LCCC ENGLISH
DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
September 30/07
Bible Reading of the day
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint John 1,47-51. Jesus saw Nathanael
coming toward him and said of him, "Here is a true Israelite. There is no
duplicity in him." Nathanael said to him, "How do you know me?" Jesus answered
and said to him, "Before Philip called you, I saw you under the fig tree."
Nathanael answered him, "Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of
Israel." Jesus answered and said to him, "Do you believe because I told you that
I saw you under the fig tree? You will see greater things than this." And he
said to him, "Amen, amen, I say to you, you will see the sky opened and the
angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man."
Opinions
A President Who Cannot Say
"No"?. By:
Walid Choucair. September 29/07
War on the Horizon?Human
Events -By: Robert Maginnis.September
29/07
Iran, Osama and 9/11.FrontPage
magazine.com.September
29/07
Less and less middle ground in a divided America.By
David Ignatius.September
29/07
Iraqis do not need need any more 'advice' from
Washington.By
The Daily Star.September
29/07
Latest News Reports From
Miscellaneous Sources for September 29/07
Hariri to Meet Bush in Washington Amidst Efforts For Consensus
on ...Naharnet
Hariri to Meet Bush
in Washington Amidst Efforts For Consensus on Presidential Candidate-Naharnet
Preparations Underway For Hariri-Aoun Meeting.Naharnet
Lebanese delay presidential choice.Chicago Tribune
Fatah
al-Islam's God Father Assassinated in Syria-Naharnet
PSP MPS
Wouldn't Vote for a non-March 14 presidential candidate-Naharnet
Berri Blasts
as 'Meddling' U.N. Call for Timely Presidential Elections-Naharnet
Berri Sets Up
Committees to Pursue Contacts with March 14-Naharnet
US Supports Consenus on Dialogue.Naharnet
War on the Horizon?Human
Events - Washington,DC,USA
Beirut slashes red tape for new businesses-Daily
Star
Leaders voice optimism over consensus candidate-Daily
Star
Washington contributes $5 million for Hariri tribunal-Daily
Star
Lahoud makes speech against foreign interference in
Lebanese politics-Daily
Star
Religious leaders stress need for consensus-Daily
Star
'Lebanon's political makeup allows foreign meddling-Daily
Star
Army to assess damage caused in Ghanem killing-Daily
Star
Siniora and Rizk discuss Hariri tribunal-Daily
Star
Nahr al-Bared devastation stuns Palestinian officials-Daily
Star
Italian UNIFIL contingent hosts iftar banquet for
Southern youth-Daily
Star
UNRWA boss: Reconstructing camp will take up to four
years-Daily
Star
Azour repeats call for badly needed reforms at EDL-Daily
Star
Lebanese Shiites speak. At least four of them do-Daily
Star
Baghdad fumes over 'federalism' plan passed by US
Senate-Daily
Star
U.S. Supports Consenus on Dialogue
U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Jeffrey Feltman informed Mp Saad Hariri Friday that
Washington encourages "what appears to be consensus" between the Lebanese
factions on dialogue covering the presidential elections. "I took into
consideration the call made a few weeks ago by Speaker Nabih Berri for dialogue,
also the call by March 14 forces and the call made by Gen. (Michel) Aoun this
week for dialogue,' He said. "I informed MP Hariri that we are very encouraged"
by these calls,' Feltman said, noting that the more backing the new president
gets the stronger he would be. The United States is fully "confident" that the
Lebanese would be able to choose their president, he stressed. Feltman said the
United States has never been involved in naming a candidate for the presidency
and would not be involved in such an issue in the future. When asked whether MPs
would be able to elect a president before Nov. 23, Feltman said: "I believe all
the elements are available for that … I am sure you will be able to elect your
president within the constitutional schedule, in line with the constitution and
without foreign intervention," Feltman concluded. Beirut, 28 Sep 07, 18:06
Berri Blasts as 'Meddling' U.N. Call for Timely Presidential Elections
The United Nations Security Council called for Lebanon to hold presidential
elections as scheduled on October 23, but House Speaker Nabih Berri quickly
blasted the world body for "meddling" in Lebanese affairs. The 15-member council
"called for the holding of a free and fair presidential election in conformity
with the Lebanese constitutional norms and schedules and without any foreign
interference," it said in a statement released on Thursday. The top U.N. body
further called for the election to be held in "an atmosphere free of violence,
fear and intimidation, in particular against the representatives of the Lebanese
people and institutions." Lebanon's parliament on Tuesday adjourned until
October 23 a crucial session to elect a new president for lack of a quorum and
to allow more time for lawmakers to reach agreement on a consensus candidate.
But fears are running high that the deadlock over the presidency could lead to
two rival governments, a grim reminder of the final years of the 1975-1990 civil
war when two competing administrations battled it out.
The Security Council "took note of the decision to convene the next session of
the Lebanese Parliament on 23 October and looked forward for the parliament to
proceed as appropriate to the election of the president," it added.
Egypt, France, Saudi Arabia and the Arab League had called earlier Thursday for
the election to be held within the timeframe set out by the constitution.
In a statement published by Lebanese dailies on Friday, Berri rejected the U.N.
statement and a similar one by the U.S. House of Representatives.
"With all due respect, it is not the business of the Security Council to
interfere in what is the business of the Lebanese parliament," Berri said in a
statement published by Lebanese dailies on Friday. "The more people are imposed
upon, the more they and the Security Council just get exhausted."
The four-week delay in electing a new president was seen by both the government
and opposition as a last chance to prevent an escalation of the political crisis
in Beirut. A two-thirds majority of the 127-strong parliament is required for a
candidate to be elected by parliament in a first round of voting to replace the
current pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud, whose terms ends in November. In the
event of a second round, a simple majority suffices.
Most of the 58 MPs from the Hizbullah-led opposition boycotted Tuesday's session
on the grounds that the feuding political parties had failed to agree on a
consensus candidate to replace Lahoud. MPs from the ruling majority have made
clear they plan to go ahead with a vote when lawmakers reconvene in October even
if no agreement has been struck. Prime Minister Fouad Saniora's government has
been paralyzed since opposition forces withdrew their six ministers from the
cabinet in November 2006 in a bid to gain more representation in cabinet.
Tuesday's session came in a tense atmosphere after the assassination last week
of MP Antoine Ghanem from the ruling coalition, the sixth deputy from the
anti-Syrian camp killed since 2005.(Naharnet-AFP) Beirut, 28 Sep 07, 08:15
Hariri to Meet Bush in Washington
Amidst Efforts For Consensus on Presidential Candidate
U.S. President George Bush is scheduled to receive al-Moustaqbal Movement leader
Saad Hariri at the White House Thursday amidst efforts to work out a consensus
agreement on a presidential candidate capable of neutralizing Lebanon regarding
regional differences. The short white house announcement did not disclose topics
of discussion between Hariri and Bush. Meanwhile, the daily an-Nahar reported
that Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri was sponsoring "Mobile rounds of
consultations" with the various political and religious leaders to crystallize
consensus on a presidential candidate accepted by the various Lebanese factions.
Berri's envoys met separately on Thursday with Free Patriotic Movement Leader
Michel Aoun and Lebanese Forces Chairman Samir Geagea and were to hold talks
Friday with Druze Leader Walid Jumblat. MP Ghassan Tueni said after meeting
Berri on Thursday that he would inform Greek Orthodox Bishop Elias Awdi of the
discussion that the speaker has had with Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir.
An-Nahar reported that the ongoing consultations focus on "political qualities"
needed for consensus on a presidential candidate. Such qualities, the report
said, focus on three main topics: Independence in decision-making and pacifying
Lebanon regarding regional and international powers; supporting the
international tribunal to the end; and reassuring Hizbullah's Resistance arm in
preparation to "absorbing its weapons" at a later stage.
An-Nahar said all parties to the consultations, with the exception of Patriarch
Sfeir, are proposing candidates.
Non-serious candidates were dropping out of the discussion which sets the stage
for a list of "serious candidates" one of them could be chosen as a consensus
runner, the newspaper reported.
Berri said contacts with Aoun and Geagea were "good" and Sfeir was quoted as
saying members of the March 14 alliance have "told me that they are
optimistic."Hizbullah MP Mohammed Raad said that party wants a president who
would re-assure the resistance that its weapons are "not targeted." Hariri, on
his part, reiterated charges that Syria wants to bloc the forthcoming
presidential elections. "No body wants Vacuum at the Baabda palace except the
Muhajireen Palace" of Syrian President Bashar Assad, Hariri told gusts to an
iftar dinner on Friday. A white house announcement did not disclose topics of
discussion between Bush and Hariri, but they are expected to cover "threats to
stability in Lebanon and the region," a reliable source told Naharnet. Beirut,
29 Sep 07, 08:13
Hariri to Meet Bush in Washington Amidst Efforts For Consensus on Presidential
Candidate
U.S. President George Bush is scheduled to receive al-Moustaqbal Movement leader
Saad Hariri at the White House Thursday amidst efforts to work out a consensus
agreement on a presidential candidate capable of neutralizing Lebanon regarding
regional differences. The short white house announcement did not disclose topics
of discussion between Hariri and Bush. Meanwhile, the daily an-Nahar reported
that Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri was sponsoring "Mobile rounds of
consultations" with the various political and religious leaders to crystallize
consensus on a presidential candidate accepted by the various Lebanese factions.
Berri's envoys met separately on Thursday with Free Patriotic Movement Leader
Michel Aoun and Lebanese Forces Chairman Samir Geagea and were to hold talks
Friday with Druze Leader Walid Jumblat. MP Ghassan Tueni said after meeting
Berri on Thursday that he would inform Greek Orthodox Bishop Elias Awdi of the
discussion that the speaker has had with Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir.
An-Nahar reported that the ongoing consultations focus on "political qualities"
needed for consensus on a presidential candidate. Such qualities, the report
said, focus on three main topics: Independence in decision-making and pacifying
Lebanon regarding regional and international powers; supporting the
international tribunal to the end; and reassuring Hizbullah's Resistance arm in
preparation to "absorbing its weapons" at a later stage. An-Nahar said all
parties to the consultations, with the exception of Patriarch Sfeir, are
proposing candidates.
Non-serious candidates were dropping out of the discussion which sets the stage
for a list of "serious candidates" one of them could be chosen as a consensus
runner, the newspaper reported. Berri said contacts with Aoun and Geagea were
"good" and Sfeir was quoted as saying members of the March 14 alliance have
"told me that they are optimistic."Hizbullah MP Mohammed Raad said that party
wants a president who would re-assure the resistance that its weapons are "not
targeted."
Hariri, on his part, reiterated charges that Syria wants to bloc the forthcoming
presidential elections. "No body wants Vacuum at the Baabda palace except the
Muhajireen Palace" of Syrian President Bashar Assad, Hariri told gusts to an
iftar dinner on Friday. A white house announcement did not disclose topics of
discussion between Bush and Hariri, but they are expected to cover "threats to
stability in Lebanon and the region," a reliable source told Naharnet. Beirut,
29 Sep 07, 08:13
Fatah al-Islam's God Father
Assassinated in Syria
The Reputed Mentor of Fatah al-Islam and other notorious Islamist terrorists
operating in Lebanon and Iraq was gunned down in Syria Friday.
Mahmoud Gul Aghasi, a Kurd who goes by the name of Abu al-Qaaqaa, was killed by
a gunman who stepped out of a car and opened fire at him from an automatic
weapon as he walked out of a mosque in the northern Syrian city of Aleppo after
Friday noon prayers, according to an Agence France Presse report attributed to
witnesses and medical sources. Aghasi was hit in the head and stomach and passed
away a few hours later in Aleppo's al Shaaba hospital, according to a medical
source at the hospital. Three people with him were wounded in the attack.
Witnesses said one of his attackers was detained by Aghasi's followers.
Al-Qaaqaa was known for his anti-American views and recordings calling for holy
war against U.S. forces, and had set up a group which recruited young men to
fight coalition forces in Iraq. He had recently fallen foul of fellow
jihadists, however, for allegedly colluding with the Syrian regime of President
Bashar Assad, and several extremist websites had called for his assassination.
Al-Qaaqaa, according to reliable sources, was responsible for preaching the
radical doctrine to Jihadi recruits at a camp in Syria before dispatching them
to fight in Iraq, and most recently in Lebanon. The sources said al-Qaaqaa was
the God Father of Fatah al-Islam militants and their terrorist mastermind Shaker
Abssi, who remains at large in north Lebanon after the army finished off his
group in a 106-day battle in Nahr a-Bared on Set. 2.(Naharnet-AFP)
Beirut, 29 Sep 07, 10:15
Berri Sets Up Committees to
Pursue Contacts with March 14
Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, who has been leading an effort to resolve the
differences between the feuding Lebanese camps, has set up committees to pursue
contacts with the majority March 14 Forces. Berri told the daily As Safir that
the committees will start their task without delay by getting in touch with
Druze chief Walid Jumblat and Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea. He said
members of his own parliamentary bloc will be in charge of maintaining constant
contact with the Hizbullah-led opposition to update them on outcome of the
talks. Berri also reiterated his adherence to the specific qualities of the new
President as agreed upon by Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah. Beirut, 28 Sep 07,
11:56
PSP MPS Wouldn't Vote for a non-March 14 presidential candidate
MP Wael Abu Faour stressed Friday that reaching consensus with the opposition on
a presidential candidate is "almost impossible" stressing that the Progressive
Socialist Party of which he is member will vote only for a March 14 candidate.
Abu Faour made the statement to reporters after meeting Maronite Patriarch
Nasrallah Sfeir in his capacity as PSP leader Walid Jumblat's envoy. "The PSP
would no accept a president from outside the frame of the March 14 ranks," Abu
Faour said.
He stressed that the March 14 alliance is "proud" to support the candidacy of
Nassib Lahoud, Butros Harb and "others" to the presidency.
"We would not be part of any settlement. We will vote only for March 14
candidates," He said "Consensus between two (colliding) political lines is very
difficult and almost impossible. A frank and open political discussion could
lead to a political understanding. But consensus on a name … cannot solve the
crisis." He explained.
The PSP, Abu Faour said, "is not blocking any settlement. It wants a settlement
based on political options and consensus on political targets and not just a
review of names.""We do not foresee a horizon for a settlement due to
restrictions imposed by regional powers and because the March 8 side is linked
to such regional restrictions at the expense of domestic understanding and
internal Lebanese interests," Abou Faour concluded. Beirut, 28 Sep 07, 17:34
War on the Horizon?
by Robert Maginnis
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22611
Posted: 09/28/2007
The war drums are sounding louder in the Mideast and America could be drawn into
the coming conflict. The Bush administration can either ignore the warnings and
abandon the region or engage the antagonists. But America’s options and
credibility are limited.
The US military is stretched perilously thin and America is not viewed as an
honest broker by many. But “We’re living under a volcano,” argues Mustata Alam,
director of security studies at the Gulf Research Center in Dubai. A study by
his organization concludes that “an accidental war” that might escalate to
include the US is “high.”
The US is ill-prepared militarily to participate in “an accidental war” if it
requires ground forces beyond those already committed to operations in Iraq and
Afghanistan. US military action to support Israel against potential antagonists
Syria, Iran or Iran’s proxy Hezbollah (Party of God) would be limited to air and
naval forces. Given the nature of the threat, however, that may be inadequate.
Syria is beating the loudest war drums and appears to be the geographical
lynchpin to any near-term conflict with Israel. Syrian President Bashar Assad
says his military is preparing for that war. “We have begun preparations within
the framework of our options,” Assad told the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Anba.
Syria has significant armed forces totaling more than 380,000 men, with another
130,000 troops in reserve. Its arsenal includes approximately 3,700 tanks and
some 510 combat aircraft. Most of Assad’s military equipment, however, consists
of relics from the former Soviet Union.
Syria has recently taken some war-preparatory moves to include modernizing its
military.
• On Sept 25, Syria practiced a nation-wide emergency drill to prepare its home
front for possible states of emergency that could include a war with Israel.
• Syria added a division along the Golan Heights and positioned thousands of
medium and long-range rockets capable of striking most of Israel.
• Syria is also preparing chemical weapons. On July 26, it was reported that
Syrian and Iranian engineers had a deadly accident while trying to arm a Scud-C
missile with a mustard gas warhead. Jane’s Defence Weekly reports that Syria
manufactures several hundred tons of chemical warfare agents like VX and Sarin
annually.
• Syria is buying sophisticated Russian weapons. This year Syria took delivery
of MIG-31E interceptors capable of simultaneously shooting several targets more
than 110 miles away and the Pantsyr-S1E self-propelled anti-aircraft gun and
missile system.
In addition, Syria’s relationship with rogues Iran and North Korea as well as
Hezbollah have earned her special status as the newest member of the axis of
evil.
In 2005, Syria signed a mutual defense pact with Iran. Syria’s defense minister,
Hassan Turkmani, explained “We can have a common front against Israel’s
threats.” Iran assists Syria in developing chemical weapons and has been
permitted to base long-range Shabab ballistic missiles on Syrian soil. Recently,
an Iranian news web site boasted that "Iran will shoot 600 missiles at Israel if
it is attacked."
Iran uses Syria as a conduit to resupply Hezbollah. After the 2006 34-day war,
Tehran rearmed and financed Hezbollah through Syrian middlemen to prepare the
terror group for the next battle with Israel. Those preparations appear to be
nearing completion.
An Iranian-funded Lebanese road has been built on the Litani River’s northern
bank. The area south of the river to the Israeli border – 12 miles – is
patrolled by United Nations peacekeeping forces sent there after the 2006 war,
allegedly to disarm Hezbollah.
Most of the land north of the road has been purchased by Shia businessmen with
Tehran’s help. Numerous small villages protected by guards toting AK-47s are
being built along the road. It’s believed that these villages include extensive
tunnels, fortifications and rocket launcher sites like those installed in the
villages south of the Litani prior to the 2006 war.
Hezbollah’s general secretary Sheik Hassan Nasrallah admits that Hezbollah is
“transporting weapons to the front” and, he boasts “We have weapons of all kinds
and quantities.” “We are certain that we can reach” Tel Aviv with these weapons,
Nasrallah said.
North Korea, Syria’s partner, helps by directing the construction of silos and
tunnels near the cities of Hama and Aleppo, by selling Syria sophisticated
rockets, providing chemical weapons know-how, and, possibly, selling nuclear
technology to Syria.
On August 14, North Korean minister of foreign trade Rim Kyong Man signed a
protocol with Syria on “cooperation in trade and science and technology.” Syrian
rocket engineers have frequently visited Pyongyang reportedly to acquire missile
technology such as the telemetry – i.e., targeting - -data to help Syria develop
a sophisticated class of Scud missiles with sufficient range to reach all
Israel. The US worries that North Korea may be transferring nuclear technologies
to countries like Syria. On October 9, 2006, hours after the Kim Jong-il regime
tested its first nuclear device, President Bush warned Pyongyang against the
“transfer of nuclear weapons or material …. Such transfers would be considered a
grave threat to the United States….” A May 2006 US report confirmed that
Pakistani supplier A. Q. Khan had already “offered nuclear technology and
hardware to Syria.”
Bush’s warning may explain Israel’s September 6 bombing of a Syrian facility
north of Raqqa. Although no details are available, many governments confirm that
Israeli fighters bombed the facility.
One possible reason for the attack is that North Korea shipped nuclear equipment
to Syria which was then transported to Raqqa. While the facts are unclear, the
Washington Post reported the US knew about the attack beforehand and may have
provided confirming intelligence.
Former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave us a glimpse under the
veil of secrecy surrounding the incident saying Israel did in fact attack
targets in Syria. His top adviser, Mossad veteran Uzi Arad, said: "I do know
what happened, and when it comes out it will stun everyone."
The Jerusalem Post confirmed that the raid was against a North Korean-supplied
nuclear installation. Israel’s commander of military intelligence Maj. Gen. Amos
Vadlin claims the attack restored Israel’s deterrent posture which was weakened
by the 2006 Lebanon war.
It may be a bit optimistic to expect a single attack to turn back the clock to
the days when Israel’s neighbors were spell-bound by Israel’s military might.
That view was shattered by the inconclusive war with Hezbollah.
The Bush administration will host peace talks this fall to address the ongoing
Palestinian issue and Syria is expected to participate. Those talks ought to
extend beyond the Israeli-Palestinian crises to confront the deafening war drums
shaking Mideast peace. Those talks should set security, diplomatic and economic
courses of action that prevent the region from stumbling into “an accidental
war” created by the Mideast’s new axis of evil.
---------------------------------------------
Mr. Maginnis is a retired Army lieutenant colonel, a national security and
foreign affairs analyst for radio and television and a senior strategist with
the U.S. Army.
A President Who Cannot Say "No"?
Walid Choucair
Al-Hayat - 29/09/07//
Since coming to power in 1998, President Emile Lahoud - whose three year
extension is now coming to an end - resolved to meet with the Syrian leadership
on a weekly basis. He was in constant coordination with the late President Hafez
al Assad, and with Bashar al Assad even before the son became president,
concerning every detail and issue. When the presidency was handed down to Bashar
in the year 2000, these meetings took place still more regularly. This continued
through the reign of the heads of Syrian military intelligence in Lebanon -
including that of the late Ghazi Kanaan and his successor Rustom Ghazali. Every
issue was thus addressed, from major and minor disagreements with the late PM
Rafic Hariri or other Lebanese leaders, to the struggle against the Israeli
occupation in the South and the resistance operations there, to the most
insignificant quarrels over the assignment of some representative in one or the
other municipal council.
This coordination extended to weekly phone conversations between presidents
Lahoud and Assad, which took place every Saturday morning at eleven o'clock
following talks between the Lebanese leader and Ghazali. Any issue that could
not be resolved in the latter talks would be addressed between the two
presidents - and anything that could not be discussed in these conversations was
relayed through their respective deputies. For the distance between the two
countries is a short one. One of the tasks involved was the 'correction of
statements' made towards the Lebanese president. or complaints by the President
about the behavior of Damascus' allies towards him.
Following the Syrian withdrawal in April, 2005, these weekly phone calls became
less frequent. According to some, this stemmed from fear of constant monitoring
by an international community seeking to ensure the implementation of Security
Council Resolution 1559 - aimed at blocking Syrian interference in Lebanon as
embodied in its call for a fair presidential election two days before Syria's
extension of Lahoud's mandate in 2004. Thus, the burden of coordination was
distributed between deputies, direct calls between Lahoud and Assad, and Syria's
total trust in Hizbullah to manage some Lebanese internal affairs.
The equation, however, remained unchanged: Damascus considers Lahoud to be its
man in Lebanon, and Lahoud believes - as he did before the withdrawal - that he
cannot deny its requests because "they have never denied mine." For when his
requests are denied, he modifies them - or drops them.
There was reason behind Syria's rejection in the aftermath of its withdrawal of
a proposal to elect a new Lebanese president by the then Syrian dominated
parliament. This was suggested by the leader of the Progressive Socialist Party,
Walid Jumblatt. It soon became clear that Syria's ties with Lahoud remained as
strong as ever following his refusal to endorse the international tribunal in
autumn of 2006 and his subsequent refusal to recognize the government of Prime
Minister Fouad Siniora. Before all this, Lahoud had rejected the seven points -
particularly those pertaining to the demarcation of the Shebaa Farms and the
"consolidation of weapons in the hands of the Lebanese state... as stipulated in
the Taef Accords." Hizbullah joined Lahoud, owing to the strategic relationship
between Iran and Syria and to the party's being the sole group to post banners
and stickers proclaiming Lahoud a "man of honor."
Lahoud has given much to Syria and has provided cover for its placing its people
in Lebanese government and security posts. How much of this acquiescence to its
regional ambitions in Lebanon will it demand in our next president? Can Syria's
allies afford to see Damascus' - and thus their own - control over the next
president shrink? Given all that has happened in Lebanon, will other nations
allow Damascus to retain even some of the share it has grow accustomed to in the
Lebanese presidency
Iran, Osama and 9/11
By Jamie Glazov
FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, September 28, 2007
Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Thomas Joscelyn, an expert on the
international terrorist network. He has written extensively on al Qaeda and its
allies, including Iran. He is the author, most recently, of Iran’s Proxy War
Against America, a booklet published by the Claremont Institute and available
for download at its web site. (Click here to download the booklet.)
FP: Thomas Joscelyn, welcome to Frontpage Interview.
Joscleyn: Good to be here Jamie.
FP: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s visit to Columbia has sparked great
controversy. Yesterday, Ahmadinejad announced in front of the U.N. General
Assembly that Iran will defy U.N. Security Council resolutions demanding that
his regime suspend its uranium enrichment.
What should the American people know about Ahmadinejad and the regime he
represents?
Joscelyn: Ahmadinejad is a puppet for the Ayatollah and his attending mullahs,
who have the real power in Iran. This clerical regime, which rose to power in
1979, is intrinsically opposed to America and her allies throughout the world.
When they chant “Death to America,” they mean it. The Iranian regime is also
dedicated to revolution. That is, they want to export the Iranian revolution
throughout the Middle East and the world. And they have often done so on the
backs of terrorists.
Iran has provided vital assistance to terrorist organizations in at least all of
the following nations/areas: the Palestinian territories (Hamas, and Palestinian
Islamic Jihad), Lebanon (Hezbollah), Egypt (the Islamic Group and Egyptian
Islamic Jihad), Sudan (a variety of terrorist groups), Somalia (Sunni
terrorists), Algeria (an al Qaeda affiliate), Saudi Arabia (Saudi Hezbollah),
Southeast Asia (various terrorist groups, including affiliates of al Qaeda),
Iraq (both Sunni and Shiite terrorist groups), Afghanistan (Iran now even arms
the Taliban, its one-time enemy), the Gulf States, and elsewhere.
So, Iran is the fountainhead of terrorism.
Much of the public outrage over Ahmadinejad’s visit has focused on Iran’s
ongoing support for our terrorist enemies in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as
his nation’s burgeoning nuclear program. These are, of course, legitimate and
grave concerns. Unfortunately, however, there has been little focus on the
relationship between Iran and al Qaeda, despite the fact that the relationship
reportedly dates back to 1990.
FP: What evidence ties Iran to al Qaeda as early as 1990?
Joscelyn: According to Lawrence Wright in his book The Looming Tower, a top al
Qaeda operative named Ali Mohamed told the FBI that Ayman al Zawahiri and the
Iranians agreed to cooperate on a coup attempt in Egypt in 1990. The Iranians
have long targeted Hosni Mubarak’s regime and so they were very willing to
assist Zawahiri’s Egyptian Islamic Jihad (“EIJ”) in a coup attempt. According to
Mohamed, the Iranians gave Zawahiri $2 million and trained his EIJ operatives
for the coup attempt, which was ultimately aborted.
Coming from Ali Mohamed, this is especially damning testimony. Mohamed was one
of the U.S. Government’s star witnesses during the trial of some of the al Qaeda
terrorists responsible for the August 7, 1998, embassy bombings in Kenya and
Tanzania. Mohamed himself admitted to his involvement in the embassy bombings –
he did the surveillance that was used to plan the operation. He also looms large
in al Qaeda’s early history: he compiled al Qaeda’s first training manual,
trained bin Laden’s security guards, helped organize al Qaeda’s move from
Afghanistan to the Sudan in the early 1990’s, and was trusted by Zawahiri to
penetrate America’s intelligence and military establishments (he even feigned
cooperation with the CIA as an informant and went on to become a sergeant in the
U.S. Army).
So, Mohamed’s testimony is good evidence that the Iranians and al Qaeda were
cooperating all the way back in 1990.
FP: And the cooperation didn’t end there, did it?
Joscelyn: No, it did not end there. There is evidence of cooperation between
Iran, Hezbollah and al Qaeda from 1990 through the present. I go into more
detail about this evidence in Iran’s Proxy War Against America, but let me
provide some of the highlights here.
According to the 9/11 Commission, the Iranians and al Qaeda held discussions in
the early 1990’s. During the embassy bombings trial we learned that one of these
meetings involved a sit down between Imad Mugniyah, who is Iran’s master
terrorist as well as Hezbollah’s chief of terrorist operations, and Osama bin
Laden. As a result of these meetings, Iran and al Qaeda agreed to cooperate on
attacks against America and Israel. Al Qaeda terrorists were then trained in
Iranian and Hezbollah training camps in Lebanon, Sudan and Iran.
Mugniyah had a profound impact on al Qaeda’s transition from an Afghani-based
insurgency group into an international terrorist empire. As a result of the
cooperation between Mugniyah and bin Laden, al Qaeda consciously modeled itself
after Hezbollah in many ways. As Lawrence Wright notes in The Looming Tower,
there are good reasons to suspect that al Qaeda even adopted the use of suicide
bombers because of Hezbollah’s influence. I think that prior to 1993 (there may
be an isolated incident or two prior to then), suicide attacks were an anathema
to Sunni Islam. They were strictly prohibited. The Shiite Hezbollah, however,
had used suicide bombers since as early 1983, when Mugniyah’s suicide truck
bombers destroyed the U.S. embassy and the U.S. Marine Barracks in Lebanon.
Zawahiri and al Qaeda adopted suicide attacks as their modus operandi only in
the early 1990’s, after Hezbollah had shown them the utility of such operations.
According to Bob Baer in See No Evil, the CIA uncovered evidence that Mugniyah
helped facilitate the travel of an al Qaeda terrorist en route to an attack on
the Egyptian embassy in Pakistan in 1995. In June 1996, according to Gerald
Posner in Why America Slept, the CIA obtained reports from a terrorist summit in
Tehran. The reports indicated that al Qaeda, Iran and Hezbollah had agreed to
step up their attacks on American targets throughout the Middle East. A few days
later, on June 25, 1996, Hezbollah – under direct orders from Tehran – bombed
the Khobar Towers complex in Saudi Arabia.
The 9/11 Commission found that in addition to strong evidence of Iran’s
involvement, there were also signs that al Qaeda played a role in the Khobar
Towers bombing. Al Qaeda had reportedly been planning a similar operation in the
months prior to the attack and intelligence officials found that bin Laden was
congratulated by senior al Qaeda members, such as Ayman al Zawahiri, shortly
thereafter. Contemporaneous reports by the CIA and the State Department noted
that Iran and al Qaeda were both suspects. Therefore, although we don’t know for
sure, there is, at the very least, a strong possibility that the Khobar Towers
operation was a joint operation between Iran, Hezbollah and al Qaeda.
The 9/11 Commission found that the al Qaeda cell in Kenya, which was responsible
for bombing the embassy there on August 7, 1998, was trained by Hezbollah for
the operation. The 9/11 Commission also found that there is evidence that Iran
and Hezbollah facilitated the travels of 8 to 10 of the hijackers responsible
for the September 11 attacks.
There is strong evidence that Iran helped al Qaeda and Taliban members escape
from Afghanistan in late 2001 and, therefore, evade American justice. Finally,
Iran harbors senior al Qaeda leaders such as Saif al Adel (al Qaeda’s military
chief) and Saad bin Laden (Osama’s son and heir) to this day.
This is just some of the evidence of Iran’s involvement in al Qaeda’s terror.
FP: So in your opinion, what is the strongest evidence of Iran’s support for al
Qaeda?
Joscelyn: The simultaneous suicide bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and
Tanzania on August 7, 1998. As I explain in Iran’s Proxy War Against America,
there is strong evidence that: (1) Bin Laden and al Qaeda deliberately modeled
the attack after Hezbollah’s simultaneous suicide bombings of the U.S. Marine
barracks and a headquarters for French paratroopers in Lebanon in 1983. (2)
According to the 9/11 Commission, Iran and Hezbollah trained at least one of the
cells responsible for the attack. They showed them how to execute this type of
operation. (3) There is evidence that Iran supplied al Qaeda with a large amount
of explosives used in the attack. (4) Iran gives safe haven to the senior al
Qaeda terrorist wanted for his involvement in the bombings, Saif al Adel, to
this day.
Therefore, we have Iran and Hezbollah inspiring, training, arming and giving
safe haven to the al Qaeda terrorists responsible for the embassy bombings. And
this was al Qaeda’s most successful operation prior to 9/11. If this isn’t
support for al Qaeda, then I don’t know what is.
FP: So wait a minute then, could it be fairly said that Iran was, to one extent
or another, behind 9/11?
Joscelyn: I do not think that Iran was “behind 9/11.” I think that, just as the
9/11 Commission found, there are open questions about Iran’s and Hezbollah’s
involvement in the September 11 attacks. If you read pages 240 and 241 of the
9/11 Commission’s final report very carefully you realize there are a lot of
dots connecting Iran and Hezbollah to the travels of 8 to 10 of the 9/11
hijackers. However, the 9/11 Commission sort of kicked the can down the road, so
to speak, on this issue. The commissioners called for further investigation into
this matter in 2004, but more than three years later no such investigation has
been launched. That’s one of the reasons I wrote this booklet.
I would also point out that the 9/11 Commission did not cover all of the threads
potentially tying Iran and Hezbollah to 9/11. As Newsweek first reported, Ramzi
Binalshibh – al Qaeda’s point man for 9/11 – made a very suspicious trip to Iran
during the planning stages of the operation. And shortly before the attack he
left Germany on a flight that landed at Tehran International Airport. Thus, one
of the main al Qaeda conspirators involved in 9/11 found it convenient (or
something more?) to travel to Iran during the key stages of the 9/11 plot.
Binalshibh reportedly told his CIA interrogators that there was nothing to any
of this, but one has to wonder if he wasn’t simply lying. And certainly we
shouldn’t take his disavowal at face value.
FP: Some on the left will no doubt accuse you of trying to bolster the case for
a war with Iran. How would you respond to this allegation?
Joscelyn: I think this hits on a big problem we face right now as a nation. The
discourse has become too politicized. The focus in this nation is largely on our
own domestic political situation and the Bush administration. I think we would
be better served by asking more of the tough questions about al Qaeda that need
answering.
In the booklet, I explicitly argue that an invasion of Iran would be disastrous.
I do not think that military strikes should be taken off the table entirely, but
I have doubts about their efficacy. And force may be required to stop Iran’s
sponsorship of terrorists who are killing American servicemen inside Iraq. But
the point of the booklet is not to advocate for a particular course of action.
The reason I wrote it was to stir debate about what I think are a significant
body of facts and evidence tying Iran to al Qaeda. I don’t think the public
interest is served by pretending that none of this evidence exists.
FP: Why is there such reticence to engage the evidence of Iran’s involvement
with al Qaeda?
Joscelyn: It seems to me that al Qaeda is an enemy we have never really
understood. Ignorance is widespread. We face a large network of terrorists, but
many prefer not to get into the nuts and bolts of how they actually work. For
example, we often hear that the Sunnis of al Qaeda and the Shiites of Iran and
Hezbollah are incapable of cooperation due to their theological differences. A
cursory examination of Iran’s and al Qaeda’s behavior reveals, however, that
this is nonsense. When it comes to facing their common enemies the two have been
more than willing to set aside their differences. In fact, Iran has long
supported Sunni terrorists, including groups such as Hamas, which is the
ideological cousin of al Qaeda. The 9/11 Commission also explicitly found that
ideological or theological differences did not prevent Iran and Hezbollah from
cooperating with al Qaeda.
More than six years have passed since 9/11. I think it is about time we got rid
of some of our more shallow assumptions about our terrorist enemies.
And perhaps we should start asking President Ahmadinejad why it is that his
nation harbors scores of al Qaeda terrorists to this day.
FP: Thomas Joscelyn, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview.
Joscelyn: Thank you Jamie.
-----------------------------------------------
Jamie Glazov is Frontpage Magazine's managing editor. He holds a Ph.D. in
History with a specialty in U.S. and Canadian foreign policy. He edited and
wrote the introduction to David Horowitz’s Left Illusions. He is also the
co-editor (with David Horowitz) of The Hate America Left and the author of
Canadian Policy Toward Khrushchev’s Soviet Union (McGill-Queens University
Press, 2002) and 15 Tips on How to be a Good Leftist. To see his previous
symposiums, interviews and articles Click Here. Email him at jglazov@rogers.com.