Tuesday, April 30, 2013

Israel Doesn't Pull a Punch - IAF Targets and Kills Key Jihadi In Gaza

Dammit I love it when the Israelis blow the shit out of jihadis in Gaza - it's like smelling napalm in the morning.

The story comes from The Long War Journal.

MSC in Jerusalem member targeted by Israeli Air Force

Today the Israeli Air Force (IAF) carried out an airstrike in the Gaza Strip in response to recent rocket fire from the Gaza Strip and Sinai Peninsula. According to a statement on the IDF website, the IAF targeted a "Global Jihad-affiliated terrorist."

The terrorist, Hithem Ziad Ibrahim Masshal, was said to have "acted in different Jihad Salafi terror organizations and over the past few years has been a key terror figure, specializing in weapons and working with all of the terror organizations in the Gaza Strip." Reuters reported that Masshal "was believed to be a member of Hamas's national security force, but relatives said he also belonged to a militant Jihadist Salafi organization." Palestinian media reports suggested that Masshal had worked as a "security officer at Shifa hospital in Gaza."

According to the IDF, Masshal, who "manufactured, improved and traded different types of ammunition," was involved in the April 17 rocket attack on Eilat from the Sinai, for which the Mujahideen Shura Council in the Environs of Jerusalem (MSC) had taken responsibility.

Following the Eilat attack, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had warned that Israel would "exact a price for this [the attack]; this has been our consistent policy for the past four years and it will serve us here as well." Egypt was reportedly briefed ahead of today's strike.

This afternoon, the MSC released a statement through the Ibn Taymiyyah Media Center confirming that Masshal, also known as Abu Ziad, was a member of their organization. "He stepped everywhere there is jihad, wanting to die, so may Allah have mercy on you, Abu Ziad. The enemy sites will miss you, which you didn't hesitate for one day to pound with rockets," the group said.

The MSC statement, which was obtained and translated by the SITE Intelligence Group, also said Masshal had held a "high position" in Hamas' Al Qassam Brigades, but he decided to leave the group after Hamas "entered the game of democracy and accepted the abandonment of the divine Shari'ah." Masshal, according to the MSC, previously worked alongside a number of Salafi jihadist leaders in the Gaza Strip including Abu al Walid al Maqdisi and Ashraf al Sabah, two MSC leaders killed in an Israeli airstrike in October 2012. The al Qaeda-linked group also noted that Masshal had previously worked with Abu Abdullah al-Suri (Khalid Banat), a former leader in Jund Ansar Allah, who was killed in clashes with Hamas in August 2009.

During the funeral, Masshal was wrapped in al Qaeda's black flag, which was first used by al Qaeda in Iraq but has been adopted by other al Qaeda affiliates.

In 2012, the Israeli Air Force targeted a number of members of the MSC. On Oct. 7, the IDF killed Tala'at Halil Muhammad Jarbi, a "global jihad operative," and Abdullah Muhammad Hassan Maqawai, a member of the MSC. Maqawai was likely a former member of Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

Six days later, the IAF targeted and killed Abu al Walid al Maqdisi, the former emir of the Tawhid and Jihad Group in Jerusalem, and Ashraf al Sabah, the former emir of Ansar al Sunnah, in an airstrike. The two men were said to be leaders of the MSC.

Following the deaths of al Maqdisi and al Sabah, a number of statements and eulogies were released by jihadist groups and media outlets such as the Global Islamic Media Front, Jaish al Ummah, Masada al Mujahideen, Islamic State of Iraq, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, Abdullah Azzam Brigades, and Ansar Jerusalem, among others.

Al Qaeda emir Ayman Al Zawahiri even released a statement, in which he praised al Maqdisi for his "martyrdom" and said that he hoped his death would act as "a motive and incitement to his brothers, his people, his loved ones and the rest of the mujahideen and the Muslims in the environs of Jerusalem and around the world, to give and sacrifice more."

Video: The AR-15...In Slow Mo

Boston terrorist’s ex-girlfriend: He tried to brainwash me to convert and hate the U.S.

 Reprisal fear … Nadine Ascencao’s features have been obscured

From The Muslim Issue via The Religion of Peace.

Boston terrorist’s ex-girlfriend: He tried to brainwash me to convert and hate the U.S.

My boyfriend the bomber
Fanatic’s ex: He said I was ‘pure’ and he took my virginity. I loved him but he slapped me and tried to brainwash me to hate US like he did

AN ex-girlfriend of dead Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev has told how he tried to brainwash her into becoming a Muslim fanatic who hated America.

Nadine Ascencao, 24, said Tamerlan made her wear an Islamic hijab and pray to Allah and slapped her when she wore Western clothes.

But she was so blindly in love with the handsome boxer who had taken her virginity, she did her utmost to make him happy.

Nadine said: “I went to his mosque a couple of times and even looked into converting to make him happy. I thought, ‘This is crazy’ — but I still did it for him.

“Tamerlan had taken my virginity and said he loved me because I was pure and hadn’t been with any other guys. I was in love and scared he’d leave me if I didn’t do what he said. Looking back I had a lucky escape.”

Tamerlan, 26, who with 19-year-old brother Dzhokhar killed three people and injured 260 when they exploded two bombs at the Boston marathon, started dating Nadine in 2006 when she was 17.

During their three-year relationship she watched him change from a cannabis-smoking, party-loving teenager into a violent extremist.

She said: “One minute he’s this funny, normal guy who liked boxing and having fun, the next he is praying four times a day, watching Islamic videos and talking insane nonsense.

“He became extremely religious and tried to brainwash me to follow Islam. Tamerlan said I couldn’t be with him unless I became a Muslim. He wanted me to hate America like he did.

“He wouldn’t let me watch TV or listen to the radio. He’d say, ‘TV is the project of Satan’ and claimed Satan sent us messages through commercial music.”

The couple even stopped having sex after he said it was wrong because they were not married.

Tamerlan, a Chechen who emigrated to the US with his family in 2002, became obsessed with Nadine’s clothes. She said: “He hated my tight trousers and made me wear long skirts. Towards the end I was wearing a hijab.

“He once ripped a pair of my jeans and hit me in the face with them. Tamerlan told me I should only talk to Muslim girls, not other ‘slutty’ girls.” Besotted Nadine moved into a flat in the house where the Tsarnaev family lived to be near Tamerlan.

And she was heartbroken when she learned he was secretly seeing another girl. Her rival was Katherine Russell, a student who was to become Tamerlan’s wife after converting to Islam. Crafty Tamerlan was soon playing the two women off against one another.

Nadine said: “He once made me learn a verse of an Islamic prayer and if I got it wrong he’d say, ‘Well Katherine can do it’.”

Tamerlan even attacked Nadine when he found her heading off to a friend’s pool party wearing cut-off jeans and a crop top.

She said: “He was shouting and screaming at me. He slapped me across the face really hard.”

Nadine called the police and Tamerlan was arrested and spent a night in the cells. Once out on bail he begged Nadine’s forgiveness.

But as soon as she dropped the charges Tamerlan dumped her and moved in with Katherine. Nadine’s relationship was over and within six months Katherine was pregnant with Tamerlan’s daughter.

Nadine put Tamerlan behind her and barely gave him a second thought until the early hours of April 19 when the FBI turned up at her home asking questions about her ex.

A few hours earlier officers had killed Tamerlan in a shoot-out in Watertown, Massachusetts.

Brother Dzhokhar, who is now in custody, was still on the run.

Nadine, who asked The Sun to obscure her face in photos for fear of reprisals, said: “When they said Tamerlan was dead, I didn’t cry.

“I was more shocked Dzhokhar was involved. He was a nice kid.”

Video: The End of the Line

Israeli Father of Five Killed In Stabbing By Muslim Terrorist In Samaria

If they can't get through with a suicide bomb vest, if they can't get through with a gun, then they will try to get through with a knife - Muslim terrorists killing a Jew receive such a special place in Mohammed's kingdom of perversion that it brings any form of terrorism to the brink.  And this morning an Israeli father of five was brutally attacked and stabbed in the upper body by such a Muslim terrorist - Mohammed has his dead Jew and the Israelis have the wounded attacker.

The story comes from Israel National News.

Jew Killed in Shomron Terror Attack

An Arab terrorist armed with a knife stabbed an Israeli at the Tapuach junction in Shomron (Samaria) on Tuesday morning.

Initial reports indicate that the terrorist stabbed the victim, identified as Evyatar Boruvsky, in the upper body, wounding him critically.

The terrorist then grabbed his gun and fired at the Border Police who were stationed in the area. Border Police officers fired back, wounding the perpetrator.

Magen David Adom teams arrived at the scene and tried to revive the 32-year-old Israeli father of five from the Yitzhar, but had to pronounce him dead on the spot.

The Tapuach junction in Samaria has known many attacks. The last one stabbing attack occurred in mid-January, when a terrorist stabbed a 17-year-old-boy near the checkpoint.

A Border Police force chased the attacker and managed to stop him from escaping the scene of the attack. The terrorist, a resident of Ramallah in his 20s, was turned over tosecurity forces for questioning.

Obama’s National Security Fraud

From Family Security Matters.

Obama’s National Security Fraud

Unlike you, federal government officials are immune from charges of fraud. The executive branch, vested with all of the government's prosecutorial authority and discretion, is not going to investigate its own operatives for carrying out its own mendacious policies.

That is the story of last week's Boston Marathon bombing and the frantic efforts of the bombers, the brothers Tsarnaev, to evade capture, shoot it out with police (one of whom they killed, and another of whom they wounded), and - we're now told - detonate more bombs in Times Square.

The Times Square non-attack is quite interesting. The specter of it, projected in the immediate wake of the Marathon murders and maimings, is horrific . . . so horrific that the government, in leaking this tidbit from its botched interrogation of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, knew that news media were certain to lead their broadcasts with it. The press would never wonder why they, and thus we, were being told about it.

But why were they told? Remember, the Times Square bombing not only never happened, it never came close to happening. It was, at most, a passing jihadist fantasy, one that the jihadists in question peremptorily dismissed as implausible. The threat was no more real than those that regularly stream out of Islamic-supremacist mosques and, just as regularly, go studiously unreported.

Mind you, there is nothing inappropriate about government officials' speaking about matters on the public record - such as the allegations lodged in criminal complaints. But the Times Square non-attack is not mentioned in the complaint filed against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. In fact, the complaint includes no information from Tsarnaev's interrogation.

Yet somehow the airwaves are now full of startling revelations from his Miranda-aborted 16-hour post-arrest interview, including not least his confession, and, of course, his assurance, as Allah is his witness, that no one other than he and his Svengali older brother - and certainly no foreign Islamic terrorist organization - had anything to do with their terror spree.

Strange, isn't it? We are governed by leftists given to finger-wagging about their commitment to due process and the rule of law - they're not like those bad old warmongering Bushies. Still, here we are in the post-arrest phase of the civilian prosecution the administration was hell-bent on commencing - the phase when due process obliges government officials to remain mum about non-public investigative information that could taint the jury pool and undermine the defendant's right to a fair trial - and we're being inundated with stunning confession evidence.

Remember, this is the same crowd that labels the Fort Hood massacre "workplace violence" and won't honor its victims with Purple Heart medals. To do so, they sniff, might prejudice the objectivity of the trial of a jihadist mass murderer who has publicly announced he'd like to plead guilty. Now, though, in Tsarnaev's case, government agencies are leaking like sieves.


Because you are being softened up. Steered by its Gitmo Bar veterans and Lawyer Left compass, the Obama administration is executing a massive national-security fraud: the farce that the jihad against America can be judicialized, that civilian-court processes are a better answer to enemy warfare than are combat protocols.

That is why Eric Holder's Justice Department, together with the FBI, darted into federal court in Boston last Sunday evening to file the complaint against Tsarnaev. Obama was determined to end the public debate over whether the jihadist is a wartime enemy combatant or a mere criminal defendant. As in the case of Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, Osama bin Laden's son-in-law and al-Qaeda's alleged "consigliere," who was whisked into the country and into civilian court before anyone even realized he'd been captured, the administration calculated that a fait accompli is the best way to impose the president's deeply unpopular preferences.

So now, the next necessary deception in the campaign is to convince you that - all together now - "the system worked." In reality, the civilian justice system did not work, and that is because it cannot work - not if the objective is the swift acquisition of vital national-defense information.

It could not be more obvious to an objective, rational person that if the aim is intelligence collection, it is far better to interrogate a terrorist without limitations on time and subject matter, without the interference of a defense lawyer, and without empowering the detainee by giving him plea-bargaining leverage to trade for information. The Obama administration, however, is telling you, with a straight face, that the imposition of civilian due process will produce intelligence just as effectively, if not better.

Most people, of course, realize that this is impossible if Miranda warnings must be given. So the administration rolls out canard No. 1: the "public-safety exception." The public is led to believe that this exception means agents have at least 48 hours of freewheeling interrogation before Miranda kicks in and the terrorist clams up (upon lawyering up). This is brazenly false.

The public-safety exception is an exceedingly limited end-around. It applies only when arrest is accompanied by an immediate threat to public safety. It is not designed to provide the government with an information-gathering advantage against the arrestee. It is narrowly tailored to address the threat that triggers the exception.

There is no 48 hours. The exception ends when the threat ends - which, in the view of most courts, happens as soon as the detainee is rendered defenseless. This usually amounts to something closer to 48 seconds than to 48 hours. Moreover, the exception is not a license to do an extensive intelligence debriefing; the pre-Miranda questioning must be tailored to the threat - along the lines of, "Where is the gun?" or "Where are the unexploded bombs?" The public-safety exception does not cover "Where did your brother get terrorist training in Dagestan?"

For intelligence purposes, the public-safety exception to Miranda does not come close to putting arrest in the civilian-justice system on par with enemy-combatant detention. The administration rightly figures the public does not know this, but to anyone with a passing acquaintance with the relevant law, the suggestion that the two paths are comparable is insulting.

Thus canard No. 2: The judge did it. The administration and its accomplices on Capitol Hill have spread the story that the Tsarnaev interrogation was going just swimmingly when, to the shock of everyone, a magistrate judge barged into the hospital room and Mirandized the terrorist, abruptly ending the hugely successful intelligence effort. This, too, is utter nonsense.

As the Justice Department well knows, the filing of the criminal complaint is the action that vested the federal court with jurisdiction to act. The moment the complaint was filed, everyone involved in that decision knew that the rules of criminal procedure mandated a prompt "presentment" hearing before a magistrate judge, who would be required by statute to advise Tsarnaev of his rights to counsel and to stop speaking with government agents. Indeed, it is customary that the Justice Department prosecutors on the case orchestrate these proceedings as soon as they file the complaint. They make sure a defense lawyer is assigned by the court, schedule a hearing time with the magistrate judge, and arrange for a court reporter and, if necessary, an interpreter.

The whole point of the presentment is to get the arrested person out of the government's clutches and into the Bill of Rights' carapace. Moreover, when an arrestee is incapacitated, as Tsarnaev was, it is unexceptional to convene the presentment at a hospital - and the magistrate judge and defense lawyer cannot get into the location where the detainee is held under heavy security unless the Justice Department arranges for that to happen.

It was not the magistrate judge who decided Tsarnaev should be Mirandized. It was President Obama and Attorney General Holder.

That being the case, we are now witnessing canard No. 3: There may have been a few bumps in the road, but we learned everything we needed to know in the Tsarnaev interrogation.

Ridiculous. A competent intelligence debriefing involves weeks, if not months, of questioning. That's because its aim is to develop a complete threat mosaic and arrange our defenses accordingly. By contrast, a post-arrest interrogation by law enforcement is designed to obtain a confession for use at trial. It is not an intelligence-gathering exercise, which is why its purposes can be served by 16 hours of questioning - and often a lot less.

An intelligence debriefing means following the leads uncovered in the questioning of the detainee, then repeatedly coming back to the detainee for clarification and additional insight as new information is discovered. That is not something that can or should be permitted in the case of a criminal defendant presumed innocent; it is for the extraordinary case of a wartime enemy operative who is part of the forces waging jihad against our country.

Obama and the Lawyer Left know this. Anyone who took a few minutes to think about it would know it. But in their twisted conceit that the threat to our nation results not from the enemy's ideology but from American aggression, they have convinced themselves that American aggression (what the rest of us call national defense) must be hamstrung by civilian due process - that war can be reduced to crime, even if the enemy declines to play by the rules.

So in the effort to tame you into believing civilian due process has proved wildly successful in the Marathon bombing investigation, just as Obama and Holder promised it would, the government is now strategically leaking interrogation details.

Sure it may look like the investigation was a tragicomedy of errors in which our $100 billion national-security edifice, despite investigating Tamerlan Tsarnaev for a year and a half before the bombing, had to ask the public's help in identifying a picture of him. But look: We stopped a spectacular bombing at Times Square! And sure, there's a lot of innuendo about Islam and overseas "extremists," but after 16 hours of penetrating scrutiny we've figured out that this was just wanton "homegrown" violence committed by a couple of confused kids - the sort of thing that is bound to happen if we don't crack down on gun ownership and Islamophobia.

The fraud is on. Will we keep falling for it?

Video: The Obama "Basketball Footage" You Didn't See In 2012

Video: Street Justice?

Monday, April 29, 2013

"Lofting"....Just How the Israeli Air Force Took Out the Syrian Weapons Convoy In January Without Entering Syrian Airspace

You know, when you deal with fighting against the Israelis...it can be more than a bit frightening.  The Syrians and Russians got all up in a tizzie when the Israelis and more specifically, the IAF (Israeli Air Force) took out a convoy of Syrian vehicles transporting high tech and chemical weapons last January...and now it comes to light that the Israeli aircraft never even entered the airspace of Syria to do it.

Read about how a nation who honors G_d is blessed with miracles.

The story comes from The Long War Journal.

Israeli Air Force struck SSRC facility without entering Syrian airspace

In late January, the Israeli Air Force (IAF) reportedly struck targets near the Scientific Studies and Research Center (Centre D'Etudes et de Recherches Scientifiques) in Jamraya. According to reports, the IAF targeted a Syrian weapons convoy, which reportedly included Russian-made SA-17 antiaircraft missiles, near the facility.

The Wall Street Journal now reports that Israeli aircraft never actually entered Syrian air space when they carried out this attack.

Instead, the Israeli warplanes were flying over Lebanon when they executed what's called a "lofting" maneuver--using a sudden burst of speed and altitude to catapult a bomb across the border to the target about 10 miles inside Syria, according to a previously undisclosed U.S. account of the Israeli operation.

Israeli officials said the decision was made to bomb from the relative safety of Lebanese airspace for diplomatic as well as security reasons. The Israeli Embassy in Washington declined to comment.

While some reports suggested that the SSRC facility itself was targeted and "flattened," satellite imagery released on Feb. 6 revealed that the facility was relatively unscathed. The images did show a burnt road near the facility, possibly indicating the location of the Syrian weapons convoy when it was hit, however.

US officials have suggested that damage to the SSRC facility was only caused by "secondary explosions from munitions in the convoy." On Feb. 2, Threat Matrix noted that the footage purporting to show the damage caused by Israel's airstrikes showed "extremely limited" damage to the SSRC facility.

While Israel has not taken official responsibility for the January strike, then Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak told a conference in Munich on Feb. 3 that "I cannot add anything to what you have read in the newspapers about what happened in Syria several days ago .... But I keep telling frankly that we said, and that is another proof that when we say something we mean it." More recently, current Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon hinted that Israel was behind the January strike. "We have a clear red line with the Syrian regime and that is not to allow advanced weapons to be passed on to Hezbollah and other militant groups...When they crossed a red line, we have acted," Ya'alon said on April 22.

According to the US Department of the Treasury, the SSRC is the Syrian government's body "responsible for developing and producing non-conventional weapons and the missiles to deliver them." In addition, the activities of the SSRC are said to "focus substantively on the development of biological and chemical weapons." In September 2010, Brigadier General (Res.) Nitzan Nuriel, then the director of the Counter-Terrorism Bureau at Israel's National Security Council, said that "[t]he international community must send a signal that next time the institute [SSRC] supports terrorism, it will be demolished."

Today's news comes amidst unconfirmed reports among some members of the Syrian opposition that Israeli aircraft targeted a chemical weapons storage facility near Damascus over the weekend.

Video: Winning the Firefight

Calling All Patriots!

My dear friend Patriot USA is in dire need of both funds and prayers.  As many know, Patriot USA had major spinal surgery this last month.  He is unable to work, unsure that he will have a job to return to, and the bills are piling up.  Recently he had to spend big bucks on the repairs to his car.  (OK his wife's car.)  Thus depleting his savings.  His wife is out of work and has one child in college and a child in High School.  Things are getting so bad that even AJ, his dog is feeling the pinch.

I know times are tight.  Heck I am short too, but Patriot's need is greater.  A few bucks his way will do wonders for his recovery and health.

Either click here and hit the side link to donate or you can donate directly by clicking here.  And remember Patriot in your prayers.

Thank you;


“Racist Hate Speech” Conviction in Belgium for Tearing up Koran in Front of a Group of Muslims

A Belgian man has been convicted of hate speech for the act of tearing up a Qur'an and his sentence is four months in prison.  Four months in prison for tearing up a book while hundreds of Belgian Muslims get off with nothing for rape, arson, and intimidation of Belgian citizens.

Welcome to dhimmified Belgium.  Welcome to the lost continent of Europe.

The story comes from Tundra Tabloids via The Religion of Peace.

“Racist Hate Speech” Conviction in Belgium for Tearing up Koran in Front of a Group of Muslims

In Belgium a man was convicted for ‘racist hate speech’ because he publicly tore up a Koran, before the eyes of a group of Muslims. The case illustrates the need to protect free speech against those seeking to criminalise ‘Islamophobia’.

On 8 June 2012 a man, identified as Arne S., participated in a demonstration organised by a radical right-wing political party, Vlaams Belang (‘Flemish Interest’), opposing the construction of a mosque in the Belgian coastal city of Ostend. In the aftermath of the demonstration S. tore up a Koran in the presence of a small group of Muslims, with whom he had exchanged words. The public prosecutor indicted S. for incitement to hatred, discrimination and violence on the basis of race and ethnic origin.

The defendant’s attorney called for an acquittal, arguing that no infraction on the anti-racism legislation had occurred. The criminal court in Bruges convicted the man, however, on 11 March 2013. Due in part to the unfavourable criminal history of the defendant, the sentence was relatively severe, consisting of an effective prison sentence of four months and a fine of 600 euros. The court held that the facts were serious and testified to “a blatant lack of tolerance and a highly questionable attitude”.

Report: Obama Spent Twice as Much Time on Vacation/Golf as Economy

One Big Ass Mistake America.

From Family Security Matters.

Report: Obama Spent Twice as Much Time on Vacation/Golf as Economy

According to a new report by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Institute (GAI), President Barack Obama has spent over twice as many hours on vacation and golf (976 hours) as he has in economic meetings of any kind (474.4 hours).

The report, "Presidential Calendar: A Time-Based Analysis," used the official White House calendar, Politico's comprehensive presidential calendar, and media reports through March 31, 2013 to calculate its results.

GAI's findings may actually understate Obama's recreational hours.

Last year, Obama told CBS News that playing golf is "the only time that for six hours, I'm outside." But instead of six hours, GAI counted a round of golf as taking just four hours. Likewise, for presidential vacation hours, researchers attributed just six hours of any day of vacation to leisure activity.

"Like most people, presidents still do work while on vacation," said GAI President Peter Schweizer. "So we really went out of our way to fairly and accurately reflect how the president spends his time."

The study applied a similarly generous assessment to Obama’s time spent in economic meetings by counting anything on the official White House calendar even remotely related to the economy as an economic meeting. For example, “Obama meets with Cabinet secretaries” and “Obama has lunch with four CEOs” counted as economic meetings.

GAI’s new report dovetails with its presidential calendar analysis last July that found Obama devotes little time to economic meetings.

Asked whether the latest numbers paint a negative portrait of presidential economic leadership, Schweizer says that is for others to decide.

“People understand that presidents have the most stressful job in the world and need a break from time to time,” said Schweizer. “There will be some who will be encouraged by the numbers and some who will wish the president spent more time in economic meetings. As a government watchdog group, we just tabulate the numbers and let others decide how to interpret them.”

Video: Shock, Awe

Video: The Perils of Robbing Ronald McDonald

Sunday, April 28, 2013

Taliban Continue To Sabotage Pakistani Elections...9 People Killed In Two Bomb Blasts Outside Campaign Offices

Remember Watergate?  Well, the version of political subversion in Pakistan takes it all to a new level as the Taliban are actively trying to eliminate any politicians from running for office in Pakistan who don't share the Islamic ideology of the terror group.  Today, we saw two more bombings outside of political campaign offices - these bombings killed 9 people at last count.

The story comes from Times of India.

9 killed, 30 injured in blasts in northwest Pakistan

ISLAMABAD: Two bomb blasts outside campaign offices of candidates contesting Pakistan's general election killed nine persons and injured more than 30 in northwest Pakistan today.

The first blast occurred outside an election office in Kohat district of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province.

Police said a remote-controlled explosive device was used in the attack.

Six persons were killed and 21 injured by the explosion, which caused extensive damage to the office of Syed Noor Akbar, an independent candidate contesting polls to a parliamentary seat in Orakzai tribal region.

Police said Akbar is a member of the minority Shia sect and this could have been a motive for the attack.

Hours later, another bomb went off outside an election office in Maqsoodabad, a suburb of Peshawar, the capital of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa.

Three persons were killed and 10 others, including three children, injured, police said.

The blast targeted the office of Nasir Khan Afridi, an independent candidate contesting polls to a parliamentary seat in the lawless Khyber tribal region.

Police officials said the bomb was attached to a bicycle left outside the office. The office and two cars were damaged.

Footage on television showed debris and election materials strewn on the road outside the office.

No group claimed responsibility for both bombings. The attacks came a day after six persons were killed and 65 others injured in three bomb attacks that targeted workers of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement and Pakistan People's Party in Karachi.

Most of the candidates contesting polls from Pakistan's tribal belt have set up election offices in Khyber- Pakhtunkhwa.

Candidates are unable to campaign in the tribal areas because of threats from the Taliban and other militant groups.

They have focussed on wooing voters in towns and villages located along the boundary with the seven semi-autonomous tribal agencies.

Air Force Recruits Chaplains From Muslim Brotherhood Front Group

From The Clarion Project.

Air Force Recruits Chaplains From MB Front Group

If the Islamic Society of North America meets the standards for military chaplains, then the standards have to change.

The U.S. Air Force has confirmed to The Clarion Project that it paid nearly $5,000 for advertisements in the magazine of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism-financing trial that was also labeled a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity by the government. The Air Force said it would continue to consider paying ISNA for ads.

An advertisement for the U.S. Air Force Chaplain Corps is in the March-April issue of Islamic Horizons, ISNA’s magazine. ClarionProject.org asked the Air Force about the advertisement and included facts about ISNA. Air Force spokesperson Captain Lindsey Hahn responded:

"The Department of Defense does not endorse any one religion or religious organization, and provides free access of religion for all members of the military services. The Department respects (and supports by its policy) the rights of others to their own religious beliefs, including the right to hold no beliefs. In order to recruit chaplains capable to provide for the diverse needs of Airmen and their families, Air Force chaplain recruiters advertise in a wide variety of religious organization publications.

“The Islamic Society of North America is one ofmany religious organizations recognized by the Department of Defense that satisfy the ecclesiastical requirements to endorse qualified religious ministry professionals to serve as chaplains within the Military Departments.

“This ad ran twice in the Islamic Horizons magazine to create awareness for Air Force chaplain recruiting efforts in the Muslim community. It cost $4800 total."

When asked whether the U.S. Air Force will reconsider paying ISNA for advertisement space in the future, the spokesperson repeated the earlier statement.

There are three takeaways here. First, the U.S. Air Force gave nearly $5,000 of taxpayer money to ISNA. Second, the Air Force says ISNA is qualified to endorse Muslim chaplains for the military. And lastly, even when provided with the facts about ISNA, the Air Force says it will consider future payments to ISNA for ads.

ISNA is the first organization mentioned in a 1991 U.S. Muslim Brotherhood memo's list of “our organizations and the organizations of our friends.” The same memo describes its “work in America as a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.”

Declassified FBI memos reveal that ISNA was identified as a Brotherhood front as early as 1987. One memo cites a source that has traveled worldwide on behalf of ISNA and other Brotherhood entities who is “convinced that this organization has a secret agenda which includes the spread of the Islamic Revolution to all non-Islamic governments in the world which does include the United States.”

The source reports that “the entire organization is structured, controlled and funded by followers and supporters of the Islamic Revolution as advocated by the founders” of the Brotherhood in Egypt. The FBI says the source provided a private ISNA document in August 1988 that “clearly states that ISNA has a political goal to exert influence on political decision making and legislation in North America that is contrary to their certification in their not-for-profit tax returns as filed both with the State of Indiana and with IRS.”

The Justice Department labeled ISNA an unindicted co-conspirator in the terrorism-financing trial of the Holy Land Foundation, a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity that was shut down for funding Hamas. The U.S. government listed ISNA as one of the “individuals/entities who are and/or were members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.” The label was upheld in 2009 because of “ample” evidence linking ISNA to Hamas. The Holy Land Foundation “operated from within ISNA,” the ruling noted, and it used an ISNA bank account to send “hundreds of thousands of dollars” to Hamas.

The director of ISNA’s Office of Interfaith and Community Alliances, Sayyid Syeed, was on ISNA’s founding board of directors and was the secretary-general from 1994 to 2006. In 2006, he was recorded saying, “Our job is to change the constitution of America.”

The U.S. Air Force feels that this history shouldn’t disqualify ISNA from receiving taxpayer money and endorsing chaplains for the military. If ISNA meets the standard, then the standard has to change.

Video: The Taliban IED Team That Went Permanently Unemployed

Just How Close Is Al Qaeda To Getting Chemical Weapons In Syria?

 A location widely reported as a chemical weapons facility in Al Safirah

By the way, is there anyone out there that is still wondering how all of these chemicals weapons or as they are commonly called, weapons of mass destruction, got into Syria?

But the issue is now and that is that the legions of al Qaeda now in Syria are getting damn close to a full scale ownership of weapons that could totally change life as we know it in the Middle East and in the world.

And while our President issues another empty warning of "a red line" the forces of evil will soon be ready to kill thousands of innocents.

The story comes from The Telegraph.

Syria: Al-Qaeda's battle for control of Assad's chemical weapons plant

Set amid the rolling plains outside Aleppo, the town of al-Safira looks just like another vicious battleground in Syria's civil war. On one side are lightly-armed rebels, on the other are government troops, and in between is a hotly-contested no-man's land of bombed-out homes and burned-out military vehicles.

The fight for al-Safira is no ordinary turf war, however, and the prize can be found behind the perimeter walls of the heavily-guarded military base on the edge of town. Inside what looks like a drab industrial estate is one of Syria's main facilities for producing chemical weapons - and among its products is sarin, the lethal nerve gas that the regime is now feared to be deploying in its bid to cling to power.

Last week, Washington said for the first time that it had evidence of Sarin being used in "small" amounts during combat operations in Syria, a move that President Barack Obama has long warned is a "red line" that President Bashar al-Assad must not cross.

But as the West now ponders its response, the fear is not just that President Assad might start using his chemical arsenal in much greater quantities. Of equal concern is the prospect of it falling into even less benign hands - a risk that the stand-off at al Safira illustrates clearly.

For among the rebel lines in al-Safira flutters the black flag of the al-Nusra Brigade, the jihadist group that recently declared its allegiance to al-Qaeda. Known for their fighting prowess honed in Iraq, they are now taking the lead in nearly every frontline in the Syrian war, and earlier this month, pushed to within just over a mile of al-Safira, only to for the Syrian troops to regain the ground last week.

Should the tide of battle turn in al-Nusra's favour again, though, there is the possibility of the West's worst-case scenario unfolding - Syria's weapons of mass destruction falling into al-Qaeda's control. More than 500 times as toxic as cyanide and deadly in milligram-sized doses, a single canister of sarin could unleash carnage if released on a Tube network in London or New York.

Such grim possibilities are now uppermost in the minds of Western officials as they try to work out how to prevent Syria's vast chemical stockpiles being unleashed, be it by President Assad on his own people, or by his more extreme opponents on the outside world.

Yet it is not just at al-Safira that the danger lies. As the Syrian uprising has intensified in the past year, the regime has been secretly moving its stockpiles to weapons dumps all over the country, much of which it barely controls anymore. Nobody knows, therefore, when or where a cache might be captured by the opposition's more militant factions.

"The West may be saying: 'A red line has been crossed, let's do something'. But the question is what exactly can they do?" said Dina Esfandiary, an expert on Syria's WMD programme with the International Institute for Strategic Studies, the London-based defence and security think-tank. "Syria's stockpiles of chemical weapons are huge, and President Assad has done a very good job of hiding them all over the country."

The Syrian regime's chemical warchest is indeed vast - the biggest in the Middle East, and the fourth largest in the world. Started in the 1970s ranks with help from Syria's Cold War sponsor, Russia, today its programme includes facilities for making mustard gas, sarin and another nerve agent, VX, which stays lethal for much longer after dispersal.

In charge of the programme is the innocuous-sounding Scientific Studies and Research Centre outside Damascus, a body officially tasked with academic research. In practice, it reports directly to President Assad and operates a string of chemical production facilities, some allegedly developed with help from Iran and North Korea.

As Syria has not signed the international Chemical Weapons Convention, it has never declared details of its stockpiles to the outside world. But outside intelligence estimates reckon that Damascus has between 100 and 200 warheads filled with sarin for its Scud missiles, and thousands of chemical artillery bombs filled with sarin and VX.

Nobody outside the Assad regime now knows for certain where the stockpiles are now: the contents of the plant at Safira, for example, may have been moved to other, more secret storage spaces for safekeeping. But that uncertainty adds to the challenge. With such a vast arsenal scattered nationwide, the West would face a formidable task were it to attempt to secure it by force.

In December, the Pentagon told the Obama administration that it would require upward of 75,000 troops - almost half the number it took to topple Saddam Hussein. Such numbers would amount to an invasion in everything but name, and would doubtless attract hostility from both of Syria's warring sides.

An alternative would be smaller, ad hoc strikes of the sort that Israel has already admitted to doing to stop the weapons falling into the hands of its Lebanon-based enemy Hezbollah, whose Assad-backed fighters are now in Syria helping defend the regime. But these would not be practical for a large-scale neutralisation of the country's chemical threat, according to Ms Esfandiary.

"Airstrikes aren't reliable because they can just release all the chemical agents into the air," she said. "Alternatively, they only do half the job and then render a secure site open to looters."

Nor, she added, would quick-fire raids by small teams of special forces be an alternative. "You would have to first secure the sites and then do a careful analysis of what was there, followed by controlled explosions. It is, frankly, a labour intensive job, and that is why the Pentagon assessed it as requiring 75,000 men.

"Besides, there may be any number of caches hidden all over the place, and even if you could look for them properly - which is difficult with a civil war going on - you would run the risk of some being left behind."

Not all the sites represent a genuine danger. Some store only the basic component chemicals, which must be mixed first before being weaponised, processes which require technical know-how. But others have cannisters full of battle-ready nerve agents, which could be operated in crude fashion simply by breaking them open.

"They might not be quite as effective in amateur hands, but the fact is that they are containers full of very nasty stuff, and if they were opened on a Tube train it would very dangerous," said Ms Esfandiary. "As an instrument of terror, they also have a fear factor that more conventional weapons don't have."

Despite that, many analysts believe that the "red line" is now simply being blurred rather than crossed. With only limited evidence of Sarin use so far, they suspect Damascus is deliberately using such weapons just occasionally to test - and gradually undermine - Washington's resolve. President Assad, they reason, knows all too well that a major chemical attack would leave the US no option but to take action. But successive, smaller ones are a harder call, while still having the desired effect of spreading terror among Damascus's foes.

Outside of Syria, it also has another desired effect - underlining the differences between Mr Assad's opponents in the West. Last week, the hawkish US Republican senator, John McCain, who lost to Mr Obama in the 2008 presidential race, called on America to send in troops to secure factories such as al Safira. But Mr Obama shows no enthusiasm for doing so, and this weekend he even appeared to adjust his language slightly, saying that America would not permit the "systematic" use of chemical weapons. Critics pointed out that proscribing the use of chemical weapons on a "systematic" basis is not the same as proscribing their use altogether.

Yesterday, the Syrian information minister, Omran al-Zohbi, described the US claims of chemical weapons use as a "barefaced lie", insisting that for both legal and "moral" reasons, Damascus would never deploy them. But with Syria's civil war escalating daily, nobody - least of all a Syrian government minister - can guarantee that al Safira's deadly concoctions will remain safe forever.

Taliban Kick Off Spring Offensive With Roadside Bomb That Kills 3 Afghan Policemen

From DAWN.

Roadside bomb kills three policemen in Afghanistan

KABUL: A remote-controlled roadside bomb killed three police officers in eastern Afghanistan on Sunday, an attack the Taliban claimed as the opening round of their spring offensive.

The bomb exploded in Ghazni province beneath a police convoy that was traveling to the district of Zana Khan to take part in a military operation against insurgents, Mohammad Ali Ahmadi, the province’s deputy governor, told The Associated Press.

He said the blast destroyed the vehicle carrying Col Mohammad Hussain, the deputy provincial police chief, killing him and two other officers.

Ahmadi said two officers also were wounded in the insurgent operation, adding that it clearly targeted Hussain.

Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid claimed responsibility in an email sent to the media. He called the bombing the first attack in the spring offensive that Taliban’s leadership said it was starting Sunday.

This year’s offensive is named after Khalid ibn al-Walid, a companion of Islam’s Prophet Muhammad (PBUHU) who became a legendary Muslim military commander known as the ”Drawn Sword of God.”

The insurgents said their forces planned to infiltrate enemy ranks to conduct so-called insider attacks and target military and diplomatic sites with suicide bombers.

Insurgents have escalated attacks recently in a bid to gain power and influence ahead of next year’s presidential election and the planned withdrawal of most US and other foreign combat troops by the end of 2014.

US-backed efforts to try to reconcile the Islamic militant movement with the Afghan government are gaining little traction.

April already has been the deadliest month this year for attacks across the country, where Afghan security forces are increasingly taking the lead on the battlefield in the war that has lasted more than 11 years.

On Saturday, a Nato plane crashed in southern Afghanistan, killing four international troops.

The alliance said initial reports indicated no enemy activity in the area where the plane went down.

Coalition personnel secured the site and were investigating the cause of the crash.

Nato didn’t identify the province where the crash occurred, but Mohammad Jan Rasoulyar, deputy governor of the southern province of Zabul, said an aircraft belonging to foreign forces crashed there on Saturday afternoon.

Nato declined on Sunday to provide any more information about the crash, including the type of aircraft involved, as the investigation continues.

Also on Sunday, the US-led international military coalition said Afghan and foreign forces arrested six insurgents on Saturday, three in Helmand province, one in Baghlan province and two in Kandahar province.

The report said the two taken into custody in Kandahar city included a local Taliban leader who allegedly had coordinated assassinations, sniper ambushes and other attacks there against coalition and Afghan forces.

There are about 100,000 international troops in Afghanistan, including 66,000 Americans. A top priority of the US force, which is slated to drop to about 32,000 by February 2014, is boosting the strength and confidence of Afghan forces.

Video: Sunday Morning's Boom

Video: Yeah, Let's Mount a Saw Onto a Helicopter

Saturday, April 27, 2013

Obama Announces "Red Line" For Syrian Use of Chemical Weapons....Wait Just a Minute....Didn't He Do That 8 Months Ago?

President Barack Obama made a big announcement on Thursday that Syria would be crossing a "red line" if the reports were validated that they had used chemical weapons in the civil war going on in that country.  For those of you thinking this is a deja vu moment, you're right.

Our leader, the spineless wonder of the Free World...the man who has never followed through on any warning or promise in his entire life, said the same bullshit nearly eight months ago when he said the following in August 2012:

"A red line for us is (if) we see a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around, or being utilized. That would change my calculus” on whether a U.S. intervention is merited, the president said.

But hell, why would Obama actually stand up for any thing he has ever said?  Most of the sheep in this country wouldn't pay attention unless they were getting a new free phone.

The story comes from The National Journal.

Obama's Chemical Weapons ‘Red Line’ for Syria Keeps Shifting: Former WMD Hunter

President Obama’s “red line” for U.S. intervention in Syria is actually more of a fuzzy zone whose goalposts keep shifting, said the former top WMD hunter in Iraq.

“It’s a term I particularly don’t like because unless you’re prepared [to carry through] you really do damage to your credibility and the power of our diplomacy because no one believes you,” said David Kay, who from 2003 to 2004 led the Iraq Survey Group that searched for evidence of unconventional weapons in Iraq following the U.S.-led invasion.

Washington on Thursday said it was reasonably confident that Assad loyalists in recent months have carried out one or more limited-scale chemical attacks in Syria, likely involving the nerve agent sarin.

President Obama and his top officials have repeatedly affirmed that use or proliferation of Syrian chemical weapons would constitute an act that would demand a U.S. response.

The Thursday announcement, however, was not followed by any announcement from the White House that its threatened intervention in the Syrian civil war is now in the offing or that Assad would even be prevented from carrying out further chemical attacks.

"Were [Assad] to undertake any additional use, he would be doing so under very careful monitoring from us and the international community," a senior administration official said in a Thursday conference call with reporters. "We are going to be methodical, rigorous, and relentless in gathering the relevant information and putting it together so we can establish exactly what happened."

"If we reach a definitive determination that this red line has been crossed ... what we will be doing is consulting with our friends and allies and the international community more broadly, as well as the Syrian opposition, to determine what the best course of action is,” the staffer told reporters.

The United States has pledged nonlethal aid to the Syrian opposition but has so far avoided arming the rebels or providing any direct military assistance in the war that has already killed more than 70,000 people.

Obama first laid down his red line on chemical weapons in the Syrian civil war in August 2012. "A red line for us is (if) we see a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around, or being utilized. That would change my calculus” on whether a U.S. intervention is merited, the president said.

“We have communicated in no uncertain terms with every player in the region that that's a red line for us and that there would be enormous consequences if we start seeing movement on the chemical weapons front or the use of chemical weapons,” the president said.

While the administration did not discuss specifics, outside experts interpreted the reference to movement of chemical weapons as addressing the potential removal from storage and transport of chemical weapons for firing or for proliferation to nonstate actors. However, when the Syrian military was detected in December apparently loading sarin into aerial munitions, the administration indicated that its red line was actually carrying out a chemical attack, not readying for one.

Obama officials since then in their threats to Assad ceased mentioning the movement of chemical materials while still warning against providing them to extremist organizations.

“I want to make it absolutely clear to Assad and those under his command, the world is watching,” Obama said in December. “The use of chemical weapons is and would be totally unacceptable.”

Administration officials have always been careful to refrain from actually defining what it means for chemical weapons to be utilized; how many must be used or proliferated to warrant a U.S. reaction; and specifically what kind of a response the United States would take.

Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also in December said there was worry "that an increasingly desperate Assad regime might turn to chemical weapons, or might lose control of them. ...We have sent an unmistakable message that this would cross a red line and those responsible would be held to account."

Last month Obama said, “We have been clear that the use of chemical weapons against the Syrian people would be a serious and tragic mistake. …The Assad regime must understand that they will be held accountable for the use of chemical weapons or their transfer to terrorists."

The administration has said it has sent warnings on the matter directly to Assad.

“I do question the utility of red lines if they lack clearly delineated boundaries and meaningful consequences,” House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) said in a Thursday statement that called on the White House to make good on its threats to Assad. “I am confident the president does not wish for America’s resolve to be called into question.”

Global Green USA chemical-weapon expert Paul Walker, though, said he did not feel the administration was giving conflicting signals about where its red line lies. “I don’t think the red line has been moving but it’s still a question of what one means by use of chemical weapons.”

Kay in a Thursday interview said the lack of clarity around the red line for Syria has implications that go beyond that conflict. Other nations with their own disputes with the United States, namely Iran and North Korea, are paying attention. “You are devaluing your diplomacy when you do that because it’s going to be heard in other places.”

“We’ve used that term so often with Iran that in fact the desert must be pink,” said Kay, now a senior fellow with the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies.

The Obama administration is in a tough spot in trying to balance sending a strong deterrent signal to Assad while still giving itself enough time to make certain that a chemical strike has in fact taken place and that it knows who is responsible. Answering all of those questions is no easy feat in Syria, where the U.S. lacks its own intelligence operation and an uneasy coalition of rebel militias might have their own motivations for trying to pin a chemical attack on the regime.

Kay acknowledged that the Obama White House has the added challenge of following in the footsteps of the Bush administration, which did make good of its threats to go after Saddam Hussein only to find out afterward it had been grossly wrong in its intelligence surrounding Iraqi WMD capabilities.

“Under those conditions you have to be careful about not over threatening, particularly … about not talking about consequences that you’re not prepared to carry out,” Kay said.

Walker agreed: “We have to be careful that statements at this time do not accelerate to more than people want or is necessary.”

Video: Now You See the Jihadi, Now You Don't

Three British Muslims Jailed For Sexual Enslavement of 13 Year Old Girl

 Hamza Ali, Suran Uddin and Mohammed Sheikh treated the girl "like a piece of meat"

From BBC News via The Religion of Peace.

Ipswich sex slave teenager case: London men jailed

Three men from east London who abducted a 13-year-old girl from the streets of the city and forced her to become their sex slave have been jailed.

The girl, described as being from a troubled family, was driven to a house in Ipswich and sexually abused over four days, Norwich Crown Court heard.

Mohammed Sheikh, 32, Hamza Ali, 39, and Suran Uddin, 26, were convicted of sex offences and trafficking.

Uddin was jailed for 15 years, Sheikh for eight years and Ali for five years.

Judge Nicholas Coleman said the girl had been left traumatised.
'Piece of meat'

The judge told the men: "Instead of helping this girl find refuge, you were all intent on sexually exploiting her for your own ends," he added.

"She was taken to a town she'd never visited, a house she never been to, in the company of men she had never met.

"All three of you treated her like a piece of meat and passed her about.

"This happened over four days until she was finally rescued by police."

Jurors heard how the men took advantage of the girl's "youth and naivety" to persuade her to get into a van, driven by Uddin.

They took her to a house in Chevallier Street, Ipswich.
'Engaging with strangers'

Maria Denine, mitigating for Sheikh, said the defendants had not been aware of her background or how vulnerable she was.

Mitigating for Uddin, Scott Ivill said his client was married with two children and any custodial sentence would cause his family to suffer.

Lindsay Cox, for Ali, said his client was also a married man.

He added: "This girl looked appreciably older than her age and she had a history of engaging with strangers."

Uddin, of St Matthew's Row, Bethnal Green; Sheikh, of Seaton Point in Hackney; and Ali, of Chilford Road, Waltham Forest were all found guilty of conspiracy to traffic in the UK.

Uddin was also convicted of two counts of rape and supplying a class B drug to the victim.

Sheikh was convicted of causing a child to engage in sexual activity and supplying a class B drug.

Ali was found guilty of a sexual assault.

All three men were placed on the sex offenders register and Sheikh and Ali could face deportation to Somalia, their home country.

A fourth defendant, Abdul Hammed, 46, of Wellington Street, Ipswich, was cleared of supplying a class B drug, two counts of rape and trafficking.

Video: What's the Farthest a Jihad's Body Has Flown After Getting Hit By a Hellfire?

Karachi, Pakistan....Literally Hell On Earth

I have purposely avoided blogging about all of the death and destruction that goes on in Karachi, Pakistan because much of it is not related to the Taliban or to other jihadis - it's always been intertwined with organized crime, with gangs, with two bit tribal rivalries but the fact of the matter is that Karachi has simply become Hell on earth.  If there's a more dangerous place on this planet, I'd like to know about it.

Well, another bomb blast has killed a ton of people in Karachi but what else is new?

The report comes from DAWN.

Third strike in four days in Karachi; 11 die in blast at ANP meeting

KARACHI: As the city observed a day of mourning for people killed in Thursday’s bomb blast near an MQM election office in North Nazimabad’s Nusrat Bhutto Colony area, Karachi was aggrieved by a gruesome militant attack on the street corner meeting of a candidate of another liberal democratic party, the ANP, on Friday evening.

This was the third militant attack in four days as the militants appeared determined to keep the MQM, ANP and PPP out of the electoral process, possibly encouraged by the reluctance of two mainstream parties actively engaged in electioneering in Punjab to condemn the wave of terror attacks in three other provinces.

At least 11 people were killed and over 50 others injured when a bomb blast hit the election meeting of Awami National Party (ANP) candidate Bashir Jan in Orangi Town.

The Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack.

Earlier in the day, Abdul Rehman Khan, another ANP candidate contesting for the NA-255 seat, survived an attack when an improvised explosive device detonated near his vehicle in Landhi area.

Bashir Jan, the ANP general secretary for Sindh survived the attack as he was inside his car at the time of the attack.

“I was sitting in my car when the explosion took place. The car was thrown up a few feet in the air because of the impact of the blast,” Mr Jan said.

This was the third attempt on his life. Earlier, he had been fired upon near Hasan Square and he was wounded when an IED exploded near his car in the Frontier Colony area last year.

“A street corner meeting was supposed to be held in a small ground surrounded by walls. The blast took place when Bashir Jan was approaching the venue in his car through a narrow street,” SSP district west Asif Ajaz Shaikh told Dawn.

Although police had not been formally informed about the meeting in advance, a police mobile with a few personnel had been deputed at a distance from the venue at the request of the organisers, he said.

“Preliminary findings suggest that Bashir Jan was the target of the attack. Because a large number of people were there he could not be targeted,” SSP of CID’s counter-terrorism unit Raja Umar Khattab told Dawn.

He said the explosives weighing about 10kgs had been placed in a rickshaw.

The brunt of the attack was borne by three vehicles parked in the street and some shops. Debris started falling on the narrow lane after the blast.

The windscreen of Bashir Jan’s vehicle was damaged, he said.

The bodies and the injured were taken to different hospitals. The Civil Hospital received six bodies, Abbasi Shaheed Hospital three and Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Centre one. One of the critically injured died in Civil Hospital.

Speaking to Dawn.com on phone from an undisclosed location, Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan spokesman Ihsanullah Ihsan said the TTP had carried out the attack on the ANP election meeting because of their secular politics.

Talking to a private news channel, ANP chief Asfandyar Wali condemned the attack and said his party would not bow down to the terrorists who were targeting political workers.

“People know who are behind these barbaric acts; they want to force us out of the election process,” he said, but made it clear that the ANP would not boycott the May 11 elections.

The Muttahida Quami Movement chief also condemned the attack.

DAY OF MOURNING: The ANP announced a peaceful day of mourning on Saturday. The party leader Senator Shahi Syed appealed to the people, traders and transporters to observe mourning but not to shut their businesses.

Video: Occupy Wall Street ....Phase 2 ?

Video: Don't You Love It When a Palestinian Gets a Tear Gas Canister To the Face?

Friday, April 26, 2013

Who Are These Ignorant Christians Being Duped By the "Interfaith" Charade Put On By CAIR?

From The Clarion Project.

CAIR Misinformation Campaign - Honors Christian Allies

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is making a point on showing how much it treasures its interfaith defenders. Recent CAIR fundraisers and events have highlighted their partnership, flattering them enough to overlooking its well-documented ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas.

CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in the terrorism-financing trial of the Holy Land Foundation. The federal government specifically identified CAIR as an entity of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee, a secret body set up to advance the Hamas agenda. In 2009, a federal judge ruled in favor of preserving the label, citing the “ample” evidence linking CAIR to Hamas.

The annual banquet for the Oklahoma chapter of CAIR is honoring Reverend William Tabbernee of the Oklahoma Council of Churches with a Building Bridges Award. His group also sponsored the event. The keynote speaker of the event is Imam Johari Abdul-Malik, who endorsed attacks on Israeli infrastructure in 2001. He is the Outreach Director for Dar al-Hijrah, a Virginia mosque with extensive Islamist ties. Its imam, Shaker Elsayed, preached in favor of armed jihad at a Virginia high school in January.

The Cincinnati chapter of CAIR recently completed a series on interfaith dialogue that was hosted by the Transfiguration Spirituality Center in Glendale. Its website says it’s a “religious community for women in the Anglican/Episcopalian tradition.”

The Connecticut chapter of CAIR held a workshop on “Islamophobia” at All Souls Unitarian Church in New London. It was sponsored by the congregation and the Unitarian Universalist Fund for Social Responsibility. If the past is any indication, CAIR taught the 75 people in attendance that its critics are anti-Muslim bigots.

The New York chapter of CAIR honored the Interfaith Center of New York with a Partners of Justice Award at its fundraising banquet. One of the presenters of the award was Zead Ramadan, the CAIR-NY board president. In December 2011, he refused to condemn Hamas. He has also appeared on Iranian state television to complain about America’s treatment of Muslims. Cyrus McGoldrick, who was CAIR-NY’s leader until January 7, has a history of extremist statements that include supporting Hamas and the destruction of Israel.

Other sponsors of the CAIR fundraiser were the Islamic Circle of North America, a group that is listed by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood in 1991 as one of “our organizations and the organizations of our friends.” Another sponsor was the Muslim American Society. Federal prosecutors said in 2008 that it was “founded as the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.”

Basim Elkarra, executive director of CAIR-Sacramento, spoke at CAIR-NY’s fundraiser. He has suggested that “Islamophobes” be prosecuted just like Holocaust deniers and he refused to condemn Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist groups in 2007.

Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer gave Elkarra a “certificate of accomplishment” in 2006 and then rescinded it after learning of CAIR’s background.

The Interfaith Center of New York has Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf of “Ground Zero Mosque” fame as a vice chairman of the board. The Executive-Director of the Interfaith Center endorsed a March 13, 2012 letter protesting the NYPD’s showing of the film The Third Jihad to officers, claiming it contains anti-Muslim “misinformation” and is “harmful and offensive.”

The letter was written by a coalition called Shoulder-to-Shoulder that has the President of the Islamic Society of North America as an Executive Committee member. The Third Jihad pointed out that the Islamic Society of North America, like CAIR, is designated as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land trial. And, like CAIR, the U.S. government listed it as a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity. It is also the first mentioned in the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s list of “our organizations and the organizations of our friends.”

CAIR thanked the Interfaith Center of New York for organizing a joint condemnation of the subway advertisements that dared to say, “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.” Its press release listed CAIR-NY board member Zead Ramadan as a contact for the media. The Islamic Society of North America is named as a sponsor, as are two organizations founded by Imam Rauf.

As I documented at the time, the list of organizations signing the Interfaith Center’s letter includes many allies of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entities with a track record of activism against Israel. One even hypocritically posted anti-Israel subway ads before the controversy even started and escaped the ridicule of its co-signers. For these groups, “Islamophobia” is a verbal weapon to use against the opponents of CAIR.

You would think CAIR’s background would repel Christians and Jews looking for Muslim partners. Apparently, for some, the desire to showcase their tolerance takes priority over thoughtful consideration of these facts. After all, applauses feel better than being called an “Islamophobe.”

Video: What Happens When An Apache 30mm Round Hits a Jihadi With a Suicide Belt On?

It's the Religion, Stupid

This article, from Family Security Matters, brings up the amazing naivete' of the Left in America when it comes to the link between Islam and terrorism.

I would put forth that those on the left saying that they have "no idea" why the Boston bombers did this are simply lying.  The Communists in America know exactly what the Islamists do, they know why and for that reason, because they KNOW why, that is why they cover for the islamists.  Don't buy into it for one minute...these Democrat, Progressive, Marxist politicians really aren't that stupid or bling - they know why Muslims are targeting America, they know why they want to kill innocents and the reason they won't admit that they know is because THEY SUPPORT IT 100%.

It's The Religion, Stupid

It amazes me what lengths to which the left will go to avoid mentioning terrorism and Islam in the same sentence. During the days between the bombing Monday and identifying the two bombers early Thursday, the left desperately wished they would be American white guys. Leftist Salon.com ran the headline: "Let's hope the Boston Marathon Bomber is a white American." Writer David Sirotta invoked the leftist creed of so-called White Privilege "There is a double standard: White terrorists are dealt with as lone wolves, Islamists are existential threats."

US Representative Peter King (R-NY) has tried to investigate links between Radical Islamists in the US and terrorism, but he's accused of bigotry for his efforts. He proposed it again on Fox News Sunday with Senator Diane Feinstein (D-Cal) when she said: "I - I don't think all of this is very helpful. . . . I don't think we need to go and develop some real disdain and hatred on television about it."

Three years ago, Radical Muslim Major Nidal Hasan shot forty-five soldiers and killed thirteen at Fort Hood while chanting "Allahu Akbar!" (God is great), but our officials in Washington still refuse to call the incident terrorism. The Pentagon's 86-page report on the shooting refused to mention Islam as a motive! Texas Congressman John Carter whose district includes Fort Hood was appalled. "People are afraid to speak out and label someone because they'll be accused of being a racist or accused of profiling or being prejudiced against a certain religion or race of people," Carter told POLITICO. "But in a time of national crisis, which I believe we are in, all identifiers must be discussed."

An officer in the US Army, Hasan publicly identified himself as a "Soldier of Allah" on Army documents, yet the army's top officer - General George Casey said of the mass murder: "as horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that's worse."

So General, political correctness is more important than the very lives of soldiers under your command?


Our leftist commander-in-chief suffers from the same willful blindness. "Why did young men who grew up and studied here as part of our communities and country resort to such violence?" asked President Obama last Saturday.

It's the religion, stupid.

Obama's Mini-Me - Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick - said on Good Morning America last Sunday that he had no idea why the Tsarnaev brothers would do such a thing.

It's the religion, stupid.

Former Maine Governor John Baldacci, a very liberal Democrat, played down Muslim association when he hosted a Saturday morning "Inside Maine" radio talk show last Saturday. He claimed poverty was the major factor in motivating the Tsarnaev brothers to bomb the Boston Marathon. Fellow liberal Ken Altshuler was Baldacci's obsequious parrot and strongly supported this foolish contention.

It's the religion, stupid.

MSNBC has been trying desperately to disassociate Islam from the Boston bombings. Before the Tsarnaev brothers were identified, its guests tried to blame the Tea Party. After they were identified as Muslims, another MSNBC guest insisted the Chechen Muslim backgrounds of the brothers "had nothing to do" with the bombings.

So, why does the left so desperately want to portray the Tsarnaev brothers as domestic terrorists? Because it would play into their world view of conservatives as redneck, cretin Neanderthals who "get bitter [and] cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them" as President Obama described them.

Bitter clingers won't vote for progressive elitists and they have guns. Progressive elitists would disarm them by ramping up gun control and dilute their influence during elections by granting amnesty to millions of illegal aliens who'll vote Democrat. Gun control and amnesty were before Congress when the bombs went off. That riveted America's attention and unraveled carefully-crafted, progressive spin. Already skyrocketing, gun and ammunition sales increased even more as more Americans were suspected their elected leaders were either fools or worse - they were covering up something.

They're wondering, as I am:

*If the Tsarnaevs needed asylum from Chechnya, why did the parents move back?

*If they all feared for their lives, why did Tamerlan Tsarnaev go back to visit for six months?

*What were the chances that a Saudi national with relatives in Gitmo being at the finish line and close enough to be wounded by the blast?

*Why did President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry have emergency meetings with the Saudi Foreign Minister while the Saudi national was held in the hospital as a "person of interest"?

*Why was the Wednesday FBI press conference postponed again and again during all this?

*Why was the Saudi national living in Revere, Mass. when his student visa was for a college in Ohio?

*Why does Janet Napolitano profile terrorists as pro-life demonstrators, pro-gun activists, and Iraq veterans - but not radical Muslims?

Israeli Air Force intercepts Hezbollah drone off coast of Israel

From The Long War Journal.

Israeli Air Force intercepts Hezbollah drone off coast of Israel

The Israeli Air Force (IAF) intercepted an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) this afternoon. The drone, which Israeli officials say belonged to Hezbollah and took off from Lebanon, was intercepted over the Mediterranean Sea, five nautical miles west of Haifa and at an altitude of 6,000 feet.

A statement released by the IDF on the incident said: "UAVs pose a serious threat to the State of Israel's security. The IDF will not tolerate any attempt to violate Israel's sovereignty or harm its security." Similarly, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel is prepared to deal with any threat posed by Syria or Lebanon in the air, land, or sea.

In addition, Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon said that "[b]y way of the Hezbollah, the Iranians are trying us and checking us.... We will respond at the point which we believe to be appropriate, but there will be a response."

Hezbollah has denied that it sent the drone. "Hezbollah denies sending any unmanned drone towards occupied Palestine," a headline on Hezbollah's Al-Manar said this evening. Al-Manar did not provide any additional information. Earlier today, a Hezbollah official told the Associated Press that the Iranian-backed terror group did not have any information on the incident but would release a statement "if it had something" to say.

Today's interception is the second such action by the Israeli Air Force in the past year. On Oct. 6, the IAF shot down a drone, which Hezbollah took responsibility for, near the Yatir Forest in the northern Negev.

When Hassan Nasrallah, the Secretary-General of Hezbollah, announced that Hezbollah was behind the October drone, he said, "It is our natural right to send other reconnaissance flights inside occupied Palestine.... This is not the first time and will not be the last. We can reach any place we want."

Hezbollah has used drones against Israel on a number of occasions in recent years. During the 2006 war with Hezbollah, the Israeli Air Force shot down a number of Hezbollah drones, and in 2004 an Iranian-made drone spent approximately five minutes in Israeli territory. In April 2005, a Hezbollah drone (Mirsad-1) was sent over Israel. According to a secret cable released by Wikileaks, Syrian intelligence officers may have helped Hezbollah with this launch.

Last April, Yedioth Ahronoth reported that "Hezbollah has been allocating increased resources towards bolstering its drone unit."

Video: This is Exactly Why Haji Shouldn't Carry His AK In a Blanket

Video: Somehow, This Has To Be the Fault of Conservatives

Thursday, April 25, 2013

Why Muslims Kill

From Family Security Matters.

Why Muslims Kill

The murderer is the new celebrity. He emerges out of nowhere with a rags to mass murder story, and is swiftly accorded all the trappings of fame. Reporters track down anyone who knew him to learn about his childhood and his main influences. Relatives and friends both contribute fuzzy anecdotes, mostly indistinguishable from the ones they would present if he were competing on American Idol or running for president.

The disaffected form fan clubs around him. The experts discuss what his rise to fame means. Books are written about him and then perhaps a movie. And then it ends and begins all over again.

The Tsernaev brothers, the living one and the dead one, are already receiving that treatment. Like most murderers they have already become more famous than their victims. More famous than the rescuers. The original Tamerlane is better known than any of his countless victims. The new one is already eclipsing his victims. Before long one of those Chechen bards whose videos he tagged into his playlist on YouTube will write a ballad about the Boston massacre and the circle will be complete.

That ballad, murderous and vile, will still be more honest than most of the media coverage about the two Chechen Muslims has been. The media's coverage is weighed down by its old fetish of murder as celebrity. The media covers murderers and celebrities in the same way. It writes exhaustively about them, but rarely meaningfully. The murderer, like the celebrity, is famous for being famous. And fame clips context and suppresses meaning. It becomes its own reference. A thing is famous for being known. It is known for being famous. It enters the common language as a reference. A metaphor.

In the case of the Tsernaevs, the surface coverage, the endless rounds of interviews with friends and relatives, with anyone who ever met them or retweed them, is mandatory because it avoids the more difficult question of why they killed.

The better news outlets answer with convenient terms like "radicalization" or "self-radicalization" and much of the public, primed to react to meaningless political jargon as if it had meaning, will think that they understand. A radical, they know, is a bad person, except for a brief period when surfers and ninja turtles could use it and still be good people. They don't quite know why that is, but they also don't know why high debt is good for the economy or why Islam is a religion of peace.

Radical and extremist are convenient terms for dismissing people and subjects without discussing them. Mental shortcuts like that can be convenient. No one really wants to spend every waking moment debating the people who think that the moon landing was faked or that we are ruled over by miniature T-Rex's who somehow look just like people. But when the body count gets high enough, dismissing it as extremism or radicalism doesn't hold up. The question must be discussed.

The experts point to foreign policy, but Muslim violence began a thousand years before the United States existed as an independent political entity. The younger Tsernaev sibling scrawled something about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, prompted or unprompted, but Iraq is yesterday's news and America is in Afghanistan because of the Muslim attacks of September 11. We can keep retracing every event and connecting it to a prior event, but the constraints of history will swiftly take us back to before Independence Hall, Columbus and for that matter the English language.

If we are to flounder looking around for a first cause, we must either fetch up against the founding of Islam or try to make a case for Islamic violence predating Islam. Neither is very tenable. Dzhokhar can claim that he and his brother were defending Islam by murdering an 8-year-old, Hitler claimed that he was defending Germany by invading Poland and Japan is still waiting around for South Korea to thank it for protecting it from Western imperialism.

Prisons are full of 300 pound men who beat their 90 pound wives to death in self-defense and spree killers who felt bullied and misunderstood and defended themselves with killing sprees. The kind of evil we see in movies, the serial killer who gleefully whisper about demonic pacts and the joy of killing, are a rarity. Even human monsters are human. They explain things in terms of their egos. They are always defending themselves against some form of oppression and looking for someone to sympathize with their outrage.

Muslim terrorists are no different. The Taliban just poisoned a girls school as part of their campaign to defend Afghanistan from women who can read and write. Hamas fired an anti-tank missile at an Israeli school bus in defense of Palestine. Tamerlan Tsarnaev put down a bomb next to an 8-year-old boy in defense of Islam.

Islam, as one of the great world religions, has a long history of needing to be defended against small boys, blind female poets and elderly cartoonists. Sometimes Muslims have to defend Islam against each other, the way they are now doing in Syria. Other times defending Islam requires demolishing its archeological sites, the way that the Saudis are doing. Either way defending Islam is difficult work.

Everyone in a war usually claims to be defending against something. But the younger Tsarnaev was not really angry about Afghanistan or Iraq. He wasn't defending them. He was defending Islam. If you want to defend Afghanistan, then all you have to do is board a plane to Pakistan and then make the right contacts and find your way across the border to join a band of likeminded fellows fighting to defend your new country from women who can read. But to defend Islam, you can stay at home in Boston and kill little boys.

What is this thing called Islam? We can call it a religion, but that doesn't tell us much. Defining religion is a famously tricky affair. The bombmaking instructions in Al Qaeda's Inspire magazine begin by telling the would-be defender of Islam that the key ingredient in building a pressure cooker bomb, like the one used at the Boston Marathon, is trust in Allah. There is a kind of faith in that, but it's more like the kind of prayer you expect to hear Jeffrey Dahmer or Charles Manson utter to a god that they made in their own murderous image. Serial killers praying to a patron deity of serial killers to help them murder little boys in defense of a religion whose faith is in the murder of little boys.

But the whole thing need not be all that mysterious. Western man spent much of the last century threatening to fight to the death over the political and economic system that he would live under. Dispense with the label of religion and the sight of two angry young men setting off bombs in an American city is not all that alien. Neither is their motive.

There are two Islams that we can conceive of; the private and the public. It is it not difficult to see which of these the Tsarnaevs were defending. Despite the morbid fantasies of the real Islamophobia industry, practiced by CAIR and the left, no one was holding down either of the brothers and shoving pork in their mouths or forbidding them from reading the Koran. The government has carved out broad swaths of entitlements for Islamic religion in a country where Iftar is celebrated in the White House and the Department of Justice sues any store that thinks twice of frowning at a Hijab.

It's the public Islam that Tamerlan and Dzhokhar were defending. The private Islam forbids Muslims to eat pork or drink liquor The public Islam bars pork or liquor from being sold. The private Islam tells women to cover their hair. The public Islam establishes an entire system of police and judges to compel them to cover their hair.

Western liberals like to think of Islam as a private religion, in the tradition of most of its extant religions, but it isn't. Islam cannot function for very long as a private religion just as Communism could not function for very long as a private experiment on a few communal farms. It is an all or nothing system. Its fundamental expression is public. In private, it withers and dies.

The private Islam need not be defended with bombs. The public Islam must be. And as with so many totalitarian systems, when it speaks of freedom, it means slavery, when it talks of peace, it means war, and when it claims defense, it means attack.

Why did Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev detonate bombs at the Boston Marathon? They were engaged in an old disagreement over political systems. Terrorists of the left set off bombs to force a political revolution. Their Islamist fellow-travelers are doing the same thing. Dig away enough of the trappings of the celebrity murderer and you come to the ideas buried underneath all the rubble.

The Tsarnaevs are not the first terrorists to kill Americans in the name of a political idea. If they are radicals and extremists, than so are the likes of Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. What difference is there between the radicals who detonated bombs to impose the rule of the left and those who detonate bombs to impose the rule of Islam?

When it comes to the Weather Underground, the media is eager to discuss their ends, but not their
means. And when it comes to the Tsarnaevs, the media will discuss their means, but not their ends. Dealing with the violence of the left would only make the left look bad. And dealing with the agenda of the terrorists would make the left's plan for a multicultural society seem unworkable. It would make it clear that terrorism is not random, but a violent means of imposing an idea. And it is the idea that is the issue.

If we are going to discuss Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, let us spend a little less time on their endless parade of relatives and former friends, and a little more time on the idea in whose defense they chose to kill and maim so many. Let us discuss Islam, not just as an abstract idea, but as a concrete political system. Let us discuss it the way that we discuss the plans and platforms of the Republican and Democratic parties. Let us look at Saudi Arabia, at Pakistan and at the new Egypt to see what this thing that the terrorists would like to impose on us is.

Despite thousands dead, a searching examination of that sort is exactly what the media would like to avoid. It does not want another "Better Red than Dead" or "Better Dead than Red" debate. It wants us to speak of foreign policy as an isolated American act and of random violence as arising from thin air. It does not want us to understand the nature of the struggle. It does not want us to know why we die. It is determined to keep from us the reason why Muslims kill.