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)

Advertisements

Friends and enemies: Muslim Brotherhood edition

May 4, 2011

In this episode, we learn to learn to tell friends from enemies by seeing what they say to each other in their own language.

Remember when our Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, said this about the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt?

At a House Intelligence Committee hearing earlier in the day, Rep. Sue Myrick (R-N.C.) questioned Clapper about the threat posed by the group. Clapper replied by suggesting that the Egyptian part of the Brotherhood is not particularly extreme and that the broader international movement is hard to generalize about.

“The term ‘Muslim Brotherhood’…is an umbrella term for a variety of movements, in the case of Egypt, a very heterogeneous group, largely secular, which has eschewed violence and has decried Al Qaeda as a perversion of Islam,” Clapper said. “They have pursued social ends, a betterment of the political order in Egypt, et cetera…..In other countries, there are also chapters or franchises of the Muslim Brotherhood, but there is no overarching agenda, particularly in pursuit of violence, at least internationally.”

I wonder how DNI Clapper feels now, after the Muslim Brotherhood said this about Osama bin Laden’s death:

Statement from the Muslim Brotherhood on the assassination of Sheikh(1) Osama bin Laden

The whole world has lived and the especially the Muslims have suffered from a fierce media campaign to label Islam as terrorism and to describe the Muslims as violent, by attaching the September 11th attacks to al-Qaeda(2).

Today, the U.S. president has announced that a special task force of U.S. marines has succeeded in assassinating Sheikh Osama bin Laden, a woman, and one of his children, along with a number of his companions(3). [With this development], We find that we are facing a new situation.

The Muslim Brotherhood declares that they are against the use of violence generally, and against the methods of assassination, and they are with the fair trial of anyone accused of any crime, whatsoever(4).

The Muslim Brotherhood demands for the world (in general) and the Western world, as peoples and governments (particularly) to stop linking Islam with terrorism(5), and to deliberately correct the erroneous image which it has already promoted for a number of years.

The Muslim Brotherhood confirms that the legitimate resistance against foreign occupation for any country is a legitimate right guaranteed by divine law and international convention. Confusion [shuffling papers] between legitimate resistance and violence against innocent people was intended by the Zionist enemy in particular.(6)

And so long as the occupation remains, the legitimate resistance will remain. It is on America, the NATO pact, and the European Union to speedily end the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq and to recognize the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people.(7)

The Muslim Brotherhood demands that the United States cease its intelligence operations(8) against the violators and to desist from interfering in the internal affairs of any Arab or Muslim country.

The Muslim Brotherhood

Cairo, on the 29 of Jumada 1 1432 A.H., corresponding to May 2, 2011

Translation by Sami al-Abasi at Pajamas Media, who notes that the English-language release was scrubbed for Western consumption. Be sure to read the whole thing. Meanwhile, I’ve highlighted some points above:

(1) The Brotherhood bestows an Arab title of honor and respect on bin Laden. Not quite what you’d expect of someone who’s been accused of perverting Islam, but then, really, the only difference between the Brotherhood and al-Qaeda is the point at which the resort to violence is acceptable. The Brotherhood thinks al-Qaeda went violent too soon, risking a Western backlash. Thus, their disagreement is over strategy and tactics, not goals. And, contrary to the multi-culti fluff we’re fed on TV, bin Laden understood Islam very well. As does the Brotherhood.

(2) Yeah, awfully unfair of us to do that, since it was only bin Laden himself who took credit for the attacks, and his Operations Chief, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who admitted planning it. We really shouldn’t jump to conclusions.

(3) “Companions” is a deliberate allusion to the Companions of Muhammad, the original generation who took up Islam and fought alongside him. Thus the Brotherhood again honors and elevates the man who slaughtered nearly 3,000 Americans and countless Muslims.

(4) A “fair trial” under Sharia law, of course, since no trial held under laws created by Man can ever be fair or just. Remember, to the Brotherhood and other Salafis, democracy is a sham; something to be exploited with the eventual goal of implementing Allah’s divine law.

(5) Again, Islam is treated so unfairly. Just because Muhammad himself repeatedly invoked terror is no reason to associate the religion he created with terrorism. Or something. For example:

Allah said, ‘No Prophet before Muhammad took booty from his enemy nor prisoners for ransom.’ Muhammad said, ‘I was made victorious with terror. The earth was made a place for me to clean. I was given the most powerful words. Booty was made lawful for me. I was given the power to intercede. These five privileges were awarded to no prophet before me.’ –Ishak 326

(6) Bear in mind that the Brotherhood, as does its offshoot Hamas, considers Israel to be an “illegal occupation,” which means all Israelis are fair game for legitimate resistance terrorism. Key point: when the author distinguishes between legitimate targets and innocent victims, no Jews or Christians in Israel are innocent. And, hey, if you happen to get a few innocent Muslims, too, well… fortunes of war, and all that.

(7) And by this the Muslim Brotherhood supports terror attacks against American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, notwithstanding that those forces freed millions of Muslims from horrific tyrannies.

(8) By which the authors means the very kind of intelligence operations that allowed us to track down and kill bin Laden. Yeah, we’re going to jump right on that.

So here  we have an organization that, when speaking in its own language, sanctifies our deadliest enemy; demands that we fool ourselves about the nature of jihad and the role of terror in it, and that bin Laden himself was acting in that those traditions; and authorizes terror attacks against Americans and their allies. Oh, and tries to hide it with a sanitized English version.

I’d call that an enemy, wouldn’t you?

PS: Clapper is still an idiot.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Friends and enemies, and how to tell the difference

May 3, 2011

Consider this a bookend to yesterday’s post about Hamas eulogizing bin Laden and thus declaring itself an enemy of the United States.  Here’s what a friend, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, had to say:

This is an historic day for the United States of America and for all the countries engaged in the battle against terrorism.  I want to congratulate President Obama and the American people.  I want to congratulate America’s soldiers, and its intelligence personnel for a truly outstanding achievement.  It took ten years to track Osama bin Laden down.  It took ten years to bring a measure of justice to his victims.

But the battle against terrorism is long and relentless and resolute.  This is a day of victory – a victory for justice, for freedom and for our common civilization.

And here’s the video:

Friends and enemies. It’s not hard to tell them apart at all.

via Power Line

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


In which Hamas openly declares itself an enemy of the United States

May 2, 2011

Okay, okay. anyone who’s been paying attention has known for years that Hamas is an enemy of America: a Salafist, jihadist organization dedicated to our ally Israel’s destruction and the genocide of her Jews, they’re also the spawn of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is waging a “civilizational jihad” against America and the West. You don’t have to be a great analyst to deduce that Hamas is not likely to be friendly to the US and is indeed probably an enemy.

But it is considerate of them to make it plain for all to see:

The Palestinian Islamist group Hamas on Monday condemned the killing by U.S. forces of Osama bin Laden and mourned him as an “Arab holy warrior.”

“We regard this as a continuation of the American policy based on oppression and the shedding of Muslim and Arab blood,” Ismail Haniyeh, head of the Hamas administration in the Gaza Strip, told reporters.

Though he noted doctrinal differences between bin Laden’s al-Qaida and Hamas, Haniyeh said: “We condemn the assassination and the killing of an Arab holy warrior. We ask God to offer him mercy with the true believers and the martyrs.”

So, eulogizing the guy responsible for the deaths of nearly 3,000 Americans and foreign guests and untold thousands of Muslims in Iraq and elsewhere. Nice.

To invert an old saying:

The friend of my enemy is my enemy.

I wonder if Seal Team 6 is busy right now… .

via Power Line

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)