Anwar al-Awlaki: “Maybe Nidal was affected by one of my lectures”

Unfortunately for those who previously backed Awlaki (but say that he must have recently changed from being a fluffy friend of all to fire-breathing jihadist preacher without anybody noticing), in his first interview since the Fort Hood attacks, the Yemeni-American preacher has revealed that it was under his influence that Major Nidal Malik Hasan was first radicalised back in 2001/2002.

Aulaqi said Hasan viewed him as a confidant. “It was clear from his e-mails that Nidal trusted me. Nidal told me: ‘I speak with you about issues that I never speak with anyone else,’ ” he told Shaea.

The cleric said Hasan informed him that he had become a devout Muslim around the time Aulaqi was preaching at Dar al-Hijrah, in 2001 and 2002. “Anwar said, ‘Maybe Nidal was affected by one of my lectures,’” said Shaea.

Now, Osama Saeed, Islamic Forum Europe and others may be on the defensive but Awlaki certainly isn’t. Speaking to an intermediary for the Washington Post, he affirmed his support for Nidal’s murderous rampage:

Explaining why he wrote on his Web site that Hasan was a “hero,” According to Shaea, Aulaqi said: “I blessed the act because it was against a military target. And the soldiers who were killed were not normal soldiers, but those who were trained and prepared to go to Afghanistan and Iraq.” [...]

Aulaqi said Hasan’s alleged shooting spree was allowed under Islam because it was a form of jihad. “There are some people in the United States who said this shooting has nothing to do with Islam, that it was not permissible under Islam,” he said, according to Shaea. “But I would say it is permissible. . . . America was the one who first brought the battle to Muslim countries.”

The cleric also denounced what he described as contradictory behavior by Muslims who condemned Hasan’s actions and “let him down.” According to Shaea, he said: “They say American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan should be killed, so how can they say the American soldier should not be killed at the moment they are going to Iraq and Afghanistan?”

And, although the email relationship between Awlaki and Nidal seems to have been made up of a dozen or so emails from Nidal and just two or three from Awlaki, there is a suggestion that Awlaki may have been tailoring the contents of his blog to try to influence Nidal.

On Dec. 23, 2008, days after he said Hasan first e-mailed him, Aulaqi also posted online words encouraging attacks on U.S. soldiers, writing: “The bullets of the fighters of Afghanistan and Iraq are a reflection of the feelings of the Muslims towards America,” according to the NEFA Foundation, a private South Carolina group that monitors extremist Web sites.

Whatever the true extent of the relationship between Awlaki and Nidal, the fact that Nidal first adopted extremist ideas back in 2001 whilst under Awlaki’s influence shows us that people who claim that Awlaki was a moderate in the years between being a “spiritual advisor” to the 9/11 hijackers and him reprising that role with Nidal are horribly ill-informed, mad or bad. Or all three. Awlaki may have got more extreme in that period, but Nidal still thought to go to him in the months before shooting to death 13 soldiers.