The New York Times Destroys Obama

nytoSo pathetically, in a bid to defend Obama and Clinton and the rest of the Democrats, the Times published a report that showed that Obama’s laser like focus on the Zawahiri-controlled faction of al Qaida has endangered the US.

By failing to view as enemies any other terror groups — even if they have participated in attacks against the US – and indeed, in perceiving them as potential allies, Obama has failed to defend against them. Indeed, by wooing them as future allies, Obama has empowered forces as committed as al Qaida to defeating the US.

Again, it is not at all apparent that the Times realized what it was doing. But from Israel to Egypt, to Iran to Libya to Lebanon, it is absolutely clear that Obama and his colleagues continue to implement the same dangerous, destructive agenda that defeated the US in Benghazi and will continue to cause US defeat after US defeat.

By Caroline Glick:

The New York Times just delivered a mortal blow to the Obama administration and its Middle East policy.

Call it fratricide. It was clearly unintentional. Indeed, is far from clear that the paper even realizes what it has done.

Last Saturday the Times published an 8,000 word account by David Kirkpatrick detailing the terrorist strike against the US consulate and the CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012. In it, Kirkpatrick tore to shreds the foundations of President Barack Obama’s counter-terrorism strategy and his overall policy in the Middle East.

Obama first enunciated those foundations in his June 4, 2009 speech to the Muslim world at Cairo University. Ever since, they have been the rationale behind US counter-terror strategy and US Middle East policy.

Obama’s first assertion is that radical Islam is not inherently hostile to the US. As a consequence, America can appease radical Islamists. Moreover, once radical Muslims are appeased, they will become US allies, (replacing the allies the US abandons to appease the radical Muslims).

Obama’s second strategic guidepost is his claim that the only Islamic group that is a bona fide terrorist organization is the faction of al Qaida directly subordinate to Osama bin Laden’s successor Ayman al-Zawahiri. Only this group cannot be appeased and must be destroyed through force.

The administration has dubbed the Zawahiri faction of al Qaida “core al Qaida.” And anyone who operates in the name of al Qaida, or any other group, that does not have courtroom certified operational links to Zawahiri, is not really al Qaida, and therefore, not really a terrorist group or a US enemy.

These foundations have led the US to negotiate with the Taliban in Afghanistan. They are the rationale for the US’s embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood worldwide. They are the basis for Obama’s allegiance to Turkey’s Islamist government, and his early support for the Muslim Brotherhood dominated Syrian opposition.

They are the basis for the administration’s kneejerk support for the PLO against Israel.

Obama’s insistent bid to appease Iran, and so enable the mullocracy to complete its nuclear weapons program is similarly a product of his strategic assumptions. So too, the US’s current diplomatic engagement of Hezbollah in Lebanon owes to the administration’s conviction that any terror group not directly connected to Zawahiri is a potential US ally.

From the outset of the 2011 revolt against the regime of Muammar Qaddafi in Libya, it was clear that a significant part of the opposition was comprised of jihadists aligned if not affiliated with al Qaida. Benghazi was specifically identified by documents seized by US forces in Iraq as a hotbed of al Qaida recruitment.

Obama and his advisors dismissed and ignored the evidence. The core of al Qaida, they claimed was not involved in the anti-Qaddafi revolt. And to the extent jihadists were fighting Qaddafi, they were doing so as allies of the US.

In other words, the two core foundations of Obama’s understanding of terrorism and of the Muslim world were central to US support for the overthrow of Muammar Qaddafi.

With Kirkpatrick’s report, the Times exposed the utter falsity of both.

Read more at Front Page

Related articles

Patrick Poole: Day One Highlights from the World Summit on Counter Terrorism

1185075_10151793556875999_1809247653_nBy Patrick Poole:

As I noted in my previous post, I’m reporting from the 2013 World Summit on Counter Terrorism in Herliya, Israel. The first day’s session was entirely in Hebrew with translation via earphones (rendering my recorder irrelevant), so I’m going to rely on translations from the Israeli media to cover the highlights.

The keynote speaker was Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon, who said that Israel would stay out of the Syria crisis unless“red lines were transgressed,” meaning retaliatory attacks directed at Israel in the event of a U.S. attack. Included in those “red lines” would also be transferring chemical weapons to Hezbollah.

But he also warned that inaction by the U.S. would also have consequences. This is particularly interesting, as the conference falls six years after Israel launched an attack on Syria’s nuclear weapons development facility.

As the Times of Israel noted, most of Ya’alon’s speech was directed at challenging Western misconceptions of the region and expressing skepticism at the efforts to bring democracy to the Arab world. Of particular note was the aspirations of the Palestinians to form a state:

One of the most incredible things in a period when the notion of the nation-state is collapsing before our eyes is that there are those who are trying to advance, in one way or another, the founding of yet another nation-state — even as it remains unclear how the people of Jenin are connected to the people of Hebron, and uncertain that there is a common denominator between those in Judea and Samaria and those in Gaza.

Former Mossad chief Shabtai Shavit noted the incompatibility between Western norms and the intentions of jihadists in the fight against terrorism:

Western culture espouses the values ​​of tolerance and acceptance of the other, but radical Islam is not willing to accept the other and according to its perception the “infidels” must die. Since the West places an emphasis on morality, it tries to fight terrorism while its hands are tied. The tension between the need for security and morality is also expressed by means of preventing and combating terrorism. With technological developments I predict that eventually the technology will evolve into an effective tool in fighting terrorism, but until that development will come, terrorism will have already been at work in the non-conventional arena.

remarkable statement by former Israeli National Security Council director Uzi Arad not only questioned the effectiveness of a U.S. strike against Syria, but also its legality under international law (a point also made during today’s session by Syracuse University professor William Banks):

Syria is not a signatory to international conventions against the use of chemical weapons. You cannot say that Assad violated an international convention Syria is not signed onto.

I find it hard to believe that intervention will bring about a substantially better situation. The best thing now would be for Obama to carefully bring the crisis to an end, without creating negative ramifications in the region and the world, whether before or after an attack.

One personal observation from my interactions the past two days with Israeli officials: not a one has had a positive thing to say about President Obama.

I hope to post more thoughts later.

For more information see the facebook page: ICT: International Institute for Counter-Terrorism

Obama’s scrub of all mention of Islam from counterterror training materials under fire after Boston jihad bombings

Chart by Patrick Poole

Chart by Patrick Poole

By Robert Spencer:

CAIR deserves some credit for this — they mounted a huge campaign in 2010 to have me dropped as a trainer of FBI agents. Others responsible for the politically correct scrubbing of counterterror training materials of any mention of Islam or jihad include hard-Left pseudo-journalist Spencer Ackerman, who published a series of “exposes” of “Islamophobic” counterterror training; Fatima Khera, who wrote a letter to John Brennan demanding that this material be removed; Brennan, who readily acquiesced to this demand; and Salam al-Marayati, who piled on in the mainstream media. They got what they wanted: the scrubbing of counter-terror training materials of the truth about Islam and jihad. Now in Boston, we have begun reaping the fruit of this.

Khera’s letter to Brennan complained that my books could be found in “the FBI’s library at the FBI training academy in Quantico, Virginia”; that a reading list accompanying a powerpoint presentation by the FBI’s Law Enforcement Communications Unit recommended my book The Truth About Muhammad; and that in July 2010 I “presented a two-hour seminar on ‘the belief system of Islamic jihadists’ to the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) in Tidewater, Virginia,” and “presented a similar lecture to the U.S. Attorney’s Anti-Terrorism Advisory Council, which is co-hosted by the FBI’s Norfolk Field Office.”

In fact, I gave many such presentations to various government agencies and law enforcement groups. This was amid many other complaints about similar material from other writers, and presentations by other counter-jihadists. So now all that material is gone, and the witless and politically correct FBI of today ignored Tamerlan Tsarnaev despite repeated warnings from Russian authorities. And if they did investigate him, they didn’t know what to look for or how to understand what they were seeing.

The Leftist journalists and Islamic supremacist groups who pressured Obama (as well as Obama and his administration officials themselves) ought to be held accountable for the law enforcement and intelligence failures connected to the Boston jihad bombings.

Read more at Jihad Watch

Sebastian Gorka on the purge:

 

 

Why Terrorist Attacks Have Quadrupled Since 2001

1280-computational-analysis-of-terrorists-groups-437x350By Kerry Patton

Terrorism is a tactic used by individuals with specific ideologies. Killing an ideology is nearly impossible. The war on terror is a complete misnomer. A war cannot be waged against a tactic. And proving to be an ideological war, evidence demonstrates that today, the tactic of terrorism is actually growing world-wide.

Since 2001, the United States and our allies have been engaged in a complex war fighting against an ideology. Many people have been killed while many more have been maimed. Today, it is known via the University of Maryland’s Global Terrorism Database, deaths caused by terror have decreased yet attacks have actually quadrupled world-wide since 2001.

The leading ideological culprit behind the growing terror dilemma is Islam. The Global Terrorism Database proves unequivocally that those who embrace a very twisted religious ideology are leading the world today in terrorist activities — i.e. Islamists.

Terrorists have varied their tactics with advanced unconventional tools. Today, we learn that Syria is threatening to incorporate chemical weapons against its opposition. The Free Syrian Army (FSA) has already ransacked at least three Syrian military bases procuring Manual Portable Air Defense (MANPAD) systems shooting down a Syrian military helicopter just last week. Do we know whether they obtained any chemical weapons during the raids as well?

What happens if the opposition obtains these chemical weapons? What happens if Al Qaeda elements fighting alongside Free Syrian Army rebels transfer these weapon systems elsewhere later, incorporating them into the streets of a European or North American nation? Terrorist and their movements strengthen.

Four credible arguments can be made explaining why terrorist incidents have increased over the years—weak US foreign policy, internal fighting between conventional and unconventional military wisdom, technical intelligence dependency, and decapitated US human intelligence.

A weak US foreign policy could be partially blamed for the spike in world-wide terrorist incidents. Since the start of the Arab Spring, the United States has actually emboldened terrorist groups through “behind closed doors” diplomacy, weapons procurement, and other logistical needs. Simply put, the very people we often assist frequently become the very people we fight.

Read more at Front Page

Obama’s National Security Priority: Moderate Muslim Rappers

By Daniel Greenfield:

Also known as, this is what the leading counterterrorism experts were doing the day after Benghazi.

The day after Islamic extremists attacked the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, the nation’s top counterterrorists hosted something of a brainstorming session on how to keep violent extremism down in the long term. While the consulate burned, 100 or so intelligence analysts, military officers, prosecutors, academics and civil rights experts gathered… for a conference on “Countering Violent Extremism / Community Engagement.”

Afterward, according to a draft agenda obtained by Danger Room, attendees were invited to a nearby mall for a happy hour at Coastal Flats, a restaurant known for its crab cakes.

A State Department official, Shahed Amanullah, ran through the ways effective al-Qaida propagandists spread their message on the internet, and described how a program he runs, called Viral Peace, seeks to troll the online radicals.

“With CVE, the spectrum starts at prevention, with the regular Joe on the street,” explains Humera Khan, who runs a number of such prophylactic programs and who spoke at the Sept. 12 event. “The idea is to increase the barriers to entry, so that he never goes down that radical path.”

A national security priority of the Obama White House, CVE is supposed to work by using the various government security branches to “empower” Muslim communities at home and abroad.

As discussed previously, CVE has actually subverted legitimate counterterrorism efforts by making it a priority to win over Muslims domestically, instead of cracking down on terrorists. The FBI has been neutered by CVE and so have most domestic law enforcement agencies.

Instead of focusing on counterterrorism, the Obama Administration is putting all its weight behind CVE and bringing a lot of Muslims on board to throw around money on their Islamic programming.

Read more at Front Page

What’s Missing From Our New National Strategy for Counterterrorism

By Kerry Patton:

On June 28, the White House released its 2011 National Strategy for Counterterrorism. This twenty-six page document could be observed as an extremely narrowly focused strategy—possibly too narrow. Al Qaeda is the main focus within the plan and, for many reasons, rightly so. Most of our major command’s areas of operations are identified as well but one crucial region is missing—South and Central America.

First, it’s critical to understand the importance of a strategic plan and how it is developed. For starters, a Strategic Plan is created by Strategic Intelligence. Strategic Intelligence is defined as:

- Intelligence that is required for forming policy and military plans at national and international levels.

- Intelligence that is required for the formulation of military strategy, policy, and military plans and operations at national and theater levels. (DOD)

- “Intelligence employed in the formulation of policy and military plans at the national and international levels.” [Polmar, Norman and Thomas B. Allen. The Encyclopedia of Espionage. New York: Gramercy Books, 1997, p. 538]

- “Warning of the enemy intention to attack, and ‘tactical’ warning, i.e., the detection of actual physical preparations for an attack.” [Luttwak, Edward and Dan Horowitz. The Israeli Army. 1975]

So, in understanding the different types of definitions related to Strategic Intelligence, one can see that prior to a plan being developed, it is critical to have the proper collection and analysis of a broad range of insight globally to formulate plans to secure the nation–known as Strategic Plans.

Read more at Fox News

Kerry Patton is co-founder of the National Security Leadership  Foundation,  a non-profit organization with a pending 501c (3) status. He has worked in South  America, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and Europe, focusing on intelligence and  security interviewing current and former terrorists, including members of the Taliban.  He is the author of “Sociocultural Intelligence: The New  Discipline of Intelligence Studies” and the children’s book “American Patriotism.”  You can follow him on Facebook.

 

Ignoring Islamo-Fascism at our Peril

By Alan Caruba at FSM:

In early November 2009 Americans were shocked to learn that an Army psychiatrist, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, had shot and killed twelve soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas, and wounded thirty-one others. Because of the unrelenting political correctness prevailing in the Army and other services, all the signs that Hasan was a ticking time bomb were ignored.

Hasan was known to be a Muslim, had exhibited signs of a growing fanaticism, occasionally showed up in the post exchange dressed in Arab garb, and as it turned out later, was being mentored by Yemen’s al Qaeda leader, Anwar al-Awlaki , an American citizen who was later killed by a drone strike. As Hasan stood before the soldiers, firing at them, he yelled “Allah Akbar.”

This and other attacks, planned, failed, and thwarted occurred before and since 9/11; an attack that stunned Americans, all contribute to the worldwide terrorism intended to bring about the domination of Islam. Not only has the memory faded, but in 2009 the Obama administration did away with the earlier description of “a war on terrorism”, it ordered the Pentagon to replace it with “overseas contingency operations.”

The administration’s magical thinking about the Islamo-fascist threat makes one wonder why it has a Department of Homeland Security.

When it became known that the New York City Police Department was training its force to be especially watchful for any signs of terrorist attacks and was paying close attention to the mosques in the city and across the river in New Jersey, there was an outcry that totally ignored the threat. Initially they were rebuked by the Governor of New Jersey, a state where the 1993 attack on the Twin Towers was planned. One of the conspirators arrested lived in my hometown!

A report by the NYPD notes that Newark police officers worked closely “at all times” with their New York City counterparts. Much of the criticism of the NYPD’s program has been due to its success!

In a new book by Peter Feaman, “The Next Nightmare: How Political Correctness Will Destroy America” ($14.99, Dunham Books, softcover), a trial lawyer with thirty years’ experience, warns against the way Americans are leaving themselves vulnerable to future attacks. “Intolerance of Christianity and Judaism, and violence against infidels, is preached weekly in mosques across the United States.”

A great deal of the problem is that Americans believe that Islam is a “religion.” Historically, it has been a cult of conquest that merges its belief system with a political agenda in which Sharia law is intended to be imposed throughout the world. Its early, swift spread was based on terror and warfare.

No other “religion” preaches death to believers of other faiths. No other “religion” demands that apostates who convert be sentenced to death. No other “religion” resorts to intimidation on the scale of Islam. It is fascism masquerading as religion.

“At the end of World War II,” notes Feaman, “there were about fifty mosques located in the United States. Today there are more than 1,300 – and the number grows monthly.” Much of the funding comes from Saudi Arabia for Sunni mosques and Iran for Shiite mosques.

There are moderate Muslims seeking reform within Islam and there are Muslims who are loyal Americans. They are, however, vastly outnumbered by those with very bad intentions.

Read the rest…

 FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Alan Caruba writes a weekly column, “Warning Signs”, posted on the Internet site of The National AnxietyCenter, and he blogs at http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com. His book, “Right Answers: Separating Fact from Fantasy”, is published by Merrill Press.

Mosques of New Jersey – a Case of Short Memory Syndrome

Patrick Dunleavy at FSM:

In the latest outcry against the NYPD’s successful Counter Terrorism strategies, caused in part by an article from the Associated Press’s Washington-based Investigative team,Islamic and civil libertarian groups such as the ACLU and CAIR are once again calling for the resignation of Commissioner Ray Kelly and a federal investigation of the police department for alleged spying on the Muslim community in the Greater New York area.
 
At the center of the accusations is the release of an NYPD document that details in part intelligence gathering on Mosques in the state of New Jersey. Newark, New Jersey mayor Cory Booker voiced outrage telling the press that the city was never notified of the NYPD conducting a surveillance operation in their city. However the evidence shows that the NYPD did notify New Jersey law enforcement officials and that police officers from the Garden State acted as liaisons between the New York Police and Newark PD.
 
Questions on the issue of jurisdiction were also raised asking, “What gives NYPD the right to go outside the city limits to conduct investigations?”
 
At first glance the average reader might think that this is a clear case of government abuse of power and of law enforcement collecting information on innocent citizens in violation of constitutional rights. Those that do so suffer from a case of short memory syndrome. Looking back over the history of Islamic terrorist activity in New York prior to 9/11 is a sure cure for the malady.
 
In 1990 a little known Egyptian immigrant committed a homicide in Manhattan. What was once looked at as just a single act of violence by a lone individual in a crime ridden city has now come to be known as the vanguard attack of the jihadists on the United States. The victim of the killing was Rabbi Meir Khane, an outspoken Jewish activist, and founder of the Jewish Defense League, with a reputation for making inflammatory speeches. The shooter was El Sayyid Nosair. The investigation into the murder revealed that Nosair was a member of Al Gama’a al Islamiyya, an Islamic terrorist organization whose spiritual leader was Omar Abdel Rahman, the Blind Sheik. Nosair prior to the shooting had participated in raising money for an organization known as Maktab al Khadamat. That organization was founded by Abdullah Azzam and Osama bin Laden in Pakistan as a means of providing financial support for the mujahadeen fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980’s.
 
The headquarters for the organization in the United States was run out of a mosque, Al Farouq, in Brooklyn. But funds were also supplied from several mosques in New Jersey which both Nosair and the Blind Sheik had visited and with whom they maintained ties.
 
In February of 1993 a truck loaded with explosives was detonated in the World Trade Center by radical islamists. The jihad had now moved from a single killing to an attack on innocent civilians and a landmark structure in the United States. 
 
In the investigation that followed conducted by Federal, State, and City law enforcement, names, locations, and the activities of the conspirators were outlined in the successful prosecution by the US Attorney’s Office. Once again El Sayyid Nosair was involved in the jihad. From his cell in Attica state prison he was able to contact individuals in New Jersey and who were constructing the truck bomb. Among the other perpetrators led by Ramzi Yousef, were individuals such as Ibrahim al Gabrowny, Nosair’s cousin, and Mohammed Salameh. Both lived and attended mosques in New Jersey.
 
The connection between the mosques in the New York City area and Jersey mosques was provided by non other than Sirhaj Wahhaj, the Imam of Al Taqwa Mosque in Brooklyn, NY. Wahhaj was an unindicted co-conspirator in the case who was called to testify during the first World Trade Center trial. In his testimony he talked of an incident at the El Salaam Mosque in New Jersey involving Sheik Abdel Rahman and his followers.
 
Wahhaj stated he had just left another Islamic Center in New Jersey, when he “just happened to drive by” the mosque where several of the individuals convicted in the first World Trade Center Bombing were attending.   Wahhaj admitted that he knew Sheik Abdel Rahman as well as the others in the Jersey mosque. The same violent rhetoric calling for jihad was preached in every mosque the Blind Sheik and his followers went to in the United States, including the ones in New Jersey.
 
Court records clearly revealed that the terrorists who planned the attack in New York City lived and were attending mosques in New Jersey. Inmate visitor and phone records of El Sayyid Nosair clearly showed communication with individuals from New Jersey who were attending mosques in New Jersey. If that wasn’t enough, the very truck that was loaded with explosives was rented in New Jersey.
 
So the question is, should NYPD wait until the terrorists bent on attacking the city cross over the George Washington Bridge before they start to investigate or gather intelligence?
 
That would be ridiculous. The philosophy that drives Commissioner Kelly and the NYPD to station Detectives overseas to glean real time live information of terrorist attacks or to follow any lead anywhere in protecting the city is rock solid and founded not on abusing civil liberties, but protecting them.
 
Investigative journalism is necessary for a strong vibrant free press. But a lopsided story that fails to look at the history of radical terrorists in New Jersey’s Islamic Centers is myopic and does not give an accurate view of the facts.
 
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Patrick Dunleavy is the former Deputy Inspector General for New York State Department of Corrections. He is the author of “The Fertile Soil of Jihad: Terrorism’s Prison Connection,” details of which can be found at his website, and he can be contacted at: mail@patrickdunleavy.com.
 
See also: