Proposed Reform of UN Counter-terrorism Activities Falls Short

By Victor Comras

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has just issued his recommendations on steps to streamline UN activities. The report, entitled � Mandating and Delivering: An analysis and recommendations to facilitate the review of mandates,� takes a hard look at the numerous UN activities that have been mandated over the years by the Security Council and General Assembly. These cover a wide range of activities and the report devotes separate sections to (a) International Peace and Security; (b) Promotion of Sustained Growth and Sustainable Development; (c) Development of Africa; (d) Promotion of Human Rights; (e) Coordination of Humanitarian Assistance; (f) Promotion of Justice and International law, (g) Disarmament; (h) Gender Equality and Empowerment of Women, and (f) Research and Training. It also has a section on Drug control, Crime Prevention and Combating International Terrorism. I am going to deal here only with these counter-terrorism recommendations.

With regard to terrorism, the Secretary General notes there are now three different Security Council Committees dealing with Terrorism: the Counter-Terrorism Committee, the Al Qaeda and Taliban Sanctions Committee, and the Committee charged with preventing terrorists from acquiring WMD. He also notes that there is considerable overlap between these committees. The most obvious is that the membership of all three committees is the same as the membership of the Security Council. Each committee is supported by a separate Secretariat staff. Each has different procedures. Each reports separately to the Security Council. The Secretary General believes that special consideration should now be given to consolidating their work and their reporting requirements. Immediate steps should be taken, he recommends, to combine their travel to reduce the burdens on the UN as well as the countries being visited. �In the long run,� he says, �it would be a good idea to look at the possibility of creating a single subsidiary body that covers all the expertise of the current three. This body could include experts in different areas and would in effect take care of the other problems mentioned.�

The corridor talk is that the Secretary General wants to combine the three counter-terrorism committees under the general structure of the Counter-Terrorism Executive Directorate. That would be a big mistake. CTED was established by the Security Council over two years ago with the intent of re-invigorating the near dormant Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC). Its principal function is to assist countries in developing and implementing national counter-terrorism laws and strategies, and matching technical assistance to countries lacking the means to combat terrorism. The results of this work have either been very sparse, or tightly held. For, there is little public evidence of any of these accomplishments. Nor has the CTC lived up to expectations that it would provide a meaningful platform for stimulating international cooperation and judicial assistance in going after the terrorists.

The performance of the Al Qaeda and Taliban Sanctions Committee has been more substantial. It is the only terrorism related committee that maintains a list of al Qaeda terrorists and their financial supporters. It obliges all countries to take specific measures against those on the list. This includes freezing their assets, halting their travel and depriving them of access to arms and explosives. The Committee has its own Monitoring Team which, while constrained from �naming and shaming,� has been able to hammer away at the systemic problems associated with these objectives. Unfortunately, the list this committee maintains is woefully short, out-of-date and inaccurate.

As for the Committee dealing with WMD and Terrorism, it has served as little more than a repository for country reports�each prepared by the countries themselves. None provides any real glimpse into problems or shortcomings.

Perhaps the UN should scrape all three committees and start afresh. What�s really needed is an independent auditing or watchdog group that could oversee what countries are actually doing, or not doing, to implement internationally agreed counter-terrorism measures. Such a group would bring increased transparency and credibility to the international counter-terrorism effort. It would place increased pressure on countries to comply with these measures. It would also provide an independent assessment of any remedial action that might be needed. The fact is that no Security Council Committee will ever be in a position to truly question what specific countries are actually doing. There is just too much diplomatic and political baggage involved in their initiating such inquiries or findings.

The watchdog group that I envisage would include 8 to 10 senior experts or statesmen appointed for three to five year non-renewable terms. Their work would be supported by an independent staff that answered only to them. Their authority would derive from the Security Council pursuant to Chapter VII of the UN Charter. They would report directly to the Security Council on a periodic basis, but no less than quarterly. These reports would be public. The reports would include their own independent assessment concerning the implementation of the counter-terrorism measures along with recommendations to improve their effectiveness. These experts would be beholden to no country. Their views would not be ascribed to any country avoiding the political and diplomatic pitfalls when one country appears to investigate or question another. The Security Council would be free to discuss, debate, and even question their findings. In this way all countries would be on notice that their actions or inactions may well come under close public international scrutiny.

I suspect that the actual reforms that the UN will adopt will fall far short of this strident approach. .

Did Saddam Hussein Assist Palestinian Terrorist Groups More Than Previously Thought?

By Andrew Cochran

On January 7, I discussed the potential disclosure of up to 2 million documents from Saddam Hussein's intelligence apparatus and whether it would lead to a reassessment of his ties to Islamic terrorist groups. I expressed hope that the documents would be "seriously examined, analyzed, and released to the public" and that "counterterrorism experts with knowledge of terrorist groups and individuals, from inside and outside government, should be invited to review the evidence." The first group of 600-700 have been released by the Director of National Intelligence and are available from the website of the U.S. Army Foreign Military Studies Office at Ft. Leavenworth. Concurrently the U.S. Joint Forces Command released the unclassifed version of its "Iraq Perspectives Project" (large Acrobat file), a two-year effort in which information from interviews with senior Iraqi military and political leaders and thousands of official Iraqi documents were analyzed to determine the forces and motivations behind the Hussein regime's pre-war and wartime decisions. (EDIT: The U.S. House oversight subcommittee which reviewed UBS's currency violations this week will hold a hearing next week on this report.)

The IPP authors carefully tried to authenticate the statements in the report. "Some things we did not use in the study because we could not find multiple ways of identifying was it true or not true. We explicitly excluded them...Then there's the plausibility factor of does it make sense militarily, is this possible the way they described it? Some of the stories were not so we left those off."

More evidence of Saddam's ties to terrorist groups has already emerged from these releases. One of the docs from Saddam's intel stash apparently points toward funding of Abu Sayyaf, the Filippino-based terrorist group. One paragraph on page 54 of the IPP has drawn attention to Saddam's possible ties and cooperation with Islamic terrorist groups, especially those with a Palestinian focus. We already knew that Saddam had funded Palestinian suicide bombers through an account in Rafidain Bank in Jordan, but this paragraph extends the possible range of such assistance. Even those in the CT community (official and otherwise) and the "terrorism press" who are highly skeptical of claims of the value of the intel docs are intrigued by the following paragraph:

Jill Carroll is free; the reasons will be known soon

By Walid Phares

Jill Carroll's release is a reason for joy and relief among her family and the public. Any hostage freed from the Jihadists or any other terrorists is excellent news. The next stage, now, is to understand why she was kidnapped, and what were the reasons for her release, unharmed. The study of her kidnappingand release may help in analyzing the other hostage taking situations, including the fate of those still abducted. "Why was she kidnapped at first, and how did the Jihadists exploit her captivity" are the first set of questions. What is the importance of the Islamic Party in this equation? Why would the kidnappers release her to a location close by the headquarters of this particular party? Who was she interviewing when she was kidnapped, and why was her translator killed? Then one would look at her writings before and after she was kidnapped and see if the Jihadists had another wider issue on their mind. Ms. Carroll said she didn't know why she was kidnapped nor who were her abductors, even though she speaks Arabic. However, she used specific words to describe them politically when she was released. Each word used by the ex-hostage before and after the abduction, are now of great importance to better understand the matter. Her future writings are going to tell the world more about the reasons behind the kidnapping.

New "Martyr" Biographies from Zarqawi in Iraq

By Evan Kohlmann

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's Al-Qaida's faction--now a leading force within the so-called Iraqi "Mujahideen Shura Council" (MSC)--has released several new biographies of fallen Al-Qaida members killed during past clashes with U.S. and Iraqi government forces, including: Abu Fares al-Ansari (a former Iraqi intelligence officer), Julaybib al-Muhajir (from Saudi Arabia), Abu Baseer al-Emirati (from the United Arab Emirates), Abu al-Hurr al-Ansari (a native Iraqi recruit), and Abu Turab al-Najdi (from Saudi Arabia).

Click to view documents c/o Globalterroralert.com:
- Al-Qaida's Distinguished Martyr: Abu Fares al-Ansari
- Al-Qaida's Distinguished Martyr: Julaybib al-Muhajir
- Al-Qaida's Distinguished Martyr: Abu Baseer al-Emirati
- Al-Qaida's Distinguished Martyr: Abu al-Hurr al-Ansari and Abu Turab al-Najdi
- March 2006 video clips from the MSC in Iraq  (video)

Finally, Taylor in Hand

By Douglas Farah

In an incredible stroke of luck, Nigerian policemen arrested fugitive Charles Taylor as he tried to cross by land into Cameroon. According to eyewitness accounts, he was wearing a white safari suit, driving a Landrover with diplomatic plates and had bags full of dollars in the trunk. He made it through the immigration check point, but was stopped when trying to get through customs.

He was flown to Abuja, Nigeria, then put on a presidential jet to Roberts Field, Liberia. From there he should be flown to Freetown, Sierra Leone, where his cell is awaiting him, along with some of his cohorts in the murder and mayhem that he wreaked. He is charged with 17 counts of crimes against humanity.

The arrest does not mitigate the gross negligence on the part of the Obasanjo government in letting Taylor operate with impunity from his estate in Calabar while in exile and then allowing him to escape. While Taylor's arrest may have salvaged Obasanjo's visit today with President Bush, it should not preclude a reevaluation of the close and dependent relationship the United States has developed with Nigeria's president, who has shown himself to be little better than his reviled predecessors who were international pariahs. My complete blog is here..

Daily Standard: The New Roman Lions

By Daveed Gartenstein-Ross

I discussed the Abdul Rahman apostasy case in several previous CT Blog posts (see below). Now that Abdul Rahman has been released, I summarize the lessons that we should take from this case at the Daily Standard. Most significantly, the practice of punishing apostates is more widespread throughout the Middle East than most Americans realize -- and this practice affects not only those who leave Islam, but also everybody who believes that democratizing the region will make us safer. An excerpt:

A BROAD CONSENSUS EXISTS through much of the Islamic world that apostates from the faith deserve to be killed. This consensus could be glimpsed in Abdul Rahman's case, where the judge, Ansarullah Mawlavezada, said, "In this country we have the perfect constitution. It is Islamic law and it is illegal to be a Christian and it should be punished." Even the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, expected to take a more moderate stance, called for Abdul Rahman's punishment, claiming that he clearly violated Islamic law.

But apostasy laws stretch far beyond Afghanistan. At least 14 Islamic countries make conversion out of Islam illegal. The crime is punishable by death in at least eight of these states, either through explicit anti-apostasy laws or the broader offense of blasphemy.

Official proceedings against those who convert out of Islam are rare, at least in part because most of those who leave Islam choose to keep it secret. More often the government looks the other way while irate citizens mete out their own punishment. In July Paul Marshall, a senior fellow at Freedom House's Center for Religious Freedom, estimated that dozens of apostates from Islam had been killed throughout the world in the previous year. Bolstering Marshall's estimate, the Compass Direct News Agency was able to identify 23 expatriate Christian workers who were killed in the Muslim world between 2002 and July 2005.

BUT THE RIPPLES spread beyond the obvious victims. While a large number of elections were held throughout the Middle East over the past year, we may be seeing a rise in illiberal democracies in the region. Hamas's victory in the Palestinian Authority and the Muslim Brotherhood's massive parliamentary gains in Egypt are suggestive of this trend.

The reason for the rise of illiberal democracy is the lack of true alternatives. The only safe way to criticize most Middle Eastern governments is from a fundamentalist direction, so citizens are forced to protest the ruling regimes by voting for the Islamist opposition. Thus, in our promotion of voting, we may be unwittingly empowering our enemies.

Read the whole article here. My previous postings on the subject:

• "The Apostasy Problem is Far Larger than Abdul Rahman" (March 22)
• "Afghan Clerics Call for Abdul Rahman's Death" (March 24)
• "Abdul Rahman Freed" (March 26)

Pressure Grows on Bush to Cancel Meeting with Obsanjo

By Douglas Farah

A growing bipartisan chorus in Congress is demanding that President Bush cancel his meeting, scheduled for Wednesday, with Nigerian president Obasanjo, given Obsanjo's complicity in the escape of Charles Taylor.

The best line of the day was provided by Obsanjo's spokesman, Femi Fani-Kayode: "It was not for us to take him back," he said of Nigeria's failure to keep Taylor in custody. "The onus was on the Liberian government. He was a guest of ours, and you do not pick up your guests and take them anywhere." Whew, that clears it up! Seems to apply even if the guest has an outstanding indictment on 17 counts of crimes against humanity and Interpol arrest warrants.

Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif and leader of the movement to bring Taylor to justice, was the first to call on Bush to cancel tomorrow's informal summit. �Nigeria reportedly has let a mass murderer with alleged links to al-Qaeda slip out the back door. President Bush should cancel tomorrow�s scheduled meeting with President Obasanjo,� Royce said. He also warned that any country that gave Taylor sanctuary would face serious sanctions.

Sen. Barak Obama, D-Illinois, and Rep. Chris Smith, R-NJ and chairman of the House Subcommittee on Africa, joined the call. "There have been persistent questions about the level of security provided by the Nigerian government to ensure that Charles Taylor didn't haveunchecked ability to travel," said Smith. "As a result a warlord with ties to Al-Qaeda and terrorism is now on the loose."

Human Rights Watch says Mr Taylor's disappearance is a "disgrace" and "brings into question President Obasanjo's commitment to peace and security for the people of West Africa, the reason he allegedly took Taylor in the first place."

The White House hinted it would drop the meeting. The full blog is here.

House Oversight Subcommittee Targets UBS Currency Violations

By Andrew Cochran

The U.S. House International Relations Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations has announced additional witnesses for tomorrow's hearing on offshore banking and terrorism (previously noticed on CTB here). It's clear from the witness list that the subcommittee, which conducted a very successful investigation into the Oil-for-Food scandal last year (see the 12/07/05 hearing), wants to pursue currency violations by Swiss-based bank UBS. U.S. dollars supposedly guarded by UBS in a Swiss facility somehow found their way to pre-war Iraq (Saddam stored them in a vault), Cuba, and Iran, in violation of U.S. law. First publicized in 2004, the violations have already resulted in a $100 million fine of UBS, the loss of its privilege to transport U.S. currency overseas, and an embarrassing hearing at the Senate Banking Committee in May 2004, during which the committee chairman referred to UBS employees' acts as "despicable." Last year, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) demanded an investigation and wants the U.S. government to freeze any assets of the Castro regime that may be held by UBS in Zurich. The expanded witness list now includes an assistant prosecutor from New York, UBS's head of compliance for the Americas, and John Moscow, a former (and legendary) prosecutor in Manhattan who led the investigation that resulted in the conviction of Tyco CEO Dennis Kozlowski. This could be worth watching.

There Is No Evidence to Support Moussaoui's Claims

By Steven Emerson

This morning I appeared on NBC's "Today" program to discuss the claims by Zacarias Moussaoui yesterday that he was supposed to hijack a fifth jetliner with Richard Reid and fly it into the White House as part of the September 11, 2001 attacks. You can see a clip of my appearance as posted on The Investigative Project on Terrorism website, and here is the full transcript:

LESTER HOLT: Steve Emerson is an MSNBC News terrorism analyst. Steve, good morning to you.

STEVEN EMERSON: Good morning, Lester.

HOLT: Let's talk about the credibility of this claim and if it is true, why didn't authorities know about this earlier?

EMERSON: The question really comes down to whether in fact he is credible. He has given many different stories before this. Obviously, as you pointed out, he had referred to the fact earlier on in his confession that he was going to be in a follow up plot. Now he is alleging that he was actually going to be part of the fifth set of hijackers carrying out an attack on the White House. There is no evidence, Lester, to suggest that there were co-conspirators in the United States at the time he was arrested that have not yet been found, and there is no evidence that Richard Reid, whom he alleged was a co-conspirator, was actually going to be in the United States at the time of the 9/11 plot.

HOLT: Let's back up a second, Steve. We all remember the jitters we had in the days after 9/11 and theories that maybe other planes had been targeted but they were grounded before they could carry out the attacks. Just that part of his claim that there was a fifth plane with a target that day, do you totally discount that?

EMERSON: I don't totally discount it, because in the end, he may go to his grave or to his gallows without ever confessing the final details in the same way that Richard Reid may never have fully disclosed all that he knew about the shoe bomb plot for which he was convicted in the December 2001 conspiracy. The fact of the matter is that most of the evidence suggests, Lester, that the U.S. government has not found anyone else who would have participated in this fifth set of hijackers as he has alleged.

In Choreographed Move, Taylor Escapes

By Douglas Farah

In a stunning display of choreographed incompetence, the Nigerian government of president Obasanjo has let Charles Taylor slip away into the night. Nigeria, Liberia, the Bush administration and United Nations all bear a large dose of responsibility in the fiasco that will haunt the region for generations.

So, a man who sold diamonds to al Qaeda, bankrolled weapons dealer Viktor Bout while Bout was selling weapons to the Taliban and wreaked havoc on an entire region, has flown from the gilded cage, where the money he stole from his raped and pillaged country was able to buy him freedom.

Despite being indicted on 17 counts of crimes against humanity, he enjoyed almost three years of relatively unfettered freedom in his exile home in Calabar. From his gilded cage in Calabar, where he paid his Nigerian "security guards" to let him continue his deadly meddling unabated, to some undisclosed location where his cash reserves in France, Switzerland and offshore structures will buy him more protection.

Like a bad novel, Taylor's escape became a foregone conclusion when Obasanjo suddenly announced that Liberia could come and get Taylor. Obasanjo, who now, in classic Big Man African fashion, is ordering an "investigation" into how Taylor escaped, withdrew all of the guards from Taylor's compound. It was clear that was Taylor's signal to slip away. The U.S. did virtually nothing. The UN was paralyzed. The British ran for cover. The complete blog is here..

Immigration Reform Is Critical to National Security

By Bill West

The national debate about how to reform and improve America�s massive immigration problems is heating up dramatically. There are many competing interests in all this that will seek their own agenda. What should be remembered are how critical immigration issues are to national security.

From border security to visa issuance control to interior enforcement to the aggressive pursuit and prosecution of immigration benefit fraud perpetrators, these are all significant aspects of immigration control that have been violated and abused by foreign terrorists, their organizations and supporters for the purpose of those terrorist aliens gaining entry into the US and remaining here once they�ve crossed the border. Any immigration reform measures must put national security as the highest priority.

That said, given the highly charged political nature of immigration policy, the American people can probably expect, at best, any changes in US immigration law and policy to reflect only moderate improvement relative to security. These issues will be very interesting to observe as they play out over the coming months. In October of last year, I wrote an article for FrontPage magazine detailing a number of these issues and suggested how immigration enforcement matters might be substantially improved without implementing draconian measures.

These are critical times in the immigration arena. While a handful of US political leaders seem to genuinely recognize the importance of these matters relative to our national security, there are far too many who still appear to place other considerations ahead of that issue.

Daily Standard: Free to Dissent

By Daveed Gartenstein-Ross

Tomorrow, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in the Hamdan v. Rumsfeld case. This will be a significant case for determining the role of federal courts in the global war on terror, as the Supreme Court will consider whether the Bush administration can try Guantanamo detainees in special military tribunals, or whether the detainees' cases have to be heard in federal court. But the current controversy surrounding this case is whether Justice Scalia should recuse himself because of remarks he made in a March 8 speech at the University of Freiburg in Switzerland.

In that speech, Justice Scalia allegedly told attendees that "[w]ar is war, and it has never been the case that when you captured a combatant you have to give them a jury trial in your civil courts." Asked if detainees were entitled to relief under the Geneva Convention, he allegedly said, "If he was captured by my army on a battlefield, that is where he belongs. I had a son on that battlefield and they were shooting at my son and I'm not about to give this man who was captured in a war a full jury trial. I mean it's crazy." While these remarks appear to present a strong cace for recusal at first blush, they are far less damning when one realizes that his comments do not go beyond the views already articulated in two published opinions, a dissent in Rasul v. Bush and another in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld. I weigh in on the recusal today in the Daily Standard. An excerpt:

So a strongly-worded dissent in a matter likely to reappear before the Supreme Court shouldn't disqualify a justice from future cases. Such opinions are invaluable, as they offer a competing analysis that can affect subsequent court decisions, be they mere years (Justice Stevens's dissent in Bowers) or generations (Justice Harlan's dissent in the Plessy v. Ferguson segregation case) after the fact.

Nor should the fact that Justice Scalia put forward essentially the same views expressed in Rasul and Hamdi in a public speech change matters. Such a rule would have prohibited Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices Stevens and Blackmun from publicly espousing their prior dissents for fear of future recusal. To ban such post-opinion statements, as opposed to pre-opinion statements, would upend the precarious balance our legal system achieves in the interests of promoting judicial impartiality on the one hand and steady, predictable rule of law on the other. Every time a judge hears a case, that judge brings to the bench an entire foundation of held legal principles, represented not only by past holdings of Court majorities, but also by the past concurrences and dissents of that judge. (Witness the extent to which justices cite their own past concurrences and dissents in subsequent opinions.) Our system does not demand that justices approach each case with a clean jurisprudential slate, and it has never demanded that a justice pretend that his past concurrences and dissents never happened.

Read the whole article here.

Round Two of Dubai Investment Issue Begins, This Time for U.S. Defense Plants

By Andrew Cochran

Weeks after political pressure forced Dubai Ports World to announce that it would surrender its control of U.S. port operations obtained in the P&O purchase, the issue could return to the front page. Today UPI reports the following:

Dubai International Capital, an investment company owned by the emirate's ruling al-Maktoum family, inked a deal last year to acquire a privately held British aerospace company called Doncasters Group, Ltd. The company owns nine plants in the United States, and makes parts for U.S. tanks and military planes, including for the Joint Strike Fighter -- currently at the center of a transatlantic row about contracts and technology sharing.

After senators questioned officials about the Doncasters deal earlier this month, the secretive inter-agency panel known as the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, which is responsible for assessing such takeovers, announced that it was launching a special 45-day national security review of the purchase. The attention led Dubai International Capital to announce last week it was postponing the $1.2 billion takeover for two months while the CFIUS review went ahead.

Dubai International Capital isn't standing still; they've hired veteran Washington lobbyists at the firm of Hill & Knowlton to persuade Congress and the Executive Branch to approve the sale. And the UAE Minister of Economy was in Washington last week to try to ensure that relations between the UAE and the U.S. are not permanently damaged. But news of the DIC-Doncasters deal could run smack into the same issues that sank the DPW deal. Here are the CT Blog posts about that issue:

"The UAE�USA�Important Allies" by Dennis Lormel
"A Jihad Window at the Emirates Gate?" by Walid Phares
"The DP World Port Sale: Overblown Fears" by Daveed Gartenstein-Ross
"DP World Expands Worldwide, including to United States Ports. What effect on Port Security?" by Victor Comras
"Steven Emerson: Mixed UAE Record on Terrorism, With Hamas Still Supported" - my post of an interview with Steven Emerson
"Al Qaeda Claimed Infiltration of Key UAE Agencies in 2002" - my post on information provided by Lorenzo Vidino
"Poetic Justice in Ports" by Michael Kraft
"US Ports, the UAE and US visas" by Bill West
"Weaknesses in CFIUS Review Process Reported to Congress Last Year" by me
"The UAE (Hesitantly) Takes on Bout" by Douglas Farah

The Abu Sayyaf Strike Again

By Zachary Abuza

The Abu Sayyaf is suspected in detonating a bomb in the southern Philippines island of Jolo, which killed 9 and wounded 20. Some 2,000 US forces conducted a joint training exercise with their Filipino counterparts there earlier this month. A small contingent of US advisors and trainers is based in Zamboanga, where a bomb was detonated killing one, outside of the military base. A Special Forces soldier was killed by an ASG bomb in October 2002. The attack continues a trend of ASG terrorism since 2004, with a concurrent stoppage in kidnapping.

Abdul Rahman Freed

By Daveed Gartenstein-Ross

Today the case against Abdul Rahman, the 41-year-old Afghan man who was charged with apostasy for converting from Islam to Christianity, was dismissed. (See my previous blog posts about Abdul Rahman, here and here.) An Afghan official who spoke with the media on condition of anonymity said that the court dismissed the charges because of a lack of evidence, and the matter has been returned to prosecutors for further investigation.

Time has an excellent summary of how this result leaves in place the anti-apostasy laws pursuant to which Abdul Rahman was prosecuted -- and thus might only postpone a showdown between the U.S. and Afghanistan over these laws:

Abdul Rahman and others like him still face the possibility of being charged with apostasy for converting out of Islam, an offense that carries a penalty of death unless they renounce their new faith. While Afghanistan's constitution embraces international human rights conventions that guarantee freedom of worship, it also codifies the role of Islamic Sharia law -- under which Abdul Rahman was charged. And even while Washington and NATO governments whose troops help provide security for Karzai's government had urged Kabul to drop the charges, public opinion on the streets of Afghanistan -- recently inflamed by episodes such as the furor over Danish cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad -- showed strong support for legal action against the convert. But Karzai, whose government's security position remains as precarious as ever, was in no position to resist Washington's demands. As President Bush put it, "We have got influence in Afghanistan, and we are going to use it to remind them that there are universal values."

But it was not in recognition of "universal values" that Abdul Rahman was released. Instead, authorities cited insufficient evidence, insinuations about his mental state and even questions raised by the authorities over his citizenship. The legal basis for charging someone for converting from Islam to Christianity has not, thus far, been altered -- the political confict that from having U.S. troops trying to protect a government that can't guarantee the right of its citizens to choose the same faith as the President of the United States has simply been kicked down the road. Not only that, the Abdul Rahman case has alerted the Evangelical Christian base of the Republican Party to the need to press the Bush Administration on the issue, and at the same time mobilized the conservative Muslim clerical establishment and the powerful Islamist politicians in Afghanistan's coalition government to defend their Sharia code. Not surprisingly, there is speculation that Abdul Rahman may leave Afghanistan once he's out of jail.

Congress to Examine Nuclear Terrorism, Terrorist Financing, and Shoulder-Fired Missile Threat

By Andrew Cochran

Congressional committees will hold a number of open terrorism-related hearings during the week of March 25, including two hearings on the threat of nuclear terrorism; a hearing on offshore banking and terrorist financing; one on the terrorist threat from shoulder-fired missiles; and another on counternarcotics strategies in Latin America (timely in light of the FARC indictments this week - see Doug Farah's and my posts). You can download an Acrobat file with all open terrorism-related hearings here:

Download CongCommHrgs032506.pdf

Qatar, next target of Iranian attacks?

By Olivier Guitta

In fact the Saudi daily Al Riyad very recently reported on Iranian threats on Qatar. The leaders of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard are very angered by Qatar's alliance to the US and allegedly to Israel. In case of a military confrontation between the US and Iran over the nuclear crisis, Revolutionary guards are threatening to attack Qatari oil and gaz facilities by sea and air. They plan to use suicide boats and air missiles.
One overlooked aspect of the whole Iran crisis is the huge fear instilled by Iran to Gulf Arab monarchies including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Barhein and the Emirates. This is why, Arabs are trying to define a common position on that very issue. I suspect that a "middle of the road" communique is going to come out of the forthcoming Arab League summit in Khartum in order not to antagonize Iran too much.

Will We Allow Illegal "Other Than Mexicans" to Remain as "Guest Workers?"

By Michael Cutler

I have linked to an interesting story ("Non-Mexican migrants 'rent a family' to avoid deportation") that manages to combine a number of immigration issues in one fell swoop. It shows the burgeoning problem that so-called OTMs ("Other Than Mexican") aliens represent to our nation along the Mexican border. That the number of so-called OTMs apprehended along the border has more than doubled last year from the previous year, makes it clear that the Mexican border is a major entry point for aliens from a variety of countries other than Mexico. While the article did not name the countries from which these aliens came. I would be curious to know how many of them were identified as being from "Special Interest Countries." The term "Special Interest Country" is the term that DHS uses to describe countries known to be involved in terrorism such as Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iran, to name three. I would also be curious to know how these OTMs managed to gain entry into Mexico. Somehow, I believe that some sort of corruption was involved, but then I tend to be mistrustful of a country that has made a national policy of encouraging its indigent citizens to head to a neighboring country for health care, education and most significantly, money. I am also mistrustful of a country that acts as a way point for much of the narcotics that flows into our country.

Afghan Clerics Call for Abdul Rahman's Death

By Daveed Gartenstein-Ross

In my previous blog entry about Abdul Rahman, the 41-year-old Afghan man who may face the death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity, I noted that while a number of Islamic states outlaw apostasy, "the greater threat comes from vigilantes." I made a similar observation in a February 2004 article that I wrote for Commentary:

The greatest threat to apostates in the Muslim world derives not from the state, however, but from private individuals who take punishment into their own hands. In Bangladesh, for example, a native-born Muslim-turned-Christian evangelist was stabbed to death in the spring of 2003 while returning home from a film version of the Gospel of Luke. As another Bangladeshi apostate told the U.S. Newswire, "If a Muslim converts to Christianity, now he cannot live in this country. It is not safe. The fundamentalism is increasing more and more."

The Abdul Rahman situation bears this out. Even if the state doesn't put Abdul Rahman to death, Afghan clerics have announced that they will incite others to kill him. The Associated Press reports today (with emphases added):

"Rejecting Islam is insulting God. We will not allow God to be humiliated. This man must die," said cleric Abdul Raoulf, who is considered a moderate and was jailed three times for opposing the Taliban before the hard-line regime was ousted in 2001. . . . Diplomats have said the Afghan government is searching for a way to drop the case. On Wednesday, authorities said Rahman is suspected of being mentally ill and would undergo psychological examinations to see whether he is fit to stand trial. But three Sunni preachers and a Shiite one interviewed by The Associated Press in four of Kabul's most popular mosques said they do not believe Rahman is insane. "He is not crazy. He went in front of the media and confessed to being a Christian," said Hamidullah, chief cleric at Haji Yacob Mosque. "The government is scared of the international community. But the people will kill him if he is freed." Raoulf, who is a member of the country's main Islamic organization, the Afghan Ulama Council, concurred. "The government is playing games. The people will not be fooled."

"Cut off his head!" he exclaimed, sitting in a courtyard outside Herati Mosque. "We will call on the people to pull him into pieces so there's nothing left." He said the only way for Rahman to survive would be for him to go into exile. But Said Mirhossain Nasri, the top cleric at Hossainia Mosque, one of the largest Shiite places of worship in Kabul, said Rahman must not be allowed to leave the country. "If he is allowed to live in the West, then others will claim to be Christian so they can, too," he said. "We must set an example. . . . He must be hanged."

These clerics add their voices to a growing chorus of Aghan citizens calling for Abdul Rahman's death, including his own father: "He is my son. But if a son does not care about the dignity of his family, the dignity of his father, God can take him away. You cannot make anything out of such a son. He is useless."

This case makes clear that the threat to converts out of Islam does not just come from the state, but from private citizens as well. And it makes clear that the belief that apostates deserve death is not an aberration, but is more widespread that many would like to acknowledge. The resolution of this case may well be a barometer of Afghanistan's future, and the future of democracy in the Middle East.

Senior Executive William Langford to Leave FinCEN

By Dennis Lormel

William Langford, Associate Director of Regulatory Policy and Programs, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), will be leaving the agency next month to join JPMorgan Chase & Co. This represents the second significant personnel loss at FinCEN since February when former Director Bill Fox left to join Bank of America.

Langford joined FinCEN, along with Fox, in January 2004, when they both left main Treasury to assume their leadership positions. Like Fox, Langford was highly visible and accessible with the financial sector. He worked diligently to foster a positive working relationship between government and industry.

As noted above, William was accessible and readily participated in industry Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Compliance conferences. Last week, for example, he participated in the Money Laundering Alert Annual AML Conference. There were more than 1,500 attendees. William was gracious enough to participate in five separate and distinct panel discussions. This required considerable preparation. Based on his executive position and the sensitivity of issues, William was repeatedly barraged with difficult and complex questions. He was straightforward and unwavering in his responses.

William possesses a remarkable grasp of the myriad issues, conflicts and concerns surrounding the Bank Secrecy Act and the respective interests of industry, law enforcement and the regulators. He served the government with distinction and left an impression of credibility with anyone who listened to his presentations at the many forums he spoke at. His outreach efforts served FinCEN well.

Langford�s departure represents another tough loss for FinCEN. He was definitely one of the good guys in the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing. I would like to take the opportunity to thank William for his outstanding government service and wish him well in his future endeavors.

My schedule has precluded me from writing posts on the Counterterrorism Blog on a regular basis. A topic that deserves attention is the turnover of senior and vital personnel in government service. There are a number of dimensions that warrant discussion. I plan to discuss certain of these dimensions. In conclusion, I believe we can rest assured that, despite the losses of talented individuals like Bill Fox and William Langford, FinCEN and its companion government agencies will move forward and continue to excel in the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing.

U.S. Treasury Department Designates Hizballah's Media Arms as Terrorist Entities

By Walid Phares

The U.S. Treasury Department today designated the al-Manar television operation, al Nour Radio, and the Lebanese Media Group, parent company to both al-Manar and al Nour Radio, as Specially Designated Global Terrorist Entities.  Under Secretary Stuart Levey made it clear why the media arms were designated: "Any entity maintained by a terrorist group � whether masquerading as a charity, a business, or a media outlet � is as culpable as the terrorist group itself."  Al-Manar has also supported the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade.  The State Department had placed al Manar on the Terrorist Exclusion List in December 2004, thus barring aliens who engage in a range of actions involving Al-Manar from entering the United States.

This very positive announcement also proves that a nonpartisan, grassroots organization can move the U.S. government towards action against terrorism.  The Coalition Against Terrorist Media, a coalition of numerous groups (including Muslim and Jewish organizations) and founded by the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, worked tirelessly for the designation and obtained the support of Congressmen from both sides of the aisle.   �Today�s action gives the government the tools it needs to cripple al-Manar�s broadcasts, which spread the Iranian regime�s propaganda, support terrorism, recruit suicide bombers, and incite violent attacks,�  said Mark Dubowitz, COO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. 

I have discussed al-Manar's role as jihaist propagandist often on this blog - here is just one example.

Going After the FARC is Important for Terror Financing

By Douglas Farah

The indictment of 50 top leaders of Colombia's Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) is a sign of the increasing importance U.S. intelligence and law enforcement communities are placing on the extensive opportunities that the flow of FARC's illicit money provides to aid other terrorist organizations, including Islamic radicals.

Some intelligence efforts have been focused on the tri-border area of Paraguay, Brazil and Argentina. But until recently no consenus had emerged in the intelligence or law enforcement communities over the existence of links between Islamic terrorism and the massive amount of drug trafficking revenues, comingled with tens of millions of dollars from contraband and counterfeit goods, that flow through the region.

There has been no solid evidence that the financial network of the FARC overlaps with the Islamic groups. While it is difficult to imagine that there are clear barriers to doing business when that much money is in play, so little is known from human intelligence that the reporting has been weak for years. That could be changing.

Because the amounts of money sloshing through the illicit money channels in Latin America are so large-billions from FARC-controlled cocaine and heroin trafficking, many millions more from other criminal activities-it is impossible to trace where the money goes.

A host of financial institutions, from banks to informal exchange houses to merchants willing to sell their products for cash, all help launder the funds. This needs to be juxaposed with another reality which is often overlooked or ignored: There have been many signs of radical Islamic activity in the tri-border region, from the reported visit of Osama bin Laden and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in 1995 to 1999 arrests of several al Qaeda-linked operatives in the region. The full blog is here.

Foiled Attacks Can Lull Public

By Michael Kraft

In looking at the linked articles on the right side of the blog, I was struck by the number of attempted major terrorist attacks in different parts of the world that were foiled and thus unlikely to register in the public consciousness.

If reported at all in the U.S press, the overseas news reports were relegated to the inside pages or a fleeting mention on the media. Thus, it is easy to be lulled into a false sense of security, that the international terrorism threat is receding.

Illustrative Items:
� In London, seven British Muslim men are on trial for attempting to blow up a significant target in the capital city.
One of seven was linked with efforts to obtain radioactive material from Russian mafia members in Belgium.

� In Spain, 32 men, mostly of Algerian background, were indicted by a judge for allegedly planning a massive truck bomb attack against the National Court building in Madrid, where many terrorist investigation records are housed.

� In Israel, after a dramatic chase between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, police arrested a vanload of 10 Palestinians and found a five kilo explosive belt in vanload of 10 Palestinians who apparently were planning to bomb a major target there. Israeli officials said they are dealing with at least 13 solid warnings of attacks as the country prepares for elections March 28.

� In France, a trial began this week of 27 persons accused of planning to attack the Eiffel Tower and a Paris shopping center.

� In Azerbaijan, officials said three army deserters were involved in plots to blow up major energy facilities.

Had any of these plots succeeded, there potentially could have been a large loss of life and massive destruction. In four of the countries, Britain, France, Israel and Spain, there are large numbers of American visitors, students and residents. One can easily imagine the flow of words from Congress and talking heads (with apologies to some of my colleagues) had the plotters managed to kill large numbers of persons, especially Americans. However, when the attacks do not succeed, no news in the American press is not necessarily good news. It is too easy to think that because major attacks have not taken place on American soil since 9/11, the terrorist threat -- outside Iraq -- is fading.

It is still out there. It is growing more dangerous because it is decentralized and can emerge from self starters who are inspired by al-Qaeda, live in the target country and are willing to blow up their neighbors. The next time the terrorists might be lucky and escape undetected, perhaps because some investigator could not connect the dots or get their superiors to pay enough attention, as an FBI agent testified in the Moussaoui case.

The international terrorism threat will not be effectively countered by speeches or resolutions. International cooperation is key to countering international terrorism. It is far from certain that the White House and Congress will do a better job doing the hard work of funding and effectively implementing nuts and bolts counterterrorism programs than it has in the past.

Is the ETA's "Ceasefire" Sincere and Permanent?

By Andrew Cochran

The "Basque Fatherland & Freedom" terrorist group, known as ETA, has declared a ceasefire and pledged to pursue the political process to achieve its goal of political independence for the Basque territory. Founded over 40 years ago, ETA is considered responsible for over 800 killings. You can read profiles on ETA at the BBC site, Wikipedia encyclopedia, and MIPT's Terrorism Knowledge Base. You can see the text of the ceasefire statement at the CNN site. ETA was first designated as a "Foreigh Terrorist Organization" by the U.S. State Department in October 1997.

But is the ETA sincere in its new declarations, considering the numerous ceasefires previously declared and broken, and will this one be permanent? Emilio Alonso, a Spanish blogger with whom I've communicated about ETA from time to time, wrote a post on his blog (Spanish-language) with his skepticism. At my request, he translated his post, which I'm running in total below with no edits, comments, or explanation of the parties named in the post. For a more optimistic view, see James Dunnigan's post on his StrategyPage.com site. Here is Emilio's post (all links are his, and I removed footnotes in his original):

Where�s the news here?

What�s this all fuss about? It could have happened a little later, as Socialist Party would have wished to use it as lure for the nearing local polls but, as a matter of fact, it was as clear as daylight that ETA was to announce a cease-fire sooner or later. It is the next logical step in the strategy designed by the radical nationalists in Perpignan which includes, obviously, the vile exploitation of the people�s passionate eagerness to see the end of the terrorist murdering, just to achieve their objectives.

No need to be Talleyrand to know the way the next facts will happen.

FARC Terrorist Leaders Indicted for Massive Cocaine Dealing

By Andrew Cochran

The U.S. Justice Department has obtained indictments against 50 of the top leaders in the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, for importing more than $25 billion worth of cocaine into the United States and other countries. This is the single largest narcotics trafficking indictment ever filed in U.S. history and represents a major commitment of U.S. government resources towards ending the leading narco-terror group in the Western Hemisphere. From the DOJ press release: "According to the indictment, the FARC currently supplies more than 50 percent of the world�s cocaine and more than 60 percent of the cocaine that enters the United States...According to the indictment, the charged FARC leaders used terrorism and violence to further the FARC�s cocaine-trafficking activities and ordered that Colombian farmers who sold cocaine paste to non-FARC buyers or otherwise violated the FARC�s strict cocaine policies be murdered." In addition, the State Department announced rewards of over $75 million for information leading to the capture of 24 of the FARC leaders charged today. Pertinent documents:

Indictment (43-page Acrobat file from FindLaw site)
Press conference transcript
U.S. DEA fact sheet about FARC terrorists
U.S. Justice Department press release

This is just the latest step taken to try to puruse the most active and dangerous terrorist organization operating south of our borders today. President Bush designated FARC as a "Significant Foreign Narcotics Trafficker" on May 29, 2003, and in February 2004, the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) added the names of FARC leaders to the list of �Tier II� persons designated under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act (Kingpin Act). President Bush�s Executive Order 13224 in October 2001 named FARC as a "Specially Designated Global Terrorist." In October 1997, FARC was identified as a "Foreign Terrorist Organization" under the 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act.

The Algerian amnesty of terrorists is a recipe for disaster

By Olivier Guitta

Among the terrorists recently freed by Algeria (part of the general amnesty), two in particular were vital for French authorities. For that reason diplomatic tension is palpable between Paris and Algiers. Indeed, the two individuals, Mohamed Benyamina and Akil Chraibi, were part of two major cells recently dismantled in France. The first one was part of the Bourrada cell (which I wrote on here) which had planned terror attacks against the Paris-Orly airport, the Paris subway and the DST (French equivalent to the FBI) headquarters. The second one is a student in Montpellier, France, who was arrested in Algeria while providing the GSPC with explosive devices. French authorities are also concerned about the possibility of some potential dangerous individuals entering French territory.

Finally yesterday the GSPC called all the amnestied militants to join the ranks of the terrorist group. Algerian authorities might not have to wait long to regret their ill-advised decision.

Is the EU Softening Its Position Re Hamas?

By Victor Comras

Hamas� victory in the Palestinian elections has posed a serious dilemma for our EU partners. In their first pronouncements after the January 25th Palestinian elections EU leaders took common position with the United States. They warned that continued assistance and maintenance of positive relations with the EU would be predicated on Hamas renouncing violence and recognizing Israel�s right to exist. Hamas intransigence, they said, would put at risk some 500 million Euro that the EU had previously pledged to the Palestinian Authority.

Since then the EU has appeared to backtrack. With no assurances from the Hamas government that it would renounce terrorism, EU Foreign Ministers, on February 27th, and again on March 20th, agreed to go ahead with the first tranche of their pledged assistance -- a grant of some 120 million Euro -- to the new Palestinian Authority. EU External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner indicated no preconditions, but stated that " How we are able to help the Palestinians in the future will depend to a large extent on the decisions taken by their newly elected government; whether its members support non violence, recognise Israel and stand by existing agreements.� The package includes some 64 million euros channeled through UN agencies to the poorest in the Palestinian territories, 20 million euros to pay the salaries of Palestinian Authority officials, and 40 million euros for electricity and other energy expenses. The first checks were handed over to the Palestinians and the UN yesterday (March 21, 2006). Whether to proceed with further payments will be a central issue at the 2 day EU Summit meeting beginning tomorrow. .

The EU decision to move ahead now followed warnings from James Wolfensohn, the former World Bank chairman and now special envoy, that the Palestine Authority faces immediate collapse due to lack of funding. It also masks some serious differences between European leaders as to the right posture to take in dealing with Hamas. The British, German and Austrian governments want to make it clear that further payments will be conditioned on Hamas� moderating its anti-Israel activities. But other leaders, such as French President Jacques Chirac, are suggesting that the EU should not take any step that would penalize the Palestinian people. We must find a way to pursue European aid to the Palestinian people ... without it being sent where it shouldn't be.� We should not sanction the Palestinian people economically {even if} �this result {a renunciation of terrorism} is not clear or immediate."

While there is no indication that Hamas is willing to change its spots, Hamas leaders are looking for ways to ensure that EU assistance will continue. Salah Bardawil, a Hamas spokesperson, has indicated that unofficial contacts with EU countries have already been established �through third parties� Presumably these include Russia, where Hamas leaders recently held talks at Putin�s invitation.

One thing is for sure. The pressure on Hamas must be maintained. It must be made clear to Palestinian leaders that running their government and taking care of their citizens is their primary responsibility. Its up to them to act responsibly, and put the welfare of their people first. It's not up to the EU, US, UN or others to bail them out if they choose violence and terrorism over these real responsibilities.

Bad News for Viktor Bout

By Douglas Farah

In an interesting development, the European Union has issued an aviation "black list" of 92 companies-including several linked to Viktor Bout-banning them from operating in EU territory. The BBC reports that the measures are taken for safety reasons. "The European Union now has a coherent approach to banning airlines," said Jacques Barrot, Vice-President of the Commission for transport. "This blacklist will keep dubious airlines out of Europe. It will also make sure that all airlines operating in Europe's sky meet the highest safety standards."

The list of companies includes all airlines operating from the Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Equatorial Guinea and Swaziland, bastions of allowing criminals and terrorists to use their national registries. It is not clear how many of these companies actually flew into the EU to begin with, but the list is a first step on helping to clean up the notoriously lax international aviation system.

Among the companies are several that have been flagged by the U.N. or government investigators as belonging to Bout's empire, which seems to have moved much of its registrations out of Africa and into the former Soviet republics. These include Reem Air and Phoenix Aviation of Kyrghizstan, GST Aero Air of Kazakhstan, along with several suspected Bout companies in Sierra Leone.

Bout, however, continues to fly for the U.S. Pentagon into Iraq, according to sources on the ground in Iraq and a close Bout associate. My full blog is here.

The Apostasy Problem is Far Larger than Abdul Rahman

By Daveed Gartenstein-Ross

Yesterday, Bill West wrote about the case of Abdul Rahman, a 41-year-old Afghani man who may face the death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity. This case has generated an enormous amount of media attention because the U.S. and its allies liberated Afghanistan from the fundamentalist Taliban regime, so Westerners find it disconcerting that people can still be killed in that country for leaving the Islamic faith. While this media attention is warranted, it is important for observers to understand that the problem of apostasy laws reaches far beyond Abdul Rahman and Afghanistan.

This is fundamentally an issue that people in the counterterrorism field and those who follow terrorism should care about. The Bush administration has invested in a strategy of democratization to counter the extremism that can be found in the Islamic world. But voting rights will not serve as an effective counterbalance to extremism if voting is simply superimposed over the current Middle Eastern political systems, with their lack of basic political freedoms. The most crucial freedoms for creating true democracy in the Middle East are freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of religion -- and of these, the lack of freedom of religion in the region is the most dramatic.

I have written about the issue of Muslim apostasy several times before:

• "When Muslims Convert" (originally published in Commentary, but publicly available here) provides an overview of the problem of Muslim apostasy. The article explains that this is a serious issue not only in the Middle East, but also in the West -- and that the practice of killing those who apostate from the faith sadly has its intellectual apologists in the West.
• "The Islam Challenge" details a rather remarkable Christian satellite television show that has been broadcast in the Middle East. The show is noteworthy both because it tries to bring the kind of unfettered religious debate that we're accustomed to in the West to the Middle East, and also because one of the show's hosts is himself a convert from Islam to Christianity. A note from the article on the status of religious freedom in the Middle East in late July 2005: "In large part, Questions About Faith [the satellite TV show] has met with a strong reaction in the Middle East because of Islam's privileged position in the region. No fewer than 11 Arab states outlaw proselytism by non-Islamic faiths, and at least 9 Arab countries outlaw apostasy. But the greater threat comes from vigilantes. According to statistics obtained from Compass Direct News Agency, 23 expatriate Christian workers have been killed in the Muslim world since 2002. While it's difficult to estimate the number of apostates who are killed for their new faith, Paul Marshall, a senior fellow at Freedom House's Center for Religious Freedom, estimates that dozens have been killed in the past year."

• "Muslim Apostasy: When Silence Isn't Golden" was published in early 2005, after Prince Charles tried to lead efforts to combat the Islamic law of apostasy. He was told by the Muslim delegation that he brought to his private summit that non-Muslims should not speak publicly about apostasy laws. This article makes the case for why Westerners should speak out on the issue.

Islamic apostasy laws have long been a problem that fell beneath the media's radar. With the attention focused on the Abdul Rahman case, the issue may now begin to get some of the attention it deserves. Ultimately, given the democracy's centrality to U.S. attempts to transform the region, it is an issue that may affect us all.

Current & Former CT Blog Experts Focus on Hamas

By Andrew Cochran

Current and former Contributing Experts are writing and commenting on Hamas' future and financing as it assumes control of the Palestinian Authority. Matthew Levitt, who posted here while he was a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, wrote, "Hamas: Politics, Charity, and Terrorism in the Service of Jihad" before assuming a senior position with the Treasury Department. The book will be released by Yale University Press soon. The Washington Institute describes the book as follows: "In the book, Levitt demolishes what he terms 'the myth of disparate wings.' The notion that Hamas�s military, political, and social �wings� are distinct from one another is belied by ample evidence. In fact, the records show, Hamas meets in the mosques and hospitals it maintains to plan terror attacks, buries caches of arms and explosives under its own schoolyard playgrounds, and transfers and launders funds for terrorist activity through local charity committees." In an interview with the Council on Foreign Relations, Matthew predicted, "Being the government, I don't think, is going to moderate Hamas in the least. And the reason for that is they have a model they have already articulated that they intend to follow, which is the model of Hezbollah in the north."

This week's edition of "National Journal" includes an article by veteran reporter Marc Perelman, "Hamas's Banking Handmaidens," about the investigation into the Arab Bank for serving as a conduit for funds to Hamas (Acrobat file available with express permission and gratitude). In February 2005, the Treasury Department's OCC ordered Arab Bank to cease its banking activities in its New York branch, and later the OCC fined the Arab Bank $24 million because of �especially serious� inadequacies in its money transfer operations. Dennis Lormel is cited as a source, and I was quoted: "It�s troubling that the Justice Department has not made any public move with regards to the Arab Bank, because they have had all the evidence from Treasury for months."

Prosecutor: Taheri-Azar Cannot be Charged with a Terrorist Offense

By Daveed Gartenstein-Ross

I've blogged a couple of times (here and here) about how, in my judgment, Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar couldn't be prosecuted for a terrorist offense. I reasoned that North Carolina doesn't have a terrorism statute that can be brought to bear against him, and the federal sentencing enhancement for terrorism is inapplicable because no federal crime was committed. On Thursday, the district attorney who will be prosecuting Taheri-azar confirmed this analysis. A local news channel reports:

A UNC-Chapel Hill graduate will not face terrorism charges. Mohammad Taheri-Azar plowed his car through a popular student hangout earlier this month and injured nine people. Although some have called the incident an act of terrorism, Taheri-Azar will not be charged because North Carolina doesn�t have a terrorism statute. . . . [District attorney Jim] Woodall said Taheri-Azar will be charged to the full extent of North Carolina criminal law, but cannot charge him without statutes concerning terrorism. When asked if he thinks North Carolina should add terrorism laws, Woodall said he would leave that up to state legislators.

I've expressed skepticism about whether Taheri-azar truly had terrorist motivations. Nonetheless, his own words suggest that he very well may have. I believe the prosecutor should have the ability to charge him with a separate terrorist offense or seek a sentencing enhancement if Taheri-azar's motivations prove to be related to terrorism. Hopefully state legislators -- not just in North Carolina, but in other states as well -- will indeed take this issue seriously. A chart produced by the American Prosecutors Research Institute in October 2003 suggests that at least 22 states beyond North Carolina lack terrorism statutes that could apply in cases such as Taheri-azar's.

There may well be future terrorist acts or attempts in which no federal law is violated. In such cases, the states should be prepared to seek greater punishment for those with terrorist motivations.

Some Afghan Government Officials Should Be Added to the US Immigration Exclusion List

By Bill West

Today, the New York Sun reported about the Afghan man, Abdul Rahman, who is facing trial and possible execution in a court in Kabul for the heinous offense of...converting from Islam to Christianity some fifteen years ago while working as a relief worker in Pakistan with a Christian-run aid group.

As this story emerges, human rights and Christian advocacy organizations around the world are expressing outrage. Curiously, there has so far been a muted response from the US Government. In view of the fact the �new� Afghan government is responsible for bringing these charges under the �new� Afghan �democratic� constitution the US was so instrumental in installing after we invaded and occupied that country, having routed the radical Islamic jihadist Taliban in that process. The Taliban, you know, the Muslim extremists that did things like execute former Muslims for committing anti-Islamic crimes such as converting to Christianity.

Chart: Major Sunni Militant Groups in Iraq

By Evan Kohlmann

A new analytical chart is available for download from Globalterroralert.com titled, "Major Sunni Militant Groups in Iraq: March 2006."  The document helps decipher the complex web of groups at the heart of the Sunni insurgency in Iraq and the larger role played by Al-Qaida and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.  The groups featured in this chart include Zarqawi's Mujahideen Shura Council (MSC), the Iraqi Factions of Jihad, the Fatihin Army, the Islamic Army in Iraq (IAI), the Rashideen Army, the Mujahideen Army, the Ansar al-Sunnah Army, the 1920 Revolution Brigades, the Iraqi Islamic Resistance Front (JAAMI), and more.

Click to view chart - "Major Sunni Militant Groups in Iraq" c/o Globalterroralert.com

Al-Qaida in Saudi Resurfaces with Martyrdom Video of Abqaiq Mastermind Fahd al-Farraj

By Evan Kohlmann

On March 15, Al-Qaida�s Committee in the Arabian Peninsula released the first edition of a new video series titled �Blood that will never be forgotten� commemorating its �martyred� operatives in Saudi Arabia.  This first edition, subtitled �The Battle of Al-Yarmuk District in Eastern Riyadh� featured the recorded will of Al-Qaida commander Fahd bin Farraj al-Juwair al-Farraj, who headed the organization at the time of his death.  Al-Farraj�one of the original participants at the notorious Al-Battar training camp inside Saudi Arabia during 2002-2003�was also named by Al-Qaida as the mastermind behind the failed February 2006 suicide bomb attack on a major oil refinery in the eastern Saudi town of Abqaiq.  On February 27, only days after the clash at Abqaiq, al-Farraj was killed in a shootout with Saudi police in an affluent section of the capital Riyadh.

Click to view documents c/o Globalterroralert.com:
- English transcript of martyrdom video from Fahd al-Farraj
- Video of Fahd al-Farraj at Al-Qaida's former Al-Battar training camp inside Saudi Arabia

Sebastian Junger Revisits Afghanistan and Points Finger at Pakistan

By Andrew Cochran

Sebastian Junger is famous for his book, "Perfect Storm," but he's also in a unique position for having visited Afghanistan in 2000 and traveling with the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance leader, Ahmad Shah Massoud. Massoud was assassinated two days before the 9/11 attacks, and Junger wrote a book, "Fire," about his experience. In interviews, he supported using the Afghans as much as possible to pursue Osama Bin Laden, exactly the strategy employed by the U.S. and heavily criticized after Bin Laden's escape.

Junger has returned recently to Afghanistan and has written an outstanding article, "America's Forgotten War" for the April issue of "Vanity Fair." This in-depth and thoughtful piece is worth buying the magazine. He writes without prejudice of the problems and successes in the continuing counterterrorism activity there. Moreover, he fingers elements in the Pakistan army and intelligence service ("ISI") as critical sponsors in the resurging Taliban activity. He notes that while Pakistan has captured and turned over key Al Qaeda operatives, it hasn't turned over a single mid- or high-ranking Taliban official to the U.S. since the attacks. Junger talked with a former Taliban government official with current knowledge of that assistance. He writes that some Pakistani military are training Taliban recruits. The Taliban official gave him the name and phone number of an ISI agent who brings recruits from a region in Afghanistan, inserts them into training camps in western Pakistan, and then sends them back to fight. Junger also writes that the ex-Taliban told him that the Paks are receiving as much money from Osama Bin Laden to not capture him as they are taking from the United States to catch him. If true, this claim indicates both a level of duplicity that must start near the top of the Pakistani government, and a level of resources available to Bin Laden that is extremely high. Doug Farah posted precisely on the latter subject on August 19 of last year in, "Signs that al Qaeda is Flush With Cash."

Liberia Formally Requests Taylor's Extradition

By Douglas Farah

A spokesman for Nigerian president Obasanjo today said that Liberia has formally requested the extradition of Charles Taylor.

Obasanjo's spokeswoman Remi Oyo said in a statement that Johnson-Sirleaf had asked Nigerian to return Taylor and that the president would give his response to the request after consulting fellow African leaders.

It is a brave and important step for Liberia's new president, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf and a tribute to steadfast, biparisan group in the U.S. Congress led by Ed Royce (R-Ca), who have kept the issue of Taylor's extradition on the front burner despite little more than pro forma support from the White House and a large dose of apathy in most of their collegues. What is significant in a time when few in Congress get credit for doing anything that does not bring immediate electoral gain, Mssrs. Royce, Wolf, Feingold and others have pressed an issue that will probably not change one vote back home. But it is the right thing to do, and they have done it.

The big hurdle will now rest with the African leaders Obasanjo is "consulting" on whether to honor the request, a request he has consistently said he would honor if made by an elected government in Liberia. Now, Ms. Johnson-Sirleaf has fulfilled her historic obligation on this issue. The question is whether the rest of the "Big Men" of Africa, whose culture of mutual protection is largely responsible for the culture of impunity and corruption that is eroding the continent, will rise to the occassion. For information on Taylor's ties to terrorist organizations through the diamond trade, the fight to get him extradited and his crimes against humanity see my blog here.

Lebanese Army Squeezing Al Qaeda for Iranian Proxies

By Andrew Cochran

On January 13, based on intel from a reliable Western government source, I posted that a turf war was developing between Islamic terrorist groups in and around Gaza and southern Lebanon. That came after the December 27 rocket attack into Israel by Al Qaeda elements, which called into question Hezbollah's dominion over southern Lebanon. This week, the Lebanese army announced that it had arrested the suspects in the attack, and Olivier Guitta posted on the conflict between a growing Al Qaeda presence in Lebanon and the entrenched Hezbollah power. The Western intel source told me yesterday that the Lebanese army is assisting its Hezbollah allies by working to squeeze Al Qaeda elements out of southern Lebanon. The suspects arrested this week were Lebanese and Palestinian, testifying to Al Qaeda's recruiting success in the region. In early February, Emily Hunt of the respected Washington Institute for Near East Policy wrote, "Ultimately, future interaction between the two groups will depend partially on the Iranian and Syrian stances on al-Qaeda operations in the Lebanese context." The intel source told me that Iran is satisfied with funding Hezbollah (roughly $100 million/year), Hamas (roughly $250 million), and PIJ in Lebanon and Palestine, and would not assist elements of Al Zarqawi's anti-Shiite Al Qaeda.

The intel source also described the final order on March 9 by the U.S. Treasury Department for U.S. financial institutions to cease all activity with the Commercial Bank of Syria as part of a combined American-French effort to punish Syria for its continuing interference in Lebanon and the Palestinian territory.

How Many Terrorist Watch "Hits" Were Illegal Aliens?

By Michael Cutler

Here is an interesting story ("6,000 terror watch list hits inside U.S.") that leads to more questions about the supposed strategy of our nation in defending itself against the next possible terrorist attack. It is clear that there are people inside our country, even as you read this, who are believed to have an involvement with terrorism. While it is hard to know how many different individuals were encountered multiple times to generate the 6,000 hits noted in the article, it is clear that there are a significant number of individuals within our borders who may pose a threat to the safety and well being of our nation and our citizens. It only took 19 terrorists to create the disaster of 9/11.

What was not noted in the article but which occurred to me as a former INS special agent, is the question as to how many of the individuals who were encountered by law enforcement officers during the course of carrying our their duties were aliens who are illegally in the United States. While it is certainly quite possible that there were people who were stopped because their names were similar to someone on a watch list, while they were not involved in terrorism, it is also entirely possible that some of the individuals who were stopped were involved in terrorism but while they are being scrutinized there is not sufficient evidence to take a law enforcement action against them. In such cases, it would be worthwhile to consider seeking their removal for committing immigration law violations if, in fact, they have violated these laws. The problem is that there are far too few ICE agents to handle these issues as effectively as they should. It would be interesting to know how many of these people who aroused suspicion were interviewed by an ICE agent, presuming that such person was, in fact, an illegal alien.

The point is that by enforcing the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States in that fashion, when individuals suspected of an involvement in terrorism are encountered, can yield benefits in two ways.

Daily Standard: The Problem of the Lone-Wolf Terrorist

By Daveed Gartenstein-Ross

Last week, I blogged about why, even if Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar's explanation that he ran down nine people at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in retaliation for U.S. foreign policy is an accurate description of his motives, he cannot be prosecuted for a terrorist offense or receive a sentencing enhancement due to his motivations. Today an expanded discussion of this issue appears in the Daily Standard. An excerpt:

REGARDLESS OF TAHERI-AZAR'S TRUE MOTIVE, this case points to a real legal problem: Even if his statements trumpeting jihadist motivations are true, authorities can neither charge him with a terrorist offense, nor seek a sentencing enhancement based on his terrorist motives. This points to a significant blind spot in dealing with terrorism in the United States.

Taheri-azar is being prosecuted in state court, and North Carolina doesn't have an applicable terrorism offense that can be brought to bear against him. The state only has two statutory provisions dealing with terrorist incidents. One bans weapons of mass destruction, while the other amends the murder offense. The amendment to the murder offense doesn't apply here--not only because Taheri-azar didn't murder anybody, but also because it only applies when the murder was performed with a nuclear, biological, or chemical weapon.

The federal sentencing guidelines do contain a sentencing enhancement in �3A1.4 for offenses intended to promote a federal crime of terrorism. In turn, 18 U.S.C. � 2232b(g)(5) sensibly defines the predicate intention for a federal crime of terrorism as actions "calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct." While this provision may seem at first glance to apply to Taheri-azar, it doesn't provide federal courts with independent jurisdiction. Rather, the terrorist intentions must be coupled with an independent federal crime.

Quite simply, prosecutors would have trouble getting Taheri-azar into federal court because it appears that he committed no federal crime. The prosecution could argue that there was a federal civil rights violation because this was carried out on the basis of religion. But Taheri-azar didn't target his victims on the basis of their religion. He may have been motivated by religion, but federal civil rights laws really only come into play when the victim is targeted because of his religion. And Taheri-azar's SUV didn't discriminate between Muslim, Jew, Christian and Hindu. Federal hate crime laws seem inapplicable for the same reason.

Read the whole article here.

Johnson-Sirleaf Offers Only Hesitant Assurances on Taylor Extradition

By Douglas Farah

Liberian president Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf addressed a joint session of Congress today, but offered only oblique assurances that she will seek the extradition of former strongman Charles Taylor, who not only wreaked incalculable damage on West Africa but also aided and abetted al Qaeda and Hezbollah.

In a followup interview on CNN, she declined to say she would ask Nigeria to extradite Taylor from his luxurious exile to the Special Court for Sierra Leone, but also did not rule it out. She simply said that discussions were ongoing and that U.S. aid was not conditioned on Taylor's extradition.

The key passage of her speech said that "While we seek national unity and reconciliation, we must not sacrifice justice. I respect the life-saving role that our West African neighbors, particularly Nigeria, played at no small cost to them in accepting to host Mr. Charles Taylor. Liberians are deeply grateful. But I say here, as I have said before, Liberia has little option but to see that justice is done in accordance with the requirements of the United Nations and the broad international community."

What does that mean? It is not clear. Johnson-Sirleaf clearly has her hands full with the nation's multiple, seemingly-insurmountable problems. Nothing in her country works, from hospitals to electricity to schools.

But key Congressional leaders are not willing to let the Taylor issue slide. The full blog can be read here.

ACLU?s Islamist Trend Continues

By Steven Emerson

Previously in this space I wrote about the ACLU positioning itself as the defender and champion of Palestinian Terrorists (see: "The ACLU�s Palestinian Terrorist Friends"). This should come as no surprise as the ACLU continues to reach out to the �organized� Muslim community to fill its leadership positions.

The Florida branch of the ACLU recently elected Parvez Ahmed, Chairman of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) to serve as a board member. According to the ACLU�s Florida website, Ahmed was elected as an �at-large� member in February of this year. According to Ahmed�s bio, he was also the recipient of an ACLU �civil liberties� award in 2002.

At a CAIR-sponsored event at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. on February 16, titled �Religious and Political Perspectives on the Cartoon Controversy,� (just a week and a half after the ACLU and Ahmed formally cemented their relationship), Ahmed called for the government of the United States, and those around the world, to adopt �blasphemy� laws as a manner to ensure that the cartoons, originally published by a Danish newspaper, could never be published again. At the event, Ahmed stated:

�I think the next steps would be to broaden the scope of anti-hate laws and even contemplate about passing blasphemy laws, because blasphemy with such sacred icons, like the Prophet Muhammad, like the Koran, or the cross, or other religious symbols � So governments, legislatures, international bodies � must contemplate about what are the ways in which an anti-blasphemy law can be passed that can protect the right to exercise freedom of religion.�

Steven Emerson: Mayor Bloomberg Too Soft on Imam Jalil

By Andrew Cochran

The decision by NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg to suspend, but not fire, Imam Umar Abdul-Jalil for his outrageous comments ("We know that the greatest terrorists in the world occupy the White House, without a doubt...the Zionists of the media to dictate what Islam is to us") are provoking heavy criticism, including from Steven Emerson. It was Steve's group, The Investigative Project on Terrorism, which obtained an audio tape of his comments (also see this post on CAIR's support for Imam Jalil). Steve was on Fox News Channel's "Hannity & Colmes" last night - here is the transcript with his criticism of Mayor Bloomberg:

Alan Colmes: Joining us now from the Investigative Project on Terrorism, Steve Emerson. Steve, as I understand it, he was suspended for two weeks because he didn�t make it clear that those were private, not public, comments, not for the content of his speech. I like what Bloomberg said, which is, we can�t get involved in what people say. In a democracy, basically, people have different points of view. Punishing people for that is not what we do in America.

Steve Emerson: The question, Alan, is whether, in fact, his role as head of all chaplains for the correctional facilities in New York and as someone that is doing outreach to lots of Muslim inmates should be making statements that refer to the kufar, or infidel, that refer to the Zionists running the media, the fact that the President is a terrorist or the fact that a convicted cop killer, Jamil al-Amin, was set up. These are incendiary comments designed to inflame and the only question is why didn�t the mayor ask for him to repudiate his own comments?

Alan Colmes: Actually, he did say, �I�m sorry the statement was quoted out of context. It was offensive.� He also said that he respects people of all faiths and he is defended by people like Rabbi Joseph Potasnik, who is the chaplain of the fire department in New York; a conservative by the way. So, I think Mayor Bloomberg is on pretty strong ground here.

Steve Emerson: Except he did not repudiate it by saying that it was taken out of context. The words, I have them in front of me, were not taken out of context. The Mayor is treating his comments as if they were a slip of the tongue. I am sorry. How could he slip up nineteen times? The fact of the matter is that he was making these outrageous statements and the Mayor did not demand that he thoroughly disown them.

UN Continues to Struggle Unsuccessfully With Definition of Terrorism

By Victor Comras

The UN appears no closer to working out a consensus on a definition of terrorism � a key element holding up the adoption of new UN Comprehensive Anti Terrorism Convention � than it was at the start of this sixtieth session of the UN General Assembly last fall. Achieving a Comprehensive Anti Terrorism Treaty is one of the principal objectives set by heads of state attending this special anniversary session. Nevertheless, UN legal committee negotiators continue to wrangle over phrases that continue to convey major differences over the application and scope of the convention. The drafters, members of a working group of the UN General Assembly�s Sixth (Legal Affairs) Committee ended their week-long meeting March 3rd without even setting a new date to reconvene. All 191 UN members have a seat on the working group.

Following negotiations last summer, the Sixth Committee Working Group Coordinator put together a consolidated draft convention text for further consideration. Article 2 in that draft states:

1. Any person commits an offence within the meaning of the present Convention
if that person, by any means, unlawfully and intentionally, causes:
(a) Death or serious bodily injury to any person; or
(b) Serious damage to public or private property, including a place of public
use, a State or government facility, a public transportation system, an infrastructure
facility or to the environment; or
(c) Damage to property, places, facilities or systems referred to in paragraph
1 (b) of the present article resulting or likely to result in major economic loss;
when the purpose of the conduct, by its nature or context, is to intimidate a
population, or to compel a Government or an international organization to do or to
abstain from doing any act.
2. Any person also commits an offence if that person makes a credible and
serious threat to commit an offence as set forth in paragraph 1 of the present article.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference Countries (OIC) protested the consolidated draft stating that it prejudiced its position in the negotiations. The OIC, along with the Unaligned Group insist on additional language in the treaty that could be interpreted as exempting armed resistance groups involved in so-called �struggles against colonial domination and foreign occupation.� At the same time they want the convention to specifically cover the activities of regular armed forces, which, because they are covered by other humanitarian and Law of War Conventions, now fall outside the purview of the terrorism convention. (For more details on these issues see my October 25, 2005 Blog)

"Vendetta" is a Pro-Terrorism Movie (updated 3/17)

By Andrew Cochran

What are the Warner Brothers studio and parent company Time Warner thinking? They've released a movie, "V for Vendetta," that is simply a pro-terrorism movie. Sure, it hides behind an attractive theme of "revolution" against a totalitarian government, but the methods it promotes are right out of the Al Qaeda 9-11 attack handbook by blowing up London landmarks and justifying it as resistance: "Blowing up a building can change the world." The fact that this movie is also anti-Christian, with a modified cricifix employed as the symbol of the government, only adds to my distaste and my disappointment in TW.

I wrote on February 3 that Hollywood doesn't get it when it come to terrorism, citing "Syriana," "Valley of the Wolves Iraq," and "Munich." And on January 23 we posted comments from a homicide victims' father about the legitimization of the bombers in "Paradise Now." At least we have Universal Studios finishing "Flight 93" about the heroes who fought to keep the fourth hijacked plane from hitting its intended target on 9-11. Since I wrote that post, I've received some positive comments about the efforts made in that movie to "get it right," so I look forward to seeing perhaps ONE in-theater movie this year in which terrorists are not glorified or the U.S. is not "the enemy." As for "Vendetta," I hope audiences engage in one against TW and Warner Brothers by not seeing the movie.

UPDATE 3/17: Thanks to Andrea Morigi of the Italian newspaper "Libero" for writing a story on the movie and quoting this post - see it here (in Italian):
Download LIberoVendettaQuoteItalian.pdf

Taylor's Last Dance?

By Douglas Farah

It looks like Liberian president Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf has decided the time to get Charles Taylor to the Special Court may be now. Of course, we have seen various steps in this dance before, and ultimately Taylor remains in Nigeria and justice is thawarted. I am not overly optimistic the case will be different this time.

However, ther are some important changes from the past. Various press reports tell of Nigerian president Obasanjo and South African president Mbeki meeting to discuss handing Taylor over to the Special Court. Today, the Liberian government officially acknowledged for the first time that Liberia was looking for a way to extradite Taylor from his luxurious exile in Calabar, Nigeria.

In a statement issued in Monrovia, the Liberian government said that it, in conjunction with Nigeria, it is seeking a solution that will be "acceptable to the international community, the United Nations and at the same time guarantee the rights of Mr. Taylor's under international law."

In a demonstration of just how well connected Taylor remains in some quarters of the Obasanjo administration, it was Taylor's spokesman, Sylvester Paasewe, who initially said that Liberia has made an extradition request. The full blog is here.

Is Al Qaeda Plannng a New Attack?

By Douglas Farah

The level of "chatter" by al Qaeda operatives is currently as high or higher than in the months prior to 9-11, and the question in many parts of the U.S. and European intelligence communities is not if al Qaeda will strike again, but when. Much of the thinking centers on the near-term. This is also reflected in current corporate security alerts being circulated among elite business establishments.

There are several factors that point to al Qaeda at least having a plan for an imminent attack. The first is the January appearance of Osama bin Laden himself after months of silence. The second is the repeated warnings and boasts from bin Laden, Zawahiri and on al Qaeda web sites of impending action.

Several analysts I have spoken with believe the leadership of the historic al Qaeda would not raise expectations of an attack, especially at a time of intense competition with Zarqawi's operation for the mantle of carrying out international jihad, without something important afoot. The risk of losing credibility is too high. Zarqawi is already viewed as the person carrying out action, while bin Laden and Zawahiri have been left in the roles of elder statesmen, respected but no longer operational in the field of battle.

One corporate risk analysis group reported something else of interest: A March 10 posting on al-Hesbah website, known for posting al Qaeda messages, carried a message from the Global Islamic Media Front. The message gives a final warning to the United States before carrying out what it said would be two devastating attacks. The second attack would not be launched until after Washington had time to respond to the first one, the message said. The full blog is here.

GSPC kills one of its ex-leaders

By Olivier Guitta

In fact, on Friday March 10, Abdelkrim Kaduri was gunned down in Al Ued by a GSPC armed squad. This is a very important because of a few reasons:

1- Until 1999, Kaduri was the military adviser to GSPC leader Hassan Hattab before turning himself in to Algerian authorities. He had joined the ranks of emir El Para who had started helping Algerian authorities to arrest GSPC operatives. Also Kaduri convinced tens of GSPC elements to turn themselves in and lay down arms.

2- In light of the new amnesty law which allowed the release of 2000 Islamists, Kaduri pleaded for a total halt of fighting between GSPC units and Algerian security services. Just before his assasination, Kaduri appealed to his ex-fellow GSPC members: " Do not let this opportunity of reconciliation slip by."

Before Kaduri, the GSPC had killed in 2002 imam Abu Hafs for the same reasons. This latest assasination is clearly a warning to any dissidents who would think of helping Algerian security services.

But more importantly, it does not bode well for a real end to the fifteen-year civil war. And releasing ex-terrorists does not sound to me like a great solution...

CAIR Supports Imam Jalil's Hateful Views

By Andrew Cochran

Brian Hecht of Steven Emerson's Investigative Project on Terrorism has prepared the following post; please quote Brian:

Yesterday, the "New York Post" broke the story of an anti-Government, anti-Semitic speech made by the chief Imam of New York City�s Department of Corrections. On an audio tape obtained by the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) at a 2005 Muslim Students Association conference in Arizona, Umar Abdul-Jalil, also the Imam of the Masjid Sabur mosque in Harlem, complained that �the greatest terrorists in the world occupy the White House� and that the �Zionists of the media� have portrayed Islam in a negative light. Responding to the news of Imam Jalil�s comments, New York City has placed him on administrative leave pending a further investigation. As reported by the Post:

At one conference session, Abdul-Jalil charged that Muslims jailed after the 9/11 attacks were being tortured in Manhattan, according to the tape. "They [some Muslim inmates] are not charged with anything, they are not entitled to any rights, they are interrogated. Some of them are literally tortured and we found this in the Metropolitan Correctional Facility in Manhattan. But they literally are torturing people," Abdul-Jalil said.

Abdul-Jalil also accused the Bush administration of being terrorists, according to the tape. "We have terrorists defining who a terrorist is, but because they have the weight of legitimacy, they get away with it . . . We know that the greatest terrorists in the world occupy the White House, without a doubt," he said.

At another session, Abdul-Jalil urged American Muslims to stop allowing "the Zionists of the media to dictate what Islam is to us" and said Muslims must be "compassionate with each other" and "hard against the kufr [unbeliever]."

Not surprisingly, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which has a long history of espousing and defending extremist, hateful and anti-Semitic speech (see Steven Emerson's "The American Muslim Leaders' 'Fatwa' Is Bogus"), is defending Imam Jalil�s right to preach his views while earning $76,000 in taxpayer-supported salary and holding a position of public trust, supposedly involved in the rehabilitation of convicted criminals. Of course, CAIR won't defend the rights of newspapers when publishing cartoons which CAIR deems insulting.

A bombing in Bangkok unlikely to be work of the insurgents

By Zachary Abuza

A small bomb was placed in front of the house of the King�s closest personal advisor and former Prime Minister, Prem Tinsulanonda, on Thursday, wounding two western tourists. It is unlikely that it had anything to do with the Islamist insurgency in the south. Though there is considerable concern that the insurgents will at one point move beyond their area of operations and take their war to Bangkok and tourist venues, to date there is little evidence that they are doing so now. Simply their current strategy and tactics is working.

Thursday�s bombing was more likely perpetrated by political operatives bent on creating greater political instability in Thailand.

Hamastine could become a deportation dilemma

By Bill West

The Tampa Tribune ran a report today about attorneys for Sameeh Hammoudeh filing a writ of habeas corpus in US District Court on his behalf. Hammoudeh is the former co-defendant of accused Palestinian Islamic Jihad US-based leader Sami Al-Arian in Tampa. Hammoudeh was acquitted of all the charges against him in his trial with Al-Arian. Al-Arian remains detained awaiting a decision to retry him on several counts on which the jury was unable to reach verdicts relative to him. Hammoudeh, however, had been previously convicted of various Federal fraud charges in a separate case before the PIJ caper went to trial, and is being detained by US Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) pending the execution of what is now a final removal (deportation) order against him stemming from that prior case.

The habeas writ comes after many months of ICE apparently being unable to expeditiously effect Hammoudeh�s physical removal from the United States. His attorneys now claim his continued detention is illegal and he should be released until the Government can actually remove him. ICE, per the article, claims it continues to make those arrangements. Hammoudeh, for just a bit of brief background, only had a student visa in the US and had been in this country for something on the order of a decade. Among his felony convictions are immigration and tax fraud.

The Hammoudeh deportation case highlights a problem that is likely to continue plaguing the US Government. The issue became a hot topic in the media with the deportation of Al-Arian�s brother-in-law, Mazen Al-Najjar, in 2002 (another illegal alien who had overstayed his student visa by more than a decade while enmeshing himself with Al-Arian). In fact, a similar habeas action was filed by the ACLU on Al-Najjar�s behalf in May of that year, and it failed in securing his release from detention before his deportation several months later. The pending deportation of former Cleveland, Ohio Imam Fawaz Damra, another fraud felon convicted PIJ-connected ex-crony of Al-Arian who is now under a removal order, may similarly prove problematic for the Feds.

Flip-Flop on Guest Worker Program Endangers National Security

By Michael Cutler

I am linking to an article ("View on Guest Workers Changes") that fills me with utter OUTRAGE! I cannot recall the last time that I started writing about a newspaper article with these words but I do not know how else I can begin without stating clearly and without equivocation that I am filled with rage over an article about immigration where it has a significant impact on national security!

When I heard that Mr. Gonzalez was the administration's choice for the head of USCIS I made the point that he had come from a lobbying organization that boasted that it would be able to over come bureaucratic hurdles for its clients. I expressed serious misgivings about Mr. Gonzalez's orientation and integrity. Then I was told that Mr. Gonzalez had shown that he was truly a man of integrity because during his confirmation hearings he clearing and unambiguously stated that it was his belief that USCIS, the division of DHS that adjudicates various applications for a variety of immigration benefits including the conferring of resident aliens status and even United States citizenship upon aliens, would be unable to grapple with a guest worker program given the limited resources available to USCIS. I stated that I would give him the benefit of the doubt. Now we see that he has gone 180 degrees in the opposite direction and is contradicting himself just five months after that hearing ("The director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services said yesterday that the agency is now ready to run a guest-worker program, just five months after he told a Senate hearing that the agency was not prepared"). Would anyone like to have some maple syrup with that waffle? Does Mr. Gonzalez really stand for anything? I desperately wanted to find that I was wrong in my initial assessment of Mr. Gonzalez, but sadly I was not wrong! He is now advocating that private employees adjudicate applications for various immigration benefits. These employees will not have a vested interest in the agency that will employ them. They will be more vulnerable to corruption and will simply do what they are told to do. I suspect that the orders of the day will be to simply rubber-stamp each and every application! If I wanted to be an optimist about the potential for corruption with contract employees, it is that with all of those rubber stamps cranking out approved applications, bribery will not be necessary! Why pay for what you can get for the price of an application?

IRAN: What can Congress do?

By Michael Kraft

Iran is already in a war against the United States, an unconventional conflict that is largely overlooked or unacknowledged amid the growing friction over Tehran�s efforts to obtain nuclear weapons.

This is becoming increasingly clear as a result of recent developments.

Iran warned the United States it would feel �pain� if tough measures were imposed by the U.N. Security Council program against Tehran because of its nuclear program. The warning was issued at an International Atomic Energy Committee meeting in Vienna yesterday in advance of next week�s Security Council meeting.

But Iran already is imposing pain.

At a news conference Tuesday, General Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff acknowledged that troops in Iraq are finding some improvised explosive devices that are traceable back to Iran�an ominous development reported by the British six months ago. These explosives have been described as powerful shaped charges, far more lethal in destroying armored vehicles than earlier explosives.

Defense Secretary Rumsfeld told the same news conference that Iranian revolutionary guards have been infiltrating into Iraq. These men apparently are helping some Shiia militia groups in the escalating fighting against the Sunnis. The growing sectarian violence, already being called a civil war by some observers, is making it more difficult for the new Iranian army and police to stabilize the county and clear the way for the U.S. to withdraw its forces.

Iran is supplying manpower and trainers to fuel the Iraqi conflict and is smuggling in explosives used to directly attack American and British troops. This follows a long history of Iranian-backed terrorist attacks against the United States, including the embassy and Marine bombings in Lebanon during the 1980�s to the Kobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia in 1996.

If this is not a war against the United States, it is a pretty good imitation.

Treasury Department Won't Freeze Mohammed Taheri-Azar's Assets, Either

By Andrew Cochran

Another point to add to Daveed's excellent post below: if the Treasury Department wanted to seriously investigate Mohammed Taheri-Azar for possible terrorist connections, they could designate him under the OFAC program and freeze his assets to prevent him or his family from moving them overseas. Treasury did exactly that to the Ohio-based, Hamas-associated KindHearts charity on February 19, without any prosecution of its officers or directors. But one e-mail exchange yesterday with a Treasury official who is in the loop on all terrorist designations convinced me that they won't designate Taheri-Azar. Believe me, if any key official in the Justice or Treasury Departments thought that this kid is a real terrorist, they would move in that direction, and they're not.

DHS Agency Can't Handle Immigration Fraud Caseload

By Michael Cutler

A "Washington Times" article today, "Immigration agency falters in handling fraud cases," addresses an area of concern that I was greatly concerned about during virtually my entire career at the former INS that spanned some 30 years. I began my career at John F. Kennedy International Airport and was responsible to determine whether or not aliens seeking entry into the United States should be admitted. I was detailed for one year to the unit that adjudicated applications to accord aliens residency in the United States based on marriage to a United States citizen or resident alien. In 1975 I became a special agent and rotated through every section of the Investigations Branch of the former INS including a stint in the Frauds Unit. My career included 4 years as the INS representative to the Unified Intelligence Division of the DEA in New York, Senior Special Agent assigned to the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force, and work with counterparts from the FBI, DEA, U.S. Customs, local and state police organizations, and representatives of foreign governments. Many of the criminal aliens who were targeted for investigation as subjects of narcotics and terrorism investigations often were found to have committed immigration fraud in order to either enter the United States or hide in plain sight once they got here. Fraud is a major area of vulnerability that has been overlooked for far too long.

Simply stated, immigration fraud can be thought of as a lie put on an application that enables an individual to gain an immigration benefit that he/she would not receive if all of the relevant facts were known. Additionally, fraud can be thought of as coming in two broad categories, document fraud and fraud schemes. Both areas leave our nation vulnerable and virtually nothing is being done to address these issues in meaningful ways. While much attention has been paid to the situation at our nation's borders, immigration benefit fraud has been all but ignored by the government and by most of the news media. It is far easier to associate the immigration crisis with the border than to consider the other components of this issue. During the last Presidential campaign, the President made the point that since he had been the governor of a border state, he understood illegal immigration. Nothing could be further from the truth. It has been estimated that some 40% of the illegal alien population did not run our nation's borders but rather entered the United States through a port of entry such as an airport and then, in one way or another, violated the immigration laws. In fact, we still have a Visa Waiver Program that enables aliens from 26 countries plus Canada to enter the United States without first obtaining a visa. The truth is that any state that has a seaport or an international airport is, in fact, as much a border state as are those states that lie on our nation's northern or southern borders.

Can Mohammed Taheri-Azar Be Prosecuted for a Terrorist Offense?

By Daveed Gartenstein-Ross

On Friday, Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar drove a Jeep through a crowd at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, hitting nine people. Fortunately, none of the nine were seriously injured. Taheri-azar has been charged with nine counts of attempted murder for his actions. The case has garnered quite a bit of press attention because Taheri-azar may have had a terrorist-type motivation. A search of his apartment suggests that Taheri-azar planned the attack for months and was disappointed that he didn't inflict more damage. He told police that he believed the U.S. was "killing his people across the sea," and that his actions reflected "an eye for an eye." Indeed, in his confession to a 911 dispatcher, Taheri-azar said that he wanted to "punish the government of the United States for [its] actions around the world," and he told the judge in his criminal case that he was "thankful for the opportunity to spread the will of Allah."

Despite Taheri-azar's statements, some question remains about his true motivations. One question mark, as my colleague Andrew Cochran pointed out, is the fact that Taheri-azar called 911 to turn himself in right after his Jeep escapades. Nonetheless, Taheri-azar's statements to authorities and to the court makes clear that there may have been an Islamist motivation to the attacks. Today I was on Studio B with Shepard Smith to discuss whether Taheri-azar could be charged with a terrorist offense. As it turns out, the answer is no.

Taheri-azar is being prosecuted in state court. But North Carolina does not have an applicable terrorism offense that can be brought to bear against him. There is a terrorism offense for weapons of mass destruction (not applicable here) and a terrorism sentencing enhancement for murder -- but Taheri-azar did not succeed in murdering anybody.

The federal sentencing guidelines do contain a sentencing enhancement in Guideline 3A1.4 for offenses designed to promote terrorism. (In turn, 18 U.S.C. 2232b(g)(5) sensibly defines a federal crime of terrorism as occurring when the act "is calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct.") The problem is that there appears to be no federal crime in this case to provide the federal courts with jurisdiction. The prosecution could argue that there is a federal civil rights violation because this was carried out on the basis of religion. The problem with that argument, though, is that Taheri-azar didn't target his victims on the basis of their religion. Taheri-azar may have been motivated by religion, but the civil rights laws only really come into play when the victim is targeted because of his religion.

This gives rise to a serious point. Terrorist crimes are worse than other crimes because of their potential to disrupt society. Terrorists make war on the United States, and we should provide prosecutors with an additional ability to punish the terrorists. In the future, we may well see a shift not only to more decentralized terrorist cells that act autonomously from broader terror networks, but also to more lone-wolf acts of terrorism. If we take Taheri-azar's statements in this case at face value, this would be an act of lone-wolf terror for which there is no way to enhance the perpetrator's sentence due to his terrorist motivations. This is an issue that states should now begin to address in their criminal codes.

U.S. Government Assisting Bangladesh Terrorism Investigation and Securing Radioactive Materials

By Andrew Cochran

How important were the captures of JMB terrorist leaders Abdur Rahman and Bangla Bhai in the past week? Important enough for the Treasury Department to send two top experts to Bangladesh this week to determine how JMB was financed and to set up measures to prevent and detect movements of terrorists' money, including establishing Bangladesh's first financial intelligence unit (FIU). Here's an excerpt from today's "Daily Star":

US Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) Senior Research Analyst Mary Jo Melancon and Senior Intelligence Research Specialist Kristen J King, who arrived here last week, have already sat with Bangladesh Bank (BB) officials on Monday and Tuesday.

Today they will illustrate and orient a select group of police, judicial, customs and central bank officials to how FinCEN operates to safeguard the US financial system from abuses and crimes like terrorist financing and money laundering, BB sources said.

The Washington-Dhaka high-level cooperation to clip the wings of the Islamist terrors comes concurrently with the recent captures of the top two JMB masterminds and the government's inability so far to unearth the sources and ways of their funds.

The "Bangladesh Observer" reports that the U.S. signed a cooperative agreement Wednesday to secure Bangladesh's radioactive materials from possible terrorist attack and takeover. That paper also reports that Abdur Rahman "spent a huge amount of money for launching several bomb attacks including the countrywide serial bomb blasts on August 17, 2005 with the help of the said persons. The money that he received from different local and international sources for launching militancy in the country were deposited by them in fake names and addresses." Bangla authorities have found checkbooks, raided businesses, and arrested a bank branch manager as part of the investigation. Bangla authorities continue hunting for two other top JMB terrorists, and Australia has offered its anti-terrorist financing software expertise, which is among the best in the world.

Exposing CAIR as "Islamists Fooling the Establishment"

By Andrew Cochran

Daniel Pipes and Sharon Chadha have a new expose of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) on the Middle East Forum site today, titled "CAIR: Islamists Fooling the Establishment." The article is an excellent profile of CAIR's very shady side, which includes former employees and board members with terrorist ties, its lack of credibility with many patriotic Muslim Americans, and its successful manipulation into a "mainstream" group in the mainstream press. This should be required reading, especially in the halls of Congress and the Executive Branch. Steven Emerson's numerous writings and testimony and those of staff at The Investigative Project are quoted and cited often in the article. Excerpts with links as added in the article:

The Department of Homeland Security refuses to deal with it. Senator Charles Schumer (Democrat, New York) describes it as an organization "which we know has ties to terrorism."...Steven Pomerantz, the FBI's former chief of counterterrorism, notes that "CAIR, its leaders, and its activities effectively give aid to international terrorist groups."...Counterterrorism expert Steven Emerson calls it "a radical fundamentalist front group for Hamas."...Randall ("Ismail") Royer, an American convert to Islam, served as CAIR's communications specialist and civil rights coordinator; today he sits in jail on terrorism-related charges...CAIR has a number of links to the terror organization Hamas, starting with the founder of its Texas chapter, Ghassan Elashi...CAIR has also consistently defended other radical Islamic terrorists. Rather than praise the conviction of the perpetrators of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, it deemed this "a travesty of justice."...CAIR continues to expose its fascistic side by its repeated activities with William W. Baker, exposed as a neo-Nazi in March 2002...CAIR liked Baker's work so much, it used the title of his book, More in Common Than You Think, in one of its ad campaigns in March 2004 and as the title of an Elderhostel lecture...CAIR's decision to accept Islamic Development Bank funding is unfortunate, given the bank's role as fund manager of the Al-Quds and the Al-Aqsa Funds, established by twelve Arab countries in order to fund the Palestinian intifada and provide financial support to the families of Palestinian "martyrs."...CAIR attempts to close down public debate about itself and Islam in several ways, starting with a string of lawsuits against public and private individuals and several publications...

The UAE (Hesitantly) Takes on Bout

By Douglas Farah

The United Arab Emirates has, in recent days, grounded all flights of Irbiss Air, one of Viktor Bout's flagship airlines that was banned by the United Nations but continued to fly unimpeded despite that minor inconvenience.

Sources on the ground in Sharjah confirm what the U.S. Embassy in the UAE recently transmitted to the State Department-that Irbiss, which continued to post flights on the Sharjah airport without even changing its name, was being shut down and its aircraft grounded. The UN action to designate Bout's companies and freeze his assets came last December, but had not be heeded by UAE. Of course, it had not been heeded by contractors working for the U.S. military either, who continued to hire Bout aircraft despite the fact such contracts are illegal.

The primary reason for the move against Irbiss, my sources said, was the UAE's embarssment of letting Bout continue to fly despite years of international requests to shut him down. Bout's close business relationship with the Taliban and his ferrying weapons to that despotic regime, which shared the weapons with al Qaeda, did not seem to bother the UAE leaders. The full blog is here

Has the Pakistan Government Joined the "Cartoon Jihad?"

By Andrew Cochran

Tracy Tywman of Portland, Oregon, whose websites were hacked by cyber-terrorists after she published "the cartoons," now tells me that the Pakistan government has officially banned one of her sites and at least 11 others. Read the details of the banning on that site. In another post, she explains how the sites were banned, with her conclusion that the Pakistan government chose the sites to ban from the cyber-terrorist's website. The U.S. State Department and Congress should protest this official action by the Pakistani government, and we should demand that President Musharraf explain the standards applied by his government to ban American websites. This is another example of Pakistan's "anti-ally" role as discussed by Steven Emerson on TV last week. UPDATE: Tracy also tells me that "a lawyer representing the Pakistani Communication Authority said that I and the other 11 webmasters could be extradited to Pakistan to face blasphemy charges, punishable by death. That's ridiculous of course, but what isn't so far-fetched is what he went on to say: that Pakistanis who find ways of getting around the ban and manage to access the websites, or Pakistani government officials who fail to do their utmost to stop this from happening, can also be prosecuted for blasphemy and killed." Unbelievable.

Congressional Hearings on Terrorism Issues Soon

By Andrew Cochran

Several committees in the U.S. Congress are planning hearings this spring on a variety of terrorism-related issues. The committees averaged 2-3 hearings a week last year, until Hurricane Katrina absorbed most of the attention and resources. I can't divulge the details now but will at the appropriate time. Sent via BlackBerry Handheld

NC Hit-and-Run Case Publicity Trivializes Real Terrorism

By Andrew Cochran

The cable news networks and some of my favorites blogs are in danger of trivializing real terrorism by trumpeting the case of the University of North Carolina graduate student from Iran, who tried to run down students to "avenge the deaths of Muslims around the world." One top blogger e-mailed me and justified the coverage as an effort to educate college students on the real thing. I suggest that instead of focusing on one nutcase who wasn't born here (and no real terrorist turns himself in on a 911 emergency call!!), try calling attention back to the 20-something Hamid Hayat's (in California) and Ahmed Omar Abu Ali's (across the Potomac from Washington) who were born here, raised here, brainwashed on radical Islamist propaganda in their communities here, and then went overseas to learn how to attack their fellow Americans. They aren't the only ones. If that doesn't scare a college kid, nothing will.

The Themes of al-Zawahiri's Latest Tape

By Daveed Gartenstein-Ross

My colleague Andrew Cochran noted that al-Qaeda deputy leader Ayman al-Zawahiri released new audio and video tapes on Saturday. Since a large component of the global war on terror is the battle of ideas, it is important to understand how al-Qaeda is attempting to sell its cause and ideas in the Muslim world. Before analyzing al-Zawahiri's new message, it is worth noting that the video of al-Zawahiri's message was again aired by al-Jazeera. My colleague Walid Phares recently noted the panel discussion on al-Jazeera following the release of al-Zawahiri's January tape, wherein the panelists agreed with and amplified his message. Given the benefits that al-Jazeera derives from being granted exclusive releases by al-Qaeda, we can expect more of the same for future tapes that al-Qaeda releases.

There are five primary themes in this new al-Zawahiri tape. The first is the development of a deeply anti-Western theory of the world based on current events, wherein there is a grand conspiracy to undermine the Islamic faith. Al-Zawahiri describes the publication of cartoons satirizing Prophet Muhammad as part of a crusader plot against the Muslims, saying that the publication is "an example of the hatred of the crusaders led by America." He said that Muslims should boycott countries where the cartoons were published, including Denmark, Norway, France and Germany. Al-Zawahiri states that the publication of these cartoons stands in contrast to the fact that "no one dares to harm Jews or to challenge Jewish claims about the Holocaust nor even to insult homosexuals." We can expect future al-Qaeda tapes to further develop the idea of a far-reaching conspiracy against Muslims, and to frame future controversies involving Islam as manifestations of that conspiracy. In doing so, the terrorist group will frame itself as the true defender of the Muslim nation: a group that is willing to stand up while the Middle East's cowardly governments kowtow to the West.

A second theme is the oppression of the Palestinians. Al-Zawahiri voices his support for Hamas's refusal to recognize Israel, and urges them to "continue the armed struggle." He describes previous deals between the Palestinian Authority and Israel as "surrender accords," and lashes out at previous secular governments that ruled over the Palestinians. He says that no Palestinian has the right "to give away a grain of the soil," and that the only alternative is to pursue armed struggle "until the liberation of Palestine and the building of an Islamic state." In doing this, al-Zawahiri is attempting to link al-Qaeda's struggle to that of the Palestinians -- a cause with immense popularity in the region. Reaching out to Hamas serves a dual purpose for al-Zawahiri. On the one hand, there is the chance that Hamas will respond well to his overtures (although thus far Hamas appears uninterested). On the other hand, al-Zawahiri surely knows that being in power may cause Hamas to moderate somewhat and enter into talks with Israel. If it does, al-Qaeda will attempt to exploit that move by positioning itself as the true representative of the Palestinian people's theological aspirations.

In a third theme, al-Zawahiri urges Muslims to attack the West. He says that those attacks should hurt the West economically: "[Muslims have to] inflict losses on the crusader West, especially to its economic infrastructure with strikes that would make it bleed for years." Al-Qaeda has for some time focused on the West's economy as one of its key areas of vulnerability. See, for example, the video that bin Laden released just before the 2004 election, in which he trumpeted his "bleed-until-bankruptcy plan" for defeating America.

Bangla Bhai the Second Major Terrorist Leader Captured in Bangladesh (updated)

By Andrew Cochran

On March 2, I posted about the capture in Bangladesh of Abdur Rahman, leader of Islamic terrorist groups Jamaatul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB) and Jagrata Muslim Janata Bangladesh (JMJB) and Bin Laden ally during the 1990s. Bangladesh have followed up on that success by capturing Bangla Bhai, Rahman's partner in terrorism. These captures are extremely important and indicate a penetration and infiltration of the JMB-JMJB network by Bangladesh security operations. It could enable them, and hopefully Western counterterrorism officials, to obtain documents, financial records, and oral statements on the ties and contacts between the Bangla groups, Al Qaeda, and possibly other major Islamic terrorist groups. At "The Fourth Rail," Bill Roggio has an excellent summary of the arrest and Bangla Bhai's work with Rahman, with pictures of Rahman and Bhai. Bangla Bhai was wounded in the capture but will recover from his wounds. Here's more on the continuing investigation of Rahman and Bhai from "The Daily Star" site in Bangladesh (updated):

Bangla Bhai, the tyrant who once spread Islamic militancy with the administration's protection, was captured wounded yesterday from a remote Mymensingh hideout after skirmishes with the Rapid Action Battalion (Rab). As the splinter-hit and explosive-burned militant top gun was carted along the rutted roads of Rampur village in Muktagachha, the curtain dropped on his reign of terror in the northern Bangladesh where he killed and tortured scores amid the government's denial about his existence. Siddiqul Islam alias Bangla Bhai was flown to Dhaka by a helicopter after given treatment at Mymensingh Medical College Hospital and is kept at BDR Hospital in Dhaka. Despite splinter wounds in the abdomen and burns almost all over his body, his condition is now stable, the state minister for home said.

Tyrant Bangla Bhai finally captured
Rise and fall of a dreaded militant leader
Rahman had training on arms in Afghanistan
Ex-Jamaat leader's chequebooks found in Rahman's hideout
Rab raids in Sylhet in search of top militant

Captured terrorist leader Bangla Bhai in handcuffs and scenes from arrest ("The Daily Star")

Iran Sanctions: Difficult But Necessary Now

By Victor Comras

The UN Security Council is scheduled this week to take up Iran�s continuing defiance of its NPT and IAEA obligations. When Iran acted earlier this year to break the monitoring seals at three of its nuclear facilities and to move ahead on uranium enrichment it knew that it would provoke a new international crisis. Iran's leaders had decided to gamble that the very tight international oil market and America�s growing imbroglio in Iraq will insulate Iran from any effective international response. They calculate that the international community is not likely to risk cutting off the flow of Iranian oil by imposing sanctions and count on China and/or Russia to hold up any really effective UN mandated action. They have reportedly hardened their key nuclear facilities against possible missile strikes, and believe that the US, already overextended militarily in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, and given current public attitudes, is unlikely to launch a sustained military operation to take the facilities down. They also count on support from within the Islamic community which may view Iran�s nuclear program as an effective response to Israel�s presumed nuclear capabilities.

All indications are that they are right that the Security Council will steer clear of recommending new sanctions on Iran at this time. Secretary Rice and Ambassador Bolton have already cautioned the Media not to expect any firm action from the Security Council at this time. Bolton has suggested that the Security Council must first throw its weight behind the IAEA and give Iran further time to reconsider. Rather than raise the ante and call Iran�s bluff, the Security Council will merely reiterate its future determination to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Much firmer Security Council action will be needed to convince Iran�s leaders to abandon their Uranium enrichment plans. And the longer we wait, the harder it will become to get Iran�s leaders to change course. .

The Question is can the West, barring military action, get Iran to back down? The answer may lie in coming up with some innovative sanctions measures.

Iran�s economy is quite fragile and vulnerable to trade restrictions. Oil accounts for around 80 to 90 percent of Iran�s total exports and 40-50% of the government�s budget. Despite high oil prices, Iran�s economy has softened considerably since President Ahmadinejad took office. Unemployment is rampant and new investment in Iran�s industry and infrastructure has stalled. Substantial new foreign capital investment is also needed to modernize its petroleum infrastructure and to meet growing domestic energy demands while maintaining revenue producing oil exports. Iran's leaders can ill-afford to aggravate Iran's economic distress further.

But, getting the Security Council to act will not be easy. Iran accounts for about 5% of the world�s oil exports. And with international spot oil prices over $65.00 a barrel, even threatening to cut off Iranian crude from the market could cause international oil prices to spike. This, alone, is likely to give hesitation to imposing comprehensive UN trade sanctions. China is a major importer of Iranian oil and traditionally reluctant to impose sanctions measures. Russia also has developed a lucrative market as a supplier to Iran's nuclear reactor program and for Iran's oil industry. Yet, both countries must share the same deep concerns as the West about Iran's gaining nuclear weapons status.

Even if we can't get the Security Council to adopt comprehensive sanctions, it's critical that we press quickly for measures that at least demonstrate that the Security Council will not countenance Iran's uranium enrichment program. We must, at a minimum, press for accelerating sanctions aimed at first isolating Iran and cutting off its access to goods and services, including financial services. Technical support and supplies for Iran's overall nuclear program and investment and technical support for its oil production, exploration and development projects should be halted immediately. Iran�s overseas accounts should be frozen and targeted Iran business entities and regime supporters cut off from participating in international transactions. A UN resolution should also encourage other oil producing countries to act to rationalize the oil market in anticipation of further sanctions against Iran. Further measures, including a ban on oil exports, should be envisaged if Iran continues to resist compliance with IAEA norms.

Alone the United States has little sanctions leverage left on Iran. The US has barred most trade and investment with Iran, including the purchase of Iranian oil since 1995. But, we must press Europe and our other friends and allies to act with us together to bring home to Iran our opposition to its uranium enrichment program. Working with our European allies, Japan and other countries, targeted trade sanctions, even in the absence of a Security Council Resolution, can have a substantial impact. Iran's business community is heavily dependent on goods and services from Europe and Japan. In fact, imports from Europe and Japan have more than offset oil export�s to them two out of the last five years. Concerted action on such sanctions now, may still dissuade Iran from its current course. In the face of real sanctions, Iran might choose to re-think its position and take up Russia�s offer to provide alternative, and safeguarded, uranium enrichment services. Further debate and delay will only encourage Iran to move ahead with its enrichment program, leaving no options other than military action.

New Ayman al-Zawahri Tape Urges Terrorist Attacks, "Cartoon Jihad" Strikes, & Contributions (updated)

By Andrew Cochran

In new audio and video tapes released yesterday, Al Qaeda's #2, Ayman al-Zawahri, urges followers to attack the West, supports the "cartoon jihad" economic strikes aganist Danish and other Western countries, supports Hamas' refusal to recognize Israel, and asks for contributions for his and other Islamic terrorists. You can see clips of the video from BBC. Other segments are on the English Aljazeera site. Quote from CNN: "I would like to tell my brothers in Hamas to fight on and not to accept agreements between the Palestinian Authority and Israel." Dore Gold, former Israeli Ambassador to the U.N., writes today about the long-standing ties between Al Qaeda and Hamas, ideologically and logistically: "Bin Laden sent emissaries to Hamas in September 2000 and January 2001; Israel arrested three Hamas militants in 2003 after they had returned from an al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda operations chief Abu Zubaydah entered the world of terrorism through Hamas. And according to a 2004 FBI affidavit, al Qaeda recruited Hamas members to conduct surveillance against potential targets in the United States." Hamas officials were not impressed with al-Zawahri's support. "Hamas believes that Islam is completely different to the ideology of Mr. al-Zawahri...We have no links with any group or element outside Palestine," U.S. General John Abizaid predicted new Al Qaeda attacks against mosques in Iraq in order to spark a civil war. Longtime terrorism expert Brian Jenkins wrote on March 3 that the real danger to oil supplies is not a single attack but a regional war in the Persian Gulf. Here are pertinent posts by our Continuing Experts:

Evan Kohlmann: "The State of Al-Qaida in Saudi Arabia, Connections to Zarqawi in Iraq" and "Al-Qaida in Saudi Arabia Issues Rules on Attacking Oil Facilities"

Douglas Farah: "Why Bin Laden is Still At Large, and Why it Matters"

Daveed Gartenstein-Ross: "Al-Zawahiri Calls for Attacks on Gulf Oil Facilities" and "The Cartoon Riots: The Price of Freedom" and "Al-Qaeda's Hurricane Lesson: Target the Oil Supply" (last September)

Olivier Guitta: "Saudi Arabia, Iran and Syria's holy partnership in the Cartoon Jihad"

Lorenzo Vidino: "Danish cartoons: new political tool" and "Fabricated cartoons worsened Danish controversy" (the post which exposed the fraud behind the "cartoon Jihad")

Ayman al-Zawahri in video tape (click to enlarge):

Al Qaeda's expansion in the Palestinian territories

By Olivier Guitta

Abu Mazen's interview to the pan-Arabic daily Al Hayat is getting lots of attention. In fact, his recognition of Al Qaeda's precense in Gaza and the West Bank coupled with his warning of the "destruction of the whole region" because of the terrorist entity, is only confirming what Israeli security services have been saying for months.

Another possible sign of Al Qaeda's expansion in the Palestinian territories has been revealed by the Emirati daily Al Ittihad. A so far unknown Palestinian group named " Jihad's Army and fight against corruption" (maybe sounding a little bit like an Al Qaeda offshoot) has been sending messages to foreign diplomatic representations in Gaza demanding that all personnel leave within a month. The communique calls for all non-Muslim foreigners to leave Gaza. It also denounces a Western style democracy on Muslim land and affirms its determination to impose sharia law.
Finally it mentions that a man like Saladeen, Ben Laden or Zarqawi is "on its way to Palestine to fight the symbols of corruption and the supporters of the infidels' democracy".

Coincidence or not, according to the newswebsite Proche-Orient.info, France has asked and obtained very quietly that all its citizens leave Gaza and the West Bank. Also, in the past six weeks, Israel had warned France three times of kidnappings risks.

Steven Emerson: Pakistan Is Ally and "Anti-Ally" Against Terrorists

By Andrew Cochran

Steven Emerson appeared this morning on NBC's "Today" Show to discuss President Bush's visit to Pakistan and the extent of that country's cooperation with the U.S. against terrorism, or lack thereof, depending on the issue. You can see the video of the appearance from The Investigative Project website (Windows Media file). Here are selected segments from the unofficial transcript by the IPT (to which I added some links):

COURIC: I know that he is meeting with President Musharraf tomorrow. What does he need to do because it is, as we have said already this morning, a delicate balance? Pakistan really is a mixed bag when it comes to helping the U.S. with this War against Terror.

EMERSON: Well, it is both an ally and it's an "anti-ally," so to speak. It has been helpful. It's also been detrimental.

COURIC: Let's talk about the way it has been helpful, first.

EMERSON: Well, first of all, we know that Musharraf has helped crack down on Al Qaeda to a certain extent. He has allowed the arrest of Ramzi Bin al-Shib, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, and other Al Qaeda terrorists, particularly those in the leadership of the 9/11 plot. He also has been helpful in terms of trying to stem some of the financing coming from the hawalas in Pakistan. So, that is in the plus side. On the minus side, I would say that he has not been able to shut down some of the Lashkar-e-Taiba camps, the other Kashmiri oriented liberation groups, some of the Al Qaeda organizational movements operating on the border with Afghanistan, and he has refused to allow American troops independent access there, which is really critical if we are going to find Bin Laden and arrest him or kill him.

COURIC: Because he is thought to be in the Afghan-Pakistan border area at his point in time, right, Steve?

EMERSON: He is thought to be in the Waziristan area, which really straddles the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. But, it's a very tough terrain and he has not allowed U.S. ground troops access there, which is really critical for independent collection of intelligence.

Growing Pessimism on Afghanistan

By Douglas Farah

It is unusual to have several high-level administration officials in the same week predict gloom and gloom on one of the major battle fronts in the war against al Qaeda and armed Islamic militants. But that is what has happened in recent days on Afghanistan.

President Bush's surprise visit to Kabul earlier this week did not blunt the impact of the unusual 1-2-3 punch this week delivered as he was en route. Lt. Gen. Michael Maples, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency; John Negroponte; and the State Department all painted a bleak picture of what is happening in that country, something my sources both in Europe and Pakistan have been worried about-and warning about-for almost a year. And they warn it is likely to get much worse this year.

The causes are multiple: Resources siphoned off to Iraq; a growing opium trade providing massive revenue streams for regional warlords who owe no loyalty to the central government or the democratic process; a rejuvinated Taliban drawing strength from both Pashtuns in Afghanistan-Pakistan border regions and a renewed influx of Arab jihadist fighters and money; and a changing of the guard on the ground as NATO takes over for some of the U.S. Special Forces carrying out the brunt of the combat.

While it is a welcome sign of well-deserved concern that senior leaders are publicly acknowledging the problem, there seems to be little being done to actually try to turn the situation around. The full blog is here.

Yale Taliban...This is What They Were Thinking?

By Bill West

On March 1, AFP and Yahoo News carried an article wherein a US Department of State (DOS) spokesman, Adam Ereli, claimed "there was nothing improper about giving a visa to a former spokesman for the Taliban who has been studying at...Yale."

In the article, Ereli is quoted as saying, "At the time he applied, for the purposes for which he wished to come to the United States, and based on a review of his activity in the past, it was determined that there was no basis for ineligibility."

The subject of discussion, of course, is Rahmatullah Hashemi, who was initially identified in a 2/26 New York Times article as having been issued a student visa to come to the United States last year to enroll in and study at Yale University, where he is currently. Last night, Fox News tracked Hashemi down on the Yale campus and attempted to interview him, only to have Hashemi, the former "roving ambassador" for the Taliban who, as the spokesman for that murderous gang had the job of touting their glory and wonder before the world's media, shove his hands in front of the Fox camera, refuse to answer questions and demand the tape from the producer as he ran away (he didn't get the tape).

Abdur Rahman, Key Terrorist Leader & Bin Laden Ally, Captured in Bangladesh

By Andrew Cochran

Abdur Rahman, the leader of Islamic terrorist groups Jamaatul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB) and Jagrata Muslim Janata Bangladesh (JMJB) in Bangladesh, was captured in Bengal on Thursday after a siege of well over a day (the number of hours differ by news account). Rahman, who faces charges in up to 225 cases for his leadership in terrorist attacks, surrendered meekly to police and promptly whined about violations of his civil rights. That news account describes the kingpin of Bangla terror as looking "like a cornered mouse." Bill Roggio has already posted about Rahman's alliance with Osama Bin Laden in 1998. That alone would make this an important arrest, but it's Rahman's leadership in the August 17 series of bombings and numerous other terrorist events which make this one of the most important counterterrorism victories since the 9/11 attacks. The Bangladesh media is filled today with accounts of his life, his terrorist leadership, and his arrest, so I invite you to read their accounts:

Terror don surrenders meekly
The rise of JMB supremo Shaikh Abdur Rahman
Supplementary charge sheets placed against top JMB men
We do not believe the madness was all his own
Where's Bangla Bhai? (about Rahman's collaborator, Siddiqul Islam alias Bangla Bhai)
PM sings success of law enforcers
An arrest praised by politicians, public alike
Militant kingpin faces 225 cases

Picture of Abdur Rahman capture (click to enlarge)

The State of Al-Qaida in Saudi Arabia, Connections to Zarqawi in Iraq

By Evan Kohlmann

After over six months of deafening silence, Al-Qaida's lurking cells in Saudi Arabia have once again managed to resurrect themselves in a failed bid to unleash suicide car bombs on a major oil refinery in eastern Saudi Arabia.  Virtually all of the men involved in the latest attack on Abqaiq were most wanted terrorism suspects already on the run from Saudi authorities.  They managed to conceal themselves in an urban setting, including at locations in affluent sections of the Saudi capital Riyadh.  Now, Iraqi border guards claim to have captured Saudi national Abdullah Salah al-Harbi in the desert between the two countries--al-Harbi reportedly told interrogators, "the last operation I took part in was last week's attack on [the] oil facility in Abqaiq."  Al-Harbi also claimed that at least five other Saudi fugitives had crossed the border with him but disappeared in the Iraqi desert.

What is the current state of Al-Qaida in Saudi Arabia, and what exactly is the connection to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Iraq?  On a recent trip to London, I asked these and other questions to Dr. Saad al-Faqih, a well-known Saudi Islamist accused by the U.S. government of being the onetime representative of Usama Bin Laden in the United Kingdom...

Steven Emerson Discusses "Cultural Jihad" & Considers Australia Attack "Very Viable"

By Andrew Cochran

An outstanding profile of Steven Emerson has been published in the March 7 issue of "The Bulletin" in Australia. In it, Steve comments on the compromises by Western media with the jihadists over the Mohammed cartoons, labels an attack on Australia as "very viable" given certain factors, and criticizes the Karen Hughes-led effort to reach out to the Arab world. I've known Steve for over 4 years, and this is the best profile of his work and the implications for his personal life that I have read in that time. Steve, his staff at The Investigative Project on Terrorism, the experts whom I've come to know (starting with our Contributing Experts), and top counterterrorism officials in the U.S. government have one thing in common: they live, eat, and breathe this stuff out of love of country and fear of the next 9/11. I'm sure that the same is true of many of their counterparts in other countries. All deserve our respect and admiration. The profile also punctures some myths about Steve and the IPT perpetrated by his enemies. Some segments from the profile:

Emerson reserves some of his ire for the editors here and elsewhere who failed to publish the Danish cartoon capers of the prophet Mohammed. �Are they worried about their own skin or are they worried about the national interest? Are they worried about Australians being attacked overseas? And if so, how does that always dictate what they publish anyway? If they discovered that Australians were abusing Iraqi prisoners, would they withhold reporting about that? Absolutely not.�

And here Emerson bumps up against one of his principal anxieties: that the compromises the West has made with radical Islam are leading to a dilution of its own freedoms. He damns it as �cultural jihad� � the deliberate insinuation into Western society of fundamentalist Muslim elements masquerading as pluralist. While the West responds by tempering its own behaviour, the jihadis �by virtue of their vehemence and irrationality, [have] become much more leveraged in ... their ability to influence our behaviour � and I reject that!�

Israeli Firm's Endorsement of DPW a Major Boost to Port Purchase Prospects

By Andrew Cochran

The chairman of Zim Integrated Shipping Services Ltd., the largest Israeli shipping firm, wrote on February 22 to Sen. Hillary Clinton (Acrobat file from CNN website) to strongly endorse the purchase of U.S. port operations by Dubai Port World. The chairman cited both the sound security and business efficiency of DPW operations. "As an Israeli company, security is of the utmost importance to us...and we are very comfortable calling at DP World's Dubai ports. During our long association with DP World, we have not experienced a single security issue in these ports or in any of the terminals operated by DP World and have received exemplary service that enhances our efficiency and the smooth running of our operations."

The endorsement of DPW's security standards by this important Israeli company will be a substantial comfort to many Congressmen, even as disagreement has arisen over whether the first CFIUS investigation sufficiently considered possible links between DPW and Al Qaeda. Rep. Peter King, chairman of the U.S. House Homeland Security Committee, asserts that CFIUS did not review possible links, while the Treasury Department's Deputy Secretary defended the national security review undertaken by CFIUS again today on Capitol Hill.

Al-Qaida in Saudi Arabia Issues Rules on Attacking Oil Facilities

By Evan Kohlmann

In response to their failed suicide bombing attack last week on a Saudi oil refinery in Buqayq, Al-Qaida's Committee in the Arabian Peninsula has issued a 63-page booklet, titled "The Laws of Targeting Petroleum-Related Interests and a Review of the Laws Pertaining to the Economic Jihad", by Shaykh Abdullah bin Nasser al-Rashid (a.k.a. Abdelaziz bin Rashid al-Anzi).  The document explains that despite Usama Bin Laden's past stated reservations against targeting oil, "we must take into account the date in which [these] statements were made... before the fiery eruption of the jihad and before many developments pertaining to the conflict took place.  Since [then], attacks against oil-related interests, such as the attack on the French oil tanker, have been claimed by Al-Qaida.�

Click to view English excerpts c/o Globalterroralert.com

New State Department Report Raises More Concern Over Afghanistan

By Andrew Cochran

The U.S. State Department today released the 2006 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report (INCSR), an annual report which "describes the efforts of key countries to attack all aspects of the international drug trade in Calendar Year 2005." Much will be written about this report and the intersections with terrorism. For starters, it renders another official U.S. government verdict on the alarm bells about Afghanistan at a time when Taliban and Al Qaeda are attempting a comeback. Robert Charles posted here on January 14 about the threat to Afghanistan from the narcotics. The report officially recategorizes the country from a "Jurisdiction of Concern" to a "Jurisdiction of Primary Concern." It's the movement here that matters, indicating the country's slide in its battle against money laundering gangs.

That latter category includes the UAE, a designation which might be claimed by critics of the DPW port purchase deal as a justification for nixing the deal. But leaders in the war against terrorist financing, such as the U.S. itself, the U.K., France, Canada, Germany, and Israel, are also designated as "Primary Concern" countries. So the tag shouldn't be held against the UAE. The website includes a long list of factors to be considered in categorizing the countries. Here is a segment of that discussion:

The "Jurisdictions of Primary Concern" are those jurisdictions that are identified pursuant to the INCSR reporting requirements as "major money laundering countries." A major money laundering country is defined by statute as one "whose financial institutions engage in currency transactions involving significant amounts of proceeds from international narcotics trafficking." However, the complex nature of money laundering transactions today makes it difficult in many cases to distinguish the proceeds of narcotics trafficking from the proceeds of other serious crime. Moreover, financial institutions engaging in transactions involving significant amounts of proceeds of other serious crime are vulnerable to narcotics-related money laundering.

The links to the 2006 and the 2005 INCSRs are in the Counterterrorism Library in the left sidebar.

Al-Qaida Mourns Slain Saudi Insurgent Commander in Iraq

By Evan Kohlmann

Supporters of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's Al-Qaida faction in Iraq have released the biography of 25-year old Saudi mujahideen commander Khallad al-Najdi (a.k.a. Khaled al-Mani), a former resident of Riyadh, killed in clashes with coalition forces during mid-January 2006.  According to the document, Khallad had successfully risen through the ranks to become a deputy commander of an elite Al-Qaida special forces unit in central Iraq known as the "Lions of al-Tawheed" that was reputedly operating under the direct orders of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.  Khallad's unit was trained particularly in urban warfare and "and incorporated tactics used by the [American] marines."

Click to view English translation of biography c/o Globalterroralert.com