Turkish Forum English

Tag: Al-Qaeda

  • Europe Plots Show al-Qaida ‘Escalation’ to Assault-Style Attacks

    Europe Plots Show al-Qaida ‘Escalation’ to Assault-Style Attacks

    By: David A. Patten

    son dakika

    Intelligence experts warned Wednesday that the massive terror plot involving simultaneous assault-style attacks in London, Paris, and Germany represents a serious escalation in al-Qaida’s war with the West, and poses a clear and present danger to the United States.

    European counterterrorism officials are describing the plan of attack as being modeled on the November 2008 assault in Mumbai, India. In that attack, several teams fanned out across the city and used explosives and automatic weapons to kill over 170 people.

    Der Spiegel is reporting a 36-year-old Hamburg man who was arrested in Kabul in July provided authorities with intelligence about a series of attacks planned for Germany and neighboring European countries. He stated several teams of attackers bearing European passports had received training in remote Waziristan and Pakistan.

    The plot is believed related to heightened security around the Eiffel Tower, which has been closed to tourists twice in the past week.

    “It’s completely certain that at some point, something like that will happen here,” Michael Scheuer, former CIA counterterrorism expert who headed the unit assigned to capture or kill Osama bin Laden. “It’s not only because you have increasing numbers of young Muslim males who are U.S. citizens who want to act violently, but we have completely neutered our police forces because they have 12 million undocumented aliens that they have to worry about, and they don’t know a thing about them.

    “So it’s a huge problem,” Scheuer says, “and not an easy one by any means.”

    ForeignPolicy.com reported the plot disrupted Tuesday involved “simultaneous Mumbai-style attacks — with coordinated attackers taking hostages, using guns and grenades — on cities in the U.K., France, and Germany.”

    Author Steve Emerson, one of the nation’s leading experts on terror, and the executive director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism, tells Newsmax that if al-Qaida is shown to be behind the series of attacks that were planned in Europe, “It would represent an escalation, as well as of course an expansion and diversification of their tactics, considering the success achieved in Mumbai.”

    Several sources say the plot to attack Europe recently shifted into an operational stage in Pakistan. The CIA has conducted a record number of drone strikes in Pakistan in the past month in an apparent bid to disrupt the attackers.

    Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano would not address specific threats but told Fox News Wednesday, “We are working constantly to make sure the American people are safe, and that includes plots against soft targets like hotels.”

    “We certainly have to be on the lookout for Mumbai-style attacks with bombs or assault rifles, at simultaneous institutions or commercial facilities in the United States,” Emerson tells Newsmax. “That certainly could be pulled off.”

    The Wall Street Journal is reporting that U.S. counterterrorism officials are working urgently to determine if the European plots also involve an immediate threat to the United States.

    “You have folks increasingly concerned about: Is it not just Europe that needs to be careful, but is there a threat here as well?” one U.S. counterterrorism official told the Journal.

    Intelligence sources are saying it has been years since a plot on the scale of the European assault has been uncovered.

    “This isn’t just your typical Washington talk about how the threats have evolved,” a counterterrorism official told the Journal. “People are very concerned about what they’re seeing.”

    In some ways, experts say, the latest plot suggests terrorists learned from the relatively simple, brutally effective assault carried out in Mumbai.

    Experts continue to believe al-Qaida’s chief objective is to carry out an attack on American soil using weapons of mass destruction. But the apparent shift to simultaneous assaults with explosives and automatic weapons, presumably targeting “soft targets” such as hotels, tourist attractions, and mass transportation hubs, shows the organization is also interested in attacks that aren’t as lethal, but can be much more difficult to detect.

    Andrew McCarthy, the former assistant U.S. attorney who led the 1995 prosecution of “Blind Sheik” Omar Abdel-Rahman, points out the 9/11 attacks took over 18 months to carry out.

    “An armed assault, while it’s not likely to result in the same number of casualties, is easier in the United States to train for. There are lots of remote areas to train in. The training curve is not as high to get someone ready to carry out an attack like that,” he says.

    McCarthy also tells Newsmax: “Even if the attackers are not particularly competent, we saw in Fort Hood that one guy shooting a high-powered weapon in kind of a haphazard fashion can still kill a lot of people in a very short period of time.”

    Kent Clizbe, a former CIA counterterrorism operative, agrees with McCarthy that one reason terrorists may be shifting their tactics to armed assaults is that larger plots have proven too difficult.

    “I think the only thing that’s surprising is that they have not done it here yet,” he says. “You look at the relative ease with which you can acquire firearms. You can buy a semi-automatic AK-47 pretty easily here.”

    Clizbe adds that it may be no coincidence the plot occurs as the Iraq war winds down. That conflict, he says, acted like “fly paper” to keep many violent extremists occupied in the Middle East.

    “We have a supply and demand problem,” Clizbe says. “You have supply building up and up, and they want to do an attack. So the further and further away we get in time from the Iraq war, the more supply of jihadis there is.”

    Mark Lowenthal, former CIA assistant director and president of Intelligence & Security Academy, a national security training and consulting firm, tells Newsmax that the nature of the thwarted European attacks may actually indicate progress in the war on terror.

    “We’re driving these guys to smaller, less coordinated, less catastrophic action,” he says. “That doesn’t mean it’s over. But it shows we’re making their lives more operationally difficult.

    “It also means that the intelligence problem becomes more difficult. But clearly at this point the intelligence is working, or you wouldn’t have all these warnings.”

    Fred Burton, the vice president of intelligence for the STRATFOR intelligence group in Austin, Texas, agrees wholeheartedly.

    “It’s our assessment that al-Qaida no longer poses a strategic threat to the United States,” he tells Newsmax. “Now that doesn’t mean that they still can’t kill. But if you look at their target sets, and if you look at the series of attacks that we’ve had in the United States — such as the Little Rock National Guard shooter, Major Hasan at Fort Hood, the attempt to blow up the airplane on the inbound flight into Detroit — you’ve got very isolated lone-wolf operations that are clearly jihadi inspired. But you’re not going to be able to carry out that kind of WMD attack on U.S. soil.”

  • Uyghur Evictee Detained

    Uyghur Evictee Detained

    2010-08-10

    Chinese authorities hold an elderly Uyghur farmer in Beijing.

    RFA

    Abdurehim Mollek says his land in Onsu county was sold to a resettled Han Chinese farmer by local officials.

    HONG KONG-Authorities in Beijing are holding an 84-year-old Uyghur farmer after he traveled to the capital to lodge an official protest over the loss of his farmland, the man and his son said.

    Abdurehim Mollek, a Muslim Uyghur from Aksu prefecture in the troubled northwestern region of Xinjiang, was being held by police after being taken from his motel room in the eastern Beijing suburb of Weigongcun, he said.

    Traveling with his 29-year-old son, Abdurehim Mollek said Sunday he had already been detained without trial for two years by authorities in Aksu’s Onsu (in Chinese, Wensu) county after he tried to petition over the actions of local officials.

    “We are in the Xinjiang Affairs Department’s motel with dozens of other Uyghur petitioners. I am allowed go out to the yard of the motel, but my father is not. There are two guards at the motel door who are always watching us. Probably in the next few days the police will come from Aksu to return us there,” his son said.

    “The Xinjiang Affairs Department usually holds us until the local officials come to take us away. That’s how it has worked most of the previous 10 times,” he said, referring to earlier trips his father had made to Beijing to petition.

    Abdurehim Mollek’s son said they had been planning to petition publicly at Tiananmen Square or at an international news bureau to make their voices heard.

    An officer who answered the phone at the Wanshousi police station in Beijing confirmed Abdurehim Mollek’s detention.

    “Yes, yes, that’s right … He is a petitioner. It says so in the system,” the officer said. “The system has identified him as a key petitioner.”

    Taken from motel

    He described their detention Monday by regular police officers at their motel in the capital.

    “Three Beijing policemen came to our motel room in the morning [at 9 a.m.] and checked our documents,” Abdurehim Mollek’s son said.

    “Abdurehim Mollek showed the police our IDs and papers about our case. Then the police took us to their office.”

    “They asked no questions and conducted no investigation. We were not allowed to have any food to eat. We were finally released at 6 p.m.,” he said.

    The father and son were placed in the custody of two police officers, a Uyghur and Han Chinese, who brought them to the Xinjiang Affairs Department and placed them, under guard, in a motel room at the department’s headquarters.

    “Regardless of whether the authorities agree to solve our problem, we will stay here. If we go back [to our hometown], we might be detained or sentenced. The last time [my father] was brought back home, he was detained in a mental hospital for 60 days. [The police said] if we petition again, we will be detained in a mental hospital permanently,” his son said.

    Years of petitioning

    Abdurehim Mollek has been petitioning ever since local officials in Kizil [in Chinese, Qingnian] village took over 220 mu (36 acres) of his farmland in 1997.

    His property was part of a total 3,000 mu (494 acres) of land which belonged to 20 Uyghur farmers, taken by local officials and sold to a Chinese farmer surnamed Chen who had recently settled in the village from another province.

    The land was later resold to another Chinese farmer surnamed Lu, who is the current owner.

    Abdurehim Mollek said the two Chinese farmers are close relatives of village chief Han Guoming, although calls to the village office to confirm this went unanswered.

    After being provided only a portion of his promised compensation, Abdurehim Mollek petitioned local and provincial authorities for 10 years.

    In 2007, he began to petition the central government and has since traveled to Beijing 11 times to plead his case.

    In 2008, he was held without trial in a detention center in Onsu county for two years. His most recent visit to Beijing was his second trip in three months, and the second since his release.

    After his previous trip to the capital, Abdurehim Mollek was forcibly repatriated to Aksu prefecture and held in a local mental hospital for 60 days.

    He has been returned to Xinjiang under police guard nearly every time he has petitioned the central government.

    Other petitioners targeted

    Mamut Rozi, a Uyghur from Yarkent county, in Xinjiang’s western Kashgar prefecture, is also currently in Beijing petitioning the central government over the forced sale of his land by local officials to a resettled Chinese farmer.

    In a telephone interview, Mamut Rozi said he feared being forcibly repatriated to Yarkent by local authorities.

    Two of his Uyghur roommates in Beijing were arrested by Xinjiang provincial police and taken to Aksu prefecture.

    The roommates, former workers at an Aksu sugar factory, had been chosen as representatives by a group of 200 workers recently fired by the plant to petition authorities in the capital over the loss of their jobs.

    “[The police] said to my roommates, ‘Why are you organizing others to petition? Why don’t you just take care of your own case? We’re arresting you for illegal organizing,'” Mamut Rozi said.

    “I couldn’t hold back my tears as I saw them handcuffed by the police.”

    ‘Cause for concern’

    Dilxat Raxit, spokesman for the Munich-based World Uyghur Congress, said petitioners like Abdurehim Mollek are highly vulnerable to arbitrary detentions by Beijing authorities if they try to complain about their local government in the capital.

    “And after they get sent back [to Xinjiang] they become a real cause for concern,” Raxit said.

    “Every time a Uyghur is sent back to Xinjiang, they are either sentenced to labor camp, or they suffer some kind of economic punishment.”

    Dilxat Raxit said this is routine. “All Uyghurs in this situation who get sent back home end up suffering for it to a greater or lesser degree.”

    “Many petitioners who travel to Beijing to complain from all over China are picked up by officials from their hometowns, who run representative offices in the capital for this purpose, and are escorted back home, where they can face beatings, surveillance, and further detention.

    China’s army of petitioners say they are repeatedly stonewalled, detained in “black jails,” beaten, and harassed by authorities if they try to take a complaint against local government actions to a higher level of government.

    Millions of Uyghurs—a distinct, Turkic minority who are predominantly Muslim—populate Central Asia and Xinjiang.

    Uyghurs say they have long suffered ethnic discrimination, oppressive religious controls, and continued poverty and joblessness despite China’s ambitious plans to develop its vast northwestern frontier.

    Those frustrations erupted in July 2009 in deadly riots that left nearly 200 people dead, by the Chinese government’s tally.

    Chinese authorities blame Uyghur separatists for a series of deadly attacks in recent years and accuse one group in particular of maintaining links to the al-Qaeda terrorist network.

    Original reporting in Uyghur by Shohret Hoshur and in Mandarin by Qiao Long. Translated by Luisetta Mudie and Shohret Hoshur. Written in English by Joshua Lipes and Luisetta Mudie.

    https://www.rfa.org/english/news/uyghur/farmer-08092010142338.html

  • The 7 Most Shocking Secrets From the WikiLeaks Files

    The 7 Most Shocking Secrets From the WikiLeaks Files

    The Daily Beast is dedicated to news and commentary, culture, and entertainment. We carefully curate the web’s most essential stories and bring you original must-reads from our talented contributors.

    Romeo Gacad, AFP / Getty Images More than 90,000 classified files documenting the war in Afghanistan have been published by the whistle-blower site WikiLeaks, painting a dire portrait. From hidden civilian casualties to a special unit tasked with murdering top Taliban leaders without trial, see what’s in the explosive files.

    The WikiLeaks Afghanistan files, one of the biggest leaks in the history of the U.S. military, cover January 2004 to December 2009, a time span the Obama administration has been quick to highlight, given that it implicates “under-resourcing” on the part of President George W. Bush. Although the White House was quick to condemn the release as “irresponsible,” The New York Times noted in its report that the paper did attempt to verify the information—withholding documents it felt would endanger national security—and that no government officials denied its authenticity.

    Among the findings:

    1) Pakistan’s spy service, according to revealed documents, is a major supporter of insurgents in Afghanistan, allowing its members to meet secretly with the Taliban, offering strategy advice, organizing groups to fight coalition troops, and plotting the assassinations of members of the Afghan government.

    2) A top-secret group of American forces, nicknamed the “black” unit, is specially tasked with hunting down top Taliban leaders and either killing or capturing them on the spot—without a trial. The Obama administration has apparently increased the missions even though some have gone awry, killing civilians.

    3) NATO troops are relying on remote-controlled Predator drones more and more heavily, controlling them from a base in Nevada and using them to kill an increasing number of Taliban targets.

    4) The Taliban has access to heat-seeking missiles and has used them against American aircraft, a fact never before disclosed publicly. Many of the missiles aren’t successful, but Americans are forced into dangerous retrieval operations when the missiles crash, so that Taliban do not recover them.

    5) Several documents detail the frustrating disappearance of money meant for humanitarian aid, such as the case of an orphanage erected with much fanfare and donations in Gardez. A year after its opening, American visitors reported that there we no orphans at the site, and that many had been called home for the holidays. (In Afghanistan, an orphan is defined as having no father, but many still have mothers.)

    6) Civilian death tolls are rising consistently, with the Taliban conducting a successfull roadside bombing campaign. As of the writing of the report, one document cited 2,000 civilian deaths from roadside car bombs alone.

    7) U.S. forces covered up a 2007 helicopter attack, according to the documents, claiming that Taliban brought down a coalition helicopter with conventional weaponry—when instead they used a missile. A U.S. official at the time said the attack, which killed seven soldiers, “had probably been brought down by a rocket-propelled grenade.”

  • Israel Will Strike Iran Before November

    Israel Will Strike Iran Before November

    Former Def. Minister: Israel Will Attack Iran by Nov.

    Friday, 02 Apr 2010 12:36 PM

    By: Ken Timmerman

    Israel will be compelled to attack Iran’s nuclear weapons facilities by this November unless the U.S. and its allies enact “crippling sanctions that will undermine the regime in Tehran,” former deputy defense minister Brig. Gen. Ephraim Sneh said on Wednesday in Tel Aviv.
    Efraim Sneh.jpg
    The sanctions currently being discussed with Russia, China, and other major powers at the United Nations are likely to be a slightly-enhanced version of the U.N. sanctions already in place, which have had no impact on the Iranian regime.

    And despite unanimous passage of the Iran Petroleum Sanctions Act in January, the Obama administration continues to resist efforts by Congress to impose mandatory sanctions on companies selling refined petroleum products to Iran.

    In an Op-Ed in the Israeli left-wing daily, Haaretz, Sneh argues that Iran will probably have “a nuclear bomb or two” by 2011.

    “An Israeli military campaign against Iran’s nuclear installations is likely to cripple that country’s nuclear project for a number of years. The retaliation against Israel would be painful, but bearable.”

    Sneh believes that the “acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran during Obama’s term would do him a great deal of political damage,” but that the damage to Obama resulting from an Israeli strike on Iran “would be devastating.”

    Nevertheless, he writes, “for practical reasons, in the absence of genuine sanctions, Israel will not be able to wait until the end of next winter, which means it would have to act around the congressional elections in November, thereby sealing Obama’s fate as president.”

    Sneh does not foresee any U.S. military strikes on Iran, an analysis that is shared by most observers in Washington, who see the Obama administration moving toward containment as opposed to confrontation with Iran.

    In a recent report for the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), military analyst Anthony Cordesman concluded that Israel will have to use low-yield earth-penetrating nuclear weapons if it wants to take out deeply-buried nuclear sites in Iran.

    “Israel is reported to possess a 200 kilogram nuclear warhead containing 6 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium that could be mounted on the sea launched cruise missiles and producing a Yield of 20 kilo tons,” Cordesman writes in the CSIS study he co-authored by Abdullah Toukan.

    Israel would be most likely to launch these missiles from its Dolphin-class submarines, he added.

    While Sneh is no longer in the Israeli government, his revelation of a drop-dead date for an Israeli military strike on Iran must be taken seriously, Israel-watchers in the U.S. tell Newsmax.

    “Ephraim Sneh is a serious guy,” said Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. “He was deputy minister of defense and has long been focused on the issue of Iran.”

    Shoshana Bryen, Senior Director for Security Policy at the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), said that what struck her most about Sneh’s comments was the shift of emphasis from resolving the Palestinian problem to Iran.

    “For 30 years, he’s been saying that solving the Palestinian problem is Israel’s biggest priority. Now he’s saying, forget about the Palestinians. Iran is the problem.”

    Sneh “is extremely well regarded on the left and the right,” she added. “People respect him enormously.”

    In his Op-Ed, Sneh argues that the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu needs to mend its bridges with the United States, and the only way to do so is by enacting an immediate and total ban on any settlement activity, including in Jewish neighborhoods in East Jerusalem.

    “Without international legitimacy, and with its friend mad at it, Israel would find it very difficult to act on its own” against Iran, he argued.

    ========================================

    Efraim Sneh (Hebrew: אפרים סנה‎, born 19 September 1944)[1] is an Israeli politician and physician. He has been a member of the Knesset for the Labor Party and served briefly in the current Government as Deputy Defense Minister. He currently heads the Yisrael Hazaka party, which he established in May 2008.

    [edit] Biography

    Born in Tel Aviv in 1944,[2] Sneh is the son of Moshe Sneh, who was one of the heads of the Haganah. His father was elected to the first Knesset as a representative of Mapam, before defecting to Maki, the Israeli Communist Party.

    Sneh served in the Nahal infantry battalion from 1962 to 1964. He studied medicine at Tel Aviv University and specialized in internal medicine. Once he finished his studies he returned to military service as a battalion doctor, then as a brigade doctor for the Paratroopers Brigade. In the Yom Kippur War he commanded a medical unit of the brigade in the Battle of The Chinese Farm and battles west of the Suez canal. Sneh also commanded the medical unit at Operation Entebbe, served as commander of the elite Unit 669 and as commander of the security zone in south Lebanon. His last role in the IDF was as head of the civilian administration of the West Bank.[3]

    In December 1987, with his release from the army he joined the Labor Party. From 1988 to 1994 he served on many delegations, specifically dealing with the Palestinian leadership. In 1992 Sneh was elected to the Knesset, serving as Minister of Health from 1994 to 1996. In 1999 he was appointed Deputy Minister of Defense, and in 2001 he was appointed Minister of Transportation.[3]

    Sneh stood out in his objection to the withdrawal from southern Lebanon, though he eventually accepted it following Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s decision. Generally, Sneh is considered a “hawk” in the Labor Party.[4] He has repeatedly expressed concern over Iran’s Nuclear Program,[5][6] In 2006, Iran filed a complaint to the UN Security Council over his remarks that Israel must be ready to prevent Iran’s nuclear program “at all costs.”[7]

    In the negotiations leading to the formation of the 31st Government under Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, there was extensive speculation that Sneh would be appointed Deputy Minister of Defense. Although not initially appointed to a position in the government, Sneh was appointed Deputy Minister of Defense on 30 October 2006. He served under Defense Minister Amir Peretz, who also was the Labor Party leader. The replacement of Peretz by Barak as both party leader and Defense Minister in the summer of 2007 also led to a change in the deputy position; Sneh left office on 18 June 2007 and was replaced by Matan Vilnai.[8]

    On 25 May 2008 Sneh announced that he would be leaving the Labor Party and creating a new party, Yisrael Hazaka. He left the Knesset on 28 May and was replaced by Shakhiv Shana’an.[9]

    He lives in Herzliya, and is married with 2 children.

  • Ruling by Judge William Young, US District Court.

    Ruling by Judge William Young, US District Court.

    Reid: ‘I am at war with your country’

    Friday, January 31, 2003 Posted: 11:10 AM EST (1610 GMT) Richard Reid (CNN) – The following is a partial transcript of Thursday’s court hearing in which Richard Reid was sentenced to life in prison for his confessed plan to try and blow up a jetliner with explosives he had hidden in his shoes. The exchange is between Reid and Judge William Young. RICHARD REID: I start by praising Allah because life today is no good. I bear witness to this and he alone is right to be worshiped. And I bear witness that Muhammad Sa’laat Alayhi as-Salaam is his last prophet and messenger who is sent to all of mankind for guidance, with the sound guidance for everyone. Concerning what the Court said? I admit, I admit my actions and I further, I further state that I done them. JUDGE WILLIAM YOUNG: I didn’t hear the last. I admit my actions and then what did you say? REID: I further admit my allegiance to Osama bin Laden, to Islam, and to the religion of Allah. With regards to what you said about killing innocent people, I will say one thing. Your government has killed 2 million children in Iraq. If you want to think about something, against 2 million, I don’t see no comparison. Your government has sponsored the rape and torture of Muslims in the prisons of Egypt and Turkey and Syria and Jordan with their money and with their weapons. I don’t know, see what I done as being equal to rape and to torture, or to the deaths of the two million children in Iraq. So, for this reason, I think I ought not apologize for my actions. I am at war with your country. I’m at war with them not for personal reasons but because they have murdered more than, so many children and they have oppressed my religion and they have oppressed people for no reason except that they say we believe in Allah. This is the only reason that America sponsors Egypt. It’s the only reason they sponsor Turkey. It’s the only reason they back Israel. As far as the sentence is concerned, it’s in your hand. Only really it is not even in your hand. It’s in Allah’s hand. I put my trust in Allah totally and I know that he will give victory to his religion. And he will give victory to those who believe and he will destroy those who wish to oppress the people because they believe in Allah. So you can judge and I leave you to judge. And I don’t mind. This is all I have to say. And I bear witness to Muhammad this is Allah’s message. YOUNG: Mr. Richard C. Reid, hearken now to the sentence the Court imposes upon you.

    start quote… we all know that the way we treat you, Mr. Reid, is the measure of our own liberties.end quote
    — Judge William Young
    		1
    1
    On counts 1, 5 and 6 the Court sentences you to life in prison in the custody of the United States Attorney General. On counts 2, 3, 4 and 7, the Court sentences you to 20 years in prison on each count, the sentence on each count to run consecutive one with the other. That’s 80 years. On Count 8 the Court sentences you to the mandatory 30 years consecutive to the 80 years just imposed. The Court imposes upon you on each of the eight counts a fine of $250,000 for the aggregate fine of $2 million. The Court accepts the government’s recommendation with respect to restitution and orders restitution in the amount of $298.17 to Andre Bousquet and $5,784 to American Airlines. The Court imposes upon you the $800 special assessment. The Court imposes upon you five years supervised release simply because the law requires it. But the life sentences are real life sentences so I need not go any further. This is the sentence that is provided for by our statutes. It is a fair and a just sentence. It is a righteous sentence. Let me explain this to you. We are not afraid of any of your terrorist co-conspirators, Mr. Reid. We are Americans. We have been through the fire before. There is all too much war talk here. And I say that to everyone with the utmost respect. Here in this court where we deal with individuals as individuals, and care for individuals as individuals, as human beings we reach out for justice. You are not an enemy combatant. You are a terrorist. You are not a soldier in any war. You are a terrorist. To give you that reference, to call you a soldier gives you far too much stature. Whether it is the officers of government who do it or your attorney who does it, or that happens to be your view, you are a terrorist. And we do not negotiate with terrorists. We do not treat with terrorists. We do not sign documents with terrorists. We hunt them down one by one and bring them to justice. So war talk is way out of line in this court. You’re a big fellow. But you’re not that big. You’re no warrior. I know warriors. You are a terrorist. A species of criminal guilty of multiple attempted murders. In a very real sense Trooper Santiago had it right when first you were taken off that plane and into custody and you wondered where the press and where the TV crews were and you said you’re no big deal. You’re no big deal. What your counsel, what your able counsel and what the equally able United States attorneys have grappled with and what I have as honestly as I know how tried to grapple with, is why you did something so horrific. What was it that led you here to this courtroom today? I have listened respectfully to what you have to say. And I ask you to search your heart and ask yourself what sort of unfathomable hate led you to do what you are guilty and admit you are guilty of doing. And I have an answer for you. It may not satisfy you. But as I search this entire record it comes as close to understanding as I know. It seems to me you hate the one thing that to us is most precious. You hate our freedom. Our individual freedom. Our individual freedom to live as we choose, to come and go as we choose, to believe or not believe as we individually choose. Here, in this society, the very winds carry freedom. They carry it everywhere from sea to shining sea. It is because we prize individual freedom so much that you are here in this beautiful courtroom. So that everyone can see, truly see that justice is administered fairly, individually, and discretely. It is for freedom’s seek that your lawyers are striving so vigorously on your behalf and have filed appeals, will go on in their, their representation of you before other judges. We care about it. Because we all know that the way we treat you, Mr. Reid, is the measure of our own liberties. Make no mistake though. It is yet true that we will bear any burden; pay any price, to preserve our freedoms. Look around this courtroom. Mark it well. The world is not going to long remember what you or I say here. Day after tomorrow it will be forgotten. But this, however, will long endure. Here, in this courtroom, and courtrooms all across America, the American people will gather to see that justice, individual justice, justice, not war, individual justice is in fact being done. The very President of the United States through his officers will have to come into courtrooms and lay out evidence on which specific matters can be judged, and juries of citizens will gather to sit and judge that evidence democratically, to mold and shape and refine our sense of justice. See that flag, Mr. Reid? That’s the flag of the United States of America. That flag will fly there long after this is all forgotten. That flag still stands for freedom. You know it always will. Custody, Mr. Officer. Stand him down. REID: That flag will be brought down on the Day of Judgment and you will see in front of your Lord and my Lord and then we will know. (Whereupon the defendant was removed from the courtroom.) YOUNG: We’ll recess. All rise.
    1
    RELATED
    Reid sentenced to life in prison
    —————————  SAME ITEM DIFFERENT WRITER —————————————– moz screenshot 1moz screenshot 2 Remember the guy who got on a plane with a bomb built into his shoe and tried to light it? Did you know his trial is over? Did you know he was sentenced? Did you see/hear any of the judge’s comments on TV or Radio? Didn’t think so.!!! Everyone should hear what the judge had to say. Ruling by Judge William Young, US District Court. Prior to sentencing, the Judge asked the defendant if he had anything to say.  His response: After admitting his guilt to the court for the record, Reid also admitted his ‘allegiance to Osama bin Laden, to Islam, and to the religion of Allah,’ defiantly stating, ‘I think I will not apologize for my actions,’ and told the court ‘I am at war with your country.’ Judge Young then delivered the statement quoted below: January 30, 2003, United States vs. Reid. Judge Young:   ‘Mr. Richard C. Reid, hearken now to the sentence the Court imposes upon you. On counts 1, 5 and 6 the Court sentences you to life in prison in the custody of the United States Attorney General.  On counts 2, 3, 4and 7, the Court sentences you to 20 years in prison on each count, the sentence on each count to run consecutively.  (That’s 80 years.) On count 8 the Court sentences you to the mandatory 30 years again, to be served consecutively to the 80 years just imposed.  The Court imposes upon you for each of the eight counts a fine of $250,000 that’s an aggregate fine of $2 million.  The Court accepts the government’s recommendation with respect to restitution and orders restitution in the amount of $298.17 to Andre Bousquet and $5,784 to American Airlines. The Court imposes upon you an $800 special assessment. The Court imposes upon you five years supervised release simply because the law requires it. But the life sentences are real life sentences so I need go no further. This is the sentence that is provided for by our statutes.  It is a fair and just sentence.  It is a righteous sentence. Now, let me explain this to you.  We are not afraid of you or any of your terrorist co-conspirators, Mr. Reid.  We are Americans.  We have been through the fire before.  There is too much war talk here and I say that to everyone with the utmost respect.  Here in this court, we deal with individuals as individuals and care for individuals as individuals.  As human beings, we reach out for justice. You are not an enemy combatant.  You are a terrorist. You are not a soldier in any war.  You are a terrorist.  To give you that reference, to call you a soldier, gives you far too much stature. Whether the officers of government do it or your attorney does it, or if you think you are a soldier, you are not—– you are a terrorist.  And we do not negotiate with terrorists.  We do not meet with terrorists.  We do not sign documents with terrorists.  We hunt them down one by one and bring them to justice. So war talk is way out of line in this court.  You are a big fellow. But you are not that big.  You’re no warrior.  I’ve known warriors. You are a terrorist.  A species of criminal that is guilty of multiple attempted murders.  In a very real sense, State Trooper Santiago had it right when you first were taken off that plane and into custody and you wondered where the press and the TV crews were, and he said: ‘You’re no big deal.‘ You are no big deal. What your able counsel and what the equally able United States attorneys have grappled with and what I have as honestly as I know how tried to grapple with, is why you did something so horrific.  What was it that led you here to this courtroom today? I have listened respectfully to what you have to say. And I ask you to search your heart and ask yourself what sort of unfathomable hate led you to do what you are guilty and admit you are guilty of doing?  And, I have an answer for you.  It may not satisfy you, but as I search this entire record, it comes as close to understanding as I know. It seems to me you hate the one thing that to us is most precious. You hate our freedom.  Our individual freedom.  Our individual freedom to live as we choose, to come and go as we choose, to believe or not believe as we individually choose.  Here, in this society, the very wind carries freedom.  It carries it everywhere from sea to shining sea.  It is because we prize individual freedom so much that you are here in this beautiful courtroom, so that everyone can see, truly see, that justice is administered fairly, individually, and discretely.  It is for freedom’s sake that your lawyers are striving so vigorously on your behalf, have filed appeals, will go on in their representation of you before other judges. We Americans are all about freedom.  Because we all know that the way we treat you, Mr. Reid, is the measure of our own liberties.  Make no mistake though.  It is yet true that we will bear any burden; pay any price, to preserve our freedoms.  Look around this courtroom.  Mark it well.  The world is not going to long remember what you or I say here.  The day after tomorrow, it will be forgotten, but this, however, will long endure. Here in this courtroom and courtrooms all across America , the American people will gather to see that justice, individual justice, justice, not war, individual justice is in fact being done.  The very President of the United States through his officers will have to come into courtrooms and lay out evidence on which specific matters can be judged and juries of citizens will gather to sit and judge that evidence democratically, to mold and shape and refine our sense of justice. See that flag, Mr. Reid?  That’s the flag of the United States of America .  That flag will fly there long after this is all forgotten. That flag stands for freedom.  And it always will. Mr. Custody Officer.  Stand him down. So, how much of this Judge’s comments did we hear on our TV sets?  We need more judges like Judge Young.  Pass this around.  Everyone should and needs to hear what this fine judge had to say. Powerful words that strike home.

  • Yegparian: Blood Money: This Oughta Get You Moving!

    Yegparian: Blood Money: This Oughta Get You Moving!

    SCREAMS FROM American-Armenian Diaspora

    By Garen Yegparian • on October 23, 2009 •

    This week, we’re back to the local level with a Turkish twist.

    A group parading under the moniker of Pax Turcica has engaged in an effort to support, at least financially, Christine Essel, Paul Krekorian’s opponent in the Dec. 12 runoff election for LA’s 2nd District City Council seat.

    Of course you notice the oxymoron, the utterly incompatible, internally contradictory essence of the term “pax turcica”—Turkish peace. It must be a reference to the growing Al-Qaeda participation by Turks from various countries reported by the LATimes on Oct. 17; to the Azeri massacre of Armenians as the USSR broke up; the now almost century-long persecution, massacre, and forced relocation of Kurds in Mustafa Kemal Ataturk’s so-called republic; Turkey’s brutal invasion and ongoing occupation of Cyprus (with 30,000 “disappeared” still unaccounted for); Azeri policies of the Soviet era that denuded Nakhichevan of its then-remaining Armenian population; the sacking of Shushi and other massacres by Azeris (then called Tatars) during and immediately after World War I; the massacres of Assyrians by the Turks in the dying days of the Ottoman Empire; of course, the Armenian Genocide; the countless massacres and all kinds of persecution of various minorities, of all religions, living under the Turkish yoke of the Ottoman era; and heck, why don’t we throw in the original Turk, Tamerlane. Yup, it must be this kind of “peace” that Pax Turcica supports. Your belly should be aching from the laughter this absurdity engenders.

    But now, get over your hysteria and get to work. Christine Essel should be contacted by everyone and urged to return the blood money she’s taken. The two pieces found online at www.alaturkaonline.com/yazi.asp?4485/champagne-brunch-on-saturday– and www.today.az/news/politics/56701.html don’t mention how much was raised at an Oct. 17 fundraiser for Essel. But, we do learn that she attended.

    So she can’t deny knowing that she got the blood money, the way Ohio Congressman Jean Schmidt can’t “remember” the Turkish dollars she’s received. I have to wonder what’s going on: Is it the same kind of Turkish (and in this case Azeri, too) governmental money laundering that is at the heart of the issue leading Schmidt to slimily sue her opponent, David Krikorian (more on him in a few weeks), for revealing these truths supported by whistleblower Sibel Edmonds’ explosive revelations?

    Maybe we should even give her the opportunity to come clean and return whatever funds she’s gotten. But meanwhile, contact all her supporters, tell them what she’s done, and ask them to withdraw their endorsements. Check out the listing at www.essel09.com/endorsements and focus on the electeds (get contact info from their websites). But most of all, write or call the LATimes, which has endorsed her (letters@latimes.com, 800/548-4637 ext. 74511), and urge them to withdraw their endorsement. This should be couched in the language of consistency with their own policies, which now properly refer to the genocide as such.

    The Turkic groups involved are genocide deniers. Ask anyone you contact if they’re OK with candidates accepting blood money.

    Most importantly, get out and support Paul Krekorian. Those living close by should make it a point to go in as often as possible to help with canvassing and phone banking, i.e. contacting voters to get their support. Those who can’t should at least donate. You can contact the campaign through the website or by calling (818) 849-5200. In particular, the campaign is targeting Nov. 7 for a huge drive—“2009 in 2009”—with the goal of reaching 2009 voters that day. Go for it, you’ll be surprised how much you enjoy the work if you haven’t tried it yet.

    This will be a VERY low turnout election. People will be at holiday parties, gift shopping, or at home—understandably nursing their globalization-and-Wall-Street-inflicted financial wounds. Every vote turned out for Paul Krekorian matters, and that’s where each and every person’s efforts matter. The last time this seat was seriously contested, the difference between winner and loser was only 225 votes.

    As I’ve implied before, Paul’s election is a crucial test of our community’s political growth. Let’s do it!

    From: