UTT Throwback Thursday: IRAN is Still a Threat

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, April 6, 2017:

President Jimmy Carter’s Ambassador to the United Nations, Andrew Young, said “(Ayatollah) Khomeini will eventually be hailed as a saint.”

As a result of the U.S. administration being soft-hearted, soft-minded, and naive, Iran launched an Islamic revolution, and on November 4, 1979 52 American hostages were taken from the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and held for 444 days until President Reagan’s Inauguration Day.

The following month, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan.

President Obama’s administration appeased Iran and provided it billions of dollars in violation of federal law.

This was done despite the recognition by the U.S. government that Iran is the most dangerous state sponsor of terrorism in the world, continues to aggressively pursue nuclear weapons, and makes it’s desire to destroy the United States and Israel clear.

Iran’s constitution states:  “In the organization and equipping of the countries (sic) defense forces, there must be regard for faith and religion as their basis and rules. And so the Islamic Republic’s army, and the corps of Revolutionary Guards must be organized in accordance with this aim. They have responsibility not only for the safeguarding of the frontiers, but also for a religious mission, which is Holy War (JIHAD) along the way of God, and the struggle to extend the supremacy of God’s Law in the world.”

The Iranian constitution then quotes Koran 8:60 which is:  “Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into the hearts of the enemies of God and your enemies, and others beside.”

This is the same Koranic quote referenced on the International Muslim Brotherhood’s logo.

Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah – a designated terrorist organization – reports to the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah kisses the sleeve of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, a sign of respect and deference.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei stands with Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah under a portrait of Ayatollah Khomeini.

From the Congressional Record dated October 4, 2002:  “Prior to September 11, Hezbollah, through its terrorist wing, the Islamic Jihad Organization, had killed more Americans, by far, than any other terrorist organization in the world. The bombing of U.S. Marine Corps barracks in Beirut, the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, the hijacking of TWA flight 847, numerous other brutal kidnappings and murders of Americans.”

From the 9/11 Commission Report:  “In June 1996, a truck bomb demolished the Khobar Towers apartment complex in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, killing 19 U.S. servicemen and wounding hundreds.  The attack was carried out primarily by Saudi Hezbollah, an organization that had received help from the government of Iran…In late 1991 or 1992, discussions in Sudan between Al Qaeda and Iranian operatives led to an informal agreement to cooperate in providing support – even if only training – for action carried out primarily against Israel and the United States.  Not long afterward, senior Al Qaeda operatives and trainers traveled to Iran to receive training in explosives…The relationship between Al Qaeda and Iran demonstrated that Sunni-Shia divisions did not necessarily pose an insurmountable barrier…Senior managers in Al Qaeda maintained contacts with Iran and the Iranian-supported worldwide terrorist organization Hezbollah…Al Qaeda members received advice and training from Hezbollah.  Intelligence indicates the persistence of contacts between Iranian security officials and senior Al Qaeda figures after Bin Laden returned to Afghanistan…In October 2000, two future muscle hijackers Mohand al Shehri and Hamza al Ghamdi, flew from Iran to Kuwait…In November (3 other muscle hijackers) traveled in a group from Saudi Arabia to Beirut and then onward to Iran.  An associate of a senior Hezbollah operative was on the same flight that took the future hijackers to Iran…There is strong evidence that Iran facilitated the transit of Al Qaeda members into and out of Afghanistan before 9/11, and that some of these were future 9/11 hijackers.”

Additionally, senior Al Qaeda leader Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his family lived in Iran.

FBI officials testified in February 2002 “FBI investigations to date continue to indicate that many Hezbollah subjects based in the United States have the capability to attempt terrorist attacks here should this be a desired objective of the group.”

CIA Director George Tenet testified in February 2003 “Hezbollah, as an organization with capability and worldwide presence, is [Al Qaeda’s] equal, if not a far more capable organization.”

A July 28, 2011 U.S. State Department press release reads:  “The U.S. Department of the Treasury today announced the designation of six members of an al-Qa’ida network headed by Ezedin Abdel Aziz Khalil, a prominent Iran-based al-Qa’ida facilitator, operating under an agreement between al-Qa’ida and the Iranian government.”

In 2012, the U.S. Treasury Department designated the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and Security – Iran’s primary intelligence agency – for providing material support to Hezbollah and Hamas (TERRORIST organizations), for providing Al Qaeda operatives with documents (passports, ID), facilitating Al Qaeda’s movement in Iran, and providing weapons and money to Al Qaeda in Iraq during the war there.

Approximately one week ago, U.S. Central Command Commander General Votel testified before Congress that “Iran posses the greatest long-term threat to stability in this part of the world.”

It is high time the United States government destroy Iran’s ability to wage war at all levels, including Hezbollah’s operations in Lebanon, Iran, and their cells here in the United States.

Aliens Guaranteed Entry Into the U.S.?

vbg

Trump’s executive order on immigration and the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

Front Page Magazine, by Michael Cutler, February 1, 2017:

Irresponsible incendiary rhetoric spewed by politicians and members of the media, in reaction to the executive order signed by President Trump to temporarily suspend the entry into the U.S. of aliens from a limited number of countries that are associated with terrorism, whether they had been issued visas, has fired up throngs of demonstrators in New York City and elsewhere.

President Trump began his executive order bynoting how failures of the immigration system enabled terrorists to carry out the murder of 3,000 innocent people in the United States on 9/11.

The 9/11 Commission was crystal clear about the ways that failures of the immigration system enabled not only the 9/11 terrorists, but others, to enter the United States and embed themselves as they went about their deadly preparation.  We have seen similar attacks in the years since as I noted in my article, “Reflections On 9/11’S Vulernabilities.”

The report, “9/11 and  Terrorist TravelStaff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.” began with this first paragraph:

It is perhaps obvious to state that terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the United States if they are unable to enter the country. Yet prior to September 11, while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a tool in the counterterrorism arsenal. Indeed, even after 19 hijackers demonstrated the relative ease of obtaining a U.S. visa and gaining admission into the United States, border security still is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy. We believe, for reasons we discuss in the following pages, that it must be made one.

That report should be required reading for all journalists and politicians.

Trump’s action is not without precedent.

The Obama Administration Stopped Processing Iraq Refugee Requests For 6 Months In 2011.

In 1980 then-President Jimmy Carter banned citizens of Iran from entering the United States as the Washington Post reported on April 9, 1980, “Carter’s Visa Crackdown Won’t Hurt Immediately.”

On February 24, 1998, just two days shy of the fifth anniversary of the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, the U.S. Senate’s Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism and Government Information conducted a hearing on the topic, “Foreign terrorists in America : five years after the World Trade Center.”

At that hearing Senator Dianne Feinstein hammered failures of the immigration system more than three years before the attacks of September 11, 2001.  Her testimony included this statement:

I am also concerned that we need to strengthen further our immigration laws and procedures to counter foreign terrorist operations. I have grave reservations regarding the practice of issuing visas to terrorist supporting countries and INS’ inability to track those who come into the country either using a student visa or using fraudulent documents through the Visa Waiver Pilot Program.

In FY 2013 it was estimated by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) that more than 200,000 aliens were denied entry into the United States at ports of entry.

On January 26, 2015, CRS issue a report, “Border Security: Immigration Inspections at Ports of Entry” that began with this paragraph:

About 362 million travelers (citizens and non-citizens) entered the United States in FY2013, including about 102 million air passengers and crew, 18 million sea passengers and crew, and 242 million land travelers. At the same time about 205,000 aliens were denied admission at ports of entry (POEs); and about 24,000 persons were arrested at POEs on criminal warrants.

I have long been concerned about Politics, the Media and False Perceptions About Immigration.  Today, however, given the media’s hostility to President Trump, the true significance of immigration law enforcement has been utterly obfuscated.

What has been blithely ignored is the fundamental fact that an alien who is granted a visa to enter the United States is not guaranteed admission into the United States.

The State Department has the authority to issue visas to aliens seeking entry into the United States, however, the State Department has no authority to admit aliens into the United States.

That authority is vested with the CBP (Customs and Border Protection) Inspectors.

For aliens who require visas to enter the United States, the visa should be thought of as a “ticket” that gets them to the inspection facility at a port of entry into the United States so that they can be inspected by a CBP inspector who determines whether to admit that alien.

That decision is based on the overarching principle aliens are to be barred from entering the United States if their presence would pose a threat to national security, public safety and/or the overall wellbeing of America and Americans.

Title 8 U.S. Code § 1182 – Inadmissible aliens enumerates the categories of aliens who are deemed “inadmissable.”

I’m intimately familiar with this issue.  For the first four years of my thirty year career with the former INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) I was an Immigration Inspector assigned to John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City.  I can tell you from personal experiences, the challenges are daunting. With just a quick interview, they must attempt to not only determine if an alien’s passport and documents are authentic and unaltered by also determine if that aliens has a criminal history or an affiliation with a criminal or terrorist organization by accessing databases.

The inspector must also attempt to determine if an alien seeking entry is likely to violate the immigration laws.  This presents a daunting challenge and as a consequence, it is estimated that more than 500,000 non-immigrant aliens violate the terms of their admission each year.

Aliens who have been issued a visa but appears nevertheless, to be inadmissible, is given the choice of withdrawing his/her application for admission and returning to the country from which they came or opt for a hearing before an Immigration Judge.

Depending on the determination of risk of flight, that alien may be permitted to leave the airport and is then provided with a notice as to when and where to appear for an immigration hearing, or may be taken into custody, when it is believed that the alien presents a significant risk of flight or poses an apparent threat to public safety or national security.

The significance of our immigration laws and the importance of the inspections process conducted at ports of entry was my focus on March 20, 2013 when I testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee at a hearing on the topic,  “Building an Immigration System Worthy of American Values.”

In addition to Border Patrol agents and support personnel the CBP employs more than 20,000 CBP (Customs and Border Protection) inspectors who are assigned to the 325 ports of entry located along America’s land border ports, seaports and international airports.  (This goes back to my often noted point that the United States does not have just four border states – those states that lie along the U.S./Mexican border, but has 50 border states.)

The mission of CBP is, indeed, one of great importance.  That agency’s Mission Statement includes this excerpt:

About CBP

With more than 60,000 employees, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, CBP, is one of the world’s largest law enforcement organizations and is charged with keeping terrorists and their weapons out of the U.S. while facilitating lawful international travel and trade.

As the United States’ first unified border entity, CBP takes a comprehensive approach to border management and control, combining customs, immigration, border security, and agricultural protection into one coordinated and supportive activity.

The men and women of CBP are responsible for enforcing hundreds of U.S. laws and regulations. On a typical day, CBP welcomes nearly one million visitors, screens more than 67,000 cargo containers, arrests more than 1,100 individuals, and seizes nearly 6 tons of illicit drugs. Annually, CBP facilitates an average of more than $3 trillion in legitimate trade while enforcing U.S. trade laws.

While U.S. citizens may never be prevented from entering the United States, aliens have the burden of providing proof, to the satisfaction of the CBP inspector, that they will not violate the terms of the admission that are determined by the category for visa that they have been issued.

There are two categories of aliens: immigrants and non-immigrants.  Yet politicians incite the demonstrators by referring to all foreign nationals as “immigrants” thereby intentionally ignoring this important distinction.

Non-immigrants are aliens who have not abandoned their domiciles in their home countries and seek entry into the United States for a temporary period of time.  Examples of such non-immigrants include tourists, foreign students, foreign journalists and aliens with temporary work visas.

Immigrants are aliens who have been issued immigrant visas are lawfully admitted for permanent residence and are issued Alien Registration Receipt Cards and are the pathway to citizenship.

President Trump is acting responsibly and decisively to protect America, Americans and indeed, all present in the United States. The open-borders immigration anarchists are in a frenzy having become accustomed to the suicidal open borders policies of the Obama administration.

Michael Cutler is a retired Senior Special Agent of the former INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) whose career spanned some 30 years. He served as an Immigration Inspector, Immigration Adjudications Officer and spent 26 years as an agent who rotated through all of the squads within the Investigations Branch. For half of his career he was assigned to the Drug Task Force. He has testified before well over a dozen congressional hearings, provided testimony to the 9/11 Commission as well as state legislative hearings around the United States and at trials where immigration is at issue. He hosts his radio show, “The Michael Cutler Hour,” on Friday evenings on BlogTalk Radio. His personal website is http://michaelcutler.net/.

Fighting the War on Terror with Immigration Sanity

Long_border_fence-450x300Frontpage, February 17, 2015 by Michael Cutler:

Ever since the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 many of our leaders justified sending troops to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan by saying that we must fight them (the terrorists) “over there” or we would have to fight them “over here.”

Now that the president is asking Congress for resources to combat ISIS overseas to defend the United States against the rapidly escalating threat posed by that extremely violent terrorist organization it is vital that a serious effort be mounted to devise an all-encompassing strategy to achieve total victory.

Of course the United States must act and act effectively and decisively in bringing the battle to our enemies on their turf.  Going on the offensive overseas is essential.  That is the mission of our military.

But it is time for a serious reality check on what really needs to be done to win this battle and protect America and Americans from the defensive perspective as well.

On that horrific day in September more than 13 years ago, America’s enemies turned lower Manhattan, a field in Pennsylvania and the Pentagon into a deadly battlefield.  On that day, all of the casualties were inflicted “over here” by aliens who had gamed the visa process and/or immigration benefits program.  If the immigration system had worked effectively, most of those aliens who participated in those attacks should not have been able to enter the United States, let alone receive immigration benefits, including being granted political asylum or acquiring lawful status under the 1986 Amnesty program.

For all of the rhetoric about fighting al-Qaeda overseas, the Patriot Act and stringent security measures implemented at airports and other critical facilities made it clear that the battle was and is being fought within the borders of the United States.  The component of the “War on Terror” involving our borders brings us to the realm of effective immigration law enforcement.

While most politicians and others simply want to address the issue of border security along the U.S. Mexican border, the reality is that the legislative approach attempted by the House of Representatives would not succeed.  My disgust with that legislative disaster was the focus of my February 5, 2015 FrontPage Magazine article, “The ‘Secure Our Border First Act’ Deception” (tag line: Why it’s no solution to the immigration crisis).

The goal where immigration is concerned is multifaceted to actually succeed in protecting America and Americans.

We need to secure our borders against those aliens who would evade the inspections process by running our northern as well as our southern borders.  We need to tighten up surveillance of all ships entering our harbors to prevent stowaways from surreptitiously gaining entry into the United States and need to make certain that the Coastguard has the resources it needs to identify all ships approaching our coastline and interdict them.

We need to end the Visa Waiver Program and provide more resources to the inspections process conducted by CBP (Customs and Border Protection) at ports of entry.

However, it is inevitable that no matter how much we will try, aliens will evade the Border Patrol and the Coastguard.  Aliens who have been lawfully admitted into the United States will violate the terms of their admission.  The solution to these issues is to greatly increase the number of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) agents to locate and arrest those aliens who slip through the defenses I noted above.

By effectively enforcing our immigration laws, opportunities will be created to cultivate informants and cooperating witnesses to enable law enforcement and intelligence agencies to more readily identify emerging threats before attacks are carried out.  This aspect of the significance of effective immigration law enforcement was the subject of  my November 10, 2014 commentary for Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS), “Lack of Intelligence in Failures to Enforce Immigration Laws.”

Finally, the process by which aliens are granted immigration benefits ranging from being granted political asylum to providing lawful immigrant status and the conferring of United States citizenship upon aliens via the naturalization process must have eaningful integrity.  This is essential to deprive terrorist “sleepers” the ability to embed themselves in communities around the United States as they await instructions to carry out an attack within our borders.

Again, this requires that many more ICE agents be hired and assigned to combatting immigration fraud — a serious vulnerability identified by the 9/11 Commission.

Terrorism has been defined as “asymmetrical warfare.”  America’s enemies, the radical Islamist terrorist groups, ISIS, al-Qaeda and others know that they can not win a conventional military battle with the U.S. armed forces.  Their goal is to get behind their enemy’s lines and inflict casualties among the civilian population to instill fear and terror.  For these terrorists, the “enemy lines” are the borders of the United States.

During the Second World War, when soldiers sought to go behind enemy lines they often boarded military aircraft that, under the cover of darkness, flew over the country they wanted to attack and parachuted behind the enemy lines to carry out reconnaissance missions and sabotage their enemy’s critical facilities.

Sometimes, under the cover of darkness, enemy combatants boarded submarines and other ships and stealthily approach the enemy’s coastline to send commandos ashore to carry out their deadly missions.

Read more

SAUDI ARABIA AND 9/11: THE REAL CONNECTION

saudi bushBreitbart, by Dr. Sebastian Gorka, Feb. 8, 2015:

Many expect a smoking gun to be found in the 28 still-classified pages of the official 9/11 Commission Report, evidence linking Saudi Arabia to Al Qaeda. The truth about the Kingdom’s links to the Global Jihadi Movement is historic and already established.

Again this week, there were calls to declassify the missing sections of the 9/11 Commission report. This time, the pressure comes from relatives of the 9/11 victims, who have brought a court case alleging that a charity linked to the government of Saudi Arabia was funneling funds to Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda. The revelation of official statements made last year by the so-called “20th hijacker,” Zacarias Moussaoui have given the accusations more credence. You can read the transcripts of his depositions here, here, here, and here.

Over the years, Moussaoui has made serial claims about Al Qaeda’s international links and plots beyond the 9/11 attacks, including a plan to down Air Force One with a Stinger missile. Now, he accuses members of the Saudi royalty of being financiers of Osama bin Laden and his organization. Unsurprisingly, the official response from the Saudi government has been swift and dismissive, with the embassy in Washington, D.C. stating that “Moussaoui is a deranged criminal” and that “His words have no credibility.”

Those who expect some kind of resolution or spectacular revelation will likely be disappointed even if the redacted portions of the Commission report are released. As has been documented, a wide range of Moussaoui’s stories in the past have been demonstrated to be not only questionable but even impossible. It should be remembered that back in 2006 he was diagnosed as suffering from paranoid schizophrenia. Even if he no longer suffers from mental illness, his latest statements may be just another pedestrian case of a “lifer” bargaining testimony for concessions.

The truth about the Kingdom’s connections to the international jihadist movement are in fact much older and well documented.

To begin with, the Kingdom was actually created out of the pact made between Mohammad bin Saud and the fundamentalist religious leader Mohammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, the founder of the puritanical version of Sunni Islam know as Wahhabism. Subsequently, the nation that resulted was one defined in stark contrast to enlightened modern monarchies such as the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan or secular Muslim republics such as Ataturk’s Turkey. But the definitive connection between the House of Saud and the Global Jihadist Movement can be traced back to 1979. In a year that would see the Soviets invade Afghanistan and catalyze a Holy War against themselves, and a theocratic revolution erupt in Iran, 500 jihadi terrorists stormed the holiest site in Islam, the Grand Mosque in Mecca. Their leader, Juhayman al Otaybi, launched the assault because of his belief that Islam had lost its way, that Muslims were weak because they had become unfaithful, and their leaders, starting with King Khalid bin Abdulaziz Al Saud had become un-Islamic.

Eventually, the siege was broken with the help of French counterterrorism operators that had been smuggling into the Kingdom and “converted” to Islam so they could enter Mecca. However, when the king found out that Saudi clerics, members of the learned ulema, had endorsed this holy war against him and his royal house, the king made a deal with the jihadist clerics. In exchange for Saudi Arabia being kept free from jihadist ideologically internally, his regime would support the export and dissemination of Jihadism outside of Saudi Arabia, to non-Muslim lands. For chapter and verse see the excellent book The Siege of Mecca. As a result, for several decades, the Saudi government facilitated the growth internationally of jihadist ideology, be it through Arab Mujahedeen in Afghanistan, or the Balkans, or elsewhere, until the First Gulf War. When the then-king invited “infidel” US troops to station themselves on the Arabian peninsula, Osama bin Laden added the House of Saud onto his target list, despite being born a Saudi Arabian and his father being very close to the royal family. For bin Laden, the House of Saud had become false Muslims, just as in the eyes of the original Meccan raiders on 1979. This has all been well-documented, most especially in Lawrence Wright’s Pulitzer Prize-winning book The Looming Tower. When we sent troops to the land of Mecca and Medina, Al Qaeda reinvented itself as an organization that would not only kill infidels, but also apostate or “false” Muslims, including a campaign after 9/11 that targeted the Saudi security services and government officials.

In recent years, especially with the rise of The Islamic State, Saudi Arabia has fundamentally reassessed its attitude to the Global Jihadist Movement. That does not mean, of course, that all its princes or government officials are whole-heartedly on the side of America and her allies, but it does mean that events such as the recent immolation of the Jordanian pilot Muadh al Kasasbeh have a much greater significance for the Islamic governments of the region.

Sebastian Gorka PhD. is the Major General Matthew C. Horner Distinguished Chair of Military Theory at the Marine Corps University. You can follow him of Twitter at @SebGorka.

The Missing Pages of the 9/11 Report

William Kratzke/AP; Photo Illustration by The Daily Beast

William Kratzke/AP; Photo Illustration by The Daily Beast

Daily Beast, by Eleanor Clift, Jan. 12, 2015:

The lead author of the Senate’s report on 9/11 says it’s time to reveal what’s in the 28 pages that were redacted from it, which he says will embarrass the Saudis.
A story that might otherwise have slipped away in a morass of conspiracy theories gained new life Wednesday when former Sen. Bob Graham headlined a press conference on Capitol Hill to press for the release of 28 pages redacted from a Senate report on the 9/11 attacks. And according to Graham, the lead author of the report, the pages “point a very strong finger at Saudi Arabia as the principal financier” of the 9/11 hijackers.

“This may seem stale to some but it’s as current as the headlines we see today,” Graham said, referring to the terrorist attack on a satirical newspaper in Paris. The pages are being kept under wraps out of concern their disclosure would hurt U.S. national security. But as chairman of the Senate Select Committee that issued the report in 2002, Graham argues the opposite is true, and that the real “threat to national security is non-disclosure.”

Graham said the redacted pages characterize the support network that allowed the 9/11 attacks to occur, and if that network goes unchallenged, it will only flourish. He said that keeping the pages classified is part of “a general pattern of coverup” that for 12 years has kept the American people in the dark. It is “highly improbable” the 19 hijackers acted alone, he said, yet the U.S. government’s position is “to protect the government most responsible for that network of support.”

The Saudis know what they did, Graham continued, and the U.S. knows what they did, and when the U.S. government takes a position of passivity, or actively shuts down inquiry, that sends a message to the Saudis. “They have continued, maybe accelerated their support for the most extreme form of Islam,” he said, arguing that both al Qaeda and ISIS are “a creation of Saudi Arabia.”

Standing with Graham were Republican Rep. Walter Jones and Democratic Rep. Stephen Lynch, co-sponsors of House Resolution 428, which says declassification of the 28 pages is necessary to provide the American public with the full truth surrounding the 9/11 attacks. The two lawmakers echoed Graham’s assertion that national security would not be harmed, and point out that on two separate occasions President Obama has told 9/11 families that he wants to see the pages declassified. Jones and Lynch wrote a letter to Obama in April urging him to take action, and have been told by the White House that a response is in the works.

The purpose of the Wednesday press conference was to put pressure on the White House by building bipartisan support in the House and Senate. Any member with a security clearance is able to read the redacted chapter in a closed room, albeit under supervision and with no note taking and no staff.  It’s a cumbersome process, and most members haven’t bothered. The relatively few who have read the pages come away with varying levels of shock and surprise. Lynch said he was so blown away that the information was being kept from the public that he told the two room monitors he would be filing legislation. HR 428 had 27 co-sponsors in the last Congress.

Among the attendees at the press conference was Jack Quinn, formerly a top lawyer in the Clinton White House, who is representing 9/11 families in their effort to gain compensation from the Saudi government. If the redacted pages document complicity in the attacks by the Saudi government, or religious and charitable institutions related to the kingdom, which is relevant to a lawsuit in the Southern District of New York where the Saudis are the defendants. Quinn, who is one of several lawyers involved with the case, previously represented families in the Lockerbie crash in their suit against the Libyan government.

Read more

U.S. Links Iran to Both Al-Qaeda and Taliban Terrorists

Iran Ayatollah Khamenei in front of a picture of the leader of the 1979 Iranian Islamic revolution Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini

Iran Ayatollah Khamenei in front of a picture of the leader of the 1979 Iranian Islamic revolution Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini

By Ryan Mauro:

The U.S. Treasury Department is again linking the Iranian regime to Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. On August 21-22, it sanctioned several terrorists and disclosed their Iranian ties. Yet again, it is confirmed that Shiite and Sunni terrorists are willing to cooperate against common enemies.

An August 22 press release announces the sanctioning of Abdul Mohsen Abdullah Ibrahim al-Sharikh, described as an Al-Qaeda facilitator and strategist in Syria. He is also a senior leader of Jabhat al-Nusra, Al-Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate, and very active in social media.

The Obama Administration explains that he also played a leading role in Al-Qaeda’s pipeline in Iran that operates with the consent of the regime:

“Prior to his work in Syria with [Jabhat al-Nusra], al-Sharikh served in early 2013 as chief of al-Qaida’s Iran-based extremist and financial facilitation network before the return of already designated al-Qaida facilitator Yasin al-Suri to the position. Al-Sharikh has also previously served al-Qaida as a key financial facilitator in Pakistan.”

A press release from a day prior announced that the Treasury Department was sanctioning the Basir Zarjmil Hawala based in Chaman of Pakistan’s Baluchistan Province. Hawala networks are underground money transfer systems in the Muslim world.

The U.S. government says the Basir Zarjmil Hawala became the “principal money exchanger” for Taliban leaders in Pakistan in 2012. It provides a list of branch offices, with one being in Iran. Given the tyrannical nature of the Iranian regime and suspicion of Sunni terrorists, it is inconceivable that the regime is unaware of this major operation. Other offices are in Afghanistan and Dubai.

The Clarion Project’s fact sheet on Iranian sponsorship of terrorism details how the Clinton, Bush and Obama Administrations have all asserted that the Iranian regime supports Al-Qaeda, despite their intense ideological divisions.

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, Iran and Al-Qaeda began collaborating in late 1991 or early 1992. Al-Qaeda operatives began receiving training, particularly in explosives, inside Iran and Lebanon.

The report leaves open the possibility that Al-Qaeda worked with Iran in carrying out the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia in 1996. The attack killed 19 U.S. soldiers. The Iranians wanted to expand the relationship after Al-Qaeda’s bombing of theUSS Cole in Yemen in 2000, but Osama Bin Laden was worried about losing Saudi supporters.

“The relationship between al-Qaeda and Iran demonstrated that Sunni-Shi’a divisions did not necessarily pose an insurmountable barrier to cooperation in terrorist operations,” the 9/11 Commission concluded.

***

Iran is offering to help the U.S. defeat the Islamic State (formerly Al-Qaeda in Iraq) if sanctions are lifted on its nuclear program. The Iranian regime is acting like a firefighter that sets blazes so it can come to the rescue.

The Shiite Iranian regime and the Sunni terrorists of Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State may kill and condemn each other, but they are far closer to each other than they are to us. The history of the relationship shows that they will work together against us, even as they fight tooth-and-nail in Syria and Iraq.

At the end of the day, Islamist terrorists will always choose each other over us. We ignore that demonstrated behavior at our own cost.

Read more at Clarion Project

Clinton Admits He Passed on Killing Bin Laden

clinton-450x337by :

In a memorably explosive 2006 interview with Chris Wallace, former President Bill Clinton went off on a finger-wagging “tear,” as Wallace put it, when questioned about whether he had done enough during his terms in office to get Osama bin Laden. “I got closer to killing him than anybody has gotten since,” growled a furious Clinton. Now a recently-released audiotape confirms that Clinton did indeed have at least one clear opportunity to kill the world’s most wanted man in 1998 – and passed on it, allowing bin Laden to live to mastermind the 9/11 attacks.

Last week Australian Michael Kroger, the former head of the Liberal Party in the state of Victoria, unveiled on Australia’s Sky News a never-before-released audio of Clinton speaking to a group of businessmen in Melbourne on September 10, 2001, recorded a mere ten hours before the first plane hit the World Trade Center. In that recording, made with the former president’s knowledge according to Kroger, Clinton responded thusly in response to a question about international terrorism:

And I’m just saying, you know, if I were Osama bin Laden — he’s a very smart guy, I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about him — and I nearly got him once. I nearly got him. And I could have killed him, but I would have to destroy a little town called Kandahar in Afghanistan and kill 300 innocent women and children, and then I would have been no better than him. And so I didn’t do it.

Questioned by Fox News about the Clinton recording, Michael Scheuer, chief of the bin Laden unit from 1995 to 1999, replied that Clinton was a “disgrace” and a “monumental liar” for claiming that he didn’t kill bin Laden because of the collateral damage. He asserted that only Taliban and bin Laden and his crew would’ve died if Clinton had given the go-ahead for a missile strike on the region in December of 1998. But Clinton didn’t act, said Scheuer, because he’s a “coward morally” and because he’s “more concerned, like Obama, with what the world thinks about him.”

Read more at Front Page