| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
No, it's no joke.
"Official: Militant Pakistani group causes terror concerns in New York," from The Associated Press (thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist):
NEW YORK: A follower of an Islamic militant group caused a previously undisclosed scare in 2004 when someone in his truck took mobile phone photos of the support structures of the Brooklyn and Williamsburg bridges, a police official said.The New York Police Department uncovered the suspected reconnaissance mission in Manhattan while investigators already were on alert that Pakistani immigrants loyal to the radical Sunni group, Sipah-e-Sahaba, were in the city "and possibly up to no good," said Paul Browne, the NYPD's top spokesman.
The spokesman detailed the bridge episode in response to a report on Friday in the Daily News that the NYPD was involved in the detention of a member of the group who is purportedly wanted in Pakistan for the assassination of a Shiite leader.
The NYPD has credited one of its intelligence analysts with piecing together evidence that the suspect, Akhtar Hussain Muawia, had used an alias to slip into the United States after the 1997 assassination and was working as a clerk at a grocery store in Jersey City, New Jersey, across the Hudson River from New York.
Muawia, 33, was detained in May and is fighting deportation. His attorney has denied he was involved in the killing or any acts of terrorism.
The NYPD's involvement in the Muawia case reflects its concerns that U.S. followers of lesser-known radical groups like Sipah-e-Sahaba could pose a threat to the city. The Pakistani government outlawed the group after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in an effort to purge the country of extremism, much of it anti-American.
The group also has been designated a terrorist organization by the State Department.
Investigators from the NYPD's Intelligence Division first became aware of a Sipah-e-Sahaba presence in the city in the summer of 2003, Browne said. That fall, acting on an unfounded tip about a potential plot against the subways, police and the FBI that fall raided a Brooklyn apartment where they discovered membership applications and other documents related to the group....
Posted by Robert at November 3, 2007 7:44 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
That fall, acting on an unfounded tip about a potential plot against the subways, police and the FBI that fall raided a Brooklyn apartment where they discovered membership applications and other documents related to the group....
.. and giving away identity documents to illegal aliens "makes sense", doesn't it, Hillary?
Posted by: Alert![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at November 3, 2007 8:06 AM
Speaking of Hillary, I was just informed that her ME Advisor is a Muslim woman from Michigan, I believe. Anyone know anything about this person?
Posted by: darcy at November 3, 2007 8:21 AM
I watched ABC News about Pakistan and Mushy last night. The closest story I could find on the web site is linked below. The Dhimmi reporters interviewed a man who said, "Musharraf is a dictator, he takes orders from America. I hate from America [sic]". The reporter asked, "Why do you hate America?". He answered, "Because they make war with Muslims". This is from memory and I have not found the video on abcnews.com.
My point is that the MSM will give a microphone to anybody in the world who says that they hate America. Note that the man did not say, "I hate Pres. Bush".
--
CT Yank
===============================================
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/story?id=3813701
'Videos are being distributed on the streets showing boys as young as 14 beheading soldiers who cooperate with the Americans."
Posted by: CTYankee at November 3, 2007 8:42 AM
Is this jihadi one of those the Dem governor wants to give a drivers license ?
Is this jihadi also supported by the senator from New York, Hillary, in this intention that he be given a drivers license ?
Voters, apart from the NYPD, who's watching the store ?
Posted by: dgene at November 3, 2007 8:44 AM
Hi darcy,
The woman's name is Huma Abedin and I just saw an article on Atlas Shrugs on the topic yesterday. Some rumors are spreading on the blogosphere about her. She was born in Michigan when she was 2 her family moved to SA where she lived until she was 18. Her mother works as a professor in SA (how does that work I wonder?).
It was posted on 11/1
Posted by: eve_anne_gelical at November 3, 2007 9:01 AM
"That fall, acting on an unfounded tip about a potential plot against the subways, police and the FBI that fall raided a Brooklyn apartment where they discovered membership applications and other documents related to the group...."
...and Hillary and the dhimmicrats want to do away with survelliance tactics such as the PATRIOT ACT....
The word "patriot" in the PATRIOT Act is an acronym that spells out as "Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism."
.....As it seems....the "unfounded tip" seems to have had some substance....
Investigate all tips regarding possible terrorist activities and suspicious Muslim activities...
and Ban Muslim Immigration...
Posted by: exsgtbrown at November 3, 2007 9:47 AM
What on Earth is an "unfounded tip"? The very nature of a tip is that someone thinks something is going on, but isn't sure, and believes someone in authority should look into the matter.
I wonder how many unfounded tips the powers-that-be are ignoring, right now.
Posted by: Abscedere at November 3, 2007 10:02 AM
The pathetic pathological lying leftists have skipped the "amnesty" argument, and moved directly to "voter fraud" in recommending documentation of anyone who asks for it. Spitzer should be in jail, as should the Clintons.
Is it any wonder they won last November? The MSM won't discuss it, but that election was rife with fraudulent votes for democrats.
Posted by: n.a. palm at November 3, 2007 10:05 AM
Musharraf Declares State of Emergency in Pakistan
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/03/world/asia/04pakistan.html
Posted by: Mackie at November 3, 2007 10:23 AM
"Spitzer should be in jail, as should the Clintons."
As should Bush and his cronies.
They have done far more damage, lasting damage, to our freedom and safety than the Clintons and their cronies ever did.
at November 3, 2007 10:26 AM
...hmmm...now that I think about it...I have not seen the Pakistani gas station owner or his young bearded associates for over a week now.....his wife has been running the store....I wonder?....
Posted by: exsgtbrown at November 3, 2007 10:50 AM
"The Pakistani government outlawed the group after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in an effort to purge the country of extremism, much of it anti-American."
-- from the article above
What a misleading way to put it. First of all, the Pakistani government did not make an "effort to purge the country of extremism, much of it anti-American." The "extremism" was the widely-shared "extremism" of all those who take their Islam seriously, and about that the Musharraf government did almost nothing, and what little it did do was purely in order to justify all the money and military aid it received, while it continued to allow the source of the terrorist threat -- the ideology that prompts it -- completely unchallenged.
Furthermore, Sipah-e-Sahaba is a Sunni group, in the main devoted to killing Shi'a. It is no more or less "anti-American" than other Muslim groups. A bit of googling would have supplied more information about Sipah-e-Sahaba, and further, a bit of study might have prevented the writer of this article from describing, inaccurately because incompletely, the group as "anti-American." It is anti-Infidel, and the Americans are hated because they are Infidels (what does the Qur'an say again? -- start with Sura 9 and go from there), and the Shi'a are hated by these Sunnis because they, too, are regarded as Infidels.
Every news report should be an occasion for further enlightenment, not further confusion. Most people are quite confused enough -- look at the incoherence of American, and Western, policy. An incoherence that has led to a fantastic squandering of resources, and the great harm being done to necessary policies (about domestic monitoring of a Muslim menace, about Iran's nuclear project) by this clearly misguided and vainglorious undertaking, that naive and counter-productive "bringing freedom" to "ordinary moms and dads" in Iraq and then, because Iraq was to have served as a Light Unto the Muslim Nations, to the greater Middle East.
Stupidity, timidity, rigidity, cupidity -- everywhere you look.
Sipah-e-Sa
at November 3, 2007 11:02 AM
@ Hugh
What do you think will be the situation in 15-25 years time?
Posted by: Big Luke at November 3, 2007 11:23 AM
Question for you:
Nancy Pelosi is third in rank on succession to the presidency and has engaged in unilateral diplomacy with Assad of Syria. Should Hillary Clinton win the Presidency, that would mean at least two of our top 3 leaders will be women. It seems to indicate we have shifted to being a matriarchal society.
Question: What will be the perception of this matriarchal shift to those in Islamic society. Will we be perceived as weak, given the inferior status of women in Islam? Will that give fodder to the Imams declaring we are a corrupt society and embolden our enemies to further violence?
Or will they recognize that Hillary is "one tough woman" as she self professes on her election website.
Posted by: GrimReaperxxx at November 3, 2007 12:39 PM
GrimReaper--
I think we should act in our own best national interests without regard for what the jihadists think. After all, they'll hate and plot against any infidel leader, and any non-Islamic state.
I don't think Hillary Clinton as president would truly mark any major social shift (certainly not to a matriarchal society). That shift will have taken place when a female presidential candidate is no longer a shock (just like a female doctor used to be exceptional, but now they're found everywhere), and when the candidate herself can't play the gender card, but can only rely on the merit of her ideas.
And if that ever happens, the jihadists will still hate us at that point in the future, too.
Posted by: MarisolJW at November 3, 2007 3:31 PM
Marisol,
Good point, but missed the mark. I was not observing that we should think what Jihadists would do before we mark our ballot on election day. Certainly there are women that would be tough and able. Two come to mind as excellent examples of women that would be capable of leading through strength. Margret Thatcher and Jane Kirkpatrick to name two. I would vote for either woman in a second.
The question I have is what would be the reaction from our enemies. Whether Clinton and Pelosi, from their stated positions, would engender a perception by Jihadists that we were weak and encourage more violence against our interests? or?
If you care, check out the story of the top woman diplomat in Iraq and how she was treated by her own countrymen.
Posted by: GrimReaperxxx at November 3, 2007 5:13 PM
The debate underscores the deep differences that still exist within Iraqi society over the role of women and of Islam, and whether practices like polygamy should be allowed. Some women themselves do not accept the notion of equality between men and women.
Iraq's new constitution provides that all people men and women have basic legal rights such as voting and being able to own property or sue in court. But it also declares that Islam is a foundation though not the only one for Iraqi law.
Under the constitution, questions of divorce, marriage and inheritance are governed by the religion of those involved. That would allow Muslim men to continue taking up to four wives a practice which is not followed as widely in Iraq as in some other Muslim countries.
For Al-Rayes, the sheer presence of women legislators was a feat after many opposed efforts to do away with, or make temporary, the current quota system that ensures women get no less than 25 percent of parliamentary seats.
"Some still believe that women have unrightfully taken seats that should have gone to men," she said. "These women (legislators) will learn a lot just by being there. Men were not born experts on politics."
She said women parliamentarians had other triumphs such as managing to overcome objections and include in the constitution a sentence that allows Iraqi mothers to pass on their nationalities to their children, even if they are married to foreigners.
Women also took part in most parliamentary committees, said al-Rayes, who herself was an official of the key constitution drafting committee.
"This committee saw a lot of heated discussions, which toughened the skins of women," she said.
But Yanar Mohammed, a women's rights activist who is not in parliament, argued that to meet the quota, some political parties stacked their lists with women who had no interest in women's causes but were put there simply to rubber-stamp party decisions.
The activist, who has received death threats from militant groups because of her calls for secular laws, accused women legislators of passing a constitution that undermined women's rights.
"A constitution that is based on a religious law that gives men the right to marry four wives is one that is against women," she said. "All the gains that Iraqi women have made since the 50's have been taken away."
Under Saddam Hussein's regime, Iraqi women prided themselves on enjoying more rights than many other women in the conservative Middle East.
Not true, said Jenan al-Ubeidi, a member of the Shiite alliance who wears one of the more conservative forms of Islamic veil. She argues that Iraqi women were just as oppressed as all Iraqis under Saddam and that the constitution does not undermine the position of women.
"True, the constitution says that no law that runs contrary to the teachings of Islam may pass, but it also says that no law can be adopted if it contradicts the principles of democracy," she said. "Any law that can hurt women will not be adopted."
Al-Ubeidi believes nothing guarantees women's rights more than Islam.
Posted by: GrimReaperxxx at November 3, 2007 5:27 PM
An "unfounded tip" would be information with no substance or valid information. It seems to me that the subsequent raid on an apartment yielded some good intelligence and the tipster should be referred to as a " confidential reliable informant". Its hard to get good reporters these days.
Posted by: pismopal at November 3, 2007 7:40 PM
How about all of those Pakistanis owning/working the rental care agencies near the DC airports. Anything to be worried about?
Posted by: lafn at November 4, 2007 10:08 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)