World Terrorism : Weapons of Disruption Onging...

Whereas we have no masses, it certainly would be seriously challenging to deliver a "weapon of mass destruction" in the vast majority of geographical areas in the American West, as well as in many areas in the East and South. For instance, Montana is approximately the size of Germany, yet the population hovers only around a million (we have one representative in the House). There is no "metropolitan" area anywhere around, though Spokane is about three hundred miles away. Wyoming has more sheep than people. Utah has Salt Lake City and a few nearby populous areas. Nevada has two populated regional areas, Las Vegas and Reno. North and South Dakota have, well, a few folks here and there. Idaho folks are few and far between. I swear you can drive from San Antonio to El Paso without seeing a city policeman, because I've done it several times. Then there are Arizona, New Mexico, eastern California, inter alia. The point is we have a few population points, while the rest of the states are empty excepted for isolated small communities.Thus, out West we probably need to talk more about "weapons of disruption." (Some folks say "weapons of mass disruption," but we have no masses!)

You must ask yourself: What would I do if I were a terrorist (or a terrorism preparedness instructor) looking into the ramifications of launching a rural terrorism attack? Personally, I would concentrate on considering the consequences of disruption rather than mass destruction. Here are a few scenarios you might want consider when your local rural emergency management/response group gathers to discuss terrorism exercises.

1) Wildland Fire Incidents: Incendiary (mostly wildland) warfare has been used by military strategists for at least 2500 years, over a thousand years before the use of gunpowder. The western U.S. is disrupted, seriously disrupted, every year by wildland fires. Quite a few are started by humans, accidentally and purposefully. Starting dozens of major fires in a dozen western states could be a brilliant line of attack if militants wished to disrupt America. Thousands of security personnel could do nothing and the perpetrator/s would probably never be implicated, much less captured. Are you prepared?

2) Railroad Chemical Incidents: Many railroad main lines go through tunnels. A few strategically placed armor-piercing shells in a series of chlorine cars, along with appropriately staged derailments leaving the leaking cars in the tunnels, could shut down many main line routes in the West. Spin-off scenarios are numerous. Ready?

3) Flammable Liquid Incidents: Bridges are not easily brought down from below and approaches to bridge support structures are often highly visible and randomly monitored. However, on CNN we all have seen many tanker truck accidents involving burning hydrocarbons which have made bridge structures unusable. How hard would it be to have a few terrorists steal trucks and drive them (as opposed to hijacking planes and flying them) to strategic bridges over wide rivers or narrow gorges, ignite the gasoline (or diesel or crude), block the approaches with other incendiary or chemical releases, and make the structures extremely dangerous and impassible to highway traffic? Gotcha!

There are many variations of these themes. You probably have or can make up many more plausible, novel, and easily implemented rural-specific attack scenarios. Design exercises around them. If you want to stop terrorist events you must think like a terrorist and quit fighting last year's war!

Frederick J. (Fred) Cowie, Ph.D. E-mail: fredcowie@aol.com Phone: (24 hr cell) 406-431-3531 Website: fredcowie.com

[a post for study and research--this is a must read]

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21841

Who's Behind the Immigration Rallies?
By Ben Johnson
FrontPageMagazine.com | March 29, 2006

BIG CORPORATIONS AND THE FAR-LEFT HAVE ONE THING IN COMMON: both like
to
employ cheap illegal immigrants to do their heavy lifting.

The leftist media have tried to portray this weekend’s massive
protests
against House measures to curtail illegal immigration as the uprising
of
“The Other America”: forgotten, humble, hidden Hispanic members of the
working poor simply demanding their “rights.” As events spanned from
California to Detroit, Phoenix to Washington, D.C., the media kept up
its
anti-enforcement drumbeat. Although some have credited Latino DJs for
the
500,000-strong illegal immigrant turnout in Los Angeles alone – and
some
credit is deserved – the real legwork was done by a more eclectic group
of
organizations: leftist labor unions, George Soros-funded agitators,
Open
Borders lobbyists, Roman Catholic clergy, and teachers unions.

Los Angeles

Los Angeles predictably had the largest turnout – and the most
disruptive.
Half-a-million people crowded the streets demanding the “right” to
flaunt
this nation’s immigration laws, and underage students ran onto a
California
freeway, risking their lives and shutting down interstate traffic.

Andres Jiminez, director of the University of California's California
Policy Research Center, told the media, “It's not only Latinos who are
marching in the streets, its unions too: firefighters, farm workers and
Hispanic students who had thought of U.S. law as protecting them and
are now
starting to see it as a threat to their future.”

He was right about this much: Latino organizations did not act alone.
The
media has failed to report that organized labor directed the illegals
and
minors. The L.A. Times revealed the rally’s “security” was handled by a
union identified only as “Local 1877.” That would be local 1877 of the
Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the far-Left union
founded by
New Left radical Andrew Stern, which called for the withdrawal of all
U.S.
troops from Iraq in June 2004 and worked in concert with Ted Kennedy to
roll
back anti-terrorist Homeland Security measures. According to the L.A.
Times,
the SEIU’s goons kindly helped “herd marchers along the route.” That
was not
the extent of SEIU’s help, though. The union also “coordinated the more
than
100 buses that dropped off marchers from throughout California, Las
Vegas
and a few Southwestern cities.”

In other words, the massive rally against Homeland Security – since
that
is what gaining control of America’s borders would promote – was staged
by a
leftist labor union and staffed primarily with illegal immigrants.

SEIU did not work alone in this. It was aided by other radical or
left-wing political pressure groups, including:

· Southern California Human Rights Network (SCHRN), whose
members
are apparently affiliated with the International Socialist
Organization.
SCHRN drafted a resolution in Orange County declaring, “We believe that
no
human is illegal and oppose the criminalization, dehumanization, and
exploitation of migrants, immigrants and or economic and political
refugees,
by means of media, legislation, ideology, rhetoric, etc. [This]
includes
augmenting border patrol units, commissioning other law enforcement
agencies
to work in conjunction with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and
[includes] such policies as the Central American Free Trade Agreement,
the
North American Free Trade Agreement, and other policies that exploit
the
indigenous, peasantry, and environments of countries abroad.” In other
words, capitalism and any form of immigration laws are exploitative.
· Pomona Day Labor Center, which helps employers hire “day
laborers.” One must presume this organization knows its employees are
illegals.
· Central American Resource Center, which advocates for
illegals
and lobbies for the government to make a “‘presumption’ of hardship”
for and
grant “permanent residency” to Central American illegals.
· Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles
(CHIRLA),
founded in 1986 to “get as many people as possible through the amnesty
program established” by Ronald Reagan.

CONTINUED...................

[Part 2 of LA riots, posted for study and research]

The cause is being helped in another way by the Los Angeles Unified
School
District – where more than 25,000 walked out of classes: through
taxpayer-subsidized lobbying courses. According to the district,
students
“would remain in their home rooms through the day for discussions on
the
immigration issue, how to influence lawmakers and the consequences of
walkouts, said Rowena Lagrosa, executive officer for educational
service.”
(Emphasis added.)

Michelle Malkin obtained a copy of a letter Lagrosa wrote Monday to
the
students of the school district stating LAUSD would chauffer students
to
high school after they protested on the freeway. The letter states
after the
rally, the district “will provide buses to return students to schools
when
appropriate.” Moreover, “we will do everything we can to ensure that
those
students who do leave the campus are supervised as they leave the
campus.”

Naturally, the leftist groups, illegals, and teachers unions could
count
on the media to cover for them. Mickey Kaus pointed out in Slate that
the
L.A. Times wrapped the protestors in the American flag, erasing all
references to the Mexican standard, although the Mexican flag was
hoisted at
least as often in the crowd as Old Glory.

Gone from the media coverage, too, was mention that these protests
had all
the hallmarks of leftist riots of bygone days. Although depicted as
nonviolent and mainstream, FrontPage Magazine columnist Tammy Bruce
noted
Hispanic protestors burned American flags at the L.A. rallies. Michelle
Malkin has preserved some of the protestors’ other extremist messages.
L.A.
protestors ran onto freeways and threw rocks and bottles. LAPD Chief
William
Bratton – who put his men on tactical alert – said the protestors
diverted
police resources from fighting crime in the City of Angels. Fights
broke out
at protests in Watsonville, CA, and police arrested 21 minors and three
adults for riotous behavior, including assaulting a police officer, in
Escondido, CA.

D.C.: “Clergy” Against the Law
On Monday, the “mainstream media” reported some 300 clergy met near
the
Capitol for a prayer service to support illegal immigrants. The rally
flyer
claims these concerns sacerdotal ministers objected to legislation that
would “Deny basic civil rights to immigrants.” No outlet reported this
meeting was organized by the far-Left Center for Community Change, a
member
of the United for Peace and Justice coalition, headed by atheist and
Marxist
Leslie Cagan. On the CCC Board of Directors are:

Former Rep. Ron Dellums, D-CA, the ranking Democrat on the House
Armed
Services Committee 1993-7. A letter written by a Dellums staffer to
Grenada’s Marxist dictator discovered by U.S. troops as they liberated
the
island stated besides that toppled Marxist, “The only other person that
I
know of that [Dellums] expresses such admiration for is Fidel
[Castro]”;
Cecelia Munoz, VP of the National Council of La Raza;
Sara K. Gould of the Ms. Foundation for Women;
Peter Edelman, a professor at Georgetown Law School, former Clinton
administration official, and board president of the New Israel Fund.
Today,
he is perhaps best known as the husband of Hillary Clinton mentor
Marian
Wright Edelman. ; and
Sandra L. Ferniza, Arizona State University’s director of the Office
of
Public Affairs.
CCC is generously funded by the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the
Ford
Foundation, the William Randolph Hearst Foundation, the George
Soros-funded
Open Society Institute, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Tides
Foundation.

Other event sponsors include:

Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). A
large,
sometimes violent leftist organization with a history of invading
welfare
offices and intimidating left-wing groups it perceives as “rivals.” In
2003,
the group supported a resolution condemning the U.S. liberation of
Iraq.
ACORN’s would-be platform calls for the establishment of socialism in
the
United States. It founded the socialist Working Families Party in 1998
and
endorsed Hillary Clinton’s senate campaign two years later.
American Friends Service Committee (AFSC). Although it has long
presented
itself as a benign Quaker organization, the AFSC has a multi-decade
history
of supporting unilateral disarmament and aiding Communist regimes, even
eulogizing the head of a Tanzanian Communist party 13 years after the
fall
of the Berlin Wall. AFSC signed a document days after 9/11, saying the
terrorist attacks should be treated as a police matter. It has for
decades
promoted the “rights” of illegal workers.
League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC). Steve Brown and
Chris
Coon reported, “José Velez, the head of LULAC 1990-1994 used his
“special
status with the INS” to submit false papers for over 6,000 illegals
seeking
amnesty.” LULAC is today associated with race-based Affirmative Action
programs and often allied with Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow/PUSH Coalition.
Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition. As I noted
in my
book, 57 Varieties of Radical Causes, Teresa Heinz Kerry awarded a
Heinz
Family Foundation grant to MIRA. In June 2002, MIRA instructed its
members,
“Please do NOT aid people in applying with INS unless you are familiar
with
their immigration history and are certain they would not be at risk of
deportation by doing so.” (Emphasis theirs.) Immediately after 9/11 a
MIRA
press release asked people to “Refer local Arab, Muslim, and affected
groups
to MIRA.” They also advocate for illegals to receive in-state college
tuition rates.

CONTINUED........

[a post for study and reasearch, Part 3 of LA riots]

National Council of La Raza, a race-based organization that signed
the
“Statement of Solidarity with Migrants,” calling on the government to
recognize the contributions of illegal immigrants to the labor market.
It
calls reduced welfare payments (to illegals), ““a disgrace to American
values” and has firmly opposed numerous Homeland Security measures; and
The Gamaliel Foundation, a leftist organization inspired by Saul
Alinsky.
In addition to lobbying for illegal aliens, this member of the
“Religious
Left” hosted a campaign event in 2003 featuring Sen, Russ Feingold,
D-WI,
and then-presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich.
The event was another attempt for the Left to wrap its message in
clerical
garb, this time executed successfully.

Phoenix
Also on Monday, several hundred underage students in Phoenix staged a
walkout that culminated with protests at the state Capitol.
Underreported
was the role played in the rallies by MEChA, a radical Hispanic
organization
demanding the U.S. government give the Southwestern portion of the
United
States “back” to Mexican-Americans for the establishment of a new state
called Aztlan. MEChA promotes its agenda alongside the National Council
of
La Raza, Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF),
and the
American Friends Service Committee.

A sense of MEChA-like entitlement pervaded the entire rally, as an
illegal
alien told the media:

I'm not a criminal. I'm a good person and I deserve a quality
education.
That's why I'm here. To show that I'm willing to work toward that goal
and
that I've earned that right.

She did not elaborate on how she “earned” the “right” to illegally
cross
the border and access taxpayer-subsidized services restricted to U.S.
citizens.

Georgia
Last Friday, tens of thousand of Georgians, including not a few
illegals,
staged a “sick-in” to protest a bill that passed the state house the
day
before. CNN reported, “That bill, which has yet to gain Senate
approval,
would deny state services to adults living in the U.S. illegally and
impose
a five percent surcharge on wire transfers from illegal immigrants.”
Not
only do immigrants have the “right” to live in Georgia illegally and
collect
government services, they also have the “right” to use Western Union
without
paying an extra five cents on the dollar. That’s some willingness to
contribute to one’s home country. These are supposedly the minority
members
willing to work tirelessly to help their host country at jobs no one
wants.

FrontPage Magazine columnist Allan Wall – whose National Guard
brigade
recently returned from serving our country in Iraq – has pointed out
the
Georgia protest’s organizer, Teodoro Maus, acted as Mexico’s consul
general
in Atlanta for 12 years. During that time, this Mexican government
official
protested Georgia’s declaration of English as the state’s official
language,
opposed a talk show host who supported border enforcement, and
petitioned
the Peach State to issue drivers licenses to illegals. Maus’
involvement
raises the question whether Friday’s unofficial labor strike had the
sanction of the Mexican government.

Dallas-Ft. Worth
Yesterday, area school districts estimated 4,000 students walked out
in
Dallas-Ft. Worth alone, staging a violent and disruptive rally to
sanctify
their illicit status.

Media accounts specify: “At Kiest Park, about 1,500 students from
Dallas
and Grand Prairie schools demonstrated. Dallas police outfitted in riot
gear
moved in on the crowd after some of the students started throwing rocks
and
bottles at a woman who staged a one-person counterprotest.” (Emphasis
ours.)

Protestor Francisco Rojas, speaking in Spanish, told The Dallas
Morning
News, “It's like an animal that's waking from many years of sleep. We
are
very strong, and right now is our opportunity.”

These minor students then processed into a city council meeting,
waving
Mexican and El Salvadoran flags. To her credit, Councilwoman Elba
Garcia
courageously commandeered a police PA system to tell the truants to go
back
to school (where Dallas school officials said this week’s walkouts will
be
an unexcused absence).The warning came too late for one girl, whose
hand was
severed as a result of an accident that took place at the walkout.

Undeterred by the violence and harm done to their children’s
education,
leaders in the Open Borders Lobby set out plotting their next move. “At
a
dinner meeting of the Latino group LULAC, leaders announced a major
rally on
April 9. ‘We are going to be having, hopefully it will be the largest
civil
rights demonstration in the history of Dallas, Texas – 100,000-plus,’
said
LULAC representative Domingo Garcia.”

No word on how many lone women will be battered the next time Mexican
citizens exercise American First Amendment rights.

The Impact
These massive gatherings of illegals, who denounced their government
unmolested by police or immigration officials, had an immediate impact
– on
legislation and on border security.

Reporter Sara Carter of the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin says since
these
protests, border patrol agents have reported an explosion in illegal
crossings from Mexicans (and others) keenly observing the Senate debate
and
emboldened by same. Some were under the impression amnesty had already
been
granted and hoped to be the first to take part in the second California
Gold
Rush. [1]

The rallies had a political impact, too. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-CO,
stated
on Monday:

The immigration rallies over this weekend and today show how
disordered
our immigration system has become. For years, the government has turned
a
blind eye to illegal aliens who break into this country. It isn’t any
wonder
that illegal aliens now act as if they are entitled to the rights and
privileges of citizenship.

As a sign of their political impact, Republicans immediately began
discussing the potential threat their political careers face from an
Hispanic backlash, should they have the temerity to pretend the United
States is a sovereign nation with definable political boundaries.

Leftists and illegals began their massive protest – because they saw
U.S.
law “as a threat to their future” – the same day the Senate Judiciary
Committee passed a bill that would allow illegals to attain American
citizenship without facing deportation by a 12-6 vote. John McCain
joined
forces with Ted Kennedy to promote this amnesty measure. “It is not
amnesty,” said Ted Kennedy, who has a 41-year history of fibbing about
immigration bills.

The Judiciary Committee yesterday approved Dick Durbin’s amendment
granting amnesty to individuals and non-profits that provide
non-emergency
aid to illegal immigrants. The committee had previously approved
Durbin’s
amendment to drop illegal immigration to a misdemeanor offense.

These measures are at odds with the will of the American people.
According
to the Associated Press, 59 percent of Americans oppose laws allowing
illegal immigrants to apply for guest worker status, and 62 percent
oppose
easing the path to U.S. citizenship for those who are here illegally.

Americans know illegal immigrants account for nearly one-third of all
inmates in federal prisons and add millions of dollars to their tax
load
every year. Even Mother Jones magazine exposed the health dangers posed
to
border towns throughout America, as a result of uninsured illegals
bankrupting local hospitals – six years ago.

Americans cannot comprehend why Congress feels a need to add a guest
worker program to mollify these disruptive, violent, lawbreaking
protestors,
who are occasionally political radicals and overwhelmingly individuals
who
are in violation of U.S. immigration law. What makes Congressmen think
those
whose first action in this country was to break the law will suddenly
obey
their newest futile measure?

These illegals claimed they marched to demand their “rights.” Those
would
amount to the right to a speedy trial, followed by rapid deportation.
Illegal aliens have no additional rights under our Constitutional
system,
nor should they be given any. A more inspired leadership, with a
requisite
number of border patrol agents and paddy wagons, would have made these
massive rallies an instructive object lesson in the enforcement of
immigration law. Instead, political cowardice has transformed them into
international exhibits of American impotence and paralysis.

ENDNOTES:
1. “Scarborough Country,” MSNBC. March 28, 2006.

[a post for research and study. I am filing this in my file for U.S. Communists....granny]

AIM Report: The Hollywood Left and the Real Blacklist - March B
March 23, 2006
Currently, Hollywood denigrates the War on Terror, more or less in the
tradition of its previous blindness to the Cold War.

By Wes Vernon

Hollywood's film colony has had a long romance with the Left. Today's
Hollywood, with the help of the "mainstream" media, regularly savages
those who stand up to America's enemies.

Hollywood's earnest belief appears to be that anyone who attains
show-business celebrity—actor, producer, or writer—is automatically
possessed of more political wisdom than the rest of us. Americans have
come to resent it. Radio talk-show host Laura Ingraham has written a
very good book on the subject titled "Shut Up and Sing." And when no
Hollywood parlor politico is within earshot, some liberal politicians
have whispered (likely with a smirk) their lack of respect for show
business moneybags who open their wallets and purses to the coffers of
liberal and pro-Democrat causes. In some insider liberal circles,
spending time at a Barbra Streisand soiree in Malibu is necessary to
keep the money flowing, but not a source of smart well-thought-out
political strategy.

Today's Hollywood Left is more open in its distaste for Middle
American values. Michael Moore is a prime example. He is a cruder and
more outwardly hateful propagandist than the Hollywood left of earlier
eras.

Americans often wonder exactly why so many of Hollywood's
self-anointed political sages bash America, bash this country's
traditions, bash Christians, bash Western Civilization, bash corporate
America, bash traditional marriage, bash anti-communists (of course),
and above all bash conservatives of every stripe (including free
enterprise economic advocates whose offense seems to be in believing
that even people not living in Beverly Hills mansions are entitled to
realize the fruits of the American Dream).

Currently, Hollywood denigrates the War on Terror [See "Hollywood
Surrenders to Terrorists" by Cliff Kincaid and Roger Aronoff-AIM
Report January-B], more or less in the tradition of its previous
blindness to the Cold War.

What makes these people tick? Why is Hollywood, for example, so
anti-religious? Why is it that films such as "The Passion of the
Christ" or TV shows such as "Touched by an Angel" are the exception,
not the rule?

For some on-the-ground insight, AIM turned to longtime pop recording
and box office star Pat Boone.

Talking To Pat Boone

"I've thought a lot about it," he told me. Of course he moves amongst
"all kinds of people who are 180 degrees from me spiritually and
politically, and we get along fine." But the "underlying cause for the
ultra-liberalism and humanism here is that Hollywood does not want
rules. They don't want any restrictions on what they can do to make
money or be successful. So obviously any religion embodies some form
of rules and expectations for behavior, and even consequences, and
they don't want to hear any of that." To the Left that dominates the
Hollywood culture, religion "poses a tremendous threat economically,
professionally, and socially [even though] it's not meant to be that,"
Boone explained.

Some Hollywood producers don't mind actually losing money in order to
make their anti-religious, anti-patriotic statements. One noted movie
critic, Michael Medved, wrote a book several years ago, Hollywood vs.
America, wherein he cited movie-makers who produced films they knew
were destined to be total flops at the box office, just so they can
get across anti-American and anti-religious messages.

Public outrage and threatened boycotts forced NBC to cancel the
pro-homosexual show, "The Book of Daniel." Unchastened by the
experience, NBC struck back at Christians by scheduling for April
13—the night before "Good Friday"—an episode of "Will and Grace" where
Britney Spears was to appear on a fictional TV network with a cooking
segment called "Cruci-fixin's," to mock Christianity. That, too, was
canceled due to public pressure.

As Pat Boone tells us, the Hollywood Left not only rejects religion,
"but [actually] there is an antipathy to it. Not just Christianity,
but Judeo-Christianity" is seen as a threat in "Tinseltown."

The Hollywood culture is such that known identified religious or
political conservatives believe they must try harder to succeed or
(perhaps before establishing their celebrity) stay "in the closet"
about their beliefs.

Nonetheless, the dominant leftists in Hollywood insist it is they who
are the "victims." For 50 years now, they have been wailing at the
"evils" of the "blacklist" of the Forties and Fifties. They have
produced about a dozen movies peddling the idea that Hollywood was one
happy harmonious family-friendly place until those evil ignorant
cowboys from the House Committee on Un-American Activities came along
and persecuted innocent artists for their "political beliefs."

Communism In Hollywood

Ronald and Allis Radosh explode that myth in their book, Red Star Over
Hollywood. What the committee investigated was not anyone's "political
belief," but a well-organized plot by the Communist Party to take over
the movie industry and place its considerable influence in the service
of the Soviet Union which, in those years immediately following World
War II, was gobbling up Eastern Europe. Many of our fighting men who
had put their lives on the line to save Europe from Nazism found out
after they returned here to civilian life that much of the territory
that Adolph Hitler had conquered was instead conquered by Joseph Stalin.

Against that background, the congressional committee believed if this
nation was to fight the Cold War as effectively as we fought World War
II, we should know exactly what our enemy was up to right here on our
soil.

Red Star Over Hollywood is fully documented and heavily footnoted. It
clearly shows how the highest echelons of the Soviet Union decided as
far back as the late 1920s that they would make the then-burgeoning
film capital a prime target. They had learned the lesson of history
that the way to undermine any society's values was not to try directly
to influence its leaders (often impossible), but to convey the message
to the masses through those who write its entertainment scripts and
its songs.

You may never have heard of Willi Munzenberg. The German native was
specifically assigned by the Soviets to plant the seeds of communism
in Hollywood. As the Radoshes comment: "What better place for the
Russian Revolution's promise of a classless society to take hold than
in Hollywood, the capital of dreams?"

This book smashes to smithereens the poignant myth of the brave and
unflinching Lillian Hellman (a Stalinist playwright), the persecuted
Hollywood Ten, and the supposed contemptible rats who cooperated with
the committee.

Red Star Over Hollywood documents chapter and verse the hard cold fact
that every single hostile witness in those congressional hearings was
either a hard-core member of the Communist Party or at the very least
hip-deep in Communist discipline.

Hard-Core Reds

Just so there is no misunderstanding: These were no "parlor pinks."
They were true believers—part of a group that advocated the violent
overthrow of the U.S. government. They were pivotal in the ongoing
effort to insert the propaganda line of a foreign power into the
movies seen by millions of us. The 1st Amendment gives them the right
to propagandize to their heart's content. The committee's point was
that if they were spreading propaganda on behalf of this country's
enemies, the movie-goer was entitled to know that he was being
lectured on behalf of that agenda. Suppose some Nazi brown-shirts had
been found making our movies in those days. Does anyone doubt that
Washington would have taken more than a casual interest?

The congressmen initially focused on the infamous Hollywood Ten. Those
were witnesses with Communist affiliations and activities as far as
the eye could see. They were writers and producers who defied the
House committee, refused to answer its questions and spent some time
in jail for doing so.

One of them was producer John Howard Lawson, described by the Radosh
husband-and-wife team as "the top Hollywood Communist."

According to All Media Guide, Lawson "began writing numerous plays,
most of them promoting Marxism." In yet another book, the 1998 volume
Hollywood Party, author Kenneth Lloyd Billingsley quotes the producer
as saying, "As for myself, I do not hesitate to say that it is my aim
to present the Communist position and to do so in a most specific manner."

The Radosh book cites as an example of Lawson's work the 1943 film
"Action in the North Atlantic," which the authors describe as "a
unique propaganda effort" on behalf of the Communist-run union that
represented sailors on the East Coast, Joe Curran's Maritime Union-CIO."

The film also portrays the Soviet Union in a most favorable light.
Lawson is described as using the film as an "opportunity" to "show
support for the Party," and also it "implies that in every sense the
Soviet Union was America's most noble and reliable ally"

Toward the end, Soviet planes arrive on the scene just in time to save
an American vessel from Nazi dive-bombers. Then an American says of
the Soviet planes, "They're ours!" as a close-up shows the Red-star
insignia on the fuselage. The vessel arrives on shore to the cheers of
Russian men and women yelling, "Comrade! Comrade!" The American sailor
responds in kind.

The Communist Line

The movie followed the twofold Communist Party line of that era.
First, make Americans forget that only a short time earlier, the
Soviet Union had helped bring on World War II by collaborating with
Hitler in the first place. Secondly, soften up Americans for the
postwar era when Stalin would make his move to swallow the countries
of Eastern Europe and arm the Chinese Communists. Ron and Allis Radosh
describe "Action in the North Atlantic" as "unique" in the sense that
it is "a perfect representation of the wartime Party line; patriotic
and pro-Soviet at the same time."

John Howard Lawson, who beamed that "soft" propaganda into theatres
from coast-to-coast, testified before the House Committee on
Un-American Activities on October 27, 1947 (starting on page 290 of
the transcript). He was disruptive, shouted defiance at the committee
and was ejected from the hearing room. Committee investigator Louis
Russell cited 34 instances of Communist activities on Lawson's part,
including his Communist party Card No. 47275.

[part 2 of the communists in Hollywood]

The Hollywood Ten

Similar defiance marked the testimony of the others in the Hollywood
Ten. And today it is an article of faith in Hollywood that the most
dastardly evil that befell film-land was "the blacklist," i.e., actors
and directors who had problems finding work. We are asked to believe
that nobody was guilty and those who were exposed were persecuted for
their "political beliefs." Even the popular TV series "Touched by an
Angel" bought into that line in a 1997 episode. Communism, of course,
was not a "political belief," but was in fact a conspiracy aimed at
bringing down the United States. Studio moguls did not deny Communists
jobs merely because of "political beliefs." They simply realized many
Americans did not want to feed America's enemies at the box office. It
was a business decision.

The real blacklist—totally mean-spirited—has been directed against
those in Hollywood who cooperated with the Un-American Activities
Committee's efforts to root out Communists.

Take producer Elia Kazan, for example. He told the House committee on
April 10, 1952 that he had joined the Communist Party in the
mid-Thirties, explaining he had been motivated by the threat of Hitler
and sympathy for the poor. In his testimony, Kazan—by then a fierce
anti-Communist— named eight others who were in the Party with him and
suggested they shared his own humanitarian motivations for joining.
This charitable explanation won him no points from the Hollywood Left.
He took out an ad in the New York Times urging others who had seen
the "conspiracy" from the inside to join him in coming forward. That
drove the Hollywood culture over the top. Kazan heard that Communist
Party meetings were held to isolate Kazan in the show business
community. The Communist Daily Worker accused him of "belly-crawling."

But that did not deter him from producing some widely acclaimed motion
pictures, most notably "On the Waterfront," which glorified
whistleblowers against the forces of evil.

Ultimately, due to friends he had in Hollywood and despite the many
others who had turned their backs on him, Kazan finally received a
well-deserved Lifetime Achievement Award on Oscar night in 1999. Even
then, the venom reappeared not only among aging Stalinists, but in the
liberal mainstream media. When Kazan died in 2003, Allan H. Ryskind in
Human Events cited Maureen Dowd (New York Times), Sharon Waxman
(Washington Post), and Robert Koehler (Los Angeles Times) as among
those who supported the charge that Kazan had behaved badly.

Other anti-Communists in Hollywood have suffered for their "apostasy,"
some post-humously. Years after his death, a monument to actor Robert
Taylor was removed precisely because he "named names."

Today's Hollywood blacklist targets conservatives. It is not written
down anywhere. But it's there. As Pat Boone told AIM in our interview,
"[T]here is sort of the unspoken—but very real—wish that anybody who
subscribes to these ancient Judeo-Christian concepts would get out of
Hollywood."

The very fact that, as the entertainer says, "It's not something that
somebody has sat down and written out," arguably makes it all the more
insidious. He adds, "It's just sort of a collective recognition of
certain people that are not 'in'—[who] are not welcome in the circles
of those who feel that there are no restrictions on their behavior."
Those who are "openly committed to and ….vocal about moral precepts or
conservative political ideas" are considered outsiders.

>From other credible sources, I have heard—but for obvious reasons
cannot confirm—that Hollywood workers in all parts of the film
industry who are political conservatives and/or are religious people
meet in private. Nothing formal. No minutes are kept. No one takes any
names. There are probably no dues. All they do is meet and offer each
other moral support. That reflects a fear of making Hollywood's
informal "blacklist."

The Pat Boone Case

Pat Boone believes he has at times been targeted by that informal
list. He cites an example:

"Even a movie like Robert Wise's 'Sand Pebbles,' a role that Steve
McQueen played, and of course, he did it beautifully. But I was up for
that role, and Robert Wise, when I was proposed by a casting
director—I was perfect for that role—[Wise] said, 'No, I don't want a
singer. I want an actor.' Well, I had been in the top ten [at the] box
office, and I think I had proven that I could act." Boone saw "a
certain disdainful view of me as a singer, a guy with a wife and four
kids, and pretty straight-laced if not totally square."

The film capital has tried to use Pat Boone's clean-cut image against
him, and to mock traditional values. He says "the last half dozen"
roles that he had been offered "would have caused me to portray a Pat
Boone-like person—a preacher, a husband, a citizen who on the surface
lives like I do, and then it comes out that he's a hypocrite, a
pedophile, an abuser. In other words, they want me to play those roles
because it would have been tremendously effective." Of course, he
turned down the roles.

Another point: The McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform law, which
restricts citizen groups from advertising their views within 30 days
of a primary or 60 days of a general election, benefits Hollywood and
the media, which are exempt. Any such ad could incur a stiff fine. The
intent of the law is that such advertising should be the exclusive
responsibility of the campaign of the candidate supported by the ad.
So Pat Boone believes left-tilting propaganda TV shows such as
"Commander-in-Chief" and "West Wing" be counted as "in-kind"
contributions to the Democratic National Committee.

"'Commander-in-Chief,' recognized by many as free advertising for
Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, comes off as "suspicious" in
that regard, says Boone, though he allows as how the TV show is
"beautifully acted, written, and portrayed." That, of course, makes it
all the more effective.

>From the Cold War era right up to the present terrorist threat,
Hollywood has had a curious inclination to soft-pedal the offenses of
America's enemies. One can cite the 1975 Academy Awards Night, with
its gloating rhetoric about how "in a few days" anti-Communist South
Vietnam would be "liberated" by Communist North Vietnam. There was
Hollywood's sympathy for the Communist Sandinista regime in Nicaragua
in the Eighties. Actor Ed Asner flew south of the border in 1990 to
celebrate the anticipated Sandinista victor in Nicaragua's election.
He was to be disappointed. The Nicaraguan people elected the
pro-freedom forces. And then today, Michael Moore produces movies that
viciously attack America and excuse—if not support—our enemies.

To this day, Hollywood still clings to the myth of martyrdom on the
Left—a Left that defended Communism and today soft-pedals the
terrorist threat—as Billingsley put it—"while earning, substantial
fortunes in the very country they attacked as repressive and fascist."
In Hollywood's land of dreams, as author Richard Grenier once said,
"Capitalism is evil except for the three-picture deal with Paramount,
the Malibu mansion, the swimming pool, the tennis court, and the
Mercedes Benz."

To which Billingsley adds, "Or, as Marx himself might have framed it:
>From each according to his credulity, to each according to his greed."

Wes Vernon is a Washington-based writer & broadcast journalist.

What You Can Do

Please send the enclosed cards or cards and letters of your own
choosing to Dorrance Smith of the Defense Department and Masood Haider
of the U.N. Correspondents Association.

Also, please send AIM a special contribution to help us complete our
special documentary project on Al-Jazeera.

AIM has a limited supply of the books Shut Up and Sing, by Laura
Ingraham, and Red Storm Over Hollywood by Ron Radosh available. Each
book is $22.95 postpaid or order both for $43.95 postpaid. To order
please call our office at 1-800-787-4567, extension 110, or mail in
your request to Accuracy in Media, 4455 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.,
Suite #330, Washington, D.C. 20008.

[a post for study and research]

Al-Qaeda Doctrine: Training the Individual Warrior Michael Scheuer
[From: Terrorism Focus (The Jamestown Foundation, USA) March 28, 2006 -
Volume III, Issue 12] http://www.jamestown.org

While Terrorism Focus previously examined al-Qaeda's strategic and
tactical
doctrine (February 28, March 14), this article looks at the type and
purpose
of the non-military training that is given to the individual al-Qaeda
fighter or mujahid. Based on al-Qaeda sources (see notes for complete
listing), this training appears to be common to both the organization's
insurgents and their special forces, and is intended to produce
fighters who
are pious, disciplined and unity- minded, fatalistic, and cognizant of
the
requirements and attitudes of those they are defending.

Piety

When training each mujahid, al-Qaeda's doctrine declares that the first
priority must be "spiritual preparation … because it is necessary to
attain
victory." The key to this preparation is two- fold, al-Qaeda's Ma'adh
al-Mansur explained. First, each fighter must completely accept the
fact
that God has promised victory to the Muslims if they obey His word.
Second,
the fighter must recognize that victory has not yet come because most
Muslims love life and hate death, and thus have strayed from God's
path,
most specifically from the path of jihad. As a result, al-Mansur
directs
that each trainee be taught that "God has set the infidel nations
against
them [the Muslims] to inflict on them humiliation and lowly status.
This is
an inevitable and ordained punishment that befalls those who abandon
jihad."
For this degraded status, each Muslim man should be deeply ashamed, and
should "die of grief if he does not ward off the calamities inflicted
on his
fellow Muslims and Kinsmen."

In other words, al-Qaeda doctrine does not argue that the current
predicament of Muslims is the fault of what Al-Faruq al-Amiri calls
"the
campaign and reality of the crusader enemy." Rather, that predicament
flows
from the refusal of Muslims to resist the infidels' attack. The
commonly
held Western view that al-Qaeda and its followers blame the West for
all of
Islam's woes—an understanding most stridently advocated by Bernard
Lewis—thus falls by the wayside. Al-Qaeda trainees are taught that the
humiliation God has inflicted on Muslims for their failure to obey Him
can
only be lifted by Muslims accepting God's word and "returning to
jihad."
If they do so, they will win victories like those the Prophet Muhammad
and
his companions won in the battles of Badr and The Trench in Islam's
first
years of existence. "Although the Muslims [with Muhammad] were few and
had
scanty military means, and the infidels were many and well-equipped,"
al-Mansur reminds today's mujahedin, victory was in the hands of God."

Discipline and Unity

If an al-Qaeda trainee is not thoroughly inculcated with the discipline
of
the Shariah, Abu-Hajar Abd-al-Aziz al-Muqrin warned, "[he] will turn
into an
outlaw." Abu Jandal, bin Laden's former bodyguard, noted that each
trainee
must learn that his "mission in life is to protect the ummah," and that
this
is the "cause" all fighters "carried in our hearts wherever we are able
to
go." Reflecting on his own training, al-Muqrin recalled that he and his
colleagues, "the sons of the Arabian Peninsula," came to the Afghan
training
camps with much to learn. We were "not used to military order and
discipline," al-Muqrin wrote, and found "many things full of
restrictions
and difficult." After receiving what al- Amiri called intense training
for
"faith, spirit and heart,"
however, al-Muqrin said that he and his comrades became mentally "tough
and
arduous" and knew that they "must fear no one but God and must be ready
to
sacrifice everything for upholding God's word."

While Shariah instruction develops a disciplined, focused mindset,
al-Qaeda
doctrine acknowledges that unity of belief does not automatically yield
a
consistently united organization. Of the other factors impacting unity,
al-Qaeda doctrine focuses most on eliminating animosities between
trainees,
or groups of trainees, that are based on national origins. Abu Jandal,
for
example, said that in the late 1990s he was often called on by al-Qaeda
leaders to travel to camps in Afghanistan to settle disagreements
between
different nationalities, most commonly Saudis and Egyptians. Al- Qaeda
is
unique for a number of reasons, but most of all because it is the only
Islamist insurgent organization that has been able to remain cohesive
and
effective despite a heterogeneous membership drawn from several dozen
Muslim
and non-Muslim states. Abu Jandal has written that bin Laden has long
contended that to successfully confront the United States and its
allies
al-Qaeda fighters "needed to entrench amity among ourselves and
eliminate
regional rivalries."
Part of the training regimen is to ensure, according to Abu Jandal,
that
"the issue of nationalism was put out of our minds, and we acquired a
wider
view than that, namely the issue of the ummah."

Fatalism

"What does a mujahid seek from jihad?" Shaykh Yusaf al-Alyiri answers
his
own question: "He seeks one of two happy endings, either victory or
martyrdom. He will be victorious when he achieves either of them." Of
all
the non-weapons training an al-Qaeda trainee receives, this seems the
most
simple and straightforward. The mujahid, al-Muqrin concludes, "must be
eager to enrage God's enemies and he must believe that God's victory is
certain, as promised." He must not worry about the future. "Whatever is
going to happen to you," al-Muqrin instructed would-be insurgents,
"will not
miss you, and whatever is going to miss you will not happen to you; if
it
were your fate to be killed, taken prisoner, or wounded , then this
would be
your fate, and caution will not save you from fate."

Area Awareness

Al-Qaeda's training in piety, discipline, unity and fatalism is
designed to
produce a mujahid who is part of an elite vanguard organization that is
deployed in multiple areas of the Muslim world.
Al-Qaeda doctrine tells each mujahid that he is "fighting for the whole
[Islamic] nation to preserve its religion, sanctities, the blood,
honor, and
property of the [Muslim] people, and to repulse injustice and
aggression."
That said, the doctrine notes that al- Qaeda fighters may not encounter
a
fully supportive population when they first arrive in the theater of
fighting. This is because the mujahedin themselves are outsiders as far
as
the locals are concerned, and they have not yet proved they can protect
the
local population. In many instances, therefore, the most the mujahedin
can
expect is passive assistance. "The mujahedin," al-Muqrin explained,
"must
pay attention to the fact that most people are busy with life and
pursuing
their own livelihood. If the mujahedin keep this in mind they will
realize
that in many circumstances they will not get great support unless God
wishes
otherwise."

Since this situation will be common across the Muslim world, the
mujahedin
must be disciplined and behave according to the tenets of their
training. To
turn passive support into active support, al- Muqrin claims, each
mujahid
must "be known for his nobility of character, ethics, and loyalty to
the
believers." He continues:

"The troops must be marked by their good manners and conduct. A mujahid
must
serve as a beacon to lighten the road for the people and a model for
other
colleagues to follow. He must be careful not to be like those whom God
referred to as: `Do ye enjoin right conduct on the people, and forget
[to
practice it] yourselves?'"

Conclusion

For national militaries and insurgent groups military doctrine is a set
of
ideals that cannot be perfectly applied during the unpredictable course
of a
war. Clear, demanding and repetitive doctrinal training probably is the
best
means of ensuring the fullest possible application of doctrine in war
situations. The fact that al-Qaeda has remained a united and
disciplined
fighting force in a war against the world's greatest military power,
and
continues to be welcomed in multiple Muslim countries in which
insurgencies
are underway or being kindled, suggests the inculcation of its training
doctrine for individual fighters has been largely successful.

Notes:
1. Ma'adh al-Mansur, "The Importance of Military Preparation According
to
the Shariah," al-Mu-askar al-Battar, January 3, 2004.
2. Yusaf al-Alyiri, "The Illumination on the Path of Jihad. The Road to
Battle," Sawt al-Jihad, November 1, 2004.
3. Al-Faruq al-Amiri, "What is our duty toward our ummah?" al-Mu- askar
al-Battar, August 17, 2004.
Ibid.,"God is your refuge, Al-Fallujah," al-Mu-askar al-Battar,
November 10,
2004.
5. "Interview with Abd-al-Aziz al-Muqrin," Movement for Islamic Reform,
October 13, 2003.
6. Abu Hajar Abd-al-Aziz al-Muqrin, "The Second Stage: The Relative
Strategic Balance," Mu-askar al-Battar, January 15, 2004.
7. "Interview of Bin Ladin's Former Body Guard, Abu Jandal," Al-Quds
al-Arabi, August 3, 2004 and March 15, 22, 24, and 25, 2005.

[a post for research and study]

Secret Camps Offer Operational Courses in Jihad Tactics Stephen Ulph
[From: Terrorism Focus (The Jamestown Foundation, USA) March 28, 2006 -
Volume III, Issue 12] http://www.jamestown.org

An interesting recent posting on the Abu al-Bokhary jihadi forum
(http://www.abualbokhary.net/) provides some useful insight about the
current conditions and the priorities in the training of mujahideen.
The
anonymous author of a "Basic Course for Beginners in Secret Mujahideen
Camps," describes a "five day course for first beginners in jihadist
activity." He states that it is derived from practical experience in a
fast-tightening environment, in which "time is against the brothers,
and in
which there is the necessity to train by any means available." This
means
camps "in secluded places whose existence is limited to one week."
After
first detailing the type of equipment, communications and weaponry to
be
brought, the posting gives an hour-by-hour program of events.

DAY ONE of the course is taken up with constructing the camp and
establishing the group dynamics of the 14-member team, apportioning
roles
and appointing the amir (commander). The 30-by-10 meter site of the
camp is
to contain a mosque, sleeping rooms, latrine and kitchen, for each of
which
the details on measurements, location and camouflage are provided. Time
is
to be set aside for instilling the importance of discipline, "the fear
of
God and obedience to the amir" and of banishing levity, while each day
is to
contain time slots both for physical training and spiritual exercises
in the
form of readings from the Quran.

On DAY TWO the military training begins in earnest and includes the
following sections:

--Hand weapons: assembly and disassembly of revolvers and Kalashnikovs;

--Training in Islamic law and appropriate Islamic conduct;

--Lessons in night patrols and the use of security measures, such as
passwords.

DAY THREE is made up of lessons that may last from 30 minutes up to one
hour
and include the following subjects:

--The concealment of light weapons in clothing: how to conceal a
Kalashnikov
in the clothing of two persons and maneuver with these Kalashnikov
parts;
practice in throwing the parts from one to another while moving;

--Assassination techniques: throttling, knife assault, obtaining the
enemy's
knife, how and where to deal fatal blows to the body;

--Setting up cells, maneuvering and communications between them;

--Bodyguard duties and the defense of the commander;

--Maneuvering while armed or firing the weapon;

--Map reading, route analysis and distance calculation, and determining
the
enemy's armor;

--Rapid trench digging, dugouts behind enemy lines, camouflage;

--Intelligence gathering, the planning and study of targets, and access
and
escape.

DAY FOUR is devoted to live-fire exercises. The course lays emphasis on
the
use of silencers for training exercises, the importance of collecting
and
burying spent cartridges and the restoration of the area to its
pristine
state after use. Courses then follow on discreet food preparation,
cooking
and storage of food supplies for up to two weeks.

DAY FIVE consists of a performance assessment by the commander and
elaborate
measures to disguise the camp's brief existence. An unexpected feature
of
this last day is the time given to lessons on the life and military
campaigns of the Prophet Muhammad, on the nature of God and the
Afterlife
and the punishments of Hell. A feature of this section, with no further
details offered, is the "instilling of fear in others of Hell and of
God's
punishments."

The author finally concludes with the promise to provide more
information
subsequently on details of the course. Immediately noticeable from the
posting is the sense of concern that training should to be carried out
under
greater levels of secrecy and in ever- shorter timeframes than before.
Some
of these camps, the author explains, "have lasted less than two days,
made
up of 48- or 72-hour courses." It is also interesting to note that even
under such perilous conditions, elements relating to doctrine are still
retained.

[a post for research and study]

Setmariam Nasar: Background on al-Qaeda's Arrested Strategist Stephen
Ulph
[From: Terrorism Focus (The Jamestown Foundation, USA) March 28, 2006 -
Volume III, Issue 12] http://www.jamestown.org

Since November, reports from Pakistan of the possible arrest of a
leading
al-Qaeda ideologue have been engaging the interest of media analysts on
the
war on terrorism. In mid-March, Pakistan security authorities again
hinted
that they were seeking confirmation that the man arrested last October
31
during a police raid in the southern city of Quetta was a leading
Syrian
linked to al-Qaeda, Mustafa Setmariam Nasar, also known as Abu Mus'ab
al-Suri or Umar Abd al-Hakim. Jihadi forums now regularly append the
term
fakka Allahu asrahu ("may God set him free") after his name. The arrest
is
significant since Nasar is linked both to the 2004 train bombings in
Madrid,
Spain, that killed 191 people, and to the July 7 attacks in London that
left
56 dead. He has had a $5 million bounty placed on his head by the U.S.
State
Department for training terrorists, including in the use of poisons and
chemicals, in which he worked closely with Abu Khabab al-Masri, the
poisons
and chemical explosives expert killed during a Pakistani air strike in
mid-
January (see Terrorism Focus, Volume 3, Issue 3).

Nasar is one of al-Qaeda's top ideologues, ceding place only to
Abdullah
Azzam and Abd al-Qadir bin Abd al-Aziz. In terms of his practical
analyses
on political and military policy, he has proved to be the movement's
most
significant strategic brain. Nasar had consciously set out to take on
this
role. In a response written to the statement issued on November 18,
2004 by
the U.S. State Department, he denied having collaborated with Abu
Mus'ab al-
Zarqawi, regretting it as "an honor I was not granted to share in since
I
had difficulties in getting to Iraq, and because of my isolating myself
to
devote my time to filling one of the Muslims'
most important gaps—the analysis of our past experiences, drawing
lessons
from them, and examining the nature of the confrontations and battles
that
await us, since I am one of the few that are left among the mujahideen
specializing in this" (www.fsboa.com/vw).

His jihad experience prepared him well for this task, since it covers
all
the main arenas of conflict. According to the Minbar al- Tawhid
wal-Jihad
website, after studying mechanical engineering in Aleppo, Nasar joined
the
Syrian jihadist movement al-Tali'a al- Muqatila ("The Fighting
Vanguard")
and deepened his military expertise at the hands of refugee Syrian
military
officers in Jordan and Egyptian and Iraqi instructors in Baghdad and
Cairo.
Specializing in explosives engineering and urban guerrilla warfare,
Nasar
trained recruits in the military camps of the Muslim Brotherhood in
Jordan
and Baghdad. Following the Syrian Brotherhood's dramatic reverse in the
Hama
massacre of 1982, Nasar left the movement and moved to Afghanistan with
the
intention of reconstructing the dismantled jihadist movement in Syria.
There
he fought against the Russians and joined the fledgling al-Qaeda
movement,
deepening his doctrinal and historical training.
Subsequently Nasar traveled to Spain and from there in 1995 to Britain,
where he collaborated in the founding of the Algerian Groupe islamique
armé
(GIA). The success of the Taliban movement then brought him back to
Afghanistan, where he worked both in propaganda and military training.
After
the U.S. destruction of his Al-Ghurabaa training camp at Kabul and
following
the fall of the Emirate following the September 11, 2001 attacks, Nasar
ostensibly devoted his energies to writing, re-emerging active in the
field
following a November 2004 warrant by the U.S. State Department and the
posting of $5 million reward for his arrest (www.tawhed.ws).

The range of his works in the form of treatises, books and audio
lectures
indicate the caliber of the man and his prodigious energy.
Since well before September 2001, Nasar has been authoring works on the
organization of the jihadi movements, detailing its ideal doctrinal and
political methodology and leadership structures.
Reflecting his pedagogical role in Afghanistan, Naser has written
wide-ranging works covering treatises on the present world order and
the
illegitimacy of modern democratic systems. There are a number of
tactical
works from his pen, focusing on guerrilla warfare and the use of
terrorist
cell structures, but a large portion of his oeuvre are "jihad culture"
works
that focus on the history and development of Islamic political systems.
As a
result of his deep analysis of history, Nasar's most original
contributions
are the works concentrating on reasons for failure in the jihadist
movement.
These include works on "Aspects of the Jihadi Crisis" such as the
experience
of the jihad movements in Central Asia, North Africa, the Arabian
Peninsula
and his influential 18-chapter Mulahazat hawl al- Tajriba al-Jihadiyya
fi
Suria ("Observations on the Jihadi Experience in Syria"), published in
1987
and circulated in the form of an e-book by the Minbar al-Tawhid
wal-Jihad
site (www.tawhed.ws).

His most ambitious work is the 1,600 page treatise written in December
2004,
entitled Da'wat al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya al-`Alamiyya ("The Call of the
International Islamic Resistance"), which outlines future strategies
for the
global jihad movement, prioritizing terrorist attacks and decentralized
urban warfare as the only method to guarantee success. Excerpts from
the
work are continually circulated on the jihadi forums, and the recent
attacks
on the Abqaiq oil facilities in Saudi Arabia increased the distribution
of
sections urging attacks on oil installations.

Strategists of the caliber of Mustafa Setmariam Nasar are few and far
between, and the loss of such a figure is highly significant,
particularly
since he saw his role as one of educating the "third generation" of
mujahideen. By these are understood later, dispersed jihadi formations,
not
subject to the systematic training in Afghanistan and who are in danger
of
losing the lessons learned from the experiences of earlier jihadi
arenas.
While Nasar's works continue to populate the web, his own website
al-Muqawama al- Islamiyya al-`Alamiyya, ("The International Islamic
Resistance") hosting his works and statements (www.fsboa.com/vw) no
longer
functions properly. Nasar's last dated statement was a general salvo
made on
August 20, 2005, following the London bombings, in which he encouraged
sleeper cells the world over to launch a general front against western
nations, as "a battle against a single entity that is comprised of all
the
allies" in what is "a global conflict" (from the Tajdeed jihadi forum
www.tajdeed.org.uk).

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.