Monthly Archives: December 2015

New Update on Jihadist Threat on America’s Porous Southern Border


posted by Christopher W. Holton

The Washington Times is reporting that two Pakistani nationals with terrorist ties were apprehended on the southern US border near San Diego back in September:

The Border Patrol nabbed two Pakistani men with ties to terrorism at the U.S.-Mexico border in September in the latest instance of illegal immigrants from so-called “special interest countries” using the southern border as a point of entry to the U.S.

Muhammad Azeem and Mukhtar Ahmad, both in their 20s and from Gujrat, were caught Sept. 20 by agents south of San Diego and just over the international border from Tijuana. When agents checked their identities through databases they got hits on both of them: Mr. Ahmad popped up as an associate of a known or suspected terrorist, while Mr. Azeem’s information had been shared by a foreign government for intelligence purposes.

Both men had been processed two months earlier by immigration officials in Panama, suggesting they took advantage of smuggling networks or other routes increasingly used by Central American illegal immigrants to sneak into the U.S.

Long-time readers of TTB may recall last year’s detailed analysis of the Jihadi threat on our porous southern border, which we relink here for further background detail to match the Washington Times report above:


Jihad: It’s NOT all about us…it’s about Islamic doctrine


by Christopher W. Holton

There is a narrative in the West, promoted particularly by Muslim Brotherhood operatives and their allies, that violent Jihad is primarily the result of things that Westerners have done.

Among the excuses that apologists for Islamic atrocities give are:

• Islamophobia in the West and the USA in particular.

• US support for “oppressive” regimes in the Islamic world.

• US support for Israel.

• The presence of US troops in “Muslim lands.”

Linked below are news articles about two recent events that debunk the myth that Jihad is merely something that is performed in response to things we do or say.

The first is a report from India that there is a threat of terrorist attack at New Year’s from the Jihadist organization Lashkar e Taiba. Readers may recall that Lashkar e Taiba carried out a savage attack on Mumbai, India back in 2008, killing hundreds of innocent civilians.

Lashkar jihadists planning terror attacks on New Year, PM Modi, Parliament on hit list; alert issued

Next we have two reports about the annual attack on Christians in Nigeria carried out by Boko Haram (which is now part of the Islamic State).

Christmas Day Massacre: Boko Haram Kills 16, Including Children

Boko Haram kills more than 50 people in north-eastern Nigeria in two-day wave of attacks

…Boko Haram countered with a series of devastating attacks on towns in the country’s north-east, claiming dozens of fatalities in a bloody killing spree that began on Christmas Day.

There is simply no way to blame the threat of Jihad in India or savage Christmas day terrorist attacks on Christians in Nigeria on mythical “Islamophobia” or US foreign policy or even Israel.

The fact is, Jihad is based in Islamic doctrine–doctrine that is 1300 years old. Jihadists base their actions on Islamic scripture and not on videos produced in the West or speeches given by US presidential candidates.

It’s about time we learned this lesson in America.

The Plot Thickens: Did the San Bernardino Cleric Lie?

Roshan Zamir Abbassi

Roshan Zamir Abbassi

posted by Christopher W. Holton

Paul Sperry posted a hugely important article on the New York Post yesterday that should be the top of the news on Drudge.

Roshan Zamir Abbassi is an Imam at the San Bernardino mosque where the two barbaric savages, Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik, worshipped.

He claimed that he barely knew either of the two shooters.

Problem is, his phone records show no fewer than 38 messages exchanged over a two-week period back in June–at the same time another barbaric savage murdered US servicemen in Chattanooga, Tennessee.

German Police Raid, Shut Down Mosque for Islamic State Ties

by Christopher W. Holton

Too much is made of the Islamic State’s widespread use of social media to recruit Jihadists to its barbaric savagery.

The fact is, the social media wouldn’t be effective as a recruiting tool if there wasn’t a foundation in Islamic doctrine for Jihad in the first place. And the contemporary interpretation of Islamic scripture occurs most often in mosques.

Though federal elected and appointed officials are in complete denial about it, mosques have been used as recruiting centers, planning locations, safe havens and even armories for Jihadist terrorists around the world for years.

France has recently targeted mosques with ties to violent Jihad and Germany is too.

Until Americans come to terms with the fact that activities such as Jihad are not entitled to protection under the 1st amendment to the US constitution under religious freedom, we will continue to see an escalation of Jihad attacks here.

The Enemy Within: Third Jihadi Suspect Indicted in Garland Attack


posted by Christopher W. Holton

The Justice Department filed a second superseding indictment against Abdul Malik Abdul Kareem, formerly Decarus Thomas, the Arizona “third man” connected with May’s Garland, Texas, terrorist attack, disrupted by a courageous and skilled police officer.

The indictment issued by a grand jury on December 22 provides the clearest possible link yet between Kareem and the Islamic State Jihadist terrorist organization, which took responsibility for the May 3 Garland attack. The indictment charges Kareem with conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization because of a list of U.S. military members Kareem allegedly accessed from the Islamic State.

According to the indictment, in June, 2014, Kareem, Elton Francis Simpson and Nadir Hamid Soofi began a conspiracy to support the Islamic State. They pledged allegiance to the Islamic State and committed to attacking targets in the USA. The intended targets included military bases, military service personnel, shopping malls, the Super Bowl and Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest held in Garland, Texas.

Great Britain Condemns Muslim Brotherhood for Terrorism Ties; Obama Isolated in Close Ties to Jihadist Organization


by Christopher W. Holton

Great Britain just published the results of its exhaustive investigation into the Muslim Brotherhood and it has joined the growing chorus of nations–including Islamic Arab nations such as the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Egypt–who have fingered the Muslim Brotherhood for ties to Jihadist terrorism.

The Obama administration in the US now stands lone in its close, warm ties to what can only be properly described as the granddaddy of all modern Sunni Jihadist organizations. This illustrates the increasing degree to which Obama has become isolated in the world amid appearing completely out of touch with the reality of the Jihadist threat.

While even the overtly socialist Prime Minister of France, Francois Hollande, has embarked upon a crackdown against Jihad in France and an escalated air campaign against the Islamic State in the Middle East, the American president seems all too typically aloof and detached from what has become the overwhelming security concern of the American people.

The Obama administration has had close ties to American Muslim Brotherhood organizations since before he was even elected in 2008. Prominent members of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) have served in the Obama campaigns and even in the Obama administration.

What most Americans still do not know–including most Republicans–is that ISNA is Muslim Brotherhood and was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest successful terrorism financing prosecution in U.S. history: the U.S. v. the Holy Land Foundation. It was the intention of the Dallas U.S. attorney’s office to prosecute ISNA–along with other Muslim Brotherhood unindicted co-conspirators, notably the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), but then-newly minted Attorney General Eric Holder shut the prosecution down.

This was followed up by Obama’s speech to the Muslim world from Al Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt back in 2009, in which he insisted that the Egyptian regime–a long-time U.S. ally–allow members of the Muslim Brotherhood to sit in the front row.

The Obama administration’s ties to an organization that has been increasingly exposed as a Jihadist terrorist organization cannot be overemphasized.

Up to this point, UK Prime Minister David Cameron has gone to great lengths to provide a unified public front with Obama on security issues, but the evidence gathered by his government apparently left him with no choice but to break ranks with Obama when it came to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Among the main findings of the British report, which expose the degree to which Obama has sympathized with and found common cause with a supremacist, totalitarian organization and doctrine:

• The Muslim Brotherhood seeks the unification of the Islamic world under a Caliphate ruled by Shariah. (This is the exact same goal as the Islamic State, Al Qaeda, and every other Jihadist organization in the world.)

• The Muslim Brotherhood has a clandestine, secretive cell structure around the world.

• The Muslim Brotherhood has a large, sophisticated international clandestine network of commercial enterprises, student organizations, small businesses and charities.

• HAMAS, a vicious Jihadist group designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the US government, is in fact the Palestinian wing of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood outside of the Palestinian areas, such as the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, provide funding to HAMAS in support of its violent Jihad against Israel.

• The Muslim Brotherhood’s founding fathers and ideological leaders, notably Hassan al Banna and Sayid Qutb, endorsed and supported violent attacks to promote the Muslim Brotherhood’s goals. Both of these monsters remain revered by the rank and file members, as well as leaders, of the Muslim Brotherhood today. Their views on the use of violence inspired Al Qaeda and continue to inspire violent Jihad today.

• Some Muslim Brotherhood leaders condemned the 9/11 attacks–but only in the context of claiming that it as a false flag conspiracy designed to give the U.S. an excuse to wage war against the Islamic world. In other words, according to these Muslim Brotherhood leaders, Al Qaeda didn’t carry out the attacks, America did.

• The Muslim Brotherhood leadership today opposes violence only when and where the use of violence would be counterproductive and stand in the way of their goals. When they see violence as serving their purposes, they absolutely support violent Jihad.

• The Muslim Brotherhood has been embedding itself in the West for over 50 years with the establishment of front organizations and clandestine groups.

• Muslim Brotherhood charities raise funds in the UK and throughout Europe, at least some of these charities have been implicated in funding terrorism.

In conclusion, the Obama administration stands alone in its close ties with, and support for, an international Jihadist organization that is conducting subversive, seditious activity in the U.S. and the West.

India Cuts Deal With American Jihadi Involved in Mumbai Massacre


By Christopher W. Holton

India has granted a partial pardon to David Coleman Headley, the naturalized U.S. citizen and former DEA informant, who conducted reconnaissance ahead of the horrible Mumbai massacre back in 2008.

Reportedly, India has granted this partial pardon in return for Headley’s testimony about support from Pakistani military/intelligence officials for Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Jihadist terror group that pulled off the attack.

That Mumbai attack apparently served as a model for future attacks, including the Paris attacks this year and the recent attack in San Bernardino.

For those of you who are not familiar with that attack, in which at least 10 Jihadists carried out a dozen separate attacks using small arms, grenades and IEDs, killing 166 innocent civilians in hotels and other soft targets, there is a good documentary online about it:

The partial pardon for Headley is likely to be very controversial in India.

Here is a link to a good documentary about Headley’s life as a Jihadist and an informant who fooled U.S. authorities, causing them to look the other way in return for drug information while he was hiding right out in the open as a Jihadist.

David Coleman Headley’s story illustrates just how long Jihad has been embedded here in America. It is now being operationalized and we will likely find out its infrastructure is much more developed and widespread than anyone previously believed.

CAIR-Los Angeles Chief Hussam Ayloush Blames America for “Extremism” and Terrorism

Hussam Ayloush posing with the Muslim Brotherhood's Sheikh Youssef al Qaradawi. It is worth noting that Qaradawi has been banned from traveling to the US, the UK and France for his ties to "extremism." He has also endorsed female genital mutilation and approved Jihadists fighting the US in Iraq and attacking civilians in Israel

Hussam Ayloush posing with the Muslim Brotherhood’s Sheikh Youssef al Qaradawi. It is worth noting that Qaradawi has been banned from traveling to the US, the UK and France for his ties to “extremism.” He has also endorsed female genital mutilation and approved Jihadists fighting the US in Iraq and attacking civilians in Israel

By Christopher W. Holton

Once again we have been confronted with an outrageous statement from an official of CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood front group that has been implicated in terrorist activity.

Hussam Ayloush, the head of CAIR’s Los Angeles chapter, blamed US foreign policy for terrorism and “extremism” in the wake of the horrific San Bernardino Jihad attack that killed 14 innocent civilians and wounded 21 more.

If US foreign policy is responsible for “extremism” and terrorism, we have a few questions for Mr. Ayloush. We won’t hold our breath waiting for him to provide answers…

• Mr. Ayloush, did Boko Haram Islamic jihadists in Nigeria kidnap 300 Christian school girls because of US foreign policy?

• Mr. Ayloush, did Lashkar-e-Taiba’s Islamic jihadists assault Mumbai, India in 2008, killing 175 innocent civilians because of US foreign policy?

• Mr. Ayloush, did Chechan Islamic jihadists slaughter hundreds of school children in Beslan, Russia because of US foreign policy?

• Mr. Ayloush, did Al Shabaab Islamic jihadists slaughter 67 innocent civilians in the Westgate Shopping Mall in Nairobi, Kenya because of US foreign policy?

• Mr. Ayloush, did Jemaah Islamiyah Islamic jihadists kill 202 tourists in bombings in Bali, Indonesia in 2002 because of US foreign policy?

• Mr. Ayloush, did Islamic jihadists kill 191 innocent civilians in 2004 in the Madrid, Spain train bombings because of US foreign policy?

I could go on and on, but you get the idea…the problem clearly isn’t American foreign policy. The problem is the global Jihadist movement, of which your organization’s parent, HAMAS, is a key component.

Want to Understand How Syef Farook and Tashfeen Malik Could Leave Behind a Baby Daughter to Kill Innocent Victims in a Jihadi Attack? Look to Islamic Doctrine


by Christopher W. Holton

In monitoring the TV news in the wake of the San Bernardino terrorist attack one theme we hear over and over again has to do with the question of how a young, prosperous couple with a baby girl could leave all that behind to launch a murderous attack on innocent civilians.

For the answers we need only look to Islamic doctrine.

First of all, Jihadists have stated repeatedly that they do not regard kafir civilians as “innocent.” Here it is stated in no uncertain terms by the Islamic State in a release from September 2014:

Kill the disbeliever whether he is civilian or military, for they have the same ruling. Both of them are disbelievers. Both of them are considered to be waging war (the civilian by belonging to a state waging war against the Muslims). Both of their blood and wealth is legal for you to destroy, for blood does not become illegal or legal to spill by the clothes being worn.

The greater question, of course is, how could they leave behind a baby girl and family members to perform such an act, even if they believed it was justified?

When Muslims die they don’t believe that they will go straight to paradise. They believe that they must endure the “torments of the grave” until judgment day. The “torments of the grave” are positively gruesome. Muslims believe that they will be able to feel all of the decomposition and associated effects while they are in the grave.

There ARE exceptions, however.

Those who die while waging Jihad for Allah believe that they will not have to endure the torments of the grave, but will go straight to paradise, with all of its wonderful benefits. Such people are called shahids.

Not only that–and this is the most important point–shahids also win passage for some 70 family members when they die waging Jihad for Allah.

So, Syef Farook and Tashfeen Malik believed that they were doing something great for their baby daughter and their families by waging Jihad and dying in that cause. By what they believe, they all, including the baby, have thus earned a trip to paradise without having to endure the torments of the grave.

This is Islamic doctrine and it explains the actions of the numerous Muslims who have joined the global Jihadist movement.

And the whole “terrorism” debate continues yet again…


by Christopher W. Holton

In the wake of the San Bernardino attack yesterday morning, we are once again witnessing the pointless debate in law enforcement circles, as well as the news media, as to whether the mass shooting was an act of “terrorism.”

This morning on Fox News, a so-called “expert” was dissecting the Justice Department’s official definition of terrorism to justify the FBI’s hesitation in classifying what is, let’s face it, another act of war.

That same “expert” claimed that this was another example of “self-radicalization” over the internet and thus was very difficult to classify.

Fighting through the nausea induced by the talking heads’ ignorance, I managed to utter the word, “Hogwash.”

We must refrain as a country from once again entering into a debate on what amounts largely to semantics about whether or not this latest massacre was an act of “terrorism.”

We need to get away from focusing on the term “terrorism.” Some folks still don’t consider the 1983 Beirut Barracks bombing by Hezbollah which killed 241 Marines, sailors and soldiers an act of terrorism because, by some widely regarded definitions, attacks on combatants under such circumstances cannot be termed “terrorism.”

The San Bernardino massacre and the 1983 attack on the Marine Barracks, though very different, were both acts of JIHAD.

The Jihadis themselves don’t refer to themselves as “terrorists.” But they most assuredly refer to themselves as “Jihadis.”

I say let them own that title. If one of them goes out on his own and shoots up a ticket counter at LAX, beheads a grandmother with a knife in Moore, Oklahoma, or shoots up a county health facility in California, those are acts of Jihad, just as 9-11 was an act of Jihad.

This was never a war on “terrorism.”

We are at war with the Jihadists. They are waging Jihad against us and that takes many forms:

• Outright military confict (see Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs)

• Insurgency (See Iraq, Afghanistan, Algeria, Thailand, Philippines, Pakistan, India, Somalia, Yemen, and others)

• Terrorism (9-11, Paris, train bombings in Spain, 7/7 bombings in the UK, Mumbai, etc)

• Individual acts of violent Jihad (DC sniper, LAX shooting, Ft. Hood, Garland, Texas, Moore Oklahoma, Chattanooga, Tennessee, etc.)

• Financial Jihad (zakat payments to Islamic charities which, by Islamic Shariah law, fund Jihad, Sharia-Compliant Finance)

•Civilizational Jihad (peaceful methods, such as political influence operations (Muslim Brotherhood fronts such as CAIR, ISNA), mass immigration, lawfare, imposing Islamic customs on the West (insisting we play by their rules)).