Posted by: jcom972 at November 4, 2007 9:47 PM

Jcom, My late father was on Okinawa and later sent back to the Philippines. He was in the Signal Corps, and he feeely admits that he did no fighting. The once told me except for the rare Japanese air attack and the torpedo track that was reported near his troop ship, he never thought he was in danger. He carried a carbine, but never fired it at the enemy. We were looking at his batallion photograph once and he remarked that no one in his batallion was injured.
My father never inflated his service, unlike these neo-Muslim guys in the picture. If later they were mustered into the "Red Ball Express" then I will admit that they served under very, very trying and heroic circumstances.

My father instilled in me a revulsion for men who lie about their service or remain silent when they are given laurels that they do not deserve.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 4, 2007 11:01 PM

Of course Muslims were there on the front lines on D-Day on the beaches of Normandy, leading the spearhead. General Patton was a Muslim. It was Muslims who developed and dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, saving the lives of hundreds of thousands of (mostly Muslim) U.S. soldiers. The Continental Army that fought for independence from England in the War of Independence was mostly made up of Muslims. To deny this is to be a racist and an Islamophobe. If there are no records of this, it is only because the Zionists have erased them.

Posted by: special_guest at November 4, 2007 11:03 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Ball_Express

It's Wiki, it's short, but it is accurate enough.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 4, 2007 11:09 PM

Special_guest, Oh no, that means Audie Murphy was . . .!

Posted by: Pelayo at November 4, 2007 11:11 PM

Pelayo,
sounds like your Dad was good people, too.
My father was also at Okinawa (it was his first assignment).

Keep in mind, my target of attack is the same as yours (this claim of his-being muslim and in Normandy, as if actually being in direct-fire combat with the enemy, which was just plain false. Only late-fall '44 were they brought to bear in front line combat, see 763rd armor, etc...if this guy in question was with RedBall it would've been stressed in point, but wasn't)
so thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt on such a sensitive issue

Your take on the Red Ball Express is an understatement, as those poor bastards worked their @$$es off and got little credit for it (one reason I like Ken Burns' new series, "The War", it tells the bad side as well as the good, and long overdue)-if it werent' for those guys running the supply show, we wouldn't have HAD a supply line.
We also short-changed ourselves by not letting them fight...only during Korea was that resolved, at least for starters.
But those issues aside (since they're not disputable), this issue of this guy's claim...it is so beyond-outrageous it demands equally vociferous detraction...because such an act diminishes us all in the end.

That is one thing I won't put up with.

Posted by: jcom972 at November 4, 2007 11:58 PM

Jcom972, I'll revisit this tomorrow. Yeah, my father went from Brownwood, Texas to Okinawa then to the Philippiens because there was still a Japanese army that was not yet defeated.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 5, 2007 12:10 AM

Pelayo

Sorry to say I have not seen Ritchie Boys but I can't get enough military history (TV or Books).

I am one those idiots that will get into a debate on who was a better general and over history in general. Thats what my family did when I was a kid. My grandfather and I debated who was greater Stonewall Jackson or Sherman. My father kept starting fights by claiming Henry VIII was more important then Martin Luther. We as a family debated everything and if you did not have any facts to back you up...you got killed.

But I have a soft spot for military history and science history. Thanks for the tip...I will have to check it out...

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 5, 2007 12:39 AM

try the TV links:
Military Channel-
http://military.discovery.com/
History Channel-
http://www.history.com/

The America haters H-A-T-E these channels, especially since more WWII info got declassified & now shown publicly, including info that completely exonerates people like Truman & the bomb drop, etc (but those are another matter) while the militants continue touting their lies (and look like the lying militants they are).

The Ritchie Boys is also an excellent segment, well worth seeing.

Posted by: jcom972 at November 5, 2007 2:04 AM

". I do not know when the military stopped issuing service numbers.""

...about 1970....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at November 5, 2007 6:08 AM

Anyone who thinks that Muslims did not fight the Nazis and Fascists in WWII, then he needs to educate himself rather than speaking out of sheer ignorance. Perhaps, few American Muslims might have fought with the US Military since their numbers were small in the US, but tens of thousands of Muslim soldiers fought in the Armies of France and Britain. Try to read about the Italy campaign, for example? or go visit any of the cemeteries of soldiers who died fighting for the liberation of France?

And even there was not a single Muslim American soldier, which is totally false, so what?
big deal?

Indeed what I see, as a Muslim veteran, is that your hatred of Muslims blurrs your vision in a manner reminiscent of how Europeans or even some Americans used to think, in the first half of the 20th century, of jews as being unpatriotic and even a public enemy or that Catholic Americans could only be loyal to the Pope.
Total rubbish...of course

Posted by: Al2000 at November 5, 2007 7:38 AM

Anyone who thinks that Muslims did not fight the Nazis and Fascists in WWII, then he needs to educate himself rather than speaking out of sheer ignorance. Perhaps, few American Muslims might have fought with the US Military since their numbers were small in the US, but tens of thousands of Muslim soldiers fought in the Armies of France and Britain. Try to read about the Italy campaign, for example? or go visit any of the cemeteries of soldiers who died fighting for the liberation of France?

And even there was not a single Muslim American soldier, which is totally false, so what?
big deal?

Indeed what I see, as a Muslim veteran, is that your hatred of Muslims blurrs your vision in a manner reminiscent of how Europeans or even some Americans used to think, in the first half of the 20th century, of jews as being unpatriotic and even a public enemy or that Catholic Americans could only be loyal to the Pope.
Total rubbish...of course

Posted by: Al2000 at November 5, 2007 7:40 AM

Anyone who thinks that Muslims did not fight the Nazis and Fascists in WWII, then he needs to educate himself rather than speaking out of sheer ignorance. Perhaps, few American Muslims might have fought with the US Military since their numbers were small in the US, but tens of thousands of Muslim soldiers fought in the Armies of France and Britain. Try to read about the Italy campaign, for example? or go visit any of the cemeteries of soldiers who died fighting for the liberation of France?

And even there was not a single Muslim American soldier, which is totally false, so what?
big deal?

Indeed what I see, as a Muslim veteran, is that your hatred of Muslims blurrs your vision in a manner reminiscent of how Europeans or even some Americans used to think, in the first half of the 20th century, of jews as being unpatriotic and even a public enemy or that Catholic Americans could only be loyal to the Pope.
Total rubbish...of course

Posted by: Al2000 at November 5, 2007 7:41 AM

Al2000, This is about a group of people stealing glory and credit that does not belong to them. It doesn't matter who they are; furthermore, French and British soldiers are not the subject of this article.

Your Typekey name tells me more than I want to know - Al(Gore)2000.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 5, 2007 9:55 AM

What I dont like in all these is the apparent misuse of words. We talk about Arab Americans, Black Americans which refers primarily to African Americans etc. No one is described by his/her religion. To be a moslem is not adopting a new race, it means a religion and that is it. Any person from any race can adopt it. If an American adopting islam makes him automatically, first a moslem before being an American, then the issues that are being raised here about the loyalty of moslems becomes a serious issue. I dont hear descriptions like Christian American, or Hindu American, or Buddhist American. No preacher pursues this kind of agenda. To the ordinary christian, he just sees himself as an American. To the ordinary Hindu, he just sees himself as an American. But if somebody sees himself first of all a moslem and then an American, then we are in for a very serious trouble, if not now, then in the near future. This is just another way of demonstrating their agitation and move to dominate. Unfortunately, the word combination was done by the Army Officer who addressed the people in the dedication of the islamic worship center. How ignorant most people in authority are. Once we start and continue this misuse of words, then we are in for disaster.
I hope we wake up early enough.

Posted by: Nwachinemere at November 5, 2007 9:57 AM

Nwachinemere, I wish I had said that.

Al2000, you need to read what Nwachinemere wrote at least ten times.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 5, 2007 10:11 AM

AL 2000 YOU need to read and realize the truth of muslims "helping" any allied armies.

Your "troops" tended to be used in rear (excuse the expression) support services as transport, drivers, cooking, and guard duties along highways.

The troops who did do fighting in Italy were assigned to Free French or occasionally British units with the Europeans taking the most casualties and largest responsibilities of the battle areas.

Realistically, the Europeans rarely used muslim troops because they were still recouping their huges losses from World War 1 and needed some foreign troops to fill gaps here and there.

Most of us know that the dirtiest, bloodiest, most critical battles were waged by the US and its allies.

You people tended to be with Hitler and even than rebelled against its German officers only to be crushed by SS units.

Hey, you claimed to be fighting, you were all promised and got independence for your nations.
You never did anything for the allies for free.
You did very minor actions along various sectors in Europe and received freedom from the various colonial powers.

Sorry to tell you, but D-Day, the invasion of Southern France, Italy, Battle of the Bulge, Rhineland, the push into Eastern Europe was ALL American or Russian efforts.

What muslim troops did suffer as losses could not fill a bathtub in the OCEANS of blood spilled by the Russians and other allies.

If the liberation of Europe depended on muslim troops than I seriously doubt 1 single corner or tavern on the continent would had been cleared of German troops.

Now tell me, why are all you now running and clamoring to jump BACK into Europe and the USA??

You got what you wanted thanks to your "efforts" and yet today millions of your kind and trying to break into the western world.

Is it that western racism again?

Who knows.

Posted by: Hungarian Crusader at November 5, 2007 10:43 AM

This just in on JIHADNEWS.............

The US Civil War was won by 125,000 muslim volunteers shipped in December, 1864 under cover of night and landed on the coast of Baltimore.

They than forced marched during the night and besieged Richmond, Virginia causing the Confederates to surrender while using the blue, Union uniforms.

Upon surrendering in 1865, the muslim troops changed back into their Ottoman uniforms, boarded their stealth ships, and left forever leaving General Grant to take all the credit for winning the war.

Why did the muslim troops help President Lincoln?

Because Linclon was an undercover muslim and needed help from his fellow overseas islamists!

You people dont know anything about history.

Why was this covered up for so many years?

Posted by: Hungarian Crusader at November 5, 2007 10:59 AM

For those of you interested in military history, I strongly recommend Marcus Luttrell's "Lone Survivor." I read it last week on a train and there were many times where I barely held back tears.

Luttrell was the only survivor of a SEAL mission in Afghanistan in 2005. The leader of the SEAL team, Michael Murphy, received a posthumous CMOH. Of course the mainstream media didn't cover it.

At one point in the narrative, Luttrell is hidden by a group of Afghan villagers and some of the children get him to say the shahada (Luttrell somewhat botches the phoentics of the prayer but if you're familiar with it then you'll recognize what he's talking about). This means that technically Luttrell is a convert - I assume that CAIR will now try to make him into a Moslem veteran even though numerous times throughout the book Luttrell describes himself as a practicing Christian.

Posted by: Darius LaMonica at November 5, 2007 12:23 PM

This happened more than a few times for serving Russian troops during their war in Afghanistan.

Captured Russian troops in the hands of rebels could be assured of execution during those days.

Posted by: Hungarian Crusader at November 5, 2007 12:45 PM

Well, al2000, then feel free to lodge a complaint to NARA.
I for one make sure the record is accurate, and did just that...
FIGHTING there, and simply BEING there, are two different things...
the original fraud, and it IS FRAUD, claims
he FOUGHT in Normandy...
not "WAS in Normandy" (had he said that, nobody would've cared)
not "SERVED in Normandy", (had he said that, nobody would've cared)
but "FOUGHT in Normandy"
That alludes to actual combat arms facing enemy fire directly at location mentioned.
THAT is BOGUS
THAT is NOT "ignorance",
THAT is simply a matter of RECORD.
Words mean things, no matter how much taqqiyah tries to apply, or the 5th columnists/communists wish to twist it into something it simply is NOT.

So knock off the crap...facts are facts-get over it.
I stand on my position, like my predecessors before me who really DID "fight" in Normandy, UNLIKE that FRAUD in question. Most of themaren't here anymore...I'll be damned if I'm going to sit idly by and let frauds like that assclown fraud above make a sham out of this.

Posted by: jcom972 at November 5, 2007 1:10 PM

Hungarian Crusader : I understand that you hate Muslims because your country, Hungary, was a Muslim colony for centuries under the occupation of the Ottoman Muslims who used young Hungarian men as Harem eunuchs ...but that happened a long time ago and at least they treated better than your Russian "comrades"?

Now, you can lie all you want about the role of Muslims troops who died fighting for the liberation of Europe. It is well documented and all you have to do is reach for the war archives in Italy and France, eventhough I personally think that not a single drop of non-European blood should have been wasted since it was not their war to begin with. But that's another story, the main issue here is that you Hungarians were fighting with the German Nazis against the Allies and that's something you should be ashamed of ...so where were your Hungarian crusaders?

As to why are we all now as you claim "running and clamoring to jump BACK into Europe and the USA"??

Well, as far as I know, Hungarians, be it internet crusaders or chicken hawks, do not hold the title deed to the USA, the only ones who do are the native Americans AND
have you asked yourself WHY so many Europeans, Americans and non-Muslims are looking for jobs in Dubai/the Gulf where I currently live or why many of the French, Spaniards and many others, mostly Europeans, are retiring and settling in Marrakech....It's human nature and it's globalization that makes people move where they feel the most comfortable or where they see more opportunties ....but your kind is so bigoted that they will invent lies and want everybody to believe the rubbish that they say against anybody who's seen as different from them...

Posted by: Al2000 at November 6, 2007 2:17 AM

lol

noam chomsky anyone?

lol

Posted by: jcom972 at November 6, 2007 3:40 AM

My advice to the American public on the CAIR officials:

It's time to shoot these f*ck*rs on sight. They're terrorists. REAL terrorists who are bent on destroying our nation, overthrowing our democratically elected government, and killing our people.

Since our legal systen has failed to protect us from these monsters, we'd better to do the job ourselves. Someone has to.

And, for GOD'S sake: OUTLAW ISLAM NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: pythagoras at November 7, 2007 9:30 PM