Category Archives: Osama Bin Laden

Terror Alert Sign of Resurgent Al Qaeda

The terror alerts issued by the US State Department, Interpol and the foreign offices of Great Britain, France and Germany should worry Westerners very much.

US embassy in Sanaa, Yemen

US embassy in Sanaa, Yemen

 

If there is indeed specific information about a credible threat that closed down US embassies in 22 nations, grounded 6 international airline flights (so far) and resulted in the most serious global travel advisory put out by the US State Department in several years (covering an entire month) then it is an indication that Al Qaeda is not only NOT “on the run,” but is evidently more prolific than ever in terms of its reach.

Under such circumstances, it’s not a question of “if” Western targets will be struck again, but “when.”

We have been lied to about the magnitude and scope of the Jihadist terrorist threat. That is the unmistakable conclusion.

Some cynics and skeptics seem to think that the whole issue has been contrived by the Obama administration for political purposes, but this makes no sense at all.

Obama has repeatedly declared victory over Al Qaeda. He essentially declared that the killing of Osama Bin Laden placed the terrorist organization on the ropes and all but announced an end to the war on terror, complete with a re-orientation of the US military toward a significantly smaller force primarily focused on the Asia-Pacific region.

Moreover, his policy of drone strikes was supposed to have decimated Al Qaeda’s leadership structure.

Apparently none of what Obama told us was correct.

So for Obama now to use that same terrorist threat to improve his political fortunes makes no sense at all.

Think about it: So when Obama repeatedly says Al Qaeda is on the run and for all practical purposes defeated—-it’s regarded as propaganda for the masses. And then when the State Dept issues a global travel advisory and closes 22 embassies because of a threat from Al Qaeda, that’s also propaganda for those same masses?

It doesn’t add up.  I think Obama lied about Al Qaeda in the first place. It was in his best interests to remove a major national security threat from the public sphere and, with the aid of a compliant media, he successfully did so. But it was never anything more than words on paper and talk in pretty speeches.

Al Qaeda isn’t on the run. They aren’t defeated. And this terror alert, unfortunately, isn’t phony.

The alert coincides with the end of Ramadan, a holy month in Islam in which America has often restrained itself in fighting Islamic enemies, but during which Jihadists have actually escalated their attacks. The closure of the embassies comes on the Ramadan “Night of Power.” Without getting into obnoxious detail about Islamic doctrine, all you really need to know about the “Night of Power” is that it was the day on which the USS Cole was attacked in Aden harbor in Yemen in 2000. And this is the same week during which the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in east Africa were bombed back in 1998.

9541a9cb61

So, when intelligence emerges suggesting that US targets will come under attack at this time, it is something to take seriously, especially given the fact that Al Qaeda leader Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri released a statement in the past week instructing Al Qaeda’s followers to attack US targets now.

Perhaps the most significant evidence that this terror alert should be taken seriously comes from the fact that France, Germany and Great Britain have all shut their embassies in Yemen down as well and issued travel advisories to their citizens. Unless they’re in on some scheme to help Obama’s approval rating, my guess is there is a real threat out there.

German diplomatic post in Yemen

German diplomatic post in Yemen

Al Qaeda is real, folks. They’ve been real for decades now and they’re deadly. To assume otherwise is suicidal. To make matters worse, there is evidence to indicate that they are now as capable as they have been at any time since 1998.

Consider the fact that in the past month there have been large-scale prison breakouts in nine Islamic nations, including Iraq, Libya, Pakistan and Yemen. The timing and scale of these breakouts in which mostly Jihadi fighters made their escapes, is unprecedented. Interpol suspects Al Qaeda involvement and coordination and has issued an advisory to that effect. On 22 July, 500 Jihadis, including senior level Al Qaeda operatives, escaped from Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. Five days later, on 27 July, 1100 inmates escaped from a prison near Benghazi, Libya. And four days after that, on 31 July, the Taliban led a breakout from a prison in Pakistan in which an unknown number of Jihadis escaped.

Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq

Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq

These operations were almost certainly orchestrated and coordinated, most probably with help from the inside in each country. This was a massive undertaking that demonstrates Al Qaeda’s military as well as political power in the Islamic world. With so many Jihadis back on the loose, Westerners better brace themselves.

 

 

 

 

Obama Doubles Down on His “Al Qaeda is Defeated” Meme, Sort Of

Despite the fact that Al Qaeda is conducting active operations around the world, including recent operations in which Americans were killed in Libya and Algeria, President Obama continues to spread the myth that Al Qaeda is defeated.

He has, however, changed his tune a little bit.

Ever since the killing of Osama Bin Laden, Obama has been declaring that Al Qaeda has been defeated or is “on the run.”

Now he qualifies his statement: he now says that the “core” of Al Qaeda is “on the path to defeat,” what ever that means.

Actually, it means nothing. It is meaningless political babble.

Judging from the article linked below, Obama seems to think that if the US withdraws from combat with the Jihadists, the war will be over. This attitude isn’t just naive, it’s downright dishonest and dangerously irresponsible…

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/core-of-al-qaeda-on-path-to-defeat-barack-obama/articleshow/18414243.cms

CAIR’s New Disinformation Campaign on “Jihad”

1347800307_jihad-humaidjpg__35180_zoom

By Christopher Holton

The internet has literally been littered with news reports about a new propaganda campaign being waged by the head of the Council on American Islamic Relations’ (CAIR) Chicago director.

The man’s name is Ahmed Rehab and his methodology has been to run advertising on buses to change the public perception of the word “Jihad.”

Rehab has chosen two of the most liberal cities in America in which to conduct his campaign so far: Chicago and San Francisco.

The name of the campaign is “MyJihad” and it aims to convince Americans that Jihad only means “to struggle” or, more specifically, an internal, personal struggle. Rehab claims that this is the “true” meaning of Jihad.

Unfortunately for Rehab, he is only partially correct and any campaign that claims that the term Jihad only means an internal, personal struggle amounts to disinformation. The dualistic nature of Islam, in this case as it applies to the meaning of “Jihad,” is well documented both in historical Islamic doctrine and in contemporary use of the term.

And Jihad definitely does not only mean an internal, personal struggle. In fact, the most widespread meaning of the term that is of particular interest to Westerners who are threatened by Jihad does in fact entail violence.

A false and misleading statement has been attributed to the San Francisco chapter head of CAIR, Zahra Billoo:

“A common misconception of the word jihad is that it means armed struggle or holy war, and that is something that has been perpetrated by many who’ve made careers out of pushing anti-Muslim sentiment.”

Such a meaning for Jihad has nothing to do with anyone with an “anti-Muslim sentiment.” It has everything to do with Islam itself.

Let us examine definitions of Jihad from two authoritative sources.

 Jihad According to the Quran

****************************************

6183g0glblL

*******************************

The first is the Quran itself. In this case, specifically The Noble Qu’ran, translated into English by two scholars: Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali, PhD, professor of Islamic Faith and Teachings at the Islamic University, Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah, Saudi Arabia and Dr. Muhammad Mushin Khan of the same institution. The Noble Qu’ran was published by Darussalam Publishers and Distributors, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. It has been catalogued by King Fahad National Library. On page 818, in a glossary accompanying the text of the Quran, The Noble Qu’ran provides the following definition of Jihad:

“Jihad: Holy fighting in the Cause of Allah or any other kind of effort to make Allah’s Word superior. Jihad is regarded as one of the fundamentals of Islam.”

Can the Quran itself be promoting “anti-Muslim sentiment” as CAIR’s Zahra Billoo asserts?

Jihad According to Shariah

Our second source is Reliance of the Traveler: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law.

RELIANCE OF THE TRAVELLER

Reliance of the Traveler is one of the world’s most widely read manuals of Shariah law. It has been endorsed by a variety of Islamic authorities, including Al Azhar University in Cairo, IIIT (International Institute of Islamic Thought) in Herndon, Virginia, the Fiqh Council of North America, the Islamic Fiqh Academy in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the Mufti of the Jordanian Armed Forces andthe Imam of the Mosque of Darwish Pasha in Damascus, Syria.

These can hardly be termed as those pushing “anti-Muslim sentiment” as Billoo claims.

On page 599 of Reliance of the Traveler, readers can find the following passage:

o9.0 JIHAD

(O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion…

The scriptural basis for jihad, prior to scholarly consensus is such Koranic verses as:

(1) “Fighting is prescribed for you” (Koran 2:216);

(2) “Slay them wherever you find them” (Koran 4:89);

(3) “Fight the idolators utterly” (Koran 9:36);

and such hadiths as the one related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said:

“I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah”;

and the hadith reported by Muslim,

“To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.”

Jihad According to Terrorists

If Jihad truly means to “struggle” and not warfare to establish the religion, how does CAIR explain the names of all these terrorist organizations?

Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami (Pakistan, Bangladesh, India)

Islamic Front for Armed Jihad (Algeria)

Islamic Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine (Lebanon)

Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine (Israel)

Islamic Jihad Organization (Lebanon)

Islamic Jihad Union (Uzbekistan)

Jama’at al-Jihad al-Islami (Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Russia)

Laskar Jihad (Indonesia)

United Jihad Council (India)

Contemporary Video Evidence of Widespread Use of the Term “Jihad”

Finally, there is a mountain of video evidence which illustrates vividly the widespread contemporary use of the term Jihad:

First, we have a 10 minute video from a Palestinian Authority TV children’s show using the term Jihad:

************************************************************

************************************************************

Next we have a 1-minute video of female terrorists from the group Islamic Jihad:

************************************************************

************************************************************

Here is a 2-minute news report on Taliban fighters vowing to continue to wage jihad after the death of Osama Bin Laden:

************************************************************

************************************************************

Then there’s this 6-minute tribute to the “Lion of Jihad,” Osama Bin Laden:

************************************************************

************************************************************

A 24-second sound byte from British-based Imam Amjen Choudary on Jihad in Islam:

************************************************************

************************************************************

More from Choudary; in this case a 2-minute warning that Jihad is on its way.

************************************************************

************************************************************

A 2-minute segment from Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, leader of Al Qaeda, on Jihad:

************************************************************

************************************************************

A 40-second call by Zawahiri to Pakistanis to rise up in Jihad:

************************************************************

************************************************************

A 3-minute news report on Somali Al Qaeda affiliate Al Shabaab using Social Media to call Muslims to Jihad:

************************************************************

************************************************************

A 4-minute posthumous call to Jihad by American-born Anwar al Awlaki. Keep in mind that, before he became head of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, Awlaki had been an Imam at mosques in San Diego, Denver and northern Virginia and was regarded as a great “moderate” who was a favorite show pony for “outreach” programs. He was invited to the Pentagon. He delivered sermons to the Congressional Muslim Staffers Association on Capitol Hill. Prominent CAIR officers, employees and members attended these sermons. At least one former CAIR employee who attended Awlaki’s sermons on Capitol Hill in Washington DC is now in jail on terrorism charges:

************************************************************

************************************************************

A call to Jihad by Yasir Arafat–three years after signing the Oslo Accords…

************************************************************

************************************************************

A 5-minute call to Jihad by the Chairman of the Association of Muslim Scholars in Syria:

*************************************************************

*************************************************************

A 4-minute call to Jihad from the Sudanese Minister of International Cooperation:

*************************************************************

*************************************************************

So, the Obama State Department declares the “War on Terrorism” Over

Late last week a State Department spokesman uttered “The war on terror is over.”

That utterance was followed  up by President Obama’s surprise trip to Afghanistan (“coincidentally” on the anniversary of the operation that killed Osama Bin Laden, or so we are told…). While in Afghanistan, Obama gave a political speech aimed at folks back home in America in which he echoed the sentiments of his State Department spokesman in essentially declaring Al Qaeda beaten.

Before we deconstruct this politically motivated fantasy, we should probably point out that we are not now, nor were we truly ever engaged in a “war on terrorism.” We don’t want to belabor the point because many observers have pointed out this reality over the years. Terrorism is a method, not an enemy. As the late philosopher and columnist Jeff Cooper said shortly after President Bush named this struggle the “war on terrorism:” “Give us an enemy we can shoot at, Mr. President.”

But it was not to be. Obama stopped referring to the war on terrorism as soon as he came into office, his administration floating the term “overseas contingency operations” instead.

That drew instant and widespread ridicule and we haven’t heard the term mentioned much since it was originally floated after Obama got into office.

We should have paid closer attention. This wasn’t just about changing names. This was about ending the war effort. The goal in changing the name was to prepare the American people for an end to the war. Obama came into office knowing he was going to end the war–unilaterally. The fact is, the war and the threat of terrorism don’t help liberals get elected. There was a reason why the word “terrorism” was never uttered at the 2004 Democratic National Convention when the Democrats nominated Senator John Kerry.

The DNC did the polling and the focus groups and found out that the issue was a loser for them. Ever since, the hard left has been hell bent for leather on ending the war effort.

Obama’s State Department spokesman claimed last week that “since most of Al Qaeda’s is now dead” Islamists have other places to turn for legitimate inclusion in the political process.

There is so much to comment on here that we hardly know where to begin.

First of all, most of the original members of Al Qaeda were dead before Obama even got into office. Most estimates were that some 75% of Al Qaeda’s leadership had been killed or captured in Afghanistan in Operation Enduring Freedom. The killing of Osama Bin Laden just over a year ago likely did not add much to the operational degradation of Al Qaeda. Despite claims to the contrary, it is highly unlikely that Bin Laden still exercised operational control over Al Qaeda around the globe at the time of his death. So, this is hardly a new development as the Obama State Department spokesman implies.

We now know from seized documents and from former intelligence operatives that Bin Laden had, for years, limited his communications with the outside world, including Al Qaeda, to a single human courier. There is simply no way he could possibly have maintained operational authority or control over the organization in such circumstances.

This suggests that his death did not add substantially to the degradation of Al Qaeda’s operational capability.

Bin Laden was barely involved any more. He wasn’t even in a position to raise money–his chief role for years in the past. Nor did he find it necessary to issue frequent videotaped messages to his followers or to the world at large, something he took great pride in doing earlier in Al Qaeda’s war against the West.

Because of this, Bin Laden’s death cannot be accurately  described as ending Al Qaeda. Perhaps we are on the cusp of defeating Al Qaeda in the Afghan-Pak theater of operations, but that is not due to Bin Laden’s death. Bin Laden’s death was in reality a byproduct of the campaign against Al Qaeda in that region over a period of years, starting way back in 2001.

Moreover, Al Qaeda globally is far from finished. The organization has evolved into an umbrella group for Jihadists around the globe. Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb is active in Africa. Al Qaeda on the Arabian Peninsula is locked in an active, violent insurgency in Yemen. Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, Bin Laden’s successor and always the organization’s ideologue, is still at large. His Jihadist brother, released from prison in the so-called “Arab Spring” is back in operation in Egypt.

Then there are the Al Qaeda affiliates that don’t identify themselves as Al Qaeda, but certainly operate in a similar fashion. There’s Aby Sayyaf in the Philippines, which has kidnapped and murdered Americans in the past. There’s Al Shabaab in Somalia, which recruits heavily from the Somali refugee community here in the USA. There’s Boko Haram, which is making life in Nigeria a living hell for Christians. There’s Jemaah Islamiyah in Malaysia and Indonesia, which has attacked Westerners, including the 202 deaths in the Bali, Indonesia bombing in 2002. And of course, the Taliban themselves, who are allied with Al Qaeda and gave them a launching pad for operations in the 1990s.

All of these organizations still exist. We are told now that Bin Laden did not have a high regard for these affiliates, but that doesn’t necessarily make them any less of a threat.

But let’s not forget the Jihadist terrorist organizations that operate and who are not overtly aligned with Al Qaeda. These serve as a reminder that the enemy isn’t just “Al Qaeda,” despite what the Obama administration wants you to believe. We should not take too much comfort in the fact that most of these organizations operate overseas and don’t regularly target Americans. They don’t view Americans any differently than they view other Westerners or kafirs.

There is the Moro Islamic Liberation Front in the Philippines, which, like Abu Sayyef, has targeted Americans in the past. There’s Lashkar-e-Taiba, which carried out the horrific Mumbai attacks in 2008. Keep in mind that LeT used an American to conduct reconnaissance for that operation and their captured literature showed plans to target the American homeland. There are the Islamic Jihad Union in Uzbekistan and Jaish-e-Mohammed in Kashmir. There’s Palestinian Islamic Jihad, which has known operatives in the US. And, along those same lines, we have HAMAS, which currently only targets Israel, but which has an extensive network in the US.

Most ominously, given the threat from Iran, is Hezbollah, described by more than one US official as the “A” team of terrorism. Congressional investigations estimate that they have thousands of supporters and hundred of operatives here in the US. A very recent report indicates that Hezbollah has a network centered on Shia mosques here in the US as well.

But this all misses the basic point. We are on the receiving end of a global Islamic insurgency. It’s not a homogenous insurgency by any stretch. Many of the insurgent groups are completely unrelated and some even hate each other. But they are all united in one goal: establishment of Islamic rule under Shariah law.

This war did not start on September 11th, 2001, with Al Qaeda’s attacks on the US homeland; it had been raging on a lower level overseas for decades. And the war will not end with the death of Osama Bin Laden, or the outright defeat of Al Qaeda, or the inevitable NATO withdrawal from Afghanistan.

The declaration of victory is purely for domestic political consumption, which is very sad and dangerous indeed.

***************************************************************************

Center for Security Policy Vice President Christopher Holton is available for speaking engagements on the subjects of terrorism, terrorism financing, Shariah, Shariah-Compliant Finance and Jihad. For more information, contact him at chris@christopherholton.com

Osama Bin Laden moved around a lot while on the run

We have always been skeptical that Osama Bin Laden maintained operational control over much of Al Qaeda while he was on the run, dodging US forces.

When US Special Operations forces caught up with Bin Laden and killed him in a compound in Pakistan, it was initially assumed, or at least reported, that he had been laid up there for almost the entire time he was on the run.

It was also widely reported that because Bin Laden was in a secure location for so long, he likely maintained operational control over Al Qaeda globally. That simply did not ring true to us then and it doesn’t now that it has been revealed that Bin Laden in fact lived a vagabond life, moving to five safe houses in widely separated parts of Afghanistan and then Pakistan.

The meme that Bin Laden maintained operational control over Al Qaeda while he was evading US forces was touted to essentially turn the killing of the terrorist leader into an “end-game” event in the so-called “war on terror.”

The Left in particular has promoted that narrative, but some neo-isolationists on the right have subscribed to it as well.

We buy into that rubbish at our peril. Assuming that the Jihadists will end their war against the West in general, and the US in particular, because the SEALs killed Bin Laden is irresponsible.

It defies belief that Bin Laden could possibly have maintained operational control over Al Qaeda given the conditions which he was forced to endure post 9/11.

Al Qaeda has become decentralized and its followers and admirers around the world, such as Mohammed Merah in France, will continue to act with brutal violence. Meanwhile, Al Qaeda “affiliates” continue to be active in Nigeria, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Libya, Mali and Niger to name a few.

The death of Bin Laden at the hands of US Navy SEALs was a great thing. But to assign “victory” to that single act would in fact be to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2122752/Osama-living-version-Kardashians-Abbottabad-Bin-Laden-fathered-FOUR-children-lived-houses-years-run-Pakistan-9-11.html

Oh The Irony: UAE Media Runs AP Story Critical of NYPD Intelligence Ops

Gulf News is a UAE-based media outlet and, before we delve into the article they ran today, we simply must point out that the UAE is not a free country, a free society or a nation in which the media enjoys freedom. In fact, just the opposite. The UAE is essentially a monarchy. So Gulf News cannot be regarded as independent to begin with.

Gulf News ran a story today that was published by the Associated Press which was critical of efforts by the NYPD to gather intelligence on Jihadist terror plots and groups by “spying” on Muslims.

The article is perfectly ridiculous for a variety of reasons, but the fact that Gulf News picked it up is doubly so, because if a non-Muslim gets caught kissing his girlfriend in public even in Dubai, he’s looking at jail time.

Then there’s some pesky facts as to why the NYPD might need to keep an eye on Muslims and mosques in particular. We have a breaking news bulletin for the folks at Gulf News: the overwhelming majority of terrorist plots and attacks in the US seem to involve Muslims. This is particularly true in New York, where, to name a few, we’ve seen the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the September 11th attacks and the attempted bombing in Times Square, all perpetrated by Muslims.

This doesn’t make all Muslims bad people or terrorists. But in the intelligence world, you need to gather your intelligence from locations and sources that make sense. And watching Methodist churches in the Catskills or Catholic school girls in Schenectady isn’t likely to produce any actionable intelligence to head off a terrorist attack.

Unfortunately, there is ample evidence that mosques and the Imams who oversee them have been involved in material support for terrorism, so it makes sense for the NYPD to attempt to save lives of all kinds of people by gathering intelligence on Muslims in mosques.

It’s as simple as that.

After all, it’s not like it is highly unusual for Muslims in America to be involved in Jihadi plots:

http://terrortrendsbulletin.wordpress.com/2010/07/07/18-american-jihadist-terrorists/

http://terrortrendsbulletin.wordpress.com/2009/11/29/a-year-of-jihad-in-america-december-2008-to-december-2009/

 

But now we come to the real irony when it comes to a UAE-based media outlet whining about intelligence gathering involving surveillance of Muslims.

Back when the 9/11 Commission was interviewing witnesses and officials, they received testimony from former CIA director George Tenet, who had been CIA director under both Clinton and Bush. In sworn testimony before the commission, Tenet revealed that the US missed an opportunity to kill Osama Bin Laden in an Al Qaeda camp in Afghanistan because the raid had to be called off due to the presence of members of the UAE royal family in the camp. It seems that the UAE royals were great friends with Bin Laden and shared his love of falconry. So, periodically, they’d load up a bunch of SUVs in a C-130 (bought from US manufacturer Lockheed) and fly out to go falconing with Bin Laden. They’d leave the SUVs behind for their good buddy when they scampered back in to the Hercules for the trip back home.

So, excuse us if we remain unimpressed by Gulf News’s whining about intelligence gathering targeting Muslims. In fact, we hope someone in the CIA has the good sense to keep a close eye on the UAE, given their past.

http://gulfnews.com/news/world/usa/call-to-end-police-spying-on-muslims-1.884899?


 

Was Bin Laden in Charge and Will his Death Defeat Jihad?

In the wake of the killing of Osama Bin Laden, there is a debate as to the extent that Bin Laden was operationally in charge of Al Qaeda. There have also been those who have naively speculated that Bin Laden’s death means an end to the war on terror or even Jihad altogether.

It seems apparent that Bin Laden was actively communicating with Al Qaeda elements, but it wasn’t in real time. He used a system of couriers to relay messages via email and the internet, but went to great pains to securely communicate. This means no direct internet connection and no phones, cellular, satellite or landline.

This would preclude any real dialogue with operators and cells. It seems as if Bin Laden was able to communicate in general terms about his “commander’s intent,” but was in no position to take part in detailed planning. Bin Laden wanted his followers to carry out mass casualty attacks, he wanted the attacks to occur on important anniversaries and holidays, and he was especially interested in attacks on trains, which is not hard to believe given that Jihadists have been targeting trains in the UK, Spain, France, Germany and India in recent years.

Unfortunately, what this probably means is that the loss of Bin Laden will not operationally hinder Al Qaeda. It may hurt the group’s morale and it may erode some of the group’s financial and moral support, but it might also energize those who seek to avenge Bin Laden’s death at the hands of US special operations forces.

Al Qaeda doctrinal leader Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri still lives and he has been by far more active in communicating in recent years than Bin Laden was. Anwar Al-Awlaki is still at large in Yemen and he has been the one who has successfully trained and inspired Jihadi attacks on US targets in recent years, such as the Fort Hood Jihadi murderer, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the Underwear Bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, Little Rock Jihadist murderer, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad (aka Carlos Bledsoe) and the unsuccessful plot to send bombs embedded in printer cartridges from Yemen to the US on board cargo and passenger airliners.

Muslim Brotherhood apologist Peter Bergen maintains that Awlaki is a small player and that the war on terror should end with the killing of Bin Laden, but this is hardly surprising that Bergen essentially built a career around Bin Laden, including perpetuating the illusion that Bergen himself was some sort of expert on Jihad because he had managed to spend a few hours with Bin Laden in a tent 13 years ago or so.

On top of all this, there is the additional issue of groups and organizations sympathetic to Al Qaeda and allied with Al Qaeda, but not actually part of Al Qaeda. Two significant organizations fall into this category: the Taliban and Lashkar e Taiba.

The Taliban need no introduction, but many people do not realize two things about the Taliban: Taliban leader Mullah Omar specifically declined to merge with Al Qaeda and refused to take an oath of loyalty to Bin Laden. Because of this, Bin Laden exercised no operational control over the Taliban. Second, the failed Times Square bomb plot appears to have been a Taliban operation, vice an Al Qaeda operation: http://terrortrendsbulletin.wordpress.com/2010/05/02/new-york-times-square-car-bomb-bulletin/

The significance of this is that the Taliban are willing and able to attempt terrorist attacks here in America. Adding to this worry is the recent news that six American Muslims, including Imams at a Florida mosque, appear to have been raising money for the Taliban: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1387185/Imam-Florida-mosque-sons-arrested-charges-financing-Taliban-Pakistan.html  Moreover, there is no ignoring the Taliban’s recent bombing attack against a Pakistani paramilitary training facility in northern Pakistan, which was declared as vengeance for Bin Laden’s death–with the promise of more to come.

Unfortunately, the slaying of Osama Bin Laden will have no operational impact on Taliban operations.

Then there is Lashkar e Taiba, the Pakistani Jihadi terrorist group which carried out the horrific Mumbai attacks. Again, this is a group that is often misidentified as an Al Qaeda affiliate, but, like the Taliban, LeT is a separate, standalone organization that declined to pledge any oath to Osama Bin Laden.

What does LeT have to do with America? Two things:

1. The Jihadist who conducted recon ahead of the Mumbai attacks was an American from Chicago named David Coleman Headley:

http://terrortrendsbulletin.wordpress.com/2010/07/07/18-american-jihadist-terrorists/

In fact, Headley also conducted recon on an Indian nuclear power plant as well:

http://terrortrendsbulletin.wordpress.com/2009/12/21/chicago-jihadi-conducted-recon-on-nuke-plant-for-lashkar-e-taiba/

2. LeT is known to be active in America:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/927uxqry.asp

Members of the group fought against US forces in Iraq back in 2004. The group is known to have a presence in Germany and the UK as well.

These are just two examples of Jihadi organizations that pose a threat to America that will not be impacted at all by the death of Bin Laden.

Then there is the “lone wolf” threat, the so-called “sudden jihad syndrome” threat in which enraged Muslims commit acts of violence because they were inspired by organizations like Al Qaeda and people like Osama Bin Laden. There have been examples of this, the most recent being the case of a Yemeni-American who tried to storm the cockpit door of an American Airlines flight whilst screaming “AllahuAkbar!” Fortunately, the reinforced door was securely locked and there were a retired Secret Service agent and retired police officer on board who subdued the subject:

http://www.examiner.com/headlines-in-san-francisco/did-yemen-man-yells-allahu-akbar-incident-outside-cockpit-door-video

Officials have issued warnings about such “lone wolf” attacks in the wake of Bin Laden getting his brains blown out:

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/US/05/10/bin.laden.attacks/

What of Al Qaeda itself? At least four Al Qaeda affiliates have either declared their intent to avenge Bin Laden’s death or issued veiled threats to carry on with the Jihad:

Somalia’s Al Shabaab, including Daphne, Alabama-born Jihadist, Abu Mansur Al-Amriki, mourned Bin Laden’s passing in a radio communication, confirming, incidentally, Al Qaeda’s role in fighting US forces in Somalia way back in 1993:

http://www.raxanreeb.com/?p=95817

In Indonesia, Jemmaah Islamiyah leader Abu Bakar Bashir, mourned Bin Laden and issued a veiled threat:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/jemaah-islamiyahs-abu-bakar-bashir-says-death-of-bin-laden-wont-kill-al-qaeda/story-fn3dxity-1226049072983

And, finally, Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (which has been especially active in hostage taking in recent months and years) and Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, both vowed to carry on with Jihad after Bin Laden’s death:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.312069e9fc4253641862a854552f7c85.8b1&show_article=1

http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/archives/2011/05/al_qaeda_affiliates_weigh_in_o.php

None of this takes two other significant Jihadi terrorist threats into account: Hezbollah and HAMAS.

Hezbollah has not issued any comments on Bin Laden’s death, but a former Hezbollah leader mourned Bin Laden as a hero who defended Islam:

http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=45936

Hezbollah has not targeted Americans with terrorism in recent years, but they did take an active combat and advisory role against US forces in Iraq and they are believed to have a substantial presence inside the USA. Most recently, reports have once again surfaced of the group’s presence along the American-Mexico border:

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4692389/terror-on-the-border/

What could touch off renewed attacks by Hezbollah? A confrontation with Iran for one.

The same can be said for the Palestinian Jihadist terrorist group HAMAS. Like Hezbollah, HAMAS is greatly dependent on Iran for financing, arms and training. Any confrontation with Iran carries with it the danger of HAMAS terror attacks. Many Americans do not remember that Palestinian terrorists used to target Americans with regularity. They stopped, not out of love for America, but to avoid being targeted by American power. HAMAS has the same basic goals as Al Qaeda and issued a eulogy honoring Bin Laden in which they bestowed upon him the honorific title “Sheikh:”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdDapb1rrvk

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/8488479/Osama-bin-Laden-dead-Hamas-condemns-killing-of-bin-Laden.html

HAMAS is known to have conducted extensive fundraising inside America and, like Hezbollah, is believed to have a major presence inside our country.

So, we have no answers but certainly some educated guesses:

• Bin Laden was unlikely to have played an active operational role in Al Qaeda in recent times; most likely he was limited to expressing “commander’s intent” via intermediaries with little or no direct contact with operatives around the globe.

• The Jihad will of course continue.  Jihad is not limited to a few groups and it didn’t commence on September 11th, 2001. It’s been going on for a millennium and is based on Shariah doctrine, not just the personal philosophy of Osama Bin Laden. Jihad, however, can be made dormant for a period through strong resistance since, according to Shariah, Muslims are specifically not supposed to wage Jihad if they are not strong enough to do so, therefore the situation is far from hopeless.

Al Qaeda and its affiliates have pledged to continue the Jihad and allied Jihadist groups still pose an independent threat above and beyond Al Qaeda. In fact Bin Laden’s death may ironically spur them to action. This says nothing of the threat from Jihadists that were not aligned with Bin Laden, such as Hezbollah and HAMAS, who pose an ongoing, if dormant, threat to Americans.

Now is no time to rest or become complacent. Just the opposite.

Ongoing Osama Bin Laden Slaying Thread

By now all of our readers are aware of the fact that Navy SEALs killed Osama Bin Laden over the weekend in a daring raid in Pakistan.

Rather than rehash what is already being reported, TTB will establish an ongoing thread on this monumental event, with links to news articles and analysis from around the world:

Philip Klein at the Washington Examiner points out the years of work, hunting, training and rehearsals that went into accomplishing the mission of taking out Bin Laden. It is also important to point out that if not for the detention center at Guantanomo Bay, Cuba and enhanced interrogation techniques, both of which President Obama has opposed, we’d have never gotten close to finding Bin Laden:

Some time after Sept. 11, detainees held by the U.S. told interrogators about a man believed to work as a courier for bin Laden, senior administration officials said. The man was described by detainees as a protégé of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and “one of the few Al Qaeda couriers trusted by bin laden.”

Two years ago, intelligence officials began to identify areas of Pakistan where the courier and his brother operated, and the great security precautions the two men took aroused U.S. suspicions. 

While the two brothers, the couriers, had no known source of income, the compound was built in 2005 and valued at $1 million.

After exploring every angle for months, they concluded that all signs pointed to this being bin Laden’s residence.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/05/raid-got-bin-laden-was-culmination-years-work-sr-admin-official-s?utm_source=feedburner+BeltwayConfidential&utm_medium=feed+Beltway+Confidential&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BeltwayConfidential+%28Beltway+Confidential%29feed&utm_content=feed&utm_term=feed

Here are some articles with brief introductions to SEAL Team 6, also known as DEVGROUP, the unit that carried out the mission that killed Bin Laden:

http://nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/the-secret-team-that-killed-bin-laden-20110502

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-team-that-killed-bin-laden-seal-team-6-2011-5

From the same source, here is a Timeline for the operation to kill Bin Laden:

http://www.businessinsider.com/timeline-of-bin-laden-discovery-2011-5

Here is an article with some thoughts on how Al Qaeda may retaliate against the US for killing Bin Laden. It lists possible categories of targets. We think some of the targets are certainly likely, but that this list may not go far enough, given what we know of Al Qaeda’s prior plans. There is reason to be worried about shopping malls for instance. Security breaches at chemical and bio facilities seem remote, but attacks on petrochemical refineries and similar facilities would certainly be a concern. The article also assumes that airports and airliners are off the target list, though Al Qaeda’s history suggests they will keep trying in this sector, especially after the successful attack in an airport terminal in Moscow not long ago. We have airliners bottled up tight, but there is no security to speak of in airport terminals, where large numbers of passengers have to stand in line and are vulnerable. Then there are sporting events and music concerts. Jihadists attacked a group in Africa watching the World Cup on TV last year. Not a great article, but not a total waste of time either…

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-will-al-qaeda-militants-get-their-revenge-2011-5

Here is a similar article from ABC News, including a report that a US Marine NBC (Nuclear, Biological, Chemical) Warfare unit has been urgently recalled from Japan. This indicates that there is at least some concern that Al Qaeda or its allies could have a WMD capability of some sort…

http://abcnews.go.com/US/osama-bin-laden-triggers-security-alert-recall-marine/story?id=13505844

The US Department of Homeland Security has issued an advisory about potential retaliation, though it includes scant few details:

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/05/02/general-us-bin-laden-warnings_8444923.html

One of the most promising aspects of the Bin Laden raid is the potential treasure trove of intelligence captured. No doubt, Al Qaeda operatives and supporters around the globe are holding their breath and scrambling because they can’t be certain if the next knock on the door, or the next helicopter that passes by, could be some of America’s finest come to bring down death and destruction on them…

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20058885-503543.html

CBS News has also published a story on one intriguing aspect of this event, namely that waterboarding at Gitmo produced the initial intelligence that made it possible to track down Bin Laden. It is entirely possible–in fact LIKELY–that had Khalid Sheikh Mohammed not been waterboarded, we’d still be guessing where Bin Laden is today. And had he, and other Al Qaeda terrorists, not been classified as enemy combatants and housed in detention at Gitmo, they would never have undergone the waterboarding in the first place. It is worth noting that President Obama is now taking credit for an operation that could never have occurred had he had his way with regard to Gitmo and “enhanced interrogation” techniques…techniques which we no longer employ by the way…

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20058921-503544.html?tag=cbsnewsMainColumnArea

Another article that credits “enhanced interrogation techniques” for uncovering the intelligence that enabled US forces to find and kill Bin Laden–Obama has ended the use of those techniques…

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=13512344

Now we have an article from The Telegraph in Great Britain that alerts us to the reality that Al Qaeda will not be stopped by Bin Laden’s death. The organization has been franchising itself globally for some time. It even suggests that Bin Laden was never fully in control of the global Jihadist movement, something that TTB definitely agrees with:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/8488662/Al-Qaeda-The-next-generation.html

In fact, Al Qaeda has affiliates around the world now and tomorrow’s Al Qaeda leaders may comes from several affiliated terrorist organizations:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/following_bin_ladens_death_al_qaeda_affiliates_in_africa_middle_east_poised_to_produce_new_leaders/2011/05/02/AFaJIwYF_story.html

The next two articles are sad reminders of the tens of thousands of lives Osama Bin Laden’s evil touched through violent Jihad. Back in August of 1998, hundreds of people were killed in East Africa in what was, up to that point, Al Qaeda’s bloodiest attack. Then in 2002, Al Qaeda struck in Bali, Indonesia, killing hundreds of mostly Australian tourists…

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/tears-kenyas-1998-us-embassy-bombing-somalias-al-114638162.html

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/relief-for-bali-bombing-victims-following-osama-bin-ladens-death/story-e6frf7jo-1226048732274

We find the whole emphasis on handling the monster Bin Laden’s remains according to “Islamic tradition” to be troubling as hell. It was almost as if we were showing respect for a mass murderer. Had he been any religion other than Islam there would have been no thought or mention of the religious aspects of how his remains were to be treated. The SEALs do the heavy lifting while the geeks continue to insist that we chase our tails.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/05/02/bin-laden-given-religious-funeral-prior-sea-burial/

National Journal has aerial photos of Bin Laden’s hideout in Pakistan. Hard to believe the Pakistani military didn’t know he was there…

http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/pictures-u-s-photos-of-the-bin-laden-compound-20110502#photo_0

It’s almost impossible to believe that the Pakistani military didn’t know where Bin Laden was. The available evidence suggests that they were harboring him…

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_PAKISTAN_BIN_LADEN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-05-02-18-25-32

Now that Bin Laden is dead, his sympathizers and allies are making threats. In Great Britain, a guy who really needs to be in prison, Anjem Choudary, has predicted another “7/7″ attack as a result of Bin Laden’s death…

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/8487822/Osama-bin-Laden-dead-followers-warn-of-another-77.html

As a result of veiled and overt threats, we are seeing examples of increased security and warnings from terrorism experts.

There are very visible signs of increased security in New York and Washington, the two targets of the September 11th attacks:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-02/security-heightened-in-new-york-washington-following-killing-of-bin-laden.html

Logan Airport in Boston was one of the airports transited by the September 11th hijackers a decade ago. Today, that airport has instituted tighter security precautions:

http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/east_boston/2011/05/at_logan_airport_and_around_bo_1.html

There is understandably widespread euphoria across America about Bin Laden’s demise, unfortunately, the Jihadist’s death may not make us any safer. This analysis comes from Steve Emerson’s Investigative Project on Terrorism:

That threat could come from “lone wolf” terrorists as much as from al-Qaida followers. In recent years, bin Laden has been viewed more as an iconic figure for al-Qaida rather than the controlling hand he enjoyed before the 9/11 attacks. The group has split into smaller, autonomous cells and networks, and its ubiquitous Internet presence reaches

In February, U.S. intelligence officials identified Yemen-based American-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki as a bigger threat than bin Laden. Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan and attempted Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad are among those Awlaki communicated with or inspired. During his sentencing, Shahzad defiantly told the court he tried to wage war against America because he believed the country was at war with Islam.

Meanwhile, a series of plots by homegrown radical Islamists were prevented only because of pro-active sting operations initiated by the FBI.

To close out this posting for 2 May, Jihadists around the world are making threats to avenge Bin Laden:

Jihadists in the Philippines have declared Bin Laden a martyr:

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/regions/05/02/11/moro-rebels-call-bin-laden-martyr

Hamas has condemned the killing of Bin Laden:

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/05/02/hamas-leader-condemns-killing-usama-bin-laden/

The Taliban have vowed to avenge Bin Laden’s death:

http://www.vanguardngr.com/2011/05/osama-how-he-died/

Less well-known Jihadis have chimed in on Bin Laden’s death too:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/02/us-binladen-militants-idUSTRE74147320110502

Heh

BE ADVISED THAT THIS PHOTOGRAPH IS NOT IN FACT OF OSAMA BIN LADEN AFTER HE WAS KILLED. THIS IS A PHOTOSHOPPED IMAGE THAT HAS BEEN GOING AROUND THE INTERNET.

Ron Paul: Blame America First for Jihad

Ron Paul is at it again.

But let’s not get to worked up about the crazy old loon. After all, he’ll be 76 in August. That will make him 77 by the time the next president is inaugurated. That’s nearly the age President Reagan was when he left office after two terms.

Ron Paul isn’t in this race to win. He’s one of those perpetual candidates for president who just adores the attention.

In his latest appearance on Fox News, Paul manages to stick to his McGovern-like “Blame America First” script with the tired old assumption that Jihad is being waged against us just because we are in Saudi Arabia, or Iraq, or Afghanistan, or especially because we are an ally of Israel. Paul appears to be a disciple of Michael Schuerer, who has been spouting that line since BEFORE he left the CIA.

Anyway, the good folks at Gateway Pundit posted Paul’s appearance. My comments follow the link:

http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/04/crazy-ron-paul-still-blames-the-us-for-islamic-extremism-video/

Here are my thoughts:

It is interesting that Ron Paul bases his entire philosophy on the global Islamic insurgency on the opinions of Michael Sheuer. Michael Sheuer epitomizes all that is wrong with America’s bureaucratized counterterrorism apparatus. First of all, he broke longstanding CIA regulations at the encouragement of his politicized superiors to write a book while in active service. This alone makes him a scumbag in my book. Thousands of honorable CIA operators could have done the same, but none did. There is a reason. It’s called honor. Second, Sheuer had a uniquely disturbing career in the CIA. A career analyst with no field experience, he was somehow allowed to become a case officer and eventually found himself in charge of the CIA unit tasked with killing or capturing Bin Laden. He failed miserably. Moreover, if you actually read his work, it is readily apparent that Sheuer has at best a superficial level of knowledge of Islamic threat doctrine. He is appallingly ignorant for someone who was in the position he was in. This has resulted in his belief that we are only being attacked because of things we have done and especially for our support for Israel.

I ask my friends:

Is Jemmaah Islamiya attempting to establish an Islamic state in Indonesia because the US supports Israel?

Are the Chechyan jihadists waging Jihad against Russia because the US supports Israel?

Is Abu Sayyef attempting to establish an Islamic state on Mindanao because the US supports Israel?

Are Jihadists attempting to establish an Islamic state in southern Thailand because the US supports Israel?

Have Nigerian Jihadists attacked innocent Christians repeatedly because the US supports Israel?

Is Al Shabaad conducting terrorist attacks in Kenya and Somalia on innocent civilians because the US supports Israel?

Are Jihadists attempting to create an Islamic state in India’s Kashmir because the US supports Israel?

Have Jihadists killed thousands in attacks on innocent civilians in Morocco, Algeria, Argentina, Brazil, the UK, Spain, Jordan and Bangladesh because the US supports Israel?

Are young Jihadis rioting in France because the US supports Israel?

Why is all this happening? Could it be that there is something more to this global violence than the simple “blame America first” concept that Ron Paul supposes?

Why hasn’t he bothered to learn about the enemy threat doctrine?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 104 other followers