Politics Daily

Virginia Terror Suspects Charged in Pakistan

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-17T12:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Crime, Terror, Foreign Policy, Culture, International, Afghanistan

Five young men from Northern Virginia, arrested in Pakistan in December, have pleaded not guilty to terrorism-related charges in Punjab province and will face trial before a special anti-terror court.

Prosecutors accused the men, ages 18 to 24, with using Pakistani soil to plot a terror attack against a friendly country, and with directing an individual or group to carry out terrorist activities. Both charges potentially carry life sentences, the Washington Post reported Wednesday. They also face other charges, including criminal conspiracy to commit attacks in Pakistan.

Pakistani authorities say the five men, who left Alexandria Va., in November without notifying their families, had been in touch with a Taliban recruiter and wanted to join al-Qaeda and fight U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

Their trial could take six months or more; Judge Anwar Nazir scheduled an evidentiary hearing on March 31. A judge will decide their fate, as Pakistan does not have jury trials.

The five are: Umar Chaudhry, 24; Ramy Zanzam, 22; Ahmad A. Minni, 20; Waqar Kahn, 22; and Aman Hassan Yemer, 18. They have denied contacting extremist groups.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Were Those Iraqi Elections Really Worth the Price?

Jill Lawrence — 2010-03-15T05:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Bush Administration, Barack Obama, Iraq, Iran, Terror, National Security, International, Afghanistan, 2010 Elections

My eyes didn't get all dewy when Iraqis held their parliamentary elections. Others were moved by inspirational scenes, thrilled that we had bestowed the gift of democracy on a nation that seems, at last, to be taking to it. I found myself trying to remember exactly where "democracy" was on the evolving list of rationales the Bush administration used to justify the war (No. 3? No. 4?), and entertaining a series of dark thoughts about the 4,400 lives and $711 billion it hamis taken us to get this far.

I admit it, I'm still angry. I know it's imperative that we look to the future, but the past is hard to forget. Especially when it keeps cropping up, with all its missteps and tragedies, in books and movies. The March 7 election itself was bracketed by the release of Karl Rove's memoir, in which he says the war probably would not have been waged had it been known that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction -- and "Green Zone," a film in which a U.S. soldier searches in vain for WMDs based on faulty, manipulated intelligence reports. Truth makes pretty good fiction, it turns out.

There is no doubt how most Americans feel about the Iraq war. In January, 60 percent in a CNN poll said they opposed it. Last fall, 67 percent in a CBS News poll said it had not been worth the cost in lives and money. But how do Iraqis feel? To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, are they better off now than they were eight years ago?

They are free of a genocidal dictator, free to live as they please, free to exercise political rights. Their price has included years of violence, more than 100,000 civilian deaths, loss of services as basic as water and power, and - for 2 million to 4 million refugees - loss of their homes. What do Iraqis think of the tradeoff? Was it worth it to them?

Steven Simon, an authority on counterterrorism, national security and the Middle East, calls that an important question. In response he recalls what happened when Henry Kissinger visited China in 1972 and asked Zhou Enlai for his view of the French Revolution (fought nearly 200 years earlier). "It's too soon to tell," came the reply.

Statistics and anecdotes certainly point to improving conditions in Iraq. Just before the election, Newsweek published an upbeat cover story under the headlines "Victory At Last" and "Rebirth of a Nation." The voter turnout rate was more than 62 percent. Nearly two-thirds of the country supported democracy in an ABC News poll of Iraqis last year, 21 points higher than in 2007. And 84 percent rated security in their own area positively, nearly double the level of August 2007. The poll lived up to its headline: "Dramatic Advances Sweep Iraq."

Yet everything in Iraq is relative. Six in 10 people in the ABC survey said they could "obtain basic household goods," meaning 40 percent couldn't -- terrible, but good compared to what ABC polling director Gary Langer called "the dark days of 2007." Only 38 percent said they had reliable electricity -- but that was up from 12 percent in 2008. Only about 4 in 10 said they had access to medical care and clean water -- far below 2005 levels.

There's no question more Iraqis now favor democracy -- 64 percent in the poll last year, 21 points higher than in 2007. And 84 percent rated security in their own area positively, nearly double the level in August 2007. Still, more than half reported at least one violent incident "in their area" - sniper fire, car bomb, fighting - in the previous six months. And it goes on at levels that we would consider shocking in our country. On Iraqi Election Day this month, there were 136 attacks and at least 37 killed. "I've never met an Iraqi who hadn't had somebody in their immediate family killed, injured or kidnapped" since the 2003 invasion, said Rachel Schneller, a Middle East expert at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Another sobering trend confirmed by the poll: Iraq is becoming more segregated. More than 70 percent said they lived in Sunni-only or Shiite-only communities, up 18 points from just a year earlier. Langer's summation remains accurate today: "Violence continues, even if much abated. Basic services such as medical care and clean water, though better, are still in short supply. ... Sunni/Shiite segregation has increased sharply. Kurdish-Arab relations are tense. And issues from corruption to suspected vote fraud and political gridlock cloud the horizon."

Under the "you break it, you buy it" rule, those are all problems that could be on our plate going forward. To start with refugees, there are 1 million to 2 million inside Iraq and 1 million to 2 million in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey and other countries. Those in the latter category pose a particular challenge, said Schneller, who is studying the refugee situation. "You've got another Palestinian problem, basically -- a large population of people with no future," she told me. If in five years they are still stateless and homeless and their children have no prospects, "their only real option is some sort of insurgent group or militia group."

The United States is able to take only about 30,000 refugees a year, Schneller says. Permanent resettlement is a non-starter in Syria, Jordan and other neighboring countries, which have their own economic problems and ethnic tensions. In the best case scenario, Iraq becomes stable and prosperous, refugees want to return, and the Iraqi government figures out ways to handle property claims, restitution and resettlement assistance.

The government is seen as so corrupt that in 2008, Iraq ranked 178 out of 180 nations in a public corruption report card issued by Transparency International. Eric Davis, an author and Middle East expert at Rutgers, sees risks as a consequence of Iraq's rich reserves of oil and gas, and possible plans for an Iraqi-European pipeline. "There will be a huge influx of wealth in the coming years -- just enormous," he told me. "And if you don't have the proper institutions in place, that's a recipe for huge corruption."

Davis said his work on a forthcoming book, "Taking Democracy Seriously in Iraq," had made him bullish about the Iraqi parliament. "While it hasn't been great in terms of laws that have been published, it has been an incredible place for developing trust" among ethnic groups, he said. "They have the opportunity to negotiate rather than to kill each other." He also found hopeful signs in this month's elections: "cross-ethnic alliances," like Islamic conservatives trying to win votes of women who wear makeup, and voters more interested in services than sectarianism. Gen. Ray Odierno, looking further into the future, talks of a long-term partnership with a democratic Iraq.

Others have more limited hopes. Matt Bennett, who studies military issues at Third Way, a centrist Democratic think tank, predicts our "staggering" investment will bring us "a half baked democracy that probably will slip toward some kind of strongman government eventually ... There isn't a single functioning Arab democracy and there never has been." Simon, who is co-writing a book about Muslims in Europe, said Iraq likely will stabilize "under an illiberal Shia majority government. As the shooting dies down, people are going to be better off... But violence will be pretty pervasive" given how many weapons are floating around.

In the near term, we haven't closed the book yet on these elections. Fraud allegations, slow returns and deep divisions are testing Iraq's fragile institutions, and there are anxious memories of post-election violence that broke out in 2005.

Among the many things I can't get past - the lives, the money, the distraction from Afghanistan and Pakistan, the regional instability we've fueled, the uncertainties of the future -- is the oxymoronic nature of what we've done. Democracy by its very definition should be organic, nurtured and fought for by people who want it -- not imposed by sometimes stunningly incompetent Americans.

Two-thirds of Iraqis are under the age of 25. The country is in a churning state of renewal. "It's not going to be long before the bulk of the population has no memory of Saddam or the war," Simon said. That may help Iraq recover from decades of trauma. For us, one hopes there will be no forgetting. Elections, as encouraging as they are, cannot justify the mistakes we made or diminish their magnitude.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Terrorism Suspect Worked at U.S. Nuclear Plants

Christopher Weber — 2010-03-12T19:21:00+00:00

Filed under: Terror, Yemen

A New Jersey man arrested in a roundup of al-Qaeda suspects in Yemen this month worked at nuclear plants in the United States, officials said.

Authorities are investigating whether Sharif Mobley, 26, might have had access to sensitive information that would have been useful to terrorists, The Associated Press reported.

Between 2002 and 2008, when he moved to Yemen, Mobley performed routine maintenance at plants in Maryland, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NRC officials said a laborer of Mobley's status typically would not have access to security-related information.

Mobley, a U.S. citizen, passed all federal background checks and security screenings, New York's Daily News reported.

A spokesman for the Yemeni embassy in Washington said there was no immediate connection between Mobley's arrest in Yemen and his work at the plants.

Mobley was detained along with 10 other al-Qaeda suspects in a security sweep in Yemen's capital of San'a.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Gates Hints Afghan Pullout Could Start Before July 2011

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-10T11:15:00+00:00

Filed under: Terror, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, National Security, Afghanistan

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, in an unannounced visit to Afghanistan, raised the possibility Wednesday that some U.S. troops could begin leaving the country before the July 2011 deadline for withdrawal.

Gates hedged his bets and did not elaborate. "We will begin that transition no later than July 2011, but the pace will depend also on conditions on the ground," he said, according to CNN.

President Obama ordered 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan last year and coalition forces are in the midst of an offensive against Taliban fighters.

The defense secretary toured training camps in eastern Afghanistan, observing exercises at Camp Blackhorse, where U.S. and British forces are working with Afghan soldiers.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

American Woman, 'Jihad Jane,' Held on Terror Charges in Philly

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-10T08:53:00+00:00

Filed under: Religion, Investigations, Crime, Terror, Obama Administration, Culture, International

A petite American woman who called herself "Jihad Jane" is being held in a federal detention center in Philadelphia on charges of conspiring to support terrorism. She is allegedly part of a plot that flowered on the Internet and eventually took her to Europe in a plan to attack and kill an artist living in Sweden.

Colleen Renee LaRose, 46 -- aka Jihad Jane and "Fatima Rose" -- was arrested on Oct. 15 in Philadelphia and also charged with making false statements to a government official and attempted identify theft, according to The Washington Post. She is accused of having tried to recruit others to "wage violent jihad," her indictment asserts.

Across the Atlantic in Ireland, authorities on Tuesday arrested four men and three women suspected of conspiring with LaRose in the plan -- not carried out -- to attack Swedish cartoonist Lars Vilks, CNN reported.

Her involvement began last June when LaRose, using her Jihad nickname, posted a comment on YouTube saying she was "desperate to do something somehow to help" Muslims, according to the indictment. LaRose is accused of stealing a U.S. passport in the course of the conspiracy to "facilitate an act of terrorism."

Justice Department officials would not comment on the arrests in Cork and Waterford, Ireland, or whether Vilks was a target.

David Kris, an assistant attorney general in the national security division, said the charge against LaRose "underscores the evolving nature of the threat we face."

"The case shows the use terrorists can and do make of the Internet," Kris said in a statement. "Colleen LaRose and . . . other individuals, scattered across the globe, are alleged to have used the Internet to form a conspiracy to provide material support to terrorism, culminating in a direct order to commit murder overseas."

LaRose, who stands just under 5 feet and weighs about 100 pounds, has a record in Texas for passing bad checks and driving while intoxicated, the Post said. She and fellow unindicted co-conspirators are accused of making a plan that "included martyring themselves, soliciting funds for terrorists, soliciting passports and avoiding travel restrictions (through the collection of passports and through marriage) in order to wage violent jihad."

No arraignment date has been set.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Biden Keeps Toehold in Senate, Stoking Friendships, Promoting Policies

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-09T11:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Senate, Democrats, Republicans, Barack Obama, Iraq, Health Care, Terror, Obama Administration, National Security, 2010 Elections, Congress, Deficit, Jobs, Dick Cheney, Lobbying

Vice President Joe Biden is in Israel this week, but his heart is never far from his old stomping grounds the United States Senate.

Biden, in contrast to his predecessor Dick Cheney, does not attend his party's weekly policy luncheons. But he keeps the phone lines humming, entertains at the Vice President's Residence on Embassy Row, works out with former colleagues at the Senate gym, and offers his old friends personal tours of the West Wing.

Biden has deep roots on Capitol Hill. He was elected to the Senate at age 29 and served there for 36 years before leaving to join Barack Obama's ticket. Obama served in the Senate only four years, and counts on Biden to use his subtle powers of persuasion and goodwill to advocate for the administration's policies.

"He'd never, ever tell anybody, 'The president and I want you to do this.' He'd never say that," Biden's former chief of staff and Senate successor Ted Kaufman told The Hill newspaper. "First off, it'd never work. But it's really because he just believes in the Senate and its role in the process and the importance of individual members."

Biden was a key player in selling Obama's stimulus and has also been active in Middle East and Iraq war policy. Now he finds himself involved in the final throes of the health care debate, and he could even be called on -- as Senate president -- to cast the deciding vote on the contentious issue in that chamber.

"I don't presume to give advice, but I talk to them about everything from basketball to foreign policy. . . both my Democrat and Republican friends," Biden told The Hill's J. Taylor Rushing. "I enjoy this place so much. And I really have a lot of very good friends. You don't just walk away from it."

Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said Biden keeps a "toe in the legislative branch. But he's in the executive branch. There are moments when he'll be close to us, he'll be lobbying us. But he also respects the fact that we have two branches and a need to have checks and balances."

Those checks and balances and the strength of Biden's friendships are likely to be tested in the weeks ahead.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

America the Peevish: When Debate Descends to Name-Calling

Mary C. Curtis — 2010-03-07T05:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Democrats, Republicans, Barack Obama, Religion, Nancy Pelosi, Gaffes, Humor, Media, Gay Rights, Taxes, Race, Immigration, Terror, Sarah Palin, Obama Administration, Woman Up, Culture, 2010 Elections, Conservatives, Harry Reid, News Media, Campaigns, Ethics, al Qaeda, Tea Party

Demonize your opponent. Technically, it's nothing new. But Republicans are finding that it is possible to go too far, especially if you get caught. Party leaders are backing away from a fund-raising document that suggests using "fear" to motivate donors and paints Democrats as cartoon caricatures: President Obama is the Joker, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Cruella DeVille and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Scooby-Doo.

Ruh-ro!

It's pretty hard to get worked up over such excess, as Democratic outrage resembles Claude Rains' sly Captain Renault in "Casablanca," shocked that such dirty dealings are going on.

But it is depressing that attacks that start by parsing complex issues -- from health-care reform to national security concerns -- quickly descend into school-yard taunts. The GOP PowerPoint, first reported by Politico, was catchy and occasionally funny, but it offended because it's ultimately so silly. If you are comfortable in your beliefs, isn't that enough?

Disagreement has become a battle to the death, with the other guy not just wrong but inhuman, dangerous even. It's easy to put horns on his head and to exact retribution whenever possible.

Though I have no doubt the intentions are based on Church doctrine on one side and civil rights on the other, it was troubling that the Catholic Archdiocese and Washington, D.C., could not reach a more conciliatory solution in the matter of medical insurance at Catholic Charities in the district. The archdiocese decided to cut health coverage for spouses of all future Catholic Charities employees rather than provide benefits to same-sex partners; the city would not adjust its decision or provide a waiver for the Church. When the city and the Catholic Church had a similar spat in San Francisco, they reached a compromise allowing insured employees to add anyone legally in their home -- parent, child or partner -- to their health-care package. Compromise, however, has come to mean capitulation. The result in Washington will be fewer people with health insurance.

Standing on principle looks nothing like strength. Instead, it has taken on a tone of defensiveness. And it happens on both sides.

As I prepared to leave for the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville last month, excited to talk with some of the 600 delegates who traveled to this first-ever event and - let's face it - wondering what Sarah Palin was like up close, I was surprised at the reaction from people who I thought were more open-minded.

One told me she didn't know how I could go because she wouldn't be able to even be near them, political disagreement being a contagious disease, I suppose. Others feared for my safety, as though a journalist with a notepad and tape recorder would be the prime target for a beat-down in the middle of the Opryland resort.

I didn't get this much hand-wringing solicitude from friends when I reported a story on Confederate heritage groups, and traveled to meetings where folks refused to salute the American flag "because you can't serve two masters" and punctuated solemn renditions of "Dixie" with a rebel yell.

Some tea party activists had indeed earned bad reputations, with crude signs, some disruptive behavior and the occasional firearm at rallies. But no group wants to be judged by its most extreme rhetoric. I figured the best way to get to know what someone believes was to just ask.

My first night in Nashville, sitting with three delegates from Florida, we all managed to get through dinner with no raised voices or food fights. Different roads had led them to friendship and their pro-small government, anti-health-care bill stance. We even had an interesting discussion of states' rights vs. federal rule after I said that Supreme Court intervention overturning laws forbidding marriage between blacks and whites made it possible for me to marry my husband years later.

But on the larger stage, nuances disappeared, with countless references to the president as a socialist, communist and fascist. "I have nothing against him personally," folks would say before unloading a barrage of insults, one comparing him unfavorably to Mussolini.

While delegates expressed some resentment at being defined by Tom Tancredo's speech advocating civics literacy tests as a voting prerequisite, they greeted the former Colorado congressman with loud applause and stood in a long line to chat and take pictures. A convention organizer said: "Congressman Tancredo had a gift for understatement."

Also popular in Nashville was former Judge Roy Moore, famous for his refusal to obey a federal judge's order to move a Ten Commandments monument from the Alabama Supreme Court building. His appeal was religious and muscular, as he excoriated President Obama for "denying we are a Christian nation" and called for "300 million people armed in the cause of liberty."

The terms revolt and revolution were tossed about throughout the convention weekend, with those claiming to be true patriots warning, often with a disingenuous wink, that the prospect of armed conflict against the duly elected U.S. government was at hand.

Media were placed firmly placed in the unpatriotic, villainous category. Amy Kremer of Tea Party Express led a wave of jeers toward the back of the room where media representatives camped on a platform. "We do not need the media -- at all," she said. I was in the audience at the time, sharing a pleasant breakfast with a nice older couple from California, who looked a little embarrassed. "She's going too far," they said, not daring to stand and join the crowd in shouts of "go home" since we had just been talking about family and other normal stuff. (We've been in touch since. They approved of my stories and invited me to their home.)

When conservative commentator Andrew Breitbart took over, he continued the"liberal media" bashing, saying he was going to organize a tea party at "Sixth Avenue in Manhattan," so the patriots could stand in the way of the rich elite and their beach getaways at the Hamptons. I was relieved to know he wasn't talking about me, living as I do far away on the North Carolina-South Carolina border in a lifestyle so modest that thieves recently turned their noses up at my non-flat-screen behemoth of a barely working TV.

On the one side, accusations of "racist" and "scary," on the other, "Whole Foods" and "al-Qaeda" sympathizers. Partisan politics is defined by catch phrases and characterizations that barely make sense.

The insults flying left and right remind me of a five-page handwritten letter I received when I wrote about the Confederate flag then atop the South Carolina statehouse. It was so filled with hate that by the end, the author had stopped communicating in complete sentences, content to just scrawl random insults until she ran out of steam.

Is there any hope that the 50-state "civility tour" of former Iowa Rep. Jim Leach, chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities, is taking grass root? The Coffee Party, with more than 87,000 fans and counting, hopes its March 13 National Coffee Party Day will draw believers in its mission to give "voice to Americans who want to see cooperation in government." So now you have to join a group to calmly chat? Some how, I don't know if anything not powered by outrage has a chance.

That simplistic sniping is not a new phenomenon brings little comfort. You'd think we'd know better by now.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Iraq Bombings Rattle Muslim Holy City on Election Eve

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-06T19:11:00+00:00

Filed under: Iraq, Iran, Religion, Terror, Foreign Policy, International, 2010 Elections

At least three people were killed and dozens more wounded in Iraq Saturday as a car bomb went off near buses carrying pilgrims in the holy city of Najaf -- an outbreak of violence coming on the eve of parliamentary elections.

The bomb exploded near the Safi al-Safa shrine, gutting two buses and injuring 54, including a number of Iranians, the Washington Post said, citing security and health officials. Iranian pilgrims were also said to be among the dead.

"We think it is a political targeting of Najaf province..." the Post quoted Adnan al-Zurfi, governor of the southern province, as saying. "This targeting aims to scare people."

Iraqi security officers were on alert hoping to stop violence meant to intimidate prospective voters in advance of balloting on Sunday.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Obama May Reverse Trial Plan for 9/11 Suspect and Use Military Tribunal

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-05T09:10:00+00:00

Filed under: Crime, Terror, Obama Administration, International, Conservatives

White House advisers are edging toward a recommendation for a military trial of accused 9/11 schemer Khalid Sheik Mohammed, reversing the controversial decision by Attorney General Eric Holder to try the terror suspect in a civilian court in New York City, the Washington Post reports.

President Obama has favored civilian trials in terrorism cases to demonstrate America's commitment to the rule of law. But his administration has faced enormous pressure from critics demanding that Mohammed -- the self-proclaimed mastermind of the 9/11 attacks -- and four other suspects remain under control of the U.S. military. Foes of the civilian trial also questioned whether Manhattan, scene of death and destruction in 2001, was an appropriate and secure venue.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Thursday that "no decisions have been made." But a reversal on the trial location and jurisdiction might help Obama convince a skeptical Congress to give him the funding he needs to shut down the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and move detainees to a facility in the United States.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Influential Shiite Cleric Stays Neutral in Upcoming Iraqi Elections

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-03T13:25:00+00:00

Filed under: Iraq, Iran, Religion, Terror, Culture, International, 2010 Elections

With elections coming on Sunday, a frail Iraqi cleric who could influence the outcome has refused to endorse any of the candidates or political coalitions battling for votes among the Shiite majority.

Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the Shiite spiritual leader in Iraq, has urged Iraqis to vote, but has insisted on remaining neutral himself in the campaign, a dramatic change from the role he played in 2005 when he helped unify a Shiite coalition in the rebuilt government's first national elections, the New York Times said.

On Wednesday, security in the country appeared to deteriorate as the new election approached. Three bombings in Diyala province killed 33 people and injured 55 others in attacks on a police station, a government office building, and a hospital, the Washington Post reported. Officials in the western district of Baqubah imposed a curfew and blamed al-Qaeda for the carnage.

On the political front, the refusal of the 79-year-old al-Sistani to become actively involved in the election campaign could result in more competitive balloting and also set a precedent for clerics, the Times said. Unlike the situation in neighboring Iran, the "quietist" school of Shiite thought in the holy city of Najaf holds that clerics should play no direct role in the government.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Suicide Bomber Says He Lured CIA Agents With Phony Intelligence

David Sessions — 2010-03-01T12:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Terror, Afghanistan

The suicide bomber in a late-December attack on a CIA base in Afghanistan claims in a posthumously released video that he lured U.S. intelligence officers into a trap by feeding them false information, The Washington Post reports. The bomber, a Jordanian physician named Khalil Abu-Mulal al-Balawi, says in the video that he sent U.S. and Jordanian officers fake tips about terrorist activity and videos he made of senior al-Qaeda operatives. He originally planned to kidnap one Jordanian operative, but stumbled on an unexpected opportunity to kill several Americans as well.

"It wasn't planned this way," Balawi says in the 44-minute video released Sunday by al-Qaeda's media arm. He discusses "the stupidity of Jordanian intelligence and the stupidity of American intelligence" in inviting him to Afghanistan to set up a strike against al-Qaeda.

The bombing, which killed six Americans and three others, was the deadliest attack on a CIA base in 25 years. The new video, if authentic, is the second featuring Balawi discussing his path from doctor to suicide bomber, after U.S. and Jordanian officials offered him millions of dollars for help in planning a raid.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Sue Myrick Meets the Muslims - and Brings Backup

Mary C. Curtis — 2010-02-28T13:17:00+00:00

Filed under: House, Republicans, Iran, Terror, National Security, Woman Up, 2010 Elections, Congress, Conservatives

CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- Sue Myrick met the Muslims.

And, at least for a while, she did "very well," according to Jibril Hough, spokeswoman for the Islamic Center of Charlotte. Hough had suggested Thursday night's town hall - part of what Myrick calls her "Conversation With America" -- as an opportunity for the North Carolina congresswoman to clarify her comments on the dangers of "radical Islamic extremists," homegrown and abroad.

Many Muslims, including some of Myrick's constituents, believe her warnings about radicals - and their sympathizers in U.S. government agencies -- working to "throw out our Constitution and force us to live under sharia law" have spread a fear of all Muslims.

Myrick, (R-N.C.), has always insisted that she is not talking about "mainstream" and "moderate" Muslims, such as the ones she features in her latest YouTube video. On Thursday she gave her qualifier again; but she didn't back down. Neither did a long line of mostly Muslim-Americans, grateful that she traveled from Washington but also anxious about the tone and substance of her cause. Click play below to watch her video:

"When somebody wants to kill somebody else, when somebody wants to destroy somebody else," that's extreme, Myrick said in answer to a question from Muslim-American veteran Elmer Lowe, who was applauded for his service.

"I don't think there's anybody here who would support that," said Myrick, who is the founder of the Congressional Anti-Terrorism Caucus and serves on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

"As Americans, we want to work together for the same purpose; we want to take a stand against the radical extremists who threaten our America and our American way of life," she said. Radicalization is "a form of cancer; we've got a means to cure it."

Myrick passed out copies of the foreword she wrote for "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America," the book by former Air Force investigator P. David Gaubatz and journalist Paul Sperry that accuses the nonprofit civil-rights advocacy group, Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), of, among other things, placing spies as interns on Capitol Hill. The foreword read, in part: "Government officials need to stop hiding behind political correctness and keep American people informed."

She showed charts and maps and video clips. She blamed the media, in part, for misrepresenting her views on Islam.

She explained how the much-repeated comments she was criticized for in 2003 ("Look at who runs all the convenience stores across the country. Every little town you go into, you know?") were made after a cigarette-smuggling and money-laundering case in Charlotte was tied to Hezbollah.

She responded to comments for an hour and a half from all comers in the open-to the-public forum at the Government Center in Charlotte. Most of the questions and the occasional speech came from Muslim-Americans in a diverse crowd of about 200. Myrick didn't exactly answer some of them (such as one asking if the tax protester who recently flew his plane into the side of a federal building in Austin, Texas could be labeled "a terrorist"). However, she and most in the audience were respectful.

An exception was a disagreement among audience members when Iranian-American Bahman Maalizadeh connected the persecution of women in Iran with Islamic extremists and was interrupted by shouts. "This is what's wrong," Myrick said.
Pointing to polls and surveys, several speakers cautioned that "conservative Islam does not clash with democracy," that there are many political moderates who do not endorse terrorism but who cherish their religion. "If you engage only with a small circle of secular Muslims," said Queens University professor Mohammed el-Nawawy, "you would be alienating the overwhelming majority of Muslims."

Izzat Saymeh, a 31-year-old businessman, suggested that instead of a 10-point anti-terrorism proposal, with words that can be used by anti-Islamic hate groups, Myrick should "champion the rights of the Muslims who feel threatened" with a 10-point "anti-hate proposal." When Myrick asked him to "put some ideas on paper," Saymeh said he would have them for her, "right before the election," drawing the biggest and most relaxed laughs of the night.

The laughter stopped when Myrick introduced two speakers, examples of the moderate, mainstream Muslims that she counts as advisers.

Phoenix physician M. Zuhdi Jasser founded the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) in 2003 to serve as an "example of an American Islamic institution which can be a leading voice for liberty-minded Muslims in America in the war on terror," its website reads.

"We as Muslims are in denial," Jasser said. He decried what he called the "victimology" of groups such as CAIR and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). He also called women elected as heads of state in Muslim countries "window dressing in a system that is medieval."

Hough said the comments were "condescending, disrespectful and un-Islamic."

Jasser later said the forum was an internal Muslim dialogue that needs to happen. "We try to do this in mosques and they shut us down."

Hedieh Mirahmadi, president of the World Organization for Resource, Development and Education (WORDE) -- an "Islamic Ideology Think Tank" -- traveled from Washington to speak on behalf of Myrick's efforts. Mirahmadi, 40, wearing a headscarf, said she became religious later in life, drawn to Islam because of "the inner spirit of it, the closeness I find to God."

"Islamist radicals have redefined our religion," she said. "We have to undo the way they have defined Islam." Mirahmadi said she hoped the community "saw a real side of Sue. She's not out to get Muslims."

Bill Grifenhagen, 64, and his wife, Gloria, are not Muslim. They came to the forum because they are concerned that there "has not been enough pushback from the other 95 percent of Muslims against radical Islam," Bill said before the forum. "Most Americans believe we're heading into some very difficult times from a terrorism standpoint." Afterward, he said the meeting had "given me hope."

Rose Hamid, former head of Muslim Women of the Carolinas, had a different reaction. The last two speakers "made me understand it was all staged," she said. Myrick "was not trying to hear from the Muslims, she was here to deliver a message."

Hamid also worried that Myrick is carrying out a "witch hunt against CAIR," which she said has been extremely important in bringing civil rights to the Muslim community. But "if I attended one of their functions" honoring a charitable cause, she said, "I'm afraid of being tainted as a terrorist."

With two sides starting out so far apart, maybe this first meeting was the most that could be hoped for. Hough, who had taken pre-meeting heat from some Muslim groups for his part in arranging it, was pleased it had taken place at all. Despite having had knee surgery earlier in the day and sitting uncomfortably for two hours, he thought it was worth it, and hopes Myrick will visit a mosque -- open to all -- the next time.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Congress Extends Patriot Act Without Additional Privacy Protections

Christopher Weber — 2010-02-26T18:59:00+00:00

Filed under: Terror, Congress

A bill extending the Patriot Act by one year is headed to President Obama's desk after being passed by Congress without additional privacy measures to protect against civil liberty abuses.

The House passed the legislation 315-97 on Thursday, one day after it sailed through the Senate. The anti-terror statute was set to expire Sunday.

The White House pushed to extend the Patriot Act because of provisions it says are important in tracking suspected terrorists, Reuters reported.

Among the act's extended provisions are the authority to follow individual suspects not members of an organized terrorist group and the authorization of "roving wiretaps" to track an individual's use of multiple communications devices.

Democrats wanted to institute new safeguards to protect law-abiding American citizens but Republicans said the changes would undermine the tracking of people suspected of plotting terrorism.

The Patriot Act was passed by Congress shortly after the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Bush Glad Cheney's 'Out There' Taking on Democrats, But Says He'll Avoid Politics

Tom Diemer — 2010-02-26T14:28:00+00:00

Filed under: George W. Bush, Bush Administration, Republicans, Barack Obama, Dick Cheney, Terror, 2012 President, National Security

Former President George W. Bush is glad his old second-in-command Dick Cheney is "out there" fighting the good fight against the Obama administration's national security polices, but Bush prefers to stay on the sidelines.

Bush spoke Friday at the inaugural Bush-Cheney reunion breakfast at a Washington hotel. Cheney, recovering from a heart attack, was unable to attend, and the meeting was closed to the media.

But Politico's Mike Allen, relying on accounts provided by attendees, said the former president was both funny and humble.

"Don't swagger. Sometimes I got carried away rallying the country," he quoted Bush as telling other breakfast guests. "I think the swagger criticism was fair. A lot of others weren't. I hope I conveyed a sense that I was a lonely sinner who found redemption. I'm not better than anyone else."

Bush also talked about his book, tentatively called "Decision Points," due out in November. "This is going to come as quite a shock to people up here that I can write a book, much less read one," he reportedly said.

In a serious vein, Bush said he didn't "want to be involved in politics, but I do in policy."

He said he didn't intend to be on a "panel of formers instructing the currents on what do do. I'm trying to regain a sense of anonymity. I didn't like it when a certain former president -- and it wasn't 41 or 42 -- made my life miserable."

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, was apparently the guy that Bush, number 43, was talking about.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Obama Makes Get-Well Call to Cheney After Heart Attack

Tom Diemer — 2010-02-26T08:03:00+00:00

Filed under: Bush Administration, Democrats, Republicans, Barack Obama, Dick Cheney, Joe Biden, Terror, Obama Administration, National Security, Conservatives

The two men are hardly chummy-chummy, but President Obama phoned Dick Cheney at his home Wednesday after the former vice president suffered what an aide called a mild heart attack earlier in the week.

Cheney spent two days at George Washington University Hospital, recovering from what was his fifth heart attack.

The New York Times, reporting the call, offered no details of the conversation. But Cheney has emerged as a combative critic of Obama and his administration, especially in its handling of national security issues.

At a convention of conservatives a week ago, he predicted, to lusty cheers, that Obama would be a one-term president.

But all of that was apparently put aside -- at least temporarily -- this week. Vice President Joe Biden also called his predecessor and Cheney got a personal visit from former President George W. Bush.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Sen. Graham, White House Talks on Gitmo Worrying Some Republicans

Tom Diemer — 2010-02-25T16:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Senate, House, Barack Obama, John McCain, Iraq, Crime, Terror, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, National Security, International, Afghanistan, Congress, Conservatives, Rahm Emanuel, Yemen

Sen. Lindsey Graham's private conversations with the Obama administration on closing the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, are making some of Graham's fellow Republicans nervous.

Graham (R-S.C.) has been involved in meetings and phone calls with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel over the past several weeks discussing his conditions for supporting a shutdown of the prison, the Hill newspaper reported Thursday. Graham wants assurances that it would not hurt national security, and he favors setting up a new national security court where most of the remaining detainees could be tried.

But Michigan Rep. Peter Hoekstra, the senior Republican on the House intelligence committee, said Graham should leave a central issue in any shutdown -- where the prisoners would be moved -- to state and local authorities with jurisdiction over the facilities seen as potential sites. "I think it is crazy to be negotiating with the White House on this," Hoesktra said. Graham, he added, didn't want Gitmo detainees in South Carolina when such a move was considered.

Rep. Don Manzullo, a Republican representing a district that includes a prison in Thomson, Ill. -- one possible relocation facility -- said he hoped Graham "would talk to me first" if he is involved in any talks about moving terror suspects to Illinois.

Graham, architect of legislation creating military commissions and an advocate of prosecuting accused terrorists in miiltary courts, is expected to meet with Manzullo this week, Graham spokesman Kevin Bishop said.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Lawmaker Wants to Limit CIA's Moonlighting Agents

Tom Diemer — 2010-02-24T13:01:00+00:00

Filed under: House, Democrats, Iraq, Iran, Terror, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, National Security, Culture, Afghanistan, Congress, Nuclear Proliferation, Ethics, Yemen, Law

A California lawmaker, skeptical of CIA scrutiny of its moonlighting agents, wants to crack down on active-duty intelligence officers who take part-time jobs in the private sector.

Politico said Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) intends to add an amendment to the Intelligence Reauthorization bill that would require the Director of National Intelligence and the Office of Government Ethics to issue regulations barring agents from taking second jobs if they create "a conflict of interest or appearance thereof." The intel director would also have to annually disclose all moonlighting arrangements to Congress' intelligence committees.

Earlier this month, Politico reported on the little-known CIA policy of permitting agents to take on part-time work as long as their supervisors approve and are satisfied no conflict exists.

Eshoo said she sensed that the current policy amounted to a "rubber-stamp deal" and that "no one's really looking at it or keeping a close eye on it."

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

U.S. to Cut Back on Night Raids in Afghanistan

Tom Diemer — 2010-02-24T12:15:00+00:00

Filed under: Terror, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, International, Afghanistan, Ethics, al Qaeda

In an effort to ease tensions between U.S.-led military forces and Afghan civilians, coalition commanders have decided to restrict risky nighttime raids on private homes and compounds in Afghanistan, a senior U.S. official has told CNN.

The directive is in a classified document signed by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top NATO commander in Afghanistan, according to the unidentified official who saw it.

Nighttime raids -- aimed at rooting out terrorists and finding weaponry -- can turn violent and have caused problems for U.S. and NATO forces that enter homes in what's understandably seen by Afghans as an affront and an invasion of privacy.

The new directive urges use of Afghan troops when possible to knock on doors before going into homes at night. It says troops should conduct analyses of whether night raids are essential or could be put off until daybreak, CNN said.

Earlier this week, McChrystal released a video apology after an incident in which 27 Afghan civilians were killed in an airstrike. "I have made it clear to our forces that we are here to protect the Afghan people," he said. "I pledge to strengthen our efforts to regain your trust to build a brighter future for all Afghans."

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Former Intelligence Chair Roberts Says He Didn't OK Destruction of Waterboarding Tapes

Tom Diemer — 2010-02-23T09:15:00+00:00

Filed under: Senate, Democrats, Republicans, Iraq, Investigations, Terror, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, National Security, Afghanistan, Congress, Ethics, al Qaeda

The former Republican head of the Senate Intelligence Committee is in a dispute with the CIA over the destruction of videotapes that reportedly showed CIA agents waterboarding terror suspect Abu Zubayda, once thought to be a leading member of al-Qaeda.

The CIA, in a summary of a 2003 briefing, said Sen. Pat Roberts of Kansas "listened carefully and gave his consent" after high-ranking CIA officers described circumstances surrounding the tapes and signaled that the agency intended to destroy them, Politico reported Tuesday.

But Roberts said he never signed off on such a plan.

"At no time did Senator Roberts assent to the destruction of any videotapes," spokeswoman Sarah Little said. "Senator Roberts today called on the Justice Department to release all the memoranda that exist regarding briefings for all members of Congress."

Top aides to then-Vice Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) were also present at the closed-door briefing on Feb. 4, 2003, but Rockefeller said he had only limited information about the tapes and was not consulted on plans to get rid of them.

Meanwhile, a special prosecutor, named by the Justice Department, is looking into whether laws were violated in the destruction of tapes that could have become evidence in a federal trial.

Zubayda's value as a source of intelligence information was later downgraded. The Washington Post reported that information surfaced indicating he was not a top al-Qaeda leader and apparently was not even a formal member of the loose-knit organization.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Nearly Two-Thirds Back Reading Plane Bomber His Miranda Rights

Bruce Drake — 2010-02-20T14:40:00+00:00

Filed under: Republicans, Iran, Terror, Obama Administration, Poll Watch, Nuclear Proliferation, Law

The Obama administration's handling of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the al-Qaeda-directed Nigerian who tried to bomb a U.S. airliner on Christmas Day has been a political football for weeks, with Republicans and others criticizing the decision to try him in a criminal court rather than as an "enemy combatant" before a military tribunal, and also for reading him his Miranda rights as would be done for ordinary American citizens.

But a substantial majority of Americans -- 65 percent to 33 percent -- believe that it was the correct action for the FBI to read him those rights, including the right to remain silent, according to a CNN/Opinion Research poll conducted Feb. 12-15.

Asked in general whether the practice should be followed with people suspected of attempting an act of terrorism, 56 percent said it should and 43 percent disagreed.

Although the public backs the reading of Miranda rights even to suspected terrorists, it believes by 59 percent to 40 percent that Abdulmutallab should be tried in a military court. And opinion about President Obama's handling of the incident has turned around from the 57 percent to 37 percent margin of approval in January, to 47 percent who now disapprove compared to 45 percent who approve.

On another subject, 71 percent of those polled believe that Iran currently has nuclear weapons. Sixty-three percent said that U.S. for now should rely on economic sanctions and diplomatic efforts only to pressure Iran to shut down its nuclear program while 23 percent favor taking military action. The percentage of those favoring military action was 13 percent in April. Twelve percent say no action should be taken at all and 3 percent are undecided.

Should economic and diplomatic efforts fail, the 23 percent who would take military action now are supplemented by another 36 percent. Thirty-nine percent oppose military action.

Follow Poll Watch on Twitter

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments