The Rest of the Story of the Train Attack Foiled by Americans

When will Europe get serious? It is not for lack of attacks, evidence, intelligence or testimony. The leadership in Europe is just plain stupid and that is not only dangerous, but bloody and deadly.

It is in Belgium but for sure all over Europe.

Unarmed, 3 Americans stopped what could have been a very deadly train ride.

Their interview is here.
To see the real video of the attack:

The gunman is 25-year-old Moroccan national Ayob El Khazzani, boarded the Amsterdam-Paris express in Brussels on Friday with a Kalashnikov assault rifle, a Luger automatic pistol, nine cartridge clips and a box-cutter, investigators say. Spanish police actually alerted the French intelligence wing and French police in March of 2014 and al Khazzani was in the French database. Truth be told, this jihadi was in at least 26 European databases and with good reason. He and his family lived in Spain and he was arrested several times for drug trafficking and still had outstanding warrants.

In 2014, he moved from Spain to France and traveled to Syria and Belgium intelligence services upgraded the information in their own database. France has at least 5000 jihad inspired and or trained names in their database but it is unknown what Belgium has. However, none of this should come to any surprise in Europe and there is a reason for that, so read on.

‘Sharia4Belgium’ Leader and Dozens of Other Militants Are Sentenced to Jail Time

ViceNews: A Belgian court ruled on Wednesday that Sharia4Belgium, an Islamist group accused of running a jihadist recruitment cell in the country, was “a terrorist organization” and found 45 members guilty of terror charges.

The correctional tribunal in the port city of Antwerp sentenced Fouad Belkacem, the group’s 32-year-old leader who goes by the alias “Abu Imran,” to 12 years in prison. The other 44 members on trial were sentenced to between three and 15 years in jail, with some of the sentences being suspended.

This is the biggest-ever trial of its kind in Belgium. Only seven defendants were present in court, with the remainder believed to be either dead or still fighting in Syria. The photograph above shows Michael ‘Younes’ Delefortrie outside the main entrance of the courthouse.

Sharia4Belgium — a group once credited with being a major source of Belgian jihadists to Syria — disbanded in 2012 when Belkacem was arrested and sentenced to two years for inciting hatred and violence towards non-Muslims. But, according to the court, the organization continued to operate as a recruitment cell into 2013.

Belkacem, who has been described by public prosecutor Ann Fransen as “the group’s undisputed ringleader,” is no stranger to the courts and he has been arrested several times in the past for theft.

“Belkacem is responsible for the radicalization of young men to prepare them for Salafist combat, which has at its core no place for democratic values,” Judge Luc Potargent said on Wednesday.

The trial took place amid a wider debate on escalating radicalization in Europe. It opened in September 2014, four months after a French national with links to militant groups opened fire in the Jewish Museum of Belgium in Brussels, killing four people. Wednesday’s verdict also comes in the wake of the Paris terror attacks that left 17 dead in early January.

There have been several high-profile police raids against suspected jihadist networks since then, including a shootout in the eastern Belgian town of Verviers, when counter-terrorist units reportedly foiled a jihadist plot to stage a major terror attack.

It has been estimated that 450 Belgian nationals could be fighting in Iraq or Syria. On those figures, Belgium has one of Europe’s highest per capita ratio of jihadists fighters overseas.

“Sharia4Belgium recruited young men for armed combat and organized their departure for Syria,” the judge at the correctional tribunal said.

According to reports, Sharia4Belgium was responsible for 10 percent of these departures. Romain Caillet, a researcher and specialist in Islamic movements based in Beirut, told VICE News that most of the group’s recruits are believed to be fighting alongside the al Nusra Front — al Qaeda’s branch in Syria.

Sharia4Belgium was a Salafist group that followed in the footsteps of Islam4UK, a UK-based organization formed in 2008 by radical preachers Omar Bakri and Anjem Choudary. Offshoots of the group were subsequently opened in Holland, Denmark, and even in the US. The Belgian version surfaced around the 2010 parliamentary elections and established itself in the northern city of Antwerp.

Belgian sociologist and religions expert Felice Dassetto told VICE News that the group was born of a shared vision with its UK counterpart: “Sharia4Belgium is a classic radical movement which promotes a pro-sharia ideology. According to the movement, a true Muslim must display the religion in the public space, [it is] a political vision of religion.”

As its name implies, the group’s ambition was to impose sharia law throughout Belgium. In the past, the group has declared Belgian elections illegal and threatened to destroy the Atomium tourist attraction in Brussels. The group also criticized France’s full-veil ban, saying it would support any woman who chose to wear a full-body veil in public.

In June 2011, a few months after protesters in Paris staged a demonstration against the French ban on face covering, VICE interviewed Belkacem. At the time, he described himself as “a spokesman” for both Sharia4Belgium and Sharia4Holland. “We’re tired of people constantly attacking our Ummah,” he said, referring to the worldwide Islamic community. “It’s not fair. No one is listening to us.”

At the time, Belkacem denied being at the head of a terror cell. “We want to fulfill Allah’s wish — that’s our mission,” he explained. “The true religion must dominate the world. Of course, I mean Islam. We want out message to be clear. Islam does not compromise. We don’t beat about the bush. We openly affirm the supremacy of Islam in the world.”

“We don’t believe in the separation of church and State. Look at what this democracy has brought us: nothing but economic crisis. Our country has had no government in a year. How can we still be boasting the values of democracy?”

There are several theories about why Belgium produces so many militants. For Montasser AlDe’emeh, a researcher who has been studying the Belgian jihadist movement, tensions between the Flemish and the Walloon communities in the country and the ensuing lack of national unity are a factor of radicalization.

“We live in a divided country,” AlDe’emeh told Germany’s Der Spiegel. “The obvious structure of an Islamic theocracy seems more and more alluring.”

 

 

Why Should the Civil War in Syria Concern You?

Latakia, Syria is one of the locations of Bashir al Assad’s homes. It has been yet one of many sites of deadly hostilities since the civil war began.

Syrian airstrikes just killed 50 rebels that have been taking the fight against the Assad regime.

Latakia is 4th largest city in Syria, made up of mostly Alawites, a culture from the 9th century and the Assad family dynasty is Alawite, which is to say, an Alawite is known to be from Ali ibn Abi Talib, the son in law of the prophet Mohammad. During the Ottoman Empire, the Alawites were suppressed and an attempt was make to convert them to Sunni.

Anyway, Latakia is no more the destination of choice for the elites of the Middle East. The video above demonstrates how ordinary citizens have become crafty fighters, trained on their own and resourceful when it comes to using powerful military gear, weapons, procurement and to what end?

Consider, there has been a generation that has now passed where children are now adults and their only known education is a battlefield, shelling, fighting, use of weapons and no peace. No one can determine how long this war will continue, yet with the Iranian war machine in full support of Bashir al Assad, it will continue. For generations to come, new breeds will be battlefield tested and experienced and where will our own in the United States be?

Let that sink in.

Who is This David Kendall, the Clinton’s Lawyer

If and it is a big IF, some of the Hillary emails in question were not marked with any classified designations, then one must take a hard look at all of Hillary’s inner circle with particular emphasis on Huma Abedin. Why? Huma sent emails to Hillary which was a collection of several classified electronic dispatches that were classified and summarized them into a regular and unprotected email. Confused? More here. Heh, there were passages about snipers, people movement and vehicles.

It seems the New York Times has an axe to grind with the Clintons, imagine that. But the NYT is the go to media outlet when it comes to the White House and it cannot be forgotten that it was in fact the New York Times that was first to draw blood with regard to the Clintons. This was likely due to, but not proven at the hands of Valerie Jarrett protecting the White House from any concocted Clinton scheme and scandal.

Do, who is David Kendall? There must be some praise to the New York Times as they did list some, albeit, some Clinton scandals but the list if far from complete.

As a side matter, it will also come down to who can out-lawyer who in Washington DC…will Kendall always win?

From Whitewater to Email: David Kendall, the Clintons’ Dogged Lawyer

WASHINGTON — At first, he had to worry about a remote piece of land in Arkansas that no one wanted. Then there were billing records that went missing before mysteriously reappearing in the White House. And of course there was the blue dress.

Today, the object of concern for David E. Kendall is a tiny thumb drive that sat in a safe at his law firm until a couple weeks ago before attracting the attention of Congress, the F.B.I. and the news media. Once again, the whirlpool of Washington politics has arrived at Mr. Kendall’s doorstep as he defends perhaps the world’s most famous client.

For more than 20 years, Mr. Kendall has been on the front lines for Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton as their personal lawyer, battling investigators and litigants in the superheated environment where law and politics meet. From Whitewater to impeachment, he has waged legal warfare to keep the Clintons’ political careers on track. So as Mrs. Clinton faces questions about her use of a personal email server as secretary of state, no one is surprised she turned to Mr. Kendall.

The latest furor has put Mr. Kendall under a spotlight in a way that discomfits the tight-lipped and camera-shy lawyer. From Mrs. Clinton’s foes come public questions about why he had the thumb drive containing her email and whether he secured it properly. From Mrs. Clinton’s friends come private questions about whether he has managed the situation effectively and whether he should be more outspoken to protect a Democratic presidential candidate leading in the polls.

“They always say, ‘Is Kendall the lawyer to do this or that?’” said James Carville, the former political strategist for Mr. Clinton who expresses great admiration for Mr. Kendall. “I never saw that there was a huge conflict. But you know, sometimes lawyers are lawyers and spokespeople are spokespeople.”

Mr. Kendall, said Mr. Carville, is not a public pit bull. “He has no bluster about him,” Mr. Carville said. “He’s aggressive, but he doesn’t have an in-your-face kind of thing about him. I don’t think he views that as his role. The chances that he’s going to talk to the press are way beyond remote.”

Unsurprisingly, Mr. Kendall declined to comment last week. But he enjoys Mrs. Clinton’s deep confidence.

“He has their complete trust, and he’s earned their complete trust,” said Robert Barnett, another lawyer for the Clintons and a partner with Mr. Kendall at Williams & Connolly in Washington. “There’s nobody more dedicated to his clients than David Kendall. There’s nobody who spends more time thinking about how to help his clients than David Kendall.”

To critics, that is the problem. Mr. Kendall, who turned over the thumb drive to the Justice Department on Aug. 6, has become so integrated into the Clinton apparatus that he risks crossing the line from lawyer to participant, they said. Two Republican senators wrote him letters in recent weeks questioning his handling of the thumb drive.

“The problem with the Clintons is once you begin working with them or acting as their agent you often get caught up in their scandals,” said Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch, a watchdog group suing over Mrs. Clinton’s email. “So now Mr. Kendall is stuck having to explain his handling of the classified information Mrs. Clinton gave him.” More from the NYT’s here.

Who is at Fault When it Comes to Syria Refugees?

This matter comes down to no policy on the war in Syria and the misguided, yet no less corrupt leaders in this matter include the National Security Council at the White House, Barack Obama himself and the failed control and management at the State Department which began with Hillary Clinton and now with John Kerry.

The United Nations is at the core of the mismanagement and Western countries are left to clean up the mess, while some are now saying NO.

U.N. Calls on Western Nations to Shelter Syrian Refugees

“In the case of Syrian refugees, our intelligence on the ground is alarmingly slim, making it harder to identify extremists,” said Representative Michael McCaul, Republican of Texas and chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee.

The United Nations high commissioner for refugees, António Guterres, has stepped up calls for industrialized countries, including the United States, to shelter 130,000 Syrian refugees over the next two years.

The figure is a fraction of the nearly four million refugees who have poured into the countries bordering Syria — chiefly Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey — straining their resources and plunging many displaced people into poverty.

So far, the high commissioner’s pleas have not been met. Governments around the world have promised to take in just under two-thirds of what the United Nations is urging, while a great many more Syrians have chosen to make perilous journeys by land and sea in search of asylum in Europe. More here from the New York Times.

McCaul Says Admitting Unvetted Syrian Refugees into the U.S. is “Very Dangerous”

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Chairman Michael McCaul, of the House Homeland Security Committee, wrote a letter to President Obama last Thursday expressing concerns over the Administration’s announced plans to resettle some 2,000 Syrian refugees in the United States this year. Terrorists have made known their plans to attempt to exploit refugee programs to sneak terrorists into the West and the U.S. homeland. Chairman McCaul’s letter points out the potential national security threat this poses to the United States.

Chairman McCaul: “Despite all evidence towards our homeland’s vulnerability to foreign fighters, the Administration still plans to resettle Syrian refugees into the United States. The Director of the National Counterterrorism Center and the Deputy Director of the FBI both sat before my Committee this Congress and expressed their concern with admitting refugees we can’t properly vet from the global epicenter of terrorism and extremism in Syria. America has a proud tradition of welcoming refugees from around the world, but in this special situation the Obama Administration’s Syrian refugee plan is very dangerous.”

Read Chairman McCaul’s letter HERE.

 

The Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence will hold a hearing on June 24th to examine the refugee resettlement program and discuss vulnerabilities to our security exposed by the Administration’s plan.

It was last year that Barack Obama lifted restrictions on the refugee program.

U.S. eases rules to admit more Syrian refugees, after 31 last year

President Barack Obama’s administration announced on Wednesday that it had eased some immigration rules to allow more of the millions of Syrians forced from their homes during the country’s three-year civil war to come to the United States.

Only 31 Syrian refugees – out of an estimated 2.3 million – were admitted in the fiscal year that ended in October, prompting demands for change from rights advocates and many lawmakers.

Hundreds of thousands of Syrians have been taken in by neighboring countries such as Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey.

The rules changes granted exemptions on a case by case basis to the “material support” bar in U.S. immigration law, according to an announcement in the Federal Register signed by Secretary of State John Kerry and Jeh Johnson, the Secretary of Homeland Security.

That bar had made it impossible for anyone who had provided any support to armed rebel groups to come to the United States, even if the groups themselves receive aid from Washington.

The advocacy group Human Rights First said, for example, that the existing law had been invoked to bar a refugee who had been robbed of $4 and his lunch by armed rebels, and a florist who had sold bouquets to a group the United States had designated as a terrorist organization.

“These exemptions will help address the plight of Syrian refugees who are caught up in the worst humanitarian crisis in a generation,” Illinois Senator Richard Durbin, chairman of the U.S. Senate subcommittee on human rights, said in a statement.

It was not immediately clear how many Syrians would be affected by the rules change.

By early January, 135,000 Syrians had applied for asylum in the United States. But the strict restrictions on immigration, many instituted to prevent terrorists from entering the country, had kept almost all of them out.

Washington has provided $1.3 billion in humanitarian assistance to aid Syrian refugees. This year, the United Nations is also trying to relocate 30,000 displaced Syrians it considers especially vulnerable. Witnesses at a Senate hearing last month had testified that Washington would normally accept half.

More Than Once Israel on the Cusp of Attacking Iran

RFE: Israel’s Channel 2 TV reported August 21 that a plan for Israel to strike Iranian nuclear facilities was blocked on three separate occasions in recent years.

In an audio recording of former defense minister Ehud Barak obtained by the TV station, Barak said that he drew up the attack plans against Iran, and they were approved by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

He said Israeli army chief Gabi Ashkenazi blocked one planned attack in 2010, by refusing to certify that the army was prepared to carry out the attack.

A second attack was aborted when hawkish Israeli ministers Moshe Ya’alon and Yuval Steinitz withdrew support, he said, while in 2012, Israel decided the timing was bad for an attack because of a U.S.-Israel military exercise.

The TV station said Barak tried to prevent broadcast of the bombshell revelations, but Israel’s military censor allowed it.Ya’alon and Steinitz issued a statement expressing bewilderment at the military’s decision to permit the broadcast.

The report comes as Israel has been strenuously lobbying against a nuclear deal between Iran and world powers that aims to curb Tehran’s nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions’ relief.

TOI: According to the August 21, 2015 edition of The Times Of Israel

Israel aborted a planned military strike against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure in 2012 — because the time selected for the operation coincided with a U.S. military exercise in the region.  Earlier planned military strikes in 2010 and 2011, were reportedly thwarted by deliberate leaks by those opposed to such an operation.  Israel’s Channel 2 News, reports that the U.S. was adamantly opposed to such an Israeli strike on Iran in 2012; but, that the Israeli political leadership had decided to proceed any way.  But, Tel Aviv ultimately decided to abort the mission, because the strike would have occurred at the same time that the U.S. and Israeli were conducting a joint military exercise.  Israel’s Channel 2 News reported that it relied on tape recordings of former Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak; and, other unnamed foreign reports — to reach the judgment that Israel had decided to strike Iran, only to abort the mission later.

     “The attack [pre-emptive military strike], was being readied for January 2012; but, that [time period] coincided with the long planned, Austere Challenge 12 Exercisethe largest planned joint U.S./Israeli military exercise.  “We intended to carry it out, so I went to (then U.S Defense Secretary Leon) Panetta; and, asked him if we could change the date of the exercise,” former Defense Minister Barak said in a recording broadcast by Channel 2.  “So, they delayed it as much as they could….to a few days before the U.S. election (in the U.S. that November).  However, The Times of Israel reports, the new date set for a pre-emptive Israeli military strike – was also not convenient.”

     “You demand that the U.S. respect your sovereignty; and, decide you want to do it (strike Iran), even if America is opposed to it — and, is contrary to their interests,” Minister Barak said in the recording.  “You can’t find yourself then going back on that — by trying to force America to be party to (the strike), just as it comes here [Israel], for a pre-planned [joint military] drill.  That’s how it [the pre-emptive military strike] ran into difficulties in 2012,” he explained.

     Israel’s Channel 2 News added that Barak’s revelation about a thwarted 2012 military strike – was only one in a series of bombshells in the tape recordings of his conversations broadcast Friday night in Israel.  Defense Minister Barak also “detailed how he and then Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wanted to strike [Iran] in 2010 and 2011; but, were thwarted by opposition by the Army’s Chief of Staff and ministerial colleagues.”  These new revelations “come from conversations related to a new biography of Minister Barak — being written by Danny Dor, and Ilan Kfir.  The Times of Israel adds that the former Defense Minister and Prime Minister, “attempted to prevent the broadcast of the recordings but Israel’s military’s censors allowed Channel 2 to play them.”

     I believe these reports are accurate.  As to the reasons why Israel did not go through with a pre-emptive strike?  I suspect the reasons are more nuanced and complicated than portrayed here.  Some reliable reporting in Israel suggest that Prime Minister Netanyahu never really intended to authorize a pre-emptive military strike against Iran; but, was in fact bluffing – in an attempt to influence U.S. elections; and, perhaps extract additional military concessions from Washington.