Category Archives: Uncategorized

On The Run? AQAP Kills 70 in Islamikaze Attacks in Yemen; Locals Blame US Embassy

Details over on Diplopundit.net…

http://diplopundit.net/2014/10/09/sanaa-hit-by-suicide-bombers-houthis-accused-us-embassy-yemen-for-attacks/

Yemen_fragmentation_2012-6-16_1280

 

 

HOLTON: The Enemy Knows We’re In A World War, But We Don’t

Excerpt and LINK from my guest article in The Hayride…

The Islamic State is not simply an Iraqi problem or a Syrian problem. IS has metastasized into a worldwide organization with 20,000 recruits from Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, Somalia, the U.S., Great Britain, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Austria, Spain, India, Malaysia, Indonesia and Germany. Even worse, Jihadists from Boko Haram in Nigeria, Abu Sayyef in the Philippines, Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb in Northwest Africa and Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula from Yemen have all pledged allegiance to IS.

There can no longer be any doubt that the global Islamic insurgency that some have been warning about for some time, amounts to a world war. Nevertheless, policymakers here in the U.S. continue to ignore or deny this reality.

Over the period of a generation, the West has allowed itself to be thoroughly infiltrated by a savage and barbaric belief system. This is evidenced by the global base of recruitment that the Islamic State has been able to take advantage of and the numerous public displays of support for IS in the West.

http://thehayride.com/2014/08/holton-the-enemy-knows-were-in-a-world-war-but-we-dont/

 

 

TWA 800 Revisited

0624_twa-reconstruction

This week a new documentary was released on the destruction of TWA Flight 800 17 years ago.

When the final official explanation of the cause of TWA 800’s destruction came out, like most Americans, I accepted it and had no reason to be skeptical, largely because I wasn’t paying particularly close attention.

The new documentary, simply titled TWA Flight 800, combined with another excellent documentary released in 2001 (see below), has made me think twice.

I am not one to subscribe to conspiracy theories and I don’t know that the conclusions reached by the producers is correct (I don’t understand the 3 missile theory illustrated in the documentary), but I do think there are inconsistencies and questionable aspects of the Clinton Administration’s explanation and the methodology employed in the investigation.

The reason this latest documentary is credible and so newsworthy is because members of the original investigation team have come forward to call for re-opening the investigation.

Recent FOIA requests have revealed a few confusing details that were previously unknown as well.

It is certainly not beyond the realm of possibility that our Jihadist enemies, who we know were armed with Stinger missiles at the time, attacked us in July 1996, 5 years before 9/11. I’m not ready to declare that to be the case, but there are enough troublesome holes in the official explanation of the destruction of TWA 800 to warrant a more thorough, independent analysis.

Rather than use the FBI, CIA, NTSB and FAA to conduct the investigation, I believe that the investigation should be conducted under the auspices of NASA and the Department of Defense, with a blue ribbon panel of investigators from both the public and private sector. In other words, I believe TWA 800 warrants an independent commission similar to the 9/11 Commission in the wake of the September 11th terrorist attacks.

Here are a few questions and suspicious items that remain:

• NO planes grounded afterwards for the fuel tank ‘issue’…

Once it was decided that the cause of the destruction of TWA 800 was faulty wiring in the center wing fuel tank, no order was ever issued grounding the other, numerous 747s identical to TWA 800. In fact, no order was ever issued to even inspect the wiring in the center fuel tanks of 747s. All the FAA did was issue a “rule change:”

“The FAA does not believe detailed in-tank inspections of the FQIS components would be effective because the condition of in-tank component or wiring contamination and damage can be difficult to detect while the parts are installed. The agency believes the best approach at this time is to replace the current in-tank FQIS components with new parts, including replacement of silver-plated copper wires with nickel-plated wires.

The FAA is proposing that operators remove and replace FQIS components within 20 years from the date the airplane was manufactured, or within 24 months of publication of the final rule, whichever is later. Nickel-plated wire is much more resistant to corrosion in the presence of sulfur.”

Note the total lack of a sense of urgency surrounding the suspect device claimed to be responsible for the most deadly air disaster in US history. The FAA basically said: “Replace the part when it’s convenient, or next time you have the chance.”

This doesn’t seem like what should be done in the wake of the destruction of a jumbo jet with hundreds of fatalities.

• NO other 747 incident like this before or since.

It is crucial to understand that no other 747, before or since, experienced a problem with the wiring in the center fuel tank. It is also crucial to understand that the official explanation is nothing but a theory, because the federal government was never able to duplicate the circumstances that it said created the explosion.

• Noted eye-witnesses, dismissed outright and never called to testify

 Numerous eye-witnesses reported seeing the same basic thing. Some were even trained military veterans and professional pilots. Nevertheless, they were dismissed and ignored and then misquoted by Clinton-era bureaucrats.

• The ‘splatter pattern’ on the outside of the center fuel tank, and the fact that the seat damage pattern is different from the seat occupant damage pattern are 2 of the key pieces of evidence that support an external explosion.

You must watch the new documentary to understand this revelation, which was not known in 2001 when the first documentary was produced.

The newly available evidence presented in the new documentary (as well as review of the other evidence) is damning and refutes the very premise that there ever was a responsible investigation in the first place.

That leaves the obvious question: if there was a cover-up, why? The most plausible explanation that I have seen is that the Clinton administration may have exerted immense command influence on the investigation to steer it away from pursuing TWA 800 as a terrorist attack. In July 1996, when TWA 800 blew up, Clinton led Senator Bob Dole in the polls by a wide margin. The last thing Clinton needed or wanted was a reported foreign terrorist attack so close to the election. This would not have been the first time Clinton’s team attempted to interfere in such an investigation. There are credible reports that the Clinton administration tried to influence the investigation into the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Moreover, as detailed in the book, The Third Terrorist, the Clinton administration worked to suppress evidence in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.

I urge readers to watch the documentary linked below, as well as the older documentary embedded here, and see if you think unanswered questions remain.

The new TWA Flight 800 documentary is available for free by opening a trial with Epix network. All that requires is your zip code and an email address. I did it and have received no spam at all. If you’re nervous, open a new hotmail account and use that address.

It is well worth your time to look at this film:

http://www.epixhd.com/twa-flight-800/

In addition to the new documentary, I highly recommend another documentary that was produced in 2001: Silenced: TWA 800 and the Subversion of Justice. Here it is:

 

Just who ARE America’s “Domestic” Terrorists???

There has been much written and commented on in the media about the threat from “domestic” terrorism in recent years.

At Terror Trends Bulletin, we agree that there is indeed a serious threat from domestic terrorists.

But unlike the Leftist media, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano or the rest of Team Obama, we don’t see the threat of domestic terrorism coming from veterans, Tea Party members or those committed to preserving our 2nd amendment rights.

No, an objective analysis of the situation indicates that the domestic terrorist threat looks and sounds much like the foreign terrorist threat.

In other words, the domestic terrorist threat is primarily a threat from Jihad.

Here is a list of people involved in terror crimes and plots here in the USA in recent years. Each person on this list, without exception, is Muslim. We don’t take any particular glee in that. You can call us bigoted or racist for pointing it out if you want, but that doesn’t change the facts. Hardly a month has gone by over the past 4 years in which a Muslim somewhere in America wasn’t implicated in a plot to commit an act of Jihad. In some cases, they were unfortunately successful. In some instances, terrorists on this list are now dead (which is a good thing as far as we’re concerned).

The list is by no means exhaustive; it wasn’t meant to be. It’s merely a list of 86 domestic jihadis we were able to cobble together from various law enforcement and media sources in about 45 minutes’ time. Anyone can do a search on the internet for these names and see the back story on each one. Our guess is that most people had no idea that the US had caught 86 domestic jihadis in recent years. That is primarily due to the fact that the news media in this country downplays the threat from jihad. (NOTE: If we have caught 86, how many are still out there across America?)

The threat from terrorism domestically here in the US is primarily a threat from Jihad. And that’s a fact.

A LISTING OF DOMESTIC JIHADIS 

• Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad

• Nidal Malik Hasan

• John Allen Mohammed

• Faisal Shazad

• Abdurahman Alamoudi

• Mohamad Hammoud

• Russell Defreitas

• Mohamed Mahmood Alessa

• Carlos Eduardo Almonte

• Farooque Ahmed

• Ahmed Ferhani

• Mohamed Mamdouh

• Hafiz Muhammed Sher Ali Khan

• Irfan Khan

• Izhar Khan

• Yonathan Melaku

• Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif

• Walli Mujahidh

• Amera Akl

• Naser Jason Abdo

• Rezwan Ferdaus

• Amina Farah Ali

• Hawo Mohamed Hassan

• Muhammad Yusuf

• Mohamud Abdi Yusuf

• Barry Walter Bujol Jr.

• Jameela Barnette

• Hassan Hodroj

• Dib Hani Harb

• Moussa Ali Hamdan

• Hasan Antar Karak

• David Coleman Headley

• Tahawwur Hussain Rana

• Luqman Abdullah

• Mohammad Abdul Salaam

• Abdullah Beard

• Abdul Saboor

• Mujahid Carswell

• Adam Ibraheem

• Gary Laverne Porter

• Ali Abdul Raqib

• Mohammad Alsahi

• Yassir Ali Khan

• Mohammad Abdul Bassir

• Najibullah Zazi

• Talib Islam

• Hosam Maher Husein Smadi

• Oussama Abdullah Kassir

• Hammad Riaz Samana

• Ehsanul Islam Sadequee

• Sheikh Mohammed Ali Hasan al-Moayad

• Mohammed Mohsen Yahya Zayed

• Bryant Neal Vinas

• Daniel Patrick Boyd

• Ahmed Omar Abu Ali

• Saleh Elahwal

• Syed Haris Ahmed

• Shukri Abu Baker

• Ghassan Elashi

• Mohammed El-Mazain

• Mufid Abdulqader

• Abdulrahman Odeh

• Mohammed Abdullah Warsame

• Narseal Batiste

• Patrick Abraham

• Stanley Grant Phanor

• Rotschild Augustine

• Burson Augustine

• Shain Duka

• Eljvir Duka

• Dritan Duka

• Zubair Ahmed

• Khaleel Ahmed

• Dzhokhar Anzorovich “Jahar” Tsarnaev

• Tamerlan Anzorovich Tsarnaev

• Abdul Rahman Yasin

• Adam Yahiye Gadahn

• Anwar al Awlaki

• Omar Hammami

• John Walker Lindh

• Colleen Larose

• Aman Hassan Yemer

• Ahmed Abdulah Minni

• Waqar Hussain Khan

• Ramy Zamzam

• Umar Farooq

Airliner Security Leaves Travelers More Vulnerable in Airports

Since the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States, the federal government has gone to great lengths to keep weaponry of all sorts from finding its way on airliners.

The effectiveness of these measures is open to debate, but the idea has been to prevent items such as explosive devices fashioned in the form of contact lens saline solution bottles, shaving cream cans and the like from finding their way onto an airliner. The TSA is also supposed to be on the lookout for box cutters (and pocket knifes and fingernail files), as well as shoes loaded with explosives.

All of these measures have been reactive–in response to both successful and failed terrorist plots from the past. Such is the nature of our bureaucratic counter terror apparatus. The enemy watches what we do and dreams up more methods to exploit holes and vulnerabilities in the defensive security measures. And, of course, once the enemy tries a new method, successful or otherwise, the TSA modifies its policies to defend against the last attack.

Americans of all philosophies are frustrated by what they perceive as onerous inconveniences and gross invasions of personal privacy.

But that is not the issue that should be of greatest concern to Americans. What should truly concern us all is that the measures that have locked down airliners tighter than a drum have created bottlenecks and choke points in airport terminals, leaving even larger numbers of travelers vulnerable to violent terrorist attack.

One attack on a single airliner has the potential to kill anywhere from dozens to a few hundred innocent passengers. But an attack on a busy airport terminal has the potential to kill several plane loads of innocent travelers before they get on the airplane.

Take a look at the accompanying photographs and the vulnerability is clear. A backpack bomb in a security line would be devastating and the security apparatus is exactly what caused the vulnerability.

To be fair, security lines are not the only vulnerability. Long lines at ticket counters produce huge crowds and bottlenecks as well:

What all this adds up to is an overall air travel industry that is still quite at risk.

Lest you think that I have pointed out a vulnerability that the Jihadists may not have thought of yet, rest assured that the Jihadists have already identified airports as targets for mass casualty attacks.

In fact, there have been two such attacks in recent years, one successful and one failed.

In January 2011, Islamikaze bombers attacked Domodedovo airport in Moscow, killing 35 and wounding 182. This incident is largely forgotten in the West. In fact, it received scant media attention beyond the day of the attack.

The fact that the attackers were believed to have been trained at an Al Qaeda camp in Pakistan should serve as a warning to America. If the Jihadis can train to attack Russian airports, they can train to attack American airports just as well.

The photographs below of the carnage serve as a stark contrast to the photos above showing travelers queuing up to get their tickets or go through security…Note that these photos were taken from camera phones soon after the bombing.


When one compares the photos from the security and ticket counter lines to the photos from Moscow, it is not difficult to grasp the magnitude of the vulnerability.

Moscow was not the only airport attack.

In 2007, two Moslem physicians attempted to blow up the terminal building at Glasgow International Airport in the UK with a VBIED (Vehicle Borne Improvised Explosive Device).

The two planned on driving a Jeep Cherokee through the front door and detonating a large bomb upon slamming through  the entrance. Fortunately, their bomb fizzled, but the images below show just how close they came to achieving their evil objective. Given the results from other VBIED attacks in the past in places like Lebanon, Iraq, Kenya and Tanzania, it’s not hard to imagine the horrible effects of a successful attack on a crowded airport terminal.

There is an old saying that he who tries to defend everything defends nothing. What is the answer to these vulnerabilities? No doubt technology will play a prominent role in finding solutions, but we should also consider the fact that while the newly unionized TSA is confiscating nail clippers from soldiers returning from war, making mothers sample their own breast milk, frisking  wheelchair-bound grandmothers and fondling genitalia, they are actually putting all travelers in real danger.

Despite Hurricane Sandy, the Guardians of the Tomb of the Unknowns Continue Their Vigil

God bless our troops.

The Muslim Brotherhood, the Clinton State Department, John McCain and Today’s Lax Security Mindset

 

By Christopher Holton

There was a time when it was considered necessary and proper to be concerned about possible foreign influences in US government and military service. Way back in 1981 when I first filled out forms as part of the process for joining the US military (it was a DOD form, I don’t remember the number) I had to answer a specific question regarding travel. The question asked if I had traveled to any of a list of nations after certain dates (all communist bloc countries) with a date listed by each nation (the date that each country had turned communist).

Anyone who joined the military in the Cold War era probably remembers this form and this question. If the answer to the question for any of the nations involved was “yes” you had to provide a complete explanation for the reason for the trip, when it took place, etc. Having never visited countries like Cuba, North Korea, East Germany, the Soviet Union, etc., I can’t say that I know what the process would have been had I answered yes.

But the point is, if you wanted to join the US military and you had even visited any communist countries, the Department of Defense wanted to know about it.

Fast forward to today. We are locked in a mortal struggle against a force not unlike communism. In fact, it has been called “communism with a god.” That force is Islam as defined by the Shariah doctrine which forms the basis for it. There are certain countries and organizations that are prominent in the enemy threat doctrine. Yet, to my knowledge, today we have no similar safeguards in place to what the DOD had during the Cold War years to check on the influence of foreign powers on American institutions. For instance, are any questions ever raised about travel to Iran, Syria or Sudan, three countries on the State Department’s list of terrorist sponsoring nations? For that matter, what about travel to Yemen, like Carlos Bledsoe did where he was indoctrinated to wage jihad in the USA by Anwar al-Alwaki? What about travel to the tribal areas of Pakistan, where the Times Square bomber traveled and received training? For that matter, how about travel to Saudi Arabia? After all, the Salafi strain of Islam that gave birth to Al Qaeda has its seat there and most of Al Qaeda’s cannon fodder seems to come from Saudi Arabia.

Then there is the whole present question of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood is best described as the forefather of all modern Jihadist terrorist groups. Its apologists and proponents claim that the Muslim Brotherhood has completely eschewed violence, yet the available evidence proves otherwise. HAMAS was founded as a Muslim Brotherhood wing and has been designated a foreign terrorist organization by the US State Department. HAMAS is one of the deadliest Jihadist organizations in the world, having carried out numerous Islamikaze bombings. And make no mistake, HAMAS has a large presence inside the USA.

There seems to have developed in recent years some romanticized view of the Muslim Brotherhood among certain naive political factions in the USA–and not just Democrats. Rather than being viewed as an organization in the political wing of a global insurgency, the Muslim Brotherhood is unfortunately being embraced in the West and the US. Senator John McCain, for instance, seems to have become smitten with the Muslim Brotherhood after meeting with them for a few hours in Egypt. But no one has embraced the Muslim Brotherhood quite like the Obama administration. The Obama administration has established close ties to Muslim Brotherhood organizations in the US and met with them at length and frequently. All indications are that the Muslim Brotherhood plays a prominent role in the Obama administration. Organizations like CAIR (the Council on American Islamic Relations) and ISNA (the Islamic Society of North America) were named unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terrorism financing conviction in US history. (Attorney General Holder declined to prosecute these organizations when he came to office, despite intentions by others in the Justice Department to do so.) In the Holy Land Foundation trial, in documented evidence that was stipulated to by the defense, both CAIR and ISNA were identified as Muslim Brotherhood organizations.

And yes, a high-level member of the Clinton staff at the State Department, Huma Abedin, comes from a prominent Muslim Brotherhood family. Her father, her brother and her mother all have prominent positions in the Muslim Brotherhood apparatus. If during the Cold War such a person came from a family with extensive ties to the Communist Party of Romania or East Germany, there would have been ample reason to conduct a security investigation. But in today’s politically correct surreal world of Washington DC “go along to get along” culture, it seems that no questions can be raised. This is the same culture that looked the other way while a known Jihadist, Major Nidal Hassan, hid right out in the open in the US Army spouting Islamic Jihad doctrine, culminating in the terrible terrorist attack at Fort Hood.

Well, the Center for Security Policy DID raise questions. The Center produced a 10-part video course on the Muslim Brotherhood in America that every American should watch: http://www.muslimbrotherhoodinamerica.com. Among others members of Congress, Michelle Bachmann has written a letter to inspectors general of key Washington departments inquiring as to Muslim Brotherhood influence in Washington’s halls of power. For her trouble, the likes of Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Anderson Cooper and a host of Leftist media from the Huffington Post to the Los Angeles Times and MSNBC have attacked Rep. Bachmann.

They have all done so in a total vacuum of knowledge about the Muslim Brotherhood, the Holy Land Foundation trial and American fronts like CAIR and ISNA.

The Center has published a rebuttal to this shrill, emotional criticism: http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/p19041.xml

This all stems from a complete failure of our leadership to put America on a war footing in the wake of 9/11. Our leaders have failed to identify the enemy. They have failed to try to understand the enemy threat doctrine. In fact they have denied that an enemy threat doctrine even exists. As a result of this culture, an imperialist, nefarious organization with long-standing ties to terrorism and with goals identical to those of Al Qaeda itself, namely the Muslim Brotherhood, is treated as a friend, rather than as a foe. If you even suggest that the Muslim Brotherhood might be an enemy of America, Hillary Clinton, John McCain and Anderson Cooper will attack you as if you are a wild-eyed bomb-thrower. We are indeed through the looking glass.

America’s Bureaucratized Counterterror Apparatus At Work

America is hamstrung in its efforts to defend itself from Jihadist terrorists by a remarkable denial in law enforcement, homeland security, intelligence and military circles as to the nature of our enemy and the threat we face.

This stems partly from political correctness and ignorant assumptions about our enemy and his doctrine.

But it also is the result of effective influence operations run by the Muslim Brotherhood to control how we ourselves describe our enemies and speak about our enemies. This has reached the point at which the Obama administration has openly embraced the Muslim Brotherhood overseas in nations like Egypt, Libya, Tunisia and, evidently, Syria.

Muslim Brotherhood front groups, like Hamas-tied CAIR, ISNA and the Muslim Students Association, all of which were named unindicted co-conspirators in the largest terrorism financing conviction in US history, and have been shielded from prosecution by Eric Holder, have tremendous influence in the Obama administration, to the point that we now know that, despite the fact that the FBI felt compelled to cut off all relations with CAIR, for example, Obama White House officials have met with CAIR hundreds of times over the past 3 years.

So, while the DHS pats down little old ladies and toddlers in airports, they are in TOTAL denial as to the war we are in.

Individuals like John Brennan, Eric Holder and Paul Stockton, who can only be described as bureaucratic train wrecks, control our policies and prevent America from ever being effective in coming to terms with the threat from violent Jihad, which is based in the doctrine known as Shariah.

I urge you to view the short videos below. I do not like terms like, “violent Islamic extremism” or “radical Islam,” but they are a far sight better than the terms our bureaucratized counterterrorism apparatus uses to describe the threat.

The fact of the matter is that America and the West is confronted with a global Islamic insurgency. Like all insurgencies, this one is mostly political, not military, though it does have a military/violent component. This is born out in the fact that large, global Islamic organizations that claim to be peaceful, such as Hizb ut Tahrir, the Muslim Brotherhood and Tabligi Jamaat have the same goals as terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, HAMAS, Lashkar e Taiba, the Taliban, Al Shabaab, Boko Haram, Abu Sayyaf, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Jaish-e-Mohammed, and Jemaah Islamiyah.

These goals and this insurgency are anchored in Islamic doctrine, known as Shariah. This does not mean that all Muslims are terrorists or Jihadists, but there is no denying that the doctrine exists and has existed for many years. The fact is, most Muslims do not adhere to this doctrine some are unaware that it even exists. But unfortunately that cannot be said to delegitimize the Shariah doctrine that brings us violent Jihad and a global Islamic insurgency designed to bring about supremacy of Islam worldwide.

Thanks to our own ignorance and the influence operations of the political wing of the global Islamic insurgency (especially the Muslim Brotherhood in America), we have become willfully blind to the threat. We need no further evidence than the disgraceful  bureaucrats in the three videos below:

Combative, willful denial of the threat we face

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

Congressman Gohmert Concerned That Political Correctness Will Undermine FBI Counterterrorism

In recent weeks and months the Obama administration has gone to great lengths to scrub FBI training literature of anything that discusses Islam as a possible inspiration for terrorism.

This unbelievably wrong-headed approach defies logic to such a great extent that it is difficult to believe that there isn’t an intentional effort at work within the government to prevent any investigation of the obvious connection between Islam and violent Jihad in the form of terrorism directed at the USA.

To make matters worse, we have now learned that the FBI has refused to identify for Congress the so-called experts that have been employed to do the “scrubbing.”

Congressman Louie Gohmert of Texas, a former judge, has thankfully raised the alarm about this whole program in general and the FBI’s refusal to identify those doing the scrubbing in the context of the FBI’s sorry history of establishing ties to organizations with ties to terrorism, such as CAIR and ISNA (both of which were named unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terrorism financing trial in US history.

Unfortunately, we feel certain that as long as Eric Holder and Barack Obama are in office, these types of policies will persist. We can only hope that more qualified and sober successors to those two will be able to reverse these ridiculous policies and unshackle the intellectual pursuit of the truth as the federal government tries to understand the nature of the enemy we face.

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

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

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,814 other followers

%d bloggers like this: