The Ongoing Denial of Reality

by Isi Leibler

Were we living in a sane world, the events of the past few weeks, culminating with WikiLeaks, should have confirmed the veracity of our approach to the peace process. But, alas, much of the liberal global media has once again displayed its penchant for evading realities which are out of synch with their agenda.

The leaked documents provide further irrefutable evidence that Arab leaders speak with forked tongues when they publicly attack Israel's attitude while privately urging the Americans to engage in military action to prevent the Iranians - whom they loathe - from becoming a nuclear power. In what can only be described as surrealistic, Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah - from whence the principal global funding for al-Qaida and other terrorist groups emanates - called on the US "to cut off the head of the snake," Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Muhammad bin Zayed warned the Americans that "[Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad is Hitler" and virtually every Arab leader conveyed similar frenzied messages to the US.

In this context, the hypocrisy and cynical manipulation of the Israelis by President Barack Obama was simply unconscionable. We are now aware that he was knowingly lying when he said Israel must make further unilateral concessions to the Palestinians as a precondition to persuading the Arab states to support sanctions or endorse military action against Iran.

The new revelations also expose the absurdity of foreign affairs analysts and supporters of Obama's Middle East policies (including Obama's Jewish acolytes like J Street) who repeatedly claim that only the Israelis and the "neocon cabal" favor a military option against Iran.

WikiLeaks also disclosed that despite warnings from Arab leaders that Syria could not be persuaded to weaken its links with Iran, the US continued trying to appease President Basher Assad. Despite denials, the Americans were also aware that the Syrians were collaborating with the Iranians to provide lethal weapons to Hizbullah, even using ambulances to transport weapons to Lebanon.

At the same time, in concert with other Americans allies, Israel was stunned by the feeble US responses to the unprovoked aggression by North Korea, a rogue state with which the US had been "engaging" for some time. It conveyed a chilling lesson concerning the reliability of the US as an ally. The South Koreans were shocked that the only responses from their American patron were expressions of concern, commendations for their "restraint" and appeals to the Chinese to deter their megalomaniacal ally, which we now also know was providing missiles to the Iranians.

FOR AN additional dose of reality, the impotence of our "moderate" peace partner Mahmoud Abbas was once again exposed as he endorsed resolutions carried at the two-day Fatah Revolutionary Council in Ramallah. Opening with a tribute to Amin al-Hindi, orchestrator of the Munich Olympics massacre, the council adamantly resolved that there would be no compromises with the Israelis, refused to recognize "the so-called Jewish state," reiterated the nonnegotiable right of return for Arabs - a recipe for Israel's demise - and rejected any suggestion of territorial swaps, insisting that all Jews living over the 1949 armistice lines must be expelled.

A few days later, the PA Ministry of Information published a "study" resurrecting Yasser Arafat's claim that the Temple Mount and Western Wall had no relationship to Jews, and claiming that contrary to "the Zionist occupation," the area was owned by the Wakf. This was so bizarre that eight days later, in one of its rare reprimands of the PA, even the US condemned the study.

In yet another illustration of the Alice-in-Wonderland environment in which the farcical peace process is being orchestrated, an opinion poll held in the area under PA jurisdiction disclosed that even "moderate" Palestinians remain committed to seeing the Jews pushed into the sea, and would regard an independent Arab state merely as a stepping stone on the way to "liberating" the entire country. The majority also foresee an inevitable return to "armed struggle."

Despite this, Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton continue to repeat the mindless mantra of a "vision" of two states living peacefully side by side.

While most Israelis have no desire to rule over Arabs and would settle for a two-state solution tomorrow, with all this evidence staring us in the face, must we continue this idiotic charade based on the premise that we are negotiating with a genuine "peace partner"?

SOME CRITICS argue that if virtually the entire world is against us, we should be questioning our approach rather than accusing everyone else of behaving inappropriately.

Many of us would be tempted to respond that what we are now undergoing is merely an extension of what the Jewish people have long endured with the Jewish state today assuming the role of surrogate for Jew hatred. On a global level, the UN Human Rights Council and, to a large extent, the entire UN have been transformed into a global arena for promoting pogroms against Israel. Human-rights activists unite with Islamic anti-Semites and the most loathsome elements in society in seeking to bring about its downfall.

But setting emotions aside, the recent revelations should encourage our prime minister to stand firm against those abusing diplomacy to pressure us into making further unilateral concessions.

Time after time, our acts of goodwill have rebounded against us. There is, of course, a critical need to avoid a total breakdown with the US. Perhaps Binyamin Netanyahu could take a cue from former prime ministers - Yitzhak Rabin no less than Menachem Begin - who successfully resisted American pressure which they felt endangered the long-term security of the nation. One factor Netanyahu can consider is that the vast majority of Americans would strongly disapprove of any actions by the Obama administration which they believed would endanger Israel.

Netanyahu should also cease making effusive "diplomatic" statements praising the impotent and duplicitous Abbas as a man of peace; they only confuse friends of Israel. The only difference between the goals of the PA and Hamas is strategic; both entities view the dissolution of Jewish sovereignty as their goal. Now is a time for us to cease paying false tribute to intransigent Arab leaders and concentrate on reality by directing attention to the culture of death which, alas, dominates most levels of Palestinian life.

Isi Leibler

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

UN Report: US Can Quickly Become a Vast Energy Power and Exporter of Cheap Energy

by Ed Lasky

For the past year or so I have been writing about the vast wealth America has beneath our feet in the form of shale gas. We have huge amounts trapped in shale rock that can be liberated by blasting it open via a process called hydraulic fractioning ("fracking"). Wells are drilled horizontally miles underground and then a stream of water, sand, and a minor amount of chemicals fracture the rock and release the gas. All this happens far below the surface and the water tables. Natural gas is relatively clean-burning, is on-shore, and is ours.

Now comes a report from the UN (of all places) that asserts America can be on the verge of energy independence and can become one of the world's great exporters of energy because of our shale gas and oil reserves. Natural gas is the one commodity that has been plummeting in price and delivering an economic jolt of its own for consumers more accustomed to higher energy prices.

From the Washington Examiner that picked up a report from Canada's Globe and Mail :

Toronto's Globe & Mail quotes a UN report that includes this observation: "Within a decade or so, North America will almost certainly emerge as the world's biggest supplier - and exporter - of reasonably cheap energy."

How can that be? As The New York Times reported last month, it's because the U.S. is incredibly rich with natural gas and oil shale deposits that can be reached affordably using hydraulic fracturing, the injection of liquids into rock formations thousands of feet below the drinking water table.

The injections force the gas or oil into recoverable areas, thus opening up millions of new barrels of oil and trillions of feet of natural gas for production here in America.

These new resources are having a profound impact on the U.S. energy situation and it's happening right now, not off in some projected future, as is the case with the arrival of alternative energy resources like solar, wind, and biomass.

Intrigued? Here's more detail from the Globe & Mail:

"With rising production from shale fields, the U.S. surpassed Russia last year to become the world's largest supplier of natural gas.

"Shale now accounts for 10 per cent of the country's natural gas production - up from 2 per cent in 1990. Chesapeake's production from its next Texas project, expected by the end of 2012, will by itself supply the energy equivalent of 500,000 barrels of oil a day.

"For new oil, the U.S. has the huge Green River play that overlaps Colorado and Utah, one of the largest shale oil fields in the world. The EIA reports that the country's proven reserves of crude rose last year by 9 per cent to 22.3 billion barrels.

"For natural gas, the U.S. has the four largest fields in the world: the Haynesville field in Louisiana (with production up by 77 per cent in 2009); the Fayetteville field in Arkansas and the Marcellus field in Pennsylvania (both with production up by 50 per cent); and the Barnett field in Texas and Oklahoma (with production up by double-digit increases).

"The EIA reports that proven U.S. reserves of natural gas increased last year by 11 per cent to 284 trillion cubic feet - the highest level since 1971."

It is all there for the taking. But Democrats threaten to plug all those holes warming our homes and saving us money. Meanwhile, oil prices are going through the roof -- helped along by the Obama administration's efforts to stop oil drilling off-shore, take land out of commission for exploring, and impose new rules and regulations.

Not only do they overtly and covertly favor green schemes that try to kill carbon in all forms, they have tried to enact one roadblock after another to stop us from tapping our shale gas and oil reserves (see, for example, my columns "Cheap Natural Gas and Its Democratic Enemies," a follow-up to my previous column Cheap Natural Gas and Its Enemies).

Who would benefit from stopping this energy revolution in its tracks? George Soros, environmentalists, green schemers that need government help (subsidies, investments, mandates) to make their ventures fly -- and who reward Democrats with donations, Russia, Hugo Chavez, Arab oil powers, terrorists, and other assorted international bad actors. The Russian government recently expressed concern regarding their international power because America was developing our shale gas resources.

Those are the groups Democrats help when they curtail our own development of this treasure beneath our feet. Nice company to keep, huh?

Ed Lasky

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

The New START Treaty

by Taylor Dinerman

The Cold War might over, but until the Obama administration took power, almost no one in Washington took seriously the idea that the US should deliberately make itself more vulnerable to reassure the rest of the world of our good intentions.

Reducing the number of deployed delivery systems in the US arsenal to 700 at a time when when emerging nuclear powers are building new warheads and new missiles at an increasing pace would seem imprudent to say the least. The US still has solemn obligations to provide a nuclear deterrent for the NATO alliance and for Japan and South Korea. Under the ability of the US to credibly protect its allies will be even less credible than it is with today's limited and unmodernized nuclear force.

The New START Treaty with its dramatic reduction is the number of "deployed'"warheads cuts the US overall nuclear force to 1550, on 700 deployed delivery vehicles; and a total of "800 deployed and non deployed delivery vehicles." This category of non-deployed delivery vehicles is an [sic] cunning way of touching on the issue of reloadable silos, and, with the deployment of Russia's land mobile "Topal" missile, reloadable mobile launchers as well.

This Treaty gives the Russians a serious warfighting advantage: they will have land-mobile missiles -- possibly a larger number than we know about -- while the US has nothing comparable.

The Treaty's language on Missile Defense is politically and legally ambiguous, certainly there is enough substance in the agreement for a smart lawyer to tie any future administration up in knots if it wanted to substantially increase America's National Missile Defense system. It is interesting to see that Vice President Biden, claiming in the Wall Street Journal, that the recent agreement by NATO nations to protect Europe from ballistic missile attacks somehow justifies the agreement.: this is the same agreement that the Russians interpret as limiting the ability of America to defend its own homeland.

Even if the Missile Defense issue were somehow resolved, the cut in overall US nuclear firepower in an age when the weapons, missiles and bombers that can carry them are proliferating faster than ever before, seems imprudent, to say the least.. North Korea and Iran are forging ahead with their nuclear programs. All over the Middle East, nations such as Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia and perhaps others are starting programs that look a lot like the beginnings of nuclear weapons programs. In Latin America Venezuela clearly seems to be embarking on a similar path.

In a world where most nuclear powers, including China, are increasing the size of the arsenals, why should the US follow the path of our West European allies France and Britain, and cut ours to the bone? A bilateral Russia-US Arms Control Treaty is as crucial as ever to today's geostrategic environment.

Within days of the collapse of the Soviet Union in December 1991, American liberals had began to agitate for major cuts in the defense budget, claiming that all of the major weapons and other systems then in development were 'relics of the Cold War' and thus belonged on the ash heap of history. Thankfully, neither the George H. W. Bush administration nor, for the most part, the Clinton administration paid much attention, except rhetorically, to these calls for unilateral disarmament. What made the Cold War unique in the history of conflicts was not the proxy wars in places like Korea, Vietnam, Nicaragua, Angola and elsewhere; nor the hair-trigger stand-off along the border between East and West Germany; nor the Arms Race; nor the massive propaganda war. The only truly original part of the Cold War was the central role played by "Arms Control" and Disarmament.

Previously these ideas had been used either as minor tools of political warfare. An early example was when Czarist Russia tried to use Disarmament proposals to improve its military position vis a vis Imperial Germany, in the years before 1914. In the 1920s and 1930s, the various naval arms-limitation pacts between the US Britain, Japan and, later, between Britain and Nazi Germany, were sometimes touted as harbingers of universal peace. The Washington Naval Treaty of 1920-1921 fixed the size of the fleets of the US, Britain and Japan at a ratio of 5, 5, 3. -- which gave Japan local superiority in the pacific over either the US or Britain. The Washington Treaty was regarded by extreme Japanese militarists as a symbol of national inferiority, which, for many Japanese, undermined the legitimacy of the treaty and of the civilian government that signed it.

During the Cold War, however, disarmament talks and Arms Control negotiations were the very essence of superpower diplomacy. Everything else, such as economic agreements, human rights, wars in the Third World, were seen by most observers as insignificant compared to the all-important drama surrounding the talks about the numbers, ranges, types, and characteristics of both sides' nuclear weapons.

Given the nature of atomic weaponry, this attitude may be understandable. From 1945 until 1991, however, the USSR successfully pushed a propaganda narrative that gave these weapons a special status, and blamed America for the terrible destructiveness that people feared and loathed.This campaign gained its greatest successes in the 1970s under Nixon, Ford and Carter, when the US signed onto a series of treaties, including SALT (Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty) and the ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile) treaty , that put Washington at a significant disadvantage. The ABM Treaty killed America's attempt to defend itself against Soviet nuclear missiles . The SALT agreements gave the Soviets an effective monopoly on heavy missiles, and also ignored the fact that their missile silos were designed to be reloaded= -- a significant nuclear warfighting advantage.

These agreements were made at a time when most leaders in the West were convinced that America was in terminal decline and that it was time to get the best deal possible from the Soviets -- as epitomized by President Jimmy Carter's discussion of America's "inordinate fear of Communism."

After Ronald Reagan became President in 1981. things changed. Reagan refused to sign any deal he thought put the US at a disadvantage. The Soviets and their allies responded with a gigantic political offensive that included everything from Nuclear Freeze proposals and demands for the withdrawal of US nuclear weapons from Europe, to well organized street protests and the all-out mobilization of the academic community against his military build-up. It was an impressive display of transnational political power, but it failed.

The failure of this effort to deflect President Reagan from his basic Cold War strategy, "We win, they lose," discredited the American disarmament lobby for roughly two decades. it was not until 2008 and the candidacy of Barack Obama, that the pre-1980 Arms Control concepts regained their standing in the American political arena.

While there are lots of good, solid technical reasons to object to this treaty, its incompatibility with America's role as a global superpower makes its rejection a "no brainer."

Taylor Dinerman

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Iran Placing Medium-Range Missiles in Venezuela; Can Reach the U.S.

by Anna Mahjar-Barducci

Iran is planning to place medium-range missiles on Venezuelan soil, based on western information sources[1], according to an article in the German daily, Die Welt, of November 25, 2010. According to the article, an agreement between the two countries was signed during the last visit o Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez to Tehran on October19, 2010. The previously undisclosed contract provides for the establishment of a jointly operated military base in Venezuela, and the joint development of ground-to-ground missiles.

At a moment when NATO members found an agreement, in the recent Lisbon summit (19-20 November 2010), to develop a Missile Defence capability to protect NATO's populations and territories in Europe against ballistic missile attacks from the East (namely, Iran), Iran's counter-move consists in establishing a strategic base in the South American continent - in the United States's soft underbelly.

According to Die Welt, Venezuela has agreed to allow Iran to establish a military base manned by Iranian missile officers, soldiers of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and Venezuelan missile officers. In addition, Iran has given permission for the missiles to be used in case of an "emergency". In return, the agreement states that Venezuela can use these facilities for "national needs" – radically increasing the threat to neighbors like Colombia. The German daily claims that according to the agreement, Iranian Shahab 3 (range 1300-1500 km), Scud-B (285-330 km) and Scud-C (300, 500 and 700 km) will be deployed in the proposed base. It says that Iran also pledged to help Venezuela in rocket technology expertise, including intensive training of officers

Venezuela has also become the country through which Iran intends to bypass UN sanctions. Following a new round of UN sanctions against the Islamic Republic, for example, Russia decided not to sell five battalions of S-300PMU-1 air defence systems to Iran. These weapons, along with a number of other weapons, were part of a deal, signed in 2007, worth $800 million. Now that these weapons cannot be delivered to Iran, Russia is looking for new customers; according to the Russian press agency Novosti[2], it found one: Venezuela.

Novosti reports the words of Igor Korotchenko, head of a Moscow-based think tank on international arms trade, saying that if the S-300 deal with Venezuela goes through, Caracas should pay cash for the missiles, rather than take another loan from Russia. "The S-300 is a very good product and Venezuela should pay the full amount in cash, as the country's budget has enough funds to cover the deal ," Korotchenko said. Moscow has already provided Caracas with several loans to buy Russian-made weaponry, including a recent $2.2-mln loan on the purchase of 92 T-72M1M tanks, the Smerch multiple-launch rocket systems and other military equipment.

If Iran, therefore, cannot get the S-300 missiles directly from Russia, it can still have them through its proxy, Venezuela, and deploy them against its staunchest enemy, the U.S..

But that is not all. According to Reuters, Iran has developed a version of the Russian S-300 missile and will test-fire it soon, as declared by the official news agency IRNA, two months after Moscow cancelled the delivery to comply with United Nations sanctions[3]. Iran, in fact, has its own capabilities for constructing missiles that could carry atomic warheads. According to a study recently released by the International Institute of Strategic Studies in London, Iran is presently aiming to perfect the already existing solid-fuel, medium-range missile that can carry a nuke to hit regional targets, such as Israel[4]. If a missile base can be opened in Venezuela, many US cities will be able to be reached from there even with short-medium range missiles.

The situation that is unfolding in Venezuela has some resemblance to the Cuba crisis of 1962. At that time, Cuba was acting on behalf of the USSR; now Venezuela is acting on behalf of Iran. At present, the geopolitical situation is very different: the world is no longer ruled by two superpowers; new nations, often with questionable leaders and the ambition of acquiring global status, are appearing on the international scene. Their danger to the free world will be greater if the process of nuclear proliferation is not stopped. Among the nations that aspire to become world powers, Iran has certainly the best capabilities of posing a challenge to the West.

Back in the [sic] 1962, thanks to the stern stance adopted by the then Kennedy administration, the crisis was defused

Nowadays, however, we do not see the same firmness from the present administration. On the contrary, we see a lax attitude, both in language and in deeds, that results in extending hands when our adversaries have no intention of shaking hands with us. Iran is soon going to have a nuclear weapon, and there are no signs that UN sanctions will in any way deter the Ayatollah's regime from completing its nuclear program. We know that Iran already has missiles that can carry an atomic warhead over Israel and over the Arabian Peninsula. Now we learn that Iran is planning to build a missile base close to the US borders. How longer do we have to wait before the Obama administration begins to understand threats?

[1] http://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article11219574/Iran-plant-Bau-einer-Raketenstellung-in-Venezuela.html
[2] http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20101015/160963585.html
[3] http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3982738,00.html
[4] http://www.iiss.org/whats-new/iiss-in-the-press/november-2010/iran-fortifies-its-arsenal-with-the-aid-of-north-korea/

Anna Mahjar-Barducci

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Baltimore Terror Plot Disrupted

by IPT News

Federal officials arrested a Maryland man Wednesday and charged him with plotting to blow up an Army recruiting center near Baltimore, saying the 21-year-old Muslim convert wanted to kill as many U.S. soldiers as possible, records show.

Antonio Martinez, who also goes by Muhammed Hussain, said, "we gonna hit 'em where it hurts…we are gonna go…to their stations, to their bases, to everywhere…to everywhere a soldier is," according to the criminal complaint filed in federal court in Baltimore. "Every soldier that we see in uniform will be killed on the spot, Insha' Allah." Little did Martinez know that his co-conspirator was actually an informant working with the FBI and that his plans were about to be disrupted.

After weeks of investigating, officials arrested Martinez while he attempted to detonate what he believed to be a car bomb at the Armed Forces Career Center in the 5400 block of Baltimore National Pike. Martinez is a U.S. national from Nicaragua and recent convert to Islam. According to his public profile on Facebook, "I'm just a yung brotha from the wrong side of the tracks who embraced Islam."

Charged in court documents with attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction, and attempted murder of federal employees, the case resembles other disrupted terrorist plots over the past three months. The similarities include the continued use of the Internet to radicalize Americans; the expanding influence of imams such as Anwar al-Awlaki and Omar Bakri Muhammad; and the FBI's sustained reliance upon informants and undercover operations to disrupt domestic terror plots.

According to law enforcement officials, Martinez came to the attention of the FBI in September of this year. That month, he posted a message to his Facebook account warning "the sword is cummin the reign of oppression is about 2 cease." After weeks of attempting to recruit others to join in his jihad—three of whom declined to participate—Martinez met with an FBI informant. In numerous conversations with the informant, Martinez expressed a desire to travel to Pakistan and Afghanistan and become a mujahideen because "all he thinks about is jihad."

Since he did not have the money to go overseas to fight, Martinez announced he would "make a mujahideen here, Insha' Allah, and we gonna fight against them…until they stop the oppression…fight the disbelievers until there is no more oppression and the religion is only for Allah…" The informant introduced Martinez to an FBI officer posing as an "Afghan" who would help the two construct a bomb for an attack in Maryland. "Jihad is not only in Afghanistan or Pakistan, but also in the United States," Martinez explained.

As with the case in Portland, Ore., Martinez was offered multiple opportunities to back out of the plot and refused. "I don't want to talk about this no more, man. I just wanna do it…each and every Muslim in this country…knows that America is at war with Islam and they're not doing anything about it…no one is stepping up to do anything….We have to be the ones to pull that trigger. Send that message."

On Dec. 8, Martinez met with the informant and the undercover FBI officer where they "armed" a bomb in the back of an SUV. Martinez then drove the bomb to the recruitment station and parked it in front of the building. He then got into the undercover officer's car and drove a safe distance, at which point Martinez attempted to detonate the bomb. He was immediately placed under arrest.

Information revealed by prosecutors shows that Martinez was radicalized in a way that is becoming more and more common—through the Internet. On Nov. 3, Martinez reportedly spent time on www.RevolutionMuslim.com, a site which the Investigative Project on Terrorism reported, has take a more operational role in the global jihad. "RM functions as one of the most visible English-language websites and organization's promoting al-Qaida's call to jihad," the IPT explained at the time. "In addition to promoting the literature and videos of individuals like senior terrorist ideologue Anwar al-Awlaki, RM leaders have personally participated in all levels of the radicalization process, from identifying targets to providing advice about bombings."

The day after that IPT report, Martinez was observed watching videos of bin Laden lecturers, martyrdom videos, and jihadi training films on the website.

Martinez also reportedly followed the teachings of Anwar al-Awlaki and Omar Bakri Muhammad, two preachers who have consistently called for attacks on Americans.

Omar Bakri Muhammad, a Muslim Brotherhood member who immigrated to England from Syria, founded Hizb-ut-Tahrir in England, and also started the banned extremist organization al-Muhajiroun. Bakri, was recently convicted in absentia by a Lebanese court for forming a terrorist group. Muhammad has said "the problem with Britain is that its law is not the law sent down by Allah." He has also justified violence against the United States, by stating, "When American bombs Sudan, Somalia, and Iraq, and sows destruction, the Muslims have the right to retaliate."

Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen now living in hiding in Yemen, is serving as an operational commander of al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). Since arriving in Yemen in 2004 al-Awlaki has been involved in—planning, recruiting, and sanctioning—dozens of attacks against the United States. "He has involved himself in every aspect of the supply chain of terrorism—fundraising for terrorist groups, recruiting and training operatives, and planning and ordering attacks on innocents," the U.S. government explained in designating him. IPT News has reported many of Anwar al-Awlaki's terrorist connections, linking him to the Fort Hood massacre, the Christmas Day bomb plot, and the failed Times Square attack.

"I love Sheikh Anwar al-Awlaki for the sake of Allah," Martinez posted to Facebook on Oct. 17. "A real insperation [sic] for the Ummah, I don't care if he is on the terrorist list! May Allah give him Kire ameen."

Describing the investigation and the potential danger posed by Martinez, U.S. Attorney Rod J. Rosenstein explained, "Undercover investigations are pursued only when supervisory law enforcement agents and prosecutors conclude that there is a serious risk that cannot be ignored." In fact, while this critical law enforcement tool is frequently railed on by Islamist organizations as entrapment, as a recent report by the IPT demonstrated "undercover agents and informants are a staple in everyday law enforcement."

Mohamed Osman Mohamud, the Somali-youth who attempted to set off a car bomb at Portland's tree Christmas tree lighting, pushed buttons on a cell phone in an attempt to detonate a bomb and kill thousands of civilians in Oregon. Like Martinez, Mohamud was unaware that individuals he was working with were actually FBI agents monitoring his actions who ensured that the bomb would not work. Mohamud attracted law enforcement attention in 2009 when he exchanged emails with an associate in Pakistan, hoping to travel there to prepare for violent jihad. When Mohamud's travel plans didn't pan out, the government sent in undercover agents, whose interactions with Mohamud ended in the Somali teen's attempted attack and subsequent arrest over Thanksgiving weekend.

Similarly, Farooque Ahmed, the Virginia man arrested in connection with a plot to attack the Washington, D.C., subway system, was brought down through the use of undercover officers. Ahmed, a native of Pakistan who is now a U.S. citizen, first came to the FBI's attention in January when he and an unnamed associate "were inquiring about making contact with a terrorist organization in order to participate in jihad by traveling overseas to fight coalition forces in Afghanistan and/or Pakistan," FBI agent Charles Dayoub said in court documents.

A trial date for Martinez has not yet been set. He faces up to life in prison if convicted of the charges against him.

IPT News

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

European MPs: Giving Up Gaza was a Mistake

by Maayana Miskin

Dozens of senior parliamentarians from across Europe visited the Gush Katif Museum in Jerusalem during a trip to Israel. They were joined by Minister Ayoub Kara (Likud), and all together, lit Chanukah candles as a gesture of solidarity with the Jewish people.

As they toured the museum, the MPs remarked that Israel's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, termed the “Disengagement,” had been a mistake. The one-sided move, which followed years of terrorist attacks, was seen by radical Islamists as a victory for their ideology, they said.

Israeli Jews should build throughout the land, particularly in Judea and Samaria, said Rene Stadtkewitz, Chairman of Germany's Freedom Party. Conceding land does not bring peace, but rather, strengthens terrorists, he said.

The MPs, who recently toured Judea and Samaria, noted that much of Israel is visible from the hills of Judea and Samaria, making a withdrawal from the region particularly dangerous.

Kara called on Israel to build close relationships with the Mps, members of Europe's “new Right” that supports Israel and worries about extremist Islam. The “new Right” has shared interests with the Jewish people and the state of Israel, he said.

Israel withdrew from Gaza, and forcibly removed thousands of Israeli Jews from their homes in the region, despite having received nothing in return from the Palestinian Authority. After the withdrawal Gaza terrorists increased their rocket and mortar shell attacks on southern Israel, with violence escalating until the Cast Lead counterterror operation of early 2009, which dramatically reduced the frequency of Gaza attacks.

The candles the MPs lit were held by a special menorah made of the spent casings of mortar shells that Gaza terrorists had fired at Israelis living in Gush Katif. The menorah was created by Gideon Rivlin, a Gush Katif resident and father of five who was later murdered in a terrorist attack.

Maayana Miskin

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Nazareth Teens Arrested for Attempt to Spread Carmel Fire

by Maayana Miskin

Two Israeli-Arab teenagers were arrested for attempting to spread the Carmel fire as the fire still raged, police revealed Wednesday. The two, residents of Nazareth ages 14 and 15, are accused of setting fires in the Ilut forest.

The two young arsonists set a fire in Ilut on Friday, then fled from the scene. The fire caused significant damage, and forced firefighters to abandon their efforts fighting the Carmel fire in order to battle the blaze in Ilut.

The two were arrested on Monday. They were taken to court Wednesday for an extension of their remand.

Several smaller fires broke out as rescue workers battled the Carmel fire, and police suspect a coordinated arson effort. Fires were reported near Basmat Tivon, Usafiya, and the northern border.

A 14-year-old from the Carmel region confessed to starting the fire that killed 43 people and left several others in serious condition. The boy said he accidently set fire to brush when he threw away hot coals from his nargilah (water pipe). When he saw the fire, he said, he was frightened and ran away, and did not report the blaze.

Maayana Miskin

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

The Somalia Connection

by Frank Crimi

For several years the Somalia-based Islamic terrorist group Al-Shabab has been diligently recruiting ^[1] new members in the United States, efforts that have produced both a disturbing and growing increase in the radicalization of young Somali-Americans.

When 19 year-old Somali-born Mohamed Osman Mohamud was arrested ^[2] on November 27 for his failed attempt to blow up a van full of dummy explosives at a tree-lighting ceremony in Portland, Oregon, some saw the influence of Al-Shabab.

However, law enforcement officials were quick to insist ^[2] Mohamud had not been directed by any foreign terrorist organization, pointing out he had been the one to initiate contact with Al Qaeda recruiters in Pakistan in an effort to join its jihadist movement.

While no connection to Al-Shabab apparently exists, it certainly wasn’t an implausible conclusion to draw, given the series of arrests this year alone of Somali-Americans from all parts of the United States. Each were accused of supporting Al-Shabab from either here in the United States or by going overseas to fight in the terrorist group’s war against the provisional Somali government.

In fact, Mohamud’s apprehension comes directly on the heels of the November 15 arrest ^[3] of Nimi Ali Yusuf, a 24 year-old Somali woman from San Diego, charged, along with three other Somali men, with providing Al-Shabab money and other assistance.

Their arrest follows the indictments ^[4] in August 2010 of 14 Somali-Americans from Alabama, Minnesota and California on similar charges, which forced Attorney General Eric Holder to acknowledge ^[4] the routing of fighters and money to Al-Shabab to constitute a “deadly pipeline.”

That pipeline began ^[5] in earnest in 2006 when Al-Shabab, a brutal Taliban-like organization fighting to turn Somalia into an Islamist state ruled under Sharia law, began waging war against both Somalia’s Transitional Federal Government (TFG) and peacekeeping forces of the African Union.

Al-Shabab has been aided in this fight by the assistance of many al Qaeda and Taliban terrorists who have been using Somalia as a safe haven ever since the 2001 American invasion of Afghanistan. The result of their help has allowed Al-Shabab to takeover most of southern and central Somalia, relegating the TFG to a narrow pocket of the Somalian capitol city of Mogadishu.

The other effect of housing so many foreign terrorists has been to turn Somalia into a beehive ^[6] of terrorist activity, making it the top ^[7] terror target in the world. According ^[8] to terrorism analyst Thomas Mockaitis, “Somalia has become what Afghanistan was in the 1980s. It is a failed state and it’s a hotbed for [not only] conflict, but also the training and export of extremist activity.”

The exportation of Al-Shabab’s terrorist activity became official ^[9] in February 2010 when the organization declared its alignment with al Qaeda and its quest for global jihad.

As Sheikh Fuad Mohamed Shangole, a top Al-Shabab leader said ^[9] at that time, “ “The decisions included waging jihad (holy struggle) in the Eastern and Horn of Africa regions in order to liberate the Islamic communities and to link up our jihad to the global one, led by Al-Qaeda and Sheikh Osama Bin Laden.”

So while Al-Shabab had originally recruited fighters from North America, Europe and the Middle East as part of its holy war against the TFG, now finding itself committed to a global jihad, it began an intensive campaign to recruit Somali-Americans to take the fight to the United States. For Al-Shabab, Somali communities in the United States proved to be very fertile recruiting grounds.

These Somali communities, which cover all corners of the United States, are composed primarily of refugees who have been escaping the ongoing civil wars that began in Somalia since 1991 with the ouster of then President Mohamed Siad Barre, conflicts which have gone on unabated ever since.

While most Somalis have earned a reputation as law-abiding and patriotic members of the American community, in a population ^[10] that has swelled from 35,000 in 2000 to upwards of 150,000 today, there are still a number who feel culturally disconnected, making them ever susceptible to the lure of outside jihadist forces.

As Thomas Mockaitis explains ^[8], “Many of these people are in fact the children of refugees. They were probably born in Somalia or born soon after they [i.e., their mothers] came to the United States. And they are not particularly in touch with their parents. And yet, neither are they particularly attracted to or accepted by mainstream American culture. So there is this kind of double alienation that makes them particularly prone to recruitment.”

One of the most common recruitment methods used by Al-Shabab is through the use of internet videos to promote their cause in an effort to reach young men who might never have traveled to Somalia.

One of the first such videos released by Al-Shabab was in March 2009 and featured ^[11] an English speaking Somali from Alabama, Omar Hammami, who urged its viewers to “come and live the life of a muhajid,” adding for emphasis, “We’re calling all the brothers oversees, all the Shabab, wherever they are, to come and live the life of the mujahid. They will see with their own eyes, and they will love it.”

The effects of these and other recruitment efforts have had some nasty net effects. Most noteworthy was in 2009 when over 20 Somali youth, most from the Minneapolis area, home to the largest concentration of Somalian refugees in the United States, went overseas to fight for Al-Shabab.

While some of that group has been reported killed in the fighting in Somalia, at least six are known to have returned to the United States, presumably to continue with recruitment efforts. In fact, American-Somalis make particularly good recruiters as they can use their American passports to travel relatively freely and easily.

Still, despite their efforts at developing homegrown American terrorists, Al-Shabab has not refrained from attempting to infiltrate its own members into the United States through the porous US-Mexico border, with some estimates ^[12] as high as 300 Al-Shabab members having safely made it through.

Unfortunately, even those Somalis who have been detained didn’t stay jailed for long. This unfortunate fact was seen in the release of a confidential report ^[13] that showed Mexican officials in January 2010 to have mistakenly released 23 Somali men shortly after they had been taken into custody, most of whom U.S. officials suspected as having strong ties to Al-Shabab.

The commitment of al-Shabab to promote jihad both in and outside of Somalia has been so successful that according ^[1] to Chris Harnisch of the American Enterprise Institute, “Al-Shabab is right now one of the most dangerous terrorist groups in the world.”

Of course, for Americans, the only danger to date so far posed by Al-Shabab has been limited to the preventative arrests of some terrorist wannabes. Unfortunately, Al-Shabab still has plenty of willing candidates lined up to take their place.

URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2010/12/08/the-somalia-connection/

URLs in this post:

[1] recruiting: http://www.kpbs.org/news/2010/sep/30/somali-terror-group-targets-us-recruitment/

[2] arrested: http://www.examiner.com/headlines-in-seattle/somali-teen-s-terrorist-plans-to-bomb-oregon-tree-lighting-ceremony-derailed

[3] arrest: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/11/woman-arrested-in-san-diego-on-charge-of-providing-money-to-somali-terrorists.html

[4] indictments: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129000435

[5] began: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Shabaab

[6] beehive: http://terrorfreesomalia.blogspot.com/2010/11/somalia-new-hotbed-for-terrorist-groups.html

[7] top: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2010/11/18/Somalia-tops-terror-attack-list/UPI-85911290084801/

[8] According: http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/news/2010/08/sec-100805-voa05.htm

[9] official: http://news.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/world/21-somalias-shebab-officially-join-al-qaedas-global-jihad-sk-26

[10] population: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somali_American

[11] featured: http://www.adl.org/main_Terrorism/al_shabaab_video_the_american.htm

[12] estimates: http://american3p.org/establishment-news/%E2%80%9C300-somali-muslim-terrorists%E2%80%9D-have-entered-america-via-the-mexican-border/

[13] report: http://washingtonexaminer.com/news/world/somalis-terrorist-links-feared-headed-us-border

[14] www.writingwithoutanet.com: http://www.writingwithoutanet.com/

[15] frankcrimi@sbcglobal.net: mailto:frankcrimi@sbcglobal.net

Frank Crimi is a freelance writer living in San Diego, California. You can read more of Frank’s work at his blog, www.writingwithoutanet.com ^[14] or contact him at frankcrimi@sbcglobal.net ^[15].

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Obama Administration Gives Up On Pointless "Freeze" Diplomacy

by Barry Rubin


As I predicted here ten days ago, the Obama Administration has now given up attempts to get Israel to agree to a three-month freeze of construction on existing settlements.

Here is the most fascinating sentence in the New York Times' coverage:

"Officials said the administration decided to pull the plug because it concluded that even if Mr. Netanyahu persuaded his cabinet to accept an extension - which he had not yet been able to do - the 90-day negotiating period would not have produced the progress on core issues that the administration originally had hoped for."

Translation: They decided that a three-month freeze wouldn't do any good. In other words, as I've been saying since October, the administration put forward a policy that made no sense, offering big concessions in exchange for getting something worthless.

It is good that the U.S. government has recognized the silliness of what it has been doing the last six months.

Of course, the Times tried to blame Israel exclusively: "Mr. Netanyahu could face renewed pressure from the United States and the Palestinians as the hurdle to resumed talks." As happens so often, the newspaper's writers don't seem to be reading their own words.

After all, the reporter had just pointed out that Netanyahu tried but could not get the plan through his cabinet. Moreover, the administration messed up its diplomacy to the point that nobody in Israel could tell what it was offering.

And, of course, the Palestinian Authority has been refusing to negotiate with Israel seriously for two solid years. Yet the Times wants to blame Israel or the lack of talks.

At some point early next year the Obama Administration will have to decide whether to put this issue on the back burner or keep knocking its head against a stone wall. And that stone wall isn't Israel, it's the Palestinian Authority which, now that it has recognition from Brazil and potentially from other countries, will be more intransigent than ever.

Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley). To read and subscribe to MERIA, GLORIA articles, or to order books, go to http://www.gloria-center.org. You can read and subscribe to his blog at http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com.

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

A Resurgent Syria Alarms U.S., Israel

by Janine Zacharia

Syria's fresh interference in Lebanon and its increasingly sophisticated weapons shipments to Hezbollah have alarmed American officials and prompted Israel's military to consider a strike against a Syrian weapons depot that supplies the Lebanese militia group, U.S. and Israeli officials say.

The evidence of a resurgence by Syria and its deepening influence across the region has frustrated U.S. officials who sought to change Syrian behavior. But the Obama administration has so far failed through its policy of engagement to persuade the country to abandon its support for Hezbollah and sever its alliance with Iran.

"Syria's behavior has not met our hopes and expectations over the past 20 months and Syria's actions have not met its international obligations," Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told the Lebanese daily an-Nahar on Nov. 10. "Syria can still choose another path and we hope that it does."

Israel has complained to the United Nations about long-range missiles and shorter-range rockets that are flowing freely from camps inside Syria to a transit site along the Syrian border with Lebanon and on to Hezbollah. But Israel has so far hesitated to take military action out of concern that such a strike could touch off a conflict even bloodier than the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah, said an Israeli military official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

In the past, U.S. interest in Syria was mostly limited to coaxing it to make peace with Israel and to end its rule in Lebanon. But now it is increasingly clear that Syria - with its pivotal alliance with Iran and its strategic borders with Israel, Lebanon, Turkey and Iraq - has the ability to shape regional developments on a broader scale.

Unsuccessful U.S. efforts

The Obama administration's efforts at dialogue with Syria have done little to stop the flow of weapons, end Syria's practice of sheltering Palestinian leaders of militant groups, or counter Syria's interference in Lebanon, which has undermined the U.S. effort to promote Lebanese independence from external actors.

Although President Obama has named a new ambassador to Syria, his appointment is being held up on Capitol Hill by senators who say they do not want to send a new envoy to Damascus until the United States better articulates how having an ambassador there would help achieve its goals.

Without a permanent top diplomat in the Syrian capital, U.S. envoys - including Middle East peace mediator George J. Mitchell, the assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, Jeffrey D. Feltman, and Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) - have flown to Damascus to try to persuade Syrian leaders to take steps to improve relations with the United States, which hit a low point in 2005.

That year, President George W. Bush, in the wake of Saddam Hussein's ouster in Iraq, warned Syria to stop the flow of foreign fighters across its border into Iraq, prompting fears in Damascus of a U.S. effort to topple Syria's leadership. Massive anti-Syrian demonstrations in Beirut forced Syria to withdraw its troops from Lebanon. Syria's relations with regional allies soured.

Today, there are clear signs that the country has emerged stronger than before.

While the United States maintains sanctions against Syria, American allies such as India and Turkey have inked trade deals with Damascus in recent months that undercut the American effort.

Syria plays a role in Iraq. In September, a parade of Iraqi politicians flocked to Damascus seeking advice on forming a government.

And Syria's alliance with Iran remains strong, to the dismay of U.S. officials who, as the WikiLeaks cables show, had hoped to drive a wedge between Syria and Iran, in part to stop the flow of weapons to Hezbollah. But Syria's support of Hezbollah remains robust.

Flow of weapons

Israeli surveillance tracks the nighttime missile shipments as Syrian personnel escort them from clandestine bases in Syria to the Lebanese border. At the swap area, the weapons are transferred to Lebanese trucks and driven into southern Lebanon and to Beirut, the Israeli military official said.

Asked about the likelihood of Israel striking at the border transfer area or one of the camps inside Syria, the military official said, "This is definitely one of the options Israel has. Of course any attack like this could lead to an escalation."

Persuading Syria to break its alliance with Hezbollah's chief patron, Iran, would be a key step toward ending the shipments.

But it is in Lebanon that Syria's regional resurgence has been felt most profoundly.

Abdul Hadi Mahfouz, a Lebanese government official and writer, says Syria is more effectively managing Lebanese affairs from afar than when it had 15,000 troops inside the country.

Wiam Wahab, a pro-Syrian Druze politician and former Lebanese cabinet minister, says Washington must resolve its differences with Syria if the United States wants to stymie Iran's influence.

Many Lebanese, especially those in the Christian and Sunni communities, still oppose any Syrian role in Lebanese affairs.

Lebanon's top security positions - the head of military intelligence and director of general security - are controlled by Syrian-approved appointees. The government can't make many major decisions without first consulting with Damascus. Lebanon's top leaders, including Prime Minister Saad Hariri, toe a pro-Syrian line.

Syria's supporters

But the clearest example of Syria's restored influence may be Walid Jumblatt. Five years ago, Jumblatt, a well-known Druze politician whose party holds swing votes in Lebanon's coalition government, marched with the pro-democracy March 14 movement against Syria's occupation. He now describes that period as a momentary lapse of sanity.

"I feel much more comfortable now. I'm back to my roots," Jumblatt said last month.

Jumblatt credits Syria with reestablishing order after the Lebanese civil war and suggests that Syria's military may need to take over again if Hezbollah is indicted by an international tribunal investigating the killing of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq al-Hariri and sectarian strife arises.

"It seems that, well, we cannot govern ourselves by ourselves," Jumblatt said. "Lebanon is not a nation. It's a bunch of tribes."

Janine Zacharia

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.