Abu Wabu

Andrew C. McCarthy is fuming about the revelation that a top official of the Muslim Brotherhood's American front organization has been brought to Fort Hood to lecture the troops on Islam prior to their deployment to Afghanistan.

Prepare to be infuriated.

It's been brought to my attention by several reliable sources that the Defense Department has brought Louay Safi to Fort Hood as an instructor, and that he has been lecturing on Islam to our troops in Fort Hood who are about to deploy to Afghanistan. Safi is a top official of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), and served as research director at the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT).

Worse, last evening, Safi was apparently permitted to present a check (evidently on behalf of ISNA) to the families of the victims of last month's Fort Hood massacre. A military source told the blogger Barbarossa at the Jawa Report: "This is nothing short of blood money. This is criminal and the Ft. Hood base commander should be fired right now."

ISNA was identified by the Justice Department at the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing conspiracy trial as an unindicted co-conspirator. The defendants at that trial were convicted of funding Hamas to the tune of millions of dollars. This should have come as no surprise. ISNA is the Muslim Brotherhood's umbrella entity for Islamist organizations in the United States. It was established in 1981 to enable Muslims in North America "to adopt Islam as a complete way of life" — i.e., to further the Brotherhood's strategy of establishing enclaves in the West that are governed by sharia. As I detailed in an essay for the April 20 edition of NR, the Brotherhood's rally-cry remains, to this day, "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Koran is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.” The Brotherhood's spiritual guide, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who issued a fatwa in 2004 calling for attacks on American forces in Afghanistan, openly declares that Islam will "conquer America" and "conquer Europe."

At the Jawa Report, Barbarossa observes that Nidal Hasan was simply carrying out Safi's Islamist doctrine of attacking the infidel from within:

Safi's extremist ideology was recently mentioned in a report by Rowan Scarborough, "FBI Partners with Jihad Groups":

Safi is a Syrian-born author who advocates Muslim American rights through his directorship of ISNA's Leadership Development Center. He advocates direct talks between Washington and Iran's leaders. He has spoken out against various law enforcement raids on Islamic centers.
In a 2003 publication, "Peace and the Limits of War," Safi wrote, "The war against the apostates [non-believers of Islam] is carried out not to force them to accept Islam, but to enforce the Islamic law and maintain order."

He also wrote, "It is up to the Muslim leadership to assess the situation and weigh the circumstances as well as the capacity of the Muslim community before deciding the appropriate type of jihad. At one stage, Muslims may find that jihad, through persuasion or peaceful resistance, is the best and most effective method to achieve just peace."

Again, this guy is teaching our soldiers on Islam at Ft. Hood as they are set to deploy to Afghanistan. Maj. Hasan was merely following Safi's dictates in consulting with his former imam Anwar al-Aulaqi in assessing the situation and deciding on the appropriate type of jihad. And Hasan could have easily relied on Safi's rulings on Islamic warfare in preparing for his attack. On page 29 of his "Peace and the Limits of War", Safi outlines the Islamic doctrine of a preemptive strike:

The clear-cut case of foreign aggression is a military attack on the Islamic state or its allies. The Muslims, however, are not obliged to wait until the enemies launch their attack, before responding. Rather, the Islamic state can initiate war and carry out a preemptive strike if the Muslim authorities become convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that the enemy is mobilizing its forces and is about to carry out an offensive, or if a state of war already exists between the Islamic state and its adversaries."

Can the Islamic justifications behind Maj. Hasan's murderous attack be made more clear? And now Safi goes to the very scene of the crime to check out his ideological handywork at the invitation of military brass. Guys like Louay Safi are the problem, not the solution. Whomever brought him to Ft. Hood should be court martialed and drummed out of the military in shame.

And in an update, Barbarossa describes how the more that comes to light about this madness, the worse it gets:

Once again, Safi's own book outlines the Islamic doctrine of "preemptive strikes" when any enemy of Islam (aka "America") "is mobilizing its forces and is about to carry out an offensive." Hasan consulted with Anwar al-Aulaqi (aka "Islamic authorities") according to Safi's instruction. Is Louay Safi playing both sides of the fence like his old friend, convicted Al-Qaeda bagman Aburahman Alamoudi, who established the DOD's Islamic chaplaincy program?

WTHR also reported that ISNA started a donation drive to assist the families of the Ft Hood massacre. This is much like Al-Qaeda raising money for the victims of 9/11. Could this possibly get any worse? Dare I ask?

I am convinced that this infiltration of the military by enemy Islamist elements during the Obama administration will continue at least until another devastating attack occurs on American soil. Unfortunately, since the Fort Hood massacre has done absolutely nothing to stop this madness from continuing right under the noses of a military leadership entirely cowed by political correctness, no-one can predict how bad the next attack might be.

And with stories such as this and this, it seems there is quite a lot of new activity aimed at testing America's military, government and civilian defenses.