Category: Terror War

  • Two terrorists make grave threats

    Everyone has heard that pudgy little Adam Perlman has threatened the president of the United States in his latest video message from his mom’s basement (ABC News link);

    American Al Qaeda leader Adam Gadahn told his followers to welcome Bush “with bombs and traps” upon his upcoming visit to the Middle East this week.

    “The occupied territories are awaiting their first visit by the crusader Bush and the mujahideen are also waiting for him,” said Gadahn, a California native and now an Al Qaeda spokesman.

    Gadahn is the star of the latest al Qaeda propaganda video to be posted online by the group’s media wing, As Sahab.

    Jammie Wearing Fool comments that it sounds like Harry Reid wrote this latest screed from the terrorist with a Jewish-sounding name.

    But much more frightening, is the story that George Clooney may boycott the Oscars (Times Online link);

    THE Hollywood star George Clooney is being credited with inspiring an actors’ boycott against film award ceremonies that threatens to reduce next weekend’s Golden Globe Awards to a shambles and is jeopardising the most important event in the Hollywood calendar, next month’s Oscars.

    This weekend the Screen Actors Guild announced that the 70 actors shortlisted for awards at the Globes will not be attending the ceremony in sympathy with scriptwriters who have been on strike for two months.

    Officially, television network NBC, which splits millions of advertising dollars with the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, organiser of the Globes, says the show will go on. Both bodies said on Friday they were in “an extremely difficult position” and would try to woo the actors back.

    Behind the scenes NBC is split between those who are in despair seeking to salvage the festival and those raging at the “disloyalty” of actors.

    Neither of these individuals are aware of the realities of their threats. The best thing that could happen to the war against terror is if the President were attacked. The best thing that could happen to the movie industry is for those millionaires to boycott their own pat-on-the-back ceremony.

    Both will probably make Taranto’s “Bottom Stories” list.

  • Iran ends support of Iraq’s insurgents

    In the Washington Times this morning, Sara Carter writes that Iran has apparently ended their support of the insurgency in Iraq;

    Iran’s leaders are no longer supplying weapons or training to Islamic militants in Iraq, the spokesman for the top U.S. commander in Iraq told The Washington Times.

    Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, sees Iran as following through on assurances it made to Iraqi and U.S. officials last fall not to assist extremists in Iraq, spokesman Col. Steven Boylan said, adding that other U.S. officials have noted declines in Iranian weapons and funds to Iraqi insurgents.
    “We are ready to confirm the excellence of the senior Iranian leadership in their pledge to stop the funding, training, equipment and resourcing of the militia special groups,” Col. Boylan said. “We have seen a downward trend in the signature-type attacks using weapons provided by Iran.”

    Of course the reason that Iran stopped was not because they suddenly have a heart and wish peace for the Iraqi people, but more likely because they were losing their special forces officers in sweeps by coalition forces.

    They were pretty well convinced they’d won a retreat by American forces when Democrats won the midterm elections last year. But then George Bush disappointed them and increased our defense of the Iraqi people and has nearly ended the insurgency. I’m sure Americans will remember this at the polls in November.

  • Somehow you just knew it was our fault

    Jay Solomon in the Wall Street Journal reports that Bhutto’s group are blaming the US, specifically the Bush Administration, for her death last week;

    In the wake of Ms. Bhutto’s death, some of her aides are charging the U.S. didn’t do enough to protect the former prime minister after she returned to Pakistan.

    They note that the Bush administration played a central role in brokering an agreement with Mr. Musharraf that allowed her return after an eight-year exile. And they say Washington should have done more to guarantee her safety once she was on the ground and facing numerous threats.

    Husain Haqqani, a longtime aide to Ms. Bhutto based in Boston, said he twice held talks with senior State Department officials in recent weeks concerning the former prime minister’s safety. He said Ms. Bhutto specifically wanted Washington to pressure Mr. Musharraf to allow her to hire a private security company, similar to the one used by Afghan President Hamid Karzai upon his return in Kabul. Mr. Haqqani said that Ms. Bhutto’s aides had sent a letter to Pakistan’s Interior Ministry requesting permission to hire such a firm, but hadn’t obtained clearance.

    Now, I watched the video that was released today, I saw a whole butt-load of Pakistanis standing there looking at a guy with a gun while he fired at Mrs. Bhutto. None made a move towards him, one guy right next to him ducked instead of knocking the gun away after the first shot. Pakistani authorities stopped two other homicide bombers from reaching Bhutto’s rally.

    I guess it’s just fashionable to feed crap to the American Left to use in their campaign against common sense – even in Pakistan where the American Left would gladly surrender the Pakistanis to Islamofacism.

    AP weighs in with;

    The United States provided a steady stream of intelligence to Benazir Bhutto about threats against her before the former Pakistani prime minister was assassinated and advised her aides on how to boost security, although key suggestions appear to have gone unheeded, U.S. officials said Monday.

    So I guess we should have just assigned the 82d Airborne Division to her.

  • Status of Chavez’ FARC rescue mission

    58-853-COLOMBIA_VENEZUELA_FARC_HOStages2_embedded_prod_affiliate_56.jpg

    Heavily armed Colombian policemen stand guard on Sunday

    around a Venezuelan Mi-172 helicopter

    sitting on the tarmac of the airport of Villavicencio,

    department of Meta, Colombia.

    Photo by Mauricio Duenas (AFP)

    But not to worry, look who’s on the job;

    0_21_stone_large.jpg

    U.S. film director Oliver Stone waves to journalists upon his arrival to Villavicencio’s airport in southern Colombia.

    With its fearsome record of kidnapping and violence, Colombia’s largest guerrilla army might seem a nightmare group to encounter. But not to Oliver Stone.

    The American filmmaker is jumping at a chance to meet with a group the U.S. classifies as a terrorist organization.

    Leaving the glamor of Hollywood far behind, Stone arrived in the steamy Colombian city of Villavicencio on Saturday as part of a mission led by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez to retrieve three hostages held for years by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC.

    “I have no illusions about the FARC, but it looks like they are a peasant army fighting for a decent living,” Stone said in an exclusive interview with The Associated Press at his hotel bar. “And here, if you fight, you fight to win.”

    Yep, just a peasant Army fighting for decent livng – bombing and kidnapping innocent civilians instead of working for a decent living. What a dumbass. I guess that’s why I’ve never watched “Platoon” all the way through.

    Seems the only thing Chavez MAY succeed in rescuing is Stone’s career – but I think it’ll take a few more helicopters.

  • bin Laden and Reid; the view from the cave

    Much like Harry Reid, bin Laden is having problems accepting the fact that al Qaeda has lost Iraq. Writes Salah Nasrawi in the Washington Times;

    Osama bin Laden warned Iraq’s Sunni Arabs against fighting al Qaeda and promised to expand the terror group’s holy war to Israel in a new audiotape yesterday, threatening “blood for blood, destruction for destruction.”
    Most of the 56-minute tape dealt with Iraq, apparently al Qaeda’s latest attempt to keep supporters in Iraq unified at a time when the U.S. military claims to have al Qaeda’s Iraq branch on the run.

    Bradley Brooks, also in the Times, writes about the reality of the situation in Iraq that apparently eludes bin Laden;

    Iraq’s Interior Ministry spokesman said yesterday that 75 percent of al Qaeda in Iraq’s terrorist network were destroyed this year, but the top American commander in the country said the terror group remained his chief concern.
    Maj. Gen. Abdul Kareem Khalaf said the disruption of the terrorist network was a result of improvements in the Iraqi security forces, which he said had made strides in weeding out commanders and officers with ties to militias or who were involved in criminal activities.

    He also credited the rise of anti-al Qaeda in Iraq groups, mostly made up of Sunni fighters the Shi’ite-dominated government has cautiously begun to embrace. Additionally, an increase in American troops since June has been credited with pushing many militants out of Baghdad.

    Of, course bin Laden goes on to rave that he won’t given “even an inch” to the Jews in Palestine. How he’ll deny living room for Jews with his rapidly evaporating army is beyond me. But, like Harry Reid, bin Laden is getting his news from sycophants instead of investigating for himself. I’m sure the echo chamber inside that cave in Pakistan is just as misleading as the echo chamber in the halls of Congress.

    In the Washington Examiner, Nancy Pelosi admits that Democrats have been boneheads this year;

    It’s a painful irony for Democrats: In the space of a year, the Iraq war that was the source of party’s resurgence in Congress became the measure of its impotence.

    By the end of the 2007, a Congress controlled by Democrats for the first time since 1994 had an approval rating of only 25 percent, down from 40 percent last spring. Then the debate over the war split the party and cast shadows over other issues, spawning a series of legislative failures and losing confrontations with President Bush.

    What to do about Iraq has turned into a dissing match so far-reaching and nasty that Congress’s accomplishments are seen, even by some who run it, through the lens of their failure to override Bush and start bringing the troops home.

    “There is no question that the war in Iraq has eclipsed much of what we have done,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters. “If you asked me in a phone call, as ardent a Democrat as I am, I would disapprove of Congress as well.”

    Now, if only Pelosi would wheel Reid out into the daylight.

  • Ghoulish candidates wave Bhutto’s bloody blouse

    Bezir Bhutto’s body hadn’t reached room temperature yesterday before Clinton and Obama seized on her death for political opportunism (Washington Post link);

    For [Obama’s] chief rival, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), Bhutto’s death helped underscore the line she has been driving home for months — about who is best suited to lead the nation at a time of international peril. In her comments Thursday, Clinton described Bhutto in terms Obama (D-Ill.) could not: as a fellow mother, a pioneering woman following in a man’s footsteps, and a longtime peer on the world stage.

    The differing reactions of Clinton and Obama to the assassination crystallized the debate between the two just a week before Iowans will decide the first contest in the battle for the Democratic presidential nomination.

    While aides said Clinton was anxious not to appear to be politicizing Bhutto’s death, they nonetheless saw it as a potential turning point in the race with Obama and former senator John Edwards (D-N.C.).

    Everything seems to be a potential campaign issue these days, but it’s completely tasteless to prop up a dead body, Bernie-like, and campaign from behind it. And I’m stupefied that Clinton thinks the murder of one woman politician gives her any kind of moral authority or proves her ability to be President. Clinton came close to  announcing that Bhutto would be her running mate;

    “I have known Benazir Bhutto for more than 12 years; she’s someone whom I was honored to visit as first lady when she was prime minister,” Clinton said at a campaign event in a firehouse in western Iowa. “Certainly on a personal level, for those of us who knew her, who were impressed by her commitment, her dedication, her willingness to pick up the mantle of her father, who was also assassinated, it is a terrible, terrible tragedy,” she said.

    Sweetness and Light chronicles Clinton’s lies about her relationship with Bhutto. And Obama blamed Bhutto’s death on Clinton;

    Three hours after news of Bhutto’s slaying broke, Obama delivered a withering rebuke of Clinton’s experience, depicting her lengthy political resume` as a hindrance to solving big problems, including crises abroad. In an especially charged moment, senior Obama adviser David Axelrod would later tie the killing to the Iraq war — and Clinton’s vote to approve it, which he argued diverted U.S resources from fighting terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan, both al-Qaeda hotbeds.

    “You can’t at once argue that you’re the master of a broken system in Washington and offer yourself as the person to change it,” Obama said. “You can’t fall in line behind the conventional thinking on issues as profound as war and offer yourself as the leader who is best prepared to chart a new and better course for America.”

    The Wall Street Journal reports that somehow Clinton and Richardson think their time milling around the White House gives them experience;

    Sen. Clinton, who had planned to talk about housing and the economy at a rally in Lawton, Iowa, shifted to condemn the assassination, to recall Ms. Bhutto as someone she had known personally since the late 1980s, and to stress the need for “picking a president who is ready on day one, who is ready to deal with the myriad of problems.”

    Democrat Bill Richardson, the New Mexico governor who has boasted of his experience as President Clinton’s ambassador to the United Nations, had the most muscular reaction. He called on President Bush to suspend military aid to Pakistan and “press Musharraf to step aside” in favor of a new coalition government, because he has failed to hunt down terrorists and had destabilized the country by “his attempts to cling to power.” Mr. Richardson also scheduled a speech for today in Des Moines to reiterate that call.

    How does being being one member of a hundred-person debating society give Clinton any experience in dealing with terrorism? Richardson couldn’t even talk to the Pakistani government while he was laying waste to the omelet bar at the UN. I remember that Clinton and Richardson both admitted that they couldn’t make headway against the Taliban and al Qaeda because Pervez Musharraf’s government ignored them everytime the Clinton Administration tried to enlist Pakistan. 

    I guess the Democrats figure we’ve all lost our memories.

    capt_596af4d416b544e0ad485570b37221c4_parade_magazine_benazir_bhutto_prn3.jpg

    Photo lifted from Drudge Report

    I can’t imagine any of the Democrat candidates telling their Democrat supporters that “I am what the terrorists most fear”. Well, especially since the terrorists and madmen around the world have already decided to support our Democrat candidates.

  • COB gets an early Christmas Gift

    The Washington Times’ Sara Carter reports this morning that Congressional pressure has been brought to bear on an investigation of Lieutenant General Francis Kearney who has been busy bringing up charges against American warriors doing their job in the Middle East; (more…)

  • Kissinger: Misreading the Iran report

    In this morning’s Washington Post is a must-read opinion piece by Henry Kissinger on last week’s release of the now-infamous NIE report;

    (more…)