Views From Kennewick

Thursday, November 29, 2007

Michael Savage: The Battle Between Taquiya and Talk Radio

Written by Selwyn Duke
Published November 27, 2007

You will have to forgive me, but I have a difficult time taking the war against Moslem extremists seriously. No, I haven't become the latest in a line of anti-American quislings who say the war is "all about oil" or that Islamism is not a threat. It's just that I have trouble mustering enthusiasm for overseas ventures when we allow the enemy's fifth column to operate virtually unopposed on our shores.

I'm talking about the odious Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a group that could be the legal arm of al-Qaeda. Although CAIR's machinations usually go unmentioned by the mainstream media, for quite some time now it has been training its sights on anyone who would tackle the Islamic threat with manly strength. It has carried out campaigns against National Review magazine, radio personality Paul Harvey, the producers of the television program 24, and many others who dare say the sultan has no clothes. And now it is targeting award-winning radio talk show host Michael Savage.

CAIR has been pressuring Savage's advertisers to pull their spots from his show, and I'm dismayed to learn that some businesses have capitulated to their demands. Among these cowardly companies are AutoZone, TrustedID, OfficeMax, Citrix Systems Inc., and JCPenney. I will have them know that as long as they dance with the Devil and boycott Savage's show, I will boycott them and encourage others to follow suit. And I have a very long memory.

It's not surprising that business would kneel at the altar of political correctness, as it worships mammon. And, in truth, many people - the good, the bad and the ugly - use their economic clout to try to effect social change; why, some on my side in the culture war are boycotting Ford because it supports the homosexual lobby. But I really have to wonder if these companies know to whom they're kowtowing. Let's take a closer look at CAIR.

If you think that only those on the right take issue with CAIR, think again. In point of fact, the organization is so obviously in the pocket of terrorists that even some of our most left-wing politicians have condemned them. Just consider the following quotations, the first three of which are by liberal Democrats:

"[CAIR is] unusual in its extreme rhetoric and its associations with groups that are suspect." - Senator Richard Durbin

"We know [CAIR] has ties to terrorism . . . intimate links with Hamas." - Senator Chuck Schumer

"To praise [CAIR] because they haven't been indicted is like somebody saying, 'I'm not a crook.'" - Senator Barbara Boxer

"Time and again [CAIR] has shown itself to be nothing more than an apologist for groups bent on the destruction of Israel and Islamic domination over the West." - Congressman Bill Shuster

What would inspire Boxer, Schumer and Durbin - who many characterize as soft on Islamism themselves (some on the right call Durbin "Turban Durbin") - to condemn CAIR so unabashedly? Well, just read what some officers of CAIR and their associates have said.

Omar Ahmad, the co-founder of CAIR, has made no bones about his desire for Islamic hegemony. He once stated,

"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."

Then, Ahmad attended a secret meeting at a Philadelphia hotel where Moslem leaders allegedly plotted to disguise money given to the terrorist group Hamas as charitable donations (these proceedings were surreptitiously recorded by the FBI as part an investigation). One of the other attendees, Shukri Abu-Baker, who was recently tried in a federal terror-funding case, said,

"I swear by Allah that war is deception . . . We are fighting our enemy with a kind heart . . .Deceive, camouflage, pretend that you're leaving while you're walking that way. Deceive your enemy."

Ahmad then chimed in, likening the ruse needed to deceive infidels to a head fake in basketball:

"He makes a player believe that he is doing this while he does something else. I agree with you. . . Politics is a completion of war."

Moreover, reports the website Anti-CAIR,

"Omar Ahmad was captured on FBI surveillance tapes at Hamas meetings in the United States during 1993 explaining that the IAP [Islamic Association for Palestine] could not, for political reasons, admit its support for Hamas, and then discussing how the Hamas agenda could be cloaked and advanced."

Another CAIR official, Executive Director Nihad Awad, has been more forthcoming. He once said plainly,

"I am in support of the Hamas movement."

And the above is just a sampling of the damning truth about these jihadists who masquerade as civil rights activists.

To truly grasp the insidiousness of these closet jihadists, one must understand taquiya, a principle that gives Islamists the moral authority to deceive infidels. Taquiya refers to dissimulation, the process of disguising one's true intentions by erecting a facade pleasing to his victims. Writing at Jihad Watch, Gregory M. Davis explains it like this:

In times when the greater strength of dar al-harb [the House of War - places dominated by infidels] necessitates that the jihad take an indirect approach, the natural attitude of a Muslim to the infidel world must be one of deception and omission. Revealing frankly the ultimate goal of dar al-Islam to conquer and plunder dar al-harb when the latter holds the military trump cards would be strategic idiocy.

Unfortunately, the ones guilty of idiocy here are Westerners, as we blithely ignore how these Islamic interlopers are using our own system to destroy us. CAIR and its fellow travelers have been using intimidation and the courts to silence infidels, great and small, who oppose the jihad. For instance, CAIR sued the organization I cited earlier, Anti-CAIR, for $1.35 million for "libelous defamation." This is, I suppose, what they call it when you tell the truth about them.

Then there is the case of former terrorist and current critic of Moslem extremism Zachariah Anani. For his sin of exercising his free speech rights, CAIR and other Islamic groups actually pressured the Canadian government to arrest him under the nation's hate speech laws and deport him.

It should be noted, however, that CAIR's definition of hate speech may be a little different from yours, as in 1998 it co-hosted an event at Brooklyn College during which radical Moslems characterized Jews as "pigs and monkeys" (this is also applied to Christians). I haven't yet heard CAIR condemn those speakers, though. But why would they? That idea is found in the Koran itself and is a common teaching in the Islamic world.

Then, do you remember the case of the six flying imams who were detained before boarding US Airways Flight 300? CAIR even went so far as to sue the passengers who reported their suspicious behavior. The lawsuit has since been dropped, but it illustrates well the lengths to which CAIR will go to intimidate Americans into silence.

And don't think it doesn't work. The Moslem fifth column in our midst is dropping an iron burqa over commentary that accurately frames the Islamic threat. Even if our media didn't don their politically correct corsets, the fear of career destruction, legal action and physical harm would be more than enough to still even fairly tenacious tongues. (As for the last danger, I recently wrote about artists who will not address Islam through their work because they fear for their lives.) And while there is no evidence that CAIR perpetrates violent action, it visits legal and financial beheadings on its victims that terrify all but the most intrepid souls.

This brings us back to Michael Savage. There is no one else of his stature who so bravely exposes the Islamist threat. If CAIR destroys him, they will have felled the World Trade Center of critics. Who, then, would be willing to contend with the sword of Islam? Only the small fish would be left to swim against the current from Mecca, and they would be next as CAIR and its minions worked their way down the food chain.

You don't have to be on Savage's side of the aisle to be in his corner. All good Americans should be outraged that these fifth-column warriors, these barbarians inside the gates, these vile interlopers, are targeting our countrymen for destruction. If you want free and open debate about one of the most important issues of our time, Islamic Jihad, you should care about CAIR. It is a terrorist-enabling organization that has no place in "dar al-harb."

So it shouldn't be hard to figure out who to support in this battle between taquiya and talk radio, not even for us pigs and monkeys.

Hey Selwyn, I agree.

*middle finger up at CAIR, AutoZone, TrustedID, OfficeMax, Citrix Systems Inc., and JCPenney.*

Labels: , , , ,

The Parisian Intifada and “The Project”
By Patrick Poole | Thursday, November 29, 2007
Paris is burning, yet again. The Muslim immigrant “youths” in the banlieues have taken to the streets to expand a Western front in the global jihad. This time, however, instead of just burning cars and throwing rocks, this week they have taken up arms against French police. As the Associated Press reported on the violence around Paris late Tuesday, noting the escalation beyond the car-burning intifada of November 2005, such that even apologetic Associated Press reporters are forced to describe the present rioters as “urban guerillas”:

Youths rampaged for a third night in the tough suburbs north of Paris and violence spread to a southern city late Tuesday as police struggled to contain rioters who have burned cars and buildings and — in an ominous turn — shot at officers.

A senior police union official warned that "urban guerrillas" had joined the unrest, saying the violence was worse than during three weeks of rioting that raged around French cities in 2005, when firearms were rarely used.

The urban warfare we are seeing in Paris, as well as the systematic violence by Muslim immigrants in other major cities throughout Europe, are in accord with the strategic planning documents drafted by the Muslim Brotherhood in recent decades in their hopes to establish a global caliphate through jihad.

Here I want to examine these recent events in light of the strategy articulated in two of these planning documents, one focusing generally on the West written in the early 1980s, and another elaborating on their “Civilization-Jihadist Process” developed in the 1990s. This process of confrontation also reflects a traditional Islamic view of constant warfare, muqawama, interspersed with temporary truces, hudna, to regroup for further conflict – a doctrine of warfare adopted by the Muslim Brotherhood.

In May 2006, I introduced FrontPage readers to one such Muslim Brotherhood document known in Western counterintelligence circles as “The Project”. FrontPage readers were the first to read the entire document in English translation, obtained during a December 2001 raid on the compound of Yousef Nada, a primary international Muslim Brotherhood figure and financier.

The document is self-dated December 1982, around the time that the Muslim Brotherhood was engaged in a comprehensive organizational reworking. During this period it was determined that rather than continuing confrontation with the Arab nationalist regimes in the Middle East, the Muslim Brotherhood would direct their efforts elsewhere, particularly Europe, and later, the United States.

In fact, in my introduction to “The Project”, I noted the connection between this strategic planning document and the November 2005 French intifada, as well as other contemporary events in Europe:

What makes The Project so different from the standard “Death of America! Death to Israel!” and “Establish the global caliphate!” Islamist rhetoric is that it represents a flexible, multi-phased, long-term approach to the “cultural invasion” of the West. Calling for the utilization of various tactics, ranging from immigration, infiltration, surveillance, propaganda, protest, deception, political legitimacy and terrorism, The Project has served for more than two decades as the Muslim Brotherhood “master plan”. As can be seen in a number of examples throughout Europe – including the political recognition of parallel Islamist government organizations in Sweden, the recent “cartoon” jihad in Denmark, the Parisian car-burning intifada last November, and the 7/7 terrorist attacks in London – the plan outlined in The Project has been overwhelmingly successful.

The strategic plan outlined within “The Project” specifically directs the connection of Muslim minorities in the West with the global jihadist movements elsewhere in the world as the sole “suggested mission” under the document’s “Ninth Point of Departure”:


To construct a permanent force of the Islamic dawa and support movements engaged in jihad across the Muslim world, to varying degrees and insofar as possible.


To protect the dawa with the force necessary to guarantee its security at the local and international levels.

To make contact with all new movements engaged in jihad, everywhere on the planet, and with Muslim minorities, and to create links as needed to establish and support collaboration.

To maintain jihad and awakening throughout the Ummah.


To form an autonomous security force to protect the dawa and its disciples locally and worldwide.

To study movements engaged in jihad in the Muslim world, as well as among Muslim minorities, to better understand them.

c-Suggested Missions:

To build bridges between movements engaged in jihad in the Muslim world, and between Muslim minorities, and to support them insofar as possible within a framework of collaboration. [emphasis added]

This theme is also picked up in Eleventh Point of Departure where it directs Muslim Brotherhood leaders to continue to agitate their followers to keep them in what counterterror analyst Oliver Guitta has called a “jihad frame of mind” by leveraging the Palestinian jihad against Israel amongst their followers and “to breed a feeling of resentment towards the Jews and refuse any form of coexistence with them”.

This same template of continuously escalating agitation has been directed against French law enforcement. In the November 2005 intifada, the “hero” was a Muslim boy who electrocuted himself while trying to hide from pursuing police. This most recent incident over the weekend involved the death of two Muslim “youths” riding a stolen motorbike that crashed at a high rate of speed into a police vehicle. Riots around Paris began almost immediately.

Muslim leaders have used these respective incidents to cultivate a “jihad frame of mind” to incite to violence the Muslim immigrant youth in the French cities. Since the November 2005 riots, attacks against police officers have continued on almost a daily basis in the banlieues. Now the attacks have grown more violent as the “urban guerrillas” are using firearms to attack police.

What is happening currently in France, and the campaign of violence and crime used by Muslim leaders elsewhere in Europe (such as Malmo, Sweden, the third largest city in the country that has been paralyzed by violence from the Muslim community against non-Muslims), fits perfectly into the strategic framework outlined in another Muslim Brotherhood document published a decade after “The Project”.

The second Muslim Brotherhood document I want to examine came out of the Holy Land Foundation terror financing trial this past summer as an exhibit for the prosecution. Entitled, “An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America”, bears a publication date of May 1991, but indicates that it represents principles outlined by the Muslim Brotherhood as early as 1987.

Under Section Four of the document, “The Process of Settlement”, it identifies the “grand mission” of the organization as the “Civilization Jihadist responsibility”:

In order for Islam and its Movement to become “a part of the homeland” in which it lives, “stable” in the land, “rooted” in the spirits and minds of its people, “enabled” in the lives of its society and has firmly-established “organizations” on which the Islamic structure is built and with which the testimony of the civilization is achieved, the Movement must plan and struggle to obtain “the keys” and the tools of this process in carry out this grand mission as a “Civilization Jihadist” responsibility which lies on the shoulders of Muslim and – on top of them – the Muslim Brotherhood in this country. (page 5 of 18)

In that same section, it directs leaders to foster “understanding the role of the Muslim Brother in North America” as the destruction and “sabotaging” of Western civilization from within through the “Civilization-Jihadist Process”:

The process of settlement is a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” with all the means. The Ikhwan [the Arabic name for the Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim’s destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is not escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack. But, would the slackers and the Mujahedeen be equal. (Page 7 of 18, emphasis added)

The critical aspect to the “Civilization-Jihadist Process” is that it works upon two separate lines: “their (non-Muslim) hands” and “the hands of believers”. The document further outlines how to exploit existing internal weaknesses within Western civilization: “we must possess a mastery of the art of ‘coalitions’, the art of ‘absorption’ and the principles of ‘cooperation’”. Through internal sabotage and creating their own external pressure (jihad/terrorism), they aim to topple the West. (I would highly recommend the respective detailed analyses of this Muslim Brotherhood document by my colleagues LTC Joseph Myers, Pentagon analyst Stephen Coughlin, and the researchers at the NEFA Foundation.)

The present violence we are seeing in France and elsewhere is undeniably the Muslim Brotherhood’s “Civilization-Jihadist Process” at work. As I previously noted, the violence in France never officially ended after November 2005, it just continued on a limited scale low enough to prevent a forceful response by authorities. With a new pretended provocation, the forces of jihad have re-inflamed their supporters, only in this case escalating matters even further by resorting to arms.

This jihadist pattern of intense peaks of violence, followed by extended periods of low-level conflict, then with even more intense violence, is a pattern used by the Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestinian arm, HAMAS, in their insurgency against Israel. As described by Yaniz Ofek here at FrontPage earlier this month, “The Islamic ‘Muqawama’”, the doctrine of muqawama is a “long, obstinate, and persistent struggle”.

But unlike conventional warfare, as Ofek notes, muqawama can be distinguished by four unique patterns:

1) Muqawama, whether in Israel or in the West, is seen as part of the larger global jihad;

2) Little emphasis is placed on territory;

3) Death is seen as an advantage;

4) Battle is almost conducted amongst civilians.

Ehud Yaari of the Washington Institute also explains (“The Muqawama Doctrine”) in this constant state of warfare, both HAMAS and Hezbollah have acknowledged that “when in need of a respite, it is permitted to reach hudna (armistice) agreements, valid for a limited period only.” These periods of hudna do not necessarily mean the complete cessation of hostilities, but reining in the violence to lower levels to prepare for the next expected period of assault without provoking confrontation with the enemy. This has been the official pattern of conflict followed for the past two decades by HAMAS.

The endgame of muqawama and the “Civilization-Jihadist Process” is “the erosion of the enemy’s resolve”. For this reason, as Yaari notes, “the essence is to spill blood, and since that is the case, it is better to focus on the civilian population as the primary target”.

The French intifada is taking place not only in the heart of France, but in the heart of Europe itself. Much like the 9/11 attacks that were directed at the financial and political centers of America, both symbolically and really, the constant campaign of violence by Muslims throughout Europe are intended to extend the global jihad to the deepest centers of the West. But rather than confront the West militarily, the battle against Western civilization that they have already enjoined is going to take place in the banlieues, not the battlefield. Various instruments of violence are being used, ranging from crime, rioting, and as we see in Paris today, urban warfare. Terrorism is currently used only occasionally to initiate peak periods, but we can expect its increased use as the conflict continues.

The difficulty for us on the working end of the “Civilization-Jihadist Process” is that our leaders have steadfastly refused to understand the nature of the threat and the interrelation between what is happening in Paris, France and Khandahar, Afghanistan. While different methodologies are being used, the endgame is still the same: the establishment of the global caliphate through jihad. We must come to terms with strategy and operations of radical Islam in the West, the manner in which they manage conflict, and realize the immanent nature of the threat already in our midst – a lesson the French are learning first-hand.

Until we do, the strategic planning of the forces of the global jihad, as expressed in “The Project” and other Muslim Brotherhood planning documents, will continue to meet with unimpeded success.

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, November 27, 2007

CAIR: Exploiting Children For Jihad Propaganda?

Choked for eight seconds against a wall, threatened with death by BB-gun, punched in the arm, and having a head scarf pulled off. Pretty scary stuff, especially if you are an 11 year old.

CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) recently pressed local school officials in Pinellas County (Florida) to investigate a threat it says was made against Hannah Chehab, an 11 year-old female Muslim student.

CAIR's local executive director, Ahmed Bedier, said that CAIR's primary concern is the safety of Hannah and the other students at the school.

Remember, this sudden "concern" for Hannah comes from CAIR, an organization with proven ties to Islamic terrorism and Islamic terrorists. CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad is a former officer in the Islamic Association for Palestine, a terrorist group. CAIR executive director Nihad Awad participated in a Hamas meeting in the United States where plans to derail a peace initiative were discussed. Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR spokesman, is a former employee of the Islamic Association for Palestine. Hooper is well known for his reply of "CAIR does not support these groups publicly" when asked about CAIR's public support of Hamas, Hizballah, and other government-declared terrorist organizations.

To be blunt, to expect CAIR to be concerned about a single student, Muslim or otherwise, would ordinarily be laughable if this matter weren't so serious.

Now, to the charges.

To her claim of being choked for eight seconds against a wall; there are no supporting video tapes or witnesses.

The allegation that she was threatened with a BB-gun finds no reliable witnesses.

As to being punched in the arm and having her headscarf pulled off, the words of fellow students are illustrative:

"In the seven-page police report, 11- and 12-year-old schoolmates say Hannah and the boy actually are friends and were constantly talking and playing around. One girl told investigators that the scarf incident occurred after Hannah had tapped the boy on the head. When he did the same, Hannah tried to push his hand away and the head scarf came off, the girl said."

The bottom line is that a couple of school kids had a falling out; the parents may have panicked and called CAIR.

Of course, CAIR interjected their noses into a non-issue and tried to elevate it to the level of a heinous hate-crime.

Why would CAIR take a classroom spat between friends, and attempt to turn it into national headlines? Because CAIR is a front for the terrorist group Hamas, and Hamas eagerly exploits children as tools for Jihad propaganda.

Like CAIR, Hamas has no problem putting children in front of cameras to advance their cause. Hamas has done this using Mickey Mouse type characters with a child host to indoctrinate Palestinian youth to a militant mindset.

To be sure, CAIR did nothing as horrific to young Hannah Chehab. They seemed to do everything they could, however, to exploit her for CAIR's ongoing propaganda campaign to portray the "oppressive" conditions of Muslims living in America.

Bedier, ever the dutiful CAIR henchman, had no problems propping an 11 year old child in front of the media to read a "statement" about the incident.

Not everyone was impressed with this "press conference".

From the St. Petersburg Times:

[O]n Tuesday, board member Jane Gallucci said she had concerns about the lack of emotion in the 11-year-old's presentation ... "It was as if she was reading a book," said Gallucci, who for many years worked as a middle school guidance counselor for the district. "If this was as traumatic as she said it was, there would have been more emotion in the retelling."

It appears obvious to Anti-CAIR that Bedier and CAIR were exploiting a child to gain ground for CAIR's Jihad in America. To us, this is just as abusive as Hamas or the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades exploiting children for "military jihad".

American Muslims can count on one thing when they go to CAIR with a civil rights violation: no matter how petty the "crime" may be, CAIR will do its best to equate it to a public lynching, facts be damned. Nothing counts but putting out the propaganda that Muslims in North America are oppressed.

The parents of Hannah Chehab should be ashamed for allowing CAIR to exploit their child.

"According to the report, Hannah didn't report any threats while talking to an assistant principal ..."

If any parent, Muslim or otherwise, believes that their child has been the victim of a crime while in school, they should do the sensible thing and call the school and the police. In this case, there was not enough supporting evidence from classmates and staff who witnessed the incident to back up Hannah Chehab's press conference claims. Both the school and the police reached the same conclusion.

Why did Hannah's claims change between the time of the incident and her CAIR press conference?

Or, were these press conference "claims" really Hannah's in the first place ... ?

In Defense of the Constitution

News & Analysis
020/07 November 27, 2007

Labels: , ,

Monday, November 26, 2007

Weapons seized in Mexico - intended for use in attacking Fort Huachuca?

Submitted by admin on Mon, 2007-11-26 13:35.

"Intelligence obtained by the Northeast Intelligence Network suggests that the weapons seized at the Mexican-U.S. border could be used to launch an attack against U.S. military bases, especially those situated in the southwestern United States." -- Northeast Intelligence Network

By Douglas J. Hagmann, Director

26 November 2007: Today, the Washington Times is reporting that "Fort Huachuca, the nation's largest intelligence-training center, changed security measures in May after being warned that Islamist terrorists, with the aid of Mexican drug cartels, were planning an attack on the facility." In an interesting near-convergence of events, the Northeast Intelligence Network warned of an increased risk of an attack on military bases in the Southwestern United States on March 1, a full two-(2) months before security measures were ramped up at the installation.

The warning made public by the Northeast Intelligence Network stemmed from the seizure of a tractor-trailer registered in Texas containing an unprecedented shipment of weapons, ammunition and armored vehicles. At the time of the seizure, authorities and numerous counter-terrorism analysts claimed the weapons were destined for use by warring drug cartels in Mexico and emphatically denied that they were intended to be used against assets inside the U.S.

Weapons seized across from Brownsville, Texas
Were these intended for an attack on Fort Huachuca?

Although no one is making the connection between the weapons seizure and the plot against Fort Huachuca, the timing of the seizure, the types and amount of weapons seized, and the route of travel through Mexico is consistent with such a plan of attack. The following information was made public by this agency on February 23, 25 and March 1, 2007: (Click here for complete article & photographs)

Analysis: Weapons seized in US-Mexican border town suggest large-scale operation

By Sean Osborne, Associate Director, Military Affairs

Border town of Matamoros, Tamaulipas across from Brownsville, Texas

25 February 2007: Over the past couple of days, I have analyzed additional imagery and data associated with the report of a large cache of weapons and other military supplies seized in Tamaulipas, Mexico across from Brownsville, Texas [Initial report HERE]. Contrary to various public assessments, my analysis suggests that these weapons were not intended for an assault of one Mexican narco-gang against a rival gang within the territory of Mexico, but were intended for a larger and more specific operation within the United States.

My analysis involved additional images other than what is shown below, and noted that there were a total of three civilian up-armored vehicles with bullet-proof glass seized in this shipment. The assault weapons and ammunition seized was sufficient to equip 3 six-man squads of a special operations capable strike force, with at least 400 rounds per man. The rifle and handgun ammunition consisted of armor-piercing, tracer and hollow point rounds; the M203 grenade launcher ammunition was primarily of the fragmentary type along with one armor-piercing round. This force is assessed to be comprised of former Mexican Army troops known as Zetas in addition to Islamic terrorist operatives. Click "read more" above for complete article.

The potential targets of this force range from an outrageous and unprecedented raid to liberate the Mexican Gulf Cartel narco-boss, Osiel Cardenas GUILLEN, currently being held for trial in Houston, Texas to other possibilities such as an assault on a state legislature or a similar body in Texas or elsewhere within the U.S. One other possibility includes the execution of a very large "false-flag" operation. This assessment continues as new information is being developed.

The types, the quantities, and the nature of the various weapons and ammunition seized, in addition to the other miscellaneous military equipment and vehicles are assessed to be directly related to a special operations-like assault of significant magnitude somewhere in the USA rather than utilization in a narco-gang war in Mexico. It is obvious that a large-scale operation was set to be executed in the very near term. Additional analysis and investigation is continuing.


By Doug Hagmann, Director, and Sean Osborne, Associate Director, Military Affairs

Additional analysis of weapons seizure: Intelligence obtained by the Northeast Intelligence Network suggests that the weapons seized at the Mexican-U.S. border could be used to launch an attack against U.S. military bases, especially those situated in the southwestern United States. Information obtained from military and intelligence sources indicate that military assets within the U.S. are at increased risk of attack by Islamic terrorists already present with the U.S., having entered the country illegally via the border with Mexico. Our investigation is continuing.

More on arms seized at U.S. - Mexican border town

23 February 2007: On February 11, 2007, a tractor-trailer registered in Texas and containing a large shipment of weapons, ammunition and a Nissan pickup truck fitted with armor and bullet-proof glass was stopped by the Mexican army in Matamoros, just south of the U.S. border at Brownsville, Texas.

The weapons seized included 18 M-16 assault rifles, including at least one equipped with an M-203 40mm grenade launcher, several M-4 carbines, 17 handguns of various calibers, over 200 magazines for different weapons, and more than 8,000 rounds of ammunition, assault vests and other military accessories.

Weapons seized

Although the origin of the shipment is unclear, it is vividly obvious that areas along the U.S.-Mexican border are as much war zones as transshipment points. Matamoros has long been recognized as a vital choke point for the shipment of drugs, weapons and illegal aliens, including Islamic terrorists, into the United States from Mexico. Based on the sophistication of the weapons seized earlier this month, it is apparent that a battle is shaping up just across the border from Brownsville – one that will undoubtedly have ominous implications for those protecting our southern border.

Border town of Matamoros, Tamaulipas across from Brownsville, Texas

T.A. Adams contributed to this report

Labels: ,


By Frosty Wooldridge
October 29, 2007

Tina Griego, journalist for the Denver Rocky
Mountain News wrote a column titled, 'Mexican
Visitor's Lament' -- 10/25/07.

She interviewed Mexican journalist Evangelina
Hernandez while visiting Denver last week. Hernandez

'They (illegal aliens) pay rent, buy groceries, buy
clothes... what happens to your country's economy if
20 million people go away?'

That's a good question - it deserves an answer. Over
80 percent of Americans demand secured borders and
illegal migration stopped. But what would happen if
all 20 million or more vacated America? The answers
may surprise you!

a.. In California, if 3.5 million illegal aliens
moved back to Mexico, it would leave an extra $10.2
billion to spend on overloaded school systems,
bankrupted hospitals and overrun prisons. It would
leave highways cleaner, safer and less congested.
Everyone could understand one another as English
became the dominate language again.
b.. In Colorado, 500,000 illegal migrants, plus
their 300,000 kids and grand-kids - would move back
'home,' mostly to Mexico. That would save Coloradans
an estimated $2 billion (other experts say $7 BIL)
annually in taxes that pay for schooling, medical,
social-services and incarceration costs. It means
12,000 gang members would vanish out of Denver
c.. Colorado would save more than $20 million in
prison costs, and the terror that those 7,300 alien
criminals set upon local citizens. Denver Officer
Don Young and hundreds of Colorado victims would not
have suffered death, accidents, rapes and other
crimes by illegals.
d.. Denver Public Schools would not suffer a 67
percent drop out/flunk out rate via thousands of
illegal alien students speaking 41 different
languages. At least 200,000 vehicles would vanish
from our gridlocked cities in Colorado. Denver's
four percent unemployment rate would vanish as our
working poor would gain jobs at a living wage.
e.. In Florida, 1.5 million illegals would return
the Sunshine State back to America, the rule of law
and English.
f.. In Chicago, Illinois, 2.1 million illegals
would free up hospitals, schools, prisons and
highways for a safer, cleaner and more crime-free

If 20 Million Illegal Aliens Returned 'Home' --

If 20 million illegal aliens returned 'home,' the
U.S. economy would return to the rule of law.
Employers would hire legal American citizens at a
living wage. Everyone would pay their fair share of
taxes because they wouldn't be working off the
books. That would result in an additional $401
billion in IRS income taxes collected annually, and
an equal amount for local state and city coffers.

No more push '1' for Spanish or '2' for English. No
more confusion in American schools that now must
contend with over 100 languages that degrade the
educational system for American kids. Our
overcrowded schools would lose more than two million
illegal alien kids at a cost of billions in ESL
(English As A Second Language) and free
breakfasts and lunches.

We would lose 500,000 illegal criminal alien inmates
at a cost of more than $1.6 billion annually. That
includes 15,000 MS-13 gang members who distribute
$130 billion in drugs annually would vacate our
country. In cities like L.A., 20,000 members of the
'18th Street Gang' would vanish from our nation. No
more Mexican forgery gangs for ID theft from
Americans! No more foreign rapists and child

Losing more than 20 million people would clear up
our crowded highways and gridlock. Cleaner air and
less drinking and driving American deaths by illegal

Drain On America's Economy; Taxpayers Harmed,
Employers Get Rich

Over $80 billion annually wouldn't return to their
home countries by cash transfers. Illegal migrants
earned half that money untaxed, which further drains
America's economy - which currently suffers an $8.7
trillion debt.

At least 400,000 anchor babies would not be born in
our country, costing us $109 billion per year per
cycle. At least 86 hospitals in California, Georgia
and Florida would still be operating instead of
being bankrupted out of existence because illegals
pay nothing via the EMTALA Act. (Emergency Medical
Treatment and Active Labor Act) Americans wouldn't
suffer thousands of TB and hepatitis cases rampant
in our country-brought in by illegals unscreened at
our borders.

(In case you didn't know about the EMTALA Act, check
it out at -- RO)

Our cities would see 20 million less people driving,
polluting and grid locking our cities. It would also
put the 'progressives' on the horns of a dilemma;
illegal aliens and their families cause 11 percent
of our greenhouse gases.

Over one million of Mexico's poorest citizens now
live inside and along our border from Brownsville,
Texas to San Diego, California in what the New York
Times called, 'colonias' or new neighborhoods.
Trouble is, those living areas resemble Bombay and
Calcutta where grinding poverty, filth, diseases,
drugs, crimes, no sanitation and worse. They live
without sewage, clean water, streets, electricity,
roads or any kind of sanitation. The New York Times
reported them to be America's new 'Third World'
inside our own country. Within 20 years, at their
current growth rate, they expect 20 million
residents of those colonias. (I've seen them
personally in Texas and Arizona; it's sickening
beyond anything you can imagine.) By enforcing our
laws, we could repatriate them back to Mexico.

High Integrity, Ethical Invitation

We invite 20 million aliens to go home, fix their
own countries and/or make a better life in Mexico.
We invite a million people into our country legally
more than all other countries combined annually. We
cannot and must not allow anarchy at our borders,
more anarchy within our borders and growing
lawlessness at every level in our nation.

It's time to stand up for our country, our culture,
our civilization and our way of life.

Is it going to happen?

Labels: , ,