She ascribes it entirely to al-Qaeda, which is inaccurate, but since she has hardly said anything at all about the jihad threat in the U.S. before, and got her job because of her work on the border as Governor of Arizona, this is noteworthy. "Homeland Security chief warns of threat from al-Qaeda sympathizers in U.S.," by Spencer S. Hsu for the Washington Post, December 3 (thanks to Mackie):
Al-Qaeda followers are inside the United States and would like to attack targets here and in other countries, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Wednesday night.The secretary's comments were her bluntest assessment yet of terror threats within the country, and they came one day after President Obama, in announcing his decision to send 30,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan, warned that extremists have been "sent here from the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan to commit more acts of terror."
Addressing the American Israel Friendship League in New York, Napolitano said a string of recent domestic arrests should "remove any remaining comfort that some might have had from the notion that if we fight the terrorists abroad, we won't have to fight them here," rebutting an argument advanced on several occasions by former president George W. Bush.
"The fact is that home-based terrorism is here. And like violent extremism abroad, it is now part of the threat picture that we must confront," Napolitano said. "Individuals sympathetic to al-Qaeda and its affiliates, as well as those inspired by their ideology, are present in the U.S., and would like to attack the homeland or plot overseas attacks against our interests abroad."
Napolitano cited the case of Najibullah Zazi, a Denver airport shuttle driver arrested in September after allegedly training with al-Qaeda in Pakistan....
It seems that the definition of an "al-Qaeda" member is: "any Muslim who engages in violence." The rest are "peaceful, moderate" Muslims. This is like the body count methodology according to which dead bodies were "VC" merely by virtue of having been killed. It's an ex-post-facto application of a label to hide an ugly truth. In the latter case it hid that civilians were killed as collatorral damage. In the former case, it hides the fact that Muslims are all potentially* violent and subject Sudden Jihad Syndrome.
*Of course, any person is "potentially" violent one supposes. With Muslims, the likelihood is simply far more acute.
"Napolitano said a string of recent domestic arrests should "remove any remaining comfort that some might have had from the notion that if we fight the terrorists abroad, we won't have to fight them here," rebutting an argument advanced on several occasions by former president George W. Bush."
I presume from this that Napolitano would rather fight them here and save all that money spent overseas. If she would do her job and control the borders they wouldn't BE here.
Unfortunately, as long as we continue to wage an unwinnable war against taliban/al-qaeda (as if taliban/AQ is a detached entity from islam itself, LOL!)which requires boots on the ground (invasion of muhammadan lands -- a NO NO)then the radicalization of US muhammadans will continue and the easy rational for the behaviors of US jihadists. It will just get worse and worse until Obama brings US troops home in his second term in the White House.
The important message of this website gets lost when we turn our attention away from Israel, Iran, Europe and the US where the future of civilization will have to be staked out with great acts of courage and/or violence.
Is the light beginning to dawn in the Obamahdi administration?
Well, a faint light perhaps.
I think it might clear things up for people if they just simply replaced the word al Qudea with ummah.
"It's an ex-post-facto application of a label to hide an ugly truth." (Perffect) The truth is that we are, and always have been at war with the ummah, Muslims who act upon Islamic prescritions for violence upon non-Muslims are migically transformed into the mythical beast known as "al Queda", thus keeping the rest of the peacfull Muslims partitioned, and therefore a non-threat.
In that light re-think this:
"The fact is that home-based terrorism is here. And like violent extremism abroad, it is now part of the threat picture that we must confront."
Home based religiously motivated terror will alawys be here, in direct proportion to our Islamic population.
Peace LOL!
Whoa, wait! Did I read correctly?
Janet said "Individuals sympathetic to al-Qaeda and its affiliates, as well as those inspired by their ideology, [emphasis mine] are present in the U.S., and would like to attack the homeland or plot overseas attacks against our interests abroad."
Why, could her use of the term "ideology" be construed to mean that maybe... just maybe our dear Janet might be waking up - just a little to the fact that ALL OF ISLAM is "Anti-American/Anti-Democracy/Anti-Freedom/Anti-Tolerance/Pro Violence-against-Kaffirs ideology?
Down my way, I've heard the young people tease - when one of them discovers something that they should have seen all along - and they'll call out "SNAKE! SNAKE!" So, below is a wonderfully silly video for Janet and for those of us who can't see the obvious - (the "Badger Badger Badger" song)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIyixC9NsLI
SNAKE! SNAKE!
Wonderin1
"Individuals sympathetic to al-Qaeda and its affiliates, as well as those inspired by their ideology, are present in the U.S., and would like to attack the homeland or plot overseas attacks against our interests abroad."...I wonder what that ideology Janet is referring to and where that ideology comes from. I wonder if it has anything to do with the koran and islam. I'm probably way off here since everyone knows islam is the rop but I always wonder where they get this darn ideology from.
"...boots on the ground (invasion of muhammadan lands -- a NO NO)then the radicalization of US muhammadans will continue and the easy rational for the behaviors of US jihadists."
Exactly right, that no amount of retreat from this war against a barbaric regressive bankrupt, religio-politico-cult ideology of world Jihad will constitute an end to the same jihadi threat. Whether or not we are in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran or any other Islamic nation, has no bearing on the the outcome or intent of Jihad, and they will continue to feel animosity towards us as prescribed by their evil Mohammedan creed, the eternal division between "us" and the "other", or Moslem and infidels. Them, the jihadi enemy, telling us that Al-Qaeda and wanabes hate us because of our foreign policy is a 'red herring' thrown our way to throw us off track in the real cause for this war - World Sharia. The US policy 'radicalization' of homegrown jihadis is peripheral to the real cause of Jihad.
This world-Sharia-jihad is really what we are fighting, the sinister implementation of a barbaric evil code on world civilization, sharia law, which in some Islamic circles proved too impatient to await the 'last days' and stealth jihad, so they launched a war against the West. That war had been in progress since the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt first wrote its charter spelling out activities to make Sharia law for the world, and this call had been repeated by the jihadists' numerous attacks: 1979 US embassy Tehran, 1983-4 Lebanon Marine barracks, 1983 Kuwait barracks, 1984 Spain, 1995-6 Saudi Arabia US personnel, 1998 US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, 2000 USS Cole... all leading up to the present Jihad since September 11, 2001. (See the link for additional jihad attacks within the US, some of which were treated by news media as mere 'hate' crimes.) This is the "war against terror" the Bush administration finally acknowledged after repeated attacks against US personnel, and a "war against Jihad" we are fighting now, though it remains "unnamed" as such. Does Ms. Napolitano understand this? It is NOT just Al-Qaeda, but Sharia that is the root cause.
People should look at where a attack would produce the best victory for Islam. Just where in this country would a massive attack give the enemy its boldest statement?
Another view, is where have attacks been prevented in the past? It is likely more of a target because of a failed attempt.
Bottom line is if you are close to the area that you come up with, it may be a good idea to change your location, and/or watch these areas with more care.
DHS chief discovers a jihadist threat in the U.S.
She ascribes it entirely to al-Qaeda, which is inaccurate, but since she has hardly said anything at all about the jihad threat in the U.S. before
............................
Yes—and let the insanity of virtually ignoring the biggest threat to our country for over nine months, by the very woman charged with protecting us from that threat.
So—is she *finally* waking up to the Jihad threat? Or, maybe not so much...
more:
Napolitano said a string of recent domestic arrests should "remove any remaining comfort that some might have had from the notion that if we fight the terrorists abroad, we won't have to fight them here"
............................
Since this was a topic stressed—rather myopically, I believe—by the previous president as a reason for our fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, it seems as likely that this is more yet another slam at George Bush as it is a commitment to keeping Americans safe.
Whatever Bush's failings and blind spots—and they were many—I think he and his administration had a better general grasp of the threat facing us, and certainly a stronger will to fight it.
"The fact is that home-based terrorism is here."
So home-based terrorism just suddenly appeared out of nowhere, like a rain squall. And we just have to live with it, because behaving abroad like a reckless cowboy such as George Bush just stirs things up more. We mustn't fight back. We just have to live now forever with our airports and bridges and power lines and shopping malls and sports stadiums and water supplies guarded 24/7 by a domestic army of DHS security people, sort of like the Gestapo.
But we feel so much better now, because we are so multi-cultural. The people in our towns and neighborhoods can now live in third-world chaos and tyranny, while the smugly fatalistic and irresponsible Napolitanos can lord over us from their gated communities in Washington.
Slightly Off Topic~ Here is an article about Monica Marks, a University of Louisville student who has just won a Rhoades Scholarship. Her focus of study is Islam, comparative judicial systems and Arabic languages. What's truly remarkable is the fact that she was raised as a Jehovah's Witness. What makes it so remarkable is that she understands the mindset of an all encompassing belief system. She grew up within a system that disrespects education, an analog ummah, theocracy and sharia, against whom the greatest sin is apostacy, the penalty for which (according to Watchtower publications) would be death if allowed by law.
http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20091121/NEWS01/911210361/University+of+Louisville+graduate+named+Rhodes+scholar
We need more like her on our side. Congratulations Miss Marks. Make Cecil proud.
"...those inspired by their ideology..."
I wonder how much Janet felt she was choking even to have to utter the word "ideology." It's a step in the right direction, but until she actual names the ideology in question she is not to be trusted. Same goes for everyone else in the administration currently in power in WDC.
Any actions against militant Islam must include destruction of the child-abusing midrashas that serve as an incubator of religious extremism. Intentional abuse of vulnerable, poor, children to further the aims of religious memeplex propagation must be directly confronted. No amount of military force will stop this threat on its own. Demand closure of the midrashas.
Using both hands, DHS chief discovers own backside
As long as Chinese nationals are going for $40k a head in AZ for each entering the country and let me tell you, they ARE arriving in droves, and as long as the border is so porous we are in a world of hurt. I keep trying to tell people where I live that it is too easy for the wrong types to get in, that all it takes is shaving the beard, looking western and with the way most people can't tell a Mexican from an El Salvadoran, who's to know if someone from one of those hateful Islamic places comes in? Like most people in Obama's admin, I think Napolitano is a huge waste of taxpayer money.
Does this mean that right wingers of the political spectrum are no longer Americas biggest threat to homeland security? Or is it just a diversion to make them feel safer?
That Women always reminded me of a Deer caught in the headlights of on coming car. Now she looks like she's trapped on the freeway with heavy traffic. With eyes bulging, she dances between lanes knowing a tractor trailer will soon have a Bambi was here bumper sticker.
Well, it's about time Janet had an epiphany, especially after filling the ranks of HLS with radical muslims. Who will be blamed when one of her muslim employees is directly tied to a terror attack, treason, or subversion? It won't be her, of course, because she must ensure that her department is sufficiently "diverse" and diversity couldn't be complete without the token muslims. I would love to know how any muslim could get a high level security clearance. It is inconceivable to me.
Since muslims comprise less than 2% of the population of the U.S., it wouldn't surprise me if they started hauling them in here by the millions to ensure a proper islamic impact on our diverse, multicultural society. Or maybe they'll start paying them to have more babies; instead of eight or ten, they could have twelve or fifteen per family. If the girls marry at sixteen and repeat the cycle, the problem of too few homegrown terrorists will be solved within twenty years. The domestic problems we have today will look like a picnic in retrospect.
According to Napolitano the violent extremists are sympathetic individuals and those inspired by their ideology.(hmmm what could cause such contradiction..)
They were there, but now they're here, ready to attack here and there!
This lady just defeated Backlash, let them fear.
Now if the enemy would be named.
ISLAM is our self declared enemy.
It would be nice if JN would learn what motivates our enemies. How about she read the Quran? Take a look at this site, read Nonie Darwish's books, talk to Aayan Hirsi Ali.
How about reading the testimony of John Adams and Thomas Jefferson about the motivation of the Barbarians of the Barbary War.
How is it so many profoundly stupid people are in positions of power? Jeesh!
....did POTUS or USAG Holder consult with J-NO prior to deciding to initiate NYC trials of the GITMO gang? Seems this would be contrary to good order and security based on her assumption that 'charlie is in the wire' and individuals are look'in to JIHAD themselves at a moments notice. Tragic consequences of an election....
Flowerknife wrote:
That Women always reminded me of a Deer caught in the headlights of on coming car. Now she looks like she's trapped on the freeway with heavy traffic.
...............
You mean this sort of look?
http://therealbarackobama.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/napolitano-j.jpg
Not exactly the sort of steely-eyed gaze that would strike fear in the hearts of our enemies, foreign and domestic...
One of oh so many!
Time for the Janet was here sticker.