Skip to content

One Cannot Be Both a Soldier of Allah and a Soldier of America

November 9, 2009

Fort Hood Shootings

It’s almost as though he was taunting us before he did it. And everyone around him was just too dumb or too scared to do anything.

Pamela Geller blogs about the hidden message on the Fort Hood shooter’s business card:

Here is the card that major Muslim Nidal Hasan gave to the infidels along with a quran before meeting his 72 raisins.

Could this lowlife jihadi be any more devout? He mosqued every day. Hated America, hated the troops, proselytized his co-workers, planned his jihad and completed his mission. His head was shaved. What else was shaved? If his body was shaved like his head, then the military guys and law enforcement know and have known that this was jihad, and they are scamming us now.

Now look at the card. Notice the SoA on the card? Soldiers of Allah. Followed by SWT, an abbreviation that usually follows the word Allah. (hat tip Robert)

When writing the name of God (Allah), Muslims often follow it with the abbreviation “SWT.” These letters stand for the Arabic words “Subhanahu Wa Ta’ala,” or “Glory to Him, the Exalted.” Muslims use these or similar words to glorify God when mentioning His name.

Hat tip to Michelle Malkin.

Be sure and read the whole thing.

Now before I get the George Soros Steno-Pool attacking me as an Islamophobe for that headline, let me offer a clarification which is so basic and obvious that it’s almost embarrassing to have to say it. (But when you’re dealing with operatives as inherently dishonest as Media Matters it’s kind of necessary.)

One most certainly can be both a Muslim and a soldier. There are plenty of Muslims in America and in our armed forces who reject Sharia, embrace modernity and the principles of the founding, ignore the Koran’s totalitarian tendencies, and recognize Islamo-fascism as the most dangerous force facing the Free World today.

trojan_horse_canakkaleBut Nidal Hasan was not such a Muslim. He blatantly identified as a “Soldier of Allah.” And America’s and the army’s cowardly intellectual paralysis in being unable to recognize the differences here were a key component in allowing the Fort Hood massacre to take place.

The reality is this: the unholy alliance has wheeled a wooden horse up to America’s gates and our own military has taken it inside. And only a few Cassandras have been willing to accept being slurred as “Islamophobes” and “racists” in order to call attention to it.

Will Troy’s fate be America’s? Are those challenging the stealth jihad really just Cassandras who will be ignored? I don’t know. It’s times like this when my Gen Y optimism is tested the most.

Advertisements
22 Comments
  1. John Davidson permalink
    November 9, 2009 12:23 pm

    Throughout history, spys have infiltrated enemy armies. This is a known fact to anyone who studied history.

    One wonders if we have elected people who do have a complete understanding of the historical significance of the past atrocities created by an unstable economy and the intent of those that encourage it at their own pleasure.

    • In the Know permalink
      November 9, 2009 1:01 pm

      John,

      The “past” these officials know of has either been fabricated by them or their mentors. They can’t learn from the greatest mistakes in history because they don’t actually know them. They know what they were told by their pluralist masters; they’ve admitted it openly. Only two types of people could emulate such monsters as Stalin, Lenin, Pol pot and Mao; people who are monsters who share their ideals, or people who have been lied to by the aforementioned monsters. You can rely on the fact that they are making ill informed decisions because they are ill informed. My concern is that they are more the former, ideologues, rather than the latter, fools.

      • John Davidson permalink
        November 10, 2009 7:06 am

        Perhaps we are confused by identifying them as socialist rather than socialpaths.

    • jochang permalink
      November 10, 2009 11:11 am

      Spys, of necessity, are covert. This guy was neither. He was, apparently, intent on harming the United States, advocating jihad. For goodness sake, someone in the army, in government, please face that, once and for all, and to hell with political correctness. Get some ghones. Ignoring this is nothing more than cowardly and disgraceful.

  2. crusader7 permalink
    November 9, 2009 12:57 pm

    If we can criticize muslims, do “piss-mohammad” artwork, ridicule, satire, insult, key stickers on their car, write books alleging islam are satanic verses, cartoon, and otherwise subjugate it to any and all freedoms of expression… then there’s no argument here.

    but if we can’t…. and it has some terrorifying things like fatwas, taqiyya, dhimmitude, jihad, and death if one leaves the religion… like some horrific hell religion… then i’d say we can call it hate crime.

  3. November 9, 2009 1:28 pm

    There ARE moderate Muslims. The question is how to make them count.

    The problems preventing them from being an effective force are:

    A) Getting them to stand up and speak out despite a tradition of solidarity with fellow Muslims; right or wrong.

    B) When they do speak out separating them from the majority of “moderate Muslim” spokespeople who are really taqqiya operatives of the fundamentalist mentality.

    C) The BIGGEST problem though is how to deal with religious terrorists without shredding the entire concept of freedom of religion. How do we counter-attack against the violently religious as a society, while not giving the government the ability to declare this or that faith a “non-religion”?

    The best solution I can see is to require strong, positive oaths of all elected officials, military personnel and others seeking security clearance specifically placing their duty to the Constitution above all other considerations of their own free will. Then follow up by prosecuting harshly ANYONE who is found to violate that oath.

    This needs to hold true whether it is someone like Maj. (I hate using that title for him) Hasan or someone putting their fellow soldiers at risk by trying to pass out local language Bibles in Afghanistan.

    The good news is that there IS a strong current forming in the Islamic community against the domination of fundamentalist Islamists!
    http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/5487731/the-struggle-for-islams-soul.thtml

    How do we judge sincerity? The same way we judge anyone, Virginia; by the fruit they bear. That is the core criteria over at Heretics Crusade.

  4. Paul Cooper permalink
    November 9, 2009 1:37 pm

    Great title! I envy your title making skills:)

  5. November 9, 2009 2:37 pm

    “One Cannot Be Both a Soldier of Allah and a Soldier of America” – This is true, why did it happen? It was allowed, maybe not in an intentional sense, nevertheless allowed……because we are so GD “politically correct.” God help us all if we offend any one. We continue to coddle terrorists, murderers, rapists, child and women abusers, bullies in schools, cheaters, and there are more, too numerous to mention. Too many passes and excuses have been given out and allowed, but you cannot keep doing this, someday you have to pay the piper. Find out how many people get killed and murdered world wide every day. You will be shocked. Genocide everyday. Have we forgotten 9-11 already? The marines killed in Beirut? All the car bombings of embassies all over the world? The USS Cole?
    Everywhere a pathetic world! I say get tough or will die.

  6. November 9, 2009 5:46 pm

    A commenter on CNN made an interesting point: in WWII the government was not stupid enough to ask Japanese soldiers to fight in the Pacific. Instead they sent them to Europe or Africa.

    Could we not disinvolve Muslim soldiers from anything to do with Muslims out of “cultural sensitivity”?

    • betty boop permalink
      November 10, 2009 5:41 am

      “Could we not disinvolve Muslim soldiers from anything to do with Muslims out of “cultural sensitivity”?”

      Or just from the armed services in general? Seriously. Maybe it’s time Muslims were asked to step up and make a choice. Can they be put into service here in this country? Do they need such special handling, and is that fair to others who’ve been raised with a tradition of loyalty to another religion? I hope and pray there is such a thing as a tolerant, peaceful Muslim, and I have no desire to see that person persecuted wrongly, but how can we tell? Common sense just makes me want to duck and cover when I encounter a family with Burkas now…

  7. shane comeback permalink
    November 10, 2009 4:46 am

    If we have to tell soldiers where they can and cannot serve based on “cultural sensitivity, ” then we will not have much of an army. In WW2,plenty of New York Italian kids and Milwaukee Germans fought in Europe. We just didn’t trust the Japanese enough to fight in the Pacific. Thats the un-PC truth.

  8. Freeme permalink
    November 10, 2009 5:42 am

    Who were his superior Officers and why did they allow him to react and act as though he was NOT part of the U.S Army? Filtering through the rank and file, follow the ‘trickle down’ upwards to the demands of the Commander in Chief.

  9. victor permalink
    November 10, 2009 6:18 am

    We have a serious problem with so many enemies from within and political correctness allows it to be pervasive. Has anyone been to Dearborn, Mich. to hear the vitriol every prayer service against the U.S.A. and Israel? Has anyone witnessed the desecration of the American Flag? While all Muslims are not terrorists, virtually all terrorists are Muslim. Those Muslims who are not terrorists, still support Hizbollah (murderers of over 200 of our Marines) even knowing that they are a terrorist organization. Wake up America, this was just a warning shot!

  10. Frank Salvidio permalink
    November 10, 2009 6:25 am

    The Trojan horse is in the White House.

  11. Anne White permalink
    November 10, 2009 6:57 am

    No matter who the “masters” might be, man cannot serve TWO masters. He will hate one or the other. What Muslim devoted to Allah can serve and obey military authorities?

  12. David permalink
    November 10, 2009 6:58 am

    What an eye opener! The only thing I noticed when I first saw his business card was the glaring omission that he was a Major in the US Army. It was almost as if he was ashamed and it certain dovetails in with the SoA and SWT.

    I certainly agree that the enemy is within our ranks. As long as we continue to keep our heads in the sand these things will continue to take place.

    PC is killing us. It has been in all the White Houses and is not unique to the Dems.

    This stuff about the business card needs to find a place on the evening news. How many people need to die at the hands of the jihadis before people begin to take notice??

    Keep up the good work!

  13. PRCS permalink
    November 10, 2009 9:31 am

    David Swindle,

    I’m not sure SoA stands for Soldier of Allah.

    It could actually stand for Slave of Allah.

  14. PRCS permalink
    November 10, 2009 9:54 am

    Guy DeWhitney asks:

    “Could we not disinvolve Muslim soldiers from anything to do with Muslims out of “cultural sensitivity”?”

    It’s not cultural sensitivity; that particular issue is one of religious dogma. Their squeamishness is not the result of race or ethnicity but of Islamic teachings; and from those very same teachings come the permission to kill unbelievers–without consequence.

    David Swindle wrote: “There are plenty of Muslims in America and in our armed forces who reject Sharia, embrace modernity and the principles of the founding, ignore the Koran’s totalitarian tendencies, and recognize Islamo-fascism as the most dangerous force facing the Free World today.”

    Bear in mind, to much of the world’s Muslim population, that makes them blasphemers (‘moderate’ Muslims in our parlance), and unfortunately, their personal choice to ignore selected tenets of written Islamic teachings does not change what Islam teaches and puts them in conflict with their more devout co-religionists.

    We need a national debate to determine what Islam really teaches and to make public which of its teachings make Islam antithetical to democracy and which of its teachings make it incompatible with the U.S. Constitution; so we can all quit pussy-footing around the issue.

    We cannot have military members swearing a partial oath to our constitution.

  15. peachey permalink
    November 10, 2009 12:14 pm

    PRCS,
    I understand the Western approach to a problem is to look at it from all angles and then make a decision. Islam removed the decision making process within the pages of the Koran, and the Hadiths held to be the sole source of daily living,thought,religious practice and government. Islam is not now or will ever be complatible with democratic governments and the freedoms that the people enjoy. I do know ex-Muslims (now Christian) that voice a strong concern regarding our inability to see evil for what it really is. It is very difficult for us to wrap our brains around the thought that someone could vehemently hate us so much as to sacrifice their life or their childrens lives in order to destroy a population that is willing to incorporate them into the fabric of society. While there are Muslims that have chosen to ignore the basic and core beliefs of the Koran, I am concerned about the point at which they would choose to embrace true Islam. This is the contradiction that those Muslims face every day. The sole focus and purpose of Islam is to produce men that emulate Mohammed (as being the human “perfected”). At what point do those Muslims that serve within government, the armed services, universities and technology wake up one morning and recognize that they have not fulfilled the true calling of Islam. The Koran is very clear and there is nothing that can be confusing or misinterpreted. The sayings and commands of Mohammed (the Hadiths) are brutal and clear in commands to those that are Muslims. I am concerned that the needs to meet the politically correct demands of the Progressive will continue to place all at risk. The Americans murdered at Fort Hood were the victims of an incompetent and politically correct command structure that was more concerned in accomodating a radical Muslim terrorist, than protecting those soldiers that are true Americans. With the current mindset to psychologically explain away Hassan, all soldiers are placed in danger. The blindness to true evil runs deep and throughout the government and society. Hassan was an open, functioning terrorist long before the murders. What has happened to common sense and clarity of reason?

    • PRCS permalink
      November 10, 2009 6:13 pm

      Unlike Islam, it has been hijacked.

      One note to ponder; to refer to Hasan as a radical muddies the waters.

      Listen to Sean Hannity and Congressman Hoekstra this evening as they manufacture a list of compound adjectives (radical jihadists, Islamic extremists, etc.)

      Now, eight years post 9/11, they remain ignorant of what Islam really teaches and are bitching about political correctness.

      Do they ever wonder what a Muslim ‘extremist’ is being extreme about?; Neither of them cam bring themselves to state what the problem really is: Islam–as it’s written.

      Common sense? Pah!

  16. Moss permalink
    November 13, 2009 9:03 am

    The twelve main tactics of taqiyya.

Trackbacks

  1. Fort Hood Shooters Weapon Offers Clues And Questions « Moonbat Patrol

Comments are closed.