-
In early February, Directors of the CIA, FBI and National Intelligence declared that an attack by Al Qaeda in the next 3 to 6 months “is certain!” Leon Panetta, CIA Director announced, “The biggest threat is not so much that we face an attack like 9/11. It is that Al Qaeda is adapting its methods in ways that oftentimes make it difficult to detect.”
Panetta’s statement does not take into account the ability to identify any terrorist whose goal it is to give up their life for a cause. Only when you are observing measurable emerging aggression can you identify a terrorist before they effect their violence.
The Center for Aggression Management discovered 15 years ago that there were two kinds of aggression: adrenaline-driven Primal Aggression and intent-driven Cognitive Aggression. The Primal Aggressor, in the extreme, is “red-faced and ready to explode,” the Cognitive Aggressor (the terrorist) is not. When a person, regardless of the culture, gender, education or position, rises to the level where their goal is to give up their life for a cause, their body looses animation and we see the “thousand-yard stare.” But it is more than this, the whole body and behavior looses animation and this is how we can identify them. The problem is that security and law enforcement are still looking for the Primal Aggressor (red-faced and ready to explode). Of course they are finding it difficult to detect these terrorist; a terrorist is a Cognitive Aggression; they are looking for the wrong person!
As our Government analyzes what went wrong regarding Abdulmatallab’s entrance into the United States, you can be assured that Al Qaeda is also analyzing how their plans went wrong. Who do you think will figure it out first . . . ?
You can read more at http://blog.AggressionManagement.com - February 14, 2010 7:16 AM
Showing posts with label Al Qaeda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Al Qaeda. Show all posts
Sunday, February 14, 2010
In early February, Directors of the CIA, FBI and National Intelligence declared that an attack by Al Qaeda in the next 3 to 6 months “is certain!”
Thursday, January 21, 2010
System Failure The Christmas Day bomber was never asked specific questions based on the intelligence the U.S. government had already collected on him
WeeklyStandard.com
January 21, 2010 - 1:00 AM
Stephen F. Hayes
There is one reason that White House should be thrilled about the Massachusetts Senate race. It crowded out news that came out of the stunning testimony of Obama administration officials Wednesday on the Christmas Day terrorist attack. Four top counterterrorism officials testified before a congressional committee that they were not consulted about how to handle the interrogation of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the al Qaeda operative who attempted to blow up Flight 253 on December 25, 2008. That group included all three senior Obama administration officials who testified before the Senate Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday: Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security; Michael Leiter, chairman of the National Counterterrorism Center; and Dennis Blair, the Director of National Intelligence. It also included FBI Director Robert Mueller.
With surprising candor, Blair, the nation's top intelligence official, explained that these officials were not deliberately excluded from the decisionmaking process in the immediate aftermath of the attack. Rather, he told the Senate Homeland Security Committee, there was no process at all.
"I've been a part of the discussions which established this high-value interrogation unit, [HIG] which we started as part of the executive order after the decision to close Guantanamo. That unit was created for exactly this purpose -- to make a decision on whether a certain person who's detained should be treated as a case for federal prosecution or for some of the other means. We did not invoke the HIG in this case," he said. "We should have."
That's quite an admission. Blair wasn't finished (see the 51:00 mark of this video). "Frankly, we were thinking more of overseas people and, duh!, we didn't put it then. That's what we will do now. And so we need to make those decisions more carefully. I was not consulted and the decision was made on the scene. It seemed logical to the people there but it should have been taken using this HIG format at a higher level."
When Blair said "Duh," he literally gave himself a slap on the forehead, as if to say I-cannot-believe-we-were-that-stupid. It was an appropriate gesture.
Blair admitted that Abdulmutallab was not interrogated for intelligence purposes because the Obama administration had not considered using the newly-created elite interrogation unit on terrorist in the United States.
If Blair considered the handling of Abdulmutallab a mistake, FBI Director Robert Mueller, testifying at the same time before the Senate Judiciary Committee, did not. Mueller, like Blair, acknowledged that the crucial decision about how to treat Abdulmutallab was made by local FBI agents. But unlike Blair, he vigorously defended it."The decision to arrest [Abdulmutallab] and put him in criminal courts, the decision was made by the agents on the ground, the ones that took him from the plane and then followed up on the arrest in the hospital," Mueller told the committee. He also said: "In this particular case, in fast-moving events, decisions were made-appropriately, I believe, very appropriately-given the situation."
Again, stunning. The FBI Director believes it is appropriate -- very appropriate -- that four of the nation's top counterterrorism officials were never consulted about how to handle an al Qaeda terrorist who very nearly blew up an airplane with almost 300 passengers aboard.Mueller testified that those FBI agents interviewed Abdulmutallab about "ongoing and other threats." What the FBI director did not mention was that his agents interviewed the terrorist without any input from the National Counterterrorism Center -- the institution we now know was sitting on top of a small mountain of not-yet-correlated information about the bomber. So whatever information Abdulmutallab provided, he gave up in response to general questions about his activities, not in response to specific questions based on the intelligence the U.S. government had already collected on him. And within 24 hours -- according to Senator Jeff Sessions, whose tough questioning left Mueller stuttering -- Abdulmutallab was Mirandized and he stopped talking. (It would be nice to learn, from Mueller or someone else in a position to know, precisely when Abdulmutallab was read his rights.)
The administration's embarrassing performance continued even after the hearings had been adjourned. Blair's office released a statement intended to clarify his earlier remarks about the high-value detainee interrogation group -- HIG.
"My remarks today before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs have been misconstrued. The FBI interrogated Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab when they took him into custody. They received important intelligence at that time, drawing on the FBI's expertise in interrogation that will be available in the HIG once it is fully operational."
January 21, 2010 - 1:00 AM
Stephen F. Hayes
There is one reason that White House should be thrilled about the Massachusetts Senate race. It crowded out news that came out of the stunning testimony of Obama administration officials Wednesday on the Christmas Day terrorist attack. Four top counterterrorism officials testified before a congressional committee that they were not consulted about how to handle the interrogation of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the al Qaeda operative who attempted to blow up Flight 253 on December 25, 2008. That group included all three senior Obama administration officials who testified before the Senate Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday: Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security; Michael Leiter, chairman of the National Counterterrorism Center; and Dennis Blair, the Director of National Intelligence. It also included FBI Director Robert Mueller.
With surprising candor, Blair, the nation's top intelligence official, explained that these officials were not deliberately excluded from the decisionmaking process in the immediate aftermath of the attack. Rather, he told the Senate Homeland Security Committee, there was no process at all.
"I've been a part of the discussions which established this high-value interrogation unit, [HIG] which we started as part of the executive order after the decision to close Guantanamo. That unit was created for exactly this purpose -- to make a decision on whether a certain person who's detained should be treated as a case for federal prosecution or for some of the other means. We did not invoke the HIG in this case," he said. "We should have."
That's quite an admission. Blair wasn't finished (see the 51:00 mark of this video). "Frankly, we were thinking more of overseas people and, duh!, we didn't put it then. That's what we will do now. And so we need to make those decisions more carefully. I was not consulted and the decision was made on the scene. It seemed logical to the people there but it should have been taken using this HIG format at a higher level."
When Blair said "Duh," he literally gave himself a slap on the forehead, as if to say I-cannot-believe-we-were-that-stupid. It was an appropriate gesture.
Blair admitted that Abdulmutallab was not interrogated for intelligence purposes because the Obama administration had not considered using the newly-created elite interrogation unit on terrorist in the United States.
If Blair considered the handling of Abdulmutallab a mistake, FBI Director Robert Mueller, testifying at the same time before the Senate Judiciary Committee, did not. Mueller, like Blair, acknowledged that the crucial decision about how to treat Abdulmutallab was made by local FBI agents. But unlike Blair, he vigorously defended it."The decision to arrest [Abdulmutallab] and put him in criminal courts, the decision was made by the agents on the ground, the ones that took him from the plane and then followed up on the arrest in the hospital," Mueller told the committee. He also said: "In this particular case, in fast-moving events, decisions were made-appropriately, I believe, very appropriately-given the situation."
Again, stunning. The FBI Director believes it is appropriate -- very appropriate -- that four of the nation's top counterterrorism officials were never consulted about how to handle an al Qaeda terrorist who very nearly blew up an airplane with almost 300 passengers aboard.Mueller testified that those FBI agents interviewed Abdulmutallab about "ongoing and other threats." What the FBI director did not mention was that his agents interviewed the terrorist without any input from the National Counterterrorism Center -- the institution we now know was sitting on top of a small mountain of not-yet-correlated information about the bomber. So whatever information Abdulmutallab provided, he gave up in response to general questions about his activities, not in response to specific questions based on the intelligence the U.S. government had already collected on him. And within 24 hours -- according to Senator Jeff Sessions, whose tough questioning left Mueller stuttering -- Abdulmutallab was Mirandized and he stopped talking. (It would be nice to learn, from Mueller or someone else in a position to know, precisely when Abdulmutallab was read his rights.)
The administration's embarrassing performance continued even after the hearings had been adjourned. Blair's office released a statement intended to clarify his earlier remarks about the high-value detainee interrogation group -- HIG.
"My remarks today before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs have been misconstrued. The FBI interrogated Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab when they took him into custody. They received important intelligence at that time, drawing on the FBI's expertise in interrogation that will be available in the HIG once it is fully operational."
The problem was so much that Blair had not contemplated using the HIG on terrorists captured on U.S. soil -- Duh! -- but that it is not yet fully operational. And this is better? As Blair testified himself, the HIG was "started as part of the executive order after the decision to close Guantanamo." That was a year ago tomorrow. So the elite interrogation unit that was to have been keeping us safe after the administration banned enhanced interrogation and vowed to shut down Guantanamo Bay -- it doesn't actually exist yet.
Barack Obama should call Scott Brown again -- not to congratulate him, but to thank him for guaranteeing that this extraordinary incompetence does not get the coverage it deserves.
Friday, January 15, 2010
FBI Issues Digital Mug Shot of Aging Bin Laden
This digitally enhanced image shows what a clean-shavenUsama bin-Laden could look like today.
Fox News.com
Usama bin Laden has aged a little since he was last seen in September 2007 but has put on little or no weight in the arid surroundings of the Afghan-Pakistani border — that, at least, is the assumption made by FBI forensic artists as the agency continues its relentless search for the Al Qaeda leader.
Digitally enhanced photographs have been released showing how he might look today; one in his traditional outfit, the other showing him with trimmed beard and Western clothing.
The "age-progression images" were produced in the latest effort to find the elusive terrorist chief. 
"It is our hope that these digitally enhanced images will help someone recognise these terrorist suspects and then contact the Rewards for Justice program with information that leads to their apprehension," Robert Eckert, assistant director for Diplomatic Security's Threat Information and Analysis Directorate, said.
Bin Laden's last 30-minute video released in 2007, which was itself released after an absence of three years, saw him sporting a trimmed beard rather than the straggly and seemingly unkempt appearance he seemed to be wearing in 2004.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
'Credible threat' from al Qaeda in Yemen
A general view of the Yemeni capital, Sanaa, on WednesdayJanuary 13, 2010 10:38 p.m. EST
Washington (CNN) -- The United States is closely monitoring a "credible threat" from al Qaeda in Yemen against the U.S. homeland, two senior officials told CNN.
At the same time, one official Wednesday cautioned that the threat is fairly general in nature and does not have too much specificity -- and the second said this is not a case of "we connected the dots to something imminent."
The first official did say, though, that the U.S. had gleaned that al Qaeda is already "adapting" to new U.S. security measures and that, in part, has raised the concerns.
A third source said that in following up on accused Christmas Day airplane bomber Omar Farouk AbdulMutallab, officials came across some information relevant to aviation. A fourth source confirmed the information has to do with aviation and al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). The level of concern is "measurable" this source said, adding "There is more prickling of the neck hair."
The U.S. has some information about time frame, this source continued, saying, "It is more definitive than it usually is."
The U.S. does not have information on location, however, and the source would not say if officials have a name or nationality of the person or persons involved. This source pointed out that aviation security is rigid already and that no additional protective measures have been taken. But, the source says, "there is a lot of stuff going on in the next day or two" relating to analysis.
Separately, one U.S. counterterrorism official would say only that, "No one believes the threat from AQAP ended on December 25, 2009. They continue to plot and plan."
And another U.S. counterterrorism official told CNN, "Everyone is looking closely at AQAP in the aftermath of the AbdulMutallab attempt."
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Trading Terrorist Rights for American Lives
Once again, civilians found themselves in the position of having to provide for their own safety and security
By JB Williams Saturday, January 2, 2010
On Christmas Day 2009, the first of many terror chickens to come, came home to roost when a Nigerian member of Al Qaeda climbed aboard a US commercial flight headed from Amsterdam to Detroit and attempted to set off a chemical bomb mid-flight.
Once again, civilians found themselves in the position of having to provide for their own safety and security as the folks whose primary purpose is to provide for the common defense of the people, came up sorely lacking.
Had it not been for a handful of brave patriots willing to take matters into their own hands, Flight 253 could have ended the futures of everyone on board.
This is what we should expect in a nation that puts its soldiers on trial for taking their oath seriously in the war on terror abroad, while the Obama administration offers known enemy combatants civil rights in criminal courts, by no means designed to handle the complexities of war.
In fact, when the administration sees patriotic American citizens and former military personnel as “potential domestic terrorists” - and known terrorists as mere “criminals,” this is the best outcome we can hope for…
Predictably, Obama was quick on the trigger when taking aim at the agencies responsible for securing commercial flights. As Jim Meyers reports at Newsmax, Obama told reporters: “A systemic failure has occurred, and I consider that totally unacceptable.”]
Referring to the early signals, he said: “Had this critical information been shared, it could have been compiled with other intelligence and a fuller, clearer picture of the suspect would have emerged. The warning signs would have triggered red flags, and the suspect would have never been allowed to board that plane for America.”
Obama is the “systemic failure.” He and his terror-friendly administration, including US Attorney General Eric Holder, who was engaged in the legal defense on known terrorists before being named the head of the US Justice system by Barack Obama, have great difficulty separating “acts of war” from “criminal behaviors”—and—terrorists from US soldiers or even average American citizens for that matter.
As Meyers points out in his Newsmax report based upon a story in the liberal New York Times, “two federal officials told the paper that U.S. intelligence was aware that a Nigerian Muslim was preparing an attack, yet officials did nothing to give warning of such an attack.”
The paper reported Wednesday: “Two officials said the government had intelligence from Yemen before Friday that leaders of a branch of Al Qaeda were talking about ‘a Nigerian’ being prepared for a terrorist attack.”—“But despite those signals, the administration never raised a terror alert, and would-be bomber Abdulmutallab was allowed to board a plane bound for the United States.”
Gee… I wonder why an administration that sees average citizens as “potential terrorists” and actual terrorists as “common criminals” would hesitate to warn the people of the impending danger that lurks within a nation not at all serious about an enemy just as committed to death and destruction today as they were on September 11, 2001.
We are talking about the same folks who still refuse to admit that our nation is at war with extreme Islam around the globe—that we have numerous terror training facilities right here on American soil—or that the Jihadist in Ft. Hood was in fact an Al Qaeda operative in regular contact with known Al Qaeda cells in Yemen, up until he shouted “Allah Akbar” before killing a dozen unarmed soldiers at Ft. Hood.
Despite the fact that Americans, in part, elected Obama on the false belief that Bush and Cheney made America “less safe” by their semi-aggressive “war on terror,” the Washington Times now reports that 85% of Americans now expect terrorist attacks to be successful on American soil in 2010. That’s a cheerful thought full of “hope” for the New Year, huh…
For a “change,” I agree with 85% of Americans…
Still, one is compelled to ask why those responsible for making certain that someone like Abdulmutallab is unable to climb aboard a US commercial flight, chose not to do so?
This is the real point, isn’t it? Someone “in-the-know” chose NOT to share that information with people who could have and allegedly would have stopped Abdulmutallab from climbing aboard Flight 253. It was NOT an “intelligence failure” like 9/11/01… The guy’s own father reported his son MIA after making direct threats against the west.
He reported it to the US Embassy in Yemen, and there was plenty of time to react, had that information been shared with the appropriate agencies. Why wasn’t it?
While we’re at it, why is our federal government treating American soldiers like “enemy combatants” in military courts while offering civilians criminal courts and US Civil Rights to known enemy combatants captured on the battle field?
And here’s the biggest question of all—Why aren’t American citizens demanding answers to these and many more obvious questions?
As Democrat John F. Kennedy said so well—“A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.”
In October of 2008, I wrote a column titled Terrorists, Terrorism and Obama and nobody listened. Voters had been convinced by the leftist lame stream press that even a nobody with life-long ties to terrorists, communists and third world thugs, would be “better than Bush.”
I even asked in a column, Who is باراك حسين أوباما ? – Copy and paste this into your Google translator software. If you still don’t know who and what we elected, there may be no hope for you or the future of this once free and prosperous nation.
It didn’t take a Harvard grad to see it coming, but still, few listened. Obama’s entire past remains in hiding almost a year into his unconstitutional presidency.
A year and countless unconstitutional anti-American administrative decisions later, most Americans still aren’t listening, and as a result, their future looks grim so long as they fail to ask the right questions and demand truthful answers.
Forget about where Obama may or may not have been born. This is a side show aimed at misdirecting public attention and allowing the global left to pass off all dissenters as nothing more than crackpot conspiracy theorists, while the real conspiracy continues to unfold right under our noses.
Obama is unconstitutional by bloodline. The issue of Natural Born Citizen is a statement of bloodline, under natural law, not birth place under common law. Obama’s father was at no time a citizen of the United States. Obama inherited his name, his religion and his citizenship from his father.
So ask again - Why are Obama & Co. friendlier towards known terrorists than towards average American citizens simply upset by the current destruction of their free republic?
If you understand that you are asking this question of an Arab-Muslim, not an African-Christian, then you can probably figure out the correct answer all on your own. Obama was born and raised Muslim, not Christian. His so-called “Christian church” in Chicago is actually a “Black Nationalist Church,” which explains the racist rants of his life-long pastor, Rev. Wright.
But if you still think you are dealing with some new age Marxist Messiah planning to unite the world with American assets, then I challenge you to come up with a single acceptable answer to the obvious questions posed in this column.
Only one more reasonable question remains… How insane does it have to get before the American people wake up, take note and take action?
Since 85% of Americans expect successful terror attacks on USA soil in 2010, it’s clear that 85% of Americans understand that we are indeed, still at war with international Islamic terror. So, why did they elect leaders hell-bent upon helping those terrorists succeed?
Now most Americans are able to see the anti-American Marxist “change” Obama had in mind for America. So, at what point do the people awake and arise in defense of this great nation?
I worry that JFK was right about something else—“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”
Cut off from legislators, ignored by the White House, denied access to the courts and mocked by the leftist press, all peaceful solutions are quickly vanishing. When all peaceful means of redress are exhausted, only violent remedies will remain. Those who have denied the people a peaceful solution will be responsible for the violent solution that follows. I don’t call for it, but anyone who knows Americans well could predict it.
85% of the people are right. We will see successful terror strikes on US soil in 2010 and that’s because the current leadership in Washington DC is committed to that end. Their reaction to the events of 12-25-09 was also predictable.
“It’s becoming clear that the system that has been in place for years now is not sufficiently up to date to take full advantage of the information we collect and the knowledge we have.” - Obama
No… the system Bush had in place prevented a second, third and fourth wave of terror attacks on US soil and took the fight to the enemy abroad. That system did indeed stop any father attacks on US soil for the seven years that followed 9/11/01.
It’s the new system of terror appeasements and support, both here and abroad, put in place by Obama, Holder and Napolitano which has made terror attacks on US soil inevitable again.
The attempted bombing on Flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit has touched off partisan squabbling in Washington. Republicans were sharply critical of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano after she declared on Sunday that “the system worked,” even though the bombing was thwarted only when Abdulmutallab’s device failed to detonate. (from the Newsmax column)
The Napolitano system failed and citizens were left to defend themselves on Flight 253.
In the days following the Flight 253 event, Al Qaeda leaders warned of 300 more bombers coming and counter-terrorism experts around the globe have placed the risk of massive nuclear, biological or chemical attacks on US soil at a 100% certainty. Only the hour and level of devastation are unknown.
This is what the American people voted for in 2008. 52% were dead wrong in November 2008, but 85% are dead right now. It will get worse before it can get any better.
The policies that allowed Abdulmutallab to board Flight 253 will allow countless others to advance their attacks on the US. The Obama military “Rules of Engagement” will cost many more American soldiers their lives, senselessly. Eric Holder’s Civil Rights for Terrorists campaign will set many known enemies of our nation free to kill again… and Americans will die to learn this lesson the hard way.
At the end of the day, you can’t win a war by refusing to acknowledge its existence. You can’t defeat extreme Islam by aiding and abetting Jihadists, and you can’t end the war on terror by refusing to fight the war on terror. You can only get more innocent people killed with such policies.
This is what we can look forward to in 2010. 85% of Americans know it, and thanks to the 15% who don’t, all Americans will pay a heavy price for the decision of the 52% who put these folks in unbridled power.
Is it all just an accident, or does it all serve a “greater good?” You decide how the evidence adds up, but decide soon. The clock is ticking…
JB Williams Most recent columns
JB Williams is a business man, a husband, a father, and a writer. A no nonsense commentator on American politics, American history, and American philosophy. He is published nationwide and in many countries around the world. JB Williams’ website is jb-williams.com/
JB Williams can be reached at: letters@canadafreepress.com
By JB Williams Saturday, January 2, 2010
On Christmas Day 2009, the first of many terror chickens to come, came home to roost when a Nigerian member of Al Qaeda climbed aboard a US commercial flight headed from Amsterdam to Detroit and attempted to set off a chemical bomb mid-flight.
Once again, civilians found themselves in the position of having to provide for their own safety and security as the folks whose primary purpose is to provide for the common defense of the people, came up sorely lacking.
Had it not been for a handful of brave patriots willing to take matters into their own hands, Flight 253 could have ended the futures of everyone on board.
This is what we should expect in a nation that puts its soldiers on trial for taking their oath seriously in the war on terror abroad, while the Obama administration offers known enemy combatants civil rights in criminal courts, by no means designed to handle the complexities of war.
In fact, when the administration sees patriotic American citizens and former military personnel as “potential domestic terrorists” - and known terrorists as mere “criminals,” this is the best outcome we can hope for…
Predictably, Obama was quick on the trigger when taking aim at the agencies responsible for securing commercial flights. As Jim Meyers reports at Newsmax, Obama told reporters: “A systemic failure has occurred, and I consider that totally unacceptable.”]
Referring to the early signals, he said: “Had this critical information been shared, it could have been compiled with other intelligence and a fuller, clearer picture of the suspect would have emerged. The warning signs would have triggered red flags, and the suspect would have never been allowed to board that plane for America.”
Obama is the “systemic failure.” He and his terror-friendly administration, including US Attorney General Eric Holder, who was engaged in the legal defense on known terrorists before being named the head of the US Justice system by Barack Obama, have great difficulty separating “acts of war” from “criminal behaviors”—and—terrorists from US soldiers or even average American citizens for that matter.
As Meyers points out in his Newsmax report based upon a story in the liberal New York Times, “two federal officials told the paper that U.S. intelligence was aware that a Nigerian Muslim was preparing an attack, yet officials did nothing to give warning of such an attack.”
The paper reported Wednesday: “Two officials said the government had intelligence from Yemen before Friday that leaders of a branch of Al Qaeda were talking about ‘a Nigerian’ being prepared for a terrorist attack.”—“But despite those signals, the administration never raised a terror alert, and would-be bomber Abdulmutallab was allowed to board a plane bound for the United States.”
Gee… I wonder why an administration that sees average citizens as “potential terrorists” and actual terrorists as “common criminals” would hesitate to warn the people of the impending danger that lurks within a nation not at all serious about an enemy just as committed to death and destruction today as they were on September 11, 2001.
We are talking about the same folks who still refuse to admit that our nation is at war with extreme Islam around the globe—that we have numerous terror training facilities right here on American soil—or that the Jihadist in Ft. Hood was in fact an Al Qaeda operative in regular contact with known Al Qaeda cells in Yemen, up until he shouted “Allah Akbar” before killing a dozen unarmed soldiers at Ft. Hood.
Despite the fact that Americans, in part, elected Obama on the false belief that Bush and Cheney made America “less safe” by their semi-aggressive “war on terror,” the Washington Times now reports that 85% of Americans now expect terrorist attacks to be successful on American soil in 2010. That’s a cheerful thought full of “hope” for the New Year, huh…
For a “change,” I agree with 85% of Americans…
Still, one is compelled to ask why those responsible for making certain that someone like Abdulmutallab is unable to climb aboard a US commercial flight, chose not to do so?
This is the real point, isn’t it? Someone “in-the-know” chose NOT to share that information with people who could have and allegedly would have stopped Abdulmutallab from climbing aboard Flight 253. It was NOT an “intelligence failure” like 9/11/01… The guy’s own father reported his son MIA after making direct threats against the west.
He reported it to the US Embassy in Yemen, and there was plenty of time to react, had that information been shared with the appropriate agencies. Why wasn’t it?
While we’re at it, why is our federal government treating American soldiers like “enemy combatants” in military courts while offering civilians criminal courts and US Civil Rights to known enemy combatants captured on the battle field?
And here’s the biggest question of all—Why aren’t American citizens demanding answers to these and many more obvious questions?
As Democrat John F. Kennedy said so well—“A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.”
In October of 2008, I wrote a column titled Terrorists, Terrorism and Obama and nobody listened. Voters had been convinced by the leftist lame stream press that even a nobody with life-long ties to terrorists, communists and third world thugs, would be “better than Bush.”
I even asked in a column, Who is باراك حسين أوباما ? – Copy and paste this into your Google translator software. If you still don’t know who and what we elected, there may be no hope for you or the future of this once free and prosperous nation.
It didn’t take a Harvard grad to see it coming, but still, few listened. Obama’s entire past remains in hiding almost a year into his unconstitutional presidency.
A year and countless unconstitutional anti-American administrative decisions later, most Americans still aren’t listening, and as a result, their future looks grim so long as they fail to ask the right questions and demand truthful answers.
Forget about where Obama may or may not have been born. This is a side show aimed at misdirecting public attention and allowing the global left to pass off all dissenters as nothing more than crackpot conspiracy theorists, while the real conspiracy continues to unfold right under our noses.
Obama is unconstitutional by bloodline. The issue of Natural Born Citizen is a statement of bloodline, under natural law, not birth place under common law. Obama’s father was at no time a citizen of the United States. Obama inherited his name, his religion and his citizenship from his father.
So ask again - Why are Obama & Co. friendlier towards known terrorists than towards average American citizens simply upset by the current destruction of their free republic?
If you understand that you are asking this question of an Arab-Muslim, not an African-Christian, then you can probably figure out the correct answer all on your own. Obama was born and raised Muslim, not Christian. His so-called “Christian church” in Chicago is actually a “Black Nationalist Church,” which explains the racist rants of his life-long pastor, Rev. Wright.
But if you still think you are dealing with some new age Marxist Messiah planning to unite the world with American assets, then I challenge you to come up with a single acceptable answer to the obvious questions posed in this column.
Only one more reasonable question remains… How insane does it have to get before the American people wake up, take note and take action?
Since 85% of Americans expect successful terror attacks on USA soil in 2010, it’s clear that 85% of Americans understand that we are indeed, still at war with international Islamic terror. So, why did they elect leaders hell-bent upon helping those terrorists succeed?
Now most Americans are able to see the anti-American Marxist “change” Obama had in mind for America. So, at what point do the people awake and arise in defense of this great nation?
I worry that JFK was right about something else—“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”
Cut off from legislators, ignored by the White House, denied access to the courts and mocked by the leftist press, all peaceful solutions are quickly vanishing. When all peaceful means of redress are exhausted, only violent remedies will remain. Those who have denied the people a peaceful solution will be responsible for the violent solution that follows. I don’t call for it, but anyone who knows Americans well could predict it.
85% of the people are right. We will see successful terror strikes on US soil in 2010 and that’s because the current leadership in Washington DC is committed to that end. Their reaction to the events of 12-25-09 was also predictable.
“It’s becoming clear that the system that has been in place for years now is not sufficiently up to date to take full advantage of the information we collect and the knowledge we have.” - Obama
No… the system Bush had in place prevented a second, third and fourth wave of terror attacks on US soil and took the fight to the enemy abroad. That system did indeed stop any father attacks on US soil for the seven years that followed 9/11/01.
It’s the new system of terror appeasements and support, both here and abroad, put in place by Obama, Holder and Napolitano which has made terror attacks on US soil inevitable again.
The attempted bombing on Flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit has touched off partisan squabbling in Washington. Republicans were sharply critical of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano after she declared on Sunday that “the system worked,” even though the bombing was thwarted only when Abdulmutallab’s device failed to detonate. (from the Newsmax column)
The Napolitano system failed and citizens were left to defend themselves on Flight 253.
In the days following the Flight 253 event, Al Qaeda leaders warned of 300 more bombers coming and counter-terrorism experts around the globe have placed the risk of massive nuclear, biological or chemical attacks on US soil at a 100% certainty. Only the hour and level of devastation are unknown.
This is what the American people voted for in 2008. 52% were dead wrong in November 2008, but 85% are dead right now. It will get worse before it can get any better.
The policies that allowed Abdulmutallab to board Flight 253 will allow countless others to advance their attacks on the US. The Obama military “Rules of Engagement” will cost many more American soldiers their lives, senselessly. Eric Holder’s Civil Rights for Terrorists campaign will set many known enemies of our nation free to kill again… and Americans will die to learn this lesson the hard way.
At the end of the day, you can’t win a war by refusing to acknowledge its existence. You can’t defeat extreme Islam by aiding and abetting Jihadists, and you can’t end the war on terror by refusing to fight the war on terror. You can only get more innocent people killed with such policies.
This is what we can look forward to in 2010. 85% of Americans know it, and thanks to the 15% who don’t, all Americans will pay a heavy price for the decision of the 52% who put these folks in unbridled power.
Is it all just an accident, or does it all serve a “greater good?” You decide how the evidence adds up, but decide soon. The clock is ticking…
JB Williams Most recent columns
JB Williams is a business man, a husband, a father, and a writer. A no nonsense commentator on American politics, American history, and American philosophy. He is published nationwide and in many countries around the world. JB Williams’ website is jb-williams.com/
JB Williams can be reached at: letters@canadafreepress.com
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Imam Linked to Ft. Hood Rampage Believed Among 30 Al Qaeda Killed in Airstrike
Thursday, December 24, 2009 Fox News
The radical Muslim imam linked to the rampage at Fort Hood is believed to have been killed in a Yemen airstrike that may have also taken out the region's top Al Qaeda leader and 30 other militants, a security official told Reuters on Thursday.
The raid in Yemen's east targeted an Al Qaeda leadership meeting held to organize terror attacks. It is believed to have killed Anwar al-Awlaki and at least two senior members in the organization, including the leader of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.
"Awlaki is suspected to be dead [in the air raid]," Reuters quoted an unnamed Yemeni official as saying.
The head of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, Nasser al-Wahishi and his deputy, Saeed al-Saudi Shahrani, were present at the meeting and are believed to have died, but their deaths could not immediately be confirmed.
"The raid was carried out as dozens of members of Al Qaeda were meeting in Wadi Rafadh," a source told AFP, referring to a rugged location about 400 miles east of the capital.
"Members of the group's leadership, including Saad al-Fathani and Mohammad Ahmed Saleh al-Omir, were among those killed," he was quoted as saying.
"Saudis and Iranians at the Wadi Rafadh meeting were also among the dead," said the source, without going into detail.
In an interview posted on Al Jazeera's web site, al-Awlaki said he received an email from Maj. Nidal Hasan on Dec. 17, 2008, "asking for an edict regarding the [possibility] of a Muslim soldier [killing] colleagues who serve with him in the American army."
Awlaki, born in the U.S., said subsequent emails "mentioned the religious justifications for targeting the Jews with missiles"
A Yemeni official, also speaking on condition of anonymity to AFP, said those attending the meeting "planned to launch terrorist attacks against economic installations in Yemen, in retaliation for Yemeni strikes launched last week."
On Dec. 17, warplanes and security forces on the ground attacked what authorities said was an Al Qaeda training camp in the area of Mahsad in the southern province of Abyan. Saleh el-Shamsy, a provincial security official, said at least 30 suspected militants were killed. Witnesses, however, put the number killed at over 60 in the heaviest strike and said the dead were mostly civilians.
Much like the effort with Pakistan's Frontier Corps, the U.S. military has boosted its counterterrorism training for Yemeni forces, and is providing more intelligence, which probably includes surveillance by unmanned drones, according to U.S. officials and analysts.
The Yemeni Interior Ministry said 25 suspected Al Qaeda members were arrested Wednesday in San'a and it has set up checkpoints in the capital to control traffic flow as part of a campaign to clamp down on terrorism.
The United States has repeatedly called on Yemen to take stronger action against Al Qaeda, whose fighters have taken advantage of the central government's weakness and increasingly found refuge here in the past year. Worries over the growing presence are compounded by fears that Yemen could collapse into turmoil from its multiple conflicts and increasing poverty and become another Afghanistan, giving the militants even freer reign.
The country was scene of one of Al Qaeda's most dramatic pre-9/11 attacks, the 2000 suicide bombing of the destroyer USS Cole off the Aden coast that killed 17 American sailors. The government allied itself with Washington in the war on terror, but U.S officials have complained that it often strikes deals with militants.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Sunday, December 20, 2009
U.S. prosecution links drugs to terrorism
The case -- the first of its kind -- portrays northwest Africa as a new danger zone. Three men are accused of being Al Qaeda associates and conspiring to smuggle cocaine.
By Sebastian Rotella
Reporting from Washington - Three men alleged to be Al Qaeda associates were charged Friday with conspiring to smuggle cocaine through Africa -- the first U.S. prosecution linking the terrorist group directly to drug trafficking.
The three suspects, who were charged in federal court in New York, are believed to be from Mali and were arrested in Ghana during a Drug Enforcement Administration sting. Although U.S. authorities have alleged that Al Qaeda and the Taliban profit from Afghanistan's heroin trade, the case is the first in which suspects linked to Al Qaeda have been charged under severe narco-terrorism laws, federal officials said.
The 18-page complaint describes a convergence of mafias and terrorists in northwest Africa that has caused increasing alarm among European, African and U.S. investigators.
Cocaine traffic has risen sharply in West Africa in recent years. Exploiting states that are weakened by corruption, poverty and violence, Latin American mafias have made the region a hub for moving cocaine across the Atlantic and into the booming drug markets of Europe.
Al Qaeda in the Maghreb -- a North African ally of Osama bin Laden's organization -- has muscled into the lucrative cocaine smuggling routes of the Sahara, according to Western and African officials. It existed for two decades under other names before declaring allegiance to Bin Laden in 2006.
Al Qaeda in the Maghreb finances itself partly by protecting and moving loads along smuggling corridors that run through Morocco into Spain and through Libya and Algeria into Italy, according to the complaint and Western investigators.
"We've known about this for a long time, but this is the first actionable thing we've done in response to it," DEA spokesman Rusty Payne said.
The stakes are high because of the potential for Al Qaeda in the Maghreb to use cocaine profits in attacks on the West.
Anti-terrorism investigators cite a harbinger: An Al Qaeda-connected cell of North Africans financed their 2004 Madrid train bombings, which killed 190 people, by dealing hashish and Ecstasy. Moreover, officials said, conversations among informants and suspects have suggested that the lawless region around the Gulf of Guinea is a crossroads for groups united by hatred of the United States -- Al Qaeda, Mexican gangsters, Colombian guerrillas and Lebanese militant groups.
"For the first time in that part of the world, these guys are operating in the same environment in the same place at the same time," said Michael Braun, a former chief of DEA operations. "They are doing business and cutting deals. What's most troubling about this is the personal relationships that these guys are making today, between drug organizations and terror organizations, will become operational alliances in the future."
Authorities say the three suspects charged Friday are not members of Al Qaeda in the Maghreb but allege that they are associates. The case against them is based largely on conversations in which, authorities say, the suspects described the smuggling trade and Al Qaeda's involvement to informants posing as representatives of the FARC guerrillas of Colombia.
In recent years, Western and African investigators have pointed to concrete signs of the convergence of drugs and terrorism in the region.
In 2007, two accused operatives of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, a major player in cocaine trafficking, were arrested in Guinea-Bissau -- described by many as Africa's first "narco-state."
And last year, Morocco's interior minister asserted that Al Qaeda in the Maghreb fighters were enriching themselves by taxing the cocaine smuggling routes in Mali and Mauritania to the south.
"It is a zone where there is a lot of money circulating, with cocaine traffic that is growing fast," Interior Minister Chakib Benmoussa said. "A certain number of terror networks exploit this situation because these groups guarantee, secure the routes."
The charges unsealed Friday allege that the conspiracy began in Ghana in September, when one of the suspects, Omuar Issa, made contact with a DEA informant. The informant presented himself as an anti-Western "Lebanese radical" working with the FARC. That link was not farfetched, Western investigators said, because Lebanese mafias with a presence in West Africa have long played a role in helping Latin American drug lords carve out trafficking routes.
Issa was a facilitator working for a criminal organization active in Ghana, Mali and neighboring countries, the complaint alleges. He discussed a deal to transport cocaine from Ghana through North Africa and into Spain with the protection of Al Qaeda in the Maghreb at a price of $4,200 per kilogram (2.2 pounds), the complaint said.
At meetings in October, Issa introduced the informant to Harouna Toure, another of the suspects, who authorities say is the leader of a criminal organization that works closely with Al Qaeda.
According to the complaint, Toure said his organization would use Land Rovers to drive the load across the desert to Morocco, and he described "two different transportation routes, one through Algeria and Libya and the other through Algeria and Morocco." He told the informant that his group "provides protection for planes that land in their area, including planes from Colombia," the document said.
The complaint also said Toure had described his strong relationship with the Al Qaeda groups that control areas of North Africa: "Toure stated that he has worked with Al Qaeda to transport and deliver between one and two tons of hashish to Tunisia and that his organization and Al Qaeda have collaborated in the human smuggling of Bangladeshi, Pakistani and Indian subjects into Spain."
Al Qaeda in the Maghreb has carried out attacks primarily in Algeria, Mali and Mauritania. The Algeria-based militant group's stated goal is to wage holy war across North Africa and Europe. The militants could use cocaine profits to better arm themselves, expand recruitment and buy off corrupt government allies in the region, investigators said.
And the case that was detailed Friday, Braun said, reveals the dimensions of a threat that has not gotten enough attention in the West.
"The Moroccans have been pounding on the table, warning about the involvement of Al Qaeda in the Maghreb in drug trafficking," he said. "This shows they were right. Nobody in [Washington] has been talking about this threat. The only agency that has really gone after it is the DEA."
sebastian.rotella@latimes.com
By Sebastian Rotella
Reporting from Washington - Three men alleged to be Al Qaeda associates were charged Friday with conspiring to smuggle cocaine through Africa -- the first U.S. prosecution linking the terrorist group directly to drug trafficking.
The three suspects, who were charged in federal court in New York, are believed to be from Mali and were arrested in Ghana during a Drug Enforcement Administration sting. Although U.S. authorities have alleged that Al Qaeda and the Taliban profit from Afghanistan's heroin trade, the case is the first in which suspects linked to Al Qaeda have been charged under severe narco-terrorism laws, federal officials said.
The 18-page complaint describes a convergence of mafias and terrorists in northwest Africa that has caused increasing alarm among European, African and U.S. investigators.
Cocaine traffic has risen sharply in West Africa in recent years. Exploiting states that are weakened by corruption, poverty and violence, Latin American mafias have made the region a hub for moving cocaine across the Atlantic and into the booming drug markets of Europe.
Al Qaeda in the Maghreb -- a North African ally of Osama bin Laden's organization -- has muscled into the lucrative cocaine smuggling routes of the Sahara, according to Western and African officials. It existed for two decades under other names before declaring allegiance to Bin Laden in 2006.
Al Qaeda in the Maghreb finances itself partly by protecting and moving loads along smuggling corridors that run through Morocco into Spain and through Libya and Algeria into Italy, according to the complaint and Western investigators.
"We've known about this for a long time, but this is the first actionable thing we've done in response to it," DEA spokesman Rusty Payne said.
The stakes are high because of the potential for Al Qaeda in the Maghreb to use cocaine profits in attacks on the West.
Anti-terrorism investigators cite a harbinger: An Al Qaeda-connected cell of North Africans financed their 2004 Madrid train bombings, which killed 190 people, by dealing hashish and Ecstasy. Moreover, officials said, conversations among informants and suspects have suggested that the lawless region around the Gulf of Guinea is a crossroads for groups united by hatred of the United States -- Al Qaeda, Mexican gangsters, Colombian guerrillas and Lebanese militant groups.
"For the first time in that part of the world, these guys are operating in the same environment in the same place at the same time," said Michael Braun, a former chief of DEA operations. "They are doing business and cutting deals. What's most troubling about this is the personal relationships that these guys are making today, between drug organizations and terror organizations, will become operational alliances in the future."
Authorities say the three suspects charged Friday are not members of Al Qaeda in the Maghreb but allege that they are associates. The case against them is based largely on conversations in which, authorities say, the suspects described the smuggling trade and Al Qaeda's involvement to informants posing as representatives of the FARC guerrillas of Colombia.
In recent years, Western and African investigators have pointed to concrete signs of the convergence of drugs and terrorism in the region.
In 2007, two accused operatives of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, a major player in cocaine trafficking, were arrested in Guinea-Bissau -- described by many as Africa's first "narco-state."
And last year, Morocco's interior minister asserted that Al Qaeda in the Maghreb fighters were enriching themselves by taxing the cocaine smuggling routes in Mali and Mauritania to the south.
"It is a zone where there is a lot of money circulating, with cocaine traffic that is growing fast," Interior Minister Chakib Benmoussa said. "A certain number of terror networks exploit this situation because these groups guarantee, secure the routes."
The charges unsealed Friday allege that the conspiracy began in Ghana in September, when one of the suspects, Omuar Issa, made contact with a DEA informant. The informant presented himself as an anti-Western "Lebanese radical" working with the FARC. That link was not farfetched, Western investigators said, because Lebanese mafias with a presence in West Africa have long played a role in helping Latin American drug lords carve out trafficking routes.
Issa was a facilitator working for a criminal organization active in Ghana, Mali and neighboring countries, the complaint alleges. He discussed a deal to transport cocaine from Ghana through North Africa and into Spain with the protection of Al Qaeda in the Maghreb at a price of $4,200 per kilogram (2.2 pounds), the complaint said.
At meetings in October, Issa introduced the informant to Harouna Toure, another of the suspects, who authorities say is the leader of a criminal organization that works closely with Al Qaeda.
According to the complaint, Toure said his organization would use Land Rovers to drive the load across the desert to Morocco, and he described "two different transportation routes, one through Algeria and Libya and the other through Algeria and Morocco." He told the informant that his group "provides protection for planes that land in their area, including planes from Colombia," the document said.
The complaint also said Toure had described his strong relationship with the Al Qaeda groups that control areas of North Africa: "Toure stated that he has worked with Al Qaeda to transport and deliver between one and two tons of hashish to Tunisia and that his organization and Al Qaeda have collaborated in the human smuggling of Bangladeshi, Pakistani and Indian subjects into Spain."
Al Qaeda in the Maghreb has carried out attacks primarily in Algeria, Mali and Mauritania. The Algeria-based militant group's stated goal is to wage holy war across North Africa and Europe. The militants could use cocaine profits to better arm themselves, expand recruitment and buy off corrupt government allies in the region, investigators said.
And the case that was detailed Friday, Braun said, reveals the dimensions of a threat that has not gotten enough attention in the West.
"The Moroccans have been pounding on the table, warning about the involvement of Al Qaeda in the Maghreb in drug trafficking," he said. "This shows they were right. Nobody in [Washington] has been talking about this threat. The only agency that has really gone after it is the DEA."
sebastian.rotella@latimes.com
Friday, December 18, 2009
Al Qaeda Reaches Out to Women
Zawahiri's Wife Releases Statement, Tells Women They Can Be Suicide Bombers
By MARK SCHONE
Dec. 18, 2009
Dec. 18, 2009
Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden's second-in-command, has been a regular presence on Islamic web sites for years , releasing statements and videos via al-Qaeda's propaganda arm that blast the West and urge Muslims to wage holy war. Now his wife may have joined the family business.
A grab taken from a video entitled "An invitation to Islam" produced by Al-Qaeda-linked media group as-Sahab and released on the Internet in September, 2006 shows Ayman al-Zawahiri, at an undisclosed date and place.
(AFP/Getty Images)In what is thought to be her first public statement, Omaima Hassan published a statement on Islamic web sites Thursday that encouraged "Muslim sisters" to assist with jihad, but only in suitably feminine ways. She called supporting jihad "an obligation for all Muslims, men and women." ABC News could not independently confirm the authenticity of the statement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)