Boston Bombers Had Links to al Qaeda Terrorist Cells

AlQaedaBlackFlag

Debka:

The surviving Boston bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has every incentive for insisting that he and his brother acted alone and out of “ideological” motives in the Boston Marathon bombings of April 15.

That was predictable.

What is surprising is the acceptance of this claim by his federal interrogators.

He can’t speak because of a wound to the throat. But did they really expect him to write down the names and addresses of his and his brother Tamerlan’s fellow terrorists and associates?

Dzhokhar was formally charged Monday, April 22, with using and conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction. The charge related to the twin bombings of the Boston Marathon causing the deaths of three people including an 8-year old boy and injuring 180 others.

One way or another, the 19-year old Dzhokhtar is condemned to die – whether under a federal court sentence or from his injuries.

If he sticks to his story that they brothers acted alone in the cause of Islam, he dies a “a glorious martyr” to the sacred cause, celebrated across the radical Islamic world as a shining inspiration for more terrorist cells to go forth bearing his name.
Politicians are not the only ones who care about their legacies. To achieve this he must refrain from spilling the beans and lead the FBI inquiry up a blind alley.

DEBKA’s counter-terrorism sources say the investigation’s best bet would be to finally follow up on the treasure trove the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation – the FBS – relayed to Washington in 2011. They not only fingered Tamerlan, who died in a shootout with the Boston police, as a “suspect Islamist terrorist” but revealed that he had toured radical Islamic mosques in Dagestan and Chechnya in search of contacts in jihadist terror groups. The Russians also appended a whole list of terrorist suspects of Caucasian descent in the Boston area.

Also worth following up is Barack Obama’s call to Russian President Vladimir Putin on April 19 to thank him for Moscow’s cooperation n the marathon bombing investigation

What was that about? What made Russian assistance valuable enough for the two presidents to agree on better cooperation between the FBI and the FBS?

And the content of a second conversation that took place at the height of the search for the Boston bombers would be highly relevant too. On April 17, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal arrived unannounced at the White House and was immediately received by President Obama. Our sources report that he too handed a high-value dossier from confidential files in Riyadh containing data on clandestine Saudi terrorist cells in the Boston area.

By digging into an unsolved two-year old triple murder, the Boston Globe lifted a corner of the veil on the Tsarnaev brothers’ violent past in the service of radical Islam. The Boston police consequently reopened the case this week and are looking at Tamerlan for the murder of three young Jews found with slashed throats in a Waltham, Massachusetts apartment on Sept. 11, 2011. Brendan Mess was Tamerlan’s close friend, Erik Weissman, a Brandeis University graduate and Raphael Teken a devout Jew.

Look again at the date: The murders took place on the 10th anniversary of 9/11.

 

Obama’s Global Makeover

Obama 6Center for Security Policy

By Frank Gaffney, Jr.

In an impromptu conversation with Joe the Plumber during the 2008 presidential campaign, candidate Barack Obama famously and unintentionally acknowledged his support for redistributing the nation’s wealth. And he has been hard at it ever since.

Mr. Obama has yet to cop, however,to another, arguably even more radical agenda: redistributing the nation’s power. We are, nonetheless, beginning to witness the poisonous fruits of his efforts to enhance the relative might of America¹s adversaries while degrading our own.  Call it Obama’ s global makeover.

The most obvious example is in the Middle East, where each day brings fresh evidence of how the Obama administration’s disastrous policy of embracing Islamists is transforming and destabilizing the region.  Of particular concern is the Muslim Brotherhood’s accelerating domination of the Egyptian government, which is turning the Arab world¹s most populous nation, one that sits astride the strategic Suez Canal and wields a formidable, American-supplied arsenal, into a shariah-adherent, Islamic supremacist state.  This is a formula for mass repression in Egypt, war in the Mideast and increased jihadist terror elsewhere.

Less obvious, but potentially even more problematic, is the effect of the Obama-facilitated redistribution of power on Communist China. The Chinese have not been fooled by the President’s putative strategy of ‘pivoting’ to Asia. They understand that his administration is eviscerating American military power ­ a process that will become even more draconian (and perhaps substantially irreversible) as a result of Mr. Obama¹s determination to impose the so-called sequestration round of half-a-trillion dollars more in cuts on a Pentagon already reeling from early $800 billion in previously approved reductions.

As one wag put it, the PRC views us more of a pirouetting paper-tiger than a formidable foe, whose pivot represents a meaningful trategic redeployment.

The ominous repercussions of such a perception are already beginning to manifest themselves:

Last week, police in the Chinese province of Hainan Island announced that they would stop, board, search and possibly seize vessels hey deemed to be ³illegally² plying areas of the South China Sea that Beijing has declared to be its sovereign territory.  That could apply to as much as half the world’s oil tanker traffic that passes through those waters. Some observers believe this may be a feint, designed to test American responses and resolve.  If so, the U.S. response has been negligible and the Chinese can only be further emboldened by our irresolution to stand up to their aggressive behavior.

It can hardly be an accident that China has begun throwing its weight around in other ways, as well.  As David Goldman wrote in the Asia Times on November 27th  under the nom de plume Spengler: “It is symptomatic of the national condition of the United States that the worst humiliation ever suffered by it as a nation, and by a U.S. president personally, passed almost without comment last week. I refer to the November 20 announcement at a summit meeting in Phnom Penh that 15 Asian nations, comprising half the world’s population, would form a Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership excluding the United States.

We were not accidently barred from this new grouping. Rather, Goldman reports, Obama triedto use the summit to promote a U.S.-sponsored “Trans-Pacific Partnership” that would exclude China.  He not only failed.

The ASEAN nations plus India, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand actually agreed to form instead a new club with China in, and the United States out. Spengler attributes this poke in the eye to a cold calculation by the Pacific rim types that the United States is no longer the region’s dominant economic power.  That may be.

But whether it is a recalibration rooted in changing financial and trade relations or a sense that China is emerging as the new hegemon in their part of the world, the result is the same: Dynamics in Asia that are unlikely to prove conducive to our economy or security.

Then, there is President Obama’s rash effort to rid the world of nuclear weapons, starting with ours.  A State Department advisory committee made up of rabid disarmers has just issued a recommendation that the United States make still further, deep reductions in its nuclear stockpile, through negotiated agreements with Russia, if possible, and unilaterally if Vladimir Putin will not go along. This panel ­ like the Obama administration that is expected to embrace its recommendations ­ seems indifferent to the growing evidence that China may have substantially more deployed nuclear weapons than we do. And, unlike ours, theirs are on modern launch vehicles, many of which appear to be hidden in 3,000 miles of hardened tunnels.  Meanwhile, Team Obama is ensuring that there will be no modernization of the U.S. arsenal and that its weapons, and the industrial complex vital to their future deterrent value and readiness, will continue to atrophy.

President Obama is redistributing power, all right, and is thereby giving the globe a strategic makeover.  Think of it as his “fundamentally transforming the United States of America” by diminishing its power and upgrading that of its enemies.

Does any one actually think this is going to have any effect other than emboldening those who wish us ill, even as we reduce our capacity to deter and, if necessary, to defeat them?

US disowns Israel over Iran strike: No weapons or military backup

Debkafile:

US Gen. Martin Dempsey’s assertion Thursday, Aug. 30 that the US would not be “complicit” in an Israel strike against Iran, together with the drastic reduction in the scale of next month’s joint US-Israeli war game disclosed by TIME, add up to a blunt message from US President Barack Obama to Israel: You are on your own! See how you manage without special US weapons and US military backup, including a shield against missile counter-attack, if you decide to defy us and go through with a military operation against Iran. Instead of the 5,000 US troops originally assigned for Austere Challenge 12, the annual joint exercise, the Pentagon will send only 1,200 to 1,500 service members. The missile interception systems at the core of the joint exercise will be reduced in number and potency: Patriot anti-missiles will come without crews and maybe one instead of two Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense warships, according to the magazine.

debkafile’s military sources: The Obama administration has put Israel on harsh notice that an attack on Iran to disrupt or delay its nuclear armament will be refused US missile backup – both in the course of the operation and to cover Israel’s back in the event of a counter-strike widening into a general Middle East conflict. The Netanyahu government will bear full and exclusive responsibility for the consequences of attacking Iran.

Obama, who has repeatedly pledged his commitment to Israeli security, is the first American president to cut Israeli adrift against a major threat to its security explicitly posed by Iran.

The US president has put his campaign for reelection next month at great albeit calculated risk. His rival Mitt Romney will not doubt follow up on the charges he made during his acceptance speech to the Republican convention Thursday that Obama threw “allies like Israel under the bus” and failed utterly to stop Iran’s centrifuges spinning.

Obama may find the Jewish vote and campaign contributions fading. For Romney an incumbent president  throwing Israel to the wolves against the ayatollahs is a dream come true. Binyamin Netanyahu and his defense minister Ehud Barak must bear some of the onus for one of the most damaging ruptures US-Israel relations have ever faced – as will be discussed later. However, the prime cause must be sought elsewhere. In the last month, Obama has undergone a change of face: The top US soldier and ambassador Dan Shapiro were told to start treating Israel like a pest and telling its leaders that the administration is fed to the teeth with their clamor for action on Iran.

This change did not come out of the blue. debkafile’s Washington and Moscow sources report it evolved from three events: 1. During this month, President Vladimir Putin severed Russia’s military ties with Iran and Syria as debkafile reported earlier: Obama reciprocated by cutting Israel down to size. Moscow informed Tehran and Damascus that there would be no more Russian arms supplies after the delivery of the last items in the pipeline. Putin therefore left both Iran and Syria high and dry amid war dangers in return for Obama cutting Israel off from advance military hardware at a time of peril. The Russian and American leaders thus put in place the first bricks of an accord for resolving their disputes over a nuclear Iran and the Syrian crisis by the device of slashing the military capacity of Iran, Israel and Syria. The Russian president took another step as a gesture to Obama: He pulled Russian warships out of the Syrian base of Tartus and the eastern Mediterranean, leaving only a floating dry dock. In return, he counted on Washington forcing Israel to abandon any plans to strike Iran. 2.  But this exercise in symmetrical reciprocity ran into a major snag: Obama found a tough nut in Jerusalem: Binyamin Netanyahu held out for a pledge of US military action against Iran as his price for holding back. Despite the massive pressure Obama threw at the Israeli government, both through the highest ranking US political and military channels and by mobilizing the government’s most vocal opponents and anti-war circles at home, Netanyahu and Barak did not budge.   They understood, despite Obama’s concealment, that the secret US-Russian deal would in fact preserve Iran’s nuclear program at a point at which Iran’s leaders could have a weapon assembled and unsheathed at any moment. The also realized that as long as Israel’s military option against Iran was alive, the Obama-Putin deal was stuck, because both Iran’s Ali Khamenei and Syria’s Bashar Assad would likewise refuse to fall into line.

When Romney said he would give America’s friends “more loyalty” and Putin “a little less flexibility and more backbone,” he was referring to President Obama’s request from Putin on June 18, at the G20 conference in Mexico, for more time against his promise to the Russian leader of “more flexibility” later. To keep his deal with Putin in motion, the US president will have to tighten his squeeze on Israel’s leaders to forego an attack on Iran.

Read more

US & Russia Deploy in Syria – Double Prey for Al-Qaeda

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report:

 

The failure of US President Barack Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin Monday, at the G20 summit in Los Cabos, Mexico to agree on terms for Syria and Iran holds the potential for three equally dire scenarios to unfold in Syria:

It could degenerate into another Afghanistan; or another Balkans, or al Qaeda’s next war arena. Potentially counterpoised in Syria today are, on the one side, the United States, Europe and their Arab allies; on the other, are Russia, China, Iran and Hizballah.

The last group is preparing to show its muscle with a vast joint military exercise in Syria. Al Qaeda has begun to seep through the cracks.

The Assad regime is not just shedding blood but bleeding itself  But it stays alive because 40 percent of the Syrian population is behind it  and the rebel movement is deeply fractured.

Syria is therefore in the process of breaking up into three balkanized segments:

The United States and its European and Arab allies in the northern, central and eastern regions. The Russians, along the Mediterranean coastal strip. Russian warships are on their way to secure their base at Tartus. In these circumstances, Iran and HIzballah will intensify their effort to prop up the Assad regime and solidify their grip in Damascus.

So three world forces may end up dividing Syria up between them.

Al Qaeda will have achieved its object of corralling America and Russia on one unruly territory and easily within reach of attack.

Related articles: