2007 March 08 Thursday
Former US Navy Muslim Arrested On Terrorism Charges

A former sailor in the US Navy has been charged with activities in support of terrorism.

HARTFORD, March 8 — When Hassan Abujihaad was a sailor on a United States Navy destroyer in 2001, federal prosecutors said, he began exchanging e-mail messages with a man who ran an Internet site seeking to raise money for terrorist causes.

I found a web site that claims "Abu" means holy man or saint but that it is common practice to use "Abu" to refer to fathers. So this guy's name, Abu (father) Jihaad (holy war) is father of holy war. That is probably the chosen name of a convert since he's also referred to in news stories as Paul R Hall.

Mr. Abujihaad initially contacted the administrators of the Web site to buy DVDs that promoted Muslim separatist fighting in Chechnya and elsewhere, the authorities said. But in 2001, he shared information about his ship’s whereabouts and vulnerabilities, according to a complaint filed by the Department of Justice.

The US government claims he was telling a British Muslim web site operator when his destroyer passed through the Straits of Hormuz at the mouth of the Persian Gulf. That web site operator, Babar Ahmad, is a British Pakistani who the United States government wants to extradite from Britain to put on trial in the US for raising funds for terrorism.

The investigation into Babar Ahmad turned up emails from Abujihaad.

In July of 2001, referring to the attack on the USS Cole, Abujihaad writes in an e-mail: "I am a Muslim station on board a U.S. warship currently operating deployed to the Arabian Gulf. It shall be noted before Osama's latest video was viewed by massive people all over the world. That psychological anxiety had already set in on the America's forces everywhere. All this is due to the martyrdom operation against the USS Cole."

The Western countries should stop letting Muslims immigrate and should deport the vast majority of non-citizen Muslims already here. Also, citizen Muslims should be offered money to give up their citizenship and to move to Muslim majority nations. Oherwise we are going to witness the continued development of Muslim parallel societies in the West.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2007 March 08 10:38 PM  Immigration Terrorism


Comments
John S Bolton said at March 8, 2007 11:35 PM:

This incident is a reductio ad absurdum of anti-discrimination as a social and political ideal.
It has already happened, that, as a result of elevating anti-discrimination above loyalty owed to necessary continuities, we have enemies infiltrating even the military and other places highly sensitive for national security.
This keeps happening, even though anti-discrimination as a radical notion is readily reducible to a contradiction-in-terms: discrimination is said by those who would have us discriminate against discriminators, to be both necessary and unnecessary at the same time and in the same respect.
Only unreason could insist on keeping public policy in hot pursuit of the ultimate realizations of being based on a contradiction-in-terms, when 100 ways of pulling back are possible.

Anon said at March 9, 2007 7:56 AM:

Islamics cannot be trusted in any way, shape or form. Once again, I am not surprised at the stupidity of the US military and our gov't as well as the elites who keep pushing muslim immigration and telling us how wonderful these people are and how they make great Americans. Muslims are loyal to Islam first, everything else is secondary. However, as much as I would like to see Babar Ahmad shot in the neck and buried in a pigskin in an unmarked grave, I can't really blame him alone. He is only following the Koran and Islamic teaching. It is there for anyone to read, after all translations of the Koran are available in English He was being a good muslim. Everybody knows this but nobody in gov't or the militray hierarchy wants to admit it for fear of being called racist(even though islam is not a race, muslims and their lackeys throw the racism charge around), anti-muslim, etc...So this guy has access to data that could have gotten many people killed. Remember Hassan Akbar? I do. He fragged people in his own unit because he was a muslim who was angry about the US being in Kuwait and about to invade Iraq. How many more of these incidents were covered up I wonder.
I know Mr. Parker advocated ending muslim immigration and deporting muslims who are here illegally, but I would like to propose that even "citizens" who are muslims get thrown out too. They are not Americans. They are using their citizenship as a cover. This guy was willing to send info to jihadi terrorists via e-mail. How long until some "American" muslim helps terrorists plant and detonate a nuclear bomb? Think I'm overreacting? Go to Dearborn, Michigan. You might as well be in the Middle East. Or if you live on the East Coast, try Jersey City.
You might want to read this too:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2002/09/14/do1402.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2002/09/14/ixopinion.html

Or this: http://propagandamatrix.com/Trade_Center_warning_baffles_police.htm
(it is originally from MSNBC)


Daniel said at March 9, 2007 8:23 AM:

According to the allegations, this Abu relayed information to the enemy during war time. I don't think that we have ever seen a clearer case of treason; not treason in the rhetorical sense, but treason in the actual legal sense. This goes beyond, even, the recent cases of FBI and CIA agents peddling information to the Russians or Chinese. We were not actually at war with those states.

If this administration is serious about prosecuting war against muslim terrorists and their state supporters, then, it seems to me, it is imperative that he be tried in a military court, under weight of the ultimate sanction. I don't think Bush will go for a charge of treason, though. He is too senstive to the outcry of CAIR and the other muslim pressure groups. If that is the case, though, how can Bush face up to the men and woman who are risking their lives fighting theses terrorists? How can he face up to them and allow a back-stabbing traitor, one who eagerly tried to kill his fellow American men and women in arms, off the hook?

Let's see what happens.

Wolf-Dog said at March 9, 2007 5:51 PM:


For the record, there seems to be a linguistic weakness in the recruitment procedures of the US Navy, because the name "Abujihaad" is a rather specific and highly specialized name, which means Jihad-ist (a specialist like pianist, violinist, physicist, etc.) This specific name was probably not very popular among Muslims until recenty, and such a name sounds intrinsically suspicious. Only retards would enlist such a name into the Navy.

Irish Savant said at March 10, 2007 3:33 AM:

There seems to be something strange here. As Wolf-dog says, such a chosen name would be crazy for an enlister. Also, the text quoted indicates the syntax of a non-native English speaker, yet the guy's real name of Paul Hall. Dont know....

anon2 said at March 12, 2007 12:29 AM:

This guy wasn't an immigrant. He was a convert. Merely seeing his new name suggests that he's possibly interested in violent opposition to US policies and shouldn't get clearance to any information that would be valuable to terrorists. Theese are basic background check questions that aparently weren't asked. I recall being questioned by the FBI about several of my friends about this pretty basic "does person x have beliefs sympathetic to violent opposition to the US" or "does person x have problems with authority" questions when they'd go into the military and be given positions where they either had to handle sensitive stuff or be in control of very destructive weapons. I assumed that this is still a pretty basic thing that gets done. It seems that someone either didn't speak up, the FBI didn't do it's job, or the guy did a really good job of hiding his true feelings, which seems unlikely given his name.

Does this really have much to do with Muslim immigration at all or does it instead have something to do with psychologically unstable contrarian home-grown idiots? Because in the US I don't see kids in Dearborn doing this crap, I see native-board kids in Napa valley, etc... doing this stuff. I think there will always be a segment of society that wants to be contrarian, whether it be devil-worship, neo-nazi crap, or militant islam. What does stopping nerd immigration to New Jersey, Silicon Vallley or Dearborn do to stop this? I'll freely admit that there was that blind sheik idiot in New Jersey and that was ridiculous, but is stopping Muslim nerds from moving to the US going to stop home grown idiocy from happening?

Bob Badour said at March 12, 2007 7:33 AM:

anon2,

What's contrarian about militant islam? Islam was militant at its conception and remains so today.

Tim said at March 12, 2007 8:56 AM:

Anon2,
I believe that muslims, whether homegrown converts, muslim tech nerds or sheiks from Allah knows where do not have a place in the US. "Peaceful" muslims want sharia and the destruction of the West as much as the militants or radicals do. They just differ in the methods used, it is a continuum. It doesn't take too many muslims to commit spectacular acts of terror anyway. The "peaceful" muslims provide a safe place for the radicals to hide and PR groups like CAIR make excuses for all kinds of savage muslims behavior on a regular basis. I bet the first anon is right about the muslims in the US knowing about the terror attacks in 9-11. Of course, nobody came forward. Is is because they are afraid to? And what are the "peaceful" muslims afraid of? Does it really make a difference? Look at the situation in Europe and that recent plot in Canada to behead the PM and blow up the CIS or whatever. Why take the risk with having muslims around in the first place? Is islam so necessary for America? We did OK long before any muslims got here.


Post a comment
Comments:
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

      
 
Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright ©