Was Iranian assassination plot, an inside job?

Manssor Arbabsir, alleged Iranian mastermind

By John Blythe

There are some lingering questions that have come up ever since the alleged plot unfolded on Tuesday about an Iranian American citizen with ties to Iran’s government, planned to conspire with a Mexican drug cartel to assassinate a Saudi Ambassador and blow up an Israeli embassy in Washington.

The accused mastermind behind the plot, Manssor Arbabsir, was charged by the U.S. Justice Department for conspiracy to commit a terrorist attack on American soil. Manssor’s friends however, have a completely different viewpoint on this. Manssor was a used car salesman in Texas and his friends and associates say this was a man who could barely afford to pay his bills or keep his auto records straight, let along pull off a major terrorist attack.

In another interesting twist, the plot was released to the news media on the same day that Congressman Darrell Issa, the Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee stated that he would subpoena documents relating to Attorney General Eric Holder’s role in “Operation Fast and Furious”, which led to the ATF’s sale of more than 2,000 weapons to Mexican drug cartels.

Perhaps the same Mexican drug cartels that were planning on helping Manssor assassinate the Saudi Ambassador?

U.S. thwarts Iranian terror/assassination plot

By John Blythe

Iran has apparently taken its act of aggression to a new level today as the U.S. Justice Department thwarted a plot to assassinate Saudi Arabian Ambassador to the United States Adel al-Jubeir and to bomb the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Washington.

A joint conference between U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and FBI Director Robert Mueller, uncovered the plot which tied Iran’s Government to deadly Mexican drug cartels when an American born Iranian met with an undercover DEA agent in Texas who was posing as a cartel member to wire $1.5 million into a New York bank which would have carried out unspecified bombing targets of restaurants where the Saudi Ambassador may have been and thus potentially killing hundreds of other people.

The American born Iranian was arrested last month, while one of the other co-conspirators is still at large and presumably in Iran.

CHANGE

by Jessica Contreras

Bringing the End The Fed message to OccupyLA

By Jason Mahakian

FrontierlandPost.com

October 8, 2011

 No more than 15 people along with myself from the EndTheFed Group of Los Angeles held a Protest at the Federal Reserve Branch in Los Angeles On Saturday, October 8.  I’m happy to report that there were two members of Oathkeepers with us as well.  We held our picket signs there for about an hour and a half, under the watch of private security guards, no LAPD here.  What I first noticed was that there was no signage on the building save an engraved brass door handle, obviously wanting to draw little attention to itself.   On the sidewalk, the organizer with a bullhorn led the rest of us with raised voices proclaiming various facts pertaining to The Fed, receiving support from cars that honked as they passed by.

9/11: Ask the Right Questions and Face the Truth

by Ron Paul

 

Congressman Ron Paul

Ten years ago, shocking and horrific acts of terrorism were carried out on U.S. soil, taking nearly 3,000 innocent American lives. Without a doubt this action demanded retaliation and retribution. However, much has been done in the name of protecting the American people from terrorists that has reduced our prosperity and liberty and even made us less safe.

This is ironic and sad considering that the oft-repeated line concerning the reasoning behind the attacks is that they hate us for who we are – a free prosperous people – that we must not under any circumstances allow the terrorists to win. Though it is hard for many to believe, honest studies show that the real motivation behind the 9/11 attacks, and the vast majority of other instances of suicide terrorism, is not that our enemies are bothered by our way of life, neither is it our religion or our wealth – rather it is primarily occupation. If you were to imagine for a moment how you would feel if another country forcibly occupied the United States, had military bases and armed soldiers present in our hometown, you might begin to understand why foreign occupation upsets people so much.

Robert Pape has extensively researched this issue and goes in-depth in his book “Cutting the Fuse: The Explosion of Global Suicide Terrorism and How to Stop It”. In fact, of the 2,200 incidents of suicide attacks he has studied worldwide since 1980, 95% were in response to foreign occupation. Pape notes that before our invasion of Iraq, only about 10% of suicide terrorism was aimed at Americans or American interests. Since then however, not only is suicide terrorism greatly on the rise, but 91% of it is now directed at us.

Yes, the attacks of 9/11 deserved a response, but the manner in which we responded has allowed radicals in the Muslim world to advance a very threatening narrative about us and our motivation in occupying their lands. Osama Bin Laden referred to us as “crusaders” with a religious agenda to convert Muslims, westernize their culture and take control of their resources. If we had targeted our response to only the thugs and criminals who attacked us, and refrained from invading countries that had nothing to do with it, this characterization would seem less plausible to the desperate and displaced. Blaming Islam alone is grossly misleading.

Instead, we chose a course of action that led to the further loss of 8,000 American lives, 40,000 wounded, and has left hundreds of thousands seeking help from the Veterans Administration. We are $3 to $4 trillion poorer. Our military is spread dangerously thin around the globe at the expense of protection here at home. Not only that, but we have allowed our freedoms to be greatly threatened and undermined from within. The PATRIOT Act, warrantless searches and wiretapping, abuse of habeas corpus, useless and humiliating circumstances at the airport, are just a few examples of how we have allowed the terrorists to win by making our country less free. Suicide terrorism did not exist in Iraq before we got there. Now it does. There are no known instances of Iranians committing suicide terrorism. If we invade and occupy Iran, expect that to change, too.

Sometimes it can be very uncomfortable to ask the right questions and face the truth. When a slick politician comes along and gives a much more soothing, self-congratulating version of events, it is very tempting to simply believe what we would like to hear. But listening to lies does not make us safer, even though it might make us feel better about ourselves. The truth is that ending these misguided wars and occupations will make us safer, more prosperous and more free.

Al-Awlaki killing sparks controversy

Anwar-al-Awlaki (AP)

By John Blythe

Friday’s predator drone strike in Yemen which killed long time U.S. born al-Qaeda cleric Anwar al-Awlaki was cited as a victory in the government’s on-going “war on terror”. Al-Awlaki’s death marked the second blow to al-Qaeda since its leader, Osama bin Laden was killed by U.S. Navy SEALS back in May.

Al-Awlaki, who was born in New Mexico and gradually became radicalized by Islamic extremism, had an instrumental role in provoking the 9/11 terrorist attacks, as well as connections with Major Nidel Hassan, the Fort Hood shooter who killed more than ten military servicemen and women in November of 2009 and the attempted Christmas day airplane bomber only a month later.

However al-Awlaki’s death has sparked a great deal of controversy over the weekend.

Former Vice President Dick Cheney told Candy Crowley on CNN’s Sunday show “State of the Union” that President Obama should correct his criticism of the Bush Administration’s role in finding suspected terrorists. Cheney praised Obama’s stance on taking necessary measures to stop terrorism, but says his administration has overreacted to former President Bush’s policies on terrorism in the post 9/11 era.

For example, the Bush Administration was heavily criticized in violating the Geneva Conventions and allowing enhanced interrogation techniques on terror suspects. However the Obama Administration has twice now, allowed for the killing of two al-Qaeda leaders and one of them happened to be a U.S. citizen. Yet there does not seem to be much condemnation from the same critics. What is the real difference here?

Under the Bush Administration, which I was not a fan of, captured and interrogated terror suspects, but in the Obama Administration, which I am also not a fan of, they simply went into a country and killed them. Some on the left and the right are arguing that regardless of al-Awlaki’s association with al-Qaeda, he should have been given due process since he was a U.S. citizen even though he was on the “kill or capture” list.

White House spokesman Jay Carney stated today that the Obama Administration does not support torture, and does not owe the Bush Administration any apology for criticizing its role on stopping terrorism.

But to focus on pressing the point on al-Awlaki. There are some lingering questions. Why it took so long to track down al-Awlaki in his ties to al-Qaeda? For years now, the terrorist network has been a dominate force in Yemen trying to overthrow the regime of our ally, President Ali Abdullah Saleh who was injured in a bombing earlier this year during the Yemeni uprising. Furthermore, why was al-Awlaki invited to dine at The Pentagon shortly after the 9/11 attacks, even though al-Awlaki had ties to three of the 9/11 hijackers who slammed Flight 77 into The Pentagon that day?

At the end of the day, I am perfectly happy with the deaths of bin Laden and al-Awlaki as the scumbags had it coming. However I do find the hypocrisy between both the far left and the far right simply incredible when it comes to policies under the Bush Administration and the Obama Administration as it applies to the rule of law.

Will Palestine become the newest member of the United Nations?

Israel-Palestine map

By John Blythe

What is becoming one of the most controversial items to hit world politics is Palestine’s desire to become the newest member state added to the United Nations.

Since 1974, Palestine has held observer status at the United Nations, but has not had voting rights or recognition as a state, because of the long standing conflict with Israel.

For years, this conflict has been the topic of world discussion. Israel had occupation in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and parts of Northern Lebanon as well. When the Israelis abandoned the land, Israel became the target of Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists. The Gaza Strip and the West Bank have been considered Palestinian territories despite its association with Hamas. Additionally, Palestine has argued that Jerusalem is their capital city, even though it rightfully belongs to Israel.

Earlier this year, President Obama received overwhelming criticism when he supported a plan for Israel and Palestine to return to the pre-1967 borders and there was some hint by the President and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice that by this time, this year, Palestine would be accepted and welcomed as the newest member of the United Nations.

As the session of the U.N. General Assembly opened this week in New York, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is pressing forward to obtain statehood, even though it requires formal approval by the U.N. Security Council and a two-thirds majority of the U.N. General Assembly.

In June, the U.S. Congress, both the House and the Senate, passed resolutions calling for President Obama to not support Palestine’s recognition and threatened to suspend some $500 million that the U.S. gives in financial aid to Palestine as well as stopping U.S. funds to the U.N. General Assembly.

Well, they probably should have cut off those funds a long time ago.

The Senate noted it would only recognize Palestine if peace and stability with Israel could be reached and if Palestine ceased its long association with Hamas, which is designated as a terrorist organization and for years now, has been responsible for launching rockets into Israeli kindergarten classrooms, buses and apartment buildings.

Meanwhile, President Abbas is trying to muster support from U.N. members, while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been trying to open up more of a dialogue with Abbas adding “we do not want a piece of paper, we want real peace, peace on the ground, peace with security arrangements, peace that will last and not fray before it is signed.”

It is expected that on Friday, Abbas will speak at the U.N. General Assembly and formally submit its membership application to Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon who will then submit it to the Security Council for review.

After that, we’ll see if the U.N. confirms or denies Palestine’s membership request.

Is the United States safer since 9/11?

By John Blythe

As the nation moves closer to the 10th anniversary of the tragic September 11th terrorist attacks, many Americans are wondering if we are safer now, than before?

It is unfortunate that the U.S. State Department refused to take action in the 1990’s to intervene in Afghanistan and dismantle the al-Qaeda terrorist network, led by Osama bin Laden, which threatened the United States national security for years. This network, which was partially conceived by CIA operations against the Soviet Union in the 1980’s, eventually became radicalized by Islamist extremists. This terrorist network was responisble for the World Trade Center bombings in 1993, and U.S. Embassy bombings in Africa back in 1998. Of course, had further action been taken in 1999, the United States could have gone into Afghanistan and defeated the al-Qaeda network which would have prevented the worst attack on our nation’s soil and saved the lives of 3,000 people.

Since then, al-Qaeda as a trans national terrorist organization has taken responsibility for attacks from Europe to Bali, Indonesia.

President George W. Bush, vowed to take out al-Qaeda in October, 2001 after launching the “War on Terror”. By March of 2003, the nation’s attention had been turned to Iraq, which had no al-Qaeda terrorists. Had he concentrated military efforts only on Afghanistan, perhaps bin Laden would have been killed sooner than later.

During the last ten years, Congress passed the highly controversial PATRIOT Act which allowed the FBI and CIA to spy on American citizens and violate their privacy and security measures were increased in airports nation wide. But perhaps going a bit too far with TSA patdowns and body scanners.

Thankfully, bin Laden was killed earlier this year by NAVY Seals and will rot in hell where he belongs. However, it has been speculated that al-Qaeda would vow to take revenge for his death. Unfortunately last month, they accomplished this by killing some of those NAVY Seals that took out bin Laden in May.

And growing concerns of future terrorism activitiy in the United States has escalated. Last night, the Department of Homeland Security released a statement with intelligence findings that U.S. born citizens may be linked to al-Qaeda and are currently plotting car bomb attacks in New York City and Washington D.C. at the height of the 9/11 anniversary. Homeland Security has not elevated any potential terrorist threat, but they have stepped up security both in New York and Washington and other major cities in America to take steps in identifying any likely terrorist threat this coming weekend.

But in the two years of the Obama Administration, there doesn’t seem to be much concern from Homeland Security with relation to other Islamist attacks on our nation’s soil. Remember Major Hasan who shouted “Allah Akbar” after he killed Army personnel at Fort Hood in November of 2009? Or what about the failed attacks of the Christmas Day bomber, or the Time Square bomber? All of these incidents involved the perpetrators having connections to Islamist extremist groups including al-Qaeda.

I remember that day on September 11th, 2001 as a Sophmore in high school. And it is hard to believe that ten years have passed. But many Americans including myself are wondering; how much safer are we as a nation since the 9/11 terrorist attacks?

Libyan weapons "mysteriously" disappear

By John Blythe

Well it looks like the NATO bombing of Libya has worked out wonderfully hasn’t it?

Come to find out, a handful of former Libyan Leader Moammar Gaddafi’s arsenal of weapons have apparently gone missing. Among the weapons that have disappeared include ammunition and even missiles and they’re not even sure exactly how many of these missiles have vanished. The so called “rebels” that the United States and NATO has aligned itself with, has been in communication with the Libyan National Transition Council that they had seized some of the various weapons to fight against pro Gaddafi military forces in the six months of the country’s civil war. However the NTC failed to secure all of the weapons.

Now, the Pentagon says the unaccounted weapons may have fallen into the wrong hands.

They must be kidding?

At the beginning of the Libyan War, Moammar Gaddafi had made comments suggesting that some of the rebels may have been affiliated with al-Qaeda. As usual, this was completely ignored by the U.S. State Department, just as they had ignored similar warnings in 1999 during the Kosovo conflict, instead choosing an alliance with a group of thugs that we really knew nothing about.

If indeed the weapons are in the wrong hands, the assumption has been that al-Qaeda operatives could have seized them, or perhaps other terrorists groups including Hamas, with the support of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, could have gone into Libya, pretending to be rebels, and therefore seizing the weapons which can be used for their own advantage.

As we already know, Hamas and Hezbollah use missile strikes against Israel. I find it very interesting that the Obama Administration is so determined to destabilize the Middle East, so all of the governments can work against Israel which is exactly what is going in the region. Like Egypt, Libya is falling to the Muslim Brotherhood and the idiots in the United Nations, along with NATO and the U.S. State Department, stand around with this absurd view that we’re all helping those innocent rebels and civilians, and to the extent, this is very true. However the operation has become so mismanaged that we cannot even figure out if the rebels themselves are legitimate or if they have other tricks up their sleeve.

Unfortunately, it is looking like the latter is becoming the reality.

The Tenth and the TSA

by Becky Akers

Originally Posted on Lew Rockwell

Don't Touch My Junk

Last week, Ohio’s “GOP-controlled Senate” passed a resolution that “would place an issue on the November ballot … prohibit[ing] any law from forcing Ohioans to participate in a health care system.” The measure now heads to Ohio’s House. It needs 60 votes there, which seems likely since “Republicans hold 59 out of 99 seats.”

Ohioans are probably shaking in their boots lest the proposition pass. Sure, it could save them from dying in wretched, government-controlled hospitals, but what if the Feds retaliate by closing all the doctor’s offices in the state? Or, horror of horrors, they could declare Ohio a “No-Health Zone.”

Those fears probably resonate with Texans. After all, Obama’s goons threatened to ground aviation in the state and turn the place into a “No-Fly Zone” last month when its legislature toyed with prohibiting the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) from sexually assaulting passengers.

If the Feds again rise to such extortion (they can’t stoop to it since they’re already lower than a maggot’s hindquarters), let’s hope Ohio’s legislature shows more gumption than Texas’ did — but don’t count on it: the only difference between the weasels in Austin and Columbus is 1200 miles.