Looking for His glorious appearing! Titus 2:13

Terrorists Trying to Recruit U.S. Residents
Sep 25th, 2010
DailyNewsFoxNews.com
Categories: Today's Headlines;Warning

Efforts by terrorists abroad to radicalize and recruit U.S. residents present new security threats, three top Obama administration officials told Congress on Wednesday.

The threat posed by homegrown extremists shows that the battle against terrorism has become more complex in the past year, underscoring the challenges of pinpointing and blocking plots, said Michael Leiter, director of the National Counterterrorism Center.

"Groups affiliated with Al Qaeda are now actively targeting the United States and looking to use Americans or Westerners who are able to remain undetected by heightened security measures," FBI Director Robert Mueller told the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

It appears that "domestic radicalization and homegrown extremism" is becoming more pronounced, Mueller said.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Al Qaeda has inspired an array of terrorist organizations.

"We are all seeing more diverse activity" by a more diverse collection of groups, Napolitano said.

Leiter said Al Qaeda in Pakistan is at one of its weakest points organizationally. Nonetheless, he said, the terrorist group remains a capable and determined enemy that has proven its resilience over time.

Since 2009, at least 63 American citizens have been charged or convicted for terrorism or related crimes, "an astoundingly high number of American citizens who have attacked -- or intended to attack -- their own country," said Sen. Joe Lieberman, an independent and the committee's chairman.

A year ago, the FBI arrested Michael C. Finton in Illinois and Hosam Smadi in Texas in connection with unrelated bomb attempts. The bureau used online undercover agents and confidential human sources who monitored Finton and Smadi until their arrests.

Several U.S. residents from Somali-American communities in Minneapolis were recruited to fight with the Somali-based terrorist group al-Shabab. That prompted the FBI to deploy bureau personnel to cities with high ethnic Somali populations in an outreach initiative to community leaders.

In his prepared testimony, Mueller said it is possible that more American extremists are feeling increasingly disenchanted with living in the United States or are angry about U.S. and Western foreign policy, "making their decision to leave for extremist opportunities abroad all the more appealing."

Omar Hammami, an Alabama man now known as Abu Mansour al-Amriki, or "the American," has become one of al-Shabab's most high-profile members and appeared in a jihadist video in May 2009.

Leiter said the rising profiles of U.S. citizens like Hammami in overseas terrorist groups provide young extremists with American faces as role models.

Leiter said plots by homegrown Sunni extremists were disrupted in New York, North Carolina, Arkansas, Alaska, Texas and Illinois in the past year and point to "a collective subculture and a common cause," even though the plots were unrelated.

Napolitano said U.S.-born, Yemen-based Anwar al-Awlaki is an illustration of an English-speaker spreading propaganda over the Internet, an approach she said could be helping to increase the number of homegrown extremists.

Terrorists "are working increasingly to build alliances or essentially recruit soldiers for their army from within the United States," Lieberman said.

The panel's ranking Republican, Sen. Susan Collins, said the shootings at a military base in Texas, and the attempted Dec. 25 Christmas Day attack on a Detroit-bound airliner show that the terrorist threat "is evolving and ever-changing."

North and South Korea on the Brink of War, Russian Diplomat Warns
Sep 25th, 2010
DailyNewsTelegraph.co.uk
Categories: Today's Headlines;War

North and South Korea are on the brink of war, a top Russian diplomat has warned, calling for both countries to exercise restraint and sit down for talks.

Next Israel - Hezbollah War will be Worse, Says U.S. Analyst
Sep 25th, 2010
DailyNewsHaaretz.com
Categories: Today's Headlines;The Nation Of Israel;War

In the next Israeli conflict against Hezbollah, the IDF's Northern Command would use the "Lebanon Corps" and five divisions - the 162nd, 36th, 98th, 366th and 319th, according to U.S. intelligence veteran Jeffrey White in research published last week by the pro-Israel Washington Institute for Near East Policy. 

According to White, if another Israel-Hezbollah war breaks out it will not resemble the war of the summer of 2006, but will cover much of Lebanon and Israel, and probably also Syria, and is likely to also draw in Iran, involve major military operations, cause significant casualties among combatants and civilians, and destroy infrastructure. 

Notwithstanding diplomatic efforts, success in the war will be decided on the battlefield, and White believes Israel is much better prepared for the next round than it was in 2006. 

White says that the main aim of Israel in a war would be to impose a fundamental change in the military equilibrium and defeat Hezbollah, although not a "final victory." At the center of the Israeli military strategy will be combined arms operations, land-air-sea, with the aim of quickly destroying Hezbollah's rocket and missile arsenals and the group's land forces in southern Lebanon, and seriously disrupting its command and control centers by hitting its infrastructure throughout Lebanon. 

Israel will seek to prevent the war from expanding to involve Syria, with threats, mobilizing reserves, moving forces and "flexing muscles," but will not hesitate to attack Syrian forces, infrastructure and Iranian elements that will come to Hezbollah's assistance. 

White says that Israel will seek to deter Iran from directly attacking its territory through warnings and preparing strategic attack elements - airborne, missiles and naval units. 

Hezbollah's plan will be to fire volleys of missiles and rockets against Israel's homefront in an effort to strike at the IDF forces moving toward Lebanon, in the hope of causing massive casualties. The Syrian air force will try to prevent Israeli fighters and reconnaissance aircraft from crossing through Syrian airspace, and possibly try to intercept them over Lebanon, in view of the proximity of the Syrian capital to the area of the fighting. 

If Syria finds itself involved directly in the fighting, its main efforts will be to preserve the Assad regime in Damascus, with less emphasis on helping Hezbollah in Lebanon and its ability to strike at Israel, or restoring Syria's military presence in Lebanon and defeating Israel in order to restore the Golan Heights to its control. 

Iran's reaction will begin with the flow of arms to Hezbollah and Syria, and Iran will step up the presence of advisers, technicians and light combat forces, aimed at carrying out attacks against Israeli targets, increasing tension in the region (with hostile actions in the Strait of Hormuz ), and possibly launching missiles against Israel. 

There is no certainty that Hamas will join the fighting, especially because Israel may use the opportunity to bring about the collapse of its hold in the Gaza Strip, he added. 

White says that in his assessment, the IDF will occupy parts - possibly significant portions - of Lebanon within weeks, and possibly all the Gaza Strip. He says that it will be the most serious war Israel has been involved in since 1973, and Israel must emerge victorious. 

If Israel is determined in its actions, and willing to pay the price in casualties and damage incurred, it will succeed militarily, break the military power of Hezbollah and weaken it politically, White says. The Syrian regime will be weakened, and Iran's activity in the region will be contained because of the downfall of its allies. If Iran does not assist its allies, it will also lose much of its influence. 

Hamas, if it becomes involved directly in the war, will lose its military power in the Gaza strip and at least some of its political power. 

The former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst says the U.S. should not rush to contain Israel, but give the IDF the time and space necessary to complete its operations against Hezbollah and Syria. 

White says that the U.S. role will be to deter Iran from becoming involved in support of Lebanon-Syria or in the Persian Gulf.

Hizbullah Agents Taking Up Positions in Lebanon's Christian Areas
Sep 25th, 2010
DailyNewsworldtribune.com
Categories: Today's Headlines;Warning

The Iranian-sponsored Hizbullah has been quietly infiltrating Christian areas of Lebanon in what could mark preparations for a coup.

Lebanese sources said Hizbullah has been penetrating Christian towns along the Mediterranean Sea in what could lead to an attempt to overthrow the government of Prime Minister Saad Hariri. They said thousands of Hizbullah plainclothes operatives were moving into homes and hotels in such Christian towns as Batroun, Junyeh and Tabarja. 

"They are being helped by Christian allies of Hizbullah to attack senior government officials living in these areas," a Lebanese source said.

The sources said Hizbullah was being aided by former Lebanese President Michel Aoun, a former nationalist who over the last two years has become an ally of Iran and its proxies. They said Aoun has agreed to cooperate with a Hizbullah plan to stage a coup against the Hariri government and arrest the prime minister, his aides and political allies. 

"In some cases, Aoun agents have served as middle men to buy property for Hizbullah, and in other cases, they have simply rented apartments to Hizbullah for fighters and weapons," the source said. 

The Lebanese Web site Beirut Observer said 3,500 Hizbullah fighters have been deployed along the Christian-dominated coast north of Beirut, Middle East Newsline reported. Most of Lebanon's political elite, particularly those from the anti-Syrian March 14 coalition, live in the area. 

The Observer said Hizbullah has targeted Hariri and his top aides for arrest. Some of the aides were identified as Gen. Ashraf Rifi, commander of the Hariri-controlled Internal Security Forces, and chief prosecutor Said Mirza. The head of the intelligence branch, Col. Wessam Hassan, was also said to have been designated a Hizbullah target. 

For his part, Hariri has delayed his scheduled return to Lebanon from Saudi Arabia. The sources said Hariri has been alerted to the Hizbullah plot and sought help from Saudi Arabia to neutralize any coup attempt. 

Hariri, under pressure from Saudi Arabia, has sought to defuse a confrontation with Hizbullah in connection to a United Nations investigation of his father's assassination in 2005. The prime minister, long known for his opposition to Syria, apologized to the regime of President Bashar Assad for saying Damascus was behind the killing. 

Still, Hizbullah and Syrian allies have demanded that Hariri resign. Hizbullah has pressured Hariri to blame Israel for the death of his father, who also served as prime minister. 

The last Hizbullah offensive against the government was in 2008 when Iranian-trained Shi'ite fighters stormed offices of the Future Party, now headed by Hariri. Hizbullah also attacked the Druze-dominated area of Mount Lebanon but was beaten back by forces aligned with Walid Jumblatt.

China's Dominance or Rare - Earth Elements Has U.S. Worried
Sep 25th, 2010
DailyNewsonline.wsj.com
Categories: Today's Headlines;Warning

China's control of a key minerals market has U.S. military thinkers and policy makers alike worried about access to materials that are essential for 21st-century technology like smartphones—and smart bombs.

The concern over supplies of so-called rare-earth elements was highlighted this week by a report that Chinese customs officials had blocked exports of the materials to Japan. On Thursday, Beijing denied those reports. "China doesn't block rare-earth exports to Japan," said Chen Rongkai, a spokesman for China's Ministry of Commerce.

At issue is a group of 17 metallic elements with magnetic properties suited for high-tech applications such as computer hard drives and digital cameras. Rare-earth elements are also key to "green" technology: Energy-efficient light bulbs use europium and yttrium, while hybrid car batteries and wind-power turbines use neodymium.

While rare-earth ore deposits are found around the globe, China's dominance in mining and processing the elements has raised alarms in Washington. According to an April 2010 Government Accountability Office report, China now produces approximately 97% of the world's rare-earth oxides, the raw materials that can be further refined into metals and blended into alloys that can be made into finished components.

Over the past year, China has imposed global export quotas on the elements. Its Commerce Ministry has said total exports for the year would be capped at just under 30,300 metric tons, down 40% from last year. Only 7,976 tons of that were allocated for the second half of this year. Experts say much of that has already been shipped. 

That has spurred anxiety among government officials and industry executives. Delegations from the U.S., Germany, and Japan have implored Beijing to recognize how critical they consider sustained supply.

Premier Wen Jiabao pledged last month to a visiting Japanese delegation that China wouldn't halt exports. Chinese officials have said the tighter export limits this year are motivated by environmental concerns. During the meeting with the Japanese, Chinese Commerce Minister Chen Deming said Beijing had tightened controls over production and trade because "mass-extraction of rare earth will cause great damage to the environment."

Earlier this week, London-based Industrial Metals magazine and the New York Times reported that China had blocked a shipment of the metals, in retaliation for Japan's detention of a Chinese fishing boat captain on Sept. 7 amid a territorial dispute. Officials in Japan's foreign and trade ministries said they weren't aware of such an embargo. Any ban on shipments to Japan would mark a startling escalation of the dispute, one that would risk aligning Japan, the U.S. and others against China for using its global commercial clout in a bilateral political dispute. 

Rare-earth metals have important military applications because of their magnetic strength, which allows for extraordinary miniaturization of components. The fins that steer precision bombs, for instance, have samarium-cobalt permanent magnet motors. The motors that run the rudder and tail fins on a high-performance fighter aircraft like the Air Force F-22 Raptor are built with lightweight, rare-earth magnets. Neodymium is found in the solid-state lasers used to designate targets.

In the newest issue of Joint Force Quarterly, a professional military journal published by National Defense University, Navy Reserve Lt. Cdr. Cindy Hurst, a research analyst in the Foreign Military Studies Office at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., wrote that "China appears to be holding an unlikely trump card" through its dominance in the rare-earth element industry.

"The country's grasp on the rare-earth element industry could one day give China a strong technological advantage and increase its military superiority," she wrote.

The Department of Defense is completing a study to identify the potential national security risks of rare-earth material dependency. Pentagon spokeswoman Cheryl Irwin said a full report drawing on input from a number of government agencies will be released next month.

"It is a highly charged topic," she said, adding the Pentagon is seeking to separate "fact from fiction to ensure we continue to protect the interests of both the warfighter and the taxpayer."

In parallel, U.S. lawmakers have begun probing the national-security implications of rare-earth supplies. The House Committee on Science and Technology's investigations panel held a hearing this year on the issue, and on Thursday, the committee began marking up a bill that would encourage the U.S. government to hedge against rare-earth shortages by collecting more data on potential supply and identifying alternative materials.

Rep. Bart Gordon (D., Tenn.), chairman of the committee, said he was concerned about the United States being "held hostage" when it came to access to raw materials for new technology.

Molycorp, Inc., the owner of a mine in Mountain Pass, Calif., that holds the largest, richest rare-earth deposit outside China, is currently looking to restart and expand production. Jim Sims, a spokesman for Molycorp, said the company was planning by mid-2012 to create a complete U.S.-based supply chain for some kinds of rare-earth magnets.

Company representatives have also discussed the ongoing Department of Defense study with Pentagon officials. 

Mr. Sims said the study was a "pretty significant undertaking" that involved going many steps down the defense industry supply chain to understand how rare earths contribute to a weapons system.

"It's a difficult supply chain to ferret out," he said, because "in some cases, the rare earths are used in such small amounts."

Australian Muslim Cleric Calls for Beheading - - Who Cares?
Sep 25th, 2010
DailyNewsLarry Elder - Syndicated Columnist
Categories: Today's Headlines;Contemporary Issues;Warning

What happens when an Australian(!) Muslim cleric calls for the beheading of a Dutch politician?
Not much.
 
What happens when an American pastor no one ever heard of threatens to burn a Quran?
It ignites an international outcry.

Terry Jones, pastor of a 50-member church in Gainesville, Florida, threatened to burn the Quran as a protest against the proposed construction of a mosque near the site of the World Trade Center. Democrats and Republicans denounced Jones. Gen. David Petraeus, U.S. commander in Afghanistan, warned that Jones' action would put American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan at risk, and he personally telephoned the pastor to dissuade him.
 
Those who would desecrate the Quran or who would draw a cartoon of Prophet Muhammad or who would otherwise "disrespect" Islam run the risk of being murdered. This is quite a response from followers of what President George W. Bush called a "religion of peace," the "hijacking" of which motivated the 9/11 hijackers. Bush repeatedly distinguished between a war against Islamofascism and a war on Islam. But the distinction apparently collapses if one pastor doesn't get the memo.
 
How dare this pastor of some church-nobody-heard-of show insufficient respect for Islam, many of whose followers support a global jihad that demands replacement of all non-Islamic governments, as well as the conversion of all to Islam, by force if necessary?
 
Where is the international outcry from this recent story from Reuters?

"A well-known Australian Muslim cleric has called for the beheading of Dutch anti-Islamic politician Geert Wilders....
 
"The Sydney-born (Feiz) Muhammad has gained notoriety for, among other things, calling on young children to be radicalized and blaming rape victims for their own attacks.
 
"(De Telegraaf, the Netherlands' largest newspaper) posted an English-language audio clip in which he refers to Wilders as 'this Satan, this devil, this politician in Holland' and explains that anyone who talks about Islam like Wilders does should be executed by beheading....
 
"Wilders is currently on trial in the Netherlands for inciting hatred and discrimination against Muslims.
 
"The Freedom Party leader made a film in 2008 which accused the Quran of inciting violence and mixed images of terrorist attacks with quotations from the Islamic holy book.
 
"Wilders was also charged because of outspoken remarks in the media, such as an opinion piece in a Dutch daily in which he compared Islam to fascism and the Quran to Adolf Hitler's book Mein Kampf."

Civil libertarian groups vigorously defend vile but protected speech. Where are the free-speech groups denouncing Wilders' prosecution for making abrasive comments? Or does the right to free speech only apply to the nasty comments routinely made on cable shows by Sarah Palin/Glenn Beck/tea party-hating lefties?
 
If a proposed Quran burning generates international news and condemnation, isn't the call by an Australian Muslim cleric for the beheading of a democratically elected European politician worthy of a few moments on the network nightly news?
 
Offensive acts by non-Muslims provoke calls for sensitivity and understanding. Offensive acts by Muslims generate indifference rather than denunciations of the barbarous statements and acts that Muslim clerics and others call for in the name of Islam.
 
Why the double standard?
 
Dr. Fred Gottheil is an economics professor at the University of Illinois. He calls himself a "Keynesian-type economist" who is "not afraid of deficit spending" -- not exactly Reaganesque.
 
In January 2009, some 900 academics signed a four-page petition calling for a U.S. abandonment of the support of Israel. Gottheil learned that many of the petition signatories belonged to faculty from women's and gender studies departments. He decided to conduct an experiment.
 
Would the same professors sign a "Statement of Concern" over the anti-human rights, anti-gay, anti-woman practices in the Muslim Middle East? Gottheil composed a four-page document citing evidence of atrocities, along with the names of Muslim clerics and scholars defending these violations of human decency. He e-mailed his statement to 675 signers of the anti-Israel petition.
 
What happened? "The results were surprising," Gottheil said, "even though I thought the responses would be few. They were almost nonexistent."
 
Bottom line: Barbarity in the name of Islam is not even remotely condemned to the degree that the West condemns insensitivity by cartoonists, politicians and anti-Islam clerics. Why? A denunciation of Muslim practices suggests a superiority of American values and culture. The left finds the very notion objectionable.
 
Gottheil put it this way: "If leftist 'progressives' really cared about women, gays and lesbians, then they would be fighting for their rights in places where such rights are really violated -- like under Hamas in Gaza and under the mullahs in Iran. But doing so would legitimize their own society and its values and therefore completely cripple their entire identity and life purpose, and so their purported concern for women, gays and lesbians has to go out the window."
 
It is a bizarre and dangerous double standard that allows a Pastor Jones to become more notorious than a Feiz Muhammad.

At the UN Obama Promotes Human Wrongs Against Israel Instead of Human Rights
Sep 25th, 2010
DailyNewsFoxNews.com
Categories: Today's Headlines;Anti-Israel

Wednesday in Geneva during the current session of the U.N. Human Rights Council, the Obama administration became a willing participant in the U.N.’s imposition of an apartheid-style ban on representatives of the state of Israel. Despite the promises made by the administration that by joining the Council the United States would not become part of the problem, U.S. Ambassador to the Council Eileen Donahoe chose to attend and fully participate in a meeting that deliberately excluded anyone representing the Jewish state.

Israel is the only U.N. state not permitted to be a full member of any of the U.N.’s five regional groups. Throughout the Human Rights Council sessions, these groups hold key planning meetings in which countries negotiate and share important information behind closed doors. Even the Palestinian Authority, though not a state, is permitted into the Asian regional group. Israelis are allowed into the Western European and Others Group (WEOG) in some parts of the U.N. But WEOG members have chosen to exclude them totally in all of their meetings associated with the Human Rights Council. Rather than refusing to participate until such outrageous discrimination comes to an end, Obama administration representatives walked through the door slammed in the face of Israelis and made themselves comfortable.

While Israelis are left standing in the hall during the Council’s regional group meetings, this week for the first time Libya took its seat as a full-fledged Council member. Other full voting members of the U.N.’s lead human rights body include such model citizens as Saudi Arabia, China, Cuba, Russia and Kyrgyzstan.

Joining the Human Rights Council was one of President Obama’s first foreign policy decisions. He knew then – what is still true today – that the Council has adopted more resolutions and decisions condemning the state of Israel than all other 191 U.N. members combined. He knew that the permanent formal agenda of the Council includes one item to condemn Israel and one for the rest of the world.

But rather than refusing to lend legitimacy to a body with a deeply entrenched bias, the president chose to join and direct U.S. taxpayer dollars its way, claiming that he would be the Council’s great reformer.

On Monday, writing in The New York Times, Ambassador Donahoe repeated the claim that U.S. engagement filled “a vacuum of leadership” and alleged that “the council is engaged in a serious self-reflection exercise for the purpose of improving its work and functioning with respect to its core mandate of protecting human rights.”

On the very same day as Donahoe’s op-ed appeared, the 57 members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) put the president in his place on any notion of reform. The OIC holds the balance of power at the Council, because the Council majority is composed of members from the African and Asian regional groups, and OIC countries form the majority in both the African and Asian groups.

Speaking Monday on behalf of the OIC, Pakistan declared: “the OIC…has always stressed that this is…not a ‘reform’ exercise. It is our considered view that this intergovernmental process…should not reopen the lnstitution-building package [the June 2007 agreement which governs Council operations and adopted the agenda singling out Israel]…The Council is mandated to [do] nothing more but to fine-tune where required.”

The Obama administration’s push to characterize its involvement with the Council as a success is a serious misstatement of the facts on many levels. For example, Donahoe claimed in The Times that “In June the United States co-led a cross-regional effort with 55 other nations to criticize the deplorable human rights situation in Iran…U.S. engagement at the Human Rights Council is working.”

That would be news to human rights victims in Iran. What actually occurred was that on June 15 the Norwegian Ambassador to the Council read a 171-second statement on Iran. She was interrupted 14 times, and the meeting was suspended in the middle of her statement for two hours. When the meeting resumed, Ambassador Bente Angell-Hansen felt compelled to omit the word “Iran” in several places from her original text and painfully read “We call on the *aforementioned government* to live up to the commitments it has undertaken…” Moreover, the Council has never adopted a single resolution on Iran, and behind closed doors it terminated a tentative examination of human rights in Iran on March 26, 2007.

American engagement with the Council is not simply an exercise in futility. The Council is a place where non-democracies have the run of the place, while Israel is forced to operate at a disadvantage. With its active participation in meetings that deliberately exclude only Israelis, the Obama administration is promoting human wrongs, not protecting human rights.

Ahmadinejad Drops a Virtual N - Bomb
Sep 25th, 2010
DailyNewsdebkafile'
Categories: Today's Headlines;Warning

Our Washington sources, tie Obama's remarks to a revealing comment by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's chief of staff Esfandyar Rahim Mashai on July 31, to which the US president felt bound to respond. What Mashai said was this:
"The West raised no objections to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's candid avowal that the Islamic Republic could build a nuclear bomb."
What avowal?
On February 7, said Mashai, Ahmadinejad made a speech at the National Center for Laser Science and Technology. This talk went unnoticed by US intelligence agencies, he claimed.
"One of the points Dr. Ahmadinejad made during his visit to this center was the possibility of enriching (uranium) to 100 percent, which means building an atom bomb."
"Interestingly, not a single foreign publication made a hullabaloo or raised an uproar (over this dramatic revelation)," Mashai noted. "This shows," he concluded, "that they (the US) are not worried about an atom bomb, because essentially, Dr. Ahmadinejad said this to test them (the US) in order to see what degree of worry they have about Iran producing an atom bomb."
Five days later, President Obama made his worry known to Tehran by means of his otherwise unexplained press briefing.
In the meantime, US intelligence analysts and Iran strategists had been busy trying to figure out why the admission of an Iranian nuclear bomb capability had been allowed to slip off Ahmadinejad's well-oiled tongue and why he had let his chief of staff Iran go to the trouble of bringing the hitherto strenuously-denied goal of Iran's nuclear program out in the open.