Showing posts with label Global Islamic terrorism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Global Islamic terrorism. Show all posts

Thursday, May 5, 2011

It's Time For the Hard Truth...Pakistan Is Public Enemy Number One In Terror


Finally, an article comes out that takes the gloves off and describes just how key Pakistan has been to the support of worldwide islamic terrorism in our world. This piece at Family Security Matters not only points to the joke of how the Pakistanis had harbored Osama bin Laden for all of these years but points out the hypocrisy of their stance on the Taliban along with the other terror groups in the country that have targeted India and other surrounding countries.

From the article:

Pakistan has done the impossible: It’s bumped Saudi Arabia from the top slot as America’s number-one enemy. Al Qaeda is, at most, sixth or seventh on the list, a symptom, not a cause. Without Saudi money and Pakistani protection, al Qaeda would be about as relevant as VHS cassettes. Pakistan’s intelligence service (ISI) and its military leadership have managed to hide Osama bin Laden since he fled Tora Bora; continue to harbor and support the leadership of the Afghan Taliban; collude with the savage Haqqani terror network; and nurture a range of anti-Indian terror organizations the ISI created. Iran plays in the terrorist bush leagues compared to our Pakistani “ally.”


As you will see in the rest of the article, it talks about just what the U.S. can do with the whole Pakistan situation. India is mentioned quite a bit as receiving our support and shifting some partnership there but the author misses the point that Barack Hussein Obama isn't all that fond of the Indians....I guess that Hindu religion just doesn't hold the mystique for Barack that Islam does.

One other issue to mention - if you go to Google and put in "terrorist trained in Pakistan" you will find 5,590,000 results. Pakistan has become the absolute center of the islamic universe for terror training...especially after Afghanistan was shut down many years ago with the U.S. moving in there. Nearly every major islamic terror attack in the world over the past three years can be traced back to Pakistan for either the plotting of the attack and/or the training of the jihadis.



Pakistan: Public Enemy Number One


Pakistan has done the impossible: It’s bumped Saudi Arabia from the top slot as America’s number-one enemy. Al Qaeda is, at most, sixth or seventh on the list, a symptom, not a cause. Without Saudi money and Pakistani protection, al Qaeda would be about as relevant as VHS cassettes. Pakistan’s intelligence service (ISI) and its military leadership have managed to hide Osama bin Laden since he fled Tora Bora; continue to harbor and support the leadership of the Afghan Taliban; collude with the savage Haqqani terror network; and nurture a range of anti-Indian terror organizations the ISI created. Iran plays in the terrorist bush leagues compared to our Pakistani “ally.”

Meanwhile, Washington continues to do the implausible: Kid itself that Pakistan, the world’s leading terror sponsor and haven, will ultimately reform and give up its vast investments in terrorism if only we send more money to Islamabad. One administration after another in D.C. convinces itself that we can break a junkie’s heroin habit by providing the addict with an endless supply of heroin.

There is no way that Osama bin Laden could have lived in an eyesore mega-compound in the shadow of multiple military installations in a key garrison town without anyone in the Pakistani security establishment knowing who was living there. On the contrary, the compound appears to have been custom built for bin Laden as a gilded cage: The deal would have been that the key insider Pakistani generals (who run the ISI, as well as the military) would protect him and allow him to continue to provide al Qaeda with strategic direction through couriers—but bin Laden would have to play by ISI rules, keeping them informed about his orders to his terrorists; remaining within the compound; and, essentially, staying on ice until the Pakistanis felt they could unleash him to their advantage. Meanwhile, an alive but undetected bin Laden guaranteed that billions in military and civilian aid programs would continue to flow from the USA to Pakistan. For the men who really run Pakistan, whether or not the military is formally in power, this was the perfect self-licking ice-cream cone.

Now the Pakistanis have been caught out with their salwar-khameez trousers around their ankles. And Washington, which has been oh so shocked by this massive betrayal, appears determined to help the Pakistanis get those trousers back up around their national waist as soon as possible. Yeah, we’re “demanding” explanations. But we’ll accept any Pakistani lies that allow this “important relationship” to go forward.

After all, the entire relationship with Pakistan has been built on lies and our enthusiastic self-delusion. The most recent whopper was the administration’s claim that the SEALs destroyed the helicopter that suffered mechanical problems so the top-secret technologies on board “wouldn’t fall into the hands of al Qaeda.” That’s pure bull. The al Qaeda thugs on that compound were dead or had become prisoners. We destroyed our helicopter—thoroughly—because we didn’t want the Pakistanis to grab the assorted black boxes, communication devices and night-flying avionics. We knew the Pakistanis would share anything they got with their real friends, the Chinese.

What do you do with an “ally” that hides your most-wanted enemy from you; actively helps kill your troops in Afghanistan; uses terrorists to attack the world’s largest democracy (India); tries to convince the Afghan government you’ve erected to boot you out and line up with Beijing, instead; and views terror as an essential tool of strategy and statecraft? Washington’s answer is to send billions more in aid.

Even as I write, the State Department and various members of Congress solemnly warn that cutting off aid to Pakistan could have dire results.

Really? Exactly how could this relationship get any worse? They were hiding Osama bin Laden from us, for Heaven’s sake.

The Pakistanis do have one practical hold over us: Idiotically, our Afghan strategy relies heavily on extended supply lines through Pakistan to support our troops. This is, and long has been, absolutely nuts. But you want it bad, you get it bad.

And bloated blusterers whine that “Pakistan has nuclear weapons! What if they fall into the hands of terrorists?” As if the current government in Islamabad would miss the right chance…

In the short term, if our special-operations forces can pull off a brilliant black op deep inside a hostile country such as Pakistan once, we can do it again. And again. And next time there could be devastating air cover at the ready, in case Pakistan’s punk military gets any ideas.

But that’s short-term operational stuff. We need to deal in imaginative strategies. And the clear way to cope with Pakistan’s nukes comes down to one word: “India.” Instead of supporting a nut-case, treacherous, Islamist-infiltrated regime that helps kill our troops, we should cut all aid—and all ties—with Pakistan. We need to remove most (not all) of our troops from the brainless boondoggle in Afghanistan anyway (the only reason any U.S. service member should stay in Afghanistan is to keep killing terrorists in Pakistan—forget trying to break the death-grip of extremist Islam by teaching Afghan villagers better hygiene). We should not have one more soldier or system in Afghanistan than we can resupply or evacuate by air in an emergency (crazily, our back-up supply lines run through Russia—yeah, we’re strategic geniuses, all right). Then we should close our consulates in Pakistan and the embassy in Islamabad. Treat Pakistan as exactly what it is: A lawless rogue state.

Simultaneously, throw all of our support, military and diplomatic, behind India. India’s democracy may be flawed—our own isn’t exactly perfect--but it has proven robust for over six decades (with one brief hiccup under Indira Gandhi). And India is a country of the future with vast potential, a natural long-term ally for the U.S. (we’re both worried about China, too). Pakistan has only a wretched past that repeats itself in a deteriorating cycle.

India could deal with Pakistan’s nuclear “threat” just fine. As it is, Pakistan launches terror attacks on India, confident that, before India can retaliate, we’ll jump in and prevent New Delhi from taking action—making us complicit in Pakistan’s terrorism. Think the Pakistanis would continue their provocations if we weren’t there to protect them from India’s outrage? Think the Pakistanis, with their 175-million anti-American Muslims, believe they can take on 1.3 billion Indians in a nuclear exchange? Pakistan would be a cinder…

But don’t hold your breath. Our “strategic thinkers” in Washington still live in the Cold War, when we “needed” Pakistan. Perhaps, in twenty or thirty years, when someone on the Potomac notices that we’re living in the 21st-century and that, uh, the Congress of Vienna isn’t especially relevant, we might get an initial glimmer of strategic innovation. For now, though, you can bet your life that the aid dollars will still flow to Pakistan; we’ll avidly accept Islamabad’s promises to be really, really good; and we’ll go back to pretending that the Pakistani whore can be reformed for a successful strategic marriage.

Osama bin Laden is dead, no thanks to the Pakistanis. The only qualifying note I can offer is that it’s quite possible that President Zardari, who’s regarded as a buffoon by his own security services, was never read in on the secret that Pakistan’s generals had cut a deal to protect bin Laden. But the man who knows all is the army chief of staff, General Ashfaq Kiyani, for whom many of us initially had some hope. General Kiyani’s previous job was as head of the ISI. And it’s utter nonsense to pretend that bin Laden might have been shielded all this time—and in the garrison city of Abbottabad (which translates, loosely, as “Heeeeyyyy Abbottttt!)—by “rogue elements within the ISI.” It beggars belief that renegade operatives in the tightly controlled ISI could shield bin Laden; support anti-India terrorists; protect and aid the Afghan Taliban; and collaborate with the Haqqani network without a succession of ISI chiefs knowing what was going on and signing off on the activities. Just not possible.

Oh, and our old buddy, General Pervze Musharraf, former chief of staff and Pakistani president, had to know, too.

But Washington will go on playing pretend. It’s a whole lot easier than thinking.

Meanwhile, we’ve lost the only man in Pakistan we could trust: Osama bin Laden. He, at least, meant what he said.

Monday, April 19, 2010

An Islamic Superstar Comes to America: Tariq Ramadan

by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

President G. W. Bush banned a suave, sophisticated and very smooth Muslim, Tariq Ramadan, from America because of his ties to Islamic terrorism. Today we have no Islamic terrorism in the U.S. so Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama offered America's hospitality once again, and Tariq Ramadan, the grandson of Hasan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, is free to come and go in this country.



Tariq Ramadan
In almost everything I read about Tariq Ramadan, he is described as a man with an amicable message...unless he is speaking to Arabic-speading audiences. This from Discover the Networks:
But to Arabic-speaking audiences, he vents his deep-seated hatred of the West and his endorsement of Wahhabism, the most extreme form of Islam. Moreover, Ramadan has numerous connections to fundamentalist Islamic militants and is suspected by U.S. intelligence agencies of maintaining ties with the terrorist group al Qaeda.
From the NYT
...this month, Tariq Ramadan, a prominent Muslim academic, visited the United States for the first time in six years after Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton reversed a decision by the Bush administration, which had barred Mr. Ramadan from entering the country, initially citing the U.S.A. Patriot Act. Mrs. Clinton also cleared the way for another well-known Muslim professor, Adam Habib, who had been denied entry under similar circumstances. 
Some call him an Islamist in disguise and a master of deception, and others call him an Islamic Superstar.
In the 1990s, Western liberals, alarmed at the presence of Islamic fundamentalists in their midst, turned in desperation to Muslims whom they dubbed “reformers” or “modernizers.” They hoped that these figures would have a moderating influence on disaffected Muslim youths who refused to integrate into Western society. One such “reformer” is Tariq Ramadan, a Swiss-born academic. Ramadan has won the confidence of many in the West, including the British government, which asked him to serve on its task force for preventing Islamic extremism. But as Caroline Fourest shows in her superbly documented book, which first appeared in French in 2004, Ramadan is not a worthy figure.
But in the U.S.the superstar gets a spread in The New Yorker. It is an interesting piece by George Packer who sat on a panel and had the opportunity to ask Ramadan a couple of questions, but before his questions, here are some of Packer's observations:
Ramadan—slim, famously handsome, graying in his frizzy hair and trim beard, wearing his habitual suit with open-neck shirt—was introduced as a wrongly banned speaker, and received an ovation. His opening remarks, which he’d been scribbling backstage on a piece of paper next to a bust of George Washington, congratulated the U.S. for allowing him in, thanked the free-speech groups that had fought for his entry, criticized American foreign policy in passing, and then affirmed the existence of multiple identities within individuals, urging Muslims to stop worrying about integration in the West and instead focus on contributing to their new homes....
Once Ramadan sat down, and the panel and audience got involved, he became much sharper. Hearing him talk for an hour and a half, you realized what he is and isn’t. He is not a philosopher, or an original thinker. He has been cast in that role by recent historical crises and his own ambition—the role of someone whom large numbers of people turn to for insight on a vast range of issues, from the Islamic texts to globalization, from unemployment in France to women’s rights. 
What he has to say about most subjects is garden-variety European leftism. When questions of Islam and Muslims join the debate, his stance is that of a reconciler: he wants to make it possible for young Muslims to affirm their religious faith as an identity while fully participating as citizens of secular democracies. That’s his main project, an important one, and it’s where he is at his best: as a kind of preacher to confused, questing young Muslims who want to know how to live, where they fit in. And because American Muslims are not a large and disenfranchised and angry minority in this country, I don’t think this calling leaves him with very much to say to audiences here....
An American Tariq Ramadan would likelier be talking to groups of young blacks or Hispanics.
For more on Tariq Ramadan: The Ultimate Uber-Muslim: Bringing Euro-Islam to Life


Background and Related:
Obamas quiet outreach to muslims not so quiet

Monday, March 29, 2010

Explosions rock Moscow subway. Over 40 dead, so far..

I was going to post something else but this just came in and I have been away for a few hours. China Confidential has a great report and looks a bit into the not so distant past in regard to Russia's battle with terrorism and Islamic terrorists.


Explosions rock Moscow subway, terrorism suspected.

China Confidential, 1:30 AM UPDATE: AT LEAST 41 KILLED. TWO BLASTS CONFIRMED.

Death toll in explosion at Moscow's central Lubyanka metro station rises to 25--TASS, quoting Emergency Ministry spokeswoman Irina Andrianova.

The huge blast occurred at 7:50 AM on Monday, during rush hour, when thousands of passengers were packed onto trains.

Andrianova says the dead include 14 people who were in the train's second car where the blast occurred and 11 people who were waiting on the platform of the station.

A second explosion happened at the Park Kultury station, about 40 minutes later, Russian news agency Tass reported.

Suicide Bombings Suspected

Interfax says the blasts may have been caused by suicide bombers.

The headquarters of Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB), the successor to the Soviet-era KGB, is located just above the Lubyanka station.

Today's explosions follow the Islamist bombing of the Nevsky Express passenger train last November, which killed 27 people and injured 90.

As China Confidential reported in December, the bombing of the Nevsky, a Moscow-Saint Petersburg luxury train that is popular with businesspeople and tourists, raised fears of a resurgence of Islamist terrorist attacks in Moscow and other major cities.

Russia was hit hard by Islamist terrorism in the 1990s and the early years of this decade, but the violence has largely been confined to the predominantly Muslim North Caucasus region since 2004.

Sixty people were injured in an attack on the Nevsky Express in August 2007. Fifteen people were injured in the 2005 bombing of a train headed to Moscow from Chechnya, and a suicide attack in the Moscow metro killed 41 and injured approximately 120 in 2004.

Here is more from the NYT:
Twin Subway Blasts Kill at Least 20 in Moscow

By CLIFFORD J. LEVY


MOSCOW — Huge explosions during morning rush hour in two subway stations in central Moscow killed more than 20 people on Monday, officials said, raising fears of a renewal of terrorism here.

The causes of the blasts were not immediately clear, but the government said it suspected suicide bombers, Russian news agencies reported.

The subway system, one of the world’s most extensive, had been subjected to attacks related to the separatist war in Chechnya in the early part of the last decade.

Officials said the first explosion Monday occurred at 7:50 a.m. in the Lubyanka subway station, killing people both on the platform and aboard an incoming train. Numerous others were injured.

“The blast hit the second carriage of a metro train that stopped at Lubyanka,” Irina Andrianova, a spokeswoman for the emergency ministry, told Reuters.

About 40 minutes later, another explosion occurred in the second car of a train at the Park Kultury station, officials said. The number of casualties was not immediately known.

In September 2004, a suicide bomber killed at least 9 other people and wounded more than 50 outside the Rizhskaya subway. In February of that same year, a woman carrying a bomb destroyed another subway car, killing at least 41 people as the train moved between the Paveletskaya and the Avtozavodskaya stations at one of the busiest times of the day.

The Lubyanka station, where the first explosion occurred, takes its name from the infamous Lubyanka prison that also served as the former headquarters of the K.G.B., the Soviet-era secret police.

Cross Posted from Patriot's Corner