The Sears Tower Set-up

In June of 2006, seven Florida men were charged with plotting to destroy FBI offices in Miami and to destroy the Sears Tower in Chicago. FBI Director Muller informed the nation that his agency had successfully interdicted a catastrophic 'home-grown' terrorist plot linked to Al Qaeda. No doubt, if terrorists had managed to bring down the tallest skyscraper in America, standing at 1,451 feet (442 m), the human and material costs would have been immeasurable.

The problem with this heinous story is that virtually none of it is true. The seven suspects didn't so much as own a fire-cracker between them, let alone any explosives or any knowledge whatsoever on how to destroy a colossal 110-story building. They were so poor that they didn't even have the means to travel to Chicago, and didn't have a car to drive about Miami looking for targets. They actually hailed from Liberty City, the black neighbourhood of housing projects outside of downtown Miami. Thus in the press they were swiftly nicknamed the "Liberty City Seven" or LC7.

It gets worse. Just like the Bronx Bombers (see Part 1 and Part 2), the LC7 were infiltrated, bribed to consider committing terror plots, and finally ensnared thanks to two undercover FBI informants. Funded and directed by the FBI, the two Middle Eastern "confidential witnesses" presented themselves to the LC7 as members of Al-Qaeda. They were no doubt assigned to the LC7 because they stood out like a sore thumb of odd balls in the area.

The members of the LC7 — five Afro-American citizens, one legal Haitian immigrant, and one Haitian illegal alien — defined themselves as "Black Muslims". Some wore turbans and hid their faces. Their leader, Narseal Batiste, was described as a Moses-like figure, walking the streets in a long robe and carrying a wooden staff. Known as "Prince Manna" or "Brother Naz", Batiste called his cult-like group the "Seas of David". He preached a blend of religious and political views that included angry criticism of the US government. The deeper reality was that the Seas of David was a ragtag group of mainly unemployed, down-and-out, wanna-be rebels. Some were homeless; some arguably had mental problems. Their background interests included martial arts, carpentry, street-preaching, community work, petty crimes, and smoking lots of marijuana. Above all, they were in need of money to scrape by.

Batiste couldn't believe his luck when the two FBI informants — Abbas al-Saidi and Elie Assad — provided them with a warehouse all to their own, rent-free, as a new base of operations. The warehouse was named the 'Temple'. Of course, the Temple happened to be rigged full of hidden audio and video surveillance equipment. Here, after almost a year of under-cover infiltration, al-Saidi and Assad offered the LC7 $50,000 to swear allegiance to Al-Qaeda and begin a new life as terrorists. Beclouded in marijuana smoke, unknowingly bugged, the LC7 finally agreed, swore their oath, and took the money. Batiste was caught on tape saying he admired bin Laden's 'work', and also wished to kill 'American devils'. Batiste was given a rental car and a camera to take pictures of certain Miami buildings. Describing himself as "financially exhausted", Batiste made lofty requests for black uniforms, squad cars, guns, and knee-high boots for his 'Islamic Army' of six men. The informant bought them the boots. The rest of the shopping list was promised for later.

Batiste's father, a Christian pastor, said his son was "not in his right mind" and needed psychiatric assistance. Other family members and neighbourhood acquaintances of the LC7 said they were poor, misguided, and yet not dangerous. Some witnesses said they were helpful to others in the community.

Whatever the case, the FBI raided the Temple and dragged away its occupants. The corporate media hyped the foiled plot, caught in its "planning phase", as possibly being on the order of 9/11. No firearms or explosives were found, although a few machetes, hatchets, and some amounts of marijuana were. When asked how serious the plot was, the FBI publicly conceded that it was "more aspirational than operational", adding that Al-Qaeda was in fact not involved. Nevertheless, the LC7 were charged with giving material support to Al-Qaeda, conspiring to destroy federal buildings, and for conspiring to "levy a full ground war" against the USA. After two trials ending in a hung jury and then a third trial, six of the seven LC7 members were sentenced with long prison terms. Defense attorneys plan to launch a fourth trial. All along the defense argued that no such plots could have been realized without the involvement of the government; and that several of the LC7 knew nothing of the terror plans, and had neither means nor knowledge to commit them. Furthermore, Batiste and some others weren't actually going to commit the terrorism they bragged of, but were in fact trying to con the FBI informants of cash and equipment.

Between them, FBI informants Al-Saidi and Assad received $120,000 to $130,000 for their services in "saving" Miami offices and the Sears Tower from obliteration. To make matters even more outrageous, both informants had checkered pasts (the knowledge of which withheld by the judges). One failed a FBI lie detector test and yet against protocol was still allowed to operate. The other extorted $7,000 from the man who raped his girl friend. Both informants also had histories with illegal drugs and both did jail time for assaulting their own girl friends.

Source Articles: Global Research, Miami New Times, Mahalo, Prison Planet, Washington Post 2006, Washington Post 2008, MotherJones, CNN, Wikipedia, LA Times

Naval battle off the coast of Korea

The sinking of a South Korean naval vessel Friday is raising fears that North Korea is once again rattling its sabers, though there is so far no evidence that Pyongyang had a role in the incident.

The South Korean ship, navigating in disputed waters in the Yellow Sea, was sunk Friday, and perhaps dozens of sailors were killed. But the cause of the sinking is unclear at time of writing.The South Korean ship, navigating in disputed waters in the Yellow sea.

More here.

My Comments: I'm starting to become of the opinion that North Korea's days are numbered. Very few of the great powers have anything to gain from North Korea any more and ruling party is losing power. Personally, I think the crisis point will come with Kim Jong-Il's death and succession of his son, who does not nearly have as much political clout as his father. While its hard to say what will likely happen after Jong-Il's death, one thing seems certain: this relic conflict of the Cold War will likely end.

Over the next couple of posts, I'm going to take a look at the history of North Korea to show how it's value to the great powers has deteriorated.

Is China's Politburo spoiling for a showdown with America?

China has succumbed to hubris. It has mistaken the soft diplomacy of Barack Obama for weakness, mistaken the US credit crisis for decline, and mistaken its own mercantilist bubble for ascendancy. There are echoes of Anglo-German spats before the First World War, when Wilhelmine Berlin so badly misjudged the strategic balance of power and over-played its hand.

More here...

Comments: Personally, I'm quite wary of the Chinese-American rivalry and, what many scholars and commentators point to, its path to conflict and possibly war. While the US and China may publicly differ on a number of subjects I think that these two countries have far more in common than they, or their people, would like to admit. Furthermore, they're economically dependent on each other as this article has astutely pointed out.

The article offers an interesting and largely accurate analysis of the current relationship, but comparing China to Wilhelmine Germany is perhaps too far at this point in time.

Russia's economic union

The Soviet Union is gradually being rebuilt as Vladimir Putin eyes a return to the Kremlin. The man who declared the collapse of the Communist state to be the “greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century” appears determined to forge a new empire.

The latest evidence emerged in a suggestion by Igor Shuvalov, First Deputy Prime Minister in Mr Putin’s Government, that Russia may abolish the rouble and create a common currency with Kazakhstan and Belarus.

The three states have already established a customs union and plan to form a single economic market by 2012. Mr Shuvalov said that he would not rule a currency union as “the next logical step”, adding that it would be modelled on the euro.

Read more here...

My comments: This article caught my attention because it seems to indicate things to come int he diplomatic arena. Russia is on the rebound and the world is shifting to a multi-polar diplomatic arrangement and from what this article indicates, economic union is replacing the political union. The question that lingers in my mind is: where does that leave politically based unions such as United States?

The Bronx Bombers, part 2

Part One of this story of government-sponsored terrorism can be found here.

The trial for James Cromitie, 55, David Williams, 28, Onta Williams, 32, and Laguerre Payen, 27 -- otherwise known as the Bronx Bomber 'terrorist' suspects -- seems to be imminent. They face up to life sentences if convicted. Recently, the lawyers of the four accused have filed a motion to dismiss the terror indictment against them.

The most recent mainstream news regarding the development comes from NBCNewYork.com. The article is titled "Synagogue Bomb Suspects: The Feds Put Us Up to It!"

The writers open with the claims of the defense attorneys, who say that the alleged plot to bomb New York synagogues was hatched and directed by a federal informant, Shaheed Hussain (aka Maqsood). They said the informant chose the targets, supplied fake bombs for the synagogues and a fake missile to shoot down planes. The motion said Hussain also offered to pay the defendants, who attorneys alleged weren't inclined toward any crime until the informant began recruiting them.

"The government well knew that their case had been a government-inspired creation from day one and that the defendants had not been independently seeking weapons or targets," the motion said.

The article is selective when it comes to describing the motivations of the would-be Bombers. The government criminal complaint is cited, emphasizing that the suspects were "angry and full of hate for America." Cromitie hated "those f-ing Jewish bastards" and that it would be a "piece of cake" to bomb a Jewish Center in Riverdale. The defense alleged that Hussain tried to incite the defendants by blaming Jews for the world's evil and telling them that attacks against non-Muslims were endorsed by Islam.

However, it's also stated: "Months went by between meetings [between the informant and the four accused], and the filings quote Cromitie as saying, "I'm not gonna hurt anybody" and "The plane thing ... is out of the question."

Curiously, the writers from NBCNewYork.com sidestep reports of cash bribes, gifts of free rent money, promises of cars and jobs, payments for an expensive family hospital bill, and all the marijuana handed over to the would-be bombers by the government asset. Instead, we're vaguely told informant Hussain had "as much as $250,000 available and the government provided him with a BMW, a Hummer and other cars to make him appear well-funded, the defense filings said." When it comes to details, the writers only say the FBI informant gave them groceries, supplied them with money to buy a pistol, and finally gave them the fake bombs and fake missile launcher.

No doubt, the defense attorneys will have more to say about that. While we have yet to hear anything else from NBCNewYork.com, the writers did briefly mention: "In a separate motion, they [the defense attorneys] demanded more information on inducements that the informant may have offered the defendants." In other words, the bribes.

Even stranger, the article says Cromitie approached the FBI informant first, thus triggering the entire chain of events. This claim is the opposite of what was reported earlier. Previous stories agree that the informant targeted Cromitie and badgered him until the arrests were made. Finally and most importantly, we're told the informant couldn't motivate the accused to commit acts of terrorism through ideological and religious means. And yet the four became motivated somehow later, with no explanation. Why was this?

In conclusion, there also remains speculation that the would-be Bombers were even thinking about defrauding the informant in the end. Take the money and run, so to speak. Other misguided, opportunistic criminal suspects under investigation have attempted such schemes before, thus hastening the government to move in and end the 'sting'. In such a scenario, the would-be bombers might have gotten cold feet and decided to flee instead with whatever cash and other rewards Hussain had given them. This scenario would surely bring about their arrest no differently than if they got caught trying to enact the fake crime.

Whatever the case, the upcoming trial will be intense, and may linger with several mistrials for lack of a clear case.

The Bronx Bombers, part 1

It's an admirable thing for government agencies to pro-actively infiltrate terrorists cells so that they can be stopped before anything terrible happens. However, it's something else entirely for a covert government informant and his handlers to brainstorm a terrorist plot, then bribe a group of bumbling idiots to enact it.

In May 2009, four American men were arrested in New York for plotting to blow up two synagogues in the Bronx and to shoot down military airplanes flying out of the New York Air National Guard base. The LA Times reported:

Prosecutors called it the latest in a string of homegrown terrorism plots hatched after Sept. 11.

"It's hard to envision a more chilling plot," Assistant U.S. Atty. Eric Snyder said in court Thursday. He described all four suspects as "eager to bring death to Jews."

Time magazine described the plot as being one of the most incompetent in memory. The four Bronx Bombers "spent six days trying to procure firearms before eventually settling on a single pistol. The plot's purported leader, James Cromitie, said he was stoned for many of the operations."

Richard Dreyfuss of the Nation magazine wrote that "the alleged perps -- Onta Williams, James Cromitie, David Williams, and Laguerre Payen -- were losers, ex-cons, drug addicts. Al Qaeda they're not. Without the assistance of the agent who entrapped them, they would never have dreamed of committing political violence, nor would they have had the slightest idea about where to acquire plastic explosives or a Stinger missile."

On behalf of the US government, a FBI informant recruited, bribed, and directed this group of four (which included a purse-snatcher afflicted with schizophrenia); 2) equipped them with inactive military weapons; 3) sent them off on a 'terrorist' mission in return for promises of marijuana and money; and then 4) got them arrested apparently for broader political purposes.

Maqsood, the FBI informant, claimed to be representing a Pakistani extremist group, Jaish-e Muhammad, a bona fide terrorist organization. Not true.

Lorena Mongelli and Lukas Alpert wrote an enlightening article in the New York Post regarding Maqsood and his relationship with the bumbling would-be bombers.

"Sources say Maqsood was really Shahed Hussain -- a Pakistani native who runs hotels upstate and has worked for the FBI since 2003 after getting into trouble in a fraud case. He played an integral role in unraveling another terror-related case in Albany in 2004."

Whether his name is Maqsood or Shahed Hussain, the informant unsuccessfully attempted to recruit others before targeting the future 'bombers'. He first approached ringleader-to-be and career criminal James Cromitie roughly a year before the arrests in the parking lot of the local mosque. In the following months, the informant became acquainted with Cromitie's three friends, and enchanted them with gifts of money and drugs, along with promises of good jobs and even a Mercedes Benz.

According to Kathleen Baynes, long-time girl friend of James Cromitie, the informant was "very persistent and every time he came for James he took him away. They said they were going out to eat dinner," she said. "Whenever we needed anything Maqsood would help -- like financially --he gave us money to pay rent.

"He was just constantly around. It was like he was stalking him.... Maqsood gave him a lot of marijuana," she said.

According to Cassandra McKoy, girl friend of co-conspirator David Williams, the four were fooled into the plot with the lure of a cash payday and that religious hatred had nothing to do with it.

Williams' mother, Elizabeth McWilliams, said her son fell under Maqsood's sway in April with promises to help with medical bills for his sick brother.

"Maqsood said, 'Don't worry brother, I am going to help with your brother's hospital bills,'" she quoted him as saying. "This man did nothing but set these guys up."

Sometime before the attack, Cromitie supposedly was offered $50,000 by Maqsood, whom the mainstream media still refers to as an 'informant'. Arguably this man, flush with taxpayer funds and marijuana, was operating far beyond any mission of being a pro-active informant. He was acting as an aggressive agent provocateur, no doubt under heavy direction from his FBI handlers. We are told public officials hailed the arrests as a law-enforcement coup — the result of a "painstaking investigation" over the course of nearly a year. Instead of an "investigation", the event reads as a complete set-up. Not to mention an example of government-sponsored terrorism.

The case of the Bronx Bombers not only helped to score points for politicians and security bureaucracies in regards to foiling terrorism, but it also fueled a powerful new talking point. That is, the growing illusion that home-grown terrorism is naturally, spontaneously emerging in America.

Jihad Jane

A blonde, blue-eyed, diminutive American woman using the nom de guerre Jihad Jane has been revealed as an alleged terrorist who plotted to murder the Swedish artist vilified by Muslims because of his drawings of the Prophet Muhammad.

Colleen LaRose, 46, is accused of travelling to Sweden to kill Lars Vilks, believing that her appearance would help her to move freely to carry out the attack. She was arrested by US authorities in October and has been quietly held in prison since then, but her alleged role as a homegrown terrorist who used the internet to recruit and join overseas groups emerged only yesterday after the indictment against her was unsealed by US authorities.

Read the rest of the article here...

My comment:

It was really but a matter of time before the Department of Homeland Security had its justification to continue and likely expand illegal spying on American citizens. Take a look at what agents of the Federal government are saying about it:

Richard Clarke, a former White House counter terrorism official, said this on ABC's "Good Morning America."

"...there are other people who are much more covert."

"There will likely be more attacks,"

David Kris, assistant attorney general for the National Security Division of the Justice Department, said this in the Justice Dept.'s statement:

"Today's indictment, which alleges that a woman from suburban America agreed to carry out murder overseas and to provide material support to terrorists, underscores the evolving nature of the threat we face,"

U.S. Attorney Michael L. Levy, alluded to the greater potential of Americans to take part in terrorist activities:

"This case also demonstrates that terrorists are looking for Americans to join them in their cause, and it shatters any lingering thought that we can spot a terrorist based on appearance.”

And Janice K. Fedarcyk of the Philadelphia Division of the FBI said this:

"We must use all available technologies and techniques to root out potential threats and stop those who intend to harm us.

These quotes only exemplify the will in the various arteries of the Federal Government to continue and resume spying on US Citizens and do not provide the law allowing them to do so. But as the old adage goes, "Where there is a will, there is a way."

The New Art of War?

Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, outlined a new U.S. approach to war in a series of speeches this week that replaces overwhelming firepower with more restrained use of force to safeguard civilian lives.

The speeches, delivered at Kansas State University and the Army's Fort Leavenworth, amount to a formal effort on the part of the chairman to codify how a decade of combat is changing the military's understanding of its role in battle and, more broadly, its place in U.S. foreign policy.

The rest is here.

My thoughts: While the debate over whether this doctrine will perpetuate or win wars is interesting, it seems the larger question of whether or not this will start more wars has been largely ignored.

The major paragraph that stood out to me was:

"Embedded in Mullen's new doctrine is the somewhat controversial notion that troops should assume greater physical risk in order to protect innocent civilians in places such as Afghanistan and Iraq. "We protect the innocent," Mullen said. "It is who we are."

Mullen is describing the military and the soldier more like a heavily armed policeman rather than a soldier designed primarily to fight other soldiers. And if the military can be utilized like an international police force as effectively as Mullen seems to suggest and encourage, then what does this mean for the strategies and force structures created with this knowledge? If the military can be wielded as an effective police force for various places in the world, as Mullen says it can, Washington may be more encouraged with this knowledge to play the role.