The Consequences of America’s Failure to

Understand Islam
By Jacob Thomas
Soon after the murderous attack on the enlisted men and women at Fort Hood, Texas, the
picture of the officer who mounted that carnage was flashed on the television screen. It
revealed the physiognomy of a Mideastern man! Before long, he was described as a
psychiatrist with the rank of Major in the U. S. Army, the son of an immigrant Palestinian
family, born and educated in the United States. Radio, television, newspapers, and the
various Internet websites continued reporting on the massacre, and delved into the
motives that caused a medical doctor to turn into an executioner.
I was struck immediately with the fact that his parents had given him the name Nidal. I
am familiar with many of the names Muslims give their children, but have never heard of
the name “Nidal,” which means “Struggle” being given to a Muslim boy
I am convinced that these wanton murders could have been averted if our political
leadership and the mainline media, were not blinded by an abysmal ignorance of the true
nature of Islam. As a life-time student of Islam, its history and authoritative texts, I would
like to point to the massacre at Fort Hood as a consequence of America’s failure to
understand Islam. Here is a shocking example:
On the 10th of November, 2009, The Wall Street Journal published an article with this
headline, “After the Fort Hood Massacre: Sorting the Hasans from patriotic Muslims
in the U.S. military.” The following excerpts I believe display a false dilemma regarding
the presence of Muslims in the military:

“There are two irreconcilable views of Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan’s murder of 13
people last Thursday at Fort Hood, Texas. One is that Major Hasan should be seen as not
much different than many other disturbed individuals, whose demons pitch them into
homicidal frenzies. The other is that the Hasan murders raise hard questions about the
ability of Muslims to serve at all in the American military. Neither view is acceptable. It
will be the job of public and military officials in weeks ahead to shape a policy response
that recognizes the hard political and ethnic realities of the Fort Hood massacre. So no,
Major Hasan is not just another nut. He volunteered himself into a larger Islamic jihad,
whose political weapon of choice is the murder of innocents across the globe. Just as
Americans can’t blink away the dangerous world of radical Islam, however, we also
cannot pretend that we can field a military that doesn’t include Muslims. The unreality of
attempting to fight this enemy without Muslim soldiers or operatives should be obvious.”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704402404574525743684356798.html
I am thoroughly baffled by these words, “we also cannot field a military that doesn’t
include Muslims. The unreality of attempting to fight this enemy without Muslim
soldiers or operatives should be obvious?” The author of this op-ed has actually
muddied the waters at a time when clear thinking is absolutely necessary in the aftermath
of this unspeakable tragedy.
The Defense Department is fully aware that Muslim recruits have entertained scruples
about “fighting other Muslims,” and is willing to grant them the status of “conscientious
objectors.” A strange concession indeed! Did it ever enter the minds of the DOD officials
that granting Muslim soldiers such a selective ‘conscientious objection’ is tantamount to
implying that the US Army does not dispute their allegations that it is targeting innocent
Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan! Traditionally, the classification of “conscientious
objection” is granted to U.S. citizens who are members of pacifist churches and
communions, and thus object to all wars regardless of who the enemy is. If Muslims
cannot fight even “bad” Muslims such as those of al-Qaeda or members of the Taliban,
why has it become absolutely necessary for the DOD to bend backwards in order to
accommodate would-be Muslim recruits? I cannot comprehend this twisted logic!
Let me refer to an article of mine that was posted on this website, on 21 October, 2009,
and which dealt with a related topic. In “Islam and the Decline of the West,” I pointed to
the danger faced by Western nations due to the growing number of Muslims residing
among them. This issue is extremely important and still unresolved nine years after 9-11.
See http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/10/21/islam-the-decline-of-the-west.

Several months before the above mentioned article appeared on the Elaph website, I had
commented on a 15 December, 2008, article that was also posted on Elaph with this
headline: An Increase in the Islamic Terrorist Danger Facing Europe and America.
It had predicted that more terrorist attacks would take place in both Europe and America.
It can be found here: http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?
name=News&file=article&sid=2202

The author of this article had premonitions about future acts of jihadist violence that
would occur on both sides of the Atlantic. In the light of what some of these responsible
and reformist Arab intellectuals have been writing on this subject, I offer the following
hypothesis:
All Muslims carry in their cultural and religious baggage a strong exclusivist belief
that they are the guardians of Allah’s mission and message to all mankind. Danger
is on the horizon when this belief becomes extreme and radicalized in certain
Muslims. For such persons, this exclusivism may lie dormant in their consciousness
until conditions become ripe for putting a more extreme face on this worldview,
which in turn can lead to the commission of terrorist acts. A Muslim man’s journey
starts in earnest when he begins attending mosques led by fiery and radical Imams.
Such Imams harangue worshippers during the Friday worship services with
messages filled with invectives against the Kuffar. All non-Muslims who do not
submit to Islam fit into this hated category.
Even the most “moderate” Muslim, attending this type of Friday propagandistic
services week after week and month after month, would be made susceptible to
forming attitudes and a mindset extremely critical of all non-Muslims that could
eventually wreak havoc in various ways, including terror attacks. The continuous

2
virulence of such an Imam’s sermons, coupled no doubt with copious quotations
from the Qur’an and the Hadiths backing up such rants, would inevitably trigger in
the psyche of a believer a dangerous urge to do something “fi Sabeel Allah” (In the
Pathway of Allah,). As recent history has proven, Muhammad ‘Atta and his vicious
cohorts certainly gleaned hatred from such instruction and perpetrated the horror
of 9-11. How influential such teachings from radical mosques and Imams were in
the life of Major Nidal, the Fort Hood terrorist, is yet to be determined.
My thesis would explain the Fort Hood tragedy, especially as I ponder once again the
details that surfaced in the aftermath of the 9-11 attack. The papers packed in
Muhammad ‘Atta’s suitcase did not accompany him on the flight into the Twin Towers in
New York City. Eventually they were made public and published on the Internet. I read
and re-read the speech he gave to his fellow believers the night before the horrific attack.
He exhorted them to remain firm in their resolve to punish the arrogant USA by attacking
the World Trade Center, which to him was a symbol of America’s arrogance. He quoted
passages from the Qur’an to strengthen them in their determination to go through the
suicidal mission.
Further research into ‘Atta’s background was revealing. Testimony from his German
professor at Hamburg University was telecast on the internet some months ago. It was
noted that ‘Atta had been a normal student doing excellent work in his chosen field. His
thesis regarded “Urban Renewal,” a much-needed work in his native Egypt.
So what radicalized an otherwise intellectually brilliant student who had so much to offer
his native country? One answer is certainly his Mosque attendance while a student in
Hamburg. He chose to worship at the Jerusalem Mosque notoriously famous for being
led by a fiery Imam who never ceased hurling curses and imprecations at the Infidels. I
can only conclude that ‘Atta’s conscious and subconscious mind became saturated with
that fire and brimstone preaching of the radical cleric. He became mentally unstable, and
now he had justification from his spiritual leader to go on a jihad and do something great
for Allah. His aim became to murder as many Infidels as possible.
So much for my hypothesis. Ali Sina is certainly well aware of the situation the world
community is faced with in Islam. He recently wrote on the Fort Hood murders. I
conclude with these important words from that article:

“Another Muslim, another terrorist saga, more innocent lives lost. What else is
new? All Muslims are not terrorists, but they are potentially.”
http://www.faithfreedom.org/print/6646