Avenging Osama: 80 killed in Pakistan

In its first efforts to avenge the death of their top terrorist Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda took responsibility for a pair of suicide bombings on a paramilitary training ground today in Pakistan which has resulted in the death of at least 80 people and wounding over 100 more.

Al-Qaeda is harboring resentment against the Pakistan government because they failed to stop the United States from killing bin Laden.

With the recent development of suicide bombers attacking Pakistan paramilitary trainees, it is pretty obvious that al-Qaeda’s current targets are not just Americans.

But al-Qaeda has issued a clear warning to the United States that additional violence will ensue and will aim to target Americans living within Pakistan.

Since the killing of bin Laden, Pakistan and the United States have had tense relations as to how the operation was carried out and also if Pakistan had been providing safe haven for bin Laden throughout all of these years, not to mention the billions of dollars Pakistan has been receiving from the Untied States government.

Perhaps this is a good opportunity to maybe mend those ‘fighting words’ and come up with some kind of compromise to battle terrorism.

Most significant of all is the fact that Pakistan has nuclear weapons. One possible concern is the idea of al-Qaeda somehow intervening through Pakistani intelligence and getting its hands on one of those weapons or even blowing it up through another suicide bombing.

A catastrophe would be on our hands.

The Hitler, Clinton, Obama, Libya and Kosovo connection

There is a saying “somehow everything is connected”. Well the current events in the Middle East and the wake of the death of Osama bin Laden, seem to have interconnections to prior historical events that everyone is more than likely familiar with.

A fact that is often overlooked during Nazi Germany in the 1940’s was that Adolf Hitler “secretly” had very close ties to Muslims, or more specifically, you could say the “early years” of what came to be radical Islam. Sounds bizarre. Especially when you consider that Hitler ordered the extermination of more than 6 million Jews. Hitler had a close relationship to Haj Amin al-Husseini, a Palestinian leader who supported Hitler’s reign to exterminate those Jews and asked Hitler to support Arab independence and oppose any establishment of what eventually became the Jewish State of Israel. al-Husseini also was an original member of the Muslim Brotherhood. This is the same Muslim Brotherhood that is currently occupied in Egypt and Libya and its current clerical leader Yusuf al-Qaradawi has vowed to see the extermination of Israel.

On numerous occasions, Hitler consulted with al-Husseini on ways to strengthen the Nazi regime. One way they accomplished this occurred when the Nazis invaded Yugoslavia and utilized the 21^st Division of the SS Skanderbeg, to arm the Muslim dominated Yugoslav region of Kosovo, which in turn, the Muslims fought against Yugoslav forces.

The presence of Muslims in Kosovo has existed for centuries, many of them had come from neighboring Albania; and furthermore, Kosovo had been part of the Yugoslav state of Serbia. Eventually by the late 1980’s however, Yugoslavia began to fall apart primarily due to ethnic tensions in Bosnia-Herzegovina, which had been diversely dominated by Muslims, Croats and Serbs. During Slobodan Milosevic’s rise to power in Serbia, they had invaded Bosnia and carried out “ethic cleansing” and Yugoslavia continued to become divided. By the mid 1990’s, Bosnia, Croatia and Slovenia had declared independence.

Another overlooked fact was in 1998, when the Kosovo War broke out; Milosevic was President of Yugoslavia and made unsuccessful attempts to solve the Kosovo problem peacefully. President Bill Clinton, looking at Milosevic as nothing more than a pure dictator, took action by commanding NATO to bomb Yugoslavia for three months, thus destroying the Serbian army and effectively arming Muslims in Kosovo. According to declassified CIA documents, many of these Muslims were either associated or were members of al-Qaeda who not only trained in bin Laden’s terrorist camps in Afghanistan, but also on camps in Bosnia.

Eventually, Milosevic was overthrown and turned over to the UN International Criminal Tribunal Court on war crimes charges while Kosovo continued to become a destabilized part of the former Yugoslavia, having declared its independence, but is still a disputed territory and seemingly infested with growing radical Islam.

Fast forward to Libya. President Obama made the same move that Clinton did with Kosovo. Ordering NATO strikes on Libya, and arming the so-called ‘rebels’ that we don’t even know who they are or where they’re really from. Moammar Gaddafi stated that these rebels were from al-Qaeda. Why does this sound difficult to understand? It is the same al-Qaeda group with close relations to the Muslim Brotherhood now occupied in Egypt and now occupying Libya.

In essence, the United States has not only on one occasion, but on two occasions, effectively armed the same terrorist group that orchestrated the 9/11 attacks. Yet neither Clinton nor Obama seem to realize that their decisions to arm al-Qaeda in Kosovo and Libya respectfully, is in essence, the same strategy that Hitler initiated by recruiting and arming Muslims in Nazi Germany so many decades ago.

A long commentary short, this began with Hitler’s Nazi Germany which is responsible for the extermination of 6 million Jews, utilizing Albanian Muslims from Kosovo and after World War II, the same dominated Muslims remained there. Hitler’s relationship with al-Husseini proves that the Nazi Holocaust never ended. It has continued under the direction of the Muslim Brotherhood and from its relationship with Hamas and Hezbollah, this organization’s goal is to ultimately see the destruction of Israel and Iran has the same goal as well. It should also be noted that Ayman al-Zawahiri, the new leader of al-Qaeda, is also a member of the Brotherhood. If the unrest continues throughout the Middle East, one place to watch very carefully is Kosovo.

The connection is fascinating, yet dangerous.

Senator Schumer calling for “No Ride List”

In the wake of the killing of Osama bin Laden, New York Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer is calling for a “No Ride List” for train travelers, similar to the “No Fly List” created for airline passengers. The lists are designed for individuals suspected of terrorist activity or pose as a threat to the country’s national security.

The information seized from Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan discovered plans which included targeting railway trains that pass through major cities including Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington D.C. and New York. Because of the lax in security at train stations, Senator Schumer said “that’s why I’m calling for the creation of an Amtrak no ride list. That would take the secure flight program and apply it to Amtrak trains.”

Rather strange that this was not set up in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks ten years ago, don’t you agree?

With nearly 150,000 miles of train and freight track in this country, one could certainly argue the possibility of monitoring and securing the railway system would be difficult. This stretch of train tracks doesn’t even count the subway systems in major cities.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is insisting that security will be stepped up in all public transportation eventually. What’s next? Do cab and bus drivers have to pat down passengers too?

More than likely, this means that if you wish to travel by plane, train or ship, you’ll be subjected to those invasive pat downs and body scanning machines. We’ve already seen this fiasco from the TSA at airports nationwide.

In general, most Americans understand the government’s role in protecting the country from suspected terrorists. What we don’t need in this country is to have every single form of public transportation controlled by the TSA and give them the right to basically sexually assault people including children. It is quite disgusting.

While Senator Schumer’s idea of a “No Ride List” is certainly debatable, a much better idea for DHS to impose is simple: Profile passengers!

Osama bin Laden victory becoming an embarrassment?

Today President Obama will be visiting the site, in which the World Trade Center was destroyed on September 11^th. It comes four days after he broke the news on Sunday that we had killed Osama bin Laden, and immediately, the nation sprung into celebration.

But in the days following, some of that celebration has become dominated by mixed reactions based on the contradictions of the Obama Administration. We were told at one point that Osama bin Laden was armed. Then he wasn’t armed. He used his wife as a human shield. He didn’t use his wife as a human shield. His wife was killed; then his wife wasn’t killed. CIA director Leon Panetta said the death photos would be released; now they’re not going to be released.

Over the course of the last three days, what should have been a triumphant moment to unite the country just as we were on September 12^th, 2001, the entire issue of Osama bin Laden’s death has seemingly continued to divide the country. Apparently the administration has no problem with the leaked photos that are available of bin Laden’s couriers that were killed in the compound, but they have a major problem with releasing a photo of the man that masterminded an attack which killed thousands of innocent Americans.

In addition, there is growing hypocrisy on the left and the right. People on the right are arguing that President Bush deserves more credit than President Obama for bin Laden’s demise, which is true to the extent that Bush initiated the War on Terror, even though President Obama ultimately made the final call. The left meanwhile are all up in arms about whether bin Laden should have even been killed, because universally, the left is against violence and death … with the exception of abortion.

With happiness, closure, sadness, anger, doubt and further questioning from Americans abroad, and with the actual story of the raid changing on so many occasions, one has to ask themselves if this victory has become something of an embarrassment for this administration?

Osama bin Laden photos not be released

Following the death of Osama bin Laden on Sunday, theories and speculation have been circulating by some people that they will be rest assured once they have actual evidence to see that the world’s most wanted terrorist was killed by Navy SEALS.

The most significant evidence the White House presently has in its possession? The actual photos of bin Laden riddled with bullets, including a gruesome head wound between his eyes. The photos were taken before bin Laden was thrown into the Arabian Sea.

CIA Director Leon Panetta had initially stated that the photos would be released to the public. Today however, the Obama Administration said the photos would not be released because the images would be “too inflammatory”.

It is a rather debatable move by the White House, because a majority of Americans want to see the photos as proof that the man who has killed thousands of innocent people has indeed been killed and would put conspiracy theories to rest.

However, on the other side of the issue, the Federal Government doesn’t want people to be shocked by such gruesomeness and it could further upset the Middle East, especially al-Qaeda when they see Americans celebrating the death of their “beloved martyr”.

I can honestly say that there wouldn't be much inflammatory reaction by Americans, because just about everybody, including myself, is thrilled beyond reasonable doubt that this scumbag is dead and the photos can’t be any more gruesome than what we see on a daily basis in the movies and on television.

Perhaps Americans will put the pressure on the Obama Administration and demand the release of the photos. In a strange way, this may actually unite the country for a change.

Hint the word “Change”.

Pakistan angry over Osama bin Laden raid

While the U.S. celebrated the death of Osama bin Laden, one of the world’s most wanted criminals, the reaction from the Middle East has been nothing more than pure outrage.

Hamas had publicly condemned the United States; the Muslim Brotherhood is demanding U.S. military forces leave the Middle East immediately and the Taliban is vowing revenge.

But perhaps the most interesting of all was Pakistan's comments, a country that is supposed to be a U.S. ally. Well apparently it seems as though the so-called ‘alliance’ has been rather bleak these days.

Yesterday, former Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf told CNN-IBN “American troops coming across the border and taking action in one of our towns, that is Abbottabad, is not acceptable to the people of Pakistan, it is a violation of our sovereignty. It would have far better if Pakistani special services group had operated and conducted the mission.”

What a load of crap. It has been the case since the moment we entered Afghanistan following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, that the Pakistan Government has swayed back and forth. First vowing to help the United States combat terrorism and insisting al-Qaeda members are not wanted in Pakistan and then deciding to provide safe haven for Osama bin Laden throughout all of these years. It is patently absurd that the U.S. would agree to cooperate with Pakistan military forces, because if that were the case, Pakistan would have most likely alerted Osama bin Laden’s compound and he would have fled, as he has done many times over the course of the last 10 years.

While Pakistan continues to lie to the United States about helping the Taliban and that they provided a safe haven for bin Laden all this time, we still managed to send them over $3 billion in 2010. How does that image help the United States?

Despite the fact that this evil man masterminded the most horrific attack our country has ever experienced, and the countless bombings throughout Europe, and at African embassies and the Bali nightclub bombings, this man is now garnering tremendous sympathy throughout the Muslim world.

That is a hint with relation to the uprising in the Middle East right now. We have the Muslim Brotherhood destabilizing Egypt and Libya, Hamas and Hezbollah forming a coalition to destroy Israel; Iran and Egypt bridging relations for the first time in 30 years and to completely open up the Gaza Strip.

Yes, the death of Osama bin Laden is a great victory, but his death appears to be nothing more than the end of Chapter 2.

Osama bin Laden: Dead

In a surprise announcement last night, President Obama gave a speech that every American has been waiting to hear: Osama bin Laden is dead.

The mastermind of the 9/11 terrorist attacks had been evading capture for almost ten years ever since President Bush gave the orders to the U.S. military to invade Afghanistan to overthrow the Taliban and to dismantle the al-Qaeda terrorist network.

According to President Obama, bin Laden was killed in a Navy Seal operative shoot out where he was hiding in a mansion in Pakistan, presumably where he has been hiding since fleeing Afghanistan. His body has been disposed of at sea.

While the death of Osama bin Laden immediately sparked celebrations nationwide and should offer some closure to the families of the men and women killed in the 9/11 terrorist attacks, this does not mean that al-Qaeda is gone.

Immediately following the news that bin Laden was killed, the terrorist group, Hamas, publicly condemned bin Laden’s death saying "We regard this as a continuation of the American policy based on oppression and the shedding of Muslim and Arab blood.”

In other words, there will be a high level of alert, as this news has likely infuriated al-Qaeda and followers of radical Islam. Al-Qaeda has already selected its new leader to succeed bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and most likely, al-Qaeda will continue in its pursuit to do harm to America.

On a side note, while the entire Middle East region is increasingly becoming destabilized, it was interesting to know that Ali Abdullah Saleh, the President of Yemen, after indicating for weeks that he would leave power at the height of protests, refused to cease power on the same day that bin Laden was killed. Yemen just happens to be a country that is infested with al-Qaeda.

For the moment however, this should be an exciting day for Americans and to offer some closure to those families affected by the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It is one step closer in combating Islamic terrorism in the Middle East. But when will the battle actually end? We may never know.

Truth behind Gaddafi's claim that al-Qaeda is responsible for Libyan unrest?

The usual delusional world of Muammar Gaddafi continued today as he once again singled out the terrorist network al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden, as the reason why the unrest in Libya is happening.

We could go one step further and blame Charlie Sheen for the unrest as well... but we won't. Charlie Sheen is not worth anyone's time.

Gaddafi however, is somewhat correct about al-Qaeda having a presence in his country which he is loosing control of. Recently, al-Qaeda set up an Islamic emirate in Libya near Tripoli. However there has been no evidence of al-Qaeda influencing the people of Libya to rise up against Gaddafi's reign. On another note, the Muslim Brotherhood has had an influence on the unrest across the Middle East. Deciphering some of Gaddafi's rather strange and bizarre comments, there are some credible ties between the Muslim Brotherhood and terrorist groups throughout the region including al-Qaeda and Hamas.

It wouldn't hurt to say that such terrorist related groups in general, particularly Hamas and Hezbollah are primary reasons as to why the region is collapsing. Hamas notably has participated with al-Qaeda on a number of occasions, and Hamas' own charter identifies itself as associated with the Muslim Brotherhood.

Really? You might ask.

You may recall just last month, the clerical leader of the Muslim Brotherhood issued a fatwa calling for the assassination of Gaddafi. So from the standpoint that Hamas has worked with al-Qaeda and is associated with the Muslim Brotherhood, Gaddafi may have some legitimate points about al-Qaeda bearing some responsibility for the uprising in his country.

And Gaddafi is showing no signs of giving up power. While the United Nations imposed sanctions against Libya and declared a "no-fly" zone,  it is an estimated that at least a thousand or more people in Libya have been killed since the uprising, which Gaddafi is blamed for.

This is not to say that he is 100% correct with his allegations on al-Qaeda and there is no doubt that he is an insane and irrational individual, but the fact that the Muslim Brotherhood seemingly is committed to destabilizing the Middle East, one has to look at the frightening possibilities.  

Actually Gaddafi and Charlie Sheen, two insane individuals, may get along well...

NATO putting on the pressure to pull out of Afghanistan

Last weekend President Obama hopped all over the financial summits in Asia to discuss global economic reform, and now this weekend, he is meeting with leaders at the NATO summit in Lisbon concerning the War in Afghanistan.

As many may remember, President Obama repeatedly stated that he wanted troops to come home by 2011 and handover the responsibility to Afghan forces. Now it appears that officials are more or less focusing to withdraw the 100,000 troops, which included the 30,000 troops ordered by President Obama last year, by 2014.

The reason for this?

Mainly because Afghanistan has shown very little signs of stabilizing itself.

It shouldn’t appear to be such a shocker to President Obama, nor for any official in our Federal Government, as Afghanistan remains one of the top unstable governments in the entire world and has dealt with a continuous civil war for many decades, both from the invasion from the Soviet Union in the 1970’s, to an internal war throughout the 1990’s which resulted in the Taliban. Yet every time there seemed to be a war going on in Afghanistan, it was never able to build itself into a stabilized country.

I seem to recall we also went into Iraq and overthrew Saddam Hussein. Yet after years of fighting a war in that country, Iraq is still quite unstable and the place is pretty much uninhabitable.

Of course, the primary reason for going into Afghanistan back in 2001 in the first place, was to overthrow the Taliban and dismantle the al-Qaeda network, as a direct result of the September 11^th terrorist attacks. Since that time, the U.S. Military has been unsuccessful in capturing the real ringleader behind those attacks, Osama bin Laden, ranging from theories that he is dead, or hiding out someplace in Pakistan.

President Obama has quite a bit to deal with right now in the Middle East, from leaving Iraq, to stabilizing Afghanistan, and apparently ignorant over Iran’s nuclear program.

At the NATO summit, leaders are pressuring President Obama to implement a better strategy for exiting Afghanistan by that time. While NATO has no exact departure date to be set in 2014, it is projected that the new war efforts in Afghanistan will cost American taxpayers $125 billion through these next three and a half years. Never mind the fact that the United States has enough problems on its plate including servicing its $14 trillion national debt, and providing health care for veterans that just returned from Iraq.

The real question remains as to when the United States does in fact leave Afghanistan, is that country going to be able to sustain itself as a stable government with democracy and its Afghan forces; or will it just become another breeding ground for future generations of al-Qaeda, again posing as a threat to our country’s national security, and the rest of the world?