|
|
Are the Taliban "The Enemy" or Not?
By Jeffrey Imm
Once again, another national leader of an American "ally" in the "war on terror" has offered to help the Taliban regain political power. AP has reported that Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai offered "to meet personally with Taliban leader Mullah Omar for peace talks and give the militants a high position in a government ministry as a way to end the rising insurgency in Afghanistan." AP reports that Karzai stated: "If a group of Taliban or a number of Taliban come to me and say, 'President, we want a department in this or in that ministry or we want a position as deputy minister ... and we don't want to fight anymore ... If there will be a demand and a request like that to me, I will accept it because I want conflicts and fighting to end in Afghanistan." This echoes comments this week by the UK Defense Minister that "the Taliban will need to be involved in the peace process".
In February 2007, the Afghanistan parliament granted immunity to the Taliban's Mullah Omar and other Mujahideen for 25 years worth of activities. Now Afghan President Karzai wants to meet personally with Taliban leader Mullah Omar for peace talks to allow the Taliban to join the Afghanistan government. (There is no word if the U.S. State Department would continue to offer $10 million for the whereabouts of Mullah Omar, although he is no longer on their main page of wanted terrorists.) Taliban leader Mullah Omar was reputed to have signed last year's Taliban peace truce with Pakistan.
But isn't the Taliban "the enemy" of the United States of America?
If not, what exactly does the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) call for? The AUMF called for war against "those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations", which surely included the Taliban. Furthermore, there are 171 clustered references to the Taliban in the Final Report of the 9/11 Commission. What more exactly does the United States need to view the Taliban as "the enemy"? Based on the AUMF, how can the Taliban be any less of an enemy to the United States, than Al Qaeda itself?
And if the Taliban are "the enemy", how can Americans accept the Taliban or the Taliban ideology in any political organization of an "ally" nation, let alone ones that American taxpayers provide millions of dollars to? Where is the outrage from American political leadership on this? Why is there no outrage among American political leaders at offers to "legitimize" the same Taliban that helped Al Qaeda in its Jihadist camps to kill 3,000 Americans? As previously discussed, the lack of clarity in identifying the enemy in this war is precisely what allows such disturbing realpolitik considerations.
What do such "peace at any cost" negotiations with an enemy of the United States mean to Jihadists in justifying the use of political terrorism? If the Taliban regain political power in Afghanistan, does American leadership agree that we should lose the Afghanistan war to end the fighting? Isn't that what, in other words, we call "surrender"? Or has our ambiguity about the identity of the enemy gotten so dense that American leadership can now rationalize the Taliban itself?
Earlier this month, Karzai called for peace talks with the Taliban, but the Taliban rejected such talks until "foreign troops" leave Afghanistan. This is a demand that Karzai has rejected on the basis: "[i]t should be very clear until all our roads are paved, until we have good electricity and good water, and also until we have a better Afghan national army and national police, I don't want any foreigners to leave Afghanistan". Is Karzai saying that he just doesn't want western aid to stop, as it did for Hamas?
Karzai's offer for political empowerment to the Taliban in Afghanistan comes as UPI and the Daily Telegraph report that the Taliban has publicly released its "Constitution of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan", which provides insight into what the Taliban would do if indeed such political empowerment was realized. The Daily Telegraph reports that the "23-page document envisages a country where women would remain veiled and uneducated, 'un-Islamic thought' would be banned and human rights would be ignored if 'contrary with the teachings of Islam' ", where "violators will be punished according to sharia", and that stipulates that all other constitutions are void. Furthermore, the Taliban constitution has called for "good relations" with those countries supporting Afghanistan "during jihad". I think we can make an educated guess that the Taliban would not consider such countries to include the United States.
Is this the legal system with "its roots in Islamic law" that the UK Defense Minister was stating this week would be a solution to fighting in Afghanistan?
This follows the August offer by Pakistan President Musharraf to help the Taliban become a mainstream political organization. At the August 12 jirga meeting, President Musharraf reflected that as "Taliban are a part of Afghan society", and "all of them are not diehard militants and fanatics", that reaching the Taliban and pro-Taliban population required "a more comprehensive political and development approach". President Bush was reported to have congratulated Pakistan President Musharraf on his efforts at the jirga.
Realpolitik negotiators may believe that there is a "bad Taliban" and a "good Taliban". In Presidents Karzai and Musharraf's views, the "bad Taliban" is violent, and the "good Taliban" is well, just simply "fundamentalist" in their Islamist view of the world. Does America agree with that assessment? Because that is the direction that war in Afghanistan is going based on these outreach efforts to bring the Taliban into the political mainstream. Realpolitik negotiators may believe that bringing the Taliban into a "democratic" political process will end the conflict and fighting in Afghanistan.
Did bringing Hezbollah into the Lebanon government end fighting in Lebanon?
Did Hamas' election to the Palestinian government bring peace to the Palestinian territories?
Did the Ayatollah Khomeini's Islamic government in Iran bring peace to Iran and its relations with the world?
Has the growing influence of Islamist political and other groups in Pakistan brought stability and peace to Pakistan?
Yet NATO, UN, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the US are all tolerating the idea of peace talks with the Taliban to bring them back into political power in the Afghanistan government. Americans don't even have to compare this to Islamist Iran as an analogy. We have already seen what the Taliban did when they held political power in Afghanistan. Our national homeland was physically attacked and thousands of Americans died as a result. On this near anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, how could we forget that? What next - will we be negotiating a political "mainstream" party for Al Qaeda?
Moreover, with their latest constitution, the Taliban has told us specifically what they plan to do, if they do get back into power. We know who and what the Taliban are and what they plan to do if they regain power. Yet still, American leadership is not denouncing talks to allow the Taliban to return to Afghanistan government power.
If so, this begs the obvious question, what are we fighting for?
Read More »
Sources:
September 29, 2007 - Afghan president offers Taliban a place in government for peace deal
September 29, 2007 - The Daily Telegraph: Taliban unveils hardline Afghan constitution
September 29, 2007 - UPI: Taliban constitution made public
September 25, 2007 - Pakistan Daily Times: Kabul working to bring Taliban 'back to the fold'
September 26, 2007 - Gulf Times: Taliban must be involved in Afghan peace process: UK
Authorization for Use of Military Force (Enrolled Bill), September 18, 2001
September 18, 2001 - U.S. Authorization for Use of Military Force
CTB Blog: August 13, 2007 - Pakistan President Seeks Mainstream Taliban - Jeffrey Imm
August 13, 2007: Pakistan Daily Times - Musharraf says not all Taliban terrorists
August 12, 2007: Associated Press - Pakistan, Afghanistan mired in extremism, Pakistan president says
August 15, 2007 - Pakistan Times: Bush congratulates Musharraf on successful peace Jirga
PBS Online Focus on The Taliban
Wikipedia: Taliban
September 24, 2006 - The Daily Telegraph: Omar role in truce reinforces fears that Pakistan 'caved in' to Taliban
U.S. State Department Poster: "Wanted - Mullah Omar - Up to $10 Million Reward" -- "Although Operation Enduring Freedom removed the Taliban regime from power, Mullah Omar remains at large and represents a continuing threat to America and her allies".
U.S. State Department Updated List of Wanted Terrorists - not including Mullah Omar
National Counter Terrorism Center - Mullah Omar Wanted - Contact FBI
February 4, 2007 - Europe Sun: Taliban leader Mullah Omar granted immunity
February 1, 2007 - Reuters: Afghan assembly grants immunity for war crimes
« Close It
Fault Line on Jihad: Why the Omeish Reaction is Important
By Jeffrey Imm
On September 28, the Investigative Project on Terrorism's (IPT) Lorenzo Vidino was on FOX news addressing IPT's release of videos regarding Muslim American Society (MAS) president Esam Omeish showing his documented support of Jihad. The interview points out once again the problems with the America government failing to clearly identity the enemy and failing to have a clearly defined policy on Jihad and on political Islamism. Moreover, we need to agree on the definition of "Jihad" and not be misled by apologists, as pointed out by Walid Phares.
America has to come to grips with the question: "What does it mean for Islamists to call for Jihad?" While for IPT and many others, myself included, the answer to this is obvious, without a clear American policy on Jihad, the ambivalence on Jihad will continue to undermine American national security efforts, where the FBI defines its "fight" against terrorists, but cannot address the ideological issues. The reaction of the Washington Post, Alan Colmes, and others to Omeish's resignation once again highlights this massive fault line in American national security.
Last month, Virginia Governor Kaine appointed MAS president Esam Omeish to a Virginia state immigration commission. After the release of the IPT videos of Omeish's comments on Jihad, on September 28, Esam Omeish resigned from the commission, telling the Washington Post that IPT conducted a "smear campaign". On September 29, the Washington Post has a follow-up article on this subject, where it quotes Omeish as stating that in his previous speeches where he called for "the Jihad way", that he meant Jihad as a broad term meaning "struggle".
In a video showing a December 2000 Washington DC area Jerusalem Day rally, Omeish clearly supports Jihad for Palestinians stating "you have learned the way, that you have known that the jihad way is the way to liberate your land." (The complete video is here). Moreover, as IPT reports, Omeish "congratulates Palestinians for giving up their lives for the sake of Allah in another video."
Yet Governor Kaine, the Washington Post, and FOX News Commentator Alan Colmes seem determined to defend Esam Omeish's views. It is as important to ask why they defend Omeish's views, as it is to reveal research on individuals like Omeish, because America continues to face an ongoing problem with its lack of a policy on Jihad and political Islamism, as previously addressed.
The Washington Post publishes without questioning that Esam Omeish's call for "the Jihad way" at rallies in the Washington DC area are nothing more than a call for "struggle" as Omeish says in the September 29 Washington Post. Moreover, the Washington Post provides character references for Omeish, such as well-known Stalinist Brian Becker of A.N.S.W.E.R. organization (and Communist Worker's World Party). The Washington Post report quotes Stalinist Becker on the IPT revelations of Omeish's call for "the Jihad way" in DC rallies as stating: 'we were stunned and shocked that a small group of right-wing anti-Muslim bigots would launch a campaign' against him."
In the September 28 interview of IPT's Lorenzo Vidino, FOX News' Alan Colmes challenges IPT's criticism of Omeish for calling for "the Jihad way". Alan Colmes asks Lorenzo Vidino "isn't this conservative political correctness? lets say he's got radical views, whats wrong with having a commission.. we have all kinds of views, even extreme views.. on a commission." When Lorenzo Vidino replies that Omeish endorsed Jihad in Palestine at the peak of October 2000 intifada, Alan Colmes replies: "is it possible to see his point of view that he feels that the Palestinians have been the victims of violence and he is countering that?" and asks "is he truly a threat to the United States?" It is also enlightening to see comments to the IPT YouTube posting of this interview condemning IPT's research as "propaganda" and saying to IPT that "their day will come".
Here once again, the fault line in American national security regarding Jihad and political Islamism can be seen in stark relief. There is no national hue and cry against Alan Colmes for criticizing IPT's reporting that someone called for "the Jihad way" in a Washington DC rally is nothing more than mere "conservative political correctness", because there is no agreed upon policy on Jihad, on political Islam, and on the war and identity of the enemy that we are fighting today.
In the debate over details, logistics, and tactics, it is vital that such massive national security strategic fault lines are not ignored. This is just another warning sign.
Read More »
Sources:
September 28, 2007 - Omeish Says He's the Victim of a Smear -- The Investigative Project
September 29, 2007 - Washington Post - Va. Muslim Activist Denies Urging Violence
September 28, 2007 - Washington Post (cached) - Omeish Says He's 'Victim of Smear Campaign'
Video Excerpt - Esam Omeish at Jerusalem Day Rally - IPT
Video Esam Omeish, Jerusalem Day Rally, 12-22-2000, Full Speech -- IPT
Video - Esam Omeish in front of the Israeli Embassy
September 18, 2007 - IPT News: Introducing the Muslim American Society
October 29, 2002 - LA Weekly News - Behind the Placards
July 18, 2007 -- Family Security Matters: Preventing the West from Understanding Jihad -- Walid Phares
September 17, 2007 - 9/11 and the Inconvenient Truths about Jihad and Islamism - Jeffrey Imm
September 29, 2007 - The New York Post: FBI's three-front war on terrorists
September 14, 2007 - The Washington Times - Inside The Ring, page 2 - "No war on ideas" - FBI testimony reported
« Close It
A Tale of Two Tunisis? Questions About the Latest Al-Qaida Casualty in Iraq
By Evan Kohlmann
This morning, the Pentagon conducted a press briefing with Brigadier General Joseph Anderson, the Chief of Staff of Multinational Corps-Iraq. In a video linkup from Camp Liberty in Baghdad, General Anderson addressed a number of issues--chief among them, the reported killing of a "high level" Al-Qaida commander--Tunisian national Abu Usama al-Tunisi--near Musayyib, Iraq on September 25 in a targeted strike by U.S. warplanes. According to General Anderson:
"Abu Usama al-Tunisi [was] a close associate and part of the inner circle of close advisers to Abu Ayyub al-Masri, or otherwise known as AAM, the overall leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, and his likely successor... Abu Usama al-Tunisi was one of the most senior leaders within al Qaeda in Iraq. He was the emir of foreign terrorists in Iraq, and as I stated, part of the inner leadership circle of al Qaeda in Iraq who had direct contact with Abu Ayyub al-Masri. He was originally from Tunisia, and was a primary facilitator for the movement of foreign terrorists into the country... He operated in Yusufiya, southwest of Baghdad, since the second battle of Fallujah in November '04 and became the overall emir of Yusufiya in the summer of '06. His group was responsible for kidnapping our American soldiers in June '06. He was known to have direct access to the al Qaeda in Iraq senior leader AAM. He facilitated foreign fighters in the Yusufiya area and helped equip them for improvised explosive device, vehicle-borne improvised explosive device and suicide attacks in Baghdad. He took command of the Aisha battalion after its former leader, AAM, was promoted to al Qaeda in Iraq emir status." Oddly enough, this is not the first time that Abu Usama al-Tunisi has been reported killed. Over a year ago (in May 2006), Al-Qaida supporters posted online announcements declaring the "martyrdom" of Abu Usama al-Tunisi. The news of al-Tunisi's death was distributed on, among other places, the highly credible Al-Hesbah Islamic Network--which has been directly endorsed in past propaganda films produced by Al-Qaida in Iraq. According to that announcement ( a translation of which was posted shortly thereafter on Globalterroralert.com):
"The martyrdom of Abu Usama al-Tunisi, the commander of [Al-Qaida’s] Aeisha Brigade... He caused much desperation and anxiety among the Americans and he spread frustration among their soldiers. The Americans knew Abu Usama al-Tunisi very well, because he was one of the commanders who led the Battle of Abu Anas al-Shami during which he served as the military commander responsible for one of the four frontlines of the mission... Abu Usama first entered Iraq two years ago. He used to always smile when talking to his brothers and had a profound faith in Allah. Abu Usama was killed in the area of Al-Yusifiya during an air strike that also killed four other brothers."
This naturally leads us to the problem of addressing this obvious discrepancy. Is it possible that there are two separate Abu Usama al-Tunisis serving as commanders for Al-Qaida in Iraq? Perhaps... but the likelihood of this incredible coincidence rapidly plummets when one considers that both of these men have been identically described as the commander of Al-Qaida's Aeisha Brigade and active in the area of al-Yusifiya. If we put aside this theory, we are left with quite limited possibilities. It would seem that either Al-Qaida supporters were engaged in a deliberate misinformation campaign on their own password-protected chat forums, or else the U.S. military has potentially been the victim of questionable intelligence. It should be further noted that Al-Qaida has prided itself in the past on providing accurate and timely information concerning the "martyrdom" of its military commanders. When former Al-Qaida commander Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed in a U.S. airstrike in mid-2006, the same Al-Hesbah Network was one of the first sources to correctly confirm the news of his death on behalf of Al-Qaida.
Click to view Biography of an Al-Qaida Operative “Martyred” in Iraq: Abu Usama al-Tunisi (Globalterroralert.com)
IPT Video Sinks Muslim Brotherhood Appointment in Virginia
By The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT)
Esam Omeish, President of the Muslim American Society and a newly appointed member of the state's Commission of Immigration, resigned Thursday, a few hours after Gov. Timothy M. Kaine was informed of online videos, posted by the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), showing Omeish railing against Israel and advocating "the jihad way."
For more information, including the videos, click here to go to the IPT's website.
More Schisms Among Jihadists and Muslim Brothers in Iraq
By Douglas Farah
The NEFA Foundation has translated a fascinating document from the main spokesperson for al Qaeda's Islamic State of Iraq (ISI).
The message of Abu Omar al -Baghdadi is striking because it consists almost entirely of attacks on other Muslim groups, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood. These are not merely passing shots or polite disagreements, fighting words and calls to executions.
There have been vitriolic outbreaks of angry attacks of the old guard al Qaeda against Hamas and the broader Ikhwan, particularly when Hamas chose to participate in elections.
But these attacks accuse the Muslim Brotherhood in general and Hamas in particular of treason to Allah and the _jihadist_ cause, calls for their death and urges a further purging of _jihadist_ ranks of traitors.
While the ultimate objective of the Brotherhood and al Qaeda is the same, there are clearly deep tactical differences over what victory is and how to achieve said victory. It is also clear from the speech that the Brotherhood, in the form of Hamas In Iraq and the 1920 Revolution Brigades, have armed groups in Iraq. My full blog is here.
Removal of Content
By Douglas Farah
In light of the ongoing investigations into allegations that Alexis Debat has fabricated news stories, the Counterterrorism Blog has removed his contributions on the site, pending the outcome of the current controversies.
Similar Threats, Similar Approaches: Improving Transatlantic Counterterrorism Ties
By Michael Jacobson
A piece I wrote on how to improve transatlantic counterterrorism ties, which have been seriously tested over these past several years.
With U.S. government assistance, three "homegrown" terrorist suspects were arrested in Germany several weeks ago. Despite this success story, transatlantic counterterrorism ties have been seriously tested over the past three months: prosecutors in Munich called for the extradition of CIA agents allegedly involved in abducting a German citizen; an Italian trial began against twenty-six CIA employees charged in absentia with kidnapping an imam in Milan; and Britain released a report accusing the United States of ignoring its concerns regarding terrorist "renditions."
These latest developments have undoubtedly reinforced perceptions on both sides of the Atlantic that U.S. and European counterterrorism efforts have been at odds since the September 11 attacks. Unfortunately, significant commonalities have been lost amid the heated rhetoric, both in terms of approach and problems encountered. Shifting these perceptions is critical for future counterterrorism efforts and should be a priority for U.S. and European policymakers.
To read the rest of the piece, click here
As expected, Iran's media edited out criticism of Ahmedinijad
By Walid Phares
Et voila, as expected, the Iranian official media edited out the stories about the Ahmedinijad visit to Columbia University. President Bollinger's "harsh" questions were deleted and the Iranian President's quotes lionized.
As I told Fox News and a number of radio shows, the Columbia fiasco will be mainly about weakening the resolve of the Iranian people, who would be made to believe that their leader was well-received by the largest democracy on earth, and that no one in the international community is critical of the Mullahs' man.
A very bad choice by Columbia University which will help the authoritarians to accentuate the oppression of their civil society.
Find the Iranian media text below, with my emphasis added in certain sentences:
Read More »
From the Islamic Republic News Agency of Iran
New York, Sept 25, IRNA
Ahmadinejad-Colombia Varsity-Address
Despite entire US media objections, negative propagation and hue and cry in recent days over IRI President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's scheduled address at Colombia University, he gave his lecture and answered students questions here on Monday afternoon.
On second day of his entry in New York, and amid standing ovation of the audience that had attended the hall where the Iranian President was to give his lecture as of early hours of the day, Ahmadinejad said that Iran is not going to attack any country in the world.
Before President Ahamadinejad's address, Colombia University Chancellor in a brief address told the audience that they would have the chance to hear Iran's stands as the Iranian President would put them forth.
He said that the Iranians are a peace loving nation, they hate war, and all types of aggression.
Referring to the technological achievements of the Iranian nation in the course of recent years, the president considered them as a sign for the Iranians' resolute will for achieving sustainable development and rapid advancement.
The audience on repeated occasion applauded Ahmadinejad when he touched on international crises.
At the end of his address President Ahmadinejad answered the students' questions on such issues as Israel, Palestine, Iran's nuclear program, the status of women in Iran and a number of other matters.
« Close It
New Al-Qaida Transcripts, Terrorism Legal Documents Now Available
By Evan Kohlmann
In recent weeks, Al-Qaida-led terrorist franchises based in Afghanistan and Iraq have released several new recordings of speeches by senior Al-Qaida leaders--including both Usama Bin Laden and the commander of Al-Qaida's "Islamic State of Iraq" known as "Abu Omar al-Baghdadi." English-language transcripts of these various speeches are now available for download care of the NEFA Foundation website. The audio recording released on September 14 from Abu Omar al-Baghdadi was particularly significant--especially to those who follow the very serious internal schisms opening up between Al-Qaida and the Muslim Brotherhood in Iraq. In his address, al-Baghdadi directly attacked other Sunni insurgent groups--such as the 1920 Revolution Brigades, Hamas in Iraq, and the Iraqi Islamic Resistance Front (JAAMI)--as "backstabbing" traitors who have abandoned their commitment to jihad. Needless to say, al-Baghdadi also reserved a strong dose of vitriol for the "degenerate crusader nation of Sweden", where cartoons were recently published that were viewed as disrespectful to the Prophet Mohammed. In response, al-Baghdadi promised to launch punitive terrorist attacks by mid-October on Swedish "industrial giants" such as Volvo, Scandia, Ikea, and Ericsson--in addition to killing both the cartoon artist himself and his Swedish editor.
The NEFA website also features a collection of new terrorism-related legal documents, including exhibits filed in the criminal case against Pete Seda, a former official of the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation in Oregon. Earlier this month, I testified as an expert witness on behalf of U.S. federal prosecutors during an initial bond hearing for Seda, and--among other things--I offered comment and analysis regarding several of these exhibits.
These new documents can be accessed via the NEFA Foundation "Featured Documents" website sub-section, or else from the main NEFA homepage.
Another Round of Reform for the FBI-Will it Make a Difference?
By Douglas Farah
There is another long-overdue reform brewing in how the FBI handles terrorism cases. This one, six years after 9/11, would finally bring together analysts and field agents in an effort to spot trends and set investigative strategies.
This has been a crying need for analysts to be elevated above their traditional second-tier status to be given more say in driving counterterrorism. The career paths available, the status within the agency and other factors mitigated against attracting the best and the brightest there.
This is a worthwhile endeavor, but one that is likely to run into entrenched institutional norms and conceptions that have consistently hobbled serious reform efforts in the past, to our detriment.
A new book and depressing book by Amy Zegart, Spying Blind, argues that there were 12 major intelligence reform studies from 1991 and the end of the Cold War, to just before 9/11.
Out of those, she finds 340 terrorism-related reforms, almost all of them the major themes of the 9/11 Commission, where most were recommended again.
Of those 340 recommendations, mostly directed to the CIA and FBI, only 35 were fully implemented. Another 30 were partially implemented and seven were implemented to an unmeasurable extent, meaning that 79 percent of the total-268 recommendations-were not acted on at all. My full blog is here.
Why Is New York's Governor Inviting Terrorists to Get a NY Drivers License?
By Michael Cutler
You cannot control illegal immigration purely at our borders, but must also create an inhospitable environment for illegal aliens who succeed in entering and making their way to the interior of the United States. The immigration laws of our nation are clear that anyone who induces aliens to enter our country illegally or reside in our country in violation of law or conspire to do so are violating our laws. Section 1324 of the Immigration and Nationality Act is quite clear on this issue:
Section 1324. Bringing in and harboring certain aliens
(a) Criminal penalties
(1)(A) Any person who...
(iv) encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or
reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of
the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be
in violation of law; or
(v)(I) engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding
acts, or
(II) aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts,
shall be punished as provided in subparagraph (B).
The governor of New York State has made it known that he intends to provide drivers licenses to illegal aliens. I find it incredible that the Governor, who had been the Attorney General, would not understand that the promise of providing driver's licenses to illegal aliens provides clear incentives for terrorists to illegally enter our country and to illegally reside in the United States and secure illegal employment. I find it especially disturbing that the Governor of the State that suffered the most casualties and destruction from the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 would so blithely ignore the lessons of those attacks, as articulated in the 9/11 Commission Report on the Terrorist Attacks and in the 9/11 Commission Staff Report on Terrorist Travel.
Read More »
These reports make it clear that the 19 terrorists used some 364 aliases including variations and alterations of various names and dates of birth. They used a variety of identity documents in order to embed themselves in our country and hide in plain sight among us.
As I have recently noted on previous occasions, the CBP (Customs and Border Protection) inspector is not to be confused with a toll collector at a bridge or toll road. When an alien enters the United States without being inspected, he prevents those federal law enforcement officers from having the opportunity to record his entry into the United States. The government, through those inspectors, is therefore unable to screen the alien entrant who might be excludible for a number of reasons established by our nation's immigration laws. As you may know, I began my career with the former INS as an immigration inspector assigned to John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City.
The inspectors are the officials who are charged with the responsibility to make certain that aliens who are inadmissible are prevented from entering our country. The grounds for denying an alien entry into our country are intended to safeguard our nation and our people. This process has never been more important than it is today as our nation wages a war against terrorists, violent gangs and drug trafficking organizations.
When criminals and especially terrorists are able to secure identity documents in false names as the terrorists did, rather than getting security, we wind up with the false illusion of security! The only thing worse than no security is false security!
If you read about suspects arrested in conjunction with terrorism investigations, you will notice that all of the suspects are identified as holding down some sort of job. Among the jobs that terrorists have been identified as doing are, ice cream truck driver, school bus driver, cab driver, used car lot employee, pizza deliveryman, and medical doctor!
Do you know what a terrorist is likely to do a couple of days before he participates in a terrorist attack? He is likely to go to his job where he has been hiding in plain sight!
A final thought. As an old-timer told me when I first began my career with the INS, "When a cop is chasing a bad guy, the cop is running for his paycheck; the bad guy may well be running for his life!" Illegal aliens, especially terrorists, pay attention to where they are more likely to embed themselves in communities and hide in plain sight. When a community creates a so-called "Sanctuary" for illegal aliens, those communities and cities become magnets for illegal aliens, possibly including terrorists. They know that they are far less likely to be identified as being illegally present in those communities. When a state makes it clear that illegal aliens are welcome to set up shop in that state and be able to easily obtain a driver's license, then that state similarly becomes a magnet for illegal aliens, criminal aliens, and especially aliens involved in terrorist activities.
We already have some pretty solid evidence that New York attracts terrorists! There have been several terrorist attacks committed in New York during the past couple of decades, including the killing of Rabbi Meir David Kahane in Midtown Manhattan; the fatal shooting incident involving a van transporting yeshiva students on the Brooklyn Bridge; the first bombing attack on the World Trade Center on February 26, 1993; and other terrorist attacks, including a plan to blow up a subway station in New York, and a plan that was also thwarted to blow up the fuel lines at John F. Kennedy International Airport.
Why would the Governor want to make it that much easier for illegal aliens and potentially criminals and terrorists to obtain identity documents that would be of tremendous assistance to such human vermin who have already provided ample evidence that New York is clearly in their sights?
To quote from the Washington Times article on the Governor's actions: "Obviously one 9/11 isn't enough for Spitzer," said Peter Gadiel, whose son died in the attack and who is president of the 9/11 Families for a Secure America. "People are going to die." « Close It
The Anatomy of a Betrayal
By Daveed Gartenstein-Ross
More information has recently emerged about the killing of Abdul Sattar al-Rishawi (also known as Abdul Sattar Abu Risha), who led the Anbar Salvation Front. The Associated Press reported on Saturday:
[Lt. Col. Jubeir] Rashid said Friday that Abu Risha's security chief, Capt. Karim al-Barghothi, confessed al-Qaida in Iraq had offered him $1.5 million for the slaying but that he was arrested before he could collect the money. Two other bodyguards as well as some of Abu Risha's neighbors were also detained, Iraqi police said. The arrests took place two days after the bombing. Al-Qaida front group the Islamic State of Iraq claimed responsibility for the assassination. Abu Risha, who organized 25 Sunni Arab clans into an alliance against al-Qaida, died along with two bodyguards and a driver when a bomb exploded near his walled compound just west of Ramadi, 70 miles west of Baghdad.
I spoke with a senior American military intelligence officer yesterday who filled me in on some of the details emerging from the investigation. He said that al-Barghouti had been in debt to some people in the car smuggling racket in Mosul who were affiliated with al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). The men in the car smuggling racket had a deal with AQI: the terror group would allow them to operate, guaranteeing their security, and in return they would pass information to AQI about who was in debt to them. The men in the smuggling racket passed on information about al-Barghouti's debt, and AQI told them to pressure on him to repay the debt immediately -- something he was unable to do.
This put al-Barghouti in a no-win situation. He couldn't go to the authorities because doing so would have exposed his corruption and illegal activities. Then AQI approached him to offer a way out: they would repay his debt in exchange for al-Barghouti admitting al-Rishawi's assassin to the compound, and not asking too many questions while he was on the way in. In this way, AQI created problems for al-Barghouti in order to proffer the solution.
This shows the sophistication of AQI's intelligence network. Being able to selectively apply pressure in this manner is a hallmark of professional intelligence services. Abdul Sattar's probable assassin -- Fallah Khalifa Hiyas Fayyas al-Jumayli, a.k.a. Abu Khamis -- was never part of the Iraqi intelligence services, but was reportedly the student of an AQI leader who was former in Iraqi intelligence. AQI has benefited immensely from former Iraqi intelligence and military personnel entering their ranks. This has helped not only AQI, but the broader al-Qaeda network as well.
Immigration Fraud and National Security Threats - Deja Vu All Over Again
By Bill West
On September 24, the Cybercast News Service ran a story about a GAO report issued September 21 reflecting that our Diversity Visa program was at notable risk of fraud abuse and that risk was particularly vulnerable to misuse by foreign terrorist operatives seeking to enter and remain in the United States, utilizing the program to gain “legal” immigration status and cover. The Diversity Visa program was initially established to facilitate immigration from countries with otherwise low levels of immigrant entry. This currently includes terror sponsoring countries like Iran, Syria and Sudan.
The report indicates fraud within the program is complicated by the easy potential for terrorist aliens obtaining genuine identity documents in false identities in their home countries, or such aliens who are not already known to US and allied Intelligence and law enforcement agencies, and therefore not in the various lookout systems, slipping through the alert network. Additionally, the report notes once Diversity Visa aliens are admitted into the United States, there is virtually no follow up effort by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) or any other US Government agency to verify their location or activities.
Read More »
These issues are nothing new. The fraud abuse potential is the same as exists for all our visa and immigration systems. The resources for State Department and DHS immigration agencies to investigate, pursue and address these issues are significantly limited and that is something that is little changed from the days of the now-defunct Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), the demise of which was supposed to make such things much better.
Ironically, and perhaps a bit sadly, more than ten years ago fellow CT Blog contributor Mike Cutler and I testified before the House Immigration Subcommittee on the topic of immigration and visa fraud. We spoke about the potential for such fraud being pursued by organized crime and terrorist groups and the threat that posed and the need for additional enforcement resources focused on the problem and the need to change various policies and procedures to limit the exposure of the system to such fraud. Clearly, we may as well have been speaking to ourselves in a mirror. « Close It
A Time to Outline Iran-Al Qaeda Ties
By Douglas Farah
One of the more surprising things about Iran and the
visit of its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is that Bush administration's unwillingness to lay out the case of Iran's unusual complicity with al Qaeda.
I say unusual only because Shi'ite governments do not often make common cause with Sunni radicals, although tactical alliances among non-state actors is not so unusual.
But, it seems, if the cause is big enough, tactical alliances can be made and endure. Hatred for the United States and a shared desire to create Islamist states seem to be enough in this case to unite the old guard of al Qaeda with the Ahmadinejad regime.
The tactical alliance is not new, but it is passing strange that, in light of the relationship, the current administration does not focus more explaining the Iranian threat.
This alliance alone is enough to negate Ahmadinejad's request to visit Ground Zero in New York. He scored tactical points by making the request and having it denied, although it would be akin to allowing an accomplice to lay a wreath at the grave of the victims. My full blog is here.
Internal and External Threats to the Jihad Media War
By Evan Kohlmann
Several Sunni insurgent factions fighting in Iraq have recently released official communiqués addressing brewing conflicts over the jihad media war--including divisions that exist within the mujahideen community itself. On August 29, the Mujahideen Army issued a statement accusing their "dear brothers" from the Al-Furqan Foundation--the official media wing of Al-Qaida's "Islamic State of Iraq"--of distributing a video of a military operation that had already been claimed months earlier by the Mujahideen Army. In due course, the ISI's Al-Furqan Foundation issued a response acknowledging, "the operation had indeed been executed by one of the central brigades of the Mujahideen Army... However, following the establishment of the ISI, this particular brigade pledged its allegiance to Abu Omar Al-Baghdadi and, therefore, their media archives became the rightful property of the Al-Furqan Media Foundation." The ISI has also sparked controversy with the recent release of an audio recording by its leader Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, including accusations that several major Sunni insurgent organizations are now working in conjunction with U.S. forces. One of the groups singled out by al-Baghdadi--the Iraqi Islamic Resistance Front (JAAMI)--has issued its own letter firmly denying these allegations and demanding that "the gossiping cease from all those who posted harsh words on the Al-Hesbah web forum." Separately, Asaeb al-Iraq al-Jihadiya ("the Iraqi Jihad Union") has announced the expulsion of several prominent activists within its organization for unauthorized contacts with unspecified "outsiders." Finally, the ISI's Al-Furqan Foundation has released a statement condemning a series of recent electronic attacks by "crusaders" on notorious jihad web forums--including the Al-Hesbah network.
- 7/29/07: Asaeb al-Iraq al-Jihadiya Declares Expulsions of Dissidents for Unauthorized Contacts
- 8/29/07: Mujahideen Army Statement to ISI's Al-Furqan Foundation
- 9/3/07: Al-Furqan Foundation Response to Statement from the Mujahideen Army
- 9/13/07: Al-Furqan Foundation Statement Regarding Recent Attacks on Jihad Websites
- 9/16/07: Iraqi Islamic Resistance Front (JAAMI) Response to Speech by Abu Omar al-Baghdadi
See also:
- [CTBLOG]: "Operation Niche: The Conviction of Mohammed Atif Siddique"
- Report: "State of the Sunni Insurgency in Iraq: August 2007"
Is Al Qaeda Iraq a Threat to Sweden?
By Walid Phares
The leader of al Qaeda in Iraq recently offered a bounty encouraging the assassination of a Swedish cartoonist and his editor for having published drawings deemed insulting to the religion of Islam. Omar al Baghdadi, in an audio statement said Lars Vilks, who "dared insult the Prophet", should be killed for a reward of $100,000 and, if "slaughtered like a lamb", the killer will receive another $50,000. In addition, he offered a Jihadi financial reward of $50,000 for the murder of Ulf Johansson, the editor of Nerikes Allehanda, the Swedish paper that printed Vilks' cartoon on August 19.
In the context of Global Jihadism, this second cartoon drama -- after last year's Danish cartoon crisis - displays a dimension very relevant to the ongoing War on Terror. Indeed, the identity of the threat issuer is important, because it is al Qaeda in Iraq. This development should send a significant message into the American and international debates about that conflict, especially as a significant faction within the US Congress, some of whom claim that Iraq is fighting only a civil war, is pressing for a rapid withdrawal of US troops.
What the "Jihad bounty" tells us loud and clear is this: al Qaeda's operation in Iraq is not, nor will it be, "only" about an American, Western or international presence. As the AQI press release shows, there is clear evidence that those who are beheading, killing, maiming, kidnapping and blowing up people and things in the Sunni Triangle and in the rest of Iraq have an agenda of international violence.
Iraq is merely their launching pad.
Read More »
Regardless of whether one admires the common sense or deplores the bad taste of the cartoons published this summer in the Swedish Nerikes Allehanda, or last year in the Danish Jyllands-Posten, why would al Qaeda Iraq -- and not international, European, or even Scandinavian al Qaeda -- initiate the release? Aren't the other branches ideologically "insulted" too?
The answer is simple: The Iraqi branch of al Qaeda is using a cartoon published in Sweden, "deep inside infidel land", to tell the world, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, that the emirate they want to build in Iraq -- with blood and death -- will have very long arms, capable of reaching Europe, America and beyond. Indeed, the logic of the release is not about "defending Iraq from occupiers" as claim many critics, but it's about punishing anyone who insults their religion anywhere around the world, with money -- and maybe suicide bombers -- coming from Iraq.
The Swedish cartoon, perhaps deemed offensive to devout Muslims, can be responded to in many forums and possibly in front of courts, depending on Swedish law. But al Baghdadi is telling us clearly that he and his ilk will determine whether an offense has taken place and, if so, how they will execute the offending artist as well as others involved and, as he said in his declaration, punish the entire country and its financial interests around the globe too.
Thus, Al Qaeda Iraq is an international Jihadi operation which will -- and now has demonstrated clearly that it would -- strike thousands of miles away from Iraq to satisfy its ideological vision of the world. For if tomorrow another "insult" is seen in London, Paris, New York, or Moscow, the terrorists of al Qaeda Iraq will fund and direct violence against the offenders, their cities, their countries, and their financial interests throughout the world.
Therefore, because of a cartoon, a Van Gogh-like tragedy could occur in Stockholm, and companies such as Ericsson, Scania, Volvo, Ikea, and Electrolux, may be targeted -- either by al Qaeda or by homegrown Jihadists. Other artists around the world and millions of workers in companies originating in liberal democracies will be at risk because of the imagination (albeit sometimes very insensitive) of one man's free mind. This sort of freedom is what the Enlightenment has produced: free choice. And this is what al Qaeda Iraq is telling the world it can no longer have; there is no more free choice, and we will punish you if you exercise it, at our own discretion.
Vilks told The Associated Press that he can
"only hope that Muslims in Europe and in the Western world choose to distance themselves from this and support the idea of freedom of expression."
His Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt told the 22 Sweden-based ambassadors from Muslim countries that he regrets the hurt it may have caused, but said that according to Swedish law it is not up to politicians to punish the free press.
Eventually some mainstream Muslims will -- understandably -- vehemently criticize the offense in the substance of the sketch, but will adhere to the norms of international law, particularly the freedom of press and expression. The issue, now becoming chronic, will generate debates in the Muslim world and internationally. But aside from this cultural clash, al Qaeda Iraq has just reminded us that indeed, it wants and will use a launching pad to wage terror attacks worldwide.
Just remember that Sweden, unlike Denmark -- and certainly in opposition to the United States -- has steadfastly opposed the War in Iraq, doesn't have troops in the region and, ironically, funds many associations inside its own borders that promote Jihadism as an ideology. Swedish foreign policy already is the best Islamists could lobby for in the West. And yet, this Scandinavian economy is now menaced from as far away as Anbar province.
Just imagine if the Coalition surrenders the area -- not to an Iraqi democratic Government -- but to a full fledged Taliban-like regime.
Dr Walid Phares is the director of the Future Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and a Visiting Scholar at the European Foundation for Democracy in Brussels. He is the author of The War of Ideas: Jihadism against Democracy
« Close It
In the Name of God: Islamists Spearheaded Violence over Cartoon in Bangladesh
By Animesh Roul
Hundreds of Islamic hardliners including activists of Hizbut Tahrir, Islami Oikya Andolon, Chhatra Mukti Andolon, and Islami Shasantantra Andolon descended to the streets and later resorted to violence and arson to protest the publication of a cartoon that allegedly made fun of Mohammed, in a vernacular daily. The protesters said this was a deliberate attempt by the cartoonist and the news paper to ridicule Prophet Mohammad. The cartoon appeared on Sept 17 issue of Prothom Alo’s magazine Aalpin. It was titled "Naam” (Name)” which made a childish and harmless (not outrageous at all) fun of the naming custom in the Muslim countries. Even though, the Newspaper editor apologized on the same day for the inadvertent publication of the cartoon and urged to 'forgive the mistake', violence erupted in the National capital on September 21. Clerics have called for the cartoonist (who is in police custody right now) to be punished and the news paper office to be closed. Copies of the newspaper have been burned outside mosques in Dhaka. Defying emergency rule that prohibits protest and rally of any kind, angry protesters attempted to storm the offices of the news paper. However, one could read and see the cartoon to ascertain whether the cartoon (the text included) is blasphemous or the mindless violence and burning in the name of Prophet.

The cartoon has these texts (read it as conversation between a boy and elderly cleric):
Boy, what’s your name? My name is Abu.
It is customary to put Mohammed in front of the name.
What is your father’s name? Mohammed Abu.
What is that on your lap? Mohammed cat.
And the burning of newspapers that followed.
Losing Traction against Syria
By David Schenker
The September 6 Israeli bombing of a presumed North Korean-supplied nuclear weapons facility in Syria highlights the ongoing policy challenge posed by Damascus. More than three years after President Bush signed the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act (SAA), Syria continues to support terrorism, destabilize Iraq, meddle in Lebanon, and develop weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile systems. This week's headlines tell the story: on September 19, yet another anti-Syrian parliamentarian was assassinated in Lebanon; the same day, Jane's Defence Weekly reported that a July 2007 chemical weapons accident in Syria -- involving mustard gas and VX and sarin nerve agents -- killed fifteen Syrian officers and dozens of Iranian engineers.
To date, Syria has proven largely impervious to U.S. sanctions, and Washington's efforts to forge international consensus on isolating Damascus have not gained traction. Although the regime seemed isolated after the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri, the trend has recently shifted toward diplomatic and economic engagement. If such engagement continues, Syria may avoid accountability for both the Hariri assassination and Western demands to alter its behavior.
As information begins to emerge about the extent of North Korean-Syrian ties, Washington will have another opportunity to focus the international community on the continuing dangers posed by the Asad regime. The UN's Hariri tribunal will add to the pressure on the regime, but that alone will not suffice. To stem Syria's reacceptance into the international community, Washington needs to convince its European and Arab -- particularly Gulf -- allies to freeze their engagement with Damascus. It should also exclude Syria from the Arab-Israeli peace conference scheduled to take place this November.
In the absence of effective measures, the Asad regime will continue to undermine Washington's hopes for the region. You can read the full-length version of this article here.
Pointless Proposal: EU Seeks to Ban Access to Bomb-Making Instructions Online
By Aaron Mannes
The EU is considering a proposal that would ban websites that post instructions on bomb-making. The proposal is interesting because it does not appear to focus on criminalizing the websites. Instead it puts the burden on Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to block access to these sites. While the EU says this is a not an infringement on speech, the ISPs are balking. First it would be a tremendous technical hassle for them and if they failed to successfully block the sites they could be held liable on criminal charges. Obviously a fair degree of self-interest is at play here. However, there is a freedom of speech issue – at least hypothetically - since the ISPs are being asked to do to their customers what countries like China and Saudi Arabia do to their citizens online.
It has the potential to be a big fight – and a somewhat pointless one. First, it won’t work. The Internet is a big place and the ability to migrate information and conceal it is limitless. Secondly, and perhaps more is that it is not really necessary. The major successful terror attacks have all had links to real world training and experience. The record of self-taught bomb-makers is terrible. The recent plot in Germany was serious because the individuals had had training in Pakistan. But the self-taught cells, like the Doctors Cell of this summer, have not been able to construct successful explosive devices.
Although it is conventional wisdom that anyone can build a bomb off the Internet, so far the reality does not support this contention.
The squawk over censoring access to bomb-making sites may distract the EU from the other, more serious counter-terror proposals in the package such as collecting airline passenger data from every flight in or out of Europe and a rapid alert system for lost and stolen explosives. These are the real elements of successful terror strikes – travel to major training centers (such as in London 7/7) and/or acquisition of actual explosives (such as Madrid 3/11).
To some extent one can sympathize with the EU's action. It is a way to appear to be doing something substantial and pressuring ISPs is far easier than pressuring Pakistan or Syria. However, if the EU is willing to endorse high level monitoring of Internet activity, than it would probably be more fruitful to set up online "honeypots" on bomb-making to attract potential terrorists and then track them down.
Finally, the debate over ISPs monitoring their customers’ traffic has another important angle – and this debate over bomb-making websites may distract from it as well. ISPs could play a much stronger role in preventing and breaking up the botnets and other cyber-crime activity that is growing so severe that it could threaten the operation of the web itself (see my piece in the Wall Street Journal Europe on the cyber-spat between Russia and Estonia.) If the ISPs are going to be pressed into this kind of activity - it ought to be for a good purpose.
Terror Finance Case: "Operation Cash-Out"
By Jeffrey Imm
The U.S. Attorney's Office announced today that a federal grand jury indicted 39 defendants and one business in an international money laundering case that includes one person accused of concealing terrorist financing. The terror finance case, "Operation Cash-Out", had an international scope with defendants in United States, Spain, Canada and Belgium, with the use of hawala money-transmitting businesses to launder millions of dollars.
Substantive news reports on this came out today from: U.S. Attorney's Office press release, Baltimore Sun, ABC, and NBC, with a potentially related story in Spain reported by AP.
The Baltimore Sun reported that during a news conference on Thursday that 32 of the 39 defendants had been arrested in the past 24 hours: "U.S. Attorney Rod J. Rosenstein said most of the defendants were under arrest -- at least 16 of them in Maryland -- and that an additional six had been arrested last night". NBC WBAL-11 TV reported that "[r]aids were conducted in Maryland, Washington D.C., New Jersey and Spain on Thursday". The U.S. Attorney's Office press release states that "Operation Cash-Out" includes a total of 46 defendents.
Per the U.S. Attorney's office on "Operation Cash-Out", "[t]he four indictments seek a total of $5,148,000 in criminal forfeitures and ownership interest in two convenience stores located in Snow Hill, Maryland. Five additional defendants have been arrested and charged by criminal complaint with bribery and one other with money laundering."
United States Attorney Rod J. Rosenstein said: "Operation Cash-Out was a wide-ranging undercover investigation that yielded evidence of four separate criminal schemes involving at least 46 defendants in the United States, Spain, Canada and Belgium. Three of the indictments involve money laundering hawala schemes exposed through an undercover investigation in which a cooperating witness pretended to operate a business engaged in criminal activity. The indictments allege that the hawala money-transmitting businesses laundered millions of dollars that they believed were the proceeds of illegal activities such as drug dealing, by accepting the money in the United States and returning it in other countries. One of the defendants, Saifullah Ranjha, is alleged to have laundered money that he believed was to be used by al Qaeda, a foreign terrorist organization. The fourth indictment alleges a scheme in which many defendants conspired to bribe public officials with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to illegally obtain green cards and the Maryland Comptroller's Office to receive abatement of taxes owed to the state."
The Baltimore Sun reports regarding "Operation Cash-Out": "[i]n most cases, the money laundering schemes used hawala, a system under which funds are transferred from one place to another, often different countries, through an informal network of people using codes. Although the system is not illegal, U.S. law demands that large money transfers to overseas locations be reported to federal officials and that such businesses have commercial licenses. Since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the hawala system has been suspected of playing a role in financing some terrorist activities.
It has not yet been reported whether the arrests in Spain today of 2 Pakistani nationals, Anar Muhammad Shan and Preces Mehmood Sandhu, on suspicion of being involved in financing international terrorism is a part of the "Operation Cash-Out" arrests. AP reports that in that case, "among items seized were documents showing $74,360 had been transferred to radical Islamic sympathizers in Arab countries and $9,820 in cash".
Read More »
U.S. v. Saifullah Ranjha, et al. Indictment
The Baltimore Sun reported that defendant Saifullah Ranjha, who lives in Laurel, was charged with attempting to finance al-Qaida. The U.S. Attorney's office stated today that: "[a]ccording to the 31-count second superseding indictment returned in U.S. v. Saifullah Ranjha et al., Saifullah Ranjha operated Hamza, Inc., a money remitting business in Washington, D.C. From October 2003 to the present, Ranjha, Hamza, Inc. and five other defendants allegedly conspired to launder over $2.208 million received from a cooperating witness working with ICE and FBI agents. The money was purported to be the proceeds of drug trafficking, terrorist financing and trafficking in contraband cigarettes. Saifullah Ranjha, his brother Imdad Ranjha, and Muhammad Saqi obtained the money from the witness in Laurel, Maryland or at the Hamza, Inc. office in Washington, D.C."
Per the Baltimore Sun, "Ranjha took the bait, Rosenstein said. He and his associates received money.... from the undercover operative and, in return for a commission, arranged for it to be provided to others in Canada, England, Spain and other countries, Rosenstein said. There, the funds were ostensibly intended for illegal activities. 'He transmitted money that he believed was going to al-Qaida,' Rosenstein said of Ranjha. 'That was his crime.' "
NBC's WBAL-11 TV reported that "Ranjha relied primarily on a Canadian, Mazhar Chughtai, to arrange bank deposits, and provided the unidentified witness with coded contact information for associates in Canada, England, Spain, Pakistan and Australia."
U.S. v. Ahsan and Rehman Indictment
The U.S. Attorney's office stated: "Mohammad Ahsan owned and operated a money remitting business in Washington, D.C. known as Pak Exchange Services. From November 2004 to March 22, 2007, Abdul Rehman, who is also charged in the indictment described above, allegedly conspired with Ahsan to launder $520,000 provided by the cooperating witness who represented that the monies were the proceeds of illegal drug trafficking. The witness gave the money to Ahsan at his residence in Laurel. Similar to the Ranjha money laundering scheme described above in the Ranjha case, Ahsan used the “hawala” method to arrange for the equivalent amount of monies, minus commissions, to be deposited into the witness’s designated foreign bank account, or to be delivered by Rehman and others to the witness or a designee in Canada, England, Spain, Pakistan and the Netherlands. Both men are also charged with money laundering."
U.S. v. Rehman, et al. Indictment
The U.S. Attorney's Office stated: "Abdul Rehman conspired with seven other defendants, from May 2006 to the present, to launder $1,475,000 received from a cooperating witness who represented that the monies were proceeds of illegal drug trafficking and international smuggling of counterfeit cigarettes. On a number of occasions the cooperating witness gave the money to an associate of the defendants in Harford County and Baltimore, Maryland; New York; Spain and Australia for hand-to-hand delivery, minus 5% to 7% in commissions, to the witness or a designee in Spain, Australia and elsewhere. The defendants used the hawala method to arrange for the transfer of the money."
U.S. v. Gujjar, et al. Indictment
The U.S. Attorney's Office stated: "from March 2005 to the present, Mohammad Gujjar conspired with 24 other defendants to pay bribes to an individual they believed to be a public official of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), to obtain 'green cards' for themselves and their associates. The defendants met with the cooperating witness in Snow Hill, Baltimore, Ocean City, and Salisbury, Maryland; New Jersey; Wisconsin and New York to provide bribes totaling $495,000 ranging in payments from $5,000 to $60,000.."
Sources:
September 20, 2007 - U.S. Department of Justice Press Release: "Operation Cash-Out Charges 45 Defendants in International Money Laundering and Bribery Schemes"
September 20, 2007 - The Baltimore Sun: 39 indicted in four money transfer schemes
September 20, 2007 - NBC News - WBAL-11 TV: U.S. Attorney Hands Down Money Laundering Indictments
September 20, 2007 - ABC News: 39 Charged in International Money Laundering Case
Interpol - The hawala alternative remittance system and its role in money laundering
Interpol - How Does Hawala Work?
November 7, 2001 - The Washington Post - A Hawala Primer
September 20, 2007 - AP: Spain police, FBI arrest terror suspects
« Close It
Bin Laden "Come to Jihad" Pakistan Message Transcript
By Jeffrey Imm
From Laura Mansfield - complete transcript of Osama Bin Laden September 20, 2007 message "Come to Jihad"

Image from Laura Mansfield
Complete message video link - from Laura Mansfield
CTB Analysis posting - September 20, 2007
"Come to Jihad: A Speech to the People of Pakistan
Shaykh Usama bin Ladin
(May Allah protect him)
September 2007/Ramadan 1428"
"All praise is due to Allah. We praise Him and seek His aid and forgiveness, and we seek refuge in Allah from the evil in ourselves and from our bad deeds. He whom Allah guides cannot be led astray, and he who is led astray cannot be guided. I bear witness that there is no God other than Allah alone, without partners, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His slave and Messenger."
"As for what comes after:"
"To my Muslim brothers in Pakistan:"
"Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.
"Allah, the Most High, says, 'O Prophet! Strive hard against the disbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be harsh against them. Their abode is Hell, and an evil destination it is.' (9:73) And the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, says, 'There is no one who abandons a Muslim in a place where his honor is violated and his sanctity is infringed upon except that Allah, the Most High, abandons him in a place in which he would like His aid. And there is no one who aids a Muslim in a place where his honor is violated and his sanctity is infringed upon except that Allah aids him in a place in which he would like His aid.' (Narrated by Ahmad)"
"Pervez's invasion of Lal Masjid in the City of Islam, Islamabad, is a sad event, like the crime of the Hindus in their invasion and destruction of the Babari Masjid. And this event has crucial and critical connotations, most important of which are:"
"First, this event demonstrated Musharraf's insistence on continuing his loyalty, submissiveness and aid to America against the Muslims, and this is one of the ten nullifiers of Islam, as the people of knowledge have determined, and makes armed rebellion against him and removing him obligatory. Allah, the Most High, says, 'O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guides not a people unjust.' (5:51) And His statement 'And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them' means that he is of them in Kufr (unbelief), as the people of Tafseer (explanation) have said. This ruling was the one given and confirmed by Mufti Nizamuddin Shamzai, may Allah have mercy on him, in his famous Fatwa following the raids on New York, and among the things which he said: 'If any ruler of an Islamic state provides aid to an infidel state in its aggression against the Islamic states, it is the legal obligation of the Muslims to remove him from power and consider him to be legally a traitor to Islam and Muslims.' People of Islam in Pakistan: Mufti Nizamuddin Shamzai, may Allah have mercy on him, discharged a great duty which was upon him, and declared the word of truth and didn't care about the anger of the creation. He endangered himself and his wealth and made clear the ruling of Allah regarding Pervez: that he is a traitor to Islam and Muslims and must be removed. This Fatwa enraged Pervez and enraged his masters in America, and it is my opinion that the murder of the Mufti - may Allah have mercy on him - was at their hands. And Mufti Nizamuddin Shamzai died without having replaced the word of truth with falsehood, in contrast to what many of the 'Ulama of vice do. And the obligation on us remains, and we have been extremely late in carrying it out, six years having passed, so we should make up for lost time. May Allah forgive me as well as you."
Read More »
"Second, the government's showing of Maulana Abd al-Aziz Ghazi in women's clothing in the media is clear evidence of the extent of the great hostility, hatred and contempt held by Pervez and his government towards Islam and its sincere 'Ulama, and that is greater Kufr which takes one out of Islam. Allah, the Most High, says, "And if you question them, they will most surely say, 'We were only talking idly and jesting.' Say, 'Was it Allah and His Signs and His Messenger which you were mocking?' Make no excuses. You have certainly disbelieved after believing. If We forgive a party from among you, a party We shall punish, for they are criminals." (9:65-66) And read, if you wish, the Tafseer of Ibn Katheer - may Allah have mercy on him - regarding this Ayat."
"Third, in such events, the people are tested and the friends of the Most Merciful are separated from the friends of Satan. The 'Ulama who are from the friends of the Most Merciful declare the truth, and if they are unable or are weak, they observe silence and don't help falsehood with their words or actions. As for the friends of Satan, they are led by Pakistani military intelligence to speak falsehood and help its people. Some of them deem it obligatory to unite with Pervez and his army, while others deem as Haraam martyrdom-seeking fedayee operations against the soldiers of the Taghut (idol-king), while still others assail the Mujahideen, slandering and defaming them. And this is the way of the Munafiqeen (Hypocrites). Allah, the Most High, says, "They are stingy [in helping] you. And when danger comes, you see them looking towards you, their eyes rolling like one fainting as death approaches. But when the fear has passed away, they assail you with sharp tongues, being stingy with good deeds. Those have never believed, so Allah has rendered their works null and void. And that is easy for Allah." (33:19)"
"So everyone who refrained from helping the Imam Maulana Abd al-Rashid Ghazi is from the sitters, whereas those who attacked him to help Pervez, claiming that Islam isn't established through fighting and calling fighting in the path of Allah "terrorism" - in the context of invective - and saying that the way is through peaceful demonstrations and democratic methods are from those who have gone astray and followed the path of the Munafiqeen."
"Nearly two decades ago, the soil of Pakistan saw and was watered by the blood of a great Imam of the Imams of Islam - i.e. the Mujahid champion Imam Abdullah Azzam, may Allah have mercy on him - and today, we have seen another great Imam, not at the level of Pakistan alone, but at the level of the entire Islamic Ummah: i.e. the Imam Maulana Abd al-Rashid Ghazi, may Allah have mercy on him. He, his brothers, his students and the female students of Jami'ah Hafsa demanded the application of the Shari'ah of Islam, as the reason for our creation is that we worship Allah the Most High through His religion, al-Islam, and they were killed because of this great objective. Allah, the Most High, says, "And I have not created jinn and men but that they may worship Me." (51:56) They sacrificed the great thing they owned: they sacrificed themselves for their religion. I ask Allah to accept them among the martyrs. They were killed treacherously and treasonously at the hands of the apostate infidel Pervez and his aides. The purpose of the army - or so they say - is to protect the Muslims against the Kuffaar, but now we see the armies becoming tools and weapons in the hands of the Kuffaar against the Muslims. Pervez threw away the cause of Kashmir and restrained those fighting to liberate it, in accordance with the wishes of the Hindus and Nazarenes. Then he opened his bases and airports to America for invading the Muslims in Afghanistan, and as you've seen before, the army attacked the people of Swat who also demanded the rule of Shari'ah, and attacked the people of Waziristan, in addition to betraying and extraditing hundreds of Arab Mujahideen from the grandsons of the Sahabah (Companions), with whom Allah was pleased, to the head of Kufr, America. So Pervez, his ministers, his soldiers and those who help him are all accomplices in the spilling the blood of those of the Muslims who have been killed. He who helps him knowingly and willingly is an infidel like him, and as for he who helps him knowingly and under compulsion, his compulsion isn't legally valid, as the soul of the one forced to kill isn't better than the soul of the one killed, and the Messenger of Allah - peace and blessings of Allah be upon him - said, "Were all the inhabitants of the heavens and earth to participate in the spilling of a believer's blood, Allah - the Great and Glorious - would throw them into the Fire." So I tell the soldiers who perform the Salaat (prayer) in the military organs: you must resign from your jobs and enter anew into Islam and disassociate yourself from Pervez and his Shirk (polytheism)."
"Some of the Munafiqeen among the 'Ulama of vice and others may say that Islam orders us to stay together and the people to unite with the army and government to stand in the face of the enemies and avoid Fitnah (strife). I say: the one who says this is creating lies about Allah. The government and army have become enemies of the Ummah, after becoming a weapon in the hands of the Kuffaar against the Muslims. And they refuse to rule by the religion of Islam in all of life's affairs, like politics, economy, social life and other matters. Allah has ordered these and their like to be fought, not to be united with and hung onto, as those hypocrites claim. Allah, the Most High, says, "And fight them until there is no Fitnah [polytheism], and religion is wholly for Allah." (8:39) So if some of the religion is for Allah and some of it is for other than Allah, fighting is obligatory to make the religion entirely for Allah, the Most High."
"By the grace of Allah, the Most High, we performed Jihad with the Afghan Mujahideen against the Russians, and the Afghan army was a weapon in their hands against us. They would pray and fast, but despite that, the senior 'Ulama of the Islamic world, including the 'Ulama of Pakistan, ruled that they are to be fought. And after the exit of the Russians, the 'Ulama of Pakistan also supported Taliban against the Northern Alliance, although they also pray and fast. So is there any difference between Pervez and his soldiers and Ahmad Shah Massoud, Rabbani and Sayyaf and their soldiers? There is no difference at all. All of them have pledged to the Crusaders to fight true Islam and its people, and those who say it is forbidden to fight Pervez and his soldiers and exclude him from the general ruling have an illness in their hearts: they prefer this life to the next. Allah, the Most High, says, "Are your unbelievers better than those or have you an immunity [from punishment] in the sacred books?" (54:43)"
"I tell Pervez and his army: your betrayal of your nation and people has been exposed, and the people are no longer fooled by your showing off militarily by launching some missiles after every disaster and massacre you commit against the populace, as has occurred repeatedly in the border regions, or after the biggest massacre in Lal Masjid most recently. How is the nation benefited by these weapons and tests of yours? The same goes for the nuclear bomb itself. When the American foreign minister Powell came to you, you cowered, bowed and submitted to him like a lowly slave, and you permitted the American Crusader forces to use the air, soil and water of Pakistan, the country of Islam, to kill the people of Islam in Afghanistan, then in Waziristan. So woe to you and away with you."
"Against the peoples attacking lions"
"And against the enemy rabbits and ostriches?"
"And your going to Makkah and performing the Tawaaf (circling) of the Ka'aba won't benefit you when combined with Kufr and combating of Islam and its people. Were it to benefit anyone in combination with Kufr, it would have benefited Abu Lahab, the uncle of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him."
"Then someone might say that armed rebellion against Pervez will lead to the spilling of blood. But I say: were the order to fight the apostate ruler was from the people, like 'Amr and Zayd, then it would be permissible for minds and opinions to intervene and discuss what they should do or not do. However, as you know, the order to fight the apostate ruler is an order in the Shari'ah of Allah, and it is not permissible for the Muslim to make his opinion a rival to the order of Allah and order of His Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. Allah, the Most High, says, "And it is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, to exercise their own choice in the matter concerning them. And whoso disobeys Allah and His Messenger goes manifestly astray." (33:36) "
"So when the capability is there, it is obligatory to rebel against the apostate ruler, as is the case now. And the one who believes that the strength required to rebel has not yet been completed must complete it and take up arms against Pervez and his army without procrastination. Pervez and most of the Muslims' rulers jumped to power and usurped it and ruled us by other than what Allah sent down by force of arms, and the situation will not return to normal through elections, demonstrations and shouting. So beware of the polytheistic elections and futile actions, for iron is only dented by iron, and it is through fighting in Allah's path and exhorting of the believers that the might of the Kuffar is restrained. Allah, the Most High, said, "So fight in Allah's Cause - you are held responsible only for yourself - and rouse the believers. It may be that Allah will restrain the might of the unbelievers. And Allah is strongest in might and strongest in punishment." (4:84)"
"Fighting in Allah's path is an act of worship, and it is based on sacrifice of selves. Muslim blood is spilled and poured out to protect the religion, which only reached us after his (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) cuspid tooth was broken, his head cut open and his noble face bloodied, and after the blood of the best of people, like Hamza, Mus'ab, Zaid and Ja'afar (with whom Allah was pleased), was poured out. This is the path, so follow it."
"The people have forgotten the path of victory"
"They think it comes easily"
"Or without blood running"
"Where is the Jihad of the Messenger of Allah? (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)"
"So to sum up: It is obligatory on the Muslims in Pakistan to carry out Jihad and fighting to remove Pervez, his government, his army and those who help him. And it is obligatory on them to pledge allegiance to an Amir of the Believers who observes the rule of Shari'ah rather than Pervez's polytheistic positive-law constitution. And the Muslims will not be successful in liberating themselves from slavery to Pervez and his polytheistic laws until they are successful in liberating themselves from many of the leaders and 'Ulama falsely affiliated with Islam who are in fact the first line of defense for Pervez and his government and army. You have seen with your own eyes the stances they took previously, when, rather than moving to break the siege placed on the Muslims of Afghanistan, they moved to break the siege placed on the bases and airports which Pervez gave to America and from which the planes were taking off to pound us in Tora Bora, Kabul, Kandahar, Paktia, Nangarhar and other places. And for your information, Pervez only dared to invade Lal Masjid and Jami'ah Hafsa after he was satisfied that most of the 'Ulama and leaders of the Jama'ats (groups) had renounced the Jihad which Allah the Most High legislated to enforce the truth and whose banner was tied by the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), and replaced it with polytheistic democratic solutions and with peaceful demonstrations and bogus threats to absorb the anger of the masses. Pervez had tested them before, when he broke the back of the Islamic Emirate in Afghanistan, after which they came to him voluntarily and of their own accord to participate in the polytheistic parliament, as if nothing had happened."
"So O people of Islam in Pakistan: the truth is greater than everyone, and if truth is not greater than everyone and if we don't apply the Hudood (punishments) to both the nobleman and weak, that is the road to ruin, as the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) informed, "Those before you were ruined because when the nobleman among them stole, they would let him go, but when the weak one among them stole, they would execute on him the Hadd (punishment). And by He in whose Hand is my soul, were Fatima, daughter of Muhammad, to steal, I would cut off her hand." (Agreed upon)"
"O youth of Islam in Pakistan: the Pen is writing what is for you and what is against you, and it won't benefit you to make excuses by saying that many of your 'Ulama and leaders have allied themselves to the infidel rulers and that the rest have failed to speak the truth and declare it out of fear of the ruling Taghuts, except those on whom Allah has had mercy, and these are either in prison or on the run. This huge disaster - i.e. the marching of the 'Ulama of vice in line with the apostate ruler and their currying favor with him and attacking of the sincere Mujahid 'Ulama - isn't peculiar to Pakistan, but rather, is a disaster covering the entire Islamic Ummah. And there is no power nor might except with Allah."
"So O people of Islam in Pakistan: every one of you will come alone to Allah, the Most High, and be held to account for his own actions, so discharge your duty. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) has said, "The smart one is he who subdues his self and works for what comes after death, and the feeble one is he who lets his self chase after its desires and [then] hopes from Allah." And be aware that if the Jihad becomes an individual obligation, as is the case today, there are only two ways with no third: either Jihad, which is the way of the Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and those who believed with him, or sitting, which is the way of the disobedient ones and Munafiqeen. So make your choice. Allah, the Most High, says, "They prefer to be with the womenfolk who remain behind at home, so their hearts are sealed so that they understand not. But the Messenger and those who believe with him strive [in the cause of Allah] with their wealth and their persons, and it is they who shall have good things, and it is they who shall prosper." (9:87-88)"
"And we in al-Qaida Organization call on Allah to witness that we will retaliate for the blood of Maulana Abd al-Rashid Ghazi and those with him against Musharraf and those who help him, and for all the pure and innocent blood, foremost of which is the blood of the champions of Islam in Waziristan - both North and South - among them the two noble leaders, Nek Muhammad and Abdullah Mahsud. May Allah have mercy on them all. The tribes of Waziristan have made a great stand in the face of international Kufr - America, its allies and its agents - and the major states have been unable to make the stands they have made. They have been made resolute in this stance by their Iman (faith) in Allah, the Most High, and their Tawakkul (reliance) on Him, and they have withstood huge sacrifices of souls and wealth. We ask Allah to compensate them well. And the Muslims shall not forget these magnificent stances, and the blood of the 'Ulama of Islam and leaders of the Muslims and their offspring will not be spilled in vain or neglected as long as there remains in us a pulsing vein or a blinking eye. We ask Allah to help us to fulfill that."
"O Allah, our Lord, accept those of our brothers and sisters who have been killed among the martyrs and heal the wounded; O Allah, make their graves spacious for them, and take care of their families and raise their grades in 'Illiyeen (Heaven); O Allah, Pervez, his ministers, his 'Ulama and his soldiers have been hostile to your friends in Afghanistan and Pakistan, especially in Waziristan, Swat, Bajaur and Lal Masjid: O Allah, break their backs, split them up and destroy their unity; O Allah, afflict them with the loss of their dear ones as they have afflicted us with the loss of our dear ones; O Allah, we seek refuge in You from their evilness and we place You at their throats; O Allah, make their plotting their destruction; O Allah, suffice for us against them with whatever You wish; O Allah, destroy them, for they cannot escape You; O Allah, count them, kill them, and leave not even one of them; O Allah, our Lord, give us in this world goodness and in the last goodness, and protect us from the torment of the Fire; O Allah, send prayers and peace on our Prophet Muhammad and on all his family and Companions."
« Close It
The Sudden Rush of al Qaeda Communications
By Douglas Farah
Perhaps one of the most successful achievements of the old guard al Qaeda, besides staying alive, is the vast expansion of its propaganda outreach arm.
Not only are the videos and tapes coming fast and furious, but in multiple languages aiming at a wide variety of audiences.
This indicates a level of sophistication and and stability that is both deeply alarming and indicative of how secure the group feels. The videos, with different scenes, subtitles, translations and rapid turnaround time (indicated by the references to recent events) shows that the old guard al Qaeda is dedicating significant resources to the propaganda/outreach wing and has a desire to retain a place of preeminence within the _jihadi_ world.
It is interesting that both Bin Laden and Zawahiri have become ubiquitous after years of long silences. This indicates to me that not only do they have the wherewithal to run the operation, but that they feel it is imperative to get their message out repeatedly.
For non-state groups, cut off from the normal media channels, such outreach is vitally important to survival. I draw an imperfect parallel to the success of Radio Venceremos, run by the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMLN) in the Salvadoran civil war in the 1980s. My full blog is here.
HLF Jury Begins Deliberations
By The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT)
DALLAS – The fate of five men accused of running the nation's largest terrorist-financing front is in the hands of a jury.
The men, officers and employees at the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) are charged with conspiracy and with providing material support to Hamas through their charitable donations. Prosecutors say HLF funneled more than $12 million to Hamas, mostly through a network of social welfare charities in the West Bank and Gaza.
During two and a half days of closing arguments that ended Wednesday afternoon, attorneys offered strikingly different interpretations of those charities, known as zakat committees. Prosecutors say the committees are controlled by Hamas and their activities – food programs, schools and hospitals - are a vital cog in the terrorist group's campaign to win the hearts and minds of Palestinians.
Defense attorneys say Palestinian society wouldn't allow that, that the committees were non partisan in nature and sanctioned by the Palestinian Authority which is a bitter rival to Hamas.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Nathan Garrett had the final word in the two-month long trial. In a rebuttal argument, he urged jurors to take disparate pieces of evidence together to see what HLF did for Hamas. He spent considerable time on exhibits showing HLF was part of a broader group, a Palestine Committee established in the U.S. by the Muslim Brotherhood, an 80-year-old Islamist movement that seeks the global empowerment of Islamic law.
For the full article, click here to go to the IPT's website.
Al Qaeda Bin Laden Message Declares War on Pakistan President Musharraf
By Jeffrey Imm
View image
Images from Laura Mansfield
UPDATE - 3:30 PM ET:
Bin Laden Message Transcript -- from Laura Mansfield
Complete message video link - from Laura Mansfield
Jihadist web site monitoring groups and media organizations report that Osama Bin Laden has released a new message declaring war on Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf. Laura Mansfield, the SITE Institute, Reuters, AFP, AP, ABC News, CNN, FOX News, and others have reported on this.
ABC has provided a short video excerpt of the latest Bin Laden message.
Laura Mansfield reports on the new Bin Laden message:
"This morning's video release from As Sahab features the audiotaped voice of Osama bin Laden over a video montage of older footage showing the terror leader in various activities. The message, entitled 'Come to Jihad', is directed to the people of Pakistan. However, the simultaneous release of transcripts in English, Pashtun, and Arabic indicate the terror group is looking at a wider audience, including the English-speaking world. Much of the message builds a legalistic case under Islamic shari'ah justifying why Muslims in Pakistan should take up arms against Pakistani President Pervez Musharaff. He cites numerous quotes from the Qu'ran to document Musharaff's alleged violations of Islamic law culminating with the recent events at the Lal Masjid, as well as several fatwas from clerics justifying action against Musharraf."
SITE Institute reports that the new Bin Laden message addresses Muslims in Pakistan asking them to "rebel against the government of President Pervez Musharraf and declaring al-Qaeda’s intent to retaliate for the blood spilled of 'champions of Islam', in a 23:36 minute audio speech produced by as-Sahab. Old footage of bin Laden and Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri touring a Mujahideen training camp and traversing a mountainside is shown in the center, the screen surrounded by the visages of four deceased jihadists: Abdul Rashid Ghazi, Nizamuddin Shamzai, Nek Muhammad and Abdullah Mahsud."
SITE reports that:
"Bin Laden’s speech presents justification on the grounds of Islamic Shari'a for the overthrow of Musharraf, citing his cooperation with the United States and recent actions against the Red Mosque (Lal Masjid) and Jamia Hafsa for this purpose. Echoing the sentiments of other al-Qaeda leaders, Zawahiri and Abu Yahya al-Libi, he condemns Musharraf and states: 'So Pervez, his ministers, his soldiers and those who help him are all accomplices in the spilling the blood of those of the Muslims who have been killed. He who helps him knowingly and willingly is an infidel like him'. Bin Laden advocates dismissing elections and other 'futile actions', arguing that force is required and jihad is the way. Further, in the name of al-Qaeda, Usama bin Laden declares that it will retaliate for the death of the aforementioned individuals, including Nek Muhammad and Abdullah Mahsud in Waziristan, and praises the people of Waziristan for their sacrifices against the 'international Kufr [disbelief]', America."
Laura Mansfield provides the following quotes from the new Bin Laden message:
-- regarding Pakistan's nuclear weapons program: "How is the nation benefited by these weapons and tests of yours? The same goes for the nuclear bomb itself."
-- in conclusion: "And we in al-Qaida Organization call on Allah to witness that we will retaliate for the blood of Maulana Abd al-Rashid Ghazi and those with him against Musharraf and those who help him, and for all the pure and innocent blood, foremost of which is the blood of the champions of Islam in Waziristan – both North and South – among them the two noble leaders, Nek Muhammad and Abdullah Mahsud. May Allah have mercy on them all."
Earlier this morning, AP reported that Jihadist web sites on Thursday had banners stating that such a new message would be "Soon, God willing: 'Come to Jihad (holy war)', from sheik Usama bin Laden, God protect him... Urgent, Al Qaeda declares war on the tyrant Pervez Musharraf and his apostate army, in the words of Usama bin Laden".
On Thursday, September 19, Al Qaeda's Dr. Ayman Al-Zawahiri also spoke in a separate video entitled "The Power of Truth"calling for Jihad in Pakistan and around the world. Zawahiri released a previous message "The Aggression against Lal Masjid", calling for Jihad in Pakistan on Wednesday July 11, 2007.
SITE Institute has reported on the Thursday, September 19 video, released by As-Sahab and entitled as "The Power of Truth". Per the SITE report, among other subjects, in the September 19 video, Zawahiri threatens "Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf that the death of Abdul Rashid Ghazi and the actions at the Red Mosque and Jamia Hafsa in Islamabad will not go unpunished".
AP also reports that, in the Thursday video "The Power of Truth", Zawahiri also stated that the Lal Masjid counterterror operation "revealed the extent of the despicableness, lowliness and treason of Musharraf and his forces, who don't deserve the honor of defending Pakistan, because Pakistan is a Muslim land, whereas the forces of Musharraf are hunting dogs under (President) Bush's crucifix." Zawahiri made similar comments in his July 11, 2007 video to Pakistanis, where he called Pakistanis to take action: "Muslims of Pakistan: your salvation is only through Jihad."
SITE also reports that, in the September 19 "The Power of Truth" video, "the 'truth', as given in the documentary, is that al-Qaeda and the Mujahideen have been accumulating victories in its war against the United States and the West, despite allegations to the contrary", and that Al Qaeda's Zawahiri "reiterates the call of Usama bin Laden for jihad in Sudan. Calling to Muslims everywhere to abandon those movements that seek alliance or treaties with the enemy, such as the Palestinian Authority and Omar al-Bashir in Sudan, and unite, Zawahiri declares Muslims as strong and never to be subservient to any people, opting for jihad rather than obedience. He states: 'This is what the two blessed raids embodied in the truest of representations, and that is their message to the Crusader West: that the criminal must pay the price for his crimes.' "
Laura Mansfield provides a video link of the September 19 "The Power of Truth" video. Laura Mansfield reports that the "Power of Truth" video "has a total running time of 1 hour, 20 minutes, 34 seconds".
In addition, AP reports that in the Thursday video, Zawahri called for attacks on French and Spanish interests in North Africa and on U.N. as well as African peacekeepers expected to deploy in Darfur.
AFP reports that Pakistan is dismissing the anticipated Bin Laden threat, according to chief military spokesman Major General Waheed Arshad: " 'We are already committed to fighting extremists and terrorists -- there is no change in our policy". Last month, President Musharraf made an outreach to the Taliban to become a "mainstreamed" political organization.
Two weeks ago, CNN reported on a poll of more than 1,000 Pakistanis, which concluded that Osama Bin Laden is more popular than President Musharraf. The poll was taken for the group Terror Free Tomorrow in August 2007. The poll results showed that only 4 percent believed that there was a good motivation in the "war on terrorism" with 66 percent viewing it is as a war against Islam, 74 percent said they opposed U.S. military action against al Qaeda and the Taliban inside Pakistan, and 33 percent supported Al Qaeda (only 43 percent said they opposed Al Qaeda).
Pakistan is increasingly facing internal strife on the issue of its military actions against Jihadist groups, amidst increasing violence and death toll among Pakistan's military. The Daily Telegraph reports that more than 1,000 Pakistani soldiers have died fighting their own countrymen in the US-led war on terror, including 18 ambushed on Sunday, with some having their throats cut. On Wednesday, the bodies of 15 Pakistani soldiers were found mutilated, and 250 Pakistani soldiers continue to be held hostage by Jihadists. The Daily Telegraph report states that "an increasing number of analysts have questioned the soldiers' will to fight what many Pakistanis believe to be 'someone else's war'. Talat Masood, a retired lieutenant-general wrote in a newspaper column earlier this week "[f]or all practical purposes, the state has lost its authority and is in full retreat especially in Waziristan and Bajaur".
Media have reported on desertions from the Pakistani army, and belief that some members of the Pakistani army have been infiltrated by Jihadists for attacks. AKI reports that 6 soldiers deserted the Pakistani army yesterday, and the Times of India has reported that "[s]cores of Pakistan soldiers desert forces". In the Times of India report, a deserting Pakistani soldier told reporters "I did not desert the force because I feared death, but I was not sure whether the fighting in tribal district Waziristan was Islamic or not".
In addition to the widely reported Lal Masjid mosque uprising (where it was reported that Al Zawahiri was involved in planning), there have also been individual cases of Pakistani pro-Islamist mobs attacking police to free Jihadists, as well as pro-Jihadist rallies. In July, Gulf News reported that the top cleric in Waziristan would "wage Jihad" if the US attacked Waziristan. Moreover, Pakistani Islamist press has been calling for Jihad against India.
Pakistan's government has also seen rising Islamist sentiment. Last month, the Gulf Times reported that in the Pakistan government, ruling coalition legislator and parliamentary secretary for defense Syed Tanveer Hussai has called for the Pakistan government to recognize the Taliban, use Jihad to "liberate" Kashmir, and reject US aid stating "[t]he aid that forces us to mistreat our own people should be spewed out". A month ago, on August 21, Dawn reported that Pakistan Federal Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Dr Sher Afgan Niaz called for ending Pakistan's involvement in fighting in the "war on terror", refusing US aid for the Pakistani military, stated that the "events which followed the 9/11 incident proved that it was the brainchild of Jews", and claimed that the Qur'an demanded Islamic enmity against Christians and Jews.
Read More »
Sources and Related Documents:
September 20, 2007 - Laura Mansfield: New Bin Laden Message calls for jihad against Pakistan
September 20, 2007 - SITE Intelligence Group - "Come to Jihad" – Audio Speech from Usama bin Laden Addressing the People of Pakistan, Declaring War on the Pakistani Government
September 20, 2007 - Reuters: Bin Laden vows revenge against Pakistan president
September 20, 2007 - AP: Bin Laden urges Pakistanis to revolt
September 20, 2007 - ABC: Bin Laden: Armed Rebellion Against Musharraf 'Obligatory'
September 20, 2007 - AFP: Bin Laden declares 'war' on Pakistan in new tape
September 20, 2007 - CNN: Al Qaeda calls for 'jihad' against Pakistan's Musharraf
September 20, 2007 - FOX News: Bin Laden Declares War on Musharraf in New Audiotape
September 20, 2007 - Reuters: Fight the U.S., al Qaeda's Zawahri tells Muslims in video
September 20, 2007 - AFP: Pakistan dismisses Bin Laden war threat
September 19, 2007 - SITE Intelligence Group: "The Power of Truth" - Video Documentary from as-Sahab on the War Between Islam and the United States and the West
September 19 - Laura Mansfield "The Power of Truth" -- video link.
August 13, 2007 - Pakistan President Seeks Mainstream Taliban - CTB Posting -- Jeffrey Imm
July 11, 2007 - Al Qaeda to Pakistanis: Join The Jihad - CTB report on Zawahiri message on Lal Masjid - "The Aggression against Lal Masjid"
September 11, 2007 -- CNN: Poll: Bin Laden tops Musharraf in Pakistan
Terror Free Tomorrow Poll Results - PDF file
September 11, 2007 - AP: Pakistanis Oppose US Terror Hunts
September 20, 2007 - AKI: Pakistan: 13 soldiers reported missing
September 19, 2007 - The Daily Telegraph: Pakistan troops 'lose faith in war on terror'
September 19, 2007 - Dawn - Pakistan: Mutilated bodies of 15 soldiers brought to Miramshah
August 26, 2007 - The Times of India - Pakistan: Scores of Pak soldiers desert forces
August 28, 2007 - The Hindu - Pakistan's Islamist press calls for jihad
August 22, 2007 - Dawn - Pakistan: Minister blasts pro-US foreign policy
August 17, 2007 - The Times of India - Pakistan: Mob attacks police, frees Taliban activists in Balochistan
August 9, 2007 - Gulf Times - Pakistan: Legislator urges jihad to counter American threat
July 31, 2007 - Toronto Stary - Pakistan: 2,000 rally for Pakistan jihad
July 28, 2007 - Gulf News - Pakistan: Cleric to 'wage jihad' if US attacks Waziristan
July 15, 2007 - Times of London: Bin Laden's deputy behind the Red Mosque bloodbath « Close It
Ghanem was killed by the Syro-Iranian “axis” - Chapter 7 is a "Must"
By Walid Phares
As I projected on June 12 on this site (after the assassination of Walid Eido), this is another assassination conducted within the campaign launched by the Syro-Iranian axis to reduce the majority in Parliament and obstruct the election of a new President who would represent the views of the democratic majority. Eliminating MP Ghanem is a terror act and a war crime identical to the assassination of other Lebanese leaders such as former Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri and MPS Gebran Tueni, Pierre Gemayel and Walid Eido. This is a massacre of democracy in Lebanon, happening in front of the eyes of the international community and should be met with determination. For the Syrian-Iranian axis and their extensions in Lebanon including Hezbollah, its allies, other militias and the Jihadist cells, are directly responsible for this Terror.
It is incumbent on the Security Council of the UN to vote a resolution to put the Presidential election of Lebanon under Chapter 7 of the UN charter. Lebanon’s borders and most areas in the country are now unsafe and have been infiltrated by the Terrorist networks. Clearly the UN has the obligation to intervene directly to save Lebanon’s democratic process and its citizens and elected officials from further acts of terror. UN forces should protect the legislators, the meeting place and deploy along the Syrian Lebanese borders. Nothing else would stop the bloodshed.
Picture of Assassination Scene from CNN
Syria Strikes Again? Another Assassination of an Anti-Syrian Parliamentarian Rocks Lebanon
By David Schenker
This morning, Lebanese parliamentarian Antoine Ghanem was assassinated in Beirut. Ghanem, a Phalange MP allied with the pro-West Government led by Prime Minister Fouad Siniora was the third parliamentarian in the anti-Syrian majority to be killed this year. A fourth, Gibran Tueni, was killed in December 2005. With Ghanem’s death, the Government’s majority has decreased to 68 of 127 MPs--down from 72 a few years ago. The shrinking majority of this democratically elected government raises the very real prospect that terrorism will overturn the results of the 2005 Lebanese General Elections.
None of the assassins of any of these crimes have been apprehended, although the UN has included the crimes as part of its investigation into the February 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Premier Rafiq Hariri. The leading suspect in these killings, of course, is Syria, a leading backer of the Hizballah-led political opposition.
Ghanem’s murder occurs just days before the Lebanese parliament was supposed to convene to elect a new President. The issue is highly contentious; the opposition claims that a 2/3 quorum is required to elect a president—which the majority does not have. In an effort to block the election, the opposition is refusing to attend the parliamentary session. Meanwhile, the majority believes that in the absence of a 2/3 quorum, the constitution permits for a straight majority (50% + 1 vote) election.
The stakes are high. Syria and the opposition are pressing for a pro-Syrian pro-“resistance” president. The majority is looking for a pro-West, pro-democracy figure.
The assassination comes just weeks after Israel attacked an alleged North-Korean related nuclear facility in Syria, and on the same day that Jane’s Defense Weekly reported that an explosion at a Chemical Weapons facility in July—involving mustard gas and sarin and VX nerve agents—killed 15 Syrian military personnel and “dozens of Iranian missile weaponisation engineers.”
Articles I have published this week discussing Syria’s latest military buildup and the poor judgment of Syrian President Bashar Asad can be found at the tagged links.
BREAKING: Closing Arguments Over in HLF Trial
By The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT)
Closing arguments have ended in the terror financing case against the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Develpment (HLF), and the jury is receiving instructions from the judge before beginning deliberations, which are expected to begin as early as later today.
For our earlier reports on the closing arguments, read:
First Amendment, Alternate Theories Highlight HLF Defense Arguments
"Deception" Dominates HLF Closing Arguments
Underutilized Law Enforcement Tool Finally Gaining Some Traction And Can Aid CT Efforts
By Bill West
On September 17, the Family Security Foundation ran an excellent article concerning the little known “Section 287(g)” provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). What is particularly interesting about “287(g)” is that it has existed as Federal law in its current state since 1996 yet has been largely ignored by the mainstream media and many government bureaucrats, especially the ones with the ability to make effective policy changes.
Section 287(g) is the INA section that allows Federal immigration law enforcement authorities, now the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) via Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), to grant Federal immigration enforcement authority to state and local law enforcement officers under certain specific circumstances. This provision, potentially, provides a powerful enforcement enhancement tool in the effort against illegal immigration. Given the political hot potato that is immigration enforcement, at least in the minds of the liberal elites and much of the MSM, 287(g) has managed to remain mostly buried from public scrutiny for all these years. It is now seeing some light of day.
Read More »
The first 287(g) effort came shortly after the 9/11 attacks and was a joint project between the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE). The project focused not on generalized immigration law enforcement but specifically on domestic security investigations within the state of Florida involving foreign nationals. That project, and it still exists under DHS/ICE, has been highly successful. There have been a limited number of other 287(g) projects around the country since, and all have basically worked well, but they have been limited in scope and mostly focused on identifying criminal aliens or those involved in smuggling operations.
Ironically, those successful 287(g) projects have received little fanfare. They deserve public notice and support because they work. Such efforts should be expanded. The program noted in the Family Security Foundation article will be one to follow. If it succeeds in New York state, hopefully it will be an example for others in areas formerly deemed “illegal alien friendly.”
Beyond the larger general immigration enforcement issues involved, these 287(g) projects can be especially effective when focused on security and terrorism related matters. As the original Florida project so successfully demonstrated, the delegation of immigration enforcement authority to state and local officers who are engaged primarily in multi-agency task force investigations targeting suspected security and terror threats brings that enhanced and expanded authority to bear against the most significant potential alien threat population and has the added benefit of yielding the least potential criticism. This focus arguably provides the best initial use of state and local enforcement resources within these programs. Demonstrated success at the security/terror level may then lead to more generalized acceptance of expanded 287(g) efforts within a given community, particularly among otherwise reluctant political leaders. « Close It
Worst Approach to Counter-terrorism Yet
By Steven Emerson
On Wednesday, October 3rd, the New Jersey Department of Homeland Security is hosting its "5th Annual Counter-Terrorism Conference" titled, "Radicalization: Global Trend, Local Concern?" The conference is part of the agency's "First Responder Training" and speakers and experts are brought in to instruct department employees on various topics related to security and counter-terrorism.
In a decision that defies reason, slated to speak on a panel called "To What Extent is Radicalization a Concern in the U.S.?," is none other than Georgetown University's John Esposito, a man who has never met a radical Muslim he didn't like.
At a banquet held by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in Dallas in August of this year, Esposito stated: I've got to tell you, you know, I mean, Sami Al-Arian's a very good friend of mine. I remember that when his kids told me that he was supporting a Republican I just said, ‘Tell your dad, as a lifelong Democrat, even though I don't always vote Democrat, he's ‘gonna regret voting for a Republican. And you know, God help Sami Al-Arian in terms of this administration and any others who have to live through this. Esposito finished his speech, telling the crowd, "One of the most impressive people I have met under fire is Sami Al-Arian."
Please click here to read the rest of the article at the website of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, and to see exlusive videos of Esposito's "very good friend" Sami cursing the United States and calling for the death of its allies.
HLF Trial: Defense Continues Closing Arguments
By The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT)
DALLAS - Attorneys for three Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) officers minimized their clients' roles in work prosecutors allege was designed to help Hamas. Any evidence there is against their clients is protected by the First Amendment, they said in closing arguments Tuesday.
Joshua Dratel, attorney for Mohammad El-Mezain, told jurors the evidence against his client cuts off in 1995 and 1996, when support for Hamas became illegal.
The crux of the case is whether a series of Palestinian charities, known as zakat committees, were controlled by Hamas as prosecutors say. Monday, federal prosecutor Barry Jonas argued that those commitees were part of the Hamas social wing and their work helped win Palestinian hearts and minds for the terrorist group.
Defense attorneys argue that point was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt and have repeatedly noted that none of the committees were designated as terrorist fronts by the U.S. government. The Palestinian Authority, which essentially is at war with Hamas, closed 103 charities in the West Bank a few weeks ago, Dratel said. None of the HLF charities were targeted, he said, and all are licensed by the Authority.
Dratel also cast a 1993 gathering of Hamas supporters in Philadelphia, which included defendant Shukri Abu Baker, as a political conversation. "Association, association, association - that's what the government wants you to convict them on," Dratel said.
Transcripts show the participants gathered to discuss ways to "derail" the nascent Oslo peace accord, which they feared would marginalize the Islamist movement and they opposed for its direction toward a peaceful, two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It was at that meeting that Shukri Abu Baker said "War is deception."
Attorney Marlo Cadeddu told jurors that prosecutors placed a mountain of exhibits into evidence. But the only ones dealing with her client, Mufid Abdulqader amount to a "little teeny tiny stack of documents here."
She acknowledged that part of that "teeny tiny stack" were a dozen videotapes of her client performing in a band singing songs in praise of Hamas and acting in a skit in which he pretends to kill an Israeli.
Click here to read the entire article detailing yesterday's events at the HLF trial on the IPT's website.
Defense attorney Linda Moreno will deliver closing arguments for defendant Ghassan Elashi Wednesday morning. Then, prosecutor Nathan Garret gets the final word in the government's rebuttal argument before federal Judge A. Joe Fish instructs the jury and deliberations begin.
An Attempt at Education Rather than Deprivation
By Douglas Farah
Militant Islamists willing to pick up a gun to kill for the sake of Allah are a special breed whose legitimacy, both in their own eyes and the eyes of their peers, is largely dependent on their belief that they are theologically enlightened and blessed.
Radicalization, as we have learned in many books published, is almost never an overnight event, but rather a process of some duration in which time the individual, through a combination of personal experience and theological training, comes to believe that Allah requires him to use lethal force to defeat the infidel.
If that fundamental belief structure and narrative begins to unravel, so do the justifications for the violence, especially the violence against civilians.
A counter-narrative that is theologically sound is imperative in this effort and must be led by Muslims.
(That, to me, in a nutshell, is a major reason not to engage with the Muslim Brotherhood-their narrative of their faith is not significantly different from the _jihadist_ narrative that leads to violence. While not all directly to violence, the children of the Brotherhood now engaged in violent jihad bear testimony to the fact that the narrative does not go against that grain.) My full blog is here.
The Reemergence of Hizballah in Turkey
By Matthew Levitt
With secularism, PKK terrorism, and other Turkish issues becoming international concerns in recent months, a dangerous Islamist trend has been overlooked: radical groups inspired more by the revolutionary ideology of Iran than domestic issues such as Kurdish nationalism are staking their own claim to power. One such group is Hizballah in Turkey (HiT), a Kurdish faction recovering from a government crackdown after years of violence. Although HiT's current efforts seem limited to aggressive social activism, the group's track record, like the PKK's, makes future violence likely.
In a new Washington Institute Policy Focus monograph, Rusen Cakir, a senior correspondent for the Turkish daily Vatan, explores this little known sunni extremist group. The full study is available here.
"Deception" Dominates HLF Closing Arguments
By The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT)
DALLAS - A federal prosecutor and the attorney for the lead defendant in the terror-support trial of five Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) officers traded accusations of deception Monday during closing arguments.
When federal prosecutor Barry Jonas accused the defendants of trying to deceive the American public, he pointed to their own conversations captured on surveillance tapes.
"War is deception," former HLF President Shukri Abu Baker said during a secret gathering of Hamas supporters in 1993.
Defense attorney Nancy Hollander, in turn, appealed to distrust of the government and challenged evidence presented by an Israeli security witness who testified under a pseudonym.
Jonas reminded jurors that investigators found a security manual with instructions how to avoid detection at one of the defendant's offices and that HLF officers used the word "Samah" rather than HAMAS in their conversations. In 2000, they had their office swept for bugs.
"Is this what a real charity would do?" Jonas asked repeatedly.
He pointed to Baker's 2002 sworn declaration in which he claimed to "reject and abhor Hamas, its goals and its methods" as part of a civil suit. But Baker also published an ode to Hamas in the Arabic publication Ila Filastin. "Hayzum (Gabriel's horse) Hamas has arrived," it concludes, "and we will not accept any other than Hamas." The poem was followed by a solicitation for donations to the Occupied Land Fund, HLF's original name.
For the full article detailing the first day of closing arguments in the HLF trial, visit the IPT's website.
Operation Niche: The Conviction of Mohammed Atif Siddique
By Evan Kohlmann
Yesterday, a Scottish jury at the High Court in Glasgow returned a verdict convicting Mohammed Atif Siddique--a 21-year old homegrown extremist thought intent on becoming a suicide bomber--of a series of terrorist offenses, including the possession and distribution of terrorist propaganda material via websites and providing instructional material about guns and explosives over the Internet. In reaction to the verdict, the sitting justice Lord Carloway made several brief remarks, directly addressing the defendant Siddique: "You have been convicted of significant contraventions of the Terrorism Act, in particular on charge one of having articles in your possession for the commission, preparation or instigation of an act of terrorism. The court must take these offenses extremely seriously."
In June 2006, I was formally requested by the Central Scotland Police to review and assess the significance of materials recovered from digital storage media found in the possession of Mohammed Siddique and now-defunct Internet websites he was responsible for creating. In an 18-page report filed on behalf of Crown Prosecutors, I concluded that Siddique's collection of online propaganda constituted "a formidable archive of authentic Al-Qaida recruitment and technical material that is designed and likely to be used for purposes relating to the commission, perpetration, or instigation of an act of terrorism—most specifically, a suicide or 'martyrdom' operation."
In fact, the material collected by Siddique was a virtual encyclopedia of terrorist knowledge acquired over time by Al-Qaida and its associates. It was also a remarkable who's-who lineup of some of the most high profile figures in the "homegrown terrorism" market hailing from Al-Qaida's military leadership. Though Western academics have tended to focus on the much-vaunted role of Abu Musab al-Suri (a.k.a. Mustafa Setmariam Nasar) in this respect, actual case studies are consistently demonstrating that the teachings of other competing strategists have been far more influential in Al-Qaida circles, arguably none more so than those published by the late Saudi Al-Qaida commander Shaykh Youssef al-Ayyiri. Known to his supporters as “the Swift Sword,” al-Ayyiri (a.k.a. “Al-Battar”) reportedly first joined the Arab mujahideen fighting in Afghanistan at age 18. Impressed by his enthusiasm and skills as a combatant, Al-Qaida claimed to have granted Al-Ayyiri a position of high importance as the commander of a training camp in Afghanistan. Before long, Al-Qaida judged al-Ayyiri to be a “seasoned military man… a genius and theorizer who served jihad… He is an inspired genius and a miracle of the age. Had he been in another nation, they would not have made him walk on the ground. They would have carried him on their heads.” Al-Ayyiri authored several notable theoretical works on terrorism (distributed in electronic form over Al-Qaida's first official Internet website "Al-Neda"), including “Sacrifice Operations: Suicide or Martyrdom?” and “The Moscow Theater Operation and Its Benefits for the Mujahideen.” According to another digital magazine later distributed by Al-Qaida in Saudi Arabia, when al-Ayyiri learned of the September 11, 2001 suicide hijackings in New York and Washington D.C., he “was so joyous he nearly floated on air.” A subsequent Al-Qaida propaganda video released in late 2003 contained audio messages from al-Ayyiri. Amidst scenes of suicide bombers preparing for their mission in Saudi Arabia, al-Ayyiri can be heard explaining:
“In the first stage, the stage of attrition and engaging the enemy in battle, you need to make your enemy tired more than you need to kill a large number of its members. You need to scatter the enemy, demoralize it, spread it out over a large area, and cause it to get tired. If the enemy is spread out, it will need supply armies and a lot of other things. You need to make the enemy reach this stage. In this stage, you should strike, run, and disappear. Strike at the weak points.”
Read More »
When criticized for launching suicide bomb attacks inside Saudi Arabia—the heartland of conservative Islam—al-Ayyiri responded, “Whoever asks why in [Saudi Arabia] should ask himself—if he was honest—why in Chechnya, why in Kabul, why in Jerusalem, why in Bali, and why in Mombassa. These countries are ruled by agent Karzai-type rulers and occupied by Americans or Jews who are considered infidels and untrustworthy in Allah’s book.” Moreover, according to al-Ayyiri, “this war is based on a strategy to widen the battlefield. The entire world has become a battlefield in practice and not in theory.” An English translation of al-Ayyiri’s reply to his critics was found in the possession of Mohammed Siddique in Scotland along with a score of other documents written or published by al-Ayyiri, a number of which were likewise translated into English--such as “Constants on The Path of Jihad” and “The Islamic Ruling on the Permissibility of Self-Sacrifical Operations: Suicide, or Martyrdom?”—wherein, al-Ayyiri wrote:
“Martyrdom or self-sacrifice operations are those performed by one or more people, against enemies far exceeding them in numbers and equipment, with prior knowledge that the operations will almost inevitably lead to death. The form this usually takes nowadays is to wire up one’s body, vehicle, or suitcase, with explosives, and then to enter amongst a gathering of the enemy, or in their vital facilities, and to detonate in an appropriate place there in order to cause the maximum losses in the enemy ranks, taking advantage of the element of surprise and penetration… We have found, through the course of our experience, that there is no other technique which strikes as much terror into their hearts and which shatters their spirit as much… On the material level, these operations inflict the heaviest losses on the enemy, and are lowest in cost to us. The cost of equipment is negligible in comparison to the assault… The human casualty is a single life, who is in fact a martyr and hero who has gone ahead to the Gardens of Eternity… As for the enemy, their losses are high.”
Yousef al-Ayyiri was finally killed in mid-2003 during a fierce clash with Saudi security forces after masterminding a series of suicide bomb attacks in the Saudi capital Riyadh. The local Al-Qaida leadership vacuum was quickly filled by one of al-Ayyiri’s top lieutenants, Saudi national Abdelaziz al-Muqrin (a.k.a. Abu Hajer al-Najdi), a 33-year old Al-Qaida operative with over 15 years of experience among the mujahideen. The degree to which al-Muqrin influenced Al-Qaida’s global tactics and operations is quite clearly evidenced by the material collected by defendant Mohammed Atif Siddique—among them, no less than 27 separate digital images of al-Muqrin at various stages of his life (including many photos of his body after he was killed by Saudi security forces in June 2004). Al-Muqrin is perhaps best known for his role as the masked executioner in the video-recorded beheading of U.S. hostage Paul Marshal Johnson Jr. (which was subsequently distributed by Al-Qaida via the Internet).
Much like his former mentor al-Ayyiri, Abdelaziz al-Muqrin was a firm believer in using the web in order to disseminate everything from firsthand accounts of terrorist operations to detailed instructions on how to capture or kill Western tourists and diplomats. Scottish police seized an English translation in the possession of Mohammed Siddique of a memorandum authored by al-Muqrin titled, “Appendix: To All Desiring Jihad In The Lands Of The Arab Peninsula.” In his letter, al-Muqrin explained what his intentions were by distributing such documents:
“Certainly the Mujahidin of al-Qaidah are keen on guiding the Muslim community towards realizing such acts by way of Jihadist publications, booklets, and Jihadist reference works… through these books, [those seeking jihad] can discover the way to operate and study the best ways and policies listed there for the purpose of achieving our objective and realizing our goals. [These publications] give us a summary of the method and provide us with the experiences of those prior to us. Those in the know are aware that al Qaidah is an organization which utilizes a system of cells… Qaedat al-Jihad [the Jihad of al-Qaidah] pursues the publication of the concept [of Jihad] and spreads the word to the greatest extent possible while the various, disparate cells guarantee—Allah willing—the greater continuity of [carrying out the Jihad].”
Moreover, according to the translation of al-Muqrin’s memo recovered from Siddique, the duty of carrying out jihad and establishing Muslim rule is “incumbent upon every legal aged adult including the scholars and public, the righteous and the immoral, the rich and poor, men and women; for it is absolutely necessary that people understand that this obligation isn’t restricted to the wanted 19 or 26 [referring to Al-Qaida fugitives in Saudi Arabia].” He concluded, “One’s duty, then, is the undertaking, endeavor and pioneering, of the obligation of Jihad for Allah’s sake. The Muslim should not seek to rely on a few Mujahidin, but rather direct his [own] efforts toward this [obligation].”
Of course, Al-Ayyiri and Al-Muqrin are not the only Al-Qaida figures who have provided great inspiration to homegrown terrorist cells. Indeed, in the world of contemporary self-radicalized "third generation" terrorists, perhaps no single individual has been a more highly visible icon than the late Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian founder of Al-Qaida's network in Iraq. Demonstrating the extent of that influence, searches by Scottish police during Operation Niche recovered almost two dozen photos of the deceased Al-Qaida leader Zarqawi and several others paying homage to his former deputy commander Jordanian national Abu Anas al-Shami (who was killed in a U.S. air strike in September 2004). However, the most noteworthy piece of Zarqawi propaganda in the materials seized by Scotland Central Police was an English-subtitled copy of the Al-Qaida in Iraq propaganda video, “The Expedition of Omar Hadid.” The video was first released in Arabic on October 8, 2005 and was named in honor of fallen Iraqi Al-Qaida commander Omar Hadid (a.k.a. Abu Khattab al-Falluji). It purports to document the stories of Al-Qaida suicide bombers in Iraq, including a young Libyan national using the pseudonym “Abu Dharr.” Abu Dharr eagerly explains to the camera:
“I wish to say to the brothers, to all of the mujahideen, it is obligatory upon you to continue with these martyrdom operations, because they are—by Allah—the things that affect and massacre the Americans the most, and we ask Allah for guidance in this martyrdom operation, and it is the way to the Gardens [of Paradise] and it is the quickest way to the Highest Level of [Paradise], by the Will of Allah, and [God-willing] we will be guided, and [God-willing] we will cause great damage and pain to these infidel Americans and to those who ally themselves with them… We ask Allah to create severe pain and damage amongst the ranks of the Americans, the infidels, and those who ally with them… By Allah, nothing will elevate [Islam], nothing will bring it honor except for Jihad in the Path of Allah, and the strongest Jihad in the Path of Allah in our current times are these martyrdom operations… And I wish to say to my Muslim brothers in all parts of the world, as well as to my brothers from the mujahideen: it is upon you to take this path, since it is—by Allah—the path of honor, and it is—by Allah—the path of miracles… Allahu Akhbar! Allahu Akhbar! Allahu Akhbar! I want to say to America and the helpers of America and the allies of America that we are marching towards you with men who love to die just as much as you love to live! So, by Allah, and by the Will of Allah, the Victory of Islam is coming, and the Honor of Islam is coming at the hands of these martyrs.”
In addition to the testimony and encouragement from other suicide recruits, the “Expedition of Omar Hadid” also features excerpts of a song being performed by members of Zarqawi’s Al-Baraa bin Malik Martyrdom Brigade in Iraq (responsible for executing suicide attacks). The men giddily chant in unison:
“Shaykh Abu Musab [al-Zarqawi] has raised the banner, and Shaykh Abu Musab [al-Zarqawi] has raised the banner. Our commander is Bin Laden, O' you who terrorizes America. Our power is our [faith] and our weapon is our PK [Kalashnikov]... Our leader is the Mullah [Omar], he has not abandoned his religion. All the warriors have sold their souls to Allah. Every warrior has sold his soul to Allah. If they say ‘terrorist’, then I say this is an honor for me. Our terrorism is praiseworthy, a divine call. Our terrorism is praiseworthy, a divine call. Iraqi police: apostasy and hypocrisy. We have come to you to slaughter you—no, no negotiations. We have come to you to slaughter you—no, no negotiations. We destroyed America with a civilian plane. The World Trade tower is simply a pile of rubble. The World Trade tower is simply a pile of rubble.”
At first glance, Mohammed Siddique might seem to be a reasonably poor candidate as an international terrorist. Young, confrontational, and undoubtedly naive, Siddique apparently lacked in the skills, sophistication, lengthy credentials, and cold-blooded professionalism usually attributed to organized terrorism. Unfortunately, as other recent troubling events in Glasgow and London have unequivocally demonstrated, we no longer live in an era dominated by the monolithic threat of intricately-planned "organized terrorism." In this unusual era, even an entire team of highly trained and experienced field operatives can sometimes have a lesser ultimate impact than a single, well-placed novice fanatic with an unwavering commitment to leave this world in a final orgy of violence. Anyone who doubts the veracity of this conclusion need only speak to the horrified bystanders who were eyewitnesses to the scene that unfolded at Glasgow International Airport on the afternoon of June 30, 2007. « Close It
Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb's emir kicked out
By Olivier Guitta
As The Croissant just reported citing 2 reports in the Algerian press, Abdelmalek Droudkel, aka Abu Mussab, was allegedly kicked out of his position of emir of Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) by his peers.
I had mentioned on this site the dissension inside the ranks of AQIM since the ex GSPC changed his name in January and pledged allegiance to Al Qaeda. In fact after the triple suicide bombings in Algiers on 4/11, many AQIM members did not approve of the use of suicide bombings targeting civilians.
To go on a limb, this news could mean the death of AQIM per se and a return of the ex GSPC to a more guerilla style terrorism approach.
NEFA Series "Target America": KSM's Transatlantic Shoe Bomb Plot
By Evan Kohlmann
On the heels of the foiled plots targeting Fort Dix and JFK Airport, the Nine Eleven Finding Answers (NEFA) Foundation announces the release of the eleventh in a series of reports examining the multitude of threats directed at the United States since 9/11. This week's report focuses on 9/11 planner Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's (KSM) plan to utilize two British Al Qaeda operatives -- Richard Reid and Sajid Badat -- to blow up U.S.-bound commercial airliners with shoe bombs. On December 22, 2001, Reid attempted to bring down American Airlines Flight 63 by igniting the explosive device in his shoe; his attempt failed and he was restrained by passengers until the plane landed. And, at the last moment, Badat withdrew from the plot, telling police he wanted to "introduce some calm in his life." Reid and Badat had been assisted by KSM's nephew 'Ammar al-Balucchi, who also played an important supporting role in 9/11.
The report can be viewed on the NEFA Foundation website, http://www.nefafoundation.org.
France Calls For Tough European Sanctions On Iran
By Victor Comras
The New French Government is now adding its own weight in support of U.S. efforts to get Iran to back off from its accelerated uranium enrichment program. French President Sarkozy indicated shortly after his election that he would place a very high priority on the nuclear proliferation risks posed by Iran. A few days ago French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner warned Iran in stark terms to halt its quest for nuclear weapons capability. Their failure to take the international community's s concerns seriously, could, he warned, ultimately lead to war. The “world should prepare for the worst,” Kouchner cautioned, “which is war.” That’s particularly strong language coming from the French.
While Prime Minister Francois Fillon sought to smooth over Kouchner’s harsh remarks, he didn’t back down from them. Rather, Fillon stressed that while it would continue to pursue all possibilities for a negotiated settlement, France was now convinced that further sanctions or Iran were needed to bring the message home to Iran’s leaders. France, he indicated, has formally proposed imposing European wide sanctions on Iran, which would be separate from what the UN Security Council might do. The Security Council has made little progress, so far, in coming up with a new set of sanctions on Iran. "These would be European sanctions that each country, individually, must put in place with its own banking, commercial and industrial system. The English and the Germans are interested in talking about this. We will try to find a common European position," Kouchner said. Dutch Foreign Minister, Maxime Verhagen, has also indicated that if the Security Council fails to act on new stringent sanctions measures, that the Dutch government could well join with the United States in applying unilateral sanctions on Iran.
Unfortunately, other European leaders have not been as forthcoming. In Germany, for example a conference entitled "Iran - Business Opportunities for German Exporters" is scheduled to open tomorrow in Darmstadt. The conference reportedly is a joint initiative between the Hessian state government and the Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology. However, the German Chamber of Conference did remove from its website the text of an invitation to the conference which read, in part,: "Iran is accustomed to crises - but somehow always keeps going forward. Iran's economic potential makes the country a worthwhile investment in any case."
Europe can play a critical role in convincing Iran to change course (see my Congressional Testimony on Iran Sanctions at recent House and Senate hearings) Alone, the United States lacks significant sanctions leverage on Iran. But, joined by Europe, combined US European sanctions can have a major impact on Iran’s economy, and will go a long way toward convincing Iran’s leaders to reassess their current policies. The question remains just how far European countries are willing to go with new sanctions, and how many European Countries will participate. Europe remains Iran’s largest trading partner, and potential source for foreign investment. Iran – Europe two-way trade amounts to some $26 billion per year. And Iran is still much more reliant on European imports than Europe is dependent on Iranian Oil. And beyond European Sanctions, there is still a real possibility that combined US-European clout will also bring China and Russia around. So, lets hope that France, Britain, the Netherlands and other European non proliferation committed countries follow through with meaningful sanctions and resist those advocating more effete measures in the name of a lowest denominator consensus.
Six Years after September 11: A 9-11 Commission Progress Report
By Matthew Levitt
Six years after September 11, terrorist attacks still threaten Americans. Although Washington has carried out major reforms to improve its counterterrorism measures, Mike Hurley arges there is a critical lack of urgency on several fronts.
And while the United States has used and should continue to use military power to combat terrorism, military power alone will not defeat the persistent and evolving threat of terrorist threat . America's influence in the world depends on public image and how willing other nations are to cooperate with U.S. initiatives. To achieve security in the long term, the United States needs to improve its image in the world. The best way to do so. argues Chris Kojm, is through economic assistance.
On September 12, 2007, I chaired a Policy Forum at The Washington Institute featuring Michael Hurley and Chris Kojm. Mr. Hurley, recently retired from twenty-five years of service at the CIA, served on the 9-11 Commission as a senior counsel and director of the counterterrorism policy investigation. Mr. Kojm, now a professor of international affairs at George Washington University's Elliott School, is former president of the Public Discourse Project and deputy director of the 9-11 Commission. A rapporteur's summary of their remarks can be found here.
A streaming audio of the event is available here.
Third 9/11 Jihadist Video Calls For Attacks on West (Updated)
By Jeffrey Imm
September 18 Update with additional SITE report
Media reports state that a third 9/11 Jihadist video, reportedly by Al Qaeda, has been released via Islamist web sites today, calling for Jihadist terror acts on the West to be a daily occurrence and calling for "acts of mass extermination".
AKI and AFP have thus far provided the primary reporting on this new Al Qaeda video.
AKI reports that the new 26 minute video is entitled "The attacks in New York and Washington - reasons and motives".
AFP reports that the video "features a montage of images of the burning World Trade Center towers and scenes from Islamist training camps."
AFP reports that a voiceover on the video states:
"We must take Islamist terrorism to Western countries so that it becomes a normal part of life like natural disasters" and "[i]n that way, we will have acts of mass extermination in which people will feel that their affluence also brings death... and we will have created a balance of deterrence between us and them".
AKI reports that the new video begins with a message from Abu Yahya al-Libi, the leader of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. On the new video, Al-Libi is reported to praise the role of Al Qaeda in defending the principles of Islam
AKI reports that the new video includes a montage of audio and video footage of previous messages Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri on the rationale behind the 9/11 attacks. AFP reports that the video also includes a clip by Mustafa Abu Al-Yazid, also known as Sheikh Said, the group's commander in Afghanistan.
AKI reports that:
"[a] voice on the video also gives an account of the war in Chechnya, blames the West for having committed a mass extermination and calls for revenge for this action. Also included is footage of interviews carried out by the Arab satellite TV network, Al Jazeera, with university professors, Arab commentators and editor of the London-based al-Quds al-Arabi newspaper. The entire video describes various events that occured before the 9/11 attacks, in particular the conflict in Chechnya, and tries to explain the reasons behind the terror attacks."
AKI reports that the video ends with a speech by Abdullah Azzam. Abdullah Azzam, who died in 1989, was an inspiration to Osama Bin Laden and countless other Jihadists.
AKI reports that the new video does not the logo of al-Sahab, Al Qaeda's communications arm, but carries the new logo of "al-Tanzim". AFP reports: "A third release had been trailed by Al-Qaeda's media arm, As-Sahab. In the event the new video was issued in the name of Al-Tanzem, prompting suggestions the network has launched a new media arm."
Additional SITE Reporting
SITE provided additional reporting on the 9/11 Jihadist video, pointing out that in this Al-Tanzem Jihadist video, there was significant focus on Chechnya. SITE reported that: "Chechnya is the lens through which al-Tanzem is fixated, the narrator stating: “If you see the massacres of Chechnya, you would say that this is enough reason to strike the towers of the World Trade Center.” Footage of destruction in Chechnya in human and material terms, and excerpts from interviews with Islamic scholars and al-Qaeda spokesman, Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, defend the jihad in Chechnya and portrays it as an example of a war on Islam not isolated to Russia."
SITE reported that "Al-Tanzem, in the past, has produced media praising deceased jihadi leaders, such as Mullah Dadullah, Shamil Basayev and Abu al-Walid al-Ghamdi."
SITE also provided a similar translation on the video voiceover previously reported by AFP, with SITE stating: "[a] voice which sounds like that of Abu Musab al-Suri states: 'Islamic terror must move to the Western countries so that it turns into a natural disaster such as earthquakes, volcanoes and things similar to that. They should have mass extermination so they can feel what we suffer and stop what they are doing to us, then they will have sympathy and a balance is achieved. We don’t need to understand the West; instead we make the West understands us.' "
Sources:
September 17, 2007 - SITE Intelligence Group -- "Reasons and Motivations for the Attacks in New York and Washington" – Video Presentation from al-Tanzem Foundation for Sixth Anniversary of 9/11
September 17, 2007 -- AKI: Terrorism: Al-Qaeda releases third 9/11 video
September 17, 2007 -- AFP: Qaeda urges Islamic terror in West in third 9/11 video
September 17, 2007 -- Agenzia Giornalistica Italia -- Terror: Third Al Qaeda's video, attacks must be normal
April 16, 2002 - Slate: Abdullah Azzam - The godfather of jihad
A Look at the Hamas (Muslim Brotherhood) Government
By Douglas Farah
Today's Washington Post carries a fascinating look at the way Hamas, the West Bank branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, runs its government.
The two trends that have made Islamist governments both accepted and disliked are clearly on display. The first thing the Hamas government seems to have done is get rid of the perpetual insecurity, crime and endemic corruption. This is a pattern repeated from Afghanistan to Somalia, and one that is often at the top of the list of priorities of civilian populations.
These actions, as they did elsewhere, buy an enormous amount of goodwill among the general public, and is a facet that is usually sorely lacking in U.S.-led efforts to win hearts and minds.
The second trend is the imposition of Islamist behavior. The article notes that "Gaza's streets have taken on an increasingly Islamic cast in recent months. The improved everyday security has brought people back to the markets, beaches and parks, many of them women wearing for the first time the full black gown, gloves and face covering favored by the most conservative Muslims." My full blog is here.
Al Qaeda in Libya
By Olivier Guitta
While focus has been rightly so recently on the attacks perpetrated by Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb in Algeria and Morocco, let's not forget that Libya is also possibly a target.
Furthermore, two of Al Qaeda top leaders are Libyan and dream of unseating Colonel Khadafi.
For more on what's going inside Libya, please read on this story from The Croissant:
Despite the news blackout imposed by Libyan authorities, Western chancelleries got information regarding the infiltration of Al Qaeda elements in the Maghreb.
In Mid May, after receiving a US report on potential terror attacks in Libya similar to those perpetrated in Algiers in April, Colonel Khadafi met with his top security services aides. This American report mentioned the potential use of missiles targeting the Bab Al Azizia barrack, Khadafi’s Headquarters in Tripoli. The report also mentioned that Al Qaeda members entered Libya through Algeria and Sudan. It provided a list of likely personalities targeted including security services heads, the CEO of the National Oil Company, Chucri Ghanem, the Prime Minister, Al Baghdadi Al Mahmoudi, the Interior Minister. Other targets included the headquarters of foreign companies, in particular Anglo-Saxon ones in the oil and gas sectors.
Following the US report, Libyan authorities reacted swiftly. Between May 31 and June 7, more than 250 people were arrested in major cities:just in Benghazi, supposedly over 100, in Al Baida (the Salafists and Muslim Brothers stronghold) arrests are occurring around the clock. The bulk of these alleged jihadists had already been jailed in the past, after their fighting against Libyan security services in the 90’s and at the beginning of the 2000’s ; but then they had been freed.
Authorities, not hiding their fears, even arrested family members of Islamist militants who could not be found: indeed they wanted to pressure these jihadists to surrender but it did not seem to work out this time around.
For the rest of the story, please click here.
Four questions on al Qaeda's threat to Sweden
By Walid Phares
Posted on Jihadi web sites, a declaration by the commander of al Qaeda Iraq, Omar al Baghdadi promised to pay 100,000$ for anyone who would assassinate Swedish Cartoonist Lars Vilks, who published an "offensive cartoon" of Prophet Mohammed in the Nerikes Allehanda. Al baghdadi would add another 50,000$ if the artist is "slaughtered," and 50,000$ for the killing of the publication's editor. The "Cartoon Jihad" is back in Europe after the Danish affair last year. But as we are analyzing the far consequences of this threat, and independently from the discussion of the cartoon and the sensitivities it may have hurt (which are real and important on the emotional levels), following are questions to be raised:
Read More »
1. Why would al Qaeda Iraq and not another branch offer such a bounty? The Cartoonist is Swedish and the al Qaeda Iraq fights against the US in Iraq. Where is the link here? Many voices in the debate on the War on Terror have been saying that al Qaeda came to Iraq just because the US invaded the country. What about Sweden?
2. Why is al Qaeda-Iraq offering a bounty for the killing of an editor in Scandinavia? Why offering money for Jihad? Well, when a Jihadi group begins to offer financial rewards, it means that the ideological reward isn't enough.
3. Will such a call be heeded in Sweden? Does al Qaeda have cells -dormant or not- that far north? Reports tells us that the Salafists are propagating this ideology across Scandinavia. Very few realized that an assassination of a film maker in Amsterdam was imaginable before Theo Van Gogh was killed.
4. Will al Qaeda or other Jihadists attack Swedish companies or individuals worldwide? In fact orders were given but it depends on whom would consider themselves the "infantry" and actually take action. It will also depend on what the Swedish Government and Multinational Corporations would state in public or do in private. Sweden has had decades of neutrality regarding many challenges in international relations, and its foreign policy wasn't comparable at all to NATO countries in their struggle against Terror. However, this is the greatest litmus test yet to be addressed.
Dr Walid Phares is the Director of Future Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies in Washington and a visiting scholar at the European Foundation for Democracy and the author of the War of Ideas: Jihadism against Democracy. « Close It
"Terrorists have been arrested on the border, security chief says"
By Michael Cutler
Here's the lead from an article that deals with the nexus between our nation's failure to secure our borders and the imminent danger that this lunacy poses to our nation's security, six years after the attacks of September 11, 2001: "Texas' top homeland security official said Wednesday that terrorists with ties to Hezbollah, Hamas and al-Qaida have been arrested crossing the Texas border with Mexico in recent years." The official described one person caught in 2004 as being tied to a Pakistan insurgent group and whose specialty was smuggling Afghanis and other illegal aliens across the border.
I want you to take a moment to let the significance of all of this sink in. Our nation is at war with terrorists who have already killed thousands of innocent victims within our nation's borders. The commonly quoted number of victims is approximately 3,000. In point of fact I fear that the ultimate toll will actually be a multiple of that number when you factor in all of the people who are dying of lung diseases and other ailments associated with the various highly toxic pollutants that were released when the buildings at the World Trade Center complex collapsed. And now we see how the open borders of the United States facilitate the entry of terrorists, at a time when "We the People" are being inconvenienced, and our freedoms and expectations of privacy are being significantly reduced.
We know that in order to carry out their pernicious plans, terrorists must gain entry into our country and embed themselves in communities around the United States. The key to both of these activities is the way in which our nation secures its borders and enforces the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States. So it is critical that USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services) create as tight and effective system as possible. It is also important that all governments deny illegal aliens sanctuary, because sanctuary for illegal aliens will encourage still more illegal aliens, and will enable criminals (and especially terrorists) to set up shop in those communities willing to provide sanctuary.
Report: Muslim Brotherhood U.S. Front Groups a Threat
By Jeffrey Imm
On September 10, Douglas Farah posted a CTB Blog report on a DOD memorandum "Analysis of Muslim Brotherhood's General Strategic Goals for North American Memorandum".
The Washington Times is reporting on additional comments on the Muslim Brotherhood from a Pentagon Joint Staff analyst and this week's congressional hearings.
The Washington Times reports that Pentagon Joint Staff analyst Stephen Caughlin issues a memorandum on September 7 that stated that the Muslim Brotherhood has a number of U.S. front groups posing as moderate organizations. Stephen Caughlin is a lawyer and military intelligence specialist on the Joint Staff.
The Washington Times report states that documents from the Holy Land Foundation trial "reveal new security threats from a network of more than 29 U.S. Muslim groups", and quotes Mr. Caughlin as stating "[t]hese documents are beginning to define the structure and outline of domestic jihad threat entities, associated nongovernmental organizations and potential terrorist or insurgent support systems".
The Washington Times report quotes Mr. Caughlin as stating that a 1991 Muslim Brotherhood memorandum "describes aspects of the global jihad's strategic information warfare campaign and indications of its structure, reach and activities", and identifies unindicted HLF trial co-conspirator Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) as part of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Per the Washington Times report, Muslim Brotherhood memo on organizing Muslims in North America said that all members "must understand their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within, and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions." The Washington Times quotes Mr. Caughlin's memorandum as stating that "consequently, outreach strategies must be adjusted in the face of credible information that seeming Islamic humanitarian or professional nongovernmental organizations may be part of the global jihad with potential for being part of the terrorist or insurgent support system."
The Washington Times also quotes Mr. Caughlin as stating that government efforts at outreach in the recent ISNA conference "can cause those responsible for its success to so narrowly focus on the outreach relationship that they miss the surrounding events and lose perspective. This could undermine unity of effort in homeland security, lead to potential for embarrassment for the [U.S. government] and legitimize threat organizations by providing them domestic sanctuary."
Regarding congressional hearings this week with top security officials, the Washington Times reports that Senator Joseph Lieberman asked about operational efforts to counter Islamic extremism, quoting Senator Lieberman as stating "[b]ecause this is a war, but it is ultimately a war against, and with, an ideology that is inimical to our own values of freedom and tolerance and diversity,"
The Washington Times made the following report on FBI comments regarding this week's congressional hearings and the FBI views on countering Islamist ideologies:
"FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III revealed during the hearing that the FBI has no counterideology response other than its 'outreach' to Muslim-American communities so they 'understand the FBI' and address 'the radicalization issue,' he said. Asked whether the FBI has a responsibility to wage a battle of ideas within U.S. Muslim-American communities, Mr. Mueller said: 'You put that where I would say no, that it would not be our responsibility for any religion to engage in the war of ideas.' The FBI's responsibility, he said, is 'to explain that once one goes over the line and it becomes not a war of ideas but a criminal offense, this is what you can expect, and to elicit the support of those in whatever religious community to assist us in assuring that those who cross that line are appropriately investigated and convicted.' The comment shows that despite the creation of a dedicated FBI intelligence-gathering branch, the bureau remains limited to investigation and law enforcement."
The Washington Times also reported that:
"Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff also said nothing is being done domestically to battle Islamist extremist ideas. The department's incident management team, he said, is focused on civil rights or civil liberties -- not fighting terrorists' ideology. "
Sources and Related Documents:
September 14, 2007 - The Washington Times: "Jihadist Threat" - by Bill Gertz
September 10, 2007 - U.S. Muslim Brotherhood Groups Called "Threat Organization" in DOD Memo -- CTB Blog -- by Douglas Farah
September 14, 2007 - Holy Land Foundation...A Thought Before Final Arguments - CTB Blog - Dennis Lormel
August 14, 2007 - Muslim Brotherhood Phonebook Confirms that MAS is Brotherhood's Baby - The Investigative Project
August 8, 2007 - CAIR Identified by the FBI as part of the Muslim Brotherhood's Palestine Committee - The Investigative Project
August 2, 2007 - The Muslim Brotherhood’s "Military Work" in the US - The Investigative Project
August 1, 2007 - The Smoking Gun on the Muslim Brotherhood's Agenda -- CTB Blog -- Douglas Farah
Nine / Eleven Finding Answers (NEFA) - HLF Exhibit GX 3-85 -- "An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group" - Mohamed Akram - May 22, 1991
Nine / Eleven Finding Answers (NEFA) - HLF Exhibit GX 24-29 - The Links between the U.S. and International Muslim Brotherhood
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, CR NO. 3:04-CR-240-G, Attachment A - List of Unindicted Co-conspirators and/or Joint Venturers
August 28, 2007 - DOJ, ISNA & HLF -- CTB Blog -- Steven Emerson
August 30, 2007 -- ISNA and Jihad: Why DOJ's Involvement in ISNA Conference Sends The Wrong Message -- CTB Blog -- Jeffrey Imm
Islamism - Definition - Wikipedia
9/11 Commission Report: Cluster References to "Islamism" in U.S. Final Report of the 9/11 Commission
September 11, 2007 - 9/11 and the Inconvenient Truths about Jihad and Islamism -- CTB Blog, Jeffrey Imm
Holy Land Foundation...A Thought Before Final Arguments
By Dennis Lormel
I was contacted today by a reporter who noted that the final arguments in the Holy Land Foundation trial are scheduled for Monday. He inquired about the importance of this case in the government’s anti-terrorism campaign. I posted an article on the Counterterrorism Blog during the jury selection process which, in part, addressed this question.
This is an extremely important case to the government. In complex trials like this, it is difficult to gauge the jury reaction. Regardless of whether there is a conviction or acquittal, the government succeeded in establishing a significant deterrent. Importantly, the government created a sense of awareness to the magnitude that HAMAS manipulates charities. This has caused a decline in charitable giving. HAMAS, not the government, is directly responsible for the decline in charitable giving because of their underhanded techniques in masking terrorist intent.
Documentary evidence was presented during the trial that was damning to the Muslim Brotherhood. It demonstrated the link the Muslim Brotherhood has to radical anti-Western society sentimentality and in favor of terrorism. The evidence also linked Islamic organizations to include the Counsel on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) to the Muslim Brotherhood.
These are extremely important revelations.
Read More »
Should the verdict come back guilty, the government will achieve a level of vindication. Should the verdict come back not guilty, it will demonstrate the extreme difficulty in successful prosecution of these types of cases. The government was right to have brought this case to trial. Win or lose, the government must assess its methodologies in pursuing these cases.
Whichever way the jury verdict goes, either the Islamic community or the government will gain leverage by virtue of the decision. In an ideal world, the leverage would be balanced and the government and Islamic community would establish and maintain a meaningful dialogue to address the issues at hand, funding for HAMAS
Since we live in the real world, dialogue in the aftermath of this case will be a challenge, especially if there is an acquittal. Before ISNA and/or CAIR condemn the government, they should acknowledge their relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood. They should either distance themselves from the Muslim Brotherhood, or a new moderate Islamic voice needs to step forward and assume a leadership position in moving forward and forging a meaningful relationship with the government.
My colleagues on the Blog have had a series of thoughtful debates about the Justice Department’s participation in the ISNA annual conference. Under the circumstances, the Justice Department exercised poor judgment. However, they were right to interact with the Islamic community. Most members of the Islamic community are good people, espousing moderate views and opposing terrorism. That is why it’s important for a new moderate Islamic voice to step forward.
What both sides must realize is that regardless of the jury verdict, money from Holy Land Foundation funded HAMAS. The other realization is the government has an obligation to continue pursuing these cases when predication to do so exists. That is why it is critically important for the two sides to establish a dialogue on this specific issue. The best way to deny HAMAS funding is for the two sides to work together.
« Close It
Arrest of LTTE’s KP: Goof up or Cover up?
By Animesh Roul
Media broke the news about KP’s arrest in Bangkok on Sep 10 and later picked up by all news agencies around the world. Sri Lanka took a sigh of relief and India desperately wanted to take him home for a trial. But all this euphoria died down when Thailand authority denied his arrest on the face of all media hype. KP is Kumaran Padmanadan (also, Tharmalingam Shanmughan), LTTE's point man for international arms procurement/ trafficking and a senior cadre involved in many high profile operations, including financing the assassination of a former Prime Minister of India. KP considered as the most important players within LTTE, next to chief V. Prabhakaran and Pottu Amman, head of its intelligence wing.
There is a possibility that Thai government is hiding something worthwhile now, even though they handed over three other Tamil Tigers to Lankan authority in August after they served jail terms for arms smuggling, since 2003. It is plausible that Thai govt. conveyed the news to Lanka but never thought that it would be blown to such proportions by the media which has now brought a third player, India into the whole episode. Fearing this could be interfering in the investigation process and that New Delhi would want KP to be extradited first, Bangkok authority now wished to deny the whole incident for the time being. One thing leading observers to believe that KP is in Thai custody much before the reported date of his arrest (does not matter if detained or arrested) because Sri Lanka Navy has successfully interdicted and sank three ships reportedly carrying LTTE’s arms in the high seas recently. Lankan Navy could not have achieved this success unless until they received concrete information on the shipments. A parallel can be drawn between both events. However, this speculation aside, KP’s arrest still remains a mystery, controversial and much awaited.
Read More »
Italy's Left-Wing Terrorists Flirt with Radical Islamists
By Lorenzo Vidino
My colleague Andrea Morigi and I have a piece in the latest issue of the Jamestown Foundation's Terrorism Monitor describing the links between Italy's so-called "New Red Brigades" and radical Islam:
Last February, in the quiet of a secluded northern Italian country house, three Italian far left militants brainstormed, unaware that counter-terrorism officials were listening to their every word. The men were known members of the so-called "New Red Brigades," discussing new strategies for the group. Alfredo Davanzo, the ideologue of the group who had just returned from France using a forged passport, spoke about the need to overcome the organization's isolation, caused by its secrecy and the waves of arrests it had suffered (ironically, the three would be arrested the following Monday). The group, said the men, should find new venues for their recruitment efforts and pointed to Italian mosques, described as "propellers of protests and struggles," as one of the most obvious choices. The conversation is just another indication of what Italian intelligence officials have warned about for the last few years: some of the most militant segments of the Italian extreme left have displayed an increasing interest in and admiration for radical Islam. What has been only purely moral support up to now could possibly develop into a dangerous cooperation.
The "New Red Brigades"
In assessing the threat, it is necessary to briefly examine the history of the Red Brigades. The group was formed in the early 1970s and bloodied the streets of Italy until the first half of the 1980s. Divided in compartmentalized cells spread throughout the country, the group targeted with assassinations, kidnappings and shootings all those it perceived as "enemies of the proletariat": politicians, military and law enforcement officials, entrepreneurs and business leaders. By the mid-1980s, the aggressive strategies employed by the Italian government (a clever mix of infiltration, tough judicial repression and deals with former militants) had dealt significant blows to the organization. After the crackdowns that followed the 1981 kidnapping of NATO General James Dozier and the 1988 assassination of Christian Democrat Senator Roberto Ruffilli, the Red Brigades were considered virtually dismantled. Most of its leaders received life or extremely long sentences, while only a few managed to flee Italy and settle in other countries.
Read more
Becoming a Safer Nation is an Incremental Process
By Dennis Lormel
With the somber remembrance of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the question is always posed “are we safer now then before 9/11?” The invariable answer is we are safer, but not safe. We’re not safe because we are an open society that is easily exploitable. One reason why we are safer is how the government has evolved.
The counterterrorism landscape in the government has changed dramatically and for the better. Initially, I was not a proponent for creation of the position of Director of National Security. I have since changed my view and believe we have a stronger intelligence community and infrastructure as a result. Our intelligence agencies are more cohesive and coordinated then ever before. Many functions for information sharing and analysis have been developed at the federal, state and local levels creating an environment in which officials charged with protecting us are better positioned to perform their duties. This transition is a work in progress and has been since 9/11. In essence, it’s an incremental process. We must measure the community capabilities in the same manner, incrementally. Even though we’ve made progress, there is need for significant improvement to this emerging intelligence environment. As long as the incremental maturation process continues improvements will be made.
Read More »
Because of the incremental advances and the ability to better share information, provide training, gain experience, conduct better quality investigations and most importantly, to cooperate across agency lines, we are a safer nation. The recent arrests in Germany are a case in point.
On an agency level, after 9/11, most agencies understood that they had to change and do things differently than ever before to meet the enormous challenge. Change is not easy to accept and was difficult in coming, but it is taking place thanks to the perseverance of leaders like FBI Director Robert Mueller, who has been in place since before 9/11 and who immediately reshaped the FBI. I participated in the transformation at the FBI and witnessed first hand the cultural resistance and reluctance. Director Mueller was undeterred and has overseen a successful series of changes. Much the same can be said about other agencies. The federal agencies understand. They recognize the fact that new methodologies had to be developed and integrated into the changing environment. The agencies also understood that they had to act with a sense of urgency and aggressiveness if they were going to succeed and make us safer.
New and/or aggressive techniques are necessary. Also necessary is ensuring that use of such methodologies does not cross the line of violating civil liberties. Having been in the FBI, I know how serious this was with Director Mueller. We ensured our methodologies were within the framework of the law. The National Security Letter (NSL) issue dealt with administrative, not operational, procedures. Critics over blew this issue. No ones civil rights were violated. That said, there is no justification for what transpired. Much has been made about the increase in the use of NSLs since 9/11. Detractors claim abuse. What they fail to realize is that this was a result of the prioritization of counterterrorism. It demonstrates that the FBI was doing what should have been done and doing it well. Citizens of the U.S. should be reassured that they are safer because the FBI utilized tools such as NSLs. Unfortunately, a federal judge has ruled NSLs unconstitutional. I plan to address this topic in a follow up post. It’s critically important that law enforcement and intelligence agencies be given the tools they need to thwart terrorism.
Civil servants at the federal, state and local level responsible for protecting us from terrorism deserve our appreciation and gratitude. Often times, they work under incredibly adverse conditions and put in untold hours. More often then not, instead of praise, all they receive is criticism. That’s unfortunate because the truth is, we are safer because of their dedication and professionalism. As the 9/11 anniversary passes, I for one want to thank the men and women in all capacities who are responsible for protecting us from terrorism. I also want to thank their families for supporting them and for the sacrifices they’ve made in doing so.
« Close It
Islamist party's defeat in Morocco: a few observations
By Olivier Guitta
THe PJD (Justice and Development Party), the main Islamist party in Morocco got 46 seats during the September 7 Moroccan legislative elections. This is a surprise considering that polls were predicting a landslide victory for the PJD and its leaders were conservatively expecting to win anywhere from 70 to 80 seats.
Also very interestingly, US officials were very much betting on the PJD winning and had already started meeting regularly with their leaders.
I have written extensively about this alliance between some in the US and the Islamists.
In particular regarding the outrageous Fulbright scholarship given to the editor in Chief of the PJD's unofficial paper At Tajdid, Mustapha Khalfi.
What can we expect?
Islamism is far from dead.
The other more radical Islamist party Al ADl Waalihsanne headed by Sheikh Yassine had called for a boycott of the elections.( By the way the participation rate was an all-time low 37%)
Radicalization of Moroccan society is still going strong, Wahhabism is still being preached in the mosques of the kingdom and a new generation of suicide bombers is ready to act.
Unfortunately one can expect additional suicide attacks in Morocco in the near future.
For those of you interested, my fellow CT Blogger Zeyno Baran will host a panel I will be on at Hudson in Washington DC on September 18 on Islamists in Morocco and Turkey.
By the way, The Croissant also has numerous stories on Morocco, including this one on the GICM.
The Arrest of Diego Montoya and the Power of Drug Cartels
By Douglas Farah
This week brought the welcome news of the arrest of Diego Montoya, one of the world's largest drug traffickers and most wanted criminals. His organization worked both with right-wing paramilitary squads and the Marxist FARC rebels to move tons of cocaine to the United States and Europe.
Montoya, before he had a $5 million bounty on his head, was an old nemesis of mine, along with his co-founders of the Valle del Norte cartel, operating out of the lush valleys north of Cali. I was the first journalist to write about him, in 1992, and was then cordially invited to visit with him on the farm of one of his best friend and fellow cartel leader, Ivan Urdinola. They offered to provide hospitality for me and my family, or, if I preferred, to provide any entertainment I might desire should I choose to go alone.
For some reason, the thought of breaking bread with men best know for using chainsaws to hack their enemies to pieces did not appeal to me. Authorities say Montoya's organization killed some 1,500 people. He penchant for gratuitous, vicious killing was well-known, and anyone suspected of betraying him or his organization could look forward not only to an unbelievably cruel death, but also to the same fate for his or her entire extended family.
Montoya, like Pablo Escobar and the Rodriguez Orejuela brothers before him in the Medellin and Cali cartels, is a serious player not only in funneling cocaine to the streets of the United States and Europe, but a major cause of instability in Latin America. My full blog is here.
NEFA Foundation: A Look Inside a Secret Taliban Training Camp
By Evan Kohlmann
The NEFA Foundation has obtained exclusive video footage of a secret Taliban training camp located just north of the Afghan capital Kabul, excerpts of which were aired today by NBC News. The recording was made by NEFA consultant Claudio Franco, who watched firsthand as Taliban fighters demonstrated the detailed construction of improvised explosive devices (IEDs), which their commander endorsed as his preferred method of attacking enemy forces. Asked if they would be ready to strike as "martyrdom volunteers" on targets in Western countries, the men responded, "Allah willing, we will, once we have defeated the infidels…. if we are still alive, we will go to other countries and push the infidels out from other Islamic countries." They also acknowledged that "there are mujahideen coming to us from various countries to carry out martyrdom missions... They are coming from Islamic countries, even from Europe, America, (Australia) and from all over the world, to train and, yes, also for suicide attacks."
Click to view video excerpts from NBC News

"Intense Hospitality"- Islam in American Courts and Why It Matters
By Jeffrey Breinholt
During the week we recognize the sixth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and Congress considers the future of U.S. involvement in Iraq, I want to offer some general observations about an issue I have been writing about - Islam in the American courts - and why awareness of this history is so important to counterterrorism challenges we face today.
Here’s a little-known historical fact that comes from an American court case: the reason Western countries chose to place military and diplomatic assets in foreign locations was the threat of Muslims to their nationals residing those countries. We know this because of a 1957 Supreme Court opinion, in which the wife of a U.S. Air Force sergeant who killed him and was thereafter convicted in court martial proceedings successfully challenged the application of the military tribunals to her overseas conduct. The concurring opinion by Justice Felix Frankfurter contains a history lesson, and a hilarious typographical error:
The practice of European governments to send officers to reside in foreign countries, authorized to exercise a limited jurisdiction over vessels and seamen of their country, to watch the interests of their countrymen and to assist in adjusting their disputes and protecting their commerce, goes back to a very early period, even preceding what are termed the Middle Ages. * * * In other than Christian countries they were, by treaty stipulations, usually clothed with authority to hear complaints against their countrymen and to sit in judgment upon them when charged with public offenses. After the rise of Islamism, and the spread of its followers over eastern Asia and other countries bordering on the Mediterranean, the exercise of this judicial authority became a matter of great concern. The intense hospitality of the people of Moslem faith to all other sects, and particularly to Christians, affected all their intercourse, and all proceedings had in their tribunals. Even the rules of evidence adopted by them placed those of different faith on unequal grounds in any controversy with them. For this cause, and by reason of the barbarous and cruel punishments inflicted in those countries, and the frequent use of torture to enforce confession from parties accused, it was a matter of deep interest to Christian governments to withdraw the trial of their subjects, when charged with the commission of a public offense, from the arbitrary and despotic action of the local officials. Treaties conferring such jurisdiction upon these consuls were essential to the peaceful residence of Christians within those countries and the successful prosecution of commerce with their people.
Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 77 S.Ct. 1222 (1957).
Read More »
Justice Frankfurter was quoting from the Court’s 1891 opinion in Ross v. McIntyre, 140 U.S. 453, 11 S.Ct. 897 (1891) and, if you look at that older opinion, you will realize the word “hospitality” should instead read “hostility.” Without this edit, the quote seems odd, as it suggests “intense hospitality” (a strange term in English) yielding barbaric punishment and torture, as if these things were party favors. When you consider the original language, the meaning of the Frankfurter’s language is clear: the reason we project an official presence in foreign countries is because we cannot trust how foreign countries governed by Islamic law will treat our citizens there.
Fortunately, we do not have to deal with the threat of Islamic law to American citizens who live in the U.S. This is why, prior to the 1960s, Ross v. McIntyre and Reid v. Covert were two of only a handful of cases in which an American judicial opinion mentioned Islam.
Alas, that is no longer true. We now face Muslims who want to kill us on our homeland. When caught, they sometimes try to justify what they are doing by Islamic law. Doubt that? Look at the cases.
Since this article contains general observations, I am going to avoid the temptation to drive home this point through case examples, and save it for another article. Here, I will stick with the numbers. Has the frequency of references to Islam in American court cases gone up with the rise of Islamic terrorism?
Part of the beauty of computerized legal research is the ability to search cases for particular words. I did this to determine the number of state and federal opinions that mention Islam. For this, I constructed a search for the words “Islam,” “Muslim” or “Moslem,” or some variation of these words (which, for example, would capture “Islamic” and “Muslims”). The following graph illustrates the results by decade, starting in the 1960s.
Graph: cases by Decade
Note that we still have over two years left in the current decade, yet the total number of American judicial opinions mentioning Islam is more than double what we saw in the 1990s.
This next graph, which carves the data more finely to deal with the number of cases published each year since 1990, provides more insight:
Graph: cases by Year
In this graph, I did not include the cases from 2007, since one-quarter of the year remains. However, the number of federal and state opinions issued so far in 2007 (530 and 68, respectively) suggests that the final 2007 tally will slightly exceed those figures from 2006.
To get at why there has been such a dramatic increase, one has to review the cases, something I have been doing over the last few months. While my research is continuing, I can offer this explanation: in general, Islam is increasingly being asserted by Muslims as relevant to American legal controversies. The exponential growth in federal opinions in comparison to the state court opinions (the frequency which have gone up, but remained fairly stable) is the frequent issuance of federal opinions in three types of cases: (1) prison cases, where Muslim prisoners housed at federal and state correctional facilities argue that they are being deprived of religious freedom, (2) employment cases, where Muslims claim they are being unfairly discriminated against in the workplace, and (3) asylum cases, where Muslims and non-Muslim aliens argue they should not be sent back to their home countries because of what Muslims on non-Muslims will do to them. These three types of controversies are generally decided by federal courts, and are the most recurring type of opinion mentioning Islam, along with criminal prosecutions involving Muslim defendants, which can be either federal or state.
It is the actual court opinions, beyond the numbers, that are so fascinating. Why is this legal history relevant? In counterterrorism, the law library is an undervalued source of strategic intelligence. Legal controversies involving Muslim parties are a rich source of insight, since real things are at stake and the results (and reasoning) are published for all the world to see. That means American counterterrorism analysts can get a good idea of the plans of Muslims within the U.S. - including those who might not choose to be so forthcoming about their goals and motivations if not for the litigation - by seeing how they behave in court.
Here is a great example, something to use next time someone argues that Iraq and 9/11 are completely unconnected. This is a claim we have heard since 2003, including this week as Congress questions General Petreaus. Like many others, I believe the claim is snake oil being sold for political profit.
During the prosecution of those Al Qaeda operatives responsible for the August 1998 bombing of the U.S. Embassies in East Africa, one of the defendants, Mohammed Sadeek Odeh, tried to elicit from an expert witness named Imam Seraj W’ahhaj the religious justification for Al Qaeda’s actions in planning and attacking the two embassies: that it was an appropriate response for all religious Muslims to the economic sanctions imposed on Iraq. U.S. v. Bin Laden, 2001 WL 1160604 (S.D.N.Y. 2001).
This courtroom strategy was two full years before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and prior to 9/11, and this was a fleeting reference in an opinion available on Westlaw. The implications are clear: Iraq was connected to Al Qaeda’s plans, at least in terms of being a motivating factor for Al Qaeda's conduct. Usama Bin Laden and his operatives were outraged by the economic sanctions imposed on Iraq, which is to say the status quo that the advocates of soft power were arguing we should have pursued in lieu of the invasion. Al Qaeda was willing to attack us in part because of these sanctions, which means that we would not be buying fewer angry Al Qaeda operatives if we had let the sanctions continue, judging from what one of its operatives said in an American courtroom. Whatever one thinks about whether the sanctions were sufficient, keeping them in place as a more moderate alternative to boots on the ground would not have led Al Qaeda to view us any more kindly. The Caravan of Martyrs would have continued, somewhere. We know that because of an American court opinion. What else is out there, that we might be missing?
This prospect illustrates a sermon I have been preaching for some time: American legal opinions, for those who choose to scrutinize them, are an underrated source of strategic intelligence about the goals and capabilities of our foreign enemies. In previous articles, I employed this idea to examine the implications of Muslim employment discrimination claims (which are increasing after 9/11 without any corresponding increase in their rate of success) and the Muslim tactic of pursuing frivolous libel actions. Though I have not yet written anything about the Muslim tendency to cloak alleged criminal conduct in Islamic religious principles - what I refer to as the defense of “I am a Muslim,” similar to what Mohammed Sadeek Odeh tried in 2001 - it is also a growing strategy which offers insight into a society Muslims would like to instill here. The growth of Muslim-related litigation means more court opinions, and more data. One does not have to credit the idea that the U.S. court system is becoming Islamicized to see the value of assessing how Muslim litigants behave. In fact, the results (a little secret: the Muslims generally lose) are often less instructive than their arguments and their legal tactics.
Stay tuned. In the meantime, I hope more of my fellow lawyers will start to join me in the intelligence analysis business, where the raw intelligence is within court files, even if they cannot bill their work to a paying client.
(As always, the views in this article are the author’s own and do not reflect those of the Department if Justice.) « Close It
On the Sixth anniversary of 9/11: Ten questions for the future
By Walid Phares
At this sixth anniversary of the Jihadist attacks on America, a better understanding of the past can lead us to a clearer analysis of future trends. Such analysis opens up the way for a series of critically important questions.
1. Do the Jihadists wish to destroy the enemy (the free world) or absorb it?
2. Do they want to attack the West and the United States before they accomplish their goals in the Muslim world first? A crucial question, leading to many others.
3. Will it be possible to conclude peace with the Jihadists? What would doing so entail?
4. What are al Qaeda’s priorities in the struggle against the United States?
5. What weaknesses and holes do the Jihadists see in America and the West, and how would they use them?
6. Are the governments in the United States and other western nations ready for these future wars?
7. What would the next generations of Americans, today’s children and youths, have to face in these wars?
8. What should the United States and the West do to avoid future jihads?
9. Why wasn’t it already done in the past?
10. Are the Jihadists alone, or do they have the backing of other powers and states?
Read More »
A first objective is to show that future is very much about the past. The future of America depends on our understanding of the historical roots of Jihadism. This is not a war with an enemy with whom governments can sign peace treaties or establish new frontiers. The free world is facing forces that link directly to ancient and modern history. Their ideology was born decades ago, but was inspired by doctrines from the Middle Ages. America has never engaged in a conflict with deeper roots in the past. Today’s terrorists see the world with different eyes and minds from all Americans – and from most communities worldwide. To fully understand their mindset, we must learn about the terrorists’ history and their reading of history. The future of U.S. national security, international relations, and world stability lies in the hands of those who are first to learn about the terrorists’ relevant history. That is the key to their code, but it is not a secret one; it was simply hidden for too long by our own elite, which denied the public this fundamental knowledge. By severing the historical roots from contemporary conflicts waged by the terrorists, and by camouflaging their real long term intents (which are also linked to their version of history), our elite blurred or even blinded our vision.
In my research I make the case that a central obligation in the war on terror, waged since the fall of 2001, is education of the public: the American public first, but international public opinion as well. The outcome of the conflict will be decided by how well citizens understand the threat. The Islamic Fundamentalists’ jihadist strategies are not fully centered on classical state warfare. The resources of regimes have been merged with the capabilities of networks. The jihadists’ presence is fluid and their actions are stealthy until the final stages of an operation. But ironically, jihadists emerge, grow and develop almost entirely in the open. If we look at their public manifestation and thinking, whether in chat room conversations or media like al Jazeera, we can begin to understand their objectives. And if we learn about their past and deeper history, we can understand their current and future strategies.
Many among us wonder about the global strategy of the jihadists. Not only there is a global jihadist strategy, but also several different components. Not only are the terror plans frightening; they are already underway on a global level. The terrorist and jihadist strategies against the United States and the West started earlier than most of us generally think, that terrorists have been more successful in infiltrating than we expect, and that they are readying themselves for far larger strikes than they have mounted in the past.
There should be a global effort to educate the West about past mistakes in judgment that led to the terrorist advances. But perhaps more importantly, from what we know has really happened, and what we know could have happened, comes a terrifying picture of what could happen around the world if the appropriate policies and measures are not taken.
PS: This article was adapted from Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies against America
Dr Walid Phares is the director of the Future Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and the author of The War of Ideas: Jihadism against Dem « Close It
Bin Laden Video Calls For More Jihadists, Testament of 9/11 Hijacker
By Jeffrey Imm
A new message from Osama Bin Laden has been received, in which he praises the 19 9/11 Jihadists and calls for additional Muslims to become Jihadists.
Reuters reports that a "U.S. intelligence official said the voice appeared genuinely to be that of bin Laden."
Laura Mansfield reports that the video is entitled "The Wills of the Heroes of the Raids on New York and Washington. The Will of the Martyr (as we see him) Abu Mus'ab al Shehri With a forward by Sheikh Osama bin Laden, may Allah protect him". Laura Mansfield's web site provides a excerpt of the video.
SITE Institute reports that the video/audio message is 47 minutes, and opens with a still image of Osama Bin Laden from the September 7, 2007 video "The Solution". SITE reports that Bin Laden introduces Waleed al-Shehri, describing his motivations for being among those who "penetrated the most extreme degrees of danger" of the "19 champions".
In the new video, AP reports that Osama Bin Laden praised al-Shehri, saying he "recognized the truth" that Arab rulers were "vassals" of the West and had "abandoned the balance of (Islamic) revelation."
AP also reports that the Bin Laden audio message states:
"It is true that this young man was little in years, but the faith in his heart was big. So there is a huge difference between the path of the kings, presidents and hypocritical Ulama (Islamic scholars) and the path of these noble young men," like al-Shehri, bin Laden said. "The formers' lot is to spoil and enjoy themselves whereas the latters' lot is to destroy themselves for Allah's Word to be Supreme. It remains for us to do our part. So I tell every young man among the youth of Islam: It is your duty to join the caravan (of martyrs) until the sufficiency is complete and the march to aid the High and Omnipotent continues."
Reuters reports that the video includes the "will" of the 9/11 Jihadist Waleed al-Shehri: "Hijacker al-Shehri was shown wearing white robes in the video by the network's production arm as-Sahab, which superimposed him on a backdrop featuring a model airplane and an image of New York's burning Twin Towers. In his testament, he quoted part of the Muslim holy book, the Koran, which he believes commands Muslims to fight infidels."
AP reports that the video shows 9/11 Jihadist Waleed al-Shehri, addressing the camera and warning the U.S.: "We shall come at you from your front and back, your right and left."
Reuters also reports al-Sheri as stating: "The difference between us and you -- O cowards -- is that you fear death and are frightened by it, whereas we hope for it and seek it in God's path."
SITE Institute also reports that on the video: "Shehri speaks on the condition of Islam during his time, arguing it one of depravity and able to bring one to tears 'in view of the weakness, humiliation, scorn and enslavement it is suffering because it neglected the obligations of Allah and His orders, and permitted His forbidden things and abandoned Jihad in Allah’s path.' Legitimacy of jihad and suicide bombings in particular for the Cause of Allah are at the focus of his will, Shehri describing the American presence in Saudi Arabia as among the 'chief causes' of Islam’s misfortune and the jihad against them as the 'most obligatory of obligations'. To America, Shehri speaks of its being in Saudi Arabia: 'you shall expelled from it, humiliated and subdued and dragging behind you the tails of defeat and remains of those killed. And how could we desire anything other than your killing, when our lord ordered us thus'."
Sources:
SITE Intelligence Group: The Will of Walid al-Shehri AKA Abu Musab al-Shehri, One of the Nineteen 9/11 Hijackers, Introduced by Usama bin Laden – 9/2007
Laura Mansfield web site
Laura Mansfield - Except of Video:
September 11, 2007 - AP: New Osama Bin Laden Video Shows 9/11 Hijacker's Last Testament
September 11, 2007 - Reuters: Bin Laden praises 9/11 "champions"
September 11, 2007 - UPI: No live image of bin Laden in 9/11 video
September 7, 2007 - SITE Transcript and Video Link to Bin Laden Video (Updated)
Reenlist the UN in the War on Terror
By Michael Jacobson
I had a piece in today's Baltimore Sun on the need to revitalize the UN's efforts in combating terrorist financing.
The recent National Intelligence Estimate painted a troubling picture. While al-Qaida is resurgent, with an "undiminished" intent to attack the U.S. homeland, international counterterrorism cooperation is likely to wane as 9/11 grows more distant. Revitalizing the United Nations' counterterrorism role would be an important step to bolster the international effort against al-Qaida.
The United Nations has demonstrated that it can play a significant counterterrorism role. Indeed, for the first few years after 9/11, it was at the center of the fight against terrorism. In fact, the United Nations first took on al-Qaida and the Taliban before 9/11, passing Resolution 1267 in 1999 to pressure the Taliban to evict al-Qaida from Afghanistan.
That effort failed, but the United Nations' declaration of al-Qaida as a terrorist entity was an important step forward -- particularly given the traditionally paralyzing U.N. debates about who is a terrorist and who is a "freedom fighter." The fact that al-Qaida and the Taliban were blacklisted certainly helped the United States build international support quickly after 9/11.
To read the rest of the piece, click here
9/11 and the Inconvenient Truths about Jihad and Islamism
By Jeffrey Imm
Six years after the 9/11 attacks, the key strategic issue regarding the global war has not yet been addressed by American leadership and the American people: a clear definition of the global enemy we are fighting and a clear definition of the ideology of the enemy. Extensive discussion has been held on terrorism, the nature of terrorism, tactical approaches to homeland security, tactics of terrorism and counterterrorism, and specific military campaign tactics. Significant progress has been made on such issues, but it is important to recognize that the progress has been in tactical operational areas, and that overarching strategy issues still need to be addressed.
But by ignoring the major strategic issues of fighting Jihad and addressing political Islamism, there are numerous convenient fictions contrary to our national security interests (e.g., denying Jihadist threats, misunderstanding Jihadist's ideological basis, monofocus on tactical and military debates) -- all of which ignore the uncomfortable, inconvenient truths and complexities about global Jihad and political Islamism. In effect, American policy and debate remains focused on tactical issues, without a clear agreement on the enemy, or the strategy to fight the enemy, in the world war.
This unwillingness to face the identity of the enemy is the source of our failures in foreign policy, our failures in national security, and our divisions at home. With an ambiguously defined "war on terror", the US media, politicians, and other citizens can define the war and the enemy with whatever political filter that they choose, and they do. This ambiguity is what empowers the Washington Post and the New York Times to give editorial coverage to Jihadist organization representatives.
In the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) and 9/11 Commission report, there is essentially no definition of the enemy as Jihadists that would be meaningful in a war strategy and analysis of a global conflict. Buried in the notes of the 9/11 Commission Report is a definition on "Islamism", as a basis of "Islamist terrorism", but there is no analysis on the link between "Islamism" and "Jihad", nor is there any strategy on how to deal with either. The focus of the 9/11 Commission report, like the "war on terror" is in defining "terrorists" and their "ideology" as the enemy, without an actual definition of the ideology or examination of the impact of that ideology on US national security . The remaining key documents that could be used to fight Jihad, like the FTO and SDN lists, are tactical documents for tactical operations, reflective of where the focus has been in the past 6 years.
The September 7, 2007 Osama Bin Laden tape has been dismissed as "propaganda" by the US government, but there is no reference as what type of "propaganda" it is, or the ideology being represented. This is a week after Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice, and political leaders spoke at or were exhibitors at the Labor Day weekend ISNA conference, where Islamists were key speakers (and where reportedly DHS had an exhibit next to the Islamist Hizb ut-Tahrir group). ISNA is an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorist financing trial. This is a month after Pakistan President Musharraf called for the "mainstreaming" of the Taliban organization as an acceptable Islamist political organization; this is the same Taliban organization that supported Al-Qaeda training camps used by the 9/11 attackers.
Yet the Osama Bin Laden September 7 video had a very well-defined propaganda message – of political Islamism - attacking democracy, attacking separation of church and state, and calling for the American people to abandon democracy and to accept Islam. Hizb ut-Tahrir's Islamist organization states that its chief objective is to re-establish the Islamic Khilafah (Caliphate) by attempting to force nations to "resume the Islamic way of life and to convey the Islamic Call to the world. Its role is to establish the laws of the Islamic Shari'ah and to carry the call of Islam to the world." Osama Bin Laden is the most sought after man by America, while Hizb ut-Tahrir is a legal organization in the USA that rubs elbows with the DHS at conventions (and Hizb ut-Tahrir's role in promoting Jihadist activity is ignored). But the inconvenient truth is that when it comes to their views on Islamism – Osama Bin Laden and Hizb ut-Tahrir share the same ideology.
The same day as the Osama Bin Laden September 7 video of Islamist propaganda, the London Times reported on the takeover of half of the UK mosques by the Deobandi sect used to inspire the Taliban; in the September 7 reports the London Times quoted UK imam Riyadh ul Haq as stating "adhering to the fundamentals of Islam… is considered extremism and the struggle against oppression is called terrorism." The next day, the London Times reported on Deobandi scholar Justice Muhammad Taqi Usami's views as being "that Muslims should live peacefully in countries such as Britain, where they have the freedom to practice Islam, only until they gain enough power to engage in battle." UK actually provides an example to America as what not to do in regards to political Islamism, and the lessons learned from UK's failures would be of great value to the US national security strategy… IF there was a US national security strategy that addressed Islamism.
At last week's APEC meeting, President Bush called for a unified effort against "violent Islamic extremists". Yet it is very clear that, within the United States or across the world, there is no consensus as to the definition of the term "Islamic extremist". Until American leadership, American politicians, and the American people step back to look at the strategic issues as to who and why we are fighting, this lack of national and international consensus will continue to undermine our national security.
Read More »
A. "The War on Terrorism" Versus a Strategy on Jihad and Islamism
"Terrorism" is an ambiguous definition of the enemy, which allows the politically correct phrase "war on terrorism" that seeks to avoid the difficult dialogue and decisions that America must have about who its enemies are, about its stance on political Islamism, and about Jihad as a global threat. Moreover, stating that "Islamic extremist" groups are the main thrust a "war on terror" is simply not enough. Because the ambiguity over the definition of the phrase "Islamic extremists" itself provides confusion and prevents a coherent strategy. It is essential that America define who it is fighting and why, and face the inconvenient truths about the need for a coherent strategy in fighting Jihad and addressing Islamism.
Since 9/11, America has been great at reacting. In part, this is not surprising since 9/11 itself called for action on the part of America's leadership. Reactions are, by definition, tactical. Reactions are also measurable, and quantifiable. After the 9/11 attacks, I recall a business meeting that I attended where a political leader spoke, indicating that it would be program management professionals who would keep the "war on terror" on track, by ensuring that specific war milestones were effectively defined, measured, and traced. The word "Jihad" was not mentioned, nor was the ideology of "Jihad" discussed. Who and what we are fighting has been an assumption that has not been strategically addressed.
Reactive tactical measures fail to examine the larger issues, and only address immediate areas of pain. After 9/11, the public wanted action to find those responsible for the 9/11 attacks and punish them, thus the war in Afghanistan. Then in 2003, there was stated tactical goal to deny Iraq the potential for weapons of mass destruction, thus the war in Iraq. All of these tactical actions lacked an overarching definition of the global enemy, who we were fighting, why, and a strategy to win the global war. Furthermore, it is this tactical monofocus that allows the self-deception that counterterrorism itself, which is the study of preventing/fighting a singular tactic of political violence, can provide a strategic vision for a world war with a global, transnational ideology.
If we are indeed fighting a global war, then it is time to stop and revisit if our tactical actions are consistent with a national security strategy. Without such a clearly defined strategy, American actions and policies risk being contradictory and counterproductive.
B. Unresolved Issues of Enemy Definition and Strategy Resulting From 9/11 Attacks
To effectively fight the war, America must define and develop a consensus on the following unresolved issues:
1. America's definition on the identity of the enemy and the ideology of the enemy.
Identifying scattered groups or vague generalizations simply provides open avenues for a continuing lack of consensus on war strategy and a clearly shared identify of the enemy. America needs to define and address the supporting ideology of the enemy and its strategy for fighting that ideology, and show that its tactical military and tactical counterterrorism activities are part of that overall strategy.
America has three key documents it is using in the "war on terror": (1) September 18, 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) - that basically identifies those responsible for the 9/11 attacks as the enemy (without actually naming them), (2) U.S. State Department Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) Listing - which provides a list of foreign terrorist groups, and (3) U.S. Department of Treasury - Specially Designated Nationals List (SDN) which lists groups and persons whose property is blocked. While each of these have provided a valuable function for tactical action, these tactical documents do not supplant an overarching strategy and definition of the "enemy" that can be readily understood, agreed upon, and shared among American institutions and people.
The Congressional mandate for military force in response to the 9/11 attacks, the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) states that the "President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons." What the AUMF does not do, nor does any other subsequent war declarations do, is clearly identify the enemy "nations, organizations, or persons". Furthermore, advisers to the US military have tried to persuade officials that "Jihad" is not a violent tactic.
The 9/11 Commission report does use the terms "Jihad" and "Islamism", but sparingly. The 567 page 9/11 Commission report only uses the word "Jihad" 79 times (once every 7 pages), and provides no real definition for Jihad other than it is a "holy war" (page 55). The term "Islamism" is used once (page 562). The 9/11 Commission's preferred use in defining the enemy is "terrorist", and on occasion "Islamist terrorist".
The 9/11 Commission report does, however, attempt to define an enemy: "Our enemy is twofold: al Qaeda, a stateless network of terrorists that struck us on 9/11; and a radical ideological movement in the Islamic world, inspired in part by al Qaeda, which has spawned terrorist groups and violence across the globe." (page 363)
The reality, of course, is that the enemy is more than simply Al-Qaeda and other random Jihadist terrorist groups, and the enemy is the ideology of Jihad itself which is based on Islamist ideological roots. But this "ideological movement" which is the "enemy" is not addressed by the 9/11 Commission report, except, in a notation to explain its use of the term "Islamist terrorism". It occurred to someone on the Commission that they should define what "Islamism" itself means.
So to explain its term "Islamist terrorist", the 9/11 Commission attempt to define "Islamism" in the back of the notes on page 562 (Notes Chapter 12, Note 3):
"3. Islamist terrorism is an immediate derivative of Islamism. This term distinguishes itself from Islamic by the fact that the latter refers to a religion and culture in existence over a millennium, whereas the first is a political/religious phenomenon linked to the great events of the 20th century. Furthermore Islamists define themselves as 'Islamiyyoun/Islamists' precisely to differentiate themselves from 'Muslimun/Muslims.' . . . Islamism is defined as 'an Islamic militant, anti-democratic movement, bearing a holistic vision of Islam whose final aim is the restoration of the caliphate.'"
This is hardly a clear and meaningful definition of the ideology of a mortal enemy whom we are in engaged in warfare.
The 9/11 Commission does state that "Islamism" is the ideological basis for "Islamist terrorism". What it fails to do is provide a coherent definition of "Islamism". Moreover, the 9/11 Commission provides fodder for those who view Jihadist activities as supported by political grievances by viewing "Islamism" as "a political/religious phenomenon linked to the great events of the 20th century".
This leads to the second major unresolved issue by America - a coherent definition and position on political Islamism.
2. America's position on political Islamism, Islamist governments, and Islamist nations.
First, Americans need a shared definition of what the term "Islamism" is. In a nation with a founding basis in the "separation of church and state", the concept of "Islamism" itself is both confusing and alien to most Americans.
Wikipedia provides a definition of Islamism as follows: "Islamism is a term used to denote a set of political ideologies holding that Islam is not only a religion but also a political system and its teachings should be preeminent in all facets of society. Islamism holds that Muslims must return to the original teachings and the early models of Islam, particularly by making Islamic law (sharia) the basis for all statutory law of society and by uniting politically, eventually in one state; and that western military, economic, political, social, or cultural influence in the Muslim world is un-Islamic and should be replaced by purely Islamic influences."
In short, Islamism is a form of political theocratic governance, which is not compatible with democracy, and defines that all laws and political values are based on Islamist theocratic viewpoints, as defined in the Islamic Qur'an, Islamic Hadiths, and other Islamic law.
If, as stated in the 9/11 Commission report, "Islamist terrorism is an immediate derivative of Islamism", then what should America's view be regarding Islamist organizations, Islamist politics, and Islamist nations? American political leadership refuses to address this fundamental issue, which is another root issue in defining the enemy in this war.
America must ask why Al-Qaeda and other Jihadists use Islamist political statements as the basis and the rationale for their actions.
The use of Islamist ideology by Jihadists was demonstrated once again, on September 7, 2007, in Osama Bin Laden's latest video, where the essence of Osama Bin Laden's propaganda message was the following series of quotes of Islamist propaganda, demonizing democracy, condemning division of church and state, and demanding that Americans abandon democracy and convert to Islam:
"It has now become clear to you and the entire world the impotence of the democratic system and how it plays with the interests of the peoples and their blood by sacrificing soldiers and populations to achieve the interests of the major corporations."
" This greatest of plagues and most dangerous of threats to the lives of humans is taking place in an accelerating fashion as the world is being dominated by the democratic system, which confirms its massive failure to protect humans and their interests from the greed and avarice of the major corporations and their representatives."
"The infallible methodology is the methodology of Allah, the Most High, who created the heavens and earth and created the Creation and is the Most Kind and All-Informed and the Knower of the souls of His slaves and the methodology that best suits them."
"So how about you when you associate others with Him in your beliefs and separate state from religion, then claim that you are believers?!"
"You believe that Allah is your Lord and your Creator and the Creator of this earth and that it is His property, then you work on His earth and property without His orders and without obeying Him, and you legislate in contradiction to His Law and methodology."
"This work of yours is the greatest form of polytheism and is rebellion against obedience to Allah with which the believer becomes an unbeliever, even if he obeys Allah in some of His other orders."
"To conclude, I invite you to embrace Islam, for the greatest mistake one can make in this world and one which is uncorrectable is to die while not surrendering to Allah, the Most High, in all aspects of one's life - ie., to die outside of Islam."
"And it will also achieve your desire to stop the war as a consequence, because as soon as the warmongering owners of the major corporations realize that you have lost confidence in your democratic system and begun to search for an alternative, and that this alternative is Islam, they will run after you to please you and achieve what you want to steer you away from Islam."
What more direct example of the connection between Islamism and Jihad does the American leadership and American public need than the words of Osama Bin Laden?
To ignore Islamism as irrelevant to either Jihad or a "war on terrorism" is to ignore the very ideology stated by Jihadists in their war on America. Jihadists seek the same global goal as Islamists in the creation of an Islam-based world with a global caliphate. Jihadists and Islamists in politics are simply using different tactics to achieve the same goal.
Nor is the American refusal to address the ideology of Islamism a new problem. Political Islamist nations such as the Islamic Republic of Iran have been at war with America since 1979. Yet for nearly 30 years, America has been unwilling to define rationale for Islamist Iran's venom against America beyond America's support for Shah and for Israel. Iran's Islamist governance and ideology itself is unanalyzed and unaddressed in terms of how and whether Iran's Islamism represents a threat to the United States itself.
Certainly, when America supported Afghanistan Jihadists in their war against the USSR, we also understood the ideology of Islamism then as well. What America has thus far refused to address, even 6 years after 9/11, is the consequences of deliberately not creating a policy regarding political Islamism. This non-decision continues to make problems and complications for America in fighting Jihad and around the world.
Afghanistan's "democratic reforms" are viewed as one of the successes of American foreign policy in the "war on terror". However, it was the Afghanistan democratically elected Parliament that called for the death of an Afghan man because he dared to change his religious views and leave Islam, a man who had to flee the country for his life. What is America's position on such Islamist laws?
Pakistan has Islamist laws that include blasphemy laws that have resulted in the torture and death of Christians. Nor are these isolated incidents: "Mob and police torture Catholic man accused of blasphemy", "Seven Christians arrested in false blasphemy cases and men tortured to extract false confessions", "Muslims torture for hours Christian "blasphemer" now in jail", "Christian sentenced to death, lawyer threatened", "Pakistan's Christian Community Terrified Amid Calls for Execution".
Increasingly our tactical ally Pakistan (with nuclear weapons) is also facing increasing Islamist violence against other Pakistanis and growing Islamist support in parts of Pakistan. Some Pakistani soldiers (paid by US tax dollars) have been reported as being increasingly unwilling to fight Taliban militants, such as the soldier who told reporters "I did not desert the force because I feared death, but I was not sure whether the fighting in tribal district Waziristan was Islamic or not". And Pakistan media and politicians are increasing embracing Jihad. Moreover, our tactical ally Pakistan's leader President Musharraf views that the Taliban can become a mainstreamed political force in Afghanistan (and possibly in Pakistan). This is the same Taliban ideology whose Jihadist camps trained the 9/11 Jihadists that killed 3,000 Americans. What is America's position on mainstreaming Islamist Taliban and Pakistan's Islamist laws?
Nor are such Islamist laws unique to Islamist nations, but are used by Islamists in other nations to threaten and intimidate others as apostates, including Indonesia, Egypt, and many others.
We have laws against Jihadist groups Hamas and Hezbollah, but Hizb ut-Tahrir, which calls for world domination by Islam, is a legal organization in the United States, despite the record of Hizb ut-Tahrir's role in recruiting Jihadists in the UK and around the world. The Hamas and Hezbollah Jihadist groups are registered as terrorist organizations in the U.S. State Department FTO list. Hizb ut-Tahrir is viewed as "merely" an Islamist organization; therefore, their calls for Islamist world domination, are accepted as "free speech". This is regardless of the ideological support that such Islamist views provide to Jihadist terrorists in recruiting Jihadist terrorists to attack U.S. and other democratic interests.
The fact that on September 7, 2007, Osama Bin Laden issues a propaganda video on Islamism, the same day that the London Times issues an expose that Islamist ideology has taken hold at half of UK mosques does not generate questions or debate among analysts or the media. Instead, both are largely ignored, and American leadership does not challenge the Islamist propaganda by Osama Bin Laden.
Instead, the tactical debate on the Iraq War military deployments and concepts as John Edward's tactical recommendations on counterterrorism intelligence and treaty organizations are the topics of debate by analysts and American leadership. Meantime, UK Islamic "scholars" are promoting views that Muslims should live peacefully in countries such as Britain, where they have the freedom to practice Islam, only until they gain enough power to engage in battle. If we are to understand many Islamist organizations' views, their main complaint with Osama Bin Laden would be that he struck too soon.
The larger strategy issue of Islamism is not being addressed – neither as an ideology inspiring Jihad nor as a threat to democracies and democratic values. America needs to take a stand on Islamism and define what is and is not acceptable in terms of Islamist organizations in the United States, its allies, and nations that it will do business with. Is Islamism a threat to the United States or not, as Communism was viewed during the Cold War with the USSR? Is Islamism incompatible with democracy or not? Does addressing Islamism's goals require strategic thinking from an economic, ideological, and demographic role for America's security or not? America cannot continue to sit on the fence on this fundamental war strategy issue, and busy ourselves with debating tactical issues, when the national security strategy itself is yet to be decided.
C. Reasons for Resisting a Clear Definition of the Enemy
America is a nation that is dedicated to civil rights, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion. These freedoms are a fundamental part of our identity as a nation. The 9/11 attacks and the religious component of the Jihadist terrorists who made these attacks presents Americans with a unique problem. America is a nation that vigorously defends freedom of religion and civil rights.
Yet the 9/11 Al-Qaeda Jihadists' actions were rooted in a political Islamist view of the world, which conflates religion and politics into a single ideology. The Jihadists' violent actions of terrorism were a tactic to help achieve their specific political Islamist ideological views, as expressed again by Osama Bin Laden in the September 7 video. But both Islamism and the role of religious ideologies in motivating Jihadists remains a subject that the US has no official position on.
Because such Jihadists' ideology further mentions political grievances against America, some commentators have seized on such political grievances as a rationale for why the 9/11 attacks happened. Such commentators have taken Jihadist political grievances completely out of context by not recognizing the Jihadists' ideology itself as the root cause of the 9/11 attacks.
But to examine political Islamism and its impact on Jihadists is an issue that U.S. leadership is unwilling to address because of our innate respect for freedom of religion, and our desire not to offend law-abiding Muslims. Given that America defends freedom of religion, we are unwilling to recognize any religious component within a totalitarian or enemy ideology. And therefore, the role of political Islamism and America's views on it are unexamined, as is political Islamism's impact on Jihad itself.
It is important to recognize why American leadership is so unwilling to speak frankly about the enemy's identity. This inconvenient truth is something our leadership will not clearly address for fear of offending Islamist Muslims, non-Islamist Muslims, Middle East energy suppliers, and tactical "allies" associated with specific military campaigns. Having gone far down the tight-rope walk of fighting an ambiguously defined "war on terror", American leadership is unwilling now to take a stand that would upset the delicate balance of tactical military allies and carefully crafted wording that would require difficult decisions and dialogue. If the unwillingness to define the enemy causes conflicts in strategy, those are just papered-over or ignored as much as possible, so that no one is offended or upset.
Yet the convenient fiction of "terrorism" as the enemy continually smacks against the inconvenient truth that war will (by definition) anger and upset many. There is no such thing as a politically correct war that will cause no offense... not one that any nation will win, for certain. In any democracy, it makes best sense to anger your enemies, and make peace with your own people who you are asking to fight for you. This requires that America define who it is fighting and why, so that we can agree as a nation on the long term war strategy.
D. The Inconvenient Inconsistencies of a Non-Strategy in Fighting Jihad and a Non-Position on Islamism
In June, AP reported on a GAO report where tactical problems have also been uncovered between U.S. agencies cooperating or communicating during overseas missions. The GAO report in its analysis of specific tactical challenges misses is the big picture - the lack of the overall strategy and definition of the enemy itself in the "war on terror". How can American government have clear tactical operations, when it can not even agree on the definition of the enemy, on the definition of Jihad itself?
Last month, Pakistan President Musharraf called for the political mainstreaming of the Taliban into Afghanistan politics. And the U.S. leadership applauded Musharraf's statementship. This is the same Taliban whose ideology was used by Jihadists in terrorist camps in Afghanistan to kill 3,000 Americans 6 years ago today.
A week ago, DHS Secretary Chertoff used the example of the German Jihadists' foiled attack to prove that there remains a terrorist threat. A few days earlier a representative of the DHS was scheduled to be at a conference of ISNA, an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) terrorist financing trial, where the conference had speakers that previously shown support for both Islamism and Jihadist groups It was reported that the DHS booth was near the Hizb ut-Tahrir booth at the ISNA conference.
In addition, the Department of Justice was an exhibitor at this ISNA conference, as was Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean and U.S. Congressman Keith Ellison.
At last year's ISNA conference, Muslims for a Safe America organization took a poll of ISNA conference attendees: 1/6th of the ISNA conference attendees favored violence against the US government, a majority felt that Muslims were not involved in the 9/11 attacks, a majority felt that US govt knew of the 9/11 attacks in advance and allowed the 9/11 attacks to happen, and a majority felt that Osama Bin Laden's tapes about 9/11 were fake.
E. Jihad and the Iraq War
Today, in America, the monofocus remains solely on the Iraq war, completing ignoring the rest of the Jihadist and Islamist activity in the Middle East, Asia, Africa, Europe, and the United States. As has been previously shown, the majority of the American public gets minimal reporting on the other Jihadist activities from the mainstream media, and especially from the broadcast media.
Regarding the Iraq war, one debate is over whether it was tactically sound to achieve its tactical objectives, and the other debate is over tactical troop deployments. Debate on the strategic role of the Iraq war in the overall strategy of a "war of terror" goes no further than the tactical debate over whether or not Iraq had WMDs, and the tactical debate over whether the U.S. had a sufficient tactical plan after defeating the Saddam Hussein's Iraqi army. These tactical debates completely miss the strategic issue on fighting Jihad itself.
Instead of recognizing the debate on the Iraq war in America's national security strategy as part of the larger problem in the failure to define a strategy in fighting Jihad and identifying Jihad as a global enemy, political polarization over the tactical issues monopolizes the discussion. The inconvenient truth remains, however, whatever the outcome in Iraq, Jihadists will still be at war with the United States.
Jihadist failure in Iraq is not enough, and the military battles against Jihad in Iraq and Afghanistan alone are not a global war strategy.
Jihadists are not merely battling for Iraq, but are fighting for the entire world.
"The Solution" as described in Osama Bin Laden's September 7 video is for the world to reject democracy and to convert to political Islamism. That is an inherent part of their political Islamist ideology, which the US still has no policy to address.
Until America develops a coherent strategy for fighting global Jihad and addressing political Islamism, we will not be prepared to fight that longer, larger war declared on America, regardless of our successes or failures in Iraq.
Sources and Related Articles:
Preventing the West from Understanding Jihad - Dr. Walid Phares
Islamism - Definition - Wikipedia
Why We Must Label Al-Qaeda Terrorism "Jihad Martyrdom" - Robert Spencer
Osama's Challenge - by Robert Spencer
Why The New York Times Can Legally Help The Enemy in The War on Terror -- CTB Posting, Jeffrey Imm
U.S. News Media and Terror Group Figure Editorials -- CTB Posting, Jeffrey Imm
September 10, 2007 - AP: Iraq debate is sea of statistics
Authorization for Use of Military Force (Enrolled Bill), September 18, 2001
September 18, 2001 - U.S. Authorization for Use of Military Force
9/11 Commission Report Web Site
9/11 Commission Report: Reference to "the threat posed by Islamist terrorism" in U.S. Final Report of the 9/11 Commission
9/11 Commission Report: Cluster References to "Islamism" in U.S. Final Report of the 9/11 Commission - 1 reference
9/11 Commission Report: Cluster References to "Jihad" in U.S. Final Report of the 9/11 Commission - 79 references
9/11 Commission Report: "Our enemy is twofold"
April 30, 2007 - U.S. State Department Foreign Terrorist Organization Listing
July 24, 2007 - U.S. Department of Treasury - Specially Designated Nationals List (SDN)
September 7, 2007 - SITE Transcript and Video Link to Bin Laden Video (Updated)
September 7, 2007 - DHS' Chertoff: 'These Tapes Are Always Propaganda'
Pakistan President Seeks Mainstream Taliban - CTB Posting by Jeffrey Imm
August 15, 2007 - AFP: Bush congratulates Musharraf, Karzai on 'peace jirga'
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, CR NO. 3:04-CR-240-G, Attachment A - List of Unindicted Co-conspirators and/or Joint Venturers
ISNA and Jihad: Why DOJ's Involvement in ISNA Conference Sends The Wrong Message -- CTB posting by Jeffrey Imm
Homeland Security at ISNA Right Next to Hizb Ut-Tahrir
Pre-ISNA Conference Confirmed Speakers
September 2, 2007 - Chicago Sun Times: Dean tells Muslims: Run for political office
Ellison Keynote Speaker at ISNA Conference
August 31, 2007 - Washington Times: Republicans slam Islamic Society convention
PBS Online Focus on The Taliban
Wikipedia: Taliban
Hizb ut-Tahrir in North America -- CTB Posting, July 2005
Hizb ut-Tahrir Web Site: "About Hizb ut-Tahrir"
August 13, 2007 - Australian ABC News: Indonesian group rallies for world Islamic rule
August 7, 2007 - Jyllands-Posten: Islamic group incites war on West
July 10, 2007 - Daily Telegraph: New UK terror threat from foreign students
July 10, 2007 - Newsweek: "Bin Laden's Army" by Ed Husain, former Hizb ut-Tahrir
July 8, 2007 - The London Times: "How I befriended a Glasgow bomb suspect and Islamic radical"
May 25, 2007 - Newsweek: "Why I Rejected Radical Islam" - Ed Husain Discussion on Hizb ut-Tahrir
FBI Most Wanted: Usama Bin Laden
Wikipedia: Deobandi
September 7, 2007 - London Times: Hardline takeover of British mosques
September 7, 2007 - London Times: The homegrown Islamic cleric who loathes the British
September 8, 2007 - London Times: Our followers "must live in peace until strong enough to wage jihad"
September 8, 2007 - Bangkok Post: Bush rallies Asia-Pacific against terrorism -- refers to "violent Islamic extremists"
March 29, 2006 - AP: Afghan Christian convert finds sanctuary -- Abdul Rahman
March 30, 2006 - Gulf News: Asylum-seeking convert must not escape: MPs
Wikipedia: Blasphemy law in Pakistan
April 27, 2007 - Pakistan: Mob and police torture Catholic man accused of blasphemy
April 17, 2007 - Pakistan: Seven Christians arrested in false blasphemy cases and men tortured to extract false confessions
March 28, 2007 - AsiaNews.it: Pakistan: Muslims torture for hours Christian "blasphemer" now in jail
February 3, 2006 - Pakistan: Christian sentenced to death, lawyer threatened
December 13, 2005 - Pakistan's Christian Community Terrified Amid Calls for Execution
August 26, 2007 - The Times of India: Scores of Pakistan soldiers desert forces
August 27, 2007 - Khaleej Times: Boy shown beheading Pakistani soldier in video
August 22, 2007 - Dawn: Federal Minister for Parliamentary Affairs blasts pro-US foreign policy
August 17, 2007 - The Times of India: Mob attacks police, frees Taliban activists in Balochistan
U.S. Department of Justice - The Al Qaeda Manual
September 5, 2007 - ABC: Chertoff: Terror Threat Remains 'Real'
The Generational War - Douglas Farah
Muslims for Safe America Survey Conducted At 2006 ISNA Convention
June 25, 2007 - AP: U.S. anti-terror strategy abroad questioned
2007: Strategic Thinking Needed in Fighting Global Jihad -- CTB Posting, Jeffrey Imm
9/11, Religious Faith, and Ignorance -- CTB Posting, Jeffrey Imm
9/11 and News Reporting on Jihadist Terrorism -- CTB Posting, Jeffrey Imm « Close It
Counterterrorism Foundation News
By Douglas Farah
Today the Counterterrorism Foundation, which operates the Counterterrorism Blog and of which I am a director, received a welcome letter from the IRS, informing us that CTF has been granted tax-exempt status under IRC Section 501(c)(3). The exemption is effective April 26 of last year, the date of our incorporation, and the ruling under this determination is effective through calendar year 2010, at which time CTF must justify continuation of the status. This is an important moment for CTF, and we appreciate all the support we have received.
This will enable the CTF to do numerous things as we continue to try to grow. One of the areas where we are growing is in broadening and deepening the board of directors. To this end we are very pleased to announce that Jeffrey Breinholt, on leave from his job as deputy of the counterterrorism division at the Department of Justice, has agreed to join the board. We are also very pleased to announce the addition of David Kaplan, a long-time U.S. News and World Report journalist who is well-known for his expertise on terrorism, organized crime and the overlap of the two.
So, we look forward to the coming months and will keep you posted on developments.
U.S. Muslim Brotherhood Groups Called "Threat Organization" in DOD Memo
By Douglas Farah
The following recent, unclassified memorandum, a military intelligence analysis of some of the Holy Land Foundation documents, was sent to me by a friend concerned with these issues. For the first time that I know of, the Muslim Brotherhood organizations in the United States are classified as "threat organization" in an official writing.
It also directly addresses the campaign by Truespeak Institute, led by Jim Giurard, to change the language of the war on terrorism.
J. Michael Waller is an important part of that campaign as well, and, in his recent monograph Fighting the War of Ideas Like a Real War: Messages to Defeat the Terrorists argues, a Giurard does, that one should classify Islamist terrorist attacks as _hirabah_ rather than _jihad_.
It is not an insignificant semantic difference, and its importance is given below, and in Waller's own work. Thanks to the work of Waller and Giurard, the concept is gaining some currency in the U.S. counterterrorism community.
I have done nothing to the document except remove the name of the author who did the analysis, at the request of military officials. While this is circulating widely in the Pentagon and policy making circles, I honored that request. Neither the officer who wrote this nor the official who wrote the introduction had any role in giving it to me.
This document is part of a broad debate that is finally being engaged, on the true nature of the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliated groups in the United States.
-----
This assessment makes the point that the Muslim Brotherhood should be considered a threat organization and the affiliated US domestic Muslim NGOs and associations identified in the strategy document should likewise be considered part of the Muslim Brotherhood network, that these are “front” functional organizations operating as links and nodes of the overall network.
Exceptionally important in the analysis is the role of the “Truespeak” organization and Jim Guirard who has been arguing in DoD circles and academic institutions that the term jihad should be suspended from the GWOT lexicon to be replaced by hiraba. This analysis demonstrates that “Truespeak” contributors are part of the Muslim Brotherhood threat network, with the implication that this entire communication and lexicon effort is part of a strategic disinformation and denial and deception campaign.
Those involved in strategic communication or IO, whether senior leaders, practitioners or analysts should take a close note.
This analysis begins to provide clear I&W for domestic threats that DoD, DHS and the USG must come to terms with.
LTC Joseph C. Myers
Senior Army Advisor
Air Command and Staff College
Maxwell AFB Montgomery, AL
ANALYSIS OF MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD’S
GENERAL STRATEGIC GOALS FOR
NORTH AMERICA MEMORANDUM
7 September 2007
INTRODUCTION
*The following is a brief analysis of a Muslim Brotherhood document entered into evidence in the U.S. v Holy Land Foundation trial (Trial) that the U.S. Justice Department is currently prosecuting in Federal Court. Analysis is based on this document as well as other publicly available documents. (For a broad offering of Trial documents, see here ). The attached documents relate to ISNA and the Trial.
· The first document is a Muslim Brotherhood memorandum that was accepted into evidence in the U.S. v Holy Land Foundation (HLF) case. The first 16 pages are in the original Arabic and the second are English language translations of the same. It is dated 22 May 1991 and titled “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America” (Memorandum). The document includes an Attachment 1 that contains “a list of our organizations and the organizations of our friends.” My full blog is here.
The 'Bin Trotsky' Video and the Jihadi Failure in Iraq
By Walid Phares
Has Osama bin Laden turned into Osama bin Trotsky? As I was watching bin Laden reading carefully from his prepared speech, I couldn't help but notice the dramatic drifting in the rhetoric from Salafi Jihadism to a new brand of neo-Wahabism, which I'd baptize "Jihadi Trotskyism" just for the sake of analytical linguistics. The (now) black-bearded high commander of al Qaeda was still quoting from holy texts and talking at a Caliphate level, to be sure, but stunningly, he was also reciting recycled neo-Marxism of the kind usually generated at Berkeley, Columbia or the web sites of the anarchic and post-Soviet internationalists. This mutation, above all other matters related to hair color, skin health or "where-is-Osama," is the essence of the tape, at least for those who read it from a strategic angle.
In short, the man has turned to a fantasy bi-doctrinal ideology, continuing a trend he has shown interest in years ago. I wasn't the only reader of his speech who noticed the mutation, including even the senior analyst of al Jazeera International commenting on the substance. He said, "Are we seeing a Marxist Bin Laden now?"
Obviously, the question was a sort of a teaser, for the Islamist movement knows all too well that the chief of al Qaeda is an ultra-Jihadist and is not really converting to Karl's, Vladimir's, Leon's ideas. As the connoisseurs of bin Laden thinking on multiple Western and Arabic channels agreed, he is "using the weapon" of extreme left wing discourse to generate further chaos inside the enemy camp. So, what was the real and profound goal of this tape? Let's follow the stages of Jihadi logic:
Read More »
Perhaps the most important ground upon which the entourage of Osama decided to produce the tape (regardless of the psychological abilities and health of the boss), was the state of affairs of al Qaeda worldwide: not so brilliant by the movement's standards.
Since 2001, the Taliban regime was lost and Afghanistan was never recovered from the infidels. The remnants of al Qaeda and their allies re-gathered in Waziristan, threatened the Pakistani Government and launched cross-border attacks. Although the game is not over yet, Musharref's forces are now engaging them. In Somalia, the Islamic courts were driven out of the capital, at least for now. Even in tiny Lebanon, the local bin Ladenists were hit by the Lebanese Army.
And of course in the main battlefield, the Sunni Triangle of Iraq, al Qaeda commanders were killed and local Sunni tribes are fighting the foreign Jihadists, a matter to be raised today in Washington by General Petraeus. While the news isn't good strategically, the Jihadists care less about losses than they do about the continuous process of "Jihad 'til Allah decides the outcome."
So the first reason behind the tape was a pressing need to show The Commander in command, to underline that the struggle continues.
And instead of discussing al Qaeda's failures -- particularly in Iraq -- Osama needs to redirect or bypass this debate on his movement's failures. So to dodge the obvious problems, the "speech writers" of the organization mount an ideological assault on what they see as the United States' own systemic issues, a matter bin Laden found pleasure in addressing. He wants to impress his own cohorts with his overwhelming knowledge of the inner complexities of American politics.
In a sense, he is fleeing answers about the "dar al Islam" (the Islamic zone according to the Jihadists) to focus his followers' questions on the "dar al harb" (the infidels' zone). And to demoralize his enemies and reassure his crowd that he is on top of issues deep behind enemy lines, he obviously sought the expertise of his own Americans.
From public records, we know that Adam Gadahn, aka, Azzam al Amriki, is the American spokesperson for al Qaeda. Gadahn himself has obvious ties to the Jihadi underground in the US. And that underworld absorbs the anti American anarcho-Trotskyite literature available online, on campuses and in some segments of the media.
This Anarcho-American Jihadist faction has a direct channel to Bin Laden, not always to the satisfaction of the pure Salafists of al Qaeda. But the master likes the intellectual toys offered to him by his advisors. He feels he can relate to the American public, or so he is thinking.
As I argued in my book Future Jihad, Bin Laden committed his first big mistake by launching the 9/11 attacks too early. He may be committing a second mistake by presuming that Azzam and the scholars of anarcho-Trotskyism are representative samples of the American society. Indeed, by attacking the Democratic Party for "not doing enough" the tape revealed the influence the far left has had on al Qaeda's bet to punish the Party for not ending the War on Terror fast enough.
The tape left some unease among wider circles of the usually sympathetic commentators on al Jazeera. Yassir al Zaatar from Amman argued that the speech was fantastic: "It will strengthen the Democrats, at the eve of the Iraq debate." Abdel Bari Atwan, editor of al Quds al Arabi said Bin laden is appearing under the mantra of a world Islamic authority, almost a Caliph.
But online bulletin boards witnessed a chaos unseen before. A few samples of thousands of such posting postings (summarized selected translations):
From Sudan, Usama: Allahu Akbar against the Americans, the Jews and the agents. We will behead them and throw their heads to the dogs
اسامه
السودان
الله اكبر على الامريكان واليهود والعملاء . ان ظهورك افرحنا ولكن نتمنى ان تكون كما نودوا واتنى ان لا تظهر في شريط لاننا عرفنا الدرس جيدا ان لا مكان الى الامريكان واليهود وعملائهم بين المسلمين سوف نقطع رؤسهم ونرميها لكلابنا . انشاء الله نلتقي في جنة الفردوس مع الشهداء
From “Muslim”: The tape is fabricated, this is not Bin laden, this is the CIA..
مسلم
الحقيقة
يا امة الاسلام ان هذه الصورة ليست لبن لادن الشريط مزور الحقيقة ان بن لادن تحدث في شريط قامت المخابرات الامريكية بفبركته الرجاء ان لا تجعلوا الطغاة والصهاينة يشوشون عقولكم والافضل لنا الاستمرار في شريعة الاسلام وانقاذ المسلمين بغض النظر ان تكون مع بن لادن او مع غيره جزاكم الله
From “Iraqi”: Who see serenity in killing the children of Iraq like the criminal Bin laden
عراقى
السلام على من اتبع الهدى...ومن يرى الهدى في قتل اطفال العراق و يناصر القتلة و مموليها التجار مثل المجرم المسمى بن لادن فهوْلاء لهم الخزى فى الدنيا و العذاب في الاخرة.
Jehina: Bin Laden has brought a new problem. He is a toy in America’s hands..
جهينة
الهم احفظ الامة من الفتن
اتانا بن لادن بفتنة جديدة سكت دهرا ثم نطق فتنا لو أن له عقلا راشدا لرحم المسلمين من مصائب افعاله المسلم من سلم المسلمون من لسانه ويده هذا ليس اسامة انما هو لعبة من العاب امريكا الدنيئةمثل باربي...الخ اتو بهاالامريكان ليبدأوا جولة أخرى على ديارنا
The lion of al Qaeda: to all Christians and Crusaders, we are coming
اسد القاعدة ابن الشيخ اسامة البار
الخرطوم
الى كل النصارى و الصليبين اننننا قادمون قادمون فانتظرو
Sanaa’: we miss you o sheikh of the Umma..Allah renders victorious the hero of the Mujahidin..
سناء
هذه الدنيا
اشتقنا لك يا شيخ الأمة... للهم أنصر شيخنا بطل المجاهدين أسامة وأيده بنصرك وأعز به دينك وأعلي به كلمتك اللهم أحفظه بعينك التي لاتنام اللهم آمين آمين آمين
The Trotskyite "experiment" of Bin Laden and of his "anarcho-Jihadist" advisors may not have been the greatest idea. As one can see from the reactions, many of the purest Jihadists can't absorb the Marxian theories of global corporations. They only seek the good old Jihad against the Kuffar. They have gotten too much Wahabism in their madrassa schooling. Their doctrines come from Hassan Banna and Sayid Qotb, not Noam Chomsky or the Ivy League elite.
In the end, the speech shows that the War of Ideas is the ultimate battlefield in the War on Terror. This is why, US leaders in both parties and all branches of power should not ignore or dismiss bin Laden's tape. To the contrary, I strongly suggest they respond to it, point by point. All those named in the speech must answer al Qaeda directly, instead of fleeing into domestic politics.
Photo credits: MEMRI. Piece published initially by The American Thinker, and also posted on Family Security Matters, the Counter Terrorism Blog and Political Mavens
Dr Walid Phares is the director of the Future Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and the author of The War of Ideas: Jihadism against Democracies.
« Close It
Algerian President Bouteflika targeted by the September 6 terror attack, what if?
By Olivier Guitta
After the terror bombing that occurred in Batna on September 6 15 minutes before president Bouteflika's appearance, the question of what if is at the middle of the Algerian political scene. Succession has not really been planned and a real chaos would have certainly followed the assassination of Bouteflika.
Other forces are working to unseat the current president and his regime.
From The Croissant comes this very interesting story about Algerian dissidents planning to overthrow President Bouteflika.
Here is an excerpt:
The political movement Rachad, founded by Algerian refugees living in Switzerland, the UK and Germany, was launched on April 18 from London.
This little group wants to overthrow president Abdelaziz Bouteflika and his regime.
3 out of the 5 founding members live in Switzerland:
- Abbas Aroua teaches at the University of Medicine of Lausanne
- Mourad Dhina is an ex-employee of the CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research) and of the Zurich Federal Polytechnique School
- Rachid Mesli works for the Arab Human Rights organization Al Karama in Geneva
Mourad Dhina is one of the key figures of the Algerian fundamentalists. After the dissolution of the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS) [the main Algerian Islamist party] in 1992, he fled to Saint Genis Pouilly [in France nearby the Swiss border];in 1994 he was suspected of weapons trafficking by French authorities, he then decided to flee to Switzerland where his asylum requests were denied twice. Between 2002 and 2004, he nonetheless was in charge of the FIS executive office abroad. Since 1995 he has been tolerated on Swiss soil thanks to a never-ending temporary authorization. Since Algerian authorities revoked his passport he, along with his wife and 6 children (5 of which were born in Switzerland), cannot travel outside Switzerland.
Dhina easily admits that he has “almost constant” contacts with:
Abbas Madani, the historical FIS leader and Madani’s right hand Ali Belhadj (both were jailed in Algeria for 12 years, both always refused to condemn the terrorist acts of the GSPC (Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat) now called Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb [AQIM])
To read the rest, please click here.
A New International Counter-terrorism Organization Makes Good Sense
By Victor Comras
John Edwards’ proposal for a new international Counterterrorism and Intelligence Treaty Organization (CITO) deserve serious consideration. Edwards has put his finger on the single most important shortcoming in the war on terrorism – the serious lack of international cooperation and coordination in efforts to grapple with terrorism on a world wide scale. The United Nations, and the various terrorism related committees established by the Security Council, have simply failed to carry out this important function. (see my numerous blogs on this topic: (1), (2), (3), (4), and (5) here, ). This has left a void that the United States and certain other countries have sought to fill by establishing various ad hoc bilateral arrangements, and this process has produced only limited, and very uneven, success.
While intelligence sharing and cooperation between the United States and certain European countries, directly, and under the auspices of the Roma-Lyon Group, has borne some fruit, other bilateral cooperative arrangements have proved sterile, and in some cases, even counter-productive. Numerous countries have complained that counter terrorism intelligence cooperation with the United States is too often a one way street, with US intelligence agencies proving overly reluctant to provide detailed intelligence to overseas agencies. Most acknowledge that the US has acted quickly to help foreign governments thwart imminent terrorist attacks, but, they complain that follow-up information upon which to base prosecution and continued incarceration, is frequently lacking. And US intelligence officers have also often complained of the spottiness and unreliability of information flowing to the US from foreign intelligence agencies. Without an ability to pool information, and compare notes, terrorist activists, including those recruiting and funding terrorists, and planning and carrying out terrorist attacks, often escape prosecution, or otherwise fall through the cracks.
The Roma-Lyon Group has proved to be the most effective international cooperative counter-terrorism effort to date. Following the 9/11 attacks, G8 Home Affairs and Justice Ministers agreed to combine the Roma group (set up by G7 countries in 1978 to foster intelligence and internal security cooperation) and the Lyon Group (established in 1996 to foster law enforcement cooperation in combating transnational crime). The combined forum was charged with developing and implementing recommendations to combat terrorism. Its work quickly extended to developing cooperative intelligence and enforcement arrangements, and to developing “best practices’ in combating terrorism that could be shared with other countries. However, it membership and scope is quite limited, it has not become an intelligence pooling organization, and intelligence, investigative, judicial and enforcement actions are still handled only on an ad hoc basis through bilateral --country to country – channels.
The UN’s failure to serve as an effective cooperative counter terrorism forum stems from several factors. At the base is the failure of the UN General Assembly and Security Council to develop a clear definition of terrorism. This reflects, in turn, a serious absence of consensus as to which groups should be labeled as terrorists. While there is a general agreement that Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization, the Organization of the Islamic Conference Countries continues to resist labeling Hamas, Hizbollah, and many other other Palestinian, North African, Kashmiri, and other so called “resistance movements” as terrorist organizations, despite the fact that they regularly employ terrorist tactics, including suicide bombings aimed at inflicting civilian casualities. This lack of a definition of terrorism has largely gutted the usefulness of the UN’s Counter-Terrorism Committee, and the effectiveness of UN Security Council Resolution 1373.
Read More »
The UN’s Al Qaeda and Taliban Sanctions Committee has also failed to carry out its mandate as originally envisaged under resolutions, 1267, 1333, 1390, and 1455. That committee was charged with imposing and policing measures to cut off al Qaeda’s finances, curb its mobility and inhibit its access to weapons and explosives. But this committee also fell short in motivating full implementation for these sanctions measures. This was due, in part, to the shear difficulty in applying these measures. And many countries simply lacked the resources necessary to enforce them. The Al Qaeda Committee did away with its most effective “name and shame” enforcement tool when it dismissed its independent monitoring group in January 2004. The Committee then constituted a new, more pliant analytical team, which, in its turn, also found that the sanctions regime imposed by the Security Council has had a limited impact.
One of the principal reasons for this limited impact is the committee's inability to update and expand its consolidated list of al Qaeda and Taliban members and supporters in a timely fashion. The UN list is now severely inadequate and out of date, and few of al Qaeda’s new members, recruiters, financial facilitators, or active supporters are included in the list. And there is no obligation on countries to take any of the UN sanctions measures against al Qaeda associated individuals or entities whose names are not included on the UN list.
This experience has shown that the UN is, in fact, quite ill-suited for a direct enforcement role. The UN Secretariat has little grounding in counter-terrorism expertise. And secretariat hiring procedures are simply not conducive to putting together the needed secure expert human resource base. UN procedures are very cumbersome and political. Diplomatic niceties and political realities hamper timely and forthright action. The UN has a poor record in coping with controversy or holding its member countries accountable. And few countries are likely to be willing to share sensitive information or intelligence on terrorism to so broad a forum.
The UN should concentrate, not on enforcement, but on putting together an appropriate international mandate to stimulate others to improve international and regional coordination in the war on terrorism. This should include spelling out clearer obligations on member states to act against terrorism and those that fund or facilitate it.
So, perhaps it really is time for those countries really committed to combating terrorism to, work together more closely in a forum and format more conducive to success. Edward’s suggestion for a Counter-terrorism and Intelligence Treaty organization could group together like-minded countries committed to the same principles and goals. It could provide a forum for pooling information and for exchanging more sensitive information on a need-to- know basis. The group might also include a cadre of counter-terrorism experts, analysts, and investigators to maintain and develop both a secure and open source data base on known international terrorists, and on those providing material support to terrorists, including recruitment and funding. Those so identified could then be designated as terrorists, creating an obligation on all member countries to take the necessary civil and prosecutorial steps they have already pledged to take under so many already existent international conventions. « Close It
More Overlooked History: Muslim Employment Discrimination
By Jeffrey Breinholt
I have posted a study I recently completed on the history of Muslim employment discrimination claims in our courts. Because I anticipate my findings will generate controversy, I included several appendices so critics can replicate my results, and the paper is longer than is customary for the Counterterrorism Blog. Here's the upshot: Muslim employment discrimination cases are rising at an alarming rate. The number of judicial opinions that were formerly issued in an entire decade are now coming out in a single month. Meanwhile, the rate of successful Muslim employment discrimination claims remains extremely low. In fact, the total number of judicial opinions in which courts have affirmed Muslim employment discrimination is 12. That is not a typo - the total count is a single dozen, in U.S. history. How many total claims? Around 300 resulting in court decisions. I believe that this astounding fact shows that there is a growing effort to perpetuate the myth that Muslims in the U.S. are treated poorly. The more interesting question is why this type of religious discrimination claim is on the rise. Perhaps we should look to the Muslim civil rights organizations for answers.
SITE Transcript and Video Link to Bin Laden Video (Updated)
By Jeffrey Imm

Image from SITE Institute
Bin Laden Video Link
Update: Video Link to latest Bin Laden Video from Laura Mansfield -- with subtitles in English
SITE Institute Video Transcript
The following is the transcript of the latest Osama Bin Laden Video as provided by the SITE Institute:
SITE Institute: Transcript of Osama Bin Laden video (PDF file 7 pages long)
SITE Institute: One minute video clip of new Osama Bin Laden video
"All praise is due to Allah, who built the heavens and earth in justice, and created man as a favor and grace from Him. And from His ways is that the days rotate between the people, and from His Law is retaliation in kind: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth and the killer is killed. And all praise is due to Allah, who awakened His slaves' desire for the Garden, and all of them will enter it except those who refuse. And whoever obeys Him alone in all of his affairs will enter the Garden, and whoever disobeys Him will have refused."
"As for what comes after: Peace be upon he who follows the Guidance. People of America: I shall be speaking to you on important topics which concern you, so lend me your ears. I begin by discussing the war which is between us and some of its repercussions for us and you."
"To preface, I say: despite America being the greatest economic power and possessing the most powerful and up-to-date military arsenal as well; and despite it spending on this war and is army more than the entire world spends on its armies; and despite it being the being the major state influencing the policies of the world, as if it has a monopoly on the unjust right of veto; despite all of this, 19 young men were able - by the grace of Allah, the Most High- to change the direction of its compass. And in fact, the subject of the Mujahideen has become an inseparable part of the speech of your leader, and the effects and signs of that are not hidden."
"Since the 11th, many of America's policies have come under the influence of the Mujahideen, and that is by the grace of Allah, the Most High. And as a result, the people discovered the truth about it, its reputation worsened, its prestige was broken globally and it was bled dry economically, even if our interests overlap with the interests of the major corporations and also with those of the neoconservatives, despite the differing intentions."
"And for your information media, during the first years of the war, lost its credibility and manifested itself as a tool of the colonialist empires, and its condition has often been worse than the condition of the media of the dictatorial regimes which march in the caravan of the single leader."
"Then Bush talks about his working with al-Maliki and his government to spread freedom in Iraq but he in fact is working with the leaders of one sect against another sect, in the belief that this will quickly decide the war in his favor."
"And thus, what is called the civil war came into being and matters worsened at his hands before getting out of his control and him becoming like the one who plows and sows the sea: he harvests nothing but failure."
Read More »
"So these are some of the results of the freedom about whose spreading he is talking to you. And then the backtracking of Bush on his insistence on not giving the United Nations expanded jurisdiction in Iraq is an implicit admission of his loss and defeat there. "
"And among the most important items contained in Bush’s speeches since the events of the 11th is that the Americans have no option but to continue the war. This tone is in fact an echoing of the words of neoconservatives like Cheney, Rumsfeld and Richard Pearle, the latter having said previously that the Americans have no choice in front of them other than to continue the war or face a holocaust."
"I say, refuting this unjust statement, that the morality and culture of the holocaust is your culture, not our culture. In fact, burning living beings is forbidden in our religion, even if they be small like the ant, so what of man?! The holocaust of the Jews was carried out by your brethren in the middle of Europe, but had it been closer to our countries, most of the Jews would have been saved by taking refuge with us. And my proof for that is in what your brothers, the Spanish, did when they set up the horrible courts of the Inquisition to try Muslims and Jews, when the Jews only found safe shelter by taking refuge in our countries. And that is why the Jewish community in Morocco today is one of the largest communities in the world. They are alive with us and we have not incinerated them, but we are a people who don't sleep under oppression and reject humiliation and disgrace, and we take revenge on the people of tyranny and aggression, and the blood of the Muslims will not be spilled with impunity, and the morrow is nigh for he who awaits."
"Also, your Christian brothers have been living among us for 14 centuries: in Egypt alone, there are millions of Christians whom we have not incinerated and shall not incinerate. But the fact is, there is a continuing and biased campaign being waged against us for a long time now by your politicians and many of your writers by way of your media, especially Hollywood, for the purpose of misrepresenting Islam and its adherents to drive you away from the true religion. The genocide of peoples and their holocausts took place at your hands: only a few specimens of Red Indians were spared, and just a few days ago, the Japanese observed the 62nd anniversary of the annihilation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by your nuclear weapons."
"And among the things which catch the eye of the one who considers the repercussions of your unjust war against Iraq is the failure of your democratic system, despite it raising of the slogans of justice, liberty, equality and humanitarianism. It has not only failed to achieve these things, it has actually destroyed these and other concepts with its weapons - especially in Iraq and Afghanistan- in a brazen fashion, to replace them with fear, destruction, killing, hunger, illness, displacement and more than a million orphans in Baghdad alone, not to mention hundreds of thousands of widows. Americans statistics speak of the killing of more than 650,000 of the people of Iraq as a result of the war and its repercussions."
"People of America: the world is following your news in regards to your invasion of Iraq, for people have recently come to know that, after several years of the tragedies of this war, the vast majority of you want it stopped. Thus, you elected the Democratic Party for this purpose, but the Democrats haven't made a move worth mentioning. On the contrary, they continue to agree to the spending of tens of billions to continue the killing and war there, which has led to the vast majority of you being afflicted with disappointment."
"And here is the gist of the matter, so one should pause, think and reflect: why have the Democrats failed to stop this war, despite them being the majority?"
"I will come back to reply to this question after raising another question, which is:"
"Why are the leaders of the White House keen to start wars and wage them around the world, and make use of every possible opportunity through which they can reach this purpose, occasionally even creating justifications based on deception and blatant lies, as you saw Iraq?"
"In the Vietnam War, the leaders of the White House claimed at the time that it was a necessary and crucial war, and during it, Rumsfeld and his aides murdered two million villagers. And when Kennedy took over the presidency and deviated from the general line of policy drawn up for the White House and wanted to stop this unjust war, that angered the owners of the major corporations who were benefiting from its continuation."
"And so Kennedy was killed, and al-Qaida wasn’t present at that time, but rather, those corporations were the primary beneficiary from his killing. And the war continued after that for approximately one decade. But after it became clear to you that it was an unjust and unnecessary war, you made one of your greatest mistakes, in that you neither brought to account nor punished those who waged this war, not even the most violent of its murderers, Rumsfeld. And even more incredible than that is that Bush picked him as secretary of defense in his first term after picking Cheney as his vice president, Powell as secretary of state and Armitage as Powell's deputy, despite their horrific and blood history of murdering humans. So that was clear signal that his administration - the administration of the generals- didn't have as its main concern the serving of humanity, but rather, was interested in bringing about new massacres. Yet in spite of that, you permitted Bush to complete his first term, and stranger still, chose him for a second term, which gave him a clear mandate from you - with your full knowledge and consent- to continue to murder our people in Iraq and Afghanistan."
"Then you claim to be innocent! This innocence of yours is like my innocence of the blood of your sons on the 11th - were I to claim such a thing. But it is impossible for me to humor any of you in the arrogance and indifference you show for the lives of humans outside America, or for me to humor your leaders in their lying, as the entire world knows they have the lion's share of that. These morals aren't our morals. What I want to emphasize here is that not taking past war criminals to account led to them repeating that crime of killing humanity without right and waging this unjust war in Mesopotamia, and as a result, here are the oppressed ones today continuing to take their right from you."
"This war was entirely unnecessary, as testified to by your own reports. And among the most capable of those from your own side who speak to you on this topic and on the manufacturing of public opinion is Noam Chomsky, who spoke sober words of advice prior to the war, but the leader of Texas doesn't like those who give advice. The entire world came out in unprecedented demonstrations to warn against waging the war and describe its true nature in eloquent terms like "no to spilling red blood for black oil," yet he paid them no heed. It is time for humankind to know that talk of the rights of man and freedom are lies produced by the White House and its allies in Europe to deceive humans, take control of their destinies and subjugate them. "
"So in answer to the question about the causes of the Democrats' failure to stop the war, I say: they are the same reasons which led to the failure of former president Kennedy to stop the Vietnam war. Those with real power and influence are those with the most capital. And since the democratic system permits major corporations to back candidates, be they presidential or congressional, there shouldn't be any cause for astonishment - and there isn't any- in the Democrats' failure to stop the war. And you're the ones who have the saying which goes, "Money talks." And I tell you: after the failure of your representatives in the Democratic Party to implement your desire to stop the war, you can still carry anti-war placards and spread out in the streets of major cities, then go back to your homes, but that will be of no use and will lead to the prolonging of the war."
"However, there are two solutions for stopping it. The first is from our side, and it is to continue to escalate the killing and fighting against you. This is our duty, and our brothers are carrying it out, and I ask Allah to grant them resolve and victory. And the second solution is from your side. It has now become clear to you and the entire world the impotence of the democratic system and how it plays with the interests of the peoples and their blood by sacrificing soldiers and populations to achieve the interests of the major corporations."
"And with that, it has become clear to all that they are the real tyrannical terrorists. In fact, the life of all of mankind is in danger because of the global warming resulting to a large degree from the emissions of the factories of the major corporations, yet despite that, the representative of these corporations in the White House insists on not observing the Kyoto accord, with the knowledge that the statistic speaks of the death and displacement of the millions of human beings because of that, especially in Africa. This greatest of plagues and most dangerous of threats to the lives of humans is taking place in an accelerating fashion as the world is being dominated by the democratic system, which confirms its massive failure to protect humans and their interests from the greed and avarice of the major corporations and their representatives."
"And despite this brazen attack on the people, the leaders of the West - especially Bush, Blair, Sarkozy and Brown- still talk about freedom and human rights with a flagrant disregard for the intellects of human beings. So is there a form of terrorism stronger, clearer and more dangerous than this? This is why I tell you: as you liberated yourselves before from the slavery of monks, kings, and feudalism, you should liberate yourselves from the deception, shackles and attrition of the capitalist system."
"If you were to ponder it well, you would find that in the end, it is a system harsher and fiercer than your systems in the Middle Ages. The capitalist system seeks to turn the entire world into a fiefdom of the major corporations under the label of "globalization" in order to protect democracy."
"And Iraq and Afghanistan and their tragedies; and the reeling of many of you under the burden of interest-related debts, insane taxes and real estate mortgages; global warming and its woes; and the abject poverty and tragic hunger in Africa: all of this is but one side of the grim face of this global system."
"So it is imperative that you free yourselves from all of that and search for an alternative, upright methodology in which it is not the business of any class of humanity to lay down its own laws to its own advantage at the expense of the other classes as is the case with you, since the essence of man-made positive laws is that they serve the interests of those with the capital and thus make the rich richer and the poor poorer."
"The infallible methodology is the methodology of Allah, the Most High, who created the heavens and earth and created the Creation and is the Most Kind and All-Informed and the Knower of the souls of His slaves and the methodology that best suits them."
"You believe with absolute certainty that you believe in Allah, and you are full of conviction of this belief, so much so that you have written this belief of yours on your dollar."
"But the truth is that you are mistake in this belief of yours. The impartial judge knows that belief in Allah requires straightness in the following of His methodology, and accordingly, total obedience must be to the orders and prohibitions of Allah Alone in all aspects of life."
"So how about you when you associate others with Him in your beliefs and separate state from religion, then claim that you are believers?!"
"What you have done is clear loss and manifest polytheism, And I will give you a parable of polytheism, as parables summarize and clarify speech."
"I tell you: its parable is the parable of a man who owns a shop and hires a worker and tells him, "Sell and give me the money," but he makes sales and give the money to someone other than the owner. So who of you would approve of that?"
"You believe that Allah is your Lord and your Creator and the Creator of this earth and that it is His property, then you work on His earth and property without His orders and without obeying Him, and you legislate in contradiction to His Law and methodology."
"This work of yours is the greatest form of polytheism and is rebellion against obedience to Allah with which the believer becomes an unbeliever, even if he obeys Allah in some of His other orders. Allah, the Most High, sent down His orders in His Sacred Books like the Torah and Evangel and sent with them the Messengers (Allah's prayers and peace be upon them) as bearers of good news to the people."
"And everyone who believes in them and complies with them is a believer from the people of the Garden. Then when the men of knowledge altered the words of Allah, the Most High, and sold them for a paltry price, as the rabbis did with the Torah and the monks with the Evangel, Allah sent down His final Book, the magnificent Quran, and safeguarded it from being added to or subtracted from by the hands of men, and in it is a complete methodology for the lives of all people."
"And our holding firm to this magnificent Book is the secret of our strength and winning of the war against you despite the fewness of our numbers and materiel. And if you would like to get to know some of the reasons for your losing of your war against us, then read the book of Michael Scheuer in this regard."
"Don't be turned away from Islam by the terrible situation of the Muslims today, for our rulers in general abandoned Islam many decades ago, but our forefathers were the leaders and pioneers of the world for many centuries, when they held firmly to Islam."
"And before concluding, I tell you: there has been an increase in the thinkers who study events and happenings, and on the basis of their study, they have declared the approach of the collapse of the American Empire."
"Among them is the European thinker who anticipated the fall of the Soviet Union, which indeed fell. And it would benefit you to read what he wrote about what comes after the empire in regard to the United States of America. I also want to bring your attention that among the greatest reasons for the collapse of the Soviet Union was their being afflicted with their leader Brezhnev, who was overtaken by pride and arrogance and refused to look at the facts on the ground. From the first year of the Afghanistan invasion, reports indicated that the Russians were losing the war, but he refused to acknowledge this, lest it go down in his personal history as a defeat, even though refusal to acknowledge defeat not only doesn't do anything to change the facts for thinking people, but also exacerbates the problem and increases the losses. And how similar is your position today to their position approximately two decades ago. The mistakes of Brezhnev are being repeated by Bush, who - when asked about the date of his withdrawing of forces from Iraq - said in effect that the withdrawal will not be during his reign, but rather, during the reign of the one who succeeds him. And the significance of these words is not hidden."
"And here I say: it would benefit you to listen to the poignant messages of your soldiers in Iraq, who are paying - with their blood, nerves and scattered limbs - the price for these sorts of irresponsible statements. Among them is the eloquent message of Joshua which he sent by way of the media, in which he wipes the tears from his eyes and describes American politicians in harsh terms and invites them to join him there for a few days. Perhaps his message will find in you an attentive ear so you can rescue him and more than 150,000 of your sons there who are tasting the two bitterest things: "
"If they leave their barracks, the mines devour them, and if they refuse to leave, rulings are passed against them. Thus, the only options left in front of them are to commit suicide or cry, both of which are from the severest of afflictions. So is there anything more men can do after crying and killing themselves to make you respond to them? They are doing that out of the severity of the humiliation, fear and terror which they are suffering. It is severer than what the slaves used to suffer at your hands centuries ago, and it is as if some of them have gone from one slavery to another slavery more severe and harmful, even if it be in the fancy dress of the Defense Department's financial enticements."
"So do you feel the greatness of their sufferings?"
"To conclude, I invite you to embrace Islam, for the greatest mistake one can make in this world and one which is uncorrectable is to die while not surrendering to Allah, the Most High, in all aspects of one's life - ie., to die outside of Islam. And Islam means gain for you in this first life and the next, final life. The true religion is a mercy for people in their lives, filling their hearts with serenity and calm."
T"here is a message for you in the Mujahideen: the entire world is in pursuit of them, yet their hearts, by the grace of Allah, are satisfied and tranquil. The true religion also puts peoples' lives in order with its laws; protects their needs and interests; refines their morals; protects them from evils; and guarantees for them entrance into Paradise in the hereafter through their obedience to Allah and sincere worship of Him Alone."
"And it will also achieve your desire to stop the war as a consequence, because as soon as the warmongering owners of the major corporations realize that you have lost confidence in your democratic system and begun to search for an alternative, and that this alternative is Islam, they will run after you to please you and achieve what you want to steer you away from Islam. So your true compliance with Islam will deprive them of the opportunity to defraud the peoples and take their money under numerous pretexts, like arms deals and so on. "
"There are no taxes in Islam, but rather there is a limited Zakaat [alms] totaling only 2.5%. So beware of the deception of those with the capital. And with your earnest reading about Islam from its pristine sources, you will arrive at an important truth, which is that the religion of all of the Prophets (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them) is one, and that its essence is submission to the orders of Allah Alone in all aspects of life, even if their Shari'ahs [Laws] differ."
"And did you know that the name of the Prophet of Allah Jesus and his mother (peace and blessings of Allah be on them both) are mentioned in the Noble Quran dozens of times, and that in the Quran there is a chapter whose name is "Maryam," i.e. Mary, daughter of 'Imran and mother of Jesus (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them both)? It tells the story of her becoming pregnant with the Prophet of Allah Jesus (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them both), and in its confirmation of her chastity and purity, in contrast to the fabrications of the Jews against her. Whoever wishes to find that out for himself must listen to the verse of this magnificent chapter: one of the just kings of the Christians - the Negus - listened to some of its verses and his eyes welled up with tears and he said something which should be reflected on for a long time by those sincere in their search for the truth."
"He said, "verily, this and what Jesus brought come from one lantern": i.e., that the magnificent Quran and the Evangel are both from Allah, the Most High; and every just and intelligent one of you who reflects on the Quran will definitely arrive at this truth. It also must be noted that Allah has preserved the Quran from the alterations of men. And reading in order to become acquainted with Islam only requires a little effort, and those of you who are guided will profit greatly. And peace be upon he who follows the Guidance." « Close It
9/11 6th Anniversary: Bin Laden Video Details Emerge
By Jeffrey Imm
4:45 PM ET UPDATE:
SITE Institute: Transcript of Osama Bin Laden video (PDF file 7 pages long)
SITE Institute: One minute video clip of new Osama Bin Laden video
Per SITE Institute: The "solution", as bin Laden presents it, is for the American people to embrace and join Islam. This invitation has been made in past by both Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri and Adam Gadahn AKA Azzam the American, in which bin Laden also touts the benefits of Islam for mankind and on the individual level. He presents Islam as peaceful, not barbaric against another human being, not levying taxes, and believing Jesus as a Prophet of Allah. Bin Laden declares: "the greatest mistake one can make in this world and one which is uncorrectable is to die while not surrendering to Allah".
Media Updates
ABC and NBC are both reporting details on the Bin Laden tape, which they estimate to be 25-30 minutes long. NBC reports that the Bin Laden tape urges young Muslims to carry out suicide bombings against the West. The ABC transcript report states that Bin Laden refers to the Iraq war, the U.S. Democratic Party-led Congress, and urges Americans to convert to Islam. The ABC Blotter report transcript references to the 9/11 attacks.
Bin Laden Video Transcript Details Being Reported by NBC:
-- Urges young Muslims to carry out suicide bombings against the West
-- Criticized Democrats in Congress in the video for being unable to stop the war in Iraq
-- Refers to current events in the U.S. involvement in the war in Iraq
-- Recommends reading reading books by Noam Chomsky and Michael Scheuer
-- States the Jewish people could have avoided Holocaust by placing themselves under the protection of Muslims
Transcript Details Being Reported by ABC Blotter:
"Bin Laden does refer to the Sept. 11 attacks. He criticizes Americans for not holding 'those who waged this war' accountable and for re-electing President Bush 'to continue to murder our people in Iraq and Afghanistan. Then you claim to be innocent! The innocence of yours is like my innocence of the blood of your sons on the 9/11 -- were I to claim such a thing."
Transcript Details Being Reported by ABC:
According to the transcript, bin Laden opens with "praise to Allah" and his "law of retaliation" -- "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth and the killer is killed."
"People of America: the world is following your news in regards to your invasion of Iraq, for people have recently come to know that, after several years of tragedies of this war, the vast majority of you want it stopped. Thus, you elected the Democratic Party for this purpose, but the Democrats haven't made a move worth mentioning. On the contrary, they continue to agree to the spending of tens of billions to continue the killing and war there. It would benefit you to listen to the poignant messages of your soldiers in Iraq, who are paying -- with their blood, nerves and scattered limbs -- the price for these sorts of irresponsible statements."
"Among them is the eloquent message of Joshua which he sent by way of the media, in which he wipes the tears from his eyes and describes American politicians in harsh terms and invites them to join him there for a few days."
ABC reports that according to the transcript, bin Laden says there are two ways to end the war: "The first is from our side, and it is to continue to escalate the killing and fighting against you." The second is to do away with the American democratic system of government. "It has now become clear to you and the entire world the impotence of the democratic system and how it plays with the interests of the peoples and their blood by sacrificing soldiers and populations to achieve the interests of the major corporations."
"To conclude, I invite you to embrace Islam. There are no taxes in Islam, but rather there is a limited Zakaat [alms] totaling 2.5 percent.”
Transcript Details Being Reported by AP:
(This is in regards to Bin Laden's request that Americans convert to Islam.)
"It will also achieve your desire to stop the war as a consequence, because as soon as the warmongering owners of the major corporations realize that you have lost confidence in your democratic system and have begun to look for an alternative, and this alternative is Islam, they will run after you to please you and achieve what you want to steer you away from Islam."
Sources:
September 7, 2007 - NBC News: Details of purported bin Laden video emerge -- Officials: No specific threat made; Web sites carrying tape shut down
September 7, 2007 - ABC News: Bin Laden Threatens Americans in First Video Message in Three Years
September 7, 2007 - ABC News: New OBL Tape: Iraq, Democratic Control
September 7, 2007 - AP: Bin Laden urges Americans to convert
September 7, 2007 - CNN: Bin Laden tape: Why have Democrats failed to stop war?
September 7, 2007 - Reuters: Bin Laden tape grabs attention but lacks overt threat
September 7, 2007 - AP: No overt threats in new bin Laden video
9/11 6th Anniversary: Bin Laden Video Being Analyzed by US Govt and Islamist "Special Gift" Promised (updated)
The Importance and Unimportance of Bin Laden Videos
By Douglas Farah
There is an interesting debate ongoing over whether the mass media, and particularly Arab-language television, should broadcast and assign great importance to the videos of al Qaeda leaders, particularly Osama bin Laden.
Do the broadcasts help create a mystique around a cult figure that inspires those who want to participate in the broader al Qaeda project, even on an ad hoc basis? Or are such broadcasts necessary for the general public to see and understand al Qaeda, to understand the enemy more clearly? Or both, and does it make any difference?
I think it is both, and that in the Internet age it matters little what is broadcast on air. Those who want to access the entire speech will be able to do so in a matter of hours, can download and forward it with great speed and efficiency. If there are hidden messages to followers, keeping the broadcasts off the air are hardly likely to be a deterrent or keep the message from getting through.
Broadcasting bin Laden's speeches, in whole or in part, are far less dangerous than the radical, hate-filled sermons that fill many mosques in London every week, as the Times of London documents. My full blog is here.
Former Dallas Congressman Testifies at HLF Trial
By The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT)
DALLAS - Former Congressman John Bryant (D-Texas), who served both as a lawyer and lobbyist for the Holy Land for Relief and Development (HLF), testified Thursday in the defunct charity's terror support trial. Bryant said HLF became a client in 1997 following news reports about an ongoing investigation into charity's alleged ties to terror.
Bryant said he sought several meetings with the Department of State and FBI officials asking for guidance about Palestinian charities which had terror ties and those which did not. HLF routed its donations through local Palestinian groups called zakat committees and he wanted federal officials to tell him whether HLF was doing anything illegal. If so, he wanted to know what the charity could do to take to change the situation.
He received no response, Bryant said.
During cross examination, government prosecutor Barry Jonas drew a distinction between a criminal investigation and an intelligence investigation. When Bryant approached the federal officials for guidance, the inquiry against HLF was in the intelligence investigation stage and only later became a criminal investigation, Jonas said. During a criminal investigation government agencies are under no obligation to share information, he said... Please click here for full article.
Iran Plan for Iraq
By Walid Phares
This is a part one of a series on "Freedom Lines," adapted from seminars conducted for the U.S. House of Representatives' Caucus on Counter Terrorism, summer 2007. It addresses the various plans in the region regarding Iraq, Lebanon and beyond. It was initially published by the World Defense Review. This piece attempts to summarize the Iranian strategic goals in Iraq, if they can achieve a US collapse. The piece is analytical and based on projections and some information not on strict intelligence sources.
Read More »
In March 2003, the United States made a strategic decision to send troops into Iraq and defeat the Saddam Hussein regime militarily. This decision is still being debated nationwide and internationally as to its legitimacy and rationality.
One camp claims Washington didn't have a right to change the regime and engage in an armed confrontation with Iraqis. Another camp says Saddam was a threat, the region is now better off without him, and Iraqis have been liberated from a bloody dictatorship.
In reality, only historians will determine if it was the right decision at the right time for one simple reason: While U.S. military operations aimed at dismantling the regime's military power ended in April 2003 – very successfully as a matter of fact – the second much longer road for the following set of U.S. goals is now under scrutiny.
Should American and Coalition forces withdraw immediately, begin pulling out, or staying the course, is the center of the ongoing debate. But to answer, one has to understand the goals of the adversaries in this ongoing conflict. Al Qaeda has a plan for Iraq, and U.S. forces are fighting it along with Iraqi units. But the direct geopolitical threat that is linked to the role of U.S. troops in that country is the Iranian regime and its allies in the region and inside Iraq. How does Tehran see the American presence, what are its plans for Iraq, and what will happen if U.S. forces are withdrawn abruptly?
Prior to 2001, the Iranian regime had developed regional ambitions, including a military alliance with Syria, continuous support of Hezbollah in Lebanon and a slow-pace development of a nuclear weapon. In the 1980s, its proxies delivered blows to the U.S. in Beirut and by May 2000, its allies in Lebanon had reached international borders with Israel.
During the decade following the first Gulf War, the Pasdaran were training and arming Iraqi militias for future mission in Iraq. The Khomeinists and Hafez Assad had an Iraq plan years before the U.S. invaded in 2003: overrun the Shia areas in the center and the south and open a land bridge between Iran and Syria.[1] But 9/11 shook off the foundations of the Iranian plan. By December of that year, U.S. and Coalition forces removed the Taliban and opened the path for a democratic government in Afghanistan.
The regime change in Kabul was a first problem for the Mullahs in Tehran: democracy defeating a Jihadi regime wasn't a good example to watch. By April 2003, a second catastrophe hit the Islamic Republic: Saddam was removed, but worse, democratic elections were succeeding each other in Iraq. But more dramatic was the fact that U.S and NATO forces were deployed to the East and to the West of Iran.
In strategic reading, the Khomeinist project was geographically contained: no more bridge to Syria and a greater menace was hovering over the nuclear program. Even more catastrophic was the proximity of two democratic experiments to the Iranian society. Students, women and workers have been challenging the theocratic regime since the late 1990s.
To Khamanei's ruling elite, successes across the borders meant a condemnation to the regime inside Iran. Thus the Pasdaran were tasked with a plan to destabilize Afghanistan and crumble the political process in Iraq. Since the summer of 2003 and for the following four years, Iranian backed Terrorism against civilians, Syrian passage for the Jihadists and pressures against U.S. and Coalition forces aimed at provoking a quicker and chaotic pull out.
If Washington withdraws catastrophically from Iraq what would the Iranian regime do? In about six to nine months, this is what would happen:
1) The pro-Iranian militias (SCIRI, Badr Brigade, Muqtada al Sadr, act.) would seize the control of two thirds of Iraq between Baghdad and Basra. The militias would create "security enclaves," perform several terror acts and assassinations leading to a crumbling of the central Government, and a pro-Khomeinist regime established.
2) Most moderate Shiite politicians and liberal elements in those areas would be eliminated, as did Khomeini with his partners in the Iranian Revolution in 1979. Within less than a year, most Shia partners of the Pro-Iranian forces would be eliminated.
3) And as it was practiced in Lebanon in 1990, the pro-Iranian future regime of Iraq will call in Iranian "brotherly" forces to assist in security and in the defense of the borders. The Pasdaran and the Iranian army will deploy in the southern Oil fields, along the borders with Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Jordan and would connect with the Syrian forces across the borders. The latter will be asked to help in the Anbar province.
4) The Sunni areas will be left to be dealt with later, along with Syrian interventions.
5) The Kurdish areas will be submitted to isolation, pressure and internal divisions, in a concerted effort with Syria and the Islamic Government of Turkey.
This is not a purely theoretical scenario. This is the projected reality if U.S. forces would prematurely and abruptly withdraw from Iraq before achieving one major strategic objective in Iraq and the region: Helping the independently minded Iraqis to reform and solidify their Government, erect their Army to a regional level and along with U.S. forces establish a containment system for Iranian expansionist ambitions. Any lesser goal achieved in Iraq is a direct invitation to the Iranian regime to become the greatest threat in the 21st century against Peace and Security, in the region and worldwide.
[1] See Phares, Walid "The Syrian-Iranian Axis" Global Affairs. Spring 1992.
Dr. Walid Phares is a senior fellow with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD) in Washington, D.C., and director of the Future Terrorism Project of the FDD. He is a visiting fellow with the European Foundation for Democracy in Brussels. His most recent books are Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies against the West (2006) and The War of Ideas: Terrorist Strategies against the West (2007
Article originally appeared at http://worlddefensereview.com/phares090507.shtml « Close It
9/11 6th Anniversary: Bin Laden Video Being Analyzed by US Govt and Islamist "Special Gift" Promised (updated)
By Jeffrey Imm
UPDATE: September 7, 2007:
--- US government has copy of Bin Laden tape and is analyzing. Reuters, CNN, CBS, NBC, and ABC report that the US government has a copy of the Bin Laden video and that the US government is currently analyzing it.
-- NBC reports that numerous Jihadist web sites have simultaneously shut down. NBC and FOX reports that Evan Kohlmann suspected it was the work of Al Qaeda itself, trying to find how the video leaked to U.S. officials
-- ABC and NBC are both reporting details on the Bin Laden tape, which they estimate to be 25-30 minutes long.
-- NBC is also broadcasting that NBC's experts believe that the Osama Bin Laden tape will be released today (September 7) or the very near term.
-- ABC News reports that the CIA is analyzing the video message, quoting a CIA spokesman "It's quite possible this is a new video". ABC also reports that the Department of Homeland Security released a bulletin this morning, saying it and the FBI have "no intelligence of any specific and imminent threat to the homeland at this time." ABC news states that "intelligence sources tell ABC News they believe the expected video message from Osama bin Laden is authentic, recently produced and evidence the al Qaeda leader is still alive. U.S. authorities now say they have a transcript which they say is aimed at potential suicide bombers who he urges to carry out missions against the West."
September 6, 2007 News:
The SITE Intelligence Group and Laura Mansfield reported on September 6 that a new Osama Bin Laden video message was forthcoming. SITE stated that the new Osama Bin Laden message will be "addressing the American people on the sixth anniversary of the attacks of September 11, 2001."
Associated Press also reported this stating: "Intelcenter, which is based in Alexandria, Va., and also monitors Islamic Web sites, said the video was expected within the next 72 hours, or by Sunday. That would come before the sixth anniversary next Tuesday of the World Trade Center attack."
The SITE Intelligence Group also stated that "image of bin Laden contained in the banner found on jihadist forums is reminiscent of his last video appearance in 2004, but his beard is now completely black, as it was previously streaked with grey." AP reports SITE's Rita Katz as speculating that Bin Laden has dyed his beard: " 'I think it works for their benefit that he looks young, he looks healthy,' Katz said of the new image."
In a potentially related story, FOX News reported on September 6 that "Federal counterterrorism officials are analyzing a posting on an Islamic forum Web site that warns of "a special gift" to be given on the sixth anniversary of Sept. 11".
FOX News reports that "warning was posted Sept. 2 on a site frequented by radical groups and said in part that 'there will be a special gift coming on the day of the blessed invasion of Manhattan.' "
In addition, both Laura Mansfield and the SITE Institute report the release of a new 40 minute video from Al Qaeda's "Azzam the American" to jihadist forums on September 5. Laura Mansfield has provided the video link for download.
Sources:
September 7, 2007 - NBC News: Details of purported bin Laden video emerge -- Officials: No specific threat made; Web sites carrying tape shut down
September 7, 2007 - ABC News: New OBL Tape: Iraq, Democratic Control
September 7, 2007 - ABC News: New Videotape From Bin Laden; Al Qaeda's No. 1 Still Alive
September 7, 2007 - FOX News: U.S. Officials Analyzing Usama Bin Laden Video
September 7, 2007 - Reuters: U.S. analyzing purported bin Laden tape
September 7, 2007 - CNN: U.S. trying to determine age of purported bin Laden tape
September 7, 2007 - NBC: U.S. has copy of purported bin Laden video
September 7, 2007 - CBS: U.S. Analyzing New Bin Laden Video
The SITE Institute Web Site
SITE: Image of Bin Laden in Jihadist Banners
September 6, 2007 - ABC: Al Qaeda Announces New Bin Laden Video
September 6, 2007 -- AP: "Groups: Bin Laden plans video on 9/11"
September 6, 2007 - Reuters: Web site says to carry new bin Laden video
September 6, 2007 -- FOX News: "Counterterrorism Officials Analyzing Islamic Web Post Warning of 'Special Gift' "
SITE: As-Sahab Issues English-Subtitled Version of “The Winds of Paradise”, Narrated by Adam Gadahn AKA Azzam the American
Laura Mansfield: As Sahab releases English translation of Winds of Marytrs Part 1 - video link
German Jihad Plot Investigation (Updated)
By Jeffrey Imm
Since the arrest of three Jihadist suspects on Wednesday, the investigation into the German Jihadist plot continues.
1. Identity of the three arrested suspects.
The International Herald Tribune (IHT) reports that the arrested suspects are being identified as follows: "Fritz Gelowicz" (German), "Daniel Martin S." (German), and "Ayem Y." (Turkish). All three suspects remain in custody.
2. Update - Report: German Jihadist Suspect Met 9/11 Hijacker
The London Times is now reporting that German Jihadist Suspect Fritz Gelowicz may have had contact with 9/11 Jihadist Mohammed Atta, who smashed a hijacked plane into the Twin Towers. Police state that Fritz Gelowicz came to their attention 9 years ago when he publicly praised Islamic terror attacks; they state that Fritz Gelowicz's name also comes up regarding a visit to Neu-Ulm by Mohammed Atta. Atta had visited a Neu-Ulm mosque known for its radicalism. A senior investigator stated that Atta "seems to have inspired many of the people who came in and out of the Neu-Ulm mosque".
3. Targets for Jihad Attacks.
The IHT reports that based on monitoring the suspects telephone calls and monitoring their actions, the investigators concluded that the possible targets were Ramstein Air Base and Frankfurt International Airport.
As previously reported on Wednesday, German federal prosecutor Monika Harms also stated that: "As possible targets ... the suspects named discotheques and pubs and airports frequented by Americans with a view to detonating explosives loaded in cars and killing or injuring many people"
4. Additional Jihadist Suspects
The IHT and other media report that seven additional suspects are still in Germany now. AP reports that August Hanning, a deputy interior minister, said that "about" 10 people were being sought in total, and that represent the network that the authorities knew about. Hanning also stated that he believed that investigators believed that the network no longer posed a director security threat. IHT reports that Hanning stated that the suspects still at large include German converts to Islam, Turkish residents, and other nationalities.
IHT reports that of the seven Jihadist suspects in Germany, the German federal prosecutor spokeman Andreas Christeleit stated that the seven suspects are not fugitives, and that the authorities know where they are. However, Andreas Christeleit said that German authorities lacked sufficient evident to arrest them. Other sources told the IHT that one of the remaining suspects is Pakistani, one is Lebanese, and one is stateless. The source told IHT that one of the suspect fled Germany by plane, presumably to Turkey.
5. German Jihadist Internet Communications
AP reports that one of three arrested Jihadists visited a radical Islamic web site while in Munich. German state interior minister Beckstein stated that investigators would like to perform an online search but don't have the legal basis for that. However, Der Spiegel reports that German intelligence was monitoring Fritz Gelowicz's emails since Spring 2007. It is believed that Fritz Gelowicz was the "ringleader". It was in Fritz Gelowicz's emails that intelligence learned of potential targets, logistics. Fritz Gelowicz attempted to avoid detection by not sending the emails, but keeping them in an online "draft" folder for others Jihadists to read online.
Update: UPI reports that the German law enforcement's stakeout of an Internet cafe was instrumental in capturing the arrested bomb suspects.
6. Association of the three arrested suspects with a German mosque in Ulm.
Der Spiegel reports that the three men, who had visited terrorist training camps in Pakistan, were associated with a mosque in the southern German city of Ulm which has a reputation for radicalism. The Evening Standard reports that Fritz Gelowicz worked at the Ulm city's Islamic Information Center after converting to Islam. DPA reports that German authorities watch increasing conversions to Islam with concern, noting a 400% increase in Islamic conversions from 2005 to 2006. DPA reported that "Guido Steinberg, who researches Islamic issues, said extremists were targeting new converts, and terrorist expert Rolf Tophoven said converts tended to be fanatical."
7. Explosives kept in cottage.
AP reported that the three arrested Jihadists kept both military-style detonators and explosive materials at a rented cottage in Oberschlendorn, central Germany. AP reports that "Police moved in when the suspects began moving some of the containers and acquiring other equipment used to make bombs."
8. ABC Report on German 10 Month Investigation
ABC News reports in "The Story Behind the German Terror Plot" that German police were silent for 10 months as 1,000 officers built case around the homegrown terrorists.
9. Report: Pakistanis masterminding plot?
Der Spiegel reports that investigators "want to discover the identity of two men in Pakistan they think were behind the plot." Numerous media reports have stated that the German Jihadists attended Pakistani training camps.
10. German Jihadists' Connections with United Kingdom.
The Evening Standard reports that the German Jihadists phoned British contacts as they plotted. The Evening Standard states that "Several calls to British numbers are said to been made from mobile telephones linked to two of the men being questioned in Germany. One is said to have been a 'known' number." It also reported that British anti-terror officers were "checking for links between the men held in Germany and British-Pakistani terror suspects who may have trained with them. Officers from Scotland Yard flew to Germany to assist the investigation. They want to examine any possible links with UK terror plots."
11. German Security Wants To Make Attending Terror Camp Training a Crime
AP reports that German security officials are urging the German government to make attending terror training camp a crime.
Read More »
Sources:
September 7, 2007 - UPI: Internet cafe stakeout nabs bomb suspects
September 7, 2007 - AP: German security officials urge government to make attending terror training camp a crime
September 7, 2007 - The London Times: German terror suspect 'met 9/11 hijacker'
September 7, 2007 - ABC News: The Story Behind the German Terror Plot
September 6, 2007 - Der Spiegel: German Investigators Seek Identities of Terror Masterminds
September 6, 2007 - Der Spiegel:'The Next Attack Is Perhaps Already Being Planned'
September 6, 2007 - International Herald Tribune: Germany building case in foiled terrorist plot
September 5, 2007: AP - German authorities searching for 7 more suspects in terror plot
September 5, 2007 - DPA: German authorities watch increasing conversions to Islam with concern
September 5, 2007 - The Evening Standard: UK link to German terrorists planning new 9/11 massacre -- terrorists phoned British contacts as they plotted
September 5, 2007 - Germany foils Jihadist bomb plot - CTB Posting by Jeffrey Imm « Close It
Grading U.S. Performance against Terrorism Financing
By Michael Jacobson
In December 2005, the 9-11 Commission's Public Discourse Project issued its final report card on the U.S. government's progress in the war on terror. Overall, the grades were dismal except for the "A-minus" awarded to the efforts against terrorism financing. Nearly two years later, and six years after the September 11 attacks, these efforts remain one of the few areas of government success, though serious challenges have emerged.
Complete text of this article available here:
Euro-Terror Plots + Visa Waiver = Sober Reminder
By Bill West
The past few days have realized arrests in Denmark and Germany against alleged al-Qaeda linked terror operatives suspected of plotting major attacks against Western targets, including US military facilities and personnel in Germany. Initial reports indicate at least some of the suspects are “native born” European citizens who have recently converted to Islam and attended terrorist training camps, perhaps in Pakistan. This may be one of the nightmare scenarios long held by Western law enforcement and Intelligence agencies actually starting to play out in reality.
Of additional concern to the United States is the fact that any such terror operatives holding European citizenship would “up front” qualify to enter the United States under the questionably generous visa waiver program that requires no visa application pre-screening. If such Euro-terrorists have a previously unknown identity to law enforcement and Intelligence authorities and are not listed in any of the various lookout databases, they would most likely be readily admitted into the US upon arrival at a port of entry.
Read More »
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff yesterday testified before the House Homeland Security Committee and explained the US VISIT system for tracking the entry and departure of nonimmigrant aliens (such as temporary visitors), including those under the visa waiver system, was still not fully operational. Secretary Chertoff gave only a vague answer concerning how DHS immigration authorities might be able to identify and track nonimmigrant violators and noted, without going into any detail, there was a system of prioritization for targeting such violators. He also testified that DHS mostly relied on school compliance for reporting nonimmigrant student (F-1) violators. Interestingly, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has recently reported the reassignment of some 1000 Special Agents to primary customs investigative duties and away from immigration enforcement.
It is clear the visa waiver program allows for the easy entry into the US of many European citizens and those who hold European passports (legitimately or otherwise). It is also clear the existing immigration enforcement mechanisms for identifying, tracking , locating and apprehending aliens who enter the US in a temporary visa status and then violate that status are questionable, at best. In view of the most recently intercepted European terror plots, these issues are perhaps worth further consideration. « Close It
HLF Witness Doesn't Accept Evidence Linking Charity to HAMAS
By The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT)
DALLAS-- Cross examination of former U.S. Counsel General Edward Abington continued Wednesday at the terror-support trial of five Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) officials. Abington, who served as counsel general at the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem, has testified that Palestinian charity committees supported by HLF benefited needy Palestinians and did not help HAMAS, as the prosecution claims.
Prosecutor Barry Jonas tried to challenge Abington's assertion Wednesday, identifying members of those charity groups, known as Zakat (charity) Committees, who had HAMAS affiliations. Tuesday, Abington referred to Zakat Committees as "organizations run by pious individuals."
If that's the case, Jonas asked, how would Abington explain materials glorifying HAMAS leaders and the group's violence that Israeli security forces found during raids in 2002? Those materials included posters of HAMAS leaders Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and Yehya Ayyash, the bomb maker known as "the Engineer," and the "father of martyrdom operations." Other images offered into evidence at the trial include videos and keychains.
Abington said he had seen the posters, too, while visiting the committees but denied their presence meant the group was linked to HAMAS. Under later questioning by defense attorney Nancy Hollander, Abington said having one or more HAMAS supporters at a Zakat Committee doesn't mean the committee is controlled by HAMAS.
Jonas showed a picture found in a Zakat Committee of a bus being burned by suicide bombers and asked Abington whether the picture meant anything to him. The picture "represents the daily life of Palestinians," Abington said. Does daily Palestinian life include suicide bombings? Jonas asked.
Read More »
"Daily life includes Palestinians being shot by Israelis," Abington said.
Abington was asked what he knew about different Zakat Committees, such as one in Ramallah, where an associate was involved in planning a July 1997 suicide bombing at Jerusalem's Mahane Yehuda market.
Abington also was asked about a 1991 letter found in the home of unindicted co-conspirator Ismail Elbarrasse, a former assistant to HAMAS deputy political leader Mousa Abu Marzook, that described the Qalqilya zakat committee as "ours and it is guaranteed." Abington said he didn't know anything about it.
As he did Tuesday, Abington questioned information from Israeli intelligence, saying the information was of "questionable reliability" and he would not believe the evidence the Israelis seized from the charities.
Abington denied all links between HLF and the Muslim Brotherhood. When asked whether HAMAS was the Palestinian chapter of the Brotherhood, Abington said that he saw HAMAS as a "descendent" of the Brotherhood but that it was no longer affiliated with it.
Jonas asked Abington about a 1995 letter by a HAMAS spokesman to Senator Orrin Hatch threatening "a wave of outrage against the United States" if the U.S. continued to detain Marzook, who was then being held for extradition on an Israeli murder warrant.
Abington was the counsel general at the time. He said he advised the Clinton administration that sending Marzook to Israel would generate serious consequences. When asked to explain what that meant, Abington said deporting Marzook to Israel would provoke serious anti-American sentiment in the Arab world and Palestine.
Abington was asked about whether he knew of the Islamic Charitable Society of Hebron, a recipient of HLF money. On Tuesday, he denied the charity was linked to HAMAS. When Jonas challenged that assertion, Abington said that "no one has all the information on their fingertips" and he made the statement from the information available to him at the time. [The Islamic Charitable Society of Hebron was a subject of the 2006 documentary on Hamas-linked charities produced by the BBC program Panorama called "Faith, Hate and Charity"].
Abington said that he had no knowledge of HLF's links to HAMAS and described HLF as "a Palestinian American organization that provided relief to needy Palestinians." « Close It
More Homegrown Jihadis-A Strength and a Weakness
By Douglas Farah
It is interesting to note that two of the three suspects arrested in Germany for a possible plot were homegrown jihadists, not foreigners.
This points to the growing trend before toward self-starting individuals who feel they must act on behalf of al Qaeda, without necessarily ever coming into contact with the mother ship of the organization.
These self-starting groups that come from within their own population are far harder to detect that foreigners who may stand out.
Being converts, they are often more radical than the local population, either because they were recruited in a radical environment, they feel the need to prove they are worthy of their new religion, or any number of reasons.
The arrests also highlight the dangers posed by websites, often in the United States, that offer instruction in how to wage individual strikes against high-profile targets. These sites provide not only instructions but also motivational messages to encourage the person to act. My full blog is here.
Germany foils Jihadist bomb plot
By Jeffrey Imm
Media sources have reported today that German police have arrested 3 Jihadists involved in the final stages of an "imminent" bomb plot. The International Herald Tribune reports that the plot was to be "against several sites frequented by Americans, including the busy United States air base at Ramstein and the Frankfurt international airport".
The Jihadists are reported to be two Germans and one Turk. AP reports that officials said that the "three suspects -- two Germans, ages 22 and 28, who converted to Islam, and a 29-year-old Turk -- first came to the attention of authorities because they had been caught observing a U.S. military facility in Hanau, near Frankfurt, at the end of 2006". Der Spiegel reports the men as "Daniel S. from the state of Saarland and Fritz G. from Neu-Ulm in Bavaria... [and].. Adem Y., who is believed to be from Turkey".
IHT reports that:
"They were planning massive attacks," the German federal prosecutor, Monika Harms, said at a news conference, outlining a vast six-month investigation. She said that the suspects had amassed huge amounts of hydrogen peroxide, the main chemical used to manufacture the explosives used in the suicide bombings in London in July 2005. Harms said the two German suspects were converts to Islam who had trained in terrorist camps in Pakistan. They had amassed 1,500 pounds of hydrogen peroxide to make explosives, which they had hidden and were preparing to move when they were arrested on Tuesday afternoon. Officials said they also had military grade detonators.
German federal prosecutor Monika Harms also told a news conference that: "As possible targets ... the suspects named discotheques and pubs and airports frequented by Americans with a view to detonating explosives loaded in cars and killing or injuring many people". According to Harms, the targets were to be hit by the Jihadists detonating a series of car bombs simultaneously. Official stated that the hydrogen peroxide mixed with other bomb chemical would have had the explosive power of 1190 pounds (540 kg) of TNT. German Federal Crime Office's (BKA) chief Joerg Ziercke stated that "this would have enabled them to make bombs with more explosive power than the ones used in the London and Madrid bombings".
German federal prosecutor Monika Harms also stated that the three suspects members were of the Islamic Jihad Union, which has its origins in Uzbekistan. DPA reported that BKA's Ziercke linked the Islamic Jihad Union to al-Qaeda.
CNN reported that BKA's Ziercke stated the three Jihadists suspects were united by a "hatred against American citizens". Daily Mail reported that MP Wolfgang Bosbach speculated that the bombings were planned to coincide with 9/11 attacks anniversary - next Tuesday.
DPA reported that monitoring the suspects required 300 police officers. In May 2007, a German government official stated that 32,000 German Muslims were under surveillance. In May 2007, ABC reported that Col. Andrew Pratt (Ret.) of the George Marshall Center stated that "there are 300 to 500 people who are suspected to be part of al Qaeda cells in Germany". Another report quoted Rolf Tophoven, a leading expert on terrorism in Germany, as telling NTV television that the arrests showed "that the threat to Germany is not abstract and the country has been in the firing line of terrorists for some time".
There has been a terror alert regarding threats to US facilities in Germany since April 20, 2007. On April 20, 2007, the US Embassy in Berlin issued a warning to Americans living in Germany regarding an increased threat of terrorism. ABC reported that in April 2007, U.S. increased security at government facilities following reports that suspected terrorists had conducted surveillance of the Patch Barracks facility.
In May 2007, the German magazine Focus reported that the alert was in regards to five Islamists in Germany - two German converts, and three Germans of Turkish origin, that belonged to the Islamic Jihad Union. Focus also reported in May from police sources that they had filmed valedictory messages by men who intended to die in an attack on a base.
There was also concern that German Jihadists would strike at the G8 summit in June 2007. On May 12, 2007, ABC reported that German authorities detained (and released) two suspects believed to be part of a cell of the Islamic Jihad Union. On May 14, 2007, ABC reported that U.S. Air Marshals were flooding German flights due to concern about increased threat of Jihadist terrorism.
The threat of Jihadist terrorism is not new to Germany, as previously discussed in other postings by Lorenzo Vidino, Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, and myself. In May 2006, German federal prosecutor Kay Nehm viewed Germany as a terror threat "powder keg". In May 2006, German authorities thwarted suicide bomb attacks in Iraq by German women. In July 2006 two gas suitcase bombs were placed on German commuter trains but did not explode. Subsequently, it was learned that the suitcase bombers initially planned to attack the World Cup held in Germany. Der Spiegel later reported that the suitcase bombs were placed by Lebanese students Youssef al-Haijib and Jihad Hamad, as a possible initiation test to gain entrance to Al-Qaeda. This summer, DPA reported that Germany indicted Iraqi for spreading al-Qaeda propaganda online, and DPA reported that Germany indicted Lebanese student Youssef al-Haijib for suitcase bomb attempted murder. Six Lebanese men are currently standing trial in Lebanon over the suitcase bomb plot, which targeted trains in western Germany.
Read More »
Sources and Other Related News Reports:
International Herald Tribune: German police arrest 3 in 'imminent' bomb plot
AP - Germany arrests 3 suspected of plotting terror attacks
CNN - Germany: 'Massive' attacks foiled
DPA - German police hold 3 Islamists, halt 'massive bomb attacks'
DPA - Background: Islamic Jihad Union founded in Uzbekistan
Der Spiegel Online: Three Islamist Terror Suspects Arrested in Germany
Daily Mail - 'New Al Qaeda plot to blow up planes on September 11' smashed
Australia News: Arrests 'foil massive terror attacks'
AFP - Germany foils 'massive' attack on US citizens
RFE/RFERL - Germany Arrests Three In Suspected Terror Bomb Plots
June 28, 2007: DPA - Germany indicts Iraqi for spreading al-Qaeda propaganda online
June 26, 2007: DPA - Moroccan-born Al-Qaeda suspect to be tried in Germany - Redouane e-H charged with recruiting Iraqi suicide bombers and maintaining contact with 9/11 plotters
June 25, 2007: Report - Suspected Terrorist had Access to Radioactive Material - access to a research center in Karlsruhe, Germany
June 22, 2007: DPA - Germany on alert against terrorist attack
June 20, 2007: DPA - Germany indicts Lebanese for bomb attempt
June 18, 2007 - ABC News: Suicide Bomb Teams Sent to U.S., Europe - targets to include Germany
May 16, 2007 - AP: German prosecutors charge man (Redouane E.H.) with supporting al-Qaida, co-founding Sudan terror group
May 14, 2007: ABC News - U.S. Air Marshals Flooding German, British Flights
May 14, 2007: DPA - Five Islamists in Germany said to prompt terrorism alert
May 12, 2007: CTB Article - Kurdish network behind Germany threat warning? by Lorenzo Vidino
May 12, 2007: ABC News - Authorities in Germany Detained 2 With al Qaeda Ties - Islamic Jihad Union, an al Qaeda-affiliated Uzbek group
May 11, 2007: ABC News - U.S., Germans Fear Terror Attack
May 9, 2007: Today's Zaman - "Berlin Paranoid of Terroism: 32,000 Muslims Monitored"
May 2, 2007: DPA - Alarm grows over Muslim youth in Germany
April 21, 2007: Deutsche-Welle - Germany Says Bolstered US Security Islamist-Linked
April 20, 2007: Deutsche-Welle - US Embassy Issues Warning to Americans Living in Germany
April 20, 2007: Reuters - New measures in Germany linked to terror threat: U.S
April 9, 2007: Der Spiegel - Failed Bomb Plot Seen As Al-Qaida Initiation Test
April 6, 2007: DPA - Man with al-Qaeda links connected to train plot
March 21, 2007: UPI - IT firm: Terror video made in Germany - GIMF video threatening Germany & Austria to leave Afghanistan launched from Erfurt, eastern Germany
September 2, 2006: Deutsche-Welle - Alleged Suitcase Bombers Initially Planned World Cup Attack
August 28, 2006: Der Spiegel - Every Investigator's Nightmare - investigation on suitcase bombs on trains
August 20, 2006: Deutsche-Welle - Terrorism Fears Mount in Germany After Train Bomb Plot
July 25, 2006: CTB Article - German Intelligence Supports Claim of Hizballah Cell Activation - by Daveed Gartenstein-Ross -- potential Hizbullah sleeper cell activation in Europe, other parts of world
May 30, 2006: Der Spiegel - German Women Vowed to Mount Suicide Attacks in Iraq
May 30, 2006: CTB Article - Germany and Jihad - by Jeffrey Imm
May 13, 2006: Reuters - Germany is terror threat "powder keg" - top prosecutor
« Close It
Former Ambassador Defends HLF
By The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT)
DALLAS--A former U.S. diplomat spoke in glowing terms Tuesday about the Palestinian charities supported by the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF). Edward Abington, a former counsel general at the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem, was the first defense witness in the terror-support trial of the Richardson Tex.-based foundation and five of its former officers.
Prosecutors spent the past six weeks detailing links between the Palestinian charities, known as zakat committees, and HAMAS, a designated foreign terrorist organization. While much of the money went to humanitarian relief, anything that went to benefit HAMAS violated U.S. law, the government contends.
Jurors heard a much different account from Abington...
For full blog click here to visit the website of the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT).
HLF Prosecution: CAIR “affiliated with” Hamas
By Brian Hecht, IPT
On Tuesday, the prosecution in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) filed its motion in opposition to the amicus brief filed by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
In addition to picking apart the arguments laid out in CAIR’s brief piece by piece, the government set an important precedent, officially and definitively linking CAIR to Hamas, writing: In the instant case, striking CAIR’s name from the attachment to the Trial Brief will not prevent its conspiratorial involvement with HLF, and others affiliated with Hamas, from becoming a matter of public record. That has already occurred as a consequence of the presentation of evidence at trial. (emphasis added)
The government also argues some legal basics, that CAIR has no standing to petition its removal from the list of unindicted co-conspirators since the list is not directly pertinent to the “actual, ongoing controversy” of HLF’s criminal trial, basically that, by filing the brief, CAIR has not acted as a “friend of the court,” but rather only out of self interest, and that, in the brief, CAIR has failed to show any injury as a result of its inclusion on the list of unindicted co-conspirators.
In arguing lack of injury, the prosecution makes similar points outlined in the August 21st blog post by the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), CAIR’s Reputation and Incredibly Fluctuating Membership Roll. The motion states:
Read More »
As support for its alleged injury-in-fact, CAIR provided this Court with data solely from a time period prior to the Government’s submission of its Trial Brief, a period when the alleged improper disclosure could not have affected such membership. CAIR alleges that the “negative reaction by the American public can be seen in the decline of membership rates and donations resulting from the government’s publicizing of CAIR as an unindicted coconspirator” (Amicus Br. at 10); that “the donations that they rely on for funding have suffered since the government named them as an unindicted coconspirator”( Amicus Br. at 38); and that “the government’s labeling of them as an unindicted co-conspirator has chilled their associational activity” (Amicus Br. at 51-52). In support for these assertions, however, CAIR relies upon a June 2007 article in the Washington Times, which revealed (by reviewing CAIR’s tax filings) that CAIR’s membership declined 90 percent from 2001 through 2006, down from 29,000 members to less than 1,700. ... The article provides no further factual information regarding CAIR’s declining membership since 2006. Ironically, the very same article, upon which it now relies, was publicly discredited by CAIR executive director, Nihad Awad, who claimed the article was “false and misleading." Additionally, the motion argues that the relationship between CAIR, HLF and the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP) is already public information, as described in a footnote on page 12: The role of CAIR founder Omar Ahmad on the Palestine Committee, and the presence of Ahmad and Nihad Awad at the 1993 meeting of the Palestine Committee in Philadelphia, were described during the public trial of Muhammad Hamid Khalil Salah and Abdelhaleem Hasan Abdelraziq Ashqar in November 1996 (sic). See United States v. Salah, et al., Case No. 03-978 (N.D. Ill. 2006). During that trial, defendant Ashqar was represented by William B. Moffitt, author of CAIR’s current motion for leave to file an amicus brief. The government also argues that CAIR’s amicus brief should be denied because it lacks both timeliness and usefulness, and, as perhaps a final nail in the coffin, that the brief is wholly irrelevant since both testimony and documentary evidence admitted at trial conclusively demonstrate the conspiratorial relationship between CAIR and HLF.
For some examples of such evidence, see:
CAIR: Youngest Member of Hamas Family Tree
CAIR Identified by the FBI as part of the Muslim Brotherhood's Palestine Committee
CAIR Executive Director Placed at HAMAS Meeting « Close It
Minnesota Website Tells how to Wage Jihad
By Douglas Farah
The Middle East Media Research Institute has a disturbing and interesting new report on an Islamist website hosted in Minnesota telling people how to join al Qaeda, how to attack high value targets and how to form a functioning cell.
As has previously been discussed here and elsewhere, the decentralized nature of the current incarnation of al Qaeda is stressed, including the ability to form a jihad cell wherever one is, without ever meeting anyone from the formal al Qaeda structure. The document is aimed at recruits outside the United States, possibly those seeking to fight in Iraq or Afghanistan.
"You feel that you want to carry a weapon, fight, and kill the occupiers, and that it is our duty to call for jihad as much as to call for prayer... All that is required is a firm personal decision to fulfill this obligation, and participation in jihad and the resistance," the document says.
"I don't have to meet Osama bin Laden to become a jihad fighter. Moreover, there is no need to meet even one jihad fighter to become one. Neither do I need recognition from Al-Qaeda... My full blog is here.
Pakistan: Pindi Explosions
By Animesh Roul
Two bomb blasts occurred in Rawalpindi on September 04 Morning, killed nearly 20 people and as many injured, mostly government employees working in defense departments. The first explosion hit a white-line bus in Qasim Bazzar area. The second blast (planted on a motorbike) occurred in the city's R.A. Bazaar. No outfit claimed responsibility so far. Outfits like Tehreek-e-Nafaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (Most likely behind today's twin blasts), Jaish-e-Muhammed and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi have been active in Pindi to carry out attacks on the government (Military) installations and judicial hubs. Pakistan’s most lethal religious extremist outfit TNSM has reportedly unleashed couple of suicide bombers, personally trained by TNSM head Maulana Faqir Muhammad in July this year to attack properties and lives of military officials in Rawalpindi. Early that month President Pervez Musharraf himself escaped an assassination attempt here.
Pindi is a garrison city which housed Army Headquarters, has been on the radar of religious extremists, Pro-Taliban and al-Qaeda elements since long. This place is considered as actual power center for Musharraf’s military regime.
Read More »
Mangled Vehicles

Source: Reuters

Source: AP
« Close It
HLF Case Heavy on Detail
By The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT)
It is one line among thousands of pages of evidence in a Dallas courtroom, but it summarizes the government's terror-support case against the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) and five former leaders.
"Caution should be practiced not to reveal true identity."
It comes from an internal security manual found at Infocom, a computer business run by defendant Ghassan Elashi. Prosecutors say Elashi and his HLF colleagues deliberately funneled money to HAMAS, a designated foreign terrorist organization, consistent with the objectives of the Muslim Brotherhood's Palestine Committee. And, prosecutors claim, they did everything they could to keep that a secret.
Defendant Shukri Abu Baker, HLF's former chief executive, put it another way during a secret 1993 meeting of HAMAS members and sympathizers in Philadelphia: "War is deception."
Defense attorneys say the men and their non-profit organization merely sought to relieve the suffering of Palestinians living under occupation. They will present witnesses and evidence on that claim starting Tuesday after the prosecution rested its case Thursday.
For the full summary of evidence in the HLF trial, click here to visit the website of the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT).
The Tampa Bombers: Jihadists or "Beach Boys?"
By Walid Phares
Six years after 9/11, the mainstream reading of the war on Terror still circles around the essence of the conflict. Two young men indicted for charges of possession of explosives aren't yet perceived as part of an Urban Jihadist campaign inside the United States, despite the fact that a number of cells and of individuals have been arrested over the past years, all linked to Jihadism. Ahmed Abdellatif Sherif Mohamed, 24 and Youssef Samir Megahed (in Egyptian accent it reads “Mujahid”) 21, are affiliated with South Florida University in Tampa. As one reviews all news reporting (until this day), no link was made yet to an ideology which is the master chain between the perpetrators and their action. The AP story begins with "two Egyptian students at the University of South Florida were indicted Friday on charges of carrying explosive materials across states lines and one was accused of teaching the other how to use them for violent reasons." The News Agency doesn't explain what these violent reasons are. Was it about drugs, social crisis, Palestine, Americans Politics, Egyptian politics, Abortion, or other matters? The mainstream media says "Terrorism," and so advances the Government, so far.
Ahmed Mohamed is an engineering graduate student and teaching assistant at the Tampa-based University. He and Megahed are facing "terrorism" charges for "teaching and demonstrating how to use the explosives." The question is: using them against whom, in which war, by whose instructions, under which doctrine? If none of this information is available how to define the terror factor beyond criminal charges?
Read More »
According to AP, Mohamed was charged with "distributing information relating to explosives, destructive devices, and weapons of mass destruction, which is a terrorism-related statute, a Justice Department official said. The crime carries a maximum of 20 years in prison." Fine, but the American public needs to know more about the motives. The story doesn't begin with a Police unit stopping them on a highway and charging them of transporting explosives in interstate commerce without permits. This is not a criminal story happening on an ordinary day. The media reports said in South Carolina, where Mohamed and Megahed have been held in the Berkeley County jail, "U.S. Attorney Reginald I. Lloyd praised state and federal authorities for cooperating in the four-week investigation that initially did not look like a terrorism case." So what caused the mutation from crime to Terrorism? The AP writes that "since the Aug. 4 arrest, authorities sought to determine whether Mohamed and Megahed were fledgling terrorists or merely college students headed to the beach with devices made from fireworks they bought at Wal-Mart in their car, as they claimed. The local sheriff in South Carolina said the explosives were “other than fireworks.” A non expert reader would conclude that it is the “type” of explosives that made the case into Terrorism, not the actions, intentions and the combat doctrine of the perpetrators. Had the explosives been licensed, the two men would be free now. Had the material been large fireworks, they would have also been free. So, short of capturing them moving with illegal explosives, they wouldn't have been persons of interest. But is there any other way in our legal system to arrest Terrorists than catching them with explosives? Other than presenting an evidence that they “want” to cause harm, actually there isn't. That's why we weren't able to capture Mohammed Atta and Ziad Jarrah on 9/11 before they dive with the captured airliners. Mohammed and Ziad didn't have illegal explosives in their hands before they board, and not even after they boarded. Because they chose not to use explosives, and yet they were Jihadi Terrorists who have intended to massacre thousands of Americans. So, in fact, as I made the case several times to Government and NGO entities, including legislative committees, our legal system doesn't enable the Government to stop the Terrorists before they are caught armed or with sufficient evidence that they were about to detonate the material. The next question is: can we change the system? The answer is fast and natural: no we can't and we shouldn't on the essence. All persons are presumed innocents until proven guilty.
But what we can and should do is to learn from each case: If we are lucky enough to catch them before they act, at least we have to learn from the operation all what is needed to abort other potential ones. What we must know are the motives, the big picture and the positioning of the perpetrators in the larger war. Are they part of a cell and of a movement? What are their doctrinal beliefs, their ideology, their objectives, the literature and material that indoctrinated them and transformed them into Jihadi Terrorists? Short of this information, we wouldn't (the public, the Government and the experts) be able to assess the “Terror act” and place it in the widest context. If this action is the result of two persons who were planning on having fun blasting explosives, but didn't obtain a license is one thing, with no value related to the ongoing War on Terror; but if Mohamed and Megahed were part of a larger picture, even of a homegrown experiment, this would have tremendous consequences on Homeland Security. So which is the case?
According to the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) Mohamed had "rented a room in a house in Temple Terrace, a suburb of Tampa, which was used as the office for the World and Islam Studies Enterprise (WISE), a think-tank founded by former USF Professor Sami Al-Arian. In 2006, Al-Arian pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to make or receive contributions of funds, goods or services to or for the benefit of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). Evidence presented at his trial showed Al-Arian served on the PIJ governing board.” The next question then is: Are Mohamed and Megahed linked to the activities of Al Arian? Were the activities of the latter linked to them? Is there a wider activity linking both parties in the US? Mohamed and Megahed are Egyptians hence it is less likely that they would be part of Palestinian Islamic Jihad. But they can be Jihadist regardless of not being part of PIJ. So, if a link exists between these two parties, this could also mean that PIJ and the vast Jihadist movement operating in America are connected. We’re advancing these theories because the Salafi Jihadi movement is transnational and is operating against the US and other liberal democracies. These are the conclusions of many counter terrorism authorities such as the Task Force on Future Terrorism of the Department of Homeland Security, the New York Police Department, and recently too the US Air Force report on Terrorism. This and other arrests should be analyzed under the new parameters emerging from various centers in Government and across the specialized NGOs.
Another intriguing development was –according to the Investigative Project- that the Jury in Tampa heard from the representative of a local advocacy Islamist group: CAIR. The question is why would a particular American association testify in a Terrorism case? Logically it would be called upon if it has an expertise on Terrorism, if the two indicted persons were members of the organization, or if the latter was opposing the indictment on the basis of defending the ideology behind the act. In this case, what are the reasons invoked? CAIR isn’t a qualified counter Terrorism association, which leaves the two remaining arguments: membership or advocacy. Answers on both issues are warranted to solve the enigma. But the IPT report said “M. Ahmed Bedier, spokesman for the Tampa chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), testified under subpoena. Bedier has acted as a family spokesman for the Megahed family.” The next question is to know if M Bedier acted personally or as a representative of his organization. This fact is important as it would open another series of questions as to the relationship between “advocacy groups” and the Jihadist ideology. For the CAIR representative told the Tampa Tribune “that the men were being scrutinized due to their ethnicity.” But as far as it was reported they are Egyptian citizens who have been caught with illegal explosives. There are many Egyptian-Americans, Arab-Americans, and Middle Eastern Americans who are working within Law Enforcement. Actually, when documents are translated by Government in Terrorism cases, it is often that Arab-American translators are the ones tasked with the translation. So how then are the two Egyptians scrutinized “due” to their ethnicity while among those who are protecting the Homeland Security –and often on these cases- are people who belong to the same ethnicity: Law Enforcement, analysts, translators, etc?
"Obviously their heritage and background is playing a major role in blowing this out of proportion," Bedier said. "If these were some good old boys, I doubt this [story] would be played around the world." Actually, it is the other way around. While the Government is not –unfortunately- providing the public with the ideological material leading to the actions, the “advocacy groups” who sympathize with these Jihadists ideologies are attempting to transform any arrest into an “ethnic” case. For one would ask these “groups” why don’t they move with the same vigor if Copts, Sudanese, Assyrians, Kurds, Arab Christians, anti-Jihadist Muslims? If the Islamist advocacy groups are coming to the defense of individuals just for belonging to an ethnic group, the argument is flawed, as CAIR is not representative of an ethnic group, but of a (self described) ideological agenda. But on the other hand, if CAIR comes to the defense of the indicted persons because of their affiliation with a religious group, the argument needs to be made based on statements made by the two Egyptians. That is the link between their alleged religious beliefs and the fact that they had explosives: In fact there was none, for we haven’t read or heard from them or others that they were on a “religious mission.” Hence, CAIR must present another reason for their involvement, assuming that Mr Bedier acts on behalf of the organization in this case.
Which brings the analysis back to the initial question: Did Mohamed and Megahed act as Jihadists or not? US law doesn’t need such an answer. It has them under the charge of possession of explosives. But since CAIR and other advocacy groups are claiming that there something “else” involved, it should be beneficial to the American public –and certainly to the national security planners- to learn more about the ideological context of this case. For failing to address this dimension in the War on Terror would end up being compared with the following –virtual- dramatic interpretation: 1943: Two German young men born in Berlin were arrested in South Carolina for the possession of explosives and willing to use them against the US. While the two men were charged with this crime, regardless of WWII, an advocacy group accused the US Government of being “Germanophobe.” Better, among the Law enforcement that proceeded with the arrest were many German-Americans.
Dr Walid Phares is the Director of Future Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and the author of The War of Ideas: Jihadism against Democracies. « Close It
|
|