Posts Tagged ‘Terrorist’


Kamal Saleem – Why I Left Islam

February 17, 2010

Part 1 of 2

Part 2 of 2


Not A Trial, But A Terrorist Soapbox

November 24, 2009

Not A Trial, But A Terrorist Soapbox

IBD: 24 Nov. 2009

Justice: Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to try five 9/11 plotters by a civilian court in New York rather than a military tribunal at Gitmo is already paying dividends — for the terrorists.

The five terror suspects want to use their “not guilty” pleas as a chance to voice their hate-filled beliefs and grievances against the West. In short, we’re giving them a prime-time soapbox in the most important city on Earth from which to spout their hate and recruit new adherents to their murderous cause.

We know this because Scott Fenstermaker, the attorney for terrorist suspect Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, nephew of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, says his client plans to “explain what happened and why they did it.”

That is, they’ll admit to doing it even while pleading not guilty, just so they can propagandize on behalf of their cause. In doing so, they not only will torture the families of the 3,000 people murdered on 9/11 with their lack of remorse. They will also get to make the case for jihad to a lot of sick minds around the world.

As Fenstermaker put it, the five will give “their assessment of American foreign policy.” And, he adds helpfully: “Their assessment is negative.” No kidding.

So while the judge may well exclude all sorts of evidence from the trial for procedural reasons, we’ll no doubt be treated to the inflammatory rantings of the terrorists themselves.

Of all the actions of the U.S. Justice Department since its inception, this may be the worst. Holder’s decision to hold the trial within blocks of 9/11’s Ground Zero is a bizarre affront to New Yorkers, reopening old wounds and making them targets for future attacks.

Wasn’t it just last week that Holder appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee with reassurances the terrorists wouldn’t be able to use their trial for propaganda purposes?

“I’m not scared of what Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has to say at trial,” he said then, “and no one else needs to, either.”

Another question: Can a sitting attorney general really be so naive? On Monday, former Vice President Dick Cheney said it appears Holder is seeking a “show trial” for the terrorists — one the terrorists will exploit to their advantage.

“They’ll simply use it as a platform to argue their case — they don’t have a defense to speak of,” Cheney said. “It’ll be a place for them to stand up and spread the terrible ideology that they adhere to.”a


Shariah Takes Precedence over U.S. Constitution

September 4, 2009

Oak Lawn, Illinois – Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT), the international movement to re-establish an international Islamic state ­ or Caliphate – kicked off a new campaign to win American recruits Sunday afternoon in this Chicago suburb. Nearly 300 people packed the Grand Ballroom of the Hilton Hotel for its Khalifah Conference on “The Fall of Capitalism and the Rise of Islam” to listen to HT ideologues blame capitalism for World War I and World War II; the U.S. subprime mortgage meltdown; the current violence in Iraq and Afghanistan; world poverty and malnutrition and inner-city drug use.

A speaker identified as Abu Atallah even blamed capitalism for the late singer Michael Jackson’s decision “to shed his black skin.”

Hizb ut-Tahrir aims to restore the Caliphate that existed during the Ottoman Empire in Turkey. Turkish leader Kemal Ataturk abolished it in 1924 in an effort to create a secular, Europeanized state.

Security at the conference was very tight. Oak Lawn police maintained a checkpoint outside the Hilton, and local police and HT’s own security people had a substantial presence inside the hotel. In the ballroom where the conference took place, men and women were largely segregated, with men in the front and women in the back. This became a significant point of contention between HT supporters and several members of the audience who objected to this arrangement. At one point, an unidentified Hizb ut-Tahrir speaker became flustered over this line of questioning.

“Men and women,” he blurted out, must be kept separate “to prevent people from behaving like animals.”

A woman in the audience responded: “How does intermingling between men and women make you animals?” HT panelists didn’t have a persuasive answer, and soon adjourned that session.

The conference was sometimes poorly organized. There was no list of speakers, forcing reporters to sometimes guess at the spelling of speakers’ names. But HT certainly appeared to be serious about working for the larger goals of the conference: abolishing capitalism and imposing Caliphate rule over the world.

According to Hizb ut-Tahrir, the world’s social and economic problems will not be fixed until the world is governed by Shariah and the government controls all major industries. Lenders would no longer be able to charge interest, which one speaker decried as a “poisonous concept.” Charity, or zakat, was advertised as the way to alleviate “economic inequality.”

“Secular capitalism has made me devalue my skin” and “has kept my family in ghettos,” said one speaker, an African-American who went on to blame it for the fact that he smoked marijuana and his grandmother played the lottery. Capitalism, he added, is a form of economic “terrorism” and “causes us to be sent to mental hospitals.” Barack Obama’s presidency, he said, “is only a scheme or con” to trick people into thinking that things will get better under capitalism.

But time and again on Sunday, Hizb ut-Tahrir officials seemed to be playing slippery rhetorical games of their own – particularly when it came to the behavior of despotic Muslim regimes and terrorists. When a few skeptical audience members pressed speakers over the fact that Islamic governments in Iran and Saudi Arabia are despotic, conference speakers claimed those weren’t “authentic” Muslim governments and that the CIA (and by implication, the capitalist U.S. government) was to blame for the problems in those countries. In an interview with WBBM-TV in Chicago, HT deputy spokesman Mohammad Malkawi refused to specifically condemn Al Qaida and the Taliban.

Hizb ut-Tahrir has not been designated a terrorist group by the U.S. government and it insists it is only interested in instituting radical change by nonviolent means. But HT’s alumni include 9/ll mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the late Iraqi terrorist leader Abu Musab Zarqawi and would-be Hamas suicide bombers, and the group’s pro-jihadist rhetoric has led critics to label it a “conveyor belt for terrorists.”

One Muslim American group issued a statement in advance of the conference condemning Hizb ut-Tahrir’s radical ideology and challenging others to follow suit.

“Hizb ut-Tahrir preaches an ideology that calls for the destruction of the principles that America is founded on,” said Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American-Islamic Forum for Democracy. “While their words are protected by our First Amendment, their actions and movement must not be allowed to take hold. The silence of American Islamist organizations like [the Council on American-Islamic Relations] CAIR and [the Islamic Society of North America] ISNA in condemning the ideologies of Hizb ut-Tahrir and their agenda of insurgency in America speaks volumes to their own, albeit, more camouflaged Islamist agenda.”

HT’s efforts to rehabilitate its image won’t be helped by the menacing tone on display Sunday. One late-afternoon panelist suggested that modern industrial powers could fall to Muslims the way Mecca fell to Mohammed nearly 1,400 years ago.

A speaker identified by conference organizers as Imam Jaleel Abdul Adil said that “if they offer us the sun, or the moon, or a nice raise, or a passport, or a house in the suburbs or even a place to pray at the job, on the condition that we stop calling for Islam as a complete way of life – we should never do that, ever do that – unless and until Islam becomes victorious or we die in the attempt.” (To see the clip, click here.)

Later, the following dialogue ensued between the imam and a member of the audience over whether Shariah or the Constitution should be the supreme law of the land in the United States (click here to see the clip):

Audience member: “Would you get rid of the Constitution for Shariah, yes or no?”

Imam: “Over the Muslim world? Yes, it would be gone.”

Audience Member: And so if the United States was a Muslim world, the Constitution would be gone?”

Imam: “If the United States was in the Muslim world, the Muslims who are here would be calling and happy to see the Shariah applied, yes we would.”

Audience Member: “And the Constitution gone. That’s all.”

Imam: “Yes, as Muslims they would be long gone.”

While Hizb ut-Tahrir’s controversial message attracted demonstrators and some media attention, the group at least is open about its ambitions. It not only is determined to destroy capitalism — it would shred the United States Constitution as well in favor of Shariah law.


Cartoon: Interrogation Investigation

September 3, 2009


1 Sept. 09 – M. Ramirez


Guantanamo Bay Update

September 2, 2009

Guantanamo Bay Update – Another Terrorist Freed By President Obama

Dear Military Families United Member and Supporter,

Sign Our Don’t Free Terrorists Petition

As you read in your morning paper, another detainee was freed yesterday and released in Afghanistan. Mohammed Jawad, an al Qaeda operative, was arrested by Afghan police in December 2002 for throwing a grenade into a vehicle containing two US troops and an Afghan interpreter. His actions wounded three people and today Jawad is free in the same country that our brave troops are fighting in right now.
Military Families United has been at the forefront of this issue and will continue to relentlessly fight to ensure that the most effective facilities are used to hold these dangerous terrorists; right now that facility is Guantanamo Bay. Below are some news articles that we wanted to share with you concerning Mohammed Jawad.
To read MFU’s statement on Mohammed Jawad click here.
Obama Administration Releases Gitmo Detainee Mohammed Jawad
ABC News
Former Guantanamo Bay detainee Mohammed Jawad is in Afghanistan and will be released into his family’s custody today.
Kirk Lippold, former USS Cole Commander and a senior fellow at Military Families United, decried that, “in a what has become a sadly familiar pattern of decisions, the Obama Administration has released without trial Mohammed Jawad, a terrorist who attacked and wounded two U.S. soldiers and an Afghan citizen.” Lippold called the release “just the latest example of dangerous decisions made by the Administration aimed at keeping a reckless campaign promise.”
Read More
Guantanamo Detainee Released to Afghanistan
Fox News
The Obama administration reportedly has released a prisoner from the Guantanamo Bay detention camp accused of attacking U.S. troops in Afghanistan.
Kirk Lippold, former USS Cole commander and fellow at Military Families United, criticized the decision in a statement Monday, calling it part of a “sadly familiar pattern.”
“No coherent policy in the war on terror. No comprehensive plan in place to deal with the future of Guantanamo Bay detainees. No accountability for terrorists who harm our brave fighting forces,” he said.
Read More
Guantánamo Detainee Released
New York Times
The prisoner, Mohammed Jawad, who is now about 21, was flown to Kabul, the Afghan capital, in the afternoon and was released to family members late in the evening.
Mr. Jawad was arrested in Kabul in December 2002 and accused of tossing a grenade at an unmarked vehicle in an attack that wounded two American soldiers and their interpreter. The Afghan police delivered him into American custody, and about a month later he was sent to Guantánamo Bay.
Read More



July 14, 2009

Remember Bermuda?



Great Local Article – Torturing Terrorists…What About Abortion?

June 15, 2009

Other voices: If torturing terrorists is so bad, what about unborn babies?

by Judy Bloss | Ann Arbor News

Monday June 08, 2009, 9:50 AM

We are hearing a great deal from our president lately about our values; about loss of our “moral bearings” … how we must stop violating “our ideals and our values.” We must, according to our president, “stick to who we are” in order to “restore our image in the world.”

Perhaps it is time to ask ourselves: “Who are we?” What exactly is it we are “sticking to”? We know that the president believes that many procedures ranging in severity up to and including waterboarding constitute “torture” and not simply “enhanced interrogation techniques” even when applied only to three individuals who have been determined to be:

1. Senior members of Al-Quaida or an associated group such as Jemmah Islamiyyah, Egyptian Islamic Jihad, etc.

2. Individuals who have knowledge of imminent terrorist threats against the U.S. or our allies.

3. Individuals who have had direct involvement in planning or preparing such terrorist actions.

4. Individuals who if released constitute a clear and continuing threat to the U.S. or its allies.

Techniques that are deemed by the president to constitute “torture” include:

1. Dietary manipulation (a nutritionally adequate but incredibly boring diet).

2. Nudity.

3. Attention grasp. (Frightening the prisoner by grabbing the lapels of his shirt and pulling him to the interrogator).

4. Facial slap (an insult slap, very carefully defined as to where the slap must be administered and what position the fingers must be in, etc.)

Well perhaps, you get the idea. These techniques become somewhat more severe in numbers 5-12 where twelve is sleep deprivation. The most severe technique unquestionably is waterboarding. Please “google” the “Torture Memos” and read them for yourselves. I did. Notice, please, all the safeguards that are spelled out in great detail. And observe as well that the requirement that the enhanced interrogation techniques have “no lasting effect” has been met.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind behind the deaths of 3,000 innocent people on 9/11; the man who openly bragged about beheading Daniel Pearl with a butcher knife; the man who answered routine interrogation methods about further attacks with the cryptic remark: “Soon you will see” is alive and well. So are Abu Zubaydah, co-conspirator with KSM on the 9/11 attacks and Director of Al-Quaida terrorist training camps and Hambali, the mastermind behind the Bali bombings that killed 202 civilians and maimed many more.

Now let us compare these methods of “torture” that arguably saved thousands of American lives with the current state of American law and practice regarding unborn Americans. Mr. President, you have stated unequivocally: “We do not torture”. Indeed! The fact is, we are a people who have legitimized by court decision, executive order and with taxpayer funding, the most barbaric, brutal forms of death imaginable perpetrated on the tiniest, most vulnerable human beings at our mercy.

While you, Mr. President, served in the Illinois State Senate, you called a fully born baby a “fetus.” You often say that “words matter” and they certainly do. Could it be that you intentionally chose that particular word in order to justify leaving that fully-born baby on the counter of the hospital utility room to die? After all “fetuses” are people we can abort, but “babies” are another matter. Is this torture? If not, why not?

Or consider bathing the fetus in a salt solution that burns the skin and causes the baby to die from ingesting the solution. Is this torture? If not, why not?

Or, the method known as partial-birth abortion, where the doctor grabs the foot of the baby, pulls it from the womb, and when the head is lodged in the cervix, inserts curved Metzenbaum scisssors into the baby’s skull, opens the blades to enlarge the wound, sticks a powerful suction cannula into the opening, and sucks out the baby’s “skull contents.” Is this torture? If not, why not?

Maybe Americans would be in favor of getting rid of these “late-term abortions.” First and second trimester abortions are probably much more humane. But…are they?

Early second trimester abortions (beyond 13 weeks) are often done by a procedure in which the “doctor” twists off first one limb, then another, and then the third and fourth. The baby may well be alive not only after the first arm is removed, but also after succeeding limbs are removed. Is this torture? If not, why not?

Well then let us only do first trimester abortions. The “doctor” just inserts a cannula with very powerful suction, and shreds the baby, in the womb. Have you ever seen an ultrasound of a tiny human being trying to escape from the suction? I have. The baby looked as if he was trying to put his thumb in his mouth…for comfort…I cried. Wouldn’t you?

Is this torture? If not, why not?

To me, it seems crystal clear that we believe in torturing and killing unborn American babies, while “empathizing” with the most brutal Islamist terrorists. Is this “who we are”? If it is, do we really want to “stick to” who we are?

Judy Bloss is a resident of Ypsilanti.