Us Army Capt. Yousef Yee Detained

[Luigi71585]

It was announced today that a US Chaplain is being detained and questioned by the FBI concerning several documents. Yousef Yee, birth name James, was an Islamic convert chaplain. He taught courses on Islam to US troops as well as counsel detainees that the US suspects of links to terrist organizations. Yee was questioned by the FBI who took several documents from him and then turned him over to the military.

The question at hand is what role does islam have in this war as far as the US is concerned. Many believe Yee began to simpathize with those under his charge. He had many soldiers who came to his friday afternoon islamic prayer meetings. We are fighting a people who are vrey loyal to their religion and are even dying fighting for it.

Should the US continue pumping soldiers full of Islamic teachings so they known thier enemy or...

Should we abandon teaching it and keep fighting it?

Thoughts?

[FastNed]

This is a multifaceted problem. So long as one member of the American military indicates "Muslim" as his/her religion we must provide appropriate facilities for followers of that religion. Its the Law.

This is not the first symptom of this problem - there was an earlier event when another Moslim Chaplin was found to be soliciting advice from Islamic Authorities in the Middle-East concerning preaching against American Muslims attacking other Muslims. Odd as they have been killing each other for centuries.

Another was the fellow who did the grenade attack killing one and wounding many others - in a Kuwait encampment I believe.

The basic unanswered question, of course, is are we at war with Islamic Terrorists or all of Islam? Immediately after 9.11, President Bush used the term "Crusade" but quickly eliminated it from usage. Not because the media objected but, I believe, because they found it resonated too much with mid-America. The rage within America over 9.11 is neither recognised or understood by the rest of the World but it surely is at the White House. If Americans become convinced that this war is with Islam, there will be a Crusade and there will be nuclear weapons used. In our justified rage, we are willing to think "The Unthinkable"!

[Luigi71585]

The biggest difference between this and the grenade attak and others is that Yee is being charged and detained for this based on his RELIGION. The grenadier was charged on first-degree murder charges, not a religous attack. There IS a severe hatred of Islam in this country. The point I feel needs to be emphasized is that the muslims that we are "at war" with are a radical faction which means that the ones who "corrupted" Yee were of the radical Shi'ite faction. I feel that Americans would be more accepting of the Islamic religion if we knew that the majority are also opposed to these sort of sneak attacks on innocents. They may not like America, but they certainly dont support these type of attacks.

So, are we at war with Islam? I say no, but i do believe we are at war with a faction and thats the type of information that needs to be spread throughout america. The majority of citizens are uneducated about the relgion of Islam and THAT is the US governments biggest flaw in this campaign.

[KrustyKidd]

The point I feel needs to be emphasized is that the muslims that we are "at war" with are a radical faction which means that the ones who "corrupted" Yee were of the radical Shi'ite faction. I feel that Americans would be more accepting of the Islamic religion if we knew that the majority are also opposed to these sort of sneak attacks on innocents. They may not like America, but they certainly dont support these type of attacks.

So, are we at war with Islam? I say no, but i do believe we are at war with a faction and thats the type of information that needs to be spread throughout america. The majority of citizens are uneducated about the relgion of Islam and THAT is the US governments biggest flaw in this campaign.

I have no argument about that. I am sure most people if not all know that as well. However, where do Arabic speaking/acting/looking gents habituate? Finnish Saunas? Chinatown? They habituate in Arab communities and countries. Now most people cannot speak Arabic so right there is a problem sorting the good from the bad. Minority communities and the Arab countries like to keep things to themselves and do not fully become transparent for us to see what is going on so that is another problem. I have looked into this and maybe you can find some information that I could not but there is a very small amount of support comming from Arab communities other than standard "don't blame us" lip service. In Arab countries they handle terrorism themselves and sometimes the terrorists are part of the communities themselves so are unlikely to turn them in. I did not read in the papers of a large influx of Arab volunteers to act as interpreters or spies which may account for some of the resentment the average person feels. They mutter how Islam is not to blame and then say they don't know anything. Thanks for the help.

[FastNed]

Whoa, Luigi - you are being too athletic, you are broad jumping to conclusions!

While I hate to cite the media as a source of evidence, it's all we have at this time.

He was taken into custody by the FBI for possession of classified documents upon return to the US from Gitmo. He was turned over to military authorities and is being held in the Brig.

1-This is not a bust for being a Moslim, it's for unauthorized possession of classified documents - quite a different kettle of fish!

2-The Military is holding him in the Brig - under the UCMJ, this means there is an open and shut prima facie case (read probable cause) or he'd be in the BOQ under Base or House Arrest. It is much tougher to make a case under the UCMJ than civilian law so it is significant that he is being held. Note this case is a religious and political H-Bomb and every 'i' will be dotted and 't' crossed! Expect him to get top counsel from the Army and CAIR will no doubt come up with someone like Dershowitz who can get a Top Secret Security Clearance to join or lead the Defense Team.

3-The Grenadier is charged with two counts of murder because two died from his attack. His statements about a religious motive may or may not be admitted or admissable at his Court Martial. Nonetheless, from Media reports, a religious motive was present.

4-You presume the answer to an open question: we do not know if we are at war only with 'radical' Islam. The American Jury is still out on that question. You take another broad jump when you state " There IS a severe hatred of Islam in this country. " If such a hated was fact, the body count would be significant but it is non-existent.

Because we have religious freedom here, we don't much care about the content of any religion, other than our own if we have one. We do not have to understand or approve of any religion, it's part of the beauty of our system. Our prosecution of this war is not based upon religion, it's based upon killing terrorists!

[Luigi71585]

I believe i should restate myself. I got myself tangled. Undoubtedly there is hatred for our enemies in this war. I assume when i say "this country" we all know im speaking of the US. Forgive my brash response, but logically we have hatred of anything middle eastern in this country. Its a fact. Everywhere you turn someone is promoting tolerance to middle-easterners in America. You dont have to promote tolerance if people arent being intolerated.

I was mistaken in saying it was Islam that we hate/fear. Its a culture we dont understand. The fact of the matter is that Yee CHOSE to be part of that culture and now we have reason to fear him. Where i was too extreme, FastNed is to low-key. Calling hatred of middle eastern societies "non-existent" makes no sense. What about the 1600%, thats a correct figure 1600%, increase in hate crimes towards Islamics after the attacks? How is that non-existent? Islamicity.com, a major Islam source withint he US reported similar figures. 1600%. Wow. If thats not sever hatred, please, tell me what is.

As for the grenadier, I can only base what i know on what he said and what our military tells us. Basic rule of research - go to the primary source. Media falls in as a secondary, opinion based source. Some claim that Akbars attack was sugar coated to keep US citizens fear down and fully trust our soldiers. If this was the case, then why is the Yee case running so rampant? If viewed in this light, the grenade attack was nothing more than murder (as paradoxial as that sounds).

The difference here IS that Yee is accused of terorism, thats a fact. Sgt. Akbar (grenadier) was only charged of premeditated murder. Yee was shown to be elusive in interogattion and silent when asked certain questions. If the FBI is involved, somethings going downtown.

As for the UCMJ versus the BOQ, you have much more knowledge than I. I would appreciate any links or what not you can give me to help in my research on this topic. Thanks a bunch FastNed.

Here are my sources: Hate crimes increase

Total Story

[Luigi71585]

Also, i appreciate the researched intellgent debate from Krusty and FastNed. As a newbie to this particular forum and a veteran in others, i have been most impressed by you two. Nova makes good points, buts a little to abrasive for me. haha.

In response to Krusty's post, the response of Islamics in America to the WAR, is almost non-existent. They have remained silent in this battle to neither raise hatred or respect. They did however raise enormous support for America in our campaign against Bin Laden. They main reason behind this was that they have always struggled to have our support after the original world trade attacks (use the link on my last post) and they stood firmly against the 9-11 attacks. Secondary, they were standing firmly behind their religion. Mohamed Magid (director of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society in Sterling, Va) said the Islamic culture in America was outraged because Bin Laden used the quran in his tapes.

Bin Laden quotes a verse from the Hadith: "I was ordered to fight the people until they say there is no god but Allah, and his prophet Muhammad." In quoting this verse in this context, he is generating a fatwa linking the Sept. 11 attack to an order from Allah. Unless set aside by a specific fiqh from higher authority, this, also, becomes part of Islamic jurisprudence.

Thats a quote from Efreedomnews.com, a wonderful site to further your research on the Islmaic response in America.

Once again thank you FastNed and Krusty for supporting my first thread in one way or another

[nova_satori]

without a clear understanding of your enemy, you will never taste victory.

[FastNed]

Candidly, the 1600% increase is a new figure to me - I had seen previous mention of a 600% increase so the additional 1000 is a surprise. Two comments: without knowledge of the actual number, a percentage "quote" is meaningless. If there was "one" hate crime prior to 9.11 and "seventeen" after, what percentage increase is that?

Statistics are not helpful in this area, they are too easily twisted to make whatever point is desired.

Second, let's stop talking about verbal crimes, which examination will reveal is what is involved in the majority of these cases. How many religious riots have taken place in America? How many Muslim homes, businesses and places of worship have been torched? How many Muslims have been executed simply because they are Muslim? No doubt you are reading my words and thinking: "What is this guy, crazy? That sh1t don't happen here!"

And that is my point, it does not happen in America. Yes, there is a great deal of verbal response - there is a wellspring of American rage, little understood outside of America which is poorly articulated. That guy at his local watering spot who watches a report on American casualties and announces "Those F-ing Ragheads gotta be taught a lesson!" has made a statement considered to be a hate crime. Well, the World had best understand the "Root Cause" of American rage is 9.11 - the American Street is going to make certain that its government does something about its rage.

One data disclosed about the lists seized from Yee is highly significant: Not only did he have lists of captives, he listed the names of their interrogators. This is right out of the old KGB playbook. It places at risk each and every dependant of those people; wives, spouses, children & parents become targets. There is no "humanitarian" justification or excuse for such lists and if this is true, expect him to be charged with Treason. You may also expect him to live the remainder of his life in isolation because he is a dead man in any military or civilian population.

You did ask about citations on the difference between military justice and civilian prosecutions. This is a "Truism" to which I suscribe based upon prior military service and thirty years of experience in the civilian court system. As generalities, your military defense counsel has far greater resources and input into investigations than a public defender; your judges (and jury) are other military members of your rank or higher (not a political fund raiser or bag man appointed to the Bench as a reward); and, the prosecutor is not a political appointee or someone looking for (re)election to a higher office. Of great importance, a military conviction is automatically reviewed at higher levels which insures or increases the opportunity for justice and also tends to remove "Command Influence" as a significant factor in Courts Martial. Higher Command may have to put up with General "Perfumed Prince" but they will not allow him to screw over those under his command - "good military order" does not allow this. A cultural anthropolgist could (and perhaps has) produce a great thesis here.

[nova_satori]

Another's been arrested.

Another one bites the dust

[Luigi71585]

Wow. Its almost a full fledged conspiracy! Haha. Havent had a good one in a while. Thanks Nova.

The 1600% was a fact, check the link. Its based on a Ball State University Study (Government sanctioned and approved may i add) so its verifiable. As to the argument about the percentage and numbers, lets all be adult and not play assannign. We know that these are significant numbers. Even if it was one before and 1600 after thats about 1600 more than it should be. Verbal attacks are no longer important eh? Attcks verbally arent considered "hate crimes" now? Odd coming out of a country wholl soon put a priest in jail for speaking about about homosexuals (haha thanks hugo). I consider verbal assults as bad as the next. I dont know why it should matter one way or another. A verbal attack is hatred. Its a HATE crime for Gods sake! Ive said before and ill say it again: There is hate for islam, pure and simple. Its not justified but it exists.

My point in all this is that Yee and now Ahmad I. al-Halabi have aligned themselves with something Americans HATE. Not necessarily gonna get them hissed at on the street. But as soon as the crossed the lines and began working with KNOWN ISLAMIC ENEMIES, people are going to hate them as well. You dont see a Cathol killing protestants in this war. Why? because our enemy is Iraq and some faction of islam. My feeling is that we need to understand our enemy because to quote Nova,

without a clear understanding of your enemy, you will never taste victory

but sympathizing with them, as Yee and al-Halabi have done is over the line. Its dangerous to America, hence the "conspiracy" or what have you. Our bases couldve lost serious security because of them and potentially gotten more people killed in the act. Over the line. Unforgivable.

Thanks for the Military info. found it informative.

[FastNed]

Luigi, not taking issue with an increase but there does appear to be a misunderstanding between "numbers" and "percentages".

Without knowledge of the initial numbers the percent of increase has no bearing! If last period there was "one" hate crime and this period there are "seventeen", that constitutes a 1600% increase.

As you have access to the study, if you wish to go into this, please advise: a) The initial number & reporting period. b.) Subsequent nbr & period. Exactly what is being measured? Provide examples of what constitutes a reportable event in this study. Was each event liable for prosecution under American Law? Are some/most/all what are called hate crimes? How many involve physical attacks vs. verbal attacks?

Difficult to respond to you without knowledge of the above.

[Luigi71585]

I wouldve thoguht that the numbers were specifically important here because there was moderate amounts before and enormous after. we should know better than to say say 1 before 17 after blah blah, but here you are: The council on foreign relations sites an amount of 28 in the year 2000 to 481 after 9/11. I might add that these attacks were considered beyond verbal because basic phone threats come in on a daily basis, says Majed Dabdoub, president of a major Islamic group in America. These are the numbers. They are a substantial amount. Granted, theyre not as high as normal race/religion hate crime numbers. The reason for this is that this is a new found hatred (28) and the others have deep seated places in our society.

The qestion to ask yourself is why did these numbers rise? Because we have this new-found hatred in America. A simple point blown way out of proportion. Hopefully we can return the the issue at hand-Yee and al-Halabi.

Thanks once again for the input.

Source

[Nuclear]

This is a big issue. A very interesting debate.

Islam is a religion and citizens of the United States have the right to practice their own religion.(Actually it's to worship God as they see fit, but that's another debate.)

Under the Constitution, they have the right to practice this religion.

On the other hand this religion, at least thousnads of participants in it, have started more or less a crusade against the US. We need to defend ourselves.

I don't believe Islam is a religion of peace. It was basically created by a warlord.(again, another debate)

This creates a sticky situation. Me, being a Christian that sees Islam as a religion that would love to exterminate me and all that share my faith, would not argue against them banning Islam. Then one could say, if they can ban one, what stops them from banning them all? or more than one? Nothing would.

I see it like this, and this isn't a fair view but it's mine. I like in the strongest nation in the world. There are a bunch of third world zealots who got a fig stuck up their rear and want to see my country and religion in flames. They've killed a lot of my countrymen and are constantly working on trying to kill more.

I say, us being the stronger nation, not wait till the sides could be more even(when they get nuclear capabilities or our governmental stability comes into question), I say we do whatever it takes to preserve this nation. Whatever extremes there may be.

As for a rational response to this issue, there is no easy answer. There should be mandatory pledging to this country if you want to be in their country. Nothing that would offend anyone, but basic loyalties of caring for the country and wanting to see it prosper. Basically a way to route out those who would wish it harm. Ya follow? Those who refuse could be questioned....

This is quite an issue as there is no successful rational sollution, is there. I believe that protecting the lives of this country's people is more important than violating a few human rights.

Oh no, those people can't opening practice their religion...God forbid, but it's ok for them to murder 3,000 people at a wack. Just so long as we're not violating anyone's rights....

It's a tough debate. I'm intested to see if anyone in this forum can come up with a good answer that appeases both sides...I know mine will make a few people whine. ;-)