StormWarning’s Counterterrorism

Many in the blogosphere crowd will be surprised by the answer to this question. But even the question and answer is raising the eyebrows of some people like Evan Kohlmann who know alot more about the al Qaeda mentality thant (I hate freakin’ typos!) almost everyone out there (including myself, of course).

In a commentary posted Monday on the extremist Web site al-Hesbah, which is closely linked to the terrorist group. It said the Arizona Republican would continue the “failing march of his predecessor,” President Bush.

The post apparently draws the conclusion that al Qaeda has successfully lured the U.S. into a trap that had “exhausted its resources and bankrupted its economy,” and goes on to suggest that a terrorist strike might swing the election to McCain and guarantee an expansion of U.S. military commitments in the Islamic world.

In Kohlmann’s post on Counterterrorism Blog, he points out that Randy Scheunemann and Jim Woolsey, McCain advisors quickly spoke to minimize the entry on al-Hesbah as a “blog entry.” Clearly, al-Hesbah is not just another blog site, nor is the propaganda in this particular post meaningless blog-blather.  Six months ago, on April 3, 2006, Al-Qaida’s Organization in Saudi Arabia issued an official communique regarding their relationship with Al-Hesbah: “We can only say good things about our brothers from the Al-Hesbah network…The brothers from Al-Hesbah have provided a superb service to the jihad and the mujahideen and everyone credits them for this.”

Of greatest importance to me and clearly supporting my views all along is Kohlmann’s conclusion that should be read and understood by each and every one of the blog-bursting citizen journalists who have exercised their freedom of speech to express their views to their minions who agree with them, even if the information posted there on their blogs has no real factual value (I’m not going to blockquote this section because it would de-emphasize the type face and I want it to be read):

“There is, of course, a degree of well-deserved irony in John McCain having to defend himself against charges of being a “terrorist enabler”. The McCain campaign has been unforgivably slow to condemn the vocal minority of their supporters at recent campaign rallies who have shouted out “Terrorist!” and “Kill him!” in response to hearing the name of Senator Barack Obama. The fact is, Al-Qaida’s real interest in the current American election cycle has nothing to do with choosing one candidate over the other — clearly, Al-Qaida doesn’t like either candidate. Rather, what Al-Qaida is hoping to witness this political season are internal recriminations, name-calling, racism, xenophobia, disunity, and America tearing at its own social fabric. The motivation is obviously not in crowning the victor, but in prolonging the game. Those foolish individuals who have shown up at political rallies carrying tasteless signs and threatening violence against their own fellow Americans are Al-Qaida’s real allies in this race. They are the ones who are responsible for providing a limitless bounty of propaganda fodder for our global adversaries — and there should be no tolerance in either campaign for such despicable behavior.”

Each every one of the amateurs should read that paragraph carefully, fully and then re-read it. In the search for what you believe is the truth, you have given al Qaeda and its followers, exactly what they wanted.

Is there an attack on the horizon? I don’t know and if I had that information, I wouldn’t be blogging. But contrary to the knee jerk reaction of Randy Scheunemann and Jim Woolsey from the McCain campaign, in my opinion, the meaningless “musings and bravado” has come from many of the conservative blogs that couldn’t focus on issues, and instead spent their time on name calling.

[This may be the best place for me to "get off the bus."]

Al Hesbah, Randy Scheunemann and Jim Woolsey

6 Comments »

Despite the relative calm and void of terrorist attacks on US soil, we are nonetheless a Nation at war. We all must remain vigilent and report anything, as a DHS agent said in a recent presentation that I attended, that “Doesn’t Look Right.” I some circles, a rumor of an attack on October 7 2008 had been spread. The concern is that the source of the initial analysis that was flawed, not that bloggers became the conduit of mis-information.

To think that a self-proclaimed homeland security expert (see this older post from Debbie Schlussel titled, UH-OH! Northeast “Intelligence” Network Steps In It: Fake “Terrorism Expert” Douglas Hagmann Admits Plagiarism, Fabricated Info), a “font of information” with a lack of credibility, and yet a large following (notably among only those who refuse to accept the fact that the National Intelligence Network - or NIN - and its self-proclaimed “experts” are not experts at all) actually knows more than any of our law enforcement agencies (DHS, FBI, NSA etc.) or know more than excessively credible counterterrorism websites and sources of information (one among the many being the Counterterrorism Blog), is what makes the “chicken little/sky is falling” hurricane of words, and bits and bytes, more distrubing. Ask the intelligent question, rather than relying on an unreliable source like NIN. Would none of these credible sources have written something to alert the citizenry if this supposed threat had any merit?

Of course, the argument will always be, “better right than sorry,” or “don’t worry about or be embarrassed for being wrong.” That’s all true. The problem is the source of the information, not the intention of the bloggers who spread the illicit rumor.

In my opinion, spreading an unsubstantiated rumor from a less than credible source, is exactly what the terrorists want. The more often the populace is in any way alerted to an impending terrorist attack, the more desensitized the populace will become, and the less likely they are as a broad population to be ready to respond and react when the real terrorist alert comes. Since I am passed the point of caring, the simple point is that bloggers who choose to spread information from less than credible sources, then “bicycle the blog articles around to other bloggers” do this country a huge disservice. I’m not calling these citizen journalists anything like “unpatriotic.” Quite the opposite, they are doing what they feel is the right and patriotic thing to do (albeit perhaps they are quite naive). But in spreading misinformation and bad intelligence from a less than “intelligent” source, they are not serving the public good. Thousands of people, maybe hundreds of thousands people, walked around the last few weeks thinking that we were going to be attacked yesterday, and yet, we were not attacked.

In my entire circle of friends and associates, many of whom are in the business of counterterrorism and law enforcement and national security, none ever even mentioned the rumored attacks of October 7th, 2008. That is not to say that another attack on US soil is not coming. Someday, regettably, I believe that we will be attacked, and perhaps that attack will happen sooner than later. Perhaps, even, that attack will come from within, from a US based terrorist group, maybe not even one connected to the jihad.

One thing is certain to me (and I care not about any flack I might take for writing this entry or for what I am about to say).

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

October 7, terrorism

No Comments »

Our “friend” Adam Gadahn has resurfaced in a new video that pointed at the economic “problems” as proof that “the enemies of Islam” face defeat. So, he ain’t dead (yet).

“The enemies of Islam are facing a crushing defeat, which is beginning to manifest itself in the expanding crisis their economy is experiencing,” said Gadahn, in a clip of the message distributed by the SITE Intelligence Group, a Washington-based monitor of militant Web sites.

“A crisis whose primary cause, in addition to the abortive and unsustainable crusades they are waging in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq, is their turning their backs on Allah’s revealed laws, which forbid interest-bearing transactions, exploitation, greed and injustice in all its forms.”

In the video, he also appealed to Pakistani Muslims to put their differences aside and to unite.

“It’s time for you to put aside tribal, ethnic, and territorial differences and petty worldly disputes not just for now but forever and unite to restore the glories of your forefathers and hasten, Allah willing, the defeat of the Zionist-Crusader enemy and the establishment of the Islamic state, the Ummah, the so eagerly anticipated,”

It is, still another, Mark Twain moment.

Previous reports on Adam Gadahn rumors:

• Gadahn death rumors continue to surface
March 6, 2008
• Adam Gadahn rumored killed in North Waziristan strike
February 8, 2008

Adam Gadahn

3 Comments »

For a guy who I continue to believe lives only because the War(drug)lords allow him to live, Hamid Karzai has a big set of balls. He is now blaming the British for the re-emergence of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Some people may think they were, but the truth is that they were never gone.

Karzai claims Brown has threatened to withdraw British troops from Helmand province, where 31 of them have died this year, if the president reinstates two provincial governors sacked for alleged dealings in the heroin trade.

I simply cannot accept this “brain fart” from Hamid. The Taliban is still alive because (hold onto your hats my friends), because WE allowed them to live.

All of this “happy talk” about Afghanistan emerging as a free democracy is and was crap! If you actually doubt the consistency of my beliefs and position of this, please read this search of Storm Blog on the key words of losing Afghanistan.” Then since you insist, just check out any discussion of the Durand Line or the ways in which the Pakistanis have negotiated with the Taliban in the Northwest Tribal Regions. IMO, Karzai is a damn lucky man to still be alive!

Karzai, Taliban

No Comments »

As we approach the 7 year mark post Sept 11th, Americans need to be reminded about the prupose of the War on Terrorism. Actually, we shouldn’t need it. But as President Bush prepares to leave office, he is seeking to re-affirm that we are at war with al Qaeda.

Sound strange? Well, I’ve been concerned about American complacency from when the last of the public funerals of those who died in the attacks. And yet, partly because of the passage of time, and partly because the focus of attention has been on Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran as pieces of geography instead of battlegrounds in the war versus al Qaeda. It was al Qaeda that attacked us on September 11, 2001. It was al Qaeda that attacked us at the USS Cole and at the African embassies.

Seven years after the Sept. 11 attacks, Mr. Bush’s advisers assert that many Americans may have forgotten that. So they want Congress to say so and “acknowledge again and explicitly that this nation remains engaged in an armed conflict with Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated organizations, who have already proclaimed themselves at war with us and who are dedicated to the slaughter of Americans.”

The language, part of a proposal for hearing legal appeals from detainees at the United States naval base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, goes beyond political symbolism. Echoing a measure that Congress passed just days after the Sept. 11 attacks, it carries significant legal and public policy implications for Mr. Bush, and potentially his successor, to claim the imprimatur of Congress to use the tools of war, including detention, interrogation and surveillance, against the enemy, legal and political analysts say.

Some lawmakers are concerned that the administration’s effort to declare anew a war footing is an 11th-hour maneuver to re-establish its broad interpretation of the president’s wartime powers, even in the face of challenges from the Supreme Court and Congress.

If not in any other way, this Global War on Terrorism has been miserably mismanaged. September 11th was not and should not be treated as a singular event in history. Aside from the fact that other al Qaeda attacks pre-date Sept. 11th, the question now is how the war will be waged following the election of the next President

Perhaps the attempt to tuck language into legislation is a bit “funky,” but the fact is that too many Americans have lost focus. Many of those Americans are on Capitol Hill. Sadly my dear reader, we have lost our way in my opinion. Paraphrasing: if we forget history, it will repeat itself. We are at a cross roads in our Nation’s history. If we choose wisely, we may actually remain vigilent and remain prepared for the coming of the next attack on our Homeland. “Choose wisely grasshopper” when voting this November. There is only one real choise, and his name is John McCain.

Global War on Terrorism

No Comments »

Almost unthinkably, Arab women who normally must wear a diving suit-like head-to-toe covering on mixed beaches can now wear bikinis on women only beaches! How liberal is that? This is happening only in Egypt where women shed their Sharia veils and undress to bikinis or one piece suits.

Welcome to “La Femme”, French for “The Woman”, in the posh resort of Marina, where women can lounge on sunbeds, tan, join in a daily belly-dance contest or breastfeed their babies shielded by barriers of palm tree branches from the prying eyes of men.

It is gated and shielded and costs $14 dollars on week days and $16 on weekends. Not suprisingly, this is causing quite a stir.

A security guard posted a few yards outside the beach club argued that such places catering to the whims of women were just another form of “decadence”.

A motorist agreed.

“These women should fear God, not men,” he said, asking why they could not keep the belly-dancing for home and family events.

How’s that for your Pavlov moment? Somewhat of a visual jihad???

MARINA Egypt, sharia swimsuit, Sharia veil

No Comments »

The overly simplistic outlooks expressed by “the many” who see our victory vs al Qaeda in Iraq in a vacuum, without noting the “ebb and flow” of a morphing terrorism reveals an implausible blindness to the realities of the GWOT. While celebrating the handover of more provinces in Iraq to the post-Provisional government, lost is the view that al Qaeda and the like see none of the West’s boundaries pencil drawn on maps.

Yes, even as MSNBC declares that al Qaeda is less relevant to the outcome in Iraq, stating that while they haven’t been eliminated entirely, they are less of a threat, what of related areas of conflict, and what happens after the surge? And yes, as you will read in Amy Proctor’s article, Kuwait has opened diplomatic relations with Iraq. Yes, that is significant. And still, I have that nagging “yeah, but” feeling.

Even as it is noted that insurgents in Iraq are “giving up the fight,” the reports of al Qaeda redeploying their forces to Afghanistan, reopening that front in the GWOT, and worse, importing foreign fighters from Turkey, Central Asia, Chechnya and the Middle East, we cannot consider the victory in the now relative skirmish in Iraq to be a sign that we can allow our guard to go down. In fact, with the fresh influx of al Qaeda/Taliban troops to Afghanistan, I fear that we shall once again turn our attention to the once “won” war in Afghanistan.

There are at least two issues which are ignored by those who believe that victory in Iraq is more significant than it is…victory in Iraq which I believe can truly only be declared after the post-Provisional government there is stable and is able to not only provide security, but also reliable services to their people, cannot be determined in simple terms of turning over control to the Iraqis, or even by troop withdrawals by the U.S. The first, is the continuing instability in the north of Iraq where the Turks and Kurds continue to battle. Even without al Qaeda in Iraq, the region remains dangerously unstable.

The second, and probably more significant, issue is that al Qaeda is not a government, or maybe even not an organization. It is a system, and a very adaptable one at that. So, as with the ebb and flow of the sands on an ocean beach, moving ever so slowly with the tides, shifting from one place to the next, often seeing a particular beach grow by ten yards, while two others shrink in size, al Qaeda, a system and methodology of terrorism based on the jihad, continues to morph. Thus, the influence of foreign fighters must be considered.

The Small Wars Journal posted an interesting “interim” report titled, “Beyond Iraq and Afghanistan.”

The data demonstrates that Libya, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen produce the most foreign fighters per Muslim, each averaging from four to eight times as many fighters as the average rate for the twenty countries analyzed. The second tier of foreign fighter producers consists of Kuwait, Syria, Tunisia, and Jordan. While all second tier countries produced less than half as many fighters as the top tier producers, they still produced more than the twenty-country average.

In the Long War Journal, Bill Roggio discusses that the attack at the Nuristan base on July 13th in Afghniastan was a complicated operation in which 200-500 Taliban took over an adjacent village before attacking. Here is a long but key quote:

The assault on the Wanat outpost was conducted by an alliance of extremist groups operating in both Afghanistan and Pakistan, according to reports. A senior Afghan defense official told Al Jazeera that “various anti-government factions including Taliban, al-Qaeda and the Hezb-i-Islami faction were involved” in the strike.

Tamim Nuristani, who served as governor of Nuristan before President Hamid Karzai relieve him of his post for criticizing a US airstrike that is thought to have killed Afghan civilians, said Taliban and Pakistani groups banded together for the attack. “The (attackers) were not only from Nuristan but from other districts,” Nuristani said.

“They are not only Taliban. They were (Pakistan-based) Lashkar-e-Taiba, Hezb-i-Islami, Taliban and those people who are dissatisfied with the (Karzai) government after these recent incidents,” Nuristani said, intimating the attack was revenge for the US airstrike. “They all came together for this one.”

And then Roggio discusses the mounting of U.S. troops on the border with Pakistan, returing fire of the Taliban fighters. Another quote, discussing the border:

Tensions along the ill-defined, rugged border have escalated since the Pakistani government initiated its latest round of peace accords with the Taliban and allied extremists in the tribal areas and settled districts in the Northwest Frontier Province.

Some people’s mistaken belief that the defeat of al Qaeda in Iraq is more than a minor victory in the much longer war against Islamic extremism is naive in my opinion. Further, to not see the defeat of al Qaeda in Iraq as much more than pushing the bully to another part of the playground is a dangerous outlook.

It must not be forgotten that al Qaeda will morph and shift and change as is required to adapt in the various skirmishes. Doug Farah discussed “The Morphing War Against Al Qaeda in Iraq” last February.

The point is that, while there seems to be little doubt that the al Qaeda-linked groups in Iraq are hurt, the next iteration of the groups may make them even harder to get at.

Perhaps celebrate the “victory” in Iraq (when it is actually time to do so). But do not try to convince me, or others who know more than I, that the defeat of al Qaeda in Iraq will do nothing much more than shift their attention and their resources to other fields of battle that are softer and more vulnerable.

al Qaeda, morphing, State Department

2 Comments »

Anyone who reads this space knows that I’ve frequently made predictions. Those among you also know that at the predicted time, it is time to step back, reflect and recognize the validity of those predictions. On December 26, 2007 Austin Bay wrote, “Sometime within the next six months or so, al Qaeda or Saddamist terrorists will attempt a Tet offensive.” The article urged readers to believe that the jihadists sought to emulate the strategic political effects North Vietnam’s 1968 attack obtained.

Mr. Bay then went to draw an historic parallel between the peacewing of the Democratic party during the Civil War led by Clement Vallandigham to Senator Harry Reid (who Bay called “our era’s Vallandighams”). And further, Mr. Bay predicted that:

Their “ultimate Iraqi Tet” would feature simultaneous terror strikes in every major Iraqi city. These simultaneous strikes would inflict hideous civilian casualties with the goal of discrediting Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s and General David Petraeus’ assessments that Iraqi internal security has improved. The terrorists would reduce Iraqi government buildings to rubble.

Well, I don’t want to be proven wrong by near term events, but given the “effectiveness” of the surge. there is reason to expect that no Iraqi Tet will occur (too soon at least). Of course, Bay bought himself a bit of leeway by then saying that the Election period in November would give al Qaeda, the jihad, the Islamic Fundamentalists etc. the opportunity to inflict “sensational carnage that even momentarily seeds the perception of defeat is their only chance of victory.”

But I’ll bet that Bay got his 10 votes within minutes…LOL And yes, I’ve had this article bookmarked since it first appeared simply to see if the bold prediction played out in reality.

Austin Bay, Terrorists Tet

2 Comments »

Enabling and promoting terrorism while supressing free speech is what the United Nations seems to be these days. In fact, the UN Human Rights Council not only frowns on speaking about jihad, terrorism and shariah law, but also is promoting the conspiracy theory that the Sept. 11 attacks were an “inside job.”

This is discussed at length here

The UNHRC ban on debate regarding Sharia came as a result of a three minute joint statement by the Association for World Education with the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) to the Human Rights Council on women’s rights and the impact of Sharia law. These NGOs sought to address international issues of violence against women, specifically, the stoning of women, “honor killings” of women, and female genital mutilation, as a result of Sharia law.

In more detail, the bozo (Richard Falk) who is the special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories and investigates alleged Israeli violations of human rights law for the U.N.’s Human Rights Council also wants to investigate the World Trade Center and Pentagon tragedies to determine if they were, in fact, an “inside job.”

…investigate whether “some sort of controlled explosion from within” destroyed the Twin Towers, he told FOXNews.com.

“I do think there are questions that haven’t been answered, questions about the way the buildings collapsed and the failure to heed a variety of signals that there was danger coming,” Falk said.

John Bolton comments that while this position may be “conventinal wisdom” among some delegations at the UN, Falk’s beliefs are “fruit cake city.”

The executive director of UN Watch, the NGO that watches the UN, Hillel Neuer has called for Falk’s removal.

“He should resign,” said Neuer, who raised concerns about Falk’s ability to be an objective observer. Neuer has also criticized Falk for being biased against Israel.

“If he were a principled person he would recognize the fact that he has very extreme views,” Neuer said.

I’ve said it many times in the past. The best use for the United Nations now is to through them out of the United States, make them relocate to the Hague, and then let Donald Trump devleop an entire community on the East River. That would also eliminate the persistent problem of diplomats parking illegally on the streets of Manhattan, blocking thru-traffic and ignoring the fines.

Hillel Neuer, Human Rights Council, John Bolton, UN Watch

No Comments »

Never ever forget that we are dealing with cold blooded killers who have co-opted Islam. Even when they are found “not guilty” of writing bad poetry, “these” people are dangerous.

NEFA has released a new slide presentation about a woman known as the “Lyrical Terrorist” Samina Malik, who along with Sohail Qureshi was accused of planning terrorism in Afghanistan and other places against coalition. Malik was prosecuted for possessing the documents, and not for her poetry. See Kohlmann’s post at Counterterrorism Blog.

Excerpt from “How to Behead” by Samina Malik
It’s not as messy or as hard as some may think.
It’s all about the flow of the wrist.
Sharpen the knife to its maximum.
And before you begin to cut the flesh.
Tilt the fool’s head to its left.
Saw the knife back and forth.
No doubt that the punk will twitch and scream.
But ignore the donkey’s ass.
And continue to slice back and forth.
You’ll feel the knife hit the wind and food pipe.
But Don’t Stop.
Continue with all your might.
About now you should feel the knife vibrate.
You can feel the warm heat being given off.
But this is due to the friction being caused.

More of Malik’s poetry:
• In a poem titled “Raising Mujahideen Children,“ Malik suggested that indoctrination should begin at 7 years of age: “Show the children videos and pictures of mujahideen and tell them to become strong like them…Explain how the Mujahideen fear no man - they fear Allah alone, and for his sake they are able, willing and capable to do anything in defence of Islam.”
• In a poem titled “The Living Martyrs,” Malik wrote: “For the living martyrs are awakening and Kuffars [non-believers] world soon to be shaking.”
• She also wrote, “Let us make Jihad/ Move to the front line/ To chop chop head of kuffar swine,” as well as that “Kafirs your time will come soon, and no one will save you from your doom.
• Malik argued: “to partake in something and to write about something are two different things.” She continued, “this does not mean I wanted to convert my words into actions.” She even claimed she “did not realise there was such a thing as extremism.”
• Her defense team also drew parallels with the WWI poetry of Wilfred Owen: “Poetry can be described as disturbing, shocking, even repulsive. What is the intent? Is it to shock, to revolt? That in itself doesn’t make it criminal and it doesn’t help you to get into the mind of who has written it.”

And now for the “punch line.” While at first convicted, she was let go because the British courts rules that actions and not thoughts were illegal.

Lyrical Terrorist, Samina Malik

4 Comments »

If you read certain reports like this one, you might take the position that the War in Afghanistan against the Taliban is over (I like “brink of defeat” and “decapitated” - chuckle). Then there is the statement by Agha Lalai Wali, an official with the government-sponsored Peace and Reconciliation Commission in Kandahar who said, “The Taliban are getting stronger and stronger, and after they attacked the prison, that gave them higher morale.” How can that be?

Hundreds of Taliban fighters took control of seven villages in southern Afghanistan on Monday in what appeared to be a major offensive near the country’s second-largest city, according to Afghan officials.

Some people believe that the “sophisticated” and well planned jail break is an indication of the Taliban’s growing strength. IF the Taliban is losing the fight in Afghanistan, but moving to the Pakistani side of the Durand Line which in essence is a non-existent and arbitrary border between the two countries largely unrecognized by the mountain tribes, then I wonder who is actually winning or losing.

Kandahar jail break

No Comments »

OK, so I’m late posting on this ridiculous Supreme Court ruling, so I will keep it short. Jeffrey Imm on Counterterrorism Blog writes, “Don’t You Know There’s A War On?” Until this ruling, it was never considered that the Constitution covered foreign enemy combatants.

Supreme Court Justice Kennedy ignores the reality that the U.S. Constitution was for American citizens, not foreign enemy combatants during wartime, by arrogantly demanding that “[t]he laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times.”(Justice Kennedy Majority Opinion, page 70).

The reality is that when this ruling was first announced, I had recently returned from another grueling business trip. In my moments of time, I sought sources that would detail any indication that even non-resident immigrants (legal) had Constitutional rights. While I am fairly certain that a lawyer or two among the readers here may chime in, I came across this dialog, Immigration Law: The Constitutional Rights of Non-Citizens. I believe that this ruling is a sign of justice being blind. This time. however, blind to the realities that this War on Terrorism is a long war.

Jeff Imm’s post says it all…and makes the point better than any other writer I have seen on this subject. What I believe is that this ruling is likely to increase the battlefield deaths of enemy combatants. Kill of them! Kill them all!!! There are no rights on the battlefield…are there?  Check out the outrage here.

Constitutional rights, habeus corpus, Justice Kennedy, Supreme Court

No Comments »

EDITORIAL (Got Some Dissonance? Read it anyway)

For quite some time I have battled against the “blogospheric obsession” with Obama’s middle name. I’ve known that those who focused on his name and heritage did more harm than good, and that they were actually playing into the hands of the jihadists by amplifying the expected anti-Muslim sentiment. Yes, each and every one who insists on (falsely) highlighting Obama’s middle name, claiming that he is really a Muslim, or other shameless assertions, is helping the terrorist cause…(by the way, it is easy enough in my opinion to fight an Obama candidacy without resorting to racial and religious innuendo and falsehood).

In today’s Counterterrorism Blog entry by Evan Kohlmann (and yes “Virginia” he is an expert), makes it clear how much damage those people who insist on falsely accusing Barak Obama of being a Muslim or worse (as one blog post earlier today asserted - was the Manchurian Candidate) are actually doing (thank you Evan Kohlmann for your clarity).

Thus, the real terrorism-related problem here is how to deal with the long-term political fallout stemming from the ignorant and highly-polarized American portrayals of Islam unleashed during the context of the U.S. election, which are now inevitably being manipulated by Al-Qaida as propaganda fodder to recruit new sympathizers and terrorists. Even setting aside its obvious partisan bias, this form of reckless and irresponsible “scholarship” has no rightful place in the Christian Science Monitor nor, as Clark Hoyt rightly noted, on the New York Times Op-Ed page.

Kohlmann focuses his attention (actually ire if I may characterize his feelings) on two articles, President Apostate? from the NY Times Op-Ed page and Barack Obama – Muslim apostate? For Al Qaeda, the answer – and the implication – is clear. from the Christian Science Monitor

The problem, as Mr. Kohlmann points out, is that neither article is substantiated. A third articlecited by Kohlmann, also from the NY Times, makes it very clear that in referring to Obama (as President) as the “Apostate” is very, very wrong (headed). Clark Hoyt, the author of the third article (”Entitled to their Opinions, Yes. But Their Facts?”) spent the time to interview Muslim scholars (I am certain here, that those who have spent their blogging time making it clear that their opinion was that Obama was a Muslim, will now choose to dismiss these Muslim scholars)…and found that they all disagreed with Luttwak’s “opinion.”

So Hoyt’s conclusion is this: When writers purport to educate readers about complex matters, and they are arguably wrong, I think The Times cannot label it opinion and let it go at that.

UPDATES:
NYT has second thoughts about “Sharia smear” on Obama

“The Times Op-Ed page, quite properly, is home to a lot of provocative opinions,” Hoyt wrote. “But all are supposed to be grounded on the bedrock of fact. Op-Ed writers are entitled to emphasize facts that support their arguments and minimize others that don’t. But they are not entitled to get the facts wrong or to so mangle them that they present a false picture.”

Where Facts are Made-Up

As a blogger, I’m hardly in a position to dispute Luttwak’s right to opine on matters about which he knows nothing. But if I were the editor of an op-ed page and I were interested in publishing a provocative opinion piece grounded in an interpretation of Islamic law, I would try to get a scholar of Islamic jurisprudence to write it.

Dear readers…if some of you have consistently harped on the unsubstantiated rumor that Barak Obama is a Muslim in hiding, and that he is somehow the “Manchurian Candidate,” I urge you to re-think your views (if that is within your capability and mental capacity). As far as I am concerned, Evan Kohlmann is an acknowledged expert in things relating to counterterrorism and the jihad. I read his material, and the material of others, as often as my time permits. Kohlmann has written in words far better and more pointed than I have been able to muster til now: “…the ignorant and highly-polarized American portrayals of Islam unleashed during the context of the U.S. election, which are now inevitably being manipulated by Al-Qaida as propaganda fodder to recruit new sympathizers and terrorists.” Yes, ignorant.

You are all, and have been, playing into the hands of the jihadists who want to prove just how anti-Muslim the United States is…so, all of you have been aiding and abetting the enemy. Expecting that Obama will declare himself the presumptive winner of the Democratic nomination for the Presidency (confirming my long held conviction that Hillary would not be the nominee - unless something major occurs to change the Obama-Clinton nomination race), it is now time to focus on defeating Obama on the policies and on the capabilities of leadership. Can you do that? Frankly, I doubt it very much.

apostasy, Clark Hoyt, Evan Kohlmann, Manchurian Candidate, Obama

4 Comments »

This is early, and the source is somewhat dubious since ABC has had a recent spate of “breaking news” blurts that diminishes the network to a “blogoburster,” but ABC is reporting that “officials familiar with highly sensitive intelligence on this issue,” that Iran and al Qaeda are in high level discussions. While questioning whether Iran will release bin Laden’s son’s (who are at the core of these discussions), the motives are unclear.

“The Iranians know there would be hell to pay if these guys were set free,” a U.S. official told ABC News.

“Iran likely sees these individuals, as major bargaining chips,” says another official. “How and when they’re going to use those chips or whether they are going to keep them in the bank is part of an ongoing strategic discussion they are having internally.”

Apparently, after September 11th, al Qaeda split into two groups, one heading to the mountains of Pakistan and the other, led by Saif al Adel (an Egyptian), went to Iran (Adel is suspected as the leader of the group that attacked the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 - the US State Department has put a $5 million bounty on his head). The group that fled to Iran is said to include al Qaeda’s shura (management council), and over 2 dozens members including some of bin Laden’s relatives, including two of his sons, Saad and Hamza.

“Al Qaeda would like to get those folks a deal and they’ve been trying to work a deal,” a senior defense official tells ABC News. “Right now there is greater effort being applied by al Qaeda to seek a resolution.” Although Iran has recently signaled a willingness to discuss the issue, this official says, “I don’t see the Iranian government desiring to work very fast or quickly on that. ”

AND

“Iran has repeatedly resisted numerous calls to transfer custody of its AQ detainees to their countries of origin or third countries for interrogations or trial,” the report says. “Iran also continued to fail to control the activities of some AQ members who fled to Iran following the fall of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.”

Motives behind these reported talks?
* Under one theory, the talks are a reaction to al Qaeda’s recent anti-Iranian rhetoric…Iran may be making an unspoken threat to al Qaeda’s leadership: If al Qaeda attempts to attack Iran, these people will suffer.

* Iran may have initiated the talks as a threat to the United States, that if the U.S. takes hostile action against Iran, these captives could be released, set free to plot attacks against the West.

Either way, I have an issue with the ABC statement: ABC News interviewed several high-level U.S. national security officials for this story. Because of the sensitive nature of intelligence on this subject, all spoke on the condition that their names not be used. We also asked the government of Iran to comment on this story. The spokesman for the Iranian Mission to the United States said he could not answer our specific questions but told us combating terrorism “remains one of the main Iranian political priorities.”

Also covered by the Right Truth in Iran Joining Forces with al Qaeda.

Frankly, I’ll be interested to see how this all plays out in the next few days.

ABC News, al Qaeda, Iran, Kenya and Tanzania bombings, Saif al Adel

2 Comments »

As I have before, I find myself in a sort of political “nowhere land” largely because despite what I believe in my heart, I also have a deep-seated distain for the type of personal attack politics that now pervades our society. On many issues, including the War in Iraq, I am strongly Republican (even though I feel that policy, strategy and tactical mistakes have been made). Yet when I voice my pro-choice belief, I am immediately challenged and branded a “librul.” It is clear that one is not afforded the opportunity (or privilege) of walking that thin-line in the American Middle.

There is nothing in either Democratic Party candidate that could prompt me to vote for them. Frankly, I am glad that John McCain, regardless of his flaws (aren’t we all flawed afterall?), is the candidate for the Republican Party (I am equally thrilled that a social, or “values” conservative is not the party’s nominee).

At the same time, it is impossible to maintain my views in World and National Affairs, focused on security both home and abroad, and not be appalled by this video compilation in which the Democratic Party leaders ask for what amounts to be a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq.

The road to democracy, our continuing quest to perfect an already perfect Union, remains a challenge each day. If not motivated solely by partisan politics, but in fact, driven by strongly held beliefs, these Democratics leaders are entitled to their opinions.

The reality is as former Secretary of State Powell noted…”we broke it, we need to fix it” (or something close to that). Leaving Iraq and abandoning the Middle East…in fact, abandoning the “fix the Middle East” strategy of the Bush Administration can only lead to the emboldening of those people who our State Department and Department of Homeland Security refuse to call what they are, Isalamic Fundamentalist Jihadists, exactly the opportunity they plan…a World power without the resolve to see through to the end an effort, regardless how flawed, poorly planned and implemented, or even falsely justified…and with that, the Long War of the Global War on Terrorism will be both longer, and more difficult to win.

Prevail we must…for the sake of our democracy, we must. And we will. Despite the character assassination, the inuendo, the gossip, the lies and falsehoods, the “swift boating” and all of the rest of the dirty, Internet inspired politics…we will emerge the day after this coming election day with a President who will have won the most Electoral votes, and as envisioned by our Founding Fathers, power will transfer, and the Nation shall prevail. In what state the World will be on that day, is a completely different question.

democracy, librul, McCain

2 Comments »