Elements of Al Qaeda and other Islamic extremist groups were known to be key players in the NATO-backed uprising in Libya from the beginning, but now it appears that prominent Jihadists and terrorists are practically leading the revolution with Western support.
One terror leader in particular, Abdelhakim Belhaj, made headlines around the world over the weekend after it emerged that he was appointed the chief of Tripoli’s rebel Military Council. Prior to leading rebel forces against Gaddafi’s regime, Belhaj was the founder and leader of the notorious Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG).
Eventually the terror “Emir,” as he has been called, was arrested and tortured as an American prisoner in the terror war. In 2004, according to reports, he was transferred to the Gaddafi regime — then a U.S. terror-war ally.
Many observers have long detected a fishy odor about the domestic terrorism plots the Federal Bureau of Investigation has busted, often to great fanfare, over the last decade. Frequently it appears that the government, through its informants, instigates the plots just so it can turn around and take credit for having stopped them in their tracks, thereby protecting Americans and, in the words of Glenn Greenwald, “proving both that domestic Terrorism from Muslims is a serious threat and the Government’s vast surveillance power — current and future new ones — are necessary.”
Now, thanks to a yearlong investigation by Mother Jones and the Investigative Reporting Program at the University of California-Berkeley, those suspicions have been vindicated. Having “examined prosecutions of 508 defendants in terrorism-related cases,” Trevor Aaronson writes, the investigative team found that the FBI “now maintains a roster of 15,000 spies” — plus as many as 45,000 unofficial ones — “as part of a domestic intelligence apparatus whose only historical peer might be COINTELPRO, the program the bureau ran from the ‘50s to the ‘70s to discredit and marginalize organizations ranging from the Ku Klux Klan to civil-rights and protest groups.”
American and Colombian officials suspected that a decision by the Brazilian government granting political asylum to a prominent Marxist terrorist was made under pressure from former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, whose Workers’ Party (PT) has frequently been accused of receiving millions of dollars from the drug-trafficking terror group known as the FARC.
The suspicions surrounding the case were highlighted in an explosive U.S. diplomatic cable from 2006 that was recently released by the whistle-blowing organization WikiLeaks. But despite the enormity of the revelations in the document, entitled “Brazil Grants Asylum to FARC Terrorist,” there has been virtually no press coverage of the scandal so far.
The saga described in the cable began when Francisco Antonio Cadena, the so-called “Ambassador to Brazil” for the communist Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), was arrested by Brazilian authorities in 2005. He was apparently living there with his family at the time.
The Central Intelligence Agency was intimately involved with the federal government’s infamous “Operation Fast and Furious” scheme to send American weapons to Mexican drug cartels while simultaneously working with other agencies allowing narcotics to be shipped over the border, according to a series of explosive reports.
Citing an unnamed CIA source, a Washington Times article theorizes that U.S. officials were actively aiding organizations such as the Sinaloa cartel with guns and immunity in an effort to stymie Los Zetas. That’s because, according to the piece, the powerful and brutal criminal Zetas syndicate has the potential to overthrow the government of Mexico — and might be planning to do so.
Apparently the secretive U.S. intelligence agency also played a key role in creating and using the American government’s gun-running program to arm certain criminal organizations.
The recent horrendous casualties suffered by our military forces in Afghanistan must lead the average American to ask the simple question: Why are we still there? Of course, we are told that we are there to prevent the Taliban from coming back into Afghanistan and imposing their radical Islamic dictatorship over that country’s hapless population. But as we all know, the moment we leave Afghanistan, the Taliban will be back, and it will be up to the government in Kabul to prevent them from imposing their cruel and despotic rule.
We cannot be there much longer, nor is it the responsibility of the American people, at great sacrifice in lives and treasure, to see that Afghanistan is turned into a western-style democratic society. Not only is it not our responsibility to do so, but the simple truth is that we are incapable of turning a very large, backward, primitive country into a modern state. Nations are responsible for their own destinies, and the United States does not have the right or the means to remake other nations.
Despite the touted secrecy of the Navy SEAL assassination of Osama bin Laden, the White House is apparently collaborating with a Hollywood production company on a movie documenting the incident. The film’s production is being undertaken by the team behind the 2009 Best Picture Oscar winner The Hurt Locker. The project is provoking Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee Peter King (R.-N.Y.) to call for a Pentagon investigation into the collaboration. There are a series of concerns raised by the production. The Blaze writes, “The Pentagon confirmed it‘s giving mission information to the film’s screenwriter Mark Boal and director Kathryn Bigelow.”
"This film project is only in the script development phase, and DoD is providing assistance with script research, which is something we commonly do for established filmmakers," Pentagon spokesman Col. Dave Lapan said. "Until there is a script to review, and a request for equipment or other DoD support, there is no formal agreement for DoD support."
The reaction was predictable. Following the tragic terror attack in Norway that left more than 75 people dead, calls to further empower government erupted worldwide.
Anti-gun zealots immediately pushed for more restrictive laws, despite the fact that Norway already has an extraordinarily strict gun-control regime. The bullets reportedly used by the killer were already illegal, as was murder.
Others advocated a crackdown on so-called right-wing extremists and “hate speech,” which is already considered criminal in much of Europe. In the U.K., activists wanted to ban an anti-immigration rally, as police urged citizens to report individuals with anti-government views to authorities.
When New Jersey Governor Chris Christie picked Sohail Mohammed — a lawyer who had represented acquitted terror suspects after the September 11 attacks — to be a Superior Court judge, immediate objections forced him to defend his choice. Much of the criticism of his appointment focused on Mohammed’s alleged links to terrorism and the possibility that Mohammed would be inclined to follow Shariah law; however, in his unique brand of political rhetoric, Christie labeled his critics “ignorant” and “crazies.”