Confirmation that Abdul Rahman Ali Al-Harbi, the Saudi national and initial “person of interest,” is indeed being deported this week now is spreading across the Internet. More details are emerging this weekend as Arabic sources and Saudi papers themselves are confirming “rumors” swirling in the US. (more at bottom)
Moreover, the Saudi papers are detailing the visit by the Obamas, especially Michelle to the hospital and this man. The “rumors” of the President meeting with Saudi officials in the hospital just prior to his “approved deportation” is a bragging right in their press.
More notable is the assertions that Abdul Rahman Ali Al-Harbi is free an clear of terrorist ties, when in fact over 10 names from his clan are already linked to Al-Qaeda.
Many from Al-Harbi’s clan are entrenched in terrorism and are members of Al-Qaeda as identified by the Islamic governments.
Out of a list of 85 terrorists listed by the Saudi government shows several of Al-Harbi clan to have been active fighters in Al-Qaeda:
#15 Badr Saud Uwaid Al-Awufi Al-Harbi
#73 Muhammad Atiq Uwaid Al-Awufi Al-Harbi
#26 Khalid Salim Uwaid Al-Lahibi Al-Harbi
#29 Raed Abdullah Salem Al-Thahiri Al-Harbi
#43 Abdullah Abdul Rahman Muhammad Al-Harbi (leader)
Counter-terrorism experts have renewed calls to tighten security on America’s mass transit lines following two would-be terrorists’ foiled plot to blow up a Toronto passenger train.
The alleged plan to attack Canada’s transit system has shed light on the vulnerabilities that still exist in America’s commuter system and the challenges involved in keeping it safe for travelers.
“The millions of Americans who take public transportation need to be assured that everything possible is being done to ensure their security and safety,” American Public Transportation Association President and CEO Michael Melaniphy told FoxNews.com on Monday, adding that federal funding should be increased.
… “This country has to change its outlook on day-to-day life,” he said. “We can’t let out guard down.”
Don’t let your freedoms be taken away by people who say such and such a place or event is vulnerable or open to attack. If these guys can successfully terrorize people, there can’t be any way to stop serious threats short of a North Korean police state. Every occasion and location is theoretically vulnerable. Our best protection is to build a society that eschews violence. And, when someone does go off the farm, we want a society where there is no general toleration for the act. In Chechnya or Syria or Iraq, these two boneheads would likely have found help and protection from some percentage of the population. Not so in Boston, or anywhere else in America.
PS- Today must have been CNN’s wet dream. This was like a real-life version of the Running Man (the enjoyable Richard Bachman aka Steven King book, not the awful movie), with similarly high ratings.
If you are an American, your freedom of speech is under attack. Over the past week, remarks made by Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy defending traditional marriage have sparked controversy all over the nation. Many Americans have expressed support for his remarks and many have expressed disdain for his remarks. And all of that is fine, because in the United States people are supposed to be able to express their opinions. But in Chicago, Boston and other U.S. cities, politicians are actually promising to keep any more Chick-fil-A stores from opening because their CEO does not support gay marriage, and that crosses the line. When politicians threaten to ban a business from their cities just because the CEO does not hold the “politically correct” position on a social issue that is an attack on the freedom of speech of every American. You see, the truth is that the enforcers of political correctness in America are very “tolerant” except when somebody disagrees with them… via The American Dream.
The American colonists considered themselves loyal Englishmen to a man, but when they began to enjoy unequalled prosperity by printing and circulating their own Colonial scrip, the stockholders of the Bank of England went to George III and informed him that their monopoly of interest-bearing notes in the colonies was at stake. He banned the scrip, with the result that there was an immediate depression in the commercial life of the Americas.
This was the cause of the Rebellion; as Benjamin Franklin pointed out, the little tax on tea, amounting to about a dollar a year per American family, could have been borne, but the colonists could not survive the banning of their own money… via the tap.