Homegrown Jihad

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

NOTE: I originally posted this in "Mideast," then transferred to here but left a link behind. The reason I want this is "Politics" is because it raises such serious issues.

In terms of politics, there is a private property matter. At which point does the purchase of private property give the right to a foreign-funded group to train paramilitary groups on that property?

But before the property thing, here goes the worst part (what I originally posted):

I just saw this on Hannity. Very, very disturbing. Here is footage from the trailer and a little from the Hannity broadcast, but mounted with other inflammatory stuff. Normally I don't like this kind of propaganda, but in this case, not even the propaganda attempt can interfere with the truly alarming part:

Homegrown Jihad

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8_82YGXJe0

Come see the trailer to the hit new documentary film "Homegrown Jihad:The Terrorist Camps Around U.S." Produced by PRB films, in association with The Christian Action Network.....

Scattered across the United States, unknown to all but a handful of citizens, are 35 Islamic terrorist training compounds known as Muslims of America. Under the leadership of a radical Pakistani cleric, Sheikh Mubarak Gilani, Muslims of America has thousands of devoted followers who are being groomed for HOMEGROWN JIHAD.

In never-before-seen video footage, the Christian Action Network exposes these dangerous terrorist compounds and reveals for the first time a secret training tape in which American Muslims are recruited to join one of the most advanced training courses in Islamic military warfare right here in America! They are called Soldiers of Allah and they are trained in explosives, kidnapping, murder, firing weapons, and guerilla warfare. They are told, Act like you are a friend, then kill him just like from the book.

Here is more on the documentary by the Christian Action Network.

Now that this is going to go under public scrutiny, I wonder what will happen in the shadows. That was a constant trick they did in Brazil. I am starting to see it here.

None of this is good. There is no reason on earth a Pakistani organization needs to fund 35 paramilitary training camps in the USA.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Here is news of the release from the Christian Action Network site. It happened on Feb 11.

Documentary “Homegrown Jihad” Receives Praise From Citizens, Experts

On Wednesday, February 11, 2009, the Christian Action Network premiered the documentary, “Homegrown Jihad: Terrorist Camps Around the U.S.” at Washington DC’s Landmark Theater. The documentary is about a network of at least 35 radical Islamic compounds run by a group called Jamaat ul-Fuqra under the label of “Muslims of America.”

“Act like you a friend, then kill him,” Sheikh Mubarak Gilani, the head of the group, is quoted as saying in the film. Gilani is seen in the documentary teaching tactics used in terrorism to his followers and instructing Muslims to contact his compounds in the U.S. to receive training in “Islamic military warfare.”

The documentary was met with praise from citizens and activists who attended the premiere. The members of the Christian Action Network were seen being thanked for their work repeatedly during the question-and-answer portion and after the event ended.

National security experts also offered praise of the film.

“…what if someone had produced a film that “connected the dots” before al Qaeda’s operatives did at a cost of nearly 3,000 American lives and, by some estimates, a trillion dollar loss to the U.S. economy?” asked Frank Gaffney, the president of the Center for Security Policy, in a column for the National Review.

“As it happens, those authorities have just been given a comparable gift in the form of a documentary about the terror next time.”

However, CBS News responded to the article by casting doubt on its accuracy, quoting an unnamed official as describing it as “sensationalistic” and claiming no intelligence indicated the group posed a threat. The Christian Action Network responded by noting that CBS based its article only on a trailer of the film, and failed to contact them to ask about the sources of the information presented.

The documentary is receiving widespread attention from some prominent shows. Martin Mawyer, the president of CAN, is scheduled to be on the “Hannity’s America” television show on Fox News on Monday, February 16, 2009, and Ryan Mauro, CAN’s national security researcher, was a guest on the Dennis Miller and Laura Ingraham radio shows the week of the premiere.

[Selene]

Michael:

Thanks for the video. I know the Hancock NY area, like the back of my hand, hunted fished and trapped up there all my life. There are sections of mountains around Hancock that are pure wilderness. Heavily wooded with a number of caves in some of the river cliffs.

Hancock also has a small two runway airport, train line that runs along the Delaware River. It is also the town wherein the East and West Branches of the Delaware unite. I wonder if they chose that area for some bizarre subconscious reason.

Hancock used to be a hopping small town on the river. It had a baseball bat factory and a two story landmark hotel circa 1880's where I had the best Southern Fried Chicken that I ever ate!

Beautiful country, great fishing and hunting. Just about 10 miles across the bridge into Pennsylvania is a town called Equinunk [means good fishing in native Indian]. I have been going up there since I was born as my mother was the bookkeeper [only word in English with three consecutive double letters, I believe] for her boss' small company in NY City. Her husband was born in Equinunk and became the Doctor to the town. They had no children, so my mother and father became their children by proxy and they sold the river house in Equinunk, where the Doc was born, to my parent's for one dollar in 1951.

And you thought Manhattan was a deal?

I was up there about 5 years ago and I could feel the tension in Hancock between the Muslims and "the towners" and it was not pretty.

Adam

[Greybird]

[...] At which point does the purchase of private property give the right to a foreign-funded group to train paramilitary groups on that property?

Assuming that nobody is being coerced on that property, that neighbors and bystanders are not affected by noise or other aggression, and that no fraud or violence is involved in its operations, the only answer consistent with a free society is the same as it's always been:

When they bought the property.

If fraud or violence is involved in funding such efforts, no impediments should be made for the aggrieved parties being able to sue to stop them in U.S. civil courts, as that's what they exist to do.

These operations also are subject to such independent scrutiny as is done by this documentary. I would hope that other property owners in their vicinity are becoming increasingly vigilant about what may be done to affect their own persons and property — and are armed accordingly.

And that local-government entities are aware and active enough to divert some of their own extorted resources away from fighting "vice" and "drugs," and toward greater watchfulness and response to potential armed coercion ... though, as ever, I'm not at all sanguine about that happening.

"Foreign funding" as such, though, is immaterial, just as it would be in the event of a Mideast government's sovereign-wealth fund buying shares in General Dynamics. What matters is the participants' behavior. Not the training they get, not the rhetoric or reasoning (or lack thereof) they're taught.

If this is to be banned or vetted by government, we're setting yet more terrible precedents — and being, yet again, utter hypocrites, because similar training has been done for decades by "home-funded" groups.

[...] There is no reason on Earth a Pakistani organization needs to fund 35 paramilitary training camps in the USA.

There's no (valid) reason on Earth for quite a lot of things — including "our" using airborne drones to add to the wanton slaughter of Afghani and Pakistani civilians, as Obama is doing while we speak. We might, though, pause to consider whether one set of actions helps to fuel the "blowback" impulse to do another.

Edited February 17, 2009 by Greybird

[BaalChatzaf]

First let me say that I am not convinced of the veracity of these t.v. snippets.

Let me go on to say that if these dudes are practicing military exercises with the intent of attacking the United States then they are engaged in an Act of War and can (and should) be dealt with accordingly. If any of these dudes are citizens then they are committing treason, if it is the case they are preparing to make war on the United States.

If they are not citizens then they should be deported to be on the side of safety.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Selene]

Folks:

Here is another way the subversion is being conducted and we KNOW it is true because it is in THE NEW YORK TIMES

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/17/nyregion...l?th&emc=th

Adam

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Steve,

Blowback is one thing. (I don't care for that term because, from what I have lived and experienced, it insinuates a unified hatred of the USA. If there is one thing in the Islamic culture that is lacking, it is unity.)

Letting hostile people develop an armed militia within your territory is another. Buying property within a nation does not come with the right to raise an armed revolution against the nation on it. At least not in the USA. That was settled with the Civil War.

Also, you don't have to give a gun to a hostile person and ask him to please not shoot you. There comes a point in time where prevention is much better than letting war develop. I agree with Bob. If clear and reasonable indications exist that this is going to escalate into acts of terrorism, deport these people.

One thing jumped out at me about this Christian guy, Mawyer. He seems like just as much a fanatic as the Islamic Gilani. He stated that he has been studying this issue for two and a half years and reporting it to the authorities. He insinuated that he was not taken seriously by high-ranking law enforcement personnel (but claimed he was by field officers). From his demeanor, I am not so sure I would have taken him seriously either. I get the general impression from him of an educated John Birch Society member, or something along those lines. He even claimed on Hannity that these training camps were in possession of weapons of mass destruction.

Despite my jaded view of government bureaucracy, I find Homeland Security overlooking a "detail" like that inconceivable.

But even fruitcakes can point to real danger. From the footage I saw aired on Hannity, Gilani's activities bear close scrutiny. There are more than enough warning signs.

I do hope nothing sinister comes of this.

And, like I said above, I do hope this is not a smokescreen to engage the public's attention and cover up some real lowdown monkeyshines.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Here is the video of the Hannity report from the Fox News site:

'Homegrown Jihad'

[BaalChatzaf]

Here is the video of the Hannity report from the Fox News site:

I wonder how much legal veracity these snippets have. Will they stand up in court?

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Bob,

Just so there is no confusion, the center of the report is about a documentary, not snippets about alleged this or that.

Obviously a report about a documentary will not exhibit the entire documentary.

But I agree some checking needs to be done. One source (or two in this case) is not enough.

Michael

[Selene]

Bob:

Nope.

No nexus between the Muslims of the Americas ownership of the real property and the Sheikh Mubarak Gilani, a Paki cleric, and Jamaat ul-Fuqra. No connection between the Phelps bong picture and an illegal substance either.

Adam

[BaalChatzaf]

Bob:

Nope.

No nexus between the Muslims of the Americas ownership of the real property and the Sheikh Mubarak Gilani, a Paki cleric, and Jamaat ul-Fuqra. No connection between the Phelps bong picture and an illegal substance either.

Adam

I thought so. It looks like the Christian group is playing dirty tricks. And shame on them for that! And how typical of Hannity presenting this shit like it was facts. Boo on Fox. News at the Speed of Lies.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Here is a report from CBS News on Feb 11, casting doubt on the documentary.

"Homegrown Jihad" Documentary Trailer

U.S. Officials See No Imminent Threat From Groups

By Bob Orr, Khaled Wassef and Christine Delargy

From the article:

Officials describe the film to CBS News as "sensationalistic" and without any real foundation. According to one official, it is strictly designed to upset and inflame people and does not present a true picture of any so-called “homegrown Jihad” danger. No current intelligence exists to suggest any threat connected with this group, which officials describe as “wannabes” and not terrorists.

The Department of Homeland Security and the FBI are aware of the movie and have no plans at this time to issue any new alerts or bulletins.

Here is a blast against CBS's report from Jihad Watch dated Feb 15:

CBS Publishes Piece Criticizing “Homegrown Jihad” and End Up Embarassing Themselves

By "Robert"

CBS News decided to run an article attacking the new documentary, “Homegrown Jihad: Terrorist Camps Around the U.S.” on Wednesday, February 11; an article which would have been given an “F” if graded by a high school journalism teacher. As part of the Christian Action Network that released the documentary, I feel compelled to explain why I thank CBS News for making a journalism career seem a possibility to the least capable among us.

. . .

Apparently, CBS’ impressive investigative prowess consists of going to YouTube.com and typing in “Homegrown Jihad” and then criticizing it without viewing the government-funded reports cited in the film, or really anything in the film for that matter.

. . .

Too bad they didn’t bother to call us for an interview before publishing the article, or I would have gladly informed them of my flattery.

Then, of course, comes the inevitable, anonymous official with an anonymous background and an anonymous agenda. And based on ONE official, CBS says that “no current intelligence exists” to suggest a threat from this group. Forget the arrests of Fuqra members involved in criminal and terrorist activity. Forget the blatantly anti-Semitic and extremist writings and videotape of Gilani, their leader. ONE official says to forget it. After all, they are wanna-be terrorists, not actual terrorists, so you can sleep well at night knowing they have only the intention, not the capability, to launch attacks. Apparently, CBS does more research using YouTube than using documents by think tanks and governments and police reports.

I am no fan of Jihad Watch, but this response definitely raises some red flags.

Hannity is biased toward conservatism, but he is usually pretty thorough in cross-checking his sources. I think it is too soon to make a judgment. His broadcast aired last night (Feb 16). Surely he knew about the CBS article of Feb 11.

I am going to wait a bit to see what surfaces. I have a feeling there is more coming and I suspect it will not be pretty.

Michael

[Selene]

Now NOW where for art thou NOW?

Adam

[BaalChatzaf]

Now NOW where for art thou NOW?

Adam

In other words, don't leave any visible traces of the beating.

The Rabbis had a saying: God counts a woman's tears. For Jews, wife or woman beating is strictly a no-no.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Selene]

Ba'al:

You should read long island Temporary Order of Protection Petitions from Jewish American Princesses, I was going to say JAP, but I did not want to be politically incorrect.

We microwaved the Japs [Hiroshima and Nagasaki] and kinda flash broiled the Krauts [Dresden - Feb. 13-16th, 1945] does that qualify for an international buffet?

Adam

[Greybird]

Blowback is one thing. (I don't care for that term because, from what I have lived and experienced, it insinuates a unified hatred of the USA. If there is one thing in the Islamic culture that is lacking, it is unity.)

I have no idea what you're referring to. Blowback, as a phenomenon, suggests a reaction to the thrusts of Empire — any Empire — and unexpected consequences for taking such actions. Nothing more.

That doesn't at all imply "unity." Little to no unity of purpose exists among bin Laden's marauders, the Saudi princes, and the Iranian mullahs, for they all despise each other. Yet they all are reacting in varying ways to armed meddling on "our" part.

[...] Buying property within a nation does not come with the right to raise an armed revolution against the nation on it. At least not in the USA. That was settled with the Civil War.

The conflict you're talking about had nothing to do with "armed revolution." It had to do with the same phenomenon that was at the heart of the conflict with England, over four decades and two named wars — that of secession.

"Civil War" has always been a misnomer. Neither the generation of the 1770s and 1780s, nor that of the 1860s' South, wanted to take over the government that they opposed. They wanted to depart from it. These are different aims.

[...] If clear and reasonable indications exist that this is going to escalate into acts of terrorism, deport these people.

And when criticism of the Powers that Be on the Internet is erected into sedition under federal law, as has happened repeatedly in American history, what will you do?

When and if an entirely new Internet is implemented with "drivers' licenses" that can readily be granted or withheld for ideological reasons, what will you do?

Do you want to consider the precedents that this kind of preventive law enforcement would set?

And speaking of Christians and law, some food for thought ...

* * *

William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!

Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!

More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil the benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

~ From "A Man for All Seasons" by Robert Bolt

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

And when criticism of the Powers that Be on the Internet is erected into sedition under federal law, as has happened repeatedly in American history, what will you do?

When and if an entirely new Internet is implemented with "drivers' licenses" that can readily be granted or withheld for ideological reasons, what will you do?

Do you want to consider the precedents that this kind of preventive law enforcement would set?

Steve,

This can't happen. The Internet is one area where capitalism beat government's ass big time.

Start with jurisdiction. Which court to you suppose can be used? USA? China? Germany? Bangladesh?

Try to enforce anything.

You can only enforce against transmission within one country, but not another if the laws are different. Even proxy connections make a mess of that.

And try to enforce reception when everyone can freely access the same thing. Can't be done.

There is only one way to govern the Internet: worldwide collapse and destruction of the backbones. Not even one-world government would do the trick.

I love the Internet. It's like the Wild West.

(btw - Secession is a form of revolution in the conceptual mold I was using: armed conflict to abolish the government within a specific region and replacement of that government with another.)

(btw2 - I have the perfect solution to the question of government. Let's outlaw bullies and violence and war because they infringe individual rights. Just make it all illegal and tell all bullies everywhere they can't do that stuff anymore. Then we won't need government. )

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

btw - I just saw Hannity (I know, I know... but I like the guy despite the bias...)

Not a peep about the training camps.

Michael

[Selene]

Folks:

Here is another class move by the "moderate" Muslim state of UAR - Dubai, wait do I here the clarion horns from the Olympics at Berlin in 1936?

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB1234...ODkxMTg4Wj.html

Marty Glickman, NY "Jew" benched by the climate created by that sweet man who petted the dogs at Berchtesgadener.

"Olympics Aren't Games For Jews

Two weeks before the Olympics began, German officials informed Gretel Bergmann, a Jewish athlete who had equaled the German women's record in the high jump, that she was denied a place on the team. As the winning jump at the Olympics had been attained by Bergmann earlier, the Germans sacrificed a chance for a gold medal with this action.

As a token gesture to mollify the West, German authorities allowed the half-Jewish fencer Helene Mayer to represent Germany in Berlin. No other Jewish athlete competed for Germany. Mayer claimed a silver medal in women's individual foil and, like all other medalists for Germany, gave the Nazi salute on the podium. Two-time European champion Ilona Schacherer-Elek, a part-Jew from Hungary won the gold medal and the bronze went to Ellen Preis, an Austrian, who was also of Jewish descent.

After the Olympics, Mayer returned to the United States. In 1937, she won the world championship in Paris, defeating Schacherer-Elek. During the war, Preis was forced to go into hiding to avoid arrest and deportation. [1] In the 1948 Olympics in London, Elek and Preis again won the gold and bronze medals respectively. Mayer returned to Germany in 1952 but died soon after of cancer.

A controversial move at the Games was the benching of two American Jewish runners, Marty Glickman and Sam Stoller. Both had trained for the 4x100-meter relay, but on the day before the event, they were replaced by Jesse Owens and Ralph Metcalfe, the team's two fastest sprinters. Various reasons were given for the change. The coaches claimed they needed their fastest runners to win the race. Glickman has said that Coach Dean Cromwell and Avery Brundage were motivated by anti-Semitism and the desire to spare the Führer the embarrassing sight of two American Jews on the winning podium. Stoller did not believe anti-Semitism was involved, but the 21-year-old described the incident in his diary as the “most humiliating episode” in his life.

Thirteen Jews or persons of Jewish descent won medals in the Nazi Olympics, including six Hungarians. Many Hungarian Jews shared their fellow citizens' passion for sport and viewed participation as a means of assimilation. In the 1930s, however, the anti-Semitic views of the fascist Hungarian government that developed close ties to Hitler's regime also pervaded some fields of sport. Fencing officials openly disdained Jews, even champion fencers such as Endre Kabos, who won the gold medal for Hungary in the individual and team saber events.

Jewish Olympic Medalists

Samuel Balter, USA Basketball, gold

Gyorgy Brody, Hungary Water Polo, gold

Miklos Sarkany, Hungary Water Polo, gold

Karoly Karpati, Hungary Freestyle Wrestling, gold

Endre Kabos, Hungary Individual Saber, gold Team Saber, gold

Irving Maretzky, Canada Basketball, silver

Gerard Blitz, Belgium Water Polo, bronze

Ibolya K. Csak, Hungary High Jump, gold

Robert Fein, Austria Weightlifting, gold

Helene Mayer, Germany Individual Foil, silver

Ellen Preis, Austria Individual Foil, bronze

Ilona Schacherer-Elek, Hungary Individual Foil, gold

Jadwiga Wajs, Poland Discus Throw, silver" [http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/olympics.html]