Shamefully exploiting an atrocity, Donald Trump displays his megalomania

March 27, 2016
Fine as long as the mouth stays shut

The only man to solve the problem of jihad?

Today is Easter, one of the holiest days of the Christian calendar. It was marred by news of a massacre in Pakistan when a Muslim suicide bomber attacked a park that was a favorite for local Christians and killed scores of women and children:

A suicide bomber killed at least 65 people, mostly women and children, at a park in Lahore on Sunday in an attack claimed by a Pakistani Taliban faction which said it had targeted Christians.

More than 300 other people were wounded, officials said.

The explosion occurred in the parking area of Gulshan-e-Iqbal Park close to children’s swings. The park is a popular site for members of Lahore’s Christian community, many of whom had gone there to celebrate the Easter weekend holiday.

Witnesses said they saw body parts strewn across the parking lot once the dust had settled after the blast.

These women and children were targeted because of their religion by someone who believed he was acting in accord with his religion in furtherance of a 1,400-year old war of domination. It is a war that has cost thousands of lives here in America. One would expect anyone running to be our Chief of State and Commander in Chief would at least have the decency to express sympathy with the victims.

That “anyone,” however, does not include Donald Trump, who tweeted the following:

I alone can solve.” That, ladies and gentlemen, is called “megalomania,” and that came straight from Trump’s verified account. No need to analyze all the ways it’s wrong. Res ipsa loquitur — the thing speaks for itself.

How any rational American  considering the candidates can look at that and think Trump is in any imaginable way qualified to be president and fit to command the most powerful armed forces the world has ever seen is beyond me. He makes Hillary Clinton look positively statesmanlike, while Barack Obama is a picture of humility and self-awareness by comparison.

He doesn’t need to be sent to the White House. He should be sent to the madhouse.

PS: In case Trump comes to his senses and deletes that tweet, here’s a capture:

Trump Pakistan megalomania

 

I’d say “unbelievable,” but these days that’s all too believable. And appalling.

Advertisements

Good news! ISIS is now recruiting in Pakistan!

July 28, 2015
Seal of the new Caliphate

Going global.

When the world’s most vicious jihad organization goes fishing for members in a nearly-failed nuclear-armed state that sports its own jihadi terror groups and an intelligence service that “leans jihad,” what could go wrong?

Lots.

An apparent Islamic State recruitment document found in Pakistan’s lawless tribal lands reveals that the extremist group has grand ambitions of building a new terrorist army in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and triggering a war in India to provoke an Armageddon-like “end of the world.”

The 32-page Urdu-language document obtained by American Media Institute (AMI) and reviewed by USA TODAY details a plot to attack U.S. soldiers as they withdraw from Afghanistan and target American diplomats and Pakistani officials.

(…)

The document was reviewed by three U.S. intelligence officials, who said they believe the document is authentic based on its unique markings and the fact that language used to describe leaders, the writing style and religious wording match other documents from the Islamic State, also known as ISIL and ISIS. They asked to remain anonymous because they are not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.

The undated document, titled “A Brief History of the Islamic State Caliphate (ISC), The Caliphate According to the Prophet,” seeks to unite dozens of factions of the Pakistani and Afghan Taliban into a single army of terror. It includes a never-before-seen history of the Islamic State, details chilling future battle plans, urges al-Qaeda to join the group and says the Islamic State’s leader should be recognized as the sole ruler of the world’s 1 billion Muslims under a religious empire called a “caliphate.”

“Accept the fact that this caliphate will survive and prosper until it takes over the entire world and beheads every last person that rebels against Allah,” it proclaims. “This is the bitter truth, swallow it.”

Read the rest: ISIS’ long-term goal is a major attack on India — Hindus are polytheists, therefore fair game under Islam. Almost as bad, they’re a parliamentary democracy, and democracy is a sin under sharia law (men making laws, a role reserved to Allah alone). And, unspoken, they’ve kicked Muslim Pakistan’s tail in three wars now. Can’t let polytheists get away with that, not when you come from a culture obsessed with honor and shame.

Their ultimate goal, per the document, is to use war on India to generate an apocalyptic war –literally, the “final battle”– with America, India’s ally. Presumably that would bring about the Islamic End Times, when they get to kill all the Jews.

Lovely people, aren’t they?

This new recruiting drive isn’t without its problems, however. First, well, the Taliban was there first. And neither likes the other. Thus a recruiting drive is likely to lead to armed clashes. Second, the Pakistani Taliban have a sort of, off-and-on modus vivendi with the Pakistan government. Heck, members of Pakistan’s ISI, their intelligence agency, may also be Taliban. ISIS, on the other hand, wants to recreate the caliphate and lead it, meaning no more government of Pakistan. That, shall we say, might meet with resistance.

Still, ISIS has been remarkably successful and has the will to carry out its jihad dreams. Everyone in the area –Pakistanis, Afghans, Indians, and Americans, had better be keeping a careful watch.


(Video) Why do people become Islamic terrorists?

June 15, 2015

New from Prager University, in this video Dr. Haroon Ullah does a good job of debunking two of the myths about why Muslims become terrorists, poverty and a lack of education. He does so by showing that terrorists often come from well-off and well-educated middle class families. (Remember that the 9/11/01 jihadis almost all came from such backgrounds.)

He then gives what he sees as the real reasons young Muslims turn to jihad: a revulsion at their own societies’ failings and corruption, a need to blame others, and a resort to a belief system that offers simple, clear, and absolute rules for making things better. I think he mostly gets this right, but more on that after the video:

Like I said, I think Dr. Ullah mostly gets this right, and the comparison of Islamic extremism to the appeal of Nazism, Fascism, and Bolshevism is apt: all offer simple solutions to the challenges of a complex world; all offer conspiratorial enemies responsible for our woes (Jews, capitalists, or both); and all promise paradise at the end of the line.

But he only glances against the core problem with Islamic extremism: Islam itself.

Islam’s belief system, like the ideologies of the “Isms” mentioned above, requires war against the outsider — “jihad fi sabil Allah,” or “War for Allah’s sake.” It declares an entire class of people, Jews, its eternal enemy, who at the end of days will side with the Devil. Its rules –Sharia law– are totalitarian, and its founder commanded death for any man who left the faith.

Dr. Ullah says that imams should preach that terrorist violence only causes misery in this world, that it does not make things better. He also asserts that Islamic preachers must preach that such acts will lead the terrorist to Hell, not Paradise.

He’s right, but imams who do that would be up against a big challenge: their own religion. From the Qur’an and the hadiths through over 1,400 years of learned commentary, Islam has provided theological justification for jihadist terror. Even Muhammad himself said he had been made “victorious with terror” (Sahih Bukhari 4.52.220) and his deeds, including the violent ones, are considered good examples for all time. If an imam were to say “violence is wrong,” the extremist could point to dozens of examples commanding violence or showing violence as a pious act, even at times against other Muslims. If he says those engaging in violence are condemned to Hell, the extremist believer could counter with Sura 9, verse 111 of the Qur’an:

GOD has bought from the believers their lives and their money in exchange for Paradise. Thus, they fight in the cause of GOD, willing to kill and get killed. Such is His truthful pledge in the Torah, the Gospel, and the Quran—and who fulfills His pledge better than GOD? You shall rejoice in making such an exchange. This is the greatest triumph.

Again, jihad fi sabil Allah. War for Allah’s sake. Tell him he’s going to Hell, and the jihad-terrorist can point to this and other places in the Qur’an, the hadiths, and scholarly commentaries ancient and modern that promise him instead unending pleasures in the afterlife.

I’m not saying Dr. Ullah and his hypothetical moderate imams are wrong or that it can’t be done, but Islam and its orthodox interpretation are working powerfully against them.


Al Qaeda #2 sent to meet his virgins, courtesy of the USA? Update: He’s not dead yet?

August 28, 2011

BOOM:

Atiyah Abd al Rahman, a top al Qaeda leader who long served Osama bin Laden, was reportedly killed on Aug. 22 in Waziristan, Pakistan, according to multiple press reports. Both the Associated Press and Reuters cite US officials as saying that Rahman has been killed. Matt Apuzzo of the AP reports that a US official would not confirm how Atiyah had been killed, but the AP story notes that on same day, the CIA launched a drone strike in Waziristan.

US intelligence officials contacted by The Long War Journal would neither confirm nor deny Atiyah’s reported death. One senior US intelligence official observed that verifying the deaths of top terrorists is difficult and the US has gotten it wrong in the past. Atiyah himself, the official pointed out, was reportedly killed in 2010. Still, this official said, it is certainly possible that the new reports of Atiyah’s demise are accurate.

(…)

Atiyah has been described as al Qaeda’s “operations chief” in some press reports, and his role in plotting terrorist attacks has been repeatedly noted. But according to one senior US intelligence official contacted by The Long War Journal, Atiyah was al Qaeda’s “general manager” and also served as Osama bin Laden’s “chief of staff.”

While Atiyah was involved in plotting attacks, the official said, he was not really the “operational commander.” In the nascent plot to attack the US on the 10th anniversary of 9/11, for example, Atiyah would pass messages back and forth between Osama bin Laden and operatives elsewhere, but the tactical details of the plot were left to other al Qaeda commanders.

Atiyah was also given a senior role in managing al Qaeda’s finances, the official said. Only the most loyal and trustworthy terrorists would be given such a role.

You can read more about this thankfully dead medieval lunatic glorious martyr to Allah’s cause at The Long War Journal.

As TLWJ points out, this surely hurts Al Qaeda by killing another senior leader, disrupting operations and spreading fear and mistrust — did a traitor give Atiyah’s location away? Are there spies in their midst?

But we should keep in mind that Al Qaeda is a deliberately decentralized organization, with branches (Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula) and franchises (Al Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb) that are fully capable of planning and carrying out operations on their own. Indeed, the attempted Christmas bombing over Detroit and the jihad attack at Ft. Hood were both planned or supported by AQAP, while AQIM has been linked to plots to launch a Mumbai-style attack in Europe. Striking a blow at Al Qaeda-central, while important, shouldn’t be and I’m sure isn’t our sole focus. (See also and also.)

Coming back to the probably-late Mr. Atiyah, if he is dead, it’s almost certain that this is one fruit of the intelligence haul we made when we looted bin Laden’s compound after killing him last May. You can bet there have been and will be others, as we exploit that trove of information for all it’s worth. And one has to wonder about the reaction of the next guy to be promoted to second-in-command: give thanks to Allah or run shrieking in terror? It doesn’t seem to be a job with much future in it…

UPDATE: From TLWJ’s blog, Threat Matrix, doubts are being cast on reports that Atiyah is really dead. This is a reminder that many such reports of prominent AQ and Taliban casualties have turned out to be premature. Perhaps Al Qaeda’s number two isn’t quite ready to go on the cart, yet.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Friends and allies: most major terror plots originate in Pakistan — Updated

July 7, 2011

Don’t forget, we’ve given Pakistan more than $18 billion in aid since September 11th, 2001. Gee, thanks for having our backs, guys:

Most of the major terrorist plots against the West since 2004 had links to Pakistan, including two that targeted Canada, says a study to be released today by a U.S. think tank.

In just over half of the 32 “serious” plots identified in the New America Foundation study, the participants had received either training or direction from jihadists in Pakistan.

The findings underscore Pakistan’s role as al-Qaeda’s primary safe haven, despite recent concerns about countries like Yemen, writes investigative journalist Paul Cruickshank, the study’s author.

“This paper has shown that by some measures al-Qaeda’s safe haven in Pakistan has actually become more dangerous in recent years. More serious plots emerged in the West in 2010 linked to established jihadist groups in Pakistan than in any year since al-Qaeda built up its operations in FATA in the early 2000s.”

FATA is the acronym for the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, the rugged frontier region of Pakistan, where al-Qaeda and its affiliates have set up since the fall of the Taliban in Afghanistan.

In 53% of terror plots, members of the groups involved had trained in Pakistan, compared with 6% in Yemen, 3% in Iraq and 38% where no overseas training occurred, the study says.

Forty-four percent of the plots were directed by jihadist groups in Pakistan, while 6% were directed from Yemen, 3% from Iraq and 47% had no clear overseas direction.

Most of the Western recruits who went to Pakistan had initially wanted to fight NATO forces in Afghanistan but were instead persuaded to return to their home countries to conduct terrorist attacks, it says.

This isn’t to say the Pak government directed these attacks (though in some cases they have), but the central government is chronically weak, and large factions are very sympathetic to al Qaeda, the Taliban, and the jihadist cause overall. They’ve been at best a part-time ally, sometimes giving us important cooperation, sometimes working against us — often at the same time. We’ve tolerated it because we not only need the cooperation we do get (Several al Qaeda bigwigs were nabbed with Pakistani help.), but because our position in Afghanistan has required putting up with a lot to keep supply routes open through the Khyber pass.

But that situation is changing with Obama’s decision to run away withdraw from Afghanistan; we just won’t need that supply route nearly as much.

And if that’s the case, and if so much terrorism originates in Pakistan and the government is unable or unwilling to stop it, why should we keep giving them so much money? Or do we keep paying tribute for fear Pakistani nukes would otherwise wind up in the wrong hands?

My own feelings mirror those of Victor Davis Hanson: time to say “Adios, Pakistan!”

via Undhimmi

UPDATE: And just to add a bit of fuel to the fire, our “allies” were selling nuke secrets to the North Koreans:

The founder of Pakistan’s nuclear bomb program asserts that the government of North Korea bribed top military officials in Islamabad to obtain access to sensitive nuclear technology in the late 1990s.

Abdul Qadeer Khan has made available documents that he says support his claim that he personally transferred more than $3 million in payments by North Korea to senior officers in the Pakistani military, which he says subsequently approved his sharing of technical know-how and equipment with North Korean scientists.

Admittedly, this was in the 1990s, but still, not something you want to see in a responsible friend and partner.

To say the least. (via The Jawas)

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Dear Pakistan: you have some explaining to do — Updated!

May 2, 2011

Now that the cheering has mostly quieted from last night’s news that we finally nailed Osama bin Laden, serious questions are being asked about Pakistan’s role, if any, in sheltering America’s arch-enemy. Consider this excerpt from Philip Klein’s article on how the mission went down:

Last August, intelligence officials tracked the [two couriers] to their residence in Abbottabad, Pakistan, a relatively wealthy town 35 miles north of Islamabad where many retired military officers live.

“When we saw the compound where the brothers lived, we were shocked by what we saw,” a senior administration official said.

The compound was eight times larger than any other home in the area. It was surrounded by walls measuring 12 feet to 18 feet that were topped with barbed wire. There were additional inner walls that sectioned off parts of the compound and entry was restricted by two security gates. And the residents burned their trash instead of leaving it outside for pickup. There was a three-story house on the site, with a 7-foot privacy wall on the top floor.

While the two brothers, the couriers, had no known source of income, the compound was built in 2005 and valued at $1 million. That led intelligence officials to conclude that it must have been built to hold a high-value member of Al Qaeda.

Further intelligence gathering found that there was another family who lived on the compound which had a size and makeup that matched the bin Laden members who would have most likely been with Osama.

After exploring every angle for months, they concluded that all signs pointed to this being bin Laden’s residence.

Emphases added.

So, here we have the most wanted man in the world, living comfortably with some of his family in a specially built mansion in Abbottabad(1), just a few miles from the Pakistani capital. A town that is a brigade headquarters for a Pakistani Army division and also houses a military academy.

Yet, somehow, no one noticed bin Laden was there?

In The New Yorker, Dexter Filkins asks the question that’s on a lot of people’s minds, right now:

Now that Osama is dead, the most intriguing question is this: Did any Pakistani officials help hide him?

We’re entitled to ask. Ever since 9/11—indeed, even before—Pakistan’s military and intelligence services have played a high-stakes double game. They’ve supported American efforts to kill and capture Al Qaeda fighters, and they have been lavished with billions of American dollars in return. At the same time, elements of those same military and intelligence services, particularly those inside Inter-Service Intelligence, or the I.S.I., have provided support for America’s enemies, namely the Taliban and its lethal off-shoot, the Haqqani network. American officials are fully aware of the double-game, and to say it frustrates them would be an understatement. For a decade, Pakistan’s role has been one of the great unmovable paradoxes of America’s war.

Pakistan’s double-dealing has been a dirty, semi-open secret in this war since it started. Filkins rightly points out that several high-ranking Al Qaeda operatives have been caught in Pakistani cities with Pakistani assitance and that there is no hard evidence that the ISI or other Pakistani agency was sheltering them.

But it is at the same time true that Islamist elements are strong in the ISI and Pakistani military, that Pakistan nurtured the birth of the Taliban –Al Qaeda’s ally– and has a longstanding relationship with them. Pakistan has also fostered and supported jihadist terror groups that have struck India time and again. (And also the attempted bombing of Times Square.)

So it is fair to ask just what Pakistan knew about bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad, how long they knew it, and why they didn’t tell us. We give them a boatload of money, Al Qaeda and its allies have cost us a lot of blood and treasure, and we have a right to some straight answers — now.

PS: Here are a couple of more questions to chew over: Given Pakistan’s support for numerous murderous terror groups, why are they not on the list of state-sponsors of terrorism? Islamabad seems to be giving Tehran a run for its money in that department. And now that bin Laden has gone to meet his virgin goats, do we even need Pakistan anymore?

LINKS: Diana West already has her answer. Watt’s Up With That has aerial photos of Osama’s hiding place in Abbottabad. Verum Serum has video from inside the mansion after the battle. (Gore warning.)

NOTES:

(1) “Abbottabad?” Is there a “Costelloabad,” too?

UPDATE: Bill Roggio at Threat Matrix has a very good analysis of why Pakistan was complicit in protecting Osama bin Laden. You’ll want to rad the whole thing, but I want to quote the final section that offers a very strong clue: Osama’s demonstrated confidence that he was safe:

While it is next to impossible to know the calculations made by bin Laden to shelter in a Pakistani city, it isn’t a stretch to say that he was confident enough to live in Abbottabad for an extended period of time because he felt that he, and his family, would be safe. Since his ouster from Sudan in 1996, bin Laden has been wary about entrusting his personal security to states. Yet he had to believe that there was little to no risk in sheltering in a city with a heavy military presence in a compound that gave all indications it housed a very important person. Bin Laden or his handlers had to be confident that the mansion would not be disturbed by Pakistan’s military and intelligence services. And to be confident, they must have had assurances that bin Laden would not be touched by Pakistani security forces.

Remember that the next time Pakistan comes up for foreign aid.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


If Islam can be reformed, it will come when women say “no more”

March 28, 2011

Women such as Veena Malik, a Pakistani entertainer who refuses to put up with some jackass mufti’s patronizing criticisms of her and instead tells him to go to Hell.

As they say, “you go, girl!”

I hope Veena has some bodyguards; she’s already received death threats from the brave knights of the religion of peace and misogyny for daring not to be a slave.

via Power Line