Arkansas recruitment shooter confesses motivation Pentagon report omits: killing U.S. servicemembers domestically is a 'Muslim obligation for Jihad'

The Pentagon's report about the motivations of Ft. Hood shooter, Palestinian-American Army Major Dr. Nidal Hasan, omit reference to  Islamic religious dogma for Muslims killing of American service-members. 

But Carlos Bledsoe, (pictured right) who attacked an Arkansas, Army-recruitment store, answered for the public what the Pentagon report refused to acknowledge.  His motivation for shooting to kill white 23-year old Army Private William Long and wounding an 18-year old African-American Army recruiter private wasn't racial. It wasn't political opposition to the war, it was his Islamic religious beliefs.  He confessed to the judge in his case that he is commanded, as an American Muslim, to fight those who wage war on Muslims.

(CNN - Jan 22)  A Tennessee man -- accused in a fatal attack at a military recruiting center in Arkansas in June -- wants to plead guilty and claims to have ties to al Qaeda in Yemen in a letter he wrote to the judge presiding over his case.


In the handwritten letter dated January 12, Abdul Hakim Muhammad said he did not want a trial and insisted the shooting was "justified" under jihad.

"This was a jihadi attack on infidel forces that didn't go as plan," he wrote. "Flat out truth."

Mr. Muhammad, formerly known as Carlos Bledsoe,(pictured left) is charged with killing Pvt. William Long, 23 (photos left, and wounding Pvt. Quinton Ezeagwula, 18 (photo right). The attack happened on June 1 at a recruiting center in Little Rock, Arkansas.  In his letter to the judge, Muhammad claimed he had links to al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen, a group that has claimed responsibility for the attempting bombing of a U.S.-bound airliner on Christmas Day.

"My lawyer has no defense," he wrote. "I wasn't insane or post traumatic nor was I forced to do this act. Which I believe and it is justified according to Islamic laws and the Islamic religion jihad -- to fight those who wage war on Islam and Muslims."

(End CNN article) (Photo right) Pvt. Quinton Ezeagwula

To what degree do Muslims living in the West (especially as citizens) have dual-allegiance?  Where Islamic law contradicts Western law, how often will Muslims prioritize Islamic law (shariah)? And to what extent should Western society involve itself to insure allegiance to its laws among those with a propensity to subvert its laws, or with an allegiance to promoting a conflicting political system?

A report delivered to the French parliament recommends restrictions on the use of the full face veil for Muslim women in public. It suggests banning the veil in public facilities including hospitals, universities and mass transit. (AP, Jan 26)




Time Magazine publishes: "Face Veils: Bans in Europe Fail to Take Hold in U.S."

Politics Daily publishes this op-ed by Bonnie Erbe: "France's Proposed Burqa Ban: Why Americans Might Want to Consider It Too"

"Beating the Dead Terrorist Horse" by Victor Davis Hanson's column in NRO

September 11 taught us many lessons. To our peril, we have forgotten them. Most of the current acrimony over counterterrorism is stale. The debate is simply a rehash of issues that were discussed and, in fact, resolved early last decade.  Let us review them one more time:

MOST TERRORISTS ARE NOT POOR AND DOWNTRODDEN

September 11 taught us that a Mohammed Atta or a Khalid Sheikh Mohammed does not commit mass murder out of hunger, want, illiteracy, or Western oppression.

No doubt Middle Eastern poverty contributes to religious violence. But the poor in Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Yemen are no more impoverished than those in the slums of São Paulo, Mexico City, Ho Chi Minh City, or Johannesburg. And the latter, despite their frequent claims against the West, do not feel a need to murder in mass in the name of their particular religion.

A Major Nidal Hasan or an Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab wishes to kill Westerners not because he is poor or even on behalf of the poor, but rather out of a warped sense of pride, hurt, and anger.

Such passions derive from a radical religious creed that insists that comparative failure in the modern Middle East is not self-induced — much less a product of fundamentalism, anti-Enlightenment thinking, autocracy, gender apartheid, tribalism, corruption, and statism. Instead the fact that there is no longer an intercontinental caliphate of rich and powerful believers is due to some sort of contemporary Jewish or Western oppression. 

ISRAEL IS NOT THE PROBLEM

Just because radical Muslims and the Arab Street claim that a Jewish presence on the West Bank is the catalyst for terrorist outrage does not make it so — any more than Hitler’s insistence that Versailles drove him to the invasion of Poland in 1939, or Argentinians’ claims that their problems in the early 1980s originated with the British “occupation” of the Malvinas.

No Germans today are blowing up Poles for the loss of Danzig and East Prussia. Greek Cypriots are not planting IEDs at Turkish embassies to force the return of ancestral homelands. And the world is not concerned about the divided city of Nicosia or Russian occupation of the Kuriles.

No, what privileges the Palestinian question is largely three factors that have nothing to do with disputed ground: 
1)  The presence of huge amounts of oil on Arab lands, 

2)  Endemic anti-Semitism in the West and at the U.N., and 

3)  Fear of radical Islamic terrorism.

Take those considerations out of the equation, and the West Bank is about as important to the world as a disputed South Ossetia. We forget that there were three Middle Eastern wars well before the so-called occupation of Palestine. Gaza did not become a calm place once the Israelis left.

Should Palestinians cease the violence, welcome investment from elsewhere in the Arab world, and establish a consensual government, one transparent and free of corruption, the West Bank could become like Dubai — and deal with Israel as a responsible neighbor adjudicating a common border. And yet radical Islamic terrorism in general would nevertheless continue with fresh and always mutating grievances.


Entire list in National Review Online

Jihad is a cultural power-quest driven by Arab oil-money. Israel/Palestine won't resolve it.

Here, in a new DemoCast-filmed exclusive, Dr. Tawfik Hamid rectifies the misconception that global Jihadist imperialism is motivated by the Israel/Palestine conflict. Contrary to conventional presumption, he explains that the imperialist Jihad (and associated, terror-intimidation) is actually fueled by an Arab oil-funded, Islamist cultural network of mosques, schools, clergy. It is this religious dogma, he claims, which drives hatred and domination of non-Muslims, particularly Jewish people and the Jewish state.



Democracy Broadcasting News was today awarded the internet-wide recognition, "Blog of the Day." Many thanks to all our loyal, generous supporters!

Video: "Islamic Supremacism Motivates Terror" - British Muslim Whistleblower

Shiraz Maher, reformed supremacist with Hizb ut-Tahrir, reveals how an Islamist revolution to influence the West (politically and socially) motivates terrorism among European and North Americans.

Sufi Muslim Council's Haras Rafiq explains Islamist theology and ideology motivates Muslim terrorists. Which interests (political, corporate) promote these movements to influence Western economies and policies?