Tag Archives: terrorism

How Saudi/Gulf Money Fuels Terror, by Daniel Lazare

From Daniel Lazare at consortiumnews.com:

Exclusive: With the death toll in the Paris terror attacks still rising, French President Hollande is condemning an “act of war” by the Islamic State, but the underlying reality is that France’s rich friends in the Persian Gulf are key accomplices in the mayhem, writes Daniel Lazare.

By Daniel Lazare

In the wake of the latest terrorist outrage in Paris, the big question is not which specific group is responsible for the attack, but who’s responsible for the Islamic State and Al Qaeda in the first place. The answer that has grown increasingly clear in recent years is that it’s Western leaders who have used growing portions of the Muslim world as a playground for their military games and are now crying crocodile tears over the consequences.

This pattern had its beginnings in the 1980s in Afghanistan, where the Central Intelligence Agency and the Saudi royal family virtually invented modern jihadism in an effort to subject the Soviets to a Vietnam-style war in their own backyard. It was the case, too, in Iraq, which the United States and Great Britain invaded in 2003, triggering a vicious civil warfare between Shi‘ites and Sunnis.

Prince Bandar bin Sultan, then Saudi ambassador to the United States, meeting with President George W. Bush in Crawford, Texas, on Aug. 27, 2002. (White House photo)

Today, it’s the case in Yemen where the U.S. and France are helping Saudi Arabia in its massive air war against Houthi Shi‘ites. And it’s the case in Syria, the scene of the most destructive war game of them all, where Saudi Arabia and other Arab Gulf states are channeling money and arms to Al Qaeda, the Islamic State (also known as ISIS, ISIL and Daesh), and similar forces with the full knowledge of the U.S.

Western leaders encourage this violence yet decry it in virtually the same breath. In April 2008, a Treasury official testified in a congressional hearing that “Saudi Arabia today remains the location from which more money is going to … Sunni terror groups and the Taliban than from any other place in the world.” [See Rachel Ehrenfeld, “Their Oil Is Thicker Than Our Blood,” in in Sarah N. Stern, ed., Saudi Arabia and the Global Islamic Terrorist Network: America and the West’s Fatal Embrace (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011), p. 127.]

In December 2009, Hillary Clinton noted in a confidential diplomatic memo that “donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide.” In October 2014, Joe Biden told students at Harvard’s Kennedy School that “the Saudis, the emirates, etc. … were so determined to take down [Syrian President Bashar al-] Assad and essentially have a proxy Sunni-Shia war … [that] they poured hundreds of millions of dollars and tens of thousands of tons of military weapons into anyone who would fight against Assad except the people who were being supplied were Al Nusra and Al Qaeda.”

Just last month, a New York Times editorial complained that Saudis, Qataris and Kuwaitis were continuing to funnel donations not only to Al Qaeda but to Islamic State as well.

To continue reading: How Saudi/Gulf Money Fuels Terror

Angry Belgian Muslims and the Price of Welfare Statism, by Pater Tanebrarum

From Pater Tenebrarum at davidstockmanscontracorner.com:

In the wake of recent revelations about the identities of the morons involved in the horrific Paris attacks (happily, most of them shuffled off the mortal coil as well, thereby improving the aggregate degree of moral clarity and intelligence in the world), a friend pointed us to an article at Unz Review that asks: “Why Does Belgium Have Such Angry Muslims?”

Our instinctive, immediate reaction was to argue that the bland, boring Belgian welfare state simply makes people angry by virtue of its existence. What is Belgium? It is that useless, additional stretch of flat land you are forced to cross on your way from Paris to Amsterdam. Just driving through it probably makes people angry.

Then we became aware of the following statistic from an article at QZ, which shows the European countries providing the largest numbers of foreign fighters per capita to ISIS (not surprisingly, Belgium heads the list):

European countries providing the largest number of foreign fighters per capita to the battleground in Syria and Iraq

In case you haven’t noticed dear reader, the list contains the most famous socialist paradises of Europe. The countries Bernie Sanders would love to emulate, such as Sweden, Denmark, France, Belgium, etc.

We will take it as a small piece of evidence that welfare statism leads to moral decay and deadens people’s souls. As we have pointed out in our comment on the refugee crisis, there are a number of statistical facts that cannot be denied. By way of example, we presented the following data points:

The vast bulk of refugees arriving in Europe does end up firmly attached to the teats of the European welfare state (as an aside, economic refugees are at present indeed exploiting the fact that the number of genuine war refugees is exploding; there is e.g. a brisk trade in fake Syrian passports in places like Turkey and Egypt). As the European press reports , in Norway it takes on average seven years before a successful asylum seeker finds a job. 85% of Muslim immigrants to Switzerland become recipients of social welfare. Practically all refugees from Chechnya, Afghanistan and Somalia residing in Vienna are receiving “needs-oriented basic welfare provision” (in this case, approx. $9,950 per person per year, plus extras like a top-up for heating costs in winter and free healthcare).

As we have noted elsewhere, many Muslims in Europe are ending up as economically marginalized ghetto-dwellers. We don’t want to minimize their personal responsibility, especially as statistics also suggest that refugees from some other areas of the world (such as Vietnam) tend to exhibit a great deal of social mobility, and are prepared to work extremely hard for becoming successful and well-integrated members of society. As an aside, one can of course not generalize. “Many” is by no means the same as “all”. Keep in mind when reading this that there are many individuals who have managed to escape the trap we are describing below.

To continue reading: Angry Belgian Muslims and the Price of Welfare Statism

Western Double Standards on Terrorism Deaths, by Muhammad Sahimi

There are some people who will skip this article when they see the name of the author, which will only serve as proof of what the author is saying. From Muhammad Sahimi at antiwar.com:

The Islamic State (IS), also known as the ISIS and ISIL, has taken responsibility for the horrendous terrorist attacks on Paris that murdered 129 innocent people and injured hundreds more. The criminal act has been rightly condemned by world’s leader, ranging from President Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron, to President Hassan Rouhani of Iran and even Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of the Lebanese Hezbollah. The attacks have rightly outraged ordinary people everywhere. There is a feeling of solidarity with the people of France everywhere, and there should be. But, the solidarity and sympathy appear to be selective.

The day before the Paris attacks, the IS took responsibility for carrying out another horrendous terrorist bombing, this time in the Shiite neighborhood of Beirut that killed at least 43 people and wounded hundreds.

The day before the Beirut attacks suicide bombing by the IS killed at least 26 people in Baghdad. From August through November the IS carried out a series of other terrorist attacks in Baghdad. The August attacks murdered killed at least 80 people; The September attacks killed at least 13 people, while the October bombing took the lives of at least 24 innocent people. Thus, 143 Iraqis have lost their lives at the hands of the IS over the past three months.

What has been the world’s, and in particular’ the West’s reaction to the carnage in Beirut and Baghdad? Nothing; no sympathy with the Lebanese and Iraqi people was expressed. No message of solidarity was sent, and no demonstrations or gatherings took place outside Lebanon’s and Iraq’s diplomatic missions anywhere in the Western world. The world was silent, as it has been about similar terrorist attacks over the past few months have killed a large number of innocent Muslims around the world.

Why is it that Western governments and people said almost nothing about the IS crimes in Iraq, Lebanon, and elsewhere in the Islamic world, which has in fact been happening on a regular basis for over two years now, while expect everyone to condemn the Paris attack, and in fact hold that as a measure of how strongly anti-terrorism is a nation and its people? Muslim people everywhere condemned the Paris attacks using the strongest language. Will Christians and Jews condemn the Beirut and Baghdad attacks? Do not hold your breath; it will not be coming. The double standards of the West and the Christians and Jews, and their selective grief and outrage, cannot be more glaring.

In fact, the Paris attacks have given new excuses to warmongers and Islamophobes in the U.S. to attack the President and Muslims – not that the President himself has not contributed to the bloodshed in the Middle East and North Africa; he has mightily. Appearing as moral impostors, they are calling for new wars against Muslim nations in the Middle East, and spreading Islamophobia and prejudice against Muslims in the United States.

To continue reading: Western Double Standards on Terrorism Deaths

Exploiting Emotions About Paris to Blame Snowden, Distract from Actual Culprits Who Empowered ISIS, by Glenn Greenwald

From Glenn Greenwald at informationclearinghouse.info:

Whistleblowers are always accused of helping America’s enemies (top Nixon aides accused Daniel Ellsberg of being a Soviet spy and causing the deaths of Americans with his leak); it’s just the tactical playbook that’s automatically used. So it’s of course unsurprising that ever since Edward Snowden’s whistleblowing enabled newspapers around the world to report on secretly implemented programs of mass surveillance, he has been accused by “officials” and their various media allies of Helping The Terrorists™.

Still, I was a bit surprised just by how quickly and blatantly — how shamelessly — some of them jumped to exploit the emotions prompted by the carnage in France to blame Snowden: doing so literally as the bodies still lay on the streets of Paris. At first, the tawdry exploiters were the likes of crazed ex-intelligence officials (former CIA chief James Woolsey, who once said Snowden “should be hanged by his neck until he is dead” and now has deep ties to private NSA contractors, along with Iran–obsessed Robert Baer); former Bush/Cheney apparatchiks (ex-White House spokesperson and current Fox personality Dana Perino); right-wing polemicists fired from BuzzFeed for plagiarism; and obscure Fox News comedians (Perino’s co-host). So it was worth ignoring save for the occasional Twitter retort.

But now we’ve entered the inevitable “U.S. Officials Say” stage of the “reporting” on the Paris attack — i.e., journalists mindlessly and uncritically repeat whatever U.S. officials whisper in their ear about what happened. So now credible news sites are regurgitating the claim that the Paris Terrorists were enabled by Snowden leaks — based on no evidence or specific proof of any kind, needless to say, but just the unverified, obviously self-serving assertions of government officials. But much of the U.S. media loves to repeat rather than scrutinize what government officials tell them to say. So now this accusation has become widespread and is thus worth examining with just some of the actual evidence.

One key premise here seems to be that prior to the Snowden reporting, The Terrorists helpfully and stupidly used telephones and unencrypted emails to plot, so Western governments were able to track their plotting and disrupt at least large-scale attacks. That would come as a massive surprise to the victims of the attacks of 2002 in Bali, 2004 in Madrid, 2005 in London, 2008 in Mumbai, and April 2013 at the Boston Marathon. How did the multiple perpetrators of those well-coordinated attacks — all of which were carried out prior to Snowden’s June 2013 revelations — hide their communications from detection?

This is a glaring case where propagandists can’t keep their stories straight. The implicit premise of this accusation is that The Terrorists didn’t know to avoid telephones or how to use effective encryption until Snowden came along and told them. Yet we’ve been warned for years and years before Snowden that The Terrorists are so diabolical and sophisticated that they engage in all sorts of complex techniques to evade electronic surveillance.

By itself, the glorious mythology of How the U.S. Tracked Osama bin Laden should make anyone embarrassed to make these claims. After all, the central premise of that storyline is that bin Laden only used trusted couriers to communicate because al Qaeda knew for decades to avoid electronic means of communication because the U.S. and others could spy on those communications. Remember all that? Zero Dark Thirty and the “harsh but effective” interrogation of bin Laden’s “official messenger”?

To continue reading: Exploiting Emotions About Paris to Blame Snowden

A Most Convenient Massacre, by Dmitry Orlov

From Dmitry Orlov at cluborlov.blogspot.com:

What a difference a single massacre can make!

• Just a week ago the EU couldn’t possibly figure out anything to do to stop the influx of “refugees” from all those countries the US and NATO had bombed into oblivion. But now, because “Paris changed everything,” EU’s borders are being locked down and refugees are being turned back.

• Just a week ago it seemed that the EU was going to be swamped by resurgent nationalism, with incumbent political parties poised to get voted out of power. But now, thanks to the Paris massacre, they have obtained a new lease on life, because they can now safely embrace the same policies that a week ago they branded as “fascist.”

• Just a week ago the EU and the US couldn’t possibly bring themselves admit that they are utterly incompetent when it comes to combating their own creation—ISIS, that is—and need Russian help. But now, at the après-Paris G-20 summit, everybody is ready to line up and let Putin take charge of the war against terrorism. Look—the Americans finally found those convoys of tanker trucks stretching beyond the horizon that ISIS has been using to smuggle out stolen Syrian crude oil—after Putin showed them the satellite photos!

Am I being crass and insensitive? Not at all—I deplore all the deaths from terrorist attacks in Iraq, in Syria, in Lebanon, and in all the other countries whose populations did absolutely nothing to deserve such treatment. I only feel half as bad about the French, who stood by quietly as their military helped destroy Libya (which did nothing to deserve it).

Note that after the Russian jet crashed in the Sinai there weren’t all that many Facebook avatars with the Russian flag pasted over them, and hardly any candlelight vigils or piles of wreaths and flowers in various Western capitals. I even detected a whiff of smug satisfaction that the Russians got their comeuppance for stepping out of line in Syria.

To continue reading: A Most Convenient Massacre

From Paris to Polarization, by Dan Sanchez

From Dan Sanchez at antiwar.com:

What were the Islamist terrorists trying to accomplish by attacking Paris on Friday, killing over 300 French civilians? An increasing number of analysts now agree with Juan Cole’s theory, which he raised after the last such attack (the Charlie Hebdo murders), writing:

“The problem for a terrorist group like al-Qaeda is that its recruitment pool is Muslims, but most Muslims are not interested in terrorism. Most Muslims are not even interested in politics, much less political Islam. France is a country of 66 million, of which about 5 million is of Muslim heritage. But in polling, only a third, less than 2 million, say that they are interested in religion. French Muslims may be the most secular Muslim-heritage population in the world… In Paris, where Muslims tend to be better educated and more religious, the vast majority reject violence and say they are loyal to France.

Al-Qaeda wants to mentally colonize French Muslims, but faces a wall of disinterest. But if it can get non-Muslim French to be beastly to ethnic Muslims on the grounds that they are Muslims, it can start creating a common political identity around grievance against discrimination.”

Cole likened this strategy to the early 20th century communist revolutionaries in Austria who would launch attacks for the express purpose of provoking a police crackdown on left-leaning citizens in order to radicalize them. From the perspective of the vanguard of the proletariat:

“…the fact that most students and workers don’t want to overthrow the business class is inconvenient, and so it seemed desirable to some of them to “sharpen the contradictions” between labor and capital.”

This is the strategy explicitly professed by ISIS (aka Daesh), the group that almost surely perpetrated the Friday attacks. Also shortly after the Charlie Hebdo attacks, in its official magazine Dabiq, ISIS ran an article titled, “The Extinction of the Grayzone.”

The “grayzone” is the “gray area” between black and white. According to the authors, the grayzone is the middle ground between extremist, Salafi, terrorist theocrats (i.e., themselves, whom they exclusively regard as the “camp of Islam”) on one side and an imperialist, war-waging, western “crusader camp” on the other.

In other words, the grayzone is the realm of coexistence, communication, cooperation, and commerce among people of different creeds. The grayzone is where civilization resides.

To continue reading: From Paris to Polarization

Paris Attacks Renew Call for Access to Encrypted Messages, by Chris Strohm and Del Quentin Wilber

You knew this was coming. Every time there’s a terrorist attack calls for further restrictions on liberty and expanded governmental surveillance power follow. From Chris Strohm and Del Quentin Wilber at bloomberg.com:

U.S. officials want capability to collect intelligence
Companies oppose efforts to weaken technology services

The bloodshed in Paris led U.S. officials Monday to renew calls for limits on technology that prevents governments from spying on phone conversations, text messages and e-mails.

Senator Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, said she asked Silicon Valley companies to help law enforcement and intelligence agencies access communications that have been encrypted — or scrambled to evade surveillance — if terrorists are using the tools to plan attacks.

“I have asked for help. And I haven’t gotten any help,” Feinstein said Monday in an interview with MSNBC. “If you create a product that allows evil monsters to communicate in this way, to behead children, to strike innocents, whether it’s at a game in a stadium, in a small restaurant in Paris, take down an airliner, that’s a big problem.”

The debate over using encryption illustrates how the pendulum of balancing security and privacy swings in response to events. Companies such as Apple Inc., Google Inc. and Yahoo! Inc. incorporated stronger encryption in their products after revelations of U.S. spying were exposed by Edward Snowden in 2013. Now the tables have turned.

Apple and Google on Monday didn’t respond to requests for comment on the issue. A Yahoo spokeswoman declined to comment. In the past, the companies have argued that governments can obtain evidence through other means, such as informants.

International Hunt

CIA Director John Brennan and other top U.S. national security officials stopped short of calling for new restrictions on Monday, but said terrorism suspects are using technologies to hide their planning and operations from law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

To continue reading: Paris Attacks Renew Call for Access to Encrypted Messages

 

Hell Comes to Paris, by John Wight

From John Wight, at counterpunch.org

Years spent depicting head chopping fanatics as rebels, moderates, and revolutionaries in an effort to effect the toppling of another secular government in the Middle East. Years spent cultivating Saudi Arabia as an ally against extremism and fanaticism rather than treating it as a country where extremism and fanaticism resides. Years spent treating the Assad government, Iran, and Russia as enemies rather than allies in the struggle against this fanaticism. And years spent denying any connection between a foreign policy underpinned by hubris and its inevitable blowback. All this together has succeeded in opening the gates of hell.

The aforementioned hubris was on display just hours prior to the horrific events in Paris, when British Prime Minister David Cameron elevated the killing of Mohammed Emwazi by US drone strike in Raqqa, Syria, to the status of a major military victory in the war against ISIS. Out came the podium from Number 10, and out he came to proclaim that the killing of Emwazi (aka Jihadi John) had “struck at the heart of the terrorist organization [ISIS].”

That Cameron could venture such a fatuous boast the very day after an ISIS suicide bomb attack in southern Beirut killed 43 and wounded over 200 people was yet more evidence of the extent to which Western governments are detached from the reality of the Frankenstein’s monster their foreign policy has helped create and let loose upon the world.

There is also the truth that in the minds of people whose worldview is grievously impaired by a Western prism, the deaths of Lebanese, Syrians, Iranians, and Kurds – in other words those engaged in the struggle against ISIS on the ground – constitute a statistic, while the deaths of Europeans and Americans to the same barbarism are an unspeakable tragedy.

In years to come historians will prepare such a scathing indictment against this generation’s leaders of the so-called free world, it will make the indictment prior generations of historians have leveled against the authors of the Sykes Picot Agreement, the Balfour Declaration, the Treaty of Versailles, the Munich Agreement, and the Suez Crisis seem like a playful tap on the wrist in comparison. In fact, the only issue of debate in the course of preparing it will be where it should begin and where it should end. As things stand, it is on track to be open-ended.

To continue reading: Hell Comes to Paris

France’s Far-Right Party Calls For Nation To “Re-Arm Itself”, Revoke Muslims’ Passports, “Eradicate” Radical Islam, by Tyler Durden

From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

If there is one ‘winner’ from last night’s terrible events in Paris, it is France’s anti-EU, anti-immigration far-right wing Front Nationale party leader Marine Le Pen. Having already ascended to the lead in yet another poll ahead of France’s 2017 elections, Le Pen came out swinging this morning call for France to “re-arm itself,” stating that radical Islam must be “eradicated” from France. She further demanded that border controls be made “permanent” and binational Islamists must be depreived of their French passport.

As Bloomberg notes:

*FAR RIGHT PARTY LEADER MARINE LE PEN COMMENTS IN TV SPEECH
*LE PEN SAYS FRANCE NEEDS TO CONTROL ITS BORDERS PERMANENTLY
*LE PEN CALLS FOR PERMANENT BORDER CONTROLS
*LE PEN CALLS FOR ‘ERADICATION’ OF RADICAL ISLAMISM IN FRANCE
*LE PEN: FRANCE IS ‘VULNERABLE’, ‘MUST RE-ARM ITSELF’
*LE PEN: FRENCH PEOPLE ARE NO LONGER SAFE
*LE PEN: BI-NATIONAL ISLAMISTS MUST DEPRIVED OF FRENCH PASSEPORT

Which is all fine if this was some extreme and unpopular party, but in fact…

Marine Le Pen Tops Another French Presidency Poll

The Front National party in France are moving one step closer to seriously challenging for the country’s presidency. A new opinion poll reveals that their leader, nationalist firebrand Marine Le Pen, has topped yet another poll ahead of the elections in 2017.

The IFOP poll in conjunction with Sud Radio and Lyon Capitale gives Ms. Le Pen a lead under three different scenarios, reflecting the panic setting into the French political establishment which is considering a ‘grand coalition’ of centre-left and centre-right parties to keep the Front National out.

According to IFOP, if centrist politician Francois Bayrou and centre-right Nicolas Sarkozy ran, Ms. Le Pen would top the first choice in the multi-round election with 28 per cent of the votes. In second, the Republican Party’s Sarkozy (23), and in third, current president, socialist Francois Hollande (21).

As John Rubino noted previously, there are two reasons for the rise of National Front and other anti-euro parties:

1) The adoption of a common currency hasn’t delivered the broad-based prosperity that was promised. Instead, Germany has entered a golden age of soaring exports, massive trade surpluses and balanced budgets while most other eurozone countries have been unable to function with a currency they can’t devalue at will.

2) The European Union’s decision to counter falling birthrates with rising immigration from Africa and the Middle East has, in the opinion of a growing number of Europeans, produced a two-tiered society in which a shrinking layer of liberal, pacifist, aging “natives” sits atop a growing, restless layer of newcomers who instead of assimilating are trying to impose their culture on traditional Europe.

And then came the Paris attacks. The perps are Middle Eastern though it’s not clear what group they’re affiliated with. But no one seems to care whether it’s ISIS or al-Qaeda. Their ancestry is all that will matter in the next election, and any politician with an anti-euro, anti-immigrant platform will find a suddenly very receptive audience.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-11-14/frances-far-right-party-calls-nation-re-arm-itself-revoke-muslims-passports-eradicat

She Said That? 10/29/15

Every day Margaret Griffis at antiwar.com publishes a running tally of the people killed in Iraq. She is impartial, listing violent deaths inflicted by all parties. SLL is publishing this list to show how routine violence is in this land that had been supposedly conquered and pacified by the US. Seventeen were tortured to death, suicide bombers killed 10, the body of a director of a blood bank was discovered with knife wounds, and so on. Imagine if 64 people in the US were killed in one day in the ways listed in this account. Somebody would declare of state of emergency. However, there is nothing unusual about the tally for yesterday; some days the number killed is higher, some days it’s lower. From Margaret Griffis:

Despite many assurances to the contrary from U.S. leaders, U.S. troops are already “in combat” in Iraq, according to U.S. spokesperson Col. Steve Warren.

At least 64 were killed and 25 were wounded, but the numbers could be much higher if reports over the capture of dozens of Peshmerga are true.

There are unofficial reports concerning about 30 to 40 Peshmerga who were captured by militants near Mala Abdulluh. If true, most of the troops were wounded before capture, and some were already executed.

In Mosul, 17 people were tortured to death, including civilians.

Four suicide bombers struck in Abbasiya, killing 10 security personnel.

In Thar Thar, clashes left six security members dead.

Clashes in Fat’ha left one security member dead and five wounded. Five militants were also killed.

One civilian was killed and seven more were wounded by a blast in Taji.

In Baghdad, a bomb killed one civilian and wounded six more.

One security member was killed and three were wounded in a blast in Abu Ghraib.

The body of the director of the blood bank at Sadr General Hospital was discovered with knife wounds in Sadr City.

A dumped body was discovered in Madaen.

A mortar attack on Speicher Base left three policemen with injuries.

Airstrikes killed 14 militants in Fallujah.

In Tel al-Dhahab, a strike killed two militant leaders and wounded an aide.

Just another ho-hum day in Iraq.

http://original.antiwar.com/updates/2015/10/28/at-least-64-killed-in-iraq-including-isis-prisoners/