Thursday, December 24, 2009

Where is Islamberg and Why is it a Ghost Town?

I know there are those who will never accept any 'anomaly' as evidence and this same segment of the population will never take the time to research this subject to see if what they have been indoctrinated with stands up to the scrutiny of history and sound academic research. For everyone else; here is yet another troubling evidence of the continuing and coming storm. The question we all have to ask is just how many times this 'anomaly' has repeated itself nationwide and for that matter, in Canada and western Europe? Do those in whom we have entrusted our security know the answer to that and what are they prepared to do about it? The events that have unfolded in Afghanistan concerning our 'strategy change' and related ROE have suggested that these decisions are based on a faulty understanding of the enemy and a left-wing agenda. I'm curious to know how many more 9/11's we will have to experience before our sworn Leaders and the Protectors of our Constitution, Land and People are going to be willing to re-visit their flawed perception of the enemy?

The latest revelation surrounding the latest Executive Order that affords diplomatic immunity to Interpol and by extension the ICC suggest much darker times ahead. It is no secret that the ICC and other international governing bodies see the campaigns in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan as 'illegal' by their own standards. Until the 17th of this month, that meant little. Now , our own President has laid the ground work necessary to subjugate an entire country which was entrusted to him by 53% of the population. This population which can no longer expect protection from their government from a foreign pestilence in the form of Interpol and the ICC. Our Warriors can no longer expect they will not be held liable for 'crimes against humanity' by a foreign agancy that has already expressed their disdain for America and declared the war we are embroiled in, illegal. It has been feared that they would eventually exploit any opportunity to hold any and all American Warriors liable. This President has given them that opportunity. Can you say Sedition?

Some will say that these things are not inter-related but that is an extremely naive and dangerous view. These things are all related! Applying a battle strategy that has failed historically, in a land of people that have no respect for their own central government and ideologically hate all outside of their ideology, where the human and physical terrain is unforgivable and murderous is insane. Placing our Warriors in this place without expectation of simple, timely, organic fire support from weapon systems like 60mm mortars is murderous - not naive and not unrelated to the bigger picture! It very clearly smacks of a government and government officials that no longer fear their constituency and no longer love or respect the men in uniform that they have placed in harm's way. One can only deduce that they have a new constituency and a new 'first love'. The question is, will this present constituency tolerate the current crop of traitors or will they show them the door in 2010? Will the new crop that replaces them be any different? Will they understand what the current crop has so obviously forgotten; that they have sworn an oath 'to support and defend the constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic;' or will they continue the same failing policies of their predecessors and continue to drive this, their country into the ground and into the shackles of some foreign pestilence?

A question was posed to me the other day; 'Power, money, and prestige are motivators toward evil. O for honest men and women to stand up and lead! Are there any out there? Can they possibly rise to the top without corruption?' To which I answer; I don't know. I honestly don't know.

John Bernard

Dr. Paul L. Williams, PhD
Why Is Islamberg Now a Ghost Town?
December 22, 2009

The Wall Street Journal reports this week that U.S. investigators are discovering that more and more young Muslims are vanishing from mosques, madrassas, and Islamic centers.

The disappearances, the Journal notes, are raising grave concerns among FBI and Homeland Security officials who fear that an onset of jihadist activity will take place on American soil in the near future.

Hundreds of Muslim men are also missing from Islamberg and this is not a propitious omen.

The sentry post is gone and no guards are in sight at the entrance to the 70 acre Islamic settlement located in the dense forest between Deposit and Hancock in upper New York State.

Young men in Islamic garb no longer congregate before the makeshift mosque, and no students are in attendance at the one room shack that serves as Sheikh Gilani's “International Quranic Open University.”

Gunfire no longer can be heard from the firing ranges along the eastern parameter of the property – and no grunts come from new recruits at the obstacle course.

A new sign at the entranceway reads, “Welcome to Holy Islamberg: The International Quranic Open University.” Next to this sign, which features the image of a mosque emerging from the mountains, is a pot of plastic carnations. Another sign proclaims that the community is home to the “United Muslim – Christian Forum.”

Such statements of welcome are offset by the “No Trespassing” signs that have been nailed to trees throughout the compound.

On the opposite side of the road leading into the community is a rack of metal mailboxes bearing such names as Abdul-Haqq, Abdul Jalil, Mumim Roberts, Abdullah Simonds, and Salam Insan.

What has happened to this once bustling complex of radical Islamists – a place where the cries of muezzins were accompanied by the incessant rat-tat-tat of machine gunfire? Where are the Arab dignitaries that used to visit this remote community in chauffeur-driven limousines? Where are the armed sentries who warded away all intruders?

A handful of children play in the mud and muck before rows of rusty old trailers, and a few women in full burkas walk along the rutty dirt road that leads to the heart of the squalid Muslim compound.

The few residents who remain in the settlement are not environmentalists. Sewage seeps from septic tanks and outhouses into the creek that flows at the base of the settlement. Bags of rotting garbage remain stacked between the trailers. And the once pristine countryside is now littered with junk cars, moldy mattresses, empty tanks of propane, and old appliances.

Where are the men?

What has happened to this bustling center of jihadi training?

Why has Islamberg become a ghost town?

The same phenomenon of vanishing Muslim men is taking place at mosques, madrassas, and other Islamic communities throughout the country and at other Jamaat ul-Fuqra paramilitary compounds, including one in Red House, Virginia.

U.S. investigators have now discovered that many of the missing Muslims are showing up in the killing fields of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Somalia.

Five American Muslims recently were arrested in Pakistan following a raid at the home of a member of the Jaish-e-Muhammad, a Pakistani movement designated as a terrorist group by the U.S. Treasury Department in 2001.

The five American Muslims – identified as Ahmed Abdullah, Waqar Hassan Khan, Eman Hassan, Yasir and Rami Zamzam – were planning to join forces with the Taliban to fight the U.S.-led coalition forces in Afghanistan.

Zamzam is a graduate dental student at Howard University, where he served as president of the Muslim Student Association.

David Coleman Headley, another Muslim who disappeared, is a native of Chicago who attended Lashkar-e-Toiba-operated terrorism training camps in Pakistan and helped Lashker-e-Toiba members and others plan and execute the attacks in Denmark against the newspaper which published cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed, which Muslims found offensive, as well as the violent attack in Mumbai, in about 170 people died.

At the same time Headley was taken into custody, U.S. investigators discovered that 20 Somali immigrants, who were reported missing from a mosque in Minnesota, had joined the Islamist insurgent group, al Shabaab, and were engaged in fighting Somalia's U.S.-backed government.

And there is the case of Najibullah Zazi, a 24-year-old resident of Denver, who made a trip to Peshawar, Pakistan, in 2008 for the stated purpose of visiting his wife only to show up at an al Qaeda training camp where he received instruction in making and detonating explosives. In September, Zazi was collared by federal officials as he made his way to New York City to carry out attacks with the same back-pack bombs that were used to blow up a train station in Madrid and several subway stations in London.

Where are the Muslim men from Islamberg?

The answer comes from a heavy-set woman in a long black burka who stops to check her mail box. “The men – all gone,” she says in halting English. “All – in Pakistan.”

Islamberg was established in 1980 by Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani, a Pakistani cleric who served as the imam of the Yasin Masjid in Brooklyn. A quack practitioner of something called “Koranic psychiatry,” Sheikh Gilani presented himself to the Brooklyn congregation as "the sixth Sultan ul Faqr,” with a lineage that dates back to the prophet Mohammed. He claimed to have supernatural powers that came from his regular reception of visits by jinn and “non-human beings.”

Sporting ammunition belts, Gilani called upon members of a Black Muslim street gang known as Dar al-Islam (DAR) to take part in the holy war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Hundreds answered the call and headed off to training camps in Pakistan, which had been established by Osama bin Laden, and other members of the mujahadeen.

Under Gilani’s direction, the DAR transformed into Jamaat ul-Fuqra (“the community of the impoverished”) and continued its prison ministry under Muslims of the Americas, a new, non-profit corporation. The sheikh soon came to realize that it would be financially advantageous to train new recruits for the holy war on American soil rather than shelling out the freight of sending them to Lahore and Peshawar. He purchased a 70-acre parcel of land near Green Haven, set up a firing range and an obstacle course, purchased a slew of old single-wide trailers and created a paramilitary compound called Islamberg.

When released from the federal prison, former convicts now received not only the customary $10 and a suit of clothes but also a one-way ticket to Gilani’s compound.

What took place at Islamberg and the International Quranic Open University?

The answers came from Sheikh Gilani in his recruitment videos: “We give [students] specialized training in guerilla warfare. We are at present establishing training camps. You can easily reach us at Open Quranic offices in upstate New York or in Canada or in South Carolina or in Pakistan.”

Similarly, in a handbook, published by the university, Gilani wrote that the foremost duty of all students is to wage war against “the oppressors of Muslims.” The students are expected to sign an oath that reads: “I shall always hear and obey, and whenever given the command, I shall readily fight for Allah’s sake.”

Now that the recruits at Islamberg have been trained in the basics of guerilla warfare, they have been deployed to Pakistan for advanced courses in explosives and weapons of mass destruction.

They will be returning home soon.

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

The Real Rules Of War

Another great perspective on the Rules of Engagement, Civilization, the cruelty of war and an argument for reason.

By Warren Kozak

Five years ago, a particularly gruesome image made its way to our television

screens from the war in Iraq. Four U.S. civilian contractors working in

Fallujah were ambushed and killed by al Qaeda. Their bodies were burned,

then dragged through the streets. Two of the charred bodies were hung from

the Euphrates Bridge and left dangling.

This barbaric act left an impression that our military did not forget: In a

special operation earlier this year, Navy SEALs captured the mastermind of

that attack, Ahmed Hashim Abed. But after he was taken into custody in

September, Abed claimed he was punched by his captors. He showed a fat lip

to prove it. Three of the SEALS are now awaiting a courts-martial on charges

ranging from assault to dereliction of duty and making false statements.

This incident and its twisted irony takes me back to an oddly serene setting

many years ago. When I was in college, I joined my parents on a trip to

retrace my father's wartime experience in Europe. We drove from France,

through Holland and Belgium and on to Germany-the same route he had taken

with the U.S. Army in 1944-45. At a field outside the Belgian town of

Malmedy, we got out of our rented car where my father described something I

had never heard before.

During the Battle of the Bulge, in the bleak December of 1944, the Germans

had quickly overrun the American lines. They took thousands of prisoners as

they pushed through in a last chance gamble to turn the war around. One

unit, part of the First SS Panzer Division, had captured over a hundred GIs.

They were moving fast, and they didn't care to be burdened by prisoners. So

the SS troops put the American soldiers in that field and mowed them down

with machine guns.

Around 90 Americans were killed in that barrage. The Germans then walked

through the tangle of bodies, shooting those who were still alive in the

back of the head. The few that survived were brought to where my father was

located in the nearby town of Liege where word of the massacre quickly


My father was never a talker. And in spite of the fact that we were on a

trip to look at his past, he didn't open up much, or couldn't. When I asked

him what the reaction was among the U.S. troops, he answered without

emotion: "We didn't take prisoners for two weeks." I immediately understood

what he meant, and had the sense not to press the issue any further. I just

looked out at the field, now green and peaceful on a beautiful summer day,

and realized he was looking at the same field and seeing something quite


In the weeks following the Malmedy massacre, U.S. troops clearly broke the

rules of the Geneva Conventions. Justified or not, they were technically

guilty of war crimes.

My guess is that the American correspondents imbedded with those troops knew

all about this and chose not to report it. So did their officers. They

understood the gravity of the war, as well as the absolute importance of its

outcome. And they understood that disclosing this information might

ultimately help the enemy. In other words, they used common sense. Was the

U.S. a lesser country because these GIs weren't arrested? Was the

Constitution jeopardized? Somehow it survived.

You don't have to dig too deep to understand that war brings out behavior in

people that they would never demonstrate in normal life. In Paul Fussell's

moving memoir, "The Boys' Crusade," the former infantryman relates a story

about the liberation of Dachau. There were about 120 SS guards who had been

captured by the Americans. Even though the Germans were being held at

gunpoint, they still had the arrogance-or epic stupidity-to continue to heap

verbal abuse and threats on the inmates. Their American guards, thoroughly

disgusted by what they had already witnessed in the camp, had seen enough

and opened fire on the SS. Some of the remaining SS guards were handed over

to the inmates who tore them limb from limb. Another war crime? No doubt.

Justified? It depends on your point of view. But before you weigh in,

realize that you didn't walk through the camp. You didn't smell it. You

didn't witness the obscene horror of the Nazis.

Rules of war are important. They are something to strive for as they

separate us from our distant ancestors. But when only one side follows these

rules, they no longer elevate us. They create a very unlevel field and more

than a little frustration. It is equally bizarre for any of us to judge

someone's behavior in war by the rules we follow in our very peaceful

universe. We sit in homes that are air-conditioned in the summer and warmed

in the winter. We have more than enough food in our bellies and we get

enough sleep. The stress in our lives won't ever match the stress of battle.

Can we honestly begin to decide if a soldier acted in compliance with rules

that work perfectly well on Main Street but not, say, in Malmedy or


In his book, Mr. Fussell probably sums up the feelings of many soldiers when

he quotes a British captain, John Tonkin, who experienced a great deal of

the war. "I have always felt," Capt. Tonkin said, "that the Geneva

Convention is a dangerous piece of stupidity, because it leads people to

believe that war can be civilized. It can't."

Mr. Kozak is the author of "LeMay: The Life and Wars of General Curtis

LeMay" (Regnery, 2009).

Wither Sovereignty

This is probably the single most troubling piece of information to come up in the past year. With this amended Executive Order, Interpol now has authorization to 'Operate' on American soil and for all practical purposes, has control of sovereign US citizens. With the stroke of the pen, the President has perpetrated an act of sedition against the sovereignty of the United States of America and our citizens; and everyone just watches....

Executive Order Amended to Immunize INTERPOL In America - Is The ICC Next?

By Steve Schippert, Clyde Middleton December 23, 2009

Last Thursday, December 17, 2009, The White House released an Executive Order "Amending Executive Order 12425." It grants INTERPOL (International Criminal Police Organization) a new level of full diplomatic immunity afforded to foreign embassies and select other "International Organizations" as set forth in the United States International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945.

By removing language from President Reagan's 1983 Executive Order 12425, this international law enforcement body now operates - now operates - on American soil beyond the reach of our own top law enforcement arm, the FBI, and is immune from Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

For Immediate Release December 17, 2009
Executive Order -- Amending Executive Order 12425

- - - - - - -

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288), and in order to extend the appropriate privileges, exemptions, and immunities to the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), it is hereby ordered that Executive Order 12425 of June 16, 1983, as amended, is further amended by deleting from the first sentence the words "except those provided by Section 2©, Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6 of that Act" and the semicolon that immediately precedes them.


December 16, 2009.

After initial review and discussions between the writers of this analysis, the context was spelled out plainly.

Through EO 12425, President Reagan extended to INTERPOL recognition as an "International Organization." In short, the privileges and immunities afforded foreign diplomats was extended to INTERPOL. Two sets of important privileges and immunities were withheld: Section 2© and the remaining sections cited (all of which deal with differing taxes).

And then comes December 17, 2009, and President Obama. The exemptions in EO 12425 were removed.

Section 2c of the United States International Organizations Immunities Act is the crucial piece.

Property and assets of international organizations, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from search, unless such immunity be expressly waived, and from confiscation. The archives of international organizations shall be inviolable. (Emphasis added.)

Inviolable archives means INTERPOL records are beyond US citizens' Freedom of Information Act requests and from American legal or investigative discovery ("unless such immunity be expressly waived.")

Property and assets being immune from search and confiscation means precisely that. Wherever they may be in the United States. This could conceivably include human assets - Americans arrested on our soil by INTERPOL officers.

Context: International Criminal Court

The importance of this last crucial point cannot be understated, because this immunity and protection - and elevation above the US Constitution - afforded INTERPOL is likely a precursor to the White House subjecting the United States under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC). INTERPOL provides a significant enforcement function for the ICC, just as our FBI provides a significant function for our Department of Justice.

We direct the American public to paragraph 28 of the ICC's Proposed Programme Budget for 2010 (PDF).

29. Additionally, the Court will continue to seek the cooperation of States not party to the Rome Statute and to develop its relationships with regional organizations such as the Organization of American States (OAS), the Arab League (AL), the African Union (AU), the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), ASEAN and CARICOM. We will also continue to engage with subregional and thematic organizations, such as SADC and ECOWAS, and the Commonwealth Secretariat and the OIF. This will be done through high level visits, briefings and, as appropriate, relationship agreements. Work will also be carried out with sectoral organizations such as IDLO and INTERPOL, to increase efficiency.

The United States is not a party to the Rome Statute - the UN treaty that established the International Criminal Court. (See: Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court)

President George W. Bush rejected subjecting the United States to the jurisdiction of the ICC and removed the United States as a signatory. President Bill Clinton had previously signed the Rome Statute during his presidency. Two critical matters are at play. One is an overall matter of sovereignty and the concept of the primacy of American law above those of the rest of the world. But more recently a more over-riding concern principally has been the potential - if not likely - specter of subjecting our Armed Forces to a hostile international body seeking war crimes prosecutions during the execution of an unpopular war.

President Bush in fact went so far as to gain agreement from nations that they would expressly not detain or hand over to the ICC members of the United States armed forces. The fear of a symbolic ICC circus trial as a form of international political protest to American military actions in Iraq and elsewhere was real and palpable.

President Obama's words have been carefully chosen when directly regarding the ICC. While President Bush outright rejected subjugating American armed forces to any international court as a matter of policy, President Obama said in his 2008 presidential campaign that it is merely "premature to commit" to signing America on.

However, in a Foreign Policy in Focus round-table in 2008, the host group cited his former foreign policy advisor, Samantha Power. She essentially laid down what can be viewed as now-President Obama's roadmap to America rejoining the ICC. His principal objections are not explained as those of sovereignty, but rather of image and perception.

Obama's former foreign policy advisor, Samantha Power, said in an early March (2008) interview with The Irish Times that many things need to happen before Obama could think about signing the Rome Treaty.

"Until we've closed Guantánamo, gotten out of Iraq responsibly, renounced torture and rendition, shown a different face for America, American membership of the ICC is going to make countries around the world think the ICC is a tool of American hegemony.

The detention center at Guantánamo Bay is nearing its closure and an alternate continental American site for terrorist detention has been selected in Illinois. The time line for Iraq withdrawal has been set. And President Obama has given an abundance of international speeches intended to "show a different face for America." He has in fact been roundly criticized domestically for the routinely apologetic and critical nature of these speeches.

President Obama has not rejected the concept of ICC jurisdiction over US citizens and service members. He has avoided any direct reference to this while offering praise for the ICC for conducting its trials so far "in America's interests." The door thus remains wide open to the skeptical observer.


In light of what we know and can observe, it is our logical conclusion that President Obama's Executive Order amending President Ronald Reagans' 1983 EO 12425 and placing INTERPOL above the United States Constitution and beyond the legal reach of our own top law enforcement is a precursor to more damaging moves.

The pre-requisite conditions regarding the Iraq withdrawal and the Guantanamo Bay terrorist detention facility closure will continue their course. meanwhile, the next move from President Obama is likely an attempt to dissolve the agreements made between President Bush and other states preventing them from turning over American military forces to the ICC (via INTERPOL) for war crimes or any other prosecutions.

When the paths on the road map converge - Iraq withdrawal, Guantánamo closure, perceived American image improved internationally, and an empowered INTERPOL in the United States - it is probable that President Barack Obama will once again make America a signatory to the International Criminal Court. It will be a move that surrenders American sovereignty to an international body who's INTERPOL enforcement arm has already been elevated above the Constitution and American domestic law enforcement.

For an added and disturbing wrinkle, INTERPOL's central operations office in the United States is within our own Justice Department offices. They are American law enforcement officers working under the aegis of INTERPOL within our own Justice Department. That they now operate with full diplomatic immunity and with "inviolable archives" from within our own buildings should send red flags soaring into the clouds.

This is the disturbing context for President Obama's quiet release of an amended Executive Order 12425. American sovereignty hangs in the balance if these actions are not prevented through public outcry and political pressure. Some Americans are paying attention, as can be seen from some of the earliest recognitions of this troubling development here, here and here. But the discussion must extend well beyond the Internet and social media.

Ultimately, a detailed verbal explanation is due the American public from the President of the United States detailing why an international law enforcement arm assisting a court we are not a signatory to has been elevated above our Constitution upon our soil.

America's Survival Is At Stake

This piece is from and the content dovetails with the problems with COIN and ROE that we have been discussing on this Blog.

Never before in our history has an American president, deliberately and by design, risked our very survival to a maniacal enemy power sworn to remove America from the world. Yet from all appearances, this is exactly what Obama is doing by failing to vigorously oppose Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons. But in spite of the fact that over 60% of the public favors militarily destroying Iran’s nuclear facilities, there’s nary a word of protest from the Republicans in opposition. They’re so paranoid about being labeled warmongers, they have shamefully abdicated their own national security responsibilities, just as John McCain did during his presidential run.

Obama is weakening rather than strengthening our missile defenses. That’s how seriously this Administration takes the Iranian threat.

The reality is that the fanatical, messianically driven radical Iranian zealots will pay any price, including Iran’s virtual obliteration, in order to render the U.S. and its major allies non-players on the world scene. The mullahs expect to emerge from the ruins no longer hindered by the “Great Satan,” free to use their huge oil and gas reserves to fund the imposition of their tyranny throughout the Middle East and beyond.

Not only does Obama’s psyche make him incapable of understanding the radical’s mentality but he chooses to totally dismiss their own pronouncements spelling out their sinister intentions. Obama’s determination to make the United States subservient to an international body of nations is now driving him to systematically reduce our nation to a mere shadow of its former power and influence. He seeks to leave us virtually undefended against a missile attack, dramatically weaken our military, leave Iraq on its own, deny us the ability to win in Afghanistan and relinquish our unpopular but all-important role as world policeman. The practical consequences of Obama’s extreme radical left agenda can only be to put our nation at the mercy of a new world order dominated by ruthless tyrants, thugs and spineless states who sell their souls for commercial gain. His first allegiance is to such an international order – not to the United States.

Obama is not only unfit to serve as commander-in-chief in a time of war, he is a menace to our national security. His obvious intent to allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons, perhaps under the guise of what would undoubtedly be a totally meaningless agreement not to do so, presents a risk so grave to our survival that it can only be rationally viewed as tantamount to national suicide. Under no circumstances can the mullahs be trusted to honor any agreement, as they’ve proven time and again.

Obama has an agenda that in my view is un-American, for it is absolutely contrary to the most fundamental and essential interests of our nation. Obama seems too willing to ignore internal strife of other nations, characterized by his refusal to lend encouragement and assistance to freedom-seeking Iranian protestors is a moral outrage.

Given the President’s extreme core beliefs and actions, every effort should be made to rally all Americans against him and his policies. How else can we shake our apathetic citizenry out of its blind disengagement with our national security? Tragically, we are sleep walking in a political wilderness in which too few people are willing to wake up to the unfortunate appeasement and equivocating of President Barack Obama.

No president has had a higher constitutional duty than to protect our nation against foreign attack. By almost any standard, Obama is flagrantly guilty of dereliction of duty. It cannot be overemphasized how extraordinarily perilous a situation we are in, especially at a time when virtually the entire Republican Party is AWOL on bombing Iran and strengthening national security. There is no counterweight to Obama’s disastrous policies. Obama himself recently acknowledged that if terrorists get nuclear weapons “we have every reason to believe they will use them.” Despite this admission, he refuses to take the only action that will stop them from acquiring such weapons.

If we citizenry will not take the bull by the horns and demand a total reversal of our nation’s suicidal course, we could very soon experience the apocalyptic end of the America we love and all western civilization. Let us understand that the maniacal, radical Islamic enemies confronting us are irreversibly committed to making such a cataclysmic event happen – no matter how horrific the cost to them. To think that an olive branch of brotherly love could change their goals is sheer madness.

Take heed America, Obama’s policies may be paving the way for a nuclear doomsday.

Roger Chapin
Monday, December 21, 2009