Home Front: WoT |
Texas man captured in Syria charged with aiding ISIS |
2019-01-26 |
[ENGLISH.ALARABIYA.NET] A 34-year-old Texas man who was captured in Syria and brought to the United States has been charged with providing support to ISIS. Warren Christopher Clark, 34, of Sugar Land, Texas, appeared before a federal court judge in Houston on Friday, the Department of Justice said. It said Clark was charged in an indictment unsealed on Friday with providing material support to ISIS -- which the United States has designated as a foreign terrorist organization. The Justice Department said Clark was captured in Syria by members of the Syrian Democratic Forces, an anti-ISIS alliance of Kurds and Arabs, and transferred to US custody this week. "The arm of American Justice has a lengthy reach," US Attorney Ryan Patrick said in a statement. "The FBI continues to aggressively pursue individuals who attempt to join the ranks of ISIS imported muscle or try to provide support for other terrorist organizations," FBI special agent Perrye Turner said. If convicted, Clark, a former substitute school teacher, could face 20 years in prison. Clark, in an interview with NBC News before his transfer to the United States, said he went to Syria to become an English teacher for ISIS and was never a fighter. "I wanted to go see exactly what the group was about, and what they were doing," said Clark, also known as Abu Muhammad al-Ameriki. |
Link |
Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
Two American ISIS Fighters Captured in Syria |
2019-01-07 |
![]() From the SDF link: The operation Jazeera Storm, carried out with the aim of liberating the last regions under the occupation of ISIS, continues steadily towards clearing the last bastions of the group. ISIS, which is now cornered in a small area after being cleared from large swathes of territory it once held, is suffering heavy losses due to operations of our forces. Recently, in order to prevent the advance of our forces, terrorists have attempted to carry out attacks several times. In this context, a group of terrorists who had been preparing to attack the civilians who were trying to get out of the war zone in masses was detected. Following long-term technical and physical follow-up, an operation against the cell was carried out by our forces. As a result of the operation, 5 terrorists originally from the United States, Ireland and Pakistan were captured. The ID details of captured terrorists are as follows; Warren Christopher Clark (Abu Mohammad al-Ameriki) originally from Houston, USA. Alexandr Ruzmatovich Bekmirzaev, originally Dublin, Ireland. Zaid Abed al-Hamid (Abu Zaid al-Ameriki), originally from USA. Fadel al-Rahman Cad (Abu Enam al-Muhajir), originally from Lahor, Pakistan. Abed al-Azem Rajhoud (Abu Omea al-Pakistani), originally from Sialkot, Pakistan. |
Link |
Syria-Lebanon-Iran | ||||
US-backed SDF captures five ISIS fighters among them two Americans | ||||
2019-01-07 | ||||
![]()
Among the five two from the United States and others from Ireland and Pakistain, according to SDF. In a blurb on Sunday, SDF confirmed capturing the five ISIS members, saying that "They were preparing to launch attacks against the fleeing civilians from that areas" pointing out that the capture happened on December 30. According to field sources, the SDF only announced the news after it finished interrogation with the five elements. The five are American Warren Christopher Clark (34 year) from Huston, who goes by the name "American Abu Mohammad" and American from Arab origin Zaid Abed al-Hamed known by "American Abu Zaid".
The Syrian Democratic Forces have locked away Drop the gat, Rocky, or you're a dead 'un! around 1,000 imported muscle of ISIS during its control of vast areas in Syria. Among those captured, Death Eaters who were part of a notorious kidnapping cell dubbed "The Beatles" known for torturing hostages and executing foreign journalists in Syria and Iraq, in addition to another fighter from al-Qaeda, known to have met with the terrorist group’s leader the late Osama bin Laden ![]() , before he was killed. Most of the foreign governments refuse to repatriate their citizens who were fighting with ISIS, while Kurdish officials say "they cannot detain them (ISIS fighters) forever, calling the international community to "find a solution." In contrast to what is happening in Iraq, where the Iraqi judicial authorities sentenced more than 300 members of the Death Eater group, including 100 foreigners to life imprisonment or death, the Kurdish authorities and their local allies in Syria refuse to prosecute captured ISIS fighters while they only prosecute the Death Eater group local members without carrying out the death penalty The Syrian Democratic Forces, the armed wing of the Kurdish-dominated Democratic Council of Syria, fought its last battles against ISIS in Deir al-Zour, ending its long-standing rule in several Syrian regions.
| ||||
Link |
Terror Networks |
Pakistan, Qatar, Turkey: Time for Trump's State Department to call them sponsors of terrorism |
2017-09-28 |
[Washington Examiner] Since 1979, the State Department has maintained a State Sponsor of Terrorism list. Three laws inform the designation: (1) The Export Administration Act of 1979; (2) The Arms Export Control Act; and (3) the Foreign Assistance Act. If the secretary of state determines a country "has repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism," onto the list it goes. Libya, Iraq, South Yemen, and Syria were charter members of the list, and Cuba, Iran, and North Korea all joined in the 1980s. In 1993, Secretary of State Warren Christopher added Sudan, which at the time hosted Osama Bin Laden. Over the next several years, however, the State Department removed most countries: South Yemen left the list in 1990 when, upon Yemeni unification, it ceased to exist, and Iraq was removed after Saddam Hussein's ouster. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice removed both Libya and North Korea less because either state abandoned terrorism, and more to advance unrelated diplomatic initiatives. Secretary of State John Kerry acted similarly with regard to Cuba. Today, only Iran, Syria, and Sudan remain listed, and it's likely that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson will remove Sudan soon. The shrinking of the state sponsorship list against the backdrop of worsening terrorism, much of it supported by governments, highlights how subjective short-term diplomatic considerations corrupt what should be a tool to pressure states to stop using terror. It's time to return the terror list to its original purpose: calling out states which embrace terrorism, no matter whether they are U.S. allies or not. Certainly, Iran and Syria deserve to be on the list. The Palestinian Authority would too, if it was a state. Rice removed North Korea for all the wrong reasons, and the Trump administration should rectify that mistake. But, what about the other countries that have never been on the list but deserve to be? |
Link |
India-Pakistan |
Robin Raphel: Old Anti-India Hand |
2014-11-17 |
India looking at Robin OLD POST B.RAMAN [Intellibriefs] The "News", the Pakistani daily, has reported on August 3,2009, that the Barack Obama Administration has decided to appoint Robin Raphel, who was a Counselor for Political Affairs in the US Embassy in New Delhi from 1991 to 1993 and subsequently became the Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs in the Bill Clinton Administration, as a member of the team of Richard Holbrooke, the Special Representative to the Af-Pak region. 2. According to the paper, she will be based in Pakistan and will co-ordinate the implementation of the plan for non-military assistance to Pakistan. She is expected to arrive in Pakistan on August 14,2009. Her bio-data as taken from the Wikipedia is annexed. 3. During her posting in the US Embassy in New Delhi, she was actively interacting with the various anti-India groups in Jammu & Kashmir and it was reportedly on her advice that the Hurriyat, as an umbrella organization of these groups, became very active. 4. After Bill Clinton assumed office as the President in January,1993, she joined the State Department as the Assistant Secretary of State in charge of South Asian Affairs under Warren Christopher, who was the Secretary of State. It used to be said that she knew the Clintons from her younger days and this gave her easy access to the President despite her junior position in the State Department. She exploited this to prevent Pakistan being declared as a State sponsor of terrorism after the Mumbai blasts of March,1993. 5. It was during her tenure as the Assistant Secretary of State that the Clinton Administration declared Jammu & Kashmir as a "disputed territory" and started calling for the resolution of the dispute between India and Pakistan over the Kashmir issue in accordance with the wishes of the Kashmiri people. This refrain has once again been taken up by the Obama Administration. 6. Towards the end of 1993 , during a non-attributable discussion with some Indian journalists in Washington DC she reportedly defended this formulation and contended that the US considered the Kashmiri territory transferred by Pakistan to China in 1963 when Ayub Khan was the President also as disputed territory, whose future was yet to be decided. 7. The "Times of India" prominently carried this story on the front page without identifying the official of the State Department who had talked to the Indian journalists on the Kashmir issue. Enquiries made by the Government of India identified the official as Robin Raphel. 8. It was during her stewardship of the South Asian Affairs portfolio in the State Department that the Taliban under Mulla Mohammad Omar came into existence in 1994 with the joint support of the Pakistan and US Governments. The Taliban was prepared to support the construction of an oil and gas pipeline by UNOCAL, an American oil company, from Turkmenistan to Pakistan via Afghanistan and she had met Mulla Mohammad Omar in this connection. This period also saw Osama bin Laden shift from Khartoum to Jalalabad in 1996 without any objection from the US. The Taliban later shifted him to Kandahar. 9. Even after she left the State Department and joined the faculty of the National Defence University, she reportedly maintained active contacts with anti-India elements in J&K. 10. The "News" has correctly described her as "one known to be Pakistan's friend". 11. She is. 12. The text of the "News" report is also annexed. (3-8-2009) (The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai.) |
Link |
-Obits- |
Warren Christopher pegs out |
2011-03-20 |
Warren Christopher, a former US secretary of state who worked to end the war in Bosnia and negotiated the release of American hostages in Iran, has died, aged 85. He "passed away peacefully, surrounded by family at his home in Los Angeles" of complications from kidney and bladder cancer, local media quoted his family as saying in a statement on Friday. As the chief US statesman under former president Bill Clinton from 1993 to 1997, Christopher was a behind-the-scenes negotiator. Often called the "stealth" secretary of state, he was known for his understated, self-effacing manner. "Careful listening may be the secret weapon," the New York Times quoted him as saying in a 1981 speech when he was deputy secretary of state. "I observed some time ago that I was better at listening than at talking." That "secret weapon" helped Christopher weather diplomatic crises. In 1995, he intervened during the crucial final days of the US-brokered Bosnian peace talks at Dayton, Ohio. He had an important role in closing the deal, according to his then deputy, Richard Holbrooke, the force behind the agreement. As secretary of state, Christopher devoted much of his time to the Middle East. He made at least 18 trips to the region in pursuit of peace and a ceasefire in southern Leb between Israel and Hezbullies. In 1994, he witnessed the signing of a peace treaty between Jordan and Israel. As Jimmy Carter's ... the worst president ever. Maybe the second worst. The votes aren't all in yet... deputy secretary of state, he negotiated the release of 52 Americans taken hostage at the US embassy in Tehran in 1979. The hostages were freed on January 20, 1981, minutes after Ronald Reagan was sworn in to succeed Carter as president. He also helped negotiate the Panama Canal treaty, worked on establishing normal relations with China and played a major role in developing Carter's human-rights policies. |
Link |
Science & Technology |
It's Got to Suck to be a Climavangelist! |
2009-12-06 |
What are the global warming grunts going to do now that the Apostles of the Holy Church of Climatology have been busted for cooking the "truth" (I believe the exact word they used was "tricking" us) so that we the sheeple would step-n-fetch to their Chicken Little crap? What will chunky Al Gore do seeing that he has officially slammed into a veritable inconvenient truth? I hear that Gore hasn't been this gauche since he was busted in 2001 by Warren Christopher while lip-synching to "Dancin' With Myself" in the Lincoln Bedroom wearing only Tipper's pantyhose, Madonna's snow cone bra, and Janet Reno's glasses. This just in! NewsBusters reports that Al Gore has just cancelled his $1,200 per person December 16th Climate Change blah blah blah speech in Copenhagen. Come on, Al, don't quit now. It's just about to get good. And there will always be plenty of Euro-tools who'll continue to buy your trumped-up, utterly specious green hash gobbledygook. Cowboy up, sister. You and I both know that Judas Priest Albert Gore, facts be damned, will never recant but will instead retreat in a recalcitrant manner deeper into Hollywood weirdness where the global warming Kool Aid runs like Tiger Woods did from his angry wife with a 3 iron. Trust me. As John Stewart pointed out on the Daily Show this week, oh the irony that the Internet Al invented has debunked his global warming bunkum. Christmas came early this year for me! Yes it did. Pay attention, kiddies: You're viewing history in the making. Yep, little children, the Climavangelists' attempt to hoodwink our planet will make your history books. Correction: that would be the homeschoolers' history books. But I digress. Back to the modus operandi of the tree humpers. Here's what the greenies will do now even though they know they've been had: They'll try to kill the news, and if that doesn't work they'll attempt to kill the messenger as they plug their ears, stomp their feet, and keep believing their goofy gospel of green. They have no other recourse as they have worked too hard for this to be true. In addition, for the power brokers of this hot earth heresy there is just way, way too much money to lose and control to be forfeited for them to concede that their leaders have been lying SOBs. Nor should you expect the lower level hairy-legged earth girl to bail out of her tree, cease to drop acid, stop wearing hemp and assimilate into reality anytime soon just because she got fish slapped with truth. These green gals will, one and all, Jim Jones this thing to the bitter end and maintain their global warming course right through the coming ice age. Hail hot mother earth! Yep, since the revealing of the egregious climate con job discovered in the email exchanges with "scientists" at the University of East Anglia and the subsequent resignations of a couple of their glory boys, Climavangelism and Climavangelists have fallen on tough times. Kinda like ACORN has. Maybe, like ACORN, the Climate Change/Global Warming reality stylists could change their name. Yeah, that's it! I hear ACORN is going to fly under the new moniker "Societal Assistance Through Action Now," or "SATAN" for short. As you can tell, I truly don't give a rat's backside what Al Gore and his warm earth whores do in light of being lied to, but I do care what normal, non-brainwashed droogies do in lieu of this academic Ponzi scheme. I say a little rebellion is in order seeing how these clowns have sought to control our lives and milk our wallets in one of the greatest scientific scams in the last few centuries. |
Link |
Home Front: Politix | ||||
Panel calls for new war powers legislation | ||||
2008-07-08 | ||||
The next time the president goes to war, Congress should be consulted and vote on whether it agrees, according to a bipartisan study group chaired by former secretaries of state James Baker III and Warren Christopher. In a report released Tuesday, the panel says the current law governing the nation's war powers has failed to promote cooperation between the executive and legislative branches. It says the 1973 resolution should be repealed and replaced with new legislation that would require the president to inform Congress of any plans to engage in 'significant armed conflict,' or non-covert operations lasting longer than a week. In turn, Congress would act within 30 days, either approving or disapproving the action.
And I'm sure it will work as well as history indicates.
The panel has briefed the presidential campaigns of Barack Obama and John McCain, as well as congressional leadership. Spokesman Tommy Vietor said Obama commends the panel 'for advocating that the president consult Congress more closely on issues of critical national importance like the use of military force.' McCain did not provide comment. But I'll bet he rolled his eyes. Congress' involvement in approving combat operations became a central issue in the Iraq debate last year, when Democrats tried to force President Bush to end the war. While Congress had authorized combat in Iraq, Democrats said the resolution approved only the invasion and not a five-year counterinsurgency. After taking control of Congress in January 2007, Democrats tried to cap force levels and set a timetable for withdrawals. While they lacked a veto-proof majority to put the restrictions into law, the White House argued that such legislation would have violated the Constitution by infringing upon the president's right as commander in chief to protect the nation. Democrats disagreed, contending there was ample precedence. The one surefire way for Congress to have ended the war was to cut off money for combat operations -- a step most Democrats weren't willing to take because they feared doing so would have hurt troops in harms' way, or at least be perceived by voters that way. Yeah, I guess 'at least be perceived' is technically accurate.
So much for being able to carry a big stick if this stoopid idea sticks, which I don't think it will. The founding fathers set things up the way they did for a reason. Sometimes it takes a king to get things done. | ||||
Link |
Home Front: Politix |
Former U.S. Officials Want to Change Process for Going to War |
2008-07-08 |
Oh dear.... Congress should pass legislation to require the president to consult lawmakers before going to war, according to a bipartisan study group chaired by former secretaries of state James Baker III and Warren Christopher. In a report released Tuesday, the panel says the current law governing the nation's war powers has failed to promote cooperation between the executive and legislative branch. It says the 1973 resolution should be repealed and replaced with new legislation that would require the president to inform Congress of any plans to engage in "significant armed conflict," such as operations lasting longer than a week. In turn, Congress would act within 30 days, either approving or disapproving the action. Baker, who served as in the first Bush administration and co-chaired the 2006 Iraq Study Group, said the proposal isn't intended to resolve constitutional disputes between the White House and Congress on who should decide whether the nation fights. "What we aim to do with this statute is to create a process that will encourage the two branches to cooperate and consult in a way that is both practical and true to the spirit of the Constitution," he said in a statement. A new joint House and Senate committee would be established to review the president's justification for war. To do so, the committee would be granted access to highly classified information. Congress' involvement in approving combat operations became a central issue in the Iraq debate last year, when Democrats tried to force President Bush to end the war. While Congress had authorized combat in Iraq, Democrats said the resolution approved only the invasion and not a five-year counterinsurgency. After taking control of Congress in January 2007, Democrats tried to cap force levels and set a timetable for withdrawals. While they lacked a veto-proof majority to put the restrictions into law, the White House argued that such legislation would have violated the Constitution by infringing upon the president's right as commander in chief to protect the nation. Democrats disagreed, contending there was ample precedence. The one surefire way for Congress to have ended the war was to cut off money for combat operations -- a step most Democrats weren't willing to make because they feared doing so would have hurt troops in harms' way, or at least be perceived by voters that way. The plan identified by Baker and Christopher, who served as secretary of State under President Clinton, would not necessarily resolve such issues in the future. But it would create a consultative process between the White House and Congress that currently does not exist. Also, calling on Congress to respond would exert significant political pressure on a president if he ignored lawmakers' wishes. The panel studied the issue for more than a year and consulted more than three dozen experts. Other members of the panel include former Democratic Rep. Lee Hamilton, who in 2006 led the Iraq Study Group with Baker; former Attorney General Edwin Meese III, and Strobe Talbott, former deputy secretary of State. The Miller Center of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia sponsored the study. |
Link |
Home Front: WoT |
Liars' Round-Up: on Security, Facts Matter |
2008-06-29 |
by Ralph Peters THE facts about your security are being torn to shreds by activist liars. And they think that you're too stupid to know the difference. Let's lay out the worst current examples of media make-believe and election-year truth-trashing: Whopper No. 1: America is less safe today than it was on Sept. 10, 2001. Oh, really? Where's the evidence? The Clinton years saw New York City attacked and Americans slaughtered by terrorists around the globe. Nothing was done to protect us. And the true end of the Clinton era came on 9/11. A record to be proud of. Countless aspects of the Bush-Cheney administration deserve merciless criticism. But fair is fair: Since 9/11, we haven't suffered a single successful terrorist attack on our homeland. Not one. Explain to me, please, how this shows we're less safe. What factual measurement applies, other than the absence of attacks? God knows, the terrorists desperately wanted to strike our homeland. And they couldn't. Are we supposed to believe that was an accident? Whopper No. 2: Al Qaeda is stronger than ever. Al Qaeda just suffered a strategic defeat in Iraq that may prove decisive. It can't launch attacks beyond its regional lairs. The cowardly Osama bin Laden can't show his face (remember his Clinton-era pep rallies?). Yes, terrorists can still murder innocents on their home court. I personally prefer that to them killing Americans in Manhattan and Washington. Even in Iraq, al Qaeda's been beaten down to violent-fugitive status. By what objective measurement is al Qaeda stronger today than it was when it had an entire country for its base and its tentacles reached all the way to Florida and the Midwest? Whopper No. 3: Success in Iraq is an illusion - the surge failed. Folks, this is something only a New York Times columnist could believe. Every single significant indicator, from Iraqi government progress through the performance of Iraqi security forces to the plummeting level of violence, has changed for the better - remarkably so. If current trend-lines continue, it may not be long before Baghdad is safer for Iraqi citizens than the Washington-Baltimore metroplex is for US citizens. Iraq's government is working, its economy is booming - and its military has driven the concentrations of terrorists and militia from every one of Iraq's major cities. And our troops are coming home. Where's the failure? Whopper No. 4: Iran is stronger than ever. Tell that to the Iraqis, who've rejected Iranian meddling in their affairs, who've smashed the Iran-backed Shia militias and who didn't take long to figure out that Tehran's foreign policy was imperialist and anti-Arab. The people of Iraq don't intend to trade Saddam for Ahmadinejad. Iran has lost in Iraq. At this point, all the Iranians can do is to kill a handful of innocent Iraqis now and then. Think that wins them friends and influence? Whopper No. 5: The US-European relationship is a disaster. In fact, Washington and the major European capitals have built new, sturdier bridges to replace old ones that badly needed burning. The Europeans grudgingly figured out that they need us - as we need them. The big break in 2003 cleared a lot of bad air (there was no break with Europe's young democracies). Relations today are sounder than they were in the fiddle-while-Rome-burns Clinton era. Oh, and NATO has become a serious military alliance - fighting in Afghanistan, patrolling the high seas and conducting special operations against terrorists. The Germans announced this week that they're sending another thousand troops to Afghanistan. France is re-engaging with NATO's military side. Where's the disaster, mon ami? Whopper No. 6: As president, Barack Obama would bring positive change to our foreign policy - and John McCain's too old to get it. Hmm: Take a gander at Obama's senior foreign-policy advisers: Madeleine Albright (71), Warren Christopher (82), Anthony Lake (69), Lee Hamilton (77), Richard Clarke (57) ... if you added up their ages and fed the number into a time-machine, you'd land in Europe in the middle of the Black Death. More important: These are the people whose watch saw the first attack on the World Trade Center, Mogadishu, Rwanda, the Srebrenica massacre, a pass for the Russians on Chechnya, the Khobar Towers bombing, the attacks on our embassies in Africa, the near-sinking of the USS Cole - oh, and the US bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. Their legacy climaxed on 9/11. You couldn't assemble a team in Washington with more strategic failures to its credit. Whopper No. 7: Our troops are all coming home as psychos victimized by their participation in military atrocities. Tell it to the Marines. |
Link |
-Signs, Portents, and the Weather- |
Obamas National Security Whos Who of Incompetance |
2008-06-18 |
"Depressingly, there is not a single innovative, controversial, outside-the-box thinker on this list. Where is the intellectual challenge and vitality?"from a commenter somewhere. Obamas National Security Whos Who of Incompetence Jun 18 at 1:01pm by Macranger Youve got to love this. Heres is Obamas National Security Working Group: * Secretary of State Madeleine Albright * Senator David Boren, former Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence * Secretary of State Warren Christopher * Greg Craig, former director of the State Department Office of Policy Planning * Secretary of the Navy Richard Danzig * Representative Lee Hamilton, former Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee * Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder * Dr. Tony Lake, former National Security Advisor * Senator Sam Nunn, former Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. * Secretary of Defense William Perry * Dr. Susan Rice, former Assistant Secretary of State * Representative Tim Roemer, 9/11 Commissioner * Jim Steinberg, former Deputy National Security Advisor |
Link |
Israel-Palestine-Jordan |
Netanyahu says he never offered to give up all of Golan |
2008-05-27 |
![]() Lauder made the statement to Yediot Aharonot in April 2001 in an article that Netanyahu's aides distributed at the Knesset on Monday to counter claims to the contrary from Netanyahu's adversaries, including Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. "Prime Minister Netanyahu never agreed to withdraw to the June 4, 1967 borders or close to them, and never allowed me to make such an offer," Lauder said. "An agreement was not reached in the summer of 1998, due to Netanyahu's refusal to accept the Syrian demands and his insistence that the final border with Syria be a significant distance east of the June 4, 1967 lines and the 1923 international border." At Monday's Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee meeting, Netanyahu revealed that in September 1996, the US State Department issued a statement at his request saying that Israel was not obligated to withdraw from the Golan Heights, despite commitments that former prime minister Yitzhak Rabin made to former US secretary of state Warren Christopher. At the meeting, Olmert threatened to reveal documents proving that Netanyahu did in fact agree to give up the Golan Heights. Netanyahu will convene the Likud central committee in Katzrin in the Golan Heights on Thursday to show solidarity with the region. |
Link |