Holton: Why I Don’t Have Much Faith in Robert Mueller

Terror Trends Bulletin, by Christopher Holton, May 18, 2017:

Robert Mueller has been appointed as a special prosecutor to investigate alleged Russian influence operations involving the 2016 US elections.

I don’t have a strong opinion on that investigation, but I do believe that all the fawning over Robert Mueller that I have seen the past 24 hours is…well…unwarranted.

That’s because I was thoroughly unimpressed by his tenure as FBI director. When selected by George W. Bush to head the FBI on 4 September 2001–one week before 9/11–the word on Mueller was that he was someone who was selected because he would not rock the boat or make too many sweeping changes.

If ever there was a wake up call to make sweeping changes, it came on 11 September 2001 and America was saddled with a guy leading the FBI who was chosen because he was a “safe” pick.

On Mueller’s watch the FBI bumbled some key counterjihad initiatives.

First of all, the FBI purged counterterrorism training materials that referred to terms like “Jihad” or “Islam” on Mueller’s watch. These decisions were arrived at because Mueller had a “stuck on stupid” habit of conducting outreach with Muslim Brotherhood operatives, some of whom winded up in jail.

Secondly, speaking of Russians, the Russians warned the FBI about the Tsarnaev brothers who then bombed the Boston Marathon and then went on a two-man jihad in the Boston area. The FBI did essentially zilch about them despite the warnings and even conducted outreach with the Boston area mosque co-founded by a man convicted on terrorism charges and described by the Justice Department as the primary Al Qaeda financier in America.

These are hardly indications of a competent guy.

Congressman Louis Gohmert was particularly tenacious in his periodic grilling of Mueller as FBI director. These videos are well worth a look to give you the details–as well as the general idea–of what I’m talking about…

Gohmert Challenges FBI Director About the Purging of Training Material:

FBI Director Unaware Boston Mosque Founded By al Qaeda Funder:

GOP’er Louie Gohmert And FBI’s Robert Mueller Explode Over Investigation Into Boston Bombers:

***

Also see:

UTT Throwback Thursday: Will New FBI Director Smash Jihadis in U.S.?

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, May 10, 2017:

After 9/11, the only Islamic organizations the FBI conducted “outreach” with were known enemies of the United States – Muslim Brotherhood (MB), Hamas, and Al Qaeda.

While individual agents work diligently to protect their communities, the FBI’s strategic response to the Global Islamic Movement has been destructive and incoherent.

Here are a few of the hundreds of examples:

On February 13, 2002, FBI Director Robert Mueller met at FBIHQ with a group of “national leaders of Arabs, muslims, and Sikh organizations.”  All five (5) muslims present represented jihadi organizations.  Specifically, they were:   Nihad Awad, Executive Director of Hamas (dba CAIR) and the “Government Affairs Director” for Hamas (CAIR); two leaders from the Islamic Institute founded by Al Qaeda financier Abdurahman Alamoudi; one leader from the American Muslim Council founded by Al Qaeda financier Abdurahman Alamoudi; and the National Director of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Muslim Public Affairs Council.

In November 2005, Special Agent in Charge of the Washington Field Office Mike Rolince gave an award to jihadi Imam Mohamed Magid, who was the Vice President then President of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), identified by the Department of Justice as Muslim Brotherhood organization which funds the terrorist group Hamas.

FBI SAC Mike Rolince gives award to jihadi Imam Mohamed Magid at the FBI Washington Field Office

The FBI publishes recruiting ads in Islamic Horizons, the monthly publication for ISNA. According to the Department of Justice, ISNA is a Muslim Brotherhood organization which funds the terrorist group Hamas.

In the FBI’s publication celebrating it’s 100th anniversary, the FBI allowed ISNA (terrorist funding MB organization) to take out a half-page ad congratulating the FBI and stating boldly, “ISNA – Leading the Way.”

On dozens of occasions since 2002, Hamas (dba CAIR) conducted sensitivity training for FBI agents around the country.

In March 2008, the FBI’s Deputy Assistant Director for Intelligence Tim Healy and the Assistant Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s Washington Field Office conducted “outreach” at the Muslim Brotherhood’s All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) Center in Sterling, Virginia, led by Imam Mohamed Magid, the former President of the largest Muslim Brotherhood organization in North America (ISNA) which finances the terrorist group Hamas.  During this outreach, the FBI leaders told the audience, “One of the things the FBI believes in is diversity,” and went on to say the FBI was working hard to hire more Muslims.

That same year – 2008 – FBI Director Mueller presented a “Director’s Award” to senior Muslim Brotherhood jurist Imam Yahya Hendi, who is not only the Imam of the MB’s Islamic Society of Frederick (MD) but also sits on the MB’s Fiqh Council of North America.

FBI Director Robert Mueller presents Muslim Brother Yahya Hendi with award (2008)

On February 8, 2012, FBI leaders – including FBI Director Robert Mueller – joined a number of Muslim Brotherhood groups (ISNA, MPAC, Muflehun) to discuss “inflammatory training” that “offends muslims.” The FBI leadership ensured the jihadis the FBI would do all they could to appease them – and they did. The FBI no longer teaches anything about sharia, the MB networks, or the Global Islamic Movement.

On June 13, 2013 FBI Director Robert Mueller testified before the Judiciary Committee about the Boston Marathon Bombing and admitted he did not know the mosque the Tsarnaev brothers attended – Islamic Society of Boston/ISB (Muslim Brotherhood) – was founded by Al Qaeda financier Abdurahman Alamoudi. Director Mueller defended not sending FBI agents to the ISB after the bombing because the FBI was there before the bombing doing “outreach” with the Imam.

See a short video of that exchange HERE.

In April 2016, the FBI’s Washington Field Office presented the “Director’s Award” to the Muslim Brotherhood’s ADAMS Center (VA).  On the same day, FBI Director James Comey presented the Director’s Award to jihadi Imam Mohamed Magid at FBI headquarters.

FBI Assistant Director Paul Abbate (left of jihadi) presents award to jihadi Mohamed Magid at ADAMS

FBI Director James Comey presents award to jihadi Imam Mohamed Magid (2016)

Today the FBI’s official outreach partners for the “Islamic” community only include Muslim Brotherhood organizations.  Specifically, the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS), Muslim Advocates, and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC).

Is it any wonder that 100% of the members of the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) who attend Understanding the Threat’s 3-day training program universally state they have never heard the information presented, yet also state the information is “critical” to protecting their communities?

Is it any wonder the jihadis in the United States feel emboldened to confront elected officials, law enforcement leaders and others to “demand” such training be shut down because it “offends” them?

Is it any wonder that nearly all of the Islamic jihadis who have acted and killed in the name of Islam in the United States have been interviewed by the FBI, under investigation but deemed “not a threat,” or simply dismissed as having “mental issues?”

The FBI is in need of a bold and aggressive Director who will use the full power of the Bureau to destroy the Islamic Movement and its supporters in the hard-left socialist Movement to restore law and order in our Republic.

FBI Training Questioned in Recent Terror Attacks

This notebook recovered in the arrest of suspected bomber Ahmad Khan Rahami mentions deceased al Qaeda recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki / AP

This notebook recovered in the arrest of suspected bomber Ahmad Khan Rahami mentions deceased al Qaeda recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki / AP

Washington  Free Beacon, by Bill Gertz, Sept. 22, 2016:

Recent domestic terror attacks by Islamic extremists are raising questions among officials and security experts about whether FBI counterterrorism training is deficient.

The chief suspect in the New York City homemade bombing attacks last weekend, Ahmad Rahami, was probed for several weeks by the FBI in 2014 after his father alerted authorities to his terrorist leanings.

Rahami’s father, Mohammad Rahami, told reporters this week that he informed the FBI about concerns about his son after Rahami stabbed one of his brothers in a domestic dispute.

“Two years ago I go to the FBI because my son was doing really bad, OK?” the elder Rahami said. “But they check almost two months, they say, ‘He’s okay, he’s clean, he’s not a terrorist.’ I say OK.”

“Now they say he is a terrorist. I say OK,” Mohammad Rahami said.

The FBI acknowledged dismissing concerns that Rahami posed a terrorism threat. “In August 2014, the FBI initiated an assessment of Ahmad Rahami based upon comments made by his father after a domestic dispute that were subsequently reported to authorities,” the bureau said in a statement. “The FBI conducted internal database reviews, interagency checks, and multiple interviews, none of which revealed ties to terrorism.”

An FBI spokeswoman did not respond to questions about counterterrorism training.

Rahami is charged with setting off a bomb in downtown New York City that injured 29 people. Other bombs were planted nearby and in New Jersey. He was arrested after being wounded in a shootout with police.

Evidence gathered in the case reveals Rahami carried out the bombing in support of the terrorist groups Islamic State and al Qaeda.

A notebook found on Rahami mentioned ISIS terror leader Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, who was killed in a U.S. drone strike in Syria last August. The terror leader was quoted by Rahami as instructing sympathizers to kill non-Muslims.

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R., Va.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, plans to question FBI Director James Comey about its counterterrorism work at a hearing Wednesday.

“From San Bernardino to Orlando to the most recent terrorist attacks in New York, New Jersey, and Minnesota, the United States has experienced a rise in radical Islamic terrorism and we must ensure that the FBI has the resources needed for its counterterrorism efforts in order to thwart these heinous plots and protect Americans from harm,” Goodlatte said in a statement.

Former FBI Special Agent John Guandolo said the FBI does not lack resources but has failed to understand the nature of the Islamist terror threat and thus has prevented proper training of counterterrorism agents over misplaced concerns of discrimination against Muslims.

“Obviously the FBI’s training program is catastrophically broken,” Guandolo said, noting the string of recent domestic attacks involving terrorists who were at least familiar to FBI counterterrorism agents because of indications they were linked to Islamists.

Six earlier terrorist attacks, among them mass murders at an Orlando nightclub and killings on a military base in Texas, were preceded by FBI investigations or inquiries into the attackers or their immediate family members.

The list of those recent attacks includes:

  • The 2009 shooting at a U.S. military recruiting station in Little Rock, Arkansas, by a Muslim extremist who had been investigated earlier by the FBI
  • The 2009 mass shooting at Fort Hood, Texas, by Army Maj. Nidal Hasan, who killed 13 people. Hassan was known to the FBI in 2008 through communications he had with an al Qaeda terrorist in Yemen
  • The 2013 Boston Marathon bombings were carried out by two Islamist terrorists from Russia who were the subject of terrorism warnings provided to the FBI by the Russian government
  • The 2015 shootings at military installations in Chattanooga, Tennessee, carried out by Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez, whose father had been placed on a terrorism watch list in the past
  •  The 2015 shooting in Garland, Texas, by two terrorists, one of whom was known to the FBI in 2009 as a potential terrorist
  • The 2016 Orlando nightclub killings of 49 people by Islamic terrorist Omar Mateen who was investigated twice by the FBI prior to the attack

Counterterrorism expert Sebastian Gorka said the FBI’s counterterrorism division has created excellent counterterrorism training courses since the 2009 Fort Hood attack.

“That is not the problem,” said Gorka, professor of strategy and irregular warfare at the Institute of World Politics. “The issue is the courses aren’t being held.”

Since last year, Justice Department funding for counterterrorism training was slashed by nearly 50 percent, Gorka said. As a result, the “Terrorism: Origins and Ideology” course designed specifically for Joint Terrorism Task Force members—whose mission is to catch people like Rahami before they kill—were reduced from eight courses per year to less than four.

“As a result our law enforcement officers are less prepared just as the threat has increased,” Gorka said.

Michael Waller, an expert on unconventional warfare, said the FBI is missing the bad guys in advance of their attacks due to a policy that prevents monitoring jihadists before they become violent.

“This policy began under the previous FBI director, Robert Mueller, and for years has had a chilling effect throughout the bureau,” said Waller, an analyst with the research firm Wikistrat.

Waller says the FBI made a strategic error after the September 11 terror attacks by reaching out to Muslim Brotherhood Islamists and their front groups in the United States to court “moderate” Muslims.

“That’s equivalent to the FBI asking the KGB for help in fighting Communist subversion and violence,” he said, referring to the Soviet-era political police and intelligence service.

“The administration’s whole approach to ‘countering violent extremism’ literally keeps avowed jihadists off the FBI watch list, as long as they are not ‘violent,’” Waller said. “So while the FBI does investigate some of these jihadis in advance, too often it lets them go, or misses them completely, until they murder and maim.”

Waller noted that any expression of Islamic extremism poses a threat to the Constitution because, whether violent or not, it advocates the overthrow of the U.S. government.

“Such individuals, by statute, are proper targets for arrest and prosecution,” he said. “The FBI’s job—like any federal agency’s job—is to defend the Constitution ‘against all enemies, foreign and domestic.’ In this regard, the FBI has failed.”

The FBI did not have information about the terrorists in advance of last year’s shooting in San Bernardino, California, in which a married couple pledging loyalty to ISIS murdered 14 people. However, the couple had communicated privately on social media about waging jihad, or holy war, before the attack.

A common tie between the perpetrators of several recent Islamist terror attacks, including the New York bombings, was English-speaking online al Qaeda recruiter Anwar al Awlaki, who was killed by a U.S. drone strike in 2011 but whose recruiting videos are available on the Internet.

Awlaki was an inspiration behind the shootings at Fort Hood, San Bernardino, and Orlando, as well as the New York bombings, according to investigations of those attacks.

Court documents in the New York and New Jersey bombing case reveal that Rahami, a naturalized U.S. citizen of Afghan descent, had made “laudatory references” to Awlaki that were found in a journal he carried at the time of his arrest after a shootout with police.

Rahami also praised Nidal Hasan, who killed 13 people during the Fort Hood attack.

The FBI complaint against Rahami indicates that he constructed several pressure cooker bombs planted in a two-state bombing spree. The bombs contained homemade explosives and were meant to be triggered remotely by cell phones.

Similar pressure cooker bombs were used in the Boston Marathon bombings. Plans on how to manufacture the devices have been published in an al Qaeda magazine called Inspire.

Guandolo, the former FBI agent, noted that the FBI complaint against Rahami states that he received “instructions of terrorist leaders” to “attack nonbelievers where they live.”

Additionally, Rahami stated in a personal journal that “guidance came [from] Sheik Anwar”—a reference to Awlaki.

“From whence did that ‘extremist’ idea come?” Guandolo said, noting that the Koran directs Muslims to “fight and slay the unbelievers where you find them and capture them, and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush.”

Rahami’s notebook ends with the passage that “the sounds of bombs will be heard in the streets. Gun shots to your police. Death to Your OPPRESSION.”

***

Also see:

Today there will be a hearing of the Homeland Security Oversight and Management Efficiency subcommittee, looking at the failure to successfully identify the enemy in our current fight. Former HIPSC Chairman Pete Hoekstra and Anti-Islamist Muslim formers Zhudi Jasser and Shireen Qudosi will be going up against DHS hack and former Arab American Anti-Discrimination Committee grievance monger George Selim and Pro-terror Islamist law professor Sahar Aziz. – David Shideler, follow @ShidelerK for running commentary on the hearing

Hearing: “Identifying the Enemy: Radical Islamist Terror.” livestream:

Dems Balk at MB Bill Terror Findings

713by John Rossomando
IPT News
March 3, 2016

Last Week’s House Judiciary Committee discussion of a bill requesting the State Department evaluate classifying the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization showcased the confirmation bias of the bill’s Democratic opponents on the panel.

Numerous examples of ties between the international Muslim Brotherhood and terrorist groups like Hamas and al-Qaida peppered the original draft of the bill introduced by Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Fla.

However, Ranking Member Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., made the oft-repeated assertion the organization had sworn off violence.

Conyers asserted that the Brotherhood had become a “non-violent religious and social service organization” and that Diaz-Balart’s bill promotes so-called “Islamophobia.”

“Before rushing to conclusions that can lead to unknown and unintended consequences, our committee should consider the facts that pertain to this complex organization,” Conyers said.

He pointed to testimony given in a 2011 hearing but much of what was said there undermines Conyers’ premise the Brotherhood is “non-violent.”

For example, Washington Institute Executive Director Robert Sotloff testified that the Muslim Brotherhood is far from “an Egyptian version of the March of Dimes,” whose orientation was fundamentally humanitarian.

“Should the Brotherhood achieve political power, it will almost certainly use that power to transform Egypt into a very different place … A more realistic situation would see deeper and more systemic Islamization of society, including the potential for a frightening growth of sectarianism between Muslims and Copts and even deepening intra-Muslim conflict between Salafis and Sufis,” Sotloff said, accurately predicting the divisive nature of the Brotherhood’s rule before it was ousted in July 2013.

Similarly, another person who testified before the subcommittee cautioned against falling victim to the Brotherhood’s semantics when it comes to terrorism.

“Just because the MB opposes al-Qaeda does not mean that they agree with us on the definition of terrorism,” Tarek Masoud of Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government told the committee. “For example, they view both Hamas and Hezbollah as freedom fighters whose acts of violence are legitimate forms of resistance against what they see as Israeli occupation. In August 2006, former Muslim Brotherhood leader Mahdi Akef even declared that he was ready to send 10,000 (ten thousand) Brothers to fight alongside Hezbollah in its war against Israel. He didn’t, of course. But the sentiment reveals the gulf between us and the Brotherhood on this issue.”

The House bill also includes the 2011 assessment from then-FBI Director Robert Mueller: “I can say at the outset of that elements of the Muslim Brotherhood both here and overseas have supported terrorism.”

Conyers’ effort to characterize the Brotherhood as a “a predominately non-violent religious political and social service organization” ignores the repeated involvement of Brotherhood-linked charities in terrorism financing, ranging from the Union of Good to the Holy Land Foundation. The Holy Land Trial exposed a Hamas-support network in the United States created by the Muslim Brotherhood which included the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) as a branch.

Conyers ignores statements by the Brotherhood in the past year, including a Jan. 27 call for a “long, uncompromising jihad” against the Egyptian government, as noted in Diaz-Balart’s bill.

Groups calling themselves “Revolutionary Punishment” and “Popular Resistance” havecarried out attacks against Egyptian police stations and businesses with support from Brotherhood-connected social media accounts. These accounts have been promoted by U.S. based pro-Brotherhood activists.

The legislation included other numerous specific examples of Brotherhood support for funding or engaging in violent jihad since its founding in 1928 by Egyptian schoolteacher Hasan al-Banna.

“…Jihad in its literal significance means to put forth one’s maximal effort in word and deed,” Al-Banna said in an undated speech. “[I]in the Sacred Law it is the slaying of the unbelievers, and related connotations, such as beating them, plundering their wealth, destroying their shrines, and smashing their idols … it is obligatory on us to begin fighting with them after transmitting the invitation [to embrace Islam], even if they do not fight against us.”

Al-Banna also stated that the “people of the Book” should be fought until they pay jizyah, a tax mandated by the Quran paid by Christians and Jews to an Islamic state in exchange for keeping their lives and not embracing Islam.

It notes that the U.S. government previously listed Hamas, the Brotherhood’s Palestinian branch, and Lajnat al-Daawa, the social wing of Kuwait’s branch of the Brotherhood, as terrorist entities.

Lajnat al-Daawa’s reported involvement in terrorism financing on behalf of Osama bin Laden underscores the hollowness of the Brotherhood’s condemnation of al-Qaida.Ramzi Yousef, planner of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, architect of 9/11, each worked for Lajnat al-Daawa.

Numerous individual Brotherhood members with ties to al-Qaida who were previously sanctioned by the U.S. government as terrorists are mentioned in the bill. Among them; Osama bin Laden’s brother-in-law, Mohammad Jamal Khalifa, served a senior member of the Lebanese branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. Khalifa ran charitable offices on al-Qaida’s behalf in the Philippines, including an office for the Saudi-controlled International Islamic Relief Organization. He also established a charity called the International Relations and Information Center in the Philippines, which was the primary funding mechanism for Khaled Sheikh Mohammed and Ramzi Yousef’s 1995“Bojinka” plot to blow up American airliners over the Pacific.

Diaz-Balart’s bill additionally points out that the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood’s militias joined forces with Ansar al-Sharia, the al-Qaida linked militia responsible for the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.

In opposing the bill, Conyers said it unfairly paints all Brotherhood members as terrorists. He dismissed the measure as “Islamophobia [which] may be good politics … but it certainly is not good policy.” Classifying the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization had more to do with fear than keeping Americans safe, he said.

But existing groups on the State Department’s terror list. such as Hizballah and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), also actively engage in social services or serve in parliament.

Hizballah’s social services give it strong support among poor Shiites in Lebanon. It also has 14 seats in Lebanon’s parliament and considerable political clout. Likewise, FARC has a significant social-service component.

CIA Files From Benghazi: Now in the Hands of Al Qaeda?

ben7

15 individuals with information helpful to the U.S. Benghazi investigation have been killed? Did Al Qaeda find out who they were?

BY CLARE LOPEZ:

The U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) released its Review of the Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Facilities in Benghazi, Libya, September 11-12, 2012 on January 15, 2014.

One of the most disturbing sections in the entire report comes on page 42, where the report cites then-FBI Director Robert Mueller in testimony before the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies telling Congress that “as many as 15 individuals supporting the investigation or otherwise helpful to the United States have been killed in Benghazi since the attacks [of September 11, 2012].”

While Director Mueller rightly noted the “lawless and chaotic circumstances in eastern Libya,” the SSCI report also added that “It is unclear whether their killings were related to the Benghazi investigation.”

While calling post-Qaddafi Libya “lawless and chaotic” is something of an understatement, the SSCI’s suspicions about these particular killings and the possibility that they could be connected to the Benghazi investigation should be noted and noted carefully.

The identity of these individuals has not been revealed publicly, but it is certain that the SSCI and the Intelligence Community for which it holds oversight responsibility know who they were. And while it is certainly possible that each and every one of these 15 killings can be explained by the continuing battles among the Al Qaeda militias that led the uprising against former Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi, the possibility that these are targeted killings – assassinations – must also be considered, even as the SSCI seems to hint that it has thought of this, too.

In an insightful early report about the Benghazi attacks, the Wall Street Journal reported on November 1, 2012 that “…the day after the attack…the CIA appears to have dispatched local Libyan agents to the annex to destroy any sensitive documents and equipment there.”

The WSJ use of the term “agents” would seem to indicate that these local Libyans were CIA recruited assets, who either were trusted enough for this assignment or perhaps were all they had to turn to at that point. They may have been Libyan officials, whether uniformed police or others such as intelligence and security officials.

We do not know and the SSCI report does not tell us. In any case, what that short section of the SSCI report does tell us, at a minimum, is that sensitive documents and equipment were believed by the CIA to have remained in the CIA Annex the day after the attack, that they had not been destroyed or removed by the fleeing Americans and were of sufficient concern to the CIA that it was willing to take a chance on tasking local Libyans to retrieve whatever was there.

What became of any such materials and whether they were successfully recovered or not is not noted in the SSCI report. Tom Joscelyn, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), writing in the Weekly Standard on January 7, 2014 about the Obama administration’s belated admission about the role that Abu Sufian Ben Qumu (a former GITMO detainee) and his group — the Derna, Libya branch of Ansar al-Shariah — played in the Benghazi attack provides a possible follow-up, however.

In the very last line of his piece, “Obama Administration’s Benghazi Bombshell,” Joscelyn writes that two U.S. intelligence officials say that Faraj al Chalabi, an identified Libyan jihadi, “is suspected of bringing materials from the compound in Benghazi to senior al Qaeda leadership in Pakistan.”

This report begs the question: How is it possible for U.S. intelligence officials to so specifically name al-Chalabi as someone who may have taken materials from Benghazi to al-Qa’eda leadership in Pakistan?

What materials have they identified as having been removed from the CIA Annex and how do they know (or why would they suspect) such materials have been taken to Ayman al-Zawahiri in Pakistan in the first place? In fact, it doesn’t seem possible – unless U.S. intelligence officials themselves perhaps were the ones who dispatched al-Chalabi or an associate to the compound to recover those “documents and equipment.”

Read more at Clarion Project

From 9/11 to Syria: Incompetence, Cowardice, and Treason Among American Leadership

americanflagand3crossloopBy John Guandolo:

Years ago, it is hard to imagine anyone being able to see into the future to today and predict the complete collapse of leadership in America – but it has come.

On 9/11/2001, I was plodding through the wreckage of the Pentagon as an FBI Special Agent, recovering what was left of fellow Americans in what was left in the sections of the building hit by an airplane commanded by jihadis.  Furious at our enemy, I was determined to do all I could to seek out this enemy and destroy  him.  I could have never imagined that, years later, America’s leaders would give such aid and comfort to our enemies.

As we survey the rubble of American foreign policy and the incoherent domestic agenda, specifically as they relate to the security of America, we discover a most incredible thing – the leadership of both political parties in America, through ignorance, cowardice, and outright treason, are aiding and abetting the very enemy who attacked us in our homeland on this day 12 years ago.

In the last several years we have seen the full authority of the U.S. government support:  the Muslim Brotherhood in their quest to take power in Egypt; Al Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood “rebels” in Libya; the Taliban by holding direct talks with them and trying to appease their “concerns”; and Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood “rebels” seeking to overthrow the regime in Iranian-backed Syria.

At the same time, this Administration continues to give easily identifiable jihadis positions inside our government with access to classified systems within those agencies they work.

Departing FBI Director Robert Mueller III said in a final interview that “jihadis” are a major threat to this country, yet as Director the FBI gave official awards to known jihadis like Mohamed Magid (President of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Islamic Society of North America), Yahya Hendi (a leader on the Muslim Brotherhood’s Fiqh Council of North America), and so many others.  In open testimony to Congress, Director Mueller admitted to being ignorant of the significant fact that the Islamic Society of Boston (a subsidiary of ISNA) where one of the Marathon bombers attended was founded by Al Qaeda financier Abdurahman Alamoudi.  During his tenure, Mueller hosted many meetings at FBI HQ with known jihadis such as the leaders of Hamas in America (CAIR) and others.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has proven to be either grossly incompetent or a willful agent of our enemies.   Over the past several years she has directly changed or created DHS policy based on the complaints or recommendation of the jihadi leadership from the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.  From removing words DHS and other government employees can use to describe the jihad threat (you can’t say “jihadi”) to their “Building Bridges” campaign with the Brotherhood’s Muslim Public Affairs Council, to shutting down all fact-based training regarding the jihadi threat, to defending Muslim Brother Mohammed Elibiary in open testimony before Congress, our enemies couldn’t have it better if Mullah Omar was the DHS chief.

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs has proven to be no more competent or faithful to his Oath to the Constitution.  General Dempsey has demonstrated his willingness to avoid his duties while ensuring the enemy gets a pass within the military by shutting down all training which honestly and factually assesses the enemy.  His decision over a year ago to cease all training In the military and “review it” to ensure it was not “offensive” – a move prompted by complaints to the White House from Hamas (CAIR) and the Muslim Public Affairs Council – makes it impossible for the military to understand the real threat we face.  General Dempsey may want to keep in mind that the truth is always offensive to those who don’t have it.  He may also want to note that when ordered to violate his Oath, he always has the option to step down.

Where are those men and women of courage in our government?

Read more at Understanding The Threat

John Guandolo’s new book, “Raising a Jihadi Generation” will be out in the next 10 days or so. This book details the threat for the Muslim Brotherhood network in the United States, their thousands of organizations here, and how they support jihadi operations.

 

The FBI and the Muslim Brotherhood

ijg3D_mo9KB8-450x333 By :

A recent report in Mother Jones magazine has given the lie to FBI Director Robert Mueller’s defense of his agency’s failure to take any action against Nidal Hasan, despite intercepting a series of emails between the mass murderer and terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki, beginning as early as 2008. Appearing on CBS News last Thursday, Mueller was asked if his agency “dropped the ball.” ”No, I think, given the context of the discussions and the situation that the agents and the analysts were looking at, they took appropriate steps,” he responded.

Mueller’s statements are shocking in light of the mountain of evidence showing FBI dereliction of duty, which is now finally getting the media attention it deserves. On the other hand, Mueller’s remarks make perfect sense given the Obama administration’s long and disturbing track record of allowing Islamists to shape U.S. national security policy, including at the FBI. Mueller himself has been Obama’s point man in that effort.

Recall that in 2012, the FBI eliminated 876 pages and 392 presentations from its counterterrorism training manuals. At the time, FBI spokesman Christopher Allen said that the Bureau found some of the material to be inaccurate, too broad or, in some cases, offensive, because it allegedly characterized Muslims as prone to violence and/or terrorism. Four criteria were used in the purge, including the politically incorrect metrics of “poor taste” and “stereotyping.” Former Congressman Allen West (R-FL) made a stir at the time for characterizing the purge as “cultural suicide” that was influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood and its associated groups.

Unfortunately, West was exactly right. On February 16, 2012 the Washington Post revealed that the FBI met with a coalition of Muslim groups eight days earlier to consider a proposal that “a coalition of Muslim and interfaith groups … establish a committee of experts to review materials used in FBI anti-terrorism training.” Those meeting with Mueller included the Muslim Brotherhood front groups the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), despite its listing by the Justice Department as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation terrorism-funding trial, and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC). MPAC’s president, Salam al-Marayati, had previously written an LA Times column threatening the FBI with non-cooperation from the Muslim community if the FBI didn’t apologize to Americans Muslims and establish a proper vetting process along with an inter-agency task force to conduct an independent review of the training material.

Despite these revelations, the Obama administration has stonewalled investigation into FBI “guidelines” on Islam curricula, forcing the government watchdog group Judicial Watch to sue both the FBI and the DOJ for their failure to honor Freedom of Information Act requests. But remarkably, the FBI has continued to push the envelope. In late 2012, the Bureau released a new document online called “Guiding Principles: Touchstone Document on Training.” The document contains a disturbing clause instructing agents that “mere association with organizations that demonstrate both legitimate (advocacy) and illicit (violent extremism) objectives should not automatically result in a determination that the associated individual is acting in furtherance of the organization’s illicit objective(s).” In other words, even those who may be involved with a terrorist group’s “charity arm,” which many groups have as a funding mechanism and as a means of cover, cannot be assumed to be supporting terrorism and must be given the benefit of the doubt.

In June of 2013, investigative journalist Patrick Poole revealed how far the Obama administration has taken its warped philosophy. In “Blind to Terror: The U.S. Government’s Disastrous Muslim Outreach Efforts and the Impact on U.S. Policy,” Poole extensively chronicles the administration’s effort to take some of the same groups it has called terrorists in federal court and turn them into “outreach partners.”  Poole further cites the disturbing number of “leaders of American Islamic organizations that partner with the U.S. government” who later transitioned into officials for Muslim Brotherhood fronts.

Even many people under active federal investigation for terrorist activities were simultaneously meeting with government officials to help formulate U.S. policy (long before the Foot Hood massacre took place). According to Poole, this was part of “a full scale campaign of political correctness waged inside the [FBI] and throughout the U.S. government … against any attempt to link jihadi terrorism with anything remotely connected to Islam of any variety.”

Read more at Front Page