Fort Hood Shooter: "I was defending the Taliban"

Editor’s Note – When a shooter yells “Allah hu akbar” while killing Americans it is obvious to everyone what motivated the shooter, yet the Obama Administration chose to call it ‘workplace violence’. This prevented the assignment of Purple Hearts to those in the military who were training to fight those at war with us who do so under the mantle of Islam who were wounded or killed. How ironic!

By not designating the act as terrorism, the families of those slain had their rights removed from them and the proper attribution of heroism was denied those soldiers who deserve to be recognized with a Purple Heart. Why this was approached in the fashion it was indicates a political motivation rather than a legal one, especially now since the perpetrator said himself said that it was in defense of a terrorist group, the Taliban.

The administration should forthwith amend their stance to properly reflect the facts, sans political rhetoric. This shameful chapter MUST be closed and we need to make the administration and its sycophants and surrogates see fact. We must eschew the propaganda of the Islam apologists, we must know thine enemy!

Fort Hood Shooter Blasts Obama Admin Story

‘I was defending Taliban’ in attack Washington called ‘workplace violence’

From WND Exclusive

For years, the Obama administration has maintained that the victims of the 2009 shooting at Fort Hood, for which Islamist Maj. Hidal Hasan is charged, simply were in the crosshairs of a situation of “workplace violence.”

The victims – 13 people were killed and nearly another three dozen were injured when, according to witnesses, Hasan shouted “Allahu Akbar” and started firing at people – have been denied benefits and combat honors because the government insisted there was no link to terror.

Now, however, the defendant himself is taking that off the table.

As part of his defense, he has demanded to represent himself in his still-unscheduled trial, and this week asked for a delay of several months so that he could prepare his defense which will be built on the idea he did the shootings “in defense of others.”

When asked by the judge, Col. Tara Osborn, to identify those he was “protecting,” Hasan said, “The leadership of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, the Taliban” and its leader, Mullah Omar.

Hasan, an Army psychiatrist at Fort Hood, is accused of walking into the Soldier Readiness Center on the base Nov. 5, 2009, and opening fire on his fellow soldiers.

The attack didn’t stop until Hasan himself was shot and paralyzed.

A survivor reported Hasan shouted “Allahu Akbar,” or “Allah is greatest,” a phrase commonly uttered by jihadists prior to carrying out an attack. The Fort Hood attack was the worst shooting on an American military base.

Now, however, the defendant himself is taking that off the table.

As part of his defense, he has demanded to represent himself in his still-unscheduled trial, and this week asked for a delay of several months so that he could prepare his defense which will be built on the idea he did the shootings “in defense of others.”

When asked by the judge, Col. Tara Osborn, to identify those he was “protecting,” Hasan said, “The leadership of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, the Taliban” and its leader, Mullah Omar.

Hasan, an Army psychiatrist at Fort Hood, is accused of walking into the Soldier Readiness Center on the base Nov. 5, 2009, and opening fire on his fellow soldiers.

The attack didn’t stop until Hasan himself was shot and paralyzed.

A survivor reported Hasan shouted “Allahu Akbar,” or “Allah is greatest,” a phrase commonly uttered by jihadists prior to carrying out an attack. The Fort Hood attack was the worst shooting on an American military base.

Hasan had been on federal officials’ radar screen for at least six months prior to the shooting over postings he made on the Internet. He likened a suicide bomber who kills women and children to a soldier who throws himself on a grenade to give his life in a “noble cause.”

Intelligence officials also intercepted at least 18 emails between Hasan and the radical American-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. Hasan told al-Awlaki in one of the emails, “I can’t wait to join you” in paradise. He also asked al-Awlaki whether it was appropriate to kill innocents in a suicide attack, when jihad was acceptable and how to transfer funds without attracting government notice.

In spite of this, Attorney General Eric Holder declined to press terrorism charges against Hasan. Instead the government has labeled the shooting as a case of “workplace violence.” During a memorial service for the victims, President Obama never once used the word terrorism.

The designation has prevented survivors and the victim’s families from receiving Purple Hearts and being able to obtain combat-related special compensation.

Staff Sgt. Shawn Manning was shot six times in the attack, yet he is denied the same benefits a soldier shot in a similar action overseas would receive.

Fellow soldiers that day “were killed and wounded by … somebody who was there that day to kill soldiers, to prevent them from deploying,” Manning said. “And if that’s not an act of war, an act of terrorism, I don’t know what is.”

Survivors and their family are forced to watch while Hasan continues to receive a paycheck and medical benefits from the military – closing in on $300,000 already.

Neal Sher and Reed Rubinstein, who are representing the Ford Hood victims and their families, said Hasan’s statements change the picture.

“Now the government’s ‘workplace violence’ lie has been fully exposed,” they told the Washington Times. “By his own admission, Hasan was a jihadist who killed innocent Americans to defend the Taliban.”

The lawyers said the Army should simply admit the Fort Hood attack was terrorism and then give the victims, the survivors and their families “all available combat-related benefits, decorations and recognition.”

Earlier, a judge who was going to require Hasan to shave – to comply with military regulations, was removed from the case and replaced with Osborn, who allowed Hasan to make his own decisions about grooming.

The dispute over the beard and other issues have caused some to say Hasan is making a mockery of the military legal system.

“If he were not a Muslim and murdered 13 people in cold blood he would long since have been tried and convicted by now,” said Robert Spencer, founder of Jihad Watch. “This ridiculous haggling over his beard is part of the general policy of the United States government not to offend Muslims and accommodate them in every way possible.”

Spencer went on to say the Army’s deference to Hasan on the beard issue is particularly appalling because it was his own piety that led him to kill his fellow soldiers.

“This accommodation is particularly unconscionable because Hassan said he has to have the beard because of his Muslim faith. But he also by his own account murdered 13 people because of his Muslim faith,” Spencer noted. “Because of this why should we be giving him any accommodation because of his faith? This would be like making sure a Nazi guard at a concentration camp in prison was later supplied with a copy of Mein Kampf along with a swastika emblem.”

Some have questioned why Hasan had no problems being clean shaven before the shooting and why it only became an issue later. Spencer explained the reason is Hasan wants to make himself a martyr in the eyes of the Muslim world.

“The martyr goes into paradise in the condition in which they die. A beard is a sign of a Muslim’s piety, and if he doesn’t have it, it is a serious mark against him,” Spencer explained. “He will consider himself to be an Islamic martyr if he is executed for his crimes or even if he dies in prison for his crimes. This is why he has attempted to plead guilty on several occasions.”

Under military law, an individual is not allowed to plead guilty in any case involving the death penalty.

WND Founder and CEO Joseph Farah, in a commentary, said, “Did you hear about Barack Obama’s Defense Department characterizing the execution-style shooting slayings of 13 and wounding of 29 at Fort Hood in 2009 by a crazed Islamist Army officer as ‘workplace violence’? … The reclassification of one of the worst terror attacks ever on domestic U.S. soil came in a strategic plan on battling ‘violent extremism in the United States’ focused on engaging local law enforcement and communities, and on countering ‘extremist propaganda.’ It pledged to put together a ‘task force of senior officials’ to work with local communities that could be targeted for recruitment and radicalization.”

But, he wrote, the report never mentions “radical Islam.”

“This is akin to reclassifying the 9/11 attacks as ‘pilot error,’” wrote Farah.

Also commenting recently was William Murray, author of “My Life Without God.”

“President Barack Hussein Obama refuses to designate Hasan’s assault on Fort Hood as terrorism even though Hasan referred to himself as a ‘soldier of Islam.’ As a result of Obama’s refusal, the families of the dead and the injured have been refused combat compensation.

“President Obama will not even issue Purple Hearts to the victims – not to the families of the dead, and not to those who were wounded,” he wrote. “Barack Obama and his Department of Defense insist Hasan’s attack was mere ‘workplace violence’ and was ‘isolated’ and therefore not terrorism or combat.”

But, Murray pointed out, “Obama ordered the assassination of Hasan’s jihadist partner and instructor in the attack, American-born al-Qaida collaborator Anwar al-Awlaki. A CIA drone killed al-Awlaki and several others in Yemen in September 2011. It was the first execution ever of a U.S. citizen without trial by our government.

“If Maj. Nidal Hasan acted alone and the jihad attack at Fort Hood was mere ‘workplace violence,’ why was retribution required on al-Awlaki? Because the killing wasn’t retribution at all; it was because Obama needed to shut al-Awlaki up and stop his bragging about the attack on Fort Hood. With al-Awlaki taking credit for the shooting, Obama could not classify it as ‘workplace violence.’ All those involved other than Hasan had to be eliminated,” he said.

In an exclusive interview with WND’s Greg Corombos, former U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy, who led the successful prosecution against the 1993 World Trade Center bombers, said the military judge had no choice but to allow Hasan to represent himself at trial and probably couldn’t stop Hasan from turning the courtroom into a platform for his radical Islamic views.

“I don’t see how the judge could avoid it. As the Supreme Court has held, if you make a knowing and intelligent decision before the trial starts that you want to represent yourself, you have an absolute constitutional right to do that,” McCarthy said.  ”I think that the objections that people have or the fears they have that by representing himself he’s going to turn the proceedings into a circus are a little bit overblown. Let’s face it, even if he weren’t representing himself he could try to turn the case into a circus if that’s what he was determined to do.

“Whether he’ll be able to do that or not is really going to be a function of how strong the judge presiding over the trial is, not whether (Hasan’s) just a defendant at the table or the defendant who represents himself.”

McCarthy said Hasan’s strategy is most likely to lay the grounds for an appeal of a likely death sentence.

“What a defendant is always trying to do is sow error into the record because that’s the best chance you have of getting the outcome reversed on appeal. I think what he’s really trying to accomplish here is get the death penalty off the table one way or the other. This is a way that makes the trial a little bit more chaotic,” said McCarthy, who argued that if Hasan is convicted and sentenced to death he has a good chance of finding a sympathetic appellate court that could save his life.

Another issue in the case is what discovery evidence Hasan will have access to as he prepares his defense. McCarthy said the government’s cautious charges in this case should limit the amount of sensitive information provided to Hasan.

“It would concern me more if he were being accused as an al-Qaida operative because then there would be an argument that he should be given the discovery about the overall al-Qaida conspiracy,” McCarthy said. “The way the prosecution has a way of regulating how much or how little a defendant is entitled to in terms of discovery is how you plead the case.

“In this case, the prosecution has plead the case narrowly. They’ve gone out of their way not to accuse him of terrorism, which I think is a mistake, but I think they have made it a simple, straightforward homicide case. Therefore, I would say that he should not be entitled to any discovery about our enemies,” said McCarthy, who noted the only al-Qaida-related content the prosecution will likely mention is Hasan’s relationship with radical cleric Anwar Al-Awlaki.

Hasan is also asking for a delay in the start of the trial because of his intent to pursue a new, “defense of others” strategy.  When asked by Judge Osborn who he was defending, Hasan mentioned the leadership of the Islamic emirate of Afghanistan, the Taliban and Taliban leader Mullah Omar.  McCarthy said he would not delay the trial any further and hopes the judge will rule that way.

Listen to the radio interview between WND and Andrew C. McCarthy here.

"Extortion 17" – Ramp Ceremony – Imam Damns Heroes to Hell

Warriors damned to hell in a ceremony to honor the fallen – Families Speak Out!

By Scott W. Winchell, SUA National Editor-in-Chief


In a few minutes from the time of this post, the press conference held at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. by the families of our heroic warriors we lost on August 6, 2011 in Afghanistan will have begun. Many of the fallen were members of SEAL Team VI, and the announcement will have revealed new information and an astonishing video of the “Ramp Ceremony” held for members of “Extortion 17”  who were ambushed by the Taliban.

Larry Klayman moderated the press conference and some of the parents gave moving speeches regarding the loss of their sons. Stand Up America’s MG Paul E. Vallely and many others spoke in support of the fallen warriors. Billy and Karen Vaughn with their daughter Tara and their granddaughter Annabelle were in attendance, along with Charlie and Mary Lou Strange, Doug and Shawne Hamburger with their son Jeremy, and Mr. Sidh Douangdara, all family members of some of the fallen heroes of “Extortion 17”.

Also speaking were Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney, Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, Navy SEAL Ben Smith, Capt. Larry Bailey, Adm. “Ace” Lyons, former Congressman Lt. Col Allen West, and Brigitte Gabriel of ACT. Two Representatives from Congress also showed their support by attending for as long as they could, they were Michelle Bachman (MN) and Louie Gomert (TX). Tom Trento of United West recorded the event and provides us with the video below. Billy and Karen Vaughn provided the “Ramp Ceremony” video that was edited and captioned by Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch.

Other family members of our fallen heroes like the Benson Family wished to attend but were unable to be there.

Scroll down for the video of the Ramp Ceremony.

Here is the live recording of the press conference in its entirety:


The fact that a Muslim ceremony was included is not the point, what is, are the words spoken over members of our lost warrior team by a Muslim in uniform, flown in especially for the event. The Imam’s words were not only insulting, it was undoubtedly an attempt to curry favor with our enemies at the expense of American heroes and their families. It not only denigrates the faith of the fallen, it damns them to hell.

The Commander-in-Chief and his Administration is once again revealed for their true loyalties, and their concerted efforts to denigrate and dismantle our military. Military morale is at an all-time low, we wonder why!

How do you think the families felt hearing a translation of what was said? Their loved ones in flag draped coffins being damned to hell by a Muslim in uniform. Ft. Hood quickly jumps to mind, as does the way Obama and his crew prioritizes its message to the world – damned be the American families and their grief and beliefs.

Then ask yourself why this administration insisted upon this type of funerary “ramp” service. Who thought this up? Who made this happen? Why did the content of the Muslim sermon not get vetted before it was spoken over the souls of our fallen warriors? Did they think we would not eventually know what was said over the souls of our heroes, those who lived up to the ultimate extent of their oaths?

With the hearings on Benghazi restarted yesterday in the House of Representatives, one must seriously question the motives and loyalties of our federal leadership concerning the interaction America has with the Muslim community worldwide and the failed foreign policy of Hillary Clinton and Barrack H. Obama. It is time for all Americans to stand up and take notice.

Hear are the words of the Muslim speaking over the flag draped coffins of our dead heroes in the video:

“Amen, I shelter in Allah the merciful forgiver. The companions of the fire, the sinners and the infidels who are fodder for hell fire are not equal with the companions of heaven. The companions of heaven, Muslims are the winners. Had we sent this Koran to a mountain, you would have seen the mountain prostrated in fear of Allah. (Mocking the God of Moses) Such examples are what we present to the people, to the people so that they would think. (Repent and convert to Islam). Blessing are to your God (Allah) the God of glory of what they describe. And peace be upon the messengers (prophets) and thanks be to Allah the Lord of both universes of mankind and Jinn.”

The video is amazing, and it is reduced in size and augmented by captioning to quickly tell the story of the unconscionable way our deceased warriors were treated upon their arrival. The original version was also redacted only to protect the innocent and the families.

Here is a brief on what was conveyed by the family and our retired military community:

  1. How President Obama and Vice President Biden, having disclosed on May 4, 2011, that Navy SEAL Team VI carried out the successful raid on Bin Laden’s compound resulting in the master terrorist’s death, put a retaliatory target on the backs of the fallen heroes.
  2. How and why high-level military officials sent these Navy SEAL Team VI heroes into battle without special operations aviation and proper air support.
  3. How and why middle-level military brass carries out too many ill-prepared missions to boost their standing with top-level military brass and the Commander-in-Chief in order that they can be promoted.
  4. How the military restricts special operations servicemen and others from engaging in timely return fire when fired upon by the Taliban and other terrorist groups and interests, thus jeopardizing the servicemen’s lives.
  5. How and why the denial of requested pre-assault fire may have contributed to the shoot down of the Navy SEAL Team VI helicopter and the death of these special operations servicemen.
  6. How Afghani forces accompanying the Navy SEAL Team VI servicemen on the helicopter were not properly vetted and how they possibly disclosed classified information to the Taliban about the mission, resulting in the shoot down of the helicopter.
  7. How military brass, while prohibiting any mention of a Judeo-Christian God, invited a Muslim cleric to the funeral for the fallen Navy SEAL Team VI heroes who disparaged in Arabic the memory of these servicemen by damning them as infidels to Allah. A video of the Muslim cleric’s “prayer” will be shown with a certified translation.

The video is just over ten minutes, please watch the entirety and make your own judgment as to the solemnity and content:


America – this is not who we are, certainly not as depicted by this Imam!

A transcript and video will be produced shortly capturing the news conference and the complete set of words spoken by retired military, Larry Klayman, and the families of our fallen warrior heroes, many of whom were warriors responsible for the demise of Osama bin Laden.

Time to challenge the lies!

Lara Logan keynote about Gen. Allen

Editor Notes – Green on blue is slowly becoming black and white, meaning that the picture is becoming quite clear that the lies out of the Obama administration have no limitations. Our troops are being murdered by those they are forced to trust.

Lara Logan, a CBS correspondent, just recently aired an interview with General Allen, the Commander of the war theater in Afghanistan. He clearly intoned that our troops are up to the fight, but they will not be murdered or destroyed. In fact, that is exactly just what goes on daily in Afghanistan. So angry are the troops and General Allen, that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Martin Dempsey made a surprise visit a few weeks ago to have a sit down with General Allen. Likely, General Allen laid it out on the line, so much so that, only recently was it announced that General Allen has been relieved of his command. Approval is pending to replace General Allen with General Joseph Dunford, a four star.

Lara Logan actually found the truth as told to her by General Allen, and she made a stellar presentation before an audience of 1,100 in Chicago and gave a veracious accounting of the facts regarding the Taliban and al Qaeda which is in complete opposition to that told to us by the Pentagon and the White House.

Reporter Lara Logan brings ominous news from Middle East

By Laura S. Washington – Chicago Sun Times

This was no ordinary rubber chicken affair. That was my reaction to the extraordinary keynoter at Tuesday’s Better Government Association annual luncheon.

Lara Logan, a correspondent for CBS’ “60 Minutes,” delivered a provocative speech to about 1,100 ‘influentials’ from government, politics, media, and the legal and corporate arenas. Such downtown gatherings are a regular on Chicago’s networking circuit. (I am a member of the BGA’s Civic Leadership Committee, and the Chicago Sun-Times was a sponsor).

Her ominous and frightening message was gleaned from years of covering our wars in the Middle East. She arrived in Chicago on the heels of her Sept. 30 report, “The Longest War.” It examined the Afghanistan conflict and exposed the perils that still confront America, 11 years after 9/11.

Eleven years later, “they” still hate us, now more than ever, Logan told the crowd. The Taliban and al-Qaida have not been vanquished, she added. They’re coming back.

“I chose this subject because, one, I can’t stand, that there is a major lie being propagated . . .” Logan declared in her native South African accent.

The lie is that America’s military might has tamed the Taliban.

“There is this narrative coming out of Washington for the last two years,” Logan said. It is driven in part by “Taliban apologists,” who claim “they are just the poor moderate, gentler, kinder Taliban,” she added sarcastically. “It’s such nonsense!”

Logan stepped way out of the “objective,” journalistic role. The audience was riveted as she told of plowing through reams of documents, and interviewing John Allen, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan; Afghan President Hamid Karzai, and a Taliban commander trained by al-Qaida. The Taliban and al-Qaida are teaming up and recruiting new terrorists to do us deadly harm, she reports.

She made a passionate case that our government is downplaying the strength of our enemies in Afghanistan and Pakistan, as a rationale of getting us out of the longest war. We have been lulled into believing that the perils are in the past: “You’re not listening to what the people who are fighting you say about this fight. In your arrogance, you think you write the script.”

Our enemies are writing the story, she suggests, and there’s no happy ending for us.

As a journalist, I was queasy. Reporters should tell the story, not be the story. As an American, I was frightened.

Logan even called for retribution for the recent terrorist killings of Christopher Stevens, the U.S. ambassador to Libya, and three other officials. The event is a harbinger of our vulnerability, she said. Logan hopes that America will “exact revenge and let the world know that the United States will not be attacked on its own soil. That its ambassadors will not be murdered, and that the United States will not stand by and do nothing about it.”

In the “good old days,” reporters did not advocate, crusade or call for revenge.

In these “new” days in a post-9/11 world, perhaps we need more reporters who are willing to break the rules.

Violence erupts – Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan

Editor’s Note – The Afghanistan/Pakistan Theater continues to roil with violence. In Pakistan, over 380 prisoners were freed by Taliban attackers, and in Afghanistan, attacks erupted across the country.

Additionally, things are not quiet in Syria again as:

Syria’s ceasefire increasingly was under threat on Sunday as the government vowed a crackdown on a wave of “terrorist attacks” and its forces shelled Homs on the day the first U.N. peace monitors were due to enter the country. (Read the rest here.)


Kabul bomb wave, rockets fired: Taliban targets diplomats & NATO


Taliban attack Pakistan prison, free 380 prisoners


DERA ISMAIL KHAN, Pakistan (AP) — Taliban militants armed with automatic weapons and rocket-propelled grenades battled their way into a prison in northwest Pakistan on Sunday, freeing close to 400 prisoners, including at least 20 described by police as “very dangerous” insurgents, authorities and the militants said.

The raid by more than 100 fighters was a dramatic display of the strength of the insurgency gripping the nuclear-armed country. The escaped prisoners may now rejoin the fight, giving momentum and a propaganda boost to a movement that has killed thousands of Pakistani officials and ordinary citizens since 2007.

The attackers stormed the prison before dawn in the city of Bannuin Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province close to the Afghan border, said police officer Shafique Khan. They used explosives and hand grenades to knock down the main gates and two walls, said Bannu prison superintendent Zahid Khan.

Taliban freed 380 prisoners - Pakistani soldiers mill about afterward.

“They were carrying modern and heavy weapons,” said Zahid Khan. “They fired rockets.”

Once inside the building, the attackers headed straight to the area of the prison where death-row prisoners were being kept, he said. They fought with guards for around two hours, setting part of the prison on fire before freeing the 380 inmates, including at least 20 “very dangerous Taliban militants,” said Shafique.

Provincial police chief Akbar Hoti said authorities suspected the militants may have had inside help from prison officials.

“I think the officials did not respond as they could have,” Hoti told reporters. “It is also suspicious how the attackers could have exact information about their comrades.”

The militants coordinated with each other using radio handsets as they freed their colleagues in different parts of the prison, said one of the prisoners who did not escape, Amanullah Khan.

“They had hammers to break the locks and doors,” he said. “They shot at locks when they failed to break them open.”

The militants shouted “God is great” and “Long live the Taliban” when they freed Adnan Rashid, who was on death row for his involvement in an assassination attempt against former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, said Amanullah Khan. They honored him by placing a turban on his head, he said.

The prison in Bannu housed 944 inmates. The government used the prison as the main facility to detain scores of Taliban militants arrested in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, said provincial minister Bashir Bilour.

“They have previously been in separate prisons, but for some time they have been shifted to this prison,” said Bilour.

He did not know exactly how many militants were released by the attackers.

Pakistani Taliban spokesman Asimullah Mehsud claimed nearly 150 militants were freed and made it safely to Mir Ali, a town in the North Waziristan tribal area, the group’s main sanctuary. Militants beat drums to welcome them when they arrived, he said.

Pakistan’s military has launched a series of operations against the Pakistani Taliban, which has forged alliances with al-Qaida and other transnational militant movements based along the Afghan border. The movement is closely linked to the Afghan Taliban, which is battling U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan.

Soldiers and police have killed or arrested hundreds of militants, but the insurgency has proved resilient. Insurgents have carried out suicide bombings and other attacks across the country in retaliation, raising doubts in some quarters over whether the county can survive. Prison breakouts like the one Sunday have been rare.


Associated Press writer Asif Shahzad contributed to this report from Islamabad.

Obama and Clinton – Negotiate with old enemies?

By SUA Staff

The White House and the State Department are in the midst of discussing future moves with some very strange characters; people we have either been at war with for years, or worked ardently with the former Egyptian regimes to stymie in the past. At one time, no one would have ever dreamed of talks with the Taliban or the Muslim Brotherhood, so what is the current administration up to?

The Taliban

It has been revealed publically that the United States has been in talks with the Taliban regarding a peace deal since early 2009, legally or otherwise. Peace talks with an avowed enemy, an arch-enemy, a supporter and kin to al Qaeda is questionable at best. This appears to be why V.P. Joe Biden said the Taliban were not necessarily our enemy, despite the fact that at one time, they were at the top of the enemy list. It is clear that Obama and crew are more concerned with fulfilling campaign promises then doing what is in the best intersts of the USA.

America and her allies have been at war with the Taliban for ten long years, so why is there an objective to bring them to the peace tea table now? The 16 page National Intelligence Estimate on Afghanistan will give you a comprehensive summary and includes the various tribes that comprise the Taliban and al Qaeda.

U.S. lawyers and members of Congress expressed deep concern and opposition over the details of this endeavor with the Taliban and had even placed restrictions on the transfer of any prisoners from Guantanamo, let alone Taliban members in the National Defense Authorization Bill (NDAA). It is likely part of the reason for including key text in the NDAA. However, in defiance, the State Department and the White House have moved forward anyway, standing on their ‘signing statements’ as a spring board.

Despite the arguments over negotiating with a known terrorist, or terrorist support groups, the peace talks involve the release of Taliban commanders from Guantanamo Bay Detention Center. The question is, who are these detainees and how bad are they? Just who are these commanders that were selected for release? For a complete list of those on the list click here. In a Congressional hearing, Paul Stockton, a top Pentagon official testified that we are only at war with al Qaeda and not Islam or other radical Islamic factions, which apparently excludes the Taliban.

Noorullah Noori

Three specific commanders, Mullah Khair Khowa, Noorullah Noori, and Mullah Fazl Akhund have already been freed according to SUA sources, but why? These were the baddest of the bad; that’s why they have been in custody so long. In Afghanistan, dual roles and multiple allegiances are the norm and its not a surprise that some of these bad men were also political leaders and office holders. Some were in power along the border with Iran, a place where tribal relationships have no border distinction . It was estimated that five Taliban prisoners were set to be released and three appear to already be well on their way to Qatar where they will be living under asylum conditions with oversight from an unknown committee and enforcement.

Mullah Khowa was the interior minister and governor of Herat Province; the province abutting Iran. What is more that should be known is Khowa had ties with Iran as was presented in legal briefings in cases post 9-11. Please refer to page 85 and 86 here. Khair and Akhund were together after the Taliban fell, and were heading to Quetta when Pakistan intelligence picked them up and handed them over to the United States.

Also captured in the arrest was Mullah Abdul Naizi, who later escaped. It is alleged that the United States demanded that Khowa be part of the peace process after the negotiations, perhaps to minimize the betrayal of notorious Afghan warlord,  General Dustam when he pledged to evacuate Fazl and Noori from the north . Instead, Dustam handed them over for eventual Guantanamo Bay detention . These three and the rest are members of an evil network , the type that would make a horror story author blanch. SUA staff and contacts tell us that any vicious description is a gross understatement; as these people are truly wicked men, men even the Russians feared from the outset of their long military occupational conflict in Afghanistan . If you are so inclined to understand their history, click here.

What may be most important about sending these Taliban commanders to Qatar is that it is more neutral concerning other Middle East conflicts allowing easier future diplomatic agreements. Additionally, many other players in the region will be footing some of the bill to securely house them in the lap of luxury. Are the White House and State also working an angle to include in any agreement in this release to consider it a trade for one Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, 25 years old, captured and held by the Taliban since 2009?

Let’s examine some other facts. The Taliban and al Qaeda have worked together for ages and are presently seeking Pakistan’s help to take on the remaining American forces in Afghanistan. The quest is to force an earlier than scheduled exit of American and NATO forces from Afghanistan planned for 2014. One must ask the question, does al Qaeda get a voice at the negotiating table, either overtly or through the Taliban?

It is unlikely that the United States, with the help of NATO membership, will break any alliance between Afghanistan and Pakistan. The United States could easily get duped again with trade and peace deals as Afghanistan and Pakistan are essentially either hidden proxies of Iran and Russia or willing players, playing both ends against the middle. The relationship between the United States and Pakistan is broken and the probability for a make-up session is slim. With current upheaval between the government and the military in Pakistan, it continues to be less than likely that the relationship will warm once again.

A key player in all this chicanery is Vali Nasr, a professor at Tufts University, born in Iran. He is the designated point man tasked with implementing the peace talks with the Taliban, and has been an Obama administration adviser for some time. Nasr is their so-called expert on Middle East policy as well as Islam now. From 2009-2011, Nasr served the administration providing policy advice for Afghanistan and Pakistan and he predicted the Arab Spring and is aligned with the Council of Foreign Relations.

Vali Nasr - Obama Adviser on the Middle East and Taliban

Nasr is a member of the Board of Trustees at the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the National Democratic Institute while being a Carnegie Scholar and holding a PhD from MIT. The National Democratic Institute is closely associated with the Democratic Party as well as Socialist International and it was one of their offices that was raided by police in Egypt in December.

Muslim Brotherhood

The State Department is also negotiating with the Muslim Brotherhood in addition to the Taliban. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have ignored and or gambled on Nasr’s advice regarding Afghanistan and Pakistan as well as that of the Arab Spring in which we saw the fall of Egypt to the Muslim Brotherhood and the administration is doing the same when it comes to war-gaming with Syria and Iran.

2012 is re-election year for Barack Obama and arranging a peace with the Taliban would have all the appearances of another check mark in the diplomatic ‘win’ column and the fulfillment of past campaign promises. This dovetails well with the killing of Osama bin Ladin, the assassinations of Anwar Awlaki, and the United States has formally exited Iraq as promised. On the surface, these are great talking points, but where has his foreign policy actually taken the USA? Additionally, since Barack Obama promised to close Guantanamo, so by moving prisoners to another location in a ‘slight of hand’ move that may appease his base without actually closing the base and avoids the contentious military tribunals this administration and the Department of Justice staunchly oppose.

What ever the end story becomes, once the Taliban agreement is complete and how it plays out regarding Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan is still up for debate. However, we clearly are witnessing a gathering of forces with new partnerships with strange bedfellows.